How should we measure human tolerance of carnivores?

          Mountain lions are returning to the eastern US after an absence of nearly a century. This recolonization has spurred conversations among state wildlife agencies about how to manage the reappearance of this large... [ view full abstract ]

          Mountain lions are returning to the eastern US after an absence of nearly a century. This recolonization has spurred conversations among state wildlife agencies about how to manage the reappearance of this large carnivore. Human dimensions studies indicate that eastern state residents have mixed feelings about the prospect of mountain lions returning. This ambivalence creates a critical decision moment for state wildlife agencies, as once attitudes toward mountain lions have solidified, they will be difficult to change. Therefore, any new management plans should include policy and educational interventions carefully designed to minimize factors that lead to intolerance of mountain lions. A few barriers prevent the implementation of such plans. For one, the lack of consistent methodology for measuring tolerance of wildlife prevents effective pre/post testing of tolerance-boosting interventions. Uncertainty surrounding the concept of tolerance has real consequences, as conservation decisions are increasingly made on the basis of perceived human intolerance for certain wildlife species. In addition, few studies have examined the downstream impacts of wildlife policy on tolerance, further limiting the development of plans to mitigate potential human-mountain lion conflict in the east.

            To address these issues, we distributed a social survey to rural communities in three western states with varying mountain lion policy. The survey included several metrics of wildlife tolerance that have been used more or less interchangeably in the literature, including attitudes, behavioral intentions, and normative beliefs about acceptability. We developed a tolerance metric drawn from the sociological literature (“putting up with something you do not like”) that integrates attitudes and acceptability to predict conservation-related behavioral intentions. We also identified antecedents of tolerance and developed a typology of the truly “tolerant.” Finally, we examined whether mountain lion policy has had a top-down effect on public tolerance by comparing current findings with historical voting data in Western states and found evidence to suggest that social norms may shift more readily than attitudes. Wildlife managers wishing to understand the viewpoints of their constituents should consider measuring acceptability of wildlife conflict as well as attitudes toward wildlife to access the full spectrum of human tolerance and intolerance.