ABSTRACT
A number of watershed partnerships have emerged in the western US to address the impacts of wildfire through investing in wildfire mitigation activities. To motivate collective action and design effective risk mitigation programs, these stakeholders draw on evidence linking wildfire mitigation to outcomes of interest. To advance knowledge in this area, we 1) assessed the strength of existing scientific evidence linking wildfire mitigation treatments with societal outcomes and 2) measured the importance of this evidence to watershed partnerships in the western US. To address objective one, we created a systematic evidence map to identify the most common wildfire mitigation treatment and societal outcome relationships reported. From the more than 100 studies examined, we found that the most commonly studied linkages were related to the impacts of thinning on infrastructure and timber. To answer objective two, we surveyed 38 professionals affiliated with organizations involved in eight watershed partnerships in the western US. We asked about the relative importance and strength of evidence linking wildfire treatments to societal outcomes for their watershed partnership, and used this information to create an importance-strength analysis and gap analysis. We found that most linkages were considered important to these organizations, and that the biggest gap identified was for evidence linking mulching to water quality or quantity outcomes. Forest and wildfire specialists perceived a larger need for additional evidence generation than other professional groups. Jointly, the results from this study point to areas of evidence generation important for watershed partnerships and other organizations involved in wildfire mitigation, and suggest a need to more thoroughly disseminate information about existing evidence to this new group of stakeholders investing in wildfire risk mitigation.
Subject(s)
Fires , Wildfires , Forests , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Wild pigs (Sus scrofa) are a non-native invasive species in the United States that cause significant economic loss, transmit disease, and inflict damage upon natural resources, agriculture, livestock, and property. Geographic distribution of wild pigs in the United States has nearly tripled since 1982, with anthropogenic influences playing a significant role in the expansion. In this regard, there is speculation that a driver of the expansion may be human-mediated movement of wild pigs to new areas for the purpose of sport hunting. In response, states have implemented a variety of wild pig control policies, including legal restrictions on their transport. The success of such policies depends, in part, on their level of public support, which in turn may be influenced by individuals' attitudes concerning wild pigs, their interest in maintaining wild pig populations (e.g., for sport hunting), and their knowledge and awareness of the threats wild pigs pose. Multiple regression was used to analyze data collected from a nationwide survey concerning attitudes toward wild pigs and policies that restrict their transport. Results indicate that a majority of individuals in the United States have negative attitudes toward wild pigs and support policies that restrict their transport and penalize transgressors. Consistent with other invasive species research, findings suggest that as knowledge and awareness of wild pigs increase, so too does support for policies restricting and penalizing transport of wild pigs. Contrary to previous studies, this research also finds that hunters are more likely to support restrictions on wild pig transport than are non-hunters. Overall, these findings suggest that legal restrictions on the transport of wild pigs, even in states with large hunter populations, enjoy broad public support and may help to curb the expansion of wild pig populations.
