Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013
‘Adaptive management’, which has been defined as the repeated iteration between management action, scientific assessment and revised management action, leading to a strengthened foundation for management, is required by Swedish law to be incorporated into the management of large carnivores. We have...
Published in: | Wildlife Biology |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Other Authors: | , , , , |
Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Wiley
2017
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.2981/wlb.00251 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full-xml/10.2981/wlb.00251 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2981/wlb.00251 |
id |
crwiley:10.2981/wlb.00251 |
---|---|
record_format |
openpolar |
spelling |
crwiley:10.2981/wlb.00251 2024-09-15T18:40:16+00:00 Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 Swenson, Jon E. Schneider, Michael Zedrosser, Andreas Söderberg, Arne Franzén, Robert Kindberg, Jonas National Center for Research and Development Naturvårdsverket Svenska Jägareförbundet Norges Forskningsråd Austrian Science Fund 2017 http://dx.doi.org/10.2981/wlb.00251 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full-xml/10.2981/wlb.00251 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2981/wlb.00251 en eng Wiley http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Wildlife Biology volume 2017, issue 1, page 1-13 ISSN 1903-220X 1903-220X journal-article 2017 crwiley https://doi.org/10.2981/wlb.00251 2024-07-30T04:19:38Z ‘Adaptive management’, which has been defined as the repeated iteration between management action, scientific assessment and revised management action, leading to a strengthened foundation for management, is required by Swedish law to be incorporated into the management of large carnivores. We have evaluated whether the size and/or trend of the brown bear Ursus arctos population in Sweden corresponded to management‐decided national objectives during five management regimes during the past 70 years (1943—2013). We found that the objective had been met in only one period, when it had been worded very vaguely. During the last period studied (2008—2013), when management was carried out on the county level and adaptive management was required by the Swedish Government, four of six counties met their trend objectives, but only one of six met the population objectives, although one was close to meeting them. Sociological studies have documented major problems in communication among the members of the county delegations responsible for the management of large carnivores. As adaptive management apparently never has been implemented successfully in brown bear management in Sweden, we recommend that the Delegations for Game Management be mandated to integrate up‐to‐date, scientifically documented biological information into their decisions. This is not done consistently today. Researchers should be involved in the process to inform about relevant, available information, design testable scientific ‘experiments’ based on the predicted results of management decisions, and evaluate the results in relation to the predictions, perhaps as members of a ‘boundary organization’ consisting of researchers, managers and stakeholders. This would require a new management paradigm, because many in Sweden seem to be skeptical to the idea of involving researchers in management. Article in Journal/Newspaper Ursus arctos Wiley Online Library Wildlife Biology 2017 1 1 13 |
institution |
Open Polar |
collection |
Wiley Online Library |
op_collection_id |
crwiley |
language |
English |
description |
‘Adaptive management’, which has been defined as the repeated iteration between management action, scientific assessment and revised management action, leading to a strengthened foundation for management, is required by Swedish law to be incorporated into the management of large carnivores. We have evaluated whether the size and/or trend of the brown bear Ursus arctos population in Sweden corresponded to management‐decided national objectives during five management regimes during the past 70 years (1943—2013). We found that the objective had been met in only one period, when it had been worded very vaguely. During the last period studied (2008—2013), when management was carried out on the county level and adaptive management was required by the Swedish Government, four of six counties met their trend objectives, but only one of six met the population objectives, although one was close to meeting them. Sociological studies have documented major problems in communication among the members of the county delegations responsible for the management of large carnivores. As adaptive management apparently never has been implemented successfully in brown bear management in Sweden, we recommend that the Delegations for Game Management be mandated to integrate up‐to‐date, scientifically documented biological information into their decisions. This is not done consistently today. Researchers should be involved in the process to inform about relevant, available information, design testable scientific ‘experiments’ based on the predicted results of management decisions, and evaluate the results in relation to the predictions, perhaps as members of a ‘boundary organization’ consisting of researchers, managers and stakeholders. This would require a new management paradigm, because many in Sweden seem to be skeptical to the idea of involving researchers in management. |
author2 |
National Center for Research and Development Naturvårdsverket Svenska Jägareförbundet Norges Forskningsråd Austrian Science Fund |
format |
Article in Journal/Newspaper |
author |
Swenson, Jon E. Schneider, Michael Zedrosser, Andreas Söderberg, Arne Franzén, Robert Kindberg, Jonas |
spellingShingle |
Swenson, Jon E. Schneider, Michael Zedrosser, Andreas Söderberg, Arne Franzén, Robert Kindberg, Jonas Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 |
author_facet |
Swenson, Jon E. Schneider, Michael Zedrosser, Andreas Söderberg, Arne Franzén, Robert Kindberg, Jonas |
author_sort |
Swenson, Jon E. |
title |
Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 |
title_short |
Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 |
title_full |
Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 |
title_fullStr |
Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 |
title_full_unstemmed |
Challenges of managing a European brown bear population; lessons from Sweden, 1943–2013 |
title_sort |
challenges of managing a european brown bear population; lessons from sweden, 1943–2013 |
publisher |
Wiley |
publishDate |
2017 |
url |
http://dx.doi.org/10.2981/wlb.00251 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full-xml/10.2981/wlb.00251 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2981/wlb.00251 |
genre |
Ursus arctos |
genre_facet |
Ursus arctos |
op_source |
Wildlife Biology volume 2017, issue 1, page 1-13 ISSN 1903-220X 1903-220X |
op_rights |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
op_doi |
https://doi.org/10.2981/wlb.00251 |
container_title |
Wildlife Biology |
container_volume |
2017 |
container_issue |
1 |
container_start_page |
1 |
op_container_end_page |
13 |
_version_ |
1810484580706156544 |