Wolves are back: Sociopolitical identity and opinions on management of Canis lupus ...
In 2010 an interdisciplinary team of social and natural scientists began a project to study society–environment interactions in northeast Oregon. At first, the Communities and Forests in Oregon (CAFOR) project focused on Baker, Union and Wallowa Counties. Subsequently the project’s scope expanded to...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Dataset |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Dryad
2019
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.wm37pvmhr https://datadryad.org/stash/dataset/doi:10.5061/dryad.wm37pvmhr |
| Summary: | In 2010 an interdisciplinary team of social and natural scientists began a project to study society–environment interactions in northeast Oregon. At first, the Communities and Forests in Oregon (CAFOR) project focused on Baker, Union and Wallowa Counties. Subsequently the project’s scope expanded to cover Crook, Grant, Umatilla and Wheeler Counties. One part of the CAFOR research involved a series of telephone surveys carried out in four stages over 2011 to 2018. The surveys employed consistent methods with landline or cell telephone interviews of independent random samples conducted by trained personnel from the Survey Center of the University of New Hampshire. Questions covered a range of topics related to environment and community change. Some questions were repeated with identical wording on two, three or four surveys, watching for continuity and change in public opinion. The survey design involved stratification with oversampling of smaller-population counties, and in some cases also of forest ... : Survey Questions. The return of wolves has been controversial in this region, particularly with ranchers and hunters. To measure views among the general public, we asked on all four CAFOR surveys: Which of the following four statements about wolves in eastern Oregon comes closest to your personal beliefs?”. Respondents could choose eliminating wolves from the region, limited hunting, or no hunting with or without compensation for livestock losses. Telephone interviewers rotated the order of these response choices. The simple, un-nuanced choices by no means exhaust the possible views on wolf management, but only three percent of our respondents were unable to choose between them. As will be seen, responses were highly structured in terms of individual characteristics and location, and highly replicable across survey years—suggesting high validity despite or because of the question’s simplicity. Data Selection. Four CAFOR surveys conducted over 2011 to 2018 interviewed a combined total of more than 5,000 ... |
|---|