Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorCranston, J
dc.contributor.authorCrowley, SL
dc.contributor.authorEarly, R
dc.date.accessioned2022-09-02T12:16:11Z
dc.date.issued2022-04-26
dc.date.updated2022-09-02T10:50:24Z
dc.description.abstractThe global redistribution of species due to climate change and other anthropogenic causes is driving novel human–wildlife interactions with complex consequences. On the one hand, range-shifting species could disrupt recipient ecosystems. On the other hand, these species may be contracting in their historic range, contributing to loss of biodiversity there. Given that arriving range-shifting species could also perhaps have positive effects on recipient ecosystems, there is [in principle] a net benefit equation to be calculated. Thus, public opinion on these species may be divided and they may present a unique challenge to wildlife management. We surveyed the opinion of wildlife recorders about the establishment and management of eight birds and eight insects whose ranges have recently shifted into the United Kingdom. We asked whether respondents' attitudes were explained by the species' or respondents' characteristics, and whether or not climate change was emphasised as a cause of range-shift. We also conducted qualitative analysis of the recorders' text responses to contextualise these results. Attitudes to range-shifting species were mostly positive but were more ambivalent for less familiar taxa and for insects compared with birds. Respondents were strongly opposed to eradicating or controlling new range-shifters, and to management aimed to increase their numbers. Whether climate change was presented as the cause of range-shifts did not affect attitudes, likely because respondents assumed climate change was the driver regardless. These findings suggest that it will be difficult to generate support for active management to support or hinder species' redistribution, particularly for invertebrate or overlooked species among wildlife recorders. However, the positive attitudes suggest that on the whole range-shifting species are viewed sympathetically. Engaging with wildlife recorders may represent an opportunity to garner support for conservation actions which will benefit both currently native and arriving species, such as improvements to habitat quality and connectivity. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNatural Environment Research Councilen_GB
dc.format.extent879-892
dc.identifier.citationVol. 4, No. 4, pp. 879-892en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10325
dc.identifier.grantnumberNE/N008669/1en_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/130654
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-1009-4763 (Cranston, James)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-4854-0925 (Crowley, Sarah L)
dc.identifierScopusID: 56658383600 (Crowley, Sarah L)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0003-4108-5904 (Early, Regan)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWiley / British Ecological Societyen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6371204en_GB
dc.rights© 2022 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.en_GB
dc.subjectattitudesen_GB
dc.subjectcitizen scienceen_GB
dc.subjectclimate changeen_GB
dc.subjecthuman-wildlife interactionen_GB
dc.subjectpublic opinionen_GB
dc.subjectrange-shiften_GB
dc.subjectspecies' redistributionen_GB
dc.subjectwildlife managementen_GB
dc.titleUK wildlife recorders cautiously welcome range‐shifting species but incline against intervention to promote or control their establishmenten_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2022-09-02T12:16:11Z
dc.identifier.issn2575-8314
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available from Wiley via the DOI in this record. en_GB
dc.descriptionDATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT: The survey design and responses available on the dryad data repository (Cranston et al., 2022). Code for the analysis is available in a public GitHub repository and accessible at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.6371204.en_GB
dc.identifier.journalPeople and Natureen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofPeople and Nature, 4(4)
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2021-12-21
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2022-04-26
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2022-09-02T12:13:36Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2022-09-02T12:16:24Z
refterms.panelAen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2022-04-26


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2022 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society.

This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2022 The Authors. People and Nature published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Ecological Society. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.