Learning and adaptation in the management of waterfowl harvests

A formal framework for the adaptive management of waterfowl harvests was adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1995. The process admits competing models of waterfowl population dynamics and harvest impacts, and relies on model averaging to compute optimal strategies for regulating harvest...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of environmental management 2011-05, Vol.92 (5), p.1385-1394
1. Verfasser: Johnson, Fred A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1394
container_issue 5
container_start_page 1385
container_title Journal of environmental management
container_volume 92
creator Johnson, Fred A.
description A formal framework for the adaptive management of waterfowl harvests was adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1995. The process admits competing models of waterfowl population dynamics and harvest impacts, and relies on model averaging to compute optimal strategies for regulating harvest. Model weights, reflecting the relative ability of the alternative models to predict changes in population size, are used in the model averaging and are updated each year based on a comparison of model predictions and observations of population size. Since its inception the adaptive harvest program has focused principally on mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos), which constitute a large portion of the U.S. waterfowl harvest. Four competing models, derived from a combination of two survival and two reproductive hypotheses, were originally assigned equal weights. In the last year of available information (2007), model weights favored the weakly density-dependent reproductive hypothesis over the strongly density-dependent one, and the additive mortality hypothesis over the compensatory one. The change in model weights led to a more conservative harvesting policy than what was in effect in the early years of the program. Adaptive harvest management has been successful in many ways, but nonetheless has exposed the difficulties in defining management objectives, in predicting and regulating harvests, and in coping with the tradeoffs inherent in managing multiple waterfowl stocks exposed to a common harvest. The key challenge now facing managers is whether adaptive harvest management as an institution can be sufficiently adaptive, and whether the knowledge and experience gained from the process can be reflected in higher-level policy decisions.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.064
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_867734706</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0301479710003968</els_id><sourcerecordid>855204214</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-f81495f840b034491192fabe8adc0b43a22a69c7a2878db939abfb4956c829893</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU1P3DAQhq0KVLa0P6FVxKW9ZOuvxPYJIdQC0kpc2rM1cSbgaONs7ewi_n0ddtsDB-BkafS888rzEPKZ0SWjrP7eL3sMuwHCktOn2ZLW8h1ZMGqqUteCHpEFFZSVUhl1Qj6k1FNKBWfqPTnhjNWaV2ZBzlcIMfhwV0BoC2hhM8Hkx1D4UEz3WOQCuMMBw1SMXfEAE8ZufFgX9xB3mKb0kRx3sE746fCekt8_f_y6vC5Xt1c3lxer0kmtp7LTTJqq05I2VEhpGDO8gwY1tI42UgDnUBungGul28YIA03X5EjtNDfaiFPydb93E8c_29xsB58crtcQcNwmq2ulhFS0fp2sFOPCsOoNZMWp5Exm8tuLJFNKsfxRPaNnz9B-3MaQb_PUrIXkM1TtIRfHlCJ2dhP9APHRMmpnvba3B7121juPs96c-3JYvm0GbP-n_vnMwPkewOxi5zHa5DwGh62P6Cbbjv6Vir-gz7Yn</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>857183424</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Learning and adaptation in the management of waterfowl harvests</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Johnson, Fred A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Fred A.</creatorcontrib><description>A formal framework for the adaptive management of waterfowl harvests was adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1995. The process admits competing models of waterfowl population dynamics and harvest impacts, and relies on model averaging to compute optimal strategies for regulating harvest. Model weights, reflecting the relative ability of the alternative models to predict changes in population size, are used in the model averaging and are updated each year based on a comparison of model predictions and observations of population size. Since its inception the adaptive harvest program has focused principally on mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos), which constitute a large portion of the U.S. waterfowl harvest. Four competing models, derived from a combination of two survival and two reproductive hypotheses, were originally assigned equal weights. In the last year of available information (2007), model weights favored the weakly density-dependent reproductive hypothesis over the strongly density-dependent one, and the additive mortality hypothesis over the compensatory one. The change in model weights led to a more conservative harvesting policy than what was in effect in the early years of the program. Adaptive harvest management has been successful in many ways, but nonetheless has exposed the difficulties in defining management objectives, in predicting and regulating harvests, and in coping with the tradeoffs inherent in managing multiple waterfowl stocks exposed to a common harvest. The key challenge now facing managers is whether adaptive harvest management as an institution can be sufficiently adaptive, and whether the knowledge and experience gained from the process can be reflected in higher-level policy decisions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0301-4797</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-8630</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.064</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21168259</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JEVMAW</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adaptive management ; Anas platyrhynchos ; Animal populations ; Animals ; Anseriformes ; Birds ; Conservation of Natural Resources - methods ; Decision Making ; Decisions ; Dynamic programming ; Environment ; Environmental Policy ; Exposure ; Harvest ; Harvesting ; Learning ; Mallards ; Management ; Mathematical models ; Modelling ; Models, Biological ; Mortality ; Natural resources ; Optimization ; Policies ; Population Dynamics ; Populations ; Raw materials ; Resource management ; U.S.A ; United States ; Waterfowl ; Wildfowl ; Wildlife conservation</subject><ispartof>Journal of environmental management, 2011-05, Vol.92 (5), p.1385-1394</ispartof><rights>2010</rights><rights>Published by Elsevier Ltd.</rights><rights>Copyright Academic Press Ltd. May 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-f81495f840b034491192fabe8adc0b43a22a69c7a2878db939abfb4956c829893</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-f81495f840b034491192fabe8adc0b43a22a69c7a2878db939abfb4956c829893</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.064$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27923,27924,45994</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21168259$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Fred A.</creatorcontrib><title>Learning and adaptation in the management of waterfowl harvests</title><title>Journal of environmental management</title><addtitle>J Environ Manage</addtitle><description>A formal framework for the adaptive management of waterfowl harvests was adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1995. The process admits competing models of waterfowl population dynamics and harvest impacts, and relies on model averaging to compute optimal strategies for regulating harvest. Model weights, reflecting the relative ability of the alternative models to predict changes in population size, are used in the model averaging and are updated each year based on a comparison of model predictions and observations of population size. Since its inception the adaptive harvest program has focused principally on mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos), which constitute a large portion of the U.S. waterfowl harvest. Four competing models, derived from a combination of two survival and two reproductive hypotheses, were originally assigned equal weights. In the last year of available information (2007), model weights favored the weakly density-dependent reproductive hypothesis over the strongly density-dependent one, and the additive mortality hypothesis over the compensatory one. The change in model weights led to a more conservative harvesting policy than what was in effect in the early years of the program. Adaptive harvest management has been successful in many ways, but nonetheless has exposed the difficulties in defining management objectives, in predicting and regulating harvests, and in coping with the tradeoffs inherent in managing multiple waterfowl stocks exposed to a common harvest. The key challenge now facing managers is whether adaptive harvest management as an institution can be sufficiently adaptive, and whether the knowledge and experience gained from the process can be reflected in higher-level policy decisions.</description><subject>Adaptive management</subject><subject>Anas platyrhynchos</subject><subject>Animal populations</subject><subject>Animals</subject><subject>Anseriformes</subject><subject>Birds</subject><subject>Conservation of Natural Resources - methods</subject><subject>Decision Making</subject><subject>Decisions</subject><subject>Dynamic programming</subject><subject>Environment</subject><subject>Environmental Policy</subject><subject>Exposure</subject><subject>Harvest</subject><subject>Harvesting</subject><subject>Learning</subject><subject>Mallards</subject><subject>Management</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Modelling</subject><subject>Models, Biological</subject><subject>Mortality</subject><subject>Natural resources</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><subject>Policies</subject><subject>Population Dynamics</subject><subject>Populations</subject><subject>Raw materials</subject><subject>Resource management</subject><subject>U.S.A</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Waterfowl</subject><subject>Wildfowl</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><issn>0301-4797</issn><issn>1095-8630</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkU1P3DAQhq0KVLa0P6FVxKW9ZOuvxPYJIdQC0kpc2rM1cSbgaONs7ewi_n0ddtsDB-BkafS888rzEPKZ0SWjrP7eL3sMuwHCktOn2ZLW8h1ZMGqqUteCHpEFFZSVUhl1Qj6k1FNKBWfqPTnhjNWaV2ZBzlcIMfhwV0BoC2hhM8Hkx1D4UEz3WOQCuMMBw1SMXfEAE8ZufFgX9xB3mKb0kRx3sE746fCekt8_f_y6vC5Xt1c3lxer0kmtp7LTTJqq05I2VEhpGDO8gwY1tI42UgDnUBungGul28YIA03X5EjtNDfaiFPydb93E8c_29xsB58crtcQcNwmq2ulhFS0fp2sFOPCsOoNZMWp5Exm8tuLJFNKsfxRPaNnz9B-3MaQb_PUrIXkM1TtIRfHlCJ2dhP9APHRMmpnvba3B7121juPs96c-3JYvm0GbP-n_vnMwPkewOxi5zHa5DwGh62P6Cbbjv6Vir-gz7Yn</recordid><startdate>20110501</startdate><enddate>20110501</enddate><creator>Johnson, Fred A.</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Academic Press Ltd</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>H97</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7U6</scope><scope>H95</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20110501</creationdate><title>Learning and adaptation in the management of waterfowl harvests</title><author>Johnson, Fred A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c488t-f81495f840b034491192fabe8adc0b43a22a69c7a2878db939abfb4956c829893</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Adaptive management</topic><topic>Anas platyrhynchos</topic><topic>Animal populations</topic><topic>Animals</topic><topic>Anseriformes</topic><topic>Birds</topic><topic>Conservation of Natural Resources - methods</topic><topic>Decision Making</topic><topic>Decisions</topic><topic>Dynamic programming</topic><topic>Environment</topic><topic>Environmental Policy</topic><topic>Exposure</topic><topic>Harvest</topic><topic>Harvesting</topic><topic>Learning</topic><topic>Mallards</topic><topic>Management</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Modelling</topic><topic>Models, Biological</topic><topic>Mortality</topic><topic>Natural resources</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><topic>Policies</topic><topic>Population Dynamics</topic><topic>Populations</topic><topic>Raw materials</topic><topic>Resource management</topic><topic>U.S.A</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Waterfowl</topic><topic>Wildfowl</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Johnson, Fred A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution &amp; Environmental Quality</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Sustainability Science Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science &amp; Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences &amp; Living Resources</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental management</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Johnson, Fred A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Learning and adaptation in the management of waterfowl harvests</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental management</jtitle><addtitle>J Environ Manage</addtitle><date>2011-05-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>1385</spage><epage>1394</epage><pages>1385-1394</pages><issn>0301-4797</issn><eissn>1095-8630</eissn><coden>JEVMAW</coden><abstract>A formal framework for the adaptive management of waterfowl harvests was adopted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 1995. The process admits competing models of waterfowl population dynamics and harvest impacts, and relies on model averaging to compute optimal strategies for regulating harvest. Model weights, reflecting the relative ability of the alternative models to predict changes in population size, are used in the model averaging and are updated each year based on a comparison of model predictions and observations of population size. Since its inception the adaptive harvest program has focused principally on mallards ( Anas platyrhynchos), which constitute a large portion of the U.S. waterfowl harvest. Four competing models, derived from a combination of two survival and two reproductive hypotheses, were originally assigned equal weights. In the last year of available information (2007), model weights favored the weakly density-dependent reproductive hypothesis over the strongly density-dependent one, and the additive mortality hypothesis over the compensatory one. The change in model weights led to a more conservative harvesting policy than what was in effect in the early years of the program. Adaptive harvest management has been successful in many ways, but nonetheless has exposed the difficulties in defining management objectives, in predicting and regulating harvests, and in coping with the tradeoffs inherent in managing multiple waterfowl stocks exposed to a common harvest. The key challenge now facing managers is whether adaptive harvest management as an institution can be sufficiently adaptive, and whether the knowledge and experience gained from the process can be reflected in higher-level policy decisions.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>21168259</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.064</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0301-4797
ispartof Journal of environmental management, 2011-05, Vol.92 (5), p.1385-1394
issn 0301-4797
1095-8630
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_867734706
source MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Adaptive management
Anas platyrhynchos
Animal populations
Animals
Anseriformes
Birds
Conservation of Natural Resources - methods
Decision Making
Decisions
Dynamic programming
Environment
Environmental Policy
Exposure
Harvest
Harvesting
Learning
Mallards
Management
Mathematical models
Modelling
Models, Biological
Mortality
Natural resources
Optimization
Policies
Population Dynamics
Populations
Raw materials
Resource management
U.S.A
United States
Waterfowl
Wildfowl
Wildlife conservation
title Learning and adaptation in the management of waterfowl harvests
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T21%3A06%3A28IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Learning%20and%20adaptation%20in%20the%20management%20of%20waterfowl%20harvests&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20management&rft.au=Johnson,%20Fred%20A.&rft.date=2011-05-01&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=1385&rft.epage=1394&rft.pages=1385-1394&rft.issn=0301-4797&rft.eissn=1095-8630&rft.coden=JEVMAW&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jenvman.2010.10.064&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E855204214%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=857183424&rft_id=info:pmid/21168259&rft_els_id=S0301479710003968&rfr_iscdi=true