Jeff Vance Martin | USGS Science

USGS2025

Species nativeness as a cultural paradigm in conservation

Conservation entails cultural practices shaped by our worldviews, values, beliefs, and priorities for our interactions with nature. These inform how we categorize which species we want to occur in which landscapes. In Western conservation organizations, conceptualizations of species ‘belonging’ typically align with a dichotomy of native versus introduced species. This is a cultural paradigm, informed by biological considerations, and it is not uniformly shared across different cultures, resulting in varied conceptualizations of species belonging. These conceptualizations may continue to evolve as socio-ecological systems change over time. Thus, misalignment in perceptions of species belonging can manifest in seemingly intractable conflicts. We apply a cultural evolutionary lens to: (1) consider the social history of the native-introduced dichotomy; (2) describe social and ecological factors causing friction around the dichotomy; (3) explore how conservation can integrate diverse and changing values about species belonging, and (4) make predictions about future socio-ecological change that may shape conservation governance and our categorization of species. In doing so, we encourage conservation scientists and practitioners to practice reflexivity about the cultural nature of conservation and management of introduced species. This application of cultural evolution presents a unique lens for recognizing the inevitability of both social and ecological change and inspires critical consideration of how diverse and changing values might be integrated into, and shape, the future of conservation.

Biological Conservation↗

USGS2022

The socioecology of fear: A critical geographical consideration of human-wolf-livestock conflict

Animal fear can be an important driver of ecological community structure: predators affect prey not only through predation, but by inducing changes in behavior and distribution—a phenomenon evocatively called the “ecology of fear.” The return of wolves to the western United States is a notable instance of such dynamics, yet plays out in a complex socio-ecological system where efforts to mitigate impacts on livestock rely on manipulating wolves’ fear of people. Examining Washington state’s efforts to affect wolf behavior to reduce livestock predation, we argue that this approach to coexistence with wolves is predicated on relations of fear: people, livestock, and wolves can arguably share landscapes with minimal conflict, as long as wolves are adequately afraid. We introduce the “socioecology of fear” as an interdisciplinary framework for examining the interwoven social and ecological processes of human-wildlife conflict management. Beyond frequently-voiced ideas about wolves’ “innate” fear, we examine how fear is (re)produced through human-wolf interactions and deeply shaped by human social processes. We contribute to the Critical Physical Geography project by integrating critical social analysis with ecological theory, conducted through collaborative interdisciplinary dialogue. Such integrative practice is essential for understanding the complex challenges of managing wildlife in the Anthropocene.

Washington↗