A unit of Lasting Forests
Sustained forests; sustained profits
evolving since March 30, 1999

Modern Wild Faunal
Resource System Management

[ Web site Home | The Course's Home | Table of Contents | The Finder | Glossary ]

Notes on Wildlife Research: Developing Hypotheses

See also Notes on Wildlife Research: Alternatives to Conventional Research

Entering the new scientific process, there is need for an idea, a plausible relationship that needs to be tested and possibly refuted. There are few discussions about how this is done. The same procedure can be used in gaining expert opinion. The approach is that of rough graphing or sketching relations. For example, we might have a discussion of the relations between providing hunter access to areas and the game actually taken. The procedure is to force that idea or discussion on to paper in the form of a graph. Usually what the manager can do or the thing(s) over which the manager may have some control are shown on the horizontal axis. In this case, "hunter access" is placed on the horizontal axis. "Game kill" is placed on the vertical axis and, for the time being, no numbers are used. The ideas are general and first approximations. Revisions will come later. A curve is sketched as shown. Often a straight line in the approximate direction is all that can be sketched. Then, whether it "flattens out" or not can be decided. Starting out points and ending levels are useful to discuss. Forcing general ideas onto graphs can be difficult but may show relations never realized. In the graph at the right, if the curve is correct, then there may be some optimum amount of road or access if game kill is an objective.

Can a simple curve be developed for research progress? If we tally results of an agency or a research center (papers, conclusions, etc.) how might that relate to research effort, say as measured by person-years committed or funding? It might appear as at the right, with long "dry" periods and break-throughs.

By working in pairs of ideas, concentrating on managerial things on the horizontal (the independent variable of statistics) groups of ideas may emerge that may later be developed in multiple regression expressions or in complex three dimensional pictures. Here research effort is studied further and its effects on requirements for administrative support or effort are sketched. In some situations, more produces more but it levels off. In other situations is results in the need for rapid growth in administrative support, then later levels as in a sigmoid growth function. Does it start at zero? Can it ever decline? Expert opinion can be sought. The graphs can become the medium for very effective, directed conversations and may send people to the literature on the topics.

Interest may be high in effects of many different things on a single element of the agency or operation. Here "administrative effort" is one such topic, and optimum size of agencies, license costs and annual budgets may drive a variety of inquiries that can start with sketches. Refuting or supporting them may be the task of different staff. Here the prospects of economies of scale are suggested. Mechanizing many systems can allow the effort to stabilize.

Hunter success is difficult to define but if it is taken at total reported kill from a management area, and road counts and checking station data are used, then a graph can be seen to be possible. Data may be costly and so many areas might be accumulated. The big question is that of what will be done with the data and the conclusion. Maybe just the sketch if agreed upon by experts, may be sufficient to shape policy for a few years and then data-hungry studies can be done when the preliminary work justifies the high cost and low expected effect of "knowing." Here there is uncertainty about take from an area that is closed or historically no hunters. As the hunters increase, the take is about the same (there are only so many good hunters and hunting density limits kill even when populations are high). Hunters quot;move the animals" and removals may peak, then decline if hunting is excessive. Regulated hunts may achieve high returns for many years. The question: will more animals be taken by a regulated hunt over the last 5 years (shown here) than by a boom-and-bust harvest in those years? Which is best? Why?

Managers may find public support from their perceived success in increasing game abundance (as sketch-suggested here). An alternative is that greater abundance requires greater management effort. It may be interesting to ponder the graph if the axes are reversed. Will total management effort increasing result in game population abundance? What will be the shape of that curve? Will it be the inverse of the one shown here? If no effort is exerted, will there be zero population? Maybe effects of management need to be evaluated from that level.

Go to the top.

This Web site is maintained by R. H. Giles, Jr.
Send an email message - Questions, revisions?
Last revision January 18, 2004.