Tackling the motivation to monitor: success and sustainability of a participatory monitoring program

Monitoring of species and their ecosystem attributes is a fundamental requirement in applied ecology and conservation. However, landscape scale monitoring requires an immense effort and commitment, especially when species have a wide distribution or are migratory in nature. Participatory monitoring, whereby local communities are engaged, is increasingly being proposed to address landscape scale monitoring. Its implementation is met with many challenges related to finances, motivation of the local people, lack of trained manpower, and nondirect legal use of the species in question. It is of interest to determine what makes a participatory monitoring program interesting for locals to ensure their long term engagement. Using the unique 26-year program of hunters' observations of moose (Alces alces) in Sweden as a case study, we present the evolution of this highly successful participatory monitoring program and show that tackling the motivation to monitor, early involvement of local NGOs, social activities revolving around use of the resource, the biology and economic value of the species, and technical and practical aspects related to the monitoring, together create a successful participatory monitoring program. When users benefit directly from the resource, participate in conservation/ management decision making, socialize with other participants, and get rewards for their commitment and effective monitoring, participatory monitoring schemes can then become rewarding and sustainable.

[1]  Göran Ericsson,et al.  From migration to nomadism: movement variability in a northern ungulate across its latitudinal range. , 2012, Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America.

[2]  Rick Bonney,et al.  The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement , 2012 .

[3]  N. Bunnefeld,et al.  Effectiveness and cost efficiency of monitoring mountain nyala in the Bale Mountains National Park, Ethiopia , 2012 .

[4]  Julia P. G. Jones,et al.  Training Programmes Can Change Behaviour and Encourage the Cultivation of Over-Harvested Plant Species , 2012, PloS one.

[5]  V. Radeloff,et al.  Difference in spatiotemporal patterns of wildlife road-crossings and wildlife-vehicle collisions , 2012 .

[6]  E. J. Milner-Gulland,et al.  The challenge of monitoring biodiversity in payment for environmental service interventions , 2011 .

[7]  Jeffrey B. Luzar,et al.  Large-Scale Environmental Monitoring by Indigenous Peoples , 2011 .

[8]  Henrik Andrén,et al.  Survey method choice for wildlife management: the case of moose Alces alces in Sweden , 2011 .

[9]  T. Gallo,et al.  Creating a Successful Citizen Science Model to Detect and Report Invasive Species , 2011 .

[10]  Roman Lukyanenko,et al.  Easier citizen science is better , 2011, Nature.

[11]  Julia P. G. Jones.  Monitoring species abundance and distribution at the landscape scale , 2011 .

[12]  Navinder J. Singh,et al.  Monitoring ungulates in Central Asia: current constraints and future potential , 2011, Oryx.

[13]  Karin Pirhofer-Walzl,et al.  Environmental monitoring: the scale and speed of implementation varies according to the degree of peoples involvement , 2010 .

[14]  R. Bergström,et al.  Moose density and habitat productivity affects reproduction, growth and species composition in field layer vegetation. , 2010 .

[15]  E. Milner‐Gulland,et al.  Hunter Reporting of Catch per Unit Effort as a Monitoring Tool in a Bushmeat‐Harvesting System , 2010, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[16]  E. Lindberg.  Hunter demography, trends and correlates of hunting participation in Sweden , 2010 .

[17]  J. Kindberg.  Monitoring and Management of the Swedish Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) Population , 2010 .

[18]  J. Silvertown.  A new dawn for citizen science. , 2009, Trends in ecology & evolution.

[19]  M. Crimmins,et al.  Flowering range changes across an elevation gradient in response to warming summer temperatures , 2009 .

[20]  J. Clobert,et al.  Advantages of Volunteer‐Based Biodiversity Monitoring in Europe , 2009, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[21]  Göran Ericsson,et al.  Monitoring rare or elusive large mammals using effort-corrected voluntary observers , 2009 .

[22]  M. Stokes,et al.  Social‐Psychological Principles of Community‐Based Conservation and Conservancy Motivation: Attaining Goals within an Autonomy‐Supportive Environment , 2008, Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology.

[23]  T. Heberlein,et al.  Female Hunting Participation in North America and Europe , 2008 .

[24]  J. Månsson,et al.  Evaluation of four methods used to estimate population density of moose Alces alces , 2008 .

[25]  M. Boman,et al.  Welfare foundations for efficient management of wildlife and fish resources for recreational use in Sweden , 2008 .

[26]  E. Richard Hoebeke,et al.  Citizen scientist rediscovers rare nine-spotted lady beetle, Coccinella novemnotata, in eastern North America , 2007, Journal of Insect Conservation.

[27]  A. Lawrence.  ‘No Personal Motive?’ Volunteers, Biodiversity, and the False Dichotomies of Participation , 2006 .

[28]  Finn Danielsen,et al.  Does Monitoring Matter? A Quantitative Assessment of Management Decisions from Locally-based Monitoring of Protected Areas , 2005, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[29]  Julia P. G. Jones,et al.  When Should Communities and Conservationists Monitor Exploited Resources? , 2005, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[30]  Neil D. Burgess,et al.  Monitoring Matters: Examining the Potential of Locally-based Approaches , 2005, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[31]  E. Solberg,et al.  Change-in-sex ratio as an estimator of population size for Norwegian moose Alces alces , 2005 .

[32]  A. Seiler.  Predicting locations of moose–vehicle collisions in Sweden , 2005 .

[33]  F. Danielsen,et al.  A simple system for monitoring biodiversity in protected areas of a developing country , 2000, Biodiversity & Conservation.

[34]  S. Schneider,et al.  Fingerprints of global warming on wild animals and plants , 2003, Nature.

[35]  L. Edenius,et al.  The Role of Moose as a Disturbance Factor in Managed Boreal Forests , 2002 .

[36]  J. P. Ball,et al.  AGE-RELATED REPRODUCTIVE EFFORT AND SENESCENCE IN FREE-RANGING MOOSE, ALCES ALCES , 2001 .

[37]  J. P. Ball,et al.  Partial migration by large ungulates: characteristics of seasonal moose Alces alces ranges in northern Sweden , 2001, Wildlife Biology.

[38]  S. Sylvén.  Effects of scale on hunter moose Alces alces observation rate , 2000, Wildlife Biology.

[39]  R. Bergström,et al.  Disturbance by large herbivores in boreal forests with special reference to moose. , 2000 .

[40]  K. Wallin,et al.  Hunter observations as an index of moose Alces alces population parameters , 1999, Wildlife Biology.

[41]  William J. Sutherland,et al.  Ecological Census Techniques: Contents , 1996 .

[42]  R. Bergström,et al.  Interactions between Browsing Moose and Two Species of Birch in Sweden , 1985 .