Communication

Techniques of Wildlife
Managers
Communication Campaign

Marie Wagner

Wagner 1

Rationale
Goals:
Scientists and other subject matter experts typically write for their fellow subject matter experts
and are often perceived as having poor communication skills when they present information to
the public. It is especially important that scientists and wildlife managers communicate ideas and
theories to the public in an audience-appropriate way when addressing controversial topics that
affect the general public or when they need cooperation from particular groups of people to more
effectively manage endangered species. Communicating facts in an organized paper for a
scientific or professional journal is very different than explaining complex concepts and eliciting
support from non-subject matter experts. In particular it is vital to remember that personal
beliefs, socioeconomic factors, and occupation are crucial when one is communicating with the
public about controversial issues (Kellert, 1985).
With the human population growing rapidly, animal habitat is disappearing at an alarming rate.
According to the IUCN Red List, 85% of species that are listed as endangered or critical are on
the list due to habitat loss (Leary et al, 2008). The people who are directly contributing to the
rapid expansion into the habitats required by many of these species need to be made aware of the
impacts that their expansions have on the environment. An effective communication campaign is
vital to the success of any conservation effort that depends on cooperation from the public.
Fragmentation, lack of species diversity, decreased genetic diversity, and decreased quality of life
for people are just a few of the many negative effects of poor wildlife management. By using a
mass media publicity campaign to raise awareness of these effects, with special emphasis on
decreased quality of life for people, wildlife managers and the public could become allies. A
successful publicity campaign could include seminars and public service announcements on
carefully selected topics. The common theme would be an emphasis on the impacts human
actions have on wildlife. For example, educating people about what fragmentation does to
migration and breeding patterns and how species diversity is crucial to the survival of a single
species, including humans, can change public behaviors. In turn this can help to improve wildlife
habitat. The objective is to involve the general public affected by wildlife management plans

Wagner 2

with the goal that they will attend monthly community meetings with wildlife managers to learn
even more.
Starting small and at a local level is the first step to making big changes in wildlife management.
Short-term goals will include finding a target audience to educate, as well as finding the most
efficient way to communicate necessary information so that ongoing discussions yield results.
This will involve research to identify two elements: the people who would have the most impact
in the short term, perhaps the most influential farmers or ranchers in the area, and what will drive
people to change their behaviors and/or views on an issue. By completing the short-term goals,
the long term goals can be addressed: if the reason a rancher shoots wolves on his property is
because he believes they will kill his livestock, then it might be most appropriate to find a way to
help the rancher install anti-wolf fences or acquire guard dogs; if the reason a city is dumping
waste in a river is due to costs of modernizing, it might be appropriate to help raise funds to
modernize, and so on. While this more targeted approach will require a substantial investment of
thought and effort, long-term consequences will be less severe.
Audience:
The initial target audience of the media plan will be ranchers and farmers. When wildlife
managers engage with them and address what types of barriers they perceive, it will be more
efficient and easier to make the necessary changes.
Ranchers and farmers are typically motivated by monetary incentives. If something is going to
decrease their profits, they are unlikely to change. Part of the problem is the high level of distrust
between many producers and wildlife managers. Getting compensation for damage caused by
animals is one a hot-button topic. If a wolf kills a cow, humans want compensation in money or
blood. If mule deer are destroying their crops, the same concept applies; however, it is up to
wildlife managers to decide if and how much an individual farmer or rancher will receive in each
case, which creates tension (Irby, Zidack, Johnson, & Saltiel, 1996).
Because economic incentives are a major driving factor in large carnivore management and
endangered species management, wildlife managers can make decisions that try to appease both

Wagner 3

rancher/farmers and wildlife. What causes the most decrease in support for management
programs is the seemingly inadequate compensation for damaged crops or depredation of
livestock (Sommers, Price, Urbigkit, & Peterson, 2010). By recognizing these factors, it will be
easier to pinpoint how to best talk to each audience about potential changes that need to be made.
Another tension point is a lack of overlap between the personal lifestyles of wildlife managers
and rancher/farmers, despite the fact that they both work in the same areas, (i.e. the same
geographical range). The personal lives of wildlife managers and ranchers typically do not
coincide. As noted by Harvey Harris, wildlife managers typically read periodicals and other
similar materials in their free time, while ranchers and farmers are more likely to get their
information from livestock reports, by word of mouth (Harvey, 1950) or, increasingly, from
professional but biased websites such as Cattle Today. Indeed, Cattle Today is an excellent
place to advertise because the publication keeps people in the agriculture industry up to date.
When subject matter experts address a general audience as if they have a common frame of
reference, misunderstandings and misinterpretations are inevitable. Subject matter experts need
to make adjustments in their communication strategies and show that they recognize that there
are multiple sides to every issue to increase the odds that each new audience will be receptive to
their message. Acknowledging differences is key to finding compromises and solutions to the
disagreements often found between these two groups.
The target audience members for the mass media campaign will be the ranchers and farmers in
the North Idaho, North Minnesota, Yellowstone, and Eastern Washington areas; however, the
general public will likely be involved, too. This is especially important to note because of the
social circles that surround the ranchers and farmers that dictate their lives.
Ranchers and farmers are very influential in the political climate of the area. This group is often
one of the most difficult groups to convince to make changes. They are elected by the people of
the area to reflect and uphold their views. The main issue here is that typically politicians will
make decisions based on the time frame of re-election, like two-year terms or four-year terms,
and do what they think will get them re-elected; consequently many do not think or act long-term

Wagner 4

(Wielgus, 2012). Therefore, it is paramount to align the campaign messages with the needs of
ranchers and farmers.
Contact with politicians is important because in each geographic region, rancher/farmers vote the
politicians into office. In areas where agriculture is the main profession or economic entity, the
politicians target audience members are those who depend on agriculture for their livelihoods;
science often is ignored. Unambiguous, audience-appropriate communication about the science
behind a wildlife management plan and its direct effect on the quality of life for people as well as
wildlife is the only way to mitigate this situation. Campaign messages that are meant to address
the general public will also be heard by politicians. With this in mind, messages should be
reviewed for possible misuse and, potentially, immediate rejection by elected officials who want
to maintain the status quo and who do not wish to expose themselves to possible voter
dissatisfaction by engaging in any sort of public debate or possible compromise.
Messages:
The messages in this communication campaign will demonstrate empathetic communication
between wildlife managers and ranchers. These messages include:

Wildlife interactions are part of life here. We need to work with wildlife instead of
against them.

Thinking long-term is the most viable option when managing wildlife populations.

Monthly meetings will be held to connect members of our community with wildlife
managers.

Monetary concerns must also be taken into account when managing wildlife.

There are many objections to the messages above. Each of the groups that interact with wildlife
managers have difficulty with different aspects of these messages and goals. The main objection
that target audience members will have with these messages is that at least one goes against their
core belief system. Politicians tend to think in terms of elections, most activists think that
prioritizing money over wildlife should be a crime, and ranchers and farmers would rather not
deal with wildlife at all and just eliminate the organisms that cause them nuisance. The purpose
for monthly meetings will be to give members of these various groups opportunities to discuss

Wagner 5

wildlife management options and methods, which will, in turn, help to bridge some of the
informational and societal gaps between members of these groups.
Perhaps the greatest challenge will be the challenge of illustrating why proposed management
strategies should be accepted. It is going to be difficult to convince a politician to make a
controversial decision if it means there is a potential to be voted out of office; it will be equally
difficult to convince an activist that the livelihoods of those affected by the changes are
important too. However, most difficult will be convincing a farmer or rancher, along with the
people who are economically connected with them, to expose themselves to any level of
increased economic risk that may be associated with the loss of livestock or crops.
To address these challenges, potential campaign statements will include the following:

Can you name the disaster that struck Yellowstone National Park between 1926 and
1995? If you answered that the wolves were driven out, youre correct.

Do you remember Yellowstone with no wolves? The park was destroyed.

Do you know where your food comes from? Without farmers and ranchers, we wouldnt
have enough.

Dont make life altering decisions by what tomorrow looks like. Make them for the
future. Your childrens future.

To illustrate the importance of wildlife, show its role in peoples lives. To accompany these
statements, it will be vital to have striking images that will appeal to everyone who sees them.
Images, for example, may feature small animals alone or with a Bambi-like tragedy, or
desolate parks with no wildlife and dead trees. It is also important to include images of people,
for example with a rancher standing next to his herd, or a lettuce farmer setting up a deerprotection fence. By connecting tragic imagery to powerful words, the messages will resonate
with many.
There isnt just one best spokesperson for this campaign; it would be ideal to have a group
consisting of a wildlife manager, a local politician, an activist leader, and a rancher/farmer. By
having a group instead of just one person, there is a representative for every occupation.

Wagner 6

Media
Media has international proportions. With the increased usage of Facebook, Twitter, and other
social media including YouTube and LinkedIn, there is a much wider range of audiences that are
reached. Facebook and Twitter have a 100% usage by special interest groups for both
environmental groups as well as agricultural groups; YouTube and blogs have more than an 80%
usage by special interest groups (Obar, Zube, & Lampe, 2012).
Public Service Announcements (PSAs) are a cost effective way to reach local audiences. There
are several different types of PSAs, including television, radio, and newspaper PSAs (Peters,
2010). Historically, the main issue with PSAs is that it has been very difficult to determine if the
target audience members have received a message, making it difficult to determine if change was
being made. However, given the continued upward trend in social media usage, it has become a
little easier to pinpoint where people are getting their information (Obar, Zube & Lampe, 2012).
Social media has led to a larger coordination of movements. By using coordination techniques
such as Facebook groups and Twitter hashtags, everyone interested in the campaign can obtain
and transmit information to large numbers of people (Obar, Zube & Lampe, 2012). A significant
problem, however, is the potential for fast transmission of anecdotal information instead of actual
facts; consequently misinformation can spread and lead to more problems in the future (Obar,
Zube & Lampe 2012).
In tandem with the increase in social media usage, most people are getting their news from
online sources as well (Obar, Zube & Lampe, 2012). This suggests that people are spending more
time reading online, so online advertisements and potentially short news stories with links to a
website with more information could deliver the message to an even wider audience.
Even though there appears to be a downward trend in paper media for dispensing information,
informational fliers are always a good way to dispense information (Caffee & Frank 1996).
Acting on this, we can target college campuses and public arenas. There is a high chance that
many people will get rid of the fliers but many people still will see the information.

Wagner 7

Knowing all of this information about how information dispersion we can target specific media
and audiences. We can issue a PSA to local television stations, like the local CBS, Fox, and CNN
stations on day time television and paid advertisements during evening news shows, disperse
fliers in areas where crowds congregate like college campuses and shopping malls, advertise on
Cattle Today since many ranchers get a lot of their information from the site and it keeps up on
current topics of interest to ranchers and farmers, and build a website so people can learn more
about the topic of wildlife management and the issues surrounding it. Traffic will be directed to
the website via information given on PSAs, fliers, and in magazines like Cattle Today.
Budget and Production
Budget
Element

Cost

PSA Production for Television and

Graphic Design
Permissions
Script Writer
Spokesperson
5 Actors for PSA and Ad

$3000

Airtime for PSA

Airtime for Ad
Graphic Designer
(fliers and web page)
Advertisement Production for Television
and Graphic Design
Website Domain for PSA Info
Annual Renewal for Website Domain
Website Maintenance
Delivery of PSA Info to Local TV
Stations
Advertise on Cattle Today
Incidentals
Total:

Total
Cost
$3000

$500
$35 per hour for 6 hours
$50 per hour for 10 hours
$20 per hour per actor for 5 hours
(times 2 for Ad and PSA)
Gratis from local stations
$5000 for 6 months of airtime
$2000

$500
$210
$500
$1000

$0 (done in tandem with PSA

production)
$200
$100 per year for 10 years
$150 per year for 10 years
Delivered by Volunteers

$0

$100 per month for 6 months

$600
$400
$15910

Production of Public Service Announcement

Hire a
production
company,

Disseminatio

$0
$5000
$2000

$200
$1000
$1500
$0

Wagner 8

Funding
Approva
l
Time
Required

6 months

writer,
spokesperson,
and
extra actors
2 months

PSA
n
Production to Television
Stations

First
Airing

2 months

2
months

1 month

Total
Time
13
month
s

Website

Funding
Approval
Time Required 6 months

Hire a Web Designer

1 month

Webpage Production
2 months
Total Time
9 months

Advertisement on Cattle Today

Funding
Approval
Time Required 6 months

Hire a Graphic Designer

1 month

Ad Production
2 months
Total Time
9 months

Assessment
Objective
PSA Completed On Time
PSA Completed On Budget
PSA Airing on Public
Television
PSA Airing for Time
Budgeted

Grade, 1-5, 5 is highest

Total
Points

Wagner 9

Website Completed On
Time
Website Appeals to Target
Audience
Website is Functional
Website Gets 5000 hits in
one year
Cattle Today Ad is Effective Ad gets 500 page views in 12 months
Target Audience is Being
Survey on website to determine which groups are
Reached
logging on to website
Use this data from the assessment to determine if the PSA, ad, and website are increasing
attendance in the monthly meetings has increased.
Conclusion
By using public service announcements, websites, and social media, we create a cost effective
and widespread communication campaign. By using PSAs and other media campaigns, we can
reach all of the target audience members in just a few hours. Starting small and at a local level is
the first step to making big changes in wildlife management. Public involvement is the only way
to make the changes necessary to improve wildlife management techniques. Audienceappropriate communication is the key.
References
Cattle Today Online. (n.d.). Retrieved 28 March 2015, from
http://www.cattletoday.com/index.shtml
Chaffee, S., & Frank, S. (1996). How Americans Get Political Information: Print versus
Broadcast News. American Academy of Political and Social Science, 546.
Harris, H. (1950). Why havent farmers taken to regrassing? Journal of Range Management, 3.
Irby, L., Zidack, W., Johnson, J., & Saltiel, J. (1996). Economic Damage to Forage Crops by
Native Ungulates as Perceived by Farmers and Ranchers in Montana. Journal of Range
Management, 49.
Kelllert, S. (1985). Social and perpetual factors in endangered species management. Journal of
Wildlife Management, 49.

Wagner 10

Leary, T., Seri, L., Flannery, T., Wright, D., Hamilton, S., Helgen, K., Singadan, R., Menzies, J.,
Allison, A., James, R., Aplin, K., Salas, L. & Dickman, C. 2008. Zaglossus bruijnii. The
IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2014.3. <www.iucnredlist.org>.
Downloaded on 23 March 2015.
Obar, J., Zube, P., & Lampe, C. (2012). Advocacy 2.0: an analysis of how advocacy groups in
the United States perceive and use social media as tools for facilitating civic engagement
and collective action. Journal of Information Policy, 2.
Peters, Doerte, Media Campaigns Posters and Flyers sswm.info, Sustainable Sanitation and
Water Management. 2010. 26 March 2015.
Sommers, A., Price, C., Urbigkit, C., & Peterson, E. (2010). Quantifying Economic Impacts of
Large - Carnivore Depredation On Bovine Calves. Journal of Wildlife Management, 74.
Wielgus, R. (2012, October). Lecture.