Human dimensions of fish and wildlife management

Word cloud for human dimensions of fish and wildlife management

Fish and wildlife management is more than just biology.

It’s also about navigating how different groups of people think fish, wildlife and habitat should be managed and making decisions given those potentially diverse perspectives.

Understanding the human dimensions of fish and wildlife management helps wildlife and fisheries managers design activities, regulations, policies and practices that are biologically sound and sustainable as well as socially acceptable.

Populations, habitats & humans

Imagine fish and wildlife management as a stool with three legs.

Biologists who monitor and maintain the health and viability of fish and wildlife populations represent one leg of the management stool. The second leg is work to conserve and improve the habitats that support those populations.

A wealth of scientific research that seeks answers on how to best conserve, improve and manage populations and habitats are integral parts of those first two legs of fish and wildlife management.

The third leg – human dimensions – seeks to explain the values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors of fish and wildlife stakeholders in relation to management concerns. This work integrates research findings in decisions about population management, hunting regulations and land use so fish and wildlife management decisions and actions reflect the preferences of stakeholders and strive toward long-term sustainability.

Why human dimensions matter

Even if a fish or wildlife policy is biologically sound, it can fail if the public views it as unfair, unnecessary or misaligned with its values. Natural resource managers recognize that natural resource management involves more than ecological processes. Social processes and consequences also must be considered.

Human dimensions research helps address questions such as:

  • How many ducks did hunters harvest last season, and how many days did they spend hunting?
  • What proportion of anglers support or oppose a fishing regulation and why?
  • What beliefs do Minnesota residents hold about wolves, deer, elk or other species of interest and how do they influence their preferences for management?
  • How acceptable or unacceptable are potential management responses to human-wildlife conflicts to different stakeholders?
Examples at the Minnesota DNR

Deer management: Hunters, farmers, suburban homeowners and conservationists all have different experiences with deer. Managers may need to balance crop damage, ecological browse impacts, car collisions, public safety and hunting tradition. Each year, the Minnesota DNR surveys a sample of deer hunters to assess trust in the agency, satisfaction with deer management and preferences for management objectives and regulatory proposals. In 2019, the DNR also surveyed landowners to understand the severity of deer-related crop damage and gather input on chronic wasting disease management in southeastern Minnesota. Findings from these efforts help guide deer hunting regulations statewide.

Species tradeoffs: Species' needs are diverse and often in conflict. For example, management actions that benefit moose can come at the expense of deer. In 2024, the Minnesota DNR partnered with the University of Minnesota–Duluth to assess public preferences for management outcomes related to moose, deer and wolves in northeastern Minnesota. The findings from this study will help shape updated management objectives for these species in the region.

Nuisance wildlife: How tolerant people are of bears near town or actions to respond to unwanted animals in their attic can influence appropriate management approaches. In 2023, the Minnesota DNR surveyed a sample of licensed trappers to better understand their participation in nuisance wildlife trapping, where they trap and their views on trapping regulations. The results provided insights into trapper activity as well as levels of support and opposition for current and potential regulations.

Fisheries: Effective fisheries management relies on both robust biological data and the support of anglers to ensure compliance and maintain trust between resource managers and the public. In 2023, the Minnesota DNR conducted a statewide survey of anglers to understand their fishing behaviors, including targeted species, frequency of fishing, attitudes toward fisheries management practices and preferred sources of fishing information. The survey results offered valuable insights into trends in catch-and-release participation and revealed which management techniques are most and least supported by Minnesota anglers.

Methods used

Human dimensions draw heavily from:

  • Surveys: Surveys are structured tools used to collect information from people. They typically involve asking a set of standardized questions – online, on paper, by phone or in person – to learn about people’s opinions, experiences, behaviors or characteristics. In natural resource management, surveys help researchers and agencies understand what the public thinks, wants or does so decisions can reflect both ecological science and the perspectives of the people who use or care about those resources.
  • Interviews: An interview is a method of collecting information by asking people questions directly, usually through a conversation between an interviewer and a participant. Interviews can be structured (using a fixed list of questions), semi-structured (using guiding questions with flexibility) or unstructured (open-ended and conversational). They allow researchers to explore people’s experiences, opinions and motivations in depth and are commonly used when detailed, nuanced information is needed.
  • Focus groups: A focus group is a guided discussion with a small group of people, typically six to 12 participants, led by a trained facilitator to explore their opinions, experiences or reactions to a specific topic. Unlike surveys or individual interviews, focus groups rely on group interaction. Participants respond not only to the facilitator’s questions but also to each other. This dynamic often reveals shared views, disagreements and insights that might not surface in one-on-one settings. Focus groups are especially useful for understanding how people think and talk about an issue in a social context.
  • Citizen science: More accurately called community science among researchers, citizen science is a research approach in which members of the public actively contribute to scientific projects. Participants may collect data, monitor wildlife, report observations, test environmental conditions or help interpret results. Community science expands the reach of research, builds public engagement and provides valuable information for natural resource management while giving people a hands-on role in understanding and protecting the environment.

The Minnesota DNR primarily uses statistically representative surveys to ensure that decisions are based on accurate and generalizable data about stakeholders. These surveys are designed using scientific methods to ensure that estimates reflect the broader population – not just those who respond.

This helps us understand the full range of perspectives, including those who may not attend public meetings or comment online. By using reliable survey data, we can make management decisions that are informed, balanced and responsive to the needs and values of Minnesotans.

Where human dimensions data fits

Biological and scientific research data tells us “What is happening with fish and wildlife populations and their habitats?” Human dimensions data tell us “What management actions will the public accept, support or comply with?” Fish and wildlife decisions ideally integrate both.

Research partners

The Minnesota DNR regularly collaborates with academic researchers; state and federal agencies; and non-profit organizations to conduct integrated research that guides fisheries and wildlife management. These partnerships address biological, social and economic dimensions of resource stewardship.

The approach recognizes that effective management depends on both ecological science and public engagement. Together, we work to support biologically diverse and resilient ecosystems, while ensuring that management practices are sustainable and reflective of the values of Minnesota’s communities.

Reports & publications

List of reports and publications. See folder (not defined) for archived reports.

Back to top