Members of the public play a primary role in successful implementation of wildlife management plans, making communication between scientists and the public a vital component of wildlife management. Although there is substantial public interest in the health of ungulate populations, stakeholder perspectives can vary widely, rendering a single approach to communication ineffective. To improve science communication, we characterized perspectives regarding issues negatively affecting mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) in Wyoming, USA. We used Q methodology, a mixed quantitative-qualitative approach where participants ranked a series of statements followed by semi-structured interviews, to identify shared perspectives. We interviewed individuals (n = 37) representing prominent stakeholder groups (e.g., ranchers, hunters, conservation non-profits) in Wyoming. We identified 3 perspectives (52% of variance explained) that captured shared views regarding what factors are negatively affecting mule deer: bottom-up (n = 17 participants; 26% variance), human contributions (n = 9; 14% variance), and top-down (n = 8; 12% variance) perspectives. Most participants shared the idea that mule deer are being negatively affected, but participants diverged in views as to the primary issues. Perspectives ranged from being focused on bottom-up factors (e.g., habitat fragmentation, condition of winter ranges) to top-down factors (e.g., predation, disease) to factors focused on human contributions (e.g., human activity, public and political interests). Based on how participants diverged in perspectives and their interest in mule deer management, we discuss opportunities for scientists to improve communication by incorporating ecological complexity and nuance, moving towards a 2-way dialogue of communication, and sharing their own first-hand experiences in future communications with stakeholders. © 2021 The Authors. The Journal of Wildlife Management published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The Wildlife Society.

中文翻译：

---

拥抱复杂性和背景以改善科学传播

公众在成功实施野生动物管理计划方面发挥着主要作用，使科学家和公众之间的交流成为野生动物管理的重要组成部分。尽管公众对有蹄类动物的健康有很大的兴趣，但利益相关者的观点可能差异很大，导致单一的沟通方法无效。为了改善科学传播，我们描述了对美国怀俄明州骡鹿 ( Odocoileus hemionus )产生负面影响的问题的观点。我们使用 Q 方法，这是一种混合定量-定性方法，参与者对一系列陈述进行排序，然后进行半结构化访谈，以确定共同的观点。我们采访了个人（n = 37) 代表怀俄明州的重要利益相关者群体（例如，牧场主、猎人、保护非营利组织）。我们确定了 3 个观点（解释了 52% 的方差），它们捕获了关于哪些因素对骡鹿产生负面影响的共同观点：自下而上（n  = 17 名参与者；26% 方差），人类贡献（n  = 9；14% 方差），和自上而下 ( n = 8; 12% 差异）观点。大多数参与者都认为骡鹿受到了负面影响，但参与者对主要问题的看法不同。视角范围从关注自下而上的因素（例如栖息地破碎化、冬季范围的状况）到自上而下的因素（例如捕食、疾病）到关注人类贡献的因素（例如人类活动、公共和政治利益） . 基于参与者的观点分歧以及他们对骡鹿管理的兴趣，我们讨论了科学家们通过纳入生态复杂性和细微差别来改善交流的机会，走向双向交流对话，并在未来分享他们自己的第一手经验与利益相关者的沟通。© 2021 作者。由 Wiley Periodicals LLC 代表野生动物协会出版的《野生动物管理杂志》。