Acceptability of black bear management options relative to frequency of sightings and conflicts with humans

Abstract Estimates of abundance and frequency of human–bear conflicts are commonly used in American black bear ( Ursus americanus ) management decisions; however, the importance of these measures to residents of bear inhabited areas and their influence on the acceptability of management actions is unclear. This study surveyed residents ( n = 1497) in Tennessee counties inhabited by bears to elicit their support toward various management actions intended to minimize human–bear conflicts and to determine whether and how support varied by the frequency of bear sightings or human–bear conflicts in the area where they live. Overall, residents expressed positive attitudes toward black bears and preferred less intrusive over more intrusive actions to minimize human–bear conflicts; lethal actions were least preferred. Residents' support toward the most intrusive actions differed according to their perceptions of the frequency of bear sightings and bear‐related conflicts; less intrusive actions were preferable to residents, regardless of their perceptions of bear sightings or conflict frequency. These findings suggest understanding the attitudes and perceptions of residents in bear inhabited areas can help managers design policies and interventions that are more likely to be supported by local communities while maintaining viable bear populations and safeguarding human–bear welfare.