Expanding Into the Urban Arena

Extension has been effective because it derives its programming direction from the informational needs of the public it serves. Population shifts from rural to urban areas challenge Extension to expand and redefine its traditional program emphases to be meaningful to, and therefore supported by, a mostly urban public. This challenge is now evident, even in traditional agriculture and natural resource areas such as wildlife programming.

Historically, Extension wildlife programs responded to rural property owners wanting to increase the profitability of some types of wildlife, while reducing the economic damage of others. Contemporary wildlife information needs extend far beyond that limited scope. All people who purposefully or incidentally provide food, cover, and water for any species can be considered producers or growers of wildlife. Wildlife consumers are those who actively or passively appreciate or dislike wildlife. Greater environmental awareness and increased encounters with wildlife in the suburbs and cities have created increased demand for educational programs about wildlife directed toward these urban audiences.

Few examples of successful approaches and methodologies for urban wildlife programming exist. Some insights into research, management, and Extension efforts in the urban arena and general guidelines for implementing urban wildlife programs have been published. However, each city has unique issues and clien-tele needs requiring original Extension programming efforts.

In Florida, a new focus on urban wildlife education was established in 1986 through a cooperative agreement between the Florida Cooperative Extension Service and the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. Although this agreement outlined broad objectives, detailed planning was required to determine specific needs and develop a proactive educational effort for urban areas.

The first step in developing short- and long-term goals for any new program is to conduct a baseline assessment of clientele and commodity/resource needs. This needs assessment provides an original focus for strategic planning. Needs identified by asking clients what they feel to be the most important concerns are called "felt needs." These differ from "ascribed needs," which evaluate specific program elements. Several methods were used to conduct an original needs assessment for wildlife education in Florida in 1988. Needs were identified as either information in great demand by urban publics or information required for proper conservation of wildlife resources in urban areas.

To determine the greatest clientele information needs, biologists at the five regional offices of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and Extension agents in all 67 county Extension offices were surveyed. The most frequent requests for wildlife information at county Extension and game commission offices covered topics on nuisance, identification, injuries, attracting, life history, and laws. Both agencies received calls on birds, endangered species, raccoons, and snakes. The frequency of calls about other species weren't shared evenly between Extension and commission offices.

To solicit ideas about wildlife needs in urban environments, the nominal group technique was used at workshops for biologists, conservationists, and wildlife faculty. They identified habitat loss and degradation as the major problems confronting urban wildlife. Other identified problems, in descending order of importance, included lack of wildlife knowledge by urban publics, predation and harassment by free-ranging pets, traffic, lack of city and county planning to address wildlife needs, and pollution. All of these concerns are related to human influences on wildlife or wildlife habitats.

Based on the needs assessment, Florida Extension wildlife specialists and game commission biologists jointly identified objectives and actions that could most effectively address clientele and wildlife needs for a strategic plan. This plan was developed using a step-down technique-reducing the primary objective into less complex subordinate objectives until terminal issues are reached. Terminal items are recognized as actions that can be performed or are candidates for solution by research, literature review, and consultations. Plan development is from more complex to less complex. Execution of the plan is from terminal items to the primary objective. The primary objective of the resulting strategic plan for this program was to enhance and preserve urban wildlife populations and their habitats. Second order objectives included:

1. Providing urban residents with information about understanding and dealing with wildlife nuisance and damage situations.

2. Increasing the participation of urban residents in activities that enhance and preserve urban wildlife and their habitats.

3. Providing land-use decision makers with information relating to the ecological consequences of various land-use options.

4. Determining the ecological requirements of wildlife in urban environments.

Fifty-seven more specific objectives are included in the plan. Numerous educational activities were developed to accomplish these objectives through five major efforts, which are still ongoing:

1. Responding to Urban Clientele. To enhance county agents' ability to respond to client questions, a county-by-county directory of agencies, organizations, and individuals providing wildlife-related services and information was prepared. An "unwanted wildlife" dictionary with brief statements about preventing and controlling wildlife-related prob-lems was developed for agents' reference as they dealt with client questions. Also, urban dwellers were offered fact sheets on a variety of topics, including nuisance wildlife and tips on attracting wildlife.

2. Multimedia Information Transfer. Print and electronic media were used to disseminate information about wildlife to a broad audience. Several 30-minute video programs were also produced, broadcast on government access and network channels, and disseminated to libraries and schools.

3. Landscaping for Wildlife. Information on attracting wildlife and a personalized certificate were provided to participants who adequately complete an application showing how they enhanced the wildlife habitat values of their property.

4. Habitat Information. Extension specialists provided wildlife information to developers, planners, and land regulators so wildlife habitat needs could be effectively addressed.

5. Urban Wildlife Research. Research was conducted on a variety of urban wildlife-related topics:

• Nesting success of roof-nesting least terns.

• An evaluation of an Extension program to encourage construction and placement of bat houses on private property.

• Attractiveness of nectar flowers to butterflies.

• Impacts of water management and energy production on reproductive success of American crocodiles.

• An evaluation of manatee distribution patterns in response to public use activities.

• Effects of urbanization on bird communities associated with streamside habitats.

Most state conservation agencies don't have the resources, facilities, or networking capabilities of Extension to transfer wildlife information to these large, geographically separated urban audiences. Cooperative programming may be the most effective approach to successfully plan and implement an urban emphasis requiring wildlife expertise and information transfer capabilities. Effectively addressing urban residents' requests for wildlife information while also transferring technical information about wildlife needs and land-use decisions is both a challenge and a tremendous new opportunity for Extension.

1. Proceedings of a National Symposium on Urban Wildlife (Columbia, Missouri: National Institute for Urban Wildlife, 1987, 1991).

2. C. K. Phenicie and J. R. Lyons, "Tactical Planning in Fish and Wildlife Management and Research" (Washington, D.C.: Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife, 1973).