Activating uncertainty: Scientific evidence and environmental values in wildlife management

Abstract

This paper examines the entanglement of science and politics through a case study of a controversy over hunting as a form of environmental management in a suburban town in the northeastern United States. Drawing on interviews with stakeholders, meeting observation, and media reports, we examine the justifications for and resistance to a municipal-level recreational deer hunting program. Our study reveals how participants activate discourses of science-based management and scientific (un)certainty (regarding deer populations, their impacts on forest ecosystems, and deer control approaches) to support arguments for and against hunting. In focusing on questions of science and rationality, the arguments of both opponents and proponents of the hunting program elide the varying human values, ethics, and emotions that underlie the deer management debate, even as they frame their positions as an act of care for the environment. In contrast to oft-cited cases where scientific uncertainty has primarily been deployed strategically by powerful actors, our analysis reveals nuance and complexity in the activation and mobilization of science and uncertainty in environmental politics and decision-making. As both hunting proponents and opponents appeal to the collection of further scientific data to resolve the controversy, we argue for greater attention to the ethical and emotional dimensions of this value-laden conflict.