In Texas, landowner associations for the management of common-pool resources
such as wildlife and groundwater have become increasingly popular. Successful
management of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) depends upon the collective
decision-making of landowners. Likewise, aquifer reserves are a trans-boundary
resource subject to the "rule of capture." Numerous factors may affect the success of
common-pool associations, including property ownership and habitat characteristics,
landowner demographics, and social capital. I used a mail questionnaire to explore the
relationship between these factors and their effect on association activities and
management practices for eight Wildlife Management Associations (WMAs) occurring
within the Lower Post Oak Savannah (LPOS) and the Central Post Oak Savannah
(CPOS). In addition, I compared responses of members of WMAs in CPOS to members
of the Brazos Valley Water Alliance (BVWA), a groundwater association situated in the
region. Compared to CPOS, members of WMAs within the LPOS belonged to much
larger groups, were generally more recent landowners that met more often, raised more
money using more funding methods, and tended to have longer association membership
than CPOS landowners, yet they had lower social capital. CPOS landowners owned
significantly more land and considered relaxation/leisure and hunting more important
land uses than LPOS landowners. The smaller group size in CPOS may be the most
important factor in building social capital. Intra-association trust was positively
influenced by the longevity of property ownership, the number of association meetings,
the percentage of males in the association, and other factors. Negative influences on trust
included absentee ownership and Habitat Cover Index, which was a measure of the
amount of wooded habitat present.
In CPOS, members of the BVWA were part of a much larger, more
heterogeneous, and more recently formed group than members of WMAs. They also
placed greater importance on utilitarian aspects of their properties, as opposed to land
stewardship for conservation as practiced by members of WMAs.
If associations are kept small ( < 50) with more frequent meetings, greater social
capital and information sharing may be achieved, which may lead to increased land
stewardship practices. However, landowners may be motivated more by their shared
values independent of any benefit from their association
