Matthew P. Hinrichs, Julia Nawrocki, Matthew P. Gruntorad, Mark P. Vrtiska, Mark A. Pegg, Christopher J. Chizinski
{"title":"An examination of scenarios to increase waterfowl hunting participation","authors":"Matthew P. Hinrichs, Julia Nawrocki, Matthew P. Gruntorad, Mark P. Vrtiska, Mark A. Pegg, Christopher J. Chizinski","doi":"10.1002/wsb.1490","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Since the 1970s, waterfowl hunting participation has declined in the United States, which has resulted in socioeconomic consequences for waterfowl conservation and management. Attempts to increase the waterfowl hunter population have been difficult, partly due to social factors (e.g., constraints, motivations, demographics) influencing who participates, frequency of participation, and diversity of desired outcomes from hunting experiences. We examined the preferences of 10 potential management options by hunters and anglers from several states in the central U.S. during 2018. Respondents were grouped into the following activity groups based on responses to survey questions: frequent waterfowl hunters, sporadic waterfowl hunters, previous waterfowl hunters, hunters (never hunted waterfowl), and nonhunters (anglers who have never hunted). All ordinal models indicated that the ability of the scenario to increase participation significantly ( P < 0.05) depended on the activity group. Scenarios, including Having someone to take the respondent hunting (probability of increasing participation > 0.35 for all activity groups) and Special areas for new waterfowl hunters, had the greatest indication (probability > 0.40) of increased waterfowl hunting participation across activity groups. Frequent and sporadic waterfowl hunters ranked Special areas to allow for a quality hunt highest, while hunters and non‐hunters ranked Someone to take me hunting as the most preferred scenario. Information for what new/inexperienced hunters need, Classes or materials to teach waterfowl ID, and Ability to rent equipment were scenarios consistently ranked as the lowest for all activity groups. Our research underscores that only some of the scenarios had the same appeal to all activity groups, which implies a need for a greater diversity of experiences in the landscape of public waterfowl hunting access. Also, continued promotion of current waterfowl hunters taking new or inexperienced individuals may increase waterfowl hunting participation.","PeriodicalId":23845,"journal":{"name":"Wildlife Society Bulletin","volume":"10 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Wildlife Society Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1490","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Environmental Science","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Abstract Since the 1970s, waterfowl hunting participation has declined in the United States, which has resulted in socioeconomic consequences for waterfowl conservation and management. Attempts to increase the waterfowl hunter population have been difficult, partly due to social factors (e.g., constraints, motivations, demographics) influencing who participates, frequency of participation, and diversity of desired outcomes from hunting experiences. We examined the preferences of 10 potential management options by hunters and anglers from several states in the central U.S. during 2018. Respondents were grouped into the following activity groups based on responses to survey questions: frequent waterfowl hunters, sporadic waterfowl hunters, previous waterfowl hunters, hunters (never hunted waterfowl), and nonhunters (anglers who have never hunted). All ordinal models indicated that the ability of the scenario to increase participation significantly ( P < 0.05) depended on the activity group. Scenarios, including Having someone to take the respondent hunting (probability of increasing participation > 0.35 for all activity groups) and Special areas for new waterfowl hunters, had the greatest indication (probability > 0.40) of increased waterfowl hunting participation across activity groups. Frequent and sporadic waterfowl hunters ranked Special areas to allow for a quality hunt highest, while hunters and non‐hunters ranked Someone to take me hunting as the most preferred scenario. Information for what new/inexperienced hunters need, Classes or materials to teach waterfowl ID, and Ability to rent equipment were scenarios consistently ranked as the lowest for all activity groups. Our research underscores that only some of the scenarios had the same appeal to all activity groups, which implies a need for a greater diversity of experiences in the landscape of public waterfowl hunting access. Also, continued promotion of current waterfowl hunters taking new or inexperienced individuals may increase waterfowl hunting participation.
期刊介绍:
The Wildlife Society Bulletin is a journal for wildlife practitioners that effectively integrates cutting edge science with management and conservation, and also covers important policy issues, particularly those that focus on the integration of science and policy. Wildlife Society Bulletin includes articles on contemporary wildlife management and conservation, education, administration, law enforcement, and review articles on the philosophy and history of wildlife management and conservation. This includes:
Reports on practices designed to achieve wildlife management or conservation goals.
Presentation of new techniques or evaluation of techniques for studying or managing wildlife.
Retrospective analyses of wildlife management and conservation programs, including the reasons for success or failure.
Analyses or reports of wildlife policies, regulations, education, administration, law enforcement.
Review articles on the philosophy and history of wildlife management and conservation. as well as other pertinent topics that are deemed more appropriate for the Wildlife Society Bulletin than for The Journal of Wildlife Management.
Book reviews that focus on applied research, policy or wildlife management and conservation.