1 / 24

Commitment among waterfowl hunters in Illinois

Commitment among waterfowl hunters in Illinois. Andrew L. Stephenson Brent D. Williams Craig A. Miller Human Dimensions Research Program Illinois Natural History Survey University of Illinois. Waterfowl Flyways in North America. Pacific Central Mississippi Atlantic.

alexis-woodard
Download Presentation

Commitment among waterfowl hunters in Illinois

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Commitment among waterfowl hunters in Illinois • Andrew L. Stephenson • Brent D. Williams • Craig A. Miller • Human Dimensions Research Program • Illinois Natural History Survey • University of Illinois

  2. Waterfowl Flyways in North America PacificCentralMississippiAtlantic

  3. Waterfowl Management Zones in Illinois

  4. Study Objectives Investigate commitment among waterfowl hunters in Illinois Identify demographic differences among waterfowl hunters based on their commitment - Age, years hunting waterfowl, frequency of hunting waterfowl Identify hunting characteristics of highly committed waterfowl hunters - Harvest, days afield, success (harvest/hunter/day)

  5. Methods Mail survey (n=5,000) -Random sample of previous years’ State Waterfowl Stamp purchasers -Harvest card prior to the season opening -Questionnaire mailed after season close Response Rate -Sample reduced to 4,840 -50% response rate (n=2,424)

  6. Analysis Principal Component Analysis (PCA) on attitudes toward waterfowl hunting -3 Components: - Commitment - Skill - Success K-means Cluster Analysis on Commitment variables -4 Groups: “Very Low”, “Low”, “High”, “Very High” ANOVA and Chi-Square tests

  7. Commitment Cronbach’s alpha = 0.982

  8. Skill Cronbach’s alpha = 0.884 *p<0.001

  9. Success Cronbach’s alpha = 0.580 ᵃReverse coded,*p<0.01, **p<0.001

  10. Cluster Analysis ( = 1.8) ( = 3.3) ( = 4.8) ( = 6.2) Clustered into 4 groups: n = 2256

  11. Demographics *p<0.001

  12. Hunted During 2011-12 Season χ² = 439.90, p<0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.44

  13. Frequency of Hunting Waterfowl in Illinois χ² = 838.43, p<0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.35

  14. Hunted During 2011-12 Season Nearly 64% of respondents hunted waterfowl during the 2011-12 Season. n = 1480

  15. Hunted During 2011-12 Seasons

  16. Season Participation n = 1480, χ² = 116.63, p<0.001, Cramer’s V = 0.16

  17. Percent of Total Season Days Afield

  18. Percent of Total Season Harvest

  19. Harvest/Hunter *p<0.01, **p<0.001

  20. Effort (Days Afield/Hunter) *p<0.001

  21. Success (Harvest/Day/Hunter) *p<0.05, **p<0.01, ***p<0.001

  22. Discussion Very highly committed hunters are: -younger, -have been hunting for longer, -are more likely to hunt every year, -participate in more seasons each year,-use spinning-wing decoys more often than low and very low commitment hunters,-are more successful waterfowl hunters. Represent 34% of active hunters and are responsible for: -55% of total days afield -60% of all waterfowl harvest in Illinois.

  23. Acknowledgments • Illinois Department of Natural Resources • Illinois Natural History Survey • Federal Aid in Wildlife Restoration Grant W-112-R-23 • All survey respondents

  24. Questions? Photo by Kevin Murphy

More Related