Marketing and Ecological Models to Predict Permit Purchasing Behavior of Sportspersons

Graham, Katherine A.; Price, Nathaniel B.; Jones, Valerie K.; Fontaine, Joseph J.; Chizinski, Christopher J.

doi:10.1201/9781003009054-6-8

Cited by 4 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although our understanding of the social factors associated with waterfowl hunter participation has improved, managers lack a detailed understanding of waterfowl hunter vital rates (e.g., recruitment, retention, license purchase probability), which would provide those engaged in R3 planning insights into where to direct limited resources to most effectively maintain or increase hunter numbers (Graham et al 2021). Vital rates may act as a better measure of participation, as compared with single-year measures of license purchase, because of high hunter turnover, also called hunter churn (Southwick Associates 2015Associates , 2022Hinrichs et al 2020).…”

Section: Department Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mark-recapture methods allow for consideration of the larger waterfowl hunter population, not just those who purchase a license every year (Graham et al 2021). The larger waterfowl hunter population includes individuals who purchase a license every year but also individuals who sporadically purchase a license.…”

Section: Department Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to informing targeted R3 initiatives, the parameter estimates discussed above can be used to predict the effect of potential waterfowl hunter management alternatives (Price Tack et al 2018, Graham et al 2021.…”

Section: Assumptions and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…High hunter churn can limit the reliability of using the number of single‐year license purchases or unique annual users as a measure of hunter population size because these measures do not fully encapsulate those engaged in hunting, which includes both sporadic and active participants. Further, those involved with R3 could benefit from analytical frameworks that allow for the prediction of future waterfowl hunter participation in similar fashion to processes embraced in the management of waterfowl populations (Nichols et al 2007, Johnson et al 2015, Humburg et al 2018, Price Tack et al 2018, Graham et al 2021).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Exploring the population dynamics of waterfowl hunters using a mark‐recapture approach

Graham,

Vrtiska,

Humburg

et al. 2024

J Wildl Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of waterfowl hunters in the United States has declined since the 1980s despite relatively abundant waterfowl populations and liberal hunting regulations. Programs focused on recruiting, retaining, and reactivating (R3) waterfowl hunters have become important to avoid further losses in traditional revenue for habitat management and protection and political support for waterfowl conservation and management. We focus on 4 waterfowl hunter population vital rates (i.e., recruitment rate, retention probability, license purchase probability, realized population growth rate), which can be used to improve the effectiveness of waterfowl hunter R3 activities and initiatives by providing a deeper understanding of waterfowl hunter population dynamics to determine who programs should target, where programs should be targeted, and finally the evaluation of programs. To do so, we analyzed Nebraska state electronic license data from 2012–2019 using Pradel survival and recruitment models in a mark‐recapture framework. Female waterfowl hunter recruitment was higher than males; however, retention and license purchase probabilities were lower. Recruitment was highest in younger generations and retention highest in older generations. License purchase probabilities were highest among those in the oldest and youngest generations. The availability of hunting opportunity increased license purchase probabilities but had a minimal influence on retention and no association with recruitment. There were weak relationships between rurality and recruitment, and retention and license purchase probabilities. Finally, belonging to Ducks Unlimited was positively associated with higher license purchase and retention probabilities. Targeting an increase in license purchase probability by promoting social support for hunters through conservation organization membership should be a focus of waterfowl hunter R3 efforts to have the greatest influence on increasing waterfowl hunter participation.

show abstract

Section: Department Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Department Of Thementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Assumptions and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exploring the population dynamics of waterfowl hunters using a mark‐recapture approach

Graham,

Vrtiska,

Humburg

et al. 2024

J Wildl Manag

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To help offset the consequences associated with the decline in hunters, wildlife agencies and non-governmental organizations have expended considerable time, money, and effort to increase hunter participation through recruitment, retention, and reactivation (R3) programs (Metcalf et al 2015, Council to Advance Hunting and the Shooting Sports 2016). Increasingly, research suggests that R3 efforts should shift away from a sole focus on traditional stakeholders and begin addressing factors inhibiting or prohibiting would-be hunters rather than focusing on those already engaged in the activity (Larson et al 2014, Graham et al 2021, Gruntorad and Chizinski 2021. Jackson (1997) described constraints as "factors that are perceived or experienced by individuals to limit the formation of leisure preferences and to inhibit or prohibit participation and enjoyment in leisure."…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Perceived and experienced constraint negotiation: do first‐time elk hunters know what they are in for?

Gruntorad

Chizinski

2022

Wildlife Society Bulletin

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opportunities to hunt big game species such as elk (Cervus canadensis) are often rationed through a lottery permit system when demand for permits exceeds the population's ability to sustain harvest levels. We conducted a survey of elk hunters and would-be elk hunters in the summer of 2016 to compare elk-hunting constraints among 3 groups of individuals. Groups consisted of 1) individuals who possessed a landowner hunting permit at some point between 2011 and 2016 (Landowner), 2) individuals who did not possess a landowner permit but did possess a general hunting permit between 2011 and 2016 (General), and 3) individuals who had not possessed a Nebraska elk-hunting permit of any kind between 2011 and 2016 but had attempted to draw a permit from the lottery system at least once during these years (Lottery). We used latent class regression to classify survey participants based on their responses to 7 questions related to constraints to elk hunting that were either experienced (Landowner and General) or perceived (Lottery) on a 5-point scale (Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree). Probability of latent class membership was estimated for each hunter group. Latent class regression revealed 6 latent classes with Landowner participants most likely to belong to classes who exhibited the least difficulty negotiating all constraints. General and Lottery participants were most likely to fall into classes exhibiting more difficulty

show abstract

Constraints to Waterfowl Hunting by Hunters and Anglers in the Central United States

Hinrichs

Gruntorad

Nawrocki

et al. 2021

Wildlife Society Bulletin

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Waterfowl hunting participation has been on the decline since the mid‐1980s. We used a web‐based survey to better understand waterfowl hunting constraints (i.e., factors that limit or prohibit participation and enjoyment in leisure activities) among hunters and anglers that hunted or did not hunt waterfowl in the central United States. Forty‐eight constraint items were condensed into 10 constraint factors: Rules and Regulations, Waterfowl Identification, Cost, Waterfowl Hunting Skills, Land Access and Permissions, Interference by Other Hunters, Travel, Social, Waterfowl Populations, and Views of Others. We observed significant effects of both state of residence and activity type (i.e., frequent waterfowl hunters, sporadic waterfowl hunters, dissociated waterfowl hunters, non‐waterfowl hunters, and anglers) but the effect sizes were mostly small. There were few meaningful differences between constraints based on state of residence, indicating that the perception of constraints was largely consistent among the states included in our study. However, Social, Waterfowl Identification, and Waterfowl Hunting Skills constraints had greater differences, particularly between frequent waterfowl hunters and non‐waterfowl hunters. Our assessment of waterfowl constraints did not indicate a single constraint that was inhibiting (or prohibiting) participation of waterfowl hunting among waterfowl hunters or non‐waterfowl hunters. However, there were numerous constraints that were slightly to moderately limiting across all activity groups similarly, which suggests that constraints may act collectively to create a perception of an insurmountable impediment to participation to the individual. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.

show abstract

Marketing and Ecological Models to Predict Permit Purchasing Behavior of Sportspersons

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

Exploring the population dynamics of waterfowl hunters using a mark‐recapture approach

Exploring the population dynamics of waterfowl hunters using a mark‐recapture approach

Perceived and experienced constraint negotiation: do first‐time elk hunters know what they are in for?

Constraints to Waterfowl Hunting by Hunters and Anglers in the Central United States

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About