Mourning Dove Hunting in Alabama: Motivations, Satisfactions, and Sociocultural Influences

Hayslette, Steven E.; Armstrong, James B.; Mirarchi, Ralph E.

doi:10.1080/108712001317151930

Cited by 50 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Although factors that contribute to hunter motivation and satisfaction may vary with location and/or hunting method (Potter et al 1973, Hammitt et al 1990, Hayslette et al 2001, reasons among hunters for hunting deer in our study illustrate the importance of considering nonharvest motivations when evaluating hunter satisfaction. For the hunter groups we surveyed, the top motivation to hunt was experiencing nature.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Attitudes and motivations of Tennessee deer hunters toward quality deer management

Harper

Fly

Beaver

2012

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Attitudes and motivations of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) hunters are important for state wildlife agencies to consider when they are trying to meet harvest goals for the species. In recent years, interest in quality deer management (QDM) has grown, but little is known about hunter support for QDM. We surveyed hunters on private hunting clubs and Wildlife Management Areas where QDM was practiced, as well as statewide sportsman license holders in Tennessee, USA, following the 2004-2005 deerhunting season to identify characteristics, attitudes, and motivations of these hunter groups. Respondents in all 3 hunter groups identified QDM as a ''sensible management strategy for white-tailed deer'' and a majority (>76%) of the hunters preferred hunting areas managed under QDM guidelines. Hunter groups varied in their responses related to specific QDM guidelines and implementation. Nonetheless, all 3 hunter groups were primarily interested in herd health and buck quality, wanted a reduction in the buck bag limit, and supported harvest of antlerless deer. Motivations to hunt varied by hunter group, but respondents in all 3 groups indicated that experiencing nature was the number one reason for hunting. Our survey results suggest that though opinions may vary on how QDM might be implemented, the general deer-hunting public in Tennessee has moved away from the traditional deer-management philosophy that allowed buck harvest without age restrictions and restricted antlerless harvest. Using biological justification along with hunter opinion, we recommend that state wildlife agencies consider providing QDM opportunities where appropriate and offer annual education programs to improve hunters' understanding of deer-management strategies. This should help ensure hunter satisfaction and will help state wildlife agencies meet deermanagement objectives. ß 2012 The Wildlife Society.KEY WORDS hunter attitudes, hunter motivations, Odocoileus virginianus, quality deer management, white-tailed deer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 73%

Attitudes and motivations of Tennessee deer hunters toward quality deer management

Harper

Fly

Beaver

2012

Wildlife Society Bulletin

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hunters' motivations also include recreation, spending time with family and friends, and being in nature (Frawley, 2005;Manfredo, Driver, & Tarrant, 1996). Mourning dove hunters in Alabama, for example, were motivated by companionship, nature, exercise, challenge, tradition, escape, and learning (Hayslette, Armstrong, & Mirarchi, 2001). Trophy hunters' motivations include spiritual, emotional, intellectual, self-directed, biological, and social needs (Radder, 2005).…”

Section: Hunters' Values Value Orientations and Motivationsmentioning

confidence: 98%

Hunters' Motivations and Values: A South African Perspective

Radder

Bech‐Larsen

2008

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article examines the values and motivations of South African biltong hunters. A hierarchical value map of associations between attributes, consequences and values resulted from laddering interviews with 34 hunters. The Means-End Chain approach proved useful in identifying: (a) personal values, (b) wildlife value orientations, and (c) motivations associated with desired benefits and satisfactions. Values reflected socialization, achievement, stimulation, hedonism, universalism, and conformity. Materialism, attraction/interest, respect, environmentalism, and rational/scientific were the predominant wildlife value orientations. Motivations included male identity, escape, appreciation of nature, and bonding with family and friends. The study refuted perceptions that biltong hunters primarily hunt for the meat or for the sake of killing an animal.

show abstract

“…Hazel, Langenau, & Levine, 1990;Woods, Guynn, Hammitt, & Patterson, 1996;Frey, Conover, Borgo, & Messmer, 2003;Hayslette, Armstrong, & Mirarchi, 2001, Manfredo, Fix, & Teel, 2004Schroeder, Fulton & Lawrence, 2006). This extensive literature shows that satisfaction determinants are seldom uniform across the whole hunter segment, and that hunters can typically be more or less clearly grouped into what we call hunter typologies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grouse Hunting Regulations and Hunter Typologies in Norway

Wam

Andersen

Pedersen

2013

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Game management relies on satisfied hunters. Satisfaction determinants are, however, seldom uniform across the whole hunter segment and may therefore be difficult to accommodate.Latent class analysis (LCA) is a probabilistic model-based approach to categorizing hunter typologies by, for example, their attitudes and preferences. We applied LCA to large-scale survey data relating to grouse hunting regulations in Norway (3,293 respondents). We identified three typologies with regard to importance of bag size (the "Experience Seeker" 43%, "Bag Oriented" 32% and "Northern Traditionalist" 25%) as well as crowding tolerance (the "Semi-tolerant Mainstream" 86%, "Altruistic Compatriot" 10% and "Passionate Crowdavoiding" 4%), but we could not find a set of typologies that conformed uniformly across the two. The potential and limitation of using hunter typologies in game management is discussed in an applied context. Broadly summarized, typologies are valuable for tailoring local hunting regulations, provided their actual distribution is identified at the appropriate scale. Key-words: bag limit, game, harvest, willingness-to-pay, ptarmigan Declining grouse populations is a pressing management issue worldwide (Storch, 2007). The underlying causes are complex, and while no study has yet identified one single factor that explains the declines at larger spatial scales, the most prominent threat seems to be habitat loss, degradation and fragmentation (e.g., Webb, Boarman, & Rotenberry, 2004;Marzluff & Neatherlin, 2006): changes that are long-lasting and not easily reversed.Additionally, we see growing evidence that game-bird hunting may be more additive to other causes of mortality than previously thought (Smith & Willebrand, 1999;Pedersen et al., 2004;Pöysä et al., 2004;Sandercock, Nilsen, Brøseth, & Pedersen, 2011;Connelly, Hagen, & Schroeder, 2011; but see also Sedinger, White, Espinosa, Partee, & Braun, 2010).It thus seems clear that harvest regulations are inevitable for mitigating grouse population declines. Management agencies then face a partly conflicting quest; they must achieve the ecological goal without overly restricting hunting opportunities and thereby jeopardize hunter satisfaction. Grouse hunting has a considerable socioeconomic impact.Norway, for example, has about 55,000 ptarmigan hunters (out of a population of 4.8 million people; Statistics Norway, 2010a), and they annually spend approximately €1,200 each on activities directly related to grouse hunting (Pedersen, & Karlsen, 2007;Storm, 2007;Andersen et al., 2009).As initiated by Hendee (1974), hunter satisfaction has many components and is therefore best looked at by a "multiple-satisfaction approach" (e.g. Hazel, Langenau, & Levine, 1990;Woods, Guynn, Hammitt, & Patterson, 1996;Frey, Conover, Borgo, & Messmer, 2003;Hayslette, Armstrong, & Mirarchi, 2001, Manfredo, Fix, & Teel, 2004Schroeder, Fulton & Lawrence, 2006). This extensive literature shows that satisfaction determinants are seldom uniform across the whole hunter segment, and that hunters...

show abstract

Mourning Dove Hunting in Alabama: Motivations, Satisfactions, and Sociocultural Influences

Cited by 50 publications

References 13 publications

Attitudes and motivations of Tennessee deer hunters toward quality deer management

Attitudes and motivations of Tennessee deer hunters toward quality deer management

Hunters' Motivations and Values: A South African Perspective

Grouse Hunting Regulations and Hunter Typologies in Norway

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About