Population and Environment

, Volume 34, Issue 4, pp 460–480 | Cite as

The future of hunting: an age-period-cohort analysis of deer hunter decline

Original Paper

Abstract

This paper employs a cohort analysis to examine the recent decline in the number of deer hunters in the State of Wisconsin and considers the implications of hunter decline for wildlife management and conservation. North American natural resource management strategies currently depend on hunters and anglers to fund habitat conservation, wildlife management, and land protection through license fees and special taxes on hunting equipment. However, hunter participation is declining across the United States, challenging the long-term viability of this approach. We undertake an age-period-cohort (APC) approach to analyze hunter participation rates and introduce an APC method to project the future number of hunters in Wisconsin. We find that if the recent patterns continue, the number of Wisconsin male deer hunters will decline by more than 10 % (55,304 hunters) in the next 10 years and an additional 18 % (88,552 hunters) between 2020 and 2030.

Keywords

Hunting Population projections Age-period-cohort Conservation Cohort effects Wildlife management 

References

  1. Aiken, R. (2010). Trends in fishing and hunting 19912006: A focus on fishing and hunting by species. Report 2006-8. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  2. Benson, D. E. (2001). Survey of state programs for habitat, hunting, and nongame management on private lands in the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 29(1), 354–358.Google Scholar
  3. Coombes, B. (2009). Generation Y: Are they really digital natives or more like digital refugees. Synergy, 7(1), 31–40.Google Scholar
  4. Dale, V. H., Brown, S., Haeuber, R. A., Hobbs, N. T., Huntly, N., Naiman, R. J., et al. (2000). Ecological principles and guidelines for managing the use of land. Ecological Applications, 10(3), 639–670.Google Scholar
  5. Decker, D. J., Organ, J. F., & Jacobson, C. A. (2009). Why should all Americans care about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation? Transactions of the 74th North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 74, 32–36.Google Scholar
  6. Dizard, J. E. (1999). Going wild: hunting, animal rights, and the contested meaning of nature. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dratch, P., & Kahn, R. (2011). Moving beyond the model. The Wildlife Professional, Summer, 61–63.Google Scholar
  8. Duda, M. D., Bissell, S. J., & Young, K. C. (1995). Factors related to hunting and fishing participation in the United States. Phase V: Final Report. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Reference Service Report.Google Scholar
  9. Duda, M. D., Jones, M. F., & Criscione, A. (2010). The sportsman’s voice: Hunting and fishing in America. State College, PA: Venture Publishing Inc.Google Scholar
  10. Dunlap, T. R. (1988). Saving America’s wildlife: Ecology and the American mind, 1850–1990. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Eagan, K. (2010). Governing Wisconsin: Public lands. Report published by the Legislative Reference Bureau. No. 32. June. http://www.legis.wi.gov/lrb/GW.
  12. Gill, R. B. (1996). The wildlife professional subculture: The case of the crazy aunt. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1, 60–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Glenn, N. D. (1976). Cohort analysts’ futile quest: Statistical attempts to separate age, period and cohort effects. American Sociological Review, 41, 900–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Glenn, N. D. (2005). Cohort analysis. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  15. Haider-Markel, D. P., & Joslyn, M. R. (2008). Beliefs about the origins of homosexuality and support for gay rights. Public Opinion Quarterly, 72(2), 291–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Heberlein, T. A. (1987). Stalking the predator: A profile of the American hunter. Environment, 29(7), 6–11, 30–33.Google Scholar
  17. Heberlein, T., Serup, B., & Ericsson, G. (2008). Female hunting participation in North America and Europe. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13(6), 443–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Heberlein, T., & Thomson, E. (1996). Changes in US hunting participation, 1980–1990. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(1), 85–86.Google Scholar
  19. Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2000). Millennials rising: The next great generation, First edition. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  20. Jacobson, C. A., Decker, D. J., & Carpenter, L. (2007). Securing alternative funding for wildlife management: Insight from agency leaders. Journal of Wildlife Management, 71, 2106–2113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kilpatrick, H. J., & Labonte, A. M. (2003). Deer hunting in a residential community: The community’s perspective. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 31, 340–348.Google Scholar
  22. Kilpatrick, H. J., LaBonte, A. M., & Seymour, J. T. (2002). A shotgun-archery deer hunt in a residential community: Evaluation of hunt strategies and effectiveness. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 30, 478–486.Google Scholar
  23. Kitagawa, E. M. (1955). Components of a difference between two rates. American Statistical Association Journal, 50(272), 1168–1194.Google Scholar
  24. Land, K. (2011). Age-period-cohort analysis: New models, methods, and empirical analyses. Presentation at Indiana University, April 15, 2011. Accessed online May 20, 2011.Google Scholar
  25. Leisure Trends Group. (2008). Gen Y not digging nature. LeisureTRAK ® Report 7 (1), March.Google Scholar
  26. Leonard, J. (2007). Fishing and hunting recruitment and retention in the U.S. from 19902005. Report 2001–11. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.Google Scholar
  27. Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books.Google Scholar
  28. Mahoney, S. P. (2009). Recreational hunting and sustainable wildlife use in North America. In B. Dickson, J. Hutton, & W. M. Adams (Eds.), Recreational hunting, conservation and rural livelihoods: Science and practice (pp. 266–281). Oxford, England: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Manfredo, M. J., & Zinn, H. C. (1996). Population change and its implications for wildlife management in the new west: A case study of Colorado. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1, 62–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mason, W. M., & Fienberg, S. E. (1985). Cohort analysis in social research: Beyond the identification problem (1st Edn.). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  31. Mason, K. O., Mason, W. H., Winsborough, H. H., & Poole, K. (1973). Some methodological issues in cohort analysis of archival data. American Sociological Review, 38, 242–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Miller, C., & Vaske, J. (2003). Individual and situational influences on declining hunter effort in Illinois. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 8, 263–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Mockrin, M., Aiken, R. A., & Flather, C. H. (In review). Trends in Wildlife-Associated Recreation: A technical document supporting the 2010 USDA Forest Service RPA assessment. USDA General Technical Report-RMRS-XX.Google Scholar
  34. National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Related Recreation (FHWAR). (1980, 1985, 1991, 1996, 2001, 2006). U.S. Census Bureau.Google Scholar
  35. Nelson, M. P., Vucetich, J. A., Paquet, P. C., & Bump, J. K. (2011). An inadequate construct? The Wildlife Professional, Summer, 58–60.Google Scholar
  36. Organ, J. F., Mahoney, S. P., & Geist. V. (2010). Born in the hands of hunters. The Wildlife Professional, Fall, 22–27. Google Scholar
  37. Peterson, M. N. (2004). An approach for demonstrating the social legitimacy of hunting. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 32, 310–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Peterson, M. N., Hansen, H. P., Peterson, M. J., & Peterson, T. R. (2010). How hunting strengthens social awareness of coupled human and natural systems. Wildlife Biology in Practice, 6(2), 127–143.Google Scholar
  39. Poudyal, N., Cho, S. H., & Bowker, J. M. (2008). Demand for resident hunting in the Southeastern United States. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 13, 158–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Presser, L., & W. V. Taylor. (2011). An autoethnography of hunting. Crime, Law and Social Change, 55, 483–494.Google Scholar
  41. Regan, R. (2010). Priceless but not free: Why all nature lovers should contribute to conservation. The Wildlife Professional, Fall, 39–41.Google Scholar
  42. Reiger, J. F. (2001). American sportsmen and the origins of conservation. Corvallis, OR: Oregon State University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Responsive Management. (1999). Hunters’, anglers’, and boaters’ awareness of and attitudes toward the federal aid in sport fish and wildlife restoration programs. International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Harrisonburg, VA.Google Scholar
  44. Responsive Management. (2003). Factors related to hunting and fishing participation among the nation’s youth. Harrisonburg, VA.Google Scholar
  45. Responsive Management. (2005). Public opinion on fish and wildlife management issues and the reputation and credibility of fish and wildlife agencies in the southeastern United States: Southeastern region report. Harrisonburg, VA.Google Scholar
  46. Ryder, N. B. (1965). The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. American Sociological Review, 30(6), 843–861.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sassi, F., Devaux, M., Cecchini, M., & Rusticelli, E. (2009). The obesity epidemic: analysis of past and projected future trends in selected OECD countries. OECD Publishing http://ideas.repec.org/p/oec/elsaad/45-en.html. Accessed June 23, 2011.
  48. Scarce, R. (1999). Who or what is in control here? Understanding the social context of salmon biology. Society and Natural Resources, 12(8), 763–776.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Schwadel, P. (2011). Age, period, and cohort effects on religious activities and beliefs. Social Science Research, 40(1), 181–192.Google Scholar
  50. Smith, H. L. (2004). Response: Cohort analysis redux. Sociological Methodology, 34, 111–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Southwick and Associates. (2007). Hunting in America: An Economic Engine and Conservation Powerhouse. Produced for the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies with funding from Multistate Conservation Grant Program, 2007.Google Scholar
  52. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service National Hunting License Report, 1958–2010.Google Scholar
  53. Vaske, J. J., Timmons, N. R., Beaman, J., & Petchenik, J. (2004). Chronic wasting disease in Wisconsin: Hunter behavior, perceived risk, and agency trust. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 9, 193–209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Voss, P. (2007). Projections of the Wisconsin population by single year of age, sex, and race, 2000–2030. Madison: Applied Population Laboratory, University of Wisconsin.Google Scholar
  55. Willging, R. C. (2008). On the hunt: The history of deer hunting in Wisconsin (1st Edn.). Madison: Wisconsin Historical Society Press.Google Scholar
  56. Williams, S. (2010). Wellspring of wildlife funding. The Wildlife Professional, Fall, 35–38.Google Scholar
  57. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (2000–2010). Wisconsin resident deer hunter license sales records.Google Scholar
  58. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (2001). Participation trends and projections in outdoor recreation, 14 pp.Google Scholar
  59. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. (2009). Your investment in Wisconsin’s Fish and Wildlife 20082009. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources.Google Scholar
  60. Woolf, A., & Roseberry, J. L. (1998). Deer management: Our profession’s symbol of success or failure? Wildlife Society Bulletin, 26, 515–521.Google Scholar
  61. Yang, Y. (2008). Trends in US adult chronic disease mortality, 1960–1999: Age, period, and cohort variations. Demography, 45, 387–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Yang, Y., Fu, W. J., & Land, K. C. (2004). A methodological comparison of age-period-cohort models: The intrinsic estimator and conventional generalized linear models. Sociological Methodology, 34, 75–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Yang, Y., Fu, W. J., Schulhofer-Wohl, S., & Land, K. C. (2008). The intrinsic estimator for age-period-cohort analysis: What it is and how to use it. American Journal of Sociology, 113(6), 1697–1736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social SciencesMichigan Technological UniversityHoughtonUSA
  2. 2.Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations