IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i7p3820-d778296.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Using Different Migratory Game Bird Hunter Types to Explore Drivers of Support for Hunter Recruitment, Retention, and Reactivation Policies in North Carolina, USA

Author

Listed:
  • Elena C. Rubino

    (Arkansas Forest Resources Center, Division of Agriculture, University of Arkansas System, Monticello, AR 71655, USA
    College of Forestry, Agriculture, and Natural Resources, University of Arkansas at Monticello, Monticello, AR 71655, USA)

  • Christopher Serenari

    (Department of Biology, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA)

Abstract

Policies designed to retain, recruit, and reactivate hunters have been developed to stimulate a range of motivations, although knowledge of which hunter types are more driven by various motivations remains deficient. To help fill this gap, we use survey responses from two types of migratory bird hunters in North Carolina as a case study to better understand hunter attitudes towards and motivational drivers of support for/opposition against the Sunday hunting of migratory birds. The results indicate that support for the legalization of Sunday migratory waterfowl hunting was driven by the importance of including as many weekends as possible each season, beliefs about increasing youth participation, and the potential for economic benefits, whereas opposition was driven by the importance of providing time for waterfowl to rest from hunting pressure. Opposition to the legalization of Sunday webless migratory bird hunting was driven by the belief that legalization may harm webless migratory bird populations. These findings provide agencies with an understanding of the differences in migratory waterfowl and webless migratory bird hunters’ motivations and encourage the inclusion of both social and ecological motivations when designing recruitment, retention, and reactivation policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena C. Rubino & Christopher Serenari, 2022. "Using Different Migratory Game Bird Hunter Types to Explore Drivers of Support for Hunter Recruitment, Retention, and Reactivation Policies in North Carolina, USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-11, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3820-:d:778296
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3820/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/7/3820/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pienaar, Elizabeth F. & Jarvis, Lovell S. & Larson, Douglas M., 2014. "Using a choice experiment framework to value conservation-contingent development programs: An application to Botswana," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 39-48.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Rubino, Elena C. & Pienaar, Elizabeth F. & Soto, José R., 2018. "Structuring Legal Trade in Rhino Horn to Incentivize the Participation of South African Private Landowners," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 306-316.
    2. Bennett, Michael T. & Gong, Yazhen & Scarpa, Riccardo, 2018. "Hungry Birds and Angry Farmers: Using Choice Experiments to Assess “Eco-compensation” for Coastal Wetlands Protection in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 71-87.
    3. Maldonado, Jorge H. & Moreno-Sanchez, Rocio & Henao-Henao, Juan P. & Bruner, Aaron, 2019. "Does exclusion matter in conservation agreements? A case of mangrove users in the Ecuadorian coast using participatory choice experiments," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 1-1.
    4. Waldman, Kurt B. & Richardson, Robert B., 2018. "Confronting Tradeoffs Between Agricultural Ecosystem Services and Adaptation to Climate Change in Mali," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 184-193.
    5. Grabowski, Philip & Schmitt Olabisi, Laura & Adebiyi, Jelili & Waldman, Kurt & Richardson, Robert & Rusinamhodzi, Leonard & Snapp, Sieglinde, 2019. "Assessing adoption potential in a risky environment: The case of perennial pigeonpea," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 171(C), pages 89-99.
    6. Lee, Deborah E. & Du Preez, Mario, 2016. "Determining visitor preferences for rhinoceros conservation management at private, ecotourism game reserves in the Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: A choice modeling experiment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 106-116.
    7. Xin Nie & Qian Chen & Ting Xiao & Han Wang, 2019. "Willingness to pay for ecological function regions protection based on a choice experiment method: a case study of the Shiwandashan nature reserve," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 813-829, March.
    8. de Rezende, Carlos Eduardo & Kahn, James R. & Passareli, Layra & Vásquez, William F., 2015. "An economic valuation of mangrove restoration in Brazil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 296-302.
    9. Ben Ma & Yali Wen, 2019. "Community Participation and Preferences Regarding Conservation and Development Policies in China’s Giant Panda Nature Reserves," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(18), pages 1-17, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    game birds; hunting policy; HRR; R3; Sunday hunting legalization;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • R3 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Real Estate Markets, Spatial Production Analysis, and Firm Location

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:7:p:3820-:d:778296. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.