The Pittman-Robertson Act was established in 1937 to fund state-based wildlife conservation through an existing excise tax on sporting arms and ammunition. Because these items were purchased mostly by hunters at the time, they were the user group primarily funding wildlife conservation. Subsequent amendments to Pittman-Robertson expanded the taxable items to include pistols, revolvers, and archery equipment, effectively broadening the pool of conservation funding contributors to include non-hunters. The continuing trends of declining hunting participation, increasing handgun sales for non-hunting purposes, and increasing sport shooting and target archery independent of hunting, mean that non-hunters are contributing a disproportionately greater amount to Pittman-Robertson funding than hunters, and therefore contributing more to wildlife conservation. The evolving sources of revenue to Pittman-Robertson pose several threats to this historically important source of conservation funding. Addressing them may require new funding coalitions and outreach describing the conservation benefits and outcomes of Pittman-Robertson funding.

Internet or online surveys have become attractive to fish and wildlife agencies as an economical way to measure constituents' opinions and attitudes on a variety of issues. Online surveys, however, can have several drawbacks that affect the scientific validity of the data. We describe four basic problems that online surveys currently present to researchers and then discuss three research projects conducted in collaboration with state fish and wildlife agencies that illustrate these drawbacks. Each research project involved an online survey and/or a corresponding random telephone survey or non-response bias analysis. Systematic elimination of portions of the sample population in the online survey is demonstrated in each research project (i.e., the definition of bias). One research project involved a closed population, which enabled a direct comparison of telephone and online results with the total population.

Public Awareness and Credibility of Fish and Wildlife Agencies in the Northeastern United States Mark Damian Duda , Martin F. Jones & Andrea Criscione To cite this article: Mark Damian Duda , Martin F. Jones & Andrea Criscione (2009) Public Awareness and Credibility of Fish and Wildlife Agencies in the Northeastern United States, Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 14:2, 142-144, DOI: 10.1080/10871200802691221 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200802691221

Abstract American black bear (Ursus americanus) hunting has come under close scrutiny over the past decade. As black bear populations have increased and expanded, wildlife agencies have been faced with new challenges on how to set population and harvest goals. Wildlife agencies have altered proposed regulations or have had seasons entirely stopped because of public opposition, necessitating a proactive approach to wildlife management based on a scientific understanding of public opinion rather than reactive decision-making in response to public resistance. In November–December 2006, we conducted a telephone survey of 1,206 West Virginia residents to determine their opinions and attitudes toward black bear populations and hunting seasons and to help strengthen the state's black bear management strategies. Although the majority of West Virginians, nearly 3 of 4 respondents in this study, indicated they know at least something about black bears in West Virginia, there were significant regional differences in the public's assessment of their knowledge of the species. Although most respondents thought the black bear population size was “about right,” again, there were regional differences among respondents. In general, most respondents supported black bear hunting if the population was carefully monitored, if they knew the population was stable, or both; however, a number of regional and sociodemographic characteristics appeared to influence public opinion on black bear hunting and hunting seasons in the state, and support for specific seasons varied considerably according to hunting method. Interestingly, our study found that even among hunters, public opposition exceeded support for the current, year-round training season of black bear hunting dogs without harvesting animals in the state. Although it is important for wildlife managers to consider human dimensions and public opinion data in conjunction with biological data when making management decisions, we demonstrate that it also is important for managers to consider regional and sociodemographic differences with respect to attitudes and opinions when making management decisions and population objectives.