Transcript Voluntary Public Access and Habitat Incentive Program

Iowa’s Voluntary Public Access &
Habitat Incentive Program:
hunter attitudes and willingness
to pay
Peter Fritzell, Iowa Department of Natural Resources
James Crain, Iowa State University
Rebecca Christoffel, Ph.D., Iowa State University
Voluntary Public Access – Habitat Incentive Program
(2010 USDA - VPA-HIP stimulus grant)
IHAP
Objectives
1. Assess the satisfaction of hunters and landowners with IHAP.
2. Obtain statewide estimates of the number of hunters hunting
IHAP sites, days IHAP are hunted, and IHAP days/hunter.
3. Determine hunter willingness-to-pay to support IHAP in the
absence of external funding.
Challenges and Limitations
1.
2.
3.
4.
Hunter awareness of IHAP’s existence.
Scattered distribution of IHAP sites across Iowa.
Limited budget for creating awareness of IHAP.
Hunter distinction between IHAP and other public hunting areas
even as IHAP has grown.
Approach
An ongoing mixture of surveys and hunter
intercepts to create sampling frames of
hunters who have hunted IHAP properties.
•Voluntary Hunter Report Cards
•Solicited Hunter Report Cards (opening weekends of
pheasant, 1st & 2nd gun deer, 1st – 4th spring turkey)
•Statewide IHAP Use mail survey
•Willingness-to-pay mail survey of hunters identified
through report cards, combined with sample of all
hunters who purchased a small game hunting license
during 2012-13.
Check Out Box
Site Visit Satisfaction
• Hunters in Group?
Mean = 2 hunters /group, Sum = 536
• Time spent on Site?
Mean = 2 hrs (15 minutes to 12 hours)
• Species Reported Hunted?
Deer, Turkey, Pheasant, Quail, Squirrel,
Rabbit, Dove, Waterfowl, Coyote
• Travel distance? Mean = 50 miles
• Expenses? Mean = $56 per visit
• Will they hunt IHAP again? 95% - Yes
• Satisfaction with visit to IHAP site?
72% - satisfied
11% - unsatisfied
• Voluntary submission of name, address
and/or license numbers.
Statewide IHAP Use Survey
(N=8501)
• Response rate 21%, after 1st mailing
(n=1596)
• Did you hunt an IHAP site? 8% Yes
• How many IHAP sites?
Med. = 2.0 sites (1 to 12 sites)
• How many days?
Med. = 3.0 days (1 to 32 days)
• Satisfaction with opportunities provided by
IHAP sites hunted?
71%-Satisfied, 13% -Dissatisfied, 16%-Neutral
• Will you hunt IHAP sites again?
80%-Yes, 2% -No, 14%-Unsure
• IHAP Counties hunted most often?
?? - I think I’m lost.
Hunter IHAP-WTP Survey
• Survey conducted in summer 2014.
• Stratified statewide random sample of 5,327 hunters.
• 19 Strata used to represent residents/nonresidents,
deer/non-deer hunters, in 9 regions of Iowa.
• Modified Dillman method consisting of 1st survey mailing, a
postcard reminder, and a 2nd survey mailing.
• 1,833 respondents; adjusted response rate 34%.
Importance of hunting
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Importance
Most important recreational activity
One of most important rec. activities
No more important than other recreational activities
One of least important recreational activities
Least important recreational activity
Type of Game hunted in 2012-2013 seasons
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
Game hunted in 20122013
Upland Game (rabbits, squirrel, etc) Upland Birds (pheasant, quail, etc)
Wild turkey
Waterfowl
Bow Deer
Shotgun Deer
Muzzleloader Deer
Furbearers
Type of land hunted during 2012-2013
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Private land ONLY
Both Private and Public land
Public land ONLY
Type of private land hunted, and/or qualified for special
landowner license
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Land I owned
Land owned by
Family or Friend
Private land NOT Priv. land for a fee Rented land for Ag. Landowner/Tenant
family or friend
Production
qualified
100
90
80
PERCENT respondents
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Used IDNR website
Prior knowledge of IHAP
No
Yes
Hunted IHAP*
Factors affecting support for IHAP
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
IHAP is needed to IHAP is benefits
improve access
IOWA
Strongly disagree
IHAP is benefits
ME personally
Somewhat disagree
IHAP causes
IHAP decreases IHAP creates NEW
hunters to lease hunter dropouts opportunities to
for themselves
hunt private lands
Neither
Somewhat agree
Strongly agree
Level of Support for IHAP on 1 – 7 Scale
25
20
15
10
5
0
1 Not at all supportive
2
3 Slightly supportive
4
5 Moderately supportive
6
7 Extremely supportive
Likely behaviors concerning IHAP
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
To hunt IHAP in future
Extremely Unlikely
Pay annual ~$30 fee
Somewhat Unlikely
Pay daily ~$5 fee
Neither
Increase General License fee
Somewhat Likely
Extremely Likely
Amount to increase General hunting license fee
(n = 1755)
15.3
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.5
34.8
26.3
8
4.4
8.1
1.4
Zero $
$1
$2
$3
$4
$5
$6
$7
$8
$9
$10
Reasons for giving a Zero $ increase to the General Hunting License to
support IHAP.
(n = 652)
35
31.9
30
25.6
25
20
18.1
15
10
8.9
10.1
5.4
5
0
I receive no benefit Cost of living is too Method of payment I have a right to I don't believe IHAP Other reason given
from IHAP
high & cannot pay not fair or equitable IHAP & should not works as described
more
pay more
Support for IHAP
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Not at all
supportive
Land poor
2
Slightly
supportive
Land rich
4
Moderately
supportive
Did not hunt IHAP
6
Extremely
supportive
Hunted IHAP
Willingness to add to the cost of the
General Hunting License to support IHAP
The most you would add to
the General Hunting License
The most you would add to
the General Hunting License
N
Mean
Std Dev
Std Error
Did not hunt
IHAP
1,500
$3.14
3.405
.088
Did hunt
IHAP
216
$5.16
3.675
.250
Land poor
1,277
$3.71
3.557
.100
Land rich
455
$2.55
3.209
.150
Willingness to add to the cost of the
General Hunting License to support IHAP
The most you would add to
the General Hunting License
The most you would add to
the General Hunting License
N
Mean
Std Dev
Std Error
Did not hunt
IHAP
1500
$3.14
3.405
.088
Did hunt
IHAP
216
$5.16
3.675
.250
Land poor
1277
$3.71
3.557
.100
Land rich
455
$2.55
3.209
.150
• In September, Iowa was awarded a second VPA-HIP
grant for $3,000,000.
Questions?
[email protected]
(515) 432-2823 ext.113