Floridian's wildlife related activities, opinions, knowledge and attitudes toward wildlife

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Floridian's wildlife related activities, opinions, knowledge and attitudes toward wildlife
Physical Description:
Book
Creator:
Duda, Mark Damian

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
ltqf - AAA1634
notis - AME1741
alephbibnum - 002436581
System ID:
UF00000197:00001

Table of Contents
    Cover
        Page i
        Page ii
    Abstract
        Page iii
    Acknowledgement
        Page iv
    Introduction and methodology
        Page 1
        Page 2
        Page 3
    Table of Contents
        Page v
    Results
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
    Discussion and conclusions
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
    Literature cited
        Page 82
    Appendix A: Conventions used for cross-tabulations
        Page 83
    Appendix B: Tabular response distributions - 1995 survey
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
    Appendix C: Respondent comments
        Page 117
        Page 118
    Appendix D: 1995 survey instrument
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
        Page 127
        Page 128
        Page 129
        Page 130
        Page 131
        Page 132
        Page 133
        Page 134
        Page 135
        Page 136
    Copyright
        Page 137
Full Text





Floridians' Wildlife-related Activities,
Opinions, Knowledge, and Attitudes
Toward Wildlife: 1995 Update






Mark Damian Duda
Kira C. Young



Responsive Management
Mark Damian Duda and Associates
Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801













Submitted as final report for
Nongame Wildlife Program project NG94-017


December 1995


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA






















This report is the result of a project supported by the Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission's Nongame Wildlife Program. It has
been reviewed for clarity, style, and typographical errors, but has not
received peer review. Any opinions or recommendations in this report
are those of the authors and do not represent policy of the Commission.

















Suggested citation:

Duda, M.D., and K.C. Young. 1995. Floridians' wildlife-related activities,
opinions, knowledge, and attitudes toward wildlife: 1995 update. Fla.
Game and Fresh Water Fish Comm. Nongame Wildl. Program Final Rep.
136 pp + v. Tallahassee, Fla.










Floridians' Wildlife-related Activities,

Opinions, Knowledge, and Attitudes

Toward Wildlife: 1995 Update



Mark Damian Duda
Kira C. Young
Responsive Management, Mark Damian Duda and Associates, Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801



Abstract: This study was conducted to assess Floridians* current awareness and knowledge levels,
opinions, and attitudes toward wildlife conservation in Florida. The major objective of the survey was to
document and update public attitudes toward wildlife and identify trends which have occurred since 1985.
Public opinion was assessed through a random-digit dialing telephone survey. Methodology included
randomly-generated telephone numbers as well as randomization within households to ensure that the
survey results can be projected to the adult, resident, Florida population. Results from the 1995 telephone
survey were compared to data collected from telephone surveys using similar methodology and identical
questions in 1985 and 1987.

Floridians remained very positive toward wildlife in Florida and when 1995 results were compared to
1987 and 1985 data, virtually no major changes in public attitudes and opinions were detected. A majority
of Floridians supported increased funding for wildlife conservation in 1995 (58%). Participation among
Floridians in a variety of activities was similar in 1987 and 1995: watching television shows, visiting state
parks, feeding wildlife, motor boating. bird watching, buying art of wildlife, backpacking/tent camping,
membership in a humane-type organization, membership in a sportsmen-type organization, identifying birds,
membership in a wildlife-conservation organization, camping in a recreational vehicle, and hunting. Slight
declines in participation were detected among participation in fishing, zoo visitation, and helping injured
wildlife, while slight increases were detected among participation in off-road or all-terrain vehicle use. No
difference in the importance of amenities when taking a wildlife or nature-related trip was detected among
Floridians in 1985 and 1995. Restrooms were considered the most important amenity followed by camping
and picnic grounds, nature trails, wildlife exhibits, and primitive areas with no facilities. Results from the
1995 survey show that most Floridians still get their wildlife information from television documentaries,
followed by nature/wildlife magazines, newspapers, and personal experiences. Overall, newspapers and
personal experiences have taken on more importance as sources of information about wildlife.

Twenty-three percent of respondents were able to correctly name the Florida Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission as the state's primary wildlife agency. compared to 25% in 1985, representing no
statistical difference. Overall, the Commission received good ratings on its job performance, although
almost half felt they did not know enough about the Commission to answer this question. Six percent said
excellent, 30% good, 18% said fair, 4% said poor and 43% said don't know. Most respondents (75%) said
they know a little or nothing about the activities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission.

Several new questions were asked on the 1995 survey, including attitudes toward wetlands. A majority
of respondents (55%) said that Florida's laws protecting wetlands should be strengthened, 31% said remain
the same, only 7% said weakened, and 7% did not know.




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We sincerely appreciate the assistance from Bureau of Nongame Wildlife
staff, especially Brian Millsap and David Cook, and the support provided for
the project by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission's Nongame
Wildlife Program.





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


INTRODUCTION

This study was conducted for the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission to reliably and accurately assess the public's current awareness
and knowledge levels, opinions and attitudes, and behaviors regarding wildlife
conservation in Florida. The major objective of the survey was to update
public attitudes toward wildlife and identify trends which have occurred since
1985 (Cerulean and Duda 1988) and 1987 (Montgomery 1988). Throughout
the report, 3 surveys are compared, and each is designated by the date of data
collection. Data from the Cerulean and Duda (1988) report were collected in
1985; data from the Montgomery (1988) report were collected in 1987 and
data from this survey were collected in 1995.

METHODOLOGY

Since the primary purpose of this project was to assess changes in
Floridians' wildlife-related activities, opinions, knowledge, and attitudes
toward wildlife between 1985 and 1995, the 1995 survey instrument was
developed largely from questions used in the 1985 and 1987 questionnaires,
although some new questions were added. Copies of the 1985 and 1987
survey instruments, as well as a number of surveys conducted for other state
fish and wildlife agencies, were sent to 17 Commission employees.

These Commission employees rated the relative importance of questions
in the 1995 survey using a scale of high priority, medium priority, or low
priority. The highest priority information needs of Commission staff were
Floridians' opinions on funding wildlife programs, wildlife-related activities
of Floridians, how Floridians receive their information on wildlife, public
awareness of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, the values
Floridians associate with wildlife, what Floridians think the Commission
should do to help wildlife, and finally, an assessment of nuisance wildlife
problems in Florida. Based on the Commission staff rankings of informational
needs, a survey instrument was developed (Appendix D).

Results are based upon a random-digit dialing (RDD), computer-assisted
telephone survey administered to 809 adult Florida residents. Interviews were
conducted in both English and Spanish. Telephones were selected as the
preferred sampling medium since nearly all Florida residents have access to a
telephone. In addition, a central polling site allowed for rigorous quality
control over the interviewers and data collection. A random selection of
telephone numbers and thereby households was purchased from Survey
Sampling, Inc. (SSI) of Fairfield, Connecticut. This firm has patented
computer programs that generate random numbers which are, in the opinion





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


of most research professionals, of the highest quality. The approach used by
SSI produces successful connections with random households 35% more often
than other random digit sampling methods. Telephone numbers randomly
generated in this fashion overcome bias against new listings and residents with
unlisted telephone numbers.

To overcome bias of those individuals most likely to answer the phone,
questionnaire respondents were selected from each random household. The
random selection procedure used within each household was the "last
birthday" procedure. This means that when someone answered the phone, the
interviewer asked to speak to the person over 18 that had the most recent
birthday. This procedure was used because it is easy for the respondent to
understand. Randomly-generated telephone numbers coupled with the "last
birthday" method ensure that the survey results can be projected to the adult,
resident population of Florida as a whole.

Responsive Management (RM) maintains its own telephone interviewing
facilities in-house. These facilities are staffed by interviewers with
experience conducting computer-assisted telephone interviews on the
subjects of natural resources and outdoor recreation for state fish and wildlife
agencies. A total of 23 different interviewers collected the data for this
project. RM conducted the telephone interviews utilizing "Questionnaire
Programming Language 3.0." The project supervisor randomly monitored
the telephone workstations without the interviewers' knowledge to evaluate
the performance of each interviewer.

RM has designed a telephone interviewing facility that stresses the
importance of highly-trained telephone interviewers who work under the close
supervision of RM professional staff. The project supervisor edits each
completed survey to check for clarity, understanding, completeness, and form.
To ensure the data collected are of the highest quality, the interviewers are
trained according to the standards established by the Council of American
Survey Research Organization. Method of instruction includes lecture and
role-playing. The project supervisor conducts project briefings with the
interviewing crew prior to working on the specific project. Interviewers are
instructed on the following: study goals and objectives, type of study,
handling of survey questions, interview length, termination points and
qualifiers for participation, reading of interviewer instructions, reading of
survey, review skip patterns, and probing and clarifying techniques necessary
for specific questions on the survey instrument.

Throughout this report, findings are reported at a 95% confidence interval
with a sampling error of at most �3.5%. This means that if this survey was





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


administered 100 times, to different samples that were selected in the same
fashion, 95 of the surveys' findings would fall within �3.5% of each other.
Please see Appendix A for detail regarding which variables were used as the
basis for cross-tabulations. Cross-tabulations utilized chi-square statistics to
determine the independence of variables. Only statistically significant
findings, at a 95% confidence interval, are reported in the results section.

Some response distributions may not add to 100% exactly due to
rounding, while a few questions allowed for multiple responses. Those
questions which accepted multiple responses are noted specifically.

Fieldwork for the survey began on June 6 and lasted until June 20, 1995.
Interviews were conducted Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00
p.m. and on Saturday from 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.. A 5-call-back design was
used to maintain the representativeness of the sample, avoid bias toward
people easy-to-reach by telephone and provide an equal opportunity for all to
participate (numbers were often called up to 8 times). Subsequent calls are
placed at different times of the day and different days of the week. This
intensive call-back procedure is a good technique for boosting response rates.

The software used for data collection was QPL version 3.0. QPL is a
comprehensive system for computer-assisted telephone interviewing. The
survey data are entered into the computer as the interview is being conducted,
eliminating manual data entry after the completion of the interviews. The
survey instrument is programmed so that QPL branches, codes, and substitutes
phrases in the survey based upon previous responses to ensure the integrity
and consistency of data collection.






NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT







TABLE OF CONTENTS


ABSTRACT ..........


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


INTRODUCTION .....


METHODOLOGY.....


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iii


... .................... .... ............... iv


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ... .. .


....................... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . I..


RESULTS ...........................
Funding for W wildlife ................
19 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19 95 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Wildlife-related Activitie nf Flnridianns


19 87 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1995 . .. .. ... .. .. . ..... ... . ... .. . .. . ...
1985 ............................ . . ....
199 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
How Floridians Receive Their Information on Wildlife
19 8 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1995 ...................................
19 8 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19 9 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Agency Recognition and Responsibility ...........
19 8 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19 9 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Values Floridians Associate with Wildlife .........
19 8 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
199 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
What Floridians Think the Commission Should Do to
19 8 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19 9 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Nuisance W wildlife Problems ....................
19 8 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
19 9 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


..�.
....

�.�.
.�..
.*��
*�*�
Help




.�..
Help


.......
.�.����

.......

...�.�.


.......
.� � . . �. . �


......�





Wildlife

..�,...
.......


....�..


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS ..................


LITERATURE CITED .............................


APPENDIX A: Conventions Used for Cross-tabulations .....


APPENDIX B: Tabular Response Distributions - 1995 Survey


APPENDIX C: Respondent Comments ............................... 117


APPENDIX D: 1995 Survey Instrument ............................. .119





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


RESULTS

A total of 2,900 phone numbers were attempted, resulting in 348
disconnected telephones, 90 deaf/language barrier problems, 431 businesses,
288 no answer after at least 5 attempts (pay phones, non-working numbers), 598
hard refusals, 277 soft refusals (more than 5 answering machines or "call back
at a different time"), 59 terminated interviews, and 809 completed interviews.

Funding for Wildlife

State government spends its revenue on a multitude of different programs.
It is difficult for most citizens to evaluate any specific program since each one
is so complex, but the public can set priorities among the broad functions of
state government. Often, the public is supportive of most programs. Public
judgments are more discriminating when choosing between increasing or
decreasing spending, keeping it the same, or when choosing a top priority for
an increase or a decrease in spending (Parker and Oppenheim 1985).

Since 1979, respondents to the Florida Annual Policy Survey (FAPS)
have been asked to evaluate whether state spending in a series of broad
program areas should be increased, decreased, or kept the same. The first part
of this survey was designed to discover how people viewed state spending for
wildlife conservation, compared to other programs addressed annually by the
FAPS questionnaire. All program areas used in the FAPS were not repeated;
3 areas were chosen that would best allow comparisons to the FAPS data: to
combat crime, to assist low income families with children, and to promote
tourism. The 4 areas, to combat crime, to assist low income families with
children, promote tourism, and wildlife conservation were repeated verbatim
for comparison in 1995.

1985.-In 1985, a majority of Floridians supported increased state
spending to combat crime (70%) and for wildlife conservation (60%). Less
than a majority wanted increased spending for low income families with
children (47%) and 33% wanted increased spending to promote tourism.

Overall, 27% wanted spending for wildlife conservation to be maintained
at its present level, while only 4% wanted to decrease the amount of money
currently being spent for wildlife conservation.

Support for increased funding for wildlife conservation declined as age
increased, while support for increased funding increased the more an
individual participated in nonconsumptive wildlife-related recreational





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


activities.' Support for increased governmental funding for wildlife
conservation did not vary significantly according to area of residence, children
living at home, Florida native, or level of educational attainment.

To further discriminate public opinion on the importance of state
spending, respondents were asked to designate the program area they felt
should be the top priority for increased funding. Forty-eight percent felt that
combating crime should be the top priority for funding, followed by low
income families (24%), wildlife conservation (13%) and tourism (5%) (Fig.5).
Individuals who attained a higher level of education tended to place wildlife
conservation as their highest priority.

No significant differences for top priority funding were detected regarding
the following variables: place of residence, children living at home, Florida
native, and gender.

1995.-In 1995, a majority of Floridians supported increased state
spending to combat crime (63%) (Fig. 1) and for wildlife conservation (58%)
(Fig. 3). Less than a majority wanted increased spending for low income
families with children (40%) (Fig. 4) and 30% wanted increased spending to
promote tourism (Fig. 2).

Overall, 30% wanted spending for wildlife conservation to be maintained
at its present level, while only 6% wanted to decrease the amount of money
currently being spent for wildlife conservation.

The likelihood to want increased spending on wildlife conservation
decreased as age increased; specifically, 70% of 18-34 year olds, 63% of 35-
44 year olds, 64% of 45-54 year olds, and 53% of those aged 55 or older said
funding for wildlife conservation should be increased. Respondents who
described their political affiliation as Independent/other (73%) were more
likely than Republicans (51%) to say funding for wildlife conservation should

'Consumptive wildlife use refers to hunting, trapping, and fishing. "Nonconsumptive wildlife use" refers
to activities that do not involve the removal or intended removal of animals from their natural habitats. "Use
of this term is not meant to imply that nonconsumptive activities have no effects on wildlife resources. The
term is useful and a widely adopted means of categorizing an important group of human activities involving
wildlife resources. Also, although the term "nonconsumptive" is used for describing certain categories of
human behavior, it should not be confused with distinctions between game and nongame, which describe
legal designations for kinds of wildlife" (Shaw and Magnum 1984:2). In this study, nonconsumptive
wildlife use was categorized as primary and secondary. Primary activities are those in which seeing,
hearing, photographing, or feeding wildlife are the primary objectives of the activity. Secondary activities
are those in which wildlife is enjoyed in the context of an event undertaken for some other primary purpose
(Shaw and Magnum 1982). Level of participation in nonconsumptive wildlife use can be graded on a
continuum from no use, secondary only, primary only, to primary and secondary, representing an ever-
increasing participation in nonconsumptive wildlife activities.






Should funding for programs to
combat crime be...


Percent


I 1985 (n=996) �M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 1. Floridians' opinions regarding funding levels for programs to combat crime.




Should funding for programs to
promote tourism be...


Percent


1985 (n=996) [ 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 2. Floridians' opinions regarding funding levels for programs to promote tourism.






Should funding for wildlife
conservation programs be...


Percent


L 1985 (n=996) 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 3. Floridians' opinions regarding funding levels for wildlife conservation programs.






Should funding for programs to help
low income families with children be...


Percent


1985 (n=996) [ 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 4. Floridians' opinions regarding funding levels for programs to help low income families with children.






Which program is your top priority
for increased spending?


Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 5. Floridians' opinions regarding which of 4 listed programs is top priority for increased spending.





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


be increased. Similarly, Republicans (39%) were more likely than Independents
(23%) to say funding for wildlife conservation should remain the same. There
were no statistically significant differences of opinion regarding funding for
wildlife conservation based on respondents' gender, education level, race, or
annual household income.

To further discriminate public opinion on the importance of state spending,
respondents were asked to designate the program area they felt should be the top
priority for increased funding. Forty-seven percent felt that combating crime
should be the top priority for funding, followed by low income families (22%),
wildlife conservation (18%) and tourism (4%) (Fig. 5). Three percent did not
know and 6% said none of these 4 programs should receive increased funding.

The likelihood to select wildlife conservation as the top priority for
increased funding decreased as age increased; specifically, 27% of 18-34 year
olds, 18% of 35-44 year olds, 21% of 45-54 year olds, and 11% of those aged
55 or older selected wildlife conservation as the top priority for increased
funding. There were no statistically significant differences of opinion
regarding selection of wildlife conservation as the top priority for increased
funding based on respondents' gender, education level, race, annual household
income, or political affiliation.

Wildlife-related Activities of Floridians

Floridians enjoy and participate in a wide variety of wildlife-related
activities. This section gauged the extent of wildlife-related recreational
activities of Floridians. In general, most Floridians participate in 1 or more
wildlife-related activity.

1987.-In 1987, Floridians participated in a wide range of wildlife-related
activities over the preceding 2 years (Fig. 6). Ninety-five percent watched
television shows on wildlife, 71% visited state parks, 69% fed wildlife (for
example, birds and squirrels), 61% visited the zoo, 58% fished, 49%
photographed wildlife, 42% motor boated, 41% helped an injured animal, 38%
watched birds, 38% bought art or prints of wildlife, 25% backpacked or
camped in a tent, 21% identified 20 or more bird species, 16% held a
membership in a wildlife preservation/conservation organization, 14% camped
in a recreational vehicle, 14% held a membership in a Humane Society-type
organization, 12% held a membership in a sportsman-type organization, 11%
hunted, and 10% participated in off-road or all-terrain vehicle use.

1995.-In 1995, Floridians participated in a wide range of wildlife-related
activities at similar levels during the past 2 years (Fig. 6). Ninety-four percent







In which of the following activities
have you participated in last 2 years?


Hunting-
Camping in RV
Member of wildl. conserv. org.
Identifying 20+ birds
ORV/ATV use
Member of sportsmen org.
Member of animal welfare org.
Backpacking or tent camping
Helping injured wildlife
Buying art of wildlife
Bird watching
Motor boating
Photographing wildlife
Fishing
Visiting the zoo
Feeding wildlife
Visiting state park
Watching TV show on wildlife


1U ZU 30.U 50 3U 6O /U
Percent


I 1987 (n=1699) F 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 6. Percent of Floridians participating in wildlife-related activities in the past 2 years.


.. . q ..... A
J tMfJiS :. :


. . . . . . .,




---- <- --X - ....... E S 3
M �y?, -/)yyyd ~

..... .... ... "M " " ' ....." " '


? -
I


80 90 100





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


reported watching a television show on wildlife, 70% visited state parks, 60%
fed wildlife (for example, birds and squirrels), 50% visited the zoo, 50% fished,
40% photographed wildlife, 39% motor boated, 36% watched birds, 34%
bought art or prints of wildlife, 33% helped an injured animal, 24% backpacked
or camped in a tent, 18% participated in off-road or all-terrain vehicle use, 18%
held a membership in a sportsman-type organization, 18% held a membership
in a Humane Society-type organization, 16% identified 20 or more bird species,
16% held a membership in a wildlife preservation/conservation organization,
15% camped in a recreational vehicle, and 12% hunted.

1985.-When considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips,
restrooms were very important to 75% of the respondents. Camping or picnic
grounds were very important to 51% of respondents, nature trails were very
important to 48%, wildlife exhibits were very important to 41%, and primitive
areas were very important to 35% of respondents (Figs. 7-12).

Nature trails were very important to almost half the respondents when
considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips (Fig. 10). The importance of
trails declined as age increased. The presence of nature trails was very important
to participants in wildlife-related activities. No significant differences on the
importance of trails were found based on area of residence, children living at
home, Florida native, educational level, race, hispanic origin, or gender.

Wildlife exhibits were more important to heavy nonconsumptive users of
wildlife than those individuals who do not participate in nonconsumptive
wildlife-related recreation. For example, exhibits were very important to 10%
of individuals not involved in nonconsumptive wildlife activities as compared
to 46% of primary and secondary users that ranked wildlife exhibits as very
important. No significant differences on the relative importance of wildlife
exhibits when considering taking a trip and the following variables were
detected: area of residence, children living at home, Florida native, gender,
race, hispanic origin, or age.

Camping and picnic facilities were very important to 51% of the
respondents when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips (Fig. 9).
Picnic areas and camping were more important to respondents with children
than respondents without children. Older individuals were less likely than
younger individuals and wildlife enthusiasts were more likely than
respondents who did not participate in wildlife activities to consider these
facilities important. No differences were detected in the importance of
camping and picnic grounds when cross-tabulated with the following
variables: Florida native, race, gender, or hispanic origin.












Wildlife exhibits

. :. ..- . - . . . _ .........
I Nature trails .......

. . . . . . . . .. . . |

Camp & picnic grounds 1


Restrooms z

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent


[ 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 7. Percent of Floridians who said listed amenity is very important when considering wildlife-oriented trips.










Not important





Somewhat important





Very important


Percent


1985 (n= 996) 1995 (n= 809)


Fig. 8. Floridians' opinions on the importance of restrooms when considering wildlife-oriented trips.








\ l~


Not important . .





what important





Very important . . ..5


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percent


80 90 100


I 1985 (n=996) 0 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 9. Floridians' opinions on the importance of campgrounds and picnic areas when considering wildlife-oriented trips.


Som


.^ -^ -^











Not important





Somewhat important





Very important



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent


[ 1985 (n=996) r 1995 (n=809)



Fig. 10. Floridians' opinions on the importance of nature trails when considering wildlife-oriented trips.





00





19

0
O









41
z


) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent



1985 (n 996) 1995 (n= 809)


Fig. 11. Floridians' opinions on the importance of wildlife exhibits when considering wildlife-oriented trips.


Somewhat








0

Not important >
z



n40
Somewhat important





Very important 35



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent


1985 (n=996) g 1995 (n=809)



Fig. 12. Floridians' opinions on the importance of primitive areas when considering wildlife-oriented trips.





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Restrooms were very important to 75% of the respondents when
considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips (Fig. 8). Restrooms were
very important to all groups; we detected no differences among any variable,
including area of residence, Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic
origin, gender, or age.

Primitive areas with no facilities were very important to 35% of respondents
(Fig. 12). Thirty-three percent of respondents said that primitive areas with no
facilities were not important at all when considering taking wildlife or nature-
oriented trips. Primitive areas were more important to nonconsumptive wildlife
enthusiasts when compared to non-enthusiasts. Older individuals were less
likely to see these areas as important when compared to younger individuals. No
significant differences were detected by area of residence, children living at
home, Florida native, race, hispanic origin, or gender.

1995.-When considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips,
restrooms were very important to 76% of the respondents. Camping or picnic
grounds were very important to 50% of respondents, nature trails were very
important to 48%, wildlife exhibits were very important to 38%, and primitive
areas were very important to 33% of respondents (Figs. 7-12).

Women (55%) were more likely than men (42%) to say nature trails were
very important when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips. The
likelihood to say nature trails were very important decreased as age increased;
specifically, 52% of 18-34 year olds, 54% of 35-44 year olds, 52% of 45-54
year olds, and 39% of those aged 55 or older said nature trails were very
important. Similarly, the likelihood to say nature trails were not important at
all increased as age increased; specifically, 14% of 18-34 year olds, 12% of
35-44 year olds, 12% of 45-54 year olds, and 28% of those aged 55 or older
said nature trails were not important at all when considering taking wildlife or
nature-oriented trips. White respondents (46%) were less likely than other
respondents (63%) to say nature trails were very important. There were no
statistically significant differences of opinion regarding importance of nature
trails based on respondents' education level or annual household income.

Women (44%) were more likely than men (34%) to say wildlife exhibits
were very important when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips.
The likelihood to say wildlife exhibits were not important at all increased as age
increased; specifically, 14% of 18-34 year olds, 20% of 35-44 year olds, 17%
of 45-54 year olds, and 25% of those aged 55 or older said wildlife exhibits
were not important at all when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented
trips. The likelihood to say wildlife exhibits were very important decreased as
level of education increased; specifically, 45% of those with a high school





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


degree or less education, 43% of those with some college or trade school, and
29% of those with a college degree said wildlife exhibits were very important.
However, the likelihood to say wildlife exhibits were somewhat important
increased as level of education increased; specifically, 35% of those with a high
school degree or less education, 41% of those with some college or trade
school, and 50% of those with a college degree said wildlife exhibits were
somewhat important when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips.
White respondents (36%) were less likely than other respondents (52%) to say
wildlife exhibits were very important; similarly, white respondents (21%) were
more likely than other respondents (8%) to say wildlife exhibits were not
important at all. The likelihood to say wildlife exhibits were very important
decreased as annual household income increased; specifically, 49% of those
earning less than $20,000, 42% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, 35% of
those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 28% of those earning $60,000 or more said
wildlife exhibits were very important. However, the likelihood to say wildlife
exhibits were somewhat important increased as annual household income
increased; specifically, 32% of those earning less than $20,000, 40% of those
earning $20,000-$39,999, 47% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 53% of
those earning $60,000 or more said wildlife exhibits were somewhat important.

The likelihood to say picnic or camping grounds were somewhat
important when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips decreased
as age increased; specifically, 42% of 18-34 year olds, 34% of 35-44 year olds,
36% of 45-54 year olds, and 29% of those aged 55 or older said picnic or
camping grounds were somewhat important. Likewise, the respondents aged
55 or older were more likely than other respondents to say picnic or camping
grounds were not important at all; specifically, 11% of 18-34 year olds, 10%
of 35-44 year olds, 12% of 45-54 year olds, and 24% of those aged 55 or older
said picnic or camping grounds were somewhat important. The likelihood to
say picnic or camping grounds were very important decreased slightly as level
of education increased; specifically, 54% of those with a high school degree or
less education, 54% of those with some college or trade school, and 43% of
college graduates said picnic or camping grounds were somewhat important.
However, the likelihood to say picnic or camping grounds were somewhat
important increased as level of education increased; specifically, 30% of those
with a high school degree or less education, 33% of those with some college
or trade school, and 43% of college graduates said picnic or camping grounds
were somewhat important. Respondents earning less than $20,000 annually
(24%) were less likely than respondents earning $20,000-$39,999 (41%) or
those earning $40,000-$59,999 (39%) to say picnic or camping grounds were
somewhat important. There were no statistically significant differences of
opinion regarding importance of picnic or camping grounds based on
respondents' gender or race.




NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Women (84%) were more likely than men (69%) to say restrooms were
very important when considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips.
However, men (21%) were more likely than women (12%) to say restrooms
were somewhat important. The likelihood to say restrooms were somewhat
important decreased as age increased; specifically, 22% of 18-34 year olds,
20% of 35-44 year olds, 14% of 45-54 year olds, and 11% of those aged 55 or
older said restrooms were somewhat important. The likelihood to say
restrooms were very important decreased as level of education increased;
specifically, 83% of those with high school or less education, 79% of those
with some college or trade school, and 68% of college graduates said
restrooms were very important. However, the likelihood to say restrooms
were somewhat important increased as level of education increased;
specifically, 12% of those with high school or less education, 14% of those
with some college or trade school, and 23% of college graduates said
restrooms were somewhat important. There were no statistically significant
differences of opinion regarding importance of restrooms based on
respondents' race or annual household income.

Men (40%) were more likely than women (28%) to say primitive areas
with no facilities were very important; similarly, men (19%) were less likely
than women (33%) to say primitive areas were not important at all when
considering taking wildlife or nature-oriented trips. The likelihood to say
primitive areas were not important at all increased as age increased;
specifically, 16% of 18-34 year olds, 23% of 35-44 year olds, 25% of 45-54
year olds, and 37% of those aged 55 or older said primitive areas were not
important at all. Respondents with high school or less education (31%) were
more likely than those with some college or trade school (20%) to say
primitive areas were not important at all. There were no statistically
significant differences of opinion regarding importance of primitive areas with
no facilities based on respondents' race or annual household income.

How Floridians Receive Their Information on Wildlife

Floridians receive information on wildlife-related issues from a variety of
sources, including television, radio, newspapers, and friends and family, to name
a few. In order to effectively communicate wildlife-related issues to Floridians
and educate Floridians about wildlife, it is important for the Commission to
identify how, and to what extent, Floridians receive their information on wildlife.

1987.-In 1987, an open-ended question was posed on how Floridians get
information about wildlife that allowed a full range of responses (Fig. 13).
Most individuals surveyed received their information about wildlife from
nature or wildlife documentaries or weekly shows on television; 42% from





Where do you get your information
about wildlife?



Other iI
Other people
Radio
Workshops/courses
Brochures
Personal experience
Field trips/nature walks
TV: movies
Books
Newspapers
Wildl. article in magazine
TV: PSA, news stories i i
Wildlife magazines
TV: documentaries . |____
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent, check all that apply


[ 1987 (n= 1699) 1995 (n= 809)


Fig. 13. Sources of wildlife information for Floridians. Respondents were allowed to name more than 1 information source.





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


nature or wildlife magazines, 42% public service announcements or news
from television, 37% from magazines other than wildlife magazines, 32%
newspapers, 27% books, 24% from full-length movies on television, 12% field
trips and nature walks, 7% personal experience, 6% brochures, 4% workshops
or courses, 3% radio, 3% other informed individuals, 2% movies, 2%
involvement in wildlife/nature organizations, 1% slide shows, 4% other, 2%
did not know or refused.

1995.-The open-ended question that allowed a full range of responses
was repeated on how Floridians get information about wildlife (Fig. 13).
Respondents were allowed to say more than 1 information source; therefore,
response percentages will add to more than 100%. Most individuals surveyed
received their information about wildlife from television - 49% said nature or
wildlife documentaries or weekly shows, 25% nature or wildlife magazines,
24% newspapers, 22% personal experience, 19% books, 17% public service
announcement or news stories on television, 12% from magazines other than
wildlife magazines, 10% family and friends, 9% brochures, 5% field trips and
nature walks, 4% full length movies on television, 2% workshops or courses,
1% radio, 1% work, 3% other, 2% don't know/refused and 1% did not have
any information on wildlife.

The top 3 sources for information, wildlife documentaries on TV, newspapers,
and wildlife magazines, were analyzed to see if any demographic subgroups were
more likely than others to select these as information sources. There were no
statistically significant differences in likelihood to list wildlife documentaries on
TV as an information source based on respondents' gender, age, education level,
race, or annual household income. The likelihood to list newspapers as a wildlife
information source increased as level of education increased; specifically, 17% of
those with high school or less education, 23% of those with some college or trade
school, and 32% of college graduates listed newspapers. White respondents
(26%) were more likely than other respondents (13%) to list newspapers. Those
respondents earning less than $20,000 annually (15%) were less likely than those
who earn $20,000-$39,999 annually (28%) to list newspapers. There were no
statistically significant differences in likelihood to list newspapers as an
information source based on respondents' gender or age. White respondents
(27%) were more likely than other respondents (15%) to list wildlife magazines
as an information source. There were no statistically significant differences in
likelihood to list wildlife magazines as an information source based on
respondents' gender, age, education level, or annual household income.

1985.-In 1985, 57% of respondents wanted more information about
wildlife (Fig. 14). Fifty-one percent wanted information on how to identify
wildlife, 51% on how wild animals live, 48% on where to go to see more






Would you like more information
about wildlife?


100-

90-

80-

70-
0-' -. . .... . - . . .......... . - - - ..........
60-

50-
42 41
40-

30-

20-

10-
0
Yes No

M 1985 (n= 996) 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 14. Percentage of Floridians who would like more information about wildlife.




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


wildlife, 40% on how to help injured wildlife, and 33% on how to feed and
attract wildlife (Fig. 15).

Respondents with children were more likely than respondents without
children, Florida natives were more likely than nonnatives, more highly
educated individuals were more likely than less educated individuals, younger
individuals were more likely than older individuals, and individuals who
participated heavily in nonconsumptive wildlife-related activities were more
likely than nonusers to want more information about wildlife. No significant
differences were detected with desiring more information on wildlife and the
following variables: area of residence, race, hispanic origin, and gender.

Rural respondents were more likely than urbanites or town residents, and
individuals who participated heavily in wildlife-related activities were more
likely than those who did not, to want information on how to feed or attract
wild birds or animals to their yards. No significant differences were detected
between individuals who wanted this type of information and those who did
not based on children living at home, Florida native, level of education, race,
hispanic origin, and gender.

Respondents participating in nonconsumptive wildlife-related activities
were more likely than those who did not to want to know more about wild
birds or animals and how they live, although a majority in both groups wanted
more information. Otherwise, responses did not vary significantly based on
area of residence, Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic origin,
gender, or age.

Rural respondents were more likely than town or urbanites, Florida natives
were more likely than nonnatives, less educated individuals were more likely
than more educated individuals, younger individuals were more likely than
older individuals, and those participating more heavily in wildlife-related
activities were more likely than those who did not to want to know how to care
for injured wildlife. No differences were detected based on area of residence,
children living at home, Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic
origin, or gender.

No significant differences were detected for the following variables and
interest in identifying wildlife: area of residence, children living at home,
Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic origin, gender, age, and
participation in nonconsumptive wildlife-related recreational activities.

1995.-In 1995, 58% of respondents wanted more information about
wildlife (Fig. 14). Forty-eight percent wanted information on how to identify





Would you like more
information on how to...


Feed/attract wildlife


Care for injured wildlife


Where to see wildlife


How wild animals live


Identify wildlife


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percent saying yes


80 90 10


-33

!7X>l~x


1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 15. Percentage of Floridians wanting more wildlife information who want more information on each listed topic. Read as: In 1995, 48% of Floridians who
want more information on wildlife want more information on how to identify wildlife.


0
z
0



0
r
m

0
0





0 0





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


wildlife, 47% on how wild animals live, 47% on where to go to see more
wildlife, 38% on how to help injured wildlife, and 25% on how to feed and
attract wildlife (Fig. 15).

The likelihood to want more information about wildlife decreased as age
increased; specifically, 70% of 18-34 year olds, 67% of 35-44 year olds, 60%
of 45-54 year olds, and 39% of those aged 55 or older wanted more
information on wildlife. White respondents (56%) were less likely than other
respondents (70%) to want more information on wildlife. There were no
statistically significant differences in likelihood to want more information
about wildlife based on respondents' gender, education level, or annual
household income.

Those respondents who indicated a desire for more information on
wildlife were asked if they would want information on several different topics;
this analysis is based on those respondents only. White respondents who
wanted more information on wildlife (40%) were less likely than respondents
of other raceswho wanted more information on wildlife (55%) to want
information on how to feed birds and attract wildlife. There were no
statistically significant differences in likelihood to want more information on
feeding and attracting wildlife based on respondents' gender, age, education
level, or annual household income.

The likelihood of those respondents who wanted more information about
wildlife to want information on wild birds or animals and how they live
decreased as age increased; specifically, 85% of those who wanted more
information on wildlife aged 18-34, 81% of those who wanted more
information on wildlife aged 35-44, 76% of those who wanted more
information on wildlife aged 45-54, and 72% of those who wanted more
information on wildlife aged 55 or older said they wanted information on wild
birds or animals and how they live. There were no statistically significant
differences in likelihood to want more information on how wild animals live
based on respondents' gender, education level, race, or annual household income.

The likelihood of those respondents who wanted more information about
wildlife to want information on how to care for injured wildlife decreased as
age increased; specifically, 76% of those who wanted more information on
wildlife aged 18-34, 69% of those who wanted more information on wildlife
aged 35-44, 59% of those who wanted more information on wildlife aged 45-
54, and 43% of those who wanted more information on wildlife aged 55 or
older said they wanted information on how to care for injured wildlife. White
respondents who wanted more information about wildlife (60%) were less
likely than respondents of other races who wanted more information about




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


wildlife (80%) to want information on how to care for injured wildlife. There
were no statistically significant differences in likelihood to want more
information on how to care for injured wildlife based on respondents' gender,
education level, or annual household income.

The likelihood of those respondents who wanted more information about
wildlife to want information on where to go to see wildlife decreased as age
increased. Specifically, 85% of those who wanted more information on
wildlife aged 18-34, 82% of those who wanted more information on wildlife
aged 35-44, 83% of those who wanted more information on wildlife aged 45-
54, and 65% of those who wanted more information on wildlife aged 55 or
older said they wanted information on where to go to see wildlife. There were
no statistically significant differences in likelihood to want more information
on where to go to see wildlife based on respondents' gender, education level,
race, or annual household income.

Women who wanted more information about wildlife (86%) were more
likely than men who wanted more information about wildlife (77%) to want
information on how to identify wildlife. The likelihood of those respondents
who wanted more information about wildlife to want information on how to
identify wildlife decreased as age increased. Specifically, 88% of those who
wanted more information on wildlife aged 18-34, 85% of those who wanted
more information on wildlife aged 35-44, 81% of those who wanted more
information on wildlife aged 45-54, and 70% of those who wanted more
information on wildlife aged 55 or older said they wanted information on how
to identify wildlife. There were no statistically significant differences in
likelihood to want more information on how to identify wildlife based on
respondents' education level, race, or annual household income.

Agency Recognition and Responsibility

This section was included in order to assess the extent of Floridians'
knowledge and awareness of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission. Additionally, the extent of commitment to several issues was
measured, including Floridians' opinions of how much effort should be spent
to minimize the environmental impact of development, whether more or less
time and money should be spent protecting endangered species, whether more
or less time and money should be spent protecting wetlands, and whether
Florida laws protecting wetlands should be strengthened, stay the same, or
weakened.

1985.-In 1985, respondents were asked if they could name the agency
with management responsibility for wildlife. If they responded correctly, they




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


were asked how well they felt the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission performed.

Twenty-five percent of respondents correctly identified the Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission as the agency responsible for managing and
protecting wild animals in Florida (Fig. 16). Seventy-five percent answered
incorrectly. Rural residents were more likely than urban or town residents,
Florida natives were more likely than nonnatives, males were more likely than
females, younger respondents were more likely than older respondents, and
individuals involved in nonconsumptive activities were more likely than those
who were not to know the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission is
Florida's wildlife agency.

1995.-In 1995, respondents were also asked if they could name the
agency with management responsibility for wildlife. All respondents were
then asked how well they felt the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission performed.

Twenty-three percent of respondents correctly identified the Florida Game
and Fresh Water Fish Commission as the agency responsible for managing and
protecting wild animals in Florida (Fig. 16). Twenty-two percent answered
incorrectly, and 56% did not know.

Men (30%) were more likely than women (16%) to correctly identify the
Commission as the state's fish and wildlife agency; likewise, women (65%)
were more likely than men (46%) to say don't know to this question.
Respondents aged 35-44 (32%) were more likely than those aged 55 or older
(17%) to correctly identify the Commission as the state's fish and wildlife
agency. The likelihood to say don't know when asked what agency is
responsible for managing the wild animals in Florida decreased as level of
education increased; specifically, 64% of those with high school or less
education, 52% of those with some college or trade, and 50% of college
graduates said don't know to this question. White respondents (25%) were
more likely than other respondents (9%) to correctly identify the Commission
as the state's fish and wildlife agency; likewise, white respondents (53%) were
less likely than respondents of other races (68%) to say don't know to this
question. The likelihood to correctly identify the Commission as the state's
fish and wildlife agency increased as annual household income increased;
specifically, 13% of those earning less than $20,000, 23% of those earning
$20,000-$39,999, 28% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 30% of those
earning $60,000 or more correctly named the Commission. Likewise, the
likelihood to say don't know when asked who manages the state's fish and
wildlife resources decreased as annual household income increased;





What state agency is responsible for
managing & protecting FL wild animals?


-- i i -


Wrong Answer/Don't know


Lxxx


FL Game & Fresh Water Fish Commission


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100
Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 16. Percent of Floridians who can name the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission as the agency responsible for managing and protecting wild
animals in Florida.





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


specifically, 69% of those earning less than $20,000, 55% of those earning
$20,000-$39,999, 49% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 46% of those
earning $60,000 or more said don't know to this question.

All respondents were asked how they would rate the Florida Game and
Fresh Water Fish Commission in doing its job of managing Florida's wildlife
in 1995 (Fig. 17). Six percent said excellent, 30% said good, 18% said fair,
4% said poor, and 43% said that they did not know enough to say.

Of the 182 respondents who correctly identified the Commission in 1995,
6% said excellent, 45% said good, 19% said fair, 4% said poor, and 26% said
that they did not know enough to say. The shift in opinion for those who know
what state agency is responsible for managing wildlife occurred as these
respondents moved from not knowing to rating the Commission's
performance as good. The percentages of respondents selecting the excellent,
fair, and poor categories remained constant.

Men (22%) were slightly more likely than women (14%) to say the
Commission was doing a fair job. Women (51%) were more likely than men
(35%) to say they did not know enough about the Commission to rate its
performance. There were no statistically significant differences of opinion
regarding overall Commission performance based on respondents' age,
education level, race, or annual household income.

Respondents were asked if they knew a great deal, a moderate amount, a
little, or nothing about the activities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission (Fig. 18). Five percent said a great deal, 21% said a moderate
amount, 54% said a little, and 21% said they knew nothing about the activities
of the Commission.

Men (26%) were more likely than women (16%) to say they knew a
moderate amount about the activities of the Commission; likewise, men (13%)
were less likely than women (29%) to say they knew nothing about the
Commission. The likelihood for respondents to say they knew a moderate
amount about the Commission increased as level of education increased;
specifically, 15% of those with a high school or less education, 23% of those
with some college or trade school, and 25% of college graduates knew a
moderate amount about the activities of the Commission. Similarly, the
likelihood for respondents to say they knew nothing about the Commission
decreased as level of education increased; specifically, 30% of those with a
high school or less education, 15% of those with some college or trade school,
and 17% of college graduates knew nothing about the activities of the
Commission. White respondents (56%) were more likely than respondents of







How would you say the Commission is
doing its job of managing FL wildlife?




Don't know 43 o


Poor


Fair 1



Good .30



Excellent 6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n= 809), 1995 data


Fig. 17. Floridians' opinions regarding the performance of the Commission in its job of managing Florida's wildlife.







How much would you say you know about
the activities of the FL G&FWFC?


Nothing




Little




Moderate amount




Great deal


21


2




5


I --


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 18. Floridians' self-reported knowledge levels of Commission activities.


J^ ___ ^ ____ f / ^





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


other races (43%) to say they knew a little about the activities of the
Commission; likewise, white respondents (18%) were less likely than other
respondents (39%) to say they knew nothing. The likelihood for respondents
to say they knew a moderate amount about the Commission increased as
annual household income increased; specifically, 14% of those earning less
than $20,000, 20% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, 24% of those earning
$40,000-$59,999, and 29% of those earning $60,000 or more knew a moderate
amount about the activities of the Commission. Similarly, the likelihood for
respondents to say they knew nothing about the Commission decreased as
annual household income increased; specifically, 27% of those earning less
than $20,000, 23% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, 17% of those earning
$40,000-$59,999, and 12% of those earning $60,000 or more knew nothing
about the activities of the Commission. There were no statistically significant
differences of opinion regarding knowledge of Commission activities based on
respondents' age.

Several new questions were added to the 1995 questionnaire. First,
information was collected to assess knowledge levels of Floridians on specific
responsibilities of the Commission. Respondents were asked what they
believed to be the primary responsibilities of the Commission, and were
allowed to name multiple functions (Fig. 19). Forty-one percent cited general
wildlife conservation, 21% said threatened and endangered species protection,
18% said environmental protection, 18% said law enforcement, 18% said
fishing, 16% said preserving natural areas, 13% said hunting, 10% said game
management, 8% said fisheries management, 4% said public education, 3%
said forest management, 3% said nongame management, 2% said outdoor
recreation other than hunting or fishing, 1% said helping landowners, and 2%
said other functions. Eleven percent did not know what the primary
responsibilities of the Commission are.

Next, respondents were asked to rate how well the Commission does in
incorporating hunters' and anglers' wants and needs into the management of
the state's fish and wildlife resources (Fig. 20). Four percent said excellent,
31% said good, 16% said fair, 4% said poor, while 42% did not know, and 4%
had no opinion. Comparatively, respondents were asked to rate how well the
Commission does in incorporating non-hunters' and non-anglers' wants and
needs into the management of the state's fish and wildlife resources (Fig. 21).
Three percent said excellent, 22% said good, 17% said fair, 6% said poor,
while 48% did not know and 5% had no opinion. This indicates that the public
generally feels the Commission adequately addresses both traditional and non-
traditional constituents wants and needs, but most Floridians are lacking
enough information to develop opinions regarding Commission performance.







What are the primary responsibilities
of the FL G&FWFC?


Help landowners
Other
Outdoor recreation
Nongame mgmt.
Forest mgmt.
0. Education
Fisheries mgmt.
Game mgmt.
M3 Hunting
. Preserve natural areas
Fishing
Law enforcement
Environ. protection
T&E species mgmt.
General wildl. conserv.


li
2
2
13
3
4





Z .4o


6 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 19. Horidians' awareness of Commission responsibilities. Respondents were allowed to name more than 1 responsibility.













6

:z
.42








ZZ
r'rl
;11 1 11







C-q

C


40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 20. Floridians' opinions of how well the Commission incorporates hunters' and anglers' wants and needs into the management of the state's fish and
wildlife resources.

































30 40 50 60
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 21. Floridians' opinions of how well the Commission incorporates non-hunters' and non-anglers' wants and needs into the management of the state's fish
and wildlife resources.




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Men (20%) were more likely than women (12%) to rate the Commission's
performance in incorporating hunters' and anglers' wants and needs into the
management of the state's fish and wildlife resources as fair. Women (53%)
were more likely than men (38%) to say don't know when asked to rate the
Commission's performance in addressing hunters' and anglers' wants and
needs. There were no statistically significant differences of opinion regarding
Commission performance in incorporating hunters' and anglers' wants and
needs based on respondents' age, education level, race, or annual household
income. The likelihood to say don't know when asked to rate the
Commission's performance in incorporating non-hunters' and non-anglers'
wants and needs into the management of the state's fish and wildlife resources
increased as age increased; specifically, 46% of 18-34 year olds, 46% of 35-
44 year olds, 48% of 45-54 year olds, and 66% of those aged 55 or older said
don't know to this question. There were no statistically significant differences
of opinion regarding Commission performance in incorporating non-hunters'
and non-anglers' wants and needs based on respondents' gender, education
level, race, or annual household income.

Several specific issues have arisen since both the 1985 and 1987 surveys which
warranted specific inclusion in the 1995 survey: environmental impacts related to
development, endangered species, wetlands, and privately-owned habitat.

Fifty-eight percent of respondents said that more, 25% said about the
same, and 8% said less of the Commission's time and money should be spent
managing and minimizing the environmental impacts of'Florida's growth and
development (Fig. 22).

The likelihood to say the Commission should spend more time and money
managing and minimizing the environmental impacts of Florida's growth and
development decreased as age increased; specifically, 67% of 18-34 year olds,
65% of 35-44 year olds, 60% of 45-54 year olds, and 43% of those aged 55 or
older said much more or slightly more to this question. The likelihood to say
the Commission should spend more time and money managing and
minimizing the environmental impacts of Florida's growth and development
increased as level of education increased; specifically, 51% of those with high
school or less education, 59% of those with some college or trade school, and
66% of college graduates said much more or slightly more to this question.
Respondents who described themselves as Republicans (53%) were more
likely than those who said they were Independents (69%) to feel the
Commission should spend more time and money managing and minimizing
the environmental impacts of Florida's growth and development (Fig. 23).
There were no statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the
amount of time and money spent managing and minimizing the environmental












Don't know 9


C Much less 4

-o
S Slightly less 4
B

C About the same 5
, -r ,-,. 1. 1 1,-.1 1|

Slightly more 29


Much more 30

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 22. Floridians' opinions of whether more or less time and money should be spent managing and minimizing the environmental impacts of Florida's growth
and development.






Opinion of effort spent to minimize
environmental impact of development


Percent (1995 data)


IM Republican (n=255) E2 Democrat (n=261)


Independent (n=249)


Fig. 23. Florida Republicans', Democrats', and Independents' opinions of whether more or less time and money should be spent managing and minimizing the
environmental impacts of Florida's growth and development.


I





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


impacts of Florida's growth and development based on respondents' gender,
race, or annual household income.

Fifty-seven percent of respondents said that more, 29% said about the
same, and 9% said less of the Commission's time and money should be spent
managing and protecting endangered species (Fig. 24).

The likelihood to say the Commission should spend more time and money
managing and protecting endangered species decreased as age increased;
specifically, 70% of 18-34 year olds, 63% of 35-44 year olds, 56% of 45-54
year olds, 40% of those aged 55 or older said much more or slightly more to
this question. However, the likelihood to say the Commission should spend
about the same time and money managing and protecting endangered species
increased as age increased; specifically, 23% of 18-34 year olds, 29% of 35-
44 year olds, 26% of 45-54 year olds, and 38% of those aged 55 or older said
about the same to this question. The likelihood to say the Commission should
spend more time and money managing and protecting endangered species
decreased as annual household income increased; specifically, 62% of those
earning less than $20,000, 61% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, 58% of
those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 46% of those earning $60,000 or more
said much more or slightly more to this question. However, the likelihood to
say the Commission should spend about the same time and money managing
and protecting endangered species increased as income increased; specifically,
22% of those earning less than $20,000, 28% of those earning $20,000-
$39,999, 30% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 38% of those earning
$60,000 or more said about the same to this question. Respondents who
described themselves as Republicans (47%) were more likely than those who
said they were Independents (63%) to feel the Commission should spend more
time and money managing and protecting endangered species (Fig. 25). There
were no statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the amount of
time and money spent managing and protecting endangered species based on
respondents' gender, education level, or race.

Fifty-five percent of respondents said that more, 27% said about the same,
and 10% said less of the Commission's time and money should be spent and
protecting wetlands (Fig. 26).

Republicans (45%) were less likely than Independents (64%) to say much
more or slightly more time and money should be spent protecting wetlands
(Fig. 27). There were no statistically significant differences of opinion
regarding the amount of time and money spent protecting wetlands based on
respondents' gender, age, education level, race, or annual household income.









Should more or less time and money be
spent protecting endangered species?




0






z
, I
* : ' ; ; ; ; ;r
I I I I I I I I
I I i I I I IIl
{ i j i I I I -

I4 -- 0
I ' : ' ; i ' !0
J ____J I I I I I


i ' | < | J | ; |m

^^ -' i I i I I 10
* ' ! ; ! ; ! ; H


Fig. 24. Floridians' opinions of whether more or less time and money should be spent managing and protecting endangered species.


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 7'
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)





Should more or less time and money be
spent protecting endangered species?


Percent (1995 data)


I Republican (n=255) RM Democrat (n=261) = Independent (n=249)


Fig. 25. Florida Republicans', Democrats', and Independents' opinions of whether more or less time and money should be managing and protecting endangered species.







Should more or less time and money be
spent protecting wetlands?



z


















33

20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n= 809, 1995 data)
: \ ; ! I ':H

| ; j | | r
I ''** ; I I I C
I I I I I I
I I I I i H
I I | I | |


; ; ': ** * *:
1 1 1 1 1 1 1



� 1 | I I







Percent (n= 809, 1995 data)


Fig. 26. Floridians' opinions of whether more or less time and money should be spent protecting wetlands.






Should more or less time and money be
spent protecting wetlands?


Percent (1995 data)


M Republican (n=255) R Democrat (n=261) - Independent (n=249)

Fig. 27. Florida Republicans', Democrats', and Independents' opinions of whether more or less time and money should be spent protecting wetlands.





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


A majority of respondents (55%) said that Florida's laws protecting
wetlands should be strengthened, 31% said remain the same, only 7% said
state wetlands laws should be weakened, and 7% did not know (Fig. 28).

Republicans (49%) were less likely than Democrats (62%) and
Independents (69%) to say Florida's laws protecting wetlands should be
strengthened (Fig. 29). However, Republicans (40%) were more likely than
Independents (27%) to say state wetland laws should remain the same. There
were no statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the amount of
time and money spent protecting wetlands based on respondents' gender, age,
education level, race, or annual household income.

Opinions were mixed regarding the Commission using tax dollars to
reimburse private landowners to maintain and improve fish and wildlife
habitat (Fig. 30). Specifically, 16% strongly supported, 32% somewhat
supported, 19% somewhat opposed, 20% strongly opposed, 5% had no
opinion, and 9% did not know about using tax dollars to reimburse private
landowners to maintain and improve fish and wildlife habitat.

The likelihood to support using tax dollars to reimburse private
landowners to maintain and improve fish and wildlife habitat decreased as age
increased; specifically, 52% of 18-34 year olds, 53% of 35-44 year olds, 52%
of 45-54 year olds, and 36% of those aged 55 or older strongly or somewhat
supported this effort. There were no statistically significant differences of
opinion regarding using tax dollars to reimburse -private landowners for
maintaining and improving habitat based on respondents' gender, education
level, race, or annual household income.

Values Floridians Associate with Wildlife

People associate several different values with wildlife. Respondents were
asked to rank the importance of 5 ways they might value wildlife: knowing
that wildlife exists in Florida, seeing wildlife on trips in Florida, knowing that
wildlife is around their home, knowing people can hunt and fish in Florida,
and knowing wildlife will not create a nuisance.

1985.-An overwhelming majority of respondents (80%) said that it was
very important to know that wildlife exists in Florida. More than 61% of
respondents said that it was very important to personally see wildlife on trips they
take in Florida; 30% said this was somewhat important. Sixty percent said it was
very important to know that wildlife was around their home, while 28% said this
was somewhat important. Knowing that people can hunt and fish in Florida was
very important to 42% and somewhat important to 32%. Finally, knowing that










Don't know 7




Weakened 7




Remain the same


-H


Strengthened


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 28. Floridians' opinions of whether laws protecting wetlands should be strengthened, remain the same, or weakened.


31


















Remain the


Percent (1995 data)


Republican (n=237) M Democrat (n=245) = Independent (n=227)


Fig. 29. Florida Republicans', Democrats', and Independents' opinions of whether laws protecting wetlands should be strengthened, remain the same, or weakened.













DK/no opinion




Strongly oppose




Somewhat oppose




Somewhat support




Strongly support


14



20




19


1


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Percent (n=809, 1995 data)


Fig. 30. Floridians' opinions of the Commission using tax dollars to reimburse private landowners to maintain and improve fish and wildlife habitat.


- -,


90 100


/ J /


J J J J


J i r


I J





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


wildlife doesn't interfere with their other activities was very important to
28%, somewhat important to 36%, and not important to 34% of respondents
(Figs. 31-36).

Senior citizens (65+ years) were less likely than other age groups to respond
that it was very important to know that wildlife exists in Florida, although a
majority (68%) said this was very important. Individuals who participated in
nonconsumptive wildlife-related activities were more likely than those who did
not to respond that it was very important to know that wildlife exists in Florida.
No significant differences in opinion were detected on the importance of
knowing that wildlife exists in Florida based on area of residence, children
living at home, Florida native, level of education, hispanic origin, or gender.

Senior citizens (65+ years) were less likely than younger respondents to
view as very important personally seeing wildlife on trips taken in Florida,
although almost half (48%) responded that this was very important.
Nonconsumptive users were much more likely than individuals who did not
participate in these activities to believe it is very important to personally see
wildlife while taking trips in Florida.

No significant differences in responses were detected on the importance of
personally seeing wildlife on trips taken in Florida and the following variables:
area of residence, children living at home, Florida native, level of education,
race, hispanic origin, and gender.

Rural residents were more likely than urbanites or town residents, younger
age groups were more likely than older age groups, and nonconsumptive wildlife
users were more likely than individuals who did not participate in these activities
to respond it was very important to know wildlife was around their home.

No significant differences on the importance of having wildlife around
their homes based on the following variables were detected: children living at
home, Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic origin, or gender.

Blacks were almost twice as likely as whites to feel that it was very
important that wildlife doesn't interfere with their other activities.
Respondents with children were more likely to feel wildlife interfering with
their other activities was not important.

Insignificant variables on the importance wildlife interfering with other
activities included area of residence, Florida native, level of education, gender,
age, and participation in nonconsumptive wildlife activities.






Percent of respondents who said "value"
is very important to them.




Knowing wildlife won't interfere


Knowing people can hunt/fish


Knowing wildlife is near home


Seeing wildlife on trips


Knowing wildlife exists in FL I

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent
S 195 (n996) 1995 (89)

~= I5(n99) M 195( J89


FIg. 31. Percent of Floridians who said listed value is very important to them.





How important is it to you to know that
wildlife exists in Florida?


Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 32. Importance of knowing that wildlife exists in Florida.








How important is it to you to know that
wildlife exists in Florida?


Not





Somewhat


Very important


Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n= 809)


Fig. 33. Importance of seeing wildlife on trips while in Florida.






How important is it to you to know that
you have wildlife around your home?


Percent
I.


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 34. Importance of knowing that wildlife exists around the home in Florida.


Not





Somewhat





Very










How important is it to you to know that
people can hunt or fish in Florida?


Not important





Somewhat important





Very important


23





32
/ __ I I


I 1 1 ..- �zZIZIIZZZ27~7


6 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Percent


80 90 100


[I M 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 35. Importance of knowing that people can hunt or fish in Florida.


I J [





How important is it to be sure wildlife
doesn't interfere with other activities?


Not important





Somewhat important





Very important


Percent


1985 (n=996) E2 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 36. Importance of knowing that wildlife doesn't interfere with other activities.






NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Knowing that people can hunt or fish for wildlife in Florida was very
important to many more Florida natives than nonnatives. These activities were
very important to 57% of natives compared to 39% of nonnative respondents to
rate the importance of hunting and fishing in Florida as very important. Males
were more likely than females to rate these activities as very important.

No significant differences on the importance of hunting and fishing were
detected based on area of residence, race, hispanic origin, age, or participation
in nonconsumptive wildlife activities.

1995.-In 1995 as well, an overwhelming majority of respondents (78%)
said that it was very important to know that wildlife exists in Florida; 19% said
this was somewhat important. Sixty-three percent of respondents said that it
was very important to personally see wildlife on trips they take in Florida;
27% said this was somewhat important. Almost 60% said it was very
important to know that wildlife was around their home, while 26% said this
was somewhat important. Knowing that people can hunt and fish in Florida
was very important to 37% and somewhat important to 37%. Finally, knowing
that wildlife doesn't interfere with their other activities was very important to
27%, somewhat important to 31%, and not important to 39% of respondents
(Figs. 31-36).

Respondents aged 55 or older were less likely to say that knowing wildlife
exists in Florida was very important; specifically, 81% of 18-34 year olds, 82%
of 35-44 year olds, 82% of 45-54 year olds, and 70% of those aged 55 or older
said this was very important. There were no statistically significant differences
of opinion regarding the importance of knowing wildlife exists in Florida based
on respondents' gender, education level, race, or annual household income.

Respondents aged 35-44 (71%) were more likely than those aged 55 or
older (55%) to say that seeing wildlife on trips in Florida was very important.
There were no statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the
importance of seeing wildlife on trips based on respondents' gender, education
level, race, or annual household income.

Respondents aged 55 or older (25%) were more likely than other
respondents (11% of 18-34 year olds, 9% of 35-44 year olds, 9% of 45-54 year
olds) to say that knowing wildlife is around their home is not important at all.
The likelihood to say that knowing wildlife is around their home is very
important increased as level of education increased; specifically, 53% of those
with high school or less education, 61% of those with some college or trade
school, and 67% of college graduates said this was very important. The
likelihood to say that knowing wildlife is around their home is very important




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


increased as annual household income increased; specifically, 49% of those
earning less than $20,000, 63% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, and 67% of
those earning $40,000-$59,999 said this was very important. There were no
statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the importance of
knowing that wildlife is around the home based on respondents' gender or race.

The likelihood to say that knowing wildlife doesn't interfere with other
activities is somewhat important increased as annual household income
increased; specifically, 23% of those earning less than $20,000, 33% of those
earning $20,000-$39,999, and 40% of those earning $40,000-$59,999 said this
was somewhat important. There were no statistically significant differences of
opinion regarding the importance of knowing that wildlife doesn't interfere with
other activities based on respondents' gender, age, education level, or race.

Men (47%) were more likely than women (30%) to say that knowing people
can hunt or fish in Florida is very important. Likewise, women (30%) were more
likely than men (18%) to say that knowing people can hunt or fish in Florida is
not important at all. There were no statistically significant differences of opinion
regarding the importance of knowing people can hunt or fish in Florida based on
respondents' age, education level, race, or annual household income.

What Floridians Think the Commission Should Do to Help Wildlife

This section was developed to gauge the importance of 8 different
Commission responsibilities. These responsibilities included wildlife habitat
protection, enforcing laws to protect wildlife, protecting endangered species,
helping injured wild animals, providing wildlife information to the public,
funding wildlife research, providing wildlife viewing opportunities, and
providing more hunting and fishing opportunities.

1985.-A majority of respondents felt that it was very important to protect
habitat (86.8%), protect endangered species (86.2%), enforce laws to protect
wildlife (86.2%), and help injured wild animals (80%) (Figs. 37-40). Sixty-
nine percent believed it was very important to provide information and
education (Fig. 41), 62.8% felt it was very important to fund wildlife research
(Fig. 42), and 55.5% believed it was very important to provide more wildlife
viewing opportunities (Fig. 43). The only question which was not met with
majority support as a very important activity was providing more hunting and
fishing opportunities (Fig. 44). Twenty-six percent of respondents believed
that providing more hunting and fishing opportunities was very important.
Providing hunting and fishing opportunities also elicited the largest "not
important" responses. Thirty-two percent of respondents said it was not
important to provide more hunting and fishing opportunities.












Not important




Somewhat important




Very important ^ 4


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 37. Importance of protecting the habitat where wildlife lives.














Some'


Not important



hat important 14


Very important


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 38. Importance of enforcing laws to protect wildlife.


h86


















20 I
1












) 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent 0


1985 (n=996) ^ 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 39. Importance of protecting endangered species.


























Percent


I 1985 (n=996) E 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 40. Importance of helping injured wildlife.













Not important


Somewhat important


Very


Percent


I 1985 (n=996) M] 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 41. Importance of providing information about wildlife to public.












O










51 .3

63


20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent


1985 (n=996) Z 1995 (n=809)
^" ^


Fig. 42. Importance of funding wildlife research.











Not important




Somewhat important
35::



Very important


0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent 3


i 1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 43. Importance of providing more wildlife viewing opportunities.











0
Not important





Somewhat important





Very important



0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent a

0-
1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 44. Importance of providing more hunting and fishing opportunities.





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Protecting habitat was considered the most important thing that can be
done for Florida's wildlife by 32.4% of respondents (Fig. 45). Twenty-one
percent felt the most important activity was enforcing laws to protect wildlife
and 21% felt it was protecting endangered species. Nine percent believed
providing information was the most important activity, 5.5% felt it was
helping injured wildlife, and 2.6% said it was funding wildlife research. Two
percent of respondents felt the most important thing the Commission can do
was providing more hunting and fishing opportunities and 1% felt the top
priority should be providing more wildlife viewing opportunities.

Younger individuals were more likely than older individuals, and
nonconsumptive wildlife users were more likely than nonusers to feel that
providing information about wildlife to the public is very important. No
significant differences were detected based on area of residence, children
living at home, Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic origin, and
gender. Younger individuals were more likely than older respondents to view
protecting endangered species as very important. Ninety-four percent of
respondents aged 18-24 saw endangered species protection as very important.
Eighty percent of senior citizens (65+ years) saw this as very important. The
more an individual was involved in nonconsumptive use the more likely they
were to feel endangered species protection was very important. Insignificant
variables included area of residence, children living at home, Florida native,
level of education, race, hispanic origin, and gender.

Florida natives were twice as likely as nonnatives to believe that it was very
important to provide more hunting and fishing opportunities. Forty-eight
percent of natives placed a very important value on this while 24% of nonnatives
placed a very important value on this. Blacks were more likely than whites and
more highly educated individuals were less likely than less educated individuals
to feel it was very important to provide more fishing and hunting opportunities.
Insignificant variables on the importance of providing more fishing and hunting
opportunities included area of residence, children living at home, hispanic
origin, gender, age, and participation in nonconsumptive wildlife activities.

Respondents with children were more likely than respondents without
children to believe it was very important to provide more wildlife viewing
opportunities. Older individuals were less likely than younger individuals to
see this as very important and, as would be expected, nonconsumptive wildlife
recreationists were more likely than respondents not participating in these
activities to believe it was very important to providing more wildlife viewing
opportunities. No significant differences were detected on the importance of
providing wildlife viewing opportunities and the following variables: area of
residence, Florida native, level of education, race, hispanic origin, or gender.





Which is the most important thing the
Commission can do for FL wildlife?



Enforce wildlife laws 22

Fund wildlife research 3

Help injured wildlife 6.

Protect wildlife habitat 3

Provide wildl. viewing oppor.

Provide hunt/fish oppor.

Protect endangered species

Provide information 9
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0
Percent


1985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=809)


Fig. 45. Floridians' opinions of what is the most important thing the Commission can do for wildlife.





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Younger respondents were more likely than older respondents, and
respondents who participated in nonconsumptive wildlife activities were more
likely than those who did not to believe wildlife habitat protection was very
important. Insignificant variables on the importance of habitat protection
included area of residence, children living at home, Florida native, level of
education, race, hispanic origin, and gender.

Females were more likely than males, and nonconsumptive users were
more likely than those not participating in these activities to feel it was very
important to help injured wild animals, although all groups had a majority that
felt this activity was very important. No significant relationships on the
importance of helping injured wildlife and the following variables were
detected: area of residence, children living at home, Florida native, race,
hispanic origin, and age.

Younger respondents were more likely than older respondents, and
respondents involved in nonconsumptive wildlife activities were more likely
than those who were not to view funding wildlife research as very important.
Insignificant variables on the importance of funding wildlife research include
area of residence, children living at home, Florida native, level of education,
race, hispanic origin, and gender.

Younger respondents were more likely than older respondents, and those
participating in nonconsumptive wildlife activities were more likely than those
who were not to see enforcing laws to protect wildlife as very important. No
significant differences were detected on the importance of enforcing laws to
protect wildlife based on area of residence, children living at home, Florida
native, level of education, race, hispanic origin, or gender.

1995.-Ninety-eight percent of respondents believed that protecting
habitat was important (84% said very important and 14% said somewhat
important) (Fig. 37). Closely following was enforcing laws to protect wildlife,
with 97% saying this was important (83% very important, 14% somewhat
important) (Fig. 38). Ninety-six percent of respondents said that helping
injured wild animals was important (75% very important, 20% somewhat
important) (Fig. 40). Ninety-six percent of respondents believed providing
information and education was an important Commission activity (66% very
important, 30% somewhat important) (Fig. 41). Ninety-five percent said that
protecting endangered species was important (75% very important, 20%
somewhat important) (Fig. 39). Ninety-two percent of respondents said
funding wildlife research was important (51% very important, 40% somewhat
important) (Fig. 42). Eighty-seven percent said that providing more wildlife
viewing opportunities was important (46% very important, 41% somewhat





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


important) .(Fig. 43). Although a majority of respondents (60%) said
providing more hunting and fishing opportunities was important (19% very
important, 41% somewhat important), over a third (37%) said this was not
important at all (Fig. 44). This finding corroborates numerous other studies
conducted by Responsive Management, in that respondents rate functions that
protect and preserve wildlife, including information and education programs,
higher than recreation-based programs.

Next, respondents were asked which one of the 8 functions presented is
the most important thing the Commission can do for Florida wildlife.
Protecting habitat was considered the most important thing that can be done
for Florida's wildlife by 36% of respondents (Fig. 45). Twenty-two percent
felt the most important activity was protecting endangered species, and 17%
felt it was enforcing laws to protect wildlife. Nine percent believed providing
information was the most important activity. Four percent of respondents felt
the most important thing the Commission can do was providing more hunting
and fishing opportunities. Three percent said helping injured wildlife and 1%
said funding wildlife research. Less than 1% felt the top priority should be
providing more wildlife viewing opportunities. Four percent did not know,
while 2% said none of the 8 listed functions were the most important thing the
Commission could do. There were no statistically significant differences of
opinion' regarding which of the 8 Commission functions was the most
important based on respondents' gender, age, education level, race, or annual
household income.

Respondents aged 55 or older (58%) were less likely than those aged 18-
34 (71%) and those aged 45-54 (72%) to say that providing information was a
very important Commission activity. There were no statistically significant
differences of opinion regarding the importance of providing information based
on respondents' gender, education level, race, or annual household income.

The likelihood to say that protecting endangered species was a very
important Commission function decreased as age increased; specifically, 86%
of 18-34 year olds, 84% of 35-44 year olds, 72% of 45-54 year olds, and 62%
of those aged 55 or older said protecting endangered species was a very
important Commission activity. There were no statistically significant
differences of opinion regarding the importance of protecting endangered
species based on respondents' gender, education level, race, or annual
household income.

Men (28%) were more likely than women (13%) to say that providing
more hunting and fishing opportunities was a very important Commission
activity. Similarly, women (48%) were more likely than men (28%) to say this





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


was not important at all. The likelihood to say that providing more hunting
and fishing opportunities was a very important Commission activity decreased
as level of education increased; specifically, 25% of those with high school or
less education, 20% of those with some college or trade school, and 14% of
college graduates said this was very important. White respondents (45%) were
more likely than respondents of other races (30%) to say that providing more
hunting and fishing opportunities was a somewhat important Commission
activity. Similarly, white respondents (35%) were less likely than other
respondents (51%) to say this was not important at all. There were no
statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the importance of
providing more hunting and fishing opportunities based on respondents' age or
annual household income.

The likelihood to say that protecting wildlife habitat was a very important
Commission activity decreased as age increased; specifically, 89% of 18-34
year olds, 88% of 35-44 year olds, 87% of 45-54 year olds, and 75% of those
aged 55 or older said this was a very important function. However, the
likelihood to say that protecting wildlife habitat was a somewhat important
Commission activity increased as age increased; specifically, 10% of 18-34
year olds, 11% of 35-44 year olds, 11% of 45-54 year olds, and 22% of those
aged 55 or older said this was a somewhat important function. There were no
statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the importance of
protecting wildlife habitat based on respondents' gender, education level, race,
or annual household income.

Women (81%) were more likely than men (70%) to say that helping
injured wild animals was a very important Commission activity. The
likelihood to say that helping injured wild animals was a very important
Commission activity decreased as annual household income increased;
specifically, 86% of those earning less than $20,000, 77% of those earning
$20,000-$39,999, 74% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 66% of those
earning $60,000 or more said this was a very important function. But, the
likelihood to say that helping injured wild animals was a somewhat important
Commission activity increased as income increased; specifically, 12% of those
earning less than $20,000, 20% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, 21% of
those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 27% of those earning $60,000 or more
said this was a somewhat important function. There were no statistically
significant differences of opinion regarding the importance of helping injured
wild animals based on respondents' age, education level, or race.

The likelihood to say that funding wildlife research was a very important
Commission activity decreased as age increased; specifically, 60% of 18-34
year olds, 53% of 35-44 year olds, 54% of 45-54 year olds, and 44% of those





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


aged 55 or older said this was a very important function. There were no
statistically significant differences of opinion regarding the importance of
funding wildlife research based on respondents' gender, education level, race,
or annual household income.

The likelihood to say that enforcing wildlife laws was a very important
Commission activity decreased as annual household income increased;
specifically, 91% of those earning less than $20,000, 87% of those earning
$20,000-$39,999, 85% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 74% of those
earning $60,000 or more said this was a very important function. However,
the likelihood to say that enforcing wildlife laws was a somewhat important
Commission activity increased as income increased; specifically, 8% of those
earning less than $20,000, 12% of those earning $20,000-$39,999, 14% of
those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 24% of those earning $60,000 or more
said this was a somewhat important function. There were no statistically
significant differences of opinion regarding the importance of enforcing
wildlife laws based on respondents' gender, age, education level, or race.

Nuisance Wildlife Problems

The Commission receives calls and letters requesting information
regarding nuisance animals. The objective of this section was to assess the
extent of nuisance wildlife problems in Florida as well as to determine if
nuisance animal problems are increasing, decreasing, or remaining stable over
the past 10 years.

1985.-Respondents were asked if they had experienced any problems
with wildlife in their neighborhoods or around their homes within the past
year. Twenty percent said yes, while 80% said they had not experienced any
wildlife-related problems (Fig. 46). Respondents who experienced wildlife
problems were asked to describe the animals causing the nuisance (up to 2
responses) and the nature of the problem caused by wildlife.

Raccoons and opossums caused problems for 11% of respondents,
followed by birds (4%), and reptiles and amphibians (Fig. 47). Respondents
reported that the most common problems were animals in garbage (8%),
wildlife in yards and gardens (4%), problems with food stuff (2%), nuisances
involved with pets and livestock (2%), structural damage (2%), and threats to
humans (2%) (Fig. 48).

1995.-Twenty-six percent said yes, while 74% said they had not
experienced any wildlife-related problems within the past year (Fig. 46).
Respondents who experienced wildlife problems were asked to describe the





Did you have any problems with any wild
animals or birds within the last year?


100-

90-
80 z
80/- 74 7

70-

60-
40-




20


10-


Yes No

M 1985 (n=996) 1995 (n 809)


Fig. 46. Percentage of Floridians who had problems with any wild animals or birds in the past year.





What wild animals have caused
you problems?


Percent, check all that apply


1 I 985 (n=996) M 1995 (n=80)


Fig. 47. Percentage of Floridians who had problems with specific species in the past year. Respondents were allowed to name more than I species.





What kind of problem did
the wildlife cause?


threat


Percent, check all that apply


S1985 (n=4996) P 1995 (ns 809)


Fig. 48. Percentage of Floridians who had specific kinds of nuisance wildlife problems in the past year. Respondents were allowed to name more than I kind of problem.




FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


animals causing the nuisance and the nature of the problem caused by wildlife.
Respondents were allowed to give more than 1 answer related to the animal
causing the problem and what kind of problem they experienced.

Raccoons were the most frequently cited animal causing problems; 14%
of respondents noted this animal (Fig. 47). Opossums caused problems for 5%
of respondents, followed by reptiles/amphibians (4%), squirrels (3%), and
birds (2%). Four percent of respondents cited other animals as causing
problems and less than 1% of respondents specifically noted deer, panther, or
invertebrates. No respondents said bears had caused problems. Respondents
reported that the most common problems were animals in garbage (10%),
wildlife in yards and gardens (5%), threats to humans (4%), nuisances
involved with pets and livestock (3%), structural damage (3%), and 3%
reported other sorts of problems (Fig. 48).

The likelihood for respondents to say they had experienced problems with
wildlife in the past year increased as level of income increased; specifically,
18% of those earning less than $20,000, 24% of those earning $20,000-
$39,999, 31% of those earning $40,000-$59,999, and 33% of those earning
$60,000 or more noted a nuisance wildlife problem. There were no
statistically significant differences in likelihood to have had a nuisance
wildlife problem in the past year based on respondents' gender, age, education
level, or race.




NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The primary purpose of this study was to assess changes in public
opinions on and attitudes toward fish and wildlife-related issues between 1985
and 1995. The major conclusion of this study was that opinions, values, and
attitudes toward wildlife and wildlife management have remained stable
among Floridians. Overall, Floridians continued to care deeply about the
state's wildlife, and either wanted wildlife and environmental protection
efforts kept at present levels or increased. There was no mandate by Floridians
to have wildlife management or environmental protection efforts weakened.
In fact, only about 10% of Floridians exhibited anti-wildlife or anti-
environmental attitudes.

The strong support for wildlife conservation and environmental protection
cut across social and demographic groups and varied only slightly in degree
among different groups of Floridians. This support for wildlife conservation
and environmental protection cut across political boundaries as well. For
example, when asked if more, about the same, or less time and money should
be spent managing and protecting endangered species, 86% of Democrats and
83% of Republicans stated that either more or the same amount of time and
money should be spent protecting endangered species. Only 12% of
Republicans and 9% of Democrats wanted the Florida Game and Fresh Water
Fish Commission to spend less time and money protecting endangered species.
When asked if the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission should
spend more, about the same, or less time and money minimizing the impacts of
Florida's growth and development, 53% of Republicans and 58% of Democrats
said the Commission should spend more time and money on this area. Only
11% of Republicans and 8% of Democrats stated the Commission should spend
less time and money minimizing the impacts of Florida's growth and
development. Finally, when asked, "Should Florida laws protecting wetlands
be strengthened, remain the same, or weakened?," 49% of Republicans said
strengthened while 40% of Republicans stated remain the same. Only 11% of
Republicans stated that laws protecting wetlands should be weakened. Among
Democrats, 62% stated laws protecting wetlands should be strengthened, 29%
said remain the same, and 9% stated these laws should be weakened.

Given the remarkably positive attitudes toward wildlife conservation and
environmental protection in Florida identified in this study, it is important to
note the intent of this project and the survey methodology utilized. The intent
of this study was to reliably and accurately assess Floridians' wildlife-related
activities, opinions, knowledge, and attitudes toward wildlife and
environmental issues. The survey instrument was developed and administered
using textbook style research. The random-digit dialing methodology coupled





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


with the "last birthday" procedure ensured that every Floridian over the age of
18 had an equal likelihood of being contacted. Additionally, questions were
worded in such a way as to avoid bias. For example, questions were worded
as neutral as possible: "In your opinion, should Florida laws protecting
wetlands be strengthened, remain the same, or weakened?" From a scientific
standpoirIt, the highest quality methods were employed. The upshot was that
the results presented in this report accurately reflect Floridians' knowledge,
attitudes, and opinions on wildlife management and environmental protection
in Florida in 1995.

The most important policy implication of this survey was the magnitude
to which Floridians care about wildlife and the environment, as well as the
stability of those attitudes. Positive opinions regarding wildlife conservation
and environmental protection were not an ephemeral phenomenon, but were
deeply held values among Floridians. The pro-wildlife and environmental
attitude that was visible during 1985 and 1987 remained strong among
Floridians in 1995. It did not go away.

Public opinion does not shape Florida's budget (Easterling 1988), and at
times public opinion is ignored by policy- and decision-makers. This may be
due to the fact that policy-makers are unaware of public sentiment or choose to
ignore it. It is important to point out, however, that when policy- and decision-
makers consistently ignore strong public sentiment on an issue, frustrated
citizens move to other policy arenas, such as referendums. The net ban vote in
1994 is an excellent example of citizens taking charge of an issue directly.

We believe the net ban referendum was largely an issue perceived by most
Floridians as a pro-environment vote, regardless of the other social and
economic issues involved. The net ban vote points out several important issues
regarding public opinion and public policy. Policy-makers, decision-makers,
and agency personnel lost control of an important natural resource issue. There
was an assertion of the pro-environmental stance held by most Floridians.
Referendums often have social, economic, and political ramifications beyond
their original intent, as well as ramifications beyond the voter's intent.

Policy and decisions made in conflict with strongly held public values can
result in policy-makers and agency personnel losing control of public policy.
Positive attitudes toward wildlife conservation and environmental protection
among Floridians are not going away. Florida policy- and decision-makers
that develop policy in conflict with public opinion and values will likely
initiate additional net-ban-types of referendums with similar complex social,
political, and economic ramifications for Florida.




NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Floridians participate in a number of wildlife-related recreational
activities. The most pervasive activities include watching television shows on
wildlife, visiting state parks, and feeding birds at home. Any wildlife or
environmental protection education strategy should consider using television
as a medium. If a Commission-sponsored television show is not possible, the
Commission should consider actively seeking partnerships, or at least
consulting roles, with wildlife television show producers. More Floridians get
their wildlife information from television than from any other source, and
partnerships with television shows would go a long way in educating
Floridians about wildlife.

Visiting state parks is another pervasive wildlife-related recreational
activity among Floridians. Seventy-one percent - almost three-quarters of
Floridians - visited a state park during the past 2 years. Partnerships between
the Commission and state parks is another area that could be enhanced in order
to bring meaningful wildlife experiences to Floridians.

Sixty-nine percent of Floridians fed birds and squirrels around their homes
during the past 2 years. The Commission should continue its efforts in
enhancing meaningful interactions with wildlife and use wildlife-related
activities around the home as a springboard to increase wildlife knowledge
levels and other wildlife conservation activities. The highly successful
"Planting a Refuge for Wildlife" program should continue and perhaps even
be expanded. Although several thousand of these brochures have been
distributed, there is still a large market for this type of information.

The availability of restrooms at wildlife viewing and nature sites continues
to be an important amenity for Floridians considering taking wildlife and
nature-oriented trips. In light of the success of the "Florida Wildlife Viewing
Guide," additional sites should be evaluated in terms of the amenities visitors
think are important - such as bathrooms.

The large numbers of Floridians expressing very positive attitudes toward
wildlife, coupled with the large numbers of Floridians participating in a
multitude of wildlife-related recreational activities, continue to offer the
Commission major opportunities for bringing in new constituents to the
agency. This is especially important as the Commission's traditional
constituents and revenue base - hunters and anglers - decline in numbers.
Floridians support the traditional hunting and fishing activities of the Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission; however, they view the agency, as
well as want the agency, to be involved in holistic wildlife management
activities. For example, 59% of Floridians want the Commission to spend
more time and money managing and minimizing the environmental impacts of





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Florida's growth and development. Fifty-seven percent want the Commission
to spend more time and money protecting endangered species, and 60% want
the Commission to spend more time and money protecting wetlands. By
expanding the Commission's activities, the Commission will increase its
constituent base and thus will help increase the recognition of the Florida
Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission among Floridians. Currently, only
25% of Floridians can name the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Cokimission as the agency responsible for managing and protecting wild
animals in Florida.

Programs that enhance Floridians' involvement in wildlife-related
recreational activities such as wildlife watching, hunting, and fishing should
not be considered only as recreational activities, but as educational
opportunities as well. This is especially true with children and wildlife
viewing. Most environmental educators and psychologists agree adult
attitudes toward the natural world are greatly influenced by childhood events.
And nothing seems to foster positive attitudes toward wildlife better than
direct participation in wildlife-related activities.

In a study on youth and their attitudes toward wildlife, researchers from
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service found that children who actively watched
birds, fished, or hunted knew more about wildlife and the natural world than
children who did not participate in these activities (Westervelt and Llewellyn
1985). In another study of children and wildlife, Kellert and Westervelt (1983)
reported that children who only learned about wildlife in the classroom or in
zoos had the least real knowledge about animals and had a far less ecological
perspective than other children. Learning about animals in school needs to be
supplemented by direct encounters with animals and their natural habitats,
whenever possible, to impart a deeper understanding and lasting knowledge of
wildlife to children. Another researcher, Dr. David LaHart, in a study of
wildlife knowledge and perceptions of a group of Florida eighth graders,
found an important link between positive attitudes and wildlife-oriented
activities such as camping, fishing, birdwatching, and hunting. Of all the
variables he examined, LaHart found that participation in hiking,
birdwatching, and wildlife photography exhibited the highest association with
actual wildlife knowledge. He also discovered that class field trips produced a
far greater gain in wildlife knowledge than did film strips, class lectures,
reading, or watching television shows about wildlife (LaHart 1978). It is clear
that some of the best wildlife education is wildlife recreation.





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


LITERATURE CITED

Cerulean, S., and M. D. Duda. 1988. Floridians' wildlife-related activities,
opinions, knowledge and attitudes toward wildlife. Unpublished report.
Nongame Wildlife Program, Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission, Tallahassee. 121pp.

Easterling, C. 1988. Does public opinion shape Florida's budget? Florida
Policy Review 3(2):8-10.

Kellert, S., and M. Westervelt. 1983. Children's attitudes, knowledge and
behaviors toward animals. Phase V of U. S. Fish and Wildl. Serv. Study,
Govt. Printing Off. 024-010-006-412, Washington, D. C. 202pp.

LaHart, D. 1978. The influence of knowledge on young people's perceptions
about wildlife. Fla. State Univ., Tallahassee. 101pp.

Montgomery, C. 1988. Specific educational marketing strategies for Florida's
Nongame Wildlife Program. Final Rep. to the Fla. Game and Fresh Water
Fish Comm. Montgomery Research Consultants, Inc., Atlanta, GA. 248pp.

Westervelt, M., and L. Llewellyn. 1985. Youth and Wildlife. U. S. Dep.
of Interior, Fish and Wildl. Serv., U. S. Gov. Printing Off., Washington,
D. C. 78pp.





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


APPENDIX A

Conventions Used for Cross-tabulations

Several of the demographic variables collected were adjusted in order to provide categories that
yielded large enough sample sizes to conduct the cross-tabulations. All cross-tabulations are based on these
demographic breakouts.

The variable describing respondents' age was collapsed into 4 categories: 1) 18-34, 2) 35-44, 3) 45-
54, or 4) 55 and older.

The variable describing respondents' educational attainment was collapsed into 3 categories: 1) high
school diploma or less, 2) some college or trade school or 3) college graduate.

The variable describing respondents' racial background was collapsed into 2 categories: 1) white, or
2) non-white. Hispanic respondents were included in the non-white category.

The variable describing respondents' total household income was collapsed into 4 categories: 1) less
than $20,000, 2) $20,000-$39,999, 3) $40,000-$59,999, or 4) $60,000 or more.

The gender variable contained sufficient cases in each category to allow for cross-tabulations without
combining categories.






84 NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT






APPENDIX B

Tabular Response Distributions - 1995 Survey


Q6. First I'm going to ask you about spending by the state government in Tallahassee. Please bear in
mind that eventually all government spending comes out of the taxes you and other Floridians pay.

OK, Do you think funding for programs to combat crime should be increased, kept at the present
level, or decreased?


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


Value Label


Increased
Kept @ present level
Decreased
Don't know


1 512
2 202


809


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q7. What about programs to promote tourism?


Value Label
Increased
Kept @ present level
Decreased
Don't know


Value Frequency
1 244
2 386
3 143
4 36


809 100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q8. What about wildlife conservation programs?


Value Label

Increased
Kept @ present level
Decreased
Don't know


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


468
241
47
53

809


57.8
29.8
5.8
6.6

100.0


57.8
29.8
5.8
6.6

100.0


57.8
87.6
93.4
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Percent
30.2
47.7
17.7
4.4


Valid
Percent
30.2
47.7
17.7
4.4


Cum
Percent
30.2
77.9
95.6
100.0





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Q9. What about programs to help low income families with children?

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Increased 1 322 39.8 39.8 39.8
Kept @ present level 2 265 32.8 32.8 72.6
Decreased 3 151 18.7 18.7 91.2
Don't know 4 71 8.8 8.8 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q10. Of the program areas which you feel should receive increased spending, which 1 would you
designate as your top priority for the increase?

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Combat crime 1 377 46.6 46.6 46.6
Promote tourism 2 30 3.7 3.7 50.3
Wildlife conservation 3 148 18.3 18.3 68.6
Low income families 4 175 21.6 21.6 90.2
Don't know 5 27 3.3 3.3 93.6
None 6 52 6.4 6.4 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


QI la. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Camping in a
recreational vehicle like a Winnebago

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Not checked 0 686 84.8 84.8 84.8
Checked 1 123 15.2 15.2 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql lb. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Bird watching

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Not checked 0 519 64.2 64.2 64.2
Checked 1 290 35.8 35.8 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Q1 lc. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Hunting


Value Frequency

0 713
1 96


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


88.1
100.0


809 100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q1 Id. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Visiting the zoo


Value Frequency

0 405
1 404


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


50.1
100.0


809 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql le. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Photographing
wildlife


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


0 483 59.7
1 326 40.3

:al 809 100.0


59.7
100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q1 If. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Backpacking or
tent camping


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


0 612 75.6 75.6
1 197 24.4 24.4

:al 809 100.0 100.0


75.6
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked






FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Ql Ig. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Fishing


Value Frequency

0 404
1 405

Total 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


49.9
50.1

100.0


49.9
50.1

100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q Ih. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Identifying 20 or
more bird species


Value Frequency

0 677
1 132

'otal 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


83.7
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q 11 i. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Feeding wildlife,
for example, birds and squirrels


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


0 325
1 484

tal 809


40.2
59.8

100.0


40.2
100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql lj. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Off-road or all-
terrain vehicle use


Value Frequency

0 664
1 145


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


Total


809


100.0 100.0


Missing cases 0


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Valid cases 809





NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Qllk. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Helping an
injured wild animal


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


0 540
1 269

Total 809


66.7
33.3

100.0


66.7
100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q111. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Watching a
television show on wildlife


Value Frequency

0 50
4 759

totall 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


6.2
93.8

100.0


6.2
100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q1 lm. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Visiting state parks


Value Frequency

0 242
1 567

Total 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


29.9
70.1

100.0


29.9
70.1

100.0


29.9
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q1l n. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Motor boating


Value Frequency

0 492
1 317

total 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


60.8
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Ql lo. In which of the following activities have you participated during the last 2 years? Buying art or
prints of wildlife


Value Label Value Frequency

Not checked 0 538
Checked 1 271

Total 809

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql12a. In the past 2 years did you have a membership


Value Label Value Frequency

Not checked 0 680
Checked 1 129

Total 809

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql2b. In the past 2 years did you have a membership


Value Label Value Frequency

Not checked 0 663
Checked 1 146

Total 809

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q12c. In the past 2 years did you have a membership


Value Label Value Frequency

Not checked 0 667
Checked 1 142

Total 809

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Percent

66.5
33.5

100.0


Valid
Percent

66.5
33.5

100.0


Cum
Percent

66.5
100.0


in a wildlife conservation organization?

Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent

84.1 84.1 84.1
15.9 15.9 100.0

100.0 00.0


in a Humane


Percent

82.0
18.0

100.0


Society-type organization?

Valid Cum
Percent Percent

82.0 82.0
18.0 100.0

100.0


in a sportsmen-type organization?

Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent

82.4 82.4 82.4
17.6 17.6 100.0

100.0 100.0





90 NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT






Q13. What state agency is responsible for managing and protecting wild animals in Florida?


Value Frequency


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


22.5
44.3
100.0


809 100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q14. Would you say you know a great deal, a moderate amount, a little, or nothing about the activities of
the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission?


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


Value Label


A great deal
A moderate amount
A little
Nothing


1 38 4.7 4.7
2 166 20.5 20.5
3 434 53.6 53.6
4 171 21.1 21.1

:al 809 100.0 100.0


4.7
25.2
78.9
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q15. How would you say the Commission is doing its job of managing Florida's wildlife? Would you say it
is doing an excellent, good, fair, or poor job, or do you not know enough about the Commission to say?


Value Label

Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Don't know enough


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


1
2
3
4
5

Total


5.6
35.4
52.9
56.7
100.0


809 100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Value Label

FL G&FWFC
Wrong answer
Don't know






FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Q16a. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? General wildlife conservation

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Not checked 0 479 59.2 59.2 59.2
Checked 1 330 40.8 40.8 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql6b. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Hunting regulations/licenses

Valid Cum
Value Labe Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Not checked 0 703 86.9 86.9 86.9
Checked I 106 13.1 13.1 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16c. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Game management

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Not checked 0 732 90.5 90.5 90.5
Checked 1 77 9.5 9.5 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16d. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Fishing regulations/licenses

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Not checked 0 667 82.4 82.4 82.4
Checked 1 142 17.6 17.6 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0


Missing cases 0


Valid cases 809






NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT


Ql6e. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Fisheries management

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


0 745


Total


809


92.1
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16f. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Environmental protection (water, waste, pollution)


Value Frequency

0 663
. 1 146

Total 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


82.0
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16g. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Forest management

Valid Cum
Value Labe Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


Not checked
Checked


782
27

809


96.7
3.3

100.0


96.7
100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16h. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Nongame management

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


0 783
1 26

Total


96.8 96.8
3.2 3.2

809 100.0


96.8
100.0

100.0


Missing cases 0


Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Not checked
Checked


Valid cases 809






FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATTITUDES - Duda and Young


Q16i. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Endangered & threatened species protection and recovery


Value Frequency

0 641
1 168

Total 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


79.2
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16j. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Educating public about fish and wildlife


Value Frequency


774
35

809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


95.7
4.3

100.0


5.7
100.0


100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q16k. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Law enforcement


Value Frequency

0 666
1 143

total 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


82.3
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q161. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Preservation of natural areas


Value Frequency

0 684
1 125

totall 809


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


15.5 15.5

100.0 100.0


84.5
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked





94 NONGAME WILDLIFE PROGRAM FINAL REPORT






Ql6m. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Helping landowners


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


0 799
1 10

al 809


98.8
100.0


100.0 100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


QI6n. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Outdoor recreation (other than hunt/fish/trap)


Valid Cum
Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


0 790
1 19

al 809


97.7
2.3

100.0


97.7
2.3

100.0


97.7
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql6o. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Other

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent


0 796


809


98.4 98.4
1.6 1.6

100.0 100.0


98.4
100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Ql6p. What do you believe to be the primary responsibilities of the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish
Commission? Don't know


Value Frequency


0 717 88.6
1 92 11.4

Total 809 100.0


Valid Cum
Percent Percent Percent


88.6
11.4

100.0


Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked


Not checked
Checked


Value Label

Not checked
Checked





FLORIDIANS' WILDLIFE-RELATED ATrrrTITUDES - Duda and Young 95





Q17. In general, how well does the Game and Fish Commission do in incorporating hunters' and anglers'
wants and needs into the management of the state's fish and wildlife resources? Would you say they
do an excellent, good, fair, or poor job?

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Excellent 1 35 4.3 4.3 4.3
Good 2 247 30.5 30.5 34.9
Fair 3 127 15.7 15.7 50.6
Poor 4 29 3.6 3.6 54.1
Don't know 5 342 42.3 42.3 96.4
No opinion 6 29 3.6 3.6 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q18. In general, how well does the Game and Fish Commission do in incorporating non-hunters' and non-
anglers' wants and needs into the management of the state's fish and wildlife resources? Would you
say they do an excellent, good, fair, or poor job?

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Excellent 1 27 3.3 3.3 3.3
Good 2 177 21.9 21.9 25.2
Fair 3 134 16.6 16.6 41.8
Poor 4 45 5.6 5.6 47.3
Don't know 5 388 48.0 48.0 95.3
No opinion 6 38 4.7 4.7 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0

Valid cases 809 Missing cases 0


Q19. The Florida Game and Fish Commission uses its time, money, and personnel to support a variety of
programs. I am going to list some of these programs and I would like you to tell me if you think
that more, about the same, or less time and money should be spent on each program.

OK. Do you feel that more, about the same, or less time and money should be spent managing and
minimizing the environmental impacts of Florida's growth and development?

Valid Cum
Value Label Value Frequency Percent Percent Percent

Much more 1 239 29.5 29.5 29.5
Slightly more 2 232 28.7 28.7 58.2
About the same 3 204 25.2 25.2 83.4
Slightly less 4 32 4.0 4.0 87.4
Much less 5 33 4.1 4.1 91.5
Don't know 6 69 8.5 8.5 100.0

Total 809 100.0 100.0


Missing cases 0


Valid cases 809