LAPSED HUNTERS’ LICENSE PURCHASINGBEHAVIORS AND THEIR OPINIONS ON MESSAGES ENCOURAGING THEM TO PURCHASE HUNTING           ...
LAPSED HUNTERS’ LICENSE PURCHASINGBEHAVIORS AND THEIR OPINIONS ON MESSAGES ENCOURAGING THEM TO PURCHASE HUNTING           ...
Acknowledgments Responsive Management would like to thank Coren Jagnow, Carol Heiser, Tom Wilcox, LeeWalker, and Julia Dix...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                             iEXECUTIVE SUMMARYINTR...
ii                                                                        Responsive Managementsampling and data collectio...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                          iiiHUNTING BEHAVIORS AND ...
iv                                                                           Responsive Management     makes an anticipate...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                            v Text Box 1: Things Th...
vi                                                                         Responsive Management     Near the end of the s...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                                      vii       o  ...
viii                                                                          Responsive ManagementREACTIONS TO WORDS, PHR...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                                                   ...
x                                                                          Responsive ManagementPERSONAL LIFESTYLE DATA   ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                              xi        however, th...
xii                                                                        Responsive Managementdifferences between survey...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                           xiiiof having the charac...
xiv                                                                       Responsive Managementanalysis, the predicted inf...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                        xv2009-2010 Virginia huntin...
xvi                                                                       Responsive Management      •   Hunting bonds fam...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                              xviimessages (ranked ...
xviii                                                                   Responsive Managementmemories.” Note, however, tha...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                            xixwildlife or habitat,...
xx                                                                          Responsive Managementgiven for not purchasing ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                                                   ...
xxii                                                                                                   Responsive Manageme...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                                                   ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                             1INTRODUCTION AND METH...
2                                                                          Responsive Managementtimely, and are more cost-...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                              3could not be reached...
4                                                                                      Responsive ManagementFigure 1. Nonp...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                                                   ...
6                                                                          Responsive ManagementSURVEY RESULTSHUNTING BEHA...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                             7   The majority of la...
8                                                          Responsive ManagementFigure 3. Hunting on Private Land         ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                 9Figure 4. Years Hunted of Past 5 ...
10                                                                       Responsive ManagementFigure 5. Days Hunting      ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                   11Figure 6. Increase or Decrease of Hunting Acti...
12                                                           Responsive ManagementFigure 7. Hunting Outside Virginia      ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                          13Figure 8. Other States ...
14                                                                                        Responsive ManagementFigure 9. S...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                                     15Figure 10. H...
16                                                         Responsive ManagementFigure 11. Membership in Hunt Clubs       ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                  17Figure 12. Purchase of Licenses...
18                                                                                                Responsive ManagementFig...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                        19Figure 14. Likelihood to Purchase a 2009-...
20                                                             Responsive ManagementFigure 15. Reasons for Hunting        ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                    21Figure 16. Membership in Conservation or Spor...
22                                                         Responsive ManagementFigure 17. Involvement in Hunting Accident...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                           23SATISFACTION AND DISSA...
24                                                                         Responsive Management        requirements) and ...
Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results                                         25   above the rest, all w...
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually

186

Published on

Research from Responsive Management and the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fishing

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
186
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Encouraging Lapsed Hunters In Virginia To Buy License Annually

  1. 1. LAPSED HUNTERS’ LICENSE PURCHASINGBEHAVIORS AND THEIR OPINIONS ON MESSAGES ENCOURAGING THEM TO PURCHASE HUNTING LICENSES TELEPHONE SURVEY RESULTS Conducted for the National Shooting Sports Foundation by Responsive Management and the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries This project is supported by the Hunting Heritage Partnership, a grant program of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. 2009
  2. 2. LAPSED HUNTERS’ LICENSE PURCHASINGBEHAVIORS AND THEIR OPINIONS ON MESSAGES ENCOURAGING THEM TO PURCHASE HUNTING LICENSES TELEPHONE SURVEY RESULTS 2009 Responsive Management National Office Mark Damian Duda, Executive Director Martin Jones, Senior Research Associate Tom Beppler, Research Associate Steven J. Bissell, Ph.D., Qualitative Research Associate Andrea Criscione, Research Associate James B. Herrick, Ph.D., Research Associate Weldon Miller, Research Associate Joanne Nobile, Research Associate Amanda Ritchie, Research Associate Carol L. Schilli, Research Associate Tim Winegord, Survey Center Manager Alison Lanier, Business Manager 130 Franklin Street Harrisonburg, VA 22801 Phone: 540/432-1888 Fax: 540/432-1892 E-mail: mark@responsivemanagement.com www.responsivemanagement.com
  3. 3. Acknowledgments Responsive Management would like to thank Coren Jagnow, Carol Heiser, Tom Wilcox, LeeWalker, and Julia Dixon of the Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries; Jodi Valenta of Mile Creek Communications, LLC; Tammy Sapp; Southwick Associates; and MelissaSchilling of the National Shooting Sports Foundation for their input, support, and guidance on this project.
  4. 4. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results iEXECUTIVE SUMMARYINTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGYThis report discusses the results of a telephone survey that was conducted for the NationalShooting Sports Foundation in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Game and InlandFisheries (VDGIF) as part of a larger study regarding messages to encourage lapsed hunters topurchase a hunting license. The overall project entailed the following: • Identification of lapsed hunters (i.e., to develop the sample for the survey), including categorizing the lapsed hunters into their various Tapestry segments. (Tapestry Segmentation™ is a market segmentation system developed by Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. Tapestry segments are more fully explained in the section of this report titled “An Examination of the Data Regarding Tapestry Segments.”) This portion of the project was completed by Southwick Associates. • A review of VDGIF strategic and marketing plans, a literature review regarding past research pertinent to the study, an inventory of current VDGIF outreach and educational activities, and staff interviews. This portion of the project was completed by Tammy Sapp. • Three focus groups of lapsed hunters (used in part to develop the survey instrument for the telephone survey that followed). This portion of the project was completed by Responsive Management. • A telephone survey of lapsed hunters and an analysis of the telephone survey data. This portion of the project was completed by Responsive Management. • Note that a final report will be produced subsequent to this report with recommendations and strategies regarding marketing to lapsed hunters.This report discusses only the results of the telephone survey of lapsed hunters and the analysisof the telephone survey data. Specific aspects of the telephone survey methodology arediscussed below.For the survey of lapsed hunters, telephones were selected as the preferred sampling mediumbecause of the almost universal ownership of telephones among hunters in Virginia.Additionally, telephone surveys, relative to mail or Internet surveys, allow for more scientific
  5. 5. ii Responsive Managementsampling and data collection, provide higher quality data, obtain higher response rates, are moretimely, and are more cost-effective. Telephone surveys also have fewer negative effects on theenvironment than do mail surveys because of reduced use of paper and reduced energyconsumption for delivering and returning the questionnaires.A central polling site at the Responsive Management office allowed for rigorous quality controlover the interviews and data collection. Responsive Management maintains its own in-housetelephone interviewing facilities. The telephone survey questionnaire was developedcooperatively by Responsive Management, the VDGIF, Southwick Associates, Tammy Sapp,and Mile Creek Communications. Responsive Management conducted a pre-test of thequestionnaire to ensure proper wording, flow, and logic in the survey.Interviews were conducted Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday fromnoon to 5:00 p.m., and Sunday from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., local time. The survey wasconducted in November 2009. Responsive Management obtained a total of 803 completedinterviews of lapsed hunters from Virginia. The software used for data collection wasQuestionnaire Programming Language. The analysis of data was performed using StatisticalPackage for the Social Sciences as well as proprietary software developed by ResponsiveManagement.For this report, a nonparametric analysis examined how various responses to the survey relatedto behavioral, participatory, and demographic characteristics. Responses for selected questionswere tested by means of z-scores for relationships to behavioral, participatory, and demographiccharacteristics. A positive z-score means that the response and characteristic are positivelyrelated; a negative z-score means that the response and characteristic are negatively related.Throughout this report, findings of the telephone survey are reported at a 95% confidenceinterval. For the entire sample of Virginia lapsed hunters that was provided to the research team,the sampling error is at most plus or minus 3.45 percentage points. Sampling error wascalculated using a sample size of 803 and a population size of 118,713 lapsed hunters that wereprovided in the sample.
  6. 6. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results iiiHUNTING BEHAVIORS AND PURCHASE OF HUNTING LICENSES Nearly half of the “lapsed” hunters in the sample (46%) had hunted on private land in Virginia in the 2008-2009 season. (Virginia hunting regulations allow hunting on private land without a license in specific situations.) • The survey asked about hunting anywhere in Virginia in the past 5 years: 32% of all respondents had hunted all 5 of the past 5 years in Virginia; the median is 4 of the past 5 years. • The median number of days per year that hunters had typically hunted is 10 days. • The majority of respondents (58%) indicate that their amount of hunting in Virginia has decreased over the past 5 years. Only 9% indicate that it has increased. The survey also asked about hunting outside of Virginia in the past 5 years: 17% had done so, most commonly hunting in North Carolina, West Virginia, Maryland, or Pennsylvania. The most commonly hunted species among the lapsed hunters are deer (89%, the top answer by far), small game/upland game birds (41%), and wild turkey (36%). The most common hunting companions are friends (38%), the respondent’s son (20%), the respondent’s father (13%), and/or the respondent’s brother (11%). The majority of lapsed hunters (89%) are not members of a hunt club in Virginia; however, 9% are members of a hunt club in Virginia. The survey asked about purchasing behaviors over the past 4 years. For each of the hunting years asked about (starting with the 2004-2005 season through the 2007-2008 season), at least 57% but no more than 64% had purchased a hunting license. • The most commonly purchased licenses are the Basic Hunting license (78% had purchased this type) and the Bear, Deer, and Turkey license (70%). Regarding plans to purchase a hunting license for the 2009-2010 season, 34% indicate being very likely to do so (along with the 9% who indicated that they had already bought one, this
  7. 7. iv Responsive Management makes an anticipated purchase rate of approximately 43% among the sample). On the other hand, 24% indicate being not at all likely. Respondents were asked to choose their most important reason for hunting from among four reasons (for the meat, for a trophy, to be with family and friends, or to be close to nature). They are fairly evenly divided among three of the answers: 32% did so to primarily be with family and friends, 32% did so primarily to be close to nature, and 28% did so primarily for the meat. Just under a third of lapsed hunters (31%) have been a member of and/or have donated to a conservation or sportsman’s organization other than a hunt club in the past 2 years.SATISFACTION AND DISSATISFACTION WITH HUNTING IN VIRGINIA, ANDCONSTRAINTS TO HUNTING PARTICIPATION The overwhelming majority of lapsed hunters (87%) report that they have been satisfied with their hunting experiences in Virginia over the past 5 years; only 8% say that they have been dissatisfied. The survey asked 32 questions about things that may have taken away from respondents’ enjoyment of hunting, shown in Text Box 1 on the following page. In examining the results of things that strongly or moderately took away from enjoyment of hunting, 8 of the 32 items stand out above the rest, each with about a third or more of respondents saying that it strongly or moderately took away from their enjoyment. For the most part, they relate to time, access, and cost. • Three items are at the top, all related to time; each has at least half of respondents saying it took away from enjoyment: not having enough time (61%), work obligations (56%), and family obligations (50%). • In the next tier are five items, with access and cost being prominent. This tier consists of the following: having other interests that are more important (42%), not having enough access to places to hunt (41%), not having enough places to hunt (40%), the cost of licenses (35%), and the cost of hunting equipment (31%).
  8. 8. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results v Text Box 1: Things That May Have Taken Away From Enjoyment of Hunting That Were Asked About in the Survey (Did this strongly take away, moderately take away, or not take away from your enjoyment of hunting?) What about because you feel you lack skills? What about because you think hunting may be wrong? What about because you have other interests that are more important? What about because you dont have time? What about because youre not interested? What about work obligations? What about family obligations? What about personal health? What about poor behavior of other hunters? What about poor behavior of other recreationists? What about not enough places to hunt? What about not enough access to places to hunt? What about not having anyone to go with? What about fear of injury by another hunter? What about having to travel too far to hunt? What about the cost of hunting equipment? What about the costs of licenses? What about other costs related to hunting, such as gas and lodging? What about other peoples negative opinions of hunting? What about harassment by anti-hunters? What about not enough law enforcement officers? What about because you dont want to kill animals? What about too many hunters in the field? What about your concern that hunting might endanger animal populations? What about pollution or litter? What about not enough game? What about the concern about causing pain to animals? What about complex regulations? What about bag limits or season lengths? What about mandatory hunter education requirements? What about not enough trophy game? What about not enough big bucks? As a follow-up to the above list of potential problems, the survey asked respondents to name the most important reasons that they did not buy a 2008-2009 Virginia hunting license (although the question followed the above listing, respondents were not limited to the reasons on the list but could say anything that came to mind). Five reasons stand out above the rest, all with 10% or more of respondents: hunted on private land (i.e., did not need a license) (25%), lack of time (25%), work obligations (17%), family obligations (11%), and personal health (11%).
  9. 9. vi Responsive Management Near the end of the survey, those who indicated that they would be not at all likely to purchase a 2009-2010 Virginia hunting license were asked to name the reasons why. The top reason is not being required to purchase one: 30% said because they will hunt on private land. Three other reasons were named by more than 10% of this “not at all likely” group: personal health (15%), not being interested (13%), and lack of time (12%).MOTIVATIONS FOR PURCHASING A HUNTING LICENSE The survey included 19 questions about potential things that might encourage respondents to purchase a license, shown in Text Box 2 on the following page. Five of the questions relate to actions that the state would take (e.g., more specific information about hunting opportunities in Virginia being made available, having a family license available); the other questions relate to the respondent being informed about various positive aspects of hunting and can be thought of as themes that would resonate with them. • The top themes that resonated (i.e., the themes with the highest percentages of respondents saying that the items would make them very likely to purchase a Virginia hunting license) are as follows, each with more than a third of respondents saying it would make them very likely to purchase a license: o Being reminded that it is important to continue the hunting heritage of this country (48%). o Being reminded that hunting helps people relax (43%). o Being reminded that hunting helps people learn the value of wildlife and natural resources (42%). o Being reminded that hunting provides an environmentally friendly source of food (41%). o Being reminded that hunting helps people connect with nature (38%). o Being reminded that purchasing a hunting license helps fund conservation of wildlife (37%). o Being reminded that hunting is peaceful (also 37%). • The top action items are: o Having a family license made available (34%).
  10. 10. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results vii o Being able to attend an outdoors show free with the purchase of a Virginia hunting license (30%). Text Box 2: Things That Would Make Hunters Likely To Purchase a Virginia Hunting License That Were Asked About in the Survey (Would this make you very likely, somewhat likely, or not at all likely to purchase a Virginia hunting license during a year that you otherwise might not?) What about just having more specific information about hunting opportunities in Virginia made available? What about being reminded that hunting is important for wildlife management? What about being reminded that hunting is important for the conservation of land and natural resources? What about being reminded that hunting is important for the conservation of wildlife? What about being reminded that purchasing a hunting license helps fund conservation of wildlife? What about being reminded that hunting provides an environmentally friendly source of food? What about being reminded that you can hunt elk in Virginia? What about being reminded that it is important to continue the hunting heritage of this country? What about being reminded that hunting helps people learn the value of wildlife and natural resources? What about being reminded that hunting helps people relax? What about being reminded that hunting helps people connect with nature? What about being reminded that hunting is peaceful? What about being reminded that hunting is important to your family? What about being reminded that you can bond with family and friends while hunting? What about being reminded about the thrill or excitement you get from hunting? What about if a family hunting license was available in Virginia? What about being able to attend an outdoors show free with the purchase of your Virginia hunting license? What about receiving a reminder about when hunting seasons for specific species will start? What about receiving a reminder to purchase your license? A question asked respondents if they support or oppose having the VDGIF provide reminders to hunters to encourage them to purchase a license: the large majority support doing so (78%), while only 10% oppose. Those who indicated that they would be very likely to purchase a 2009-2010 Virginia hunting license or who said that they had already done so were asked to indicate their primary reason for buying a license. If they simply said, “to hunt,” respondents were prompted to be more specific. Nonetheless, this answer, “to hunt,” or the related answer, “to hunt in Virginia,” remained the top answers. However, excluding those, the top answers are to hunt on public land in Virginia, to connect with nature/to escape/to relax, to take children hunting, to take an adult family member hunting, to obtain meat, and to take a friend hunting.
  11. 11. viii Responsive ManagementREACTIONS TO WORDS, PHRASES, AND MESSAGES AS THEY RELATE TOHUNTING The survey presented respondents with 36 words or short phrases, shown in Text Box 3 below. Respondents were asked to indicate if the word/phrase had a positive association with hunting, a neutral association, or a negative association with hunting. • In this list, 8 of the 36 words/phrases had at least 90% of respondents making a positive association: connect to nature (96%), quality time (94%), fun (94%), get away from it all (93%), relaxing (92%), memories (91%), excitement (91%), and heritage (90%). Text Box 3: Words and Phrases That Were Asked About in the Survey (Does this have a positive, negative, or neutral association with hunting?) Conserve Friends Quality time Environment Relaxing Connect to nature Economical Tradition The basics Family Stewardship Preserve Active Manage Protect Thrill Outdoor lifestyle Expensive Heritage Conservation funding Memories Natural Organic Fun Quality Investment Excitement Conservation Roots Escape Environmentally friendly Peaceful Wildlife management Inexpensive Get away from it all Healthy The survey presented respondents with 28 messages that might encourage them to purchase a hunting license; these are shown in Text Box 4 on the following page. For each message, the survey asked respondents if the message would be very effective, somewhat effective, or not at all effective at getting them to buy a Virginia hunting license. • Three of the messages stand out, each with at least half of respondents saying it would be very effective: o Make memories. Take someone special hunting. (54%) o Hunting - protect the heritage, protect the environment. (54%) o Hunting bonds family. Share the experience. (50%) • Six more messages rank above the rest, all with 44% or more saying it would be very effective at getting them to buy a Virginia hunting license: o Connect to nature, hunt Virginia. (47%)
  12. 12. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results ix o Hunters, the original stewards of the land. (46%) o Hunting connects family and friends. (46%) o Buy a license, take a friend, make memories. (45%) o Purchase a Virginia hunting license and help conserve wildlife. (44%) o Connect with nature, connect with family. Hunt Virginia. (44%) Text Box 4: Messages Presented to Respondents in the Survey (Do you think this message would be very effective, somewhat effective, or not at all effective at getting you to buy a Virginia hunting license during a year that you otherwise might not?) Get outside, hunt Virginia. Only a license away. Buy your license, help conserve the environment. Hunters, the original stewards of the land. Make memories. Take someone special hunting. Buy your license today, plan your trip today. Visit www.dgif.virginia.gov/hunting. Hunting is a source of quality, naturally replenished food. Hunting - big game, big fun, big benefits. Hunt Virginia. Buy your license. Hunting is an investment with many returns. Buy your license, help conserve habitat. Life is short. Break free and go hunting. Buy a license, take a friend, make memories. Unwind the time, hunt Virginia. Hunting provides healthy, organic meat, no hormones or chemicals. Hunting - protect the heritage, protect the environment. Hunting - its our nature. Purchase a Virginia hunting license and help conserve wildlife. Need a break? Peace awaits you in Virginias outdoors. Go hunting. Hunting bonds family. Share the experience. Hunting season only comes once a year - dont miss it. Hunt Virginia and reduce your carbon footprint with a local, organic source of meat. Hunting - make memories, fund conservation. Buy a license. Connect to nature, hunt Virginia. Purchase a Virginia hunting license and help manage wildlife. Hunting connects family and friends. Hunting - pass on the tradition. It starts with a license. Big game, big fun. Hunt Virginia. [or Small game, big fun. Hunt Virginia.]* Connect with nature, connect with family. Hunt Virginia. Life is short, dont miss the hunting season. Buy your license today. *This message used the term, “Big game,” for hunters who indicated that they hunted bear, deer, elk, or wild turkey in the species question earlier in the survey; the message used the term, “Small game,” for hunters who did not hunt any of the big game species and who indicated hunting for fox, raccoon, small game, and/or waterfowl. All remaining respondents (those who hunted some other species or who answered “Don’t know” to the species question) were randomized between “Big game” and “Small game.”
  13. 13. x Responsive ManagementPERSONAL LIFESTYLE DATA The survey asked questions about personal lifestyle choices that relate to characteristics of Tapestry segments (note that Tapestry Segmentation™ is more fully explained in the following section; it is essentially a marketing system that categorizes all parts of the country into various marketing segments called “Tapestry segments”). For this analysis, all of the respondents were assigned to the Tapestry segment in which their residence is located. Specific characteristics are conjectured to be associated with each Tapestry segment. For each Tapestry segment, respondents identified as being in that segment were asked questions about a characteristic of that segment, and some respondents identified as being not in that Tapestry segment were asked the same questions about the characteristic associated with the segment. A comparison was then made of those within the segment versus those outside of the segment. In other words, those respondents within the Tapestry segment should answer in the affirmative regarding the characteristic more often than those outside the Tapestry segment. This was done to test the validity of the characteristics conjectured to be associated with the Tapestry segment. • In the first question along these lines, respondents were presented a list of eight behaviors (e.g., reading the Sunday paper, listening to country music on the radio or TV) and were asked if the behaviors were true for them. Presumably, the percentage exhibiting the behavior should be greater among those who are in that identified Tapestry segment versus those who are not in that Tapestry segment. Of the eight behaviors in this question, three show statistically significant differences between the two groups: subscribes to satellite TV (67% of those in the Tapestry segment that supposedly includes this behavior versus 49% of those not in the Tapestry segment) (p < 0.001), has four or more TVs in the household (51% of those in the segment; 33% of those not in the segment) (p < 0.01), and has high-speed Internet access (60% versus 43%) (p < 0.01). All other differences between the groups are not statistically significant. • Following the above question, the survey had 12 additional questions that delved into Tapestry segment characteristics. For 8 of the 12 questions, those whose Tapestry segment includes the characteristic more often have the characteristic when compared to those who are not within that Tapestry segment—in other words, the Tapestry segment description is accurately predicting the more common presence of the characteristic;
  14. 14. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xi however, the differences are not statistically significant. For 4 of the 12 questions, the findings contradict the Tapestry segment description—in other words, those from outside the segment more often have the characteristic than do those within the Tapestry segment; again, however, the differences are not statistically significant.AN EXAMINATION OF THE DATA REGARDING TAPESTRY SEGMENTSUsing the personal lifestyle questions discussed above, the researchers examined how the resultsrelate to Tapestry Segmentation™, which is a system of analysis developed by EnvironmentalSystems Research Institute, Inc. (ESRI). This discussion starts with a short overview of TapestrySegmentation™.ESRI’s Tapestry Segmentation™ is a “market segmentation system [that] classifies U.S.neighborhoods into 65 segments based on their socioeconomic and demographic composition.”Tapestry Segmentation is based on the entire U.S. population and is used for marketing purposes.The telephone survey for this project provided data to test the validity of the system as it appliesto lapsed hunters by asking specific questions about various Tapestry characteristics and thencrosstabulating these results by whether the respondent lives in the Tapestry segment associatedwith that characteristic.Responsive Management determined the top 13 Tapestry segments in the sample of lapsedVirginia hunters. Each of these top 13 segments was then reviewed for a variety of factors.Income, residential area type, and education level for each segment were noted. In addition,certain details from each Tapestry description were also noted, and 20 questions were createdpertaining to these details. Respondents were then asked a series of questions to test the validityof these Tapestry descriptions. Finally, results from the survey questions were compared to thedetails predicted by the Tapestry Segmentation™ system.In general, surveyed income information was relatively close to the Tapestry Segmentation™prediction. For 7 of the 13 segments, median household income of the respondents was within$10,000 of the predicted income for their segment. For the remaining 6 segments, the
  15. 15. xii Responsive Managementdifferences between surveyed median income and predicted income ranged from approximately$10,000 to $22,000.Regarding education levels, ESRI’s Tapestry Segmentation™ gives a fairly accurate assessmentof education levels for many segments. The Salt of the Earth segment (Virginia lapsed hunters’largest segment) is predicted to have about two-fifths of its population having attended somecollege. This aligns well with the survey results of 41%. In addition, ESRI reports about one-seventh of the population in the Salt of the Earth segment as having a bachelor’s or graduatedegree. This is slightly lower than the survey results of 21%. On the other hand, about one-thirdof Sophisticated Squires (another top Tapestry segment of lapsed hunters in Virginia) arepredicted to have a bachelor’s or graduate degree, with an additional one-third having attendedcollege. In the telephone survey results, only 23% of lapsed hunters in this segment possessed abachelor’s or graduate degree, although an additional 32% had some college experience withouthaving earned a bachelor’s degree. In general, education levels in the survey data appear to befairly close to the predicted Tapestry segment.The Tapestry Segmentation™ system uses 11 categories to describe how urban or rural an areais; the telephone survey used 4 categories. Therefore, the 11 Tapestry categories werecategorized into the 4 categories used by the survey. The analysis found that the telephonesurvey results closely match the Tapestry Segmentation™ predictions on this characteristic,thereby validating the Tapestry Segmentation™ system regarding urban-rural residency.In addition to demographic and socioeconomic information, each Tapestry segment includes a“Preferences” section that is usually a few paragraphs. Hobbies, recreational activities, personalinterests, and other unique characteristics are given to create a portrait of the population in eachTapestry segment. Responsive Management reviewed the 13 Tapestry segments thatpredominated in the sample and created questions from common themes found in the“Preferences” sections.Each question developed to explore the characteristics was asked of all of the respondents withinthat segment associated with the characteristic and some respondents not in that segment. Rates
  16. 16. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xiiiof having the characteristic were compared between respondents in that segment versusrespondents not in that segment. For all but three characteristics, the differences between thegroups (those in the segment versus those not in the segment) were not statistically significant, asshown in Table 1 below.Table 1. Tapestry Questions Tapestry Question Pearson Chi-Sq. P-Value 1) Sunday paper p = 0.228 2) Country music p = 0.607 3) Auto racing p = 0.544 4) Satellite TV p < 0.001* 5) Four or more TVs p < 0.01* 6) High speed Internet p < 0.01* 7) Personal computer p = 0.631 8) Separate freezer p = 0.526 9) Power tool use p = 0.365 10) Riding lawnmower p = 0.307 11) American-made vehicle p = 0.924 12) Motorcycle ownership p = 0.246 13) Treadmill ownership p = 0.825 14) Home improvement project p = 0.879 15) Garden p = 0.585 16) Golf p = 0.594 17) Catalog or telephone purchase p = 0.054 18) Eating out more on weekends p = 0.321 19) Life insurance p = 0.551 20) Political views p = 0.524*Denotes being statistically significantFor satellite TV use, ownership of four or more TVs, and having high speed Internet, acorrelation exists between the characteristic (as determined in the survey) and the Tapestrysegment. As the remaining 17 p-values show, there is not a correlation between a characteristicbeing mentioned in the Tapestry segment and the prevalence of the characteristic in those peopleidentified as being in that segment. It should be noted that the survey sample included onlylapsed hunters and thus may not be representative of that Tapestry segment as a whole.The conclusion of this aspect of the research is that ESRI’s Tapestry Segmentation™ can be auseful tool in identifying certain demographic and socioeconomic data for a region. In the
  17. 17. xiv Responsive Managementanalysis, the predicted information for education, income, and residential area matched fairlywell with the survey data. However, the predicted information did not match most other data inthe survey. Individuals interested in hunter marketing would be wise, therefore, to use cautionwhen reading the “Preferences” of households living in a given segment. In short, theresearchers found little correlation between the preferences given in the Tapestry segment andthose of the respondents in the survey, although it is important to note that the Tapestry segmentswere designed from data that included the entire U.S. population and not solely hunters.Nonetheless, as the preeminent marketing segmentation system, ESRI’s TapestrySegmentation™ is increasingly being used by fish and wildlife departments to market to huntersand anglers. Users should be aware of the strengths and limitations of Tapestry Segmentation™when tailoring their messages to the desired audience.AN EXAMINATION OF TARGET MARKETSAs part of the analysis, Responsive Management explored potential target markets of lapsedhunters. Two questions in particular were examined to help characterize those hunters whocould be persuaded to buy a Virginia hunting license. The first question was the number ofprevious seasons the respondent had bought a hunting license. The question asked eachrespondent to indicate all of the previous four hunting seasons in which he/she had purchased aVirginia hunting license. The results of the question were then simplified to show how many ofthe previous four seasons before 2008-2009 the respondent had purchased a license.Respondents were then grouped into one of two groups: those who had purchased a license 1 or2 years in the past 4 years and those who had purchased a license 3 or 4 years in the past 4 years.The second question of interest was the likelihood of purchasing a 2009-2010 Virginia huntinglicense. Respondents could answer “Very likely,” “Somewhat likely,” “Not at all likely,” or“Don’t know.” The “Don’t know” respondents were eliminated, and the remaining threeselections were examined in a nonparametric analysis to see if the groups that gave thatparticular answer were closely associated with any demographic characteristics.In that nonparametric analysis, z-score testing revealed an association between the group thatpurchased licenses only 1 or 2 years and the group answering “Not at all likely” to purchasing a
  18. 18. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xv2009-2010 Virginia hunting license (p < 0.01). On the other hand, hunters who had purchasedlicenses 3 or 4 years were associated with answering “Very likely” to purchasing a 2009-2010license (p < 0.01). This suggests that lapsed hunters who have lapsed only once (i.e., havemissed only one season) are more likely to “re-enter the fold” and purchase another license,relative to those lapsed hunters who have missed more seasons. Conversely, after several yearsof not hunting, it appears to become more difficult to convince lapsed hunters to purchase alicense and start hunting again.Respondents who purchased a license only in 1 or 2 of the 4 years before 2008-2009 werepositively associated with having children (p < 0.05). Those respondents who had children werepositively associated with answering “Strongly” or “Moderately” to the question that asked if nothaving enough time took away from hunting enjoyment (p < 0.05).Respondents who hunted 3 or 4 of the 4 years before 2008-2009 had a positive association withhaving no children (p < 0.05). In addition, this group had positive associations with fourmessages (p < 0.05 for each one): • Purchase a Virginia hunting license and help conserve wildlife. • Hunting bonds family. Share the experience. • Hunting season only comes once a year - dont miss it. • Hunt Virginia and reduce your carbon footprint with a local, organic source of meat.Finally, those who hunted 3 or 4 of the 4 years before 2008-2009 had a positive association withthe Exurbanites Tapestry segment (p < 0.01).Respondents who reported being “Very likely” to buy a hunting license for the 2009-2010 seasonhad positive associations with 16 hunter messages (p < 0.001 to p < 0.05): • Buy your license, help conserve the environment. • Hunters, the original stewards of the land. • Hunting is a source of quality, naturally replenished food. • Hunting is an investment with many returns. • Buy your license, help conserve habitat. • Hunting - protect the heritage, protect the environment. • Hunting - its our nature. • Purchase a Virginia hunting license and help conserve wildlife. • Need a break? Peace awaits you in Virginias outdoors. Go hunting.
  19. 19. xvi Responsive Management • Hunting bonds family. Share the experience. • Hunting season only comes once a year - dont miss it. • Hunt Virginia and reduce your carbon footprint with a local, organic source of meat. • Hunting - make memories, fund conservation. Buy a license. • Hunting - pass on the tradition. It starts with a license. • Big/small game, big fun. Hunt Virginia. • Connect with nature, connect with family. Hunt Virginia.In addition, respondents who reported being “Very likely” to buy a hunting license for the2009-2010 season were more likely to be in the Heartland Communities Tapestry (p < 0.05) andto have hunted in 3 or 4 of the seasons before 2008-2009 (p < 0.01).Respondents who answered that they were “Somewhat likely” to purchase a 2009-2010 huntinglicense were positively associated with the education level “Some college or an associatesdegree” (p < 0.05). This was the only association for this group.Respondents who answered that they were “Not at all likely” to purchase a 2009-2010 huntinglicense had several associations. They were strongly associated with having at most a highschool diploma (p < 0.01). In addition, they were positively associated with having a householdincome of less than $40,000 per year (p < 0.05). They were also associated with the Salt of theEarth Tapestry (p < 0.05). As mentioned before, this group of respondents was also positivelyassociated with having purchased a Virginia hunting license only 1 or 2 years in the 4 yearspreceding the 2008-2009 season (p < 0.01).A DISCUSSION OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF THE TELEPHONE SURVEY RESULTSON COMMUNICATION STRATEGIESA final part of this report discusses some of the implications of the survey research regardingmarketing messages. The data suggest the following:DO consider using the top three messages (or variations of the messages using similarthemes, phrases, and words) rated by respondents as very or somewhat effective at gettingthem to buy a hunting license during a year that they otherwise might not. These threemessages were the top three messages among those rated very effective, as well as the top three
  20. 20. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xviimessages (ranked in a slightly different order) when ratings of very and somewhat effective werecombined, and they were at the bottom of the ranking by not at all effective. • Make memories. Take someone special hunting. • Hunting – protect the heritage, protect the environment. • Hunting bonds family. Share the experience.DO use messages and outreach materials that incorporate the “passing on the huntingheritage” theme. All of the top three messages rated as very or somewhat effective overall(discussed above) pertain to the “passing on the hunting heritage” theme. Two of the top threemessages focus on the hunting heritage, and the third is a “blended theme” message thatcombines the hunting heritage theme with a conservation theme. Furthermore, when asked aboutmessage themes (i.e., the series of questions about things that would make lapsed hunters likelyto purchase a Virginia hunting license), respondents’ top message theme was “being remindedthat it is important to continue the hunting heritage of this country” (this was the top item thatrespondents indicated would make them very or somewhat likely to purchase a Virginia huntinglicense during a year they otherwise might not). Finally, “heritage” ranked eighth among wordsand phrases with which respondents said they had a positive association regarding hunting.DO use the words, phrases, and concepts of “connect,” “share,” “make memories,” and“heritage.” These terms were used frequently in the top nine messages rated as being very orsomewhat effective. All messages that used the word “connect” were in the top nine messages,regardless of whether the concept referred to making connections with nature or with family andfriends. The phrase “connect to nature” was the top-ranked term among words and phrases thatrespondents indicated as having a positive association with hunting; the word “memories” rankedsixth. Also note that the message that ranked fourth overall as very effective, “Connect to nature,hunt Virginia,” was the top-ranked message as being very effective among those who indicatedthey are not at all likely to purchase a 2009-2010 hunting license.Furthermore, those who indicated that they are not at all likely to purchase a 2009-2010 huntinglicense had three messages ranked among the top six in the rating by very effective that used theword “connect.” Another message among the top few messages used the phrase “make
  21. 21. xviii Responsive Managementmemories.” Note, however, that the word, “tradition,” did not appear to be as effective as theother words and phrases that were related to the hunting heritage. “Tradition” ranked lower onthe list of words and phrases with positive associations, and messages using the word “tradition”were not rated as high in effectiveness as were messages using the terms “connect,” “share,”“make memories,” and “heritage.”DON’T use the term “environment” or other words, phrases, and concepts related to thetheme of “environmentally friendly,” “eco-friendly,” or “going green” unless it is blendedor used with another theme (other than the direct “buy a license” theme), such as thehunting heritage theme. Although one of the top messages overall uses the word“environment,” its concept of protecting the environment is blended with the hunting heritagetheme. All three messages pertaining only to the “environmental impact of hunting” theme—essentially an “environmentally friendly” or “going green” theme—ranked quite low in the veryor somewhat effective ratings and were in the top messages rated not at all effective. Also notethat the blended messages that ranked high did not have a strong “going green” message, butrather an appeal to protect the environment that did not use common “going green” terms thatwere used in the low-ranked messages, such as “natural,” “organic,” and “local.”DON’T use the term “conserve” without being specific about what is being conserved.Conserving the “environment” is too general or broad; specify conservation of wildlife, habitat,etc. Two of the three messages pertaining to the “conservation/appreciation of the naturalworld” theme were among the top dozen messages rated as very effective. The conservation-themed message that resonated the best was “Buy your license, help conserve habitat.” Thenearly identical conservation-themed message, “Buy your license, help conserve theenvironment,” did not rank as high and was not among the top dozen messages rated veryeffective. For the two nearly identical messages pertaining to the “monetary contribution ofhunters to conservation and wildlife management” theme, the one using the word “conserve”ranked higher than the one using the word “manage.” Messages with direct “buy a license”statements also ranked high when blended with a conservation theme. It appears that “conserve”is a preferred word or concept, but that messages that specify what is being conserved, such as
  22. 22. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xixwildlife or habitat, may be more effective among lapsed hunters than more general or broadconcepts like “the environment.”DO use messages and outreach materials that appeal to passing on the hunting heritage,connecting, making memories, and bonding with someone special, but be non-specific (e.g.,someone special) or all inclusive (e.g., friends and family) regarding who “someone special”is (see next “DON’T”).DON’T make family the primary or central person/people in messages and campaignmaterials that appeal to passing on the hunting heritage, connecting, making memories,and bonding. Lapsed hunters most commonly hunt with friends, followed by alone. Malefamily members were common hunting companions, but still less typical than friends and alone.Also note that over half (58%) of lapsed hunters in Virginia do not have children in thehousehold. Although the age distribution indicates that the slight majority who do not havechildren in the household may likely be due to their children being grown, their absence may stillcontribute to the higher likelihood of friends being hunting companions rather than familymembers. Additionally, those messages that specifically mention “someone special,” “a friend,”and “family and friends” all ranked higher (by a few percentage points) in the top sevenmessages rated as very effective by those who indicated they are not at all likely to purchase a2009-2010 hunting license than the message that mentions only family.DON’T focus predominantly on time constraints and obligations that interfere withhunting. These factors are, for the most part, beyond the control of the VDGIF. Additionally,all four messages with a “time factor” theme ranked fairly low among messages rated as very orsomewhat effective among respondents overall; three of the four “time factor” messages rankedin the top dozen messages rated as not at all effective.DO address availability and quality of hunting opportunities on public land in messagesand outreach materials. Also consider focusing some Department resources, if necessary, onimproving hunting opportunities on public lands (e.g., acquiring more land, adjustingregulations, attempting to reduce crowding). Having hunted on private land was the top reason
  23. 23. xx Responsive Managementgiven for not purchasing a 2008-2009 hunting license, and about a third (30%) of those whoindicated that they are not at all likely to buy a 2009-2010 license said that they are not at alllikely to do so because they will hunt on private land. Nearly half of all lapsed hunters—thispercentage is about the same for both those who indicated they are likely to purchase or havealready purchased a 2009-2010 hunting license and those who are not at all likely to purchase a2009-2010 hunting license—hunted on private land during the 2008-2009 season. Finally, nothaving enough places to hunt and not having enough access to places to hunt were among the topfour factors that strongly took away from lapsed hunters’ enjoyment of hunting in Virginia. Itmay even be an effective message approach to associate hunting on public land with the huntingheritage, the latter being the most popular message theme.DON’T use “buy a license” as the primary or dominant theme in messages and campaignmaterials. Many direct “buy a license” messages were not popular. The direct “buy a license”message appears to be more effective when used in conjunction with the words “conserve” or“conservation”: the 3 messages with a direct “buy a license” statement that were among the top12 messages rated as very or somewhat effective associated buying a license with the concept ofconservation. Note, however, that receiving a reminder to purchase a license was the top itemrated not at all likely to make respondents purchase a license during a year in which theyotherwise might not.
  24. 24. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xxiTABLE OF CONTENTSIntroduction and Methodology ........................................................................................................1Survey Results .................................................................................................................................6 Hunting Behaviors and Purchase of Hunting Licenses ...........................................................6 Satisfaction and Dissatisfaction With Hunting in Virginia, and Constraints To Hunting Participation..............................................................................23 Motivations for Purchasing a Hunting License .....................................................................32 Reactions To Words, Phrases, and Messages as They Relate To Hunting ...........................41 Demographic and Personal Lifestyle Data ............................................................................48An Examination of the Data Regarding Tapestry Segments .........................................................73 Overview ...............................................................................................................................73 Methodology..........................................................................................................................73 Demographic and Socioeconomic Results ............................................................................74 Tapestry Details.....................................................................................................................75 Conclusion.............................................................................................................................77An Examination of Target Markets ...............................................................................................78A Discussion of the Implications of the Telephone Survey Results on Communication Strategies ..................................................................................................81About Responsive Management ....................................................................................................95List of TablesTable 1. Tapestry Questions .........................................................................................................76List of FiguresFigure 1. Nonparametric Analysis Equation...................................................................................4Figure 2. Sampling Error Equation.................................................................................................4Figure 3. Hunting on Private Land .................................................................................................8Figure 4. Years Hunted of Past 5 Years..........................................................................................9Figure 5. Days Hunting.................................................................................................................10Figure 6. Increase or Decrease of Hunting Activity .....................................................................11Figure 7. Hunting Outside Virginia ..............................................................................................12Figure 8. Other States Hunted.......................................................................................................13Figure 9. Species Hunted ..............................................................................................................14Figure 10. Hunting Companions...................................................................................................15Figure 11. Membership in Hunt Clubs .........................................................................................16Figure 12. Purchase of Licenses in Past 4 Seasons.......................................................................17Figure 13. Types of Licenses Purchased.......................................................................................18Figure 14. Likelihood to Purchase a 2009-2010 Hunting License ...............................................19Figure 15. Reasons for Hunting ....................................................................................................20Figure 16. Membership in Conservation or Sportsmen’s Organizations......................................21Figure 17. Involvement in Hunting Accidents..............................................................................22Figure 18. Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction With Hunting in Virginia............................................26Figure 19. Things That Strongly Took Away From Hunting Enjoyment.....................................27Figure 20. Things That Strongly or Moderately Took Away From Hunting Enjoyment.............28Figure 21. Things That Did Not Take Away From Hunting Enjoyment......................................29
  25. 25. xxii Responsive ManagementTABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)List of Figures (continued)Figure 22. Most Important Reasons for Not Purchasing a 2008-2009 Hunting License..............30Figure 23. Reasons for Not Planning to Purchase a 2009-2010 Hunting License........................31Figure 24. Things That Would Be Very Likely to Encourage License Purchase.........................35Figure 25. Things That Would Be Very or Somewhat Likely to Encourage License Purchase......................................................................................................................36Figure 26. Things That Would Be Not at All Likely to Encourage License Purchase.................37Figure 27. Support or Opposition to License Purchase Reminders ..............................................38Figure 28. Reasons for Opposing Hunting License Purchase Reminders ....................................39Figure 29. Reasons for Purchasing a 2009-2010 Hunting License...............................................40Figure 30. Word and Phrase Associations With Hunting .............................................................44Figure 31. Messages That Would Be Very Effective at Encouraging License Purchase .............45Figure 32. Messages That Would Be Very or Somewhat Effective at Encouraging License Purchase......................................................................................................................46Figure 33. Messages That Would Be Not at All Effective at Encouraging License Purchase......................................................................................................................47Figure 34. Gender of Respondents................................................................................................51Figure 35. Ethnic Backgrounds of Respondents...........................................................................52Figure 36. Children in Household.................................................................................................53Figure 37. Ages of Respondents ...................................................................................................54Figure 38. Years of Residency in Virginia ...................................................................................55Figure 39. Levels of Education of Respondents ...........................................................................56Figure 40. Occupations of Respondents .......................................................................................57Figure 41. Household Incomes of Respondents ...........................................................................58Figure 42. Type of Residential Area of Respondents ...................................................................59Figure 43. Tapestry Behaviors of Respondents ............................................................................60Figure 44. Ownership of Power Tools..........................................................................................61Figure 45. Ownership of Riding Lawnmowers.............................................................................62Figure 46. Ownership of American-Made Vehicles .....................................................................63Figure 47. Ownership of Motorcycles ..........................................................................................64Figure 48. Ownership of Treadmills or Stationary Bikes .............................................................65Figure 49. Work on Home Improvement Projects........................................................................66Figure 50. Planting of Flower or Vegetable Gardens ...................................................................67Figure 51. Golf Playing.................................................................................................................68Figure 52. Purchase of Items Over the Telephone........................................................................69Figure 53. Eating Out on Weekends or Weekdays .......................................................................70Figure 54. Ownership of Life Insurance Policies .........................................................................71Figure 55. Political Views of Respondents...................................................................................72Figure 56. Messages That Would Be Very Effective at Encouraging License Purchase (Previously Shown) ..................................................................................................82Figure 57. Messages That Would Be Very or Somewhat Effective at Encouraging License Purchase (Previously Shown).....................................................................................83
  26. 26. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results xxiiiTABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)List of Figures (continued)Figure 58. Messages That Would Be Not at All Effective at Encouraging License Purchase (Previously Shown) ..................................................................................................84Figure 59. Things That Would Be Very or Somewhat Likely to Encourage License Purchase (Previously Shown) ..................................................................................................85Figure 60. Word and Phrase Associations With Hunting (Previously Shown) ............................86Figure 61. Messages That Would Be Very Effective at Encouraging License Purchase Crosstabulated by Not Likely To Purchase a 2009-2010 Hunting License.............................88Figure 62. Most Important Reasons for Not Purchasing a 2008-2009 Hunting License (Previously Shown) ....................................................................................................91Figure 63. Reasons for Not Planning to Purchase a 2009-2010 Hunting License (Previously Shown) ....................................................................................................92Figure 64. Hunting on Private Land Crosstabulated by Likelihood To Purchase Hunting License .......................................................................................................................93Figure 65. Things That Strongly Took Away From Hunting Enjoyment (Previously Shown) ...............................................................................................94
  27. 27. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 1INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGYThis report discusses the results of a telephone survey that was conducted for the NationalShooting Sports Foundation in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Game and InlandFisheries (VDGIF) as part of a larger study regarding messages to encourage lapsed hunters topurchase a hunting license. The overall project entailed the following: • Identification of lapsed hunters (i.e., to develop the sample for the survey), including categorizing the lapsed hunters into their various Tapestry segments. (Tapestry Segmentation™ is a market segmentation system developed by Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. Tapestry segments are more fully explained in the section of this report titled “An Examination of the Data Regarding Tapestry Segments.”) This portion of the project was completed by Southwick Associates. • A review of VDGIF strategic and marketing plans, a literature review regarding past research pertinent to the study, an inventory of current VDGIF outreach and educational activities, and staff interviews. This portion of the project was completed by Tammy Sapp. • Three focus groups of lapsed hunters (used in part to develop the survey instrument for the telephone survey that followed). This portion of the project was completed by Responsive Management. • A telephone survey of lapsed hunters and an analysis of the telephone survey data. This portion of the project was completed by Responsive Management. • Note that a final report will be produced subsequent to this report with recommendations and strategies regarding marketing to lapsed hunters.This report discusses only the results of the telephone survey of lapsed hunters and the analysisof the telephone survey data. Specific aspects of the telephone survey methodology arediscussed below.For the survey of lapsed hunters, telephones were selected as the preferred sampling mediumbecause of the almost universal ownership of telephones among hunters in Virginia.Additionally, telephone surveys, relative to mail or Internet surveys, allow for more scientificsampling and data collection, provide higher quality data, obtain higher response rates, are more
  28. 28. 2 Responsive Managementtimely, and are more cost-effective. Telephone surveys also have fewer negative effects on theenvironment than do mail surveys because of reduced use of paper and reduced energyconsumption for delivering and returning the questionnaires.A central polling site at the Responsive Management office allowed for rigorous quality controlover the interviews and data collection. Responsive Management maintains its own in-housetelephone interviewing facilities. These facilities are staffed by interviewers with experienceconducting computer-assisted telephone interviews on the subjects of natural resources andoutdoor recreation. The telephone survey questionnaire was developed cooperatively byResponsive Management, the VDGIF, Southwick Associates, Tammy Sapp, and Mile CreekCommunications. Responsive Management conducted a pre-test of the questionnaire to ensureproper wording, flow, and logic in the survey.To ensure the integrity of the telephone survey data, Responsive Management has interviewerswho have been trained according to the standards established by the Council of American SurveyResearch Organizations. Methods of instruction included lecture and role-playing. The SurveyCenter Managers and other professional staff conducted project briefings with the interviewersprior to the administration of this survey. Interviewers were instructed on type of study, studygoals and objectives, handling of survey questions, interview length, termination points andqualifiers for participation, interviewer instructions within the survey instrument, reading of thesurvey instrument, skip patterns, and probing and clarifying techniques necessary for specificquestions on the survey instrument. The Survey Center Managers and statisticians monitored thedata collection, including monitoring of the actual telephone interviews without the interviewers’knowledge, to evaluate the performance of each interviewer and ensure integrity of the data.After the surveys were obtained by the interviewers, the Survey Center Managers and/orstatisticians checked each completed survey to ensure clarity and completeness.Interviews were conducted Monday through Friday from 9:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Saturday fromnoon to 5:00 p.m., and Sunday from 5:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., local time. A five-callback designwas used to maintain the representativeness of the sample, to avoid bias toward people easy toreach by telephone, and to provide an equal opportunity for all to participate. When a respondent
  29. 29. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 3could not be reached on the first call, subsequent calls were placed on different days of the weekand at different times of the day. The survey was conducted in November 2009. ResponsiveManagement obtained a total of 803 completed interviews of lapsed hunters from Virginia.The software used for data collection was Questionnaire Programming Language (QPL). Thesurvey data were entered into the computer as each interview was being conducted, eliminatingmanual data entry after the completion of the survey and the concomitant data entry errors thatmay occur with manual data entry. The survey instrument was programmed so that QPLbranched, coded, and substituted phrases in the survey based on previous responses to ensure theintegrity and consistency of the data collection. The analysis of data was performed usingStatistical Package for the Social Sciences as well as proprietary software developed byResponsive Management.For this report, a nonparametric analysis examined how various responses to the survey relatedto behavioral, participatory, and demographic characteristics. Responses for selected questionswere tested by means of z-scores for relationships to behavioral, participatory, and demographiccharacteristics. A positive z-score means that the response and characteristic are positivelyrelated; a negative z-score means that the response and characteristic are negatively related.The z-score shows the strength of the relationship between the characteristic and the response tothe question. Those z-scores that have an absolute value of 3.30 or greater indicate a relationshipthat is so strong that it would happen by chance only 1 out of 1,000 times (p < 0.001). Thosez-scores that have an absolute value of 2.58 to 3.29 indicate a relationship that is so strong that itwould happen by chance only 1 out of 100 times (p < 0.01). Finally, those z-scores that have anabsolute value of 1.96 to 2.57 indicate a relationship that is so strong that it would happen bychance only 5 out of 100 times (p < 0.05).The z-scores were calculated as shown in the formula on the following page (Figure 1).
  30. 30. 4 Responsive ManagementFigure 1. Nonparametric Analysis Equation ( p1 − p2 )z= ⎡1 1 ⎤ p(1 − p)⎢ + ⎥ ⎣ n1 n2 ⎦where: n1 represents the number of observations in Group 1. n2 represents the number of observations in Group 2. p1 = a/(a + b) = a/n1 and represents the proportion of observations in Group 1 that falls in Cell a. It is employed to estimate the population proportion Π1 (% of Group 1 who had specific characteristic). p2 = c/(c + d) = c/n2 and represents the proportion of observations in Group 2 that falls in Cell c. It is employed to estimate the population proportion Π2 (% of Group 2 who had specific characteristic). p = (a + c)/(n1 + n2) = (a + c)/n and is a pooled estimate of the proportion of respondents who had specific characteristic in the underlying population.(Equation from Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures, 2nd Edition by David J.Sheskin. © 2000, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, FL.)Throughout this report, findings of the telephone survey are reported at a 95% confidenceinterval. For the entire sample of Virginia lapsed hunters that was provided to the research team,the sampling error is at most plus or minus 3.45 percentage points. This means that if the surveywere conducted 100 times on different samples that were selected in the same way, the findingsof 95 out of the 100 surveys would fall within plus or minus 3.45 percentage points of eachother. Sampling error was calculated using the formula described below (Figure 2), with asample size of 803 and a population size of 118,713 lapsed hunters that were provided in thesample.Figure 2. Sampling Error Equation ⎛ Np (.25) ⎞ ⎜ − .25 ⎟ Where: B = maximum sampling error (as decimal)B=⎜ Ns ⎟(1.96) NP = population size (i.e., total number who could be surveyed) ⎜ Np − 1 ⎟ NS = sample size (i.e., total number of respondents surveyed) ⎜ ⎟ ⎝ ⎠Derived from formula: p. 206 in Dillman, D. A. 2000. Mail and Internet Surveys. John Wiley & Sons, NY. Note: This is a simplified version of the formula that calculates the maximum sampling error using a 50:50 split (the most conservative calculation because a 50:50 split would give maximum variation).
  31. 31. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 5Note that some results may not sum to exactly 100% because of rounding. Additionally,rounding in the graphs may cause apparent discrepancies of 1 percentage point between thegraphs and the reported results of combined responses (e.g., when “very likely” and “somewhatlikely” are summed to determine the total percentage being likely).The 28 messages that were tested in this survey included 4 messages (or close derivativesthereof) that were developed in past research sponsored by the National Shooting SportsFoundation conducted by D.J. Case & Associates and that were considered for use by someagencies, such as the Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency and the Florida Fish and WildlifeConservation Commission. These four messages that were not developed exclusively for thisstudy are as follows: o Hunting season only comes once a year – don’t miss it. o Big game, big fun. Hunt Virginia. [or Small game, big fun. Hunt Virginia.]* o Life is short. Break free and go hunting. o Need a break? Peace awaits you in Virginia’s outdoors. Go hunting.*This message used the term, “Big game,” for hunters who indicated that they hunted bear, deer, elk, or wild turkey in the speciesquestion earlier in the survey; the message used the term, “Small game,” for hunters who did not hunt any of the big gamespecies and who indicated hunting for fox, raccoon, small game, and/or waterfowl. All remaining respondents (those who huntedsome other species or who answered “Don’t know” to the species question) were randomized between “Big game” and “Smallgame.”
  32. 32. 6 Responsive ManagementSURVEY RESULTSHUNTING BEHAVIORS AND PURCHASE OF HUNTING LICENSES The sample consisted of those who had not purchased a hunting license for the 2008-2009 season (respondents who had were not interviewed). Nonetheless, nearly half of the “lapsed” hunters in the sample (46%) had hunted on private land in Virginia in the 2008-2009 season (Figure 3). (Virginia hunting regulations allow hunting on private land without a license in specific situations.) • The survey asked about hunting anywhere in Virginia in the past 5 years: 32% of all respondents had hunted all 5 of the past 5 years in Virginia; the median is 4 of the past 5 years (Figure 4). • The number of days per year that hunters had typically hunted (in those years in which they had hunted) is shown in Figure 5. While 32% typically hunted no more than 5 days, there are some who hunted much more often, including 14% who typically hunted more than 25 days annually. The median is 10 days. • Because the sample consists of hunters identified (in the sample as well as through screener questions in the survey) as lapsed, it is not surprising that the majority (58%) indicate that their amount of hunting in Virginia has decreased over the past 5 years (Figure 6). Only 9% indicate that it has increased. The survey also asked about hunting outside of Virginia in the past 5 years: 17% had done so (Figure 7). • Those other states in which they had hunted include North Carolina (18% of those out-of- state hunters had hunted there), West Virginia (18%), Maryland (9%), and Pennsylvania (9%) (Figure 8). The most commonly hunted species among the lapsed hunters are deer (89%, the top answer by far), small game/upland game birds (41%), and wild turkey (36%) (Figure 9). The most common hunting companions are friends (38%), the respondent’s son (20%), the respondent’s father (13%), and/or the respondent’s brother (11%) (Figure 10).
  33. 33. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 7 The majority of lapsed hunters (89%) are not members of a hunt club in Virginia; however, 9% are members of a hunt club in Virginia (Figure 11). The survey asked about purchasing behaviors over the past 4 years. For each of the hunting years asked about (starting with the 2004-2005 season through the 2007-2008 season), at least 57% but no more than 64% had purchased a hunting license (Figure 12). • The most commonly purchased licenses are the Basic Hunting license (78% had purchased this type) and the Bear, Deer, and Turkey license (70%) (Figure 13). These were distantly followed by the Muzzleloading license (29%) and the Archery license (19%), among others. Regarding plans to purchase a hunting license for the 2009-2010 season, 34% indicate being very likely to do so (along with the 9% who indicated that they had already bought one, this makes an anticipated purchase rate of approximately 43% among the sample) (Figure 14). On the other hand, 24% indicate being not at all likely. Respondents were asked to choose their most important reason for hunting from among four reasons (for the meat, for a trophy, to be with family and friends, or to be close to nature). They are fairly evenly divided among three of the answers: 32% did so to primarily be with family and friends, 32% did so primarily to be close to nature, and 28% did so primarily for the meat; a relatively low percentage did so for a trophy (5%) (Figure 15). Just under a third of lapsed hunters (31%) have been a member of and/or have donated to a conservation or sportsman’s organization other than a hunt club in the past 2 years (Figure 16). A final question in this section asked hunters if they had ever been involved in or witnessed a hunting accident in which somebody was injured by a hunting weapon: 6% indicated that they had (Figure 17).
  34. 34. 8 Responsive ManagementFigure 3. Hunting on Private Land Q16. Did you hunt on private land in Virginia during the 2008-2009 season? Yes 46 No 53 Dont know 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  35. 35. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 9Figure 4. Years Hunted of Past 5 Years Q24. How many of the past 5 years have you hunted in Virginia? 5 years 32 4 years 21 3 years 18 Mean = 3.4 2 years 13 Median = 4 1 year 10 Have not hunted in Virginia in the 5 past 5 years Dont know 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  36. 36. 10 Responsive ManagementFigure 5. Days Hunting Q27. When you hunted in Virginia in the past, how many days did you typically hunt in Virginia in a year? More than 25 14 days 21-25 days 3 Mean = 15.1 16-20 days 8 Median = 10 11-15 days 14 6-10 days 24 1-5 days 32 0 days 1 Dont know 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  37. 37. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 11Figure 6. Increase or Decrease of Hunting Activity Q30. Has your amount of hunting in Virginia increased, decreased, or stayed the same over the past 5 years? Increased 9 Stayed the same 32 Decreased 58 Dont know 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  38. 38. 12 Responsive ManagementFigure 7. Hunting Outside Virginia Q40. Have you hunted outside of Virginia in the past 5 years? Yes 17 No 83 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  39. 39. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 13Figure 8. Other States Hunted Q42/43/44. In what states other than Virginia did you hunt in the past 5 years? (Asked of those who hunted in another state in the past 5 years; shows only those states with at least 3%.) North Carolina 18 West Virginia 18 Maryland 9 Pennsylvania 9 Colorado 7 Multiple Responses Allowed Texas 7 South Dakota 6 New Mexico 5 Kansas 4 Alabama 4 Idaho 4 Maine 3 New York 3 Wyoming 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=139)
  40. 40. 14 Responsive ManagementFigure 9. Species Hunted Q34. Which species have you hunted in Virginia? Deer 89 Small game / upland game 41 birds Turkey 36 Multiple Responses Allowed Waterfowl 11 Bear 10 Fox 4 Raccoon 3 Elk 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  41. 41. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 15Figure 10. Hunting Companions Q38. With whom do you typically hunt? Friends 38 Nobody / goes 23 alone Son 20 Father 13 Brother 11 Multiple Responses Allowed In-law 6 Spouse 4 Uncle 4 Cousins 3 Organized group 3 Grandson 2 Nephew 2 Daughter 2 Grandfather 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  42. 42. 16 Responsive ManagementFigure 11. Membership in Hunt Clubs Q203. Are you currently a member of a hunt club in Virginia? Yes 9 No 89 Dont know 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  43. 43. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 17Figure 12. Purchase of Licenses in Past 4 Seasons Q20. Please tell me if you bought a Virginia hunting license for each of the following seasons? 2004-2005 59 2005-2006 61 Multiple Responses Allowed 2006-2007 64 2007-2008 57 Dont know 18 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  44. 44. 18 Responsive ManagementFigure 13. Types of Licenses Purchased Q23. Which of the following licenses have you purchased in the past? Basic Hunting 78 license Bear, Deer, and 70 Turkey license Muzzleloading 29 license Multiple Responses Allowed Archery license 19 State Waterfowl 11 Stamp Sportsmans 8 license Crossbow license 6 Trapping license 1 None of these 2 Dont know 1 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  45. 45. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 19Figure 14. Likelihood to Purchase a 2009-2010 Hunting License Q185. How likely are you to buy a 2009-2010 Virginia hunting license? Very likely 34 Somewhat likely 29 Not at all likely 24 I have already bought a 2009- 9 2010 license Dont know 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  46. 46. 20 Responsive ManagementFigure 15. Reasons for Hunting Q31. Thinking about when youve hunted, what is your most important reason for hunting? To be with family 32 and friends To be close to 32 nature For the meat 28 For a trophy 5 Dont know 3 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  47. 47. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 21Figure 16. Membership in Conservation or Sportsmen’s Organizations Q204. In the past 2 years, have you been a member of or donated to any conservation or sportsmans organizations other than a hunt club? Yes 31 No 66 Dont know 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  48. 48. 22 Responsive ManagementFigure 17. Involvement in Hunting Accidents Q205. Have you ever been involved in or witnessed a hunting accident in which someone was injured by a hunting weapon? Yes 6 No 92 Dont know 2 0 20 40 60 80 100 Percent (n=803)
  49. 49. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 23SATISFACTION AND DISSATISFACTION WITH HUNTING IN VIRGINIA, ANDCONSTRAINTS TO HUNTING PARTICIPATION The overwhelming majority of lapsed hunters (87%) report that they have been satisfied with their hunting experiences in Virginia over the past 5 years; only 8% say that they have been dissatisfied (Figure 18). The survey asked 32 questions about things that may have taken away from respondents’ enjoyment of hunting, shown in Text Box 1 on the following page. In examining the results of things that strongly or moderately took away from enjoyment of hunting, 8 of the 32 items stand out above the rest, each with about a third or more of respondents saying that it strongly or moderately took away from their enjoyment. For the most part, they relate to time, access, and cost (Figures 19, 20, and 21). • Three items are at the top, all related to time; each has at least half of respondents saying it took away from enjoyment: not having enough time (61%), work obligations (56%), and family obligations (50%). • In the next tier are five items, with access and cost being prominent. This tier consists of the following: having other interests that are more important (42%), not having enough access to places to hunt (41%), not having enough places to hunt (40%), the cost of licenses (35%), and the cost of hunting equipment (31%). • A large middle tier exists: 15 of the 32 items have at least 15% of lapsed hunters (but less than 30%) who say the item took away from hunting enjoyment, as shown in the graph. These problems run the gamut, such as poor behavior of other hunters, not enough game, complex regulations, personal health/age issues, and not having anybody to go with. Included within this tier are a couple of items that relate to access and cost, as well. • At the bottom are 9 items, suggesting that the problems in this tier are relatively unimportant. Many of the problems here appear to be related to respondents’ basic beliefs about hunting (e.g., other people’s negative opinion of hunting, thinking hunting may be wrong). The relatively small percentage of people naming the problems in the bottom tier appear to be a group that is not well-informed about hunting (e.g., concern that hunting might endanger animal populations, mandatory hunter education
  50. 50. 24 Responsive Management requirements) and is also prone to anti-hunting rhetoric. That these problems are in the bottom tier suggests that they are relatively unimportant. Text Box 1: Things That May Have Taken Away From Enjoyment of Hunting That Were Asked About in the Survey (Did this strongly take away, moderately take away, or not take away from your enjoyment of hunting?) What about because you feel you lack skills? What about because you think hunting may be wrong? What about because you have other interests that are more important? What about because you dont have time? What about because youre not interested? What about work obligations? What about family obligations? What about personal health? What about poor behavior of other hunters? What about poor behavior of other recreationists? What about not enough places to hunt? What about not enough access to places to hunt? What about not having anyone to go with? What about fear of injury by another hunter? What about having to travel too far to hunt? What about the cost of hunting equipment? What about the costs of licenses? What about other costs related to hunting, such as gas and lodging? What about other peoples negative opinions of hunting? What about harassment by anti-hunters? What about not enough law enforcement officers? What about because you dont want to kill animals? What about too many hunters in the field? What about your concern that hunting might endanger animal populations? What about pollution or litter? What about not enough game? What about the concern about causing pain to animals? What about complex regulations? What about bag limits or season lengths? What about mandatory hunter education requirements? What about not enough trophy game? What about not enough big bucks? As a follow-up to the above list of potential problems, the survey asked respondents to name the most important reasons that they did not buy a 2008-2009 Virginia hunting license (although the question followed the above listing, respondents were not limited to the reasons on the list but could say anything that came to mind) (Figure 22). Five reasons stand out
  51. 51. Lapsed Hunter Message Testing: Telephone Survey Results 25 above the rest, all with 10% or more of respondents: hunted on private land (i.e., did not need a license) (25%), lack of time (25%), work obligations (17%), family obligations (11%), and personal health (11%). Near the end of the survey, those who indicated that they would be not at all likely to purchase a 2009-2010 Virginia hunting license were asked to name the reasons why (Figure 23). The top reason is not being required to purchase one: 30% said because they will hunt on private land. Three other reasons were named by more than 10% of this “not at all likely” group: personal health (15%), not being interested (13%), and lack of time (12%).

×