See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/216830463

Enhancing sport-hunting opportunities for urbanites

Article  in  Wildlife Society Bulletin · June 2003

DOI: 10.2307/3784340

CITATIONS READS

37 132

4 authors, including:

John H. Schulz Brian Washburn

University of Missouri Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service
68 PUBLICATIONS   745 CITATIONS    98 PUBLICATIONS   1,626 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Missouri Ozark Forest Ecosystem Project View project

Evaluation of a Voluntary Lead Free Ammunition Program View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Brian Washburn on 18 September 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Enhancing Sport-Hunting Opportunities for Urbanites
Author(s): John H. Schulz, Joshua J. Millspaugh, Daniel T. Zekor and Brian E. Washburn
Source: Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol. 31, No. 2 (Summer, 2003), pp. 565-573
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Wildlife Society
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3784340 .
Accessed: 31/03/2014 13:16

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Wiley and Wildlife Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Wildlife
Society Bulletin.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 565

In MyGu

Enhancing sport-huntingopportunitiesfor
urbanites
JohnH. Schulz,JoshuaJ.Millspaugh,Daniel TJZekor,
and Brian E. Washburn
AbstractRecentdeclinesin recreational
sport-hunting ratesresultfroma variety
participation of
societalandcultural changesas wellas extensive changesinthedistribution oftheUnited
Statespopulation.Concurrently, natural-resource agenciesareundergoing broadchanges
infocusandgoals,withholistic ecosystem management competing withtraditional
game
management forlimitedfinancialresources.We believethatrecreational hunting is an
important culturalelementthatshouldremaina mainstream recreational activityand
shouldcontinue to havea significantplace in natural-resource agencies.Giventhetran-
sitionoftheUnitedStatespopulation to a moreurbanizedsociety, new innovative pro-
gramsneedto be developedto recruit and retainrecreational sporthunters fromurban
populationcentersthatprovide"successful" hunting experiences.We identify several
components thatwillbe essentialto thesuccessoftheseprograms, suchas providing a
reasonableexpectation ofsuccessor accomplishment (e.g.,harvesting an animal),pro-
vidingsport-hunting opportunitiesnearurbanpopulation centers, and providing opportu-
nitiesthataresensitivetotheneedsofdiversegroups(e.g.,minority, gender).We propose
2 solutionsforproviding recreationalhunting opportunities to residents ofurbanareas:1)
establishingcropfieldsto attractmourning doves(Zenaidamacroura) and 2) implement-
ingput-and-take hunting undercertain restrictions.
We recognize manypossibleproblems
withthesesuggested programs. Natural-resource professionals havestrong opinionsabout
theseissues,butwe believediscussions are neededifhunting is to remaina mainstream
recreationalactivity.Thesedialoguesneedto 1) addresstheroleofrecreational hunting
in resourceagencypoliciesand programs, 2) identify innovative programs to educate,
introduce, and retainurbanresidents in recreationalhunting, and 3) identify innovative
programs toprovideurbanhunters withexperiences similar tothosewe haveproposed.If
we failto recognizetheemerging societal,cultural,and professional changesimpacting
sport-hunting participation
rates,thisactivity
likelywillbecomean anachronism.

Key words hunterrecruitment,

hunterretention,
hunting,
hunting
opportunities,
mourning
doves,
pen-raised
birds,recreation, urbancenters,
sporthunting, Zenaidamacroura

NorthAmericansporthuntingonce was viewed ed dollarsto manage all wildliferesources. Today,

as complementaryto natural-resourcemanage- however,a growingnumber of resource profes-
ment,ifnot the veryeconomic enginethatprovid- sionals see a disjunctbetween sport huntingand

Wildlife
SocietyBulletin
2003,31(2):565-573 Peeredited

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 566 WildlifeSocietyBulletin 2003, 31(2):565-573

wildlifemanagement,and confusionexists among

professionalbiologists and students about how
wildlifemanagementand huntingare compatible.
Today'schallengeforwildlifebiologistsis to remain
responsive to traditionalhuntingconstituencies
while simultaneously embracinga broaderecosys-
tem paradigm. The difficulty is magnifiedwhen
scarcefinancialresourcesmustbe stretchedfarther
to provide more diverse and numerousconserva-
tionprograms.
In additionto our profession'schangingview of
hunting, sport hunting itself is changing.
Participationrates peaked in 1975 (17.1 million
hunters) and declined to 14.0 million in 1996
(UnitedStatesFish and WildlifeServiceand United
States Departmentof Commerce,Bureau of the
Census 1997), and it appears the declinelikelywill
continue(Brown et al. 2000). Duringthe period
when hunterparticipationrates were declining,
many upland game-birdpopulations were also
experiencinglong-term and range-widepopulation
declines. In Missouri,forexample,the harvestof
northernbobwhite quail (Colinus virginianus,
used as a relativeindexofpopulationsize) declined
from4.0 millionin 1969 to 300,000 in 2001 (92.5%
decline; Missouri Department of Conservation,
unpublished data). Similarto declines in quail
indices(Guthery2002), dramaticpopulationindex
Mourning aroundmanaged'lure" crops
doves concentrate
declines in ring-neckedpheasants (Phasianus wheat),whichcan providegreaterhunting
(e.g.,sunflowers,
colchicus) duringthe 1940s-1990s in the Midwest and generatemoreshooting
forurbanresidents
opportunities
have been attributedto habitatloss and predation comparedto the traditional paradigm.
habitat-management
PhotobyMissouri Dept.ofConservation.
(Riley and Schulz 2001). We believe that small-
game-hunterdeclines and game-birdpopulation
declines are more causally linked than had been 1996). Beforethe existence of game laws, com-
previouslybelieved (i.e., the primarycauses of the mercializationof wildliferesourcesand associated
declinesin small-gamehuntingare decreasedavail- markethuntingwere the catalystsfor a general
abilityof upland birdsand the lack of opportunity wildlifeconservationparadigm,includingthe need
to huntand predictablyharvestgame animalsclose for professional management. Many natural
to home). Thus,our objectiveis to providea ration- resources that had once been abundant were
ale for managementactivitiesthat provide pre- becoming scarce or nonexistent. Passenger
dictablehuntingexperiencesclose to where urban pigeons (Ectopistes migratorius),Carolina para-
constituentslive. We also suggest that these keets (Conuropsis carolinensis), great auks
options,in the proper context,can provide more (Pinguinus impennis),and ivory-billedwoodpeck-
cost-effective huntingopportunitiescompared to ers (Campephilusprincipalis) became extinctand
existinghabitat-management programs. provideda motiveto preservethe remnantsof the
remaining wildliferesources(Cokinos 2000). Bison
(Bison bison) and otherbig-gamespecies associat-
Historyofwildlifescienceand the ed with wilderness landscapes became scarce
habitatparadigm because of overharvestand habitat alterations
Since the birthof modernwildlifeconservation (Schmidt1978).
in the 1930s,biologistshave been exposed to a vari- In the face of diminishingnaturalresources,it
ety of shiftingmanagement paradigms (Kuhn was believed thatrefugesand closed huntingsea-

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 InMyOpinion* Schulzet al. 567

sons would providea venue forfuturegenerations establishedto manageanimalsthatwere nothunted

to appreciate once-abundantwildlife resources. (i.e., nongame). As managersof huntedand non-
This period also saw the beginningof wildlife hunted groups of animals searched forvalidation
researchand the expenditureof moneyforscien- within this changingresource paradigm,species-
tificinvestigationsaddressingwildlifemanagement specificplans became a fashionablemechanismto
questions. As the researchprocess began to piece justify and guidemanagementactivities.Entiregen-
togetherthe componentsand processes of natural res of planningdocumentswere generatedby a
systems, the idea of sustainablegame management planningprocessthatevolvedintoan activity which
emerged(i.e.,gamepopulationscould be increased became an end in itself.The species-basedplanning
throughreasonable harvest and habitat manage- process quicklyprovedburdensomebecause a sep-
ment)(Weddell2002). arateplan could not be writtenforeveryspecies.
Despite advancementsin researchand manage- Alongwith thisrealizationcame a new idea focus-
ment,manynativegame-bird populationscontinued ing on multi-speciesmanagement, or management
to decline (e.g., greater prairie-chicken gearedtowardan entireecosystem.The concept of
[Tympanuchus cupido]). The introductionof ecosystemmanagementwas attractively simpleon
exotics to bolstersaggingnativegame populations the surfacebecause it appeared to be the nextlogi-
became a popularconcept-examples includering- cal expansion in professionalresource manage-
necked pheasants,graypartridge(Perdixperdix), ment. Otheremergingideas (i.e.,conservationbiol-
and chukars (Alectoris chukar). The period ogy) built upon the ecosystem concept, further
1930-1950 could be called the "propagationera," expandingthe scope of utilitarianand restoration
when poultry"assemblylines"were establishedto resourcemanagement(Weddell2002).
providea game crop in areas where naturalrepro- This briefhistoricalreviewhelps to explainwhy
ductioncould notkeep up withhunters'demandor manybiologiststodayhave difficulty understanding
the habitat'scarryingcapacity(Allen 1954). the role of sporthuntingin the contextof emerg-
As the science of wildlifemanagementmatured, ing and shiftingresource-management paradigms.
numerousuniversity textbookswrittenforthenew The complexitiesof the problemare compounded
armyof professionally trainedbiologistsdescribed with the interaction of professional paradigm
the failureof artificialpropagationprogramsand shifts,culturaland societal changes,modifications
how those dollars could be betterspent on time- of wildlifehabitat,and changes in the distribution
tested methods (e.g., habitat management) and abundance of upland game populations.
(Leopold 1933, Trippensee 1948, Allen 1954). Togetherthese shiftsnegativelyaffecthunter-par-
These textslaid thefoundationfortheuplandhabi- ticipationrates. Innovativesolutionsare needed if
tat paradigm(i.e., problemsassociatedwith a lack huntingis to surviveas a mainstreamrecreational
of small game can be rectifiedprimarilythrough and culturalactivity.
"proper"habitatmanagement). The paradigmof
habitatmanagementbecame well entrenched,not
onlyamongprofessionalwildlifemanagersbut also
in the huntingpublic,as evidencedtodayby sever-
al nongovernmental organizations(NGOs) devoted
to promotinghabitatmanagementfor a specific
species or suite of species (e.g., Ducks Unlimited,
Pheasants Forever,RuffedGrouse Society,Quail
Unlimited).
The activitiesassociated with natural-resource
managementbegan to expand beyondcreatingtar-
gets solelyforhunters.The firstEarthDay in 1970
signaleda new paradigmshiftthatencompassed a
broader constituency group (Weddell 2002).
Numerousstategame and fishagencies aroundthe Hunting todaymustfitintotheexistinghecticurbanlifestyle
countrywere reorganizedinto departmentsof nat- and providea reasonableexpectation ofsuccess. Our profes-
expectyounghunters
sioncan no longer in
toremaininterested
ural resourcesto reflectthisbroaderconstituency recreational iftheyonlyhaveaccess to publicland
hunting
(Belangerand Kinnane2002). New programswere wheregame animalsare oftenscarce. PhotoJohnH. Schulz.

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 568 WildlifeSocietyBulletin2003, 31(2):565-573

Habitatparadigmrevisited surrounding 3 urbanpopulationcentersin Missouri

could bringenoughchangeto meetthedemandfor
One of the unchallengedtenetsof wildlifecon- huntingopportunity.We presenta best-casesce-
servationis the habitat concept. Simplyput, it nario by usingconservativeurbanpopulationesti-
statesthatr-selectedsmall-gamepopulationdensi- mates thatexcluded the outer metropolitanareas
ties are drivenby habitatqualityand quantity, and (United States Census Bureau 2000, unpublished
that harvest has limited impacts,given suitable data).We assumedthat20% oftheurbanpopulation
habitat(Leopold 1931,Warner1988). Impliedhere- was potentialor existinghuntersand thatalmost
in are linkagesthatare believed to bringabout a everyhectareon the 3 urbanwildlifemanagement
chain reactionof positiveor negativeoutcomes. A areas could be managedas optimumquail habitat.
positiveexample goes somethinglike this:A new Givenoptimumhabitat,we assumedquail densities
small-gamehabitatimprovement initiativeleads to of0.3-1.0 quail/haand averageannualharvestrates
increased landowner awareness of small-game of 44% of the prehunt population (Roseberry and
habitat requirements,which leads to increased Klimstra1984). Last,we defineda successfulhunt-
habitat quality and quantity,which leads to ing tripas someone killinghalfthe dailybag limit
increased distributionand densityof small-game (i.e., 4 quail/trip). Our hypotheticalexample
populations,which leads to largersmall-gamehar- demonstrates thatregardlessofhow manyacresare
vests,whichlead to hunterskillingmorebirds/trip, developed into optimumnorthernbobwhitequail
which leads to an overallincreasein hunternum- habitaton public huntingareas close to urbanpop-
bers,which makes huntersmore satisfied,which ulation centers,only a small number of hunters
leads to more small-gamehuntinglicenses being (31-285) can be accommodatedamonga potential-
sold,which leads finallyto a utopianworldwhere ly large number of available hunters (29,000-
hunters,biologists,and administrators are simulta- 88,000) in and aroundthe 3 urbanpopulationcen-
neouslyhappy.The antithesisis a seriesofnegative ters in Missouri(Table 1). Althoughour data and
outcomesassociatedwithdeclinesin habitat,small- assumptionsmay be criticized,no amountof data
game populations,and finallyhunters.Specifically massagingwill changethe ultimateconclusion:we
forupland bird hunters,the qualityor numberof cannotbringabout enoughhabitatchangeto main-
huntingopportunitiesis a product of the annual tain large enough game-birdpopulationsto meet
habitat quality and resultingnesting season. If thepotentialhunterdemandclose to urbancenters.
prospectsfortheupcominghuntingseason appear In otherwords,optimalhabitatalone can no longer
less thanpromising, a rangeof plausible causative meet the potentialdemandforhuntingopportuni-
factorsare easilyrelatedback to the habitatpara- tiesclose to whereurbanresidentslive.
digm. As survey data have previously shown, the
Althoughthe habitatparadigmis a valuableman- remainingdiehardupland bird hunterstravelfar-
agementtenet,it is not a cure-allforeverysmall- ther and fartherfromhome and make numerous
game-related issue. We have become so entrenched tripsout of stateto findsuitablehuntingopportu-
in our thinkingthatthe habitatfactorhas become nities(Duda et al. 1998, Brown et al. 2000). For
unchallengeableprofessionaldogma. Alltoo often, those who stillhunt,Brownet al. (2000) reported
wildlifebiologists and administrators regard the increasesin hunting-related expendituresfortrip-
outcome of manyconservationprogramsas a fore- related expenses (30.3%), equipment (46.2%), spe-
gone conclusion even thoughempiricaldata sup- cial clothing (72.7%), processing and taxidermy
porting a program's effectivenessare lacking (74.4%), and NGO membership dues and contribu-
(Weddell 2002). We have become so confidentin tions (55.3%). Those hunters who have neither the
our solutionsthatwe perceivefailureas onlya mat- financialresourcesnorthe recreationalfreetimeto
ter of too littleapplicationof the patentremedy. makea largecommitment stop buyingpermitsand
We have become too comfortablein our problem- likelygive up the sport of hunting(Duda et al.
solvingabilityand forgetthatwe sometimesneed 1998, Adams et al. 2000). When asked why they
to changeour perspective. huntedless thanin previousyears,45% of hunters
Given the declines in numbers of small-game reportedlack of time as a primaryconsideration
huntersand the birds themselves,the authorsof (Duda et al. 1998).
thisstudywanted to determinewhetheroptimum Today,manystateresource-management agencies
applicationof thehabitatparadigmon public lands operate fish hatcheries on the premise that

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 InMyOpinion* Schulzet al. 569

Table 1. Hypotheticalnorthern bobwhitequail harvestand numberof huntersaccommodat-

ed on actual public conservationareas located near urbanpopulationcentersin Missouri(a
Whathuntingis,
best-casescenarioof habitat,population,and huntermanagement). whatit is not
We propose thatrecre-
Usable Prehunt Hunters
Conservationarea Human Potential acres quail Anticipated accom- ationalhuntingshould be
(metro-area) populations huntersb (hectares)c populationd harveste modatedf promoted firstand fore-
Busch,CA 333,960 66,792 6395 776-2588 341-1139 85-285 most as a mainstream
(St. Louis) (2588) societal activitybecause
Bois D'arc, CA 142,669 28,534 2882 350-1166 154-513 39-128 of its culturalsignificance
(Springfield) (1166) to our heritage. Hunting
J.A. Reed,WA 437,764 87,553 2318 281-938 124-413 31-103
(Kansas City) (938)
has helped to defineus as
a species (Ortegay Gasset
a Estimatedhuman populationwithinthe city limits,excludingthe greatermetropolitan 1985). At thispoint,it is
area (UnitedStatesCensus Bureau 2000, unpublisheddata); minimumestimatedmetropop- usefulto develop a defini-
ulation. tion of huntingbased on
b Potentialnumberof new and existinghuntersif20% of populationhunted.
ideas proposed by Ortega
c Usable acres (ha) include all forestland, cropland,glades, grasslands,and old fieldsas
potentialquail habitatgivenoptimummanagement. y Gasset(1985), who stat-
d Prehuntquail populationgiven optimumhabitatmanagementand quail densitiesuni- ed thathuntingis the act
formly distributedat 0.3-1.0 quail/ha(Roseberryand Klimstra1984). of a predatoryanimaltak-
e Estimatedquail harvestbased on a 44% harvestrate(includingcrippling)of the fallpre- ing possession, dead or
huntpopulation(Roseberryand Klimstra1984).
alive, of a prey species
f Hypotheticalnumberof successfulquail huntersaccommodatedduringthe entire76-day
Missouriquail huntingseason ifa successfulhunteris definedas someone who killed4 quail wherein the outcome of
(includingcripples)(i.e., halfthe daily bag, butenough to make a familymeal). any huntis uncertainbut
successfulenoughto war-
rant continued participa-
recreationaldemandsforfishare so high in some tion. The key elementin the act of huntingis the
areas thatnaturalreproductionofwild fishpopula- harvestingof an animal,and the act must occur
tions cannot keep up with recreationaldemand; withsome regularfrequency.
some state agencies (e.g., Illinois and Wisconsin) The "modern"huntingexperience,however,is dif-
even maintainpen-rearedput-and-take game-bird ferentfroma "traditional" huntingexperience(the
facilitiesbased on the same premise. How much terms"modern"and"traditional" beingdefinedbyan
different is a fishhatcheryfroma game-birdhatch- individual'sperceptionofpastand presentpersonal
ery? Let us takea quick look at the amountof fish- realitiesas comparedto a rigidepistemologicaldef-
ing opportunity providedat Missouri's4 managed inition).To illustratehow these modernand tradi-
trout parks. User-groupsurvey data show that tionalviews affectmanagementdecisionsto poten-
these 4 put-and-takefishing areas generated tiallyimprovehuntingopportunities, we construct-
>450,000 anglertripsin 1998,withthe numberof ed a simple conceptual model summarizingele-
trips showing a steady increase (Missouri ments of hunterparticipation(Table 2). In this
Departmentof Conservation,unpublished data). model,huntingparticipation = culturalacceptance
Althougheach troutpark has an adjacent natural (tradition) + desire (must be valued)+ time+ know-
streamdesignatedas a special trophy-trout man- how (or want to learn)+ reasonableexpectationof
agementarea offering wild populations,75% of the success+ social supportsystem(external-friends) +
anglersreportedtheyfishedexclusivelyat put-and- social support system (internal-family) + financial
takeparkfacilities.Almost80% of anglersreported resources.The model definesthe economic,social,
thattheystartedtheirtroutfishingcareers at the and culturalfactorsinfluencing hunters.Thus,what
parks,with70% sayingthattheyfishmainlyat the used to be a working solution to a management
troutparks;some anglersfishthe same holes year issue becomes irrelevant in our modern world.
afteryear. During 2001 estimatedattendanceon
opening day at the 4 parks was >8,900 anglers;
record attendance was 14,000 anglers in 1992, Componentsessentialto effective
when opening day of the fishingseason fellon a solutions
Saturday. Programs designed to maintain recreational

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 570 WildlifeSocietyBulletin2003, 31(2):565-573

Table2. Characteristics
ofmodern
andtraditional
hunting
experiences
contrasting cul-
today's status quo (Duda et al.
turewithprevious
traditions. 1998) and offerhuntingto
everyone, in particular
Characteristic Modernhunting experience Traditionalhunting experience
urban individuals who
Expectation Reasonableexpectation to Hopeful to harvest
game;successis typicallydo not have the
harvestgame;successis notlinkedtowhether gameis
tiedto harvest harvested same opportunities as
Cost Experience Economical their rural counterparts.
Timecommitment Minimal; mustfitintobusy Open-ended Individualswithina partic-
schedules ulargroupmostlikelywill
Purpose Another recreational Aesthetic;value-ladenexperience participatein recreational
opportunity (e.g.,spiritual
renewal);
spendtime huntingonly if othersin
withfamily orfriends
their peer group do so.
Recruitment Moreopportunistic Predominately passedon from
generation togenerationfromfather Forexample,when Ameri-
to sons can teenagers(ages 13-20
Accessibility Limited access;available Hunting placesmorewidely nationwide) were asked
areascrowdedandoften availableandgameanimalsplentiful how much they were
overhunted
interestedin hunting,52%
reportednot being inter-
ested at all (Duda et al.
huntingas an important culturalactivityduringthe 1998). When nonhunting teenagerswere asked to
next centurymustbe innovativeand incorporate givereasonstheydo not hunt,23% said otherinter-
the aforementionedbroad societal and cultural ests take up too much of theirtime,15% did not
changespresentlyoccurring.To be effective, these knowhow to hunt,13%didnothaveanyoneto hunt
programsneed to focus on the expandingurban with,13% did not want to killanimals,and 7% did
and suburbansectorsof the UnitedStatespopula- not have anywhereto hunt(Duda et al. 1998).
tion, targetingpublic lands near those centers Effective mechanismsfordetermining the prod-
(Cordelland Super 2000). Second,these programs ucts and servicesnecessaryto expose urbancon-
mustprovideat leasttheperceptionofa reasonable stituentsto huntinglikelywillincludemanagement
chance of harvestingan animal.Withouta moder- activitiesthatprovidethe animalsneeded forhar-
ate chance of success,individualsnew to hunting vestby the new hunters.Aldo Leopold (1933) pro-
likelywill abandon the sportforotherrecreational vides today'sresource managerswith a paradox.
opportunities(camping,backpacking,golf;Cordell On one hand,Leopold recognizedthatthe denser
and Betz 2000) thatprovidemoregratification. This thehumanpopulation,themoreintensethesystem
is especiallytrueforyoungergenerationsof poten- of game managementmustbecome to supplythe
tialhunterswho havegrownup multi-tasking video same proportionof people withhuntingopportu-
and computergames,watchingsatellitetelevision, nities. On the otherhand,he statedthatthe recre-
listeningto CDs or MP3s on wirelessheadsets,and ationalvalue of game is inverseto its artificiality.
talkingto friendson a cellular phone (Witt and The challengefacingtoday'sresourcemanageris to
Crompton2000). Huntingall day and findingfew, finda balance between these 2 ideas-increasing
ifany,shootingopportunities can't competeforthe the numberof huntingopportunitiesand ensuring
attentionof an urbanyoungsterwho can findreal- thatthese experienceshave minimalartificiality.
istic and limitlessshootingand killingopportuni-
ties in cyberspace.
Given the limitedamount of recreationaltime Possiblesolutions
and money available in today'ssociety,successful We propose 2 potentialsolutionsthatfocus on
programsneed to provide sport-hunting opportu- creatingat least the perception of a successful
nities that are relativelyinexpensiveand close to hunting experience, which in most cases will
home. Such programsmustalso be sensitiveto the include the harvestof game. We believe these 2
needs of minority and gendergroups.To effective- options are a startingpoint to initiatediscussions
ly improve hunter recruitmentand maintain among resource professionals interested and
huntersin urban areas,new programsmustmove involved in the recruitmentand retention of
past the stereotypicalrural,white-male-dominatedhuntersnearurbanareas.

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 InMyOpinion* Schulzet al. 571

One solution-improving and increasing the potentialbenefits(e.g., optimaltimingof releases).

amount of habitatmanaged for game species on Althoughmany resource professionalsmay per-
publiclandsnearurbanareas-surelywillappeal to ceive this concept as morally objectionable
most wildlifemanagers. Althoughwe recognize because of theirown ideologies,we believe it rep-
that habitat management has a role here, no resentsa potentialsolutionworthyof serious dia-
amountof habitatmanagementconcentratednear logue. We wantto emphasizethatwe are referring
urban centerscan meet the potentialdemand for to programsin which pen-raisedbirdsare released
recreationalhunting,as previouslydemonstrated just priorto hunting.Such put-and-take programs
(Table 1). would have the clearlydefinedgoal ofoptimizinga
First,manywildlifemanagerstodayare focusing hunter'schance to harvestan animal.Thisidea is in
theirefforts on providingfeedingfieldsto increase contrastto the traditionalconcept of annually
shootingopportunitiesformourningdove hunters stocking large numbers of pen-raised animals
(Baskett 1993). Mourningdoves are primarily weeks to monthsbeforehuntingseason to bolster
ground feeders(Lewis 1993), and theirdiet con- saggingor overharvestedwild populations. The
tains more than 90% grain-cropseeds (Korschgen role of state fish and wildlifeagencies could be
1958). Consequently, properlymanagedsunflower variable,and adaptable to area-specificopportuni-
(Helianthus spp.) and wheat (Triticumspp.) fields ties. Forexample,an agencycould promoteor sub-
may increase huntingopportunitiesby attracting sidizeput-and-take huntingon privateshootingpre-
feedingmourningdoves. Emphasizingdove fields servesnear urbanareas,or privateconcessionaires
located on public lands near urbanareas can both could be contractedto providetheirservicesand
capitalize on the social aspects of traditional releasepen-raiseduplandbirds(ring-necked pheas-
mourningdove huntingand accommodatea rela- antsor northernbobwhitequail) on publichunting
tively higher density of hunters on the same areas.
amountof public area,comparedto othertypesof Put-and-takeprograms designed to enhance
hunting(e.g., fordeer). For example,duringthe recreationalhuntingon public lands are certainly
first30 days of the 2001 mourningdove hunting not a new idea. Severalstates(includingIllinois,
season, 6 Missouriconservationareas near urban Maine,New Jersey, New York,Ohio, Pennsylvania,
centersprovided>24,000 hours of recreationfor and Wisconsin) currentlyhave some form of
2,834 hunterswho killed 10,209 doves (Missouri agency-sponsoredput-and-take hunting,primarily
Departmentof Conservation,unpublished data). forring-necked pheasants.These programsappear
This option mightbe the most palatable to many to be favorableto the generalpublic and extremely
wildlifeprofessionalsand the generalpublic,given popular with the hunting public (K. Warnke,
thatwild birdsare harvestedinsteadof pen-reared WisconsinDepartmentof NaturalResources,per-
birds. In additionto providingsportfora relatively sonal communication).User surveysshowed that
large number of hunters,the productionof lure 46% of Wisconsinhuntersalways or usuallytook
crops also providesa high-energy food source for advantageof additionalhuntingopportunitieson
other surface-feedinggranivorous birds (e.g., public lands (Petchenik1999).
Americangoldfinches[Carduelistristi]).Although
we believe such programshave potential,a long-
term decline in mourning dove populations Potentialproblems
(Dolton and Smith2000) representsa significant The programswe have suggestedcertainlyhave
area of concern. Thus,we would advocate a thor- potentialforrecruiting and retainingsporthunters
ough evaluationof how the widespreadimplemen- nearurbancenters.However,we realizetheypres-
tationof such programsmayaffectmourningdove ent potentialproblemsas well. In fact,these pro-
populationsat both local and regionalscales. gramscould providenew managementchallenges
Put-and-take huntingprogramson public lands to resource agencies. For example,animal-rights
near urban areas representa second option for groups could challengethe validityof such pro-
recruiting and retaining
urbanhunters(Lobdelland grams,claimingtheypromoterecreationalkilling.
Giles 1972). If such programsare to be effective, Similarly,
some resourceprofessionals mayobjectto
however,theymusthave clearlydefinedgoals,be such programson moralgroundsor because they
implementedon specificpublic landsnear popula- believe that resource management,rather than
tions centers,and be designed to maximize the recreation, shouldbe theagency'sprimary concern.

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 572 WildlifeSocietyBulletin 2003, 31(2):565-573

Such concernsmaybe valid,but ifsporthunting hunterswho can pass alongthe social benefitsand
is to be preserved,extensivedialogueamongnatu- camaraderiethat are fundamentalto the hunting
ral resource professionalswill be needed in the experienceis a valuableasset to such programs.
immediatefuture. A thoroughexplorationof all
concernsand viewpointswill be essentialto these Acknowledgments. We wish to thank R. D.
discussions and any resultingrecommendations. Applegate andJ.A.Tantilloforconstructive reviews
As a potential forum for such dialogue, The of this manuscript.
WildlifeSociety (TWS) has ConservationPolicy
Statementson shooting preserves and hunting Literature cited
(http://www.-wildlife.org/policy/index.cfm?tname ADAMS, AND J.L. COOKE. 2000. A place to hunt:
C. E., N.WILKINS,
=policystatements). We propose thatthese policy organizational changesin recreational hunting,usingTexasas
statements be re-evaluated,giventhecurrenttrends a case study.WildlifeSocietyBulletin28:788-796.
in hunterparticipationand given that the policy ALLEN, D. L. 1954. Our wildlifelegacy.FunkandWagnalls,New
statementswere established in the 1970s (and York, New York,USA.
BASKETT,R.K. 1993. Shootingfieldmanagement.Pages 495-506
recentlyreviewedin September2002 by theTWS in T.S. Baskett,M.W Sayre,R. E.Tomlinson, and R. E. Mirarchi,
Council). We believethe currentre-examination of editors. Ecology and managementof the mourningdove.
thepolicystatements is an excellentopportunity to StackpoleBooks,Harrisburg, Pennsylvania,USA.
begin a serious dialogue about the currentand BELANGER,D. O., AND A. KINNANE. DATE? ManagingAmerican
future role of recreational hunting in natural- wildlife:a historyoftheInternational AssociationofFishand
WildlifeAgencies. Montrose,Rockville,Maryland, USA.
resourcemanagement.Furthermore, we hope such BRowN,T. L.,D.J.DECKER,W E SIEMER,ANDJ.W ENCK. 2000. Trends
discussions would produce a series of possible in huntingparticipation and implicationsformanagementof
solutionsto the problemof declininghunterpar- game species. Pages 145-154 inW C. Gartnerand D.W Lime,
ticipation. editors. Trendsin outdoorrecreation,leisureand tourism.
The proposedprogramsalso raisemonetarycon- CABI,Wallingford, UnitedKingdom.
COKINOS, C. 2000. Hope is the thingwithfeathers:a personal
cerns. Cost estimatesfromcurrentstate-agency chronicleof vanishedbirds.JeremyP Tarcher/Putnam, New
put-and-takeprograms range from $6-14 per York,New York,USA.
released bird (T. Musser,Illinois Departmentof CORDELL, H. K.,ANDC.J.BETZ.2000. Trendsin outdoorrecreation
NaturalResources;C. F Rieger,PennsylvaniaGame supplyon publicand privatelandsin theUS. Pages 75-89 in
Commission;D. Risley,Ohio DivisionofWildlife;K. W C. Gartnerand D.W Lime,editors.Trendsin outdoorrecre-
ation, leisure and tourism. CABI, Wallingford,United
Warnke, Wisconsin Department of Natural Kingdom.
Resources,personalcommunication).In thesedays CORDELL, H. K.,AND G. R. SUPER. 2000. Trendsin Americans'out-
oftightand oftenshrinking budgets,such programs door recreation.Pages 133-144 in W C. Gartnerand D. W
could be perceivedas a waste ofpreciousresource- Lime, editors. Trends in outdoor recreation,leisure and
agencydollars. Furthermore, theirimplementation tourism.CABI,Wallingford, UnitedKingdom.
DOLTON, D. D.,AND G.W SMITH. 2000. Mourningdove breeding
is not a legitimateuse of Federal Aid in Wildlife population status,2000. United States Fish and Wildlife
Restorationdollars. Activitiesineligibleunderthis Service,Laurel,Maryland, USA.
programinclude"Stockingof game animalsforthe DUDA,M. D., S.J.BISSELL,AND K. C.YOUNG. 1998. Wildlifeand the
purposes of providing hunting of the animals Americanmind:public opinionon and attitudestowardfish
stockedwithoutobjectivesforrestoration or estab- and wildlife management. Responsive Management,
Harrisonburg, Virginia,USA.
lishmentof self-sustaining populations"(Federal GUTHERY,F S. 2002. The technologyof bobwhitemanagement:
AidToolkit,521 FW 1.8 (F)). Consideringthe cur- the theorybehindthe practice. Iowa State,Ames,USA.
rentclimate,in which resourceagencies are evolv- KORSCHGEN, L. J. 1958. Food habitsof the mourningdove in
ing and new areas and issues (e.g., holistic,ecosys- Missouri.JournalofWildlifeManagement22:9-16.
tem-levelmanagementapproaches,threatenedand KUHN,T. S. 1996. The structureof scientificrevolutions.Third
Edition.University of Chicago,Chicago,Illinois,USA.
endangeredspecies management)are competing LEOPOLDA. 1931. Reporton a game surveyof thenorth
central
forlimitedfinancialresources,sources of financial states. Sporting Arms and AmmunitionManufacturers
supportforsuch programsare problematic. Institute, DemocratPrinting, Madison,Wisconsin,USA.
Some will argue that put-and-take bird-huntingLEOPOLDA. 1933. Game management.University ofWisconsin,
programswill just provideeasier opportunitiesfor Madison,USA.
LEwIsJ.C. 1993. Foods and feedingand ecology.Pages 181-204
existinghunters.However,a majorcomponentof in T S. Baskett,M.W Sayre,R. E.Tomlinson, and R. E. Mirarchi,
thehuntingexperienceis itssocial interactions and editors. Ecology and managementof the mourningdove.
rituals.The presenceofestablished, knowledgeable StackpoleBooks,Harrisburg, Pennsylvania,
USA.

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
 InMyOpinion* Schulzet al. 573

LOBDELL, C. H.,ANDR.H. GiLEsJR.1972. A model fordetermining

least-cost quail stocking programs. Pages 361-366 in
4AIIiancl
Morrison, J.A., and J.C. Lewis,editors. Proceedingsof the
firstnationalbobwhite quail symposium. Oklahoma State
University, USA.
Stillwater,
ORTEGA Y GAssET, J. 1985. Meditationson hunting. Scribner's,
New York,New York,USA.
PETCHENIK, J. 1999. Pheasanthuntingin Wisconsin:a surveyof
currentand formerpheasanthunters. Unpublishedreport,
Bureau of Integrated Science Services, Department of
NaturalResources,Madison,Wisconsin,USA.
RILEY,T. Z., AND J.H. SCHULZ.2001. Predationand ring-necked
pheasantpopulationdynamics.WildlifeSocietyBulletin29:
33-38.
ROSEBERRY,J.L., AND W D. KuMsTRA. 1984. Populationecology of
the bobwhite. SouthernIllinoisUniversity, Carbondale,USA.
SCHMIDT, J.L. 1978. Earlymanagement:intentionaland other-
wise. Pages 257-270 in J.L.Schmidtand D. L.Gilbert,editors.
Big game of North America: ecology and management.
StackpoleBooks,Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA.
TRIPPENSEE,R. E. 1948. Wildlifemanagement: upland game and
generalprinciples. McGraw-HillBook Company,New York,
New York,USA.
UNITEDSTATES DEPARTMENT OF INTERIOR,
FISHANDWILDLIFE SERVICE,
ANDUNITEDSTATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, BUREAU OFTHE
CENSUS.1997. 1996 NationalSurveyofFishing,Hunting, and
Wildlife-Associated Recreation.WashingtonD.C., USA.
WARNER R. E. 1988. Habitatmanagement:how well do we rec-
ognize the pheasant factsof life? Pages 129-146 in D. L.
Hallett,W R. Edwards,and G. V Burger,editors. Pheasants:
symptomsof wildlifeproblemson agricultural lands. North
Central Section of The Wildlife Society. Bloomington,
Indiana,USA.
WEDDELL, B.J. 2002. Conservinglivingnaturalresourcesin the
context of a changing world. Cambridge University, of theMissouri PA'S Chapter, oftheTWS
and president-elect
Cambridge,UnitedKingdom. NorthCentralSection.JoshuaI. (josh)Milispaughis an assis-
WITT, PA.,AND J.L. CROMPTON.2000. Trendsin the development
tantprofessorof conservation
wildlife at the University of
Missouri(MU). Priorto joiningtheMU faculty, josh was a
of recreationservicesforyouthat risk. Page 393-402 in W researcherin the School of Fisheriesat the
postdoctoral
C. Gartnerand D. W Lime,editors.Trendsin outdoorrecre- University of Washington (UW). He receivedhis Ph.D. in
ation, leisure and tourism. CABI, Wallingford,United wildlife sciencefrom theUW,hisM.S.from SouthDakotaState
Kingdom. and his B.S.fromSUNY Collegeof Environmental
University,
(SUNY-ESF).His research
Scienceand Forestry focuseson the
designand analysisof radiotracking studies,large-mammal
Address for John H. Schulz: Missouri Departmentof ecologyand management, and therefinement and application
Conservation, ConservationResearchCenter,1110 South ofnon-invasive hormone assaysinwildlifeconservation.Brian
College Avenue, Columbia, MO 65201, USA; e-mail: E. Washburnis a researchbiologistwith USDA, Wildlife
schulj@mdc.state.mo.us.AddressforJoshuaJ.Millspaughand Services, NationalWildlifeResearch Center,Ohio FieldStation
BrianE. Washburn:Department of Fisheriesand Wildlife inSandusky. Brianwasa postdoctoral
Previously, Fellowinthe
Sciences, Universityof Missouri,302 ABNR Building, Department of Fisheriesand WildlifeSciencesat MU. He
Columbia,MO 65211, USA; presentaddressforWashburn: receivedhis B.S. fromSUNY-ESF, his M.S. fromPennsylvania
USDA/APHIS/VVS/NWRC, 6100 ColumbusAvenue,Sandusky, StateUniversity, and hisPh.D.from theUniversity ofKentucky.
OH 44870, USA. Addressfor Daniel T. Zekor:Missouri His research includewildlife
interests nutrition
and physiology,
Department ofConservation, City,
P.O. Box 180,Jefferson MO restoration ofnativeecosystems, andforest andgrassland habi-
65102-0180, USA. tatmanagement. DanielT.(Dan) Zekoristhefederal aid coor-
dinatorfortheMissouriDepartment of Conservationand has
workedextensivelyin strategicplanning and policydevelop-
JohnH. Schulz(photo)is resourcescientistforthe Missouri ment.Dan receivedhisB.S.and M.S. in wildlife biologyand
Department of Conservation.Atone time,Johnwas an avid managementfromthe Universityof Wisconsin-StevenPoint.
hunterand angler. Due to his modernurbanand hectic He is also a member oftheOrganization ofWildlifePlanners
however,
lifestyle, he now spendsmuchof hisfreetimedis- andthecurrent presidentoftheMissouri Chapter ofTWS.
tancerunning and trainingformarathons.The photoshows
Johnfinishing his 10th,the inaugural2002 Des Moines
marathon.Johnreceivedhis B.S. and M.A. in biologyfrom
Minnesota StateUniversity
(formerlyMankatoStateUniversity).
He is a member ofTheWildlifeSociety(TWS),a pastpresident

This content downloaded from 128.206.252.59 on Mon, 31 Mar 2014 13:16:31 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
View publication stats