Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri
ABSTRACT Antler point restrictions (APR), intended to create an older male age structure of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), have been implemented in many states, but effects of APR on hunters’ satisfaction and activities often have not been measured. During 2004–2008, we conducted mail s...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2018-12-01
|
| Series: | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.919 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1846120020490321920 |
|---|---|
| author | Lonnie P. Hansen Jason A. Sumners Ron Reitz Yuanyuan Bian Xiaoming Gao Joshua J. Millspaugh |
| author_facet | Lonnie P. Hansen Jason A. Sumners Ron Reitz Yuanyuan Bian Xiaoming Gao Joshua J. Millspaugh |
| author_sort | Lonnie P. Hansen |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | ABSTRACT Antler point restrictions (APR), intended to create an older male age structure of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), have been implemented in many states, but effects of APR on hunters’ satisfaction and activities often have not been measured. During 2004–2008, we conducted mail surveys of firearms deer hunters in Missouri, USA, to measure effects of an APR on respondents including 1) perceptions of deer population trends and availability of large males; 2) satisfaction with the hunting experience and deer management; and 3) support of the APR. There was no effect of the APR on how respondents perceived deer population trends, but respondents hunting under the APR believed there were more large males in both central and northern Missouri. Respondents were less satisfied with their hunt and deer management in central Missouri areas under the APR during years when hunter success was reduced. There was no effect of the APR on how respondents rated their most recent deer season in the northern areas under the APR, although respondents there were less satisfied with deer management prior to implementation of the APR and for the first 2 years after implementation with no differences after that time. In all areas, generally >70% of respondents supported the APR; presence of the APR where a respondent hunted did not affect support of the APR. Respondents supporting the APR were more likely to have less deer hunting experience, hunt counties where harvest of antlered males was relatively greater, rate Missouri deer management as good or excellent, hunt private land during at least part of the season, and select for antlered males while hunting. An APR may be most appropriate where deer densities are moderate or large and harvest rates of antlered males are excessive. Use of APRs in areas with low‐density deer populations where harvest opportunity is low may not be popular with hunters. © 2018 The Wildlife Society. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-a749e4557b81437abf5d2878260c208d |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2328-5540 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2018-12-01 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Wildlife Society Bulletin |
| spelling | doaj-art-a749e4557b81437abf5d2878260c208d2024-12-16T13:40:50ZengWileyWildlife Society Bulletin2328-55402018-12-0142460761510.1002/wsb.919Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in MissouriLonnie P. Hansen0Jason A. Sumners1Ron Reitz2Yuanyuan Bian3Xiaoming Gao4Joshua J. Millspaugh5Missouri Department of Conservation3500 E Gans RoadColumbiaMO 65201USAMissouri Department of ConservationP.O. Box 180Jefferson CityMO 65102USAMissouri Department of Conservation3500 E Gans RoadColumbiaMO 65201USADepartment of Statistics, 307 Middlebush HallUniversity of MissouriColumbiaMO 65211USAMissouri Department of Conservation3500 E Gans RoadColumbiaMO 65201USADepartment of Fisheries and Wildlife SciencesUniversity of Missouri302 Natural ResourcesColumbiaMO 65211USAABSTRACT Antler point restrictions (APR), intended to create an older male age structure of white‐tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), have been implemented in many states, but effects of APR on hunters’ satisfaction and activities often have not been measured. During 2004–2008, we conducted mail surveys of firearms deer hunters in Missouri, USA, to measure effects of an APR on respondents including 1) perceptions of deer population trends and availability of large males; 2) satisfaction with the hunting experience and deer management; and 3) support of the APR. There was no effect of the APR on how respondents perceived deer population trends, but respondents hunting under the APR believed there were more large males in both central and northern Missouri. Respondents were less satisfied with their hunt and deer management in central Missouri areas under the APR during years when hunter success was reduced. There was no effect of the APR on how respondents rated their most recent deer season in the northern areas under the APR, although respondents there were less satisfied with deer management prior to implementation of the APR and for the first 2 years after implementation with no differences after that time. In all areas, generally >70% of respondents supported the APR; presence of the APR where a respondent hunted did not affect support of the APR. Respondents supporting the APR were more likely to have less deer hunting experience, hunt counties where harvest of antlered males was relatively greater, rate Missouri deer management as good or excellent, hunt private land during at least part of the season, and select for antlered males while hunting. An APR may be most appropriate where deer densities are moderate or large and harvest rates of antlered males are excessive. Use of APRs in areas with low‐density deer populations where harvest opportunity is low may not be popular with hunters. © 2018 The Wildlife Society.https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.919antler point restrictionfirearms deer hunterMissouriOdocoileus virginianusperceptionssatisfaction |
| spellingShingle | Lonnie P. Hansen Jason A. Sumners Ron Reitz Yuanyuan Bian Xiaoming Gao Joshua J. Millspaugh Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri Wildlife Society Bulletin antler point restriction firearms deer hunter Missouri Odocoileus virginianus perceptions satisfaction |
| title | Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri |
| title_full | Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri |
| title_fullStr | Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri |
| title_full_unstemmed | Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri |
| title_short | Effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in Missouri |
| title_sort | effects of an antler point restriction on deer hunter perceptions and satisfaction in missouri |
| topic | antler point restriction firearms deer hunter Missouri Odocoileus virginianus perceptions satisfaction |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.919 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT lonniephansen effectsofanantlerpointrestrictionondeerhunterperceptionsandsatisfactioninmissouri AT jasonasumners effectsofanantlerpointrestrictionondeerhunterperceptionsandsatisfactioninmissouri AT ronreitz effectsofanantlerpointrestrictionondeerhunterperceptionsandsatisfactioninmissouri AT yuanyuanbian effectsofanantlerpointrestrictionondeerhunterperceptionsandsatisfactioninmissouri AT xiaominggao effectsofanantlerpointrestrictionondeerhunterperceptionsandsatisfactioninmissouri AT joshuajmillspaugh effectsofanantlerpointrestrictionondeerhunterperceptionsandsatisfactioninmissouri |