Nonconsumptive Use of Wildlife

1
Non-consumptive Use of Wildlife
2
Non-consumptive Use

• Any non-hunting or non extractive use
• Examples
• Wildlife feeding
• Bird watching
• Whale watching

3
Source of Information

• Based on USFWSs series of National Surveys of
  Fishing, Hunting and Wildlife-Associated
  Recreation
• Funded by the 1937 Federal Aid in Wildlife
  Restoration Act
• Website www.fa.r9.fws.gov/surveys/surveys.html

4
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• No. of Americans that fish increased by 17
• No. of Americans that hunted decreased by 8
• This decrease occurred in the early 1990s after
  being stable during the 1980s.

5
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Hunting participation rates
• 1980- 9
• 1985- 8
• 1990- 8
• 1995- 7

6
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Hunting participation rates higher than national
  average for
• Males
• Whites
• Ruralites
• 16-44 year olds
• People with above median income

7
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Wildlife watching (feeding, observing or
  photographing)
• While on trips at least one mile from home
  increased 63!
• While around the home declined by 15
• (this is the single largest wildlife-watching
  activity!)

8
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Wildlife watching (feeding, observing or
  photographing)
• The number of residential wildlife observers has
  nearly doubled from 1980-1995.

9
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Wildlife watching (feeding, observing or
  photographing)--Regional attributes
• For comparison
• Midwestern states number of households that
  hunted increased by 3
• Northeastern states largest percentage decline
  in hunting 18
• The South had the largest increase in fishing 21

10
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Wildlife watching (feeding, observing or
  photographing)--Regional attributes
• The South had the largest increase in the number
  of residents who went on trips for the primary
  purpose of feeding, photographing or observing
  wildlife 81!

11
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Wildlife watching (feeding, observing or
  photographing)--Regional attributes
• No region had a decline in nonresidential
  wildlife-watching.
• All regions saw an increase in the number of
  people who closely observed or tried to identify
  wildlife around their home.

12
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Nonresidential wildlife watching change,
  1980-1995.
• Number of households that took trips at least one
  mile away from home to observe, photograph or
  feed wildlife increased 63.
• Each region increased at least 52 South 81
• Number of females participating increased 66

13
Some Nation-wide Trends, 1980-1995

• Nonresidential wildlife watching change,
  1980-1995.
• Number of males participating increased 60.
• Urban and rural populations had similar increases
  in participation (65 rural, 62 urban)
• 18-24 year old group only group that had a
  decrease in participation

14

• Wildlife watching equipment and related items
• Binoculars, scopes 636 million
• Cameras, video equip.,etc 1.7 billion
• Film developing 1.1 billion
• Packaged wild bird food 2.1 billion
• Bulk bird food 604 million
• Feed for other wildlife 457 million
• Nest boxes, bird houses, baths 832 million
• Other wildlife watching stuff 167 million
• Day packs, special clothing 553 million
• TOTAL 8.3 billion

15
National Impacts of Wildlife Watching 1996
Participation 62.9 million people Total
expenditures 29.2 billion Employment 1,010,59
0 jobs Employment Income 24.2 billion
In 1996, 77 million people participated in
hunting, fishing, and wildlife watching By
comparison, 73.8 million attended all major
league baseball football games.
16
National Impacts of Wildlife Watching 1996 By
Selected State
California 2.1 billion Florida 1.3
billion Texas 1.1 billion Alaska
728 million Oregon 407
million Indiana 264 million Montana 212
million Idaho 120 million