A new survey of public opinion done for the Game and Fish and Boat Commission in 2014 shows managing and conserving threatened and endangered species and providing opportunities for fishing were the top two functions of the Commissions supported by 92 percent of those surveyed.

The function with the greatest percentage of respondents describing it as very important is managing and conserving threatened and endangered species-- 75 percent rated it as such.

A large majority of respondents-- 87 percent-- also rated managing and conserving nongame wildlife as important, with 62 percent rating it very important.

In fact, the percentage of Pennsylvanians in 2014 who considered managing and conserving nongame wildlife to be very important represents a 14 percentage point increase over the 49 percent of respondents who gave the same response in 1996.

Background

Often accounting for the vast majority of all wildlife in a state, species that are not hunted, fished, or trapped, i.e., nongame species, add critical diversity to overall fish and wildlife populations and ecosystems.

As the health of all species and their habitats is inextricably tied to the sustainability of the overall environment, many state agencies over the past several decades have acknowledged the importance of nongame species by establishing dedicated wildlife diversity programs for their benefit.

Such management proceeds from the understanding that while game species may enjoy a higher-profile status among many residents, nongame species remain equally important to wildlife diversity as a whole. 

This study was conducted by Responsive Management for the Game Commission, in collaboration with the Fish and Boat Commission (both of which are tasked with the management of Pennsylvania's nongame species), and was supported by State & Tribal Wildlife Grants Program funds.

Responsive Management examined state residents' opinions on and attitudes toward nongame wildlife, activities and priorities of the Commissions, and funding for the Commissions.

The 2014 survey used in this study partially replicated a 1996 study conducted by Responsive Management, thus allowing evaluation of trends in residents' opinions between the two studies.

Further, while it was important to know how Pennsylvania residents as a whole felt about wildlife management in the state, the study was also intended to provide lawmakers and decision-makers across the state with data specific to their constituents.

For this reason, the 2014 survey was conducted by Congressional District, resulting in statistically valid results for each of Pennsylvania's 18 Congressional Districts. 

Overall, the study found that fish and wildlife management and conservation is important to the residents of Pennsylvania, including management and conservation of all species.

Such species include mammals, amphibians, reptiles, fish, and birds, many of which are visible to Pennsylvania residents near and around their homes every day.  The 2005 Pennsylvania Wildlife Action Plan produced by the two Commissions notes that nongame species account for 75 percent of the state's fish and wildlife.

In general, the study results reinforce the impression that while Pennsylvania residents may distinguish between various categories of species, wildlife as a whole remains highly important to most people.

Summary Of Results

The overwhelming majority of Pennsylvanians think that managing and conserving both threatened and endangered species and nongame species is important.

The survey asked respondents to rate the importance of five functions of the Commissions, and the top two items, according to the percentage of respondents who said the function is either very or somewhat important are managing and conserving threatened and endangered species and providing opportunities for fishing-- a total of 92 percent described each item as important.

The function with the greatest percentage of respondents describing it as very important is managing and conserving threatened and endangered species-- 75 percent rated it as such.

A large majority of respondents-- 87 percent-- also rated managing and conserving nongame wildlife as important, with 62 percent rating it very important.

In fact, the percentage of Pennsylvanians in 2014 who considered managing and conserving nongame wildlife to be very important represents a 14-percentage-point increase over the 49 percent of respondents who gave the same response in 1996.

In addition to the major functions of the Commissions, respondents were asked to rate the importance of a larger list of more specific Commission activities. The two highest-ranked Commission activities in importance are addressing wildlife diseases-- 96 percent of Pennsylvanians said this is important, with 80 percent saying it is very important and enforcing wildlife laws-- a total of 96 percent of respondents rated this as important, including 79 percent who indicated it is very important.

In the ranking by the percentage of respondents who rated the items as very or somewhat important, four more activities had at least two-thirds of respondents saying they are very important: restoring and improving habitat, addressing invasive species, conservation actions for nongame species at risk, and educating the public about nongame wildlife.    

Most of the top-ranked activities above can be directly associated with at least one of the four main areas addressed by Pennsylvania's State Wildlife Action Plan: Species of Greatest Conservation Need, habitat condition where those species live, threats to species and habitats, and conservation actions to lessen those threats.

Although the majority of residents are not currently aware of the plan--which is a proactive plan to keep species from becoming threatened or endangered--the Commission activities they rated as greatest in importance align with the goals and values of the plan.

These results, as well as many of the results of this study, are currently being used by the Game Commission and Fish and Boat Commission to update the State Wildlife Action Plan.    

In the survey, respondents were also asked whether more, the same, or less effort should be directed to managing and conserving four types of nongame wildlife: birds, small mammals, reptiles/amphibians, and fish.

Although the most common response for three of the four types of wildlife was the same, the percentage saying that more effort should be directed to management and conservation exceeded the percentage saying less for each type of wildlife.

In comparing the four types of wildlife, the most concern is for birds: 37 percent want more effort directed to managing and conserving this category of wildlife.

Funding Options

Another important objective of the 2014 Responsive Management study was to examine support for nongame funding options. On this topic, it is useful to note differences in the funding traditionally available for game and nongame species.

While funding for management of the former typically comes from such reliable mechanisms as license fees from hunters and anglers and excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment, many agencies rely on direct donations from residents or other voluntary contributions, e.g., tax check-offs or license plate purchases) to provide non-federal funding for nongame conservation efforts.

In the survey, respondents were asked about ten potential funding sources for nongame wildlife conservation. All funding sources on the list except one have a majority of Pennsylvanians in support.

The funding source with more than half of respondents strongly supporting it is a collector's conservation stamp: 55 percent strongly support this potential funding source, overall support for it, including moderate support, is at 81 percent.

Other top ranked funding sources include funds from fishing license fees, a small percentage of revenue from gaming, funds from hunting license fees, a fee on the consumptive use and degradation of water used for industrial purposes, and a tax on energy development activities.

A copy of the survey is available online.

1/26/2015