1. Investigating Cohort Effects on Deer Hunter Participation in Michigan and Wisconsin Richelle Winkler & Chris Henderson Dept of Social Sciences/Environmental & Energy Policy Grad Program Michigan Tech University

3. Sources: US Fish and Wildlife Service Hunting License Reports, US Census Bureau

5. Common Explanations Time demands Land conversion/accessibility Alternative activities Urbanization Fewer animals Changing social support/counter-movement, etc. Policy Change Population Aging Cohort Theory

8. Research Questions 1.To what extent are cohort effects driving hunter participation? 2.How does this vary across space, by sex, by species hunted? 3.What are the implications for future hunting numbers and the North American Model? 4.How can we explain cohort effects?

9. Age-Period-Cohort Models Age Physical ability Life course Period Change over time Socioeconomic Environmental Policy Cohort Generations with different experiences Sociocultural Theoretically Distinct Age Physical ability Life course Period Change over time Socioeconomic Environmental Policy Cohort Generations with different experiences Sociocultural …But Empirically Blurred?

10. Data & Analysis 1.State license records by single year age, sex, residence Not by race/ethnicity 2.General population estimates and projections (US Census Bureau) 3.APC Analysis using Intrinsic Estimator (IE) approach in Stata (Yang et al. 2008)

17. In Summary/Future Questions Growing body of research suggesting cohort effects are key. We need to design research and planning strategies that consider this approach. Michigan and Wisconsin very similar-- effects of policy, env? Models predict exacerbated decline to come – lasting social change away from hunting? – Serious implications for North American model Could be spatial variation, sex, race… Important to understand WHY cohort effects? Anglers too? Small game? Etc.

18. Potential for Spatial Variation

19. Rates highest in rural areas, especially northwest.

20. Middle-aged decline greatest in east. Most Drop-out (2004-2009): Forest (-19%) Vilas (-18%) Juneau (-16%) Florence (-14%) Oneida (-14%)