1. By: James Crain, Iowa State University Rebecca Christoffel, Iowa State University Peter Fritzell Jr., Iowa Department of Natural Resources Chris Jennelle, Iowa Department of Natural Resources http://fieldsbayoutfitters.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/fbo-posted.jpg

2. Objectives:  Identify the condition of hunter- landowner relations in Iowa  Identify hunter opinions of: ○ private landowners ○ themselves ○ other hunters  Determine if a need exists for supplemental education to enhance relationship building

3. Background  Declines in Hunter Numbers Noticeable throughout the United States  Wildlife Agencies Depend on funds License Sales Excise Taxes Hunters contribute more per capita to wildlife conservation than non-hunters and general public Less effective wildlife management  Declines have prompted research on Hunter Recruitment and Retention (HRR)

4. Why Less Hunters?  Determined by many influences: lack of time, family responsibilities, work, lack of places to hunt, etc.  Lack of accessible hunting land is one influence that wildlife agencies have focused on  Walk-in Hunting programs  Programs vary by state Size Type of land Benefits to landowners Hunter Requirements  IHAP launched in 2011 Stipulation -Do more to address hunter behavior www.iowadnr.gov

5. What About Private Land?  A USFWS study reported that 82% of hunters hunt on private land, at one time or another  Private landowners have become more reluctant to allow hunting Many diverse reasons  Landowners more concerned with hunting on their property than any other recreational activity  5 major reasons for not allowing access Opinions about users User intentions Financial Incentives Landowner Attitudes about activities Liability

6. Iowa  Number of hunters have steadily decreased over the last decade  As of 2010, Iowa ranked 49 th out of 50 states for land open to public hunting  Hunters in Iowa depend on preferred private land access.  In 2004, an IDNR study showed that 37% of respondents lost access to private property previously hunted 37% lost hunting days as a result  Private landowners typically grant access to people they know best; friends and family  Prior studies indicate that a need exists for relationship building for hunters and landowners. Improvements in relations may help to improve HHR

7. Methods  Mail Survey (2-sections) Likert Scales and Open Ended Questions Cognitive Interviews  Modified Dillman Tailored Design Method June – August 2014 Two Mailings, Reminder Card  2 Samples Stratified Random Sample of Iowa Resident Hunters ○ Further stratified by region (9) and type of hunting performed in 2013. Known population of Iowa Habitat and Access Program Hunters  Abby Flexicapture, IBM SPSS Statistics v.22

8. Hunters were asked about… Hunter Opinions of ○ Other Hunters ○ Themselves ○ Private Landowners Their Hunting Behaviors ○ Acquiring Access ○ Communication Overall Relationships Need for DNR Supplemental Education http://wolftracker.ca/wp/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/farmer-shake-hands.jpg

9. Results Results without strata and mailing weights 1833 respondents, n = 5327 ○ 34% response rate ○ Over 14,000 pages of data 47% of hunters indicated they had lost access to private land they hunted in the past. ○ Sale of land ○ Family began hunting ○ Landowner leased hunting rights

10. Private Property Access

11. Over the past 5 years…

12. Private Landowner Contacts

13. Hunter Opinions of Landowner Perceptions

14. Healthy Relationship  Evaluation of hunter experiences while attempting to gain access on private land in Iowa  Hunters were asked to evaluate: Their own behavior Their experience with private landowners  Group of questions that resemble what a healthy LO and hunter relationship requires  6 components to a healthy relationship Listening Positive Attitude Compromise Forthcoming with expectations Appreciation Offering to work for access  Hunters rated each component of a healthy relationship on a scale (1-7)

15. Relationship Questions Landowner Component QuestionsHunter Component Questions Private landowners carefully listen to me. I carefully listen to private landowners’ directions and concerns. Private landowners address me in a positive manner. I approach private landowners in a positive manner. Private landowners are forthcoming with expectations / rules for hunting their property. I follow the rules established by private landowners. Private landowners are willing to make compromises. I am willing to compromise with private landowners in order to obtain hunting access. Private landowners appreciate my asking permission before hunting. I appreciate private landowners’ willingness to allow me to hunt. Private landowners will allow me to hunt if I offer to do chores. I offer to do chores in exchange for hunting access.

16. Hunter – Landowner Relationship Score Comparison

17. Hunter Behavior – Landowner Visits

18. Hunter Behavior - Tenure

19. Hunter Behavior – Time of Acquiring Access

20. Hunter Behavior – Check-in Frequency

21. Communication

22. Overall Relationship

23. Hunter Behavior Correlations

25. DNR Education Program

26. Take-Home Messages  Iowa hunters generally have positive relationships with private landowners  Iowa Hunters put effort into obtaining PL access  Room For Improvement?  Support for supplemental education program http://www.hunter-ed.com/alaska/studyGuide/The-Hunters-Image- Matters/201001_700049376

27. What’s Next  Strata weighting Regional Analysis  Quantitative study to elicit opinions of private landowners in Iowa  Develop a possible education module and present to IDNR http://kdwpt.state.ks.us/var/news/storage/images/kdwpt-info/news/weekly- news/11-28-13/landowner-permission-a-must-when-hunting-private- land/257671-1-eng-US/LANDOWNER-PERMISSION-A-MUST-WHEN- HUNTING-PRIVATE-LAND_frontimagecrop.jpg

28. http://caryschmidt.com/2009/07/top-15-questions-christian-teens-ask/

29. Acknowledgements  A special thank you to Rebecca Christoffel, Peter Fritzell, and Chris Jennelle for their guidance and expertise.  This project is co-funded by the Iowa DNR and Iowa State University.  Thank you to all respondents for their time and willingness to participate in this study.