Transcript The Animal Welfare Challenge to Hunting At Cape Cod National

The Animal Welfare Challenge to
Hunting At Cape Cod National Seashore:
Social Psychology and Resource Management
Walter F. Kuentzel
Rubenstein School of Environment and
Natural Resources
University of Vermont
Pro-Hunting/Anti-Hunting
Controversy
What’s All the Fuss?
• 1961 Enabling Legislation Permitted Hunting
• Not Many Hunters (~2000)
• Perhaps 100-200
• Low Profile
• Poor Habitat
Poor Habitat
The Legal Challenge
2003 - Fund for Animals, Humane Society of US, Area Residents
http://dep.state.ct.us/burnatr/wildlife/factshts/pheasant.htm
Stopped the Pheasant Hunt
Conditions
Changed
2002
- Fund Have
for Animals
Ordered an EIS - All Hunting Programs
How Does Social Psychology Help?
• Attitude Theory
• Social Cognition
– Social Identity Theory
Attitudes, Behavior, and
the “Educate-the-Public” Myth
White Pine
Birch
Educate the Public?
•
•
•
•
Attitude Structure
Attitude Strength
Salience
Polarization
Polling Culture?
• Justify Decisions
– Opposition/Support
– Avoid Lawsuits
– Social Acceptability
•Participatory Democracy
– Identify Stakeholders
– Facilitate Discourse
– Consensus Building
Recreation Conflict
Goal Interference
• Activity Style
• Resource Specificity
• Mode of Experience
• Tolerance for Lifestyle
Diversity
Social Values Conflict
Face-to-Face contact not
necessary for perceived
conflict
How do we know when people are different?
and
How do we know when those differences matter?
Social Identity Theory
1) Positive In-Group; Negative Out-Group Attributions
2) Variation in Willingness to Attribute Differences
3) Self-Identity and Group Membership
Hunting Attitudes
Group Identification
Onsite Conflict
• Hunter Survey
– Field
– License
– Volunteer
• Resident Survey
– 6 Cape Towns
– Seashore Property
Mailed Questionnaire
August – Sept., 2005
5-Contact Protocol
Hunter – 60.4% (n=413)
Resident – 57.9% (n=754)
Pro-Hunting/Anti-Hunting Scale
8 Pro-Hunting Statements – 8 Anti-Hunting Statements
(Adapted from Wood, 1997)
Examples:
Examples: Anti-Hunting
Pro-Hunting
•• Hunting
an important
wildlife
management
tool society
Hunting is
encourages
a culture
of violence
in today’s
•• Hunting
supported,
because
it isand
an cripple
important
Hunting should
is cruel,bebecause
hunters
wound
tootradition
many in
American
animals culture
Additive Index from -32 to +32
Attitudes About Hunting
Residents
Hunters
30
# of People
25
20
15
10
5
0
-32 -27 -20 -14 -8
-2
4
-1.09
Mean = 21.02
10
16
22
28
Social Identity Scale
5 Semantic Differential Scales
Quiet-Loud
Safe-Unsafe
Humble-Arrogant
Courteous-Discourteous
Friendly-Unfriendly
Sum the Differences – Average – 0 to 96
Importance of Group Differences
Residents
Hunters
# of People
30
20
25
15
20
15
10
10
5
5
0
0
20
40
Mean = 39.1
38.3
60
80
Onsite Conflict
Hunters:
I have been harassed by people who were not hunting
at the Seashore.
Residents:
I have felt unsafe seeing people hunting in the Seashore.
I have felt unsafe hearing shots from people hunting at
the Seashore.
4-Point Scale:
1) No, not at all
2) No, not much
3) Yes, somewhat
4) Yes, definitely
Hunter Harassment
How were you harassed? (n=323, 46.5%)
94 – Verbal abuse
15 – Noise (car horns, whistles, loud music
42 – Field protests
5 – Obscene gestures
6 – Called the authorities
7 – other (frightening dogs, scratching vehicles
Hunter Harassment
What did you do about it?
44 – Ignored them, went about my business
61 – Moved away, continued my hunt
14 – Talked with the people
7 – Contacted Seashore officials
14 – Left the Seashore
6 - Other
Hunter Arguments
What was the argument about? (n=47, 13.4%)
16 – Anti-hunting
2 – Pheasants
7 – Hunters and safety
2 – Conflicting activities
15 – Miscellaneous hunting issues
5 – Not specified
Residents Who Felt Unsafe
Around Hunters
What did you do about it? (n=232, 33.6%)
60 – I did nothing
16 – Contacted Seashore officials
14 – Wore blaze orange
49 – Moved away from hunters
56 – Left the Seashore
5 – Asked hunters to move
23 - Other
Residents Who Felt Unsafe
Hearing Shots
What did you do about it? (n=236, 35.6%)
78 – I did nothing
12 – Contacted Seashore officials
7 – Wore blaze orange
42 – Moved away from hunters
54 – Left the Seashore
5 – Asked hunter to move
28 - Other
Onsite Conflict Model
Pro-Hunting/Anti-Hunting
(Attitudes)
Onsite Conflict
Group Formation
(Social Identity)
Siege Mentality vs.
the Dirty Bastard Spiral
Hunters - Siege Mentality
Social Identity – Harassment – Polarization
Importance of Group Differences
Hunters
# of People
30
20
25
15
20
15
10
10
5
5
0
-32
0 -27 -20
20 -14 -840 -2
4 6010
Mean
Mean== 21.02
38.3
16 80
22
28
Siege Mentality vs.
the Dirty Bastard Spiral
Residents – Dirty Bastard Spiral
Anti-Hunting Attitudes – Fear – Social Identity
Attitudes About Hunting
Residents
Residents
of People
People
## of
30
30
25
25
20
20
15
15
10
10
55
00
-32
0 -27 -20
20 -14 -840 -2
4 6010
Mean == -1.09
39.1
Mean
16 80
22
28
Norms and Onsite Conflict
Norms and Cape Cod Hunting
Acceptability
2
Very Acceptable
0
Very Unacceptable
-2
1
3
5
7
9
11
15
25
Number of Hunters Seen
Hunters
Residents
Visitors
35
Norms and Cape Cod Hunting
Acceptability
2
Very Acceptable
0
-2
Very Unacceptable
1
3
6
10
15
21
30
45
Number of Shots Heard
Hunters
Residents
Visitors
60
Predicting Behavior?