Wisconsin's Wildlife Constituency Study: A SummaryCooperative Extension Service, University of Wisconsin--Extension, 1989 - Wildlife conservation - 14 pages |
Common terms and phrases
72 percent addition Amenities amount animals Approximately one-third beauty birds comparatively constituency groups consumptive and dual consumptive and nonconsumptive consumptive users consumptive wildlife contrast Development dual group dual user group Education Levels Education Programs Entire equipment expected facilities field forests funding Given Greatest highest homes hunting important included income interest Involving Land Development less levels of education Limiting Factors LIST Location Madison majority male management issue Memorial Library University Ninety Non-users nonconsumptive activities Nonconsumptive Wildlife Activities observation Participation in Nonconsumptive possible practiced preferred preserves Priorities public lands pure consumptive pure consumptive group pure consumptive users pure nonconsumptive group pure nonconsumptive users rated reasons for participation recent relatively Residence Resources Results rural areas sample Satisfaction selected signs small groups Summary third undeveloped urban users Figure users were asked volunteer WILDLIFE CONSTITUENCY STUDY wildlife lands Wildlife Management wildlife recreations Wisconsin younger