Wildlife and the Illinois public: a benchmark study of altitudes and perceptions

Natural resource management agencies are increasingly challenged to involve the public in issues pertaining to wildlife management. However, there has been little systematic attempt to describe the perceptions, knowledge, and altitudes of the general public regarding using and managing wildlife. We conducted a benchmark study during June-July, 1996, of selected attitudes, perceptions, and knowledge of Illinois residents relative to wildlife and r elated issues and compared these factors for residents in the northeast met ropolitan region (metro) and the rest of Illinois (nonmetro). We considered these findings in the context of emerging knowledge regarding public perce ptions of wildlife. A high percentage of residents believed that wild anima ls add value to their lives and that conservation education should be a pri ority. There was extensive participation in non-consumptive forms of wildli fe recreation and minimal involvement in hunting and trapping. In fact, a m inority of residents supported hunting for sport alone, and only a nominal majority supported hunting to provide economic development, food, or to pre vent the overabundance of selected species. Three interrelated factors (pla ce of residence, generation, and gender) in part portray differences in wil dlife-related knowledge and attitudes of Illinois residents. Place of resid ence suggests differences in the populations of the northeastern metropolit an region (metro) and those of the smaller cities and more rural regions of Illinois (nonmetro). Compared to nonmetro, metro residents have fewer dire ct encounters with wildlife, including participation in wildlife recreation , and fewer wild animal problems such as collisions, crop damage, etc. The metro population is less supportive of hunting and hunting-related revenues that benefit wildlife conservation, more likely to attribute imperiled spe cies to overexploitation than to habitat destruction, and more likely to va lue wildlife similar to the way they value pets or people. The generational factor indicates that the younger portion of the population, the emerging generation of influence, also is more likely to value wildlife similar to t he way they value pets or people. Further, they are prone to believe that h abitats support unlimited numbers of animals (i.e., are not resource limite d). The gender factor suggests that females from both regions are less supp ortive of hunting and tend to attribute endangered species to hunting rathe r than habitat. Similar to urbanites in general, females were less satisfie d with the status of wildlife and management.