Human Dimensions
in an Integrated Framework
Andrew Raedeke
Missouri Department of Conservation
Dale Humburg
Ducks Unlimited, Inc.
Human Dimensions: The Third
Leg of the Stool
Questions:
1. Is the institution of waterfowl management
poised to keep pace with the changing social
and ecological landscape?
2. Can we continue to manage waterfowl without
explicitly addressing human dimensions
considerations?
3. How can we incorporate hunters and hunting
into waterfowl and habitat management?
Question 1
Is the institution of waterfowl management
poised to keep pace with the changing
social and ecological landscape?
Evolution of Waterfowl Management in a
Changing Social Landscape
Experience of Nature
Public Discourse
Society
1900
1930 1950 1970 1980 1990 2000
Flyways – 1950s
Humans andand
Habitat:
Populations
Hunters:
Populations and Distribution:
“Our waterfowl are caught in the jaws of a vice.
“…more
to build
and maintain
arather
widely
distributed
“…
pleasure
than
more
On
the
one
hand
–per
thebird
growing
demands
of birds
an
population
at a level sufficiently
high
per
hunter.” of waterfowl
ever-increasing
human population.
On the other,
bothshrinkage
hunters and
non-hunters
utilize
(Mississippican
Flyway
Counciland
1958).
athat
steady
of the
wetland
habitats
which
enjoy this
outdoorsupply.”
resource now and in the future”
control
waterfowl
(Mississippi
Flyway
Council
1958).
(Mississippi
Flyway
Council
1958).
The Social Landscape - Flyways
From horses to tractors
NAWMP – 1980s
Linking
A
linkage
hunters
to hunters:
to habitat:
“When
duck
or goose
hunting
no longer
“Meeting
these
goals would
provide
the
provides
a viable
opportunity,
opportunity
for 2.2recreation
million hunters
in Canada
these
areas
willStates
not betomaintained.”
and the
United
harvest 20 million
ducks annually.”
Jack Grieb, 1985
NAWMP, 1986
The Social Landscape - NAWMP
From tractors to hard drives
We live in a different world!

Information Revolution

Global Society

Shift from production to consumptionbased landscape

Distance no longer an obstacle
Linking Habitat and Population
Management

Are more direct organizational connections
needed between Joint Ventures and Flyways?

Are more explicit connections needed between
population and habitat management decisions?

What will be the most effective allocation of
staff and budget resources for harvest and
habitat management?
Question 2
Can we continue to manage waterfowl
without explicitly addressing human
dimensions considerations?
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90
95
00
05
04
-
20
99
-
19
94
-
19
89
-
19
84
-
19
79
-
19
74
-
19
69
-
19
64
-
19
59
-
19
54
-
19
49
-
19
44
-
19
39
-
19
34
-
19
Duck Stamp Sales, 1934-2007
3,000,000
2,500,000
-40%
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
0
13
Projected Hunter Numbers
Using 1999-2006 Rate of Loss
1,200,000
½ the
hunters
in
If we have half the hunters,
19
years?
just how much habitat and
900,000
600,000
what size duck population
will we need?
300,000
48
20
41
20
34
20
27
20
20
20
13
20
06
20
19
99
0
Waterfowl Management in the Absence
of Hunting
“Targets”
“Sustainability”
Hunters
Objectives met
through game
preserves
Populations
Objectives met
through climate
change legislation
Habitat
More Habitat = More Ducks
Future role of populations,
habitat, and hunters?
Who will provide the support for
waterfowl management?
Types of Support
Political capital
Social capital
Economic Capital
Cultural Capital
Habitat Challenges
Population
Challenges
Weakenedvs.
Reg’s.
Waterfowl
Loss of
CRP
other
species
Hypoxia among
Balance
Climate Change
species
Water Quality
Water Scarcity
Question 3
How do we incorporate hunters and
hunting into waterfowl and habitat
management?
Hunter Participation
1. Can we more effectively
accommodate hunters through
habitat and population
management?
2. How should we address factors
beyond habitat and population
management?
19
Distribution of “Satisfaction Days”
Accommodate 5,000 Hunter Satisfaction Days
Hunter Numbers
1,000
1000 hunters x 5 days
500 hunters x 10 days
500
250 hunters x 20 days
0
5
10
Days per Hunter
20
Regional Differences in Hunter
Carrying Capacity
Carrying capacity for ducks and hunters
Hunter Numbers
Habitat Acquisition
Manage Hunter Distribution
K
Hunter Recruitment
Habitat & Duck Numbers
Harvest, Habitat, and People
 What
are the impacts of harvest regulations
on hunter distribution, participation, and
satisfaction?
 What are the impacts of habitat
management on hunter distribution,
participation, and satisfaction?
NAWMP
JV’s
AHM
Flyways
Sustain waterfowl
populations
Sustain ecosystem
processes
Sustain hunter
participation
Social
factors
A National Hunter
Participation Plan
A model-based plan
A coordinated, “stepped-up”
systems approach
A National Hunter
Participation Plan




Objectives
Model
Actions
Monitoring
Which of the following would you prefer
for a hunter participation objective?
1. Don’t worry about hunter
numbers
2. Stabilize hunter numbers
3. Increase by 10%
4. Increase to 1970s levels
5. None of the above
(Turning Point Question)
Which of the following would you prefer for a
hunter participation objective?
a)Focus on habitat and populations and don’t
worry about hunter numbers
b)Stabilize hunter numbers within 10 years
c) Increase hunter numbers by 10% within 10
years
d)Increase hunter numbers to 1970s levels within
10 years
e)None of the above
Hunter Participation Model
Human Dimensions Working Group
Hunter Participation Model
•Decisions (social psychology)
•Identity (anthropology)
•Capacity (sociology)
Temporal Scale
Hunter Participation Model
Society
Building
Capacity
Individual
Identity
Production
Decision to
Hunt
Temporal Scale
Shift attention away from “silver bullet”
strategies to model-based strategies
Model
Strategies
Decisions
Reduce constraints, negotiate
constraints, match motivations
Identity
Long-term mentor/apprentice
relationships
Capacity
Strengthen the waterfowl
hunting community
Strategies/decisions based on
participatory methods
Avoids “like me” strategies and decisions
based on “My hunters want” or “Our Joint
Venture Partners” want…….
Percent indicating waterfowl hunting is their
most important recreational activity?
Differences Across Generations
Baby
Boomers
Matures
Generation X
Millennials
1946-64
Before 1946
1965-80
1981-2k
Amos & Andy
Depression
WW II
Rationing
Leave it to
Beaver
Brady Bunch
Simpsons
Vietnam Latch key kids World Trade
Center
Space Race Roe v Wade
Internet
Watergate
Berlin Wall
Dedicated to job Live to work
Work to live Live in moment
Information from:
Missouri Training Institute
College of Business
304 Cornell Hall
University of Missouri
Avoid “one size fits all” strategies.
Change in Hunter Numbers from 1970-74 to 1997-01
Decreased
No Change
Increased
Hunter Status
Photo Credit: Glenn Chambers
Habitat Status
Evolution of Institutions
NAWMP
SRC
?
JVs
Flyways
Sustain waterfowl
populations
Decisions
Sustain ecosystem
processes
Sustain hunter
participation
Identity
Capacity
Integrated Framework
Organi
StakeProcesses Resources
-zation
holders
Objectives
Models
Actions
Monitoring
Decisions