A telephone survey of 2,526 Californians was conducted in May and June of 1987 for the purposes of: (1) describing consumptive and nonconsumptive fish and wildlife users in California, (2) identifying Californians' attitudes toward wildlife and state wildlife programs, and (3) determining attitudes toward funding approaches for nonconsumptive fish and wildlife programs. Respondents overwhelmingly agreed (86.1 percent) that fish and wildlife should be maintained even if it means higher consumer prices. Most respondents (72.5 percent) disagreed with the idea that there will be plenty of space in California for fish and wildlife even with increased housing and industrial development. Most respondents (72.3 percent) agreed that people who enjoy the state's outdoor resources should contribute financially to preserve fish and wildlife, even if they do not themselves hunt and fish. Respondents were segmented into seven groups on the basis of (1) amount of time spent outdoors and (2) participation in fish and wildlife-related recreation activities. All four groups that participate in fish and wildlife activities expressed strong support for entrance fees to fish and wildlife areas, conservation passes, and additional registration fees for boats and off-road vehicles (ORVs) as funding alternatives for nonconsumptive fish and wildlife programs. Less support was expressed for a $1 additional Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) vehicle registration fee and very little support was shown for a tax on outdoor sporting equipment.
|
