Importance—Satisfaction Analysis of Deer Management Cooperative Members

Our study explored the utility of using Importance-Satisfaction Analysis (ISA) to identify critical attributes to deer management cooperative (DMC) member satisfaction. With white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginanus) management by landowners becoming an increasingly popular conservation tool, DMCs re...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Wildlife Society bulletin (2011) 2021-03, Vol.45 (1), p.85-96
Hauptverfasser: PRUITT, HUNTER P., BOLEY, B. BYNUM, D’ANGELO, GINO J., MURPHY, BRIAN P., MCCONNELL, MARK D.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 96
container_issue 1
container_start_page 85
container_title Wildlife Society bulletin (2011)
container_volume 45
creator PRUITT, HUNTER P.
BOLEY, B. BYNUM
D’ANGELO, GINO J.
MURPHY, BRIAN P.
MCCONNELL, MARK D.
description Our study explored the utility of using Importance-Satisfaction Analysis (ISA) to identify critical attributes to deer management cooperative (DMC) member satisfaction. With white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginanus) management by landowners becoming an increasingly popular conservation tool, DMCs represent an approach by private landowners and hunters to collaboratively improve deer herds and hunting quality. Deer management cooperatives are a group of landowners and hunters voluntarily working together to improve the quality of wildlife, habitat, and hunting experiences on their collective acreage. Deer management cooperatives show promise in providing dual benefits to hunter satisfaction and large-scale conservation efforts such as increasing habitat connectivity. Heterogeneity of satisfaction for deer hunting is well-documented and DMC member satisfaction is an important factor in member retention and recruitment. We surveyed 2,817 members of 45 DMCs across five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New York, and Texas) using ISA methodology to better understand their satisfaction with their experience. Hunters’ responses (n = 459) to the 22 attributes measured were segmented by their divergent motivations for DMC membership, resulting in four unique clusters for comparison (Solitude Members, Social Members, Representative Members, and Quality Harvest Members). Our results indicated that motivations for membership influenced importance and satisfaction ratings, further elucidating that multiple types of hunters and members exist within DMC networks. Areas of agreement among the four DMC clusters were the need for Neighbors to follow Quality Deer Management practices, that DMCs are performing well on members Seeing deer and Co-op members sharing similar harvest goals, and that Preventing crop damage and the Lease value of the DMC property are low priorities. However, there was little agreement in quadrant placement among the four membership clusters for the remaining 17 attributes indicating the importance of DMCs understanding their individual members’ motivations for joining. By retaining satisfied members, DMCs can continue to provide the hunting quality expected as well as the tangential conservation benefits.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/wsb.1158
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_wiley_primary_10_1002_wsb_1158_WSB1158</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>27014854</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>27014854</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2878-ebbd5a753cdfee17414b6e15437f46d32acc700ddb4194a8fc468f53e0dcd7573</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkc1KAzEQgIMoWGrBFxD2KMjWJJts0mNd_wotHqp4XLLZiWzpbkqyWvbmQ_iEPolZWooXwbnMHL4ZZr5B6JzgMcGYXm99MSaEyyM0oAmVMecMH_-qT9HI-xXGmDAiJ4QO0GxWb6xrVaPh-_NrqdrKG6XbyjbRtFHrzlc-sia6BXDRQjXqDWpo2iizdgMu0B8QLaAuwPkzdGLU2sNon4fo5f7uOXuM508Ps2w6jzWVQsZQFCVXgie6NABEMMKKFAhniTAsLROqtBYYl2XByIQpaTRLpeEJ4FKXgotkiC53c7Wz3jsw-cZVtXJdTnDeW8iDhby3ENCrHbqFwhqvKwhnHvCgIaWCSYb7IIGW_6ezqlW9pcy-N21ojfet1Rq6PxfKX5c3-8UudvzKt9YdeCrCY2RQ8QO4xIn7</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype></control><display><type>article</type><title>Importance—Satisfaction Analysis of Deer Management Cooperative Members</title><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><source>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021&lt;img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /&gt;</source><source>Wiley Online Library All Journals</source><source>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021&lt;img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" /&gt;</source><creator>PRUITT, HUNTER P. ; BOLEY, B. BYNUM ; D’ANGELO, GINO J. ; MURPHY, BRIAN P. ; MCCONNELL, MARK D.</creator><creatorcontrib>PRUITT, HUNTER P. ; BOLEY, B. BYNUM ; D’ANGELO, GINO J. ; MURPHY, BRIAN P. ; MCCONNELL, MARK D.</creatorcontrib><description>Our study explored the utility of using Importance-Satisfaction Analysis (ISA) to identify critical attributes to deer management cooperative (DMC) member satisfaction. With white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginanus) management by landowners becoming an increasingly popular conservation tool, DMCs represent an approach by private landowners and hunters to collaboratively improve deer herds and hunting quality. Deer management cooperatives are a group of landowners and hunters voluntarily working together to improve the quality of wildlife, habitat, and hunting experiences on their collective acreage. Deer management cooperatives show promise in providing dual benefits to hunter satisfaction and large-scale conservation efforts such as increasing habitat connectivity. Heterogeneity of satisfaction for deer hunting is well-documented and DMC member satisfaction is an important factor in member retention and recruitment. We surveyed 2,817 members of 45 DMCs across five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New York, and Texas) using ISA methodology to better understand their satisfaction with their experience. Hunters’ responses (n = 459) to the 22 attributes measured were segmented by their divergent motivations for DMC membership, resulting in four unique clusters for comparison (Solitude Members, Social Members, Representative Members, and Quality Harvest Members). Our results indicated that motivations for membership influenced importance and satisfaction ratings, further elucidating that multiple types of hunters and members exist within DMC networks. Areas of agreement among the four DMC clusters were the need for Neighbors to follow Quality Deer Management practices, that DMCs are performing well on members Seeing deer and Co-op members sharing similar harvest goals, and that Preventing crop damage and the Lease value of the DMC property are low priorities. However, there was little agreement in quadrant placement among the four membership clusters for the remaining 17 attributes indicating the importance of DMCs understanding their individual members’ motivations for joining. By retaining satisfied members, DMCs can continue to provide the hunting quality expected as well as the tangential conservation benefits.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2328-5540</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2328-5540</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/wsb.1158</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>HOBOKEN: Wiley</publisher><subject>Biodiversity &amp; Conservation ; Deer Management Cooperatives (DMCs) ; Importance‐Satisfaction Analysis ; Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine ; Membership Motivation ; Original Article ; Private Landowners ; Science &amp; Technology</subject><ispartof>Wildlife Society bulletin (2011), 2021-03, Vol.45 (1), p.85-96</ispartof><rights>2021 The Wildlife Society</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>true</woscitedreferencessubscribed><woscitedreferencescount>6</woscitedreferencescount><woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid>wos000627484000001</woscitedreferencesoriginalsourcerecordid><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2878-ebbd5a753cdfee17414b6e15437f46d32acc700ddb4194a8fc468f53e0dcd7573</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c2878-ebbd5a753cdfee17414b6e15437f46d32acc700ddb4194a8fc468f53e0dcd7573</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/27014854$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/27014854$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,804,1418,27929,27930,39262,39263,45579,45580,58022,58255</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>PRUITT, HUNTER P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BOLEY, B. BYNUM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D’ANGELO, GINO J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MURPHY, BRIAN P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCCONNELL, MARK D.</creatorcontrib><title>Importance—Satisfaction Analysis of Deer Management Cooperative Members</title><title>Wildlife Society bulletin (2011)</title><addtitle>WILDLIFE SOC B</addtitle><description>Our study explored the utility of using Importance-Satisfaction Analysis (ISA) to identify critical attributes to deer management cooperative (DMC) member satisfaction. With white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginanus) management by landowners becoming an increasingly popular conservation tool, DMCs represent an approach by private landowners and hunters to collaboratively improve deer herds and hunting quality. Deer management cooperatives are a group of landowners and hunters voluntarily working together to improve the quality of wildlife, habitat, and hunting experiences on their collective acreage. Deer management cooperatives show promise in providing dual benefits to hunter satisfaction and large-scale conservation efforts such as increasing habitat connectivity. Heterogeneity of satisfaction for deer hunting is well-documented and DMC member satisfaction is an important factor in member retention and recruitment. We surveyed 2,817 members of 45 DMCs across five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New York, and Texas) using ISA methodology to better understand their satisfaction with their experience. Hunters’ responses (n = 459) to the 22 attributes measured were segmented by their divergent motivations for DMC membership, resulting in four unique clusters for comparison (Solitude Members, Social Members, Representative Members, and Quality Harvest Members). Our results indicated that motivations for membership influenced importance and satisfaction ratings, further elucidating that multiple types of hunters and members exist within DMC networks. Areas of agreement among the four DMC clusters were the need for Neighbors to follow Quality Deer Management practices, that DMCs are performing well on members Seeing deer and Co-op members sharing similar harvest goals, and that Preventing crop damage and the Lease value of the DMC property are low priorities. However, there was little agreement in quadrant placement among the four membership clusters for the remaining 17 attributes indicating the importance of DMCs understanding their individual members’ motivations for joining. By retaining satisfied members, DMCs can continue to provide the hunting quality expected as well as the tangential conservation benefits.</description><subject>Biodiversity &amp; Conservation</subject><subject>Deer Management Cooperatives (DMCs)</subject><subject>Importance‐Satisfaction Analysis</subject><subject>Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine</subject><subject>Membership Motivation</subject><subject>Original Article</subject><subject>Private Landowners</subject><subject>Science &amp; Technology</subject><issn>2328-5540</issn><issn>2328-5540</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>GIZIO</sourceid><sourceid>HGBXW</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkc1KAzEQgIMoWGrBFxD2KMjWJJts0mNd_wotHqp4XLLZiWzpbkqyWvbmQ_iEPolZWooXwbnMHL4ZZr5B6JzgMcGYXm99MSaEyyM0oAmVMecMH_-qT9HI-xXGmDAiJ4QO0GxWb6xrVaPh-_NrqdrKG6XbyjbRtFHrzlc-sia6BXDRQjXqDWpo2iizdgMu0B8QLaAuwPkzdGLU2sNon4fo5f7uOXuM508Ps2w6jzWVQsZQFCVXgie6NABEMMKKFAhniTAsLROqtBYYl2XByIQpaTRLpeEJ4FKXgotkiC53c7Wz3jsw-cZVtXJdTnDeW8iDhby3ENCrHbqFwhqvKwhnHvCgIaWCSYb7IIGW_6ezqlW9pcy-N21ojfet1Rq6PxfKX5c3-8UudvzKt9YdeCrCY2RQ8QO4xIn7</recordid><startdate>20210301</startdate><enddate>20210301</enddate><creator>PRUITT, HUNTER P.</creator><creator>BOLEY, B. BYNUM</creator><creator>D’ANGELO, GINO J.</creator><creator>MURPHY, BRIAN P.</creator><creator>MCCONNELL, MARK D.</creator><general>Wiley</general><scope>17B</scope><scope>BLEPL</scope><scope>DTL</scope><scope>DVR</scope><scope>EGQ</scope><scope>GIZIO</scope><scope>HGBXW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20210301</creationdate><title>Importance—Satisfaction Analysis of Deer Management Cooperative Members</title><author>PRUITT, HUNTER P. ; BOLEY, B. BYNUM ; D’ANGELO, GINO J. ; MURPHY, BRIAN P. ; MCCONNELL, MARK D.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c2878-ebbd5a753cdfee17414b6e15437f46d32acc700ddb4194a8fc468f53e0dcd7573</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Biodiversity &amp; Conservation</topic><topic>Deer Management Cooperatives (DMCs)</topic><topic>Importance‐Satisfaction Analysis</topic><topic>Life Sciences &amp; Biomedicine</topic><topic>Membership Motivation</topic><topic>Original Article</topic><topic>Private Landowners</topic><topic>Science &amp; Technology</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>PRUITT, HUNTER P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>BOLEY, B. BYNUM</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D’ANGELO, GINO J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MURPHY, BRIAN P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>MCCONNELL, MARK D.</creatorcontrib><collection>Web of Knowledge</collection><collection>Web of Science Core Collection</collection><collection>Science Citation Index Expanded</collection><collection>Social Sciences Citation Index</collection><collection>Web of Science Primary (SCIE, SSCI &amp; AHCI)</collection><collection>Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021</collection><collection>Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><jtitle>Wildlife Society bulletin (2011)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>PRUITT, HUNTER P.</au><au>BOLEY, B. BYNUM</au><au>D’ANGELO, GINO J.</au><au>MURPHY, BRIAN P.</au><au>MCCONNELL, MARK D.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Importance—Satisfaction Analysis of Deer Management Cooperative Members</atitle><jtitle>Wildlife Society bulletin (2011)</jtitle><stitle>WILDLIFE SOC B</stitle><date>2021-03-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>45</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>85</spage><epage>96</epage><pages>85-96</pages><issn>2328-5540</issn><eissn>2328-5540</eissn><abstract>Our study explored the utility of using Importance-Satisfaction Analysis (ISA) to identify critical attributes to deer management cooperative (DMC) member satisfaction. With white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginanus) management by landowners becoming an increasingly popular conservation tool, DMCs represent an approach by private landowners and hunters to collaboratively improve deer herds and hunting quality. Deer management cooperatives are a group of landowners and hunters voluntarily working together to improve the quality of wildlife, habitat, and hunting experiences on their collective acreage. Deer management cooperatives show promise in providing dual benefits to hunter satisfaction and large-scale conservation efforts such as increasing habitat connectivity. Heterogeneity of satisfaction for deer hunting is well-documented and DMC member satisfaction is an important factor in member retention and recruitment. We surveyed 2,817 members of 45 DMCs across five states (Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, New York, and Texas) using ISA methodology to better understand their satisfaction with their experience. Hunters’ responses (n = 459) to the 22 attributes measured were segmented by their divergent motivations for DMC membership, resulting in four unique clusters for comparison (Solitude Members, Social Members, Representative Members, and Quality Harvest Members). Our results indicated that motivations for membership influenced importance and satisfaction ratings, further elucidating that multiple types of hunters and members exist within DMC networks. Areas of agreement among the four DMC clusters were the need for Neighbors to follow Quality Deer Management practices, that DMCs are performing well on members Seeing deer and Co-op members sharing similar harvest goals, and that Preventing crop damage and the Lease value of the DMC property are low priorities. However, there was little agreement in quadrant placement among the four membership clusters for the remaining 17 attributes indicating the importance of DMCs understanding their individual members’ motivations for joining. By retaining satisfied members, DMCs can continue to provide the hunting quality expected as well as the tangential conservation benefits.</abstract><cop>HOBOKEN</cop><pub>Wiley</pub><doi>10.1002/wsb.1158</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 2328-5540
ispartof Wildlife Society bulletin (2011), 2021-03, Vol.45 (1), p.85-96
issn 2328-5540
2328-5540
language eng
recordid cdi_wiley_primary_10_1002_wsb_1158_WSB1158
source JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing; Web of Science - Science Citation Index Expanded - 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />; Wiley Online Library All Journals; Web of Science - Social Sciences Citation Index – 2021<img src="https://exlibris-pub.s3.amazonaws.com/fromwos-v2.jpg" />
subjects Biodiversity & Conservation
Deer Management Cooperatives (DMCs)
Importance‐Satisfaction Analysis
Life Sciences & Biomedicine
Membership Motivation
Original Article
Private Landowners
Science & Technology
title Importance—Satisfaction Analysis of Deer Management Cooperative Members
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-15T15%3A39%3A41IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Importance%E2%80%94Satisfaction%20Analysis%20of%20Deer%20Management%20Cooperative%20Members&rft.jtitle=Wildlife%20Society%20bulletin%20(2011)&rft.au=PRUITT,%20HUNTER%20P.&rft.date=2021-03-01&rft.volume=45&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=85&rft.epage=96&rft.pages=85-96&rft.issn=2328-5540&rft.eissn=2328-5540&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/wsb.1158&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_wiley%3E27014854%3C/jstor_wiley%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=27014854&rfr_iscdi=true