The 2001 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation is a partnership effort with states and national conservation organizations, and has become one of the most important sources of information on fish and wildlife recreation in the United
States. It is a useful tool that quantifies the economic impact of wildlife-based recreation.
A National Survey on Communities, this report is broken down into three sections - (1) The Dream: American's preferences for different types of development and aspects of community, (2) The Reality: The public's level of satisfaction with the choices they have currently, and (3) Policies - getting from dream to reality: The public's support for specific policies to address the issues of how we live and where and how to develop.
In 2013, a record number of Americans — 142.6 million — participated in at least one outdoor activity and collectively, went on 12.1 billion outdoor outings. although the number of participants rose, the percentage of participants fell slightly from 49.4 percent in 2012 to 49.2 percent in 2013, due to population increase.
American voters’ broad support for conservation generally extends to specific policy decisions, such as funding the Land and Water Conservation Fund. All of these views – including support for LWCF –extend across party lines, across the nation, and with all key demographic sub-groups.
American voters are highly committed to conservation, and three out of four believe that we can protect land and water and have a strong economy at the same time. Even more strikingly, this survey shows that three in five voters support increased public investments in conservation at the state, local, or federal levels – and are willing to pay a small increase in taxes to support them. Together, the data provide ample evidence that American voters have a strong and undiminished desire to conserve the nation’s land, water, and wildlife.
Poll shows that a vast majority of American voters support the Endangered Species Act and recognize the importance of safeguarding vulnerable wildlife.
A national bipartisan poll shows that sportsmen and women on both sides of the aisle overwhelming support Clean Water Act protections for headwater streams and wetlands. The majority of hunters and anglers polled (92 percent) would strengthen or maintain the federal government’s current safeguards for clean water that supports healthy fish and wildlife habitat—even as federal agencies and Congress seek to roll back these standards. Hunters and anglers showed nearly unanimous support for the 2015 Clean Water Rule, which the Trump administration’s EPA and Army Corps of Engineers have worked to repeal and replace.
Across the political spectrum, voters in the United Sates consistently demonstrate support for conservation. (Print version of CT Guide)
National survey shows that most hunters and anglers, who often lean Republican, consider themselves conservationists. Large percentages care deeply about conserving land so that future generations can enjoy outdoor traditions, and oppose cuts to federal conservation funding.
This survey shows at least one issue is widely supported by Americans across the political spectrum: the conservation of our nation’s land and water. And, the bipartisan team of pollsters note, from “Tea Party Republicans to liberal Democrats, more than four-in-five American voters say that conserving our country's natural resources—our land, air and water—is patriotic.”
Voters who identify as hunters and/or anglers believe the federal government should make preserving fish and wildlife habitat and managing public lands for fishing, hunting, and other outdoor recreation a priority.
Nationwide survey among 1,024 registered voters that shows broad support for the National Park System across the political, ethnic, and regional spectrum. Traces voters' priorities for NPS, park usage, and views towards pro-park political candidates.
Voters across the ideological spectrum see National Parks as a legitimate and important federal responsibility—nearly nine in 10 say it is extremely important (59%) or quite important (29%) for the federal government to protect and support National Parks. And even in these difficult fiscal circumstances, very few voters from either side of the political
aisle say the federal government should be cutting back on funding for National Parks. Likewise, this same spirit of bipartisanship is exemplified by the large majority of voters who say that support for National Parks is an issue that can unite people across party lines.
In brief, the research shows that the many other benefits that co-benefits of natural climate solutions bring about are more intuitive, immediate, and popular than climate mitigation itself: when advocating for specific projects, communications should focus on water quality, public health, disaster prevention, and quality of life whenever we talk about nature as a climate solution.
At the same time, among a range of policies for mitigation of or adaptation to climate change, NCS is perhaps the most broadly and strongly popular, with an appeal that cuts across demographic and partisan lines in a way that many other policies do not. People find the concept of natural climate solutions intuitive and appealing. The introduction of the idea is, of course, hugely important: drawing on people’s existing associations and understandings makes the work of pitching NCS more effective and efficient.
Produced by the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, these maps provide estimates of climate change beliefs, risk perceptions, and policy preferences across the United States. The estimates are derived from a statistical model using multilevel regression with post-stratification on a large national survey dataset (n>18,000), along with demographic and geographic population characteristics. Maps can be sorted by state, county, congressional district, and metro area.