Census of Agriculture Still Accepting Responses

The Census of Agriculture is conducted every five years and "is the only source of consistent and comprehensive agricultural data for every state and county in the nation."

A news release from the United States Department of Agriculture indicates that over two million forms have already been received and they are still accepting responses.

This current effort is the first Census of Agriculture where producers and farmers could respond using an online form.

Data collection for the current effort, the 2007 Census, began December 28th, 2007. Results are expected to be available beginning in February 2009.

I use this information frequently, to understand the economic impacts of both farm production and conservation activities in Missouri.

Previous information from the 2002 Census of Agriculture is available in a wide variety of reports and formats.

Chuck Will's Widow Calling in the Evening

I heard two chuck-will's-widow birds singing in the evening yesterday. It's the first time I 've heard them this year. I don't recall ever hearing them when I was very young in north Missouri. They probably were not that far north.

I particularly like the sound of the chuck-will's-widow and the whip-poor-will. We can hear both birds in the evening where I live in central Missouri. The chuck-will's-widow has a song much like the name, with a quieter "chuck" and then most emphasis on the "will's-widow."

I've heard the whip-poor-will and another bird, the nighthawk, for several weeks. The nighthawk is a similar bird and generally heard in town, making a short nasal call as it circles over parking lots and buildings, catching insects.

The recently released report for Missouri from the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation indicates that about 2.2 million folks watch or observe wildlife in Missouri. Perhaps several of those folks also like to listen to the chuck will's widow.

Census of Agriculture for Missouri Farmers and Ranchers

The Census of Agriculture is being conducted now. Completed forms are due by February 4, 2008. The Census of Agriculture is conducted every five years and is a complete count of the nation's farms, ranches, and the people who operate them.

For the first time, producers have the option of completing the Census forms online.

I use the information from the Census all the time to better understand what is happening in Missouri for land use and ownership trends, economics of agriculture, and the characteristics and production practices of farmers and agricultural operations.

The Census is the only source of comprehensive agricultural data for every county in Missouri.

If you have an agricultural activity or operation, you can participate in the Census by signing up on the Census of Agriculture Web pages.

A summary for Missouri from the 2002 Census is available and you can look up summaries for each county in Missouri.

Make a Time to be Outdoors in Missouri and Experience Fish, Forests, and Wildlife

With the cool weather of the Missouri fall season, it's a great time to be outside. There are so many things you can do outside in the fall. Even just sitting outside can be fun. The temperature is cool in the morning and gently warm through the day, there are virtually no biting insects, the colorful leaves rustle in the breeze, and there are a variety of fishing and hunting seasons open.

Yet in surveys since the mid 1990s in Missouri, people report that lack of time is their biggest obstacle to enjoying outdoor recreation.

I certainly don't know how add more time to each day.

I do know that I can make a little time to be outdoors each day to take a walk, exercise, or walk the dog. Or to schedule longer outings on the weekend to go walking, camping, fishing, hunting, or a wide variety of outdoor activities. You can do this with your family or friends and make a lifetime of memories with every trip.

If you can't get outside of your yard, try one of those free-standing firepit bowls from the local hardware or department store and sit around a small fire, roasting marshmallows in the cool fall evenings. One of the coolest marshmallow roasters I've seen is the "rolla-roaster" and you can buy it for a great price from REI Equipment. You can put one or two marshmallows on the end, use the thumbwheel to rotate the marshmallow until it is golden brown, and eat it between two graham crackers. They certainly taste better than the blackened marshmallows I produced as a child after the marshmallow turned into a fiery torch; except I seem to recall I really enjoyed watching the marshmallow flame up dramatically and turn black.

You can also use the firepit to try outdoor cooking. I've used our firepit near the house with charcoal for dutch oven cooking. You can feel like you are camping in fall weather and never leave home. This makes it easy to squeeze in some outdoor time, even if finding time is an obstacle.

If you want to try out dutch oven cooking, I've purchased some dutch oven supplies from Chuckwagon Supply and learned about new recipes from the blog 'Round the Chuckbox. I prefer the pre-seasoned "Lodge-Logic" dutch ovens from Lodge Manufacturing. You can get a cool Lewis and Clark dutch oven on sale from Lodge with a specially cast lid or look at the wide variety of ovens available from Chuckwagon Supply.

Go outside. I think you'll really enjoy it.

You can learn more about going outdoors from the Missouri Outdoor Families Web pages and events from the Missouri Department of Conservation. You can learn more about places to go near you from the Missouri Department of Conservation or find a state park or historic site managed by the Missouri Department of Natural Resources.

Walk or Run to Support Conservation in Missouri

I like to walk. And apparently, many other Missourians like to walk also. In a 2003 survey conducted for the Department by the University of Missouri, 76 percent of Missourians said they had walked in their neighborhood in the last 12 months. Fifty percent said they had hiked in the outdoors. And 27 percent said they had run or jogged.

I support conservation efforts for animals and plants in Missouri. And most Missourians feel the same way. More than three-quarters of Missourians agree that “the Missouri Department of Conservation should make an effort to restore animals that once lived here or are currently very rare in Missouri” (79 percent) and that the Department “should conserve and restore rare and endangered plants” (79 percent).

We can walk, or run, and show support for conservation at the same time. The 2007 Endangered Species Walk/Run, co-hosted by the Department of Conservation, the Department of Natural Resources, the Department of Health and Senior Services, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Jefferson City Parks, Recreation, and Forestry Department, will raise money to help restore habitat, conduct research, and support education projects for endangered animals and plants in Missouri. It will be held October 13, 2007 at the North Jefferson City Pavilion, in Jefferson City, Missouri. The pavilion is near the Katy Trail at the intersection of Highways 63 and 54.

If you can't make it to the event, you can still learn more about the endangered animals and plants in Missouri on the Web pages of the Missouri Department of Conservation.

The event is also one of the many ways that the Department of Conservation is accomplishing its goal to encourage and support partnerships between communities, local governments and developers to reduce the impact of Missouri’s growth upon our fish, forest and wildlife resources.

I can't attend this year to walk, but the shirt looks cool, and the registration information indicates that I can make a $25.00 donation and receive a shirt to show my support for conservation in Missouri.

Surveys are Useful for Fish, Forest, and Wildlife Management in Missouri

All surveys have error and some surveys are useful. A statistician I know that works for the Missouri Department of Conservation frequently reminds me that all surveys have error. And he says in the same sentence, that some surveys are useful. The key for usefulness is proper design, careful attention to details, and appropriate analysis and reporting. Proper design and implementation of a survey reduce the level of error so the survey information is useful.

Managing by facts. The reason surveys need to be useful, and we want to eliminate error, is to have information to guide conservation decisions. The words "using the best scientific information" are used in several of the "Results we want to achieve" statements of the Department of Conservation's strategic plan, in addition to "increased availability and use of conservation-related information."

Over seven decades of best-in-class work. The staff in the Missouri of Department of Conservation started on a journey of best-in-class research and science soon after the Department was established in 1936. That research and information gathering continues today to produce accountable information that can be used for conservation decisions.

The human dimensions of conservation. In the 1970s, Department of Conservation staff began to use surveys and other public input methods very frequently to learn about the expectations, participation levels, and satisfaction of Missourians for fish, forest, and wildlife activities. These "human dimensions" of management are now included in almost every aspect of conservation work.

You can read more about how the human dimensions of conservation has been used in decisions about fish, forests, and wildlife, in the Missouri Conservationist magazine. A recent article, "Your Opinion Counts" was in the January, 2007 issue and another article, "When Missourians Speak" was in the February, 2000 issue.

Talking Fish, Forest, and Wildlife Conservation in Missouri

Want to talk about and communicate conservation messages? The results of several focus groups suggest some useful tips. Ongoing surveys continue to support the following observations.

The general public does not have an adequate understanding of conservation terminology and is not influenced by conservation messages directed to them. Respondents were asked to give their level of understanding of a list of 13 conservation terms:

most said they understood: conservation, natural resources, and water quality;

1/3 said they didn't understand: technical assistance, wetlands, and stewardship;

1/2 or more said they didn't understand: biodiversity, locally led conservation, best management practices, sustainable agriculture, watershed, nutrient management, and nonpoint source pollution.

Public understanding of conservation issues is largely based on popular opinion of the day.

Consumers generally don't think in terms of private land conservation or associated benefits.

Respondents liked the statement 'Conserving natural resources for our children and future generations.'

The statement most liked by respondents was 'Helping citizens become better stewards of natural resources in their own backyards.'

Respondents recommended the primary focus be on local government involvement with state and federal support.

Respondents said that nature-oriented messages and appropriate graphics have strong appeal.

Respondents were concerned about the potential negative impact conservation efforts may have on jobs and business success.

Emphasize water quality in communication efforts, as it is a well understood and important issue.

Use the phrase natural resources freely as it is a well understood term.

Use the term conservation in communication efforts, but provide some explanation. This explanation must emphasize conservation on private lands because consumers today generally limit their interpretation to that of preservation related to public lands.

When using the locally-led conservation concept make sure to explain what it means.

Identify partnership entities who have an interest and ability to communicate similar messages.

Work the volunteer element into outreach efforts.

Don't make the public choose between conservation and business success.

Specify the benefits of private land conservation, such as wildlife habitat, water quality, air quality, tourism, aesthetics, and recreation (fishing and hunting).

The National Association of Conservation Districts coordinated the research in cooperation with the Natural Resources Conservation Service. Marketing Horizons, Inc., of St. Louis, conducted the research during July, 1997, and prepared the final report.

Preliminary Results for Missouri Released for Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife Viewing from the National Survey

Preliminary report available. A preliminary report has been released with the state numbers from the 2006 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.

New participation numbers for Missouri. For Missouri, on page 9 of the report, it appears that compared with the 2001 survey:

• fishing participants declined slightly to 1,075,000;
• hunting participants increased to 613,000;
• and wildlife watching participants increased for both around the home, 1,976,000, and away from home, at 825,000.

We'll have to wait until November when the individual state reports begin to be released to see if any of these levels are statistically different from the 2001 and 1996 levels.

Expenditures look way up from 2001. This is great news, since the economic impacts in Missouri from fish and wildlife recreation, that is, business impacts, jobs supported, sales tax generated, and income tax revenue generated, will all be increased compared to 2001.

Conservation continues to pay its way in Missouri. This is certainly the result of the continued outdoor interests of Missourians, the efforts of conservation-minded individuals and organizations, and the work of the Missouri Department of Conservation.

The Midwest in general continues to have higher levels of participation in fishing, hunting, and wildlife viewing than the rest of the nation.

Missouri is in the top 10 list of states for numbers of participants for fishing, hunting, and wildlife viewing.

More reports from the National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation are available from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Human Dimensions, the Gnomon, and Indicators of Satisfaction with Conservation Performance

During late June and July, I spent two weeks at Philmont Scout Ranch in northeastern New Mexico helping with the National Advanced Youth Leadership Experience (NAYLE), a leadership training course for Scouts. In several parts of the program, the staff and participants pledge to be servant leaders with the statement that "as the sun dial measures the passage of time, so will my service be measured over time, by my impact on others."

The post on a sun dial, the part that casts a shadow, is called the gnomon. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines the gnomon as "an object that by the position or length of its shadow serves as an indicator."

Driving home, I thought about how the human dimensions of resource management can be used like the gnomon on the sun dial, in that the attitudes and opinions of Missourians about fish, forest, and wildlife management are an indicator. We can use human dimensions information as an indicator of satisfaction with conservation performance.

In several surveys, the Department of Conservation has asked Missourians to rate the job the Department is doing to provide conservation services. In 2003, 64.1 percent of Missourians indicated, for themselves, that the Department was doing an "Excellent" or "Good" job. In addition, 26.5 percent indicated "Don't Know," 8.5 percent said "Fair," and less than one percent said "Poor."

This level of satisfaction with the Department has remained almost exactly the same over the last 10 years. I can use this human dimensions information to help Department of Conservation staff understand the level of satisfaction that Missourians have for our conservation performance. Then the information can be used to help make plans for the future.

Human dimensions information is a very useful indicator of performance, just like using the gnomon on a sun dial to measure the passage of time.

More information about the Missouri Department of Conservation's performance is available in the Department's annual reports, and you can find more information about conservation programs on the Department's Web pages.

Using The Gallup Organization Brain to Understand Conservation Opinions in Missouri

The Gallup Organization has useful survey results. An online resource that I use frequently is provided by The Gallup Organization. They have an extensive list of polling results organized in an alphabetical list.

Or, the "Gallup Brain" is a database of questionnaires and opinion results. They describe the Gallup Brain as "a searchable, living record of 70 years of public opinion. Inside, you'll find answers to more than 136,000 questions, and responses from more than 3.5 million people interviewed by The Gallup Poll since 1935." Much of the information in the database requires a paid subscription, although there are a wide variety of reports and updates of current issues that are available without cost.

For example, in an article titled "The People's Priorities: Gallup's Top 10" they list the top 10 priorities that are the "American public's priorities for their elected representatives in Washington -- the men and women sent to the nation's capital to do the people's bidding. The Top 10 Priorities list is based on an analysis of open-ended responses to questions asking Americans to name the top priorities for the government and to name the most important problem facing the nation today, plus a series of additional questions in which Americans rate the priorities of the issues and concerns facing the nation today."

I compare the opinions of the American public with the opinions of Missourians. I find it useful to compare results from surveys conducted in Missouri for the Missouri Department of Conservation with the results reported by Gallup.

I noted in the Gallup list of the top 10 priorities that the environment is listed tenth.

The Gallup commentary describes the American public's opinions about environmental issues as "the environment is not highly likely to be mentioned spontaneously by Americans as a top problem facing the United States at this time, and has a low top-of-mind presence when the public is asked about priorities for government. The environment is seen as more important when Americans respond to a prompted list of issues. Americans willingly say the government is doing too little to protect the environment. Many worry about environmental conditions. A significant majority believes that the quality of the environment is getting worse, not better. While there has been an increase in Americans' general concern about the environment and awareness of global warming, their willingness to compromise economic growth or energy production in the furtherance of environmental quality has not grown."

Further, the commentary concludes that "the environmental policy initiatives Americans would most welcome would appear to be those with the most direct impact: maintaining the safety of drinking water, curbing toxic waste, and improving water and air quality."

Missourians support conservation. In Missouri, there are some similar feelings about the environment as the results from Gallup and yet some differences also. In an earlier post, I showed results for Missourians and their opinions about some conservation issues in Missouri. When asked about several conservation issues, Missourians indicated that they worry the most about drinking water pollution, pollution of rivers, streams, and lakes, air pollution, and the loss of natural habitat for wildlife. And like the Gallup results, conservation tasks may not be exactly at the top of many Missourians priority list, since in a survey conducted in 2000, only a few Missourians could agree on any one thing that the Department of Conservation could do to better serve them.

In a 2003 survey in Missouri, a majority of Missourians, 55 percent, agreed with the statement "I approve of protecting wildlife, unless it hurts the economic livelihood of people who make a living off the land" yet only 22 percent of Missourians agreed with the statement "I approve of filling wetlands if the land can be used to produce more jobs and income."

Regarding forests, 94 percent of Missourians approve of cutting trees to remove diseased or dying trees and 91 percent approve of cutting trees to improve forest health yet only 31 percent of Missourians approve of cutting trees to produce income for landowners.

Overall, 91 percent of Missourians agree that "it is important for outdoor places to be protected even if you don't plan to visit the area."

Clearly the Gallup results seem to match some of the general opinions of Missourians. On the other hand, the support for some issues in the Missouri survey results indicate that Missourians do support environmental issues differently than the general American public. And the overwhelming support in previous elections in Missouri, for conservation, in addition to recent continued support in elections for parks and soils, is a clear sign that Missourians recognize the benefits of conservation tasks.

I'll keep using the Gallup brain and their survey reports to compare with Missouri results as a way to better understand what Missourians are thinking about conservation.

Human Dimensions is Servant Leadership in Action for Conservation in Missouri

Human dimensions information for conservation is servant leadership in action. I have to recall the past to show how I believe human dimensions information for conservation is a servant leadership in action.

A decade of teaching and learning leadership skills. In 1996, I was asked to participate on the adult staff of a leadership training course for young men. While at that course, although I certainly enjoyed the experience, I would not have predicted that I would continue volunteering my vacation time for similar leadership training courses for every year since that time. This summer I will be part of the adult staff for my 10th course in Missouri. I'll also be involved in my sixth course at the national level, working with youth for an advanced experience at the Philmont Training Center in New Mexico.

Servant leadership is a concept about helping others. The training syllabus that we use has changed since 1996. In the 90s, it focused more on the rote skills of leadership, including communication, planning, conflict resolution, using resources effectively, and other skills. Today, using some of the best parts of current leadership theory and theories that have stood the test of time, the course is slightly different, with a focus more on broader concepts in addition to skills. One concept is that of servant leadership. Being a servant leader involves many things, and Larry Spears writes that the concept is "one that seeks to involve others in decision making, one strongly based in ethical and caring behavior, and one that is attempting to enhance the personal growth of people while improving the caring and quality of our many institutions." At its simplest, servant leadership is about a focus on the needs of others.

The training syllabus describes the concept as: "The concept of servant leadership encourages leaders to serve others while staying focused on achieving results in line with the organization's values and integrity. Servant leadership emphasizes collaboration, trust, empathy, and the ethical use of power."

This idea of including others in decision making, using an approach that is both ethical and respectful of others point-of-view, is what using human dimensions and public involvement in conservation decision-making is all about.

Human dimensions information is used to help others. Human dimensions helps resource mangers make informed decisions about fish, forest, and wildlife conservation. In Missouri, human dimensions efforts are some of the ways citizen opinions are included in conservation decisions. Human dimensions information helps managers and decision-makers provide conservation programs and services that meet the needs and expectations of Missourians. That is why I believe that human dimensions is servant leadership in action.

"What We Believe" statements of the Missouri Department of Conservation guide actions. Using human dimensions information helps me and the staff of the Missouri Department of Conservation demonstrate our "What We Believe" statements. The second statement is "All citizens are important; we value their trust and their point of view" and the third is "Missourians are our partners to achieve conservation success." The last statement includes: "Our decisions and behavior will be based on fairness, objectivity and the best scientific information."

Excellent public service is what we will provide. I believe that using human dimensions information for conservation decision-making helps achieve the first "What We Believe" statement "Excellent public service is what we will provide." These words in the "What We Believe" statements are very similar to the words I use each summer when teaching about the concept of servant leadership. Using human dimensions information and public involvement to meet the needs and expectations of Missourians for fish, forest, and wildlife in Missouri looks exactly like servant leadership to me.

Participation in Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation in Missouri

Every five years. The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation has been conducted about every five years since 1955. The survey is conducted for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Single best source. The survey is the single best source of information about participation and spending patterns related to fishing, hunting, and wildlife-watching. There is no other nationwide survey conducted in a similar statistically valid way. There is no better source of information. Results in recent surveys have been reported for each state. More information about the survey and how it is conducted is available here.


No statistical change between 1991 and 2001 for Missouri. The report for Missouri from the National Survey, available here, indicates there was not a statistically significant change in fishing, hunting, or wildlife-viewing participation away from home between 1991 and 2001 in Missouri. You can see in the chart here that there was a slight numerical decline in the estimates of participation for all but viewing around the home, which did have a statistically significant decline.

New data available soon from 2006. Preliminary results from the 2006 survey are being released now and the final reports will be available soon. I am very interested in seeing the results, especially to compare with previous years.

Why the survey is better than license sales to understand participation. In Missouri, a variety of fishing and hunting participation does not require a permit. For example, individuals under the age of 16 and those 65 and older do not need a permit for most fishing and hunting opportunities. Landowners of parcels five acres and larger do not need a permit for many fishing and hunting activities on their own property, except for needing transportation tags for deer and turkey and for appropriate waterfowl permits. More information about fishing and hunting licenses in Missouri is available here and a library of information about who needs a permit and who is exempted is available here. License sales are certainly useful to monitor trends, but don't show the entire range of participation.

The National Survey uses a statistically valid random sample of Missourians to estimate the levels of participation and expenditures for fishing, hunting, and wildlife-related recreation. The survey provides the best overall estimate of fishing and hunting available in Missouri. The Missouri Department of Conservation does conduct its own surveys and studies of permit numbers to gain additional information that is not collected in the National Survey.

In general, for the activities of fishing, hunting, and wildlife-watching that do have results reported in the National Survey, the survey numbers provide the best picture of participation.

Missourians Who Worry "A Fair Amount" and "A Great Deal" About Selected Conservation Issues

When asked about a variety of conservation issues, the pollution of drinking water had the highest level of personal worry by Missourians when the responses of "a fair amount" and "a great deal" are added together.

This "top two" approach provides an indication of the more strongly held opinions of Missourians about the selected conservation issues in this question.

Almost 80 percent or more of Missourians worry about drinking water pollution, pollution of rivers, streams, and lakes, and air pollution. A clear majority of Missourians worry about the loss of natural habitat for wildlife and not enough regulation for housing, business, or shopping developments. About one-half of Missourians worry about urban sprawl and a significant number of Missourians worry about channelized or altered streams.

The strongest held opinions, those that worry "a great deal," increase as the overall level of worry increases (the green shaded areas on the right in the chart) for the conservation issues in the list. For each issue, the number of Missourians that worry "a fair amount" (the areas shaded yellow on the left) is about the same.

In this chart, the overall ranking stays the same compared to the rankings obtained if only the levels of "a great deal" are compared in a chart or if the levels of all Missourians who had any inclination to worry about the issues are compared. Although I would be comfortable reporting any of the three ranking charts, the "top two" approach in the chart here provides a very clear perspective about what a majority of Missourians feel about the selected conservation issues.

Even a quick inspection of the chart indicates that the top four issues have the highest levels of worry by Missourians, including the issues of drinking water pollution, pollution of rivers, streams, and lakes, air pollution, and the loss of natural habitat for wildlife.

These results for how Missourians personally worry about conservation issues are from a conservation opinion survey conducted for the Missouri Department of Conservation by the University of Missouri in 2003. The survey was conducted by mail and a statistically valid random sample of Missouri adults from every Zip Code in Missouri were asked to provide their opinions. A total of 6,352 Missourians provided completed survey forms.

The Levels of Worry by Missourians for Selected Conservation Issues

Yesterday I provided a link to a report from the Brookings Institute about changes in population and where people live in Missouri and showed a chart using results from a conservation opinion survey about how Missourians worry about several conservation issues. In the chart, I included an overall total for the responses of "only a little," "a fair amount," and "a great deal."

It is often useful in survey analysis to compare the different responses to a question and look beyond the overall totals.

In the chart here, I have broken out the responses for each issue. Note in the chart that as the overall total level of worry for a specific issue increases, the number of Missourians who worried "only a little" decreases (the red shaded areas on the left) and the number that worry "a fair amount" stays about the same (the yellow shaded areas in the middle). It is the number of Missourians who worry "a great deal" that steadily increases as the overall level of worry increases (the green shaded areas on the right).

This suggests increasing awareness and concern for the conservation issues that have the highest levels of worry. Something about the issue itself has a stronger emotional meaning or seems more important. It could be that the issues that have the highest level of worry seem closer, or more personally "real" to Missourians.

Tomorrow, I'll look at just the top two responses for each conservation issue in the question. I want to see how the issues compare using the strongest levels of concern, including the responses of "a fair amount" and "a great deal," to see if this "top two" approach provides a different perspective about the level of importance of these issues to Missourians.

Missourians Personally Worry About Conservation Issues

When asked about a variety of conservation issues, the pollution of drinking water had the highest level of personal worry by Missourians.

Almost all Missourians worry about drinking water pollution, pollution of rivers, streams, and lakes, air pollution, and the loss of natural habitat for wildlife. A clear majority of Missourians also worry about not enough regulation for housing, business, or shopping developments, urban sprawl, and channelized or altered streams.

Many of these kinds of conservation issues were also discussed in a report published by the Brookings Institute in December, 2002 entitled Growth in the Heartland: Challenges and Opportunities for Missouri. The executive summary of that report is available here.

The Brookings Institute report describes Missouri as:

"Situated in the heartland, Missouri reflects the full range of American reality. The state is highly urban yet deeply rural. It contains two bustling metropolises, numerous fast growing suburbs, and dozens of typically American small towns. Elsewhere lie tranquil swaths of open country where farmers still rise before dawn and the view consists mainly of rich cropland, trees, and sky. Missouri sums up the best of the nation, in short."

The Brookings Report executive summary closes with:

"In the end: Citizens and localities have choices about how their communities grow, and can meaningfully shape their communities' futures for the better. Hopefully Growth in the Heartland will help Missourians make the best possible choices to ensure their state grows in a fiscally responsible and high-quality manner for generations to come."

For me, the most important message from the Brookings report is that Missourians are moving away from the truly urban and truly rural areas. The resulting increase of suburban areas will continue to have impacts on a variety of conservation issues. It is obvious that many Missourians personally worry about those conservation issues.

The results of how Missourians personally worry about conservation issues are from a conservation opinion survey conducted for the Missouri Department of Conservation by the University of Missouri in 2003. The survey was conducted by mail and a statistically valid random sample of Missouri adults from every Zip Code in Missouri were asked to provide their opinions. A total of 6,352 Missourians provided completed survey forms. The results reported here include the responses of "a little," "a fair amount," and "a great deal."

Missourians Watch Programs on TV About the Outdoors

In a survey where 6,352 Missourians responded, 80 percent of the individuals indicated that they had participated in the last 12 months in watching programs on TV about the outdoors. And the number was slightly higher for households, at 82 percent.

Missourians living in the outstate areas were slightly more likely to watch programs about the outdoors than those living in Missouri's largest urban areas. Men were more likely to watch, at 86 percent, than women, at 74 percent.

Those individuals who identified themselves as hunters, anglers, and environmentalists, and those who were more familiar with the Missouri Department of Conservation, were much more likely to watch programs about the outdoors.

If the household had children in the home, they were about the same in the level of watching as those without children, and age categories were about the same, except for those over 70 who were less likely to watch compared to those of age 21 to 69 years.

And the participation in outdoor TV program watching was much higher for those with a high level of outdoor activity (93 percent) compared to the level of participation in TV watching for those with a low level of outdoor activity (61 percent).

Thinking about these numbers, the following observations and conclusions from a study about national park visits does not seem to fit with the Missouri data.

John Whitehead, an economist at Appalachian State University, writes in his blog on environmental economics:

"Is love of nature in the US becoming love of electronic media? 16-year downtrend in national park visits explained by watching movies, playing video games, internet use, and oil prices."

He was referring to a recent abstract of a study published in the Journal of Environmental Management:

"After 50 years of steady increase, per capita visits to US national parks have declined since 1988. This decline, coincident with the rise in electronic entertainment media, may represent a shift in recreation choices with broader implications for the value placed on biodiversity conservation and environmentally responsible behavior. We compared the decline in per capita visits with a set of indicators representing alternate recreation choices and constraints. The Spearman correlation analyses found this decline in NPV to be significantly negatively correlated with several electronic entertainment indicators... Multiple linear regression of four of the entertainment media variables as well as oil prices explains 97.5% of this recent decline... We may be seeing evidence of a fundamental shift away from people's appreciation of nature (biophilia, Wilson 1984) to ‘videophilia,’ which we here define as “the new human tendency to focus on sedentary activities involving electronic media.” Such a shift would not bode well for the future of biodiversity conservation."

From the Missouri survey, when asked to choose, 56 percent of Missourians selected outdoor activities, like hiking, camping, birdwatching, fishing, or hunting, as the activities they enjoy most, compared to reading or watching TV (34 percent) and structured sports (9 percent) like tennis, softball, or bowling.

I'll want to read the article more closely to see how the study was conducted and how those conclusions might relate to Missouri.

Finding Human Dimensions Information About Conservation in Missouri with American Factfinder

Human dimensions information about conservation, or even demographic information of any kind, used to be easy to find but was often difficult to obtain. There were relatively few books or sources and they were difficult to locate in a nearby library or expensive to purchase.

Now, it seems that because so much information is available online, specific information is harder to find, but easier to obtain. There are so many online sources for demographic information that narrowing a search to find what is needed can be difficult. Once the information is identified, it is often incredibly easier to obtain, usually requiring only a mouse click to download the file or to design custom analysis.

The most important source of information about people in Missouri or the United States, and the first place to look, is the U.S. Census Bureau and their American Factfinder Web pages available here.

For example, type in "Missouri" in the state entry box for "Get a fact sheet for your community..." and press "GO" which will yield a list of population characteristics with all sorts of variables of interest. Down the page is a listing of housing units and characteristics, as available here. If you are interested, the estimate for total housing units in Missouri for 2005 was 2,592,809.

Try entering your own community and look at the characteristics available.

Or you can view a narrative with graphs about the how the population of Missouri is distributed as available here. In the text it is stated that in 2005 there were 2.3 million households in Missouri. The average household size was 2.5 people.

You can use the American Factfinder to obtain very focused and specific information. Overall, I think it's relatively easy to use and the availability of information is incredible. Obtaining the information is very easy. And don't be overwhelmed at the amount of information. Finding what you want is usually a matter of persistence and logical searching.

Finding and obtaining information at the American Factfinder is probably easier than my new puppy's experience at selecting a plastic egg out of a basket. He was just not sure which egg to chew on first.

Using Surveys for Public Involvement in Conservation

Frederick Mosteller, who applied statistics to help everyday people understand many subjects, said "It is easy to lie with statistics, but it is easier to lie without them."

Statistics from surveys are often used to provide accountability for conservation decisions related to fish, forest, and wildlife management. Opinions, interests, participation in activities, and satisfaction with performance are some of the human dimensions of conservation efforts. These human dimensions help the staff of the Missouri Department of Conservation make informed and accountable decisions.

Surveys provide a cost-effective way to learn about the conservation opinions of Missourians by asking a relatively small number of individuals to provide their opinions. For most questions, valid results can be obtained by asking about 800-1000 individuals to offer their opinions from the entire 5.8 million individuals that live in Missouri. When conducted correctly, a survey can provide results that are representative of the entire population. If we are willing to accept a slight decrease in the ability to separate overall responses for individual questions, a valid survey in Missouri could be conducted with 300-400 individuals.

Think of looking at the shoes that people wear. If you look at enough people, in enough places, you'll soon see most of the kinds of shoes that people wear, without having to look at everyone, in every place. Using the information you observe, you can soon predict the kinds of shoes people are wearing in other places.

An introduction to using surveys to collect public opinions is available at: http://www.whatisasurvey.info/

An article in the Missouri Conservationist that describes how surveys are used for conservation and fish, forest, and wildlife management is available at: http://www.mdc.mo.gov/conmag/2007/01/20.htm and a previous article is available at: http://www.mdc.mo.gov/conmag/2000/02/40.htm

Frederick Mosteller, who died in 2006, has biographical information at the American Statistical Association, available at: http://www.amstat.org/about/statisticians/index.cfm?fuseaction=biosinfo&BioID=10

If you want to become a statistician and pursue a career using statistics, an excellent source of information about what a statistician does and how to become one is available at: http://www.amstat.org/careers/index.cfm?fuseaction=main

The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation: Information for Conservation in Missouri

The National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation is a nationwide survey that has been conducted about every five years since 1955. It is the only source of comprehensive information on participation and expenditures related to fishing, hunting, and wildlife recreation that is comparable on a state-by-state basis. It provides information on the number of participants in fishing, hunting, and wildlife watching (observing, photographing, and feeding wildlife) and the amount of time and money spent on those activities.

I use information from this survey every working day to answer questions about how many individuals fish, hunt, or watch wildlife in Missouri and what they spend on those activities. The information on expenditures is used to calculate economic impacts. Further analysis of the data provides estimates of participation and economic impact for many individual species or categories of fish and wildlife.

The survey is the single best source for fishing, hunting, and wildlife-related recreation participation and expenditure information for the state of Missouri and the information is critically important for decision-makers and staff in the Missouri Department of Conservation.

The survey is conducted by the U.S. Census Bureau for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service at the request of the individual state agencies responsible for fish and wildlife management. The most recent survey was conducted in 2006 and the new data is expected to be available later this summer.

The survey is carefully designed and conducted using the most appropriate statistical methods. A representative sample of people nationwide is randomly selected to participate in the survey. In 2001, the U.S. Census Bureau collected information for the survey in two phases. The first phase was the screening sample which began in April 2001. During the screening phase, the Census Bureau interviewed a sample of 77,000 households nationwide to determine who in the household had fished, hunted, or wildlife watched in 2000, and who had engaged or planned to engage in those activities in 2001. In most cases, one adult household member provided information for all household members. The screen primarily covered 2000 activities while the next, more in-depth phase, covered 2001 activities.

The second phase of data collection consisted of three detailed interview waves. The first wave began in April 2001, the second in September 2001, and the last in January 2002. Interviews were conducted with samples of likely anglers, hunters, and wildlife watchers who were identified in the initial screening phase. The Census Bureau conducted these interviews primarily by telephone, with in-person interviews in the first and third interview waves for those respondents who could not be reached by telephone. Respondents in the detailed interviews were limited to persons at least 16 years old. Each respondent provided information pertaining only to his or her activities and expenditures. Sample sizes were designed to provide statistically reliable results at the State level. Altogether, interviews were completed for 25,070 respondents from the sportspersons sample and 15,303 from the wildlife watchers sample. The response rate for the screen phase was 75%. For the sportspersons sample it was 88% and for the wildlife-watching sample, 90%.

A wide variety of reports are prepared using data from the survey. More information about the 2001 National Survey and a listing of available reports is available at: http://federalaid.fws.gov/surveys/surveys.html

A listing, with links to pdf files available, of the national reports and the reports for the individual states for both the 2001 and 1996 surveys is available at: http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/fishing.html

The actual data from the survey is available, along with a data dictionary, at: http://www.bls.census.gov/ferretftp.htm#fish_hunt and data can be extracted online to create custom datasets using a utility from the Census Bureau at: http://dataferrett.census.gov/

Additional economic analysis that uses data from the National Survey is conducted by Southwick Associates, a private economics company, and is available at: http://www.southwickassociates.com/freereports/default.aspx

Human Dimensions: Your Opinion Counts with the Missouri Department of Conservation

The Missouri Department of Conservation hired its first full-time social researcher in 1978. The Department had already hired full-time statisticians and biologists to help guide a wide range of research, including social and economic research. In 1984 the first full-time economist was hired. Many biologists also conducted social research projects as part of their ongoing efforts, particularly related to fishing and hunting harvest and participation. I joined the staff in 1991 to conduct social research. And since that time several additional staff have been employed, to conduct statewide opinion surveys, to conduct and coordinate harvest and participation surveys, to coordinate forest economics information and research, to conduct waterfowl social research, to conduct focus groups, to respond to citizens as an Ombudsman, to conduct public meeting forums, and to provide staff with assistance on a wide range of public involvement methods.

Social and economic research was certainly not new, prior to 1978, for the Missouri Department of Conservation. In 1942, the Conservation Commission asked Department staff, including Conservation Agents, to find out about public perceptions of Department progress. In 1945, Rudolf Bennitt reported on some social aspects of quail hunting using data collected from 1938 to 1944. In the early 1970s, a study was conducted for the Citizens Conservation Committee, a private citizens committee, to determine the preference of Missourians for either a soft drink tax or a sales tax to fund conservation activities. Missourians did not indicate a preference for the type of tax in that survey. It was in 1975 that the Conservation Commission endorsed the efforts of that committee of private citizens to seek a ballot initiative to place a sales tax for conservation efforts before the citizens of Missouri. The vote in 1976 to create a Conservation Sales Tax helped provide funding for the Missouri Department of Conservation that has enabled staff to make more accountable conservation decisions. Decisions and Department staff are more accountable today because of the increased number of full-time staff dedicated to listening to and learning about the opinions of Missourians and the increased number of surveys and public involvement efforts that make it easier for Missourians to provide their opinions and participation preferences for fish, forest, and wildlife management. It is these "human dimensions" efforts that continue to be an important part of accountable decision-making.

Human Dimensions is a term that developed in the 1970s as resource professionals and educators combined aspects of sociology, economics, organizational management, and psychology into resource management. Although the term may be relatively new, the idea is not. Aldo Leopold stated in 1930 that wildlife conservation would make the greatest advances if it drew support from a broad-based constituency. As human dimensions has developed since the 1970s, it is about understanding the “people” aspects of resource management and understanding the many citizen interests in fish, forests, and wildlife and their expectations and satisfaction with management efforts.

Human dimensions can be equated with social and economic information. A business would call it “market information;” that is, information about their customers and the expectations and responses to their products and services. Human dimensions certainly includes aspects of customer satisfaction and also public input and involvement in decision-making processes.

How is human dimensions information used? Human dimensions can be like an informational highway sign that confirms something you may have already observed. It provides accountability for your intuition or what you may already know to be true. It can provide new insights or new information about activities and expectations. Human dimensions information is useful as performance measures or in determining satisfaction levels. The information can be very useful in developing or modifying programs and services to improve the quality of service or to improve the efficiency of the business processes to provide programs and services.

It is the intense effort that the Missouri Department of Conservation applies to listening to Missourians, to learning about the human dimensions of conservation, that allows the opinions of Missourians to be heard and then used in conservation decisions. It is this intense effort that makes the opinions of Missourians count in conservation decisions.

More information about how the conservation opinions of Missourians count is in a recent article in the Missouri Conservationist magazine, entitled "Your Opinion Counts" which is available at: http://www.mdc.mo.gov/conmag/2007/01/20.htm