Deer Survey Methods

    Our purpose for conducting this public attitude survey was to determine if the residents of Stevens Point feel there is a problem with the urban deer population. The contents of the survey included questions about methods for control of high populations, property, personal opinions, and background information.  Our methods for acquiring this information were via phone surveys and door-to-door interviews.  Residents in randomly chosen areas completed 335 surveys. Below is the survey used.    

If the survey does not appear above, click here to see it.

Urban Deer Data Analysis

    From the data collected, we were able to generate graphs depicting a diversity of opinions and the different categories of people they belonged to.  The following graphs illustrate the connection between attitudes and variables including: gender, interests, and experiences. 

General Attitude

Figure 1. This graph depicts the overall percent response of attitudes towards the urban deer population size. The overall trend is a neutral attitude, which is leaning towards agreement with the statement that the deer population is too high.

Back

Who Was Surveyed

Figure 2. The results of the differences between gender responses to the urban deer population suggest that males agreed more strongly with the statement than did females. Females tended to be more neutral in their response.

Figure 3. Public hunting participation in response to the urban deer population shows that both hunters and non-hunters tend to agree that the population is too high. Hunters agreed more strongly about the population size than non-hunters. Given that most of the non-hunting population consists of females, gender and hunters are interrelated and have similar response trends.

Figure 4. The results of different age class responses to the urban deer population suggest that older individuals are more likely to agree that there is a problem with the population. Younger age classes tended to be more neutral. This trend may be explained because older classes are likely to be permanent residents with personal property and have had more experience with the deer population.

Back

Is There a Problem?

Figure 5. This graph depicts the responses of those who have experienced property damage due to deer compared to those without any deer related property damage. The results of this comparison show that those who have had property damage were more likely to agree that the urban deer population was too high. People without property damage were more neutral towards the population.

Figure 6. This graph depicts the responses of public who were involved in a deer-car accident compared to those who have not been involved in an accident. Accident victims include individuals with personal experience as well as individuals whose friends or family have had an accident. The results show that accident victims tend to agree that there is a population size problem. Non-victims tended to have a more neutral attitude.

Figure 7.  The results of comparing pet ownership to the respective attitudes towards the urban deer population size suggest that pet owners agreed more strongly that there was a problem while non-pet owners were generally more neutral.

Figure 8. This graph depicts the attitude of gardeners vs. non-gardeners with respect to the urban deer population size. Gardeners were more likely to agree that there was a problem with the deer population size; non-gardeners tended to be more neutral.

Back

Attitudes Towards Control Methods

Figure 9. This graph shows the results of overall attitudes toward using contraception to control the urban deer population vs. percent response suggest that many people are neutral about contraception use. However slightly more people do agree with using contraception.

Figure 10. The results of attitudes toward using urban bow hunting to control the deer population vs. percent response shows that many people agree with the method.

Figure 11. The results of attitudes toward using urban gun hunting to control the deer population vs. percent response shows that many people have different opinions about the control method. The highest percent responses of people do agree with using urban gun hunting as a control method.

Figure 12. The comparison of attitudes toward using sharp-shooting to control the deer population and. percent response shows that many people disagree with the sharp-shooting.

Figure 13. The comparison of attitudes of using relocation to control the deer population and percent response shows that a majority of agrees with the method.

Back

Attitudes of Hunters Vs. Non-Hunters

Figure 14. People who hunt tend to disagree with using contraception to control the deer population more than people who do not hunt. Non-hunters tend to have more neutral opinions about contraceptive use.

Figure 15. The comparison of hunting preference towards using urban bow hunting to control the urban deer population shows that hunters tend to strongly agree on the use of urban bow hunting.  Non-hunters tend to disagree with the use of urban bow hunting than hunters.

Figure 16. The comparison of attitudes of hunters and non-hunters towards urban gun hunting to control the urban deer population shows that hunters tend to have stronger agreement with the use of urban gun hunting to control the deer population.

Figure 17. The comparison of attitudes of hunters and non-hunters towards relocation of deer to control the urban deer population shows that non-hunters tend to agree more with relocation of deer than hunters. Hunters tend to disagree more with relocating the deer population.

Figure 18. The comparison of attitudes of hunters and non-hunters towards sharp-shooting to control the urban deer population shows that hunters tend to disagree with sharp-shooting at a higher rate than non-hunters. However hunters also have a higher rate of strongly agreement with the use of sharp-shooting.

Back

Male and Female Preference in Control Methods

Figure 19. The comparison of male and female attitudes towards using urban bow hunting to control the urban deer population shows that males tend to agree with the use of urban bow hunting more than females, while females tend to disagree more.

Figure 20. The comparison of male and female attitudes towards contraception use to control urban deer populations shows that females tend to agree with the use of contraception more than males. Males tend to disagree more with the use of contraception.

Figure 21. The comparison of male and female attitudes towards using urban gun hunting to control the urban deer population shows that females tend to disagree with using urban gun hunting more than males. Males tend to agree with the use of urban gun hunting to control the deer population.

Figure 22. This graph represents male and female attitudes towards relocating deer to control urban deer population. Females tend to agree with relocating deer more than males, while males tend to disagree more.

Back

Attitudes Towards Monetary Options

Figure 23. This graph depicts the overall attitude of the respondents towards taxation as a means to support the deer population control methods. The majority is against support through taxation.

Figure 24. This graph shows the results of the overall attitudes of the respondents towards voluntary contributions such as donations or fundraising as a means to support the deer population control methods. There is less discrepancy between the attitudes than with taxation, but the trend is still against support through voluntary contributions.

Figure 25. This graph represents the attitude of public who have been involved in a deer-car accident vs. those who have not been towards voluntary contributions such as donations or fundraising for deer management. Accident victims include individuals with personal experience as well as individual whose friends or family have had an accident. The results show that those who have had an accident are more likely to support voluntary contributions while those who have not been in an accident are less willing to support contributions.

Back

Miscellaneous Comparisons

Figure 26. The comparison of fencing property and reporting property damage shows that people who report damage are more likely to have a fenced in property , and people with out a fenced property are less likely to report property damage.

Figure 27. The comparison of pet ownership and property damage caused by deer shows that pet owners are somewhat more likely to report property damage than non-pet owners.

Top of page

For more information contact

Dr. Tim F. Ginnett, (715) 346 - 4191

Tim.Ginnett@uwsp.edu