Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T09:35:16.648Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Method of Investigating the Importance of Wildlife to Countyside Visitors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 August 2009

Rodney D. Everett
Rodney D. Everett
Affiliation:
Department of Biology, University of York, Heslington, York, England.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A total of 2,816 questionnaires were completed in the Dalby Forest Area in the period from March 1975 to March 1976. The answers to six questions were combined into a wildlife interest index. These questions were concerned with: (1) the interviewees' commitments to a wildlife organization, (2) the interviewees’ activities in the Area, (3) the elements of the Area which increased the interviewees' enjoyment, (4) benefits that the interviewees felt from visiting the Area, (5) the wildlife that interviewees has seen or hoped to see, and (6) the interviewees' desire to use a hide.

The interviewees' interest in wildlife was made up of an appreciation of the aesthetic, emotive, and psychological, elements of wildlife, as well as a purely active pursuit in nature study. These attributes of wildlife are all aspects which should be taken into consideration when assessing the role of wildlife in the recreational qualities of an area.

Type
Main Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , Autumn 1977 , pp. 227 - 231
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 1977

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arbuthnott, , The Viscount of (1968). Conservation and land management. Biological Conservation, 1(1), pp. 49–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arvill, R. (1967). Man and Environment: Crisis and the Strategy of Choice. Penguin, Middlesex, England: 332 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Bayfield, N. G. & Barrow, G. C. (1976). The use and attraction of nature trails in upland Britain. Biological Conservation, 9(4), pp. 267–92, illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Black, J. D. (1968). The Management and Conservation of Biological Resources. F. A. Davis, Philadelphia: x + 329 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Driver, B. L. (1972). Potential contributions of psychology to recreation resource management. Pp. 233–44 in Environment and the Social Sciences; Perspectives and Applications (Ed. Wohlwill, J. F. & Carson, D. H.). American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.: xx + 300 pp., illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, N. W. (1969). Experience with pesticides and the theory of conservation. Biological Conservation, 1(3), pp. 201–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mutch, W. E. S. (1968). Public Recreation in National Forests: A Factual Study. Forestry Commission Booklet No. 21, HMSO, London: 99 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Ratcliffe, D. A. (1976). Thoughts towards a philosophy of nature conservation. Biological Conservation, 9(1), pp. 45–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowe, J. J. (1973). Public Demands on Forests in Relation to Forest Wildlife. Forestry Commission Research and Development Paper No. 104, Foresty Commission, London: 8 pp.Google Scholar
Shafer, E. L. & Meitz, J. (1972). Aesthetic and emotional experiences rate high with northeast wilderness hikers. Pp. 207–16 in Environment and the Social Sciences; Perspectives and Applications (Ed. Wohlwill, J. F. & Carson, D. H.). American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C: xx + 300 pp., illustr.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sillitoe, K. K. (1969). Planning for Leisure. HMSO, London: xiv + 288 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Stamp, Sir Dudley (1969). Nature Conservation in Britain. (New Naturalist Series 49.) Collins, London: xiv + 273 pp., illustr.Google Scholar
Usher, M. B., Pitt, M. & Boer, G. De (1974). Recreational pressures in the summer months on a nature reserve on the Yorkshire Coast, England. Environmental Conservation, 1(1), pp. 43–9, 4 figs.CrossRefGoogle Scholar