Private Landowners’ Willingness to Enroll Their Properties in a Public Hunting Access Program in Northeast Missouri

State wildlife agencies have successfully used public hunting access fees to increase hunting opportunity and to provide a financial incentive to private landowners for maintaining habitat. Typical payments per hectare (ac) include $3.29 ($1.25) on average in Kansas, $2.47-$3.71($1-$1.50) for pheasant hunting in Colorado, $2.47-$12.36 ($1–$5) in North Dakota for pheasant hunting, and $4.45 ($1.80) on average in South Dakota. We studied the USDA Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) in 2004 in Adair, Knox, Macon, Monroe, Ralls, Randolph, Schuyler, and Scotland counties in northeast Missouri as part of a quail and songbird habitat restoration initiative. CRP is prominent in these counties with 83,040 ha (205,197 ac) enrolled. We conducted a mail-back survey of all CRP contract holders, totaling 3,283 landowners to study their willingness to enroll their properties in a hypothetical public- access hunting program. The survey was designed to provide information about landowner demographics, attitudes toward wildlife and hunting, and knowledge of wildlife habitat management aspects of the CRP. We used the Kansas Department of Wildlife and Parks Walk-In Hunting Access Program as an example for questions related to the concept of public-access hunting, and presented landowners with hypothetical annual lease payments for enrolling, using a discrete-choice modeling framework. Survey response rate was relatively high at 59.5%. The average respondent had 34.6 ha (85.5 ac) enrolled in CRP, and field size averaged 6.47 ha (16.0 ac), ranging from 0.04 to 84.9 ha (0.1–209.7 ac). Wildlife as a product of the CRP was ‘very’ or ‘somewhat important’ to 89% of respondents and, among a list of wildlife species and native plants, northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) was most popular with 80% of respondents checking ‘very’ or ‘somewhat important’ on the survey. The corresponding values were 53–66% for wild turkey (Meleagris gallopavo), deer, rabbit, pheasant, and songbirds. We asked if landowners would enroll any of their CRP land in a public-access hunting program (PAHP). We used 8 different versions of the survey, each with a different ‘offer’ level in the question to evaluate the potential costs of a PAHP program. The structure of the survey specified whether landowners would accept payment of $X/ac, where X was one value randomly selected from the set of$1, $2,$3, $4,$5, $7,$10, or $20. None of respondents chose ‘yes’ at a PAHP value of$0, 91.9% chose ‘no’, and 8.1% chose ‘don’t know’; respective values ($) and choices ($1-1.7%, 91.3%, and 6.9%; $2-3.0$3-4.0%, 84.9%, and 11.2%; $4-3.4$5- 4.7%, 83.4%, and 11.9%; $7-7.1$10-8.4%, 77.0%, and 14.7%; and $20-14.8$2/ac ($4.94/ha), ~ 3$10,500. About 1,012 ha (2,500 ac) would be designated for quail hunting of this hypothetical PAHP area, based on respondents’ answers to what type of hunting they would allow. We estimate that 5,261 ha (13,000 ac) would be enrolled with 2,489 ha (6,150 ac) open for quail hunting at an annual cost of about $90,000 if the payment level was raised to$7/ac ($17.30/ha). There is potential to improve the feasibility of CRP lands for bobwhite hunting in northeast Missouri by adding a public-access hunting incentive, but managers will be challenged to use this approach successfully. Landowners’ inclination to allow access for deer hunting, but not for quail hunting, reduces an agency’s justification for using quail hunting access as an approach to improve conservation of bobwhites, in addition to the relatively high cost

Rowing Against the Tide: Getting Landowners to Manage Habitat for Their Favorite Wildlife Species, Bobwhites

A primary cause of the decline of northern bobwhite (Colinus virginianus) is that landowners often lack adequate motivation for the arduous task of creating and managing habitat. We gained insight into some of these motivations through survey questionnaires and focus groups in Missouri, and report findings from 3 studies containing 3,057 survey responses during 2004–2007. One of the surveys targeted Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) lands (‘CRP survey’), another lands with potential for bobwhite restoration (‘bobwhite survey’), and the third focused on grassland bird restoration. Landowners in each survey identified bobwhites as the most popular (.80% of respondents chose ‘somewhat’ or ‘very’ ‘important’ to have bobwhites ‘on my land’) natural resource among a list that included deer, turkeys, prairie-chickens, native plants, grassland birds, rabbits, hawks/owls, etc. Bobwhites were highly valued by landowners, but other answers in these surveys revealed many obstacles to habitat management including economics, time, knowledge, skill, and equipment. For example, only 39% of respondents in the bobwhite survey were interested in joining a habitat restoration cooperative, and ,50% of respondents in all surveys were willing to adopt quail-friendly habitat management (prescribed fire, disking, herbicides, moderate grazing, native vegetation, presence of weeds, etc.). Bobwhite restoration programs, because of the gap between landowners’ fondness for quail, but being less willing to take action, must include a comprehensive approach, ranging from local community involvement by agency biologists and non-government organizations to resource-use policy in Washington, D.C

Quality of Life and Adverse Events: Prognostic Relationships in Long-Term Ovarian Cancer Survival

Background: There is a critical need to identify patient characteristics associated with long-term ovarian cancer survival. Methods: Quality of life (QOL), measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Ovarian-Trial Outcome Index (FACT-O-TOI), including physical, functional, and ovarian-specific subscales, was compared between long-term survivors (LTS) (8+ years) and short-term survivors (STS) (<5 years) of GOG 218 at baseline; before cycles 4, 7, 13, 21; and 6 months post-treatment using linear and longitudinal mixed models adjusted for covariates. Adverse events (AEs) were compared between survivor groups at each assessment using generalized linear models. All P values are 2-sided. Results: QOL differed statistically significantly between STS (N = 1115) and LTS (N = 260) (P < .001). Baseline FACT-O-TOI and FACT-O-TOI change were independently associated with long-term survival (odds ratio = 1.05, 95% confidence interval = 1.03 to 1.06 and odds ratio = 1.06, 95% confidence interval = 1.05 to 1.07, respectively). A 7-point increase in baseline QOL was associated with a 38.0% increase in probability of LTS, and a 9-point increase in QOL change was associated with a 67.0% increase in odds for LTS. QOL decreased statistically significantly with increasing AE quartiles (cycle 4 quartiles: 0-5 vs 6-8 vs 9-11 vs ≥12 AEs, P = .01; cycle 21 quartiles: 0-2 vs 3 vs 4-5 vs ≥6 AEs, P = .001). Further, LTS reported statistically significantly better QOL compared with STS (P = .03 and P = .01, cycles 4 and 21, respectively), with similar findings across higher AE grades. Conclusions: Baseline and longitudinal QOL change scores distinguished LTS vs STS and are robust prognosticators for long-term survival. Results have trial design and supportive care implications, providing meaningful prognostic value in this understudied population