The future of wildlife conservation funding: What options do U.S. college students support?

Lincoln R. Larson, Markus Nils Peterson, Richard Von Furstenberg, Victoria R. Vayer, Kangjae Jerry Lee, Daniel Y. Choi, Kathryn Stevenson, Adam A. Ahlers, Christine Anhalt-Depies, Taniya Bethke, Jeremy T. Bruskotter, Christopher J. Chizinski, Brian Clark, Ashley A. Dayer, Kelly Heber Dunning, Benjamin Ghasemi, Larry Gigliotti, Alan Graefe, Kris Irwin, Samuel J. KeithMatt Kelly, Gerard Kyle, Elizabeth Metcalf, Wayde Morse, Mark D. Needham, Neelam C. Poudyal, Michael Quartuch, Shari Rodriguez, Chelsie Romulo, Ryan L. Sharp, William Siemer, Matthew T. Springer, Brett Stayton, Richard Stedman, Taylor Stein, Timothy R. Van Deelen, Jason Whiting, Richelle L. Winkler, Kyle Maurice Woosnam

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

10 Scopus citations


Insufficient funding is a major impediment to conservation efforts around the world. In the United States, a decline in hunting participation threatens sustainability of the “user-pay, public benefit” model that has supported wildlife conservation for nearly 100 years, forcing wildlife management agencies to contemplate alternative funding strategies. We investigated support for potential funding options among diverse college students, a rapidly expanding and politically active voting bloc with a potentially powerful influence on the future of conservation. From 2018 to 2020, we surveyed 17,203 undergraduate students at public universities across 22 states. Students preferred innovative approaches to conservation funding, with 72% supporting funding derived from industry sources (e.g., natural resource extraction companies), 63% supporting state sources (e.g., general sales tax), and 43% supporting conventional user-based sources such as license fees and excise taxes associated with outdoor recreation activities (e.g., hunting). Findings emphasize the need to broaden the base of support for conservation funding and highlight the importance of considering the preferences and perspectives of young adults and other diverse beneficiaries of wildlife conservation.

Original languageEnglish
Article numbere505
JournalConservation Science and Practice
Issue number10
StatePublished - Oct 2021

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The Authors. Conservation Science and Practice published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of Society for Conservation Biology

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Global and Planetary Change
  • Ecology
  • Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
  • Nature and Landscape Conservation


Dive into the research topics of 'The future of wildlife conservation funding: What options do U.S. college students support?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this