Demographics of voting on the 1996 Massachusetts ballot referendum

Human Dimensions of Wildlife

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 1999, Pages 40-55

  Zwick, Rodney R ^b   Woytek, William A ^a  

^a Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife   (United States)

^b LYNDON STATE COLLEGE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0002819509     PISSN: 10871209     EISSN: 1533158X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/10871209909359150     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Albrecht, D. E., & Albrecht, S. L. (1996). Family structure among urban, rural, and farm populations: Classic sociological theory revisited. Rural Sociology, 61(3), 446-463.
2. Arthur, L. M., & Wilson, W. R. (1979). Assessing demand for wildlife resources: A first step. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 7(1), 30-34.
3. Bath, A. J. (1989). The public and wolf réintroduction in Yellowstone National Park. Society and Natural Resources, 2, 297-306.
4. Bath, A. J., & Buchanan, T. (1989). Attitudes of interest groups in Wyoming toward wolf restoration in Yellowstone National Park. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 17, 519-525.
5. Bealer, R. C., Willits, F. K., & Kuvlesky, W. P. (1965). The meaning of rurality in American society: Some implications of alternative definitions. Rural Sociology, 30, 255-266.
6. Bell, M.M. (1992). The fruit of difference: The rural-urban continuum as a system of identity. Rural Sociology, 57(1), 65-82.
7. Decker, D. J., Brown, T. L., Driver, B. L., Sc Brown, P. J. (1987). Theoretical developments in assessing social values of wildlife: Toward a comprehensive understanding of wildlife recreation involvement. In D. J. Decker, and G. R. Goff (Eds.), Valuing wildlife: Economic and social perspectives. Bolder: West view.
8. Decker, D. J., Loker, C. A., Sc Bass, J. M. (1993). Colorado black bear hunting controversy: Amendment #10 post-election voter analysis. Unit Report No. 8. Project Report for the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Ft. Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Human Dimensions in Natural Resources Unit.
9. Decker, D. J., Provencher, R., Sc Brown, T. L. (1984). Antecedents to hunting participation: An exploratory study of social-psychological determinants of initiation, continuation, and desertion in hunting. Outdoor Recreation Resource Unit No. 84-6. Ithaca, NY: Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University, 175 pp.
10. Decker, T., Sc Langlois, S. (1993). Assessment of wildlife damage incurred by cranberry growers in Massachusetts. Massachusetts Division of Fisheries and Wildlife Technical Report No. 101. 49pp.
11. Fortmann, L., & Kusel, J. (1990). New voices, old beliefs: Forest environmentalism among new and long-standing rural residents. Rural Sociology, 55(2), 214-232.
12. Fulton, D.C., Manfredo, M. J., & Lipscomb, J. (1996). Wildlife value orientations: A conceptual and measurement approach. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1 (2), 24-47.
13. Fulton, D. C., Pate, J., Sc Manfredo, M. J. (1995). Colorado residents' attitudes toward trapping in Colorado. Project Report No. 23. Project Report for the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Ft. Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Human Dimensions in Natural Resources Unit.
14. Galvin, W. F. (1996). Massachusetts election statistics 1996. Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Elections Division. Public Document No. 43. 555pp.
15. Gentile, J. R. (1987). The evolution of antitrapping sentiment in the United States: A review and commentary. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 15, 490-503.
16. Gilbert, F. F. (1991). Trapping: An animal rights issue or a legitimate wildlife management technique? The move to international standards. Transactions of the North American Wildlife & Natural Resource Conference, 56, 400-408.
17. Hendee, J. C., (1974). A multiple-satisfaction approach to game management. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 2(3), 104-113.
18. Hendee, J. C., Sc Schoenfield, C. (1973). Human dimensions in wildlife programs. Washington DC: Mercury Press. 192 pp.
19. Horn, S., & Olsen, S. (1996). Final project. Unpublished Paper. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts, Department of Forestry and Wildlife Management. Spring 1996.
20. Hornor, E. R. (1996). Massachusetts Municipal Profiles 1996-97. Information Publications, Palo Alto, CA. 380pp.
21. Howe, P. J. (1996). Animal lovers track the voters; master ballot question politics. Boston Globe, Nov 19, 1996.
22. Jones, D. M. (1997). Characteristics associated with voting on state-wide ballot measures affecting animals. M.S. Thesis, Tufts University, Boston, Massachusetts.
23. Jost, K. (1990). Initiatives: True democracy or bad lawmaking? Congressional Quarterly Editorial Research Reports. August, 462-474.
24. Kellert, S. R. (1976). Perceptions ofanimals in American society. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 41, 533-546.
25. Kellert, S. R. (1985). Social and perceptual factors in endangered species management. Journal of Wildlife Management, 49(2), 528-536.
26. Kellert, S. R. (1986). The public and timber wolf in Minnesota. Transactions of the National Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 51, 193-200.
27. Larson, O. F. (1978). Values and beliefs of rural people. In T. R. Ford (Ed.), Rural U.S.A.: Persistence and Change. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
28. Leopold, A. (1930). The American game policy in a nutshell. Transactions American Game Conference, 17, 281-283.
29. Leopold, A. (1949). A sand county almanac. Oxford Univ. Press. 269 pp.
30. Loker, C. A., & Decker, D. J. (1995). Colorado black bear hunting referendum: What was behind the vote? Wildlife Society Bulletin, 23, 301-376.
31. Macauley, D. (1987). Political animals: A study ofemerging animal rights movement in the United States. Between the Species, 3(3), 66-74.
32. Manfredo, M. J., Fulton, D. C., & Pierce, C. L. (1997). Understanding voter behavior of wildlife ballot initiatives: Colorado’s trapping amendment. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2 (4), 22-39.
33. Manfredo, M. J., & Zinn, H. C. (1996). Population change and its implications for wildlife management in the new west: A case study in Colorado. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 1(3), 62-74.
34. Manfredo, M. J., Fulton, D. C., Ciruli, F., Cassin, S., Lipscomb, J., Sikorowski, L., & Norris, S. (1993). Summary of project report: Coloradoan’s recreational uses of and attitudes toward wildlife. Summary of Project Report No. 6. Project Report for the Colorado Division of Wildlife. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Human Dimensions in Natural Resources Unit.
35. Minnis, D. L. (1998). Wildlife policy-making by the electorate: An overview of citizen-sponsored ballot measures on hunting and trapping. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 26(1), 75-83.
36. Mohai, P., & Twight, B. W. (1986). Rural-urban differences in environmentalism revisited: Nature manipulative vs. nature exploitive orientations. Paper presented at the Rural Sociological Society Annual Meeting, Salt Lake City, UT.
37. More, T. A. (1973). Attitudes of Massachusetts hunters. Transactions of the National Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 38, 230-234.
38. Newby, H. (1980). Rural sociology. A trend report. Current Sociology, 28, 3-41.
39. Newby, H. (1986). Locality and rurality: The restructuring of social relations. Regional Studies, 20, 209-215.
40. Pahl, R. (1966). The urban-rural continuum. Sociologia Ruralis, 6, 299-327.
41. Proulx, G., & Barret, M. W. (1991). Ideological conflict between animal rightists and wildlife professionals over trapping wild furbearers. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 56, 387-399.
42. Rank, M. R., & Hirschl, T. A. (1988). A rural-urban comparison of welfare exits: The importance of population density. Rural Sociology, 53(2),190-206.
43. Redfield, R. C. (1947). The folk society. American Journal of Sociology, 60,293-308.
44. Richards, R. T., & Krannich, R. S. (1991). The ideology of the animal rights movement and activists’ attitudes toward wildlife. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 56, 363-371.
45. Shaw, W. W., Carpenter, E.H., Arthur, L. M., Gum, R. L., & Witter, D. J. (1978). The American disposition toward hunting in 1976. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 6, 33-35.
46. Shaw, W. W. (1974). Meanings of wildlife for Americans: Contemporary attitudes and social trends. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference, 39, 151-155.
47. Shaw, W. W. (1977). A survey of hunting opponents. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 5(1), 19-24.
48. Schoenecker, K. A., & Shaw, W. W. (1997). Attitudes toward proposed réintroduction of Mexican gray wolves in Arizona. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2(3), 42-55.
49. Singer, P. (1990). Animal liberation. New York: Random House.
50. Stevens, T. H., More, T. A., & Glass, R. J. (1994). Public attitudes about coyotes in New England. Society and Natural Resources, 7(1), 57-66.
51. Tonnies, F. (1957). Community and society. East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University Press.
52. van Es, J. C., & Brown, Jr., J. E. (1974). The rural-urban variable once more: Some individual level observations. Rural Sociology, 39(3), 373-391.
53. Vaske, J. J., & Donnelly, M. P. (in press). A value-attitude-behavior-model predicting wildland voting intentions. Society and Natural Resources.
54. Vaske, J. J., & Donnelly, M. P. (1995). Predicting attitudes toward a proposed moose hunt. Society and Natural Resources, 8 (4).
55. Wilkerson, K. P. (1984). Rurality and patterns of social disruption. Rural Sociology, 49(1), 23-36.
56. Willits, F. K., Bealer, R. C., & Timbers, V. L. (1990). Popular images of “rurality”: Data from a Pennsylvania survey. Rural Sociology, 55(4), 559-578.
57. Willits, F. K., Bealer, R. C., & Crider, D. M. (1982). Persistence of rural/urban differences. In D. A. Dillman and D. J. Hobbs (Eds.), Rural Society in the U.S.: Issues for the 1980 s. Boulder, CO: West view Press.