INDIVIDUAL SPECIES-STATE ANALYSIS OF NATURESERVE'S "AT-RISK" CATEGORIES: HUNTING AND FISHING'S ROLE

"We examine the impact of hunting and fishing on rankings in NatureServe's 2005 "at-risk" list using 24,291 observations on individual vertebrate animal species for 47 states (we omit Alaska, Hawaii, and Missouri). We use 1) a probit analysis of the binary "at-risk" designation and 2) an ordered probit analysis of the five categories of endangerment. We control for species type (mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish, and turtles), population density, farming area, forest cover, coastline existence, endemism, and per capita income. We find that states with higher hunting and fishing participation (or higher per capita expenditures) have fewer "at-risk" species. States with larger per capita big game spending have fewer "at-risk" non-big game species. States with larger wildlife agency budgets have fewer endangered species."("JEL "Q57) Copyright (c) 2009 Western Economic Association International.