Using relative deprivation theory to investigate wildlife recreationists' perceived differences in state wildlife agency services

Abstract Developing a deeper understanding about how wildlife recreationists perceive state fish and wildlife agencies as currently serving them, and how they feel valued in relation to other recreation groups, may help agencies more effectively engage their recreation constituencies. Using a mixed methods approach based on relative deprivation theory, we investigated the extent to which nonconsumptive (birders or wildlife viewers), consumptive (hunters or anglers), and multi‐recreationists (those who participate in both) in Virginia feel served by the Virginia Department of Wildlife Resources. We found consumptive and multi‐recreationists desired greater prioritization for hunters and anglers, while nonconsumptive recreationists desired more prioritization for birders and wildlife viewers. All recreation groups perceived nonconsumptive recreationists as being prioritized least by the agency, relative to other recreationists. Additionally, all recreation groups felt that the agency could better serve their needs by providing more access to current programs and funding relative to their activities (e.g., fishing access for consumptive recreationists and access to the Bird and Wildlife Trail for nonconsumptive recreationists). Notably, all 3 recreation groups felt the agency could serve them by providing more information and access to Wildlife Management Areas. Applying relative deprivation theory to balance the needs of wildlife recreationists has potential to address feelings of inequality among historical and emerging agency constituents, and to foster greater access to and engagement in currently available agency resources and conservation efforts.