Gender differences in resource use and evaluation of attributes of places of resource use by Native Americans and Caucasians from Western Idaho: relevance to risk evaluations.

A substantial body of literature deals with exposure differences between men and women, and how men and women perceive environmental risk, but far less attention has been devoted to how men and women use the environment and how they evaluate the features of natural environments. The objective of this study was to examine gender differences in the perceptions of environmental quality and resource use for Native Americans and Caucasians interviewed at an Indian festival in northwestern Idaho. More individuals engaged in fishing than any other consumptive activity, and more people engaged in camping and hiking than other nonconsumptive activities. For both ethnic groups, significantly more men hunted than women, although a higher percentage of Native Americans of both genders hunted than did Caucasians. Although significantly more Caucasian men fished than women (63 vs. 41%), there were no marked differences in fishing for Native Americans. Significantly more Native American women gathered herbs (57%) compared to men (37%). There were no significant gender differences in nonconsumptive activities (camping, hiking, biking, bird watching, or picnicking). For those who engaged in consumptive and nonconsumptive activities, however, there were few gender differences in the frequency of these activities, except for fishing, hunting, and crabbing by Caucasians (men had higher rates) and collecting berries and herbs for Native Americans (women had higher rates). When asked to evaluate environmental characteristics or attributes on a scale of 1 (less important) to 5 (very important), unpolluted water, clean air, no visible smog, unpolluted groundwater, and appears unspoiled were rated the highest. There were few significant gender differences in these evaluations for Native Americans, but there were significant gender differences for Caucasians: Women rated most features higher than did men (except for natural tidal flow). These data indicate a need to evaluate not only consumption rate differences between men and women, but also nonconsumptive activities, as well as resource values and perceptions, when managing environments and determining potential risk from exposure.