Wild game consumption varies from occasional meals to weekly eating, with deer dominating the species eaten in the Illinois survey. The 2023-24 IHHS Report also measured how people process deer, view safety information, and handle meat connected with chronic wasting disease (CWD). A separate Wyoming Wild Meat Sharing Survey measured how harvested wild meat mass was divided between households and outside recipients.
Contents
- How often people eat wild game
- Which wild game people eat
- How consumption changed and why it matters
- Views about safety and information
- How Illinois deer was processed
- CWD awareness, testing, and positive results
- How harvested meat was shared
How often people eat wild game
The 2023-24 IHHS Report gives five frequency categories for Illinois respondents. The largest single group, at 34%, said they eat wild game “often,” defined in the report as at least once a month. Another 33% reported eating it “occasionally,” meaning 6 to 12 times a year. Together, those two groups describe a substantial share of respondents who eat wild game repeatedly, but not necessarily every week.
Weekly eating was reported by 16% of respondents. In the report, “very often” means at least once a week. The same percentage, 16%, said they eat wild game “rarely,” defined as 1 to 5 times a year. Only 2% said they never eat wild game.
| Illinois consumption frequency | Share of respondents | Report definition |
|---|---|---|
| Often | 34% | At least once a month |
| Occasionally | 33% | 6–12 times a year |
| Very often | 16% | At least once a week |
| Rarely | 16% | 1–5 times a year |
| Never | 2% | Never eat wild game |
These figures are survey responses from Illinois, not a national estimate. They also describe frequency categories rather than pounds of meat or a precise number of meals. That distinction matters when comparing consumption behavior with harvest, processing, or household food use.
Which wild game people eat
Deer was by far the most frequently eaten wild game among Illinois respondents in the 2023-24 IHHS Report. Ninety-three percent identified deer as wild game they most often ate. Turkey was reported by 27%, followed closely by squirrel at 26%.
Pheasant appeared in the responses of 20% of Illinois respondents, while rabbit was reported by 19%. The measures are percentages of respondents and the categories can overlap: a person could eat deer and turkey, for example. They should therefore be read as reported species participation, not as portions of a single combined total.
| Wild game species | Illinois respondents reporting it |
|---|---|
| Deer | 93% |
| Turkey | 27% |
| Squirrel | 26% |
| Pheasant | 20% |
| Rabbit | 19% |
For a wild game cooking audience, the pattern places venison at the center of the Illinois responses. It also shows that small game and upland birds remain part of the reported consumption mix, even though each was named by a much smaller share than deer.
How consumption changed and why it matters
The 2023-24 IHHS Report asked Illinois respondents to compare their wild game consumption in 2023 with five years earlier. Half, or 50%, said their consumption had not changed. Twenty-one percent said it had increased, while 30% said it had decreased over that five-year period.
The survey also measured the importance respondents assigned to several food and cooking-related activities. Cooking wild game was important or extremely important to 65% of respondents. Sharing much of the harvest with friends and family reached 64%, while getting wild game as food for the household reached 58%.
Donation was important or extremely important to smaller shares. Twenty-two percent selected that level of importance for donating harvest to foodbanks, and 27% did so for donating harvest to Hunters for the Hungry.
| Activity or change | Share of Illinois respondents |
|---|---|
| Consumption unchanged versus five years earlier | 50% |
| Consumption increased versus five years earlier | 21% |
| Consumption decreased versus five years earlier | 30% |
| Cooking wild game important or extremely important | 65% |
| Sharing much of the harvest with friends and family important or extremely important | 64% |
| Getting wild game for household food important or extremely important | 58% |
| Donating harvest to foodbanks important or extremely important | 22% |
| Donating harvest to Hunters for the Hungry important or extremely important | 27% |
The change question covers a five-year comparison ending with 2023, while the importance questions measure attitudes in the 2023-24 survey period. They are related measures, but they do not establish why consumption changed or how many meals were involved.
Views about safety and information
The Illinois survey recorded several beliefs about wild game compared with store-bought meat. Eighty percent agreed that wild game meat has fewer chemicals than store-bought meat. Sixty-two percent agreed that wild game is safer to eat than store-bought meat, and 60% agreed that it tastes better.
Some respondents rejected specific concerns. Fifty-five percent disagreed that becoming ill from parasites after eating wild game is a concern. Fifty-three percent disagreed that lead ammunition fragmentation in wild game meat is a concern. These are reported opinions, not laboratory measurements of chemical content, parasite risk, or ammunition fragments.
Trust in the Illinois Department of Natural Resources, or IDNR, was also measured. Seventy-three percent agreed that they trust IDNR to provide truthful information about human safety issues related to eating wild game. The same 73% agreed that IDNR provides enough information to decide what actions to take regarding eating wild game. Seventy-two percent agreed that they trust IDNR to provide the best available information on eating wild game in Illinois.
Taken together, the figures show relatively high reported trust in IDNR alongside strong positive beliefs about wild game. The survey percentages do not by themselves evaluate the accuracy of any individual safety belief or give handling instructions.
How Illinois deer was processed
Among the deer-processing responses in the 2023-24 IHHS Report, 40% said they used both commercial processors and self-processing. Thirty-three percent processed the deer themselves, while 26% used only a commercial processor. Five percent donated the deer whole instead of processing it themselves, and 0.7% used a guide service to process the deer.
These categories describe reported processing routes. The mixed-use figure is important because it indicates that self-processing and commercial processing were not mutually exclusive for all respondents. The percentages should not be interpreted as a yield breakdown or as the weight processed through each route.
| Deer-processing route in Illinois | Share reported |
|---|---|
| Both commercial processing and self-processing | 40% |
| Self-processed | 33% |
| Commercial processor only | 26% |
| Donated whole instead of processing it themselves | 5% |
| Guide service used to process the deer | 0.7% |
Processing choices connect consumption statistics with the practical path from harvest to the kitchen. They also provide context for the survey’s separate questions about testing and the disposition of meat from deer with a positive CWD result.
CWD awareness, testing, and positive results
The Illinois responses show uncertainty about where CWD had been found. Twenty-four percent lived in a county where CWD had been found in deer, 33% did not live in such a county, and 43% were not sure. For hunting location, 22% hunted deer in a county where CWD had been found, 37% did not, and 41% were not sure.
Ten percent of Illinois respondents had donated processed venison to a food bank, Hunters for the Hungry, or a similar outlet. Four percent knew a hunter who had harvested an Illinois deer that tested positive for CWD since 2002.
Among respondents who had harvested a deer, 87% said they never tested their deer for CWD. Nine percent tested some deer, and 4% tested every deer. Of those who tested their deer, 8% received a positive CWD test result for a deer they harvested in Illinois.
The reported actions after a positive result varied. Fifty percent said they and their family ate the deer. Nineteen percent said they ate the positive deer but their family did not. IDNR picked up and disposed of the meat for 13%, while another 13% said they threw it out. Six percent said they donated the positive deer to a food pantry.
| CWD-related measure | Share reported |
|---|---|
| Lived in a county where CWD had been found | 24% |
| Not sure whether their county had CWD | 43% |
| Never tested a harvested deer | 87% |
| Tested some harvested deer | 9% |
| Tested every harvested deer | 4% |
| Testers receiving a positive result | 8% |
The denominators change across these measures: some refer to all Illinois respondents, some to deer harvesters, and the positive-result figure refers to those who tested. Keeping those groups separate is essential when reading the percentages. The data also report what respondents said happened to meat after a positive result; they do not provide a statewide count of positive deer or a risk estimate.
How harvested meat was shared
The Wyoming Wild Meat Sharing Survey measured the mass of harvested wild meat rather than the percentage of people who ate it. In Wyoming, 83.1% of harvested wild meat mass was consumed within the household. The remaining 16.2% was shared outside the household.
This is a different unit from the Illinois figures. Illinois results above are mostly respondent percentages, while the Wyoming results are shares of harvested meat mass. The Wyoming survey also measures sharing destination at the household level, not the frequency of wild game meals or the species-specific popularity of venison.
| Wyoming harvested wild meat mass | Share |
|---|---|
| Consumed within the household | 83.1% |
| Shared outside the household | 16.2% |
Read together, the two surveys offer complementary views of wild game food use. Illinois respondents reported that sharing much of the harvest with friends and family was important or extremely important to 64%, and the Wyoming survey quantified 16.2% of harvested wild meat mass as shared outside the household. Because the geography, survey designs, and measurement units differ, these figures should not be combined into one rate. They show, respectively, the importance attached to sharing in Illinois and the measured distribution of wild meat mass in Wyoming.