Spike Camp

Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation

PARA45

  • *****
  • 3266
    • View Profile
I was looking at Maven optics, and got into their Twitter page, and came across this article about hunting decline in the US.  The article it's a little long, but worth reading.  Based on the number of tree huggers, and their quest to stop hunting, I do foresee this actually happening.  I also believe, that it is our obligation as hunters to teach our sport & values to our next generation. 

Enjoy.

https://www.npr.org/2018/03/20/593001800/decline-in-hunters-threatens-how-u-s-pays-for-conservation?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social


galamb

  • *****
  • 597
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #1 on: May 16, 2018, 05:59:38 PM »
Been apparent in Canada as well for a number of years.

All the hurdles placed in the way to get potentially new hunters into the sport, the lack of places to hunt and the cost all play into the decline.

If I had not been taken on hunting trips with "Dad", I probably wouldn't have decided to become a hunter - not something that you just wake up one day in your 20 or 30's and decide is a good idea if you haven't been exposed or if you don't have a mentor.

My kids (now 28 and 31) don't hunt or fish. I exposed them to it but after (school) they moved to the "big city" and took up life in the faster lane :) - no interest. Camping without WIFI is beyond what they consider reasonable, never mind slugging it through the woods full of bugs and "icky" things...
Graham
R.C.A.F (Retired)
Ontario, Canada
The Great White North EH!

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #2 on: May 16, 2018, 10:17:43 PM »
I'm lucky, most of my nieces and nephew like to hunt, and be outdoors, but yea, hunting and being outdoors is a dying thing with the new generations.

Rob
cfp-223REM
accumark-223Rem
ultralite-240 Wby
synthetic-240 Wby
synthetic-257 Wby
ultralite-270 Wby
fibermark-270 Wby
accumark-270 Wby
accumark-7mm Wby
stainless-300 Wby
fibermark-300Wby
accumark-30378 Wby
fibermark-340 Wby
accumark-338378 Wby
custom-375 Wby
DGR-378 Wby
DGR-416 Wby
custom DGR-460 Wby

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #3 on: May 16, 2018, 10:23:35 PM »
It sure doesnít seem that way during hunting season.

Anyway, although the numbers participating in hunting may be declining, I think hunters are spending more now than 30-40 years ago.

I think the numbers will level off over time.
JK

badsection

  • *****
  • 6393
  • Do or do not. There is no "try" Yoda, Jedi Master
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #4 on: May 17, 2018, 04:00:25 AM »
I would guess this means fewer hunting licenses are being sold.  I haven't bought one in a few years as I don't need one to hunt hogs on private property.  :)

danno50

  • *****
  • 2633
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #5 on: May 17, 2018, 05:13:47 AM »
This is an excerpt from an article on the same subject, not to hi-jack Oscar's thread, just to scratch a little deeper at our decline in numbers.
Quote:
Back in 1970, there were metal bunny ears on top of television sets. If one of the three stations didnít come in, a kid was required to stand in just the right position to keep the picture clear. If his body swayed the wrong way, he would be peppered with popcorn by those trying to enjoy the show. Later on, those clicking box things helped out a lot. Iím not sure what they did but the TV would come in better if you turned the dial. If you were born after 1980, you probably have no idea what Iím talking about. In the 1970s, most houses had three television channels and that was it. Color TV was still advertised on motel signs. Pacman wasnít yet invented, but you could play pinball at the bowling alley. Some cities even had something called ďarcadesĒ.

In 2011, most homes have hundreds of high definition television to choose from. Arm chair hunters can choose from a dozen or so outdoor programming channels. Big brothers are no longer required to get up to change the channel and hold the antenna. They can sit right next to dad. Of course, big brother probably has no interest in hanging out with dad in many American households. He is playing video games, or on the internet, or texting. Heís probably doing this in the comfort of his own room. In the 1970ís most Americans had one television. If you wanted to watch television you would have to do it with the folks. Now we have three televisions per household. Those arcades are long gone. I have more games on my phone than the arcade ever had. There is a lot more for people to do these days. You have to make a concerted effort to go hunting. For most people, American Idol is more important than whitetails.

Society is a lot different than it was forty years ago. Americans are living a sedentary lifestyle. It takes work to chase gobblers over oak ridges. People are in to instant gratification. We want it all and we want it now. It may take several days to finally get a shot at a whitetail. It may take years for an opportunity at an antlered buck. Those monster bucks the people on channel 278 are shooting? Forget about it. Tell most 16 year old kids youíre going to leave them alone in the woods in freezing temperatures and your likely to have the police called on you. But thatís just what we are asking our youth to do... all in the name of a tradition that means nothing to them if they are not introduced early. They have X-Box to play. Patience, sacrifice, respect, and woodsmanship are no longer virtues in todayís society. They are requirements in the hunting world.
DosEquisShooter

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #6 on: May 17, 2018, 05:45:49 AM »
It's known as Evolution. And it's happening.

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #7 on: May 17, 2018, 07:34:14 AM »
Times have surely changed, and mostly not for the better. I remember the three channel TV world in the 1960's. As a boy and young teen, I used to walk down the road carrying a rifle or shotgun to or from wherever I was hunting squirrels, rabbits, quail, etc. People waved and that was the most reaction there ever was. Nowadays, a SWAT team would show up and tell me to drop the weapon. Sad. I think part of the downturn in hunting (besides the PC police, such as PETA) is that it's become very expensive for non-landowners. People want a small fortune to hunt their land, as opposed to free when I was young. It's becoming a rich man's sport instead of every man's sport. Public land is so over-hunted that many don't bother anymore. There's your drop in license revenue.
Some like cologne, I like the smell of gunpowder.

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #8 on: May 17, 2018, 09:18:14 AM »
We have more hunters and fisherman here in SD than ever before due to our beloved GF&P pimping out our wildlife for next to nothing. 

zonie

  • *****
  • 6732
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #9 on: May 17, 2018, 09:57:23 AM »
The underlying issue,  population increases,  too many damn people.   All this created a shift from rural America to urban America creating  all  sorts of new rules , regulations and laws. 

PARA45

  • *****
  • 3266
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #10 on: May 17, 2018, 02:11:25 PM »
We have more hunters and fisherman here in SD than ever before due to our beloved GF&P pimping out our wildlife for next to nothing.

Not so much for the out of state hunters, which I think is where your state makes most of the money.  I hunt SD (Winner) almost every November, and I've seen a steady increase in the prices of deer tags, and pheasant tags. I still go every chance I get.

badsection

  • *****
  • 6393
  • Do or do not. There is no "try" Yoda, Jedi Master
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #11 on: May 17, 2018, 02:31:17 PM »
We have more hunters and fisherman here in SD than ever before due to our beloved GF&P pimping out our wildlife for next to nothing.

Not so much for the out of state hunters, which I think is where your state makes most of the money.  I hunt SD (Winner) almost every November, and I've seen a steady increase in the prices of deer tags, and pheasant tags. I still go every chance I get. 
 It's not necessarily what is spent on licenses, but what is spent in total.  Grumpy all year people in Kent County Maryland kiss the waterfowl hunter's butts because they know how much they add to the local economy!  :)

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #12 on: May 18, 2018, 09:37:15 AM »
We have more hunters and fisherman here in SD than ever before due to our beloved GF&P pimping out our wildlife for next to nothing.

Not so much for the out of state hunters, which I think is where your state makes most of the money.  I hunt SD (Winner) almost every November, and I've seen a steady increase in the prices of deer tags, and pheasant tags. I still go every chance I get. 
 It's not necessarily what is spent on licenses, but what is spent in total.  Grumpy all year people in Kent County Maryland kiss the waterfowl hunter's butts because they know how much they add to the local economy!  :)

GFP charges a nonresident a whopping $121 to hunt all small game including phesants, and $68 to fish....it doesn't get much cheaper than that.
« Last Edit: May 18, 2018, 09:39:59 AM by cacsrx1 »

PARA45

  • *****
  • 3266
    • View Profile
Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #13 on: May 19, 2018, 07:35:43 PM »
Nope, but the deer tags (buck & doe) are $336, which I think is high for two deer.    Add it all up, and before you know it, you have $500-600 just on licenses (I hunt deer, pheasant, & turkey when I go).  Then hotels, food, processing, gas, groceries, etc, etc.  it all adds up, and the entire state, and local towns are benefiting from it.  If you jack up the prices, you will have not have the amount of hunters visiting your state.  Very few of us are hunting public land, we are either paying someone to hunt their land, or know someone.  GA is less than $120 for three days and you can shoot up to 12 deer.  I think it's a trade off, and everyone benefits from it.  If prices are too high, it becomes a rich man's game, and average Joes like me could not afford to do.

BTW, all of us who hunt your state are thankful for the opportunity to hunt such a great state.  We have stablished long lasting relationship with the locals, and I have some good friends who have visited me when I was station in FL, and here in GA. 

Re: Decline In Hunters Threatens How U.S. Pays For Conservation
« Reply #14 on: May 22, 2018, 12:51:29 PM »
Nope, but the deer tags (buck & doe) are $336, which I think is high for two deer.    Add it all up, and before you know it, you have $500-600 just on licenses (I hunt deer, pheasant, & turkey when I go).  Then hotels, food, processing, gas, groceries, etc, etc.  it all adds up, and the entire state, and local towns are benefiting from it.  If you jack up the prices, you will have not have the amount of hunters visiting your state.  Very few of us are hunting public land, we are either paying someone to hunt their land, or know someone.  GA is less than $120 for three days and you can shoot up to 12 deer.  I think it's a trade off, and everyone benefits from it.  If prices are too high, it becomes a rich man's game, and average Joes like me could not afford to do.


BTW, all of us who hunt your state are thankful for the opportunity to hunt such a great state.  We have stablished long lasting relationship with the locals, and I have some good friends who have visited me when I was station in FL, and here in GA.
If your coming from GA and hunting private land in SD the licenses are the cheapest part of your trip. There is very little out of state big game hunting pressure here.  Pheasant hunting is another story.  The GF&P lie about the pheasant count (which is down 90%) in order to sell as many licenses as possible.  They do this while not taking care of their "public hunting" land.  Signs, fixing fence, spraying weeds, and enforcing their own regulations all get pushed by the wayside.  $121 dollars lets you hunt almost any road right of way,  what that does on low bird count years is makes a lot of hunters "braver" then they normally would be(shooting too close to dwellings and livestock).  This forces the landowner to enforce the regulations.  Landowners routinely take pictures of hunting licenses and vehicle license plates, and send them to the Conservation Officer.  The typical CO response is "we never caught up with the suspects."
    The new thing landowners are seeing a lot of is now apparently you can hunt state wide for the $121 and an additional $254.  The $254 lets you claim "unknown trespassing" when a warden stops you.  "Oh I thought this was Uncle Teds land and we have permission from him."  Warden says, "well sorry guys Ill have to write you a $254 ticket, but you don't loose your birds, days left on your license, there will be no record of this anywhere so if you don't pay the fine it wont show up when you come next year and you can do the same thing again, have a nice day." 
    Im not necessarily mad at anyone coming here, but $121 is too cheap to hunt what was once one of the best pheasant hunting destinations in the world.  Then worse than that is the way the GF&P is managing the whole thing.  I hope they get it straightened out before it turns into a disaster like our walleye fishing is on the Missouri River.