Is the marketing of hunting destroying hunting?

[sneaky]

My own senator Murkowski's public lands bill was passed by Congress yesterday, among other great things adding 1.3 million acres to the wilderness system....Teddy would be proud....

https://www.apnews.com/27b092f5988441d1aa511cb95ede993e

Rob Bishop is a huge supporter of that bill.... that makes me extremely nervous.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[bruceleroy]

Either way, hunting numbers are still down.

 

[NDGuy]

Rob Bishop is a huge supporter of that bill.... that makes me extremely nervous.

Dude I thought that same thing, what the hell is in that bill that people are missing lol

Meateater TRCP etc were all happy it passed. Maybe it was Bipartisan enough?

 

[robby denning]

I agree except that there are very, very few instances where there are actually "too many" animals, and fewer still where public hunting is the best answer to that issue. I know that goes against the narrative that's been sold for 75 years in this country, but if we're being honest, it's the truth.

A more solid argument is the money that hunters and anglers generate for the benefit of not only wildlife, but other outdoor users.

I'll give you an instance around here. The Tex Creek elk herd. If they don't shoot the heck out of those elk every 5-10 years, they balloon to the point they leave the winter range and head for the valley where all the people and roads and trouble are. Some years F&G is forced to feed them to keep them where they're supposed to stay. Looks like this year they might once again loosen up the seasons to harvest more antlerless elk, as it's been more restrictive the last 5 or so years. While there might not be "too many elk for the hunters" it's pretty clear there are too many for the habitat.

Anyone else able to cite instances where the herds would outgrow habitat if left unhunted?

 

[Btaylor]

Gobs of cases of that in whitetail country. Urban archery hunts are all over the place now and continuing to show up.

 

[Newtosavage]

I said few, not none. Of all the species that have a season, it's only a handful, i.e. the exception to the rule. Most often, what we are allowed to take is the calculated sustainable harvest and that's it. In probably as many cases as there is a true need to harvest, there is another species that probably shouldn't be hunted for a while, if at all.

 

[Newtosavage]

Gobs of cases of that in whitetail country. Urban archery hunts are all over the place now and continuing to show up.

Urban archery hunts are not a case of too many for the available habitat. The habitat is there, only it's in peoples flowerbeds and that's why the hunts are allowed. LOL

 

[Btaylor]

Urban archery hunts are not a case of too many for the available habitat. The habitat is there, only it's in peoples flowerbeds and that's why the hunts are allowed. LOL

You obviously have never seen a hard browse line in an urban hunt zone. Not going to debate this with you because you have ever right to be wrong and freely express it.

 

[Newtosavage]

You obviously have never seen a hard browse line in an urban hunt zone. Not going to debate this with you because you have ever right to be wrong and freely express it.

Dude, I live 90 minutes from Austin. I'm plenty familiar with herds of deer on the golf course, in peoples yards, leaving droppings all over the HS football field, etc. The opinion that there are "too many" deer in a situation like that is just that - an opinion. There are places like Lago Vista TX that don't allow hunting in the city limits and the deer walk the streets and just about everyone is either okay with it, or loves it. Crazy I know, but that's the case. They know better than to plant flowers or plants in their yard that the deer are going to eat without protecting them in some way. Hunters in the U.S. have been conditioned to think that a scenario like that is a "problem." It's not always a problem. In other areas of the country, it becomes a problem because of disease or starvation and in those cases yes, it is an actual problem for the population. But those cases are the exception and not the rule. If you want to keep bringing up exceptions, I'll let you argue with yourself.

This is a difference of opinion friend. Nobody is "wrong" 'kay

 

[Kevin Dill]

"Is the marketing of hunting destroying hunting?"

I definitely have many thoughts along the lines of this: The current degree of marketing (of hunting) may actually lead some to feel jaded and over-exposed, perhaps driving down interest. One result may be a lessening of broad appeal for hunting as a pastime. At the same time, the marketing (all of it) has contributed to or enabled many to focus their efforts on specific states, species and populations of game. The 'work' happens via keystrokes until an entire, logical hunt plan is formulated. All that's left is to follow Siri to the last turnoff, and from there it's Onyx. It makes a western (or other nonresident) hunt much more doable and probable of success versus 40 years ago when none of this was possible.

 

[Newtosavage]

"Is the marketing of hunting destroying hunting?"

I definitely have many thoughts along the lines of this: The current degree of marketing (of hunting) may actually lead some to feel jaded and over-exposed, perhaps driving down interest. One result may be a lessening of broad appeal for hunting as a pastime. At the same time, the marketing (all of it) has contributed to or enabled many to focus their efforts on specific states, species and populations of game. The 'work' happens via keystrokes until an entire, logical hunt plan is formulated. All that's left is to follow Siri to the last turnoff, and from there it's Onyx. It makes a western (or other nonresident) hunt much more doable and probable of success versus 40 years ago when none of this was possible.

We are having to take the good with the bad these days. The internet has changed outdoor recreation forever and it will never be the same as it was 20 years ago. Before the internet, people who worked hard could find honey-holes and enjoy a lot of quality hunts or fishing trips without everyone and their friend finding out about them. These days, there are no secrets anymore. Especially now with GE scouting.

A prime example of this is the bowhunting-only area around Amistad reservoir in West TX. It's managed by the NPS and for that reason, a lot of folks just assumed there was no hunting allowed there. Those of us who did our homework back in the 80's and 90's not only knew about it, but we took full advantage of that fact. It was not uncommon to go out there and hunt an entire day without seeing anyone, and in that day you might see 30-50 deer. My brother and I spent days out there where we spot and stalked whitetails for 12 hours straight. It was an incredible hunting experience. Then along came the internet, and then the websites dedicated to just hunting Amistad, and the NPS had to enact a fee permit system (it was free before, so was the camping) and the place is now crawling with bowhunters every weekend and often during the week too. The quality of hunting has gone down the tubes to the point where we don't even bother to make the trip anymore. I'm sure everyone that's hunted for more than 20 years has a similar place with a similar story. It is what it is.

So that's the bad. But the good is exactly what you're saying - that for people who are just getting started or who are coming from out of the region, there is more good information available than ever and it's really helpful to them to have a quality experience.

Tough time to be a "local" I suppose.

 

[archp625]

I’m torn on it. On one hand you hear about how hunting is dying out as it’s not being passed down from older generations to younger ones. If it doesn’t remain popular it can easily be voted out of being legal. That’s true to some extent, this fall at the lumberyard the old guys are talking about deer hunting, as literally everyone does it.

On the other hand, I agree that forums, podcasts, YouTube, etc, have made hunting more popular, especially out west. The fact of the matter is a lot of eastern newbies come home empty handed, but have $500-$700 to western states conservation funds. The increased pressure does have effects though, as well as locals not being able to get tags as you mentioned.

Hopefully the fad aspect will pass soon. Something similar happened with duck hunting over the last decade, but it seems to be dying out.

I do wonder what will happen to the animals as they become unable to avoid hunting pressure, with guys training year round to go in deeper, backpack hunting, etc.

I agree with you on the duck hunting. It gained so much popularity in the last few years. I keep hoping that these tough season we have had lately will make people quit. I have already seen some of my friends lose interest and move on to other types of hunting.

 

[blackdawg]

Perhaps the real question should be “ is the marketing of technology destroying hunting “ . I have been a lifelong waterfowl hunter, but my desires have faded mostly in the face of technological advances.For the most part I believe waterfowling is ruined, many things including land leasing, google earth, OnX maps, social media and the absolute worst of all “ the spinning wing decoy” are contributing factors. In my opinion the hunt needs to be a hunt for the hunt to survive. Technology has helped remove much of the un-canned experience. The un-canned experience is the deep driving force for me to wake up each day with dreams of pursuing the unknown. As a group I feel that all hunters, fishermen and trappers need to join together and have some serious conversations about the direction things have taken. To survive the fractured groups need to join together and develop long range plans to attack the internal and external forces “social media, technology, leasing, urbanization,etc” which are trying to put an end to our kind.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[NDGuy]

I agree with you on the duck hunting. It gained so much popularity in the last few years.

Last year I sold my 10 year old full body decoys that I bought used originally for more than what I paid for them. That explains waterfowl craze in a nut shell.

I wish I woulda known back then I would have bought a few 1000's worth of decoys and doubled my investment!

 

[KJH]

and the absolute worst of all “ the spinning wing decoy” are contributing factors.

Agreed! If there is one true passion I have the in hunting world, its hunting ducks. I absolutely despise the spinning wing decoys and don't use them. I wish they were outlawed everywhere. I know it will never happen, but I can hope.

On the flip side, if its legal and someone wants to use them I'm OK with it. About 2 years ago, I hunted a spot from my boat and had a group about a half mile on each side of me in full view of our spread (way too close for me). We used zero spinning wing decoys and shot a 3 man limit of greenheads in about 2 hours. The other groups shot NOTHING. One of the groups went back to the boat ramp at the same time we did, and commented that they couldn't believe we were able to shoot anything at all without the spinners. They had at least 5 going. This isn't an isolated situation... I think the ducks in many situations have grown accustomed to spinners being associated with hunters!

 

[steelheadmike]

Here's my take: as long as the marketing is representing hunters as ethical, conservation-minded, and proactive individuals, I am 100% for it. I love seeing guys like Randy Newberg, Corey Jacobson, BRO, Steve Rinella out there pushing public lands/conservation/food and getting people off the damn couch. On the other hand, I cringe when I see the Nuge shooting hogs from a chopper or some other jackass shooting farm deer out of treestand and saying how their broadheads will rip a deer in half.

As far as getting more people out there and less tag availability, I am all for it. Coming from a state where an all out ban on hunting is only a ballot measure away, I would gladly take having tags that are a little harder to get over not hunting at all (I really suck at golf).

 

[robby denning]

Dude, I live 90 minutes from Austin.

This is a difference of opinion friend. Nobody is "wrong" 'kay

I don't want to doubt your experiences nor even argue, but a big chunk of West's ungulate herds are affected by winterkill (happening right now in SE Idaho) and if we didn't hunt those animals, many many of them would grow beyond carrying capacity of the range. It's not an exception out here.

 

[Newtosavage]

I don't want to doubt your experiences nor even argue, but a big chunk of West's ungulate herds are affected by winterkill (happening right now in SE Idaho) and if we didn't hunt those animals, many many of them would grow beyond carrying capacity of the range. It's not an exception out here.

It's still an exception when you consider all of the species that have a season, which was my original point. I'm not trying to downplay individual circumstances like you cite. My other point is that public hunting is a very inefficient means for population control. But that's not a popular position among public hunters, of that I'm fully aware. Doesn't make it untrue though.

 

[robby denning]

It's still an exception when you consider all of the species that have a season, which was my original point. I'm not trying to downplay individual circumstances like you cite. My other point is that public hunting is a very inefficient means for population control. But that's not a popular position among public hunters, of that I'm fully aware. Doesn't make it untrue though.

I disagree that it's a few instances, and that public hunting is "very inefficient". Over my lifetime, seasons have been shortened drastically to keep hunting pressure in check, and I'm talking elk, deer, to be clear.

 

[Newtosavage]

I disagree that it's a few instances, and that public hunting is "very inefficient". Over my lifetime, seasons have been shortened drastically to keep hunting pressure in check, and I'm talking elk, deer, to be clear.

Okay. I have no problem with you disagreeing. If there is a true need for population reduction and there is a more efficient method, I'm sure the folks in the population reduction business are all ears. A friend of mine often takes 20+ deer off a golf course in one evening each year. I have other friends who cull does on S. Texas ranches and might shoot 100 in a weekend. That's pretty efficient.