Let’s say…

[Northpark]

I put in for 8 states, devote three weeks of solid vacation to hunting?

Even I've started to wonder when the investment won't be worth the return.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

I used to do that. Now I don’t. The investment wasn’t worth it for me. I have kids and the time away hunting hurt. The money hurt and the hunts became harder and harder to draw and the tags I got I started to get real crowded. Basically when it stopped being fun or accessible I stopped applying. I still apply in my home state and still hunt plenty. I also take all that money I was spending on app fees and save it for family hunting or fishing trips to do things like shoot hogs or go on a day of saltwater fishing. Just my take on the situation.

 

[Yoder]

What about hunter success?


Maybe we should lobby to make rangefinders illegal. Reduce hunter success means they can issue more tags right?

How about nothing but stick bows and you're not allowed to wear shoes.

 

[Billy Goat]

How about nothing but stick bows and you're not allowed to wear shoes.

I'm good with that.


You can wear them toe things tho right? Can't call that a shoe.

 

[roadrunner]

An economist would probably have a better handle on this subject than an accountant in so many ways.

It's more than just numbers...

 

[Jbogg]

It’s a tough situation with no easy answers. I feel for the guys out west, and the challenges they face drawing tags, but I also understand that we hunters need a strong voice, and a positive image.

I live/hunt in the south east in a state that is mainly over the counter tags, but also fairly limited in public land opportunities when compared to the western states. I hunt a national forest that has approximately 750,000 acres in mountainous terrain in the southern Appalachians. For a number of reasons our deer numbers have plummeted in some of these areas to as few as three or four deer per square mile. An environmental group called Forest Watch using threats of litigation has almost entirely shut down any logging, select cutting, controlled burns on the National Forest. The resulting lack of fawning cover, and good browse has made it very difficult on the deer in the face of increasing predator numbers.

Our hunting regs are on a two-year cycle. The DNR (department of natural resources) holds public comment meetings both in person and online every two years to receive public input. I have been to meetings with barely a dozen hunters in attendance. Over the last few years, the forest service has proposed the foothills project which included some forest management in the form of timber, cutting and burning. They solicited public comment online, and allowed all comments to be seen on their website. I did not do a tally, but I’m guessing the comments were probably 10 to 1 opposing timber cutting on national forest. Most folks have no idea what is required for there to be a healthy ecosystem for the wildlife. They just want to take a Sunday drive through the big pretty hardwoods.

I guess what I’m saying is every state faces its own unique set of challenges, and I’m convinced the solution is not less hunters. If access, and lack of opportunity are two of the highest hurdles, then there is no excuse that every single Hunter on this forum not be a member of organizations like Howl for wildlife, sportsman’s alliance, and BHA. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and right now the environmental/anti-hunting crowd is squeaking much louder.

 

[stanginthe11s]

this post ties to so many other posts we see here. all of this is a double edge sword and also points to why we have no voice. western guys complain about overcrowding, tags and non res hunters but also agree we need more hunters. all of us complain about social media but then post pics and tips on a social media platform. we all agree it should be harder for people to hunt so long as it doesn't apply to us. it's a hard situation that we can't come together and agree on.
in my opinion, hunter #'s are up. I know what they say but the reality is I see more people in the woods across the country than I did 20yrs ago. one thing that doesn't lie is common sense. most of us here have kids and those kids hunt or will hunt (hopefully) so that is an obvious increase in hunters as our kids were not here before. also, we see a large # of young hunters and not all of their parents were hunters, again pointing to an increase.
it was said that it doesn't take large #'s to make change, and that's true, but it does take a united voice. we are very disconnected and never agree on anything. there's a reason we love being in the woods, we hate people lol, but at some point we will need to join forces and stop crying about pointless things like who's in my spot this year, and yes, I do that myself lol. as much as I hate media I still see the good it can bring. it opens our world to more people, it brings money to our sport and it makes it more mainstream which can stop antis from hurting us.
as for more access, absolutely. it disgusts me how much land is being taken from us. somewhere along the line people decided hunting is a privilege but it's not, it's our right to survive as god intended.

 

[stanginthe11s]

Most folks have no idea what is required for there to be a healthy ecosystem for the wildlife. They just want to take a Sunday drive through the big pretty hardwoods.

I guess what I’m saying is every state faces its own unique set of challenges, and I’m convinced the solution is not less hunters. If access, and lack of opportunity are two of the highest hurdles, then there is no excuse that every single Hunter on this forum not be a member of organizations like Howl for wildlife, sportsman’s alliance, and BHA. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and right now the environmental/anti-hunting crowd is squeaking much louder.

this is very true. the biggest issue I see is how we fight. as a whole we are very passive. anti's attack us and we brush it off as them being crazy (they are lol) but really, we need to show the world how crazy they are. we do good things for the environment but don't actually make it a big thing so others don't see it. doing things behind the scenes will not get what we need. most people are not partial to hunting or not hunting, they just don't care and that's ok. what we need is to show them what happens when they lose hunters and the land and show people that it will be their problem if they don't get involved.

 

[CJohnson]

It’s a tough situation with no easy answers. I feel for the guys out west, and the challenges they face drawing tags, but I also understand that we hunters need a strong voice, and a positive image.

I live/hunt in the south east in a state that is mainly over the counter tags, but also fairly limited in public land opportunities when compared to the western states. I hunt a national forest that has approximately 750,000 acres in mountainous terrain in the southern Appalachians. For a number of reasons our deer numbers have plummeted in some of these areas to as few as three or four deer per square mile. An environmental group called Forest Watch using threats of litigation has almost entirely shut down any logging, select cutting, controlled burns on the National Forest. The resulting lack of fawning cover, and good browse has made it very difficult on the deer in the face of increasing predator numbers.

Our hunting regs are on a two-year cycle. The DNR (department of natural resources) holds public comment meetings both in person and online every two years to receive public input. I have been to meetings with barely a dozen hunters in attendance. Over the last few years, the forest service has proposed the foothills project which included some forest management in the form of timber, cutting and burning. They solicited public comment online, and allowed all comments to be seen on their website. I did not do a tally, but I’m guessing the comments were probably 10 to 1 opposing timber cutting on national forest. Most folks have no idea what is required for there to be a healthy ecosystem for the wildlife. They just want to take a Sunday drive through the big pretty hardwoods.

I guess what I’m saying is every state faces its own unique set of challenges, and I’m convinced the solution is not less hunters. If access, and lack of opportunity are two of the highest hurdles, then there is no excuse that every single Hunter on this forum not be a member of organizations like Howl for wildlife, sportsman’s alliance, and BHA. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and right now the environmental/anti-hunting crowd is squeaking much louder.

I was with you right up until the point where you said join BHA.

 

[displacedtexan]

I guess what I’m saying is every state faces its own unique set of challenges, and I’m convinced the solution is not less hunters. If access, and lack of opportunity are two of the highest hurdles, then there is no excuse that every single Hunter on this forum not be a member of organizations like Howl for wildlife, sportsman’s alliance, and BHA. Squeaky wheel gets the grease, and right now the environmental/anti-hunting crowd is squeaking much louder.

I think so many hunters refusing to do anything with a group that's not "pro 2a" is shooting ourselves in the foot. Pun intended.

There's lots people who will support access, wildlife management, hunting, fishing etc... But will be turned away by 2a absolutists.

 

[Ucsdryder]

What about hunter success?


Maybe we should lobby to make rangefinders illegal. Reduce hunter success means they can issue more tags right?

Great point! I’ve talked about having primitive units in Colorado.

Archery - recurve or long bow, no sights, etc
ML - cap and ball,
Rifle - straight wall, iron sights

I bet in 3-4 years the age class would be incredible in those units.


My wife can barely remember how to load her rifle, but she hit a 10” plate at 600 yards in the cold bore challenge. I remember being a little kids thinking 300 was so far. We’d give it the old eyeball holdover and hope we could walk it in.

 

[sndmn11]

I think so many hunters refusing to do anything with a group that's not "pro 2a" is shooting ourselves in the foot. Pun intended.

There's lots people who will support access, wildlife management, hunting, fishing etc... But will be turned away by 2a absolutists.

I am anti-BHA because they remove hunting opportunity here in CO.

 

[displacedtexan]

I am anti-BHA because they remove hunting opportunity here in CO.

I'm not saying you should be a member.

But I've seen and heard so many complaints about access and wildlife orgs "not taking a stand for the 2nd"... Which I think is a ridiculous statement.

 

[sndmn11]

I'm not saying you should be a member.

But I've seen and heard so many complaints about access and wildlife orgs "not taking a stand for the 2nd"... Which I think is a ridiculous statement.

I was giving you perspective on why many Coloradans refuse to do anything with that group. Nothing whatsoever to do with 2a.

 

[ddd-shooter]

I was giving you perspective on why many Coloradans refuse to do anything with that group. Nothing whatsoever to do with 2a.

Can you give me specifics? Never heard of it, but definitely have doubts about bha

 

[displacedtexan]

I was giving you perspective on why many Coloradans refuse to do anything with that group. Nothing whatsoever to do with 2a.

The VAST majority of people I've talked to that don't like BHA have issue with them not supporting the 2nd.

Next biggest group can't walk 100 yards with a pack.

Then there's guys who think it's a bunch of hipsters (they aren't wrong).

Then guys like you (also not wrong).

 

[sndmn11]

Can you give me specifics? Never heard of it, but definitely have doubts about bha

David Petersen, Vice Chair - Conservation

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

Willoughby: Getting rid of Colorado’s spring bear hunt is right call

Willoughby: Getting rid of Colorado’s spring bear hunt is right call

www.denverpost.com

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/...r_otc_unit_elk_hunting_problems_possibilities

@Jaquomo might be able to turn up more articles.

 

[ddd-shooter]

David Petersen, Vice Chair - Conservation

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

Willoughby: Getting rid of Colorado’s spring bear hunt is right call

Willoughby: Getting rid of Colorado’s spring bear hunt is right call

www.denverpost.com

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/...r_otc_unit_elk_hunting_problems_possibilities

@Jaquomo might be able to turn up more articles.

Yep, that right there will ensure they never get a dime off me. Thanks for the info

 

[displacedtexan]

David Petersen, Vice Chair - Conservation

Backcountry Hunters & Anglers is the voice for our wild public lands, waters and wildlife.

www.backcountryhunters.org

Willoughby: Getting rid of Colorado’s spring bear hunt is right call

Willoughby: Getting rid of Colorado’s spring bear hunt is right call

www.denverpost.com

https://www.backcountryhunters.org/...r_otc_unit_elk_hunting_problems_possibilities

@Jaquomo might be able to turn up more articles.

I must have missed what opportunities BHA worked to remove.

 

[sndmn11]

I must have missed what opportunities BHA worked to remove.

Their ideals and efforts might be inline with your own then. I'm sure they would be happy to have you.

 

[CJohnson]

I think so many hunters refusing to do anything with a group that's not "pro 2a" is shooting ourselves in the foot. Pun intended.

There's lots people who will support access, wildlife management, hunting, fishing etc... But will be turned away by 2a absolutists.

I don't think I'm a 2A absolutist, and that has nothing to do with why I don't think a person should support BHA. As mention above, they are soft on predator hunting, which is typically the first thing intelligent antis target.

The quote in the article linked above sums up the sentiment I disagree with the most, "There has to be a realization that hunting is a privilege, not a right[...]" -David Petersen