Opinion On New Hunters

[Hnthrdr]

Less! Like 50-75% of the current levels. Here is my reasoning. Would guys be more passionate and protective if they are involved or if we get another 10 million western hunters and you get a tag 1x every 5-6 years, how hard are those guys going to fight? We will never have a ballot box majority and if we did, almost none of us here would get to hunt on a regular basis unless we were land owners with enough land for private tags… that is a fact Jack

 

[Chrisamx]

There is strength in numbers. there really haven't been increases in hunters, however, we have seen the decreases in opportunities. I'll cite the following from widlifeforall:

"In recent decades the number of hunters and anglers in the U.S. has declined both in actual numbers and as a percentage of the total U.S. population, based on U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service records of annual hunting and fishing license sales from all states (including U.S. territories and Washington, D.C.) and U.S. Census Bureau data.

Since 1960, the actual number of hunters increased until peaking at 16.7 million in 1982, after which it began to decline. The numbers started to climb again after 2010 but remain below the 1982 peak. In 2022 there were 15.9 million hunters in the U.S.

In relative numbers, the percentage of the U.S. population that hunts has been on a steady decline since at least 1960, when there were 14 million hunters, representing 7.7 percent of the total U.S. population of 180.7 million people. In 2022, hunters represented only 4.8 percent of the U.S. population. Even at the 1982 peak, hunters only represented 7.2 percent of the U.S. population."

On the other hand, hunting tags can be manipulated to maximize state revenue, which is an area that hunters should look at more closely when trying to understand losses in hunting opportunities.

 

[Rich M]

There is strength in numbers. there really haven't been increases in hunters, however, we have seen the decreases in opportunities. I'll cite the following from widlifeforall:

"In recent decades the number of hunters and anglers in the U.S. has declined both in actual numbers and as a percentage of the total U.S. population, based on U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service records of annual hunting and fishing license sales from all states (including U.S. territories and Washington, D.C.) and U.S. Census Bureau data.

Since 1960, the actual number of hunters increased until peaking at 16.7 million in 1982, after which it began to decline. The numbers started to climb again after 2010 but remain below the 1982 peak. In 2022 there were 15.9 million hunters in the U.S.

In relative numbers, the percentage of the U.S. population that hunts has been on a steady decline since at least 1960, when there were 14 million hunters, representing 7.7 percent of the total U.S. population of 180.7 million people. In 2022, hunters represented only 4.8 percent of the U.S. population. Even at the 1982 peak, hunters only represented 7.2 percent of the U.S. population."

On the other hand, hunting tags can be manipulated to maximize state revenue, which is an area that hunters should look at more closely when trying to understand losses in hunting opportunities.

You are still stuffing 10# of crap in a 5# bag.

Modern hunting pretty much sucks due to too many hunters on what little lands we can hunt.

 

[Cherokeeguide]

It’s not that we have more hunters overall, what has occurred is the reduction of the casual pastime hunter that is being replaced by the more committed hobby/lifestyle hunter.

That might be true in Pennsylvania. It isn't true in mule deer country and never has been.

You're generally not hunting mule deer country without real low-range, four-wheel drive capability and without an investment in camping / backpacking gear. The most expensive piece of equipment that a hunter in mule deer country has isn't a firearm. It is the vehicle needed to make full use of the firearm. That's nothing new. Mule deer hunting has always been like that.

My dad bought a new Ford Bronco in 1973. He checked every option box and it cost him as much as a new 454 Corvette would have. That was a lot of money to spend on a vehicle he wouldn't have bought if he didn't hunt and fish and didn't use unless his travel plans required low range, four wheel drive capability. When you're spending that kind of money on a piece of hunting equipment, which is what something like a Bronco is to a hunter in mule deer country, you tend to want to get the most use out of it that you can in order to justify the expense.

I have owned some kind of low-range, four-wheel drive vehicle since buying a new Suzuki Samurai in 1986 and I wouldn't have owned a single one of them if I didn't hunt and fish in mule deer country.

I shot my first whitetail in 2007. I loaded up my Mustang GT and drove 15 minutes on paved roads to the parking lot of a walk-in Public Hunting Area. I filled my doe tag with a fifteen yard shot. Her and I were home by lunch time. That night, I slept in my own bed at home. I got up the next morning and fille my buck tag with a 20 yard shot and I was home before lunchtime with it, too.. If I could legally shoot my pistol where I live inside of Tulsa city limits, I could skip the drive to the hunting area. I have deer in my back yard almost every morning. Last night, a half-dozen walked down the residential street, which dead-ends at a greenbelt, and leads to another greenbelt at a T-intersection on the opposite end.

I suppose anybody can take anything casually, but it seems to me that whitetail whacking lends itself to casual hunting in a way that hunting in mule deer country does not.

 

[schroej]

We don't necessarily need more hunters, but we need  better hunters. By better, I mean better ambassadors of the sport. Yes, there are a vocal group of anti-hunters out there, but we will never overpower them at the ballot box if we rely on hunters alone. Hunters will never be a huge fraction of the population again. But, the majority of people are non-hunters who simply never even think about hunting. We need  them on our side.
Like others have mentioned earlier, that means emphasizing the good elements of hunting (communion with nature, ethical harvest, full use of meat, etc.) while reducing the bad elements. There is so much distasteful and ethically questionable hunting content online, and we need less of that.

And at the risk of being "woke", we need to do better to make hunting seem less like a white boys club. Demographics are changing - that's a fact - and the more representation we have, the better. Why would a Latina woman, for example, care to vote for a pro-hunting agenda at the ballot box when she doesnt know or see anyone in the hunting community that looks like her? Ditto for any other minority group.

 

[wapitibob]

I have an idea. For all those out there that think we need fewer hunters, maybe you yourself should stop hunting and that would reduce the numbers. Problem solved.

Yea, you won't see that.

The common denominator encompassing the "no new hunters" NIMBY types is that they already recruited their family/friends, they want the doors closed to you and yours. No different than the jackass down the street who moved in from another state and now whines about traffic and home prices and wishes people would quit moving in.

 

[Chrisamx]

You are still stuffing 10# of crap in a 5# bag.

Modern hunting pretty much sucks due to too many hunters on what little lands we can hunt.

I gave some numbers and cited source; where are yours?

 

[Hnthrdr]

We don't necessarily need more hunters, but we need  better hunters. By better, I mean better ambassadors of the sport. Yes, there are a vocal group of anti-hunters out there, but we will never overpower them at the ballot box if we rely on hunters alone. Hunters will never be a huge fraction of the population again. But, the majority of people are non-hunters who simply never even think about hunting. We need  them on our side.
Like others have mentioned earlier, that means emphasizing the good elements of hunting (communion with nature, ethical harvest, full use of meat, etc.) while reducing the bad elements. There is so much distasteful and ethically questionable hunting content online, and we need less of that.

And at the risk of being "woke", we need to do better to make hunting seem less like a white boys club. Demographics are changing - that's a fact - and the more representation we have, the better. Why would a Latina woman, for example, care to vote for a pro-hunting agenda at the ballot box when she doesnt know or see anyone in the hunting community that looks like her? Ditto for any other minority group.

Haha at the risk of sounding like a pissed off nationalist, why the hell are we having a discussion where have to worry about specific genders of racial groups think about a lifestyle, hobby, sport passtime that was intrinsically tied to how this country was created. We are not pissed off at our government enough for what they have done to our country.

Oh btw if there were 50-100 million less people in the country maybe the woods would be less crowded? Just a thought…

I don’t care what you look like if you want to be an ethical hunter, fantastic. But all of those who think we can get numbers and vote our way out of this… yeah that isn’t going to happen… if we had 40-50% of voting pop hunting, people aren’t getting tags hardly ever… so we need great ambassadors

 

[Rich M]

I gave some numbers and cited source; where are yours?

i wasnt attacking you - things have changed quite a bit over the years.

I have to apply for a quota hunt to hunt within 1 hr drive of my house. 3-5 preference points gets me a 3 to 5-day quota hunt. Usually can hunt 1 weekend a yr as a resident. There are no free for all places to hunt within 1.5 hrs. The main free for all place is 2.5 hrs away.

I apply for local refuge duck hunts too. Last draw i got took 7 years. Am at 2 yrs and 6 draws (3 draws per year) and couting right now. Pre-2000 we could hunt it every day but folks started complaining and whining. Every couple of years they tighten the rules. It gets ugly when they try to do that. Somewhere between 400 and 900 folks apply for any given hunt. No pref points given.

I hunted a combat antelope unit in WY in 2017. In 2016 there were left over tags. None left over in 2017. It is 2 pts now. Only like 3 or 4 parcels to hunt. People have the camp sites staked out a week or more in advance.

Someone turned me on to a good 1 pt antelope unit. Applied 2020, 2021, and 2022 Quit chasing the unicorn at 4 pts and went guided in 2023.

I bought land to retire on that surprisingly has deer. It’s where can take my 85 yo father hunting. Took dad to CO muley hunting in 2019. I got a 160” and the old guy was watching them thru spotting scope from our camp while me and buddies were chasing them elsewhere - couple bucks and a herd of does. didnt hunt the mtns.

When i was a kid could hunt out my back door. The whole area is now under asphalt and industry. My folks bought a place in a river valley - could hunt all day in any direction. It’s all posted and off limits now. Used to hunt state land with open adjacent land. They built a giant subdivision and subsequently closed hunting on the adjacent state land. The 2 gravel banks we used to shoot at were developed into a subdivision. 10,000 or more acres i used to hunt and shoot on - GONE.

Those are my numbers. Just personal experiences.

Hunting is now a combat sport in areas that don’t have quota draws, and still combat in some quotas.

I got nothing against folks who thrive on that. It just isnt what i knew and fell in love with.

 

[Cherokeeguide]

Why would a Latina woman, for example, care to vote for a pro-hunting agenda at the ballot box when she doesnt know or see anyone in the hunting community that looks like her? Ditto for any other minority group.

You're saying that a Latina can't vote for something that you think Latinos don't participate in. That's okay, I guess, until you write:

Ditto for any other minority group.

I don't appreciate being lumped in with your hypothetical Latina.

I'm a member of the most minor of minority classes there is. I'm an enrolled citizen of the Cherokee Nation, with a tribal citizenship card and a Certificate Degree of Indian Blood ("CDIB") card in my wallet. All of my maternal uncles hunted and they were just as Cherokee as my mother is.

Your hypothetical Latina is most likely to be a psychologically whole adult without an abnormal reliance on emotional reasoning. She has the same capacity to respond to a logic-based argument that any other psychologically whole adult has. Your comment is essentially presuming that she's self immunized against that, but the only people who really are self-immunized to the degree you suggest are emotionally retarded individuals who have an abnormal reliance on emotional reasoning.

I don't know where you live or hunt and don't much care, but I've seen Latino hunters in every state I've hunted in. They aren't exactly rare in California or New Mexico.

 

[Rich M]

I know a lot of puerto ricans and cubans that hunt.

 

[FranklinBluth]

Less! Like 50-75% of the current levels. Here is my reasoning. Would guys be more passionate and protective if they are involved or if we get another 10 million western hunters and you get a tag 1x every 5-6 years, how hard are those guys going to fight? We will never have a ballot box majority and if we did, almost none of us here would get to hunt on a regular basis unless we were land owners with enough land for private tags… that is a fact Jack

We don't have majority support for our issues because each end every hunter adds up to 51% of the country - it's that we have enough hunters who touch enough other people to keep the culture supportive or at least tolerant of hunting practices. Culture is the key here - we all have relationships with non hunters who are willing to politically support us and that is the kind of support we have to continue to build.

If we reduce the number of hunters 50-75%, how do we yield the same cultural power? It's just an impossible math problem. I can don't want to derail the thread here but we can all think of small groups of people that have wielded outsize political results in the last couple of decades with cultural power.

 

[jayhawk]

You're saying that a Latina can't vote for something that you think Latinos don't participate in. That's okay, I guess, until you write:




I don't appreciate being lumped in with your hypothetical Latina.

I'm a member of the most minor of minority classes there is. I'm an enrolled citizen of the Cherokee Nation, with a tribal citizenship card and a Certificate Degree of Indian Blood ("CDIB") card in my wallet. All of my maternal uncles hunted and they were just as Cherokee as my mother is.

Your hypothetical Latina is most likely to be a psychologically whole adult without an abnormal reliance on emotional reasoning. She has the same capacity to respond to a logic-based argument that any other psychologically whole adult has. Your comment is essentially presuming that she's self immunized against that, but the only people who really are self-immunized to the degree you suggest are emotionally retarded individuals who have an abnormal reliance on emotional reasoning.

I don't know where you live or hunt and don't much care, but I've seen Latino hunters in every state I've hunted in. They aren't exactly rare in California or New Mexico.

 

[ddowning]

I can tell you for a fact, that hunting in PA is complete garbage and nobody should ever come here. You need to hunt Iowa. Hunter numbers are going to drop in a few years. Younger guys don't hunt as much and gen x isn't going to be able to do it forever.

Haha, I have lived in Iowa my whole life. I am 40 years old. It has never been worse to hunt here than now. I have the most money, time, energy, I have ever had in my life to pursue whitetails and turkeys. I have good access, but waaayyyyy less than 25 years ago. It also takes a lot more of that $$$$$$, time, and energy to obtain the little bit of access I have, and some of it is not even exclusive access.

The reason people always shout Iowa, Iowa, Iowa is because the regulations are good. We don't have crossbows in archery or rifles during the rut. There are only 6000 Non-resident tags available per year. We do have a state that is only 7% timber and becoming less every day due to row crop and development with a very limited, fragile whitetail resource. We have massive access issues, even with the limited NR. All of the things people are bitching about NR doing are being done by residents in Iowa because they have to in order to gain access. Years ago all the private ground was basically public. You asked and you got permission. Even though most places were hunted like public, there were way more mature bucks. Now, we are being sold the illusion of exclusive access for $$,$$$,$$$. Everyone is clambering for a little spot they have "exclusive hunting access" to. Unfortunately, it is so expensive that the average guy can't afford it and someone who does "pretty well" can only afford a tiny chunk. 13.5 acres of "hunting land" just sold 1/4 mile away from here for $165k. The person who bought it is either desperate or has no idea. They definitely fell for the marketing.

There are still people that will give permission or work to lease if you are friends/neighbors. If you are a random person you have a better chance of winning the lottery than getting permission.

The laughable thing is that the hunting has gotten worse, not better than when you could door knock and go anywhere, but had to share it with 5-10 other guys. The only people that maybe have it better control thousands of acres. I thought it was absurd when stuff started getting split into 40s and we stuffed 16 "exclusive access" hunting parcels into a section. Now it is getting split into 10's. Even in the good old days, there were very few sections that had 16 mature bucks, and there definitely aren't that many now.

In 5 years we have gone from hunting 30 acres with multiple mature bucks using it to hunting 110 acres with even more to hunting 520 acres with zero bucks known about over 5.5 years old. On 80 acre piece had over 6 mature bucks that we saw consistently while hunting in 2022. Not camera pics, but actual sightings. Now, running cameras on 500+ acres spread across 3 square miles there are zero pictures or sightings of mature bucks.

Yep, come to Iowa. It's the promised land....for realtors and older landowners looking to fund their retirement, and maybe outfitters. Let's not forget suckers with sacks of $$$$$$$.

That sounds pretty bleak. There are still big deer here. There are just a lot less of them and they are being pressured a lot more. It used to be if you passed a deer you could bet on the deer. Now, if it is over 140" I would bet on the neighbors. 20 years ago I wouldn't even think about shooting a deer unless it was 150". Now, those are fairly rare. Most of the truly mature deer are small. They get passed because of the small racks. The young ones with good genetics get shot as soon as they are 140 unless you are in an insane neighborhood. That's the trophy hunting reality in Iowa. If you are a meat hunter (I never bought beef for 2 decades until last fall) the numbers are waaayyyy down and the quotas are being drastically reduced due to ehd and over harvest.

I guess, all that to say, Iowa is on the cusp of being ruined as well. Yes, we have better regulations than Illinois, but we also have A LOT LESS habitat. There are very few places left for the average guy to hunt big whitetails in the midwest.

 

[Hnthrdr]

We don't have majority support for our issues because each end every hunter adds up to 51% of the country - it's that we have enough hunters who touch enough other people to keep the culture supportive or at least tolerant of hunting practices. Culture is the key here - we all have relationships with non hunters who are willing to politically support us and that is the kind of support we have to continue to build.

If we reduce the number of hunters 50-75%, how do we yield the same cultural power? It's just an impossible math problem. I can don't want to derail the thread here but we can all think of small groups of people that have wielded outsize political results in the last couple of decades with cultural power.

Those small groups wielding massive power were completely backed and subsidized by massive Main Street corporate interests… very Astro turfy… to clarify maybe we don’t need overall, I think we might need less “greedy” hunters. I think some of the issue is there are people hunting 2-7 states every year, killing far beyond their ability to eat, and putting a giant strain on the system, the influencer model if you will.

I can for 100 percent certainty tell you that hunting western hunting has become far harder to navigate in my short 30 some years on this earth. There is tangibly less opportunity in just the last handful of years. Quick ex: Wyoming antelope tags or elk tags, Co 2nd or 3rd choice tags, or leftover tags, waterfowl hunting in Co is hyper monetized ( like most of the country I would guess)

 

[littlebigtine]

You are still stuffing 10# of crap in a 5# bag.

Modern hunting pretty much sucks due to too many hunters on what little lands we can hunt.

Where are you hunting? That is not my experience at all.

 

[Chrisamx]

i wasnt attacking you - things have changed quite a bit over the years.

I have to apply for a quota hunt to hunt within 1 hr drive of my house. 3-5 preference points gets me a 3 to 5-day quota hunt. Usually can hunt 1 weekend a yr as a resident. There are no free for all places to hunt within 1.5 hrs. The main free for all place is 2.5 hrs away.

I apply for local refuge duck hunts too. Last draw i got took 7 years. Am at 2 yrs and 6 draws (3 draws per year) and couting right now. Pre-2000 we could hunt it every day but folks started complaining and whining. Every couple of years they tighten the rules. It gets ugly when they try to do that. Somewhere between 400 and 900 folks apply for any given hunt. No pref points given.

I hunted a combat antelope unit in WY in 2017. In 2016 there were left over tags. None left over in 2017. It is 2 pts now. Only like 3 or 4 parcels to hunt. People have the camp sites staked out a week or more in advance.

Someone turned me on to a good 1 pt antelope unit. Applied 2020, 2021, and 2022 Quit chasing the unicorn at 4 pts and went guided in 2023.

I bought land to retire on that surprisingly has deer. It’s where can take my 85 yo father hunting. Took dad to CO muley hunting in 2019. I got a 160” and the old guy was watching them thru spotting scope from our camp while me and buddies were chasing them elsewhere - couple bucks and a herd of does. didnt hunt the mtns.

When i was a kid could hunt out my back door. The whole area is now under asphalt and industry. My folks bought a place in a river valley - could hunt all day in any direction. It’s all posted and off limits now. Used to hunt state land with open adjacent land. They built a giant subdivision and subsequently closed hunting on the adjacent state land. The 2 gravel banks we used to shoot at were developed into a subdivision. 10,000 or more acres i used to hunt and shoot on - GONE.

Those are my numbers. Just personal experiences.

Hunting is now a combat sport in areas that don’t have quota draws, and still combat in some quotas.

I got nothing against folks who thrive on that. It just isnt what i knew and fell in love with.

I don't like playing that game either. I apply for most hunts here without any success, so I'm left with a zone overrun with "have nots". I've applied for turkey hunts in wildlife areas for the past 13 years with only one draw.

When started hunting deer in PA 1974, there was an estimated 400,000 to 500,000. There was also tons of hunters come opening day of rifle season. Today, the population is estimated at 1.5 million, and still many hunters. Many eastern States have similar conditions. It is an interesting comparison between there and the West.

Anyways, good luck with your future hunts. It looks like we are in the same boat.

 

[peterk123]

We were all new hunters at one point in our lives.

 

[velvet muley]

The more hunters the better, you see what the anti hunting groups have already accomplished and are putting on ballots in Oregon, Cali and Colorado to name a few states.

I have been hunting for 40 years and it doesn't faze me to see new hunters.

I think people that complain about too many hunters need to just work on becoming a better hunter themselves, I have no problems killing good elk, deer and antelope in general areas in Montana every year.

Antelope is a draw obviously but some units are pretty much 100% draw rate.

 

[Rich M]

I don't like playing that game either. I apply for most hunts here without any success, so I'm left with a zone overrun with "have nots". I've applied for turkey hunts in wildlife areas for the past 13 years with only one draw.

When started hunting deer in PA 1974, there was an estimated 400,000 to 500,000. There was also tons of hunters come opening day of rifle season. Today, the population is estimated at 1.5 million, and still many hunters. Many eastern States have similar conditions. It is an interesting comparison between there and the West.

Anyways, good luck with your future hunts. It looks like we are in the same boat.

And good luck to you.

I started in 78 in VT. Few deer, friendly folks out having a good time. At least where we were.

It is an amazing diff between eastern wooded hunts and western, see for miles hunts. Everyone needs to do that at least once.