The Case Against Hunter Recruitment

Aginor

Lil-Rokslider
Joined
Jul 23, 2020
Messages
149
Location
Idaho

Steve’s response. Doesn’t do much to address Matt’s article other than talking about recruiting women and minorities. Aside from that, it just sounds like he’s countering the people who think his opinion is the same as his brother’s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

ODB

WKR
Joined
Mar 24, 2016
Messages
4,011
Location
N.F.D.

Steve’s response. Doesn’t do much to address Matt’s article other than talking about recruiting women and minorities. Aside from that, it just sounds like he’s countering the people who think his opinion is the same as his brother’s


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This is turning out to be a good idea that wasn’t.
 
Joined
Jan 17, 2013
Messages
471
Location
Idaho
I tend to agree with Matt's article.

I think R3 efforts need to be tailored to fit the needs of specific areas. The western states don't need any more hunters unless we want to have hunters that don't have tags to go hunting with. Eventually this is going to happen with increased numbers of resident hunters. R3 efforts in the west should focus more on increasing herd numbers and preserving winter range. R3 only makes sense if we are making the pie bigger too. In eastern states R3 should likewise focus on reducing the culture of land leases and allowing more hunters onto private land instead of focusing on growing trophy deer.

We've been told for years that the number 1 reason why people quit hunting is loss of access. So R3 is only helpful if we increase land access. Where are all of these hunters going to hunt if we don't open up landlocked public ground and stop leasing up private land?
 
Top