Studies: Interest in Hunting Fading

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
Studies: Interest in Hunting Fading

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationw...print.story?coll=sns-ap-nationworld-headlines


By ANGIE WAGNER
Associated Press Writer

March 10, 2005, 2:19 PM EST

As a teenager, Bryan Dinkins and his grandfather would go out before dawn on many a winter morning to hunt duck. They would quietly discuss school and life while waiting for the birds.

Dinkins, now 40, hasn't been hunting in six years. He's too busy, he says, and anyway it would take six hours to drive somewhere to hunt ducks in California.

It's a common lament in the new century, a time when urbanization and hectic lives can get in the way of hunting traditions. Hunting now is not just about when to go, but where to go? How much will it cost? And, more than ever, who will go?

"If we think about how the country was explored and developed, it was hunters, it was trappers," said Steve Williams, director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. "If we lost that, I think in some way we lose part of the American character."

Across the country, the number of hunters declined from 14.06 million to 13.03 million, or 7.3 percent, from 1991 to 2001, according to the Census Bureau and the Fish and Wildlife Service. The drop was greater in the West -- 9.6 percent, from 2.46 million to 2.22 million.

Hunting has survived through generations by fathers passing the tradition on to their children, and families bonding during hunting trips. But many people have given up on hunting, or never tried it at all.

The decline in Western hunters came even as the population jumped. California had the largest drop -- from 446,000 to 274,000, or 38.6 percent -- followed by Colorado, Arizona and Nevada. Washington, Wyoming, Oregon and Hawaii had slight declines.

Most hunters said in the 2001 Census and in the Fish and Wildlife survey that they did not hunt as much as they would have liked because they were too busy or had family or work obligations. The reasons were the same for those who gave up hunting altogether, another study found.

As the West becomes more urban, with new residents flocking to cities like Las Vegas and Phoenix, development inevitably leads to fewer hunting lands.

"A generation or so ago, it was still possible to take a son and daughter out to the country, knock on a farmer's door and be out in the field hunting in pretty short order," said George Cooper, spokesman for the Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership.

"That's how young people got into hunting. Loss of habitat due to sprawl and landowner worries about liability have made that sort of old-fashioned access hard to come by," he said.

Those who rely on private land often find they must pay for the privilege, and it can be expensive. Duck hunting for the season may cost $10,000 on a private hunting preserve.

Eventually, it will be up to children to carry on the tradition. But a study by Responsive Management, a public opinion research firm for natural resources issues, found if people are not exposed to hunting before they are 16 or 17, they likely will not hunt as adults.

And the more people grow up in urban areas, the less likely they are to be exposed to the hunting culture, said Mark Damian Duda, executive director of the group.

"That's the big, broad demographic trend that's taken its toll on hunting," he said.

Many states are promoting hunting by sponsoring outreach programs and youth hunts.

But the state fish and wildlife agencies that are working to recruit and retain hunters face their own threats. Most depend on hunting license sales for money, and as the number of hunters drops, programs are cut and jobs are left unfilled.

California is suffering the worst. The game warden staff has been cut by 25 percent over the last few years; budgets for wildlife managers have been slashed; maintenance is lacking.

"We had counties where we didn't even have a warden present," said Lorna Bernard, spokeswoman for the California Department of Fish and Game.

It's a delicate relationship that hunters and state agencies share. States depend on hunters to help fund their conservation projects and to control animal populations.

"Traditionally, the people that have paid for and cared for wildlife have been hunters and anglers," said Steve Huffaker, director of Idaho Fish and Game and past president of the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies.

"If we lose that support base, then we're concerned who's going to be there to take up the needs of fish and wildlife in the future," he said.

* __

Associated Press writer Bob Anez in Helena, Mont., contributed to this report. Wagner reported from Las Vegas.

* ___

On the Net:

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: http://www.fws.gov/

Responsive Management: http://www.responsivemanagement.com/

Theodore Roosevelt Conservation Partnership: http://www.trcp.org/

International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies: http://www.iafwa.org/
 
Because the article mainly quotes bureaucrats it doesn't come up with one big reason people quit hunting: excessive paperwork and forms. To shoot a duck has gotten to be a major ordeal with the red tape.
 
Gee, I wonder why California had the highest drop...
But I agree, it's too much red tape these days. =/
 
I've never had a problem when I've gone hunting. Sure, you need to secure a permit, but I don't mind. That money pays for the upkeep and salaries of people doing the work. Ditto for a fishing license.

The biggest reason I haven't been fishing in over 3 years and hunting for at least double that is because I'm too busy with work and school. I never have enough time to put a decent trip together not to mention the cost. Things seem to have gotten more expensive and I can't afford to skip out on work for a week as well as burn a couple hundred bucks to sit in the wilderness for a few days.

Sad, but thats life. I suppose I could go varmint hunting, but I actually like to get things I can eat.
 
I don't know how it is in other states, but you have to shell out $500 minimum here in Texas to get on a deer lease. Duck lease? About the same. Plus, a lot of leases overcrowd the land with too many hunters. And, that is if you can find one. All the good leases are already full and membership passes onto friends and family. It is a real racket. My dream is to find some land one day and have my own little plot of heaven.
 
I've been reading the stats on the decline of hunters numerically for 30 years. I believe it.
When I was a kid all the Dads I knew and the ones in my family took their kids hunting (except mine but I learned anyway ;) ) because it was cheap and nearby. It's neither now and there are just too dang many regs to know backwards and forwards. A book full most places!!!

Dads take their kid to play soccer these days because it's cheaper than hunting, easier and there are leagues everywhere.
It's also PC and both sexes can participate.

I think it's a good thing wildlife agencies are finally giving this issue some thought. Most of the public hunting land I've been on was poor to pathetic.
If they want to keep their jobs they better start giving it a lot of thought. I've met a few agents over the decades that seemed to think they were there just to "bug" hunters and try to find any violation they could to give a ticket. I guess it never occured to them hunters pay their salaries.
Perhaps they are in for some attitude adjustments.
S-
 
Some of it is cultural, and for many other people just plain lack of time or money no doubt. But I think the greatest is the costs. It is fast becoming unaffordable for many people, and for that matter so is access to the remote parks and other such areas.
 
I think a lot has to do with habitat. Growing up on the farm, you could walk out the door and work the fencerows. Now there are very few fencerow. Also, urban sprawl. Very few places to shoot a rifle or even shotgun without fear of hitting someone. I used to hunt a woodlot for rabbits. The woodlot's been cut up into parcels and has houses now.

Agree with above...everything's about money and lawsuits. Even if I owned land, I wouldn't let hunters on, and I hunt. Too many SOB's looking for easy lawsuit money

I have a good friend that runs a large factory here. He's lost 22% of his workforce to drug tests. If you let someone hunt, chances are about 1 in 4 they're drugged up. Talked to a customer yesterday. They've had 2 meth lab busts within a mile of their house, and this is rural Indiana.

Per Bob Dylan..."the time's they are a changin'"
 
Most hunters said in the 2001 Census and in the Fish and Wildlife survey that they did not hunt as much as they would have liked because they were too busy or had family or work obligations.

Well duh! I would like to be out in the woods every day from Sept to Jan but I'm too busy doing other things to do so. :rolleyes:
 
Less Hunters but Better-Managed Wildlife

Okay, let's see.

I love to hunt. So do half my brothers and our kids. We always invite one or two "newbies" to go along with us on our camping/fishing/hunting trips to spread the enjoyment that hunting brings to both the soul of the hunter and to the bonding of the relationships between those who go on the hunt.

Regardless of the decline in the number of hunters heading out, the Wildlife Management services of the various states have done a good job of re-introducing certain species and of managing the sizes of wildlife populations.

Therefore: Less Hunters, More Game, Better Opportunities.

My little boy watches BOTH his Cartoos AND his Buckmasters show every weekend and when we head out on a hunt or a fishing trip, he is always having to decide which of his friends (and their dads) need to go with us.

It is a generation-to-generation thing passion that can be introduced with not a lot of effort. Give it a try. Take your family & friends out hunting. You'll see what I mean.
 
It is a generation-to-generation thing passion that can be introduced with not a lot of effort. Give it a try. Take your family & friends out hunting. You'll see what I mean.

Between a few others and I, we have converted 6 or 7 guys who have never picked up a rifle, shotgun, or bow into die hard hunters within my workplace- all in their 30s and 40s. There's a lot of people out there who would love to go hunting but they don't know how and no one has asked them to go along to a shooting range or on a hunt yet. Its a lot easier to get people enthusiastic about hunting than they think. :D
 
We all need to slow down, take some time off, spend more time in the woods and take a kid out hunting.

Also there are a lot of adults out there who did not get a chance to grow up hunting. Many are probably on this board. Introduce these folks to hunting so they can introduce their kids to hunting. (I need to do this myself).

I think there is also an issue with State Departments of Natural Resources shifting focus away from hunting and fishing (even though hunting and fishing funds a huge portion of their budget -- SPORTSMEN PAY FOR CONSERVATION!). Their mission is in the process of shifting and many of THEM have never hunted or fished. Here in Minnesota, I speculate that few of the workers at the MN DNR facility ever leave the city or suburbs.

Interesting story. Thanks!
 
This kind of thing is a far greater danger to gun enthusiasts than Brady or any other politician.
The average gun owner I see at IDPA meets and so on is a middle-age to older (40's-60's and more) white man. We have seen one thread recently on who was going to inherit your guns and a fair number of peeople had no children who were interested in them. I believe the number of guns sold has been steadily declining for some time (maybe an occasional blip, like around Y2k).
An aging gun owner population coupled with mortality will mean fewer defenders of gun right and fewer voters. That is very disturbing.
 
My main worry is not so much the number of hunters, but the attitude towards hunting among the general non-hunting population. Too many urban and suburban children today know animals only as their indoor tamed pets, or as anthropomorphic creatures on TV, possessing human attributes. This is part of what has caused the rise in animal rights supporters,as well as other beliefs that to one degree or another elevate animals to the status of human beings. That moral change alone will eventually kill hunting if we don't start taking more kids out and teaching them about the way nature really works.
Hunting will be voted out of existence by enormous masses of bunny hugging voters raised in a make believe animal world.
If I had to peg the demise of hunting to something, it would be urbanization-a 100 year old trend. It wasn't as obvious 50 years ago, because everyone still knew at least someone with rural land. Now, many extended families can claim no one who owns more than 1/2 acre of their own,though they may be quite wealthy otherwise.
 
Sad

I believe it. Here in Washington, the Red Tape isn't too bad, and I don't consider the cost exessive. I think the problem here is animal related. I mean, Washington as a whole has always been kind of a meat factory state, but the last few years, things have even gotten bad in that department.

We have had pretty bad droughts the last few years(Heading for another one, too.) and sprawl is getting worse. The latest thing that scares me there is people breaking up their 1000 acre ranches and selling them off as 15-20 acre 'Estate' properties. I mean, you take and put a house every 10 acres, and even if the deer or elk stick around, it ruins it as hunting land.

Washington isn't too bad as far as available public land goes, and deer hunting still sees about a 30% success rate, but elk... Elk you just have to keep going deeper and deeper into the woods for. The elk success rate is down to about 10% now.

From my standpoint, as a hunter, I haven't hunted elk the last two years. The places I used to hunt near Ellensburg have just been beat up by the droughts. The local herd has been just about wiped out, and the weather hasn't attracted any roaming herds. Since then, I have been working so many hours, I haven't had a chance to go scouting a new area, and going into an area looking for elk blind just seems like a big waste of time. Especially when you are lucky to get three days off work to go hunting!

Just need to start setting priorities, I guess.

greg
 
We all neeed to go and take a kid with us. It is vital to the survival of our sport.
Can I volunteer for the job of the kid?

I'm a college student. My parents are city folk and have never had any experience hunting, so I never had the chance to learn it from my father. I've always wished, somewhere in the back of my mind, that I knew how to hunt and fish.

I know this is a bit off topic, but how might one get started in these things without the aid of dad or grandpa?
 
HTG - I'm in the same boat as you, only I've already gotten started in gaining hunting experience. Either from work, THR, church, or whatever source find someone that's an experienced hunter that is willing to show you the ropes. Ask around. You'll be surprised how many hunters there are. Many still keep that part of their lives on the QT becuase it is not politically correct anymore. To give you an idea, when my mom found out I was going deer hunting, she wished the deer good luck, not me. I had tried to not let them in on it, but my wife let it slip. Anyway, I casually asked around at work and found a guy that had been a hunter for 30 years. We put in together for the draw (one downside to AZ is the lottery system for big game tags) and managed to get tags for mule deer in a souther AZ unit. We went out 3 times together scouting starting about a couple months before the season opened, and then went out for the 10 day season. Didn't get to shoot anything (well I got a shot at a spike but missed), but still had a lot of fun.
 
I know this is a bit off topic, but how might one get started in these things without the aid of dad or grandpa?

Just swing by a Rod and Gun Club or a hunting club and post a notice on the bulletin board. One of the clubs I frequent actually has a mentor program. But it usually means you have to bring the sandwiches and carry the heavy stuff.
 
Note to Headless Thompson Gunner

don't know where you at in Indiana. I'm north-central, about 20 minutes S. of South Bend. I see you're a college student. Couldn't be going to a wuss school like IU...I'd guess Purdue, but that's a guess

Anyway, if you're close, PM me. If not, find out when there's a Ducks Unlimited or NWTF banquet in your area. Find an Isaac Walton, etc. Heck, just start hanging around a good gun shop.

My dad never hunted, but at least I grew up on a farm and we had guns I could use. Everything I learned, I learned myself. A great start would be sporting clays. That's the closest thing there is to hunting.
 
Rabbi

I agree.

I'm sure everyone here knows about Pittman Robertson Funds. I have no stats to support this but because some of us are into the marksmanship sports and not into hunting we subsidize the hunting issue via PR even if we never set foot in the woodlot. Not sure there is one iota of reciprocity.

PR allows different amounts of the approx 10% (IIRC) of excise taxes on guns, ammo and bows to be used for all kinds of wildlife management activities including range construction.

Most of the states I have lived in have spent not a dime on range building.

If they did and even if those ranges were open only to people who buy hunting licenses I think it would do more to help the shooting and hunting sports than anything else.

I hunt.
I'm teaching my sone to hunt.
We both burn orders of magnitude more ammo plinking at private ranges killing paper then we do in the field.

Not having access to decent, safe places to shoot and shoot long range is a massive issue if we want either of these sports to survive and grow.

Some metro governments own and manage golf courses, soccer fields, ball diamonds and basketball courts in city parks beyond counting all on user fees and our tax dollars. I've never seen or heard of a single metro supported shooting range in my life anywhere. Ditto for any county or state managed ranges save those accessible to LE only.

These same state agencies work hard in most states to buy or lease land annually to hunt on...(in many cases land of dubious quality) ....but nothing for ranges.

We can all connect the dots....
S-
 
Last edited:
I've never seen or heard of a single metro supported shooting range in my life anywhere.
Pima County (contains Tucson, AZ) is building (anyone know if it's complete yet??) a whole shooting complex on the county fairgrounds land. It will include pistol ranges out to at least 25 yards, rifle lanes out to IIRC 300 yards, and a trap range. I think it might also have some archery set ups. It will be open to the public for a daily fee, and one would assume they'd have annual memberships as well.
 
I can definately understand this. I'm in my early 20s, and know a few guys my age who are also big into shooting. None are hunters, even though we're all at least somehwat intereted in it. Our parents weren't hunters and we don't really know the first thing about how to start out.
 
sumpnz

Consider yourself lucky.

I few years back a saw a public range in Montana. Assuming it's still open to the public that makes the ratios 2:280,000,000 approximately.

S-
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top