goosifer

It was a hypothetical question based upon the idea that hunting land will get more and more scarce, for whatever reasons, as several posters and articles have expressed.

Maybe # of deer harvested, or # of deer harvested as a % of tags issued, would be a better measure of hunter participation. I will be curious to see what data is available.

What if some of the hunters the state loses would have liked to continue hunting, but drop out of hunting because they no longer have access to hunting land for some reason beyond their control? I can understand your not having any sympathy for the state and its revenue, but what about the hunters who get squeezed out (if that were to happen)?

I will try to get some data on hunting license sales. I will say though that there are trends in play that might not yet be reflected in recent hunting license sales, but that could be a factor in the future like CWD.

post deleted. misunderstanding

I can't argue with those statements. I think they are truisms that apply to anything/everything.

Don't underestimate the impact of technology/internet/social media on society, especially younger folks. It's really a mixed blessing.

If so, it would be addition by subtraction. Antler hunters as a percentage of total hunters will go up, but the number of total hunters will go down. It's like why the unemployment rate is so low. There are a lot of good people who are hunters who may no longer be able to hunt/be the one's who get priced out. And there are a lot of potential future hunters that would benefit from hunting, but won't be given the opportunity to start because the people who would have been their hunting mentors can't afford to hunt. As a whole, it just seems like the population of hunters and/or society as a whole will be worse off. Maybe these trends are inevitable, and the industry-related business that are properly positioned to take advantage of these trends will benefit economically, and not worry so much about the impact on priced-out non-antler hunters.

With regards to the future of hunting, will hunting for big antlers be a cause and/or an effect? If the supply of hunting land gets really tight and people will have to pay (one way or another) for access to hunting land, the antler hunters may be the only one's left as the meat and social hunters will be priced out of the market whereas antler hunters are willing to pay up. On the other hand, it could happen that antler hunters will be the one's restricting access to hunting land, either by buying it up or supporting ARs. So it seems like antler hunters, either as a cause and or consequence of decreased access to hunting land, could cause the number of hunters overall to decline. You may be OK with that, maybe even prefer that, but I can't help but feel that, as a whole, all deer hunters are worse off under those circumstances, if they were to come to pass in the future.

Sorry for the misquote. Thank you for correcting me. It's a complicated subject, and my writing style is very verbose. This thread in particular, has an almost academic style to it. I'm sure there are many readers who start to read it, and then their eyes start to glaze over. It's OK. Like I said, it will be diary or journal of sorts, with links to related articles and web pages. Even with just the few articles I have posted and the responses I have recieved so far, I am learning more about the issue.

Well, maybe go 51/49 in case a sausage inspector comes by. Give a couple of different venison/pork/pork fat recipes a try till you find the one you like the most. It's like how some guys like to make a burger with 100% venison. Not for me, but if they like it that way, great.

Rob, this thread isn't about hunting for antlers vs. hunting for meat. There are plenty of other threads and posts about that. This thread is about will there be anyone in the next generation hunting, and if so, under what conditions/circumstances. There have been some responses that have basically said that due to lack of access to hunting land in the future, the only hunting done will be hunting on private land at a cost, and futhermore, those future hunters will be hunting for horns. But that is not the same thing as what FSW usually says, that all hunting [today] is motivated by antlers. So I think you misinterpreted what this thread is intended to be about. Yeah, there are some posters that have strayed from the thread's topic, but I can't moderate that. Just look at the posts I've written in this thread to see my intentions for it.

This has an aristocratic vibe to it. Or may a Robin Hood era "the king's forest" vibe. I understand what you are saying, and you may be right, but it's a bit disheartening. At a bigger picture level, I guess it relates to the idea that young kids just know that food comes from a grocery store, and have no idea what a farm or ranch is.

gjs4, any thoughts on to what extent the issues you raise are specific to NYS? Might there be other states that aren't as affected by these factors, for whatever reason? (Just looking for a ray of hope.)

Does your apathy extend to the future of deer hunting, then? Do you care whether or not future generations have the opportunity to experience hunting the way you did?

I was trying to find out more about qdma's Mentored Hunting Program, and ended up coming across Hunting Heritage Action plan at http://huntingheritage.org/ which has a database of various "hunting heritage/hunting mentoring" programs across the county. There are also some "hunting access programs".Looks like it is trying to address the issues mentioned above head on. It is put together by the Wildlife Management Institute, et al From their website: Are there any forum members that are involved in any sort of hunting heritage/hunting mentoring programs?

Article: 4 Ways to Ensure the Future of Deer Hunting (4/8/16) at qdma.com by Brian Grossman Synopsis: The author discusses four ways to ensure the future of deer hunting are: 1. Introduce someone new [both youth and adults] 2. Hunt legally and ethically 3. Stand united [with other hunters] 4. Get involved [with qdma] - - - - - - goosifer comments on article: I agree with #1 and #2. Surprised the author didn't mention the qdma Mentoring Program (will cover soon.) As we've seen on this forum, #3 is tough. I think it would be better to say to find common ground that all hunters can agree on. For #4, I think some sort of lobbying is needed. Maybe qdma would be the best as it avoids the association with guns that seems to "trigger" people. One thing the author doesn't address is the overcommercialization of deer hunting. It's like what's happened to Christmas. Need a way to counterbalance that for the next generation of hunters.

I reread what I wrote, and what I should have wrote/what I intended to communicate was ",if the above is true, I worry that . . ." I can't go back and edit it now; hope you take my word for it. Note, I did precede what I said with This view of the future . . . . I agree with that sentiment, and have an article about that I will share next from QDMA. That is not how I feel, and I hope I didn't give you that impression. I am much more concerned about the future generation of [potential] hunters, the people, and what they might lose out on, than the the "sport" itself. I'm not clear on what you are saying, but I hope you don't think I was bashing anyone/anything. I very much agree with and support this sentiment.

Nice pics, Biz. Pretty, classic deer hunting terrain. If we are allowed to guess, I am saying doe because of the rounder ears.

I was inspired to start this thread based upon an exchange I had with Four Seasons Whitetails in the "Wonderful quote from the late Charlie Alsheimer" thread. See Post 1 and Post 2. I don't necessarily agree with everything he said, but I am not in a position to comment on the veracity of his statements. I've started doing some further research on the subject, and will share my findings here for further discussion and debate. From my perspective, it will be a work in progress/diary of sorts, as I add more links and information. - - - - - - - - One article I've come across so far is a Q&A with Gordon Wittingdon, the Editor of North American Whitetails magazine for 8/21/17. Some of his comments were similar to what 4SW said: The full article is here: HOW DEER HUNTING HAS CHANGED AND ITS FUTURE - A Q&A WITH GORDON WHITTINGTON - - - - - - - - This view of the future saddens me. It seems to me that a lot of potential future hunters will get priced out of the market (reminds me of the housing market) or get frustrated and quit when they can't get the big buck like they see on TV. But if that is what they are taught to value . . . . I hope I'm wrong.

4SW, Thank you for your responses. A few follow up questions: On your third point, I would think a lot more than half don't have what it takes to find and kill a big buck. (When you factor in the time and financial commitment involved, that number get's even higher.) Relative to when you started hunting, do you think it is now easier or harder for a beginner hunter to learn what it takes to find and kill a big buck? While there are now a lot more technology, gear, youtube videos, forums like this, DVD's and magazines on the subject then in the past, I get the impression there seems to be less person-to-person mentoring/teaching opportunities. Regarding public land for hunting, why do you believe that will not be an option in the future? Legislative changes? Or just that there will be no/too few big bucks such that hunters will not want to bother with public lands?

Four Seasons Whitetails, with respect to your characterization of "deer hunting", I look at it as two different things. One is the "deer hunting industry" (companies and people that make money selling products) and the other is the deer hunters themselves. While I see you point on the deer hunting industry and its focus on promoting the pursuit of big bucks, I am not convinced that extrapolates to what motivates most individual hunters. I did a "Why do you hunt?" thread earlier this season, and there were a lot of people whose reasons/motivation for hunting was different or more than just the pursuit of big bucks. So I am not saying you are wrong with respect to the deer hunting industry, but I think your applying it to most individual hunters might be an oversimplification. Something to consider. But let me ask you this, as far as deer hunting being all about the pursuit of big bucks, how long do you think it's been this way? Do you think that the modern industry has pushed things in that direction so they could convince hunters to buy more of their stuff? I mean, 50 years ago, were there all these hunting shows, hunting technology, hunting clothes, etc.? Maybe it's a natural evolution of the "sport" as the "need" to hunt for meat isn't what it used to be? Do you think this focus on big bucks has made it more or less easy for hunters to enjoy the act of hunting? How do you think the focus on big bucks has affected hunters' ability to recruit new hunters, particularly younger hunters, into hunting? Made it easier or harder? Lastly, obviously, the focus on big bucks has been very good financially to many companies, including yours, but might it be detrimental to deer hunting or the population of deer hunters in the long term? Just curious how you see those aspects of deer hunting in light of it being all about the antlers. Again, I am not disputing what you are saying, I am just trying to get a better understanding of how you think it relates to these aspects of deer hunting.

I don't have the jaw, I gave the head to my buddy. He took the pics and sent them to me. he was going to show them to someone to age it and he never did. I came across the pics on my phone looking for something else today. So I thought I would just throw them out there to see if someone here could age it. Not a big deal.

my muzzleloader buck. hope the pics are good enough for someone to age it. thanks.

So, the fridge was a little crowded with leftover rice, heavy whipping cream on its expiration date and some almond milk. (Used the heavy whipping cream instead of milk.) Me, being the helpful guy that I am, used it all to make rice pudding. Was a bit on the creamy side, but I suffered through it. This also counts as my What's for Dinner thread contribution