How to grow hunter numbers in New York?

[defrazzle]

I made the point way back about lowering license prices as well as trusting mentors with strange kids. Defrazzle, how did your interview go? Any new developments?

Hi Bubba - the interview went well. I was asked all kinds of questions as to why I wanted to be an instructor and what my experience was. I had plenty to tell and in the end the interviewer said there are no issues. Now I am waiting for the next step.

Also my meeting with the local Gander Manger went well. He understood what I was trying to to do. He said that corporate (Gander) would have to "bless" any of the programs that I would like to start locally. This is still on my agenda....am scheduling a second meeting with the manager. Although there seems to be little resistance in getting a program started - the corporate "blessing" could be a deal breaker pending what they think the liability for them is. I have not given up!! :-)

[nyantler]

Love farmers but that is the biggest reason I HATE nusance permits. They remove a benefit to have us there.

So true.. but in their defense many irresponsible hunters of the past ruined things for a lot of us. But i still think farmers could be selective about letting a certain amount of hunters hunt their property instead of just entertaining mass killings by one or two of their friends or relatives with nuisance permits.

[SteveB]

Most farmers I know using nuisance permits also hunt and/or allow hunting. In fact, I cannot think of one of the several I know that don't. Only so many deer can be killed in the hunting season and sometimes it is not enough.

[tony m]

There are some resaons.

The media saturation of firearms as a threat to man has more people believing that guns are bad. I believe this is the number one reason.

More posted signs.

[shawnhu]

Down here, it's definitely loss of hunting opportunities. All the places we used to hunt when I was a kid, are now buried beneath $700,000 homes. Out of four of us that hunted in my family, I'm the only one who still does. I have my own reservations about even bothering to "hunt" anymore. It's all "hole in the wall" hunting here anymore, and there's damned good odds that someone who moved up from down below, will call the cops when they hear a gunshot. It's happened to me. To me, this is not hunting. Hell, you can hear people talking, the traffic, and everything else, while "hunting". You're definitely not going to have any solitude here-I can tell you that. Everyone I know that gave it up, is for the reason mentioned-no place to hunt here anymore.

Stan, although lack of access to hunt was a major deterrent for me, you have gone out of your way to show us the ropes and opened your wisdom to myself and some others. I may have given up hunting had I not had some success last year. Thank you. It may not be what it used to be for you as far as access goes, but to this novice hunter, you've showed me that there is plenty.

[nyantler]

Most farmers I know using nuisance permits also hunt and/or allow hunting. In fact, I cannot think of one of the several I know that don't. Only so many deer can be killed in the hunting season and sometimes it is not enough.

I see things a bit differently.. the farmers I know do not hunt and only let some family members hunt thousands of acres... only those individuals get to use the permits... and really most of the farms around me don't even apply for the permits.. I literally have 10 farms within a 3-4 mile radius of my home... each farm incompasses thousands of acres... with little access to any of it by outside hunters... great for me living in the middle of it all, not so good for other hunters... I'm sure it's different everywhere.. that is just my experience.. I'd like to see more access for the average guy that doesn't have a place to hunt.

[Doc]

I wonder if there wouldn't be some way of tying the issuance of nuisance permits to opening up some land for public hunting? I'm not sure how that might be worded or how the details might be worked out, but certainly I can see a connection between a farmer complaining about excessive deer vs. that same farmer limiting the DEC from using their chief population control tool .... hunters. Wouldn't you think there should be some strings attached to those permits that might remedy two problems at once?

[shawnhu]

I wonder if there wouldn't be some way of tying the issuance of nuisance permits to opening up some land for public hunting? I'm not sure how that might be worded or how the details might be worked out, but certainly I can see a connection between a farmer complaining about excessive deer vs. that same farmer limiting the DEC from using their chief population control tool .... hunters. Wouldn't you think there should be some strings attached to those permits that might remedy two problems at once?

Issue less permits so farmers can open their land to hunters. That would be a good compromise.

[SteveB]

Blanket statements don't work.

I'll repeat: "Most farmers I know using nuisance permits also hunt and/or allow hunting. In fact, I cannot think of one of the several I know that don't. Only so many deer can be killed in the hunting season and sometimes it is not enough."

And from Joe: the farmers I know do not hunt and only let some family members hunt thousands of acres... only those individuals get to use the permits... and really most of the farms around me don't even apply for the permits.

Lots farms hunting alone is not enough. And bottom line is no one should be forced to allow anyone use of their land in order to protect their livelihood. So no - no strings attached.

[nyantler]

There have been programs where hunters could get access to hunting land in exchange for helping out the farmer around the farm... the programs were met with little enthusiasm. I have found that leasing the land from the farmers to help pay some of the taxes has worked for me... the farmer usually allows me the number of hunters on the property that I feel works best for both not over hunting the land and helping to absorb some of the cost of the lease.

[mike rossi]

Cheap labor is an imense resource to a farmer... But charging for hunting or accepting labor in exchange for access does two things: 1) creates a labor liability 2) creates a hunting liability that a landowner is otherwise exempt from if the hunting is free of charge. Thus creating a employee- employer relation program for hunting access is (another ) foolish idea. BTW: although hunting is a fairly safe activity, agricultural labor is one of thee most dangerous occupations... Scrap that idea...

Why would a deer hunter obsess over private land anyway? I seek out private land for other game, but I wouldnt waste my time for deer or turkey.

Besides, there is not any relationship between getting new recruits and access... A percentage of former hunters may have quit because they lost convenient and familiar hunting land; but this has no bearing on recruiting youth and other novices. Anyone who quit because they lost a farm isnt very committed and also will not be persistent and enthusastic enough to turn his teen away from athletics and electronics...

Hunting has never been for everyone. The front door to hunting should be target shooting. A percentage of target shooters eventually seek greater challenges after becoming proficient and turn toward hunting.

[Elmo]

Morally and health conscience eaters are the biggest wave of new wave of hunters.

[mike rossi]

Morally and health conscience eaters are the biggest wave of new wave of hunters.

I think this wave helps the public image of hunting and makes it attractive to people who otherwise would NEVER have considered hunting, but I will have to take your word about the wieght of its impact.

Most people who get into shooting eventually start asking questions or seek information about hunting... The answers they recieve and the information they consume at that point is critical, because it dictates whether an interest in hunting will be fostered or if they will be turned off to the idea.