Hunting's Infighting & Fewer Hunters will end all hunting

[Rattler]

Get on the right Team Image By LARRY CASE

Our hunting privileges in the America are in jeopardy like they’ve never been before. Hunter numbers have dropped drastically; in 1970 over 40 million people bought a hunting license and today that number is probably less than 12 million. As our numbers decrease, so do our supporters. We’re already at the point in some states that every vote is needed when hunting related issues are on the ballot. After spending over 35 years as a DNR Conservation Officer, I’m still amazed how sportsmen, hunters and fishermen, cannot seem to agree on anything! Hunters are their own worst enemy; every type of hunter seems to have only that group’s interest at heart. Bow hunters don’t seem to be able to get along with gun hunters; muzzleloaders are often at odds with both of those groups, and there’s no way for a state game agency to set deer seasons that’ll please them all. Speaking of archery hunters I don’t believe I’ve ever seen a group of hunters more fragmented than those who hunt with some form of a stick and string. For years many avid bow hunters have fought the use of crossbows with an almost cult like fervor. “Crossbows are ruining bowhunting!” “It’s too easy!” “You don’t have practice!” “The crossbow hunters will kill too many deer!” I’ve heard these complaints in barbershops, at gun counters, on Internet forums, and on social media for years. Many seasoned bow hunters would have you believe a crossbow is the tool of the devil. The problem is certainly not just with bow hunters. Those who hunt with dogs often run afoul with other hunters in the field. Every year beloved and valuable hunting dogs are shot for no good reason. Currently there’s a debate going on in some states about deer management, the lowering of buck limits, and antler restrictions. Many deer hunters want to encourage the growing of bigger antlers. That’s all well and good, but how about the guy who just wants to go on public land with his kid in hopes of taking any legal deer? I don’t want to tell a young hunter he or she can’t take a spike or a fork horn for their first deer. There has to be leeway for both sides. On public land especially we’ve got to learn to respect the wishes of other hunters. Somehow, by the grace of God, we’ve got to get away from this close-minded thinking in the hunter ranks, which basically says “ I am right and you are wrong, my way or the highway!” You have your way of hunting, you learned from Dad and Grand Dad and maybe Uncle Bill. The guy in the next county over or in another state may not see hunting the same as you. What we’re getting down to is – and I want you to pay attention – If the other guy is hunting in a way that is not your cup of tea, but is legal, then keep quiet about it and even offer support if someone attacks him. The guy in a ground blind with a crossbow may not have your self-appointed seal of approval and the bird hunter’s setter that ran past your treestand didn’t really cause all the deer in a three county area to leave the country. If it’s legal to bait in your area but you don’t like it, don’t do it, but don’t berate the guy who does. Boys and girls, we’re way past the times when we can be picky about what another hunter does. Anything and everything we can do to get another pair of boots on the ground, to get another license purchased, and to have money spent in a gun store; that’s what we had better be thinking about. The well organized and well-funded anti-hunting groups are watching, and some say all they have to do is wait – wait for our numbers to fall below recoverable levels – and then move in for the kill. Why make their job easier by squabbling amongst ourselves? I didn’t coin this phrase, but, united we stand, divided we fall.

Edited March 11, 2019 by Rattler

[rob-c]

I agree with every thing he has said. I believe the push for big antlers has contributed to this problem. Don’t get me wrong  I like to shoot big bucks also, but over the 35 + yrs I have been hunting things sure have changed. 

[First-light]

33 minutes ago, rob-c said:

I agree with every thing he has said. I believe the push for big antlers has contributed to this problem. Don’t get me wrong  I like to shoot big bucks also, but over the 35 + yrs I have been hunting things sure have changed. 

It truly divides. My late FIL would say fill all those tags that's what they are there for. Things have changed a lot. There is so many factors that go into what type of deer you set your sites on. Judge the hunter on the size of the smile not the horns after the harvest! 

[Jeremy K]

It was ok ,just had to get that shot in at archery hunters though .

Edited March 11, 2019 by Jeremy K

[G-Man]

I'm still trying to figure out how to charge the state for feeding all of their deer that then charge me to shoot on my on property which they also tax me on just for owning......

[The_Real_TCIII]

It was ok ,just had to get that shot in at archery hunters though .

Agreed. If you disagree with any proposed change you’re a greedy bowhunter, dividing the sport


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Doc]

I know that the level of disagreement seems to be at an all-time high. But is that really the cause of the decline of popularity in hunting. I think not. I like a good hunting debate as much as anybody and certainly have taken part in almost all of them. But I still go out every year and do my thing regardless of whatever controversy has been stirred up. Honestly, it does not bother me one bit. I can disagree, and enter into the most bitter of debates with no effect on my enjoyment of the activity. I think that this point that disagreement is what's killing hunting is really concentrating on the wrong thing. What can have a direct influence on my hunting is the new house going up in my favorite hunting spot, or the new posted signs that lock me out from old hunting grounds. and of course lately I am being influenced more and more by old age. I can disagree vehemently with any number of subjects that come up here in the morning and still enjoy the heck out of my hunt in the afternoon.

I think we are all smart enough to know that the true threat to hunting today is the societal pressures and the cultural changes. We have the seed generations that are simply losing interest in all things outdoors. And even the older generations are starting to suffer a bit of Bambism and laziness and a migration to other interests. The American culture is evolving away from all things natural.

Let's not blame the demise of hunting on differing opinions and discussion. I think we can disagree on the details of what we do, and still remain staunch advocates for our hunting as a bona-fide activity. In fact I am convinced that discussion only strengthens the final versions of what hunting turns out to be.

 

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Doc

[rob-c]

10 minutes ago, The_Real_TCIII said:

Agreed. If you disagree with any proposed change you’re a greedy bowhunter, dividing the sport


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

You are not entirely wrong.Bowhunters get a bad rap,  we enjoy the challenge and the time it takes to become a great shot with a bow. I know many coworkers and friends that have hung up the vertical bow for a crossbow and they all have commented on how accurate they are with no practice and their success rate has gone up because of it. 

But having said that , I am finding as I get older and my aches and pains are catching up with me. I have had to make some significant changes to my bow to continue to bow hunt. I will use a vertical bow for as long as I can,  but I may have to go to a crossbow in my elder yrs to enjoy my favorite time in the woods. 

Its easy to look down on crossbow hunters because I used to do this, but when or if the time comes and One finds him or herself making a choice of no more bowhunting or picking up a crossbow. Well I will do what ever I have to and hunt my favorite time of the yr. 

[rob-c]

8 minutes ago, Doc said:

I know that the level of disagreement seems to be at an all-time high. But is that really the cause of the decline of popularity in hunting. I think not. I like a good hunting debate as much as anybody and certainly have taken part in almost all of them. But I still go out every year and do my thing regardless of whatever controversy has been stirred up. Honestly, it does not bother me one bit. I can disagree, and enter into the most bitter of debates with no effect on my enjoyment of the activity. I think that this point that disagreement is what's killing hunting is really concentrating on the wrong thing. What can have a direct influence on my hunting is the new house going up in my favorite hunting spot, or the new posted signs that lock me out from old hunting grounds. and of course lately I am being influenced more and more by old age. I can disagree vehemently with any number of subjects that come up here in the morning and still enjoy the heck out of my hunt in the afternoon.

I think we are all smart enough to know that the true threat to hunting today is the societal pressures and the cultural changes. We have the seed generations that are simply losing interest in all things outdoors. And even the older generations are starting to suffer a bit of Bambism and laziness and a migration to other interests. The American culture is evolving away from all things natural.

Let's not blame the demise of hunting on differing opinions and discussion. I think we can disagree on the details of what we do, and still remain staunch advocates for our hunting as a bona-fide activity. In fact I am convinced that discussion only strengthens the final versions of what hunting turns out to be.

 

 

Agreed, there are numerous reasons why hunting numbers are declining. 

Edited March 11, 2019 by rob-c

[The_Real_TCIII]

You are not entirely wrong.Bowhunters get a bad rap,  we enjoy the challenge and the time it takes to become a great shot with a bow. I know many coworkers and friends that have hung up the vertical bow for a crossbow and they all have commented on how accurate they are with no practice and their success rate has gone up because of it. 
But having said that , I am finding as I get older and my aches and pains are catching up with me. I have had to make some significant changes to my bow to continue to bow hunt. I will use a vertical bow for as long as I can,  but I may have to go to a crossbow in my elder yrs to enjoy my favorite time in the woods. 
Its easy to look down on crossbow hunters because I used to do this, but when or if the time comes and One finds him or herself making a choice of no more bowhunting or picking up a crossbow. Well I will do what ever I have to and hunt my favorite time of the yr. 

Putting Crossbows aside, even when they propose that early ML season if a bowhunter objected they were “greedy” and unwilling to give up any of their season.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Culvercreek hunt club]

9 minutes ago, The_Real_TCIII said:

Putting Crossbows aside, even when they propose that early ML season if a bow hunter objected they were “greedy” and unwilling to give up any of their season.
 

With only about 5% of the population hunting and about 5% rabid anti-hunting, there is a huge population that is on the fence. When polled the vast majority are tolerable with hunting for food and population control. When polled about "trophy" hunting their support free falls. That is part of my issue with AR's and how they are presented for "bigger racks". It also bothers me about the ML in early archery debate. I LOVE to bow hunt but if they tossed a ML season in bow in the high population area I live and hunt in, I would understand it. I'd likely take part in it too. When over I'd pick that bow back up. It is unnerving when hunters get so polarized on the issues though. I have been involved in some heated debates of topics. That isn't bad but we should be framing all of it under the umbrella of conservation. What is the best for the resource.  

[phade]

If we reserved 10% of the time whining about in-fighting, and instead placed that effort on access...I suspect the in-fighting would be almost imperceptible.

What happens when you put more and more people into dwindling access or pay to play? Many leave and those that stay get radicalized into their corner. It's like shaking up a hornet's nest.

 

 

[Steve D]

15 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

It is unnerving when hunters get so polarized on the issues though. I have been involved in some heated debates of topics. That isn't bad but we should be framing all of it under the umbrella of conservation. What is the best for the resource.  

I think that applies to this forum as well.

[Steve D]

3 hours ago, Rattler said:

Somehow, by the grace of God, we’ve got to get away from this close-minded thinking in the hunter ranks, which basically says “ I am right and you are wrong, my way or the highway!” You have your way of hunting, you learned from Dad and Grand Dad and maybe Uncle Bill. The guy in the next county over or in another state may not see hunting the same as you. What we’re getting down to is – and I want you to pay attention – If the other guy is hunting in a way that is not your cup of tea, but is legal, then keep quiet about it and even offer support if someone attacks him

I think a lot of this dissension germinates from not experiencing, understanding, or trying to understand the season or sport one is pointing fingers at.  This part is particulary true:

 

3 hours ago, Rattler said:

If the other guy is hunting in a way that is not your cup of tea, but is legal, then keep quiet about it and even offer support if someone attacks him

 

[crappyice]

The most important Thread that, I have read on this Site in a very Long Time!!  

Have you not seen the beer thread?!? Sorry to make a joke!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rattler]

Just to clarify what the author of the article is saying, the infighting isn't causing a decline in hunter numbers. 

He's saying with the decline in hunter numbers, we cannot afford infighting, because when those two factors combine, it is easier for the enemies of hunting to destroy it.

 

[Hunter007]

1 hour ago, ODYSSEUS said:

No matter what you Hunt or how you Legally Hunt it- all Links in the Hunting Chain must remain Strong as Many Young Socialists are Taking over the Democratic Party. We all must Stick Together. The Population having Guns and Hunting does not go well with-- The New Green Deal.

Actually if the socialist take over this country and they do manage to pass the green new deal . You will see more people hunting again because the green new deal and socialism will cause starvation poverty in this country  a Depression and once again people will  be  forced to hunt for food or starve  like in  the past .

I believe Hunting is down because its relatively easy to buy food and the food is less expensive now compare two peoples income,   then in years past .  

Edited March 12, 2019 by Storm914

[Culvercreek hunt club]

3 hours ago, Storm914 said:

Actually if the socialist take over this country and they do manage to pass the green new deal . You will see more people hunting again because the green new deal and socialism will cause starvation poverty in this country  a Depression and once again people will  be  forced to hunt for food or starve  like in  the past .

 

If society hits that wall, hunting will not be phase one. There are too many folks to be supported by hunting. That won't be viable until the riots and taking from your neighbor phase is done and the population is reduced. 

[Hunter007]

41 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

If society hits that wall, hunting will not be phase one. There are too many folks to be supported by hunting. That won't be viable until the riots and taking from your neighbor phase is done and the population is reduced. 

Out of desperation they will be hunting rats probably in the city's !!  

All I know is you can't feed millions of people with out cheap fossil fuels,   the farmers of today are dependent on it  there is no way you would be able to truck in food to places like NYC with out gasoline powered trucks from 100s of miles away .  You need cheap energy to do that .  People in the citys will be starving probably hunting rats and anything else to stay alive .

The green new deal people are even against nuclear power and hydroelectric power .

Wind and solar not enough too expensive to work right for everything we need to  power in this country. It would be a disaster. 

 

 

[Doc]

On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 8:17 AM, rob-c said:

You are not entirely wrong. Bowhunters get a bad rap,  we enjoy the challenge and the time it takes to become a great shot with a bow.

Actually, that was why the season was created in the first place and pulled out separate from the gun season. It began as a season with special challenges that tested the dedication and hunting and shooting skills of a small number of people who were willing to severely handicap their hunt in a unique way. In this age of "fairness and dumbing things down so all can participate" I guess it is no longer politically correct to set aside seasons for such out-dated concepts as "adding" challenge.  Was it a concept worth saving? Apparently not for the majority. Was there some that didn't want to see the original concept lost and would not give up quietly?.... Sure. Was that effort to preserve the initial concepts of bow season wrong?...... I guess that depends on which side of the changes you were on.....lol. Were the bowhunters who wanted to save bow season to be strictly bows evil people bent on the destruction of all hunting?...... You would think so from the reactions of those that were trying to shoe-horn their way in.

If we are not supposed to disagree about any hunting matters and doing so means the end of hunting then perhaps the concept of sport hunting is simply doomed. One thing is for sure, you will not change the nature of the humans that are involved in hunting. Anything that is participated in as passionately as hunting is bound to have areas of disagreement. We have withstood differences of opinion in the past, and likely we will withstand them in the future.

I can only say that it will not be "disagreements" that will end my hunting. I will continue until they pry my bow from my cold dead hands .......lol.

[Steve D]

On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2019 at 5:19 AM, Rattler said:

The well organized and well-funded anti-hunting groups are watching, and some say all they have to do is wait – wait for our numbers to fall below recoverable levels – and then move in for the kill. Why make their job easier by squabbling amongst ourselves?

I didn’t coin this phrase, but, united we stand, divided we fall.  

As long as "hunting" continues to be a source of significant revenue for government it will be around. The  group(s) of hunters generating the most revenue or potential revenue will receive the most benefit in forms of relaxed restrictions and season dates. More reason to stick together and support each others interest.

QUOTE:

Fishing and hunting are long-standing institutions in the United States. Not only are they hobbies enjoyed by millions, fishing and hunting are important contributors to the country's massive outdoor recreation economy. Consumer spending on outdoor recreation contributes $887 billion to the U.S. economy, employs 7.6 million Americans and generates $125 billion in tax revenues. More than $63.1 billion in retail spending can be attributed to fishing and hunting, while the two industries employ nearly 483,000 Americans, with salaries and wages of more than $17.8 billion as  disclosed in the Outdoor Industry Association's 2017 report

 

[Rattler]

15 minutes ago, Steve D said:

Consumer spending on outdoor recreation contributes $887 billion to the U.S. economy, employs 7.6 million Americans and generates $125 billion in tax revenues.

More than $63.1 billion in retail spending can be attributed to fishing and hunting

Notice how hunting and fishing's retail spending has become about 7% of the total outdoor recreation spending?  That's a lot less of the total than it used to be, and that includes fishing.  Today with outdoor recreation including things like bird watching, skiing, hiking, camping, mountain biking, etc., there are many more people out there using the woods for things other than hunting and they could easily force hunters out of the woods if push came to shove.

Edited March 12, 2019 by Rattler

[Doc]

6 minutes ago, Rattler said:

Notice how hunting and fishing's retail spending has become about 7% of the total outdoor recreation spending?  That's a lot less of the total than it used to be, and that includes fishing.  Today with outdoor recreation including things like bird watching, skiing, hiking, camping, mountain biking, etc., there are many more people out there using the woods for things other than hunting and they could easily force hunters out of the woods if push came to shove.

Yes, I had several prime and very productive archery stand sites on state land that were wrecked by mountain bike trails and heavy use of hikers. A whole section of the hill was taken over by a maze of heavily used bike/hiking trails. The deer were still in the area but not active until the cover of darkness. Sure, they have a right to use the land, but it certainly has negatively impacted the bowhunting in a very large area of state land. Will that competition for land use ever create legal disputes in the future that may hamper hunting? ..... Who knows.....anything is possible.

[Rattler]

Many states that don't allow Sunday hunting get pressured by these other groups to keep hunters out of the woods one day a week so they can enjoy the outdoors safely.  They are starting to gain influence.

This is why we need to present a united front on all hunting issues.

[grampy]

The obvious reason for so much infighting is we "all" think we are doing it the "right" way.