Buck Hollow Sporting Goods - click or touch to visit their website Midwest Habitat Company

Interesting article

Initial thoughts... that is very sobering news. I can see the points behind that article pretty clearly from my own experiences. I think we are going to be facing some big changes in the next 5-20 years.
 
Agree with Daver. They listed hiking, bird watching, and photography (assuming wildlife photography) are all increasing in popularity. Many times there are using the same public lands as the hunters and that could be used to create some revenue. I've said it before and I believe that hunters are paying for the betterment of certain areas and lands and many others are using them as well.
 
Mixed feelings on this. There are so many hunters right now, will the experience be better if the numbers decline as each hunter will have less competition for the resource. Will archery numbers go up, as urban areas expand? I do not doubt that numbers will drop. Maybe public land will be better overall? I think all states need to take this matter seriously and try to provide the best hunting possible, so we have another generation of hunters.

Habitat is a big key, will there be good farms to hunt?... I hope states like Iowa make an effort buy areas for public hunting and they need to manage it properly.
 
Well, it appears NPR has come right out of the gate with another boldface lie. 11.6 million down from 14.8 million is not a 50% decrease....unless there were just millions of poachers that called themselves "hunters". ??

From NPR....
A new survey by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shows that today, only about 5 percent of Americans, 16 years old and older, actually hunt. That's half of what it was 50 years ago and the decline is expected to accelerate over the next decade.

If you've read the article, take the blinders off and read it again. I believe this story is agenda loaded. I'll stop back when I have time this evening and unload some thoughts on this.


hunters.jpg
.
 
Wapsi Tree said:
Well, it appears NPR has come right out of the gate with another boldface lie. 11.6 million down from 14.8 million is not a 50% decrease....unless there were just millions of poachers that called themselves "hunters". ??

From NPR....
A new survey by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shows that today, only about 5 percent of Americans, 16 years old and older, actually hunt. That's half of what it was 50 years ago and the decline is expected to accelerate over the next decade.

If you've read the article, take the blinders off and read it again. I believe this story is agenda loaded. I'll stop back when I have time this evening and unload some thoughts on this.


View attachment 115984
.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too. I usually don’t believe much NPR has to say but they are kind of right on this. Even though the drop in hunters was only 14.8 million to 11.6 million, the percentage of Americans that hunt has dropped in half. The U.S. population was only around 200 million in 1968 compared to 325 million today.
 
Last edited:
booneriverbucks said:
I noticed that too. I usually don’t believe much NPR has to say but they are kind of right on this. Even though the drop in hunters was only 14.8 million to 11.6 million, the percentage of Americans that hunt has dropped in half. The U.S. population was only around 200 million in 1968 compared to 325 million today.
Click to expand...
Yes, but they chose to look at the percentage angle instead of the numbers. The story is about revenue. Numbers produce the revenue they are talking about. They want you to also believe that revenue is also down 50%. Not true. They also want you to think that hunting is an outdated, not needed, and not cool anymore. Shoot pictures, not bullets. Can't tell you how many BS stories I've seen lately claiming there are more bird watchers than hunters.
 
I think the demise of hunting is exaggerated. My son's are 18-25 and many of their friends are hunters/anglers. Trap shooting teams are increasing statewide, archery is super popular for young kids and teenagers--deer, turkey, carp shooting. These kids spend too, carp boats, duck boats, huge decoy spreads, high dollar bows, they have much better equipment than I did growing up.

Will the numbers drop a bit, yes, probably, but that is not all bad in my opinion. The number of hunters in my state (MN) is off the charts. Every parcel of cover has a guy/gal in blaze orange for a week trying to pound anything that moves. As mentioned before, maybe fewer hunters would result in a more quality hunt.
 
I despise NPR and completly agree that they try to shove a liberal agenda on us every chance they get. That said, it is still not great that the percentage of Americans that hunt has dropped in half over the last 50 years. It has its short term benefits such as less competition for hunting land etc. but the long term effects could be bad. We need all the allies we can get to stop the anti-hunting/ liberal agenda. Many points of the article may be bogus but we still need to be aware of the harmful effects that a drop in the percentage of Americans that hunt could cause.
 
booneriverbucks said:
I despise NPR and completly agree that they try to shove a liberal agenda on us every chance they get. That said, it is still not great that the percentage of Americans that hunt has dropped in half over the last 50 years. It has its short term benefits such as less competition for hunting land etc. but the long term effects could be bad. We need all the allies we can get to stop the anti-hunting/ liberal agenda. Many points of the article may be bogus but we still need to be aware of the harmful effects that a drop in the percentage of Americans that hunt could cause.
Click to expand...
I ran some quick numbers...
Iowa population 1967 vs 2017. If the percentage of hunters were at 1967 levels right now, it would be an additional 17,650 hunters just in Iowa...or 178 per county. I hear what you're saying but I honestly don't think we have the elbow room or resources for that.
 
NPR has an agenda? Surely you jest! :eek: Next you'll claim MSNBC, CNN and many/most others do too... :rolleyes: Agree, that with populations growing, and with urban development, less available land, lower percentage of hunters may not be an all bad thing. Just as long as the ones who do hunt, vote and support the folks who support them (NRA, Safari Club Int., PF, RMEF, etc...).
 
I posted the article because I thought I was the only one who felt it was skewed. In Kansas as in Iowa we sell every non resident tag available and send people away disappointed because everything is sold out. It is harder to get in on permission ground and a lot of land is getting leased. Our hunting numbers don't seem down.

I was thinking, maybe what both states should do is raise prices for non-resident deer tags by 50%. It may cut back the total number of hunters but increase the revenue. Those that want to play can pay more. Those that don't want to play can stay home. I would even bet the residents would pay $5 more per tag to help out our wildlife resources. My two cents!
 
HorseDoctor said:
NPR has an agenda? Surely you jest! :eek: Next you'll claim MSNBC, CNN and many/most others do too... :rolleyes: Agree, that with populations growing, and with urban development, less available land, lower percentage of hunters may not be an all bad thing. Just as long as the ones who do hunt, vote and support the folks who support them (NRA, Safari Club Int., PF, RMEF, etc...).
Click to expand...

I completley agree that the short term effect of having less hunters may benefit those of us that hunt right now. My only worry is that in the future as the percentage of us who hunt drops- the less our opinions, money and most importantly our votes, will matter.
 
Population growth (world wide) was hyped as a really big deal way back in the 50s! Still Concerns me more now than the dreaded "climate change"! Maybe all interrelated??? Isn't going to change a heck of a lot very fast in the years I've got left, but barring a world wide catastrophic loss of population, it will happen...:(
 
Interesting article. For years now I have been reading how hunter #'s are down, you would think it would be a lot easier to get access on private land to hunter or see few people on public land. It is the opposite though. Look at all the products at the deer classic each year or all the stuff you see on social media with all the different groups, prostaffs, etc. Its not just hunting anymore, its land, habitat, and a gazillion products...hunting and hunting related items seem to be more popular than ever.

I am more concerned about where I am going to hunt in the future on private or will I be able to hunt an unpressured public area. Seeing hunter numbers dwindle does not seem to be an issue from what I see at all. In fact I wouldn't mind seeing fewer hunters, might open up more access.

It is concerning though, that video with the graph was quite interesting to watch as I shows the baby boomer age wave fazing out in the near futre. I don't have any kids, but I do wonder about all the young kids up to early teens that have had their face buried in some sort of gaming device to think are they going to be interested in hunting ever? I have two nephews that are 8 or so and they seem to have no interest. I have taken them shed hunting, having pull my arrows after shooting my bow, try to teach them how to build a fire etc. They don't seem to have an interest. After about 10 minutes the want to go back inside and play video games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom