Decline in Hunting : Impact on outdoor places?

Photo from the New York State Senate

Overnight backcountry activities have long been declining in the United States. Be it raw numbers or as an overall percentage of the population.

People camp less. Fewer people go off backpacking. Far more people go day hiking, climbing, or other assorted day trips.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the number of people hunting has also declined in recent years.

Few hunters only go out for a day of hunting. Camping or even backpacking is needed to ensure enough time for a successful hunt in most cases.

An informative and fascinating NPR feature delved into the shrinking demographic of the US hunting population.

A trend I find worrisome as an avid outdoors person.

What does this trend mean for non-hunters or anglers?

It means the funds used to maintain, protect, and even purchase public lands is shrinking even more in this time of uncertainty when it comes to land use policy.

Hunters and anglers have essentially subsidized the public lands for many outdoor users over the years esp. on the state level. Licensing and taxes account for nearly 60% of the funds for managing the state wildlife refuges. Or over $3bn! And, a fact new to me, most of the wildlife refuges are currently under the state umbrella.

In addition to their monetary contribution, the well-organized hunters and anglers are often effective allies in preserving, promoting and protecting our public lands. Perhaps more so than the disparate and less organized outdoor users who do not hunt or fish!

With fewer funds available, will the states be less inclined to protect their public lands? Not hire the appropriate personnel? Provide lower levels of training? Or perhaps lease or even sell off the land to non-outdoor interests? Current news items give an emphatic answer of *YES* to these questions, unfortunately.

With fewer people hunting and fishing, perhaps it is time for hikers, skiers, canoeists, mountain bikers, etc. to pony up a bit and partake in the equivalent of the Dingell-Johnson (anglers) and Pittman-Robertson (hunters) Acts on the purchase of items? How to implement the Backpacker, Skier, Mountain Biker, Climber, etc. and so on of these acts I do not know.

But something must be done in the years ahead.

Something beyond greenwashing, depicting nature scenes on packaging, and purchasing products that promise to give a relatively small amount of money to outdoors conservation.

Hunters and anglers have essentially paid a tithe to protect and conserve our wild spaces. A tithe many of us have benefitted from over the years.

Maybe it is time we do the same and pay our tithe as well?

Share

4 Replies to “Decline in Hunting : Impact on outdoor places?”

  1. here in CO they have been trying..
    House Bill 1321 failed last year, but a reduced version just passed the Senate, to raise hunting and fishing license fees and tie them to the CPI. CPW (parks and wildlife) is trying to engage other outdoor recreationists and will do some surveys this year. As you say the path we’re on is not sustainable..

    https://www.denverpost.com/2018/03/14/colorado-parks-raising-hunting-fishing-fees/

    I buy a Federal duck stamp every year though I’ve never hunted ducks, because that stamp funds all kinds of wetland protections which are an unalloyed good. I like to see the ducks when I’m out fishing anyway..
    Also buy a hunting license each year, though I seldom get out anymore, just to keep hunting alive..

  2. It looks like if “we the people” don’t do something, the burden of funding will fall to corporations. And that will not be a good thing. Maybe a non-profit could be created to take on the burden of funding and managing the public lands when states do not have the resources. The Nature Conservancy seems like a viable option, but it’s run by corporate CEOs and I’m not too up to speed on its actual efforts, though their marketing is laudable.

  3. Please support the Recovering America’s Wildlife Act that will provide greatly needed funding for conservation of non-game wildlife and their habitats using a small fraction of the existing revenues from off-shore oil leases.

  4. I don’t know about other states, butin California, the hunting regulations are increasingly difficult to navigate and both hunting and fishing license fees and stamps have quadrupled in my 35 years of fishing. I recently saw someone commenting on the large number of deer in California now (with regards to a lack of redators, i.e. wolves and mountain lions). If the Department of Fish and Wildlife (it’s no longer game to be hunted) are to be believed, the number of deer in California are dangerously low. Strange how I see them in green spaces when riding in town or along freeways when I used to need to head out to forests and meadows to even have a chance at seeing a herd of deer. The true environmentalists are hunters and fishers. We actually go out in nature (or use to before we were pushed out of the wilderness). We see the destruction caused by failed protection policies that allowed the destruction of watersheds and forests, but under government oversight paid for by taxes and fees, so it was “good.” Maybe an unresponsive government agency and increased oversight by well meaning college graduates wth little real experience isn’t the answer. It sure hasn’t been in California. Rant over. 🙂

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Subscribe without commenting