"Growing the sport." Good for the goose? Or good for the Gander?

"Growing the sport." Good for the goose? Or good for the Gander (Mountain)?

I'm sitting here, watching "Death Race" and brooding over the same b.s. that infuriates me every year... "Growing the sport."

It's everywhere you look. Merchandisers selling the idea that we, as a community, should embrace the idea of "getting more people into the sport." Fair enough, right? I mean, bowhunting is fun, and we all like to get all decked-out in Under Armour and climb a tree in a $400 Lone Wolf, feeling like a Rambo badass.



Well, how many "Kings of the Mountain" can there really be?

How many "Mountains" are left?

This simple observation begs the question: Why are we as consumers so blind to the fact that "Growing the sport" equals diminishing our own piece of the pie.


Greedy? You bet your ass.

Realistic? You bet your ass.


Let's face it. There are a finite amount of big bucks living inside of an ever-shrinking landmass of huntable acres.


Population Explosion: Coming to a ZIP CODE near you!


So who gives a damn? I don't get it.



We all should. Here's why.

Every "new" hunter that enters the market is a new competitor for the limited resources that we all so dearly covet. Every "new" hunter is another consumer in the key demographic, pouring gas on the marketing fire, and driving our costs through the ceiling. Every "new" hunter is another guy heading west to the Golden Triangle, driving up the price of a decent whitetail hunt. Every "new" hunter is another guy unloading his gear in your favorite public parking lot at 5:45 a.m. on opening day.


Seriously, bow companies, clothing manufacturers, TV shows, boot makers, gun makers, outfitters . . . even the sovereign states themselves... They all have ONE thing in common: A vested interest in making and taking as much money from hunters as possible.



Most of us lose sight of that.

We buy the b.s. about "taking a kid hunting," or "getting a buddy started." They feed us the lines about "preserving our heritage" and "family values" and "comeraderie," but really, it's the lust for the Benjamins coursing through their veins. They don't give a rat's ass about your heritage or whether you go hunting with your brother-in-law, or if some new nimrod is perched in your favorite stand site on November 10 this fall.... They just want their piece of the pie.

It's YOUR job, as a consumer, and more importantly, as a HUNTER - to consider the source, and consider the real-world implications.




Let's face it. Hunting is a simple numbers game involving nothing more than basic division:
Animals / Hunter

More animals = More opportunity . . . conversely . . . More hunters = Less opportunity.

People spend thousands of dollars and lifetimes trying to manipulate the odds. They drive thousands of miles and log tens of thousands of hours in the field, all trying to tip the scales in their favor... But they still lose sight of the forest for the trees by forgetting about the most important element: The Human Element.


Growing the Sport is the one thing that the hunting public can control.
Ironically, it's the one that that the hunting public has miserably failed to control.


Chew on that for a couple days.

 

All good and valid points, but there is no questioning the fact that hunter numbers as a whole are shrinking. Along with that, the average age of hunters is on the rise. As the baby boomers who are left over from a generation before Peta nutjobs and political correctness get old and begin to stop hunting, or die, there is going to be an even more drastic decrease in overall numbers.

On the counter side of that, the animal rights/anti-hunting movements continue to gain speed, and newer, younger members.

The heart of this battle should NOT be our personal greed and desire to be totally awesome and respected on the Internet as great hunters. It should be our desire to preserve the sport we love for future generations, including our children. If we dont' continue to get more people involved, if our cause continues to shrink in size, we will risk putting hunting in harm's way. Maybe not in 5 years or even in the next decade, but eventually.

Think what you will oh King, but I disagree with you.

 

I'm going to have to agree. I've actually said this before- the more people you turn on to hunting, the less of a chance the rest of us have.

However, I get a ton of crap in response, when I say it.

I think it's great to get someone into hunting, or the outdoors, in general. There is no question that this post is accurate.

 

People who don't suck at hunting can deal with a little additional hunting pressure.

I can understand wuss-cakes having a problem with it tho'.

 

I agree...as a 23 year old, if hunter numbers continue to shrink, I think it's plausible that say 20-30 years down the line we will be in danger of losing many of our current rights.

As the anti hunting community continues to grow and less and less hunters are there to stand up for our rights, they WILL begin to erode away our seasons, one by one.

 

simple law of supply & demand. Can't really argue with it. On a side note, how many of you really think the hunter numbers in your area are shrinking? I hear it all the time, but I just don't see it. Bowhunter numbers have definately been on the rise in my area for several years.

 

you're absolutley right they do care about making more money, but that is what makes America so great, the free market place. All of us run our own buisness or show up at work to make money, if it were'nt for the Benjamins none of us would show up. As far " taking a kid hunting" I stayed out of alot of trouble as a teenager b/c of hunting. Also I have a six yr old and it is a joy to see him get excited about hunting and i'll be darned if i'm gonna be so greedy to deprive him of the passion that i've had the opportunity of enjoying since hunting with my dad as a boy 25 yrs ago.
Also there are way to many animal rights activists and left wing hunting haters that would love to see our sport come to an immediate hault. So although it is true that our hunting land is diminishing and the prices of our products do rise every year, its still better to have a voice to fight off these people than to just keep our numbers low and hope for the best.

 

Ha ha

amen sister!

 

I've never understood the pervasive collective fear of "anti's" among hunters. As stated above, all markets are, have always been, and will always be, driven by pure supply and demand.
In that vein, as long as there's a supply of animals and a demand to kill them, somebody, somewhere will let you go and have at it. Believe it. Hell, I'm shocked that there aren't beef farmers selling "Black Angus Hunts" for livestock that's set to go to the slaughterhouse. Moo Moo Buckeroo.

My fear of political reprisal by "anti's" is at less than zero. I guess, as someone who doesn't harbor the same fear that a lot of you do, that's a thought that absolutely never enters the synapses of my brain.

Look, I'm not saying that everyone in America should quit hunting. I'm just saying that we've clearly reached a point of market saturation, and that we all should be cognizant of that.

IMO, it is the stark reality.

 

Look I agree that you see way more T.V. shows, gadgets, tools ,and nick nacks on the market than ever before, and yes some people will by a small ziploc full of deer droppings, but as far as the "anti's" this new liberal society we live will support the minority opinion of these groups if not defended properly. Just look at what happened tp prayer in school.

 

As long as they are not in the area's I hunt the more the merrier!

 

This is borderline another conspiracy theory.

Why must there always be something wrong with a system or an underlying motive? Getting others involved in the outdoors is nothing more than kindness. 99% of the time, they won't take to it like you have, to the point of saturating the market. They will buy a set of camo, decals for their truck, and take to the woods 2-3 times a year. Shouldn't be a threat to you or I in any way, shape, or form.

 

I pretty much follow the lines of what Scot says, I purposely live where I do and make the sacrifices I need to do so. That way I can enjoy some solitude in the woods. For the most part its human nature to be lazy and do things the easiest way. So I pick/hunt my weekend and rifle season spots very carefully. During archery season I dont get bothered much. Doubt I ever will. Not many fat boys will climb a mountain to sit in a stand and get a shot at a big mature buck maybe 1 or 2 times a season ... If it was easy, then the masses would be out there doing it. The country here weens em out.

 

Amen to that, Troy. But here in the northeast - it's getting a little bit crowded. I'm sure Scot can relate to that a bit. Heck, there's a reason that he heads to Idaho every year for a week of peace & quiet. He wouldn't be traveling if he had 1000 acres of booners in his back yard.

The truth is, there used to be a few small, remote pockets here in the Commonwealth, where a guy could find a little bit of peace and quiet... But then everybody blew the kids' college fund on Yamaha Grizzlies, and these derelicts have no respect for property lines and the law. I'll never understand the rationale behind a guy who owns a .2 acre company house, or a guy who rents a lot in a trailerpark going out and buying an ATV... But that's a discussion for another time... LOL

Truth is, I've got a lot of hunting spots, but I'm getting crowded-out and losing land at an alarming rate. I'll always be in good shape, b/c I have the resources to always be on deer... But that's neither here nor there. This is a big picture discussion...

Big picture - the population density is continuing to grow. Huntable acreage continues to shrink. Personally, I'd tend to think that the closer you are to an economic epicenter, the more likely this discussion is to hit home with you.




It's not a conspiracy theory at all, Trev. Look around, listen to the talking heads and follow the dollars. There's a lot of monetary incentive in play, and it's driving the demand skyward with alarming speed. Here again, this is a message that NOBODY with a vested financial interest in the hunting industry would ever want the consumer to consider.

 

And the sky is blue. I just see them as unconnected. Manufacturers are in it to make money, no duh?! I just don't see them as the driving force behind the problem of hunter density..in fact, I see them as having any part in it what so ever. Like you said, it SEEMS numbers are growing because the land to access shrinks as the population rises in an area....And those guys that hunt 5 days a year securing 100000 acres to hunt on their own, but that too is another thread topic. LOL

I see your point, just think it's slightly off base in connecting two valid points that aren't really that related, at least imo.

You still heading to Ohio this year to get away from the PA hunters and into the bigger bucks? :D

 

Trevor - Manufacturers are in the business of generating hunting sales. More Hunters = More Money. It's that simple.

Yes. Definitely Ohio bound. I would travel to the ends of the earth to get away from Pennsylvania hunters.

 

Then try Alaska. I saw probably 20+ P&Ys while there and not another soul was within 7 miles of me at anytime besides my hunting partner. Slim pickings is a thing of the past up there!

Again, I realize they are in it to make money. As all manufacturers are...Just don't see this as the cause of the problem you elude to, just two separate issues. Either way, good discussion topic.

 

An interesting theory. But IMHO a wrong conclusion. I think JZ nailed it.

In the past several years I've helped teach literally hundreds (actually thousands) of kids archery at different events across Illinois. I wasn't selling anything and it cost me time and money to do it. We did it to give kids who would not otherwise be exposed to hunting or archery. If ten percent of them decide to take up hunting because of the time we gave them, I would be surprised. But hopefully most will remember how fun it was. And if the need arises in the future, they will side with hunters when/if it comes to a vote.

The reason there is so much "mechandising" is because so many hunters are willing to spend the money. I don't think I'm that old but I can remember when you had to build your tree stand(s). You would buy a bow and some arrows, a glove or tab maybe a quiver and that was it. Now it's a bow, rest, sight, release, stabilizer, quiver, range finder, binoculars, camo from head to toe, scent this and that, stuff to kill scent, stuff to keep bugs away, a cart to drag your deer and the list goes on. Why because if they think it will get 'em a big deer to brag about some chumley will buy it!

 

Not everybody can afford to go to Alaska, bro.

 

I'll agree, if TIME is the issue....but I'd wager that ANYONE can save up enough $ for the trip I went on.....ANYONE.