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

Yeah I think every manufacturer and business is disingenuine and manipulative in their quest for the almighty dollar. Stinkin capitalist.

What we need instead is more lawyers, especially trial lawyers....they are the salt of the earth....never taking advantage of anyone or any situation, and certainly not for money.

 

I have mixed emotions on this topic. On one hand, when its time for me to write a check,(bigger each year!), to pay for a lease, I think we need less people involved. Then , when I get in a stand on a cool autumn morning, watching the sun rise and break up the patches of fog. When I hear nature greeting the new day, turkeys gobbling, song birds singing, etc. I think everyone should experience that feeling of awe at least once in thier lifetime. I believe more and more people are losing touch with the beauty of God's creation and that being in touch with it is healing for the mind and more importantly the soul. I don't mind sharing that, its not mine to keep to myself.
OK, the warm and fuzzy is over. I paid $750 in dues to my hunt club for hunting rights this year. There are 15 members on 2200 acres. If I hunt hard and smart on this property I will have an opportunity to fill the freezer and maybe kill a good buck. When I joined I was told that " this is a meat lease, not a trophy lease." I know guys that pay up to $5000 a year for leases here in Texas. That is not realistic for me. When it starts to cost me more that about $1250 I may find a new passion or have to hit the increasingly crowded and pressured , limited public land offered in Texas. Access to good, affordable land is a problem for ME. I don't think getting more hunters in the woods is the problem. I think getting more TRPHY hunters in the woods is the problem. When more and more established hunters are willing to spend more and more money, are willing to buy or lease up exclusive rights to properties. And when outfitters are filling farmers pockets with cash so they can fill thier own by putting well heeled hunters on well endowed bucks, well, thats where the problem lies. To me the biggest problem, at least here in Texas, with access is about greed and "HORN PORN". Its not about hunter numbers.
I think I will try harder this year to introduce a newby to the magic of dawn in the woods.

 

Francis if I had your hunting skills I would want less hunters and more deer also. I hope to have another kid out hunting the youth hunt next weekend. I hope he whacks Mr. mass, when you grow up you will understand.

 

Less hunters, less people that care about hunting, less people concerned when someone tries to limit hunting.

"Regulatory Czar" Sunstein Formally Confirmed


Senators Casey and Specter Vote for Confirmation

(Columbus) – Last night the sportsmen’s community came within five votes of stopping the nomination of Cass Sunstein to serve as the head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA), otherwise known as the “Regulatory Czar.” Sunstein is an avowed anti hunter and does not believe the second amendment applies to individual gun ownership.
While a confirmation vote took place today, it was a formality after the Senate voted to over-ride a hold placed on the nomination by Georgia Senator Johnny Isakson. It would have taken 40 votes to prevent the confirmation. Opponents of Sunstein were only able to earn 35. Alarmingly 22 out of 53 senators who are members of the Congressional Sportsmen's Caucus (CSC) voted in favor of Sunstein.
"Having 42 percent of the sportsmen's caucus vote for an anti-hunter when we were just five votes away was a real blow," said Bud Pidgeon, USSA president and CEO. “As we have, sportsmen should take note which of their ‘friends’ voted for them and which did not.”
Democratic Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, a member of the CSC, voted for Sunstein. Pennsylvania's other senator, Arlen Specter, a recent convert to the Democratic Party also voted in favor of the controversial nominee despite facing a tough election fight in 2010.
“The Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs is extremely disappointed with Senator Casey’s “yea vote” for Cass Sunstein. We feel he left his constituents, the sportsmen and women of Pennsylvania down,” stated Jeffrey R. Souders, a spokesperson for the Pennsylvania Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs. “As a member of the Congressional Sportsmen’s Caucus, we hoped he would have sportsmen’s best interests in mind. In this case he did not.”
Souders also had concerns over Sen. Specter’s vote, ““We are baffled Arlen Specter, a veteran senator, knowing the rich outdoor heritage of this state and facing a tough election, would cast an affirmative vote for a self-proclaimed anti-hunting proponent.”
The USSA and others, including the National Wild Turkey Federation, argued for weeks that Sunstein’s views against recreational hunting, the second amendment and on giving animals standing in court should persuade the Senate to defeat the appointment.
The U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance is a national association of sportsmen and sportsmen’s organizations that protects the rights of hunters, anglers and trappers in the courts, legislatures, at the ballot, in Congress and through public education programs. For more information about the U.S. Sportsmen’s Alliance and its work, call (614) 888-4868 or visit its website, www.ussportsmen.org.

 

Interesting read Quik.

I too agree that there's more bowhunters now then there ever was (In my area there Is anyway). A big reason I believe Is because how simple shooting a compound has become. Years ago people didn't like It as much, too hard to draw a bow back and hold It. With the let offs of today and the releases people have no reason to gripe anymore, It's pretty easy on the body. Not to often do you see someone getting Into bowhunting that chooses to hunt with a traditional bow Instead over a compound. Them days are over, different breed of people now.

I'm not complaining though on the bowhunter numbers, I think It's a good thing. My daughter will have the oppertunity to hunt with a bow as well and I'll be damned If I'm going to think twice about not letting her do It because people are pissed there's to many bowhunters. Get off your ass people and put some miles on and get away from other hunters, quit taking the easy road because In allot of cases your not going to be successful!! Quik, I know you hunt hard and put miles on and If others did the same you probably wouldn't be as pissed about It then. I put up with a bunch of lazy ass bear hunters where I hunt bear. I try and get away from the other hunters but the lazy SOB's try and leech off of my hard work and success over the years, pisses me off like you won't believe!! I do all my hunting on foot, these pricks use their 4 wheelers driving down logging roads making my bear hunting damn near Impossible at times. People don't want to work for their success, they want It given to them.

The prices of NR licenses have went through the roof the last 10 years. Going out west on an elk hunt used to be very affordable, not anymore. IMHO the BIG outfitters are souly to blame for that, not the outfitters like Dan who runs a top notch quality bear camp In Ontario. Hunting no longer Is something everyone can do financially wise. It's becoming a rich mans sport when hunting certain animals In NA. I have no gripe with the people that use these outfitters, more power to them. But most people aren't going to spend that huge money If they don't like their chances of being successful so Instead there going to go the outfitter route. The outfitters have all the power here and so do their buddy politicians that there filling pockets for.

 

I agree that the "get more people hunting" sentiment that is spewed forth by the states and manufacturers is $$$ driven. I don't necessarily agree that fewer hunters is the best thing for us.

To say that I live in an area where hunting ground is at a premium and hunter numbers are high would be a gross understatement. So I feel the pain of too many hunters and not enough land.

However, as Bruce's post shows we need support. Even those that are supposed to be supporting us are failing us. 42% of politicians that are on a committee for sportsmen voted to confirm a STAUNCH anti-hunter. This guy doesn't even try to mask his distain for hunting and he still got approved. When things like that occur we should all be alarmed.

If we lose numbers the few politicians that do stand by what they say they will do for sportsmen will lose interest because they too are all about the money and they will follow the money to whoever will fund their campaigns and fuel their special interests. If there isn't numbers to support our cause over time there will be nobody to protect us from those who take an interest in discontinuing what we love.

 

Good post Bry!!

 

100% agree Bry

The bigger issue is if we lose to many hunter and we are no longer a viable tool for managing the deer herds. If we cannot kill enough deer, what good are we? More hunters = more opportunity, now some may disagree, but I too live in a state where land is a tad bit crowed. Like Francis stated it's about money and he's 100% correct, but what he is missing is the more numbers we have, the more money we have. Lets be honest money = opportunity in anything in life.

We need to be a viable management tool for the state's DNR, or they will find another way ot control deer populations. With more hunting numbers we can do so and increase opportunity for more hunters.

 

Because of where I hunt I think there are too many hunters. Maybe its just too little land. I don't really know which problem would be easier to solve. Getting rid of hunters, or open more land for access.

I do understnad the fight to keep our hunting/shooting rights in this country. I think more focus needs put into gaining allies in the non-hunting public that is indifferent. Hunters really need to keep a more respectable image than most & outwardly try to portray what they do as very needful and don't come off like an idiot.

 

Our hunter numbers are shrinking, they have to be....for example. I estimate that I have closely worked with around 50 different men over the past decade. I am the ONLY one of those men to hunt. I don't work in some high rise office buidling so its not a white-collar/blue collar type of thing, it is real. I go out of my way to talk to the guys just starting out and posting online or in person. I offer them the phone number to where I hunt, and I offer them my insight on the particular area I hunt. I readily agree to help them out in their pursuits. I have guys from all types of socio-economic, age and ethnic backgrounds express interest in how to hunt, and how to get set-up to kill their first deer. I help them all. Those people then go back into their circles and express that they are hunting, and also tell of the generosity that was bestowed upon them by their fellow hunter. That can only help in building a strong base that will enable hunting to be protected.

 

The "Undisputed King of Archery" should be able to kill the biggest of bucks off the highest pressured lands. For other hunters quake in his presence and understand the King kills what he wants, when he wants. The King should wish for more hunters so that he can mock them as they awe at his extraordinary archery talents.

 

I don't know how to feel...I like to talk to other bowhunters, especially if I can find one I work with or at a party etc...I will seek them out.. and it's great to find someone with that common bond, on the other hand, the more hunters, the less chance of getting land for myself or my friends, the more things will cost, and the less chance I have at being alone in the woods...then on the other hand again, someone may have felt that way about me 20 yrs ago when I "got into" it...(I think we are called to it..) but yet again, if everyone was a bowhunter, then there wouldn't be this special bond that the few of us as bowhunters share, kind of like a brotherhood.... so Im torn....I want to share the bowhunting experience, yet I still want it to be sacred and personal and not "band wagonish" and have every Tom, ****, and Harry bowhunting...it's a double standard.

 

Speaking as a PA'n,

We sure as hell don't need more "new" hunters. To some degree, we could fair better with a lot less however,

What we do need is more of the existing hunters getting involved with doing the right thing regardless of what that right thing is to preserve the future of hunting.

 

What if you were the "new" hunter and wished to get involved with hunting? What if there were others out there that did not care about your involvement in hunting? We were all the "new" guy at some point. You do need new hunters, tempered with old hunters learning some new tricks so to speak.

 

see Brett that's my delima...at some point I was the new hunter...and yet Im *****ing

 

Good talk guys. Fair points all around. I obviously see both sides, but I'm sitting firmly on the minority side of this argument. I understand the politics and economics in play, and in that same vein, I realize that there's just no way to have your cake and eat it too. Being a pure trophy hunter, I like my odds with less men in the field. I couldn't care less if I was the last hunter in the Commonwealth.

Egocentric? Sure. But it is what it is.



I think Rob really drove it home... Living in an area that's saturated with hunters, we really do need to slow the influx of newbs... By the same token, the EXISTING license-holders need to really re-evaluate the way they conduct themselves afield. That would help in a major-league way.

This is a discussion that's going to generate different opinions from different geographic areas. Obviously, a guy in Saskatchewan with 10,000 acres behind his house doesn't view things the way a suburbanite PA bowhunter, or a public-land pounding Texan will see the world.

Lots of different sets of glasses to look through, to be sure.


Again, solid points all around. I raise my glass.

 

Good call on the different geographical areas. I might have a different opinion if I were fighting off hunters behind every tree.

 

This is the first post I have read on this site of yours that was worthy of "The King" title you have.

To the King:D

You could lease the land around you and push all those "others" off, it's a prick move for sure:p but it works. When you ride pass the guys you gave the boot to, they will display their feelings for you. With the good old number one salute

 

I can't believe that I'm saying this, but for the first time since I've been on this website, I agree with Fran on something.... (hmmm... is this a good or bad thing?)
I also have my doubts about the dropping numbers of hunters. I think that the "traditional" gun hunter number may have dropped, but if folks take a cloder look at things, Archery numbers have grown in many parts of the country, as well as black powder gun hunters. This isn't a decline of hunters, it's a change in the style of hunting, which leads bow hunters to just the things that Fran has stated... (and I still can't believe I'm agreeing)