A Financial break for Hunter Recruitment?

[Dougfirtree]

View attachment 180852

Reminds me of John McFee's book about the Jersey Pine Barrens. Apparently, back in the day, the cranberry growers there would literally drive vans into Philadelphia at night, pick up drunks and bring them to the bogs. When they sobered up, the ride home was only available that night and there was the opportunity to make some money between now and then...

 

[Nick87]

Who says it has to be public? RMEF buys land, PF buys land, non profits buy land, states all over the west run private land programs which are highly popular with hunters coming from out of state. Not saying it would be easy, but it is certainly not unprecedented.

Yah that would be great.

 

[brockel]

If there's anything in this vein I do support is resident pricing for non-resident college students while enrolled in a state school/university

I think North Dakota does this

 

[Nick87]

I think North Dakota does this

I think there is a few states, wisconsin maybe not sure.

 

[geetar]

Increase access to huntable populations and you increase hunters. We are already leaning on the west too hard because we are losing access at home.

100 percent agreed. In all the years I had private family land around home to hunt I only went west once. I lost all that through various sales and started looking west again. I do hunt public around home too but I’m just saying when the really good opportunity was 5 miles away I wasn’t even looking at the west much.

 

[BrokenChicken]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Wildlife management agencies use that money to manage wildlife, so if all of a sudden their revenue drops off due to discounted tags, perhaps they wont be able to manage to the same level ? Just a thought

 

[brockel]

Another thing to keep in mind is that Wildlife management agencies use that money to manage wildlife, so if all of a sudden their revenue drops off due to discounted tags, perhaps they wont be able to manage to the same level ? Just a thought

Wonder what Montana does with all that cash

 

[Wildabeest]

Wonder what Montana does with all that cash

They give it to the outfitters. Because, you know, they can’t survive without FWP welfare...

 

[RobertD]

Speaking to some of the points made in general, one of the hurdles here even in the rural South with access is a result of the general trend of people moving to urban and suburban areas and losing that "connection with the land," while rural land becomes more consolidated to agriculture, larger private properties owned by fewer owners, etc.

The displacement of a more generalist type of hunter also came with the massive growth in interest in trophy whitetail hunting. (In a lot of ways, what's happening to western hunting now happened to hunting east of the Mississippi 20 years ago.)

Lots of people lost access to land they used for running raccoons, hunting rabbits, etc. around that time. Before then, even a more urban population could find casual access to private land. When hunting got "serious" so to speak, whitetail hunting sort of took the throne and people got a lot more covetous of their land.

So 20 years later and the problem of getting more of the public onto the private down here is a difficult one. Here in Georgia, to really open up opportunities, especially in the southern half of the state I think would take some sort of block management style incentive.

I have no idea what that system would cost or entail or how feasible it is. A grassroots organization would potentially be a better option.

 

[brownbear932008]

When I was a young hunter just learning to hunt going out West never even crossed my mind. I don't think that solves anything. Hell all I wanted to do was run around the small farm I had to hunt and shoot every rabbit and squirrel I could level my .22 or 410 on. That eventually turned to deer in my teenage years and has progressed from there.
IMO this sounds like personal gratification as an adult hunter looking at things nothing more. The truth is there are way more things to catch and keep a child's attention these days than running in the mountains and getting up at O dark thirty.
As adults we way over think these things and try to hard to force a child into things they end up not enjoying. If a child has an interest in hunting they will let you know at an early age. If not that child is probably never gonna really get into the sport more than likely.
What has surprised me the most the last few years is the older aged first time hunters that decided to begin hunting at an adult age. We see them here all the time.

 

[1_pointer]

There are more opportunities than one would imagine within 2hrs of where I live for hunting on public land than I could hunt in a year or possibly multiple years. One wouldn't have to work very hard or spend very much money to be able to hunt small game on public land in 3 states within 2hrs of where I sit. As mentioned, deer (and pretty much all big game) have become 'king' when it comes to hunting. It's seen here as well when by far the majority of the discussions are on big game. A concerted effort to promote upland/small game hunting would not have to provincial either! I think a whole lot of new hunters/advocates could be generated through this in all regions of the country. But, that's not what sells on TV or social media. Rinella's done a few episodes focusing on fishing/small game (darn near my favorite episodes of his), but it's far from the norm.

I used to belong to and help a local conservation club that was loosely associated with the central Indiana Pheasant's Forever chapter. That chapter realized they did not have the opportunity to work on meaningful habitat projects like many other chapters being based out of the metro Indianapolis area. So, every spring they use their funds to put on a youth pheasant hunt at the conservation club. It's a put and take, but free to the first 60 kids that sign up. Each kid gets to shoot 2 pheasants, gets to hunt over well trained dogs, and gets to shoot all the clays (ammo provided) that they can stand to shoot. I thought it was a great event and my oldest enjoyed the dickens out of it. More of the same with regards to other upland/small game species would be a better avenue than anything associated with big game species.

PS- Right now with two boys (13 & 10) my R3 focus is on those two and any of their friends that show any interest.

 

[brocksw]

I'd say quite different. Change R3 to Raise Resident Revenue! Increase those resident tag prices and take all that extra money and spend it purely on more public land, more habitat, more access, more landowner programs that pay better for good habitat.

We're priming the pump and not the well with R3 the way it currently is. We need an APR like organization in every state! Have good incentive (that doesn't include selling wildlife) for landowners to maintain/create publicly accessible habitat.

 

[jt13]

I think North Dakota does this

Some states do, some don't. I'd like to see it in every state.

If a person is dumping a few hundred thousand dollars into the local economy and living there 9 months a year for several years they deserve a break on hunting and fishing license prices especially when that person is usually young and broke.

 

[SAJ-99]

Some states do, some don't. I'd like to see it in every state.

If a person is dumping a few hundred thousand dollars into the local economy and living there 9 months a year for several years they deserve a break on hunting and fishing license prices especially when that person is usually young and broke.

I am for it, but think of the consequences. Kids already pick schools because they are close to skiing (like MSU). If they chose based on hunting opportunity, that will create a bunch of weekend warriors hitting the hills. The "locals" probably don't want the added pressure. And if you are running the university, do you want kids picking the school because of that factor? The graduation rates in Montana are already pretty bad. If you are paying out of state tuition to go to a school for the hunting or skiing opportunities, I'm pretty sure price is not an issue.

 

[MTGomer]

I am for it, but think of the consequences. Kids already pick schools because they are close to skiing (like MSU). If they chose based on hunting opportunity, that will create a bunch of weekend warriors hitting the hills. The "locals" probably don't want the added pressure. And if you are running the university, do you want kids picking the school because of that factor? The graduation rates in Montana are already pretty bad. If you are paying out of state tuition to go to a school for the hunting or skiing opportunities, I'm pretty sure price is not an issue.

I don’t remember the term for it but when I was in college ten years ago there was a collective of states that offered discounted tuition to each others residents. I went in state but my roommate and gf(now wife) took advantage of this. So the price wasn’t too outrageous.

 

[MTGomer]

I just thought if it. WUE. Western undergad exchange.

 

[Deleted member 28227]

I am for it, but think of the consequences. Kids already pick schools because they are close to skiing (like MSU). If they chose based on hunting opportunity, that will create a bunch of weekend warriors hitting the hills. The "locals" probably don't want the added pressure. And if you are running the university, do you want kids picking the school because of that factor? The graduation rates in Montana are already pretty bad. If you are paying out of state tuition to go to a school for the hunting or skiing opportunities, I'm pretty sure price is not an issue.

I’m all for it, but think of the consequences of students picking college for Titties and Beer (Tulane), if students choose based on “things other than academics” you will have a bunch of adults living their lives. And if you are running the university do you want people having things to do to relieve stress.

Bro myopic view of academics.

Also people choose Montana because it’s cheap, MSU is cheaper out-of-state than CU is in-state.

 

[44hunter45]

Alaska has several youth hunts...one for Dall sheep Aug 1-5 before the general opener on Aug. 10.

Also residents get a free hunting/fishing/trapping license at the age of 60
(along with our free over the counter sheep/goat/deer/moose/caribou/bear tags)

I was blown away by this. When I invited my Eagle River buddy to join me on POW this year, he said , "Why not, I get the license and tag for free. " Then he said the AK Air gives him a deal as well.
This fueled my desire to move to SE Alaska even more.

 

[44hunter45]

I am for it, but think of the consequences. Kids already pick schools because they are close to skiing (like MSU). If they chose based on hunting opportunity, that will create a bunch of weekend warriors hitting the hills. The "locals" probably don't want the added pressure. And if you are running the university, do you want kids picking the school because of that factor? The graduation rates in Montana are already pretty bad. If you are paying out of state tuition to go to a school for the hunting or skiing opportunities, I'm pretty sure price is not an issue.

They are already in the hills with their dogs, mountain bikes, and AR-15's and 9mm pistols. They arrive in August each year and the USFS roads fill up with mudbarus and those high end SUVs Mommy and Daddy are paying for. All with mountain bikes strapped on.

And don't forget the alcohol

 

[MTGomer]

think of the consequences of students picking college for Titties and Beer

I have heard that the ONLY reason young men go to Tempe (ASU) is for an outstanding public education.