Post by cambygsp on Nov 3, 2005 20:35:14 GMT -5
www.bowsite.com/menu/NEWS/GETNEWS.CFM?ID=1185
Hunting numbers on the upswing
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has released their National Hunting License Report for 2004. The 2004 numbers show an upswing in the numbers of hunters, but hardly give hunting groups reasons to believe the decades-long downward spiral of hunters is reversing itself.
2004 statistics show fewer than five percent of the U.S. population in possession of a hunting license. Twenty years ago that number was nearly nine percent of the U.S. population.
Still, some groups, like the National Shooting Sports Foundation are putting the best face possible on the figures. In a release from the NSSF, Jodi Valenta, director of recruitment and retention programs called the two increases over the past six years "a tribute to the wonderful programs today that are designed to recruit and retain hunters."
Ms. Valenta went on to say the hunting community was "working together" and "making a difference" with those efforts beginning to show fruit.
Hunters contribute a significant amount of dollars to wildlife and conservation efforts when they hunt. Their spending on licenses, tags, permits and stamps puts more than seven hundred million dollars into wildlife conservation and management programs in 2004. That $703 million in 2004 fees represents a three and a half percent increase over 2003.
As is true in all statistical reporting, it's also important to realize that some portion of the shrinkage in hunter participation numbers is due to U.S. population growth over the past 20 years. The numbers of hunters have definitely dropped; but the percentage decreases are skewed downward by those population increases.
In 2002, nearly 15 million hunting license holders spent $658,993,797. The 2004 expenditure increased to $703,794,135. That's an increase in spending of more than $45 million dollars.
The bad news is that fewer hunters paid those increased costs.
As the license, tags, permits and stamp revenues rose (good news for conservation efforts), fewer hunters paid those costs (bad news for everyone).
All hunting-related groups are, indeed, putting the full-court press on American youth in an attempt to help reverse the downward spiral in participation. Those efforts, however, are running into opposition from anti-firearm and animal rights groups who are also battling for the "hearts and minds" of America's youth.
If it were a political campaign, the statistical advantage would most likely be skewed in favor of the anti-side of the battle.
Our strong national hunting provides some positive encouragement in that fight. So, too, do the recent political battles won by pro-shooting forces, most notably, last week's passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act. In that passage, firearms proponents demonstrated their abilities to put considerable force to bear on Washington when the issues are viewed as critical to the industry's survival.
The numbers are helpful, but don't tell the real story of American hunting.
To keep hunting alive in America, it's critical that hunting become easier, rather than more challenging.
Anti-hunting forces recognize that fact. They've already changed their tactics from their failed full-on assault on firearms to a "kinder, gentler" approach to eliminating hunting: protecting the environment by increasing "protected" wilderness areas.
As more and more federal lands fall under the ever-broadening definitions of "protected" areas, hunters and the hunting industry must recognize the fact that what some perceive to be diminished efforts to eliminate hunting is, in fact, a retrenching of the efforts to a more subtle - but equally fatal - outcome.
Hunting numbers on the upswing
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service has released their National Hunting License Report for 2004. The 2004 numbers show an upswing in the numbers of hunters, but hardly give hunting groups reasons to believe the decades-long downward spiral of hunters is reversing itself.
2004 statistics show fewer than five percent of the U.S. population in possession of a hunting license. Twenty years ago that number was nearly nine percent of the U.S. population.
Still, some groups, like the National Shooting Sports Foundation are putting the best face possible on the figures. In a release from the NSSF, Jodi Valenta, director of recruitment and retention programs called the two increases over the past six years "a tribute to the wonderful programs today that are designed to recruit and retain hunters."
Ms. Valenta went on to say the hunting community was "working together" and "making a difference" with those efforts beginning to show fruit.
Hunters contribute a significant amount of dollars to wildlife and conservation efforts when they hunt. Their spending on licenses, tags, permits and stamps puts more than seven hundred million dollars into wildlife conservation and management programs in 2004. That $703 million in 2004 fees represents a three and a half percent increase over 2003.
As is true in all statistical reporting, it's also important to realize that some portion of the shrinkage in hunter participation numbers is due to U.S. population growth over the past 20 years. The numbers of hunters have definitely dropped; but the percentage decreases are skewed downward by those population increases.
In 2002, nearly 15 million hunting license holders spent $658,993,797. The 2004 expenditure increased to $703,794,135. That's an increase in spending of more than $45 million dollars.
The bad news is that fewer hunters paid those increased costs.
As the license, tags, permits and stamp revenues rose (good news for conservation efforts), fewer hunters paid those costs (bad news for everyone).
All hunting-related groups are, indeed, putting the full-court press on American youth in an attempt to help reverse the downward spiral in participation. Those efforts, however, are running into opposition from anti-firearm and animal rights groups who are also battling for the "hearts and minds" of America's youth.
If it were a political campaign, the statistical advantage would most likely be skewed in favor of the anti-side of the battle.
Our strong national hunting provides some positive encouragement in that fight. So, too, do the recent political battles won by pro-shooting forces, most notably, last week's passage of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Firearms Act. In that passage, firearms proponents demonstrated their abilities to put considerable force to bear on Washington when the issues are viewed as critical to the industry's survival.
The numbers are helpful, but don't tell the real story of American hunting.
To keep hunting alive in America, it's critical that hunting become easier, rather than more challenging.
Anti-hunting forces recognize that fact. They've already changed their tactics from their failed full-on assault on firearms to a "kinder, gentler" approach to eliminating hunting: protecting the environment by increasing "protected" wilderness areas.
As more and more federal lands fall under the ever-broadening definitions of "protected" areas, hunters and the hunting industry must recognize the fact that what some perceive to be diminished efforts to eliminate hunting is, in fact, a retrenching of the efforts to a more subtle - but equally fatal - outcome.
