Fewer Americans are taking up hunting every year, a trend that has wildlife agencies across the country looking for new ways to fund conservation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many states have experienced a significant decline in hunter participation over the last two decades. Yet, the money generated from hunting license sales and federal excise taxes on firearms, ammunition and angling equipment still provides 60-80% of the funding for state wildlife agencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Hunting participation peaked in 1982, when nearly 17 million hunters purchased 28.3 million licenses. Today, however, only 11.5 million people in the United States actually hunt. That\u2019s less than 4% of the national population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
For state wildlife agencies, the decline in hunting has stifled license sales and other forms of funding, leaving them inadequately staffed and unable to protect critical habitat and effectively implement management programs for deer and other animals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
\u201cWildlife agencies have relied on a user-pay, public benefit system for decades to fund their conservation efforts, and it worked when a significant portion of the population was hunting,\u201d said Lincoln Larson<\/a>, a professor of parks, recreation and tourism management at NC State\u2019s College of Natural Resource. \u201cBut now that hunting is slowly fading, alarm bells are going off at agencies all across the country \u2026 It\u2019s potentially bad news for conservation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The decline in hunting is largely a result of the nation\u2019s \u201csignificant demographic change,\u201d according to Larson. That includes the growing age gap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Baby boomers (anyone born between 1946 and 1964) make up roughly a third of all hunters in the U.S. However, many baby boomers are ageing out of hunting without a younger generation to replace them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson said urbanization and the increasing use of technology have especially deterred young adults from participating in hunting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another factor impacting hunter participation is the growth of racial ethnic minority populations, according to Larson. \u201cHistorically, these populations haven\u2019t hunted at the same rate as white Americans,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While more than 90% of today\u2019s hunters are white, census projections<\/a> show that they will make up less than half of the U.S. population by 2044.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAll these shifts are trending away from the core hunting demographic of rural, white, males, and we\u2019re just not replacing them quickly enough with a new look of hunter to make up the difference,\u201d Larson said. \u201cIt\u2019s just a lifestyle that\u2019s fallen out of vogue.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In response to the declining number of hunters, wildlife agencies and non-governmental organizations are working to recruit new hunters, retain old hunters and reactivate those who have quit the sport. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem is, according to Larson, many of these programs \u2014 often referred to as R3 \u2014 fail to attract new hunters. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA lot of R3 programs tend to focus on young people who would hunt anyway. Their families already hunt. They\u2019re connected to hunting culture. They don\u2019t need a program to lure them in,\u201d he said. \u201cThese programs are effective from a retention standpoint, but they\u2019re an inefficient allocation of funds and resources. They\u2019re not drawing a new crowd. They\u2019re preaching to the choir.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson and other researchers across the country are testing and examining programs designed to target nontraditional audiences<\/a>, including the local food movement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The local food, or locavore, movement encourages consumers to buy from farmers\u2019 markets or to produce their own food, with the argument that fresh local products are more nutritious and better tasting. It has become especially popular among urban residents. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2017, Larson and other researchers surveyed 471 \u201clocavores\u201d<\/a> in the Finger Lakes Region of central New York in order to gauge their interest in harvesting and consuming wild game meat. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The survey found that 23% of respondents would consider hunting, while 59% expressed interest in learning about preparing wild game and conservation benefits associated with wild game consumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson is also currently working with other researchers and state wildlife agencies to survey undergraduate students at public universities across 22 states to assess their hunting-related perceptions and behaviors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Preliminary results reveal that more than 60% of college students approve of hunting, while about 30% currently hunt. Another 25% of students with no previous hunting experience would consider trying it, and those students are far more diverse than the current hunting population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCollege students are in a developmental stage where they\u2019ll try anything, for better or worse,\u201d he said. \u201cOne of those things could be hunting. And that could become part of their core identity if we can build a social support system for it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n While R3 programs show promise, state wildlife agencies will also need to identify alternative funding sources if they want to keep conservation efforts afloat amid budgeting shortfalls. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Some states have passed sales taxes to help fund conservation, while others have tapped into real estate transfer fees, lottery ticket sales, licence plate proceeds and various other sources. In Missouri, for example, at least $100 million has been generated by a conservation sales tax every year since 2012. <\/p>\n\n\n\n There have also been efforts to tax outdoor recreation equipment<\/a> such as hiking boots, backpacks and tents. However, efforts to initiate a \u201cbackpack tax\u201d have largely failed due to opposition from the outdoor industry, which argues<\/a> that it already pays billions of dollars through \u201cdisproportionately high import taxes every year.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson said one of the most promising funding proposals for conservation is the Recovering America\u2019s Wildlife Act<\/a>, or RAWA. The act would provide $1.4 billion in annual dedicated funding to support conservation of at-risk fish and wildlife species. It was approved by the U.S. House of Representatives in July and sent to the Senate for consideration. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cRAWA may be a viable short-term solution to the larger problem as conventional hunting-based revenue declines,\u201d Larson said. \u201cBut we must continue to work to find ways to diversify the conservation funding portfolio and make other innovative funding strategies more politically palatable.\u201d <\/p>\n","protected":false,"raw":"\n\n\n\n\n Fewer Americans are taking up hunting every year, a trend that has wildlife agencies across the country looking for new ways to fund conservation. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Many states have experienced a significant decline in hunter participation over the last two decades. Yet, the money generated from hunting license sales and federal excise taxes on firearms, ammunition and angling equipment still provides 60-80% of the funding for state wildlife agencies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Hunting participation peaked in 1982, when nearly 17 million hunters purchased 28.3 million licenses. Today, however, only 11.5 million people in the United States actually hunt. That\u2019s less than 4% of the national population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n For state wildlife agencies, the decline in hunting has stifled license sales and other forms of funding, leaving them inadequately staffed and unable to protect critical habitat and effectively implement management programs for deer and other animals.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cWildlife agencies have relied on a user-pay, public benefit system for decades to fund their conservation efforts, and it worked when a significant portion of the population was hunting,\u201d said Lincoln Larson<\/a>, a professor of parks, recreation and tourism management at NC State\u2019s College of Natural Resource. \u201cBut now that hunting is slowly fading, alarm bells are going off at agencies all across the country \u2026 It\u2019s potentially bad news for conservation.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n The decline in hunting is largely a result of the nation\u2019s \u201csignificant demographic change,\u201d according to Larson. That includes the growing age gap.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Baby boomers (anyone born between 1946 and 1964) make up roughly a third of all hunters in the U.S. However, many baby boomers are ageing out of hunting without a younger generation to replace them. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson said urbanization and the increasing use of technology have especially deterred young adults from participating in hunting.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another factor impacting hunter participation is the growth of racial ethnic minority populations, according to Larson. \u201cHistorically, these populations haven\u2019t hunted at the same rate as white Americans,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n While more than 90% of today\u2019s hunters are white, census projections<\/a> show that they will make up less than half of the U.S. population by 2044.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cAll these shifts are trending away from the core hunting demographic of rural, white, males, and we\u2019re just not replacing them quickly enough with a new look of hunter to make up the difference,\u201d Larson said. \u201cIt\u2019s just a lifestyle that\u2019s fallen out of vogue.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n In response to the declining number of hunters, wildlife agencies and non-governmental organizations are working to recruit new hunters, retain old hunters and reactivate those who have quit the sport. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The problem is, according to Larson, many of these programs \u2014 often referred to as R3 \u2014 fail to attract new hunters. <\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cA lot of R3 programs tend to focus on young people who would hunt anyway. Their families already hunt. They\u2019re connected to hunting culture. They don\u2019t need a program to lure them in,\u201d he said. \u201cThese programs are effective from a retention standpoint, but they\u2019re an inefficient allocation of funds and resources. They\u2019re not drawing a new crowd. They\u2019re preaching to the choir.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson and other researchers across the country are testing and examining programs designed to target nontraditional audiences<\/a>, including the local food movement. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The local food, or locavore, movement encourages consumers to buy from farmers\u2019 markets or to produce their own food, with the argument that fresh local products are more nutritious and better tasting. It has become especially popular among urban residents. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2017, Larson and other researchers surveyed 471 \u201clocavores\u201d<\/a> in the Finger Lakes Region of central New York in order to gauge their interest in harvesting and consuming wild game meat. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The survey found that 23% of respondents would consider hunting, while 59% expressed interest in learning about preparing wild game and conservation benefits associated with wild game consumption.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Larson is also currently working with other researchers and state wildlife agencies to survey undergraduate students at public universities across 22 states to assess their hunting-related perceptions and behaviors.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Preliminary results reveal that more than 60% of college students approve of hunting, while about 30% currently hunt. Another 25% of students with no previous hunting experience would consider trying it, and those students are far more diverse than the current hunting population.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \u201cCollege students are in a developmental stage where they\u2019ll try anything, for better or worse,\u201d he said. \u201cOne of those things could be hunting. And that could become part of their core identity if we can build a social support system for it.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n While R3 programs show promise, state wildlife agencies will also need to identify alternative funding sources if they want to keep conservation efforts afloat amid budgeting shortfalls. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Some states have passed sales taxes to help fund conservation, while others have tapped into real estate transfer fees, lottery ticket sales, licence plate proceeds and various other sources. In Missouri, for example, at least $100 million has been generated by a conservation sales tax every year since 2012. <\/p>\n\n\n\n There have also been efforts to tax outdoor recreation equipment<\/a> such as hiking boots, backpacks and tents. However, efforts to initiate a \u201cbackpack tax\u201d have largely failed due to opposition from the outdoor industry, which argues<\/a> that it already pays billions of dollars through \u201cdisproportionately high import taxes every year.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\nA new generation of hunters <\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The hunt for funding<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
A new generation of hunters <\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
The hunt for funding<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n