Threats to Hunting

[LivingTheDream]

So with the recent CBL decision, it was brought up, "that"or "this" is the biggest threats to hunting.

So not to hijack a thread, I thought I would ask, what do you think is the biggest threat to hunting?

Is it Anti propaganda? Is it loss of habitat? Social media (YouTube influences, faux hunting celebrity)? Poaching? Hunter infighting? China invades Taiwan causes WW3 and suddenly it doesn't matter anymore?

So to just to get this thread started. I personally think the biggest threat is the lack of opportunity causing hunter infighting. I believe this more applicable to hunting in America vs Africa. But seems to me America hunters will argue over season, style and tag allocation. And while we are arguing over tags, trying to influence seasons or regulations, slowly we have new laws popping up that take away even more opportunity. And it is kind of a vicious cycle.

If you go on other forums and read Resident tags vs Non Resident tags threads it gets pretty heated, you will even see case law going all the way to Supreme Court, it is kind of wild.

Anyways thought it would be interesting to see everyone's opinion.

 

[Tanks]

Biggest threat to hunting is lack of education in regard to hunting and conservation. Every generation percentage of hunters and gun owners in the general population goes down. Eventually, it will be a very small minority that would want to hunt and it will be done away with.

 

[Certus]

Lack of opportunity. Everyone’s buying up land making it unattainable to the average Joe. After that it’s locked up for their own hunting or they lease it out. I think it’s just getting expensive.
Thats only relevant to where I’ve been - obviously the USA is a biiig place with lots of variation.

 

[375Fox]

For hunting Africa, I really think it’s population growth on the continent. Wild areas are more pressured by encroachment and poaching than ever before. That combined with a discussion of trophy import bans. In North America, I think most hunting is generally secure even as the number of hunters falls, however lack of education and perceptions of hunting by non-hunters will really hurt us with hunting major predators l think.

 

[LivingTheDream]

Wild areas are more pressured by encroachment

I think this is actually a huge issue in North America as far Mule Deer herds go. I think it also part of the issue with Wild Turkeys as well.

 

[Hogpatrol]

I see human encroachment on wild areas and habitat loss as the main threat, Secondary are costs, in equipment, time and travel required. For PA and Delaware a lot of farms that were hunted are now housing developments, highways, industrial parks and retail establishments.

 

[BRICKBURN]

.....Eventually, it will be a very small minority that would want to hunt and it will be done away with.

We are already a small minority. 3.48%. There are more Melanin enhanced people in Alberta 4.3%. We are an invisible minority.

Anthropomorphism - Urbanization - disconnect. (Education)

Without science, yeesh.

Mob rule might just lead to this kind of stuff:

Colorado Ballot Proposal 2023-2024 #91 - Prohibit Trophy Hunting​

Media pressure and repeated stories that the world is ending at the hands of hunters.
Shipping bans - totally political
Trophy bans - totally political
Etc, etc.,

​

​

​

 

[Firebird]

A combination of all of the above-furthermore, hunters in general do not represent themselves very well

 

[Connor Baumgarten]

The Infighting between hunters decently gets me scared for the future of hunting as a hole. So often I see hunter vs hunter arguments that get way to nasty and it makes hunting look bad to everyone outside of the hunting world.

 

[LivingTheDream]

We are already a small minority. 3.48%. There are more Melanin enhanced people in Alberta 4.3%. We are an invisible minority.

Anthropomorphism - Urbanization - disconnect. (Education)

Without science, yeesh.

Mob rule might just lead to this kind of stuff:

Colorado Ballot Proposal 2023-2024 #91 - Prohibit Trophy Hunting​

Media pressure and repeated stories that the world is ending at the hands of hunters.
Shipping bans - totally political
Trophy bans - totally political
Etc, etc.,

​

​

​

These types of laws really concern me, we have seen in other states. And the increase predation puts more pressure on herds. Less tags, more infighting for the remaining tags. Death by 1000s cuts.

 

[Graham Hunter]

I think we are in trouble for 2 reasons or more. Politics- Groups telling the Government we need to stop Elephant, Lion, Rhino, Giraffe etc. Stupid Politictions with no knowledge or interest of obtaining any, make uninformed or totally dumb decisions to stop or restrict hunting or import of a species only for their own apperance and popularity.. IE: Canada last fall decided we couldn't import Elephant Ivory or Rhino Horn. No consulting with Public or Organizations or Hunters. No announcement or Moratorium. Just boom read this you're done. We can't look after our own Country or Wildlife management yet we can make decisions for other Countries without any knowledge or input. Until we can look after ourselves I don't think we have any right to tell another Country how to run their's. No consideration for their economy or the Wildlife Management. Antis- We allow them for the most part to make false claims and spread complete lies. Part of this is our fault as we aren't vocal enough to show the Public where Antis are wrong. SCI works hard at this but needs more support Regionally and locally.

 

[matt85]

Infighting is why we are as weak as we are. Our opponents are organized and nearly united in their cause. On the other hand, I've even seen people on this forum all to happy to attack our own members over petty disagreements. Our enemies get stronger and more numerous while we eat our own.

Our opponents WILL win, it is just a matter of how long we can stave off the inevitable. Some day the entire world will look like Los Angeles or London. Hopefully I will be long dead by then!

 

[Mtn_Infantry]

Population growth and land development causing a reduction in accessible land. This in turn will cause an increased demand resulting in habitat loss, more competition for tags, and even spikes in hunting costs.

 

[sgtsabai]

I believe about every reason has been at least mentioned already. Like so many issues there are more than one or two reasons. The anti's want to take our guns and that includes hunting. They do not realize or I guess care that hunting is the only reason there is anything to hunt or for them photograph. I grew up in the days when we had guns in our cars and/or pickups at school because we going to shoot rabbits or doves or just tin cans/bottles afterwards. I'm also old enough to fall for the snipe hunt except it was deer. Thank you my uncles. I do know that if hunters and those that like to shoot cannot get their act together, there will be no "act". Hey just watch the idiots in the national parks that think buffalo and elk are cute critters that they should pet. I shouldn't laugh, but I do even if they learn the lesson the hard way, if they live. Those are the people we are up against, their ignorance doesn't shut them up and they make noise and politicians listen to the loud noise and "contributions". I just read how the anti's are raising hell because bringing ivory back to the states wasn't banned and they are going to keep going until they get it banned. That is what we are up against and they are "righteous" in their cause.

 

[Woodcarver]

So with the recent CBL decision, it was brought up, "that"or "this" is the biggest threats to hunting.

So not to hijack a thread, I thought I would ask, what do you think is the biggest threat to hunting?

Is it Anti propaganda? Is it loss of habitat? Social media (YouTube influences, faux hunting celebrity)? Poaching? Hunter infighting? China invades Taiwan causes WW3 and suddenly it doesn't matter anymore?

So to just to get this thread started. I personally think the biggest threat is the lack of opportunity causing hunter infighting. I believe this more applicable to hunting in America vs Africa. But seems to me America hunters will argue over season, style and tag allocation. And while we are arguing over tags, trying to influence seasons or regulations, slowly we have new laws popping up that take away even more opportunity. And it is kind of a vicious cycle.

If you go on other forums and read Resident tags vs Non Resident tags threads it gets pretty heated, you will even see case law going all the way to Supreme Court, it is kind of wild.

Anyways thought it would be interesting to see everyone's opinion.

Ignorance. Primarily in the non-hunting/don't really care segment of the world population. This allows the emotional misinformation of the anti's to gain a foothold. But that ignorance invades the small percentage that hunts as well; leaving an even smaller percentage to make the arguments that need to be made.
The ignorance I reference amongst hunters is talked about quite often on this forum. Hunters who only hunt locally often don't see or understand what is happening in their neighboring state or country, let alone on a different continent. We need to educate them, right along with that non-hunting/don't really care segment. The attitude of "it doesn't impact me, so I don't care" needs to be eradicated amongst hunters. The ignorance, maybe just unwillingness in this case, to see the harm we do when we fight amongst ourselves. We must be as united in our cause as the anti's are in theirs, even when we don't agree in all the details.
Ignorance of the non-hunters/don't care group can be reduced by showing them the value of hunting in relation to seeing any wildlife at all when they go hiking or camping; it does impact them, they're just ignorant of how.
Ignorance of overburdened, shrinking habitat. Ignorance of how Nature controls overpopulation. Ignorance of how Man is part of Nature. Ignorance of how the North American Model of conservation works. In the case of the anti's, they won't acknowledge any of this, but the fellow hunter and the non-hunting/don't care folk usually respond favorably when they actually learn real facts about the role of every hunter in the true conservation of wildlife; globally.

 

[LivingTheDream]

I believe about every reason has been at least mentioned already. Like so many issues there are more than one or two reasons. The anti's want to take our guns and that includes hunting. They do not realize or I guess care that hunting is the only reason there is anything to hunt or for them photograph. I grew up in the days when we had guns in our cars and/or pickups at school because we going to shoot rabbits or doves or just tin cans/bottles afterwards. I'm also old enough to fall for the snipe hunt except it was deer. Thank you my uncles. I do know that if hunters and those that like to shoot cannot get their act together, there will be no "act". Hey just watch the idiots in the national parks that think buffalo and elk are cute critters that they should pet. I shouldn't laugh, but I do even if they learn the lesson the hard way, if they live. Those are the people we are up against, their ignorance doesn't shut them up and they make noise and politicians listen to the loud noise and "contributions". I just read how the anti's are raising hell because bringing ivory back to the states wasn't banned and they are going to keep going until they get it banned. That is what we are up against and they are "righteous" in their cause.

I agree with this 100%. I believe in BC, Canada Anti hunters have bought a hunting concession. When does that start to happen with concessions in Africa, leases in America, etc.

Also to your point about imports, I believe Hippo, Leopard and Giraffe are all currently under review. Add in the lack of options for transporting trophies back, it starts getting tough.

If the pass the mountain lion ban in Colorado, it will be something else next...bears, trapping, etc, they just got to the next thing to raise money off of.

 

[Hunter-Habib]

3 reasons (in chronological order):

No.1: People detached from the reality of wildlife management (anti-hunters/vegetarians/vegans mostly based in urban areas) increasing their prominence like a viral infection and making numerous demands to have certain kinds of hunting banned (relatively few will openly go after all forms of hunting all at once). Celebrities who endorse these sorts of anti hunting movements (like Roger Moor or Peter Egan) are instrumental in the movements gaining prominence because many of their fans will blindly support any agenda which they endorse (even if their field of experience lies in acting and not wildlife management).

No. 2: Hunters being a group of self righteous self absorbed narcissistic ego maniacs who don't care if one form of hunting gets banned, as long as it isn't the form of hunting which they themselves practice. These people think that throwing other hunters to the proverbial wolves, will keep said wolves off their own backs. It will, but only temporarily.

No.3: Spineless politicians sitting in their city offices (& desperate to get votes) deciding that they will garner the goodwill of the anti-hunting masses (thus ensuring more votes) by imposing bans on certain forms of hunting. When they see that said form of hunting is being condemned by certain hunters themselves, they take advantage of the internal dispute and go forward with it.

Thus, one form of hunting gets banned. And the cycle begins to get another form of hunting banned. And unless hunters get their act together and stop No. 2, this will eventually lead to all hunting getting banned. And when the citizens of a so-called "Developed Country" decide that hunting is bad. they decide that it's time to get hunting banned in the so-called "Under developed countries" as well (through bullying, indoctrination and/or offering money to bootlicking government agencies).

My predecessor and professor at the University of Peshawar, Yusuf Salauddin Ahmad (the first Inspector General Of Forests for both East Pakistan & West Pakistan) quoted in 1967:
"Make no mistake, brother sportsmen. The people who wish to ban tiger shoots today, will ban deer shoots tomorrow and bird shoots the day after".

In 1973, I was an apprentice forest ranger when the government (yielding to British & Indian pressure groups) announced a complete ban on tiger hunting in South Bengal. 20 years later in 1993, I would become CCF (Chief Conservator Of Forests) for the entire country. And I observed that the same foreign pressure groups from 1973 were now trying to get deer hunting banned in our part of the world. I hate boasting, but I was in a position to do something about it this time around. I put my foot down and rejected their demands during both of my two terms. Later, when I became an MP (Member of Parliament) for two terms, I also rejected their demands and publicly called them out. After I retired, my successors fortunately are holding their own against these pressure groups. My only hope is that they remain iron willed against permitting any of these pressure groups to have a say in wildlife management.

My only regret is that I wish I could have done more while I had the chance.

 

[mark-hunter]

So not to hijack a thread, I thought I would ask, what do you think is the biggest threat to hunting?

Is it Anti propaganda? Is it loss of habitat? Social media (YouTube influences, faux hunting celebrity)? Poaching? Hunter infighting? China invades Taiwan causes WW3 and suddenly it doesn't matter anymore?

I estimate that in last 100 years, we as hunters lost about 50% of hunting grounds in Africa.
And arguably, 40% of hunting grounds globally. (Africa, Asia, South America)

Western countries (EU and North America), generally dont have these problems - I dont see anybody trying to ban hunting on national level in North America and EU, although there are challenges. One of the biggest challenge is dropping numbers of hunters joining the community, and other - various gun restriction laws, and negative MSM press.

So, the threats....

- ignorance of majority of urban population about importance of hunting to protect habitats. These group can be influenced by propaganda and MSM

- bad practices of CBL, has backlashed in bad way. Same as less known put and take hunts, etc...
Although I still think that ethical CBL hunting has some benefits, if done properly and ethically: One would be, possibility for blue collar hunters to hunt lion on affordable prices. Otherwise, wild lions hunting, as only option will remain, as rich men sport only. See next point.

- Rich men sport problem:
If / when hunting is seen by public as upper class and rich men sport then it comes under direct threat of being totally banned. This was already seen in history: India (seen as sport of British Raj), Kenya (white hunter, black poacher syndrome of colonial era), etc...
In order to survive, hunting must remain as activity for people of all classes of society. If it becomes, or remains only a rich men sport, it comes under serious threat.


- photography. This comes from our own community, and I think that various major hunting organizations had not yet dealt with this matter properly. I am not aware of any antihunting propaganda, or media witch hunt, that did not start with hunters photos of their trophies posted publicly. (Cecil the lion is only one example)
When photo of hunters with dead animal is abused and given to public, recycled and presented in negative way, the ignorant majority is polarized, and this affects the political agenda.
So, the public presentation of hunting if done in a wrong way - although benevolently, which includes dead animals, this I see as a threat, and should be dealt with with some guidelines or code of ethics within hunting organizations.

-Lack of interest by next generation.
This, maybe is the worst. We could become extinct just like that, for young people not going into hunting and conservation at young age. Pricing is also negative factor.

- Young generation and pricing
If a young men with interest is not from hunting family (to hunt wilt his father or granpa), he must buy everything from a start. I am not sure how much basic hunting kit in USA costs (clothes, budget rifle, binocular, shoes, boots, other gear, etc), but my estimate for basic hunting kit at my place does not cost less then 5-6.000 Eur. (against average monthly income 1000 eur).
This means that young men even with interest, if not coming from hunting family will be forced to start at later age - generally between 30-40 years of age, when he can afford to buy basic set of equipment. But when joining a hunting club once, it will give him a chance to hunt on budget, although hunting club system may vary from country to country.

On above points, we can have some influence. One next, much less.

- uncontrolled encroachment of some rural areas and consequential habitat destruction

- urbanization of some areas

- agricultural activities on industrial scale (habitat destruction)

- deforestation in some areas

etc

 

[VertigoBE]

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.

Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

—Martin Niemöller

 

[V.Veritas]

"Divide et impera"

The oldest trick in the book. Keeps working after +2,000 years and it will keep working until the human nature will change.

Sent from my BBF100-2 using AfricaHunting mobile app