Hunter Numbers Are Declining, We Need More Hunters.... Is This a Lie We Perpetuate?

Sabre

AH elite
Joined
Aug 7, 2024
Messages
1,202
Reaction score
2,358
Growing up, I constantly heard that hunter numbers are declining. We have never had less hunters. Hunters are aging out and no new young hunters are joining in.

As an adult, many years later, it has never been harder to draw tags, find access, and avoid running into others on public land.

Also, now as an adult, I hear both things being repeated constantly. "We don't have enough hunters"; "We have too many hunters".

I think both things are sort of true and sort of false.

By percentages, they allegedly started tracking it in the 1960s and 7.7% of the population hunted. Which is about 14 million people (a bit under really at 13.86m)
Now about 5% of the population hunts. Which sounds like a drop in hunters, but since the population is drastically higher it is more individuals hunting. It comes out to 17.1 million people hunting.

So, here is the deal, if you are talking about a "need" of voters, yes we are down in numbers because percentage will matter there. However, we never exactly had a large percentage.

But, if you are talking about sheer numbers, competing for tags, public land etc, we have never been more crowded than we are now. There are 3,240,000 more people trying to do the same thing, often times with less public space to do it, and less landowners agreeing to allow access.

I also believe that "western hunting" is likely the most overpopulated it has ever been. Due to most modes of transport becoming more advanced people are more likely to travel further and more often. Additionally, people who are even slightly interested in hunting, and many who aren't, are inundated with hunting videos on youtube and other social media glorifying western hunting like elk as the holy grail of hunting. So, more people than ever are showing interest in it, putting in tags, and giving it a go.

These overcrowding problems aren't likely to get better. I think many people think we can "introduce youth" our way out of it. Put bluntly, it won't. There is almost nothing I can think of that will change this trajectory that wouldn't also be devastating to hunting.

All of that said, I take youth hunters out every single year, as long as there is one around that even hints at wanting to go. I want to share this hobby/passion with anyone that might be interested in it.

But the reality is, we will never recruit enough people to make some big voting group. And, even if we did, we would be miserable as hunters. We would effectively ruin what we love about hunting.
 
Hmm!
In Australia we have a well publicised issue with a booming feral deer population. Sambar, Red & Fallow in particular. We also have a segment of the youth population who do not agree with the principle of farmed meat, but meat harvested from feral animals is acceptable.
At the moment with the latest political push to restricting gun ownership there has been rush of people applying for gun licences. The backlog on processing the applications is running a 6 to 9 months.
In summary we don't have a problem in getting the youth to participate, the main issue is maintaining the legal system to enable them to participate.
 
when i started to hunt off the farm in the mid 50,s( i needed a license to hunt), on the first day of any hunting season you would see many cars parked along the roads and woods-fields. today thats gone, you see very few cars parked in those same locations for the first opening days. die hards will hunt( me-myself and i) no matter what. but the hunters here have declined quite a bit. even at the clays shoots our numbers are not being replaced to keep up with older shooters dieing off. and the hunter safety courses we run for new young hunters at our club has declined quite a bit.
 

Attachments

  • DSCN0897 (3).JPG
    DSCN0897 (3).JPG
    2.3 MB · Views: 27
  • DSCN9580 (2).JPG
    DSCN9580 (2).JPG
    1 MB · Views: 30
  • DSCN9805 (3).JPG
    DSCN9805 (3).JPG
    2.9 MB · Views: 26
As I see it your problem is that so many people are applying for so many states where they probably didn’t before. I’ve read on some forums where guys are building points across basically every western state.

Fools like me apply for one only.
 
If hunter numbers are declining then why is it cheaper to hunt in Africa than many American hunts?

Supply and demand, as for access that is the real issue being there is less property accessible because of urban sprawl just like Africa.

I will say one thing, 20+ years ago leases were certainly a thing but I didn’t know anyone hoarding them; today I know several men with deep pockets and a few company owners as well that lease thousands and thousands of acres they rarely if ever hunt.
 
With the advent of leases, hunting clubs, urbanization, development of farmland and woodlots in to housing, commercial properties, posting and increase in safety zones, for many, public land is becoming the only place to hunt. Can't speak for other states but in PA, hunters are half the '70s peak. The youth of today have way more diversions than those of previous generations.
 
Hunter numbers are down slightly, but the OP presents several facts. As a percentage we are down, but as total numbers we are up. Combine this with urbanization and there is less land to hunt.

The biggest problem we face in the U.S. is the lottery for tags. A little over 20 years ago I went to a meeting at my local Hunt and Fish Club for a Conference on how to apply for tags. This was presented by a Company that specializes in getting hunters to not only apply for every species in their home State, but every State west of the Mississippi that requires entering into a lottery type system.

This Company actively encouraged hunters to have a Savings account set aside for the sole purpose of having sufficient funds every year to apply for every species in at least a 4 State area. At the time they suggested having $10,000 to apply for Deer, Elk, Sheep, Bear, Pronghorn, etc. in their home State, and 3 surrounding States.

What person in their right mind DIDN'T understand that this was going to overwhelm the system?

I openly stated that this was going to lead to far more problems than it solved, and I'm convinced I was right.

The only ones that are happy with the system are the ones charging for a tag application service, and the Fish and Game Departments collecting non-refundable application fees.
 
I do think it’s a problem, but I don’t think it’s the doom and gloom scenario some hunters envision. I think hunting has shifted from quantity to quality. Looking just at my area, we are just now starting to get a few bucks make it to 4.5. 5 years ago was only 3.5. More hunters have shifted at archery hunting and more hunters are passing younger or lesser quality bucks. The deer numbers are the same, tag numbers per hunter haven’t changed, the density of hunters during rifle season is much less, the quality improves every 5 or so years. I don’t think that’s a bad thing. I think we had way too many hunters in woods before. I do think it’s really sad that social type hunting really seems in decline, but things change. Deer camp and deer drives will be a thing of past shortly in exchange for the individual hunter taking 2 hours after work rather than a dedicated weekend. I do find it interesting small game hunting has declined so massively, but I just see it as a shift to deer, Turkey, ducks, and geese.

Hunters complain about western non-resident draws a lot, but it shows me the hunters left are willing to plan and pay. I think that’s a good thing for African hunting long term. Everyone likes to talk about aging hunters, but every hunting show I go to there are a large number of hunters in their 30s and 40s. There doesn’t seem a shortage of working age hunters from what I see.
 
Hunter numbers are down slightly, but the OP presents several facts. As a percentage we are down, but as total numbers we are up. Combine this with urbanization and there is less land to hunt.

The biggest problem we face in the U.S. is the lottery for tags. A little over 20 years ago I went to a meeting at my local Hunt and Fish Club for a Conference on how to apply for tags. This was presented by a Company that specializes in getting hunters to not only apply for every species in their home State, but every State west of the Mississippi that requires entering into a lottery type system.

This Company actively encouraged hunters to have a Savings account set aside for the sole purpose of having sufficient funds every year to apply for every species in at least a 4 State area. At the time they suggested having $10,000 to apply for Deer, Elk, Sheep, Bear, Pronghorn, etc. in their home State, and 3 surrounding States.

What person in their right mind DIDN'T understand that this was going to overwhelm the system?

I openly stated that this was going to lead to far more problems than it solved, and I'm convinced I was right.

The only ones that are happy with the system are the ones charging for a tag application service, and the Fish and Game Departments collecting non-refundable application fees.
It’s definitely a problem that hunters put in endlessly for tags without drawing, but what would you suggest? The internet made things so much easier to discover western hunting opportunities, research, and apply. It was bound to happen. It also made massively easier to research and go on international hunts. Trade an elk for a red stag and avoid the headache. Seems simple solution to me.
 
If hunter numbers are declining then why is it cheaper to hunt in Africa than many American hunts?

Supply and demand, as for access that is the real issue being there is less property accessible because of urban sprawl just like Africa.

I will say one thing, 20+ years ago leases were certainly a thing but I didn’t know anyone hoarding them; today I know several men with deep pockets and a few company owners as well that lease thousands and thousands of acres they rarely if ever hunt.
I look at supply and demand differently comparing African and North American hunts. I do think North American pricing is extremely inflated (especially white tail deer), but I look at our tags and short season system as the main driver. The rest of the world is managed on a long season and quota system. Outfitters in Africa can typically hunt April through November. They can plan better. North American outfitters have to plan their hunts for a very short window designed to limit the total harvest. They can’t employ guides and camp staff all year like in Africa, so creates a new sort of operating problems. I wouldn’t want to be a hunting outfitter here, basically just means you’ll never have a stable job or stable income (not for lot of years anyway).
 
Pretty constant around here actually. Statistically speaking.
That extra 8000 bodies in the field makes things more interesting.

hunter numbers.png


The government discovered they like the fees for each draw, raised those fees and could care less about the impact on the draw system. (point creep)
Now everyone can pay a fee for a point, no intention to hunt.

When I look at a particular sheep draw here I am dismayed that the math skills of so many people.

This years winners have been in the draw for 30 years. That is, from the beginning of this draw. There used to be only 4 tags drawn. Now there are 8 in a split season.

Screenshot 2026-09-18 at 09.52.28.png


Total applicants 5229 people applied. Readily available information in the summary every year.
EIGHT TAGS ARE AWARDED PER YEAR.
599 people entered at the bottom this year. ???

You can start to enter the draw at age 12. Life expectancy here is 78.
(Sheep hunting ability life expectancy is another thing.)

Just for fun:
5229 total applicants
599 subtract new guys
4630 applicants ahead of them in the draw.
Eight Tags per year awarded
4630 / 8 = 579 YEARS
ZERO CHANCE of being drawn in their lifetime.

The fee is now $6.00
$27,780.00 in fees collected per year from people who can never get the tag in their lifetime.
 
The irony is the people controlling the herds have to pay to do it. My two cents, It's not about game management. The fees are just cover for these bureaucracies' payrolls.
 
If hunter numbers are declining then why is it cheaper to hunt in Africa than many American hunts?

Supply and demand, as for access that is the real issue being there is less property accessible because of urban sprawl just like Africa.

I will say one thing, 20+ years ago leases were certainly a thing but I didn’t know anyone hoarding them; today I know several men with deep pockets and a few company owners as well that lease thousands and thousands of acres they rarely if ever hunt.

This. It's a part of what led me to leave Kansas for Alaska in 2002. I have said on here before, on similar threads, that I have a lot of friends back in Kansas that no longer hunt. They gave it up because access became something they couldn't afford, so they found other things to do. The ones I can think of I always thought of as being as ardent as me, and yet none of them have hunted at all in the last 5-10 years, and a lack of access was the reason.

I don't think hunting's going to die in my lifetime, but I do think it will continue to move in the direction of a rich person's activity, and maybe more so with the direction of the economy.
 
It’s definitely a problem that hunters put in endlessly for tags without drawing, but what would you suggest? The internet made things so much easier to discover western hunting opportunities, research, and apply. It was bound to happen. It also made massively easier to research and go on international hunts. Trade an elk for a red stag and avoid the headache. Seems simple solution to me.
I think you, and I, and many on this forum already figured that one out. :cool:

What I usually suggest when something used to work, but doesn't any longer, is go back to the old system. Before everyone put in for 60 tags in 10 states, you had a chance of drawing a tag in your home State, and a reasonable chance as a non-resident. Twenty years ago, it was a workable system in most Western States.

Market forces are likely to drive things back to the way they were, as many if not most non-resident hunters grow tired of the time, energy and financial investment that has little chance of paying off.
 
Market forces are likely to drive things back to the way they were, as many if not most non-resident hunters grow tired of the time, energy and financial investment that has little chance of paying off.
Have already seen this at my gun club. Older guys are now former western state hunters. Once the boomers are done, another ten or fifteen years, those states that derive over half their revenue from non residents will struggle so now they're milking the tag cow for all its worth.
As far as statistics, PA says for one year sold 930, 000 license but that includes separate tags and licenses. I purchased a regular hunting license, a muzzleloader license, an archery license and two doe tags. They count that as five licenses equating to five hunters, total BS on actual numbers of licensed hunters.
 
Last edited:
What I usually suggest when something used to work, but doesn't any longer, is go back to the old system. Before everyone put in for 60 tags in 10 states, you had a chance of drawing a tag in your home State, and a reasonable chance as a non-resident. Twenty years ago, it was a workable system in most Western States.
What old system would that be? It’s the same system just with much easier access with internet.
 
Have already seen this at my gun club. Older guys are now former western state hunters. Once the boomers are done, another ten or fifteen years, those states that derive over half their revenue from non residents will struggle so now they're milking the tag cow for all its worth.
I’m guessing you said this 10 years ago though too? Nothing has changed or appears going to. Against my advice, I know a lot of individuals in their 30s who started putting in western draws last few years. It might take 30 years to recognize their mistake but I don’t see any shortage of hunters.
 
I spoke with a guy that runs a hunting and conservation non profit in WY last year… I was surprised when he told me that hunting is actually on the rise in Wyoming and they have seen an increase in both the total number of resident licenses sold and the number of youth licenses sold over the last few years…

I didn’t bother trying to research to see how much of an increase there has been.. but thought that was promising information…


This was the organization
 
What old system would that be? It’s the same system just with much easier access with internet.
Same system.

The system didn't change, even with the Internet.

HOW people used the system and the number of tags they applied for changed.

When I was Stationed in Arizona, most hunters applied for the draw in their home State, usually for Deer, Elk, and possibly Sheep. Only occasionally did they apply in another State as a group with friends or family. If you failed to draw, you received a bonus point that applied to the draw the following year. What this means is most hunters in Arizona applied for 2 or possibly 3 tags.

When some of the Tag Application Services were created, they actually came to many Club meetings and Conventions, and encouraged hunters to drastically increase the number of tags they applied for.

Only getting an opportunity to hunt in your home State every other year? Why not apply in Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Nevada, Wyoming, Montana and every other State with a lottery system, and apply for tags for everything each State offers. Deer, Elk, Moose, Sheep, Javalina, Pronghorn, etc. So now instead of the average hunter applying for 3 tags in one State, they were applying for 20 tags across 6 States!

Arizona saw explosive growth the number of Elk tag applications. 115,500 applications for roughly 25,400 tags by the late 2010s. The number of hunters had not increased, and the Arizona Elk herd had not increased, but the number if applications DID.

Before I retired from the Army, I kept a folder with hard copies of the draw odds, number of tags in each hunt unit, total applications for each unit, etc. Everything I had predicted came to pass, and this was during the time when it was a mail in paper for process.

I gave up on Western Hunting and decided moving back to Ohio where I can buy up to 8 over the counter Deer tags was the better idea.
 
Last edited:
Growing up, I constantly heard that hunter numbers are declining. We have never had less hunters. Hunters are aging out and no new young hunters are joining in.

As an adult, many years later, it has never been harder to draw tags, find access, and avoid running into others on public land.

Also, now as an adult, I hear both things being repeated constantly. "We don't have enough hunters"; "We have too many hunters".

I think both things are sort of true and sort of false.

By percentages, they allegedly started tracking it in the 1960s and 7.7% of the population hunted. Which is about 14 million people (a bit under really at 13.86m)
Now about 5% of the population hunts. Which sounds like a drop in hunters, but since the population is drastically higher it is more individuals hunting. It comes out to 17.1 million people hunting.

So, here is the deal, if you are talking about a "need" of voters, yes we are down in numbers because percentage will matter there. However, we never exactly had a large percentage.

But, if you are talking about sheer numbers, competing for tags, public land etc, we have never been more crowded than we are now. There are 3,240,000 more people trying to do the same thing, often times with less public space to do it, and less landowners agreeing to allow access.

I also believe that "western hunting" is likely the most overpopulated it has ever been. Due to most modes of transport becoming more advanced people are more likely to travel further and more often. Additionally, people who are even slightly interested in hunting, and many who aren't, are inundated with hunting videos on youtube and other social media glorifying western hunting like elk as the holy grail of hunting. So, more people than ever are showing interest in it, putting in tags, and giving it a go.

These overcrowding problems aren't likely to get better. I think many people think we can "introduce youth" our way out of it. Put bluntly, it won't. There is almost nothing I can think of that will change this trajectory that wouldn't also be devastating to hunting.

All of that said, I take youth hunters out every single year, as long as there is one around that even hints at wanting to go. I want to share this hobby/passion with anyone that might be interested in it.

But the reality is, we will never recruit enough people to make some big voting group. And, even if we did, we would be miserable as hunters. We would effectively ruin what we love about hunting.
I would argue we have less hunters and more shooters.
Fieldcraft makes the hunter. Amd it seems a great many people getting into the sport care more about absolute efficiency than old school practices
 

Forum statistics

Threads
70,241
Messages
1,567,126
Members
167,897
Latest member
ThaliaPach
 

 

 

Latest profile posts

SStomcat wrote on Mark458's profile.
Mark - I think you have a CZ 404 Jeff in synthetic stock. Is this factory spec. or you switched the stock? thx
SS
migrabill wrote on nyrifleman's profile.
Thank you for responding to my post. You have a PRE 64 and it is still new in box???! I would need to see pics and a price please.
 
Top