The dry-shoe yuppy millennial generation is the next group of hunters.Like it or no they are here to stay. What did the previous generation say about your current generation. They will then be raising the next group of hunters. If we omit a large portion of the population based on the way they dress or what shoes they wear into the woods we are losing the long term battle. As far as out of towners destroying the land, there are just as many instances of families that have owned land for generations that will shoot every deer they see. We as hunters are part of the problem of limiting where people can hunt. How many people on this board have bought farms, more land, or lease land just for hunting. If you have hundreds or thousands of acres tied up to manage the heard to shoot large, mature, quality deer that in itself is taking away from previous hunting opportunities. Farmers used to hunt and let other people hunt their land. Now people will own land in other states just to hunt for a few weekends a year.
-
The forum has been upgraded to support both light and dark themes. Click here for directions.
Forest to Fork Movement.......
- Thread starter PineSapJunky
- Start date
dogghr
Well-Known Member
I’m not as anti young as many can be. Most young, including the mills can be a hard working nature loving environment saving group of people . I see screwups of all ages and I’m sure my dad shook his head watching me, and I’m sure his dad, had he ever been around, would’ve done the same thing with him. Certainly I’m lucky to live where the land is looked at as supportive of our lives. We have millions of acres of public land. I’ve got more permission of private lands to hunt than I can access. Love of hunting has changed. Even my own son who loves to hunt will only spend a few weekends doing so each year. For me, when Oct shows, you wont find me anywhere but the woods.
In some ways we are our own worst enemy. As so called QDM has taken hold, we as a general group manage in many ways for the horn, sometimes in the guise we are “improving” the structure of the herd. I’m guilty as charged. We hunt from high dollar stands or shooting houses built better than our homes. Many would have no idea how to hunt if they didn’t bait or have a food plot to hunt over. Still hunting is a lost art. Reading sign in the deep woods seldom understood. If we can’t get our atv or truck writhin sight of killed deer, many would have a coronary dragging one out a couple miles. Many would thumb their nose if a hunter chooses to shoot a buck they don’t deem worthy by age or rack size. And heaven knows we wouldn’t want to let too many hunt our land or scare all the deer away by doing a squirrel or coon hunt.
Meanwhile the industry and DNRs pushes new and improved weapons and seasons hoping to attract more hunters. The love of the hunt is not in the animal taken but the camaraderie that is associated with it. We’ve lost that attraction, and with it goes the impetus of newbies. Easy to blame those outside our thinking when in reality a look in the mirror is in order.
In some ways we are our own worst enemy. As so called QDM has taken hold, we as a general group manage in many ways for the horn, sometimes in the guise we are “improving” the structure of the herd. I’m guilty as charged. We hunt from high dollar stands or shooting houses built better than our homes. Many would have no idea how to hunt if they didn’t bait or have a food plot to hunt over. Still hunting is a lost art. Reading sign in the deep woods seldom understood. If we can’t get our atv or truck writhin sight of killed deer, many would have a coronary dragging one out a couple miles. Many would thumb their nose if a hunter chooses to shoot a buck they don’t deem worthy by age or rack size. And heaven knows we wouldn’t want to let too many hunt our land or scare all the deer away by doing a squirrel or coon hunt.
Meanwhile the industry and DNRs pushes new and improved weapons and seasons hoping to attract more hunters. The love of the hunt is not in the animal taken but the camaraderie that is associated with it. We’ve lost that attraction, and with it goes the impetus of newbies. Easy to blame those outside our thinking when in reality a look in the mirror is in order.
weekender21
Well-Known Member
I have a little different perspective on the "forest to fork" crowd. I haven't read the article you're referencing but I did recently have a co worker approach me wanting to take the plunge into hunting a few weeks ago. He's worked for me more than three years and knows I'm a hunting nut. He's been on a meat only diet over a year already; different topic altogether but this has quite the following. For me, this is an excellent opportunity to mentor an adult who has several kids.
The venison I feed my family is the 95% of the red meat we consume annually, maybe higher some years. I've always enjoyed this aspect as I assume most of you have well before the hipsters started formulating catch phrases for social media. Hunting for meat garners more support from the non hunting public which is by most estimations 95-95% of the Country. Much higher in some areas and much lower in others.
My co worker stepped away from our conversation, drove to the local archery store and spent $2500 on brand new archery equipment that I recommended. He's a middle class guy with a stable steady income, has the desire to hunt, and isn't approaching the sport from a trophy hunting perspective.The conservation mentorship and history on "why we hunt" lessons is up to us. He's not the first adult recruit I've had the opportunity to welcome into the sport we love and God willing he won't be the last.
The average adult hunter recruit is likely smarter than we give him or her credit for. In my personal experiences, the 20 and 30 somethings are eager to learn everything from what broadhead should I use to the science and future of the species we pursue. All good in my opinion.
The venison I feed my family is the 95% of the red meat we consume annually, maybe higher some years. I've always enjoyed this aspect as I assume most of you have well before the hipsters started formulating catch phrases for social media. Hunting for meat garners more support from the non hunting public which is by most estimations 95-95% of the Country. Much higher in some areas and much lower in others.
My co worker stepped away from our conversation, drove to the local archery store and spent $2500 on brand new archery equipment that I recommended. He's a middle class guy with a stable steady income, has the desire to hunt, and isn't approaching the sport from a trophy hunting perspective.The conservation mentorship and history on "why we hunt" lessons is up to us. He's not the first adult recruit I've had the opportunity to welcome into the sport we love and God willing he won't be the last.
The average adult hunter recruit is likely smarter than we give him or her credit for. In my personal experiences, the 20 and 30 somethings are eager to learn everything from what broadhead should I use to the science and future of the species we pursue. All good in my opinion.
Last edited:
MarkDarvin
Well-Known Member
Be glad for that. Where I hunt in MN, there is a direct correlation between poor quality hunting and where the public lands are located. When you take away the owner/guarding, public land becomes nothing more than a bank vault or liquor store that has been left unlocked, unattended, and not maintained. Public land probably works much better where it is very difficult and expensive to get to, of course those two things make it counterproductive to even being public land.
Privatization will save deer hunting for those willing to pony up the cash. Problem is, it also has to win out over farming, development, and public land acquisition. As we speak, multiple states are wiping deer off the landscape with sharp shooters and willing useful idiots under the charade of trying to stop CWD. Private land may be the only places the deer can survive while we let this hoax run its course until it gets exposed as a political scandal.
weekender21
Well-Known Member
Something to ponder regarding hunter numbers. Even IF the percentage of Americans that purchase a hunting license remained stable at 4%-5%, your local woods will still be more crowded. Just look at the population increase annually, that’s a pretty steep chart. Pretty ugly future when you add habitat loss due to various factors.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
I predict the urban yuppie hipster organic lifestyle wannabe hunter movement won't last because those type of people tend to gravitate towards vegetarian treehugger animal rights activism. But if I'm wrong it's a good thing because then at least they're with us instead of PETA.
Mennoniteman
Well-Known Member
Buy land. Its impossible to predict the future, but with population increases land values will have to increase drastically to keep up with the needs of the 11 billion people projected by 2100
weekender21
Well-Known Member
Yeah, we checked that box with kids and grandkids in mind. Hopefully they will have hunting rights on their land in 50-75 years.
weekender21
Well-Known Member
I'm good with the majority of them simply approving of hunting, we need the masses to support the idea even if they don't partake. For many, hunting only seems fun until they realize it isn't easy.
rlb165
Member
On my state’s hunting forum, I sometimes see the opinion that QDM and antlers are ruining the sport. Many residents have been priced out of the market by non-residents with more disposable income to spend on leasing hunting land.
weekender21
Well-Known Member
I’d love to see more hunters managing for even aged class but I’d MUCH rather see hunters shooting spikes then deciding to hang it up all together. At the end of the day we’re better off with more people in the woods and off their iPhones!
As far as being priced out the market...that’s just inevitable in all rural settings. Those raised in rural areas that decide to stay for lower paying jobs will not be able to compete with someone moving in from areas of higher income. Certainly possible to afford land but your income definitely determines what you’ll have to give up to make it happen.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
PineSapJunky
Well-Known Member
Let me clarify. In my area there is no shortage of hunting land. 85% of the land in my area is privately owned. We have more hunters now than ever before so the argument " I don't have anywhere to hunt is void". What has happened the larger land owners who try to manage their property for YES larger bucks with higher but healthier deer populations are struggling to justify their existence. The way I see it we have 2 choices. Either give up and let the local lead slingers win or keep procuring more land as it becomes available. We are very conservative on the deer we take off of the place. We are still way below carrying capacity for the land. Case in point. Wild quail were once in abundance in our area. But due to hay cutting practices and the lack of proper forest management they have all but disappeared. 8 years ago I set out on a mission to create a wild quail haven on my property. We are seeing the benefits and now have a couple good size covy calling my place home. Being proud of what I have accomplished I share the good news in hopes others will get on board and do the same. Now all I get is people wanting to quail hunt my place. They don't care what it took or takes to make quail habitat. They just want to take. They don't give back. They just take. This is what I am afraid of if we continue to promote deer hunting from a meat hunters stand point. People just killing without giving back. No population can survive if that's the mindset. You can argue that more licenses and fees help with conservation etc. But I have yet to see a government entity management public funds appropriately. So I'm not sold on that.
weekender21
Well-Known Member
Several great points you made. It’s definitely frustrating when a guy that owns 2 acres kills his limit and invites all of his family and friends to do the same on that size property. Obviously he’s not feeding or providing cover for the number of deer being killed. That’s an extreme example but I think it helps illustrate your point. Different regulations in each state further complicate the discussion.
In most cases conversation and education goes a long way. It’s my goal to gradually reach some sort of common ground agreement with neighbors but it’s likely impossible we’ll agree on everything.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
MarkDarvin
Well-Known Member
The point of meat as a primary objective of hunting is detrimental to the land. It requires one to ensure they get more than they give to meet their objective.
PineSapJunky
Well-Known Member
Weedender21: Thank you for putting my diatribe into a simple explanation. You are spot on. I have a core group of adjacent landowners who try to do what's best for the wildlife. But like you said it's the small landowners that open their place up for anyone they know that hurts us more than anything. Deer season to them is throw a bag of corn out on the group on Thursday if they're going to hunt the weekend.
As I am reading this I am sitting in an 80 acre clear cut that we had logged this fall leaving a few mast producing trees along with everything along the SMZ. People like us who frequent this forum will know what I am talking about. I have already mapped out places for new plots. And for those that are thinking I'm part of the problem for cutting timber. It was a 40 year old pine plantation. I am turning back out into the native oak savanna with native grasses that will be burned on rotation. This property will serve nothing but the wildlife for at least my generation. Hopefully my kids will inherit my passion for wildlife and this 83 acres will benefit the wildlife for generations to come
Last edited:
weekender21
Well-Known Member
Can you explain that further? Not sure I follow that line of thinking. If someone owns 400 acres and shoots 6 does/year for the freezer I don’t see how they are getting more than giving. Even if they’re not deliberately doing anything for their deer. In a lot areas they’d barley be maintaining. Other areas they could be shooting too many.
Deer population density varies greatly and some areas all but require recreational meat hunting to keep populations at a sustainable level. Obviously examples to the contrary are easily cited, just don’t think your statement is always accurate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Chipdasqrrl
Active Member
Lots of good points being made. I think what we have here are two groups of people with two different types of relationships with deer.
First, you have the mutualistic relationship, which is what the majority of us on this forum have. Us humans and deer have a relationship where both species benefit from each other, just like nitrogen fixing bacteria and legumes benefit each other. We provide food, cover and water for the deer, and they provide us with meat and enjoyment.
On the other hand, you have the predator-prey relationship. This is where people go out into the woods and harvest deer and provide nothing in return (for the most part, anyway). Yes, individual deer benefit because they don’t have as much competition, but deer won’t benefit as a species.
Personally, it doesn’t really bother me when people harvest deer and give nothing in return. That’s just part of nature
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
First, you have the mutualistic relationship, which is what the majority of us on this forum have. Us humans and deer have a relationship where both species benefit from each other, just like nitrogen fixing bacteria and legumes benefit each other. We provide food, cover and water for the deer, and they provide us with meat and enjoyment.
On the other hand, you have the predator-prey relationship. This is where people go out into the woods and harvest deer and provide nothing in return (for the most part, anyway). Yes, individual deer benefit because they don’t have as much competition, but deer won’t benefit as a species.
Personally, it doesn’t really bother me when people harvest deer and give nothing in return. That’s just part of nature
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
Chipdasqrrl
Active Member
And have you looked into cost sharing programs that your government might offer? I think you would have a great chance of receiving a grant for an oak savanna
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
Sent from my iPhone using Deer Hunter Forum
Anytime someone is interested in hunting it is an opportunity for our "sport" and it is in no way a bad thing. People hunt for different reasons, filling your freezer is definitely one of them for many and always has been where I am from. Not everyone cares about habitat/herd management or most of the stuff we discuss here and that is ok too, there is plenty of room for all of us. This farm to table or forest to fork movement is gaining popularity but who knows how long it will last. The more people who understand where the food on their table actually comes from the better IMO, a frightening number of people think it magically comes from the grocery store.
PineSapJunky
Well-Known Member
The last person I want on my place is our government. The "money" I would receive comes from you, me and any other working individual. Like everything else we've ever earned we have scratched, saved and sacrificed. This will be no different. I live my life with no strings attached.
"Either you will control the government or the government will control you"~ Ronald Reagan
