Three essays that every bowhunter should read, memorize and teach...
You pay the bills and don't know it!
Hunters contribute over $500 million a year from hunting licenses and
excise taxes on hunting equipment. All of that money goes to state
wildlife agencies to run their programs. In most states these two items
pay for over 75% of the wildlife agencies budget. In some states it pays
for everything.
The fact that you pay the bills for wildlife management is one of the great
leverages we have to keep hunting alive. The antis can rage on and on, but
since you pay for most or all wildlife management, even some of non-game
management, purchase habitat that everyone including antihunters can use,
pay for hunter education, etc., etc., it's hard to say, "we need to stop
hunting." Right?
Well, that's right, as long as the public and politicians know that we pay
for wildlife management. But they don't. And you don't either. What do
you mean, we don't know that? Recent studies show that most hunters do not
know that hunting license money and an 11% federal excise tax on hunting
equipment pays to run your state wildlife agency.
Studies show that in most states, the majority of the public and the
majority of hunters think that the state wildlife agency and what they do
is paid for from general tax revenues. Yes, read that again. The majority
of hunters think that all tax payers pay for wildlife management.
It gets a lot worse. Less than 5% of the general public knows that there
is an 11% excise tax on hunting equipment that helps pay the bills.....in
fact it pays for way over half of most state wildlife bills. In my state
of West Virginia, only 2 % of the general public knows that. But, get
this. Only 5% of the hunters in West Virginia know anything about Pittman
Robertson excise taxes. They don't know that these excise taxes, that they
pay when they buy equipment, pay the bills.
Before you get comfortable, know that it really isn't different in your
state. It is rare for 10% of hunters in any state to know anything about
this 11% tax that pays wildlife bills.
Where are you going with this Dave? It's simple. How can we expect non
hunters to know that hunting pays for wildlife management, keeps wildlife
populations healthy, pays for law enforcement, pays for hunter education,
pays for wildlife managers to do their thing, pays biologists to collect
research data, etc., etc., if we hunters don't know that? People are
trying to stop hunting, but they might listen to you if they knew that
without hunting there would be almost nothing left of your state wildlife
agency.
Maybe that's a bit of an over statement, but really not much. Stop
hunting, stop fishing, and you would have to come up with $1.2 billion a
year from general tax payers to raise the money hunters and fishermen raise
by purchasing licenses and equipment. Period. End of argument.
Be polite, but in letters to the editor, in discussions with your
neighbors, whenever someone criticizes hunting, politely let them know
these facts. It just might make the difference. Oh yes....even better,
let your hunting buddies know who pays the bills. Most do not
know. Recent studies show that they do not know. Scary.
Is Hunting Safe?
Every time someone proposes an urban bowhunt, the antis dredge up this myth
that hunting isn't safe. Maybe the non-hunting public buys into that
argument because much of hunting involves guns, and we all know how
dangerous guns are. Not.
And new studies show that when kids of non-hunting parents want to go
hunting (and by the way there are more and more kids who fit this
category), the number one concern parents have about hunting is safety.
When those letters to the editor hit your local papers about how hunting
isn't safe, you need to respond with facts and figures. Thus, I've decided
to put some relatively recent facts on outdoor sports injuries, published
in a new document ("Families Afield") put out by the National Wild Turkey
Federation, the U. S. Sportsmen's Alliance, and the National Shooting
Sports Foundation that talks about removing hunting regulation barriers at
the state level so that more kids can hunt.
These hunting data are for all hunting. When we look at the injuries per
100 participants, we find that football is listed as the # 1 most dangerous
outdoor sport, with 18.8 injuries per 100 participants. Of every 100
people playing football, 19 get hurt. Ice hockey is second with 15.9
injuries per 100 participants. Boxing is next (12.7), then soccer (9.3),
cheerleading (9.0), basketball (7.6), and baseball (5.8). Those are the
top ten for injuries. Touch football is # 14 at 4.4, Tennis is # 21 with
2.5, aerobics is # 25 with 1.7. Where is the dangerous sport of hunting?
Hunting is # 29. Of all outdoor sports, when it comes to injuries per 100
participants, hunting is # 29 with 1.3 injuries per 100
participants. "Families Afield " also looked at firearm hunting accidents
and found that .005 % of all 14.8 million hunters were involved in
accidents. Also, .0005 percent of all 14.8 million hunters were involved
in fatal accidents. What about kids and these firearm hunting accidents?
Only .0001% of all 14.8 million hunters who were in accidents involved
supervised youth hunters. And only .00002% of all 14.8 million hunters who
were involved in fatal accidents were supervised youth hunters. We need to
get this information out whenever the animal rights folks come to hammer us
in the press on the safety of hunting.
So, bottom line is that parents allow their children to participate in
football, soccer, cheer leading, aerobics, volleyball, tennis, basketball,
etc., and all have a higher injury rate than hunting. Many have a higher
fatality rate than hunting. Hunting is very safe, and it gets safer every
year.
Recruiting Hunters
A study came out the other day that was very alarming relative to the
future of hunting. They used a "hunter replacement ratio" that compared
the number of old hunters to the number of hunters 6-15 years of age. This
ratio shows the long term trend for hunter recruitment and only seven
states are above 1.0, which means that as old hunters die or leave they are
replaced by an equal number of younger hunters coming into the sport.
That's fine for those seven states, but for the nation as a whole, the
hunter replacement ratio is 0.69. That means that for every 100 hunters
lost, we replace them with only 69. Over the years, that means eventual
extinction.
Last March I wrote about the National Archery in the Schools Program,
supported a great deal by the Archery Trade Association, wherein kids from
grades 4-12 learn to shoot bows in the public schools. A lot has happened
since last year, and since this is the greatest hunter recruitment tool we
have, and since we now know that unless we do something to bring in new
hunters, hunting will dwindle every year, I thought I'd revisit the topic.
Here is why the National Archery in the Schools Program, now running in 25
states with 16 more states starting right now, can literally save the
future of hunting. We know from personal experience that kids love to
shoot bows. The Archery Trade Association sees the value of getting kids
shooting bows, so they provided $225,000 in matching grants for 2004-2005
to jump start this program in 15 states. Mathews, Inc. also kicked in
$100,000 as did the National Wild Turkey Federation.
The Archery Trade Association also funded a study in Kentucky to assess how
the program was working. The results were extremely
interesting. Ninety-three percent of students taking the course liked it,
in fact 92% though it was exciting. Now tell me the last time you heard of
92% of public school students "excited" about any class.
In addition, 54% thought that shooting a bow was easy, 53% felt better
about themselves after learning to shoot a bow, 30% looked for a store to
buy archery equipment, 21% actually bought archery equipment, 77% said they
would join an after school archery club if there was one, AND 22% tried to
find out information on bowhunting.
Aha!!!! Let's do the math. We already know that if 30 states have the
same success with their public school archery program as Kentucky has had,
there will be 3 million kids a year taking archery in the
schools. Twenty-two percent of 3 million kids (660,000 per year) will be
looking for information on bowhunting.
If that link is made, and if other programs are generated to get those kids
that show an interest in bowhunting into the woods and into tree stands,
the old "hunter replacement ratio" just might take a giant leap
upwards. The Archery Trade Association sees the need here and is working
to create those links for kids who, after learning to shoot bows in the
public schools, want to go bowhunting.
This is huge. I know, there are those out there who distrust the archery
industry for various reasons, some justified, most not justified. But the
fact is that hunter numbers are on a downward spiral. If you are one of
those guys who says, "so what, that just gives me more places to hunt where
I won't see anyone in the woods," then you just don't get it. As hunter
numbers drop, license monies and federal excise taxes drop. As licenses
and taxes decrease, funding to state wildlife agencies decrease. As
funding for agencies decreases, programs and staff are reduced. As
programs and staff are reduced, wildlife suffers.
Obviously, the archery industry stands to benefit when more kids shoot
bows. They also benefit when there are more bowhunters. But as hunter
numbers dwindle, as they are, based on the declining number of kids 6-15
who are coming into hunting, then the future of hunting is also very
questionable. But the National Archery in the Schools Program appears to
be making huge strides, the kind that just might save the future of hunting.
