Case Against R3

[FI460]

I guess from my perspective, I don’t think there’s as much overlap in the friends and family department as some of you do. Maybe in Bismarck or Billings. Doubtful in LA or New Orleans. And it isn’t so simple to just “Google it and figure it out” when you are 10 or 12 years old, live with a single mom and don’t have a computer at home. Granted, the emphasis of most of what I work with in getting people outdoors is youth-oriented so my view is skewed that direction.

I kind of view it similar to the Women in STEM programs. Can they find information organically? Yes. Does it help to present the information to people who didn't think they were interested? Also yes.

Sometimes a little bit of exposure sparks a big interest in a person.

 

[Tiredofthebickering]

I guess from my perspective, I don’t think there’s as much overlap in the friends and family department as some of you do. Maybe in Bismarck or Billings. Doubtful in LA or New Orleans. And it isn’t so simple to just “Google it and figure it out” when you are 10 or 12 years old, live with a single mom and don’t have a computer at home. Granted, the emphasis of most of what I work with in getting people outdoors is youth-oriented so my view is skewed that direction.

Or a phone with internet, or a friend with a computer, or a library at school with a computer, or a friend with a phone with internet, or . . .

I'm not trying to be rude, but what do you propose in that specific circumstance? How is R3 reaching that person?

 

[Hunting Wife]

I'm not trying to be rude, but what do you propose in that specific circumstance? How is R3 reaching that person?

Well, to bring us full circle, exactly the kinds of programs the HOC article was getting at.

Or a phone with internet, or a friend with a computer, or a library at school with a computer, or a friend with a phone with internet, or . . .

Yes, kids with limited resources should just man up and solve their own problems. Not to be rude, but this seems pretty callous when we’re talking about kids.

Another point of discussion. Are we sure that R3 will succeed in significantly diversifying recruitment over the friends and family model? I feel that assumption is also being made by some folks, but I'm not so sure that via R3, industry and non profits are going to succeed where the old model failed.

Recruitment, retainment, and reactivation. Two of the 3 focus topics, retainment and reactivation, have a target audience right now that I think we can all agree is majority white and male. Could I not then argue that since two of the 3 Rs are not likely to be big diversifiers, the R3 model is also flawed in regards to adding diversity?

For the record, I'm not against either model over the other. I just think maybe we need to take a step back and really dissect this thing, especially in regards to any assumptions that may be being made.

R3 wasn’t initially designed to increase diversity per se, just to increase hunters. But some organizations have seen the recruitment part ad being an opportunity for expanding diversity.

I think I’m done with this one.

 

[Tiredofthebickering]

Well, to bring us full circle, exactly the kinds of programs the HOC article was getting at.



Yes, kids with limited resources should just man up and solve their own problems. Not to be rude, but this seems pretty callous when we’re talking about kids.


R3 wasn’t initially designed to increase diversity per se, just to increase hunters. But some organizations have seen the recruitment part ad being an opportunity for expanding diversity.

I think I’m done with this one.

I think you misunderstood me here. That's not at all what I meant. I was simply pointing out that there are multiple ways to access online content, particularly if one is interested in finding that particular content.

Obviously you pointed out a very specific circumstance. And to be fair, I don't think you chose an average representation of someone getting interested in hunting, instead opting for someone with the most barriers to entry.

How does this kid hear about HOC events in the first place? How does the cash strapped mom get him/her there? Anyone without intent access, in any way, is going to have significant struggles in life in s variety of ways. They are probably at or below the poverty line already. Hunting/fishing/outdoors recreation is probably on the low end of the priority scale for that person.

My initial comments were more about the availability of resources and the fact that barriers to entry are probably as low as they've ever been on a broad, all inclusive basis. In theory, as our friend pools grow larger and more diverse, even if the overall percentage of hunters likely to bring a friend stays relatively stable, the friends and family approach will become more effective by nature of the numbers.

I'm probably not doing a great job explaining myself, and for that I apologize. I'm not trying to stir problems, just providing my perspective.

 

[longbow51]

How does this kid hear about HOC events in the first place? How does the cash strapped mom get him/her there? Anyone without intent access, in any way, is going to have significant struggles in life in s variety of ways. They are probably at or below the poverty line already. Hunting/fishing/outdoors recreation is probably on the low end of the priority scale for that person.

I'm probably not doing a great job explaining myself, and for that I apologize. I'm not trying to stir problems, just providing my perspective.

I think you explained yourself quite well. With ammo at $60/box (if you can find any) it's unrealistic to think this kid, white or black, is going hunting if he or she lives in a city. If rural, and inherits a firearm, more likely. I remember buying 2 12 gauge #2s rather than a whole box in case I ran across a goose while duck hunting, something I'll bet few here have ever thought about. Probably not even possible, but was then in small town hardware stores.

We likely have a lot of pretty well off people telling poor people what it's like to be poor.

One thing that I'll admit disturbs me about the racial aspect of this thread is that my generation fought for integration, and thought we were on our way to achieving it. More scholarship opportunities for blacks and Hispanics, affirmative action, etc.. Our dorms were pretty representative of the proportionality of races in America plus several Middle Eastern guys, mostly petroleum engineering and chemistry majors.

Now it seems in many of the "elite" schools, we have black-only dorms, graduations, student centers, and, now hunting clubs.

That's OK, a somewhat free country I guess, but it somehow saddens me, as I feel we are being somewhat recidivist. As I have only lived one place for almost 4 decades I can only speak for here, but all would be welcome at DU, where I was for years a sponsor, Pheasants Forever, or RMEF. Hate to use a covid phrase, but we are all in this together, and the sooner we recognize it the better.

 

[np307]

I guess from my perspective, I don’t think there’s as much overlap in the friends and family department as some of you do. Maybe in Bismarck or Billings. Doubtful in LA or New Orleans.

Could you elaborate on this a little bit? Hopefully I misunderstood the "overlap" you're talking about. Because I fail to see how the ultra-white plains/Intermountain West would be assumed more successful at recruiting PoC than the Southeast unless we're still assuming that the SE is the only racist part of the country.

 

[OverlordBear]

Hunting is divided by socio economic status well before it is divided by race. Your family’s wealth and proximity to public land is more of a factor whether you do things in the outdoors rather than race.

 

[Shangobango]

I am pitifully late for the discussion due to the fact that I have been scouting or hunting for public land turkeys with almost every free moment I can muster over the last 10 days.

The fact that I have been very much unsuccessfully hunting public land turkeys may color the tone of my comments here, because I am pretty frustrated about the status of our public land turkey population and the unwillingness of anyone to do anything about it.

I think @BuzzH hit the nail squarely on the head earlier in the thread. R3 should have been R4, with the extra R representing resources. Resources including access to game.

I am going to be straight forward and say that the more I get involved and study the issues before hunters, the less hope I have for the future of hunting.

If we are going to talk about barriers to entry and retention we need to talk about license prices, ammo availability and price, access to decent quality hunting without having to pay through the nose for a lease, outfitter, landowner license, etc. and so on.

The future is bleak for regular Joe and Jane hunter. That means it is also bleak for the species they pursue and the places they pursue them on.

This bubble of interest will bust. I know many say it won’t, but I disagree. You are only going to hold the interest of people that have marginal opportunities for so long and we are well down the road to marginal opportunities in many places.

If Louisiana’s turkey tags weren’t included in the price of a Big Game License there is no way I would buy them next season. All the different pieces of public ground that I have been hunting for 30 years have no business even having an open turkey season. I will be traveling elsewhere to chase turkeys until something is done. Too many people after too few birds. I have emailed, called, gave my input until I am blue in the face. Department will not acknowledge the issue. The point in all that is that it has become a marginal opportunity. I am a diehard turkey hunter of 30 years on these places and I am bailing. Wonder how long the new hunter trying his hand for the first time is going to last?

What is sad is the numbers show that the harvest rate for deer has also dropped by 300% on some of these places over the last several years. Nothing from LDWF. Gotta sell them licenses ya know.

 

[TOGIE]

Hunting is divided by socio economic status well before it is divided by race. Your family’s wealth and proximity to public land is more of a factor whether you do things in the outdoors rather than race.

not as an argument, but as something to consider in the discussion:

is not wealth and proximity to public land a potential indicator of race in the united states?

 

[OverlordBear]

not as an argument, but as something to consider in the

Hunting will be for the rich only by the end of my life, there are just too many people who have a need and desire and the supply of the resource is not great enough to meet that demand. The political will to do something about it would not come from the feds unless we got another Teddy Roosevelt as president. By the end of this then you will only be able to hunt if you are friends with the “Kings” and they grant you permission to hunt the kings stag.

Critical Race theory is a mechanism of the left, if it was not for our founding fathers we would all still be under the iron rule of monarchs all over the world. All men were created equally in the image of God. This is how people should be viewed, I don’t care what race anyone is, I care about the character of a man’s heart.

 

[EJDXT20]

To start, I do not have as much knowledge on this issue as others on here, so I am mainly writing this as a means to put down my thoughts. I read the MeatEater article when it came out and have been trying to digest it ever since. I have not read all of the arguments for and against, but I have read several. I do think it was good that Steve came back and expanded on both Matt's point of view and his, although we all know he had to do it from a business perspective. R3 is similar to a lot of movements, it's important and it sounds great when you describe it, but no matter how you slice it, it can and will have unintended outcomes. That is why it is so important for all hunters to be informed on what is going on. I myself still need to do more research and determine how it will affect me and my family, and other hunters, wildlife, public lands etc. We must remember though, you will never be able to satisfy everyone. Just like voting, you may identify as a Republican or Democrat, but odds are you don't 100% agree with every policy or viewpoint on either side. I don't think you can necessarily say it is a bad thing to advocate for hunter recruitment. It is almost a catch 22. We need hunters to spend money, so that those dollars can eventually find their way back to conserving our lands and our wildlife. But when the public lands we hunt get too crowded, or when we are negatively affected, then we find ourselves questioning if we really need to recruit more hunters. And if hunter numbers do actually start to decline, then so do resources, and so does the quality and quantity of lands available to us to do what we love. The only way we will ever be able to continue hunting is through some sort of hunter recruitment. Yes, there will always be annoying crowds in public lands, but maybe it’s a necessary evil.

I don’t think it will always stay that way though. There will always be the ones that get in it for a season or two, but then life happens. Or, maybe it’s just too hard. There is a reason trophy class animals are hard to find. So you have an initial surge, but then you inevitably lose hunters and lose funds that go towards conservation. Then there will always be the natural cycle of life and death. As we lose hunters, we must replenish hunters. If we do nothing, what Randy mentioned about losing precious habitat to development is only going to get worse. Without advocates to defend our lands, their as good as gone, which could put even more pressure on the already crowded public opportunities.

One part of the article that did worry me was where Matt states, “Last year, R3 advocates successfully lobbied congress to modify the Pittman-Robertson Act so that hunter-generated excise taxes once earmarked for conservation and access can now be reallocated to hunter recruitment.” We should understand exactly what that means. Where was, and now where is that money going? Because if it is only being used to pay salaries, or pay for entries into exhibitions, (just as an example), then IMO it’s being wasted. What would make more sense to me is if it was being put towards hunter recruitment, through a program, such as what Randy was talking about, by improving lands and habitats that need improvement to reduce the toll on resources elsewhere, or hunter densities. Even if that were to happen, you would not see an immediate result.

I don’t think we can solely rely on letting our friends and family do the recruitment. What happens when an individual doesn’t have family or friends to recruit them? This is the case especially with minorities. How do you know what you are missing if you have never experienced something? Someone of that background will likely be ok with developing a new subdivision or shopping center. Why would they care about public hunting opportunities? Why would they care about conservation? So maybe it shouldn't just be hunter recruitment, but should be hunter recruitment through education. Because you first have to know about something to care about it. While a real issue, we must also be careful not to use that as an excuse to achieve personal agendas, or let others achieve their personal agendas. As with any important issue, there will be a fine line between doing what is right and what could potentially be wrong, and unfortunately, we will likely be forced to choose a side. Sometimes the worst things have happened with the best intentions. But if we can take the time to educate ourselves as well as others, and be involved as much as possible, then just maybe it will all work out. So as a start on my part, I will do more research to educate myself to have more of an informed opinion and take action accordingly.

 

[TOGIE]

Hunting will be for the rich only by the end of my life, there are just too many people who have a need and desire and the supply of the resource is not great enough to meet that demand. The political will to do something about it would not come from the feds unless we got another Teddy Roosevelt as president. By the end of this then you will only be able to hunt if you are friends with the “Kings” and they grant you permission to hunt the kings stag.

Critical Race theory is a mechanism of the left, if it was not for our founding fathers we would all still be under the iron rule of monarchs all over the world. All men were created equally in the image of God. This is how people should be viewed, I don’t care what race anyone is, I care about the character of a man’s heart.

well, that's a lot to unpack...

i guess if throwing in the towel is part of the solution you're off to a great start

 

[Shangobango]

Could you elaborate on this a little bit? Hopefully I misunderstood the "overlap" you're talking about. Because I fail to see how the ultra-white plains/Intermountain West would be assumed more successful at recruiting PoC than the Southeast unless we're still assuming that the SE is the only racist part of the country.

Thank you. I would imagine that there are way more persons of color that hunt and fish down here than there are in Bismark or Bozeman. I would also wager that the average white person down here has many more friends, family, and aquaintences that are minorities than the average white person in Bizmark or Bozeman.

The stereotypes drive me nuts.

 

[1_pointer]

Provincialism is alive and well...

The R3 I'm most concerned about are the two boys that I am raising...

My best friend I got into hunting. He's from a non-hunting family. He's become one of the most successful deer hunters in our town. Both his two boys, his brother, and nephew are all avid deer hunters now. That said, the lot of them have no idea or spend a minute of thought on the issues surrounding hunting outside of our area or state. They have even less knowledge, concern, or interest in issues involving federal public lands, especially those hundreds of miles from home.

I feel like this is the "norm" for the majority of hunters in this country. Got into hunting due to family and/or friends. Spend little time or thought on things outside of their home sphere.

 

[Shangobango]

MeatEater Rebuttal

“Don’t be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn't do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn't know what you know today.” - El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz (Malcolm X) If you mention the name, “MeatEater,” to a hunter, they’ll know exactly who you’re talking about...

www.huntersofcolor.com

I read this yesterday, pretty fair rebuke IMHO.

I lost interest halfway through.

 

[AvidIndoorsman]

I lost interest halfway through.

 

[Shangobango]

That’s hilarious, really. I figured I would be questioned as to why, but hey, whatever.

I guess some of us just aren’t as woke as others. Or maybe the victimhood and race cards are losing their luster due to being played over and over and over and over for every single issue under the sun.

Like the article you quoted said, I don’t judge people based on their color which means I am color blind and being color blind is a problem.

 

[Doublecluck]

Very interesting, lots of thoughtful responses. I grew up in what most here would consider the city. While I was introduced to the outdoors by my grandfather and uncle hunting was something I waded in to more on my own. The resources were very limited, low success and acceptance of the practice was not exactly great in public schools or social circles. As a early adult sitting in the sweat lines of the CA refuge system, walking the hills of Orange, San Bernardino, Placer, Ventura counties, shooting dove in the fields around Blythe, sitting shoulder to shoulder on the rails of a charter boat out of Long Beach, I developed friendships with a more diverse group of outdoorspeople than probably someone in Wyoming or Montana. That said I am aware of the statistics and history of the subject. In that regard I think however there is hope in the matter based on my life experience. As the demographics of the US changes so does the culture and values. It’s important to look at how the demographics are changing and by whom. The barriers (social or geographic) that make one group less likely to participate in outdoor activities may/likely are to be different from one demographic to another. What it takes to get Black inner city youth from Baltimore to participate in the outdoors may be totally different from what it takes to get a first generation Texan from El Salvador to participate. It’s also I think important to understand that as the demographics shift, culturally some of those demographics may or may not value “our” idea of conservation with as much significance as we might hope. I would venture to say the majority of the fastest growing demographics (say Hispanic and asian) in America are far more interested in recognizing the American dream of economic prosperity, freedom, etc. rather than utilizing a piece of blm in the breaks for a lope. If you ask most, public lands = Yosemite, Yellowstone, etc. that little piece of blm you shot your antelope on most don’t even know exist or realize they may have a interest in it.

Public education is doing a great job of indoctrinating our children of all of the evils of the white man in the history of this country. It can be said the white man destroyed this land, this water, and these animals. But I think it can also be said the white man has saved and restored much of what was lost, and protected much more by recognizing their mistakes. By and large the North American model of conservation, the partnerships between, state, local, federal, private and tribal interests are a success story for animals and people on this land. Certainly in the context of the world and the worlds people utilizing a resource on the landscape sustainably. But somehow, somewhere along the line we have let our successes be hijacked by popular culture and the agendas of the antis. If we are to have a future of hunting in America we need to have outreach and education that reaches not only the traditional demographics in rural communities but also those in the populated cities that are driving policy thru population.

If the answer to saving the future of hunting and public land hunting for that matter is R3, than I don’t see it any other way, who knows the day may come when you get one Wyoming antelope tag every 5 years. It’s just not mathematically possible to R3 the number of people necessary to be politically significant and not slice up the pie of the resource in to smaller slices. Being supportive, inclusive, accepting and inviting of others sometimes means We have to give up some of what we traditionally have had and share the resource. So what you used to be able to buy a tag over the counter, your not entitled to the animals any more than the next person.

 

[longbow51]

Thank you. I would imagine that there are way more persons of color that hunt and fish down here than there are in Bismark or Bozeman. I would also wager that the average white person down here has many more friends, family, and aquaintences that are minorities than the average white person in Bizmark or Bozeman.

The stereotypes drive me nuts.

Division doesn't work without stereotypes, and division is the name of the game.

 

[Hunting Wife]

Could you elaborate on this a little bit? Hopefully I misunderstood the "overlap" you're talking about. Because I fail to see how the ultra-white plains/Intermountain West would be assumed more successful at recruiting PoC than the Southeast unless we're still assuming that the SE is the only racist part of the country.

Thank you. I would imagine that there are way more persons of color that hunt and fish down here than there are in Bismark or Bozeman. I would also wager that the average white person down here has many more friends, family, and aquaintences that are minorities than the average white person in Bizmark or Bozeman.

The stereotypes drive me nuts.

Not even remotely what I was saying. Lesson learned...won’t participate in these threads again.

Was simply pointing out that I suspect the success of friends and family model is highly situational no matter who you are. People in big towns with ample opportunity nearby likely have more hunters in their friends and family group than people living in large urban centers. Substitute whatever town vs urban you want.