SAJ-99
Well-known member
Just realized I was looking at the wrong chart. Agree. Not much of a bump in overall. Jump from 2010 to 2011 is quite large. Can't even make up a reason for that.
National hunting license trend
- Thread starter Irrelevant
- Start date
Potsie
Well-known member
Not all units are “unlimited” for residents. There’s quotas for us too… doesn’t mean it’s not OTC, there’s just only so many OTC tags to be purchased.
If NR tags aren’t OTC, and are basically unobtanium since switching to the new online system, how come many of us resident’s can still buy a second elk tag as a NR? There’s opportunity still there, over the counter.
seeth07
Well-known member
I guess its just all point of view and no sense in arguing about it anymore.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
I know this comment will result in me being burned in effigy on HT, but when a public resource is limited and in high demand I do not like a system that allows a few to consistently pull 5+ tags while others are lucky to get 1.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
With regard to this topic and this dataset it is otc. You don't have to buy a license just for the opportunity to get a tag. If you logged in this year, and were lucky enough that your preferred elk tag was available then you buy a license and the tag, if not (you were like me) and didn't buy either.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Maybe. Many thousands like 20k? ok 7x that and you get... 140k. Less than 1% of the national total.
That graph and those trends are definitely not exact for all the reasons that people here have stated, but it doesn't have to be exact for it to still provide a valid summary of our national trends.
seeth07
Well-known member
It's likely over a million though which would be a significant amount to skew the data. Like I said, CO alone just for elk only was over 100k (with fairly high confidence those people also got a home state license).
If we did a poll on this website, I'd bet that like 90 percent of us bought more than their home state license last year.
Irrelevant
Well-known member
Over a million out of 15 million? you mean like 6%? Again, not significant. But I'm done. You're clearly the smartest guy in the room.
seeth07
Well-known member
Actually 6.67%
In pretty much any data set, if your willing to accept that level of inaccuracy you aren't going to have a very credible source of data. Especially since we are talking about just one inaccurate variable. There are more than that. There are lifetime license holders. There are combination licenses that may or may not be counted. There are differences in state calendar years for counting. With each of these, the data set confidence interval changes. It would be interesting to see if the USFWS actually has a confidence interval on their data. I don't see one published.
np307
Well-known member
I feel like this is one of those catch-22 issues.
Its a legitimate point that hunters are decreasing as a percentage of the population and that may result in difficulties in hunting advocacy in the future.
Its also a legitimate point that the bare number of hunters is increasing and the "carrying capacity" of hunters has been/will be reached in a lot of places. Especially as land continues to get developed.
As with most everything hunting related, I dont really see any simple answers.
Its a legitimate point that hunters are decreasing as a percentage of the population and that may result in difficulties in hunting advocacy in the future.
Its also a legitimate point that the bare number of hunters is increasing and the "carrying capacity" of hunters has been/will be reached in a lot of places. Especially as land continues to get developed.
As with most everything hunting related, I dont really see any simple answers.
Actually lots of interesting data in that link in OP
National license trend is interesting
Relative number of total licenses sold per state is interesting....without looking, can you guess states #1 and #2 in total licenses sold in 2021? Answer might surprise...
Total license revenues per state is interesting, as is the source of those revenues per state (resident vs nonresident)
I've read before that the vast majority of hunting licenses in the US are for white-tailed deer, the data seem to support that is probably very much true.
National license trend is interesting
Relative number of total licenses sold per state is interesting....without looking, can you guess states #1 and #2 in total licenses sold in 2021? Answer might surprise...
Total license revenues per state is interesting, as is the source of those revenues per state (resident vs nonresident)
I've read before that the vast majority of hunting licenses in the US are for white-tailed deer, the data seem to support that is probably very much true.
seeth07
Well-known member
Nationwide I don't agree that the number of hunters is increasing. Some states maybe. I think the driver for "carrying capacity" being less is actually more a function of access. Its harder to get private land access due to the change in the hunting industry revolving around social media and outfitters. Also, private property parcels are getting combined by the wealthy resulting in less and less "family farms/ranches" and more "corporate farms/ranches". The result of this is the perception that there are more hunters in the woods because in places, the public lands have more people on them now.
Its on a state by state basis though and I'm thinking that dividing line is roughly the Mississippi. East of that, actual hunter numbers are declining (not just percentage of the total population) and public land use is either stable or in some parts actually having less pressure. West of that, hunter numbers aren't drastically changing simply because tags are limited and they don't change drastically from year to year. Actually some states are decreasing in the amount of tags they are giving out total in a year. Yes, interest is skyrocketing and more and more people are trying to get these few tags that exist. Actual boots on the ground numbers though aren't drastically changing. What is for sure changing out west is more and more people packed onto public lands as a result of private lands being leased to outfitters or landowners just simply not wanting to deal with the trouble of letting someone on their property.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
I am not sure if I agree with that - I think absolute numbers are also going down, but the "hunter intensity" is going up. By that I mean hunters seeking 4, 5, 6 tags; hunters going to 2, 3, 4 non-res states in a season; going hunting out west hunting every year instead of a once or twice in a lifetime experience.
I don't think the number of hunters is the big pressure point - it is the more committed hunter's expectations that are the biggest pressure on game. If everyone was limited to 2 big game in-state tags and 1 out of state big game tag then I would guess a lot of tags would open up even with current animal numbers.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
I'm not sure...
####Anecdotal Evidence###
Joined a MA FB hunting group to get a vibe of the landscape out here... seemed like to a person every had a bunch of licenses for deer. MA+NH+NY+RI+VT+ME or some combination of thereof. The New England states actually don't have as many season overlaps as you would think and are really cheap compared to western states. You can hunt (for instance) the opener week of rifle in VT then come down to MA for a month, and then finish up in RI with a crossbow after the VT/MA/NH seasons are all closed and your all in tag cost is like $300, for 5+ months of hunting.
Where I'm sitting now I'm within ~ 2hr of public land hunting in 4 states... and it's only 3hr30 min to the Canadian border.
I would guess in NE maybe 25-30% of deer hunters have 2-3 state licenses... that may even be wildly low. On my hunt this year where I killed the deer on the beach, Dave and his buddies had all hunted NH as well as MA that year, probably others... one of them definitely was headed out to WY and I think another to CO....
Last edited by a moderator:
np307
Well-known member
Not true here in NC. And unless my memory is failing me other southeastern states are also increasing hunter numbers. Some of that recent increase is a recovery from a decrease around 30 years ago, so it depends on which perspective you're talking about. Some of the older hunters talk about the fact that game lands used to be as crowded or more crowded. People who weren't hunting before the 2000s talk about how crowded the game lands are getting.
VikingsGuy
Well-known member
fixed it for you
np307
Well-known member
I can count on one hand the number of people I know who get more than one state per year, and one of those is because he lives on the border of another state. My experience obviously is a limited perspective, I just haven't observed a massive increase in people traveling to hunt.
seeth07
Well-known member
My statement was a broad brush and I totally get what your saying and understand that each state might be a little different. I do agree with you that there is a little bit of perspective required because with public land use, there probably is a difference if you look at the last 5 years vs if you look at the last 20 vs if you look at the last 50. For Wisconsin in my hunting experience I would say that today compared to 5 years ago its increased but if compared to 10 or 20 years ago its decreased.
D
Deleted member 28227
Guest
Irrelevant
Well-known member
1. Like I said draw your own conclusions. You can base those off of online user groups, or friends, or family, people you meet at the bar, or wild ass guesses. I really don't care.
2. Does it really matter if five people are each buying one license or if one person is buying 5 licenses and hunting five states? Take the single person, if they hunt those each of those states then they = a hunter in each of those states. Hopefully they also are vested in the wildlife in each of those states, and make the time and effort necessary to advocate for wildlife in those states.
People are getting too twisted around on the details and are missing the big picture.
