A sobering picture is emerging of deer hunting in Wisconsin. Between 2005 and 2022, Wisconsin lost about 65,000 hunters. That’s a lot of folks hanging up their camo, and it’s not just the baby boomers – it’s across the board. The Hunter Demographics Project’s Phase 1 report, led by Dan Storm, one of the Wisconsin DNRs Deer Research Scientists, analyzed license sales from 2005 – 2022. The study broke down hunter participation rates by age and gender over time. That data was combined with success rates (among other data) to reveal the findings, and forecast what the implications are for the future of deer hunting in Wisconsin.
The Findings
Between 2005 and 2022, Wisconsin lost 65,000 hunters. On average, that is approximately 3,600 hunters lost per year. However, from 2014 – 2022, Wisconsin lost approximately 51,000 hunters, or about 6,300 hunters per year. Looking at the acceleration of the decline is scary. During this time period, Wisconsin put policies in place to increase hunter numbers – from allowing crossbows to legalizing blaze pink – and it has not had any effect on hunter decline.
When breaking down the numbers further, the study highlights the decrease in participation across all age ranges. For example, hunter participation for boys fell from approximately 27% in 2005 to about 15% in 2022. 40 year old males had a 30% participation rate in 2005 that fell to 20% in 2022. 50 year old males had a 28% participation rate in 2005, and that number fell to 21% in 2022. While baby boomers are aging out of hunting, the numbers illustrate that hunter decline is taking place across all generations.
The Reasons
What is causing the decline in Wisconsin deer hunters? That’s the first question that came to my mind as I saw the numbers in the study. I first thought of baby boomers before seeing details of the study. Unfortunately, there likely isn’t one specific item as the causes are multifaceted. Hypothetically, some of the issues can be attributed to access limitations, additional entertainment options, and a shift in hunting culture. Some of the limitations include a greater difficulty getting access to private land and increased public land competition. Both of these items put more strain on hunters trying to find quality hunting opportunities and to fill their tag.
Additionally, society has changed since 2005. There are more competing priorities, and more entertainment options than there were 20 – 30 years ago. Travel sports have exploded in popularity. The global youth sports market was valued at $37.5B in 2022 and is forecasted to grow to $69.4B by 2030. Smart phones have enabled an “instant feedback” society. Sitting in the woods waiting for deer to show up is the opposite of instant feedback. When we look at the decline in hunter participation for boys and middle aged males, for example, there’s a likely a correlation between the two as middle aged fathers aren’t hunting as much. As a result, boys are not being taken hunting at the same rate they were 20 years ago. That results in less young hunters being introduced to the sport and a greater decline in hunter participation numbers.
How much has social media and the shift in hunting culture influenced the decline? We’ve shifted from a society that celebrated harvesting deer to celebrating harvesting big deer. Over the last 20 years in Wisconsin, deer habitat has changed population centers and deer densities across the state. Has that limited the availability of quality hunting opportunities for certain hunters? If there are fewer quality hunting opportunities to harvest big deer, theoretically, hunters could be more likely to hang up their camo.
As we look toward the future, Storm and his team – Christine Anhalt-Depies, Adam Mohr, Meghan Henry, and Beth Wojcik – are looking to take the study further to look at the findings on a finer geographic scale. Their goal is to see if the decline is more pronounced in certain geographic areas, and to examine the per capita harvest. They are looking to better understand the mechanisms of hunter decline and per capita harvest. The more we can understand the finer points of hunter decline, the better chance we, as a hunting community, can work to combat them.
What does this mean?
While we celebrate the tradition of hunting, individual hunter goals vary; yet, the goal of any state hunting program is to manage a population. In this case, the Wisconsin DNRs job is to manage the deer population via hunter harvest. While deer densities differ across the state, including areas in Northern Wisconsin that have low deer densities, there are a number of areas where there’s an overabundance of deer. According to Storm, our ability to manage the deer herd is already on shake ground with current hunter numbers.
The historical harvest levels of deer in Wisconsin is approximately 350,000. In 2022, the antlerless deer harvested per hunter was .31. If hunter numbers continue their current pace of decline, there would need to be a substantial increase in the number of anterless deer harvested to keep pace with historical harvest levels, and to manage the population accordingly. If hunters can’t manage the deer population across the state, who steps in?
Stepping back further, less hunters means less revenue to manage natural resources. It also means less political power and a potential loss of control of deer management. As hunters, this potential issue could have massive long term ripple effects on our hunting rights. Unfortunately, the decline in hunter numbers is not localized to Wisconsin either. As noted in the study, Pennsylvania and Virginia have also seen declines in hunter participation.
What can we do as a hunting community?
Right now, we do not have a scalable solution to combat the current pace of hunter decline, and as a community, we are constantly under attack from anti-hunters. What we do to combat the anti-hunting message and influence the general public is important. One idea to influence the general public is to demonstrate the value of hunting to society. We talk about conservation, and we know the amount of conservation dollars funded by hunters via the Pittman-Robertson Act; yet, we need to show and demonstrate that hunting is conservation by achieving management goals, protecting rare plant species, and demonstrating the effects of better land management.
Another great idea is venison diplomacy. One of the many traditions I was taught as a young hunter was sharing in the harvest. While we often share venison with our fellow hunters, what if we shared it with our non-hunting neighbors and friends? There’s an old saying that goes “the way to a man’s heart is through his stomach.” I have met very few people who dislike a quality venison stick or venison brat. It’s a small gesture, but one that can go a long ways.
Are those the only answers to improving the perception of hunting? Absolutely not. There are others and we’ll continue to address this issue as a hunting community. Do we have scalable answers to the decline hunter participation? Nope. The only thing we can control is our actions, our decisions to participate, the way we treat other hunters, and the way we treat non-hunters. As the stoic Zeno said, “Well-being is realized by small steps.” If we all take small steps together as a community, we can make a difference.