…And Then There’s the Time Factor
No time...?
To continue on the theme of why ruffie hunters (and all upland hunter numbers) are declining, check out this quote from a recent column in the Bowling Green (KY) Daily News:
A whole lot of people like to hunt upland birds, yet few can invest the time and effort needed to do so in this day and age. The enterprise must be nurtured year-round and most guys and gals cannot commit to the needs of securing, scouting and managing places to hunt.
There’s also housing, training and caring for a string of expensive bird dogs every day so they may be able to go out a handful of times each autumn and winter in search of quail [or any other bird] near home or other feathered quarry even farther away.
We’d add: But not so with deer hunting. For that all you need is a sighted weapon that requires just a couple weeks of practice (if that long), and a place to hunt. Maybe a stand, some camo, but that’s it.
In other words, you don’t need a $3K+ bird dog plus related expenses. Not that that’s amazingly onerous, but you can see how lots of folks would gravitate to the cheaper, easier, sexier (media-wise) alternative.
On the one hand, great – fewer folks participating mean few folks pounding fields and covers. On the other hand, not great – because by every measure (participants, spending, license sales) upland hunting has been declining, and with that comes a corresponding decrease in conservation dollars, political clout, gear innovation, etc.
We’re not saying that we want a million new bird hunters getting in our way in the field – though we do think that if that happened, the “crowding” part would be temporary, since more hunters = more political clout = more habitat work = more huntable habitat. At least in theory.
But we are saying that if the water is flowing out faster than the rate of input, sooner or later that tub will be dry. And that wouldn’t be good.
Where are we going with this…. Guess it’s just a recommendation to encourage you to encourage folks who shoot, own shotguns, want to hunt, indicate they’re interested in bird-hunting, etc., to do it however they can. If they have two legs, a gun and some blaze orange, we can help them be bird-hunters.
_____
Enough of this for now. Next week some fun stuff.
Category: Rants
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
The world is not coming to an end ! True grouse hunters will still enhabit the thickets. With out disparaging the comercial hunting clubs too much, people are willing to pay to hunt at a club for 4 hours and have a reasonble expection of seeing and harvesting a few birds. The commercial clubs offer a convieneient service to many hunters in todays busy society. That is just the opposite of the “Zen of Ruffed Grouse” . Grouse hunters by nature are masochists. We love to walk thru the thickest cover, get poked in the eyes, endure cuts, scrapes and sore muscles from walking all day to bag a couple of birds. When you limit out on grouse, you have earned the right to brag!
The article makes the sport out to be something that it is not. expensive. Here in Wisconsin, almost any hunter in the state can drive less than 3 hours and find some pretty good public hunting ground.
People who will pay for pheasants at the local club should hire a guide and try grouse hunting. It is like going from shooting trap to shooting sporting clays. Once you try it, your hooked.
Bill,
Enjoy it while it lasts, where some of us are it is over until next Fall 🙂
Great pic, the melancholic sideways glance with raised eyebrow speaks volumes.
I believe a major reason for the decline in many parts of the nation is access to quality hunting land. Grouse hunters need larger areas to hunt than turkey or deer hunters. Much of the land with best cover is posted/private.