I searched and searched and COULD NOT find any statement of what the average age of deer hunters is in the USA .... All I found was figures for individual states so not sure where BT is getting that Pa hunters are

10 years younger than the national average

????

Also do not know what year the PGC article is from where there are saying average Pa deer hunters ages were

most falling into the 45-54

I did find this interesting === about another popular and important deer hunting state..

September 2004
CHANGES IN DEER HUNTING PARTICIPATION AND HARVEST
RELATED TO HUNTER’S AGE
Brian J. Frawley
ABSTRACT
This survey was done to investigate the relationship between hunter’s age and deer
harvest in Michigan and to use this relationship to predict the number of deer
harvested in Michigan during 2005-2020. Mean number of deer harvested per
hunter in 2002 was highest among hunters 25-44 years of age. On average,
hunters gradually harvested fewer deer after they reached 45 years of age. Harvest
appeared to decline largely because older hunters spent fewer days hunting rather
than because they were less efficient while hunting. Older hunters primarily hunted
during the regular firearm hunting season. The number of people actually going
afield to hunt deer is projected to increase 3.7% between 2005 and 2020. The
number of deer harvested (all sexes combined) is projected to increase 2.3%, and
antlerless deer harvest is projected to increase 2.0%. Although hunter numbers are
expected to increase, the proportion of Michigan residents (>10 years old) hunting is
projected to decline from 8.7% to 8.5%. Human demographic trends indicate that
the mean age of hunters will be increasing, signifying a larger proportion of older
deer hunters. Because older hunters generally harvest fewer deer than younger
hunters, deer harvest is projected to increase at a rate slower than the projected
growth of Michigan residents. Moreover, the harvest of antlerless deer is expected
to increase at a slower pace than the increase in hunter numbers. Antlerless
harvest rates may lag behind the harvest of antlered deer primarily because older
hunters are less likely to harvest antlerless deer than younger hunters.

so add the 2 years and according to BT's article PA is right there with the US avarage ==

That is absolutely not true. The quote stated that the majority of PA hunters were in the 35 -45 age class, it did not state that 40 years was the average age of all hunters . Furthermore, I did not have to make any claims because the data was provided by the PGC in the PGNs article, even though they tried to blame the loss of hunters on the fact that hunters are quitting as they get older, just like you. However, at the same time they admit that the decline is also due to inadequate recruitment of young hunters ,which I pointed out was a major reason for the decrease.

what world ya in there BT...

here's from your quote...

"" in 2001, the majority of PA hunters fell into the 35-44 age class,

2001.... ya have to add 10 years to that == it's 2011.... so that would be 45-54 in 2010. ALSO just as the PGC stated in the quote...""Participants in this survey averaged 47 years of age, most falling into the 45-54 age""


so I'll stand with Pa hunters are NOT 10 years younger than the national average...

In E-mails with PGC staff on the subject this morning some of the replies I got were these...




When I mentioned that a few here keep saying it's the lack of deer that is driving hunters away I got this ==

If it is all about deer how does he explain the 100,000 NEW people (not HTE kids) who bought a license again?

In other words they didn’t lapse they bought a license after being lapsed for a number of years?

The PGC is currently finishing up on a survey about hunters in PA. I was given this tid-bid of info from that study which I may share... which as you will see wil be released in the near future... NOTE.. the use of the word OLDER (age) as I contniue to base as a major reason in the decline of hunters...

Unfortunately, lack of game is coming out near the top of a recent study of lapsed hunters we’re doing. Cost of a license (value) and time/opportunity are close behind.

After thinking about this for quite some time I think I understand it. These are primarily older hunters who grew up hunting in a time of pheasants, small game and an OVERABUNDANCE of deer. Now there are fewer places to hunt, less time, less game and the value they place on a license is diminished.

Unfortunately – it is what it is.



Results of the study will be ready in a few months.

If it is all about deer how does he explain the 100,000 NEW people (not HTE kids) who bought a license again?

In other words they didn’t lapse they bought a license after being lapsed for a number of years?

"Unfortunately, lack of game is coming out near the top of a recent study of lapsed hunters we’re doing. Cost of a license (value) and time/opportunity are close behind."

-and-

"After thinking about this for quite some time I think I understand it. These are primarily older hunters who grew up hunting in a time of pheasants, small game and an overabundance of deer

Ha ha. Yep, that sounds like something from pgc! Typical contradictions! lol.


Also, why is it "unfortunate" that this is the reason?"Unfortunately, lack of game is coming out near the top.." Seems to me, that would be one of the better reason to have, because it can be addressed more easily than some other reasons which nothing at all can be done about... That is of course assuming they were to care. Which they clearly dont.

The PGC is currently finishing up on a survey about hunters in PA.

Well we can expect them to do one of two things. Either ask Pennfed members, who will give the answers pgc wants to hear. Or they can word the questions very vaguely and twist the results to support their nonsense like they did prior to the deer plan, which they STILL use pointing to it acting as if it somehow showed we sportsmen supported this nonsense and the lengths theyve gone to all along.

I found this tidbit in the Trib today regarding the age of PA's hunters.  I guess this is further proof that the average age of PA hunters is not 10 years younger than the national average, unless of course the national average hunter age is 54

Pennsylvania's average hunter, meanwhile, is 44 years old. Its average pheasant hunter is 45....

Yes, I think it is very likely that their numbers were wrong.  A little bit of intuition and basic logic pretty much blows the "PA hunters are 10 years younger than the national average" out of the water.

Yes, in theory if we are recruiting higher numbers of junior hunters than the number of senior hunters retiring, the average age should be declining.  However, I don't see any reason to believe that is the case based on junior hunter license sales both in PA or nationwide for that matter.  The demographics are much more complex than what I mentioned and without accurate data this is merely speculation and guesses.   

I really don't care what they said.  It is not reasonable to think the average age of a PA hunter is 10 years younger than that of the rest of the nation. 

I mean seriously, are you capable of forming an independent thought?  We live in one of the oldest states in the nation and also have one of the highest resident to hunter ratios. 

The article was from 2005 issue of the PGN. The 47% average age of hunters was based on the national average ,not the PA average age of PA hunters.

Of course you wouldn't because logic calls into question the validity of the data you are using.  And that of course would kill your argument.

I would be willing to bet that some type of statistical error is present in your data.  

I told the folks there this morning I could understand the lack of ALL game considering what I had to hunt as a youth and up until the small game "left the building".
I'm still in pretty good health, so I can still get to the areas that have deer, but if I did not hunt in an area with a huntable deer population I'd probably try to find a new one with a better deer population... I'll be fishing LONG after I give up hunting that I do know...

as many have accused me of... if there is only one deer left in the state -- as long as I am healthy I'll be out there hunting it...

No lack of game excuse for me... IN fact if I really wanted to I could still hunt pheasants and rabbits around here.... my peroblem then would be the same as spring turkey.. not enough time.. it would interfere with my fishing or archery hunting.....



BT... I have all the 2005 PGN issues.. which month ???

How true...

But I still feel it's the older folks more likely to quit. Example.. fishing is still my #1..

When I lived in "the burg" it was nothing to drive up here... kyle, kahle, cloe, wilhelm, pymi, moraine, etc etc
now I find I'm happy just staying in the 15 mile circle of spots from my home... I'm catching as many fish as I usually do every year and still having fun ... the reason I enjoy the sport...

true I'm not catching Largemouths for example or strippers, or even crappies... but for some reason I don't miss them... I'm happy just catching what I'm catching at my local favorite spots.... when and if these spots "dry up" I'll have to decide to keep fishing and thus travel or give it up... since fishing does not require a lot of physical activities I image at this time I would go back to travelling.. if not ... I'd hang it up...

Maybe there are those out there that are so devoted to steelhead fishing , for example, that they would quite fishing just because steelheads disappeared... they would not be happy fishing for anything else and would probably quit the sport of fishing just because of one species..
they'd blame the PFBC and become a few of the negative types we see here... I question if they were truly anglers in the first place if that was their decision....


as for hunting..

we have fewer species readily available today compared to 20 years ago... much of that is not the PGC's fault at all... the HR did reduce the number of deer .. but how anyone could have thought the PGC was going to reduce the herd by 50% and the result would not be fewer deer available is beyond my reasoning abilities...

and to use that reduction in deer population as an excuse to say why one quit buying a hunting licenses.. is silly at best IMHO....


I'll give hunting up when I can no longer physically do it (get to the woods), as long as I can I'll be right here hunting that last deer standing...


so again I think "age" makes a person change many of their life's decisions...

As for youth.. I've already stated == they are not interested.. period.. too much to do that is more fun and gives instant satisfaction... no sitting or walking around "waiting"...

we have fewer species readily available today compared to 20 years ago... much of that is not the PGC's fault at all... the HR did reduce the number of deer .. but how anyone could have thought the PGC was going to reduce the herd by 50% and the result would not be fewer deer available is beyond my reasoning abilitie

What small game species declined significantly since 1990 ? Why you believe some hunters thought reducing the herd by 50% wouldn't result in fewer deer simply makes no sense. Every hunter I know knew the result would be a lot fewer deer and the vast majority believe a 50% reduction was over kill and they were right.

As for youth.. I've already stated == they are not interested.. period.. too much to do that is more fun and gives instant satisfaction... no sitting or walking around "waiting"../quote]

From 2003 to 2005 over 100K jr. hunters bought a license and jr. license sales were increasing from 1998 to 2004. What happened after 2004 that accounts for the decrease?

BTW, I think the quote was from the May 2005 issue of the PGN. The article on the PGC website doesn't list the issue.

Perhaps it's the same 3 that watches deerfly cut wood !

Now that's funny right there!

Ironhed

When I was a kid it was Boy Scouts and the great outdoors---PERIOD-- for most all my friends and I.
When I became an adult and a Scoutmaster I lost half my troop each Spring to ball oriented sports.  Some came back and some didnt. The Outdoors was clearly second choice to many.
Its that same old issue Doc- The world got a lot bigger than it was for us and the kids now have many more 'options'.
This combined with so many "Urban" kids now to whom the Outdoors is a foreign place is really changing things.

ORIGINAL: SilverKype

I think lack of game is a valid reason for not caring to hunt. If the little J was to get polluted and most fish were killed, it wouldn't make sense to fish it, if my intent was to catch fish. I just question some people's motives as to why they really quit hunting. It is often a multitude of reasons, but they are quick to play the blame game.

 
I agree with your statement that there are multiple reasons and not just one.  However, the lack of game may become the tipping point where the reasons not to hunt override the desire to hunt.
 
Your analogy of the Little J is a case in point.  From the age of 4 I flyfished Spring Creek.  Then there was a chemical spill that had a detremental effect on it, so I then moved on to the Little J.  The fishing was so good that I stopped going to the Juniata for bass and flyfished the Little J exclusively.  Then the Little J had a spill issue that greatly affected the fishery and I hung up the fly rod for more than 10 years and bass fished the lakes and rivers.  At some point the Little J came back to the point that it was, and I know folks dislike this word, but worth putting my time towards fishing there again.
 
Throughout the above, there were ups and downs in the fishing and I was able to switch away from the down to fish an up.  In other words, there was a viable alternative nearby that kept me fishing.  Trout, bass, they were the same challenge to me (sorry panfish, suckers, etc. that were available to me in the same relative area did not hold the same challenge and were dismissed) so I could easily interchange them.
 
Now applying that to the deer situation, there is really no direct substitute in PA.  I have no desire to hunt bear.  I have never drawn an elk tag.  And the turkey seasons either run during prime spring fishing or the fall upland bird season.  In other words, for me, deer are the only big game species that I can hunt.  If the population reaches a certain point where the hunting is no longer, again here is that word, worth it when compared to the multiple things that also vye for my time, then one makes the decision to quit.  I haven't yet, but it is very easy to see where one could come to that conclusion.
 
There will always be those that will go , as Doc puts it, one deer left to hunt, but those are few and far between.