Durability of legacy hunting camps

SD51555

5 year old buck +
Are there new guys replacing the guys that age out of running hunting camps in your circles? I'm talking that un-sung hero that does the extra legwork and eats the extra expenses to make sure camps work.

I got to wondering that as this season approaches.
 
I know one guy.
 
I've taken on this role. When I started hunting I was a boy amongst men in our camp. Time goes on and that older generation has dwindled. With two young kids myself I saw the writing on the wall. If they are ever going to experience a deer camp with more than just their father I need to recruit others to join me now. I'm responsible for bringing several friends into this great sport. While this likely negatively effects my hunting success at times, I know deer camp is bigger than that. I happily provide damn near everything and wouldn't have it any other way.
 
more than half the camps near mine, have few if any new members taking over anything, its just older retired guys, that honestly don't even hunt much, the week long stays of yrs back are now just a few days and away even they go!
the only way any of them seem to get there kids to come up is if they bring the kids, toys, ATV's MX bikes, and then IF you can get the kids out hunting, they need warm weather hunts, in pampered blinds with short walks(or atv rides to them)
the Fathers seem to do all the work and get more excited about the kid hunting than the kid is!
out of the kids I seen show up at several camps, Most were again brought up at younger ages, but when most get into teens, they all but stop showing up , unless drag aged there and then, there about as productive as a broken down tractor!
I wish I could say things were better, but honestly, unless the camp is highly modernized and has TOYS they can play with INDOORS, few have much luck getting there kids involved in hunting camps, for HUNTING purposes any how!\
SOME DO get there kids out in the early kid hunts, but again, the hunts need to be super easy, comfy hunts, that DON"T last long!

its not like a few decades back when the kids were excited and wanting to get to hunt and to camp and willing to do work to get the privilege to do so!
I have seen so many camps go under, its pretty sad !
I used to recall, how so many areas with lots of camps, would go from empty to super busy area's for deer week, and now, your lucky to see a few trucks at any camp after opening day! and even the day before, so many camps are empty now!
 
My experience with hunting clubs is that the older members are greedy and will not let in new young, go-getter members because they are jealous of anyone else’s success and wouldn’t dare drop their own odds by a percent, even if it was for the good of the club as a whole. And instead of flourishing and building a unified enjoyable camp, they are becoming old, deaf and bitter and they rather smell and don’t realize it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I grew up in deer camp. Begged my dad to join when I was around 14 as he wasnt a hunter. Was in camps until I purchased my own place. Made so many ridiculously amazing memories at deer camp growing up. The accommodations were make shift, the hunting usually sucked, was too hot in October and froze to death in December, learned some great jokes, learned how to interact with men three and four times my age, learn how to hunt and definitely how not to hunt, learned how to conquer fears of being alone in the dark in thousands of acres of South Georgia timberland as a suburban teenager, learned how to work together to keep everything running and how to pull your weight, learned how to deal with bad apples, and learned that some men just loved to hangout somewhere rustic and used “hunting” as a reason and that is totally ok in hindsight.

I don’t miss the politics and the bickering and the difficulty of getting everyone on the same page, but the good outweighed the bad a thousand times over. I fear deer camps are a dying institution. Land is getting broken up and sold off to a million different end users. Generally always too small to constitute a member based camp…at least in the south. Additionally every kid is now going to be a professional baseball, basketball and football player so they and dad don’t have time or interest being outdoors. Plus their cell phones probably wouldn’t get service in half the places I grew up roaming so they can’t make lame ass tic tok videos dancing like Nancy boys. It’s a sad state of affairs as far as the preservation of the outdoors and its traditions. I’m so glad I got to experience that for a solid 15 formidable years.
 
My dad and I always hunted public land, and had a couple small leases over the years. My father in law brought me into his lease, and their "camp". I was shocked when I brought food, and the others just did their own thing. Went to the same spots, etc. Few of them came up to do work in the off season. I went up and helped the property owner with some stuff a couple summers and it gave me access to another 40 acres that the others didn't have. The others got pissed off about it. Then they got pissed off that I was killing all "their" deer, and I was killing better bucks despite the fact that I was hunting different areas that they never touched.

My father in law got tired of it, bought 90 acres, and we do our thing. He invited the one other member of the old camp that would come and help. Now he's making a dinner during rifle season because he has a place to hunt for free, and we enjoy his company.

If I ever lose access to private land because I sell it I'll buy a small boat and start hunting corps of engineers ground again that's hard to access without the boat. It was the next best thing to private land, and we never had an issue putting meat in the freezer.
 
Here in PA, there is another wrinkle to the legacy of the hunting camp and that is gas drilling royalties. Several of the larger camps around have "tiers" as in are you in the lower, non-royalty receiving younger guy tier or are you in the upper "we get the royalties and don't even really hunt" tier. It can be incredibly difficult to even get into the lower tier of an established camp that could probably use a few new younger stronger-backed members who like to work. I am not even involved in any of these camps, but have watched several people try (and mostly fail) to get involved, even with years of hard work.
I also help out an older gent who has ~100 acres and has lost his members to old age, death and a lack of desire to hunt anymore. He is having a hard time getting new guys to join, even for 10$/week (a real bargain based on the deer around and the property and amenities (cabin, boat, 4 wheelers). The biggest issue is the younger generation (sadly, my own) just want to show up during deer season to shoot somethin or show up in the summer to party. They also don't want to do any work. I showed the one kid a Solo spreader full of seed and showed him how it worked and he looked at me like I had 3 heads. He even had gall to ask "isn't there an easier way to do this?." Well yes there probably is friend but these are not huge fields and it may or may not have been a test designed by the owner to see if he wanted to work (he didn't).
 
Around my camp - all the mid age folks have about quit coming. Work and kids barely leave them time to sleep
 
Ok, so I'm not crazy. Next, where is this headed? On one hand, we hear that hunter numbers are for the most part stable over the last 20 years. I heard that on a D&DH video a few days ago. Maybe it's the days afield that are shrinking, or perhaps some more sinister things. Does this mean the game agencies are going to have to continue to open up harvest rules to enable fewer active hunters to take more deer? Maybe they'll have to start paying 3rd parties to reduce the herds in more and more places?

I just paid my non-resident license fees yesterday to chase one deer on my own property. That makes me especially salty as the state never sends me back any cost sharing money or a christmas card for all I do for their animals.
 
My stepdad purchased 170 acres a few years ago with the idea of it would be a more permanent place for the kids, friends, and grandkids to enjoy hunting of higher quality than the USFS land we'd hunted in the northwoods forever. He's still got some gas left in the tank on doing the most work up there but I, my wife, and my step-brother help keep things up and improve the land and it's clear that that responsibility will gradually transfer to my generation as time takes it's toll.

The only shits of it is the hunting is mediocre at best. Between winter, wolves, bears, and now an uncalled for change from lottery doe area (OTC buck tag, need to draw an option for your 1 deer to be a doe) to a 2 deer limit, I see the hunting only getting worse. But we go up there for the "deer camp" aspect much more than the hunting.
 
Ok, so I'm not crazy. Next, where is this headed? On one hand, we hear that hunter numbers are for the most part stable over the last 20 years. I heard that on a D&DH video a few days ago. Maybe it's the days afield that are shrinking, or perhaps some more sinister things. Does this mean the game agencies are going to have to continue to open up harvest rules to enable fewer active hunters to take more deer? Maybe they'll have to start paying 3rd parties to reduce the herds in more and more places?

I just paid my non-resident license fees yesterday to chase one deer on my own property. That makes me especially salty as the state never sends me back any cost sharing money or a christmas card for all I do for their animals.

With MN in mind, "deer camp" makes me think of the northwoods where I have a hard time picturing deer populations getting too out of control soon up north. I also have a hard time seeing harvest dwindle in the higher population 2+ deer limit areas.
 
I think there are many NEW ways people view hunting, some view hunting camp as a place to get to get her make memories and have fun, do work, to keep the place alive and for it to do as well as it can
and many DON"T care about IF they get a deer or if the deer is of a some BIG size! the point of the camp to them, is a get together, a place to form bonds and be a part of something that a bonds the members together,
its not all about size or amount of game killed, or the priority is not
as when many of these camps were started , NO one was really a TROPHY HUNTER, or very few hunters were of the likes
the last decade or two now, the mind set on many hunters is on the size of the game, and not the quality of the hunt or the bonds hunting camps make!,
when folks have mind sets about ONLY wanting to hunt where the best odds are of killing a trophy class animal(be it by record book standards or there own)
odds are most normal hunting camp, isn;t in there future, if they DO join a hunting camp, it will be one that has a major focus on growing BIG bucks or ?? critter the club is known for!
YES clubs like this can have good members and the whole nine yards that older traditional clubs have
but it comes at a much higher price and still many member's are there for the trophy and not the bonding
IMO< its mind set changes, the world seems to have become full of very superficial people, , they only want to hunt IF they can hunt the best places, times, weather, and if not, the hell with it!
rather do something else!

Hunter numbers are STILL dropping, and fewer and fewer kids are getting into the sport!
I honestly think many hunting TV shows are to blame in some way! NOT ALL blame falls on them, but some sure does
they only talk about MATURE DEER< scores, show hunts on prime land, hunting using the top info the line gear, out of high end blinds, as if money for all these things is free and if you don;t have alal this stuff, , its NOT hunting , it sets up expectations to a level few can match! minus the more elite with deep pockets or wealthy parents/family!

They yap about how they kills big buck after big buck, even seen some cry about hunting a whole week and STILL didn;t get there game,
as if there supposed to kill some trophy class animal every time they hunt
if you were a kid watching this stuff, and didn;t have all the things and places to hunt like THEY DO<
odds are you wouldn;t have so much drive to hunt either!

so, folks with this mind set, I doubt will ever Join a hunting camp, that doesn;t push for the trophy class animals and manicured lands .
and that sort of means, about 75% of hunting camps, have little future IMO
as the older members and owners pass away, odds are the folks that inherit the lands will SELL it for quick cash, and move on, as unless they have BOND to the place and the land, they have NO reason to keep it
seen it dozens of times!

its the same with FARMS, so many farms are GONE now due to the KIDS don't have any LOVE for the land or bond to it, they rather the quick cash from a sale, than hold onto something that has been in a family for generation! due to again, NO bond to the land or it traditions!

this is how most OLD camps will go as well, Nature of the beast maybe,
or lack of teaching kids values that are missing today in so many!??
 
Ok, so I'm not crazy. Next, where is this headed? On one hand, we hear that hunter numbers are for the most part stable over the last 20 years. I heard that on a D&DH video a few days ago. Maybe it's the days afield that are shrinking, or perhaps some more sinister things. Does this mean the game agencies are going to have to continue to open up harvest rules to enable fewer active hunters to take more deer? Maybe they'll have to start paying 3rd parties to reduce the herds in more and more places?

I just paid my non-resident license fees yesterday to chase one deer on my own property. That makes me especially salty as the state never sends me back any cost sharing money or a christmas card for all I do for their animals.

Don’t get me started on the nonresident license fee as a landowner…
But I don’t think hunters number are a worry. The loss of land is more than making up for any loss of hunters. Go to any public land or try to get permission to hunt private and see if hunter numbers are an issue! If anything we have too many hunters per acre of huntable land.
 
$185 for a MN NR license fee is pretty dang fair in the big scheme of things. MT NR deer license is over $700 if you buy preference points.
 
With MN in mind, "deer camp" makes me think of the northwoods where I have a hard time picturing deer populations getting too out of control soon up north. I also have a hard time seeing harvest dwindle in the higher population 2+ deer limit areas.
I agree. Anything north of Brainerd, and winter and wolves can pretty much get that back in balance in a harsh winter. It's south of there where numbers could get dicey. I've been very interested in how harvest behaviors have changed since the big CWD PR campaign a couple years back where the dnr went too far with the booga boogery and had landfills refusing to take deer carcasses because of the nearly certain transmission of CWD to their workers, and the butcher shops exiting the cut up business en masse due to the disposal headaches.

What I'm expecting to see at some point is the license revenue gets tossed out the window to save money on the contract harvesters. They've got a choice to make, charge $34 for a license, or pay $200 to a sniper to take that same deer. I hope and pray we don't get another solution out of Fort Collins.
 
$185 for a MN NR license fee is pretty dang fair in the big scheme of things. MT NR deer license is over $700 if you buy preference points.
Sure but not when you own a couple hundred acres in another state and pay taxes and utilities, etc. But whatever, there are bigger fish to fry. Just seems inequitable for landowners.
 
$185 for a MN NR license fee is pretty dang fair in the big scheme of things. MT NR deer license is over $700 if you buy preference points.
If we had Montana quality hunting, and a points system to get a buck tag, $185 would be a steal.
 
Sure but not when you own a couple hundred acres in another state and pay taxes and utilities, etc. But whatever, there are bigger fish to fry. Just seems inequitable for landowners.
I can see your argument and some states like MO do offer benefits to NR landowners. Every state is different but in most the property taxes and utilities don't fund wildlife management

States are entrusted to manage the public's wildlife for the benefit of their residents. Making things more enticing for non-residents to buy up land for hunting TYPICALLY does not benefit the resident's access to or enjoyment of the state's wildlife.

Iff'n i bought a quarter section in ND and got a gratis tag every year I can see why residents who only draw a buck rifle tag there once every 5 years would be upset about it.

I could argue it both ways but in the end tags are a cheap part of the whole deal for many and I tend to lean towards making hunting abundantly available and cheap for residents and keeping it from being a rich man's game as essential.

Sorry for hijack.
 
Last edited:
Don’t get me started on the nonresident license fee as a landowner…
But I don’t think hunters number are a worry. The loss of land is more than making up for any loss of hunters. Go to any public land or try to get permission to hunt private and see if hunter numbers are an issue! If anything we have too many hunters per acre of huntable land.
but how many of the hunters are young one's?
just getting into the sport like??
 
Top