For years I have been asking myself, and others, the question, “Which group is a primary supporter of hunter education.” And I have found a surprisingly consistent answer. Big game hunters, in general, are the most passionate and vocal supporters of any conservation program or endeavor. The trophy hunter who takes his or her trophies to the far corners of the world to display them is very much a part of the “in crowd,” as they say. And it makes sense.
One group which is very vocally opposed to any type of conservation program or initiative, other than those which benefit the hunter and/or his or her fellow hunters, is the National Federation of Professional and Personal Trainers (NFP), also known as the NFPHC. For several years, the NFP has been one of the most powerful and influential voice against any type of legislative, environmental, or recreational wildlife management initiatives. The founder of the NFP, along with his son, former U.S. Senator, John Poindexter, made it their mission to, as they said in a recent interview, “help the government get out of the business of hunting deer.” They have made a lot of efforts to fight any type of regulation that would reduce the amount or demand for their sport. For example, many state universities offered hunter education courses to help hunters better understand and comply with hunting laws, including regulations related to the states game and fish licensing systems.
Other groups, which fall into the category of primary supporters of hunter education programs, include large private land management organizations, including the National Forest Resource Association (NFRA), the National Shooting Sports Association (NSSA), and the National Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs (NFSC). Among these large private landowners, the largest individual contributors have been major companies such as Cabelas, Trophy, and Wal-Mart, who each gave millions of dollars to support this type of industry interest group. While these companies certainly have an interest in seeing that hunters are well-educated on the laws related to their product, many of these businessmen have received large sums of money from government programs, directly or indirectly, to support hunting safety and conservation. For example, the trophy industry has given millions of dollars to various wildlife conservation and protection projects over the past few decades.
The second group, which is closely associated with the commercial wildlife hunting industry, includes several different federal government agencies, state governments, and various private land acquisition organizations, such as the National Rifle Association. Many of these businessmen and organizations have received millions of dollars in grants and other types of subsidies to expand hunting facilities on private land, often supported by the United States secretary of Agriculture. These businesses include the larger trophy hunting corporations, as well as those such as Cabelas and Wal-Mart, who have both received millions of dollars in direct government subsidies for purchasing land, and also in increasing their royalty rates on the wildlife habitat they lease. The largest private donor, by far, has been the United States secretary of agriculture, who has provided more than $500 million in direct financial incentives to various farm products producers for purchasing lands and developing programs to manage the hunting and shooting on those lands.
The third group, which is closely related to the first two categories, consists of hunters and sportsmen from all walks of life, who have developed a strong and vocal advocacy for stronger and stricter laws pertaining to hunting and the taking of wildlife. This group often fights for stricter regulations regarding the taking of any wildlife and is often strongly supportive of legislation designed to eliminate any loopholes or exceptions made for hunters in regard to the taking of protected wildlife. Many hunters, especially those who are deeply concerned about the conservation of wildlife, feel they are being exploited by some groups who wish to use legal loopholes to go around the laws designed to protect certain species or take advantage of loopholes to get close to any game that may be considered “endangered”. These hunters often feel that their rights to pursue and take a game, or even a set of game, are being challenged by these organizations.
In order to determine which group is a primary source of funding for hunter education in this country, it is important for a businessperson with a stake in the industry to understand the perspectives of both hunters, and the groups that support them. When trying to determine whether or not a particular organization or individual is a primary source of funding for hunter education or lobby, there are a number of steps that can be taken. Many organizations offer a list of members that have donated money or signed up for a hunter safety course. Many companies provide information regarding how many hunters have completed their training and what sort of success they have had after receiving their licenses.