The Biggest Threats to Hunting

Fortunately, more active regulatory measures and forward-thinking management practices allowed everything from elk and whitetail deer to wild turkeys and waterfowl to recover and flourish. Then, following World War II, came several decades of what many old timers consider the glory days of hunting in America. But over the last few decades, an emerging array of issues began to undermine the future of hunting once again. And today, those issues have solidified into what are becoming existential threats to today’s hunters.

Here’s a simple, undeniable fact: Millions of American hunters depend on access to federally managed public lands. The importance of that access was highlighted in a recent survey by the Congressional Sportsmen Foundation, which found that 90% of the hunters in Colorado use public lands, including National Forests and Bureau of Land Management property. The numbers are similarly high in many other Western states, but it is not solely a Western issue. Even in states like Texas and Ohio, where the vast majority of the land is privately owned, public lands like the Davy Crockett National Forest and the Wayne National Forest are vitally important to many thousands of hunters.

Furthermore, as habitat loss, fragmentation, and degradation is occurring at a breakneck pace throughout the United States, public lands serve as vitally important strongholds for everything from elk to upland bird, as well as a host of non-game animal and bird species. Additionally, these lands surround countless miles of headwater streams and rivers that not only harbor many species of game fish but also provide clean drinking water to millions of Americans.

While the recent political maneuvering aimed at stealing federally managed public lands from American citizens garnered national attention, some hunters may not realize these diabolical efforts are nothing new. Take the Sagebrush Rebellion, which got its start among a cadre of cattle ranchers and extractive resource groups who revolted against federal lands management policies in the late 1970s. The movement later gained steam with the support of Utah’s Senator Orrin Hatch and the Reagan administration. Thankfully, their plan to transfer federal lands in the West to state and local governments failed to gain any meaningful traction among the general public and the Sagebrush Rebellion died a well-deserved death.

But the idea never really went away. In 2016, Utah congressional representatives Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz implemented their own plan for a land grab by introducing legislation that would mandate selling off federally managed public lands. Once again, those efforts failed, largely due pressure from hunters, anglers and other members of the outdoor community. But here we are in 2025 and it’s happening all over again.

Fortunately, the latest proposal to sell off millions of acres of National Forest and BLM lands by Senator Mike Lee from, you guessed it, Utah, was met with resounding public opposition. Hunters, in particular, led the charge to defeat that portion of the Big Beautiful Bill.

But remember, while we won this round, this issue is sure to rear its ugly head again, and it will likely happen sooner rather than later. And in fact, some of our most cherished and pristine wild places—federally managed public lands such as the Boundary Waters and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge—are still directly threatened by policies laid out in the Big Beautiful Bill. Hunters need to remain vigilant. The battle continues to protect our public lands from those who view America’s natural landscapes as nothing more than political capital to be sold off to the highest bidder.

Hunters have to contend with a variety of diseases that afflict game species. Large-scale avian influenza outbreaks among many waterfowl species are causing increasingly common die-offs. Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease (EHD) regularly wipes out significant portions of whitetail deer herds around the country. Declining ruffed grouse populations in the eastern United States, which have been greatly diminished from loss of habitat, are now contending with additional mortality due to West Nile Virus.

Some elk herds in the Pacific Northwest are suffering lower survival rates and reduced birth rates from a pathogen known as elk hoof rot. Entire herds of bighorn sheep have been wiped out by bacterial pneumonia infections transferred from domestic sheep. The list goes on, but the future of hunting in the United States is threatened most seriously by Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD).

Though CWD was first discovered in captive mule deer at a Colorado research facility nearly sixty years ago, it wasn’t until a couple decades ago that state wildlife managers and hunters really started paying attention to its ever-growing and widespread impacts. Today, the debilitating and always fatal disease has spread to deer and elk herds in thirty-six states, with new cases regularly showing up in new places. It’s clever that CWD is here to stay, and evidence now shows the disease is beginning to have noticeable impacts on deer numbers in some places.

A recent study in Wisconsin, where CWD prevalence rates in whitetail deer herds are among the highest in the country, found that the long-term effects of the deadly prion disease lowered survival rates among female whitetails enough to reduce populations. Additionally, CWD fatalities are even higher among bucks than does, meaning there are fewer older, trophy-class bucks around.

The deleterious effects of CWD certainly aren’t limited to Wisconsin or whitetail deer, either. Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana all have a growing CWD problem in their mule deer and elk herds, and as prevalence rates increase, it’s reasonable to expect a corresponding decrease in mule deer numbers.

CWD deniers be damned, the repercussions it could ultimately have on American hunters is staggering. If CWD ultimately leads to significantly reduced deer, elk, and moose populations, the end result would be significantly reduced hunting opportunities. Additionally, though CWD infections have only been discovered in cervid species, the affliction is in the same family of fatal prion infections like Mad Cow Disease (cattle), scrapies (sheep), and Jakob-Creutzfeld disease (humans). If infected deer were someday found to be responsible for transferring CWD to domestic livestock or humans, the entire management strategy for wild deer populations throughout the country would change overnight.

In some places, management practices are already shifting to a more aggressive approach towards mitigation. Mandatory testing efforts are increasing throughout the United States. Some state game agencies have taken things further by banning baiting, which can concentrate a lot of deer in a small area, increasing infection rates. And some states are allowing, even encouraging, hunters to kill more deer in areas of high prevalence in an attempt to reduce densities and hopefully slow the spread of CWD. In the future, the only certainty is that CWD will continue to impact more and more hunters across America.

Roughly half the states in the country have enacted provisions in their constitutions that formally acknowledge their citizens’ rights to hunt and fish. And, regardless of what their state constitutions say, most hunters view hunting as something they have the right to do. In reality, hunting is more of a privilege than a right, and that privilege can be taken away. In fact, it’s already happened numerous times in several states.

Successful ballot box initiatives in California, Oregon, Colorado, Washington, and Michigan have led to the banning of bear baiting, spring bear hunting, mountain lion and bear hound hunting, and even dove hunting. In other states, trapping for predators and furbearers has been banned or restricted.

And nearly every year, many other states are threatened with new ballot box measures aimed at stripping away hunting privileges. The people behind these initiatives and voter referendums are anti-hunters and animal rights extremists. Hunters who write off these people as crazy tree-hugging hippies need to understand that these are actually well-funded organizations that excel at planning and publicizing campaigns that can result in fooling the general public into voting for laws that ban hunting.

But recent history has shown that when hunters organize and band together, they can defeat anti-hunting “ballot box biology” initiatives. In Montana, a 2016 attempt to ban trapping failed to garner enough votes to pass. In 2024, a ballot box initiative that would have outlawed mountain lion and bobcat hunting in Colorado surfaced. In the end, a majority of voters rejected the initiative in a major victory for hunters and science-based wildlife management. That result can be attributed to hunters finally taking a cue from their anti-hunting adversaries by raising money for an organized, united campaign.

Keep in mind, anti-hunters and their ballot box initiatives aren’t going anywhere. They’ll continue to be a thorn in the side of hunters in states across the country. When the next one pops up, it will require hunters nationwide to use the same tactics that gave us a win in Colorado.

Another increasingly troublesome trend is the rising number of anti-hunters appointed by governors to serve on state wildlife agency commissions. These boards of commissioners play a key role in steering the policies that dictate the actual work that’s done by wildlife management agencies.

In states such as Washington and Colorado, among others, we’ve already seen commissioners taking an aggressively anti-hunting approach to wildlife management by ignoring the advice of managers and biologists regarding the implementation of season dates, bag limits, harvest quotas, and other hunting regulations. The most effective action hunters can take to oppose anti-hunting wildlife commissioners is to stay informed of their intentions by attending their public meetings. Then stand up and let your voice be heard.

The few bad eggs out there that get caught poaching or trespassing are bad enough to give all hunters a black eye. But even among hunters who follow the law and do what’s ethically right, sometimes we’re still our own worst enemy.

For example, some hunters who don’t hunt mountain lions or trap furbearers just shrug their shoulders at ballot box initiatives that could ban those practices. Others have argued that while it’s sporting to shoot pheasants over a fine pointing dog, taking a bear with a pack of hounds isn’t fair chase. Those hunters need to wake up. Anti-hunters are setting up the dominoes to fall—they want to end ALL hunting.

Which brings up the often ridiculous infighting that takes place among some hunters. A traditional bowhunter that attacks the majority of archery hunters who use modern compound bows isn’t doing anyone any favors. The same goes for compound bow users who cast aspersions on crossbow hunters or a big game rifle hunter that believes taking any shot at an animal beyond three hundred yards should be illegal.

Then there are hunters who take pot shots at other hunters for killing small or young bucks. The saying “my tag, my hunt,” comes to mind here. And what about hunters who selfishly complain they’re missing out on opportunities to fill their own deer tag because of special youth seasons? Or those that decry hunter recruitment efforts like mentorship programs when older hunters are aging out and participation rates are falling among youth hunters?

The point here is that while we don’t all agree on everything, it serves absolutely no purpose for us to attack each other. Some hunters might willfully scoff at the idea that hunting is under existential threat in the United States. Others may simply take their privilege to go hunting for granted.

Still, others are rightfully concerned about existing and emerging threats to hunting. History shows those concerns are legitimate, just look at what’s already been lost. Pay attention. Stay engaged. And take a kid hunting.