Perceived Potential Barriers to Improving Access


1Five states listed additional barriers, including: limited personnel, staffing capacity and the inability to add more personnel to manage any additional landholdings; non-consumptive user groups are not willing to share access during the hunting season and a small amount of public land with many competing users.
2Six states listed additional barriers, including: providing access is no longer a priority duty of Conservation Officers; having dedicated personnel and staff to focus on this issue; the demise of CRP may eliminate the habitat base that is a needed prerequisite for consideration and enrollment into an upland game access program; and urban sprawl.
3Two NGOs listed additional barriers, including: changing in ownership leading to fragmentation of private lands; and lease hunting by individuals, groups/organizations and/or outfitters.

Funding was identified as the most frequent potential barrier for improving hunter access to both public and private lands. Potential barriers for improving hunter access programs were notably different between public and private lands in only two areas. The resistance by private landowners to providing access was identified by 38 states as a potential barrier to improving hunter access to private lands, but only by 14 states for public lands. Competition from others wishing to lease access rights was identified by 27 states as a potential barrier to improving hunter access to private lands, but only by 10 states for public lands. In addition, the general process of purchasing land appears to be a larger potential barrier to improving hunter access to public lands than private lands. It is important to note that political barriers to obtaining access to either public or private lands were not frequently identified as barriers to improving hunter access by states. A similar relative weight of each of these perceived potential barriers also was reflected in the responses provided by NGOs.