Professional Documents
Culture Documents
0 1
Hunting Culture in Gun Culture 2.0: Where Are the Trucks and Bucks?
Natalie Wilson
Wake Forest University
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 2
The recent protest wave sparked by the tragic high school shooting in Parkland, Florida,
has generated wide support for a number of gun control measures. One key demand of these
movements calls for a total ban on semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15, or ArmaLite Rifle,
named after the company that developed it in the 1950s (“Modern Sporting Rifle - AR-15
platform-based rifles,” 2017). After the Orlando, Florida, gay nightclub shooting in 2016, Hillary
Clinton called semi-automatic rifles “weapons of war.” (Will Drabold, 2016). In an opinion
column penned for the Boston Globe on March 28, 2018, former senator George J. Mitchell
suggested that “a federal ban on military-style assault weapons” would be the most effective
action to “decrease the frequency and deadliness of mass shootings” (George J. Mitchell, 2018).
As it turns out, a lot of people might. AR-15-style rifles accounted for an estimated 61
percent of all U.S. civilian rifle sales in 2016 (“Modern Sporting Rifle - AR-15 platform-based
rifles,” 2017). The push for an “assault rifle” ban has generated backlash from AR-15 fans, who
even reject the term “assault rifle” itself, saying that the political label stigmatizes the hunting
and sport shooting tool, which they call a “Modern Sporting Rifle” (MSR). In 2016, Illinois Sen.
Dick Durbin said that if you used a semi-automatic rifle like the AR-15 to go hunting “you
should stick to fishing,” but according a 2010 survey of semi-automatic rifle owners conducted
by the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF), the trade association for the firearms
industry, through websites and blogs geared toward firearm ownership, 60 percent of
respondents who owned an MSR said that they selected this gun for this purpose, and in 1963, a
few years after the AR-15 was invented, Colt, its manufacturer advertised the rifle as a “superb
hunting partner” (“Survey,” 2013; Will Drabold, 2016). Some hunters believe that a high-
powered rifle is the most ethical choice of a tool because it is more likely to kill an animal
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 3
There’s a clear divide regarding whether the semi-automatic rifle is a needed and
justifiable hunting tool or whether its danger outweighs its usefulness, and when each side of the
debate only has knowledge of its own ideas and experiences, it stalls conversation and progress.
If non-hunters, non-gun owners, and those who want to ban the AR-15 have a better
understudied, and the role of the semi-automatic rifle within it, they will be better informed to
make gun control arguments. While today’s Gun Culture 2.0 is built around handguns and a
narrative of self-defense as the primary motivation for gun ownership, hunters are hardly a
marginal population, and hunting practices still represent a key part of how guns actually
function in today’s society (Wright, 1995; Yamane David, 2017). The 2015 National Firearms
Survey found that 40 percent of gun owners named hunting as one of their reasons for owning a
gun, and according to a 2013 Pew Research Center survey, 32 percent of gun owners still cited
this as their primary reason (Azrael, Hepburn, Hemenway, & Miller, 2017; Dimock, Doherty, &
Christian, n.d.; Pew Research Center, 2013). Today, twenty-one states now recognize the right to
hunt in their constitutions (while two states statutorily recognize the right to hunt), and twenty of
those states’ constitutional provisions have actually been passed since 1996 (“State
Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish,” n.d.). Millions of Americans still hunt, and a
contemporary sociology of guns that doesn’t fully explore their culture is giving a limited picture
of the role of guns in society. To examine hunting culture’s role in current gun culture and how
and why it has changed or remained consistent over time, I have generated a brief review of
research studies on hunting. My research aims to find out more about hunters and hunting,
including who hunts, what they hunt, what firearms they use, why they hunt and what they
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 4
believe.
The number of Americans who support hunting has remained steady or even increased
over the last forty years. According to a 2003 Gallup report, an overwhelming majority of
Americans oppose banning all types of hunting (76 percent) (David W. Moore, 2003). Through
surveys conducted for the National Shooting Sports Foundation and other outdoors groups,
wildlife management research firm Responsive Management found that 78 percent of American
adults approved of hunting in 2006, up from 75 percent in 2003 and 73 percent in 1995
(Responsive Management, 2015). The National Shooting Sports Foundation also conducted an
online survey of 825 U.S. residents in November 2014 to determine views on hunting, hunters,
and hunting practices within the U.S. 87 percent of respondents agreed that it was acceptable to
hunt for food but not for trophy hunting; however, hunting has the potential to provide food even
during recreational trophy hunts, and more than 95 percent of hunters say they eat what they kill
(“Survey,” 2013) (Byrd, Lee, & Widmar, 2017). Older respondents also tended to be more
supportive of hunting and hunters (Byrd et al., 2017). Men are both more likely to hunt and more
likely to support hunting than women: 84 percent of men approve of hunting and 72 percent of
women approve of hunting. Higher levels of education and residence in a suburban area or a
large city are also negatively correlated with approval of hunting (Street, 2013).
Hunters in the U.S. are predominantly white, middle-aged men who live in rural
environments, and hunting is strongly connected to their relationships with their fathers or father
figures. The U.S. Census Bureau’s National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, & Wildlife-Associated
Recreation (FHWAR) suggested that the declining U.S. rural population correlates with the
decline in hunting participation, because in 1960, 30 percent of the U.S. population lived in a
rural area, but this percentage went down to 25 percent by 1999, 21 percent by 2000, and 19
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 5
percent by 2010 (Bureau, 2016; Geography, 2010). I have found that there is a general
understanding in both hunting research and popular discourse that those with rural upbringings
are more likely to hunt due to being surrounded by more people to socialize them into hunting
who have a “utilitarian orientation” towards nature (Stedman Richard C. & Heberlein Thomas
A., 2009); however, a study of hunting participation using data from the Continuous National
between September 1996 and January 1997 found that the only case in which a rural upbringing
significantly correlated with increased propensity for hunting was when respondents were men
whose fathers did not hunt; otherwise, respondents’ upbringings did not seem to relate to their
participation later in life. (Stedman Richard C. & Heberlein Thomas A., 2009). Men with rural
upbringings without hunting fathers were more likely to hunt than any men with urban
upbringings, but all men who had hunting fathers were more likely to hunt than those who did
not regardless of upbringing. Women who did not have hunting fathers were almost never
hunters, regardless of where they were brought up. This signifies that having a father who hunts
correlates strongly with hunting participation and that the sociology of the family may actually
provide more insight into understanding hunting culture than comparing rural and urban settings.
In general, women have typically been 10-20 times less likely to participate in hunting
than men over the last century, but where there are more men who hunt, there are more women
who hunt, because women are typically socialized into hunting by men (Heberlein, Serup, &
Ericsson, 2008; Stedman Richard C. & Heberlein Thomas A., 2009). Now, however, the positive
correlation between hunting participation rates of men and women is starting to weaken and the
participation gap between men and women hunters is narrowing; the number of women who hunt
continues to grow as overall hunting participation in the U.S. continues to decline. According to
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 6
a study conducted by wildlife management research firm Responsive Management under a grant
from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, between 1985 and 1990, the percentage of women who
went hunting more than doubled, while the percentage of men who went hunting during this
same time period declined by 16 percent (Street, 2013). The number of U.S. women who hunt
Hunting motivations and behavior also differ between men and women hunters.
Responsive Management found that women hunt predominately for utilitarian and familial
reasons (Street, 2013). In fact, women were twice as likely as men to hunt for meat (47 percent
women, 22 percent men), more than twice as likely than men to hunt to be with friends and
family (27 percent women, 11 percent men), less than half as likely as men to hunt for the sport
and recreation (20 percent women, 45 percent men), and a third less likely than men to hunt to be
close to nature (7 percent women, 22 percent men). Additionally, a study of Texas hunters using
an online survey (2,000 respondents), seven regional public forums (300 participants), and three
stakeholder meetings revealed that women hunters listed being with their spouse as the most
important reason for going hunting (Adams, Brown, & Higginbotham, 2004)
values, commitments, experiences, and expectations that create a community of U.S. hunters
(McGuigan, 2017). Overall, hunters take to the woods for a variety of reasons; however,
“hunting in most parts of advanced capitalist societies is [now] divorced from necessities of
subsistence and is instead a leisure pursuit motivated by thrill- and trophy-seeking, kinship
bonding, personal fulfillment, and the inheritance of tradition” (McGuigan, 2017). Between
1980 and 2006, the percentages of hunters hunting primarily to obtain meat significantly
decreased from 43 percent of hunters to 22 percent (Kellert, 1985; Street, 2013). It’s interesting
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 7
to note that even though only 22 percent of hunters say going after the meat is the primary reason
they hunt, more than 95 percent of hunters say they eat what they kill (Byrd et al., 2017)). On the
other hand, those who said they hunted to be with friends and family increased from 9 percent in
1980 to 27 percent in 2006, and this jump seems to correlate with the increase in women hunters,
many of whom cite familial bonding as their primary motivator for hunting (Street, 2013).
Hunting to be close to nature also increased from 10 percent in 1980 to 16 percent in 2006. In
fact, some hunters argue that sterile supermarkets and branded packaging enforce distance
between humans and nature by removing them from food systems, and that hunting allows for an
authentic and unmediated diet that promotes more mindfulness and sustainability (Montgomery
I believe that a decline in hunting participation could be the result of a number of factors
that negatively impact engagement with all commodity-intensive forms of serious leisure,
including reduced access and opportunity, increased cost, or personal constraints, rather than
increases in antihunting attitudes, preference for and interest in other leisure activities that are
similarly time- and commodity-intensive, or major shifts in the sociological “hunting culture.”
According to The Overworked American: The Unexpected Decline of Leisure, a book by Juliet
Schor, numerous factors including consumerism, employment, and the division of labor between
men and women, there has been an ongoing decline in both time and energy for leisure, which
has led Americans to engage more in nonparticipatory, passive forms of leisure (Meeropol,
1992). According to the 2001 FHWAR, 46 percent of former hunters quit for family or work and
44 percent quit due to overall lack of time (U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census,
Index). A study published in the Academy of Marketing Studies journal by Montgomery and
Blalock used an online questionnaire posted on the website of Eastman’s Hunting Journals to
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 8
garner a convenience sample of 228 respondents and found that the biggest competitors for
hunters time were work (84 percent), family (71 percent), and household chores (18 percent)
(Montgomery & Blalock, 2010). Less than 11 percent of respondents reported that other
competing leisure activities stopped them from hunting. Hunting requires dedication to expenses
for various commodities, including purchased goods like guns, permits, and training that
equivalates to a net monetary loss for most participants (Pettis, 2016; Yoder, 1997). Although the
number of people who hunt has been on a steady decline, the total number of days hunted,
average hunting days per hunter, and total spending on hunting have all increased (“Survey,”
2013).
It should be noted that the difficulties one faces when choosing a method of counting the
nation’s hunters parallel the challenge of counting gun owners overall. The U.S. Census
uses hunting permit purchases as a proxy for determining the number of hunting consumers, but
this does not include those who are younger than 16 or older than 65 or those who don’t have to
buy permits, and some of those who purchase a permit do not end up hunting frequently, if at all
(Adams et al., 2004). Overall, even as widespread and highly visible gun control movements
bring the sociology of guns further into the mainstream and academic spotlight, the lack of
literature and original research on hunting culture in the contemporary U.S. reveals that this
discipline may not yet provide a holistic and complete review of the role guns actually play in
society. Although most hunters are white, middle-aged men, I believe centering them in research
has come at the expense of gun owners who come from marginalized populations, which creates
a less nuanced sociology of gun culture. Because some of the general population does not
researchers’ own biases may also limit the study of hunting (Street, 2013). According to a policy
report produced by a thought force aimed towards increasing hunter participation and retention
in Texas, characteristics of modern hunting experiences are so vastly different from those of the
past that a new model for understanding the economic, social, and cultural factors influencing
hunters is needed (Adams et al., 2004). Contemporary research on hunting involves survey data
to explore the demographics of hunters, their motivations, their attitudes and preferences and the
amount of money they spend, but little research takes in-depth looks at the social and cultural
meaning of hunting to those who actually hunt, although I found several theses and dissertations
that attempt to correct this gap by using ethnographic methods (Carruthers Den Hoed, 2017;
Littlefield, 2006; Pettis, 2016). There was also a lack of more detailed information on what types
of firearms hunters use and why hunters both do and do not choose to use semi-automatic rifles,
meaning that there is still further research to be done in order to further the gun control debate.
As addressed by our final class discussion, statistics and survey data are not enough to change
people’s views on guns on either side of the debate. In order to have conversations that generate
more progress, I believe a more robust understanding of how semi-automatic rifles, and firearms
in general, actually function in the daily lives of responsible, law-abiding gun-owners, including
hunters, is needed.
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 10
References
Adams, C. E., Brown, R. D., & Higginbotham, B. J. (2004). Developing a strategic plan for
future hunting participation in Texas. Wildlife Society Bulletin; Bethesda, 32(4), 1156–
1165.
Azrael, D., Hepburn, L., Hemenway, D., & Miller, M. (2017). The Stock and Flow of U.S.
Firearms: Results from the 2015 National Firearms Survey. RSF, 3(5), 38–57.
https://doi.org/10.7758/RSF.2017.3.5.02
Hunters in Eastern North Carolina (M.A.). East Carolina University, United States --
https://search.proquest.com/sociology/docview/1952360544/abstract/7EFF1053A7EA4C
77PQ/1
https://www.census.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2016/cb16-210.html
Byrd, E., Lee, J. G., & Widmar, N. J. O. (2017). Perceptions of Hunting and Hunters by U.S.
Carruthers Den Hoed, R. (2017, August 17). Hunting for Food Citizenship: Food, Politics, and
http://dx.doi.org/10.5072/PRISM/26399
David W. Moore. (2003, May 21). Public Lukewarm on Animal Rights. Gallup. Retrieved from
http://news.gallup.com/poll/8461/Public-Lukewarm-Animal-Rights.aspx
Dimock, M., Doherty, C., & Christian, L. (n.d.). Why Own a Gun? Protection Is Now Top
Reason, 24.
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 11
Geography, U. C. B. (2010). 2010 Census Urban and Rural Classification and Urban Area
rural-2010.html
George J. Mitchell. (2018, March 28). Banning assault weapons is effective — and not all that
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/03/23/banning-assault-weapons-effective-
and-not-all-that-complicated/09e4tKJqmdr73xDQHFY40I/story.html
Heberlein, T. A., Serup, B., & Ericsson, G. (2008). Female Hunting Participation in North
https://doi.org/10.1080/10871200802294265
W. Fox & L. D. Mickley (Eds.), Advances in Animal Welfare Science 1984 (pp. 177–
https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/handle/10919/29695
McGuigan, L. (2017). The hunting industry: Exploring the marriage of consumerism, sport
https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540516634415
Modern Sporting Rifle - AR-15 platform-based rifles. (2017, July 5). Retrieved April 28, 2018,
from https://www.nssf.org/msr/
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 12
Montgomery, R., & Blalock, M. G. (2010). The Impact of Access, Cost, Demographics, and
Neilson, S. (2006, July). Hunting with Ethics. Alaska; Anchorage, 72(5), 56-58,74.
Influences and Scholarship Related to the Pursuit of Wild Game. The Ohio State
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/pg_10?0::NO:10:P10_ACCESSION_NUM:osu14799245426487
63
Pew Research Center. (2013). Why Own a Gun? Protection Is Now Top Reason. Retrieved from
http://www.people-press.org/2013/03/12/why-own-a-gun-protection-is-now-top-reason/
Responsive Management. (2015). How to talk to the Public About Hunting. Retrieved from
http://www.responsivemanagement.com/download/RM_ENews/RM_HuntPublic_newsle
tter.pdf
State Constitutional Right to Hunt and Fish. (n.d.). Retrieved April 28, 2018, from
http://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/state-constitutional-
right-to-hunt-and-fish.aspx
Stedman Richard C., & Heberlein Thomas A. (2009). Hunting and Rural Socialization:
Contingent Effects of the Rural Setting on Hunting Participation. Rural Sociology, 66(4),
599–617. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1549-0831.2001.tb00086.x
Street, F. (2013). Exploring Recent Increases in Hunting and Fishing Participation (p. 168).
Responsive Management.
Survey: Public Approval of Hunting Highest Since 1995 • NSSF. (2013, April 11). Retrieved
Running head: HUNTING CULTURE IN GUN CULTURE 2.0 13
since-1995/
U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census. (Index). National survey of fishing,
hunting and wildlife-associated recreation : self-study for field representatives (new hires
http://hdl.handle.net/2027/umn.31951d01338537x
Vaske, J. J., & Roemer, J. M. (2013). Differences in Overall Satisfaction by Consumptive and
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2013.777819
Will Drabold. (2016, July 6). Here Are 7 Animals Hunters Kill Using an AR-15. TIME.
Wright, J. D. (1995). Ten essential observations on guns in America. Society, 32(3), 63–68.
https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02693310
Yamane David. (2017). The sociology of U.S. gun culture. Sociology Compass, 11(7), e12497.
https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12497
Yoder, D. G. (1997). A model for commodity intensive serious leisure. Journal of Leisure