1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Decline in shooting 1989 - 2007

Discussion in 'Uncategorized Threads' started by jimbotrap, Jul 1, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jimbotrap

    jimbotrap TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    791
    While rummaging around I ran accoss the ATA average book for 1989. I glanced at the participation page and was shocked at what I saw. Nearly all major states were off in number of targets shot. Following is a list of the total target decline for many of these states

    California 2,366,070 - Certainly the largest by a considerable amount.

    Iowa 230,450

    Indiana 278,090

    Michigan 604,300

    New York 771,650

    Ohio 807,076 - Loss of the Grand is a contributing factor

    Penn. 1,132,875 - A huge loss for what has always been the target
    leader.

    Wisconsin 246,730

    Total target decline 5,337,550

    Only Illinois, Missouri and Texas showed increases

    The Illinois target increase probably is due to the relocation of the Grand.

    We have been constantly advised things are not bad. If that is true then why such losses? I certainly do not have the answers, but I would believe the ATA should be investigating same. Maybe they should hire a firm to do a study.

    With the declining economy I would be inclined to believe the declines will be even great this years.
     
  2. W.P.T.

    W.P.T. TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    8,371
    I think if you look it up again in a few more years your going to see some even more shocking numbers ... The economy is going to play hell with sports like trapshooting because more and more people are going to be on fixed incomes as time goes by ... The average shooter cannot compete like they would like to based on the increases in cost ... Look around, it ain't a pretty picture ... WPT ... (YAC) ...
     
  3. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    The California State shoot was up a few points this year. Our Club is already 100% higher than last year in registered targets (100,000+). Anyone who wishes to blame the economy,(which still is not in a recession), or the cost of shooting for any decline is looking for excuses and not solutions.

    The ATA either ought to invest some of its nest egg and/or raise dues and fees and hire a a competent marketing firm to develop a club level marketing program that clubs can use to expand their membership base. The various state associations also should raise their dues and daily fees to provide funding for club growth.

    Paying a lousy $2.00/$3.00 a day in fees while the sport suffers is myopic to the point of being ludicrous. The problem is that there are too many old farts on the various boards, club, state and ATA, who think that $2.50 targets are just fine. What BS!

    When I see the parking lot full of $50,000 - $500,000 RVs and $40,000 trucks and the line racks full of $10,000 shotguns, I see guys who can afford an extra $5.00 per day to invest to go out and find some more just like them.

    While it is trite, if all of us brought just one more sucker into this sport the number of particpants would almost double. Instead, I see and hear a bunch guys who would rather sit on their increasing fat lard asses and either bitch about how bad things are or moan about how good things use to be. While rare, it sure is refreshing when I hear someone say how they are going to work to make things better.
     
  4. BDodd

    BDodd TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,594
    I'll wager it may look even worse if we went back to as far as 1980. In the Bay area of California the '70s and maybe into the early '80s was a boom for bay area clubs and state shoots
     
  5. shot410ga

    shot410ga Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    7,760
    I think we've already seen the shell makers come out with cheaper lines of shells. I don't see anyone shooting STS, Nitro 27, or AA's anymore. Let alone Federal Papers. No one is buying shot. ERGO: prices are comming down. However, will it be enough to keep the core shooters in the sport? I know I've cut back my shooting. Not much, but some. As I thing most regular shooters, I know have.
     
  6. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Tell Exxon they need to lower the price of their gas and diesel so shooters can drive farther and shoot more. They are killing the sport, no?

    NO.

    We are killing the sport by not bringing new people into it.

    BTW, the oil companies only make a 10% profit. The governments, local, state and federal have taken 3 TIMES the amount in taxes that the oil companies have made in profits over the last 20 years.
     
  7. Bisi

    Bisi TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,399
    JBrooks wrote - "When I see the parking lot full of $50,000 - $500,000 RVs and $40,000 trucks and the line racks full of $10,000 shotguns, I see guys who can afford an extra $5.00 per day to invest to go out and find some more just like them."

    If I didn't know better I would swear a liberal wrote that. Sounds like something Pelosi, Reid, Clintons, etal would say. I can hear em now. "When I see corporate execs living in million dollar mansions with stock bonuses, flying in Gulfstreams, raking in obscene record profits, I see people who have more money than they need and they can afford a large tax increase. They got more than they can use, we need that money to provide health care, and college tuition for the poor".

    Say it ain't so.
     
  8. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Bisi,

    "I see guys who can afford an extra $5.00 per day to invest to go out and find some more just like them."

    I don't think you can find where I said we needed money to help out the poorer shooter. I said we need money to invest to go out and find the more affluent shooters like the ones with the RVs and the trucks and guns who can afford to keep this sport alive.

    It is the guys running the sport that seem more concerned about keeping the sport "affordable" for the guys that are in it rather than make the hard decisions to raise enough money to recruit guys who aren't in but can afford it.
     
  9. tburrey

    tburrey Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    130
    Our club here in Florida works a lot with youth through the boy scouts (they do a great job) but I truthfully have to admit that I haven't seen any of these kids stay with trap shooting after there out of the scouts and grown up. Maybe a couple have but if so I'm not aware of it.

    Over the years I've brought several friends out to shoot a round or two of trap and while they say it was interesting a fun they go on to other hobbies and I can't seem to get them really interested in the sport. Several of those friends (who are also hunters and fisherman) have got involved some with the local sporting clays tournments though. They even invited me to one such tournment and it was fun but not really what I like compared to trap.

    I've tried to get my two grandsons interested in trap but they would rather play video games on their computer and I cannot seem to get them interested in trap shooting. Maybe it's the lifestyle here in Florida, I don't know.

    I know before I moved to Florida in 79 I spent my years in Ohio and it seemed like a lot of kids were with their dads at the small 50 bird shoots with games and I still see some of that when I go up their in the summer but not near as many as years ago. Just my thoughts. Tom
     
  10. ffwildcat

    ffwildcat TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    845
    JB - you need to do a little more homework.

    Go pull up the annual report for Exxon and look at their income statement, balance sheet and statement of cash flows then tell me what their single biggest use of cash was in the last 3 years?

    They generated $150 B I L L I O N in cash the last 3 years from their operations.

    They increased their cash balance by $28 B I L L I O N over those same 3 years.

    The single biggest undertaking was not not building new refineries, not searching for new fields - it was buying back their own stock.

    Big oil is sticking it to the consumer is a BIG way.
     
  11. JBrooks

    JBrooks TS Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2006
    Messages:
    3,707
    Dear Kitty,

    So what is your point? They are profitable. They gave the money to their shareholders. That is the way it is supposed to work.

    They are not allowed to build new refineries and they already know where 10s of billions of barrels oil is but the Democrats won't allow them to drill.

    Sorry dude, but it is the environmentalists and the Democrats that have, are and will continue to stick it to the consumers in a big way. So, try to relax while you are bending over filling out that ballot for your democrat candidate.
     
  12. DTrykow

    DTrykow Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,542
    It's almost a 20 year slide. Not all oil related. The recent spike is taking it's toll. But what about other things like 20 years of negativity against guns. Skeet and especially Sporting Clays which has taken off. Alot of shooters have switched sports. Just some thoughts. Dave T.
     
  13. ffwildcat

    ffwildcat TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    845
    Now we're getting down to it - who's interest were they looking after while generating record profits? Not the american people, not the future energy needs of the world. they were looking after their shareholders. at who's expense?

    and if you think i'm a lefty pinko you'd be as wrong about that as you are pretty much everything else.
     
  14. markdenis

    markdenis TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,123
    Yep...I really feel sorry for those big oil companies. They buy back their own stock with investors money. They SHOULD BE building new refineries, searching for new fields and building more holding facilities. As reported by the head of OPEC today, "right now we have many tankers full of oil waiting to come to the US but we have no place to unload our oil."
     
  15. Dove Commander

    Dove Commander TS Member

    Joined:
    Feb 21, 2007
    Messages:
    1,364
    Wildcat, if you have a 401K, mutuals, or any blended stock fund...you own oil. If you don't own any of the above...well you missed the boat. Hell yes, I want the oil companies to make money. They pay taxes, employ people, create new jobs, and the best of all, they offer the product to fill my tank, not the government. I would rather pay $5 a gallon than pay $3 and have a shortage. What has a democrat done to add one drop of oil to the world market...NADA.
     
  16. jimbotrap

    jimbotrap TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    791
    As pointed out above we are an aging sport. Over 20% of the shooters at the California State Shoot were 65 and older. Some still shoot well.

    This is not about oil. Oil and fuel prices only started to increase in the past year. If you look at the prices of ammunition and entry fee's, over the past 20 years, compared to inflation you should note our sport costs have not increase proportionately. Although the demand for the recreation dollar has increased, and in shooting, the advent and increase in sporting clays, I do not believe these are the underlying problems. There are problems within our sport that are far more detrimental. These points have been argued continueally. But alas our Board of Directors only sees increasing sanctions, not promotion. - Jim
     
  17. Rick Jordon

    Rick Jordon TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2008
    Messages:
    5
    Just outta curiosity - has the ATA kept track of how many clubs there were throwing registered targets then vs now?


    I haven't been shooting trap for very long (less than a year), but I've shot NRA highpower rifle for years. That discipline is slowly dieing off from lack of ranges.


    The ranges around me are all 30 miles+ driving. My favorite has had to negotiate it's hours with neighbors that have been complaining about noise.
    Where I used to live there was only one trap range within 112 miles.
     
  18. AveragEd

    AveragEd Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,477
    Location:
    Mechanicsburg, Pennsylvania
    Mr. Brooks said that the ATA either ought to invest some of its nest egg and/or raise dues and fees and hire a a competent marketing firm to develop a club level marketing program that clubs can use to expand their membership base. The various state associations also should raise their dues and daily fees to provide funding for club growth. Good ideas all, but...

    The ATA hired its own marketing manager many years ago and when he didn't work out, hired a marketing firm. The ATA has raised its dues several times over the past 15 years and the state associations have increased their daily fees at least once each during that time period.

    Now, bringing new faces into the sport would work. But trapshooting doesn't appeal to kids with anything resembling a social life because it lacks a "cool factor" and as soon as mom and/or dad stops paying the entry fees and buying the shells, there goes what few targets the kid was shooting.

    So we need to troll the local leagues - those shooters are demonstrating that they want competition just by doing something beyond shooting practice. But many of them fail to grasp why they should pay more for targets, pay a daily fee and drive an hour or more for the privilege of shooting at the same targets with the same gun and same shells under the same rules as they do back home in their league. I tried that angle years ago and that's the response I got on more than one occasion. If they don't have an ego that needs driven, it seems like registered shooting has no appeal to them.

    The bottom line is that target shooting with a shotgun is an expensive sport. Benchrest rifle, black powder and archery are much less costly ways to get your competitive shooting jollys. And in this area, all three can be done at almost any local gun club, so the rising gasoline prices have less effect upon participant turnout.

    Fellas, with all due respect, it all comes down to disposable income and a lot of us have less of it than we used to at a time when trapshooting costs more to do.

    Ed
     
  19. spitter

    spitter Well-Known Member TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,355
    Location:
    Prairie State
    While most folks would have been somewhat thrilled with nominal increases to their incomes, increases of 200% in gasoline costs over the past 3-4 years make people worried, but if you really break the cost of gas down it crystalizes the issue...

    15000 miles per year/15 mph average = 1000 gallons or up $2000; 15000/20mpg = 750 gallons or $1500 - that's real dough and unfortunately one can't eliminate all that increase by more efficient dirving habits.

    Participation in shooting sports in general are on the rise, but trap and other disciplines are on the decline - find the lowest common denominator in what's working and there is your answer...

    Jay
     
  20. markdenis

    markdenis TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    1,123
    Ed

    Respectfully, I disagree with "disposable income" the culprit for the decline in registered shooting. If anything, shooting has increased in my area at many clubs. Not registered ATA shooting, but games, leagues, etc.

    The person who started this thread was concerned about the decline in ATA participation for the last few years. If it keeps going like it is, we will be able to shoot the Grand on 20 traps pretty soon! I think ATA participation is declining because of our leadership with little vision toward the future of the ATA. The biggest trap shooting facility just built in Sparta stopped at the 27yd. line, we have NO professional division, and actually no clear rules in some very important areas.

    However, I do want to add that we now have a President that does at least correspond with ATA shooting members. I have been shooting for many years and this is the first President I know of that is not a ghost to the shooting public.

    On more than one occasion I have had a few heated arguments with Mr. Winston and we don't agree on most everything, but I do agree he is an asset to this sport at least for one year. ATA members are lucky to have him because he does at least listen and respond to the members which is more than I can say for any other President we have had. Maybe he is a start to something good for this sport!

    Mark Rounds
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.