A lot of people engage in outdoor sports and activities other than hunting and fishing. Since the 1960's things like rock climbing, mountain biking, hiking, bird watching, wildlife photography, snowmobiles, ATV's, para-sailing/hang gliding, snowboarding and alpine skiing have all become huge businesses.
People do get out, and spend a lot of money, just for different pursuits. It is a value judgement to say one's hunting trip is better than someone else's skiing trip.
If the same percentage of a now larger population pursued hunting and fishing as in earlier times, it would drive the participation costs very high. The supply of lands available for that is shrinking. From that perspective, the remaining avid hunters and fishermen ought not to look a gift horse in the mouth. :laughing:
Deciding who pays what for their outdoor recreation is the challenge. In most states, hunting and fishing carries too much of the financial burden of maintaining the wildlife that many others enjoy the use of.
Doing away with regulations would result in a return to the days when wildlife game was all but gone before regulations. For example, I think we would find bear carcasses here in Maine with their paws and bile glands removed because those are worth a lot in the black market trade. There would be no trout left in Maine lakes and rivers were it not for the state hatcheries restocking them every year. Who supports the hatchery and the cost of policing limits, seasons and baits, if fees and regulations are eliminated?
Even at the currently reduced hunting and fishing demand, the natural supply is over-used in many cases.