Skip to main content



R3minutesR3 capacity has increased exponentially over the years and there are more projects, success stories, and lessons learned than we can count. In an effort to capture some of the year’s highlights, practitioners stepped in the ring to compete toe-to-toe in this lighthearted competition.

What is R3minutes?

R3minutes is a no holds barred; fun competition designed to allow a crowd of presenters the opportunity to highlight their best R3 efforts in rapid succession. Each presenter will have three minutes and one PowerPoint slide to step up to the mic and tell their story. No R3 project or effort is too big or small to share the why, how, outcomes and takeaways. R3minutes will provide the community with a broad overview of the great R3 work around the country and present an opportunity for attendees to follow up with presenters during the symposium and by email.



Submit Your

R3minutes Abstract

Please complete the following R3minutes submission form for Council consideration. The top 20 submissions will be chosen, and presenters will be notified of their selection.

R3minutes Submission

The Rules

Competition without rules is chaos, so act in accordance with the following:

  1. R3minutes must be projects or efforts related to R3 for hunting, shooting sports, angling or boating related to any discipline including marketing, licensing, policy, regulation, access, on-the-ground programs.
  2. R3minutes require one PowerPoint slide (no less, no more). Get creative and focus on effectively communicating your project or effort. Slide must include your name and email address to facilitate follow up questions.
  3. R3minutes is just that – Three minutes to communicate the why, how, outcomes and takeaways of your R3 project of effort. Practice in advance, to ensure you stay within the allotted three minutes.

How R3minutes are judged?

The primary goal of R3minutes is to provide an opportunity for many presenters compete and share highlights in a short amount of time. Our panel of expert judges don’t take themselves too seriously, but will strive to strictly follow these judging criteria:

  • Did the presentation follow a clear, concise, and logical pathway?
  • Was the need for the project or effort communicated effectively?
  • Were there main results and takeaways that could benefit the R3 community? (Does not have to be positive results, it could also be a lesson learned.)
  • Did the presentation make the audience want to know more?
  • Did the presenter convey enthusiasm for the project or effort and maintain the audience’s attention?
  • Did the PowerPoint slide enhance the presentation and provide contact information?
  • Did the presenter spend adequate time on each area of the presentation?