Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: BCWF-Ending trophy hunting could actually be worse for endangered species

  1. #11
    Pemby_mess Guest

    Re: BCWF-Ending trophy hunting could actually be worse for endangered species

    Quote Originally Posted by 325 View Post
    I agree that the value of maintaining wildlife and habitat is not motivated by financial considerations to the same degree as in African nations, as we are simply wealthier with more options. The non-economic arguments for wildlife conservation are valid, but where actual work is done to conserve wildlife and important habitats in NA (transplants, burns, land purchases, etc, etc), most of the money comes from hunter dollars, and often outside of government.
    Ok, i don't think I have an argument with that.

    Is it enough though?

    In BC, approximately 13% of our land base is protected, which is actually falling well short of many, more progressive developing countries. Even that, was starting to come under a lot of pressure by the previous political tenure. They themselves under significant financial pressure from parties with large economic interests in land use. The economic input from hunter's can't compete with that, when they are up against monied adverse interests, using economic justification alone.

    I have a realistic example that would help us parse about all these competing land use interests, if you're interested. But I think the fact remains; if hunter's try to use economic arguments to advance what should be their primary focus, they will continue to lose debates with adverse parties.

  2. #12
    Pemby_mess Guest

    Re: BCWF-Ending trophy hunting could actually be worse for endangered species

    What i meant to include above is;

    Consistent with the article, and that which is commonly known; the most important factor in bc conservation intiatives, will unfortunately only be accomplished by often foregoing economic opportunity rather than generating it. This I think is one of the biggest differences between the success seen in African conservation vs here in the developed world.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    3,875

    Re: BCWF-Ending trophy hunting could actually be worse for endangered species

    Quote Originally Posted by Pemby_mess View Post
    Ok, i don't think I have an argument with that.

    Is it enough though?

    In BC, approximately 13% of our land base is protected, which is actually falling well short of many, more progressive developing countries. Even that, was starting to come under a lot of pressure by the previous political tenure. They themselves under significant financial pressure from parties with large economic interests in land use. The economic input from hunter's can't compete with that, when they are up against monied adverse interests, using economic justification alone.

    I have a realistic example that would help us parse about all these competing land use interests, if you're interested. But I think the fact remains; if hunter's try to use economic arguments to advance what should be their primary focus, they will continue to lose debates with adverse parties.
    I think the intrinsic value of wildlife and maintaining biodiversity should be the ultimate motivator in wildlife conservation in NA. The existing irony in NA is that non-consumptive users of wildlife (mostly people who just like viewing wild creatures - which is valid, as I also enjoy wildlife viewing), have somehow decided that by opposing our hunting heritage, they are somehow "protecting" animals. What they fail to realize is that large, charismatic mega fauna, in many areas exists SOLEY due to the conservation efforts of hunters, trappers and anglers. In essence the wildlife they want to protect from hunters would be extirpated or extinct had it not been for the visionaries (mostly hunters) a century ago, who developed a successful model for wildlife conservation. All people should have a vested interest in maintaining biodiversity, and promoting viable wildlife populations, without making the mistake of attacking our collective hunting heritage.
    I won't always be young, but I can be immature forever

  4. #14
    Pemby_mess Guest

    Re: BCWF-Ending trophy hunting could actually be worse for endangered species

    Quote Originally Posted by 325 View Post
    I think the intrinsic value of wildlife and maintaining biodiversity should be the ultimate motivator in wildlife conservation in NA. The existing irony in NA is that non-consumptive users of wildlife (mostly people who just like viewing wild creatures - which is valid, as I also enjoy wildlife viewing), have somehow decided that by opposing our hunting heritage, they are somehow "protecting" animals. What they fail to realize is that large, charismatic mega fauna, in many areas exists SOLEY due to the conservation efforts of hunters, trappers and anglers. In essence the wildlife they want to protect from hunters would be extirpated or extinct had it not been for the visionaries (mostly hunters) a century ago, who developed a successful model for wildlife conservation. All people should have a vested interest in maintaining biodiversity, and promoting viable wildlife populations, without making the mistake of attacking our collective hunting heritage.
    All great points!

    However, I would not discount the importance of setting aside land for non-consumptive use. It behooves hunters to recognize the value of setting aside land from all forms of human interference, that may even include wildlife viewing etc. Having areas that do best with non-consumptive values recognized, certainly benefits the adjacent areas where land management coincides with hunting. Of course, Hunting is even critically necessary in wilderness-human interfaces. A fact easily lost on true anti-hunting advocates.

    When i took the opportunity, prompted by yourself, to brush up on my understanding of the NAWMM; one of the things I was most struck by, is how closely its implementation coincided with Roosevelt's formation of National parks in the US, and by extension concurrently here in Canada. This was obviously encouraged, and recognized as important by the vast majority of the voting population- not just sport hunters.

    As time proceeds, and land use gets more complex, i think trying to look for silver bullets is unsound. Sticking to dogmatic ideologies on any side is equally so. Reaching out for partners that may vehemently disagree on some points, but have core interests in common is essential.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Nelson, BC
    Posts
    3,875

    Re: BCWF-Ending trophy hunting could actually be worse for endangered species

    Quote Originally Posted by Pemby_mess View Post
    All great points!

    However, I would not discount the importance of setting aside land for non-consumptive use. It behooves hunters to recognize the value of setting aside land from all forms of human interference, that may even include wildlife viewing etc. Having areas that do best with non-consumptive values recognized, certainly benefits the adjacent areas where land management coincides with hunting. Of course, Hunting is even critically necessary in wilderness-human interfaces. A fact easily lost on true anti-hunting advocates.

    When i took the opportunity, prompted by yourself, to brush up on my understanding of the NAWMM; one of the things I was most struck by, is how closely its implementation coincided with Roosevelt's formation of National parks in the US, and by extension concurrently here in Canada. This was obviously encouraged, and recognized as important by the vast majority of the voting population- not just sport hunters.

    As time proceeds, and land use gets more complex, i think trying to look for silver bullets is unsound. Sticking to dogmatic ideologies on any side is equally so. Reaching out for partners that may vehemently disagree on some points, but have core interests in common is essential.
    We need to let science lead our decisions when managing wildlife. Making huge policy or management changes based on guesses or feelings would be ineffective or even disastrous. If all users, consumptive and otherwise support science based, and not agenda based wildlife management, wildlife would benefit.

    Keep in mind, anti hunting is big business. The business model of organized anti hunting groups precludes any cooperation with hunters. In fact, their business model precludes the use of sound wildlife management policy
    I won't always be young, but I can be immature forever

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •