Editor,
I feel utterly compelled to respond to the wildlife preserves column by Paula Moore and Carla Bennett. It seems time and time again People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) comes out and throws itself behind a cause in which it seamlessly finds a way to bring up its goal of ending hunting and fishing. The column states so many egregious errors in reference to hunting and fishing it is ridiculous.
The rhetoric these people preach reaches into the hearts of Americans with phrases such as "needless slaughter," "massacre of animals" and that hunting is not a civilized activity, as if the millions of hunters in this country are Neanderthals that traipse about the woods of America killing everything in sight.
In terms of population control, hunting is the only viable option for this problem. Without hunting, the yearly winterkill of animals would be astronomical. Animals will overproduce and overreach the land's capacity to hold them, resulting in massive die-offs. The Fish and Wildlife Service "allows for and encourages hunters to massacre animals," as Moore and Bennett state.
Without hunters and the Fish and Wildlife Service, there wouldn't even be game animals. Hunters are the wardens and protectors of the game they pursue.
It is funny the lengths that members of PETA will go to push their views on everyone else. In my home state of Washington, a PETA-led initiative to ban bear and cougar hunting with traps and hounds passed in 1996.
Get content from The Daily Lobo delivered to your inbox
This of course then led to incidents of bear and cougar attacks on people that totaled more in the following three years than in the last 50. The rapid increase in predator populations also had a devastating effect on prey populations. The presence of hunting in an ecosystem creates the natural balance between predator and prey that would naturally occur if humans were not present.
Hunters are the reason why there are so many animals today.
The historic Pittmam-Roberston Act, which passed in the mid-1920s taxes hunters on their gear and licenses. This money goes directly back into habitat preservation and other measures to benefit the wildlife.
Before the turn of the century, game animals such as deer, elk, antelope, turkey, pheasants, bear and cougars were at historic lows. Through hunters' efforts, all these animals have rebounded to exponential population increases.
Also, Moore and Bennett state that efforts to recruit new hunters have failed miserably. Why is it that the fastest segment of growth in hunting and fishing is women?
In conclusion, when you read an error-filled column like this, ask yourself to get beyond the political ideology of PETA and try to see that hunting and fishing are the best tools for animals and wildlife management.
Fishermen, like hunters, are the only people to get into the water and forests to do something tangible to help improve the habitat and game and fish populations. Hunters and fishermen are the preservers of the outdoors, not PETA.
When you can, get outside and try fishing or hunting. While you are at it, take a child along to experience the great outdoors.
Josh Mills
UNM junior
Avid hunter and fisherman
