This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Many of our most puzzling statistics arise from this otherwise innocuous report. In fact, this is the source for the statistic — that approximately 71 million Americans are “bird watchers” — that has been a veritable iceberg to the Titanic of any birding-industry company that took the number at face value.
In 1976, Congress changed the official name to the Migratory Bird Hunting and Conservation Stamp , presumably to broaden its appeal to non-hunters. Why promote the stamp to waterfowl hunters when it is mandatory that they buy one to hunt waterfowl? clean water) benefit from the contributions of hunters and anglers.”
Hunters frequently refer to them as “Rib-eye in the Sky” due to the excellent taste. ” Rather, he said it was entirely about giving hunters the chance to hunt cranes. Commissioner Gassett, can it really be worth the rancor of thousands of Kentucky’s wildlife watchers to grant 400 hunters the opportunity to shoot them?
For example, years ago, Eiton Tchenrov postulated that the wild progenitor of the domestic dog, some subspecies or another of wolf, could benefit from overlapping its breeding territory with human hunters. The humans tended to keep away a range of predators that might take the pups as a form of interference competition.
I spent a lot of time with Efe Pygmy hunters in the deep forest, and I spent a certain amount of time either entirely alone or with only one other researcher, this or that American. But in the absence of Efe Pygmy hunters, we ran into ground mammals much more frequently, and not because we were doing a better job of sneaking around.
Nearly exterminated in Maine by hunters in the 1800‘s, the charismatic, orange-beaked little puffins nested only on one other state island until Dr. Kress painstakingly – and groundbreakingly – lured them back to nest on Eastern Egg Rock in 1977. “We
Nationwide, wildlife watchers now outspend hunters 6 to 1. Giving a few hundred hunters something else to shoot, in my opinion, cannot be worth the blowback from tens of thousands of people who are willing to travel and spend just to watch the birds fly over. Isn’t that neat?
A recent meta study ( The impact of free-ranging domestic cats on wildlife of the United States ) that applied strict inclusion criteria and some fancy statistics estimates that 2.4 About 15 million birds are killed annually by hunters, and of course this is distributed among a very small number of species.
The USDA National Agricultural Statistics Services shows that most livestock losses come from weather, disease, illness, and birthing problems, and not predation. This amount is considerably less than the number of animals taken by hunters and trappers annually.
The argument is straightforward: birders (and others, including hunters) buy stamps and the federal government turns around and obtains important bird habitat. Although the statistics do not address the quality of the land purchased or other qualitative factors, it is safe to assume that when it comes to protecting habitat, size matters.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 30+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content