When People for the Ethical Treatment of
Animals (PETA) relocated their headquarters to Norfolk, Virginia in 1996, well
over a million Virginians considered themselves hunters and anglers; and both
parties were aware of the other’s agenda.
Sportsmen of Virginia, and, likewise, the
game populations of Virginia, owe their contentment to one overarching
governmental branch. The Virginia
Department of Game and Inland Fisheries (VDGIF), founded in 1916, is the Old
Dominion’s vanguard agency concerned with the health of native species, as well
as their habitats. It is the VDGIF that sportsmen
in Virginia count on for the continuation of their sports.
To this end, it is the sportsmen that fund
almost half of the VDGIF’s over $57
million annual budget through license sales, which is implemented through
habitat, wildlife, fisheries, and public land management across the state,
directly benefitting wildlife. Despite
this agenda, PETA continues to oppose the sports that provide the backbone for
the state’s strongest, federally-funded, conservation-minded department because
of the activities it endorses.
But take for example the white-tailed deer,
which had nearly been extirpated in Virginia by 1900. Colonists, unrestricted by game laws,
overharvested the animal that was so plentiful in the New World. Modern hunting was not the cause of this
near-extinction, but unregulated hunting. By 1940, 24 years following the VDGIF’s
establishment, Virginia’s deer population was increasing exponentially. How would deer populations measure today
without the restorative habitat management and restrictive game laws
implemented by the Department? Chances
are, they wouldn’t around to be counted.
History has repeated itself, in the
instance of the plains buffalo, the great auk, the Tasmanian tiger, and the
woolly mammoth, proving that the morality and fire within human peoples in
significant numbers, native peoples included, are incapable of hunting fur and
meat species stewardly, and will decimate populations left unchecked. Thus, a regulatory body is necessary to
protect species of value to humans from disappearing altogether from the Earth.
But what about non-game species—the eastern
hellbender, bald eagle, or rattlesnake?
They too, PETA claims, matter, as significant elements in maintaining
adequate biodiversity in local—and, in some cases, foreign—ecosystems. Vultures, for instance, though largely
unappreciated, play the important role of decomposition and nutrient
cycling. They also serve as locator
beacons for other scavengers—foxes, coyotes, eagles—who aid in the process, and
laterally contribute to the control of disease originating from decaying
carcasses. In the interest of these
disregarded decomposers, the VDGIF invests well over $500,000 and 6,000 hours
of time annually. Without decomposers
like vultures, ecosystems would collapse, and undernourished lands would become
the norm.
The enthusiasm PETA places on climate
change should warrant some appreciation of this safeguarding of biological
niches. Another initiative within the
Department seeks to eradicate the non-native competitors of native bivalve
species, which, as filter feeders, do their job to buffer water pollution. Without these custodial wetland species,
contaminated waters would quickly destroy our planet’s most sensitive ecosystems
and the immensely rich population of the world’s fauna that they support, moreover
compromising the filters of the air.
Why then, if sportsmen, and the VDGIF that
they support more than the federal government itself, input such programs and
funds to protect and keep healthy all species of wildlife, conserve their
habitats, educate the public on living with and respecting them, and employ
conservation officers in order to monitor illegal activity and prosecute
criminals detracting from the well-being of our ecosystems, does PETA so
radically and heartily oppose hunting and fishing?
PETA’s struggle is one not uncommon in the
world. The conflicting ideals of
eradicating animal suffering and preserving nature and our planet clash at the
human level. Without the activities of
sportsmen, agencies such as the VDGIF would not be able to operate. As a result, anarchy would rule in the woods
and on our waters, non-natives would continue to immigrate into our native
habitats unnoticed, and the nature of an overzealous people would once again
prove that humans take what they want with reckless abandon. The large-scale disruption of biodiversity,
and the land devastation, pollution, and water contamination that would follow,
are the primary ingredients for cataclysmic climate change, which would critically
endanger the indigenous. To deny
governmental groups sponsored by sportsmen funding by prohibiting the
recreational activities that provide them funding is to accept such a reality.
Originally published in the Rural Virginian
No comments :
Post a Comment