A)
As I read through some of my sources that I have
already been looking at, habitat protection seems to be an important part of
conservation. I would like to see what
has been said about hunting in order to preserve not just the animal species,
but also the habitat that they live in.
B)
Macdonald, David W., and Katrina
Service. Key Topics in Conservation Biology. Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.,
2007. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.
Summarize:
This was another book, where the whole thing really doesn’t apply
to my topic. The section that I feel is
important to my overall question is
the understanding of habitat preservation.
The article notes habitat protection as a main point and then also comes
back to the same thoughts towards the end of this chapter. As I read through the habitat protection
section, there was a good deal of pro hunting at the beginning of the
piece. The text mentions protection of
habitats for some landowners is only done in order to hunt these game species
more efficiently. In a bit of contradiction
though it gives light to that conservation-minded landowners would do this even
if hunting wasn’t in the picture. A
little bit about African land is mentioned to give perspective of how much
farming and agriculture takes up space versus natural preservation in order to
hunt. Further on in the text a bit about
ecosystem health is mentioned along with proper biodiversity in populations. In order for the habitat to thrive and
naturally be preserved, populations of waterfowl and mammals need to be in
proper balance. It states after talking
about the need for biodiversity that, “Sport hunting in these cases exacerbated
the conservation problem”. Mentioning
that high numbers of animals in order to hunt them, can mean damage to native
habitats.
Think:
This source was helpful in what I was looking for, in order
to dig deeper into habitat preservation.
Habitat and its preservation is very important. In this article I get a sense that hunters
are times very good stewards of their land and thus they preserve their land in
order to just hunt. I think it is
important to think about the landowners as if they weren’t hunters. Personally I believe that if hunting was not
in affect, that these same landowners would still be practicing land stewardship
and looking out for the native habitats.
I think because this text puts a pro and a con on hunting as a tool to
preserve land, there is no real answer to this question. If I had to lead to a side on what this
article said though, it would be hard to refute that there are large
populations of animals that are preserved in order to hunt. These preservation of wildlife in order to
then hunt can actually damage certain parts of habitat. Now I see a real problem here. Hunters stop shooting animals, these
populations then potentially grow out of control, then habitat is
affected. If hunters do shoot animals,
populations decrease, and this potentially solves the problem of animals destroying
habitat. A huge circle that is
continually hard to figure out the right side.
Synthesize:
The most obvious connection for me is that of animal
populations and habitat conservation.
Hunting is being debated in both senses.
Like the above mentioned end to my thinking portion, there is a big
circle that brings populations of animals and habitat into conversation with
one another. Proper animal populations
and herd management is necessary in direct accordance with the habitat. If there is an over population of animals,
then habitat can suffer. If hunting is
practiced, then animal populations can suffer.
With these two items, they are in direct connection. There really is no one side for me to sit on,
because I either way I have to see one item have problems. Both habitats and populations have an
excellent way of adapting to its surroundings.
Which do I think has the better chance, animals in my opinion are better
off adapting then the environment.
Question and Think:
Where I think this leading is the whole idea of a properly
managed flocks and herds of animals.
Hunting or not hunting both can do good and bad things to the
preservation of land and animals.
Management and doing it in the proper sense. I know hunters say that they hunt in order to
maintain proper levels of animals, but is that true? I would like to know more about the other
methods to preserve animal populations.
I keep thinking to myself that hunting is good and bad at certain
portions in my research. There hasn’t been
a fully yes or no answer that has come to my head, and it is making me think
about what I have thought to be a normal task of harvesting an animal. I keep coming back to the same question,
concern, or idea, it hunting done in a proper method. Where I sit right now, I would like to see if
hunting is done with a conservationist mindset where it can lead. Someone who is out to get meat for their
families might not be thinking about conservation and there I see a controversy
that may need to be challenged and investigated. My question remains if hunting is a legitimate
means of conservation, but the in depth pieces lead me more to the knowledge of
the hunter and why he or she is in pursuit.
No comments:
Post a Comment