Hacker News Reader

Comment by cbcoutinho | Hacker News Reader

I would recommend right-leaning groups as well, but that's mostly because of the hunting communities are usually associated with the actual 'use' of public lands, and have been supporting most of the ecological/wildlife research. There's recently been a big push towards historically sustainable wildlife systems, and that's a topic that resonates with most of the more conservative hunting communities.

View on HN

Yup. A lot of people don't want to admit that hunters were the original conservationists. And also, a lot of non-hunters don't support hunting-oriented conservation methods. For instance, just because you buy a duck stamp it doesn't mean you have to go duck hunting. Duck stamps support the preservation of duck habitat and other wetlands. Buying a duck stamp is an easy way to directly contribute targetted money to wetlands preservation. Just for an example.

Yea this is exactly what I was talking about. Buying a fishing tag or a hunting tag is also an excellent way to get money directly into the hands of those who work in environmental conservation

hunters originally only wanted to 'preserve' what they wanted to kill... otherwise we'd still have wolves, grizzlies, and other predators of all sizes, at their historic populations. likewise, certain hunters favorites wouldn't be dealing with population issues now. the ranchers have done the most harm though, they seem to want to kill everything, imo.

Ironically one of the consequences of strict laws protecting endangered species is it actually leads to more destruction not less. A rancher notices a protected animal on his land and gets rid of it to avoid getting harangued by the government. "Shoot, Shovel and Shutup"

Not entirely. In practice, the net result is that hunters want to preserve habitat. The large predator species that you mention require a huge range. It is the fragmentation of habitat that has done them in as much as anything else.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com