“History has shown that if you want to save something on this planet, make it a huntable or fishable species, and allow a constituency to form around it.” Dennis Anderson, outdoor editor of the Star Tribune, wrote that. I found the quote in the summer issue of the Delta Waterfowl magazine. Delta Waterfowl is an organization devoted to waterbird conservation and hunting. Hunting seasons for songbirds are not going to happen, obviously, and shouldn’t. But songbirds have more population problems than game birds do. Why? Could it be that hunters invest more passion, energy, and money into conservation of their chosen species? Do hunters have more political clout than birders do?Except for the bang factor, do you see difference between hunters and birders? If Anderson is right, why do we have to kill them to save them?Â

This entry was posted on Saturday, August 2nd, 2008 at 7:00 am and is filed under Bird conservation, Birds and politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.