As we all know, them that has the gold makes the rules.
As a result, I’ve always had mixed feelings about duck stamps and other related items. On the one hand, it makes a lot of sense that people who are using up wildlife, the common property of all American citizens (if you happen to live in the U.S., which for the purposes of this post, is what we’re discussing), should pay for the privilege. On the other hand, parks and trails and habitat and so forth cost money to maintain, and when a substantial chunk of that money comes from hunters, hunters will naturally be catered to by state wildlife departments. That isn’t always good news for birders and ecologists. Whether it’s managing habitat for edge-loving species like white-tailed deer (and thus other edge-loving species like Brown-headed Cowbirds), introducing game bird species from entire different continents, or engaging in predator control that might at best be termed overenthusiastic, hunter-centric natural resources management practices are often not what they would be if birders called the shots.
So I’m delighted to hear (via A D.C. Birding Blog) about this effort in Maine to create a birder-driven revenue stream for wildlife. The mechanism is clever and useful; the bands themselves are visible enough that there should hopefully be a positive peer pressure effect from participants; and the funds go directly to support programs for non-game species. If New York adopts a similar program, I will definitely participate.
February 23, 2009 at 8:02 am
Nice pun.
Within a system of (partially?) financing state-owned wildlife management areas through funding from private stakeholders, a “bird stamp” to counter the hunter lobby’s influence on management policies is certainly worth supporting so long as this generally flawed financing system remains in place.
However, it would generally seem to me that this is like trying to fight fire with gasoline.
The core problem is that state-run wildlife management areas are underfunded by the state (people, society, tax payers) and are thus dependent on external private contributions. This will always make them susceptible to political interference that favours the interests of them that has (or rather gives) the money. And birders might not always be that much better than hunters, e.g. by demanding access to sensitive areas, having trail systems expanded and pushing for more hides to be errected where they might cause disturbance to birds or especially other wildlife birders don’t care that much about.
The only viable solution (as I see it) is to finance conservation / management areas exclusively through taxes. This will give their management the independence necessary to operate solely on a scientific base.
But as this is not likely to happen any time soon in the US, buying bird stamps sounds like an excellent idea.
I’d buy one if I lived in Maine.
Heck, I’d even buy two.
February 23, 2009 at 3:30 pm
Jochen: Your point is well-taken; birders aren’t saints, and ideally funding for wilderness preservation and wildlife protection would be as free as possible from the vagaries of politics. We’re a long way away from that world, unfortunately.
And hurrah for you posting again! Can we hope this is the start of a trend?
February 23, 2009 at 4:22 pm
In Germany, wildlife management areas are (almost) exclusively financed through taxes. This means of course that they are independent in their management but it also means that they have absolutely no money whatsoever to actually get any management done. Yes, it’s a long, long way…
And thanks, it feels so good to write again!! The start of a trend? Well, I’ll be “free” to write during the time my wife stays at the in-laws for a holiday. After that? We’ll see.
I have often thought that my comments on other blogs, especially yours and Nate’s, are often so extensive that I might as well post them on my own blog with a short reference to the original essay. That is Plan B, so to speak. But for now, the plan is to write until my fingertips are numb.
February 24, 2009 at 12:33 am
I actually agree with Jochen on this, but unfortunately our political climate is such that wildlife management needs to rely on private funding to make up for their shortfall in tax revenues. I like the idea of raising revenue through binocular bands because it provides a tangible service in return for donations (help recovering lost binoculars) and a visible symbol that might encourage other birders to join in. That makes the program a bit more appropriate for birders than duck stamps (though buying those can be useful too).
March 3, 2009 at 6:06 pm
I’m a strong proponent of birders finding an alternative to the duck stamp. This line from the Maine bird band site says it all: “Maine’s hunters and anglers through license fees and equipment taxes have paid for the bulk of these efforts.” No matter how many non-hunters purchase duck stamps, hunters get the credit.