The February 1995 issue of Backpacker magazine reported the results of an informal poll taken on their Trail Poll Hotline. The question was, ���Should hunting be allowed in national parks?���
The reaction to that question was entirely unexpected. The first surprise came in the shape of a huge response. Quoting from their article, Backpacker wrote:
���With a final tally of 4,204 calls logged after five weeks of polling, this question blew all the previous response records out of the water by more than 2,000 calls.���
The second surprise was the final reckoning. Again, quoting the article:
���Some 55 percent of callers were in favor of hunting in national parks, while 45 percent voted against it.���
I came away from reading the article with two distinct realizations. Number one, people on both sides of the issue often felt very strongly about their positions and expressed their thoughts with intense emotional rhetoric, occasionally filled with anger and hostility.
More importantly, I realized that people on both sides of the issue often supported their positions based upon misleading, inaccurate or false information.
Understanding that so many people based their responses upon ���knowledge��� that was wrong, I could do nothing less than doubt the validity of this poll. I asked myself, how many respondents would have changed their answers (on both sides of this debate) had they been familiar with the unvarnished truth?
It has been ten years since Backpacker asked the question and published their results. Much has changed over the last decade. Counted among those changes is the fact that considerably more land has come under government control, both federal and state. At the same time, access to these lands by the public in general, and sportsmen in particular, has become more difficult.
Meanwhile, the costs of managing our public lands have skyrocketed. The National Park Service, in fact, has been at the heart of a contentious debate about funding sources, access fees, budgetary limits, and program cuts for the entire duration of the Bush administration. This same financial crunch is being felt by all resource management agencies at every level, public and private.
And while everyone screams that they don���t have enough money to do what they need to do, the resource management sector of our society has spawned an entire industry to address concerns about environmental conditions and wildlife populations. Despite the dollars being spent, we hear on a daily basis about another plant, animal, insect, river or chunk of real estate that is ���at risk���.
On top of it all, conflicts between humans and wildlife are on the rise. Large predators are expanding their ranges and getting into trouble. Large ungulates and migratory birds are eating themselves out of house and home. The agricultural industry is in constant turmoil over damaged crops and potential diseases while economic damage attributed to wildlife conflicts are estimated to be well into the billions of dollars.
The current system is not working.
Hard questions need to be asked and one question that can have far-reaching implications is the same question brought forward by Backpacker:
Should hunting be allowed in national parks?
This question is so important because it lies at the core of our policy decisions about resource management. If we cannot properly manage those tracts that represent our ���crown jewels���, how can we ever hope to appropriately manage the rest?
Before we answer that question, however, we need to eliminate the misleading, inaccurate and false information that has been so prevalent. We need to find the truth.
Through a series of in-depth articles over the course of the next several issues, ON STAND: The Sportsman���s Watchdog will be addressing a wide variety of topics that are at the foundation of this question. The intent is to provide relevant, factual data so that our readers may come to their own decisions ��� deliberate, informed and responsible decisions.
The National Park Service was established with a specific purpose in mind and a set of governing laws was established to help direct us along the right path. Over the course of our history we have seen both the purpose and the guidelines for the park system evolve.
This history has been documented and can provide us with many lessons, if we care to examine what has occurred. There are many legal issues that must be considered but the essence of laws and policies are social and philosophical beliefs. Many of these have not been publicly addressed.
There is also a serious question of economy. The prosperity of this nation has been a primary factor in our ability to preserve our natural resources, successfully exploit them for human use, and develop efficient methods for maintaining these same resources for the future. Our current path, however, portends a dark future should we fail to correct our current mistakes and misguided management practices.
Finally, there are a great many questions regarding the biological basis for which our management policies have been previously established. It may be politically correct and socially expedient to base our policies upon polling data, special interest groups and individual ���feelings��� but reality dictates that we must manage our resources based upon best available science ��� or risk losing it all.
Should hunting be allowed in national parks?
That is a tough question. You may believe that you already have your answer but, whether your natural inclination is to say ���yes��� or ���no���, I���m going to ask you to put it aside for just a while as we explore the details.
Please join us in our search for the truth.
There is a great deal at stake.