8 ms·

> To outdoorsmen like Amaro, selling off individual parcels of national land creates a “multiplier problem”, where a small parcel of land turned private can cut

> To outdoorsmen like Amaro, selling off individual parcels of national land creates a “multiplier problem”, where a small parcel of land turned private can cut off access for many. That’s what happened in Coronado national forest, he said. Ten acres that led on to hundreds of thousands of acres of public property were turned into state trust land. > “Access has been eliminated for much of the forest. The private landowners now effectively have their own private hunting preserves by not allowing public hunters a way into the national forest,” Amaro said. Sounds pretty bad - given the precedent they should at least amend the bill to ensure public access to public parts.

molmalo 10y ago
Part of me says "It's bad to block access to public land". but the other part says: "if they want an access, so they can hunt, then I wish the block to continue existing."
- blinkingled 10y ago
  Lol, yes - I don't know why I stopped short of saying exactly that. Definitely not a hunting fan myself.
  - erikpukinskis 10y ago
    In many places where we have removed apex predators, hunting is necessary to keep ecosystems healthy. I'm mostly vegan, so this is near and dear to my heart. It makes me sad how many vegans don't realize that without predators animal populations fluctuate wildly causing animal suffering and permanent ecological damage. You can either A) do the killing yourself, B) support apex predator populations, or C) wipe out all animal habitat altogether. Sadly, C) is the option most vegans support, which makes no sense. Till the land every year, kill any animals that would interfere with the growing of plants, and then sell those plants to humans. But because vegans are so sensitive about being attacked (again, as a longtime vegan I get it, I really really do) the conversation never gets started. It's sad to me.
    - pvaldes 10y ago
      > hunting is necessary to keep ecosystems healthy This is a common cliché that would merit some discussion. 'Healthy' is a problematic concept to apply to a machine and ecosystems are like machines in many senses. A 'healthy ecosystem' in this context is often a synonym of 'convenient for hunters'. Ecosystems without apex predators are more unstable but not necesarily in danger. A breed colony of emperor penguins or a small lake in winter after the resident couple of loons migrate is not an ecosystem about to collapsing or that must be fixed. Many desertic, arctic and pelagic areas are free of apex predators 340 days/year. Apex predators quit and recolonize areas constantly. Is a natural process. If preys can fly/run away and are free to quit the area the ecosystem will be fine. If not, a smaller predator will be quickly 'hired' for the job. Could be a desert fox, a parasite or a bacteria, but the ecosystem is constantly fixing itself and will be quickly rebuild with the remaining items. Hunting can be a temporary solution, but is neither the only answer to this problem nor the best necessarily (and is an obstacle to the recolonization of the area for apex predators in the future, that should be the real goal here). You can always explore other valid options: relocating the surplus animals, creating ecologic corridors, etc, etc...
      - gambiting 10y ago
        At the moment, US is having a massive problem with deer. And the major reason why that is, is that we've eliminated most of their natural predators, and lobbied very aggressively against hunting. So now you have millions of deer destroying crops in US, but of course any time anyone mentions culling, people immediately get aggressive about cruelty of hunting. I mean, I get that, and I wish there was a better way, but deer are literally worse than pests at this point. http://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/ http://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/
        giblaz 10y ago
        On top of them just being pests, when the deer populations are out of control like they are currently, diseases become dramatically more widespread and fatal. http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20110629/NEWS/306299935 http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20110629/NEWS/3062... In farming areas like Missouri, without hunting, the deer populations will get out of control and dramatically affect the farmland. Most don't realize this, but the common reproductive result is always twins. Deer populations ramp up much quicker than other animals.
- waterphone 10y ago
  Hunting is one use. Managed properly, it has its place, as others have discussed. But this land is also used by campers, hikers, birders, amateur astronomers, scientists doing research, and others.

molmalo 10y ago

Part of me says "It's bad to block access to public land". but the other part says: "if they want an access, so they can hunt, then I wish the block to continue existing."

blinkingled 10y ago
Lol, yes - I don't know why I stopped short of saying exactly that. Definitely not a hunting fan myself.
- erikpukinskis 10y ago
  In many places where we have removed apex predators, hunting is necessary to keep ecosystems healthy. I'm mostly vegan, so this is near and dear to my heart. It makes me sad how many vegans don't realize that without predators animal populations fluctuate wildly causing animal suffering and permanent ecological damage. You can either A) do the killing yourself, B) support apex predator populations, or C) wipe out all animal habitat altogether. Sadly, C) is the option most vegans support, which makes no sense. Till the land every year, kill any animals that would interfere with the growing of plants, and then sell those plants to humans. But because vegans are so sensitive about being attacked (again, as a longtime vegan I get it, I really really do) the conversation never gets started. It's sad to me.
  - pvaldes 10y ago
    > hunting is necessary to keep ecosystems healthy This is a common cliché that would merit some discussion. 'Healthy' is a problematic concept to apply to a machine and ecosystems are like machines in many senses. A 'healthy ecosystem' in this context is often a synonym of 'convenient for hunters'. Ecosystems without apex predators are more unstable but not necesarily in danger. A breed colony of emperor penguins or a small lake in winter after the resident couple of loons migrate is not an ecosystem about to collapsing or that must be fixed. Many desertic, arctic and pelagic areas are free of apex predators 340 days/year. Apex predators quit and recolonize areas constantly. Is a natural process. If preys can fly/run away and are free to quit the area the ecosystem will be fine. If not, a smaller predator will be quickly 'hired' for the job. Could be a desert fox, a parasite or a bacteria, but the ecosystem is constantly fixing itself and will be quickly rebuild with the remaining items. Hunting can be a temporary solution, but is neither the only answer to this problem nor the best necessarily (and is an obstacle to the recolonization of the area for apex predators in the future, that should be the real goal here). You can always explore other valid options: relocating the surplus animals, creating ecologic corridors, etc, etc...
    - gambiting 10y ago
      At the moment, US is having a massive problem with deer. And the major reason why that is, is that we've eliminated most of their natural predators, and lobbied very aggressively against hunting. So now you have millions of deer destroying crops in US, but of course any time anyone mentions culling, people immediately get aggressive about cruelty of hunting. I mean, I get that, and I wish there was a better way, but deer are literally worse than pests at this point. http://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/ http://blog.nature.org/science/2013/08/22/too-many-deer/
      - giblaz 10y ago
        On top of them just being pests, when the deer populations are out of control like they are currently, diseases become dramatically more widespread and fatal. http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20110629/NEWS/306299935 http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/article/20110629/NEWS/3062... In farming areas like Missouri, without hunting, the deer populations will get out of control and dramatically affect the farmland. Most don't realize this, but the common reproductive result is always twins. Deer populations ramp up much quicker than other animals.
waterphone 10y ago
Hunting is one use. Managed properly, it has its place, as others have discussed. But this land is also used by campers, hikers, birders, amateur astronomers, scientists doing research, and others.