No American Model Wildlife Conservation
General Topic
How many of you have read the text of the No American Model of Wildlife Conservation? Is the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation valid today? Does the current model need to be questioned, reviewed, adjusted, to meet modern times?
In the minds in most hunters, fishers and trappers, the premises behind the model is that hunter, fishing, and trapping fees are used to develop scientific methods to propagate, control, and scientific manage wildlife, thus hunters, fishers and trappers receive the privilege's to legally take those species. Those that do not contribute to the Model, do not have any voice or privileges. But currently there are some who totally denounce the Model as not valid and also some that believe that the Model needs a "house cleaning, refocusing, and inclusion of many outside of the "hunting" community. Social Scientist have stated, "those outside of the "hunting" community should have been included long ago.
So recently, since I have never read the total concept, history, of the Model, I took it upon myself to do so. Interesting in deed.
Here are a few articles on the subject you might find interesting and in-lighting and you can do a Google Search on these: All of these have given me a much better understanding of the Model and possible adjustment to the Model to meet our changing world.
1. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, Technical Review, 12-02, Dec. 2012 sponsored by the Boone and Crocket Club
2. Another similar study, ie, " Holes in the No American Model of wildlife Conservation
3. Rethinking the No American Model of Wildlife Conservation
My best, Paul
We have a "Sportsman's Rep" Commissioner on the PWC who has openly stated he doesn't believe in the NAMWC.
Its way beyond the NAMWC. Basically about anything successful, good, positive, traditional, wholesome, inspiring or even hinting at American exceptionalism must be destroyed.
Sad to see the system that basically rebuilt wildlife populations in much of our country being thrown by the wayside. Sad to say I'll probably see the end of it in my lifetime.
Anglers, Hunters and Trappers pay the vast majority of monies used for Conservation in the US. As such we are almost solely responsible for bringing back healthy populations of game and non-game animals.
It’s sad to see the antis go straight for the jugular, we’ve got a battle on our hands.they are bold and are playing the long game
When it comes to the NAMWC. All it’s success aside I think the most egregious abuse of the model has been the development of market hunting all over again but this time for product promotion, social media clout, and general pimping/prostitution etc… I think the original framers would be appalled and might have wanted to curb this phenomenon by limiting the sale of wildlife on the hoof as well as in the supermarket.
Yes I agree it’s sad to see money and greed step in the way of what’s the right thing to do. I attended a KDWP commission meeting last fall and it was sad to see outfitters and feed store owners get up and throw excuses out why Kansas shouldn’t ban baiting.
One guy stood up though and gave what I thought was a good and professional speech. He was on the chair for the hunter and angler association or something like that. Anyways he mention the North American Model of Wildlife a lot and he said under that the state which is KDWP is supposed to be managing and making sure the wildlife is taken care of. He told them to not to listen to anybody but basically told them to do what they have found out what is the right thing to do. Well folks KDWP knows the right thing to do is to ban bait but they are under serious attack up there because of their stance on it.
Feed store owners, outfitters, couple guys from the legislature which one himself is an outfitter is attacking KDWP. The state organization that is put there in place to help conserve wildlife is being targeted right now by some greedy folks and yes it’s not good.
Got two death threats from Mormon guides when I stepped in to stop SFW prostitution legislation once. Not only does this new Peay-for-play model exclude many, it also breeds rampant corruption. A 1-2 punch to wildlife.
Fox 20” vented barrels 20 gauge. Custom choke tubes
Fox 20” vented barrels 20 gauge. Custom choke tubes
Thanks Paul. I’ll read up on those suggestions.
For all of our flaws. We still have the most affordable hunting available.
Of course supply and demand dictate that we don’t all get sheep tags. But I squirrel and rabbit hunted this weekend and had a ball. Small game hunting is still relatively Affordable. Sorry for obtrusive evil firearm photo.
Michael x2, but be careful…. People on this site hate it when you call market hunting, market hunting… Speaking from experience ;)
Boggs, I’m curious as to what you call market hunting. Market hunting to me is shooting wild game and selling it and was outlawed long ago. Enlighten me !
100s of yearly Auction tags, transferable land owner tags, guide allocations, resident hoarding and lobbying for unfair allocation of state owned wildlife that live on public lands paid for by all Americans. Hunters amassing large areas of land for exclusive access. Leasing by guides to sell exclusive access. Nope NAM is alive and well..lol … it’s not market hunting at all… All I can say is earn more money. Its your only chance for a foot in the door.
While the NAWCM has been significantly corrupted, what remains is essential to be maintained.
In order to do so, one must be aware of the threats. While $$$ have influenced most of the erosion to the 7 Pillars, what is quickly becoming a greater concern is the complete replacement of the NA model with the Compassionate Wildlife Model. I heard Colorado is close to doing so. This WILL end hunting.
Paying money to utilize the resource including hunting, fishing and trapping is Compassionate. History has shown us all too well that only the people who have a vested interest in wildlife and wild lands are willing to pay for it. HSUS, PeTA, ASPCA and the like are really only interested in sterilization and euthanization of animals (primarily domestic) and their warped sense of nature in the balance that excludes humans. You know, a species that has only been around millions of years. Bowhunting for 5-10,000 up to 180,000 years depending upon who you talk to.
Walking Buffalo, you are correct about Colorado. The governor told a group of supporters that his goal is to "have wildlife manage wildlife". His husband is a serious ARA and is in charge of vetting and recommending appointments to the Commission, which they are rapidly stacking with people with animal rights backgrounds. He has three years left, and by then Colorado's approach will be "compassionate", and DEI will replace wildlife management as a primary focus of the Commission.
Drycreek, Merriam Webster states the following.
“Market hunter: a person who hunts game for a livelihood“
I wish that selling dead wild game was outlawed long ago, but everyone’s favorite hunting TV/YouTube channels do it all year every year. Instead of selling the meat and hide for utilization, they’re selling the carcass as a billboard for whatever gear company pays the most. In my opinion, this is even worse than selling the animal for utilization purposes…
If someone’s “content” is dependent upon them repeatedly showing dead big game animals (every hunting show) then the dead animals are their product and that is what they’re selling.
California taking over Colorado is so sad but sOO predictable. They can't afford to live there anymore SOO let's take over another state 30 acres at a time. And, bring in the same politics that is killing CA.
They are rolling here in CO. New bills like no more oil drilling, no reworking old wells after 2030, no gas/diesel vehicles sold after 2035, tax on pets, restrictions/penalties if your business results in too many vehicles coming and going due to emissions impact, bunch of gun control, lion hunting ban, and so, and so on...
An oversimplification but essentially, the NAMWC guarantees access for EVERYONE to surplus populations of game and publicly owned places to do exactly that. The why and how can be debated forever, but if we get too far off center from prioritizing the ability to engage the hook and bullet pursuits, it will lead to the downfall of the private pursuits as well. The why (intent) must be prioritized over the how, but only to clearly define the mission that is being undertaken.
“Market hunter: a person who hunts game for a livelihood“
So do guides and outfitters fall into the 'market hunter' definition, too?
MI NRC, just went against there own system and now based on public perception, they have closed coyote hunting from April thru July. Now in reality not much hunting then anyway, but it's a bite at the apple. The Govenor picked anti new candidate members
Without the NAMWC the average Joe will eventually not be a hunter. They will be priced out of hunting. It is already getting that way for some species. When the majority of people are unable to hunt, hunting will end for everyone.
Boggs your assumptions are way off base. The product is entertainment. Do fishing shows pass your ethics test? Your definition of a market hunter is a person who hunts game for livelihood. A person with a YouTube or TV channel/show is a person creating entertainment or TV for livelihood. There are many hunting shows/episodes where zero animals are killed, but $ is made.
It just so happens that hunting or the pursuit of game is the stream of entertainment. In case you're counting I don't think you've managed to convince anyone despite bringing it up on every potential thread. If you want to debate the ethics of hunting for entertainment I think there's plenty of arguments either way, but the term market hunter isn't gonna stick no matter how bad you want it to.
