Wildlife Welfare In Wildlife

Since earth was created, there has been a natural phenomenon of species across the globe appearing and disappearing. However, in the past century, many species of animals have been disappearing at an alarming rate. Mainly, this rapidly occurring issue is caused by humans. Humans that contribute to the harmful actions that cause side effects such a pollution, deforestation, habitat loss and poaching. The natural rate of extinction pales in comparison to the extinction rate caused by all of these. According to the World Wildlife Fund, the current rate of extinction is 11,000 times greater than the natural extinction rate. Several different efforts have been made in order to stop or slow down the extinction of earth’s species. The Endangered Species Act is possibly the most successful example of these efforts. It’s main purpose is to get a commitment from the American people that they will work hand in hand to help save species that are at risk of becoming extinct and never returning. This act was put in place in 1973 and since then, no other law about the disappearance of wildlife has been quite as accomplished. Many different species that are protected under this law are either fully recovered or on their way to becoming safer. Laws like these are helping many different creatures left and right, however, at the alarming rate that they are disappearing, something else needs to be done. What people don’t seem to realize is that we depend on many of the animals that we are

The conquering and development of natural land has in the past, been seen as a mark of human civilization. In the United States, our progress is often measured by growth and development, but should this be re-examined? There are many opinions on the subject of urban sprawl and its effects on wildlife, but one thing is for certain, we are expanding. From 1955 to 2005, urban and suburban areas grew by 300%, however, the population only increased by 75% over the same period (Ewing, Kostyack and Chen). According to NatureServe, a non-profit conservation organization, urban sprawl threatens one of every three endangered species in the United States. NatureServe’s analysis states, “rare and endangered species data shows that three-fifths (60

In addition to providing the animal with shelter, and necessary supplies the natural parks can bring back a whole species from near extinction. In the passage “The Impact of Animal Protection” it directly states that keeping animals protected has proven to be beneficial and increase the population of endangered animals. Bringing animals back from near extinction can be a difficult task, however it is very beneficial. Animal protection is also used to help control animal population from getting out of control. These programs have brought back plenty of species such as black footed ferrets, California condors, red wolves, and golden lion tamarins. (Do Animals Lose in Zoos?) The community would never get to see these amazing creatures if these

Fish and Wildlife Director, Department of Interior, Secretary Bruce Babbitt 's interpretation of the ESA and his characterization of the word “harm”.

Through strictly regulated hunting we have reintroduced and repopulated various game species into areas where they were previously wiped out due to extremely excessive hunting by settlers. In the early 1900s all of Indiana’s whitetail deer were virtually extinct. By the 1930s whitetail deer were beginning to be reintroduced into Indiana. In just 20 years after initial reintroduction the population was at a sustainable level so that regulated modern hunting programs could begin. Conservationism has been a necessity to the ecology of the United States and many other countries around the world. The U.S. Forest Service by itself manages 193 million acres of public land nationwide or roughly 8% of the total land in the United States. The management of this land would not be feasible without the funding hunters provide through licenses, tags, and stamps. The 193 million acres does not include any public recreational land on the state level. There is 2,260,380 acres of public hunting land in all the states

This is something that we have attempted to change over time, but have not stopped. Theodore Roosevelt called for Americans to consider conservation of the environment, but focused on the conservation of resources over the conservation of ecosystems and indigenous species. (as cited in Merchant, 2012, pp. 333-334). This type of logical use conservation is typical in American history. We have had a strong history of avid hunters supporting the conservation of animals so that their species would remain available to sportsmen. One example of this is John James Audubon. Audubon was an avid hunter. He killed birds in mass numbers in his research in Florida (as cited in Merchant, 2012, pp.178-180). However the famous Audubon Society is the organization responsible for hiring and paying Guy Bradley, the first game warden in the Florida everglades (McIver, 2003). Hunters have an interest in preserving the species they desire to hunt, and in this desire they require natural ecosystems be protected. This protection of the ecosystem ensures that their valued game stays available for hunting. However, women were at the forefront of the conservation movement in many states. Carolyn Merchant describes women’s groups across the country protecting different facets of the environment. One example was the Audubon movement created in opposition to the plume industry. These movements helped create legislation that helped protect some plume birds as early as 1913. (Merchant, 2012, pp.355-363). Eventually the land that was being conserved for eventual use were slowly being transformed into protected parks that are intended to preserve the scenery and its plant and animal inhabitants for the future. The National Parks Act of 1916 was the first to establish large national parks in the United States (as cited in Merchant, 2012, pp.371-372).

The state legislature has favored the ranching industry above ecology and continues to do so. Public polls “conducted by Boise State indicate that the overwhelming majority of Idahoans (nearly 70 percent) support wolf restoration” (Laverty, par. 4) and the legislature is seeking to remedy this by re-educating the public with “a balanced view of the impact of wolves on big game species, those sectors of the economy dependent upon sport hunting, livestock, domestic animals, and humans” (State, 3). Furthermore, the “cost of wolf reintroduction will be presented as a part of any public education program including direct and indirect costs” (State, 3).

Fish and wildlife in Northern Ontario is facing a crisis created by years of mismanagement and hidden agendas of politicians who have little or no clue how to manage this Northern resource. Too often politicians have use this Ministry to win over voters in the large urban centres by making policies that are considered green and trendy.

Even if the lands are protected, they are not safe from the ecological burden of protecting our borders. Due to changes in legislation the Border Patrol Agency is exempt from stringent environmental laws. This is true in any of the areas surrounding the border, and they are looking to expand the radius of exemption, to better protect our borders. The Defenders of Wildlife, the Sierra Club, and the Northern Jaguar Project are looking to reinstall a social rule which the United States already implemented with the Endangered Species Act. This legislation created the social rule that no species should be forced into extinction due to human activities. Riders on the Illegal Immigration Act and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 and the Real ID act of 2005 allowed this social rule to become obsolete. Social rules changes in favor of the environment occur when the public is largely in support for saving the environment. However this support can be splintered by another need of the country especially when the opposing discourse has a crisis wave to ride. This case shows how the issue of border security triumphs environmental needs due to the pertinence of immigration reform along with the crisis impact caused by the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001.

"ARTIC NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE  PART OF THE SOLUTION. " US Fed News Service, Including US State News [Washington, D.C.] 30 May 2006, Research Library. ProQuest. 15 Nov. 2007 <

Duerksen, C. & Snyder, C., (2005). Nature-friendly communities: habitat protection and land use. Case Study for Austin, TX; Washington, DC: Island Press Retrieved from http://site.ebrary.com.ezproxy.apus.edu/lib/apus/Doc?id=10149942

While the problems facing Florida panthers are well known to many, especially those who live in their current range, the effects of proposed conservation actions on these residents are less widely known. What shapes local residents’ opinions on these animals? Do opinions differ across the state? Why are ranchers unhappy about conservation efforts, and what can can be done to mitigate conflicts? Two separate groups of researchers out of the University of Florida set out to answer these questions and to share the implications of their findings, as well as to explain how their findings can be applied to the current Florida panther conservation conflicts.

I boarded the Amtrak the early morning of November 5th, 2016 from Davis, California to the Peytonia Slough Ecological Reserve (Peytonia Reserve) in Suisun, California. The trip to this brackish and saltwater reserve was to help me analyze the relationship between humans and wildlife in urban settings. Urban environments depend on the rehabilitation and protection of small natural areas like the Peytonia Reserve. At the Peytonia Reserve, both humans and native/non-native species live in cohabitation, which paints an accurate representation of reconciliation ecology. Humans use these natural areas, the Peytonia Reserve in this case, for recreational activities like hunting and fishing. This, in turn, benefits the wildlife that lives in the area because hunters and fishers want the environment to be well maintained in order to support their activities. I came up with the conclusion that even though humans have more to benefit from wildlife, wildlife also depends on humans to help protect and conserve their habitats.

There are many national organizations that recognize the environmental and conservational benefits of hunting. Ducks Unlimited supports hunting and also conserves and protects wildlife in several different ways. This organization works with hunters to conserve the environment, restore grasslands, replant the forest, and restore watersheds (“How DU Conserves Wetlands” 1). Many hunters send donations to hunting organizations like this to support this type of wildlife conservation. Hunting can also benefit the environment through preventing overpopulation of certain animals. For example, in Maryland, the Department of Natural Resource’s primary deer conservation goals are to ensure the well being of the species and its habitat while maintaining populations at levels compatible with human activity, land use and natural communities (Deer Hunting: An Effective Management Tool). These positive environmental goals are reached through hunting. Another benefit to the environment can be shown through the Pittman Robertson Act which created an 11% tax on sporting firearms and ammunition, and created a 10% tax on handguns to support wildlife conservation (Laney 115). This act helped restore wildlife, which benefits the

Extinction is nothing new to animal and plant species around the earth. Over the course of time on the earth there have been five mass extinctions, with many predicting that a sixth has already begun due to human fault. The Endangered Species Act (ESA) was designed to save both animal and plant life from these great feat. The ESA has seen only a 2% recovery rate since it enactment (Why is U.S. Recovery Rate (2%) for Endangered Species So Low?). Many critics and politicians have been calling for a reformation of the act for years. The ESA is in need of a change in the following areas funding distribution, time it takes to list a species on the endangered species list, and habitats on private land.