Although the emphasis in the discussion has been on private groups, the same reasoning applies on a governmental level too. I recall attending my first American Fisheries Soiciety meeting to give a talk on the research we had been conducting on the Atlantic Canadian fishery. At first I had little interest in the talks on inland fisheries, that seemed like pretty small potatoes to me, until I heard a description of one state's research program which was so much more extensive than ours that I had to ask how they could possibly fund such a program. The answer was simple -- fishing licenses. I don't recall the details, but they had sold something like 15 million licenses at $10 each or some other vast amount, which gave them the kind of funding that those of us dealing with the entire east coast of Canada could not even dream of.
So whatever you may think of fishing and hunting, you have to recognise that as Tim says they activities that many people enjoy, and in the long run they can be beneficial to natural populations. We need to respect the mix of what we approve of with what is distasteful to many of us. Bill Silvert ----- Original Message ----- From: "Timothy Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2007 1:52 AM Subject: Re: Motives for conservation > Hunting and fishing generate substantial funding for > conservation. Some of the conservation projects funded by hunting and > fishing have been beneficial to biodiversity and ecosystem functions...
