Wildlife conservation literature and public discourse, too often gloss over the important difference between hunting and the regulation of hunting. This is so common that there is a persistent, misinformed idea that extinctions have been avoided through the act of hunting. Historically, the regulation of hunting, not hunting itself, has averted extinction.
Call for unbiased scientific evaluation of hunting
“Differentiating between regulation and hunting as conservation interventions” is published as an open access paper in Conservation Biology and helps elaborate the important difference between the regulation of hunting and hunting itself.
Authored by Nelson Institute Professor and Founder of the Carnivore Coexistence Lab, Adrian Treves, Kyle A. Artelle from the University of Victoria and the Raincoast Conservation Foundation and Paul C. Paquet from University of Victoria and the Raincoast Conservation Foundation, the article serves as a call-to-action, encouraging scientists to not only explore the true impact of regulated hunting as an intervention method, but to also determine which interventions support the best outcomes for targeted animal populations.
“It’s well established that regulations and enforcement of laws against over-hunting and commercializing wildlife in the 19th and early 20th centuries were essential to preventing extinctions of iconic populations, such as Canada geese elk, and even white-tailed deer,” explained Dr. Treves, lead author of the paper. “But we were surprised how often conservation scientists attributed this to hunting itself, rather than regulation of that hunting.”
“Many wildlife managers believe that hunting should play a central role in conservation efforts simply because they mistakenly think it has done so in the past,” Dr. Paquet added. “I hope they will now understand that regulations with or without hunting are fundamental to conservation and apply that principle to management of all wildlife.”
“Going back decades, one finds agencies and prominent institutions advocating hunting as a conservation intervention (Clark & Milloy 2014). For example, assertions that hunting is an effective conservation intervention in and of itself, without accompanying evidence of positive outcomes for the hunted populations, have been published or promoted by The International Union for the Conservation of Nature, The Wildlife Society, the Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, the Western Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies, and the Wildlife Management Institute (Jackson 1996; Batcheller et al. 2010).” – Adrian Treves, Kyle A. Artelle, Paul C. Paquet, 2018
Overlooking the role of regulation in hunting programs weakens inference about successful conservation interventions and misguides policy.
Treves, A. , Artelle, K. A. and Paquet, P. C. (2019), Differentiating between regulation and hunting as conservation interventions. Conservation Biology. doi:10.1111/cobi.13211
Selection of literature
To celebrate the end of the year, we are so happy to be able to offer matching campaigns on two of our most pressing fundraising initiatives.
All donations to both the Southern Great Bear Rainforest tenure acquisition and our KELÁ_EKE Kingfisher Forest initiative, will be matched until the end of the year. This is a great opportunity for our supporters, like you, to make your impact go twice as far, while benefiting from tax deductions.