Dear Sonja et al,
I think we as birders need to be very careful how we approach this particular
event. The broad statement that "I don't think shooters would consider it a
waste or mindless" is unhelpful and attempts to tar all shooters with the same
brush. There are many responsible shooters out there who are very aware of the
rules applied to regulate their chosen pastime, and who abide by those rules.
There are plenty of birders who disregard or blatantly flout the rules
associated with our pastime, approaching nests too closely (see the recent
thread concerning the nesting Red Goshawks at Mataranka), using excessive
playback when photographing birds etc, but there is no suggestion that birding
should be banned. Likewise there are hunters who will disregard or blatantly
flout the rules pertaining to hunting. As birders and people generally
concerned for the environment, we must be sure to direct our efforts at
ensuring the rules that exist are enforced and that those who flout them are
puni
shed accordingly, rather than simply decrying the existence of duck shooters
as a fraternity, because one or even a minority of duckshooters broke the
rules.
This raises the follow-on question of whether the rules and regulations which
apply to hunting are adequate, an issue for which there is no easy answer.
Several species of duck are not endangered and could quite easily sustain a
level of harvesting that would not affect their population. Just as there is a
program for management of macropod populations in some rural areas, a program
whereby people are permitted to sustainably hunt certain duck species is
unlikely to have any significant effects on the populations of those species.
If such a program is effectively managed and policed I can only see benefits.
What if the money raised from such a program was put towards the conservation
of sensitive wetlands, as occurs in the United States where the hunting lobby
is also a very effective conservation group? I have often wondered why
organisations which ultimately have similar goals are not able to unite in some
way to further both their interests.
If the issue is that shooting ducks is inhumane due to the probability that
birds will be left wounded, then we should make this clear also. Is there
possibly a balance that can be reached here? What if those rules and
regulations that try to mitigate these problems can be better enforced, perhaps
with the help of conservation volunteers? Would that satisfy organisations like
the Coalition Against Duck Shooting? Could the organisations on both sides of
this argument meet at some level to come up with an accord where they agree to
disagree on some issues, but also commit to working together to solve other
problems and also advance the causes of both organisations on issues such as
wetland conservation, shooter/birder education etc.
So, before the hate mail starts rolling in, I want to make it clear that my
intention here is not to defend duck shooting. The incident that occurred in NW
Vic was abhorrent and we as bird lovers should voice our disgust and ensure
that the perpetrator(s) feel the full weight of the law. When looking at the
bigger picture though, we need to be articulate and direct about what our
issues are. If we have a particular problem with duck hunting we need to make
that clear, and we also need to ensure we can justify why it is a problem and
how this problem can be solved. Broad brush statements such as "duck shooters
are murdering innocent wildlife and should be stopped" are not helpful, and
simply force the opposing groups further apart. In reality, the abolition of
duck hunting in Victoria (and perhaps looking further ahead, NSW) doesn't seem
to be an option, so let's think outside the box and be creative in coming up
with ways we can approach this problem and get a better outcome
for all involved.
Regards and good birding (as he boards up his windows and doors, and turns off
his phone and email!!)
Nick Leseberg
===============================
To unsubscribe from this mailing list,
send the message:
unsubscribe
(in the body of the message, with no Subject line)
to:
http://birding-aus.org
===============================
|
