sign in sign up
<<
Home , Opposition to hunting, Varmint hunting

On the Destiny of Deer Camps and Duck Blinds: The Rise of the Movement and the Future of Conservation

Robert M. Muth; Wesley V. Jamison

Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 4. (Winter, 2000), pp. 841-851.

Stable URL: http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0091-7648%28200024%2928%3A4%3C841%3AOTDODC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3

Wildlife Society Bulletin is currently published by Allen Press.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/about/terms.html. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/journals/acg.html.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.

The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies, publishers, and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

http://www.jstor.org Wed Nov 21 12:11:57 2007 On the destiny of deer camps and duck blinds: he rise of the animalrights ovement and the future of I by Robert M. Muth and Wesley V. Jamison

. .' .'. .' 8 ., .. . :.;.>.,;,*.-*:c:<.?.. >.., $$-g$#,k;;:<,,?7!-, . i ; , . ,; ;:,. . .. :':'"- .c.i ...w.:i.:.i7: :J ..- ,. :,: ,, -, ,, ; Abstract As we enter the new millennium,wildlife professionals,hunters, and trappers are increasingly challenged by an influential opposed to many of the values and behaviors associated with traditional wildlife harvest and manage- ment. We argue that the emergence of the animal rights movement is related to profound sociocultural and demographic shifts occurring within modern society. It is a product of broad macro-structural conditions that, having converged in ad- vanced industrial societies of the late twentieth century,provide fertile ground for the rapid rise and powerful influence of this philosophy. We begin by tracing the development of the philosophy of sportsmanship and the rise of the North Amer- ican . We then discuss animal rights values within the con- text of 4 social precursors necessary for the widespread adoption of animal rights ideology: 1) an urban epistemology (or world view) disconnected from the reality of wild nature; 2) a popularized interpretation of science which,for many people, provides evidence for a belief in animal rights; 3) anthropomorphism,or the projec- tion of human traits and characteristics onto nonhuman ism,in which the concept of rights is extended to the nonhuman Finally, we discuss the implications of the animal rights and trapping. Key Words animal rights movement,hunting,social values,trapping,w

ted hunting and trapping have been cornerstones of subsistence harvesters as well as dlife management in the United States since the pers. Among the direct benefits o nt of wildlife conservation in the latter half of the are meat for the table, supplemental th century. In addition to being important man- bearer pelts, and trophies mounted o aagement tools, hunting and trapping over the last 100 keep alive the memories of years have provided benefits to millions of participants, out-of-doors. Proponents of hunting

Address for Robert M. Muth: Department of Natural Resources conservation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, [email protected] for Wesley V. Jamison:Interdisciplinaryand Global Studies Program, Worcester Polytechni I MA 01609 USA. 'Yrildlife Societv Bulletin 2000.28(4):81 Peer refereed Wildlife Society Bulletin 2000,28(4):841-85 1

assert that participation in these activities provides broad- about them as well, as reflected in a recent survey (n= er sociocultural benefits, such as the bonding that occurs 3,127) of members of The Wildlife Society, the American among members of kinship and friendship groups; the Fisheries Society, the Society for , teaching of values such as patience, self-reliance, and and the North American Wildlife Law Enforcement discipline; and educational experiences that allow people Officers Association. Significantly, conservation profes- to become more knowledgeable about wildlife habits and sionals were divided over the appropriateness of certain habitats. wildlife harvest and management activities. Although In light of what they see as this venerable tradition, only 6% of the respondents favored outlawing the hunt- many hunters. trappers, and wildlife conservation profes- ing of upland gamebirds with dogs, 57% favored outlaw- ing hunting black bear with dogs; and Challenges posed by animal protection organizations though approximately 46% of the respondents felt that the use of leg- have forced conservation professionals to engage in hold traps to capture furbearers should collective introspection, often stimulating- them to re- be outlawed, 3!%% opposed outlawing the use of leghold traps (15% had no examine the valihity and usefulness of long-held values opinion, Muth et al. 1998). and beliefs. These challenges to the status quo are AS the conservation profession healthy for the conservation professions. enters a new millennium, it's timely to assess the future role of hunting and trapping. Discussions concerning the sionals are genuinely perplexed over the state of siege in future of these activities are appearing more frequently in which they often find then~selvesat the present time. the professional literature (e.g., Brown et al. 1987, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the Heberlein 1991, Decker et al. 1993, Gilbert 2000) as well largest of the animal rights organizations, sponsors an as the popular press (e.g., Baker 2000, Beauchaine 2000, anti-fur campaign which receives widespread publicity; Brister 2000, Reiger 2000). In this period of questioning anti-hunting and anti-trapping protests are occurring with and change, it is imperative that wildlife professionals increasing frequency; and animal rights activists have provide leadership to American society on wildlife con- taken to "liberating" (Mustela visoiz)from ranches servation issues. To effectively do so, they must partici- where they are raised for fur. pate vigorously in the public debate about the future of Perhaps most disturbing to many, because it reflects hunting and trapping. the fact that anti-hunting and anti-trapping values res- onate with a broader cross-section of the American elec- torate than just extremist fringes, the animal rights move- The North American Wildlife ment has achieved several recent successes at the ballot Conservation Model box (Minnis 1998, Pacelle 1998). From California In the United States, the conflict between the contem- (where hunting mountain lion [Puma concolor] was out- porary animal protection movement and traditional wild- lawed) to Massachusetts (where hunting black bear life conservation that includes regulated hunting and trap- [Ursus americanus] over bait and with dogs was prohib- ping is rooted in the nineteenth-century origins of wild- ited and the use of body-gripping and leghold traps was life conservation. The concept of "the king's deer" and outlawed), animal rights activists have become increas- the English legacy of private preserves exclusively ingly effective in using the policy process in advancing reserved for the hunting pleasure of the nobility were their agenda. incompatible with the democratic precepts of the Amer- But public sentiment often ebbs and flows on hunting ican Revolution. As the European tradition became and trapping issues and the sporting fraternity has not transplanted to the New World, the need became manifest been without its successes. Recent attempts to pass anti- to "democratize" access to wildlife harvest (Sherwood hunting measures in Idaho, Michigan, and Ohio failed at 1981). Visions of unlimited abundance of wildlife and the polls. Several states have passed laws against hunter the democratization of hunting from the preserve of the harassment, and voters in North Dakota and Virginia aristocracy to an activity of mass participation gave rise recently approved constitutional provisions establishing to predictable results (Sherwood 198 1, Tober 198 1). the "right" to harvest fish and game. Certain wildlife species had become scarce enough that If it seems that the public is ambivalent about wildlife 12 of the 13 colonies had passed one kind or another of issues, conservation professionals appear to be conflicted wildlife laws (Sherwood 1981). Animal rights and the future of conservation Muth and Jamison 843

The American conservation crusade was born in the for the values and desires of the growing numbers of non- last half of the nineteenth century in reaction to the consumptive and animal protection stakeholder groups. waste, fraud, and abuse that characterized land and Criticism offered by Pacelle (1998:44) that wildlife agen- resource exploitation. Wildlife conservation, in particu- cies emerged as "extensions of the hunting industry" that lar, arose out of widespread concern over the "rarely deviated from their role as service agencies for of some species, such as the (Ectopistes hunting, trapping, and interests" reflects the views migratorius) and the heath hen (Tympanzicbus cupido of many people who neither hunt nor trap. cupido), and the near extinction of many others, includ- Despite these and other criticisms, however, it can be ing the American bison (Bison bison), (Castor argued that conservationists were perhaps too successful. canadensis), and species pursued by commercial As a result of sound management and strong public sup- hunters (Trefethen 1975, Dunlap 1988, Reiger 1986). port, declining wildlife species that were once a cause of Despite the early establishment of game laws, disregard deep concern have returned, in many cases to a point of for them was widespread and enforcement was often such abundance that agencies understaffed, lax, or nonexistent (Warren 1997). It gradu- increasingly concentrate some portion of their efforts ally became clear that laws alone were insufficient to stop ameliorating the conflicts among wildlife and people that the "excesses of democracy" imposed on wildlife by mass range from white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) participation in wildlife harvest. What arose to restrain and black bear depredation on agricultural products to these excesses was a philosophy called "sportsmanship." collisions between automobiles and deer or moose (Alces Promulgated by social elites, including people such as alces) to complaints of nuisance Canada geese (Branta George Bird Grinnell and Theodore Roosevelt, this philos- canadensis), beaver, deer, and even wild turkey (Meleag- ophy, in the words of Sherwood (1981:20), "aspired to ris gallopavo) invading our suburbs. In light of the suc- curb the hannful effects of democracy on wildlife, which cesses of wildlife conservation over the last century and were unavoidable with the population pressures, new tech- the strong tradition of hunting and trapping, it is ironic nologies, and American commercialism..." that threatened that the crest in public support for traditional wildlife many game and nongame species in the United States. conservation coincided with a momentous event that With the tenet of sportsmanship replacing market hunt- changed forever how Americans would view the con- ing and unlimited harvest as a governing norm, political sumptive use of wildlife: In 1942, Walt Disney Studios support for wildlife conservation continued to accelerate released the animated film, Barnbi. into the twentieth century. When viewed in its most com- prehensive form, wildlife conservation in the United States has been referred to as the North American Wildlife The rise of the animal rights movement Conservation Model (S. P. Mahoney, Newfoundland and Animal protection values have existed in the United Labrador Wildlife Division, and J. F. Organ, United States States at least since 1866, when founded Fish and Wildlife Service, unpublished report). Wildlife the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to conservation came to include regulated use by hunters and Animals. The humane movement gathered momentum trappers based on sportsmanship and fair chase: funding through the Victorian era with the rise in opposition to support provided through license fees, duck stamps, and and it percolated along throughout the early excise taxes on hunting and fishing equipment; acquisition half of the twentieth century. In 1928, for example, and rehabilitation of important habitat; intensive manage- South Carolina outlawed the use of steel-jaw traps, fol- ment based on professional training and scientific lowed in 1930 by Georgia and Massachusetts (Reiger research; species introduction and restoration through 1978); in the 1930s and 1940s, the American Humane stocking and trap-and-transfer programs; protection of Society regularly sponsored competitions to invent traps species perceived to be in danger of becoming extinct; and that reduced pain and suffering. However, during this enforcement of wildlife laws and regulations. For the last 100 years, wildlife conservation has served time, mainstream society often regarded the humane society well. It has not been perfect by any means. Well movement as a group of individuals who were overly into the twentieth century, for example, it was cornmon- sentimental and unrealistic. place to indiscriminately kill animals (e.g., grizzly bear [Ursus arctos], [Canis spp.], [Canis latrans], Walt Disney, Bambi, and the rise of anti- hawks, owls) that prey on domestic or game ani- hunting sentiment mals (Dunlap 1988). In addition, wildlife management The release of Walt Disney's film Bambi in 1942 tended to focus on game species that provided benefits to changed things dramatically. In our view, Bambi serves the hunting and trapping public, often with little regard as a major point of departure for the rise of the modern 844 Wildlife Society Bulletin 2000,28(4):841-85 1

animal rights movement as it relates to the blood sports. message. Indeed, "The Bambi Syndrome" is now part of Rather than initiating anti-hunting sentiment, Bambi gave our cultural lexicon. However, it wasn't until the publi- voice to inchoate and diffuse values residing in a midcen- cation over 30 years later of 's (1975) book, tury American society characterized by a profound sense , that an intellectual rationale was pre- of unease and anxiety. Although not deliberately des- sented which served to galvanize people to coalesce into igned as such, Bambi is perhaps the most effective piece institutionalized forms of social and political organization of anti-hunting propaganda ever produced (Reiger 1980; that we refer to as a mass movement. Lutts 1992, 1996; Cartmill 1993a, b). What makes Bambi so powerful? First, although the The contemporary animal rights movement movie conveys an anti-hunting message very effectively, Animal rights versus animal we2fare. The animal pro- Disney was far from the first to portray hunted deer as vic- tection movement is an overarching term that includes tims or deer hunters as cruel. But through a skillful mar- people who subscribe to a philosophy of animal rights as keting campaign and through the media of film and, later, well as those favoring one of (Jasper and television, Bambi was the first to convey an anti-hunting Nelkin 1992). Animal welfarists are those who support message to a mass audience of millions of people in the such things as treating animals with compassion and United States and around the world (Lutts 1992, Cartmill avoiding animal cruelty. Their strategies often include 19936). Over the last 60 years, Bambi, along with other reformist legislation and humane education, funding of Disney animals, has truly become "a part of our cultural anilnal shelters and anilnal birth control programs, and DNA" (Ringel 1988:M1, quoted in Lutts 1992). cooperation with existing agencies in program develop- Although Bambi is the first instance of an anti-hunting ment and implementation. Animal rightists, in contrast, message that became available to the general public argue that animals have absolute moral and legal rights to through the mass media, its dramatic impact is also due personal autonomy and self-determination with equal to a second factor. Americans who saw Bambi in the rights across species (especially higher vertebrate species). 1940s and 1950s were (perhaps unconsciously) receptive They seek total abolition of all animal exploitation and use to the 2 inescapable messages of the movie. The first and direct action to protest the use of message is that wild nature, left free of man's intrusion, animals (Jasper and Nelkin 1992. Jamison 1996) is a garden of Eden where animals are seen as innocent Animal protection organizations concern themselves playmates, reposing in a state of harmony in which the with an agenda that includes most animal-related lion lies down with the lamb (or, in Banzbi's case, where domains, including use of animals in biomedical Friend Owl, the [Bubo virginianus), research, and aquariums, animal entertainment (cir- cavorts joyfully with Thumper, the (Sylvilagus sp.), cuses, dog and horse racing), the care of pets and com- and Flower, the skunk (Mephitus mephitus), instead of panion animals, all farmed animals, anything to do with dispatching them for an easy meal). the exploitation of animal parts and products (e.g., silk, The second message is that human beings are violent, wool, leather), and wildlife and fisheries management. cruel, dangerous, and corrupting (Cartmill 19936). Man However, advocates of animal rights often have severe (as symbolized by the hunters) sets his vicious dogs on disagreements with proponents of animal welfare over the harmless forest animals; lets a campfire get away that objectives, strategies, and tactics (see the discussion by turns into a raging forest fire; shoots Bambi, nearly Francione [1996], an avowed animal rights proponent, for wounding him mortally; and, in the most powerful an articulate condemnation of the animal welfare per- moment in the film, kills Bambi's mother. The misan- spective). One value position they hold frequently in thropic mood of the film is captured in the foreboding common is a strong antipathy to trapping and hunting for response of Bambi's mother to his questions, "What hap- sport and recreation. Animal welfare advocates more pened, Mother? Why did we all run?'She ominously readily subscribe to the view that when intervention is replies, "Man . . . was in the forest." Human beings are necessary to manage a wildlife population, humane meth- seen as responsible for the fear, violence, and death ods (such as sharpshooters and nonlethal box-cage traps) found in an otherwise Edenic nature. (For an extremely should be used instead of traditional hunting and trapping insightful analysis of the extent to which these themes by sportswomen and sportsmen. Animal rights activists, are held by more contemporary animal rights activists, in contrast, would disagree with the notion of human see Dizard 1999,) intervention at all. Because of this position, animal The public reaction to Bambi demonstrated that large rights organizations often find themselves in conflict with segments of the American public were increasingly environmental organizations, such as the National receptive to animal protection values and an anti-hunting Audubon Society and the Sierra Club, which support the Animal rights and the future of conservation Muth and Jamison 845

use of lethal methods (where they view it as appropriate) mal issues, Duda et al. (1998:293) conclude that while to protect from predators or to main- "most Americans feel animals have some rights, few tain biodiversity. believe in absolute rights for animals." Furthermore, they Since 1980, animal protection organizations have remind us that considerable variation exists among grown dramatically in membership and especially fund- respondents based on demographic variables such as edu- ing support. As reported to the Internal Revenue Service, cation, ethnicity, urban-rural residence, age, and income, the combined budgets of 22 animal protection organiza- and they wisely advise that it can be dangerous and mis- tions totaled $168 million for 1998. Among the largest leading for conservation agencies and sportsmen's organ- are The Humane Society of the United States izations to "paint all such groups with the same brush." ($36,633,759), the Massachusetts Society for the Demographically, recent studies (Richards and Kran- Prevention of ($30,127,460), and the nich 1991, Jamison and Lunch 1992, Jamison 1998) sug- American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to gest that American animal rights activists tend to be Animals ($25,623,669). The budget of People for the female, overwhelmingly Caucasian, between the ages of Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) increased from 20 and 40, employed in professional occupations, and $10,681,269 in 1997 to $14,543,860 in 1998 (Animal have middle-class incomes. In addition, they have Industry Foundation 2000). achieved higher levels of education than their counter- Along with larger budgets, the animal protection parts in the general population, are apt to be well-educat- movement has grown in political sophistication and influ- ed and informed about wildlife management issues, and ence. Movement representatives are especially skilled in possess the will and the ability to influence the policy using the mass media to advantage. In 1990, 1996, and process. 2000, to publicize a variety of animal issues, animal pro- Wildlife-related goals arzd objectives. The principal tection organizations staged a "National March for the objectives of animal rights organizations are probably Animals" in Washington, D.C., that brought activists familiar to most wildlife professionals. Although animal together from every state in the union and several foreign rights activists represent a variety of perspectives and countries. positions on individual issues and many will disagree Attitudes, values, and denzographic.~.Beginning in the with the generalizations presented below, we feel that the 1970s, pioneering research conducted by Kellert (1978a, following statements represent the views of the majority b) has systematically documented the emergence of anti- of people who would classify themselves as active partic- hunting and anti-trapping attitudes and values in Amer- ipants in the animal rights movement. (Readers are ican society. More recently, research results reported by advised to consult Minnis [I9971 for a comprehensive the consulting firm Responsive Management (Duda and typology of anti-hunting beliefs.) Young 1998, Duda et al. 1998) have identified the contin- Animal rights activists object to categorizing wild ani- uing existence of anti-hunting and anti-trapping values mals as a "resource," because this implies something to among the general public in the United States. In one be managed and used for human benefit. Rather, they nationwide survey, 22% of the respondents disapproved feel that animals should be allowed to live their lives free of legal hunting and 16% either moderately or strongly of human-caused pain and suffering. Some activists disagreed with the view that hunting should continue to believe that Native Americans forfeited their rights to be legal. Trapping is rated even more unfavorably. hunt and trap for subsistence when they adopted high- Nationwide, only 34% of the respondents supported powered rifles and steel-jaw traps and when they began legal trapping and 59% disapproved of it (Duda and to sell wildlife parts and products in the commercial Young 1998). economy. Wenzel (1991: 5) quotes one activist protest- Although approximately 79% of a national sample ing seal hunts in Canada as saying, "To me, Inuit culture agreed that using animals for human benefit is acceptable is a dying one. I see my job as helping it go quickly." as long as the animal doesn't suffer undue pain, around Animal rights activists are nearly unanimous in feeling 15% subscribe to attitudes favorable toward animal that hunting, trapping, and (to a lesser extent) fishing for rights-i.e., animals should not be used by humans under sport and recreation are inappropriate uses of wildlife. any circumstances. However, validating the fact that atti- Activists feel that these activities should be, if not out- tudes do not always predict behavior, it is interesting to lawed, so heavily restricted that they will gradually dis- note that while 15% of Americans purport to hold an atti- appear. They feel that an animal's "natural" death, tude favoring animal rights, only 3% report actually not whether by starvation, disease, accident, or nonhuman using any animals for any purpose (Duda et al. 1998). In , is preferable to a death caused by bullets, summarizing the results of several studies examining ani- traps, or fish hooks. They find especially egregious those 846 WildliJe Society Bulletilz 2000,28(4):841-85 1

activities viewed as frivolous, unnecessary, or gratuitous, Four social precursors to an animal such as trapping for pelts, competitive fishing tourna- rights movement ments, guided ("canned) hunts, , catch- As can readily be seen, the challenge posed by the ani- and-release fishing, and varmint hunting. It's interesting to note that in many parts of Europe, mal rights movement to wildlife conservation agencies where hunting is heavily regulated and trapping for sport and organizations is formidable. As Decker and Brown is either outlawed or very restricted, wildlife conservation (1987:599) have perceptively observed, "The animal rights movement is particularly disconcerting for most issues are often on the agenda of animal protection wildlife professionals because it opposes not only the organizations. For example, Germany has outlawed activities that management makes possible (e.g., hunting catch-and-release fishing because of the pain and suffer- and trapping) but also the underlying assumptions and ing it is presumed to induce in fish. Fishing tournaments precepts upon which the profession has been based. It also are against the law. In England, deer hunting has questions what wildlife managers do professionally, how been outlawed on Crown lands and protests against red they do it, and why they do it. Some wildlife manage- (Vulpes vulpes) hunting are becoming increasingly ment professionals believe that the animal rights move- violent. Although a measure to outlaw was ment is one of the greatest threats to wildlife conserva- recently defeated in Parliament, human marathon runners tion faced by the profession ...." are increasingly replacing as the quarry pursued in Many wildlife conservation professionals are mystified traditional fox hunts. European animal rights activists by the pervasive influence of the animal rights move- are devoting more and more attention to international ment. We believe that the existence of 4 social precur- issues, such as stopping efforts to legalize elephant sors, or social conditions, helps to explain the persistence (Loxodonta a$-icana) harvests in Africa. and widespread adoption of philosophies, values, and Although trapping furbearer species for sport and ideologies related to animal rights. These social precur- recreation is either outlawed or under severe pressure in sors are 1) an urban epistemology (or world view) dis- many European countries, large numbers of animals are connected from the reality of wild nature; 2) a popular- often taken by trapping for -control purposes (musk- ized interpretation of science which, for many people, [Ondatra zihethicus], for example, to protect the provides evidence for a belief in animal rights; 3) anthro- Dutch system of dikes against damage). European Union pomorphism, or the projection of human traits and char- (EU) regulation 325419 1, passed in 1991, prohibited the acteristics onto nonhuman animals; and 4) egalitarianism, use of leghold traps in EU member countries. It also in which the concept of rights is extended to the nonhu- contained a provision prohibiting imports of fur from man animal world. countries that have refused to ban leghold traps or adopt internationally agreed upon humane trapping standards Urban epistemology (Hamilton et a1 1998). As the United States went through the transition from Representatives of animal rights organizations use a an agrarian society to an industrial society, participation variety of methods to advance their agenda with wildlife in agricultural and resource-extraction sectors of the conservation agencies. These methods include 1) chal- economy declined while employment in the manufactur- lenging the assumptions and biological data used to justi- ing and service sectors increased. One of the outgrowths fy harvests, seasons, bag limits, and other regulations; 2) of this shift was the concentration of people in cities. As reviewing agency compliance with the National Environ- people moved from farms and rural communities to cities mental Policy Act (and related state and federal laws) and and suburbs, they underwent a dramatic change in how monitoring agency implementation of guidelines estab- they experienced nature. Vialles (1 994: 19), in a study lished under the Animal Welfare Act; 3) protesting use that just as easily characterizes the United States, docu- of lethal techniques in programs promoting individual ments the gradual relocation of in France (often endangered) species (e.g., opposing the use of from the city to the countryside, where the killing was far sharpshooters to eliminate nonindigenous mountain goats removed from the emerging urban sensibilities that [Orearnnos ainericanus] from Olympic National Park, increasingly viewed animals as "lesser brethren." which was part of an effort to protect endangered botani- Rather than procuring their directly by killing cal species); 4) sponsoring protests of lawful hunts and game or slaughtering farm animals, most urbanites buy regulated trapping, hunter-harassment campaigns, and meat prepackaged in shrink-wrapped Styrofoam contain- sabotage efforts; and 5) organizing ballot measures in the ers. In addition, their direct links to animals as wild form of initiatives and referenda to outlaw or restrict creatures, as prey, and as sources of food have been lost. hunting and trapping. Similarly, rather than experiencing wild animals and wild Animal rights and the future of conservation Muth and Jamison 847

nature as "red in tooth and claw," urban dwellers experi- are separate from the nonhuman animal world. With the ence them through socially constructed filters and highly advent of the theory of evolution, the lines between stylized settings, such as zoos, aquariums, petting zoos, humans and other animals became blurred. The theory public parks, and one's own backyard bird feeder. of evolution dethroned humanity from its privileged sta- Finally, and perhaps most important, there is what tus at the center of the biological world. Instead, many some people refer to as the cult of the pet (Szasz 1968). people in modern society have come to view humans as For many urban people in modern society, pets are in- simply a product of random processes, processes of blind creasingly assuming roles in human relationships that variation and genetic retention. were once reserved only for other humans. Pets are in- Evolution has been interpreted as dissolving the bound- creasingly experienced as best friends, surrogate spouses, aries between humans and the nonhuman animal world and replacement children-friends who love us uncondi- (Farber 1994). After all, as evolutionary biologists tells tionally, spouses who won't divorce us, and children who us, humans are descended from apes and share approxi- don't grow up, get married, and move to some other part mately 98.6% of our DNA with chimpanzees (Pan of the country. In Pacelle's (1998:44) view, the growth of troglodytes). When this scientific fact gets popularized, the humane movement was accelerated by the "increas- humans no longer appear to be superior to our nearest rel- ingly significant bond between Americans and their pets." atives in the animal world; we are perceived to be virtually One consideration that makes societal attitudes toward the same. In fact, Pacelle (1998:44) acknowledges that the pets relevant to contemporary wildlife conservation is emerging humane movement was given added impetus by that people in advanced industrial societies increasingly "the increasing knowledge of the emotional and physical experience wild animals as domestic, either as livestock similarities between people and animals." or as housepets. Society is redefining what is wild and what is domestic. American bison, elk (Cewus elaphus), Anthropomorplzism and ostrich (Struthio camelus), anlong others, are now Collapsing the distinctions between humans and ani- raised on ranches and farms and their meat is more com- mals in this way makes the third social precursor, anthro- monly available in restaurants and supermarkets. Other pomorphism, irresistible. Anthropomorphism simply wild animals-ferrets (Mustela putorius), for example- means the projection of human attributes, values, and are now legally available in many locations for purchase personality characteristics upon nonhuman entities. The as house pets. Managing wild animals increasingly per- projection of human qualities upon animals is nothing ceived as domestic poses problems because it violates new. From jackals (Canis sp.) and cats in early Egyptian prevailing sociocultural norms against hunting animals beliefs, to the raven (Coivus corax) who created the viewed as livestock and trapping animals kept as house world in Tlingit Indian culture, to the Lamb of God in pets (Muth et al. 1998). Christian cosmology, animals have always been vested with very powerful meanings. Popularized interpretations of science Throughout history, animals have often symbolized The second social precursor is the rise of science, that which is gallant, noble. and beautiful in human specifically the theory of evolution and the practice of beings. However, they also have represented a full array evolutionary biology. This is extremely important, of negative human attributes, including the lust, danger, because for many people belief requires evidence. But and deceitfulness we often see in ourselves (Campbell we are not talking about the same science published in 1959). In reviewing the literature and art of the medieval scientific journals. It is not our intention to disparage or and Victorian periods, for example, Mason (1995) con- discount the rigorous, carefully controlled studies of ani- cludes that in the past, animals often symbolized some mal behavior, intelligence, and emotion conducted by human sexual or sensual trait, usually lust, lechery, or serious scientists. Rather, we are referring to a science promiscuity, and notes that animals dominate many of that is so heavily interpreted and popularized that conser- the notions of feminine evil that were common in late vation professionals may not even recognize it. It is the nineteenth and early twentieth century art. science that has been mediated through television "docu- But the way animals are anthropomorphized in ad- mentaries," news magazines, and popular books; a sci- vanced industrial society today has undergone fundamental ence that tells us that elephants weep from emotional change (Lansbury 1985). As we have seen, by success- deprivation (Masson and McCarthy 1995). fully anthropomorphizing Bambi, Walt Disney dramati- The Judeo-Christian heritage asserts that Man was cre- cally changed how hunters are regarded in American ated in God's image and was granted dominion over all society. From Bambi to Frc7e Willy to Babe, the noble the animals. In this cosmological perspective, humans pig, animals appear not as humans imbued with frailties, 848 Wildlife Society Bulleti~z2000,28(4):84 1-85 1

complexities, and failings but as idealized, simplified ver- hands of humans, animal activists often invoke rights- sions of humanity. There is nothing ambiguous about laden terms such as "holocaust" and "slavery." For a dis- what is now projected on animals. Animals are loving, cussion that compares the plight of animals with human loyal, caring, sincere, and trustworthy. Indeed, they are slavery, see Spiegel(1988). perceived by many people to be all those things that are increasingly in doubt about humanity in the modern age. The animal rights movement as a moral Not only are animals perceived as people, they are per- crusade ceived as good people. In summary, these 4 social precursors have come It is little wonder that people in modern society-hav- together to provide fertile ground for the emergence and ing experienced pets as family members, having wit- persistent staying power of an animal rights ideology and nessed killer whales (Orcinus orca) at Sea World kissing supporting social movement marked by the passionate their trainers, having read newspaper accounts of a goril- involvement of very committed, true believers. The la (Gorilla sp.) saving a toddler who accidentally fell into rhetoric and persistent staying power of the movement her cage--empathize with a northern river otter (Lontra leads most people in the conservation community to canadensis) caught in a leghold trap or oppose hunting believe that the animal rights movement is about animals. bison as they range outside of Yellowstone National Park. However, several scholars who bave studied animal rights So far we've seen that animals are experienced as activism advance convincing arguments that this move- members of the family, they are anthropomorphized as ment is about something more. They argue that it is less possessing human qualities, and a heavily interpreted and about animals than about larger issues and cross-currents popularized science provides evidence that animals are being played out in modem society, of which animals are truly like people. For many people, this raises a question: merely the symbols (Sperling 1988, Jasper and Nelkin Why don't animals deserve to be treated like people? 1992, Dizard 1999). From this perspective, the animal rights movement can be accurately characterized as a Egalitarianisuz moral crusade, the major objectives of which are to trans- The final social precursor necessary for animal rights form human society and individual human beings. values to take root is egalitarianism or the notion of equal As our colleague, Jan Dizard (Dizard, personal com- rights. The animal rights movement has masterfully cap- munication), is fond of reminding us, "There is some- tured one of the most potent symbols in American socie- thing about advanced industrial society that leaves us ty, the language of rights (Wildavsky 1991). Animal hungry." Many people feel empty and are searching for rights refers to the fight to extend rights, defined as state meaning. They are disaffected and deeply dismayed with protection of individual autonomy and self-determina- the direction in which modern society is headed. They tion, outward from humans to nonhuman animals (Nash are searching for things that make sense of their lives and 1989, Silverstein 1996). give them meaning and a sense of purpose. Especially In many respects, modem history has been the history during times when society is undergoing dramatic macro- of the extension of rights (Nash 1989). Looking at his- social change, many people are drawn to fundamental torical examples from the United States-from propertied movements to explain and interpret the changes they are white males at the time of the American Revolution, to experiencing (Sperling 1988). And just as some people freeing the slaves during the Civil War, to the passage of may continue to find meaning and fulfillment in their child-labor laws, to the nineteenth Amendment to the families, in their religion, or in their passion for hunting United States Constitution giving women the right to and trapping (e.g., Miller 1992; Stange 1997; Brady vote-the moral umbrella has been expanding outward 1990; Dizard, in press), others may seek it by joining and has become more inclusive (Nash 1989). militia movements, searching for extraterrestrial aliens, The debates continue on into the present-day conflicts or in the Hale-Bopp comet and the cult of Heaven's Gate. over the extension of full and equal rights to the disabled, But an increasing number of people in advanced industri- the mentally ill, gays and lesbians, illegal aliens, and al societies are finding meaning and a sense of purpose in unborn human fetuses. The animal rights movement may the new frontier of liberating animals (Herzog 1993; be viewed as simply one more stage in this history. Only Jamison et al., in press). now, for the first time, people are advocating extending Thus, the animal rights movement is as much about the legal protection of rights to the nonhuman animal modern society and its discontents as it is about animals world. (For a thought-provoking critique of this perspec- (Franklin 1999). It is about reforming society, and ani- tive, see Dizard 1999.) In fact, when describing the cru- mals are simply the symbolic vehicles through which this elty, suffering, and death visited upon animals at the reformation is to be actualized (Sperling 1988, Jasper and Animal rights and the future of collservation Muth and Jamison 849

Nelkin 1992). If that's true, animal rights activists will values and beliefs. These challenges to the status quo are not be placated when someone invents a more humane healthy for the conservation professions. As a result, the leghold trap or markets a more accurate and lethal bow attitudes and values of the conservation community also and arrow, or when agencies ban all but catch-and-release are changing, allowing conservation professionals to fishing with barbless hooks. Unless we can "fix" what identify and respond to changing social values and in millions of people perceive to be wrong with modern many cases to come into closer alignment with them. society, there will continue to be people who see fighting Perhaps among the most challenging questions raised for the cause of animals as a source of meaning and sal- by the animal rights movement are those that have to do vation (Sperling 1988, Jasper and Nelkin 1992). with the very viability of the North American Wildlife In addition to conflicting beliefs about the appropriate Conservation Model itself. Is this an outmoded model or use and treatment of animals, animal rights activists and does it simply need to be revised and updated to reflect conservationists who support hunting and trapping also modern values and sensibilities? If it is to be rejected, hold fundamental differences regarding what it means to be what should replace it? What should be the role of hunt- human. These are conflicts over whose vision-the vision ing and trapping in the future of wildlife conservation, of St. Francis of Assisi, the Patron Saint of Animals, or the regulated hunting and trapping by licensed sportsmen and vision of Orion the Hunter-is going to prevail in terms of women or hunting and trapping by agency sharpshooters what it means to be human in the twenty-first century. In and private pest-control films? And what is more accept- the minds of animal rights adherents, the question is: Are able from a moral perspective, hunting and trapping that we going to be humans who pursue and kill animals for provide benefits to humans through regulated use or dis- our own sport and personal recreation, humans who en- carding into incinerators and landfills beaver carcasses slave and exploit our animal brothers and sisters, or are we trapped by pest-control firms? The conservation commu- going to be humans who treat animals with the love and nity in general and conservation professionals in particu- respect they deserve, such that we humans are finally able lar would do well to engage one another in dialogue over to lie down with the lion and the lamb? these and related issues. In addition to pondering these questions, the conserva- Implications of the animal rights tion community needs to decide what role it should play in an era of increasing social conflict over wildlife. Is it movement for the future of hunting the role of conservation professionals simply to react to and trapping changes in social values? Or should they work to help There can be little question that societal values and shape the course of change in social values and public meanings regarding wildlife are dramatically changing policies? If a more proactive leadership role is adopted, and will continue to do so (Muth 1991). The sociocultu- conservationists would do well to remember the model ral landscape that has given rise to the animal rights upon which wildlife conservation was founded. Wildlife movement is extremely complex; many conservation pro- is managed for the public and by the public in such a fessionals and sportsmen and women find the movement way as to provide benefits from public uses of wildlife, and its influence very bewildering. Some people are whether for food, lifestyle, or culture. The benefits of frustrated or angry over the fact that animal rights use reinforce the public's self-interest to conserve wild- activists have achieved some measure of success in their life and pay for wildlife conservation (Hamilton 1998). campaigns against the traditional harvest and use of wild- In the view of many professionals, the North Ameri- life. What is the wildlife conservation community to can Wildlife Conservation Model is still useful. One make of this movement? How should conservation pro- challenge, however, will be to broaden the wildlife policy fessionals respond to it? umbrella such that it provides benefits and is more res- ponsive to a broader array of wildlife stakeholder groups. Responding to challenges posed by animal In so doing, it will be important that conservation profes- rights sionals and sportsmen and women work to forge a mid- Despite some fundamental differences between animal dle ground on wildlife management issues that is respon- activists and the conservation community, it will be sive to evolving public sentiments. One avenue for important to guard against throwing the baby out with the achieving this goal is for the conservation community to bath water. Challenges posed by animal protection identify common ground with moderate organizations in organizations have forced conservation professionals to the animal protection movement and to work together engage in collective introspection, often stimulating them with them toward progressive accomplishments in to re-examine the validity and usefulness of long-held advancing the cause of wildlife conservation. 850 Wildlife Society B~dZeti~z2000,28(4):841-85 1

If, as a result of introspection and dialogue, the conser- presented at the Northeast Fish and Wildlife Conference, vation coinmunity subscribes to the view that hunting and Framingham, Massachusetts, and J. F. Organ, J. E. trapping should be retained as instruments of conserva- Dizard, M. E. Mather, R. B. Peyton, and 2 anonymous tion, wildlife professionals, hunters, trappers, and their reviewers for insightful comments of the present draft. organizations need to position themselves as mainstream conservationists. Most Americans, although they oppose Literature cited cruelty to animals, also oppose granting equal rights to ANIMALINDUSTRY FOUNDATION. 2000. More money for animal rights animals. In developing a middle ground responsive to the groups in 1998. Animal Industry Foundation Newsletter 13(1): 3-4. attitudes and values of most Americans, the conservation BAKER,J. 2000. To save hunting in the 21st century. American Hunter. community will need to communicate the importance of 28:30-32. BEALCHAINE,D. 2000. The new millennium: do deer hunting's largest hunting and trapping in wildlife conservation. Too often challenges lie ahead? Deer and Deer Hunting 23.18-24. in the past, "educating the public" has either relied too BRADY,E. 1990. Mankind's thumb on nature's scale: trapping and strictly on the basis of science alone or has simply been a regional identity in the Missouri Ozarks. Pages 58-73 in B.Allen euphemism for trying to convince people to support hunt- andT. J. Schlereth, editors. Sense of place. University of Kentucky, Lexington,IJSA. ing and trapping. In the future, communicating with the BNSTER,B.2000. Welcome to the 21st century. Field and Stream 114: public must be conducted in such a way that the conser- 56-58. vation message resonates with people's values. BROKW,T.L., D. J. DECKER,K. G. PuRDY, AND G. E MATTFELD.1987. The future of hunting in New York. Transactions of the North American In communicating with the public, conservationists need Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 52: 553-566. to be responsive to changing public sensibilities. They CAMPBELL,J. 1959. The masks of God: primitive mythology. Viking, New need to be aware, for example, of the changing connota- York, New York, USA. tions of "sport" and "recreation." Organ et al. (1998) have CARTMILL,M. 1993a. A view to a death in the morning: hunting and nature through history. Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachu- discussed how the concept of sport has shifted from the setts,USA "unalterable love of fair play" held by George Bird Grin- CARTMILL,M. 1993b. The Bambi Syndrome. Natural History 6:6,8, nell and other early conservationists to the emphasis on 10-12. competition and winning at any cost typified by modern DECKER,D.J..LYD T. L. BROWN.1987. HOWanimal rightists view the "wildlife management-hunting system." Wildlife Society Bulletin professional athletes. As long as conservationists continue 15:599-602. to justify hunting and trapping based on the idea of sport. DECKER,D.J, J.W EXK,ANDT. L. BROWN.1993. The future of hunting: will these activities will remain abhorrent to animal rights ac- we pass on the heritage? Proceedings,Annual Governor's Sympo- sium on North America's I-Iunting Heritage 2: 21-46. tivists in particular and to a growing segment of the Ameri- DIZARD,J. E. 1999 Going wild: hunting, animal rights, and the contest- can public in general, to whom hunting and trapping ed meaning of nature. Second edition. University of Massachusetts, animals for sport, for recreation, for "fun" is anathema. Amherst, USA. The future role of traditional hunting and trapping in Dim,J. E. In press. Mortal stakes. University of Massachusetts, Amherst, USA. wildlife conservation is dependent on many factors, not DIJDA,M. D., S.J. RISSELL,ANDK. C.YOUNG. 1998. Wildlife and the Amer- the least of which is the challenge posed by the animal ican mind: public opinion on and attitudes toward fish and wildlife rights movement. If regulated hunting and trapping be- management. Responsive Management, Harrisburg,Virginia, USA. come severely restricted or eliminated as components of D~DA,IM. D.AND K. C.YOUNG.1998. American attitudes toward scientif- ic wildlife management and human use of fish and wildlife: implica- wildlife conservation, it is worth reflecting on the poten- tions for effective public relations and communications strategies. tial consequences that may obtain for wildlife and for the Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources many people who depend on them for consumptive and Conference 63: 589-603 DIJNIAP,T.R. 1988. Saving America's wildlife. Princeton University, nonconsumptive uses. Should wildlife overabundance Princeton, New Jersey, USA. result in escalating conflict between wildlife and people, FARBER,I? 1994. The temptation of evolutionary ethics. The University wildlife management may, out of necessity, shift from a of California, Berkeley, USA. conservation model to a pest-management model. In our FRANCIONE,G. L. 1996. Rain without thunder. Temple University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. view, this would be cause for grave concern. Not only F~KuN,A.1999. Animals in modern culture:A sociology of human- would it potentially weaken the support that the Ameri- animal relations in modernity. Corwin, NewYork, NewYork, USA. can public has traditionally invested in wildlife conserva- GILBERT,E E 2000. Considerations in managing wildlife populations for tion, but it would surely diminish the respect, wonder, sport. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28: 459-463. HAMILTON,D.A. 1998. Opening comments to Special Session 6. Trans- and awe with which many people in modern society actions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources presently regard wildlife. Conference 63: 525-527. HAMILTON,D.A., B. ROBERTS,G. I,INSCOMBE, N. R. JOTHAM,H. NOSEWORTHY,AND J. L. STONE.1998. The European Union's wild fur regulation: a battle Acknowledgments. We thank D. J. Decker for valu- of politics, cultures, animal rights, international trade and North able comments provided on an earlier draft of this paper America's wildlife policy. 'Transactions of the North American Animal rights and the future of coilservation Muth and Jamison 851

Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 63:572-588. Environmental Quality,Washington, D.C.,USA. HEBERLEIN,T.A.1991. Changing attitudes and funding for wildlife:pre- REIGER,G. 1980. The trouble with Bambi. Field and Stream 94: 12-17. serving the sporthunter. Wildlife Society Bulletin 19:528-534. REIGER,G. 2000. Hunting inY2K and beyond. Field and Stream 114:22- HERZOG,H. 1993. "The movement is my life":the psychology of animal 23. rights activism. Journal of Social Issues 49: 103-119. REIGER,J. E 1986. American sportsmen and the origins of conservation. JAMISON,WV.1996. Animal rights. Pages 30-36 in D. Levinson and K. Revised edition. University of Oklahoma, Norman, USA. Christensen, editors. Encyclopedia of the World of Sport. ABC-Clio, RICHARDS,R.T.ANDR. S. KRANNICH.1991. The ideology of the animal Santa Barbara,California,USA. rights movement and activists' attitudes toward wildlife. Trans- JAMISON,WV1998. A profile of animal rights activists. Pages 60-72 in actions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources H. D. Guither,Animal rights: history and scope of a radical social Conference 56:363-371. movement. Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, USA. RINGEL,E. 1988. Want to pat Bambi,marry Cinderella? A psychological JAMISON,WVANDW M. LUNCH.1992. Rights of animals,perceptions of profile of Disney fans. Atlanta Journal and Constitution,24 July science, and political activism:profde ofAmerican animal rights 1988:MI. activists. Science,Technology & Human Values 17:438-458. SILVERSTEIN,H. 1996. Unleashing rights: law, meaning, and the animal JAMISON,WV.,C.WENK,ANDJ. PARKER.In press. Every sparrow that falls; rights movement. University of Michigan,AnnArbor,USA. understanding animal rights activism as functional religion. Society SINGER,I? 1975. Animal liberation. Johnathon Cape, London, United and Animals. Kingdom. KELI.ERT,S.R. 1978a. Attitudes and characteristics of hunters and anti- SHERWOOD,M. 1981. Big game in Alaska:a history of wildlife and peo- hunters. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural ple. Yale University,New Haven, Connecticut, USA. Resources Conference 43:412-423. SPERLING,S. 1988. Animal liberators: research and mortality. University KELLERT,S.R. 1978b. Policy implications of a national study ofher- of California, Berkeley,USA. ican attitudes and behavioral relations to animals. Superintendent SPIEGEL,M. 1988. The dreaded comparison:race and animal slavery. of Documents,Washington, D.C.,USA. New Society,Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,USA. JASPER,J. M.ANDD. NELKIN.1992. The animal rights crusade: the growth STANGE,M. 2. 1997. Woman the hunter. Beacon, Boston, Massachusetts, of a moral protest. The Free Press, New York, NewYork, USA. USA. LANSBURY,C. 1985. The old brown dog: women, workers, and vivisec- Sz~sz,K. 1968. Petishism:pet cults of the western world. Hutchinson tion in Edwardian England. University of Wisconsin, Madison,USA. and Company,London, United Kingdom. Lurrs, R.H. 1992. The trouble with Bambi: Walt Disney's Bambi and TOBER,J.A. 1981. Who owns the wildlife? The political economy of the American vision of nature. Forest & Conservation History conservation in nineteenthcrntury America. Greenwood,Westport, 36:160-171. Connecticut, USA. LUTTS,R. H. 1996. North American attitudes toward wildlife in popular TREFETHEN,J. B. 1975. An American crusade for wildlife. Westchester, culture: the nature fakers, Bambi,and wildlife policy. Pages 25-45 New York New York, USA. in A. N. Rowan and J. C.Weer,editors. Living with wildlife:the biolo. VIALLES,N. 1994. Animal to edible. (English translation.) Cambridge gy and sociology of suburban deer and beaver. Tufts Center for University, Paris,France. Animals and Public Policy,North Grafton, Massachusetts,USA. WARREN,L. S. 1997. The hunter's game:poachers and conservationists MASON,J. 1995 The beast within. E Magazine. 6 (Nov.-Dec.):38-41. in twentiethcentury America. Yale University,New Haven, MASSON,J. M.ANDS. MCCARTWY.1995. When elephants weep: the em@ Connecticut, USA. tional lives of animals. Delacorte, New York, New York, USA. WENZEL,G. 1991. Animal rights, human rights: ecology,economy and MILLER,J. M. 1992. Deer camp: last light in the Northeast Kingdom. ideology in the CanadianArctic. University ofToronto,Toronto, MIT, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA. Quebec,Canada. MINNIS,D. L. 1997. The opposition to hunting: a typology of beliefs. WILDAVSKY,A.1991. The rise of radical egalitarianism. American Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Natural Resources University,Washington, D.C.,USA. Conference 62:346-360. MINNIS,D. L. 1998. Wildlife policy-making by the electorate; ail over- Wesleylamison is an assistant professor of interdisciplinary and global view of citizen-sponsored ballot measures on hunting and trapping. studies at Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Massachusetts, where he Wildlife Society Bulletin 26:75-83. teaches classes in social science lnethods and conducts research into MUTH,R. M. 1991. Wildlife and fisheries policy at the crossroads: con- political organizations, interest groups, and the animal rights move- temporary sociocultural values and natural resource management. ment. He received his Ph.D. from Oregon State University, where he specialized in political science and studied the animal rights move- Transactions of the Northeast Section of The Wildlife Society 48: ment in North America. Since that time, he has continued his re- 170-174. search into the movement and has conducted studies in both the Unit- MUTH,R. M., D.A. HAMILTON,J. E ORGAN,D.J.WITTER,M. E. MATHER,~DJ.J. ed States and Europe. His specific research interest focus upon the DAIGLE.1998. The future of wildlife and fisheries policy and man- political manifestations of contested meanings of nature, as well as agement: assessing the attitudes and values of wildlife and fisheries urban-rural conflicts. Robert M. Muth is an associate professor in the professionals. Transactions of the North American Wildlife and Department of Natural Resources Conservation at the University of Natural Resources Conference 63:604-627. Massachusetts at Amherst, where he specializes in the sociological NASH,R. E 1989. The rights of nature: a history of environmental and policy aspects of wildlife and fisheries conservation. He is also ethics. University of Wisconsin, Madison,USA. an associate faculty member in the Animals and Public Policy Pro- gram, Tufts University School of Veterinary Medicine. He received his ORGAN,J. E, R. M. Mum,J. E. DIZARD.S.J.WII.LIAMSON,AND T.A.DECKER. Ph.D. in natural resources sociology from the College of Forest Re- 1998. Fair chase and humane treatment: balancing the ethics of sources at the University of Washington in Seattle. One of his major hunting and trapping. Transactions of the North American Wildlife scientific interests involves the changing roles and meanings of wild- and Natural Resources Conference 63:528-543. life in advanced industrial society. Specific research interests include PACELI.E,W1998. Forging a new wildlife management paradigm: inte- the study of attitudes, values, motivations, and behavior of poachers; grating animal protection values. Human Dimensions of Wildlife subsistence users of wildlife and fish; animal rights activists; 3(2): 42-50. trappers; sport hunters and anglers; and wildlife and fisheries RElGER, G. 1978. Hunting and trapping in the new world. Pages 42-52 professionals. in H. l?Brokaw, editor. Wildlife and America. Council on Associate editor: Peyton