Evolution of People -Wildlife Relations

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Evolution of People -Wildlife Relations Evolution of People-Wildlife Relations ANAGING INTERACTIONS between people and wildlife is the primary focus of wildlife management. The role of human values and behaviors has been recognized by wildlife managers since the inception of the pro- fession, early in the 20th century. Only since the mid-rgyos, however, have the human dimensions of wildlife management become an organ- ized field of study, and not until more recently did they become a formally recognized as- pect of wildlife management practice. In comparison, the biological dimensions have been at the core of wildlife management since its beginning. The traditional lament of wildlife biologists-that wildlife management is IO% man- aging wildlife and go% managing people (Fazio and Gilbert rg86:3)-is recognition that in practice the human dimensions of wildlife management are an integral compo- nent of wildlife management, one for which wildlife managers historically have not been adequately trained. In this book we take steps toward preparing wildlife managers to consider people’s beliefs, attitudes, preferences, and activities as a formal part of man- aging wildlife. We view the human dimensions as natural and intriguing core elements of wildlife management. What do we mean by the term lzulnan dinzensions? We define the huvnalz dinzensions of wildli,fe nzu.lzugenzentin this way: how people value wildlife, how they want wildlife to be managed, and how they affect or are affected by wildlife and wildlife management deci- sions. The human dimensions field seeks to understand human traits and looks at ways to incorporate that understanding into wildlife management planning and actions. The term human diwlensions covers a broad set of ideas and practices, including economic and social values, individual and social behavior, public involvement in management de- j j G ,< c. G ’ i, ’ i - p ,p! cision malting, and communication. Those topics and others are covered in this text. .:t ,J L’ This chapter was contributed by Daniel .I. Decker, 1.1 FOUNDATIONS FORVALUINGWILDLIFE Tommy L. Brown, and Wildlife management is based on human values. It exists because wildlife are viewed as William F. Siemer. a resource for people. When landowners practice management on their own lands, it reflects their personal values. When a state agency undertakes management on behalf of its citizens, it reflects community or social values in that state. North Americans’ view of Social and Community Values wildlife-our belief in their value for us-motivates wildlife management at all levels. That is the premise of any study of the human dimensions of wildlife management. During the last quarter-century many writers have addressed the nature of wildlife values (e.g., Shaw and Zube 1980, Decker and Goff 1987, Gray 1993), but the subject can be traced back to the classic Greek philosophers (Petulla rg87)! We won’t dwell on ’ the evolution of philosophical arguments about nature and our relations with it, nor will we exhaustively review the eras of human-wildlife interaction in Europe and North America and their profound impact on the fate of wildlife populations. Several textbooks present the historical underpinnings of the wildlife management profession (Bailey et al. 1974, Reiger 1975, Trefethen 1975, Shaw 1985, Anderson 1991, Gray 1993, Bolen and Robinson 19g5), so we will give only a brief overview as background. Understanding the philosophical and experiential foundations of society’s interest in wildlife can help one appreciate how human-wildlife interactions and human values have shaped wildlife management. Historical insight may be essential to interpreting current situations where segments of society hold different values and the interplay between them creates challenges for wildlife managers. Here we will only scratch the surface of the complex story behind wildlife values in our amalgamated North American culture. Wildlife have been the subject of religious, cultural, recreational, economic, and sci- entific concern. Human interactions with wildlife can be intimate or vicarious, con- crete or sentimental. The situations influencing human interests in wildlife in North America have changed markedly, and although some interests have grown in imhor- tance and others have diminished, the same constellation of interests persists among segments of American society. Those interests reflect several basic value orientations toward wildlife. 1. I. I Native American Values Before Europeans arrived in North America, Native Americans relied extensively on wildlife, both for subsistence and as a focus of their spiritual life and culture. Though the reliance f&r subsistence has diminished, wildlife continue to play important roles for many Native Americans (see Chapter 17). Scholars have devoted relatively little attention, however, to contemporary Native American attitudes, values, and behaviors related to wildlife. Lack of information is more than an academic problem. It can contribute to misunderstanding, distrust, and open conflict when wildlife management agencies are faced with issues that involve tribal lands or Native rights to natural resources (McDonald and McAvoy 1997, Krech rggg, Martin 1999, Davis 2000). Despite the bleak situation generally, there are examples of concerted effort to consider Native American values, as reflected in Chapter 17. 1.1.2 New-American Values Wildlife were of tremendous practical and cultural significance for Americans of Euro- pean descent, who carried with them to the New World the Judeo-Christian concept of People-WildlifeRelat stewardship or domination over nature. They perpetuated in North America a long- standing cultural assumption of Western society-that humans are superior to other ‘elements of nature (Campbell rggr, Diamond 1997). The scientific revolution in Europe during the period of early North American settle- ment strengthened that philosophy. Science was, and still is, seen as the business of re- vealing the secrets of nature, largely for the purpose of controlling it for the benefit of . humans. It was, and still is, the systematic and disciplined approach to dominance over nature. The assumption of superiority and the goal of dominance suited the needs of early European settlers, who faced the task of “taming,” 0; at least coexisting with, a seemingly unbounded wilderness. The wilderness has been tamed, but the goal of dom- inance is still strongly embedded in North American culture (Petulla 1987). Though the idea. of human domination over nature existed for some time in Europe, most people did not in fact have the legal right to exercise domination of wildlife. In Europe wildlife laws largely prohibited common people access to wildlife. Such’ rights were reserved for the privileged classes. In the New World, however, there were few such constraints. Mammals, birds, and fish were hunted and trapped at will, for food and fiber, and harassed as needed, to pre- vent crop depredation or threats to people and domesticated animals. Wildlife were so abundant, and the struggle of the early immigrants for survival was so consuming, it is unlikely that many European colonists considered the effects of their activities on wild- life populations for anything but utilitarian purposes. Imagine the situation 300 to’400 years ago. Wildlife were a primary source of food and fiber for explorers and missionaries, for the settlers who followed, and, through the intermediaries of trappers and “market hunters,” for village and city dwellers. Wildlife were essential, and at the same time wild animals were competitors for livestock and crops. Some were even threats to human health (e.g., rabid animals) and safety (e.g., large predators) as settlers pushed into the wilderness to carve out livelihoods. The harsh conditions of life in early America reinforced the Western belief that to survive, humans had to dominate nature, and specifically wildlife. What other choice did they have? If they did not dominate nature, they would be dominated by it-that was the reality of daily survival in the New World for many people. Although conditions have changed remarkably over the last IOO to 150 years, the North American view of wildlife today has been deeply shaped by past relationships with wildlife. It’s part of our culture. 1.2 USE AND ABUSE The many values of wildlife for American society, and the depth of feeling many Americans have for wildlife, have directed the evolution of wildlife management. Conditions for wildlife that prevailed in North America for perhaps IOO centuries changed relatively quickly with the influx of Europeans. Between the mid-17th and late Social and Community Values 19th centuries American wildlife populations declined markedly. The demands of an expanding nation for food, fiber, and habitat resulted in staggering overexploitation dur- ing the I~OOS, overwhelming the natural processes that had previously allowed wildlife to prosper. Throughout our history wild animals have simultaneously been considered vermin and an important resource, depending on the situation and species. We are still facing that paradox. The massive westward migration of Americans, fueled by the discovery of gold in California and the prospects of land for farming and ranching throughout the nation’s midsection during the mid and late I~OOS, created population pressures that adversely affected wildlife. The plights of such western species as American bison and pronghorn antelope are well-known examples of exploitation almost to the point of extinction. Wildlife populations also
Recommended publications
  • Oil and Gas Industry Investments in the National Rifle Association and Safari Club International Reshaping American Energy, Land, and Wildlife Policy
    JOE RIIS JOE Oil and Gas Industry Investments in the National Rifle Association and Safari Club International Reshaping American Energy, Land, and Wildlife Policy By Matt Lee-Ashley April 2014 WWW.AMERICANPROGRESS.ORG Oil and Gas Industry Investments in the National Rifle Association and Safari Club International Reshaping American Energy, Land, and Wildlife Policy By Matt Lee-Ashley April 2014 Contents 1 Introduction and summary 3 Oil and gas industry investments in three major sportsmen groups 5 Safari Club International 9 The National Rifle Association 11 Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation 13 Impact of influence: How the oil and gas industry’s investments are paying off 14 Threats to endangered and threatened wildlife in oil- and gas-producing regions 19 Threats to the backcountry 22 Threats to public access and ownership 25 Conclusion 27 About the author and acknowledgments 28 Endnotes Introduction and summary Two bedrock principles have guided the work and advocacy of American sports- men for more than a century. First, under the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, wildlife in the United States is considered a public good to be conserved for everyone and accessible to everyone, not a commodity that can be bought and owned by the highest bidder.1 Second, since President Theodore Roosevelt’s creation of the first wildlife refuges and national forests, sportsmen have fought to protect wildlife habitat from development and fragmentation to ensure healthy game supplies. These two principles, however, are coming under growing fire from an aggressive and coordinated campaign funded by the oil and gas industry. As part of a major effort since 2008 to bolster its lobbying and political power, the oil and gas industry has steadily expanded its contributions and influ- ence over several major conservative sportsmen’s organizations, including Safari Club International, or SCI, the National Rifle Association, or NRA, and the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation.
    [Show full text]
  • The Boone and Crockett Club on Fair Chase 9/5/2016
    THE BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB ON FAIR CHASE 9/5/2016 Why a Discussion on Fair Chase? All significant human activities are conducted under a set of ethical principles that guide appropriate behavior. Depending on the activity, these principles are molded into laws when specific behavior is required. Without ethics and laws, most activities would become unsafe and unacceptable to both those who participate in them and those who do not. Hunting is no different. It, too, has principles and laws that guide ethical behavior. In modern, devel- oped societies, there exists a general expectation that hunting be conducted under appropriate conditions—animals are taken for legitimate purposes such as food, to attain wildlife agency management goals, and to mitigate property damage. It is also expected that the hunting is done sustainably and legally, and that hunters conduct themselves ethically by showing respect for the land and animals they hunt. In the broadest sense, hunters are guided by a conservation ethic, but the most common term used to describe the actual ethical pursuit of a big game animal is “fair chase.” The concept of fair chase has been widely promoted for over a century by the Boone and Crockett Club, an organi- zation founded by Theodore Roosevelt in 1887 to work towards saving what was left of dwindling North American wildlife populations. The Club defines fair chase as “the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals.” Fair chase has become a code of conduct for the American sportsman, helped shape the foundation of many of our game laws, and is taught to new hunters as they complete mandatory certification courses.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Updated: 1/4/2019 2:21 PM
    1 HISTORICAL FILES, Subject and Biographical A – Miscellaneous Abert, James Actors and Actresses Adair, John Adams Papers Adams, Daniel (Mrs.) Adkins, Betty Lawrence African American Genealogy African American History African Americans African Americans – Indiana African Americans – Kentucky African Americans – Louisville Ahrens, Theo (Jr.) Ainslie, Hew Alexander, Barton Stone Ali, Muhammad Allensworth, Allen Allison, John S. Allison, Young E. - Jr. & Sr. Almanacs Altsheller, Brent Alves, Bernard P. American Heritage American Letter Express Co. American Literary Manuscripts American Revolution American Revolution - Anecdotes American Revolution - Soldiers Amish - Indiana Anderson, Alex F. (Ship - Caroline) Anderson, James B. Anderson, Mary Anderson, Richard Clough Anderson, Robert Anderson, William Marshall Anderson, William P. Updated: 1/4/2019 2:21 PM 2 Andressohn, John C. Andrew's Raid (James J. Andrews) Antiques - Kentucky Antiquities - Kentucky Appalachia Applegate, Elisha Archaeology - Kentucky Architecture and Architects Architecture and Architects – McDonald Bros. Archival Symposium - Louisville (1970) Archivists and Archives Administration Ardery, Julia Spencer (Mrs. W. B.) Ark and Dove Arnold, Jeremiah Arthur Kling Center Asbury, Francis Ashby, Turner (Gen.) Ashland, KY Athletes Atkinson, Henry (Gen.) Audubon State Park (Henderson, KY) Augusta, KY Authors - KY Authors - KY - Allen, James Lane Authors - KY - Cawein, Madison Authors - KY - Creason, Joe Authors - KY - McClellan, G. M. Authors - KY - Merton, Thomas Authors - KY - Rice, Alice Authors - KY - Rice, Cale Authors - KY - Roberts, Elizabeth Madox Authors - KY - Sea, Sophie F. Authors - KY - Spears, W. Authors - KY - Still, James Authors - KY - Stober, George Authors - KY - Stuart, Jesse Authors - KY - Sulzer, Elmer G. Authors - KY - Warren, Robert Penn Authors - Louisville Auto License Automobiles Updated: 1/4/2019 2:21 PM 3 Awards B – Miscellaneous Bacon, Nathaniel Badin, Theodore (Rev.) Bakeless, John Baker, James G.
    [Show full text]
  • 6.0 Consultation and Coordination
    Chokecherry and Sierra Madre Final EIS Chapter 6.0 – Consultation and Coordination 6-1 6.0 Consultation and Coordination This EIS was conducted in accordance with NEPA requirements, CEQ regulations, and the DOI and BLM policies and procedures implementing NEPA. NEPA and the associated laws, regulations, and policies require the BLM to seek public involvement early in, and throughout, the planning process to develop a reasonable range of alternatives to PCW’s Proposed Action and prepare environmental documents that disclose the potential impacts of alternatives considered. Public involvement and agency consultation and coordination, which have been at the heart of the process leading to this draft EIS, were achieved through FR notices, public and informal meetings, individual contacts, media releases, and the project website. From the initial proposal of the project, the public and agencies have been approached for input on the project scope and development, as discussed in Chapter 1.0. This chapter describes this public involvement process as well as other key consultation and coordination. 6.1 Agency Participation and Coordination Specific regulations require the BLM to coordinate and consult with federal, state, and local agencies about the potential of the project and alternatives to affect sensitive environmental and human resources. The BLM initiated these coordination and consultation activities through the scoping process and has maintained them through regular meetings regarding key topics (e.g., alternatives and impact analyses)
    [Show full text]
  • The Pennsylvania State University the Graduate School the College
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School The College of the Liberal Arts ANIMALS, TECHNOLOGY, AND THE ZOOPOETICS OF AMERICAN MODERNISM A Dissertation in English by Christopher T. White 2008 Christopher T. White Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2008 ii The dissertation of Christopher T. White was reviewed and approved* by the following: Sanford Schwartz Associate Professor of English Thesis Advisor Chair of Committee Deborah Clarke Professor of English and Women’s Studies Mark Morrisson Associate Professor of English Susan Squier Brill Professor of Women’s Studies and English Philip Jenkins Sparks Professor of History and Religious Studies Robin Schulze Professor of English Head of the Department of English *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii Abstract This dissertation addresses a striking paradox of American modernity: the historical disappearance of wildlife from the natural environment and the simultaneous proliferation of animal forms across the cultural landscape—in literature, in visual and material culture, and in popular scientific writings during the half-century of dramatic change from 1890 to 1940. Across these venues the figure of the “vanishing animal” emerges as a dominant trope, as modern extinctions and the explosion of machine culture combine to frame animals within a spectral logic—disappearing, but more visible than ever. The first half of this dissertation examines the extensive technological, ideological, and representational apparatus through which animals and animal life are rendered in modern American culture, while the second half explores a significant, if surprising, correlative phenomenon whereby the modernized figure of the animal returns to haunt, and in fact disrupt, the very technics that facilitated its emergence in the first place.
    [Show full text]
  • The Inventory of the Theodore Roosevelt Collection #560
    The Inventory of the Theodore Roosevelt Collection #560 Howard Gotlieb Archival Research Center ROOSEVELT, THEODORE 1858-1919 Gift of Paul C. Richards, 1976-1990; 1993 Note: Items found in Richards-Roosevelt Room Case are identified as such with the notation ‘[Richards-Roosevelt Room]’. Boxes 1-12 I. Correspondence Correspondence is listed alphabetically but filed chronologically in Boxes 1-11 as noted below. Material filed in Box 12 is noted as such with the notation “(Box 12)”. Box 1 Undated materials and 1881-1893 Box 2 1894-1897 Box 3 1898-1900 Box 4 1901-1903 Box 5 1904-1905 Box 6 1906-1907 Box 7 1908-1909 Box 8 1910 Box 9 1911-1912 Box 10 1913-1915 Box 11 1916-1918 Box 12 TR’s Family’s Personal and Business Correspondence, and letters about TR post- January 6th, 1919 (TR’s death). A. From TR Abbott, Ernest H[amlin] TLS, Feb. 3, 1915 (New York), 1 p. Abbott, Lawrence F[raser] TLS, July 14, 1908 (Oyster Bay), 2 p. ALS, Dec. 2, 1909 (on safari), 4 p. TLS, May 4, 1916 (Oyster Bay), 1 p. TLS, March 15, 1917 (Oyster Bay), 1 p. Abbott, Rev. Dr. Lyman TLS, June 19, 1903 (Washington, D.C.), 1 p. TLS, Nov. 21, 1904 (Washington, D.C.), 1 p. TLS, Feb. 15, 1909 (Washington, D.C.), 2 p. Aberdeen, Lady ALS, Jan. 14, 1918 (Oyster Bay), 2 p. Ackerman, Ernest R. TLS, Nov. 1, 1907 (Washington, D.C.), 1 p. Addison, James T[hayer] TLS, Dec. 7, 1915 (Oyster Bay), 1p. Adee, Alvey A[ugustus] TLS, Oct.
    [Show full text]
  • The Boone and Crockett Club on Conservation and Preservation
    THE BOONE AND CROCKETT CLUB ON CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION Why a Discussion of Conservation and Preservation More people are engaging in and having a greater influence on natural resource issues than ever before through voter initiatives, public forums, and social media. They want to do what is best, yet are not necessarily familiar with the two primary approaches by which natural resources are managed— conservation and preservation. Conservation and preservation are terms everyone has heard of, but for many people they remain loosely defined and not well understood. There is a growing belief that “letting nature take its course” with no human interference is the best philosophy for the treatment of natural resources. Many are mistakenly or intentionally calling this way of thinking conservation, though it is more closely aligned with preservation. These misconceptions are helping to shift the management of natural resources from a successful “hands-on” conservation approach to a “hands-off” preservation approach, which is proving to have serious negative implications. Conservation and preservation are both concerned with protection and betterment of the environment, but they are based on different philosophies that produce different results. Conservation focuses on using and managing natural resources to benefit people, but in keeping within the limits of supply, regrowth, and change, both natural and human-influenced. It is the most widely used and accepted model for the management of natural resources, including wildlife, in North America. Preservation is a philosophy that generally views people as a negative influence on nature, and seeks to keep natural resources in a pristine state by limiting use and excluding active management by people.
    [Show full text]
  • Participant List
    Participant List Name Organization Business Phone Business Email Achterman, Gail Inst. for Nat. Resources, OR State Univ. 541-740-3190 [email protected] Ack, Brad Puget Sound Action Team Partnership 360-725-5437 [email protected] Ackelson, Mark Iowa Natural Heritage Foundation 515-288-1846 [email protected] Adair, Steve Ducks Unlimited, Inc. 701-355-3511 [email protected] Adams, Bruce San Juan County Commission 435-587-2820 [email protected] Adams, Laurie Davies Coevolution Institute 415-362-1137 [email protected] Adams, Les Ntn’l Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration 202-482-6090 [email protected] Addor, Mary Lou Natural Resources Leadership Institute 919-515-9602 [email protected] Adkins, Carol Federal Highway Administration 202-366-2024 [email protected] Agpaoa, Liz USDA Forest Service 202-205-1661 [email protected] Albrecht, Virginia S. Hunton & Williams, LLP 202-955-1943 [email protected] Alden Weingardt, Susan USDA Forest Service 510-559-6342 [email protected] Aldrich, James The Nature Conservancy 859-259-9655 [email protected] Allen, Diana National Park Service 314-436-1324 x112 [email protected] Anderson, Bob United Winegrowers for Sonoma County 707-433-7319 [email protected] Anderson, David Office of Management and Budget [email protected] Anderson, John R. Monsanto Company 919-821-9295 [email protected] Annand, Fred The Nature Conservancy, NC Chapter 919-403-8558 [email protected] Antoine, AICP, Todd Great Rivers Greenway District 314-436-7009 [email protected] Anzalone, Ronald D. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation 202-606-8523 [email protected] Arce, Mardi NPS, Jefferson National Expansion Memorial 314-655-1643 [email protected] Archuletta, Phil P&M Plastics, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Review 12-04 December 2012
    The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation Technical Review 12-04 December 2012 1 The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation The Wildlife Society and The Boone and Crockett Club Technical Review 12-04 - December 2012 Citation Organ, J.F., V. Geist, S.P. Mahoney, S. Williams, P.R. Krausman, G.R. Batcheller, T.A. Decker, R. Carmichael, P. Nanjappa, R. Regan, R.A. Medellin, R. Cantu, R.E. McCabe, S. Craven, G.M. Vecellio, and D.J. Decker. 2012. The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. The Wildlife Society Technical Review 12-04. The Wildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland, USA. Series Edited by Theodore A. Bookhout Copy Edit and Design Terra Rentz (AWB®), Managing Editor, The Wildlife Society Lisa Moore, Associate Editor, The Wildlife Society Maja Smith, Graphic Designer, MajaDesign, Inc. Cover Images Front cover, clockwise from upper left: 1) Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) kittens removed from den for marking and data collection as part of a long-term research study. Credit: John F. Organ; 2) A mixed flock of ducks and geese fly from a wetland area. Credit: Steve Hillebrand/USFWS; 3) A researcher attaches a radio transmitter to a short-horned lizard (Phrynosoma hernandesi) in Colorado’s Pawnee National Grassland. Credit: Laura Martin; 4) Rifle hunter Ron Jolly admires a mature white-tailed buck harvested by his wife on the family’s farm in Alabama. Credit: Tes Randle Jolly; 5) Caribou running along a northern peninsula of Newfoundland are part of a herd compositional survey. Credit: John F. Organ; 6) Wildlife veterinarian Lisa Wolfe assesses a captive mule deer during studies of density dependence in Colorado.
    [Show full text]
  • Circular 5. Organization and Officials
    UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Circular No. 5 fy' ii^iMcC^m Issued April 1943 ORGANIZATIONS AND OFFICIALS CONCERNED WITH WILDLIFE PROTECTION: 1942 Compiled by Harry C. Oberholser Division of Public Relations, Fish and Wildlife Service CONTENTS I'age Introduction 1 Newfoundland Government organizations 2$ United States Government organizations 2 Organizations in Mexico. 2* General non-government organizations 5 Organizations in the West Indies 24 Organizations in States and Territories 8 Organizations in Central America 24 Canadian Government organizations 22 Organizations in South America 24 Organizations in Canadian Provinces and Territories 22 INTRODUCTION Following the practice of the Bureau of Biological Survey, the Fish and Wildlife Service issues this, the forty-first edition of the directory of organizations and officials concerned with wildlife pro- tection. It is designed to meet the needs of officials charged with the administration and enforcement of fish and game laws, and is also for the convenient use of persons desiring to communicate with officials and organizations concerning wdldlife conditions in the several States and Territories, the Canadian Provinces and Territories, New^foundland, Mexico, the West Indies, Central America, and South America. Including chiefly the organizations that are national or State-wide in character, the directory follows the general form of previous editions.^ Details regarding the seasons for migratory game bird hunting and restrictions thereon may be obtained
    [Show full text]
  • The Cultural Politics of American Sport Hunters, 1880-19101
    Journal of Leisure Research Copyright 2003 2003, Vol. 35, No. 4, pp. 455-474 National Recreation and Park Association The Hunter's Aim: The Cultural Politics of American Sport Hunters, 1880-19101 Daniel Justin Herman Department of History Central Washington University American sport hunters of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries "aimed" to reclaim the frontier past, to sanctify individualism, and to demon- strate their superiority to women and immigrants. Sport hunters, however, achieved ironic results. In proposing that hunting had made Americans great, hunters forgot that Americans had once attributed their greatness to farming. In protecting their sport as a rite of individualism, hunters gave new powers to government. In identifying their sport as a badge of ethnic superiority, hunters undermined hunting as a badge of sexual superiority. In demonstrating their imperial control over the world, hunters demonstrated their fear of a world out of control. At the same time, however, hunters bequeathed to modern Ameri- cans an important legacy: the conservation of game. KEYWORDS: Ethnicity, gender, hunting, imperialism, Theodore Roosevelt, sport. Judging by its appearance in national periodicals, sport hunting in the United States reached its pinnacle in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Between 1865 and 1900, no less than thirty-nine weekly and monthly American journals were devoted to field sports, including Forest and Stream, The American Sportsman, The American Field, Outdoor Life, Recreation, Outing, and Turf, Field, and Farm. In perusing these journals, one immediately discovers that hunting was the most ubiquitous of American fields sports (apart from fishing) and the most symbolically charged.
    [Show full text]
  • (Teddy) Roosevelt Is Recognized As the Most Conservation-Oriented U.S
    BSG New Year’s Puzzler, Jan 2019 Theodore (Teddy) Roosevelt is recognized as the most conservation-oriented U.S. president. This year’s puzzler asked which these was he not? a) Driver for establishment of first national park in the world (Yellowstone) b) African trophy hunter c) Adventure seeker d) A Republican The reason this is a “puzzler” is because the answer may seem enigmatic: often we do not now associate a conservationist with a trophy hunter, an adventure-seeker, or (especially) a Republican (party of Trump). But Roosevelt was all of these. Although he did much for the fledgling U.S. National Park System, and set aside many lands for conservation, he was not (a) a driver for establishing Yellowstone National Park. a) Yellowstone National Park Yellowstone, the first U.S. national park and the first national park in the world set aside for protecting natural beauty for public viewing, came into being in 1872. Roosevelt was just 13 years old at the time; a former army general named U.S. Seal was president. However, in 1903, while Roosevelt was president, he took a trip and “roughed it” in Yellowstone National Park (photos below), helping to formulate and motivate his conservationist thinking. b) African trophy hunter Teddy Roosevelt was an avid hunter. He began hunting as a boy in the Adirondack Mountains of New York. He became proficient at hunting when living alone in the Dakotas, while grieving the death of his wife. Here he shot trophy bison, bighorn sheep, and grizzly bears (see the movie clip I sent).
    [Show full text]