Hunting Laws and Regulations
Natural resources can be divided into “commons” and “proprietary” resources. Proprietary resources are those that can be owned or possessed individually. Commons resources are those that are owned by all members of society. The atmosphere, for example, is a commons resource. The gold in a mine is a proprietary resource. The European tradition was that wildlife belongs to the landowner. When North America was settled, however, wildlife was designated as a commons resource. It could not be owned by anyone until it was reduced to legal possession. Until that time it was owned by everyone. Since what belongs to everyone belongs to no one, society created organizations or agencies to represent all people in managing wildlife.
States administer legal possession of resident wildlife, the kinds of animals that spend most their lives in a relatively limited area. Most mammals and gamebirds are resident wildlife. The federal government manages migratory wildlife like marine mammals, waterfowl, and songbirds. The right to pursue or take wildlife is governed by law. Both tradition and legal precedent support harvest of wildlife for food and fiber.
Wildlife laws can be classified in three groups. Some laws provide for the equitable sharing of commons resources. That is, they permit people a more or less equal opportunity to legally possess game. The requirement for licensing is one of those laws. Bag limits assure that one person cannot take the entire available surplus. Restricted seasons or times similarly assure that the resource will be shared and protected. Specifying methods or equipment assures “fairness” among potential users of the wildlife species.
Other wildlife laws are designed to protect the resource. Wildlife management divides the standing or existing crop of wildlife into two portions, the capital stock (brood stock, sustainable population) and the harvestable surplus (the portion of the population that will die before the next breeding season). Resource protection is the protection of future interests of the society. Limiting the total harvest to limits the population can stand involves seasons and bag limits. Sex or reproductive stage (age/sex/size) restrictions may be needed. Habitat protection regulations may be needed as well. Success stories for wildlife management are abundant. Species that are common, at least in some parts of the country, are represented among those success stories with populations being rebuilt from lows late in the 1800s or early 1900s to stable and harvestable numbers. These species include some surprises, like white-tailed deer, wood ducks, wild turkeys, pronghorns and the American elk or wapiti. All of these species were once in danger of extinction, primarily because of habitat loss. Today all of them are very abundant game animals.
A third major class of regulations is designed to protect human lives and property. Some laws apply to transporting and using firearms on public highways. Others restrict shooting to certain areas or limit the types of equipment that can be used. Restrictions on shooting hours, usable methods or mandatory clothing regulations are designed to make hunting safe for hunters.
Funding for Wildlife Management
Wildlife management is funded primarily by the hunting public. Pitman-Robertson funds, federal grants that match state money, are gained from special taxes on arms and ammunition. Sportsmen lobbied hard for that tax and the earmarked use of its revenues. Licenses, stamps, and permits generate most of the money to support federal and state refuges, agency activities, and wildlife law enforcement. General tax levies, while justifiable, are seldom and slightly used for these purposes. Sportsmen have heavily supported check-off programs even though they are often directed at wildlife that is not hunted.
Wildlife Legislation
Legislative actions are often political. By their nature, the often address issues that are viewed as “squeaky wheels.” Specific problems may create general laws. For example, declines in whale numbers may result in laws to protect all marine mammals, even though many species are not declining. Perceived problems may create laws addressing non-existent situations. Hunters need to understand how legislation is developed and to help their legislators understand the realities of hunting. Being well informed and actively involved in wildlife conservation is necessary for the future of wildlife in America.
The Relationship of Laws and Ethics
Law and ethics, agreed upon codes of conduct, are related but not the same. Some hunting laws come from ethics. Laws against wanton waste of game stem from the ethical demands that every effort be made to recover wounded game. Most hunting ethicists would agree that ethical hunting includes adhering to all wildlife laws. Sometimes ethics and law conflict, however. Swiftly finishing a wounded animal may conflict with trespass laws, for example. In spite of simplistic responses, such real situations cause an ethical dilemma. Exploring such dilemmas is valuable to ethical development. As young people explore their responses to dilemma situations and their reasons for their responses, they will see that ethical reasoning takes pace on several levels – fear of punishment, legalism, recognition of the greater good and internationalization of basic moral codes. The exposure to these different ways of looking at ethics helps young people in development of internalized ethical codes. This, many would argue, is the true source of wildlife law.
