Pantheraman
Well-Known Member
Across the modern world, many species have been either intentionally or unintentionally introduced outside of their native ranges, and in the process have caused massive ecological damage. Some of these invasive species include non-native ungulates released into North America, Hawaii, South America, Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa (fallow deer). And to help prevent these animals from damaging the ecosystem people have to control them. And with that comes the question of how to control them.
For many introduced ungulates, a common method for controlling numbers is through the use of recreational hunting. The idea is that recreational hunting can control numbers and at the same time can benefit local people by giving them more hunting opportunities, the chance to consume another form of wild game meat, and even increases job opportunities through hunting tourism. On paper, this sounds good, but at least in my opinion, when it's put into practice it falls apart. On one hand, some of these problems probably would be worse without recreational hunting, but on the other hand, we have to ask ourselves what the ideal goal of invasive species control is.
So what is the ideal goal of controlling invasive species? That goal can be summed up in one word: eradication. The reasons the recreational hunting of introduced ungulates on paper is a good idea are indeed the reasons this goal is harder to reach. and the reason for this comes down to basic human psychology: Whenever people either make money off of something or enjoy something, they won't want to get rid of it. For this, I'll list three examples here in the United States which has a very lucrative hunting industry.
1. In a recent article from the Wildlife Society, scientists pointed out that the oryx introduced into New Mexico to boost big game hunting opportunities might be putting pressure on the desert ecosystem by competing with native species. However, the task of controlling them would be more complex due to the revenue from hunting the animals making both the people and state wanting to keep them around.
"The issue also has political implications. Oryx were initially introduced as a game species, and hunters enjoy the chance to harvest these charismatic animals. Sales of hunting licenses for the ungulates provide a lot of revenue for the New Mexico Game and Fish Department. Meanwhile, some fenced ranches in neighboring Texas also hold populations.
“It’s one of these complex things,” Wagnon said." (Rising oryx numbers may distress New Mexico ecosystem - The Wildlife Society )
2. In Texas, aoudads are an invasive species as they compete with and spread a deadly disease to desert bighorn sheep. However, they'll never get rid of the aoudads because in Texas they've become a valuable hunting commodity in the state and guides make quite a bit of money from aoudad hunts. With even one hunting guide saying this:
“To put them in every area where they used to be, and then wipe out all the aoudad, I’m totally against that,” he says.
Hunting Aoudads Is Lucrative, But It’s Also Getting In The Way Of Bighorn Sheep Conservation | Texas Standard
3. And of course we come to the country's feral hogs which are unfortunately widespread in the US, and are basically ecological train wrecks. Recreational hog hunting is legal in many states, but unfortunately, there's a large business in hog hunting, and people like hunting them so much that some will intentionally release them into new areas to boost hunting opportunities. Causing some states to either put more limits on hog hunting or making it illegal. (Texas has a feral hog problem. Hunting them makes it worse. )
I also want to point out that recreational hunting isn't the only way people get incentivized to keep an invasive species. Tourism involving feral horses also lets people make money and thus also gives locals an incentive to preserve feral horse populations. The point is, whoever people gain a monetary or hobby incentive for an invasive ungulate species, it becomes next to impossible to eradicate those animals and protect ecosystems.
For many introduced ungulates, a common method for controlling numbers is through the use of recreational hunting. The idea is that recreational hunting can control numbers and at the same time can benefit local people by giving them more hunting opportunities, the chance to consume another form of wild game meat, and even increases job opportunities through hunting tourism. On paper, this sounds good, but at least in my opinion, when it's put into practice it falls apart. On one hand, some of these problems probably would be worse without recreational hunting, but on the other hand, we have to ask ourselves what the ideal goal of invasive species control is.
So what is the ideal goal of controlling invasive species? That goal can be summed up in one word: eradication. The reasons the recreational hunting of introduced ungulates on paper is a good idea are indeed the reasons this goal is harder to reach. and the reason for this comes down to basic human psychology: Whenever people either make money off of something or enjoy something, they won't want to get rid of it. For this, I'll list three examples here in the United States which has a very lucrative hunting industry.
1. In a recent article from the Wildlife Society, scientists pointed out that the oryx introduced into New Mexico to boost big game hunting opportunities might be putting pressure on the desert ecosystem by competing with native species. However, the task of controlling them would be more complex due to the revenue from hunting the animals making both the people and state wanting to keep them around.
"The issue also has political implications. Oryx were initially introduced as a game species, and hunters enjoy the chance to harvest these charismatic animals. Sales of hunting licenses for the ungulates provide a lot of revenue for the New Mexico Game and Fish Department. Meanwhile, some fenced ranches in neighboring Texas also hold populations.
“It’s one of these complex things,” Wagnon said." (Rising oryx numbers may distress New Mexico ecosystem - The Wildlife Society )
2. In Texas, aoudads are an invasive species as they compete with and spread a deadly disease to desert bighorn sheep. However, they'll never get rid of the aoudads because in Texas they've become a valuable hunting commodity in the state and guides make quite a bit of money from aoudad hunts. With even one hunting guide saying this:
“To put them in every area where they used to be, and then wipe out all the aoudad, I’m totally against that,” he says.
Hunting Aoudads Is Lucrative, But It’s Also Getting In The Way Of Bighorn Sheep Conservation | Texas Standard
3. And of course we come to the country's feral hogs which are unfortunately widespread in the US, and are basically ecological train wrecks. Recreational hog hunting is legal in many states, but unfortunately, there's a large business in hog hunting, and people like hunting them so much that some will intentionally release them into new areas to boost hunting opportunities. Causing some states to either put more limits on hog hunting or making it illegal. (Texas has a feral hog problem. Hunting them makes it worse. )
I also want to point out that recreational hunting isn't the only way people get incentivized to keep an invasive species. Tourism involving feral horses also lets people make money and thus also gives locals an incentive to preserve feral horse populations. The point is, whoever people gain a monetary or hobby incentive for an invasive ungulate species, it becomes next to impossible to eradicate those animals and protect ecosystems.
