[Tagging] Hunting area tagging

[Craig Wallace]

On 2016-10-21 14:07, Greg Troxel wrote:
>
> Craig Wallace <craigw84 at fastmail.fm> writes:
>
>> I think this is wrong. A nature reserve an area to protect wildlife,
>> not to allow it to be shot. A nature reserve is managed for the
>> purposes of conservation. So if an area is primarily for hunting, it
>> is not a nature reserve.
>
> I think you are off here.  Nature is complicated, and "preserving
> nature" is too.  There's a long tradition of wildlife management areas
> where hunting is allowed (subject to seasons and limits, set by state
> wildlife biologists).  In these, while deer and geese are taken, the
> area remains natural, and the vegetation is somewhat protected from
> overbrowsing by deer.  And, killing individual deer is not bad for the
> species.  Around me, and I'm sure around Kevin, as soon as there are
> areas that aren't paved over, there are too many deer compared to
> historical norms.  Around me, "Wildlife Management Areas" don't feel
> different from "Conservation Areas", except that there are a few weeks
> you should be wearing orange or avoiding them.
>
> I am near a federal Wildlife Refuge -- and deer hunting is allowed, in
> order to keep the population somewhat under control and protect the
> vegetation and other species.

Yes, a nature reserve may allow some hunting, to control numbers of 
particular species.

But that is different from an area is managed primarily to benefit 
hunting. eg if they are keeping deer numbers artificially high (feeding 
over winter, or breeding), just to allow as many as possible to be shot. 
Despite the damage this causes to vegetation and other wildlife.

And these hunting areas often have misleading names. eg they claim to be 
a 'reserve', when its more like a farm.