Author Question: Who pays for most wildlife conservation in this country? What will be an ideal ... (Read 49 times)

Pea0909berry · **on:** Jul 21, 2018

Who pays for most wildlife conservation in this country?

What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

If sport hunters and sport fishers had not fought market hunters, what would have happened to our fish and game
populations?

What will be an ideal response?

Question 3

Define market hunters and explain why they were so unpopular among American sports fishers and hunters

What will be an ideal response?

wfdfwc23 · **Reply #1 on:** Jul 21, 2018

Answer to Question 1

Surprisingly, most costs of wildlife conservation in the United States are paid by hunters and sports fishers. License
fees and hunting/fishing fees pay much of the costs. The sports lobbies promote conservation legislation. Finally,
farmers and other landowners who hunt and fish for recreation reserve game habitat for the wildlife on their land.

Answer to Question 2

It is probable that even more game-animal and fish species would have become extinct if market hunters had not
been opposed by sports persons. As a particular animal or bird became rarer, the market price for its fur and feathers
would go up (supply and demand). Market hunters would find and kill the very last animal or bird of a species
if the price became high enough. Eventually, the hunters themselves would have disappeared as the numbers of
commercially important game and fish declined

Answer to Question 3

Market hunters were people who killed game, fur-bearing animals, and fish for sale. Their products were meat,
furs, and fish. Sport hunters did not like to have game animals and birds harvested by market hunters because that
reduced the number of these animals and birds available for hunting