BigFin
Active Member
- Messages
- 693
Now that a debate has been offered and accepted, it seems we would all benefit from a debate of topics that reflect people?s ideas of what they think would provide useful information as we take these discussions forward. The more input you have on the topics, the more value the debate has for you.
Having read many of the threads on this site, and other sites, the main topics can be framed within the universially agreed upon standards covered in the North American Model of Wildlife Management. That Model is how wildlife is managed in North America.
There are seven tenants to the Model, all listed below. The tenants usually germane to debates I see on forums or read in blogs would be #1, #3, #4, and #7.
Here is a link to a page that has more detail of the North American Model, followed by the seven tenants of that Model.
http://www.rmef.org/Hunting/HuntersConservation/
#1: The Public Trust
#2: Prohibition on Commerce of Dead Wildlife
#3: Democratic Rule of Law
#4: Hunting Opportunity for All
#5: Non-frivolous Use
#6: International Resources
#7: Scientific Management
The Model is the topic that started the thread where the debate was first offered. This Model is looked to as the prominent policy for management of wildlife and used as the measuring tool for most policy, laws, and rules related to how we manage, use, fund, and share wildlife resources.
Example #1:
People want to discuss the appropriate role of auction tags. That can be framed by discussion how those tags might be looked at according to the accepted rules of tenants #1 and #4.
Once you frame the context of the question, the discussion is then about the details of the issue. Using auction tags, we would have to talk about:
- Has it resulted in more hunting opportunity for citizens than without the program? If so, what evidence supports that assertion?
- Has the program been abused and therefore violates the Public Trust. If so, examples of how? If not, support for why not.
- Does the public benefit from the system more/less than they would in some other system?
- Does wildlife benefit from the system more/less than it would in some other system?
Example #2:
If we discuss wolf management and reintroduction, that could fall under tenant #3 and #7.
- Has the public been involved in the process?
- Has politics altered scientific management?
- Has the bigger scope of wildlife management been improved/reduced by the issue, or the manner in which we got here?
Example #3:
Providing state held tags to conservation groups for their funding could be discussed under #1, #3, #4.
- Is that an appropriate use of public resources? If so, support as to why? If not, why not?
- What standards should be used for transparency and oversight when public resources fund conservation groups?
- What accounting should be provided and what level of independence in reporting will allow for transparency that provides public confidence?
If we are to get any value from this exercise, it needs to reflect the issues you feel are relevant. Once those are identified, they are matched to one of the tenants listed above, and a series of questions are developed that all the debate of the issue to occur.
Let's hear the topics most popular among all of you. Once the topics are identified, it is easy to see which of the sevent tenants affect policies governing the topic you identified. You name the topic and we can easily put it into the proper context of these tenants.
So, please list your topics here.
"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"
Having read many of the threads on this site, and other sites, the main topics can be framed within the universially agreed upon standards covered in the North American Model of Wildlife Management. That Model is how wildlife is managed in North America.
There are seven tenants to the Model, all listed below. The tenants usually germane to debates I see on forums or read in blogs would be #1, #3, #4, and #7.
Here is a link to a page that has more detail of the North American Model, followed by the seven tenants of that Model.
http://www.rmef.org/Hunting/HuntersConservation/
#1: The Public Trust
#2: Prohibition on Commerce of Dead Wildlife
#3: Democratic Rule of Law
#4: Hunting Opportunity for All
#5: Non-frivolous Use
#6: International Resources
#7: Scientific Management
The Model is the topic that started the thread where the debate was first offered. This Model is looked to as the prominent policy for management of wildlife and used as the measuring tool for most policy, laws, and rules related to how we manage, use, fund, and share wildlife resources.
Example #1:
People want to discuss the appropriate role of auction tags. That can be framed by discussion how those tags might be looked at according to the accepted rules of tenants #1 and #4.
Once you frame the context of the question, the discussion is then about the details of the issue. Using auction tags, we would have to talk about:
- Has it resulted in more hunting opportunity for citizens than without the program? If so, what evidence supports that assertion?
- Has the program been abused and therefore violates the Public Trust. If so, examples of how? If not, support for why not.
- Does the public benefit from the system more/less than they would in some other system?
- Does wildlife benefit from the system more/less than it would in some other system?
Example #2:
If we discuss wolf management and reintroduction, that could fall under tenant #3 and #7.
- Has the public been involved in the process?
- Has politics altered scientific management?
- Has the bigger scope of wildlife management been improved/reduced by the issue, or the manner in which we got here?
Example #3:
Providing state held tags to conservation groups for their funding could be discussed under #1, #3, #4.
- Is that an appropriate use of public resources? If so, support as to why? If not, why not?
- What standards should be used for transparency and oversight when public resources fund conservation groups?
- What accounting should be provided and what level of independence in reporting will allow for transparency that provides public confidence?
If we are to get any value from this exercise, it needs to reflect the issues you feel are relevant. Once those are identified, they are matched to one of the tenants listed above, and a series of questions are developed that all the debate of the issue to occur.
Let's hear the topics most popular among all of you. Once the topics are identified, it is easy to see which of the sevent tenants affect policies governing the topic you identified. You name the topic and we can easily put it into the proper context of these tenants.
So, please list your topics here.
"Hunt when you can - You're gonna' run out of health before you run out of money!"