For an interesting treatment of the evolution-slash-continuity of NPS policy, see this: http://www.nationalparkstraveler.com/20 ... lenges9441
Phil, I'm not following you on the KY example - are you discussing NPS' or some state agency's ("State Nature Preserve") feral hog or hunting or hog hunting policy? Or is it the case that NPS manages some or all KySNP's??? Because, in the main, anything NPS says - stops at their property line
Also, just fyi, there are many
NPS installations that aggressively manage feral hogs due to the impossibility
of simultaneously harboring hogs and
meeting their mission ("to conserve, unimpaired, for future generations").
Finally, recreational hunting of hogs has never to my knowledge been effective at suppressing them. You have to maintain
at least an annual mortality rate of ~45-50% just to stay in place, let alone knock them down. Something like a sustained (multi-year) annual kill rate over 75% is required to drive them to extinction. This which I shared recently http://www.issg.org/pdf/publications/Is ... asives.pdf
and also this http://www.issg.org/pdf/publications/tu ... e_tide.pdf
(which is a predecessor of the first) have good info on managing hogs & many other invasives on islands, which after all any nature preserve is, sort of.
Thus, not allowing recreational
hog hunting probably isn't actually a mission-impairment risk for a nature preserve, no matter who owns it. If you want to seriously deal with hogs, you just gotta go pro
. Not in-house either, but contract. "You have one job and one job only - kill hogs." If you try to get the same guys who scrub the toilets and collect the user fees to also whack the hogs - it just doesn't work. Waste of time and PR.
If you have a specific "mainland" reserve in mind for help with hogs - probably the first thing they need is a full-perimeter hog fence, and cattle guards on the road entrances (to make the preserve "an island").
This is what I found in a 10-second search for info on KySNP's: http://naturepreserves.ky.gov/naturepre ... erves.aspx
Not picking on Phil whatsoever
here, and not limiting what I'm going to say to this string - rather, making a generalized observation simply prompted by this string
: I find quite often here that people have a pretty poor understanding of the way various governmental-environmental pieces fit together (or don't). Granted, developing an understanding of this topic goes well beyond
basic civics. But, poor understanding coupled with boundless assumptions and often with harshly critical temperaments combine to form some of the most ridiculous garbage available on the internet
- right here on FHF. Niiice. If we could improve our understanding, limit our assumptions, and just mellow out on the quick-draw criticality, I think this would be a kinder, gentler place for discourse.
Or, we can just keep on with the throw-down. It's dumber than dogshit but hey, apparently it's a good time for some folks.