The American Outdoorsman and the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and Management

Blog Post | 110 KY. L. J. ONLINE | February 18, 2022

THE AMERICAN OUTDOORSMAN AND THE NORTH AMERICAN

MODEL OF WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT

By: Dustyn Sams, Staff Editor, Vol. 110

The American outdoorsman[1] is an iconic figure at the heart of this country’s history. Outdoorsmen like Davey Crocket, Theodore Roosevelt Jr., and Mardy Murie were arguably as much conservationists as proponents of wildlife management (hunting, fishing, trapping, etc.).[2] Each person listed above embodied an “outdoorsman’s conflict” in balancing natural devastation and conservation.[3] While outdoorsmen have long debated the means to achieve this balance, state and federal governments have echoed similar concerns.[4] These governments not only created a renowned system of wildlife conservation, but allowed outdoorsmen to manage wildlife populations.[5] Scholars have dubbed this system the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and Management (Model).[6] A complex history of government action has shaped the rights and privileges of outdoorsmen through the Model.[7] 

The Rise of State and Federal Conservation and Management Efforts

In early America, the state and federal governments’ conservation and management efforts were almost nonexistent.[8] At the turn of the nineteenth century, colonial immigrants, western settlers, and fur traders exploited America’s wildlife.[9] As early as 1650, fur trappers nearly eliminated beavers from the eastern coast.[10] By 1900, 540 bison remained in the country according to census data.[11] At about the same time, Americans had brought around 3 to 5 billion passenger pigeons to extinction.[12] Outdoorsmen and lobbyists petitioned the destruction.[13]

Legal and state-sponsored efforts paved way for the Model.[14] The Supreme Court decided a series of cases concerning the public trust doctrine–the government holds and manages wildlife, fish, and waterways in trust of the public.[15] This doctrine afforded the states and federal government a tighter grip on people exploiting America’s wildlife.[16] As a result, outdoorsmen adopted hunting ethics and principles like a fair chase.[17]

One can divide the Supreme Court’s public trust jurisprudence into two tracks. First, the Court deferred to the states in managing wildlife through the state ownership doctrine–the state’s ownership of wildlife within its borders.[18] In Martin v. Waddell’s Lesse, the Court first recognized the public trust doctrine, among principles underlying the state ownership doctrine.[19] In Geer v. Conneticut, the court recognized the states’ right to regulate wildlife within its borders. [20] The Court explained that a citizen’s common ownership of wildlife inside a state imposed a duty on that state’s government to preserve wildlife held in the public trust.[21]

Second, a line of cases eroded the muscle behind the state ownership doctrine. In Missouri v. Holland, the Court held that States cannot usurp federal authority, which permitted the federal government to impose regulation and legislation limits on the states.[22] In Kleppe v. New Mexico, the Court held the federal government could manage animals on federal land, despite such land existing within state borders.[23] In Hughes v. Oklahoma, the Court invoked the broad reach of the Commerce Clause.[24] It held an Oklahoma law that prohibited the transportation of minnows outside of state borders violated the Clause.[25] Chip by chip, federalism juggled wildlife conservation and management in both hands. This created and limited outdoorsmen’s rights and privileges.[26]

The states also joined the scene.[27] In 1844, the New York Sportsmen Club formed and drafted some of America’s first game laws. The laws regulated trout fishing and hunting of various birds and mammals.[28] Maine was the first to employ a game warden, and other states followed.[29]

States created commissions and agencies to protect wildlife and fisheries.[30] They also collected fees for hunting and fishing licenses, which remains a major generator of most states’ conservation efforts.[31] In 1891, Congress passed the Forest Reserve Act to combat exploitative logging.[32] In 1900, Congress passed the Lacey Game and Wild Birds Preservation and Disposition Act to limit wildlife, fish, and plants transported between states.[33] In 1981, Congress passed the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, creating one of the first statutes imposing wildlife harvesting regulations.[34]

Also, federal executive action regarding wildlife conservation and management is widely attributable to Theodore Roosevelt.[35] By the end of his presidency, Roosevelt reserved over 230 million acres, 55 wildlife refuges, and 5 national parks for America’s fauna and flora.[36] Other presidents, like Ulysses S. Grant and Lyndon B. Johnson, set aside thousands of acres for the sake of preserving wildlife and outdoorsmen traditions.[37] Outdoorsmen remained at the forefront of fueling these government efforts.[38]

The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation and Management Today

The success of the Model is predicated on the efforts of outdoorsmen from all walks of life. The harmony between state administration and federal regulation has created a scheme of conservation and management outdoorsmen cherish. Now, the states are factories for variations of the Model. The ebb and flow of public sentiment, especially from outdoorsmen, continue to shape this system.[39]

In America, the Model has permitted outdoorsmen to hunt and fish while maintaining healthy populations of wildlife.[40] Outdoorsmen apply yearly to state lottery systems for big game tags.[41] They pay fees to fund the conservation of such species.[42] Hunter dollars continue to be a major, if not the most prominent, factor in funding wildlife conservation in all states. Outdoorsmen are also limited by state and federal regulations, statutes, executive action, and the common law.[43]

The Model has many advantages: it is flexible in achieving a balance between conservation and destruction; it is practical in creating a system for all kinds of people; it is adaptable in its ability to change according to the times; the list continues.[44] Moreover, other countries have taken the success of America’s Model and implemented their own versions.[45] In African countries, like Namibia, South Africa, and Tanzania, wildlife conservation and management efforts draw from the more practical facets of the Model.[46] The countries emphasize the importance of more eco-friendly impositions on nature by its citizens and inhabitants.[47]

While there are many advantages, many issues continue to face America’s wildlife. Climate change threatens habitat loss.[48] The increase of urban and suburban civilization forces different wildlife species to comingle.[49] The dogma of America’s political atmosphere nurtures fluctuating public sentiment regarding wildlife conservation and management.[50]

Man’s duty to nature is a hot topic. Are these issues the modern comparison to the exploitation of America’s wildlife in its infancy? This is a question open to interpretation, and it would require more time and words to do it justice. But one certainty remains–the American outdoorsman will be at the forefront of any change concerning future wildlife conservation and management.

[1] The term “outdoorsman” is used hereinafter in lieu of the phrase “outdoorsmen and outdoorswomen.” This is merely for efficiency and clarity purposes, as the redundancy of the latter phrase can lead to confusion or distraction.

[2] David “Davey” Crockett (1786-1836), U.S. Dep’t of the Interior: Stewarding Conservation and Powering Our Future, https://www.doi.gov/american-heroes/davy-crockett (last visited February 8, 2022); Robert Brown, A Conservation Timeline: Milestones of the Model’s Evolution, The Wildlife Society 28-30 (2010) https://www.wildlifedepartment.com/aboutodwc/A%20Conservation%20Timeline[1].pdf;  Stuart Lavietes Margaret Murie 101; Helped Save Wilderness, N.Y. Times (Oct. 3, 2003), https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/23/us/margaret-murie-101-helped-save-wilderness.html.

[3] See id.

[4] Brown, supra note 2 at 28-31.

[5] John Organ, Et. Al., The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation: Technical Review 12-04, The Wildlife Society and The Boone and Crockett Club 1-10 (2012).

[6] Id.

[7] Brown, supra note 2 at 28-31.

[8] Id. at 28.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] Id. at 29.

[12] Id. at 30.

[13] Id. at 30.

[14] See id. at 28-31.

[15] Id. at 29.

[16] Id.

[17] Fair Chase Statement, Boone and Crocket Club, https://www.boone-crockett.org/fairchasestatement#:~:text=FAIR%20CHASE%2C%20as%20defined%20by,advantage%20over%20the%20game%20animals (last visited Feb. 8, 2022).

[18] David Willms & Anne Alexander, The North American Model of Wildlife Conservation in Wyoming: Understanding It, Preserving It, and Funding Its Future, 14 Wy. L. Rev. 666 (2014).

[19] Martin v. Waddell’s Lesse, 41 U.S. 380-90 (1842).

[20] Geer v. Conneticut, 161 U.S. 519, 529 (1896), overruled by Hughes v. Oklahoma, 441 U.S. 322 (1979).

[21] Id.

[22] Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416, 434 (1920).

[23] Kleppe v. New Mexico, 426 U.S. 529 (1976).

[24] Hughes v. Oklahoma, 441 U.S. 322, 337-39(1979).

[25] Id.

[26] See id.

[27] Brown, supra note 2 at 29.

[28] Id.

[29] Id.

[30] The Origins of EPA, United States Environmental Protection Agency https://www.epa.gov/history/origins-epa (last visited Feb. 8, 2022).

[31] Brown, supra note 2 at 30.

[32] Id. at 29.

[33] Id.

[34] Willms, note 18 at 666.

[35] Brown, supra note 2 at 29-30.

[36] Id.

[37] Id.

[38] Id.

[39] Billy Baker, A Proposed Fee Increase for Hunting and Fishing Licenses Raises Long-Term Questions About Wildlife Preservation, Boston Globe (Apr. 27, 2021), https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/04/27/metro/proposed-fee-increase-hunting-fishing-licenses-raises-long-term-questions-about-wildlife-conservation/.

[40] David Garshelis, Karen Noyce, Veronique St-Louis, Population Reduction by Hunting Helps Control Human Wildlife Conflicts for a Species that is a Conservation Success Story, PLOS ONE 1 (Aug. 1, 2021), https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0237274&type=printable.

[41] Elk Hunting: Dates, Restrictions and How to Apply, Kentucky Dep’t of Fish and Wildlife Res. https://fw.ky.gov/Hunt/Pages/Elk-Hunting-Regs.aspx (last visited Feb. 8, 2022).

[42] License and Permit Fees, Kentucky Dep’t of Fish and Wildlife Res. https://fw.ky.gov/Licenses/Pages/Fees.aspx (last visited Feb. 8, 2022).

[43] See generally supra notes 7-40.

[44] Organ, supra note 5 at 1-10.

[45] Out of Africa – Perception, Conservation, and Lions, 69 Wildlife Mgmt. Inst.: Outdoor News Bulletin (2015), https://wildlifemanagement.institute/outdoor-news-bulletin/august-2015/out-africa-perception-conservation-and-lions.

[46] Id.

[47] Id.

[48] Chelsea Harvey, Climate Change is Becoming a Top Threat to Biodiversity, Scientific American (Mar. 28, 2018), https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-is-becoming-a-top-threat-to-biodiversity/.

[49] See generally The Global Impacts of Habitat Destruction, Nat’l Geographic Society Newsroom: Science & Exploration (Sep. 25, 2019), https://blog.nationalgeographic.org/2019/09/25/the-global-impacts-of-habitat-destruction/.

[50] Baker, supra note 41.