summary

Hunting Reservations

            Alyssa Falk alumni of University of Illinois graduating with a bachelor degree wrote this research paper in 2015 with the encouragement from her professor on the benefits of hunting reservations. In Falk’s paper she talks about the history of hunting reservations and were they found their start. Falk also talks about how this style of hunting is often misunderstood. Falk gives multiple examples in the writing about how this works socially and economically.

            In Falk’s first appendix she gives a brief background on what hunting reservations are. She starts by telling us that for the past fifty years or so many have been stocking their lands in order to increase their wildlife populations they have. This does not only increase their population but also increases surrounding areas because they have so much they are able to open their land up to be hunted and make a profit off of it this would be a case of helping the economy. The reason this helps surrounding areas is because people will start to hunt this land which will then let the normal population rise back up to a regulated level which is good for both the hunter and the animal. Falk brings up the term canned hunting and when someone hears this they automatically assume the term applies to hunting reservations but Falk then gives the definition of canned hunting which is hunting a animal in a confined space smaller then its usual habitat or using unfair tactics in order to take the animal.  Falk tells us that this isn’t the case when it comes to hunting reservations because hunting reservations are large land areas that are made to simulate the animals normal habitat, hunting reservations would also have many regulations put on them in order that no unfair tactics could be used to take the animal. Falk also talks about how  privately  owned hunting reservations is like owning the animal but this isn’t the case because the animals are confined but they are kept on properties that would be the size of their migrating patterns or larger.

            Falk in her next major section tells us about the history of private hunting lands in America and how they were regulated. Falk says that Native American tribes had specific hunting areas in which they could only hunt a specific species in order to preserve the species number. The natives also set strict rules in place that would only allow their tribe’s people to hunt them during a certain time of year and also that each tribe had their own select area and other tribes could not hunt those other areas this is some of the first cases of private hunting land in America and during this time populations of animal species flourished. This point argues a great point on how this would help the current populations of wildlife in Illinois and the rest of the United States. Falk then talks about a dispute that happened over a fox being killed one man was pursuing a fox when another killed it and it went to court the United states government then put in to effect that no one owns and animal till they take it into their own possession so when someone owns privately owned hunting grounds they do not own the animals because they have not taken it into their possession.  Because most of the land after the colonial times was public land their were few regulations on it meaning they began to be over hunted because Americans only thought that animals either need to be eaten or turned into cloths they didn’t need to be messing around in the wild.

Falk talks about how when some think of hunting reservations they think of Africa and this is a good example of how they are good thing to have because this helps regulate how many game animals are taken in a certain year. Falk then talks about how in the late twentieth century hunting reservations began to take root in America this allowed property owners to regulate their land and bring in exotic animals or animals that are leaving their area from over hunting. Falk say that Illinois Representative Kelly burkes proposed a bill that would ban canned hunting in Illinois but how she defined it was too broad so it died at the end of the session in 2014. When she defined she defined it as enclosing an animal in any way which would then take private hunting lands out of the equation because they do have a fence around them. She then lets us know again that canned hunting areas usually have foods planted in specific areas in order that the hunter will know where the animal is at, at all times, but on the contrary private hunting lands do not plant any food anywhere on their property this is to make sure the animal follows its normal trends as it would in the wild and this would make sure that no one could unfairly kill the animal.

Falk says that many argue the point that privately owned lands own the animals on them meaning that they are domesticated. This is not the case though, because like Illinois many states define that any animal that is wild by nature or that is not cared for by man is owned by the state and will remain wild and not owned by anyone. So when someone begins to feed the animal then it becomes the case of being a farm which will then turn it into becoming a canned hunting area so this is where we need laws prohibiting canned hunting to stop this because there are cases of people doing this on public land. So when someone owns private hunting reservations they have to obey all the laws and regulations of the rest of the state and can include their own as long as they benefit the animal and stop the unfair taking of the animal.

Falk says that some of the benefits private hunting reservations are that since the number one regulator of conservation are the department of natural resources and they can not see what everyone is doing all the time meaning that many species are being killed with out anyone knowing and this is a big problem. So if you allow people to own hunting reservations the private owner could help regulate the amount of animals being taken. This would also allow these hunting reservations to charge a fee and part of that fee would then go to the government in order to add to funds for further need to research conservations and how we could improve are lands in the cause to make it last for future generations to enjoy. This would also promote the idea of fair chase meaning that every hunter would learn and know how to take an animal correctly in order that they are not making it unfair in any way that the animal has a chance to escape. Meaning there would not be any form of baiting of the animal allowed. Falk also says that this could be a great option for an endangered species recovery program because the land owner could start to bring the population back and not allow anyone to hunt them meaning the population could flourish then be released in other areas.

Falk then talks about the economic benefits of having private hunting property. Falk states a fact that 13.7 million people over the age of 16 went hunting in 2011. That is about 6% of the population. This brings in large revenue for the state and contrary to what many people believe about people not needing a license and tags on privately owned land this is not the case at all people still need to purchase both things. Hunters spent around 38.6 billion dollars in 2011 alone 796 million dollars of that was for tags and licenses and another 7.2 billion dollars came in on taxes on firearms and ammunitions to meaning all of that money went to the state and federal government to help further efforts of conservation and as revenue for both. Falk argues why not capitalize on this large population of people hunting and allow private hunting reservations and tax them this would in turn bring in tax dollars. If these numbers were brought forward Falk believes that this would mostly go unopposed because all of the revenue that this would bring in for the state and the United states as a whole.

Falk then talks about how Illinois should truly view private hunting reservations and should consider making them more of a reality in Illinois. Falk says that Illinois needs to look at multiple African countries so that they know how to draft a form of legislation on how to encourage private hunting land and how to have them ran in order that it benefits the state and the animals as a whole. The state also needs to make sure when they write this legislation that they make it clear that they will not allow canned hunting in any way and that all private hunting lands need to be completely natural. When Illinois proposes a bill in the future they need to make everyone aware of the major difference of canned hunting and private hunting reservations and they need to protect the private land owners in order to benefit everyone. Falk also says that Illinois needs to make sure that each private land needs to have a minimum amount of acreage so that it cannot be considered canned hunting. Also the animals on the property have minimal amount of interaction with human beings in order that they do not become accustomed to humankind and are not afraid of human kind. Falk also proposes that each private reservations needs to enforce the fair chase theory and that people have to track animals and chase them in a semi primitive way. Each land owner would have to prove they are not a canned hunting facility before they are allowed to be a hunting reservation.

Falk concludes her article by restating all the benefits of private hunting reservations. Falk also restates the fact that many will oppose this because they believe the animals are being raised for the simple fact to turn a profit. Falk finishes it all off by saying that this isn’t the only way for conservation to happen but it is a step in the right direction.