To my knowledge, all States have a Division of Wildlife or a Department of Natural Resources, charged with protecting that State's native fauna and flora as well as cooperating with federal programs to manage wetlands for migrant waterfowl. Beyond their role in protecting open space, these State agencies also participate in the restoration of natural habitat and the reintroduction of once native species. In the course of doing so, they provide vital habitat for a wide range of plants and animals and extend the opportunity for many citizens to study and observe their wild neighbors.
Nevertheless, these Divisions and Departments are, to a large extent, funded by revenue from hunting licenses and their publications, while paying homage to a diversity of wildlife, tend to focus on hunting and fishing opportunities on the lands that they manage. Of course, one can be both a conservationist and a hunter and, unfortunately, hunting has become essential to the control of species such as white-tailed deer. We have, after all, eliminated the wild predators that once kept these populations in check.
Ideally, the reintroduction of native species would include an effort to balance predator and prey populations. However, U.S. Divisions of Wildlife have a long history of supporting the reintroduction of prey species while restricting or completely prohibiting the recovery of their natural predators; this policy appears to be a response to pressure from ranchers, who fear loss of their cattle or sheep, and a nod to hunters who relish the opportunity to control the herbivores themselves. Thus, State wildlife officials continue to reintroduce species such as moose and elk without bringing the wolves and cougars along; by doing so, they have become Divisions of Hunting, answerable primarily to those who fund their work.
