Many of the points made above could be used to support ANY restoration program for ANY species at ANY cost.
Questioning how much a given restoration program costs is not the same as wholesale opposition to conservation and restoration programs.
Another way to frame the question might be to ask, "What fraction of LDWF expenditures should go to programs for species that do not generate any revenue and that no other species (including humans) depends on?"
I don't think many sportsman would have a problem with 5-10% of the total LDWF budget going toward programs for these species. However, most sportsmen would agree that most of the proceeds from license sales and taxes on sporting equipment should go to programs that have more tangible benefits for the species that are more commercially and recreationally important, including habitat protection and restoration efforts from which commercially and recreationally important species benefit.
Figuring out to protect all marine species (incl. red snapper) from explosive well removals seems like a higher priority than spending $15,000 for a reward for a dead Whooping Crane.
|