When the terms ‘wildlife refuge’ are mentioned by the media, the average individual conjures up an immediate image synonymous with ‘refuge’, i.e., shelter, retreat, safety, haven, protection. Certainly hunting and leg hold trappings would be terms in juxtaposition to this concept. Populations also enjoy and recreate at the many established refuges and parks within our state for the simple pleasure of observing, if only briefly, the multitude of natural resources that dwell therein, specifically, the diversity of wildlife, mammals and birds. Imagine, momentarily, this same population’s reactions to the scene of a resident otter, actively pursuing its normal daily activities, which have been interrupted by the otter unknowingly being ensnared in a steel leg hold trap within the refuge. Compounding this traumatic, painful and stressful situation is the entanglement of the trap itself in underbrush, making release of the foot more difficult. While waiting for a rescue team from a local rehabilitation facility, the animal suffers (incredibly).

If in fact, the Horicon Marsh, like other refuges, and all of our state parks, are there for the benefit of not only human recreation and appreciation, but to perpetuate and ensure wildlife and the natural resources within their protection, how does one justify the perpetuation of hunting on state park land and in these refuges? Age old practices of population control and dollar revenue perpetuate. To justify the eradication of targeted ‘nuisance species’ such as muskrat, many of the parks and refuges allocate specific land areas for revenue to the trappers and hunters, in return for the number of targeted species to be reduced. As ‘it has always been done this way,’ rhetoric is perpetuated, plausible more humane alternatives are seldom employed or even discussed. Of equal concern are the growing numbers of ‘non-targeted species’ that fall victim, many times fatally, to the jaws of the leg hold trap. Not only mammals, but many bird species and equal number of domestics have experienced the associated (agonizing) pain and suffering of this practice. Perpetuation and continuation of the traps being set, in areas where known non-targeted species reside also continues, and the bottom line, and the common sense question remains, why? And why can these agencies including the DNR allocate natural resources, in the form of wildlife, for revenue, without citizen input?

In addition, most recently, two families were traveling on a nature trail in the Southern Kettle Moraine State Park and were somewhat surprised and subsequently angered when encountering two hunters along the same trail. Whether or not the hunters were actively pursuing game, their questions posed, still require investigation; why is hunting allowed in a state park, especially when the hunting season coincides with populations of visitors enjoying the parks at that time of year as well. If the answer remains interwoven with age old rationales, encumbered with outdated policies and supported with dollars, it is time to review and question and provide more plausible alternatives for wildlife as well as humans.