Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Wildlife Management.

  1. #1
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Last edited by Gilroy; March 8th, 2018 at 03:31 PM.

  2. # ADS
    Advertisement
    ADVERTISEMENT
     

  3. #2
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    That sure sounds like more academic bafflegab to me. Can anyone make sense of this thing?
    I like my firearms like Liberals like voters-----undocumented.

    Proud supporter of OFAH,CCFR,NRA and A.F.& A.M.

  4. #3
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trimmer21 View Post
    That sure sounds like more academic bafflegab to me. Can anyone make sense of this thing?
    Glad to know I'm not the only one....LOL....
    Arte et marte (By Skill and by Fighting)...The RCEME motto

  5. #4
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trimmer21 View Post
    That sure sounds like more academic bafflegab to me. Can anyone make sense of this thing?
    Yeh, there is no science behind most all of the wildlife management in North America,I think we all know this from the Caribou fiasco.

  6. #5
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    In a nutshell nobody has a clue as to what they are doing.
    "This is about unenforceable registration of weapons that violates the rights of people to own firearms."—Premier Ralph Klein (Alberta)Calgary Herald, 1998 October 9 (November 1, 1942 – March 29, 2013)

  7. #6
    Member for Life

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greatwhite View Post
    In a nutshell nobody has a clue as to what they are doing.
    As hunters,we sure know what's going on,but,the academics don't listen to us,the great unwashed.
    I like my firearms like Liberals like voters-----undocumented.

    Proud supporter of OFAH,CCFR,NRA and A.F.& A.M.

  8. #7
    Apprentice

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Researchers have a responsibility to ensure unquestionable scientific integrity.

    Governments have a responsibility to ensure fiscal accountability.

    While we can all question whether governments hit that mark, the fact remains that governments don't pay for things like independent review of their practices because they don't have to and tax dollars are limited. The article just states the obvious.

    In Ontario it is exceedingly obvious that wildlife is managed in a way that minimizes expenditure. At least in the south where I live, deer are managed by a postcard survey of hunters. No check stations, no areal inventories, no pellet counts, no forage pressure analysis, no winter severity metrics, just a postcard survey. This has been in place for about 20 years since they did away with things like check stations.

    Does it lack scientific rigour? Absolutely.
    Have we gotten away with managing the population for 20 years on next-to-zero spending? You betcha.

    You can argue whether or not this is the right thing to do, or whether we should be spending more or less on our resources, but the fact remains that there is a reason why wildlife management programs lack scientific rigour - it is cheaper.

  9. #8
    Loyal Member

    User Info Menu

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by benjhind View Post
    Researchers have a responsibility to ensure unquestionable scientific integrity.

    Governments have a responsibility to ensure fiscal accountability.

    While we can all question whether governments hit that mark, the fact remains that governments don't pay for things like independent review of their practices because they don't have to and tax dollars are limited. The article just states the obvious.

    In Ontario it is exceedingly obvious that wildlife is managed in a way that minimizes expenditure. At least in the south where I live, deer are managed by a postcard survey of hunters. No check stations, no areal inventories, no pellet counts, no forage pressure analysis, no winter severity metrics, just a postcard survey. This has been in place for about 20 years since they did away with things like check stations.

    Does it lack scientific rigour? Absolutely.
    Have we gotten away with managing the population for 20 years on next-to-zero spending? You betcha.

    You can argue whether or not this is the right thing to do, or whether we should be spending more or less on our resources, but the fact remains that there is a reason why wildlife management programs lack scientific rigour - it is cheaper.
    Amen, well said. If money was of no concern, we could expect more scientific rigor going into our management practices. It's not difficult to see why it ends up so low on the priority list for budget items at the Provincial level given the demographic of the voting public. Nobody is going to win on June 7th with wildlife resource management spending at the top of their platform agenda.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •