This guy is a anti-hunter in wolves clothing,why do you know about all these protected "species" and why are you so intent onprotecting an animal just because it has a genetic flaw,as was mentioned before its just a way for the antis to get a foot in the door by getting protection for a "sub-species",and for a viewing opportunity?Cmon that is such a cop-out,all big game animals in North America recieve a great amount of protection through established seasons and quoatas determined by various government agencys devoted to wildlife and thier protection as a species,these white freak moose do not deserve any special treatment and everytime people like you push to get protection for some stupid reason as this you are taking away from the hunting opportunitys we pay for through taxes and liscence fees,maybe we shouldnt shoot moose anywhere in the world because any of them could possible be carrying the gene that will spawn a whole new race of blue moose?
41 replies [Last post]
Thu, 2005-03-17 09:42#22
Joel Said - "Does the Canadian government give different protection measures to subspecies of animals? Examples would be good" ....
Vince Said - Check the internet and look under the federal govt's SARA legislation - for example and one of the species that I work on is boreal woodland caribou and am currently on the national team developing a recovery strategy - they are classed as threatened and this is a subspecies.
Dr. Vince Crichton
V. Crichton Enterprises Ltd.
1046 McIvor Avenue
Canada R2G 2J9
(Vince is a big hunter yet seems to think protecting subspecies is OK) ...
"Cmon that is such a cop-out,all big game animals in North America recieve a great amount of protection through established seasons and quoatas determined by various government agencys devoted to wildlife and thier protection as a species"
- And out of curiosity, what quotas does the govt. have in place regarding train accidents, motor vehicle accidents, and natural predators (involving big game) ... To assume that because the government regulates human hunting activity that big game management is perfect, seems doubtful ... not sure if your're aware but in most of Ontario, there is no quota for calf harvest ... odd that there is no quota and no control regarding sex of animals taken ...
",why do you know about all these protected "species" and why are you so intent onprotecting an animal just because it has a genetic flaw,as was mentioned before its just a way for the antis to get a foot in the door by getting protection for a "sub-species",and for a viewing opportunity?"
- Are you positive that this animals is genetically flawed and not genetically advantaged? I find it odd that hunter support for the inititiative decreases as distance from these animals increases. Why would the locals care the most to protect these animals? Further, looking at the 'anti-hunter' initiatives ... they usually don't involve extensive debate over the issue ...
"you are taking away from the hunting opportunitys we pay for through taxes and liscence fees"
- Are you really that concerned if we put 10 moose out of 100,000 off limits ... and why not look at the situation as one that will increase your hunting opportunities ... like putting money into a bank to watch it grow ...
" maybe we shouldnt shoot moose anywhere in the world because any of them could possible be carrying the gene that will spawn a whole new race of blue moose? "
- Blue moose would be very interesting ... if we could be reasonably certain that a certain lineage would produce blue moose, why not protect them until they could build up their numbers ? And then open the season up and harvest at a sustainable level ...
"By this logic, it would be ok to limit/stop hunting on a hypothecial buck that matured rapidly and was able to produce a B&C/P&Y contending rack in just a year or two; under the pretext that we need to give the guy a few years to produce offspring for "all hunters everywhere". As a thought experiment, would we also protect the female off-spring of this hypothetical buck?"
- Is there an easy way to distinguish these animals in the wild from other animals ? But if they could be protected to increase the supply of genes in the pool which produce P & Y bucks quickly, why not ? Many states intentionally work their white tail herd to attempt to produce more P & Y bucks ... why not jump on the opportunity if it was possible to distinguish these animals from others ?
why do you know about all these protected "species"
- Interested in the subject so I make it a point to educate myself ...
"This guy is a anti-hunter in wolves clothing"
See my profile ...
Maybe I just love hunting that much, that I want these animals to flourish so that one day, i'll get a chance at one with my bow ... without the nasty feeling like I should pass him up because the herd was in a vulnerable position in terms of sustainability ... besides, which anti-hunting group would take me?
Thu, 2005-03-17 12:27#23
I know people that are heads of the wildlife federation here in Montana that play the same game you are trying to play,they go on the occasional hunt to keep thier hunter image intact but they are devoted to reducing huntiing opportunitys for the general public and thier long term goal is no hunting whatsoever,go play it somwhere else this is a forum for HUNTERS not sneaky little bastards that want to promote thier anti-hunting greenpeace views under the guise of a hunter and outdoorsman.You guys try to get a foot in the door with the protection of some sub-species and call it a "viewing opportunity",then you go to your club meetings and call it a win,actually its a huge loss to those of us that enjoy the wild and live to hunt and fish in it,our governments are doing a great job of protecting and planning the recovery of endagered species,the freak white moose is not one of them,Im sure you think that if you can get them protected then they will spread and eventually nobody will be able to shoot a moose up there because they all will be partially white,right?Yhe you are reallllllly sneaky,do you really think that people buy this line?
Thu, 2005-03-17 13:01#24
my family business..
Not sure if you picked up on this one, but my family business and sole source of income is to cater to anglers and hunters ... my family runs a tourist operation in N.Ontario called Air Ivanhoe .
Why would anyone act to reduce hunting opportunities if they're livelyhood depends on hunting and fishing opportunities?
While there maybe the odd greenpeace guy out there that does the hunting trip to keep the image, I fail to see how the image can be attached to myself ... perhaps you could further explain your assertion ...
"Im sure you think that if you can get them protected then they will spread and eventually nobody will be able to shoot a moose up there because they all will be partially white,right?"
- All moose are partially white (except for maybe a melanistic one)... what most states and provinces have done is to protect moose with over 50% white fur ... but I can understand how borderline cases would arise ...
Thu, 2005-03-17 15:46#25
Your family depends on hunters for thier income?Ill bet they are real proud of you!!LOL Save ur BS story for people who will buy it.....
Thu, 2005-03-17 17:18#26
Clariftying the Q
If you're asking if they agree with what I'm doing .... yes ... maybe our line of business has shown us that conservation measures do not mean a permanent reduction in hunting opportunities, but a necessary step to increase future hunting opportunities ... wildlife grows exponentially, and so we could be looking at a large herd of white moose in a relatively short time ... so long as the proper protection measures are implemented.
Thu, 2005-03-17 17:46#27
yhe we have never heard that bs line before....good luck
Thu, 2005-03-17 19:39#28
This guy is a anti-hunter in wolves clothing
I'm with NONYA on this one. There is nothing "irresponsible" about hunting an animal in accordance with the laws set by the government of the area in which someone is hunting. Darwinism is a funny thing. I'm not sure if you're familiar with it. The general idea is survival of the fittest. Being the fittest within animalia includes things such as instinctive defense of self and species, whether it be through physical superiority, or through effective camouflage that hides the animal from its enemies. The white moose will not be able to camouflage itself effectively, thus leaving it vulnerable to attack from a number of different species, including humans (lets not forget that we are animals too).
If this leads to the extermination of the species, than so be it. It would happen with or without human participation in the hunting of these moose. I am sure that there are some hungry wolves out there that would love some meat for food, and if they are hunting moose, they aren't going to bypass a white moose to support your conservation efforts.
I don't hunt solely for trophy, I hunt for meat. In fact, I don't have any souvenirs from any of my hunting trips other than pictures and a freezer full of meat. I would take the same approach to hunting a moose, and I don't feel that your inaccurate label of "irresponsible" should have been used. I'm sure your love of nature is strong, and conservation is very important to you, but speak for yourself, and let the rest of us responsible hunters do the same.
Mon, 2005-03-21 23:24#29
Just out of curiosity, how do you feel about the protection measures afforded for the Kermode Bears of BC?
Basically the same as I posted above. The same thing happened in AK a few years ago with a "white" phase bear. However, if these white moose in your neck of the woods are phase changers, I would consider them even more rare than "white phase" black bear, since black bears tend to vary quite a bit in color as it is, while moose do not.
I believe this was a kermode here....
I'll also throw up the Alaska white moose regs when I find em again, but they basically say that they should be protected for viewing pleasure... basically worth more to the public alive than in a freezer ...
That is true.
Thu, 2005-03-24 02:37#30
I don't agree with NONYA. I'm not so quick to automatically assume that someone who wants to preserve a resource is anti-hunting.
I actually helped run a petition to shut down a couple square miles of federal land to bear season in Montana once years ago. A train carload of corn had jumped the tracks and dumped a good chunk of its load on a narrow piece of land along the river between Glacier Park and The Bob Marshall Wilderness. The bears were swarming and half drunk on the fermented corn. You could get to it by driving up a dirt road and walking about a hundred yards down the tracks. It would've been on a par with hunting bears at the county dump -- shooting fish in a barrel. I supported the effort to establish a buffer zone that year to preserve the sport from the media circus that would've ensued if nothing was done. I didn't want that circus to feed a faulty public opinion and threaten bear hunting.
But that certainly doesn't make me an anti-hunter or animal rightist. I love my sport. As hunters we are, by nature, conservationists -- or at least we should be. We generate enormous amounts of revenue for wildlife management, and have more of a vested interest than any citified Hollywood celebrity who's just using a cause to generate publicity. So I don't think it's safe to automatically assume someone's anti-hunting because they want to preserve and develop a resource.