I think that is what I am hearing. No, not that the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW) is designing all it’s hunting plans around what best suits my fancy. What I think I am hearing though is that everyone else wants MDIFW to pay special attention to their needs, I guess, thinking them to be more important.
I would like to say that I don’t envy MDIFW’s job of designing 15-year management plans for moose, bear, turkeys and bear but it appears some of the difficulties being encountered are problems they or the Legislature brought on themselves. When you go out and get “stakeholders” to come sit around a table to discuss how things ought to be run, what do expect would happen? When you survey the ignorant public, the purpose of which is always to achieve desired results, and then try to manipulate your game management plans according to what the survey says, what is it that you expect?
Add to that bringing in some radical animal rights pervert interested in only banning hunting, trapping and fishing, and what then would you expect?
Here’s a laundry list of items I’ve read about that some want MDIFW to consider when it comes to managing moose.
1. Kill more moose
2. Kill fewer moose
3. Change the moose hunting seasons – for so many different reasons it appears all of them are for selfish reason, with little consideration for the welfare of the moose – and absent the scientific process.
4. Spend gobs more money to further study the moose – with still no mention about studying the tick.
5. Have a basic free-for-all moose hunt in the southern zones.
6. Stop hunting moose in the southern zones.
7. Reduce moose numbers due to damage to the forests.
8. More hunting during the rut. Less hunting during the rut.
9. Stop hunting moose during grouse season.
10. Schedule hunts around the schedules of camp and guide owners.
11. More studies should be done on moose/vehicle collisions before issuing more or less moose permits.
12. Shoot only bulls, shoot only cows, shoot only barren cows, shoot one or maybe two calves.
13. Use the current moose study data to determine moose harvest. Don’t use the current moose data for anything.
And I’m sure I’ve left off more than I’ve included.
Yikes! And where is the scientific evidence to substantiate all these claims of what MDIFW ought to do? I thought so.
There is one thing that is certain. Even after MDIFW has been spending the past 3 years studying moose, counting them and trying to figure out what role, exactly, the winter tick plays on moose survival, while mired in climate change hocus-pocus, everyone knows better about what to do…including myself, I should add. But I really do…wink-wink.
It’s a crap shoot! It doesn’t much matter what MDIFW does, they are probably damned if they do and damned if they don’t.
We can only hope that in time, biologists will figure it out and use science, instead of “stakeholders” and an ignorant society telling them how many moose suits their fancy for their own personal agendas.
I read recently one writer calling a comment made by head moose biologist, Lee Kantar, “interesting.” I might be wrong, but I assume by “interesting” he either didn’t understand or didn’t agree. I don’t have the exact quote, so I’ll attempt to paraphrase his comment. It concerned moose and automobile collisions. Kantar said that it was “inappropriate” to say that having a moose hunt in southern Maine would reduce collisions.
Perhaps to disagree is not to understand. For those not of the ability to understand, perhaps they are not in a position to be offering advice to MDIFW either?
I think it’s an insult to insinuate that Lee Kantar isn’t smart enough to put together a hunt for moose that would or would not have an affect on car collisions.
Figure that one out!