1. According to the…

1. According to the information posted on the EBR, this hunt has been proposed as being in response to "concerns expressed by some groups (commercial fishing industry, property owners) and individuals that cormorants have been detrimental to fish populations, island forest habitats, other species and aesthetics". These 'concerns' are not backed up with scientific evidence. There is ample science-based evidence that these concerns are partially or substantially unjustified.

2. The hunt would be allowed "from a stationary motorboat". Even a non-motorized boat is not entirely stable in the water and this could lead to inhumane injuries rather than clean kills, and 'accidental' hits on nearby non-target species. This also raises many concerns regarding human safety.

3. Hunters "could allow cormorant to spoil". This would be an unprecedented, careless and inconsiderate threat to human and environmental health. It is an unethical and irresponsible hunting practice. Cormorant carcasses washing up on shorelines could create an environmental and human health disaster.

4. Establish a bag limit of 50 cormorants/day with no possession limit. This combined with the provision to allow cormorant to spoil could cause water pollution, health, aesthetic and ethical issues.

5. Hunters will be "reminded to avoid conflicts with migratory game birds and other waterbirds". How would this be possible with the majority of cormorants nesting amongst other colonial-nesting and island-nesting species, some of which are species of concern. Any disturbance anywhere in the vicinity of other species during nesting season would constitute a 'conflict' capable of disrupting if not destroying their breeding cycles. Since the dates of the proposed hunt are from March 15 to December 31, nesting season is not being avoided. Eggs and chicks of colonial-nesting and island-nesting species could be abandoned leading to starvation.

6. The posting indicates that cormorant populations are currently stabilized or on the decline. Natural processes such as this should be allowed to run their course, without such drastic intervention as is proposed.

7. Mass killing of any one species damages and disrupts natural processes.

8. The cormorant eats large numbers of invasive round gobies and other non-commercial species.

9. The cormorant is being used as a scapegoat for environmental problems. No wildlife management plan should be proposed in the absence of consideration of all factors involved including climate change, pollution, control of invasive species, over-fishing, etc. These factors are not mentioned or addressed in this proposal.

10. This is not hunting in the time-honoured, traditional sense - for food, for the love of being in the great outdoors, with high respect for human, animal and environmental safety, and based on fair play and good sportsmanship. It is a hunt that promotes a killing-field mentality. No respectable, ethical hunter would engage in this type of free-for-all. It is irresponsible of the government to promote this form of public slaughter under the auspices of "wildlife management".

I am opposed to this hunt as laid out in the EBR.