Proposal to hunt double…

ERO number

013-4124

Comment ID

16475

Commenting on behalf of

Individual

Comment status

Comment approved More about comment statuses

Comment

Proposal to hunt double-crested Cormorant

From research it does appear that the Double -crested Cormorant made a very successful comeback while enjoying the protection of various laws and acts, both national and international. In some areas their high concentration does appear to negatively impact other species, the environment and possibly commercial fishing enterprises. However, there are no scientific studies demonstrating these alleged impacts.

Most governments are moving toward evidence-based policies and decision making, and so I beseech the Ontario government to review this proposal, which lacks evidence. I'm not opposed to culling birds in problematic areas, however letting the killed birds, nestlings rot on the spot may cause other problems.

I am also vehemently opposed to an open season of 294 days, that is March 15 to December 31, will certainly give rise to confrontations between outdoor enthusiasts and hunters, and as such pose a security risk. It also has the potential to cast Ontario as a gun happy, wildlife killers and tarnish the reputation of the province as Nature destination for international tourists. I like to stay out of the forests during hunting season for safety reasons, the proposed hunting season in this case will stop many like me from discovering areas of Ontario where I may have to come face to face with a sport hunter or an accumulation of rotting carcasses and the predators that may attract.

Please review your proposal to include a reduced season, safety means to protect non hunters, and. to dispose of killed birds in a hygienic fashion. Canada, and Ontario are thought to be developed, and proponents of well informed nature and wildlife management, let's not regress to the 19th century killing sprees that almost eliminated the bison. Please consult the wildlife scientists, on both side of the borders in this matter, instead of enacting a proposal in reaction to people who are reacting on perceptions rather than scientific facts.