This proposal to expand…

This proposal to expand instead of ban an unethical hunting practice is another example of how wildlife management serves hunters. Most Ontario residents are unaware of either the proposals or when public comment periods occur. But the hunters know because these are, after all, requested changes from the hunt industry. In this case we saw a committee meeting happening before the public comment period even ends. It would appear the proposal is already a decision made, and public comment is a procedural sham. This was certainly the case when the spring black bear ban was reinstated. The majority of non-hunters do not know GPS-collared dogs are trained to track, terrorize and tree large animals and that in training them smaller animals are ripped apart. It is no life for dogs either, who are starved, kept in sheds, and too often abandoned at end of season. We are regulating animal cruelty to facilitate lazy hunters. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry must ensure the same representation from non-hunters, the vast majority, as hunters in its decision-making process. In this case, training dogs with trials and contests is justified by the statements “these species have sustainable populations” [allowing] “limited take of small numbers for licensed train and trial areas.” I hope at least some members on this committee will pause long enough to consider the ethical issues here, and the shifting values of our society.