Ontario Agriculture

The network for agriculture in Ontario, Canada

Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters takes stand AGAINST farmers

http://www.ofah.org/News/index.cfm?ID=3&A=GetDoc&DID=492

Folks, this has me about as upset as I can get. For several years now, farmers in the areas where these elk have been "reintroduced" have been forced to deal with significant damage to fences, crops, stored feed, injured livestock, untold personal and financial stresses and in some cases even threats to their own physical well-being from having to work around these animals while going about their business.
They have had no compensation, and no real help from the MNR, OFAH, or anybody involved in bringing these elk here.
These aren't wild animals people. They were penned up for months and fed hay and grain in feeders both before and after being brought to Ontario, then when they were released they immediately started looking for hay in the barnyards nearby. No surprise there. I've seen them, many of the beef cattle in these areas are more wild than the elk are. They simply have no fear of human beings.
Now, FINALLY there is something for these farmers to hope for with the proposal to set the elk up as nuisance animals in the new "omnibus" bill.

Views: 286

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Dale Ketcheson on October 30, 2009 at 1:42pm
These farmers haven't been asking for much folks. The opportunity to apply for a nuisance tag and shoot one animal in one of these pods that are causing damage would probably scare the rest enough that it would start them down the road to being "wild"life again and teach them to stay away from people. A few nuisance elk being shot in the province in a year would probably cut the damage down significantly, and it's hardly a conservation issue with the Bancroft herd growing by leaps and bounds and expanding it's territory every year (with crop damage now at least 80 km from where they were released).
Yet OFAH are using conservation as an excuse to align themselves squarely alongside the animal rights and anti-hunting people to try to deny farmers this very small opportunity. This is the ONLY reason these farmers have had so far to be optimistic that anything might be done. Why would OFAH do this? These farmers can't afford to wait any longer, their family farms will be out of business within another year or two. The only reason I can see for OFAH is because they can't stand to see anyone else get a chance to legally shoot an elk before the season is opened up for hunters in general
Permalink Reply by Dale Ketcheson on October 30, 2009 at 1:47pm
However, even OFAH's own staff have admitted that the elk in the Bancroft area now are domesticated to the point where hunting them wouldn't be "sporting". So what could it possibly hurt to give farmers the opportunity to shoot a very few nuisance elk and teach the elk to fear humans like they should if they're wildlife? What's more, the Bancroft elk are now so numerous they've driven the other large game species (particularly deer but also moose) almost completely out of the area, actually REDUCING hunting opportunities in these areas.

This just makes no sense people. In recent years, we've continuously heard how OFAH want to work with farmers, how they're on our side, and yet when the opportunity comes along they stab us in the back. Don't they realize how many farmers are also their members? Don't they realize how many of their members depend on the goodwill of farmers to provide them with hunting opportunities?

Don't assume this isn't your problem. These elk are expanding rapidly. If farming is going to survive in these areas, particularly the North Hastings area, farmers need at least some limited opportunity to shoot nuisance elk NOW.
Permalink Reply by Dale Ketcheson on October 30, 2009 at 1:49pm
I wish I was still an OFAH member. It would give me great satisfaction to cancel my membership. I have a lot of people hunting on my farm for various species. At this point, I'm seriously considering not allowing any OFAH member to hunt here until they've cancelled their memberships. Why should we put up with being stabbed in the back by a group to whom we've been a great ally? This response to something farmers need is just ridiculous.
Permalink Reply by rein minnema on October 30, 2009 at 2:59pm
Lets face the reality, the greenbelt effect is going all over our province
and our so called rural municapalities are urban governed
Permalink Reply by Roadrunner on October 31, 2009 at 4:00am
The OFAH should be a strong ally to farmers.....do they know the farmers in the Bancroft area are pissed off?

You would think that the OFAH would want to work with the local farmers and pay them to help establish the elk....

I can't imagine the costs would be that great if there are only 500 elk in that large area.

Maybe the farmer needs to import(domesticate a couple of endangered rare wolves and have them hanging around his hay fields....:)
Permalink Reply by Dale Ketcheson on October 31, 2009 at 5:48am
OFAH know very well that the farmers are upset.

As for wolves, the wolves aren't really interested in the elk unless they can catch a young calf or a lame elk. There's no shortage of timberwolves in the area (since there's a hunting ban in the townships around Algonquin.....)

Thanks Roadrunner

Roadrunner said:
The OFAH should be a strong ally to farmers.....do they know the farmers in the Bancroft area are pissed off?

You would think that the OFAH would want to work with the local farmers and pay them to help establish the elk....

I can't imagine the costs would be that great if there are only 500 elk in that large area.

Maybe the farmer needs to import(domesticate a couple of endangered rare wolves and have them hanging around his hay fields....:)

▶ Reply to Discussion

RSS

Agriculture Headlines from Farms.com Canada East News - click on title for full story

Which Situations Require the Use of a Soybean Inoculant?

If soybeans have been in a rotation on the field, an inoculant is not normally recommended. Most universities recommend that if the field has not grown soybeans in the last 3 or more years an inoculant may help to prevent a yield loss. Some environmental conditions, such low pH, floods, and drought may increase the need for periodic inoculation even in fields with a history of soybean production. Care must be used when storing and handling these products as they contain a living bacteria. Soybeans form a symbiotic (mutually beneficial) relationship with nitrogen-fixing bacteria that live in the soil (Figure 1). In this relationship, Rhizobia bacteria fix atmospheric nitrogen into a plant available form in exchange for plant-derived carbon. Because soybeans are the host for the bacteria, if soybeans are grown in rotation the bacteria will persist in the soil. However, if soybeans have never been grown or have not been grown in an area for several years, the bacteria can become deple

Effects of Frost & Freeze Conditions on Young Corn and Soybeans

Air temperatures at or below 28 °F can be fatal to corn and soybeans, depending on their duration and crop growth stage. Waiting a few days after the freeze or frost event to examine affected plants, is the best way to assess the extent of damage and make management decisions. Certain management practices such as herbicide applications, may need to be delayed when frost-freeze injury occurs. Air temperatures at or below 28 °F for just a few hours can kill corn outright, even when the growing point is below ground, while air temperatures above 28 °F have a variable effect on young corn. For soybeans, when the air temperature drops below 28-32 °F, plants can experience some degree of frost damage. If the freeze period lasts for several hours and damage occurs below the cotyledons, soybeans can die. When light frost occurs, it typically shows up in bottom ground and lower parts of fields where the cold air has a chance to collect. It may also show up in fields protected by trees, since

Bfo Statement: Ontario Court Upholds The Legislation And Intent Of The Security From Trespass Act

The Beef Farmers of Ontario (BFO) is pleased to hear that the Ontario Superior Court of Justice has upheld the legislation and intent of the Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act (2020), which has been under a court challenge since 2021. We understand that while the Act has been upheld, a ruling on sections of the underlying Regulation has been suspended. We will be actively monitoring further developments regarding this case. The Security from Trespass and Protecting Food Safety Act is a critical safeguard to protect farm animals, the food supply, farmers and others from risks that are created when trespassers enter places where farm animals live or when persons engage in unauthorized interactions with farm animals. The repercussions include the risk of exposing farm animals to disease and stress, as well as the risk of introducing contaminants into the food supply. Animal neglect, abuse and cruelty is never acceptable, and animal welfare is of the utmost importance

Federal Budget 2024 Misses Key Opportunities, says Fruit and Vegetable Growers of Canada

Budget 2024 unfortunately overlooks several significant measures that could have greatly supported the fruit and vegetable sector, such as a carbon tax exemption, financial protection against market volatilities, and the establishment of a Grocery Code of Conduct. Similarly, no funding was allocated for greenhouse agriculture or the Sustainable Agriculture Strategy, both essential for climate adaptation and sustainability. Nevertheless, Fruit and Vegetable Growers of Canada (FVGC) is cautiously optimistic about several included initiatives, like the extension of the Advance Payments Program’s interest-free limit to $250,000 and the introduction of the New Canada Carbon Rebate for Small Businesses. The budget also proposes funding for maintaining the pesticides regulatory system and promoting sustainable pesticide use, which underscores the importance of sustainable crop protection practices. FVGC is particularly concerned about the rising costs affecting both growers and consumers. As

Altona's E2 Trucking acquires Rosenort-based trucking firm

E2 Trucking, an Altona-based company, has expanded it's operations by acquiring PK Friesen Trucking in Rosenort. A big step for the company, the deal closed on February 9th. . E2 owner Evan Erlandson says they learned a lot and got to know a lot of good people that he's proud to have on the team. "That added 12 trucks to our fleet, roughly an even split of north-south routes and east-west routes. The east-west trucks and trailers and business was new to us, we were not involved in that business. The north-south wasn't new to us, so we just kept those guys on. Well, we kept everyone on, and we're doing our best to keep everybody busy." The fleet now totals about 35 units. Along with the repair shop, support staff, is made up of some 10 people, including three full-time mechanics, dispatchers, administration, a couple of managers and all the drivers. From the perspective of a business owner, Erlandson feels a responsibility, especially in small town, to do what he can to preserve

© 2024   Created by Darren Marsland.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service