Jump to content

damned cormorants


Spouph

Recommended Posts

Before this thread gets locked, i would like to say this.

I am drawn towards Docs ideas on this matter.Nature will take its course eventually.The problem with that, is that nature moves very slowly, and our lifespan is like a mere spec in time.

Most of us live for instant gratification in this life.

The only times when ''Nature'' seems to move quickly, is when man has a hand in it.

Bob mentions Skunks and rabid racoons, and i personally have had many problems with them over the last couple of years.But i look around my neighborhood, and i see all the greenspace and forests that use to surround my home are all gone, and filled with unsold condos.These creatures certainly do not like living under my shed or deck, nor do they like being in contact with my two dogs.

Eventually, they will disappear, whether it takes months or years.Its up to me to deter them from living in my space.

The world of Political correctness that we live in, dictates how we deal with situations like the cormorant, or any other living creature that gets out of control.

Do i like the Cormorants? Hell no.Do i believe we should hunt them down like we did with wolves years ago? Hell no.Do i think that something should be done to give mother nature a hand in stabilizing the population of thse birds? Hell yes.

We have to leave the methods up to the people we put in charge of this problem.It is their mandate, and we should be letting them know how we all feel about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

only man is arrogant enough to think he needs to control nature.

 

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Genesis 1:25-27

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the pie chart if its lake O you need only look at the mean depth of the lake and the maximum effective feeding depth of the bird to explain why its such a small %. Put a dense population of them on a lake with a mean depth of say 10'-15' and see what the pie chart looks like. Conclusions are only as good as the data used and can be skewed for many reasons,such as lake depth in this case. And Dr., yes I have a background in stats.

Edited by hirk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Genesis 1:25-27

 

Let's not bring religion into this, this thread is silly enough without it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then God said, "Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals, and over all the creatures that move along the ground."

Genesis 1:25-27

 

What a surprise, religion on the opposite side of science. Lol.

 

Hey Galileo, you here that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without a doubt there are changes occurring in the natural environment in recent history. New/invasive species colonizing, once expatriated species recolonizing, extinctions etc. These are tangible changes to be readily observed by astute individuals that spend time in the woods and waters. If folks frequent an area for a number of years, its natural they will notice trends and make comparisons between years, decades etc.

 

No doubt that for the reasons mentioned previously, lets throw in changing climatic conditions as another driver here, the changes in populations, food chain dynamics and finally ecosystems are happening at a rate faster than previously recorded. This is a fact that hurts scientific rigor insomuch that by the time the process of a study is carried out, further changes may have occurred, leaving a whole new set of questions.

 

In my line of work, hearing local ecological knowledge is important since the holders of said knowledge are much closer to the resource and can give clues to its changes or trends. What is often lost from this local knowledge or anecdotal observations is the WHY. Saying there are less fish around is one thing, but getting to the root of why this has happened is another issue completely.

 

There are always "sexy" issues in the media, the spring bear hunt, cormorants, invasives etc. Before undertaking something like mass culling the Gov't no doubt needs to have a number of scientific questions answered, so they can make the best decision (with the information available at that time). Focusing on border issues, like nutrient loads, sedimentation, habitat loss and other anthropogenic outputs will be much better issues to lobby various levels of Gov't about.

 

Good that folks are concerned about the resources, maybe it will turn out cormorants need artificial population controls, but before culling or introducing another cormorant eating bird, I'd like to wait for someone to ask the appropriate questions and go about answering them in a careful, analytical manner.

Edited by Jay Hamilton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mean in any way to be disrespectful but I must ask. You think that the scientists are mistaken and there are more than 20 000 mating pairs in Michigan, correct? What data are you basing your position on? What do you feel are the flaws in their data collection techniques that are leading them to this false conclusion? What way do you claim your data collection to be more accurate than theirs?

Grimace,

 

I was alluding to the great numbers of birds that aren't counted because they're considered juviniles. Anything south of the UP isn't counted and that's why we assumed the report forms would change that but I don't think anyone is collecting the data. I believe it's a funding problem where ulness there's a big uproar, like the perch in the se UP, it's out of site out of mind and nothing is done. You can see by this thread the uproar is starting and things may get done. First off is a solid population number.

Edited by madhuskie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ThisPlaceSucks

before culling or introducing another cormorant eating bird, I'd like to wait for someone to ask the appropriate questions and go about answering them in a careful, analytical manner.

 

 

what a novel idea! :thumbsup_anim:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like all new species in any system, the balance will be thrown off and eventually, everything will come back to balance, a new balance. Hopefully with minimal damage done to what allready exists...

 

I just hope nothing really bad happens.

 

Lets not sit back and watch cormorants show us their "carrying capacity" ( grade 9 science ), we just may get a nice kick in the rear end watching our native populations take a few hits, hopefully they can recover.

 

I'll tell you one thing, get the trout farmers to start crying louder, beause they are taxpayers, their voices will be heard first. Then the MNR will do soemthing.

 

Edit:

 

"Science" and highly eduated people should make the final decisions, we can all agree on that I'm sure, we also have to listen to the "gun weilding red necks" who see changes happening in relatively short periods of time... they can see patterns and make plausible conclusions.

Edited by Dozer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm here all week, try the veal!

HH

I had hoped to but when sitting down by the bay at lunch , some big loon shaped black bird, swooped down and grabbed my veal samwich .. what am i to do for lunch now ??? pass the alewifes please

Edited by capt bruce
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe I'm the gentleman in which the OP was referring to when he started this topic.. Up here in Northern Ontario and also Manitoulin Island the cormerant issue has become quite an epidemic. 10 years ago I didn't even know what a cormerant was, now they are everywhere.. Since they have arrived, fishing has depleted significantly -faster than any environmental issue could have wiped them out..

On my own lake in which I live on, the sightings of the birds pretty much directly coincides with the lack of fish caught.. In the winter of 05-06 perch fishing was amazing, you could catch a perch before your lure hits bottom, if your line was in the water for more than 5 minutes without a fish it because your minnow was gone.. This was like this all day, everyday.. ( now that doesn't mean I kept every fish I caught) Now fast forward to 2011... Fishing isn't even worth going out for, you really have to try all day to catch enough for a meal for one. Please explain to me how the fishery could decline so rapidly - and NO, there aren't that many fisherman on the lake - maybe 15 - 20 huts total.

 

Also on Manitoulin island on lake wolesly.. Cormerants are feeding on the farmed rainbow trout and the native perch.. The MNR Has granted the rainbow trout farmer permission to shoot the birds so he can protect his investment.. But why do the perch have to change their spawning habits?? Perch on Lake Wolesly do NOT spawn in shallow water like they do in other lakes, instead they spawn deep, most likely under the rainbow farm nets... Why? To hide away from the cormerants!! Please explain to me why a species has to change its spawning habits on one specific body of water in order to survive?

And whoever stated that a cormerant eats 1lb of fish a day, I believe it's a lot more than that. Or there's a lot of birds that go unnoticed because they are wiping out small lakes up here in a matter of years, not generations like sport fishing would.

So I for one believe the cormerant issue needs taking care of NOW before it's too late, because things are declining Fast!!

 

For all of those who are pro-cormerant and feel I'm misinformed - flame away at me.. But before you do - come live in my region and see for yourself.

 

Ya gypsy you were the one I was refering to...I was wondering when you were going to chime in..glad you did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Before this thread gets locked, i would like to say this.

I am drawn towards Docs ideas on this matter.Nature will take its course eventually.The problem with that, is that nature moves very slowly, and our lifespan is like a mere spec in time.

Most of us live for instant gratification in this life.

The only times when ''Nature'' seems to move quickly, is when man has a hand in it.

Bob mentions Skunks and rabid racoons, and i personally have had many problems with them over the last couple of years.But i look around my neighborhood, and i see all the greenspace and forests that use to surround my home are all gone, and filled with unsold condos.These creatures certainly do not like living under my shed or deck, nor do they like being in contact with my two dogs.

Eventually, they will disappear, whether it takes months or years.Its up to me to deter them from living in my space.

The world of Political correctness that we live in, dictates how we deal with situations like the cormorant, or any other living creature that gets out of control.

Do i like the Cormorants? Hell no.Do i believe we should hunt them down like we did with wolves years ago? Hell no.Do i think that something should be done to give mother nature a hand in stabilizing the population of thse birds? Hell yes.

We have to leave the methods up to the people we put in charge of this problem.It is their mandate, and we should be letting them know how we all feel about it.

 

What does before this thread gets locked mean I am new to this

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recent Topics

    Popular Topics

    Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found

×
×
  • Create New...