An old forest is a dead forest.
an old forest is where the bears are ..
An old forest is a dead forest.
an old forest is where the bears are ..
Moose and predator interaction seems to me (not my forte but professionally read those who know more) to be a pretty complicated interaction of many factors. Snow depth. Food availablity. Predator mobility. Cover. Other things.
Many things would have to conspire against them to be effectively defenseless from predators just because of roads and cuts. Starvation leads to lethargy leads to not being able to flee leads to worse mobility in deep snow...which may be because deep snow covers food...and round we go.
IF they are well fed to begin with their odds of making it through the winter go up. Including in the presence of predators. And the rules protecting certain areas from being cut (the above example was around waterways) do provide cover.
Except for all those ones out feeding on berries and other goods in the young forest.
Wrong ..moose don't eat pine needles ..and the round up kills everything else . The bear cubs get trampled in their den. Moose need cover from predators
moose are more adapted in deep snow ..wolves like hard packed roads ....
Wrong . Moose do not survive better in these areas because once logged out , the round - up spraying starts. Kill off small shrubs and grass. All they want to start over is spruce trees.. period.. poplar or any leaf trees are destroyed (willows) . BC has been fighting this for decades
We may disagree on physics but he knows his moose habitat lol
The moose have plenty of cover in a properly managed forest. Water ways are protected with wider cut restrictions than ever, as are habitat corridors. The days of slash and burn logging are long gone, and have been for many many years. Logging will actually boost moose populations in areas when managed correctly.
R.
I could explain it better with a napkin, pencil, and over a beer!
R.
often wondered why those opposed to the spraying have never really had a large audience in Gov'r or the public
There are numerous studies on habitat use, wildfire influence, restocking practices as well as on the impact of sprays, can the anti-spray group come up with supporting science?
berries won't be there after spraying ....understando...besides bears are dead from the logging
berries won't be there after spraying ....understando...besides bears are dead from the logging
over the years I have seen more bears in my hunting area. those spots have been logged over. good size clear cuts too.
This is hilarious... The berries are there after spraying... it's called herbicide for reason... it doesn't kill fruit
Still not sure how you think logging kills bears? You figure they den up in those huge spruce tree stumps or something?
And even if they did... that particular site would be identified, flagged, and given a wide berth... as per the rules and regulations pertaining to habitat and disturbance.
R.
The veggies farmers grow are sprayed with glyphosate (roundup)
https://www.thelandbetween.ca/2022/...-of-glyphosate-in-ontarios-forestry-industry/
Transmission tower lines in norther Ontario are spot sprayed with garlon (ai triclopyr) or aspect( ai Picloram, present as triisopropanolamine salt 2,4-D, present as choline salt) Tordon is no longer used. Some reserve/traditional lands are cut by hand or with mechanical machinery.
Forest blocks are still sprayed up here and the mnr has an active spray program for budworm as do other provinces, the jack pine are having a hard time.
There isn’t anywhere on the planet that you can go that doesn’t dioxins, micro plastics are inside all of us as well.
The line from the graduate is the truth.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-...unswick-early-intervention-strategy-1.5210769