Similar drone already exists, a Russian drone enthusiast mounted an AK47 to a drone....video on YouTube
Tradition versus technology: Northerners debate use of drones in caribou hunting
- Thread starter kc34
- Start date
i must have forgotten my math as well. 10% would be 50,000 animals, 20% = 100,000. That's a lot of animals for a 1000 or so hunters combined. There is only 40,000ish people living here.
Interesting read,
http://www.canadiangeographic.com/w.../barren-ground-caribou-caribou-in-decline.pdf
No, you didn't forget your math. I started with 250,000 offspring as a base. 10% of that would be 25,000, as most animals have 1-year survival rates of around 10% (that's just my memory from moose data from 50 years ago). You were using the total population of 500,000 to start. Now, assuming my numbers are ballpark, if you subtract natural deaths of adult animals, predation of adults, etc., you would see that you can't take much more than what - 10,000 animals before you adversely impact the herd? Also, historically, our ancestors that were hunter-gatherers very often suffered starvation periods and epidemics that decimated populations - something that no longer occurs. Also, modern indigenous hunters are much more efficient than their forefathers. That must also be taken into account.
If the herd is to survive - whether the drop in population is because of climate change, over-harvesting, some unidentified illness, sterility - sport hunting has all but been eliminated. The only way to save the herds is either eliminating four-legged predators (if they have any impact), or controlling the number of animals harvested by Native people. Ot's not a question of blame or fault. It's simple math - take more animals than the herd can replace, it will disappear.
holzmeister
Regular
- Location
- Neumarkt Ontario
I'd say it IS an interesting read!! " The average family of five consumes 20 to 25 caribou a year... " What does a caribou weigh after it has been gutted??
It's not an unreasonable figure. The real sustenance hunters have a diet almost entirely made of meat, and a caribou probably gives around 100 lbs., so that works out to around 2500 lbs per year, or 8lbs per week, give or take, so even 20 to 25 per family per year is probably a conservative estimate. So no matter how you look at it, if Joe's numbers are ballpark (and I have no reason to doubt them), even at current levels of harvest, they are at the point where, if they don't curtail or limit some hunting, it's unlikely the herd will be sustainable in the long run, even with zero sport hunting and no impact from global warming.
One solution may be trading sport hunting for sustenance hunting. One caribou can probably bring a village several thousand dollars (guiding, resort, licence), more than the per pound value of the caribou. A similar approach has been used in Africa for some animals. I'm sure it would not be a popular option, but unless something is done, there will be no caribou left for anyone.
If you talk to any of the EX-outfitters up here, they were the first targets of the non-indiginous hunting ban.
I feel the decline started out as a natural swing, but they are definitely not helping any recent decline. And don't believe for a minute anything you read in the media. They tout self-imposed bans (they are the stewards after all) but the hunt continues. if you read up enough on the subject, they are already pointing the finger at resource exploration and development. It's always someone else's fault......
i lived and guided in northern quebec. the reason of decline of the 2 herds as nothing to do with over-haversting ...but 4 main reasons
-first we have no knowledge on caribou lifespan that is a cycle of 80 years roughly with of course big explosion then low numbers ...
-second and it is more interesting the calves there starting to loose 20% on body size within 5 years meaning that it was hard for them to survive in harsh spring conditions and not ready to survive the migrations due certainly to a reduction of food avaibility (the 4 big reservoirs has changed the migration curse in 20 years) i ve seen dry lichen where caribou were in big quantity the year before ...
-third predator control no - existent today as no one can take a wolf because of james bay ageement
-fourth and the most interesting: outfitters were in charge for many years of counting the herd and to report the conditions of the herd. i reported many health issues on the herd we were hunting but guess what when quota discussions arrived do you think they will shoot themselves in the foot and not getting the most of it. now it is over ....
-first we have no knowledge on caribou lifespan that is a cycle of 80 years roughly with of course big explosion then low numbers ...
-second and it is more interesting the calves there starting to loose 20% on body size within 5 years meaning that it was hard for them to survive in harsh spring conditions and not ready to survive the migrations due certainly to a reduction of food avaibility (the 4 big reservoirs has changed the migration curse in 20 years) i ve seen dry lichen where caribou were in big quantity the year before ...
-third predator control no - existent today as no one can take a wolf because of james bay ageement
-fourth and the most interesting: outfitters were in charge for many years of counting the herd and to report the conditions of the herd. i reported many health issues on the herd we were hunting but guess what when quota discussions arrived do you think they will shoot themselves in the foot and not getting the most of it. now it is over ....
Very sad, and, unfortunately, politics before science or experience.
Im sure drones are as traditional as spotlighting.....
Super-conservative numbers say that wolves and bears are taking a minimum of 75,000 animals per year!
A wolf on the calving ground will go on a killing frenzy and kill a hundred calves in a day!!
But it's not politically correct to announce that bears and wolves should be thinned out!!
The advisory board said, "no drones, if the natives don't like it, go to court!", but politics are interfering!!
A wolf on the calving ground will go on a killing frenzy and kill a hundred calves in a day!!
But it's not politically correct to announce that bears and wolves should be thinned out!!
The advisory board said, "no drones, if the natives don't like it, go to court!", but politics are interfering!!
Thing is, wolves and bears have always been around. ATV's, snowmobiles, high power rifles and drones haven't. Not saying predator numbers shouldn't be controlled, but it's probably a safe bet human activity is a major factor. Way back when, if there was a natural drop in game numbers, there was a significant drop in predator numbers. Game was rarer and harder to catch, so famine set in for four and two-legged predators. Game numbers naturally went back up. We can see that in deer and moose numbers. Cut back on the hunt and eventually numbers will go back up to where more animals can be harvested. Nowadays, that "natural" cycle doesn't occur unless humans intervene. Fewer caribou just means you have to drive a little further out, and maybe make longer shots. So unless we limit the numbers we take, the herds are screwed.
Every fall, we see does. If numbers are up, we get a tag. If we get a tag, we harvest a doe. If we don't have a tag, doe walks away to breed. When numbers were sky-high, every night we could hear dozens of coyotes howling all night (and a few wolves). When number bottomed out in our areas, we never heard any. Now, numbers are coming back up, and we started hearing the 'yotes.
