This project isn't a 'cull', it's an [eradication of an invasive deer species](https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z).
The native black-tailed deer have been outcompeted by the invasive European fallow deer since the latter's introduction early in the twentieth century. The fallow deer wipe out the forest understory, screwing up the ecosystem on the island. Previous attempts to cull the fallow deer through hunting programs - beginning in 1981 - have not been successful at eliminating them. Their population rebounds too quickly after each hunt.
The planned 2024-25 eradication program will enclose regions of the island with temporary fencing, and use marksmen and scent-tracking dogs to completely clear the fallow deer from each successive fenced region.
Good headlines are easy, "Parks Canada will kill all invasive deer on Vancouver Island this summer, restoring damaged ecosystem of native blacktailed deer."
Except almost 25 percent of deer killed were not the species targeted. Also, it uses prohibited rifles, supressors, and magazine capacity. At a cost of $62500 per legal deer killed. ( That is only the cost of the cull).
We could still let hunters do it for a significantly lower price. Humans have been obliterating nature since we learned to throw spears. It’s a bit ridiculous to say “we won’t pay Canadian hunters $1200 a deer, but we’ll pay some foreigners 12 MILLION to do it.” It’s also DOUBLE the original estimated cost, which is so typical of our government. Regardless of what way we chose, we need to hold our officials accountable for their blatant waste of resources. It’s not their money so they don’t care, but it’s still our money.
The 12 million is for restoration projects to the forest, which is in poor health due to the invasive species. Hunting programs have been doing it for 40 years but failed due to the deers population rebounding after each hunt.
Local hunters haven't been successful, according to Parks Canada.
> “After 40 years of unsuccessful population control of invasive fallow deer, including community hunting initiatives, interested parties came together to carefully plan a long-term solution to the problem: managing invasive plants, reestablishing native plants, and completely removing invasive fallow deer,” Parks Canada’s statement says.
https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/parks-canada-disputes-claim-of-rising-costs-for-sidney-island-deer-eradication-7364066
Yeah, he made "stairs" but they weren't up to code at all... There is a reason we have building codes and don't let anyone build anything in a city. He sounded decent, but it's not hard to find stupid people in a city that would build any crazy things that come to mind with shoddy quality...
It is a Canadian group.
> According to its statement, Parks Canada did hire a Canadian-based firm to do the work, which in turn brought in specialists to do the work from outside Canada after being unable to find the right workers within the country. That contract was only for phase one of the work, and the total amount spent was just shy of $800,000.
> On the issue of whether local hunters were adequately keeping the deer population under control already — as the tax group also asserted — Parks Canada said this has not worked up to this point.
> “After 40 years of unsuccessful population control of invasive fallow deer, including community hunting initiatives, interested parties came together to carefully plan a long-term solution to the problem: managing invasive plants, reestablishing native plants, and completely removing invasive fallow deer,” Parks Canada’s statement says.
https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/parks-canada-disputes-claim-of-rising-costs-for-sidney-island-deer-eradication-7364066
Says right there in the article that a Canadian-based firm was hired. Downvote me all you want. I think we have every right to be skeptical when a firm says they can't find workers.
This is nothing the Canadian Armed Forces or Reserves wouldn't be equipped enough to put to the task.
> Says right there in the article that a Canadian-based firm was hired.
Yes, in the text I quoted as well. The money is going to a Canadian firm, who said they couldn't find Canadian specialists. Do you think they're lying?
How much would it cost Canadian taxpayers to send in the military?
>The money is going to a Canadian firm, who said they couldn't find Canadian specialists. Do you think they're lying?
This does make me suspicious, actually.
It makes me wonder what this Canadian company is actually doing. Do they have experience in setting up the cull and just needed to hire out hunters? It's hard to credit that they couldn't find any local licensed hunters. I could see it might be harder to find helicopter sniper hunters, but I'd question if that is the only viable approach, or if it had to be used for all of the hunting vs only the final parts.
But if the company also has to hire out for the culling expertise...then what value are they providing, especially if the estimated budget was so far off the mark?
Friend, you're cherry picking what you need for your argument. To expand on what you quoted.
> ...which in turn brought in specialists to do the work from outside Canada after being unable to find the right workers within the country.
In other words, a Canadian based firm paid Temporary Foreign Workers to do the job. It's nice that the firm hired specialists - the actual purpose of the TFW program, but I have a really hard time believing there weren't Canadian companies or workers (not hunters) capable of dealing with this.
And yes! I wouldn't be surprised if they're lying. Just like how so many corporations lie about a labour shortage and not being able to find Canadian labour and thus bringing in cheap workers.
This is a misleading headline. The $12 million is the total cost of the overall habitat restoration project of which the deer cull is a significant (and expensive) part.
It’s the National Post. Misleading is their bread and butter. I don’t even bother to click on their articles, because I know they’ll have left out important details.
This piece doesn't give any information other than rage bait. I'm trying to find out why those hunters specifically were brought in. I want to know why the scientist and parks Canada are doing what they are doing, I don't care about the anger of Canadian hunters.
It's an interesting coincidence that this week's Quirks and Quarks had a related thing about wild pigs. They specifically touch on why hunters are not a good solution. In part, it's because hunters tend to produce hunter-savvy (and therefore harder to hunt and erradicate) more wary wild pigs. I would not be surprised if that is the same case here as well.
I'll speculate that this is another one of those "common sense" solutions that don't solve the problem because rather than being evidence based, they're "feelings" based. Although, I must admit, that I'm going with my feelings here. ;-)
[link](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/455835055470805014/1245264225123700770/Screenshot_20240528-233508.png?ex=66581e2f&is=6656ccaf&hm=88db0b4dff8e0bb8cadfe898d524762f3e21b1d5c2441ec6b94730fcdd3eebc6&)
Looks like they got brought in because the free method didn't work.
> “After 40 years of unsuccessful population control of invasive fallow deer, including community hunting initiatives, interested parties came together to carefully plan a long-term solution to the problem: managing invasive plants, reestablishing native plants, and completely removing invasive fallow deer,” Parks Canada’s statement says.
https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/parks-canada-disputes-claim-of-rising-costs-for-sidney-island-deer-eradication-7364066
B-but free! A-and freedom! Government say no then spends money for yes, but not yes to- well not me but I'm pretty sure I know someone who hunts who would be upset.
Well, that hunter could have been one of the ones thar hunted these fallow deer for the last 40 years and it didn’t solve the problem, which is why Parks Canada is doing an eradication of this deer that is not native to North America and destroying the ecosystem on this island. It isn’t a cull, as the idiotic rage farmer put it.
The native black-tailed deer have been outcompeted by the invasive European fallow deer since the latter's introduction early in the twentieth century. The fallow deer wipe out the forest understory, screwing up the ecosystem on the island. Previous attempts to cull the fallow deer through hunting programs - beginning in 1981 - have not been successful at eliminating them. Their population rebounds too quickly after each hunt.
The planned 2024-25 eradication program will enclose regions of the island with temporary fencing, and use marksmen and scent-tracking dogs to completely clear the fallow deer from each successive fenced region.
Stole someone elses comment as they gave the proper information
At the scale of government, 12 M over 8 years is also effectively free. It's peanuts. Apparently local hunters have been running culls for fifty years without success. Maybe it's a good idea to try something else?
Alternatively, 80% of the island is split into private properties with one to three acres and 200-400 feet of ocean front, [which are selling for like 500k each vacant.](https://sidneyisland.com/for-sale.html) There are [multimillion dollar cottages with airstrips.](https://www.landquest.com/listings/sidney-island-oceanfront-strata-lot-28-southern-gulf-islands) It would be satisfying if they just assessed all the stratas like 100k each over the 8 years of the program for the costs, but they probably legally can't.
The target here is an invasive species of deer that's been crushing the native black-tailed deer population and wiping out the island's Douglas fir forest ecosystem.
They've tried culling with regular hunting for more than forty years - starting 1981 - but the invasive European deer keep bouncing back. Issuing extra tags hasn't been cutting it.
This project's goal is to completely eradicate the invasive species to allow the native deer - and the island's forests - to recover. Unsurprisingly, the *National Post*'s headline is misleading as heck.
The listed cost is also for the entire forest restoration project of which removing the invasive deer is one part. A substantial and fairly expensive part, but not the entire project representing that whole price tag. It is *also* the entire cost of an *eight year program* not the cost of one instance of action taken by Parks Canada. $1.3m per year is pennies out of the federal budget; government environmental agencies spend money like that on rain gear and basic field equipment annually because there are so many people to equip. Hiring out some specialists to come solve the Fallow deer problem so proper forest rehabilitation work can proceed is cheap-as.
Maybe try to find out information instead of going off a post by someone itching to push nonsense in an effort to be “mad at government.” The fact that it’s an r/Canada post should be a hint.
Read this: (I quoted parts in my response to another comment below if you don’t want to go to the link)
https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z
[link](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/455835055470805014/1245264225123700770/Screenshot_20240528-233508.png?ex=66581e2f&is=6656ccaf&hm=88db0b4dff8e0bb8cadfe898d524762f3e21b1d5c2441ec6b94730fcdd3eebc6&)
They tried that.
I agree as well. Unless there's some reason why not to (IE, only certain specific deer have to be picked out by an expert of somesort, or the deer remains have to be taken care of in a certain way due to disease concerns), I dont see why they couldnt just issue some one time use tags.
The post is nothing but an effort to create outrage, it’s not a cull but an eradication of a deer not native to North America that is harming the ecosystem.
“In the early 20th century, settlers brought fallow deer—a species not native to North America—from England to the Southern Gulf Islands for farming and sport hunting. The population grew rapidly, and ecological issues resulting from abundance and extensive browsing were soon apparent.
Fallow deer live in larger groups and eat a broader variety of food than native black-tailed deer. Since their introduction to Sidney Island, fallow deer have eaten much of the forest’s native understory, including important food and medicine plants that First Nations Peoples have harvested there for generations. Scarcely any tree seedlings survive longer than a few years before being eaten, resulting in a forest of mature trees, with few young trees to take their place. In the absence of native trees and shrubs, invasive species like English hawthorn, Scotch broom, and non-native grasses have spread.”
And not only have other methods been considered, but used for 40 years to no avail:
“The Sidney Island community spent over 40 years conducting annual hunts and periodic culls. Despite these efforts, the fallow deer population repeatedly rebounded, and the forest continues to show signs of poor health.“
https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z
[link](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/455835055470805014/1245264225123700770/Screenshot_20240528-233508.png?ex=66581e2f&is=6656ccaf&hm=88db0b4dff8e0bb8cadfe898d524762f3e21b1d5c2441ec6b94730fcdd3eebc6&)
According to Parks Canada, the local community has attempted several culls over the last 40 years and the deer population has always rebounded. If just issuing additional tags or declaring open season would have worked then it would have by now
I don't get the down votes. Government says there is no legitimate use, and then hires someone to make legitimate use with them. No reason a Canadian company couldn't do this.
> Employing foreign sharpshooters in helicopters to cull deer inhabiting a small coastal B.C. island could cost taxpayers over $12 million
Oh fuck, hiring foreign helicopter snipers to eradicate your enemy is too metal to not spend 12M on it. Like I get that there are a lot of practical reasons the sharpshooter plan makes more sense than handing out hunting tags, but lets not forget that it's also just really really cool.
For what's being done $12 million is also *cheap*. That's nothing compared to the federal budget. It would cost that much for the government to do it themselves, and that's not the price just for the deer stuff that's the estimate for the *whole project*.
Is there enough hunters capable of achieving the necessary goal?
Can we trust all of those hunters to properly deal with the remains?
Genuine questions, not trying to throw shade.
Isn’t that why deer tags are sold? So hunters can harvest a certain amount of animals every year. Why don’t they just sell more tags?
Edit: Deer tags pay for conservation and wardens
This project isn't a 'cull', it's an [eradication of an invasive deer species](https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z). The native black-tailed deer have been outcompeted by the invasive European fallow deer since the latter's introduction early in the twentieth century. The fallow deer wipe out the forest understory, screwing up the ecosystem on the island. Previous attempts to cull the fallow deer through hunting programs - beginning in 1981 - have not been successful at eliminating them. Their population rebounds too quickly after each hunt. The planned 2024-25 eradication program will enclose regions of the island with temporary fencing, and use marksmen and scent-tracking dogs to completely clear the fallow deer from each successive fenced region.
Thank you for the proper context. Parks Canada takes this shit pretty seriously so I knew there had to be a solid reason.
We (society) really suck at communicating this stuff. The way we talk about current events is so polarizing.
Yay for rage-baiting!
Media does it for money…
It's not really that. It's just hard to portray that in the headline since most people will not read further.
Good headlines are easy, "Parks Canada will kill all invasive deer on Vancouver Island this summer, restoring damaged ecosystem of native blacktailed deer."
It also doesn't help that a lot of people read only the headline and make snap conclusions instead of reading through all the information.
Anything from the 6 people who call themselves the Taxpayers Federation is always a partial truth.
They will absolutely say anything to get in the spotlight. BS merchants right down to their shoes.
Except almost 25 percent of deer killed were not the species targeted. Also, it uses prohibited rifles, supressors, and magazine capacity. At a cost of $62500 per legal deer killed. ( That is only the cost of the cull).
We could still let hunters do it for a significantly lower price. Humans have been obliterating nature since we learned to throw spears. It’s a bit ridiculous to say “we won’t pay Canadian hunters $1200 a deer, but we’ll pay some foreigners 12 MILLION to do it.” It’s also DOUBLE the original estimated cost, which is so typical of our government. Regardless of what way we chose, we need to hold our officials accountable for their blatant waste of resources. It’s not their money so they don’t care, but it’s still our money.
The 12 million is for restoration projects to the forest, which is in poor health due to the invasive species. Hunting programs have been doing it for 40 years but failed due to the deers population rebounding after each hunt.
Local hunters haven't been successful, according to Parks Canada. > “After 40 years of unsuccessful population control of invasive fallow deer, including community hunting initiatives, interested parties came together to carefully plan a long-term solution to the problem: managing invasive plants, reestablishing native plants, and completely removing invasive fallow deer,” Parks Canada’s statement says. https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/parks-canada-disputes-claim-of-rising-costs-for-sidney-island-deer-eradication-7364066
No we couldn't. Just because a few hick are trigger happy, they don't have the tools to do the job properly (fencing, dogs, etc....).
See the Toronto stairs case study.
Yeah, he made "stairs" but they weren't up to code at all... There is a reason we have building codes and don't let anyone build anything in a city. He sounded decent, but it's not hard to find stupid people in a city that would build any crazy things that come to mind with shoddy quality...
That’s my point, yes.
Doesn't sound like anything that can't be done with Canadians and Canadian equipment, whether it's hunters or specialists.
It is a Canadian group. > According to its statement, Parks Canada did hire a Canadian-based firm to do the work, which in turn brought in specialists to do the work from outside Canada after being unable to find the right workers within the country. That contract was only for phase one of the work, and the total amount spent was just shy of $800,000. > On the issue of whether local hunters were adequately keeping the deer population under control already — as the tax group also asserted — Parks Canada said this has not worked up to this point. > “After 40 years of unsuccessful population control of invasive fallow deer, including community hunting initiatives, interested parties came together to carefully plan a long-term solution to the problem: managing invasive plants, reestablishing native plants, and completely removing invasive fallow deer,” Parks Canada’s statement says. https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/parks-canada-disputes-claim-of-rising-costs-for-sidney-island-deer-eradication-7364066
Says right there in the article that a Canadian-based firm was hired. Downvote me all you want. I think we have every right to be skeptical when a firm says they can't find workers. This is nothing the Canadian Armed Forces or Reserves wouldn't be equipped enough to put to the task.
> Says right there in the article that a Canadian-based firm was hired. Yes, in the text I quoted as well. The money is going to a Canadian firm, who said they couldn't find Canadian specialists. Do you think they're lying? How much would it cost Canadian taxpayers to send in the military?
>The money is going to a Canadian firm, who said they couldn't find Canadian specialists. Do you think they're lying? This does make me suspicious, actually. It makes me wonder what this Canadian company is actually doing. Do they have experience in setting up the cull and just needed to hire out hunters? It's hard to credit that they couldn't find any local licensed hunters. I could see it might be harder to find helicopter sniper hunters, but I'd question if that is the only viable approach, or if it had to be used for all of the hunting vs only the final parts. But if the company also has to hire out for the culling expertise...then what value are they providing, especially if the estimated budget was so far off the mark?
Friend, you're cherry picking what you need for your argument. To expand on what you quoted. > ...which in turn brought in specialists to do the work from outside Canada after being unable to find the right workers within the country. In other words, a Canadian based firm paid Temporary Foreign Workers to do the job. It's nice that the firm hired specialists - the actual purpose of the TFW program, but I have a really hard time believing there weren't Canadian companies or workers (not hunters) capable of dealing with this. And yes! I wouldn't be surprised if they're lying. Just like how so many corporations lie about a labour shortage and not being able to find Canadian labour and thus bringing in cheap workers.
This is a misleading headline. The $12 million is the total cost of the overall habitat restoration project of which the deer cull is a significant (and expensive) part.
It’s the National Post. Misleading is their bread and butter. I don’t even bother to click on their articles, because I know they’ll have left out important details.
This piece doesn't give any information other than rage bait. I'm trying to find out why those hunters specifically were brought in. I want to know why the scientist and parks Canada are doing what they are doing, I don't care about the anger of Canadian hunters.
It's an interesting coincidence that this week's Quirks and Quarks had a related thing about wild pigs. They specifically touch on why hunters are not a good solution. In part, it's because hunters tend to produce hunter-savvy (and therefore harder to hunt and erradicate) more wary wild pigs. I would not be surprised if that is the same case here as well. I'll speculate that this is another one of those "common sense" solutions that don't solve the problem because rather than being evidence based, they're "feelings" based. Although, I must admit, that I'm going with my feelings here. ;-)
Okay, but are there no Canadian specialists with Canadian equipment that could do the job?
[link](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/455835055470805014/1245264225123700770/Screenshot_20240528-233508.png?ex=66581e2f&is=6656ccaf&hm=88db0b4dff8e0bb8cadfe898d524762f3e21b1d5c2441ec6b94730fcdd3eebc6&) Looks like they got brought in because the free method didn't work.
Do you have the full link, more than a screenshot? Thanks!
https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z
Thank you!
> “After 40 years of unsuccessful population control of invasive fallow deer, including community hunting initiatives, interested parties came together to carefully plan a long-term solution to the problem: managing invasive plants, reestablishing native plants, and completely removing invasive fallow deer,” Parks Canada’s statement says. https://www.vicnews.com/local-news/parks-canada-disputes-claim-of-rising-costs-for-sidney-island-deer-eradication-7364066
B-but free! A-and freedom! Government say no then spends money for yes, but not yes to- well not me but I'm pretty sure I know someone who hunts who would be upset.
Well, that hunter could have been one of the ones thar hunted these fallow deer for the last 40 years and it didn’t solve the problem, which is why Parks Canada is doing an eradication of this deer that is not native to North America and destroying the ecosystem on this island. It isn’t a cull, as the idiotic rage farmer put it.
Yeah this just left me asking why? Repeatedly.
The native black-tailed deer have been outcompeted by the invasive European fallow deer since the latter's introduction early in the twentieth century. The fallow deer wipe out the forest understory, screwing up the ecosystem on the island. Previous attempts to cull the fallow deer through hunting programs - beginning in 1981 - have not been successful at eliminating them. Their population rebounds too quickly after each hunt. The planned 2024-25 eradication program will enclose regions of the island with temporary fencing, and use marksmen and scent-tracking dogs to completely clear the fallow deer from each successive fenced region. Stole someone elses comment as they gave the proper information
I am doing no fact checking but you answered a lot of the questions the article skirted lol
That headline reads like what I'd hear a fudd say while popping into the local gun shop.
At the scale of government, 12 M over 8 years is also effectively free. It's peanuts. Apparently local hunters have been running culls for fifty years without success. Maybe it's a good idea to try something else? Alternatively, 80% of the island is split into private properties with one to three acres and 200-400 feet of ocean front, [which are selling for like 500k each vacant.](https://sidneyisland.com/for-sale.html) There are [multimillion dollar cottages with airstrips.](https://www.landquest.com/listings/sidney-island-oceanfront-strata-lot-28-southern-gulf-islands) It would be satisfying if they just assessed all the stratas like 100k each over the 8 years of the program for the costs, but they probably legally can't.
In Saskatchewan they issue extra tags for certain zones that are overpopulated. I think they are free but I might be wrong about that.
The target here is an invasive species of deer that's been crushing the native black-tailed deer population and wiping out the island's Douglas fir forest ecosystem. They've tried culling with regular hunting for more than forty years - starting 1981 - but the invasive European deer keep bouncing back. Issuing extra tags hasn't been cutting it. This project's goal is to completely eradicate the invasive species to allow the native deer - and the island's forests - to recover. Unsurprisingly, the *National Post*'s headline is misleading as heck.
The listed cost is also for the entire forest restoration project of which removing the invasive deer is one part. A substantial and fairly expensive part, but not the entire project representing that whole price tag. It is *also* the entire cost of an *eight year program* not the cost of one instance of action taken by Parks Canada. $1.3m per year is pennies out of the federal budget; government environmental agencies spend money like that on rain gear and basic field equipment annually because there are so many people to equip. Hiring out some specialists to come solve the Fallow deer problem so proper forest rehabilitation work can proceed is cheap-as.
That explains it. Thank you for that info.
[удалено]
Maybe try to find out information instead of going off a post by someone itching to push nonsense in an effort to be “mad at government.” The fact that it’s an r/Canada post should be a hint. Read this: (I quoted parts in my response to another comment below if you don’t want to go to the link) https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z
[link](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/455835055470805014/1245264225123700770/Screenshot_20240528-233508.png?ex=66581e2f&is=6656ccaf&hm=88db0b4dff8e0bb8cadfe898d524762f3e21b1d5c2441ec6b94730fcdd3eebc6&) They tried that.
I agree as well. Unless there's some reason why not to (IE, only certain specific deer have to be picked out by an expert of somesort, or the deer remains have to be taken care of in a certain way due to disease concerns), I dont see why they couldnt just issue some one time use tags.
The post is nothing but an effort to create outrage, it’s not a cull but an eradication of a deer not native to North America that is harming the ecosystem. “In the early 20th century, settlers brought fallow deer—a species not native to North America—from England to the Southern Gulf Islands for farming and sport hunting. The population grew rapidly, and ecological issues resulting from abundance and extensive browsing were soon apparent. Fallow deer live in larger groups and eat a broader variety of food than native black-tailed deer. Since their introduction to Sidney Island, fallow deer have eaten much of the forest’s native understory, including important food and medicine plants that First Nations Peoples have harvested there for generations. Scarcely any tree seedlings survive longer than a few years before being eaten, resulting in a forest of mature trees, with few young trees to take their place. In the absence of native trees and shrubs, invasive species like English hawthorn, Scotch broom, and non-native grasses have spread.” And not only have other methods been considered, but used for 40 years to no avail: “The Sidney Island community spent over 40 years conducting annual hunts and periodic culls. Despite these efforts, the fallow deer population repeatedly rebounded, and the forest continues to show signs of poor health.“ https://parks.canada.ca/agence-agency/bib-lib/rapports-reports/~/link.aspx?_id=B84E6A3DAAEB4A90B765F4388D7B1C4A&_z=z
[link](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/455835055470805014/1245264225123700770/Screenshot_20240528-233508.png?ex=66581e2f&is=6656ccaf&hm=88db0b4dff8e0bb8cadfe898d524762f3e21b1d5c2441ec6b94730fcdd3eebc6&) According to Parks Canada, the local community has attempted several culls over the last 40 years and the deer population has always rebounded. If just issuing additional tags or declaring open season would have worked then it would have by now
The fact that they were allowed to do it with prohibited firearms, extended magazines, and suppressors is actually insane
I don't get the down votes. Government says there is no legitimate use, and then hires someone to make legitimate use with them. No reason a Canadian company couldn't do this.
It's because the government lied to you
All while shooting out of helicopters too!
> Employing foreign sharpshooters in helicopters to cull deer inhabiting a small coastal B.C. island could cost taxpayers over $12 million Oh fuck, hiring foreign helicopter snipers to eradicate your enemy is too metal to not spend 12M on it. Like I get that there are a lot of practical reasons the sharpshooter plan makes more sense than handing out hunting tags, but lets not forget that it's also just really really cool.
For what's being done $12 million is also *cheap*. That's nothing compared to the federal budget. It would cost that much for the government to do it themselves, and that's not the price just for the deer stuff that's the estimate for the *whole project*.
Is there enough hunters capable of achieving the necessary goal? Can we trust all of those hunters to properly deal with the remains? Genuine questions, not trying to throw shade.
Isn’t that why deer tags are sold? So hunters can harvest a certain amount of animals every year. Why don’t they just sell more tags? Edit: Deer tags pay for conservation and wardens
Bureaucracy at its finest