Conference vmsnet::hunting$note:hunting

1112.0. "NH Moose/Anti's" by IRWIN::OUELLETTE () Fri Dec 20 1991 10:31

 The following article was published in Nashua magazine by Network Publications
October issue. The article is actually two pieces interleafed. One is the
account of a moose collision by the victim, the other which I'll print here is
the moose hunt/population issue.




                                DANGER! MOOSE

     Animal rights proponents and New Hampshire Fish and Game officials are
sparring again. What else is new? you ask.
 
     Yes, animal rights activists and those charged with managing wild animals
in this state have had some very negative things to say to one another over the
years. But seldom has the debate been as hot and heavy as it has since the New
Hampshire moose hunt started in 1988. And it is not showing signs of abatement.

     The latest wrinkle in the dispute involves the bloating number of road
kills of moose in the state. Fish and Game personnel argue that these kills
serve as a large measure of proof that the moose herd in New Hampshire,
contrary to the contentions of animal activists, is growing in leaps and bounds
and is more than capable of supporting a hunt.

     The activists, though , scoff at the road kill numbers, insisting that
such statistics show only that people are not watching where, and how fast,
they are going. They add that Fish and Game authorities still haven't provided
an accurate count of the herd, and they want moose hunting stopped.
  
     The number of moose/vehicle collisions in the state has risen from 49 in
1985 to 170 in 1990, says state moose biologist Kristine Bontaites. This year,
the number is at 120 through August 8. And the State has posted a huge "Brake
for Moose" sign on the Kancamagus Highway near Conway.
   
     "We feel that [the number of animals] can support the hunt," says
Bontaites. "An increase in road kill is usually an indication that the herd is
increasing."

     Fish and gave estimates fix the number of moose in the state at
approximately 4,200 animals. This figure is up from about 1,600 in 1982,
authorities say. Three years ago, the state instituted a moose hunt for the
first time since 1901, as 75 permits were doled out via lottery. But this year,
the number of permits was increased by Fish and Game to 100, and the state
legislature also raised the length of the moose season from three days to 10
days.

     Such goings-on make animal activists feel that they're losing ground. But
Bontaites cautions that the road kills spell trouble for human beings, as well
as animals:"We had three people killed this spring." She adds that the Fish and
Game Department has become aware of several injuries to motorists and to
vehicles from moose mishaps.

     Bontaites points to a study done in Alaska which fish and game management
personnel found, through insurance companies, that the average cost of damage
to a vehicle when a moose collision occurs is $4,000. Bontaites stresses that
it is highly advisable that motorists decrease speed as quickly as possible
when they encounter highway signs that warn of the presence of moose.

     None of the Gish and Game rhetoric has fazed animal activists, however.
Barbara Bosignore, a vegitarian and one of the leading anti-hunters in the
state, doesn't buy the road-kill logic of the department. "I don't think we
should go out and hunt animals. If road kills are a problem, why not shoot
horses, cats and dogs, too?"

     And to Elinor Ware, president of the New Hampshire Animal Rights League,
there is no moose overpopulation in New Hampshire, and highway safety, not
hunting, should be employed to decrease the road kills. "Fish and Game is in
existence entirely to support the hunters and trappers," Ware says. "They are
not there to protect the animals. There is no need to have a moose hunt"

     Asked under what circumstances she would admit that there were adequate
numbers of moose to justify a hunt, Ware responds, " I wouldn't say there were
adequate numbers if there were a million moose."


Well there you have it folks! What a mentality were dealing with hunh?

    
    That's the usual replie you would expect to get from one of those
    people. It's my way or no way...what a dork.
    
    Hey, maybe we'll get lucky and she'll ram a moose. Better yet, maybe
    a big bull will ram her...........
    
    Rick
    

I think I know how I'd like to see him ram her!!!  8')

I think that we're damn lucky that the paper ran that article.  It
made the anti crowd look like a bunch of knee-jerk reactionairies.

The way that I saw it, the article depicted the State wildlife
agency to be making an honest, professional effort to manage the
game herd by using as much information as they could get.  The
quotes from the antis portrayed them as being extremely close
minded people who discounted anything and everything that didn't
agree with their views.

I really think that if a person who has no particular conviction
one way or another were to read this article, they would get the
same impression.  You guys ought to be writing letters to the
editor thanking the paper for running that story.

There was definitely more than one message in that news story.

Jerry

    I agree with Jim.  Read the last sentence of .0 and tell me how any
    intelligent person could keep a straigh face.
    
    This article did more harm to the anti's than anything I could have
    written.
    
    Mark.