Loading...
The Rural Voice, 1989-11, Page 66RAINY R1VER Federation of Agriculture NEWSLETTER Box 416, Emo, Ontario POW 1 E0 807-482-2051 • The Rural Voice is provided to Rainy River Federation members by the RRFA. Changeableweather dominated the Rainy River District through early Oc- tober. It was cool, warm, sunny, cloudy with showers, and there were even some snow flurries as weather patterns changed rapidly. Generally though, everyone is pleased and has been taking advantage of the good days to finish up on the fall chores. District cattlemen have been busy sorting cattle, as potentially)iigh stocker prices and an abundance of feed give everyone the opportunity to choose be- tween selling and expanding the herd. It would appear that many District pro- ducers plan to do both. But the expanding beef herds will have to do without the services of Gary Sliworsky, District red meat advisor. OMAF did not renew Gary's contract as red meat advisor for northwestern On- tario. District farmers will miss the sup- port and advice that Gary always pro- vided, along with his personal concern for District producers. OMAF officials in Guelph have once again shown their lack of under- standing of the unique problems of northwestern Ontario by stationing our red meat advisor hundreds of miles to the east. As Manitoba and Saskatchewan join Alberta in funding even more assistance to help their beef industry survive, the powers that be at OMAF continue to ignore problems here in Ontario. Rainy River District cattlemen are shifting their marketing emphasis to the west but may find themselves at the tail end of a subsidized western beef market. The Rainy River District Federation of Agriculture continues to press for action from the Ministry of Natural re- sources for better control of nuisance wildlife in the District. • District residents are tiring of suffer- ing loss and damage from the uncon- trolled nuisance wildlife. Municipal roads, farm land, and private property are being flooded by the ever-expanding beaver population. Township employ- ees and private citizens are waging an expensive but losing battle against these eager wood -choppers now occupying 64 THE. RURAL VOICE nearly every ditch and stream in the Rainy River District. However, it requires skill and exper- tise to control the nuisance wildlife humanely. Many skilled trappers have left the profession because of low eco- nomic returns. Beaver have become a growing problem in many parts of Ontario since falling fur prices have discouraged managed fur harvesting. Many munici- palities have been paying bounties while some harassed citizens are using very undesirable methods in an attempt to control the nuisance wildlife. The RRFA believes that paying bounties is not the proper solution. We do not wish to exterminate the wildlife population, but merely to control spe- cific problems. All concerned must work together in an effort to control these nuisance ani- mals humanely. Besides the beaver, wolves, bears, and smaller nuisance wildlife harass District residents. This summer farmers have again been losing calves and sheep to marauding wolf packs. Pictured is George Hyatt, his wife Beverly, and one of the 44 sheep from their flock slaughtered this past sum- mer. Many other District farmers have been suffering like losses from the ex- panding nuisance wildlife population. In the meantime, the MNR has virtu- ally abandoned any attempt to control nuisance wildlife in the rural areas. Shrinking budgets and lenient control policies encouraged by pressure groups far removed from the problems have eliminated most wildlife control offi- cers. Responsibility for nuisance wildlife control has been passed on to area desig- nated trappers. Rising costs and falling economic returns, however, have re- duced trapping to a part-time occupa- tion for most of those interested in prac- tising control measures. As present, District municipalities administer the livestock valuation pro- gram funded by MNR. Township -ap- pointed valuators investigate livestock losses and farmers are reimbursed the market value of slain animals. Although this economic return can in no way replace the loss of herd build- ing and planning for the farmer, at least the local administration provides a per- sonal concern for their losses. More concern must be expressed for the vic- tims of nuisance wildlife damage. MNR personnel have been heard to say that it is more economical to pay farmers for livestock losses than to hire wildlife control officers. This crass atti- tude must be changed. The RRFA has presented a brief to Lyn McLeod, the Minister of Natural Resources, requesting changes to the wildlife control program. The brief says the trappers must be reimbursed ade- quately for their efforts to control the nuisance wildlife problem which has been caused by current MNR practices. The administration of the new nui- sance wildlife control program should be transferred to local municipalities. Local councils have a better understand- ing of rural problems and could desig- nate a trapper who would be certain that specific problems are controlled. This type of program, funded by the MNR, has been operating successfully in some townships in the Ottawa Valley, and should be available to all munici- palities in Ontario. To date, the Minister of Natural Resources has not responded to the brief painstakingly prepared by the RRFA Wildlife Control Committee.0