Lets all create more wildlife together as a team

[Ohwildwon]

The concerns on how deactivation would affect hunters are valid and understand not wanting more restrictions

So rather than just hearing the opposition to these suggestions it would be interesting to hear alternative solutions from those that oppose any new restrictions

I think we can all agree we would like to see healthy game populations it's how it is achieved that is the debate that needs to be resolved

Certain FSR's could be handicapped road hunters only...

You know, a gate that opens with a hunting compass card! LOL

[f350ps]

Deactivation of roads is not suggested to slow the impact of regulated hunting but unfortanatly it would be a by product

The target is to lower the impact on unregulated hunters

Nail meet hammer, well said, thanks for that! K

[Wild one]

Nail meet hammer, well said, thanks for that! K

Unfortunately to achieve desired results sometimes you got to suffer for them

This is offen why it is difficult to get things accomplished people want results but people are not willing to give anything up or risk change.

[Wild one]

If people think it is only those who road hunt that would be impacted think again many who hike drive into the bush a long ways before they start on foot.

[Slinky Pickle]

Even in my local area I have seen more FSRs created while unused ones are still in place. Like as been said, the lineal distance of FSR per hectare has increased immensely over the last 20 years. Road obliteration is expensive and therefor the forest companies aren't huge fans of the idea but I really think that there should be a finite number of kilometers of FSRs in a given region. Add another road, get rid of one... just that simple. There should be a logical limit to the amount of acceptable access in any given area but beyond that there needs to be some control.

Just my $CAN0.02

[goatdancer]

The idea of deactivation has to be approached carefully. There are lot of us who are 70+ and need a lot of help to recover and transport game for who knows how far back to our vehicles. I have no problem hiking a few kms in search of game but the old body has a problem with carrying or dragging the carcass those same kms back to my truck. That will definitely be a dilemma that needs to be addressed in any large scale deactivation.

[Ourea]

The idea of deactivation has to be approached carefully. There are lot of us who are 70+ and need a lot of help to recover and transport game for who knows how far back to our vehicles. I have no problem hiking a few kms in search of game but the old body has a problem with carrying or dragging the carcass those same kms back to my truck. That will definitely be a dilemma that needs to be addressed in any large scale deactivation.

This is well understood by those tasked with the fix.

None of it will happen without funding, a sound plan and credibility...
Something the hunting community has neither of as all they do is argue over what the best nail is to use.
Yet no one is supporting building the hammer to drive the nails. Nails are usless without a hammer.

[Rob Chipman]

^^^^ Unregulated hunting. That there's gonna be a tough, tough nut to crack. We need to address it, but I'm not sure how. What a minefield.

I will say this: I believe scientists who study wildlife think that higher road density is an overall negative. There's data to support the claim in certain instances, and it would seem self-evident to be detrimental to wildlife populations. I bring that up to reinforce the idea that science would underly our management decisions whether it's roads or predators or whatever.

[goatdancer]

This is well understood by those tasked with the fix.

None of it will happen without funding, a sound plan and credibility...
Something the hunting community has neither of as all they do is argue over what the best nail is to use.
Yet no one is supporting building the hammer to drive the nails. Nails are usless without a hammer.

That I agree with wholeheartedly. I guess if us old crocs need to figure out a way to bring out a beastie it will be a plus if it will end up helping to increase the animal population. My back hates you but it will have to suck it up.

[two-feet]

^^^^ Unregulated hunting. That there's gonna be a tough, tough nut to crack. We need to address it, but I'm not sure how. What a minefield.

I will say this: I believe scientists who study wildlife think that higher road density is an overall negative. There's data to support the claim in certain instances, and it would seem self-evident to be detrimental to wildlife populations. I bring that up to reinforce the idea that science would underly our management decisions whether it's roads or predators or whatever.

Yes. Even understated. At this point the only thing written in stone is the FN right to harvest without restriction, accountability or data collection. As I stated earlier the strongest play possible would be to get our FN communities as allies, not enemies. I am not sure how to go about it, but if a group with no objective other than helping wildlife were to facilitate the natives to put pressure on govt to create more wildlife then you would see the NDP bending over backwards. Then we could bicker about allocation.