Originally Posted by 243plus
Fair point about stocking, however, if you read the individual sections of the background particular bull trout, but also the other species mentioned, that there is little question that human activity is a significant impact.
Yes. 21% of the grizzlies that died in the 5 years outlined in the study in Alberta were killed by vehicles or trains.
From pg. 30:
"Roads, vehicle traffic, and associated human activity can have a variety of substantial effects upon species and ecosystems (see reviews and hundreds of references in Trombulak and Frissell 2000, Gucinski et al. 2001, Havlick 2002, Forman et al. 2003, Coffin 2007, Fahrig and Rytwinski 2009, Beckman et al. 2010, Selva et al. 2015, Brady and Richardson 2017). "
It is not only the individual linear disturbance, but as in many things affecting habitat, cumulative effects.
I think you and I would probably agree that especially whitetail deer, but also other ungulates, are pretty resilient to population swings. Rough winter kills a lot? Twinning rates go up the next rut. The limiting factors with bull trout, grizzlies etc. are much more constraining, and what we view as little things add up quickly. I had no idea until reading some of these report the impacts of not only roads, but all linear disturbances. I was pretty skeptical at first, but the more I read about it, the more I became convinced. From a gut feeling point of view, who would think that cutlines had any negatives on critters? I always viewed them as giving a better food source for many, especially ungulates, but think about where are spring bear most likely to be seen? They love the clover on those open areas. But like I said, the more you read about the cumulative impacts (some of it in the report), the more you recognize that hey, yeah, it is an issue.
I agree, banning access is not the answer. But limiting the TYPE of access in sensitive areas is part of the answer. I would probably add that limiting the time of year may be a consideration also. As example, bull trout lay their eggs in the fall, and they hatch in the spring. Perhaps (I am speculating here, just an example) there should be curtailment of access to those spawning streams during that time? I am NOT advocating that, just giving it as an example.
My perspective as the long and short of it is that unless we want to see the type of affects we have seen of the destruction of lake shores, and often the spawning areas for many fish species, but building of cabins and then clearing the shores to get rid of weeds along the riparian areas, leaching of sewage, etc.
One cabin had little effect, the second one neither, but by the time 100 were put on a lake area, you know we had an effect. It's like the death by a 1000 cuts. We both know that is true, so when do we start mitigating our impact on habitat, or do we care?
I think most of us care. It's just that when it impacts us personally, we put our own interests above what is good for the whole. I do it, you do it, and most other people do that, especially if we are used to certain things, like camping in an area. We are all at least a bit hypocritical in that way, and I certainly will admit I've been guilty of it in the past, and probably will be in the future. It's just human nature.
|