by BRIAN CLEEVE
A North Hastings area farm group is angry that the Ministry of Natural Resources is not working fast enough to implement a controlled hunt to get rid of elk they say are costing thousands of dollars in crop damage.
Elson Ruddy is a spokesperson for the 40-member North Hastings Farmers and Landowners Association, a group he describes as: “a bunch of farmers who are angry," about the fact that elk are destroying crops such as timothy, alfalfa and horse hay.
They are also unhappy with an elk protection group they say is feeding the animals weed seed and causing a problem with weeds in farmers’ fields.
<strong>Legal action</strong>
The association had considered a lawsuit for damages against the ministry. They paid $10,000 for legal opinion. Hastings County Federation of Agriculture, contributed $4,000. The legal challenge is on hold.
"Legal fees would have been more than $250,000 and the case could have dragged on in the courts for 10 to 15 years," says Ruddy. "We will achieve more through public education and opinion than through the courts."
He adds that a court case would hamper the working relationship with the MNR and concedes that the ministry has come "a long way" on the issue without legal action.
However, at some point in the future legal action may be necessary, he says.
Ruddy says his group plans to launch a web site to let people know about the devastation caused the animals.
He also says that the problems will be discussed at a meeting March 5, at the Bancroft 580 Seniors Club.
<strong>High losses</strong>
Ruddy and neighbour Dave Parks of the Bancroft area are among dozens of farmers who say they have lost money because of the elk. Parks estimates losses up to $40,000 per year. Ruddy, who left farming in 2006 because of the problem, was suffering losses up to $10,000 per year.
"We can't even sell our houses, the property values are way down," Ruddy, complains.
Parks says the animals are roaming freely near his property and destroying his timothy, alfalfa and horse hay crops. He used dogs twice a day for several weeks to drive them away.
Parks says the government introduced the animals and should take responsibility for them.
"It's not my responsibility to feed them," says Parks, adding that the provincial government needs to adopt a management plan for the animals. He also says that he wants to be reimbursed for "existing and potential losses" caused by the elk which destroyed about 20 acres of alfalfa, and horse hay.
<strong>Officials slow to act on emergency bill</strong>
Last December the provincial government passed an omnibus that would give farmers the right to "harass capture or kill marauding elk" that are damaging property.
But Ruddy says the ministry has been slow to take action although his group is having ongoing discussions with the ministry about how this should be done.
Bette Jean Crews, president of the Ontario Federation of Agriculture, says her group is pushing for a quick hunt, but the MNR has stated it will be late in 2011 before such a hunt can be scheduled.
Crews says the MNR is taking too long to implement the emergency bill.
She says the OFA also wants a compensation package for farmers who have lost crops because of the elk, which are an endangered species.
Gayle Grills, president of the 620-member Hastings County Federation of Agriculture, says her group supports a controlled hunt. "They have bred more than anyone expected."
"No one can build a fence that will stop them," she says. Grills, who lives in Quinte West near Trenton, says there are no elk in her area but believes they will be at some point.
She says that the Ontario Federation of Agriculture is working with the MNR to implement Bill 212 that "will provide compensation for farmers."
Vincent Ewing, district manager for the MNR in Bancroft, says the draft Elk Management Plan contains objectives and strategies aimed at addressing human-elk conflicts.
"The plan refers to the need for new tools to help address the impact of human-elk conflicts, such as the impact on agricultural and private lands caused by elk."
MNR is exploring opportunities to work with local landowners on an elk transmitter collaring project to help monitor the movement of local elk.
Ewing says there are no plans for an elk cull or for penning them. He adds that the MNR has been working with farmers to resolve the issue.
Jack Caddick, a member of the original implementation team that brought the elk from Elk Island, Alta, in 2000 and 2001, says the elk had been in the Bancroft about 100 years ago, but died out over the years.
"We wanted to bring them back because they had been here and because they benefit tourism," he says.
About 120 elk were brought to the Bancroft area, one of four sites in Ontario. He says there was a discussion about having a hunt if numbers reached 300, but Caddick says there was some doubt that they would even reach that figure. He estimates there are 500 elk in the area now.
Caddick, president of the Quinte Elk Restoration Committee, says much of the problem has been "overblown."
"There are only two or three farmers affected and we (his committee) have offered to compensate them for their lost hay. But they only seem interested in getting rid of the elk."
Caddick also says that a "good wire fence (six feet) will keep the elk from damaging crops."
<strong>Boost for the local economy</strong>
His committee is planning a one- week in hunt in September 2011 in the Bancroft area.
The hunt will not only help curtail the population of elk, but will also benefit the community, he says.
"The merchants will benefit because the people coming to hunt will need accommodation and food. Landowners can also make money by renting out their land for the hunt."
But Ruddy says that the Quinte Elk group cannot guarantee there will be a hunt and if there is one it would only involve 50 tags, a "drop in the bucket" compared to the number of elk that remain.
Caddick also says bus tours are coming to see elk in an area on Hartsmere Road south of McCarther's Mills, where 50 of the critters are gathered in one place.
"They are docile, people can come close enough to take photos of them."
<strong>Spreading weeds?</strong>
Ruddy’s organization complains the elk spread weeds. They say the Quinte group feeds the animals weed seed. The animals then leave behind "rampant weeds that we know nothing about" when they defecate says Parks.
But Caddick disputes that. At one time the group did use weed seed but hasn't for "a year or two." "We take corn and grind it up," he adds.
Neither Grills nor Crews say they are aware of the weed problem.<strong>BF</strong>
<strong>Clarification:</strong> Gayle Grills says there is no compensation for farmers provided for in Bill 212.
Comments have now been disabled for this story
Comments
I beg to differ with some of the content of Mr. Cleeves article.
There is no proof that Elk ever existed in the North Hastings area, outside of an old piece of antler supposedly found in the bottom of a local lake. It was conveniently found during discussions over whether or not to bring elk to the area.
As for Mr. Caddick's comments,well,at best misinformed,at worst misleading. His comments about a 6 ft high fence stopping elk proves his lack of knowledge on the subject or perhaps they were intended to deceive. My neighbor's 8 foot high buffalo fence will not even slow them down.
If Quinte Elk has stopped feeding weed seeds to the Elk in our area, it is only because we caught them with their hand in the cookie jar,and raised a fuss municipally, provincially, and federally.
Ms. Grills comments about being unaware of this also confuse me as we took our complaints to the HFA.in the very beginning.
Mr.Caddicks offer of compensation that he likes to brag about was the offer to replace a few elk damaged bales of hay.It was refused,partly from pride, and partly because it was only a band-aid offered as a cancer treatment
How dare this Caddick character trivialize the damage these critters do. How would he feel if his neighbors dairy herd of 40 or 50 cows spent every night in his crops. He would be pretty righteous and irate over that but somehow its insignificant because its our crops.Caddick, it will take a lot more than a few bales of hay for you to make reparations to the landowners of North Hastings.
My apologies, forgot to post my name to comments
Elson Ruddy
We have looked into elk-proof fences, at a quoted cost of approximately $6.00 per lineal foot. To fence our farms to keep these marauding elk out would cost us $60,000 to $100,000. per farm, a cross we cannot afford to bear. One of the basic principals of husbandry under common law, as we understand it is; no farmer need fence his crops to protect them from depredation by animals he does not own.We simply cannot afford to fence out animals we do not own,nor do we feel we should have to.
The Province of Ontario brought these critters here and released them in an area that(a) does not have enough natural habitat, and (b) no agricultural conflict policy in place. We feel this infringes on our basic human rights as citizens of Canada, and the Province of Ontario.
Why should it potentially cost us our livelihood.we did not have anything to do with bringing them here.
In this day and age when rights and freedoms are the governments favourite catch phrase, why are we being denied ours>
Elson Ruddy
At Quinte elk's feeding location vicinity, the MNR has shot 1 bull elk so far,( because of a brainworm infestation.) Apparently mature bulls have killed several calves, while competing for food. With so many elk in so small an area( and trust me there are far more than the 50 this Caddick mentions),I suspect a great many of these elk will be carrying this brainworm infestation when they move out in the spring. Perhaps they will move south and infect the Quinte area farms with this parasite, then maybe we will see some action!
Brian, I am very disappointed with your failed attempt to get the truth out to the public regarding the real problem we farmers and landowners are facing due to elk damage and predation to our properties. You obviously did not do your home work regarding the severity of this problem.
I sent you an e-mail on January 31st with my comments responding to the Elk Management Plan and an insert from Bill 212 The Good Government Act Fish & Wildlife Conservation Act Amendments.
The only reason the elk removal authorization process came about was because North Hastings and area farmers could not sustain the losses to our crops, stored hay and fence damage any longer and we demanded that the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Provincial Government do something immediately to mitigate these damages.
Former Minister of Natural Resources, Donna Cansfield, stepped up to the plate and made changes in the fish & wildlife conservation act to lessen the burden on farmers by enabling the issuance of authorizations to harass, capture or kill elk in the protection of property.
With the help of Ontario Federation of Agriculture and strong representation from Hastings Federation of Agriculture and private landowners we fought like hell to get a resolution to this problem.
The elk removal authorization process is only a small but very important step to alleviate the emergency crisis that we are in.
We are hoping the Provincial Government and Ministry of Natural Resources will quit dragging their feet and get this act implimented immediately along with an agriculture/elk conflict policy and compensation to farmers for their losses due to elk predation.
A controlled hunt will be of very little benefit to farmers as we need emergency action to keep this invasive species away from our crops and livestock immediately.
I clearly informed you that I had been losing up to approximately $10,000. each year for the last four years. I did not state that I was losing $40,000. per year.
Therefore, Brian, you receive failing marks for this article.
You obviously weren't listening.
Dave Parks
Where is the tourism dollars? Other than Joe N, who is making anything from this? Joe said he made $600. last year from bus trips. WOW! And he is the only one. As naibors, we would like to know where all the antlers that drop off these bulls every year go,I have heard they are worth megabucks on the blackmarketand when they are losing them there is a hell of a lot more than 50 elk there
To try to clarify some misquotes and such: Yes there is no compensation in Bill 212. I doubt that compensation has even seriously been considered, particularly to anything near the extent of the damages that are being done. Fencing is not a realistic solution. The kind of fence that will restrain an elk just isn't financially possible. I am glad that there's finally a provision in 212 for harassment and possibly killing elk that are causing damage, at least this is finally something to give the farmers in North Hastings some cause for optimism, but it's nowhere near a full solution. There needs to be compensation, and there needs to be recognition that these elk just should not have been allowed to be present in this area, particularly in the unsustainable numbers the population has been allowed to grow to.
If Jack Caddick's quotes are accurately represented, it's VERY disappointing to me that the Quinte Elk group would try to mislead people. There are far more than just 2 or 3 farmers being affected by this. There is even some significant crop damage now occurring south of Highway 7 in Hastings County, in fact I can think of at least 3 farmers with significant losses in the southern half of the county without even getting into the main area of damage where it is much more widespread.
As for the weed seed issue, this has been discussed for at least a year now. If the elk group have indeed stopped sending weed seeds north than that is a positive sign, however, the damage has been done. Perhaps we need some stronger recognition in this province that packaging seed plant screenings and elevator and feed plant leftovers and exporting them to other areas that haven't had the same weed concerns or haven't yet had the same types of weeds in their areas isn't an appropriate thing to do. It certainly doesn't seem like a very neighbourly thing to do to someone you claim to want to cooperate with.
I do hope that the province can move forward as quickly as possible with 212.
Dale Ketcheson
Past-president
Hastings Federation of Agriculture
Caddick, "overblown"? You stated only two or three farmers are affected. There are a lot more than two or three farmers affected as well as landowners with gardens, trees and shrubs being destroyed by these domesticated nuisance elk. How would you like to have to rake two to three wheel barrel loads of elk dung off of your lawn before you can even mow your grass? Or put your children in the car and drive them to the end of the driveway to catch the school bus during the elk rut? Your erroneous comments in the article are an attempt to pull the wool over the eyes of others.
Dave Parks
Caddick, we are fighting for the survival of our 3rd and 4th generation family farms. We are suffering from physical, mental and financial ruin. Your comments are misleading and your actions are questionable and this only compounds our problems. Shame on you for trying to discredit such a serious problem.
Dave Parks
It is with disbelief, dismay and disdain that I read this "Elk good for tourism bad for farming". While working the fields of our 100 year old family farm, I can look across the hills of North Hastings to the neighbouring farms where this man-made tragedy has unfolded for the past 10 years.
Working with my fellow farmers and neighbours for the past 5 to 6 years, we have mounted a campaign of education and a lobby of relief for those effected farmers. Our efforts have been met with both successes and setbacks. The Royal Assent of Bill 212, in late December 2009, was a recognition on behalf of the Ministry that they did indeed perpetuate a travesty. The North Hastings Farmers and Landowners Association in conjuction with the OFA and HFA will be pushing hard in the next few months to develope the implementation policy of Bill 212.
My dismay and disbelief are directed toward Mr. Jack Caddick. The fact that a well-educated man, President (Quinte Elk Restoration Committee) could try to negate and trivialize this tragedy with statements of "overblown", "2 or 3 farmers", "good wire fence (6 feet)" only show his astute lack of knowledge (ignorance) and complete lack of undo diligence. My disdain is also directed toward Mr. Caddick's complete and calous disregard and disrespect of the farmers and landowners this elk restoration committee has effected. These feelings will only be amplified by my fellow neighbours in days to come. One can only wonder, Mr. Caddick, if you also slew the facts equally, with nil regard to the real story, when standing in front of your own group.
As we farmers of North Hastings fight for the very survival of our family farms while you sit down to that T-Bone steak dinner; maybe you will give pause and think about where your food really does come from. If not, God willing, you will choke.
Lynn J. Davis
Vice-President, Hastings Federation of Agriculture
North Hastings Farmers and Landowners Association
Owner/Operator, Windy Wold Farm
It would be nice if Quinte elk would post a complete list of members,so we would know what businesses in the Quinte area to boycott. I wonder if this travesty is being perpetuated by the entire membership or by just a few at the top of the Quinte elk food chain. I would urge folks from the north part of the county, to avoid doing business anywhere in the Quinte Area, until the Quinte elk membership becomes clearer, and we know who to boycott.
It would seem to me, that, The Quinte Elk Restoration Society,would like to stock their own private hunting grounds with elk to hunt, so that some "good old boys" from the south part of the county can come up here in the fall and hunt their trophy elk. What does it matter if they step on a few locals in the process,heck, who cares about them.What if a few farms are destroyed in the process,what if the whitetail population is decimated,who cares, they don't live here anyway. Who cares if children can play in their own yard or walk to the school bus without an armed guard, certainly not Quinte Elk or their MNR confederates. This entire restoration project was shoved down the throats of the people of North Hastings and Area with no regard for us, our freedom to enjoy our land,the safety of our children, or our land values. All this so a few "good old boys" from the Quinte Area can shoot a trophy elk close to home. Doesn't sound fair to me, does it to you?
The 2010 calf crop alone, using the mnr's own numbers (which by the way are always at least 20% low ) will be well over 100. We believe the true number to be closer to 200. If the first hunt has less than 100 tags available the entire process becomes a joke.
We have tried to work with the mnr but are always excluded from any meeting where things like this are discussed.
We call on the new Minister of Natural Resources, Linda Jeffries, to stand up and take control of her ministry. We need some "top down" involvement on this issue. It becomes more and more obvious that the mnr on any other level are more concerned with their career and being "upwardly mobile " than they are with the landowners or even the health and welfare of the elk herd.
Elk are dying weekly at the Quinte Elk feeding station, the mnr does nothing. The elk are destroying farmers new seed hay daily,again the mnr does nothing. Even "Ranger Rick Rosatte" the mnr's own elk guru has said since 2006 that there are too many elk here, the herd needs to be culled for its own health, again, you guessed it the mnr does nothing.
Come on Ms.Jeffries, call on your vast knowledge of our natural resources acquired in your own riding, Brampton is it not,and do something as it becomes more and more obvious that no one below you will.
If you think this sounds bitter,we are. If you think we are scared and angry,we are,people on the edge of bankruptcy because of this mismanaged sham get that way.
Elson Ruddy
Angry and Disgruntled Farmer
This article can not possibly be one of Brian Cleeve's better efforts. Careless quotes, seemingly obtained by telephone, pieced together with some basic facts, does not even come close to acknowledging the nuisance problems created by roaming pods of elk in a long established agricultural area. It is not only livestock farmers who are significantly impacted but also enterprises like christmas tree farms and market gardens. Fences are routinely destroyed and crops are decimated, over and over again.
Non-agricultural rural residents are unable to keep up with landscaping as their lawns are buried under elk dung and shrubs, trees, and flowers are decimated. Children are unable to safely wait for the school bus at the end of their own driveway because the area has become a thoroughfare for elk.
Farmers, more than any other sector of society, are well aware of the environmental limits on their activities. The MNR and various elk foundations (defunct as well as still in existence) however, seem to be blithely unaware of what their initiative is doing to an agricultural area that historically has always been able to support and sustain itself.
Jack Caddick is quoted as saying that the elk provide benefits to tourism. Can he provide figures for how much the local economy has profited from this endeavour? I am certain it is not even enough to compensate the numerous farmers sustaining damages year after year, much less be a driving force for the region. Tourism benefits should not come at the expense of the agricultural industry. It is inexcusable for Mr. Caddick to infer that only two or three farmers are impacted and the entire issue is overblown. Compensation offered for lost hay is a slap in the face to the dedicated farmers of North Hastings when their damages far exceed stored crops. By the way, has Mr. Caddick priced out fencing? Why should the exorbitant cost of predator fencing fall on the farmer? The farmers have been on the losing end of this situation for almost ten years now!
Liability for livestock running at large, the repeated aggravation of rebuilding and maintaining fences, the loss of income and the inability to be self-supporting - these far outweigh any benefits that the elk may provide.
Vince Ewing, district manager for the MNR in Bancroft, says the draft Elk Management Plan refers to the need for new tools to help address the impact of human-elk conflicts. Had the MNR, along with the elk foundations, done their homework before the introduction of the elk, they would have found out that there is no chance for peaceful co-existence with a species that by its very nature is destructive to the surrounding ecology. Looking for new tools now seems a little late. Talk about closing the barn door after the horse is gone!
The very real threat of the spread of disease by the elk to domestic livestock has not even been addressed, much less acknowledged in the draft Elk Management Plan. Who will pay for the cost of this disturbing possibility, should this become the next pandemic to hit agriculture in North Hastings and elsewhere?
I would like to take this opportunity to invite Mr. Cleeve and Mr. Caddick to the meeting scheduled for March 5 in Bancroft at the Seniors Club. It would give both a chance to meet and speak with farmers, landowners, and residents, as well as possibly take a tour of the affected area to see firsthand what a disgrace this entire project has been and how much it has hurt the local economy, not to mention the environment.
Klaasje Bergveld
Secretary
Hastings Federation of Agriculture
-- You Be The Judge --
Rick Rosatte, Professor at Trent University and Senior Research Scientist with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources in charge of the elk project made the following comments in November 2009.
Elk don't get along particularly well with deer, with whom they compete for food, and they can run them out of an area to the dismay of hunters.
Elk can also present a hazard to motorists. Their size makes them more dangerous than deer as they can do much more damage to a vehicle and its occupants, and like deer during the rut, they are most active just after sunrise and before sunset, when visibility is fading.
Rosatte advises people who see the animal to give it a wide berth, to drive with caution in areas where elk have been sighted and not to attract the animals to their property as this not only causes the animals to lose their fear of humans but also spreads disease between populations that congregate in the same place for food.
I would never approach a bull elk during the rut. The worst thing you can do is try and feed them, He said.
Three years ago, Rosatte's opinion was that the province consider a limited elk hunt following the 2006 aerial survey which counted about 300 elk in the Bancroft/North Hastings herd. His concern was about the abundance of bulls and that they are starting to spar outside of the rut -- an indication that their numbers should be cut down slightly. A hunt would benefit the herds health.
Rosatte also said that their funding ran out last year, so we can only guess at this year's numbers, but our recent mild winter is cause for optimism.
We say, shame on our Government for even considering introducing elk into the province and not having proper funding and knowledge in place to properly manage an elk herd or establishing an agriculture/elk conflict policy before introducing such an invasive species.
Double shame for the Ministry of Natural Resources to totally ignore the facts that their lead scientist, Rick Rosatte, informed them of three years ago. Elk are being killed outside of the rut by the agressive bulls at the location where the Quinte Elk Restoration Committee has been feeding elk for the last several years. As well more incidents of elk are having to be put down with significant symptoms of brainworm. This should be enough proof for Jack Caddick and his committee of Quinte Elk Restoration to stop feeding these elk immediately.
Dave & Penny Parks
North Hastings Area Farmers
& Landowners Association
Hi Dave, my name is Krris Nahrgang, and I am the Chief of the Kawartha Nishnawbe First Nations in Burleigh Falls. We have the right to hunt the Elk, anytime of year, but we need to stay below Bancroft. Are any of your members interested in having the Elk taken off of their properties. Thanks, Chief Kris Nahrgang
We are farmers in our 70's.We have farmed in this area all of our lives. When we started farming, we had the support of our government. The mnr paid a bounty on nuisance wolves and bears. The ag. ministry as well as the mnr were there to support our way of life.
Now wolves that kill our livestock are a protected species,and the mnr has brought absolute devastation to our community with transplanted elk who roam our farms at will destroying fences,crops, and stored feed.
Over one million acres of farmland has disappeared in the so called "Golden Horseshoe" alone in the last 15 years. Instead of being self sufficient for food, Ontario only produces 15% of what we consume. Howcome? you might ask? Well disappearing farmland is one reason, but we feel unreasonable government is mostly to blame. Farmers and food producers are regulated to death in Ontario,as far as what pesticide,herbicide,fertilizer,etc; we can use,or even which slaughterhouse can process our animals.The markets reaction to this,is to import food from areas that are not so stringently policed. Consumers are protected only from what is produced in Ontario.
Now they transplant hundreds of disease carrying, fencebreaking,crop destroying animals into rural Ontario to drive the perhaps final nail into the coffin, on a way of life stretching back hundreds of years in this province
Wake up government before it is too late! Rural Ontario may not have as many votes as metro Toronto, but we could sure use a little support right now.
Allan and Winnie Kuno
Farmers from New Carlow
(before it became R.R.#1
Maple Leaf Ontario)
Why can't you harvest the elk in the same manner as a herd of beef cattle?
I understand that the elk are protected but now that the herd size has increased it doesn't need protection just harvesting but controlled as a farmer would a beef herd.
I would suggest having the controls on the herd reduced so that some of the herd could be brought into some of the farms in the area and harvested like beef cattle.
This would avoid law suits that only help lawyers and the meat could be sold to not only supermarkets but high end restaurants in Toronto, Ottawa and other large cities.
Good luck.
If anyone ever hit the nail on the head it is this letter. Thanks Allan and Winnie. I wish you were alone in your problem, but it is the same in the Kootenays in BC.
Elk rule and farmers suffer.
John Fraser,
Box 243,
New Denver, B.C.
Jack Caddick, you had one statement correct. We are interested in getting rid of the elk.
As far as your offer to compensate us with a few round bales of hay, Mervin Kuno and Jeremiah Amos were quite concerned about the quality of hay they would be receiving to feed their registered belgian horses and cattle. Perhaps having your members appear at the farm of Jeremiah Amos with rakes and shovels and wheel barrels to remove the massive amount of elk dung from the children's play ground would have been a more acceptable offer and gesture. Once your members have completed that task they could go from farm to farm picking weeds that had been spread to our farms through your feeding process. Then continue to pick up litter such as coffee cups, beer bottles and garbage etc... left behind by the elk site-seers that think our farms are zoos and are invading our privacy. If you are sincerely interested in giving us a helping hand please stop feeding and domesticating the elk immediately.
This is a plea to other farmers and/or landowners anywhere in the province. We are in a fight for our very existence here.
Our Provincial Government along with a few special interest groups decided that it would be nice to have elk in the province. A short time later, with no impact studies, 125 elk were transported to the North Hastings area and released. Days later our problems began.
A decade later they are still working on an elk management plan. The population now exceeds 600.Every farm in the area, if not already under siege from these animals are being threatened.
The scary thing is, what is next? The wild turkey program is creating nightmares for some farmers, we have elk,heaven only knows what or where is the next disaster will be.
Please,we need your support,call E-mail,or write your MPP and express your concern,it is happening to us it could very well happen to you.
It was with a certain disappointment that I read this article. Brian Cleeve starts out by saying the farmers of North Hastings are angry. Well, Mr. Cleeve, it is not that the farmers are so angry, it is that they have suffered significantly from the importation of the elk. They are frustrated by the officials in the various provincial government ministries lack of support and respect for a situation they (the government) created. And in all of this there is an amazing amount of believable misinformation being put out by people who are in positions of relative importance in the groups responsible for bringing the elk to Ontario.
One major piece of misinformation is in reference to the elk as being an indigenous species of Ontario. To date, the only archaeological evidence of elk in Ontario are five sets of 5000 bones found in Sarnia. There were also elk seen up around Lake Superior in the latter part of the 1700’s. There were elk brought to Eastern Ontario in the early 1900’s and in the 1930’s. Both of the herds did not survive. There is no physical or archaeological evidence that elk lived in Eastern Ontario. Eastern Ontario was part of the land settled by the Aboriginal Nations of the Woodlands Area. There is no mention in story or artefact from these cultures that referenced the elk as being part of their lives. No archaeological evidence of elk has been found in this area of Ontario beyond a ½ set of 500 year old antlers found at the bottom of a lake. If elk were here in the last 5000 years, there would be a lot more physical evidence of their occupation in this area.
Mr. Caddick claims that he and his group brought the elk here so that the North Hastings area would benefit from increased tourism. First of all, why does the Quinte Elk foundation care about the economic health of North Hastings? Secondly, the elk were originally destined for the Haliburton area until it was deemed unsuitable due to the lack of open grazing areas. Third, what tourism? Farmers are not going to welcome tourists to their farms to climb their fences and tromp their fields and crops. They are not going to build “viewing towers.” They are not going to welcome strangers to hunt on their land. And they are not going to be happy to clean up garbage from tourists, having their farm animals scarred and their lives disrupted by strangers. Farmers are not going to receive any financial benefit from the elk.
Based on the established birth/survival rates, current estimates indicate that there are closer to 900 elk in the North Hastings area as opposed to the claimed 500. That is nearly three times the target number considered sustainable in the area and required to institute a hunt. Now the elk are beginning to sicken and die in areas that are overpopulated by the elk.
Sadly, Mr. Caddick, does not see beyond his own views. He says a few farmers are affected. In fact, many people and farms are being affected, that is why there are more than 40 people who have joined the North Hastings and Area Farmers and Landowners Association. He offers replacement hay for those two or three farmers. What he does not see are the larger issues; the lost grain, hay and straw crops, the damaged fences, the financial losses and the time lost to replace and repair the elk damage. Not to mention the need to put new and different herbicides on the fields to get rid of the new weeds introduced to the North Hastings Area by the Quinte Elk Foundation. Feeding weed seeds to the elk over the last ten years was not a great idea.
In the end, I wonder how the farmers south of Hwy 7 will feel when the elk migrate their way. How happy will they be standing at their gates guarding their children from the elk as they wait for the school bus? What will they think as they survey the elk damage to their fields, crops and fence? And just so you all can know, all of these things have happened here in the Bancroft area. In addition to that, people have been injured by the stampeding of horses when the MNR helicopters tried to herd and tag elk while they were eating alongside the cow and horse pasture.
Farmers as Victims of the Elk was written by Carol Counts
A very simple question needs to be asked and answered by someone in this process.The Rocky Mountain Elk Federation spearheaded the drive to bring elk into Ontario. They spearheaded fundraising across the province. Where are they now? The Ontario chapter is closed and they are gone.
How much money was raised,and who if anyone kept track of it. Whenever I ask this question,doors get shut in my face.You be the judge,am I out of line,is it really none of my business,or should someone make a public accounting? I know if I or an organization I belonged to worked our butts off to raise funds for this project I would want an answer to this Question. Just today, I was told that the trailers purchased to transport elk to Ontario are also gone south.
Something smells funny about the whole process,and as with any fund raising project involving hundreds of thousands of dollars(a lot of it cash) someone needs to step forward and provide an accounting of just how those dollars were spent.
Your publication is not the first I have submitted this story to.
I have even asked Government agencies for an answer.No one has printed this to date and no agency has answered me. I don't expect you will print it either,but I will keep on until someone does.
Elson Ruddy
How can these elk be an endangered species?The opportunity to bring the elk here was the result of overpopulation elsewhere,wasn't it?
Also,I was told that if we ran out of round hay bales then the Quinte group would provide some hay to feed the cattle and horses.They were not interested in the crop loses or even replacing the hay bales destroyed by the elk,ONLY IF WE RAN SHORT!
There was no commitment that the hay would as good a quality hay as we lost.
Rick
For everyone's info, the OFAH recently released a postion paper on the elk problem. Not surprisingly, the report did NOT recommend that the government pay for fencing. The report did NOT recommend that landowners be allowed to destroy elk that were damaging crops or property.
Instead, the OFAH's recommend solution was to allow a controlled hunt, so that populations could be sustained at farmer's expense. The OFAH is licking its lips at the prospect of providing its members with hunting opportunities to bag grain-fed elk.
The O.F.A.H has taken a position on this that I cannot understand.Do they not realize how many hunting opportunities are dependent on the goodwill of farmers? I for one am going to stand with my brother farmers and refuse any OFAH member permission to hunt on my land until they change their position on this. I urge each and every farmer to do the same as well as email ed reid@ofah.org and let him know how you feel
has anyone seen or heard elk in haliburton i believe i heard one in july 2012
Post new comment