Editor’s note: This commentary is by Sophie Bowater, who is a volunteer with Protect Our Wildlife and Green Mountain Animal Defenders. The views here are her own.
Vermont’s moratorium on the hunting of its plummeting moose population didn’t last long – only a year. And now using anecdotal information from recent deer hunter observations, the Department of Fish and Wildlife is estimating that moose numbers are higher in a section of the Northeast Kingdom than previously thought. Thus a proposal to issue 55 moose hunting permits is being proposed by DFW to the Fish and Wildlife Board.
Unlike most agencies in Vermont’s executive branch, the DFW has no authority to establish bag limits or seasons on game animals; that authority rests with the FWB (one representative per county). The FWB has no required credentials other than the unwritten rule that members hold trapping and hunting licenses. The FWB makes decisions on Vermont’s iconic wildlife species, including moose, without broad public representation on its board.
The basis for the hunt is ostensibly to reduce the moose population to below one per square mile. The belief is at this density there will be less damaging tick loads. However, if there are fewer moose, then why would these ticks not just jump on another species? Tick numbers are rising due to the effects of climate change and there’s no relief in sight. What DFW has not offered in its proposal are the results of the recent moose hunts and the impact on tick loads, pre and post hunts. Nor have they quantified the tick load in the area where the hunt is proposed to take place other than “high” nor have they identified what the change in tick load will be post hunt.
The chief reason for justifying the hunt is to reduce tick loads, yet no qualitative or quantifiable data is being presented in its recommendation for the hunt. How can a hunt be undertaken without clear data that describes pre and post hunt status? The lack of this clear data, coupled with the fact that the population “data” being used is based on anecdotal information from deer hunters’ observations from only one year, rather than actual, direct surveys of the moose population, shows that our DFW is not fulfilling their jobs and they are not working for the wildlife and the majority of Vermonters. And if the reliability of those observations were so solid as to suggest the moose population in this area were low previously, then how then does a moose population, under such stress, increase suddenly? This suggests the data being used is not reliable.
The other issue this proposal shines light upon is the state of Vermont’s wildlife governance. In Vermont, the professionals at the Department of Health adopt regulations to guide the agency’s functions – there’s not a citizen’s panel of people who have happened to visit a doctor’s office as their credentials. Nor is there a citizen’s panel at the Agency of Transportation making determinations on which roads or bridges are repaired because those citizens are credentialed with a driver’s license. Yet in the case of wildlife (game species), by law a public “resource,” citizens who represent a tiny fraction of the populace hold extraordinary power over public “resources.” In turn, this excludes all other stakeholders having an interest in wildlife.
Furthermore, there are calls for changing wildlife governance from industry leaders. The industry voice representing the interests of fish and wildlife agencies across the country is calling for agencies to transform their culture, structures, and operations, and even the staff at DFW (via a 2018 survey) indicate that DFW is not sufficiently addressing the change facing it. Currently there are two bills in the Vermont Legislature that recognize the crisis in wildlife governance and seek to bring Vermont into the 21st century.
I urge the DFW to withdraw its proposal and plan an actual survey of the moose population in that section of the Northeast Kingdom. Then they can determine the actual status of moose loads on an appropriate sample of moose. Then in the event a hunt does take place, the results of the hunt can actually be determined based on science and not crude observations and judgements. In the future I hope they’ll figure out a way to save moose without having to kill them.
