Forums36
Topics40,964
Posts558,011
Members18,506
|
Most Online3,612 Jan 10th, 2023
|
|
15 members (Theo Gallus, Jason D, Sunil, Shorthose, rjackson, Bobbss, John Folchetti, Lake8, JoshMI, LeighAnn, FishinRod, canyoncreek, Drago, Boondoggle, highflyer),
1,281
guests, and
182
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,722 Likes: 282
Lunker
|
OP
Lunker
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 5,722 Likes: 282 |
Over the last 30 years, we have had the opposite trend. Our conversion of farmland to wildlife habitat has had a dramatic positive impact on wildlife. My trapper neighbor has seen a more widespread increase in fur bearers as well which I attribute to wider adoption of conservation tillage facilitated by glyphosate-tolerant crops. Even during droughts, we have a lot of water for the wildlife on our place which I believe, in combination with development of dense cover, has kept our wildlife numbers high. The one counter trend is the prevalence of ground-nesting birds which I attribute mostly to high raccoon numbers. I am hoping fur prices will recover to incentivize trapping. I am not against others controlling predator numbers, but personally would like to see their fur go to good use. I have had to remove damaging beaver and muskrats though.
|
|
|
Moderated by Bill Cody, Bruce Condello, catmandoo, Chris Steelman, Dave Davidson1, esshup, ewest, FireIsHot, Omaha, Sunil, teehjaeh57
|
|