New Brunswick Hunting Forum banner
1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
What a shit show that department is turning into. It's too bad cuz Joe is actually a really good guy and biologist...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,759 Posts
The Human factor.. should be renamed to the Irving Factor.. ;)

---

"When asked what role forestry practices played in the decline of whitetail deer, Kennedy initially refused to comment.
"I'm not getting into that," he said.

Therein lies the problem ...

---
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
867 Posts
Wow.....it would appear Joe Wouldn't Say Chit if He had a Mouthful Kennedy needs his job a lot more then Cumberland did.
Be sure to watch the 3 minute video clip at the end....Fn pathetic!!
MUZZLED!!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,759 Posts
Totally.. just another puppet.. to bad really...
Nothing but pre-rehearsed answers... waste of tax dollars to pay his salary.. :(

Take away these peoples homes and food..
Next, throw them into the middle of a clear cut, middle of winter... let them see how well they get by..

They are worse than useless... the totalitarian regime in this province needs to end...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
153 Posts
Totally.. just another puppet.. to bad really...
Nothing but pre-rehearsed answers... waste of tax dollars to pay his salary.. :(

Take away these peoples homes and food..
Next, throw them into the middle of a clear cut, middle of winter... let them see how well they get by..

They are worse than useless... the totalitarian regime in this province needs to end...
x 1,000,000 brah...worthless politicians collecting huge paychecks to sell out the legacy of NB forests. Such a travesty!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
Has anyone heard of this?? Is anyone going??

Join us for an Interactive Session

To learn more about the science of forest renewal and herbicide use

In New Brunswick, our forests provide important economic, recreational and spiritual value. Ensuring they are sustainably managed is important to all of us.

Join three of Canada's leading scientists for a discussion moderated by Forest NB about the science of forest renewal, and the practices in use today to keep our forests growing for generations to come. Topics to be covered include wildlife, human health and safety.

Presenters
Dr. Doug Pitt
NRCAN- Canadian Forest Service
Research Scientist

Specializing in quantitative silvicultural research, Dr. Pitt has published more than 75 scientific articles, and continues to give hundreds of presentations at conferences and workshops. Ultimately, Dr. Pitt strives to provide forest managers with practical tools for crop establishment, stand tending, and remote sensing applications in forest sampling.

Dr. Dean Thompson
NRCAN - Canadian Forest Service
Research Scientist

With research interests spanning environmental chemistry, ecotoxicology and ecology Dr. Thompson primary focus is the health and sustainable management of Canada's forests. With roots in New Brunswick, Dr. Thompson has led field studies documenting the effects of glyphosate on the forest environment.

Dr. Len Ritter
University of Guelph
Professor, Environmental Science

Dr. Ritter is an expert in toxicology, offering his expertise to many national and international agencies investigating toxins found in food and consumer products. With experience working for Health Canada, the US Environmental Protection Agency, and the National Cancer Institute of Canada, Dr. Ritter also researches environmental toxins in Canadian ecosystems.

When: Wednesday, April 27th, 1:00 pm - 3:30 pm
Where: Centennial Park Lodge
125 Rotary Lodge Lane
Moncton, New Brunswick


Please RSVP by emailing [email protected] by April 22, 2016​
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I didn't attend but heard from a few people who did.

Apparently it was about as one sided as you can get. Not one negative thing was said about herbicide. Basically you can drink the stuff is what the overall message was.

Anyone attend who can elaborate?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
Summary from a friend of mine who attended.:

I took 4 pages of notes but some of it was repetition - The meeting was put on by NB Forest Products and includes membership from JDI; Twin Rivers Paper Co; Acadian Timber; Fornebu Timber; AV Nackawic & AV Cell.

Meeting was chaired by Mike Leger (Executive Director) of NB Forest Products Ltd.

Presentations were made by;

1. Dr. Doug Pitt, NR Canada - Research Scientist

2. Dr. Dean Thompson - NR Canada - Research Scientist

3. Dr. Len Ritter - University of Guelph - Professor, Env. Science

Approx. 50 individuals in attendance.

The largest group in attendance seemed to be DNR Forest Rangers in Uniform + some from DNR Headquarters (Fredericton).

The presentations were well managed and no questions could be asked until they were all over.

Mike Leger opened the meeting and made a short presentation himself.

Quick Summary of Mike's Presentation:

- 220,000 directly employed in forest industry in Canada

- 22,0000 directly employed in NB

- $1B annual economic output in NB

- NB is a National Leader in responsible forest management and renewal

- In Canada 45% of all harvested forests are left to regenerate naturally without using herbicides

- In NB only 1% of forests are harvested

- 67% of our forests are regenerated naturally without using herbicides

- This leaves 33% to be treated with glyphosates (if required)

- 0.3 % of NB forests are treated with glyphosates

- Herbicides (effective management tool)

- Delivers required results at lowest cost, smallest environmental footprint

- Sustainably balances our forest resources

Dr. Doug Pitt

- NB's future depends on forests

- NB must do "weed control" to ensure softwood dominance

- Productivity comes from vegetation management

NB Land Area - 7.3 Million hectares

NB Forest Cover - 6.2 Million hectares

1% of NB's forests are harvested annually

0.3 % treated annually with glyphosates

NOTE: Some of this is a repeat but this is from my notes.

Silvaculture results in15 to 20,000 ha annually but is very labour intensive and expensive - cost would be $600 to $4000 per hectare

Herbicides are 96 % glyphosates

88% is distributed via aircraft

Low risk and costs about $200 per hectare

Approx. 20,000 hectare per year is sprayed with herbicides annually in NB.

Glyphosates are very safe when used as directed.

Other alternatives have been considered but were too costly

Dr. Dean Thompson

- Glyphosate based herbicides are not at all harmful to the environment

- Do they pose a risk to wildlife?

- Wilson & Crouch 1987 (all chemicals are toxic no exceptions)

- Greater the exposure = greater effect/response

- No exposure - no dose - no effect

Glyphosate is a natural ingredient found in products known as Vision/Vision Max/Forza/Vantage

95% of herbicides used in Canadian forests is glyphosate.

Glyphosate is toxic to plants but not to animals.

Glyphosate cannot effect seeds or roots.

USA - EPA - effects on birds, mammals, fish and invertebrates are minimal.

- After herbicides are applied to forest habitat has definitely changed

- Deer may move to other areas but are not otherwise affected

- Some animals like the conifers

- Sullivan & Sullivan 2003; 60 different studies evaluated; no relation to winter starvation in deer

- 2/3 of cutovers in NB forests are untreated

- It has never been scientifically proven that declines in deer are occurring where herbicides have been used for many years

- There are other major factors affecting deer populations in NB such as; poaching, coyotes and artificial feeding

- These factors are rarely discussed

- The majority of wildlife biologists will agree that glyphosates will not affect deer

- NR Canada continues to study herbicides

Summed up by saying;

Glyphosate is the most extensively studied herbicide of all time. All available science and the weight of evidence clearly supports a conclusion that it is a very low risk.

Dr. Len Ritter - University of Guelph

Glyphosate - Understanding the Issues

- Dr. Ritter presented a great deal of information and scientific studies concerning herbicides in general

- Most of this was over my head and probably over the head of many at the session

- He stated that glyphosate was the largest selling herbicide in the world

- That 283 million pounds had been applied in the U.S. in 2012

- It was first registered in 1976 in Canada

- Herbicide use is re-evaluated every 15 years in Canada and the U.S.

- Dr. Ritter quoted WHO where it was said that glyphosate was probably carcinogenic to humans

- BUT that RISK = hazard X exposure and it was therefore in the lowest category of risk

NOTE: Dr. Ritter is an expert in toxicology and studies the effects of herbicides as they relate to cancer in humans.

- WHO basically states that even though glyphosate has been assigned a hazardous classification as probably carcinogenic to humans the level of exposure determines the actual risk and they cannot predict how it will be used in various jurisdictions

DOES MEAT FROM WILD GAME THAT HAS BEEN EXPOSED TO GLYPHOSATE POSE A RISK TO HUNTERS?

- Dr. Ritter states that scientific studies have shown that glyphosates do not accumulate in the muscle tissue of animals and is excreted in urine and feces.

- He also stated that berries inadvertently sprayed with glyphosate were okay

- Sessions were well controlled and no question could be posed until after the completion of all presentations

- I really didn't hear much (only what I have written above) regarding the spraying of hardwoods and therefore our deer browse and how this would/could or has affected our deer population in NB

- NR Canada was and is very protective of the current forestry practices in NB including herbicide spraying

- Facts, numbers presented by the participants here are very hard to disagree with by lay people

- A large number of DNR personnel (some in uniform attended) 3 Irving Vehicles were parked outside

- I was the only person representing a Club affiliated with the NBWF if there were others I didn't see them

- It seemed (not to be unfair) that the meeting was stacked on purpose

- No efforts were made to identify those in attendance (introductions)

- Questions at the end were scarce and no challenges were observed although I left with 5 minutes remaining in the Q & A period

- Dr. Pitt and Thompson were critical of the Province of NS and the Province of Quebec concerning their refusal to support herbicide (glyphosate) spraying and noted that their forest industry is suffering from this decision (but they both have deer) and NS allows any sex hunting in many Zones + has a considerably longer season even in Cumberland County which is very close to NB and has similar winters.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
My response;

I certainly appreciate you taking the time to take these notes, and typing it out for all of us who could not attend. People need a bit more history on the glyphosate file, and why there are meetings like this lately all across NB to "inform" DNR and hunt/fish clubs.

You have done a great job summarizing just how important glyphosate is economically to the forest industry here in NB. This is the primary reason behind the aggressive strategy to convince DNR and as many others as possible that things are still "ok". If the use of glyphosate ends, costs go up and profits go down. Also, it affects the AAC that allows these companies to cut all the extra wood they claimed they needed to stay in business from the conservation forest that we know will endanger 9 species of wildlife on Crown land in NB.

I became vocal on this issue based on visual and empirical evidence on the deer herd change in NB during my time at DNR. When I began to look into DNR supplied numbers on the spray program, things did not add up. When I looked at the wildlife research (that essentially says herbicide spray doesn't hurt deer) and then at the forestry research (that basically says glyphosate kills hardwood regen excellent….and for a long time) - it was clear that these two bodies of research could not both be correct. The deeper I dug, the clearer it became - the wildlife research suggesting herbicide does not bother deer was poorly done, misapplied, and NEVER quantified actual deer use. I knew what I and thousands of hunters saw all across NB - deer no longer live on Crown land (although deer still exist from southern NB to northern NB - negating the "harsh winter" argument that this is why there are few deer in NB). Deer exist across NB - but on private land - anywhere where there is ample deer browse in SUMMER and winter. They need BOTH and quite simply, glyphosate spraying in NB removes over 30,000 TONS of this deer food every single year. It is absolutely idiotic to suggest this has not affected deer ecology, deer habitat or deer numbers.

Seeing an ex-DNR employee was speaking out against herbicide, DNR, JDI, Forest Protection and several forest-based groups began to meet and collectively come up with money for a strategy to "fight back". They have employed several Federal forest researchers (Doug Pitt & Dean Thompson - Canadian Forest Service) and a toxicologist (Dr. Len Ritter, U of Guelph) to "fight back" and show all is well with glyphosate. The forest industry's strategy is to suggest that they will stand behind the "federal review" of glyphosate done last year, and to be finalized this year by Health Canada. If the feds say it is "safe" then they will continue to use it.

The problem here is that the ties and strategy goes much deeper than what most realize. Dr. Ritter is the same toxicologist that DEFENDED the feds use of Agent Orange on Base Gagetown. Think about that for a bit. We know how that ended up. Ritter suggested there was "no problem". Really. Now here he is defending glyphosate. Ritter is also behind the current federal review of glyphosate that suggested (in the draft review) that it is safe. I have written several letter, complete with over 40 cited research papers that demonstrate a totally different conclusion.

Biggest problem with these reviews is they only test glyphosate BY ITSELF…yet we all know it is NEVER used by itself - but with adjuvants and emulsifiers that in themselves are also toxic and make Roundup and Vision 1000X more toxic than glyphosate by itself (Mesnage et. Al. 2014). The other problem is they only look at INDUSTRY FUNDED research. This research is outdated, short-term and only looks at glyphosate by itself. They NEVER mention the 40+ research papers from around the globe that reveal glyphosate AND the additives have HUGE problems, from killing myccorhizza in soil, to diabetes, heart disease, autism, infertility and cancer in humans and the list goes on.

These researchers (Pitt and Thompson) suggest that at low doses there are no problems, then suggest how low forestry doses are, and conclude there is no problem. However, modern research also debunks these assertions. I printed a research paper off just yesterday by Mesnage et. Al (2015) that proved that his long, 2 year study shows glyphosate at the very low dose of 1 Part per Billion caused LIVER AND KIDNEY DAMAGE in rats. A researcher in France also did a long term study and found cancerous growths in rats (this one caused the change in the World Health Organization to list glyphosate as a probable carcinogen). They have gone to the extreme to try and have the french research withdrawn because they know how much damage this will cause.

There is a huge effort at present to "get this message out" that all is OK. I heard these presentations at the Canadian Woodlands Forum in Moncton two weeks ago - I chastised Thompson for not showing all the research, for suggesting that hardwoods "bounce back" after plantations are sprayed and for knowing very little about deer in NB. Didn't phase them a bit. Just this week, there was another huge conference at the Forestry center in Fredericton on "Advanced Forest Vegetation Management" - same speakers, same message convincing foresters and DNR people from around NB that all is well. They use the same old data, and still do not address any of the points I make. Obviously, I am never invited to bring what I know and have seen. Because the media is controlled by JDI, this message doesn't get out very fast or effectively.

There are a LOT of PhD's around the globe that are researching and speaking out against glyphosate. They are all solid PhD's, but the one that caught my eye was Dr. Therrien Vrain. He was a Federal researcher and defender of Glyphosate used in GMO's….and now that he is retired, travels across Canada telling many people about the research we have both seen, and how dangerous glyphosate is.

The strategy presently is to have these three and their dog and pony show go to as many places as they can to convince as many as they can that all is well. Industry is relying on Dr. Ritter to publish the federal review saying that glyphosate is still OK to use, and this frees up the industry to continue to use it for another 12 years until it is reviewed again. These public talks are meant to "quell the revolution" until the federal review is out, then all is well once again.

People need to know what is going on. These people have LOTS of money, and are employed full time to do this. We are part timers with no $$ to get the truth out.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
how much of this does he eat?

would he eat them if they were in front of him!

Dr. Ritter states that scientific studies have shown that glyphosates do not accumulate in the muscle tissue of animals and is excreted in urine and feces.

- He also stated that berries inadvertently sprayed with glyphosate WERE OKAY....BEING THE KEY WORDS HERE!

PHD's mean squat when you are knowing lying to the public to line your pockets!

thank you Axeman....appreciate the info!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
780 Posts
Just so you know fellas, we are harvesting a mere 14% of the deer we harvested in 1985 (86% decline).

Maine has only declined 5% from it's 1985 harvest, and Quebec? They are UP 300% from their 1985 harvest.

What a coincidence they stopped spraying herbicide in 2000.

No - there is nothing wrong in NB....it's all coyotes and winters. What a joke.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
174 Posts
I cannot believe that politicians/scientists/biologists would take money over properly informing the public on something as serious as carcinogenic substance (herbicide). Do these people have no conscience? Pretty well everyone has been affected by cancer in one way or another including these gutless pieces of dog sh##. These people who are already making big salaries are going to just flat out lie to the people of NB about this for a few extra dollars? Forget about the deer and the 9 species of animals we will lose with the new forestry plan. This is a much more serious issue!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,153 Posts
I cannot believe that politicians/scientists/biologists would take money over properly informing the public on something as serious as carcinogenic substance (herbicide). Do these people have no conscience? Pretty well everyone has been affected by cancer in one way or another including these gutless pieces of dog sh##. These people who are already making big salaries are going to just flat out lie to the people of NB about this for a few extra dollars? Forget about the deer and the 9 species of animals we will lose with the new forestry plan. This is a much more serious issue!
it is just human nature for some people

there bulging pockets are more important than the public that trust them and there reputation!

just like all these initials after there name......phd and masters dont mean squat to me!

i would take someone who has lived in the woods word over any scientist!

think about this guys/gals.....there is a wealth of information just on this site with all OUR experiences in the woods than any PHD out there! If they wanted to know what is going on.....they dont need to spend 1000's of our tax paying dollars to find out

ask the people who are out there living it!

just my 2 cents worth and how i see it!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
One big problem i see is that hunters and outdoors enthousiats (and i should add any New-Brunswicker that don't want to die of cancer)are not organised. We should be one large group working together to fight this before it's too late. We don't have a voice as it is right now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
571 Posts
The Group is there it is Called the New Brunswick Wild (Edited) Life Federation.. Not enough members and as a result there is not enough backbone to voice issues of Concern..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
If you are talking about the New-Brunswick wildlife Federation, i might be wrong but I think the president and representents (not sure it's how they are called) are named by the Nb gouvernement.
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top