Logo
Lili Koule avatar

Lili Koule

JP flag

📍Nesoddtangen Island

📍Nesoddtangen Island
📍Nesoddtangen Island
No comments yet
Lili Koule avatar

Lili Koule

JP flag

Đ”Ń€ŃƒĐłĐžĐ” запОсО

უბრალოდ ლამაზია ყაზბეგჹი

უბრალოდ ლამაზია ყაზბეგჹი

Post: 17 October 2022

Lili Koule

Grippe aviaire : les mesures Ă  suivre pour prĂ©venir et limiter la transmission du virus DĂ©tenteurs d’appelants ou chasseurs de gibier d’eau, le passage du niveau de risque nĂ©gligeable Ă  modĂ©rĂ©, dans le contexte de la dĂ©gradation de la situation liĂ©e Ă  l’influenza aviaire, appelle Ă  la prise de mesures concrĂštes. Alors que depuis deux semaines, on assiste en France, Ă  une dĂ©gradation de la situation liĂ©e Ă  l’influenza aviaire, le ministĂšre de l’Agriculture vient de dĂ©cider de passer le niveau de risque de « nĂ©gligeable » Ă  « modĂ©rĂ© ». ConcrĂštement, des mesures doivent ĂȘtre prises pour Ă©viter un pic Ă©pidĂ©mique. Pour les chasseurs Les oiseaux chassĂ©s ne doivent en aucun cas entrer en contact avec des oiseaux d’élevage. L’enjeu est d’éviter tout contact direct (d’oiseau Ă  oiseau) ou indirecte (par le biais de fientes, de matĂ©riel, de bottes ou pas les mains de l’homme) entre appelants et animaux domestiques (Ă©levages ou particulier). – les oiseaux chassĂ©s doivent ĂȘtre conservĂ©s dans des contenants Ă©tanches (bacs, sacs
) qui seront rigoureusement nettoyĂ©s1 dĂšs le retour Ă  la maison – aucune partie des oiseaux tuĂ©s Ă  la chasse ne doit ĂȘtre abandonnĂ©e en milieu naturel, il est indispensable de mettre les plumes, les pattes les ailes et les viscĂšres dans des sacs Ă©tanches avant de les jeter – les bottes sont rincĂ©es sur le lieu de chasse et laissĂ©es sur place, ou bien elles sont dĂ©barrassĂ©es de leur boue, transportĂ©es dans un sac plastique fermĂ© avant d’ĂȘtre nettoyĂ©es et dĂ©sinfectĂ©es1 de retour du lieu de chasse – – les vĂȘtements de chasse sont nettoyĂ©s1 Ă  l’arrivĂ©e Ă  la maison, – – le matĂ©riel de chasse (palettes, gibeciĂšre
 ) est nettoyĂ© de retour du lieu de chasse et ne doit pas ĂȘtre en contact avec des volailles ou des Ă©levages avicoles, – les pattes des chiens doivent ĂȘtre lavĂ©es avant de remonter dans le vĂ©hicule et les chiens ayant participĂ© Ă  la chasse ne doivent pas pĂ©nĂ©trer dans un Ă©levage ou une basse-cour, ni avoir aucun contact d’aucune sorte avec des oiseaux domestiques, – les Ă©changes d’oiseaux et de matĂ©riel entre chasseurs ou avec des oiseaux domestiques sont Ă  Ă©viter Ă  tout prix – aucun Ă©levage d’oiseaux ne doit ĂȘtre visitĂ© dans les 48h (2 nuitĂ©es) aprĂšs la chasse – les appelants sont transportĂ©s dans des caisses rĂ©servĂ©es Ă  ce seul usage, affectĂ©es aux appelants d’un seul dĂ©tenteur et de façon Ă  Ă©viter toute dispersion de fientes ou de plumes, ces caisses sont nettoyĂ©es rĂ©guliĂšrement – en fonction des niveaux de risque, le transport des appelants peut ĂȘtre limitĂ© Ă  30 oiseaux maximum, sans mĂ©lange entre oiseaux de diffĂ©rents dĂ©tenteurs, et uniquement pour les dĂ©tenteurs des catĂ©gories 1 voire 2. Des prĂ©cautions sont aussi Ă  prendre pour les oiseaux migrateurs trouvĂ©s morts : – ne pas ouvrir ni mĂȘme « ausculter » les oiseaux trouvĂ©s morts, mais contacter la FDC ou l’Office Français de la BiodiversitĂ©, qui les emmĂšnera tels quels au Laboratoire VĂ©tĂ©rinaire DĂ©partemental. – mettre des gants de prĂ©fĂ©rence jetables ou au moins des gants lavables et bien les nettoyer aprĂšs la manipulation – mettre le cadavre dans un sac plastique que l’on ferme en serrant bien, en Ă©vitant de respirer l’air sorti du sac – mettre le 1er sac plastique dans un 2Ăšme sac – retourner les gants et les mettre dans le 2Ăšme sac – fermer le 2Ăšme sac en serrant bien – se laver les mains systĂ©matiquement aprĂšs avoir manipulĂ© des oiseaux – nettoyer ses bottes et ses vĂȘtements aprĂšs la manipulation. Les dĂ©tenteurs d’appelants La dĂ©claration des dĂ©tenteurs et l’enregistrement des appelants est indispensables. La traçabilitĂ© est primordiale, elle permet de recenser sur tout le territoire l’ensemble des dĂ©tenteurs d’appelants ainsi que l’ensemble des oiseaux qu’ils dĂ©tiennent. Cela est fondamental lorsqu’on veut pouvoir passer rapidement un message d’alerte ou de vigilance. La traçabilitĂ© repose sur : – la dĂ©claration annuelle des dĂ©tenteurs d’appelants auprĂšs de leur FĂ©dĂ©ration DĂ©partementale des Chasseurs (celle du dĂ©partement du lieu principal de dĂ©tention de leurs appelants), avec nom, prĂ©nom, adresse du dĂ©tenteur et lieu de dĂ©tention, ainsi que leur catĂ©gorie en fonction de leur possible dĂ©tention d’autres oiseaux – le registre tenu par chaque dĂ©tenteur, comportant les informations suivantes : nombre d’appelants dĂ©tenus, espĂšces, Ă©vĂšnements survenus dont la mortalitĂ©, mouvements d’oiseaux entre Ă©levages ou dĂ©tenteurs – l’obligation de baguage de tous les appelants dans les 30 premiers jours, avec une bague fermĂ©e. Toute mortalitĂ© anormale ou liĂ©e Ă  des symptĂŽmes nerveux doit ĂȘtre dĂ©clarĂ©e au vĂ©tĂ©rinaire traitant et Ă  la FDC. Lors de la dĂ©tention d’appelants Lors de la dĂ©tention d’appelants, la sĂ©paration entre appelants et oiseaux d’élevage doit ĂȘtre totale. SĂ©parer les appelants des autres oiseaux dĂ©tenus sur un mĂȘme site par : – une sĂ©paration physique : les deux catĂ©gories d’animaux ne doivent pas ĂȘtre dans des enclos voisins, si l’on ne peut pas faire autrement, une cloison pleine doit les sĂ©parer (le grillage ne permet pas une sĂ©paration satisfaisante) – des mangeoires et abreuvoirs distincts – le matĂ©riel utilisĂ© (vĂȘtements, bottes, seaux etc) doit ĂȘtre diffĂ©rent – la personne qui s’occupe des oiseaux doit commencer par les oiseaux d’élevage avant de passer aux appelants, elle doit se laver les mains entre les 2 – ces oiseaux ne doivent pas avoir accĂšs au mĂȘme plan d’eau https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RQtkDGKmXvw

Post: 17 October 2022

Lili Koule

Nevada hunters make positive impact on rural economies Nevada hunters help local economies through their hunting dollars. A new study conducted by the University of Nevada, Reno (UN-R) in collaboration with the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) analyzed data from 2020 and looked at the amount of money spent on travel and hunting expenses as well as hunting-related expenses like all-terrain vehicles, firearms, ammunition and campers, according to a press release. The conclusion? Big money comes from big game and upland game hunters, which positively impacts rural communities where “wildlife is plentiful,” particularly in Elko, White Pine and Lincoln counties. In 2020, hunters spent about $380 million on hunting in Nevada. And the spending was nearly identical to that in 2019, meaning that the COVID-19 pandemic did little to deter the amount of money spent and the number of hunters who hunted. Researchers worked with NDOW to collect expenditures via a survey sent to 2,000 hunters, which resulted in two additional reports: Hunting-Related Economic Activity in Nevada and Hunter Expenditure in Nevada. These were produced in partnership with UN-R’s Department of Economics, Extension and Experiment Station’s Nevada Economic Assessment Project. “More people want to hunt big game animals here in Nevada than there are available big game hunting tags,” said Michael Taylor, a co-author of the reports. “That’s what makes hunting kind of a recession-proof industry. There are so many people who want to go, that demand stays strong even during an economic downturn.” Two interesting takeaways from the study were that the majority of hunters lived in Washoe and Clark counties while the biggest economic impact were where the most tags were issued: Elko, White Pine and Lincoln counties. Yet, the amount of economic impact varied based upon the type of tag issued. NDOW’s Bobby Jones, who works as the outdoor connection coordinator, said that “the hope is that information from the report will help small businesses, county commissioners and other decision-makers better understand how conserving Nevada’s natural resources and providing sustainable opportunities for Nevadans to hunt, fish, hike and camp supports the state’s economy.” Prior to this research, the economic relationship between hunting and the state economy wasn’t available. “Generally, people are aware that hunting exists and support legal, regulated hunting, but are not hunters themselves, and even hunters might not sit down and pencil out exactly what they spend on hunting each year,” said Jones. “Before this report, there was not enough information available to show exactly how hunting in Nevada impacts our economy.” “In comparison to this report, most national survey data severely underestimate hunter spending in Nevada,” continued Jones. “Knowing this, we’re curious to know if that is the same for other outdoor pursuits, or not. If hunting generates almost $400 million per year, are fishing or wildlife viewing bigger economic drivers than we realize? Possibly, but we can’t know without moving forward with a similar effort if we want to know for sure.”

Nevada hunters make positive impact on rural economies Nevada hunters help local economies through their hunting dollars. A new study conducted by the University of Nevada, Reno (UN-R) in collaboration with the Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) analyzed data from 2020 and looked at the amount of money spent on travel and hunting expenses as well as hunting-related expenses like all-terrain vehicles, firearms, ammunition and campers, according to a press release. The conclusion? Big money comes from big game and upland game hunters, which positively impacts rural communities where “wildlife is plentiful,” particularly in Elko, White Pine and Lincoln counties. In 2020, hunters spent about $380 million on hunting in Nevada. And the spending was nearly identical to that in 2019, meaning that the COVID-19 pandemic did little to deter the amount of money spent and the number of hunters who hunted. Researchers worked with NDOW to collect expenditures via a survey sent to 2,000 hunters, which resulted in two additional reports: Hunting-Related Economic Activity in Nevada and Hunter Expenditure in Nevada. These were produced in partnership with UN-R’s Department of Economics, Extension and Experiment Station’s Nevada Economic Assessment Project. “More people want to hunt big game animals here in Nevada than there are available big game hunting tags,” said Michael Taylor, a co-author of the reports. “That’s what makes hunting kind of a recession-proof industry. There are so many people who want to go, that demand stays strong even during an economic downturn.” Two interesting takeaways from the study were that the majority of hunters lived in Washoe and Clark counties while the biggest economic impact were where the most tags were issued: Elko, White Pine and Lincoln counties. Yet, the amount of economic impact varied based upon the type of tag issued. NDOW’s Bobby Jones, who works as the outdoor connection coordinator, said that “the hope is that information from the report will help small businesses, county commissioners and other decision-makers better understand how conserving Nevada’s natural resources and providing sustainable opportunities for Nevadans to hunt, fish, hike and camp supports the state’s economy.” Prior to this research, the economic relationship between hunting and the state economy wasn’t available. “Generally, people are aware that hunting exists and support legal, regulated hunting, but are not hunters themselves, and even hunters might not sit down and pencil out exactly what they spend on hunting each year,” said Jones. “Before this report, there was not enough information available to show exactly how hunting in Nevada impacts our economy.” “In comparison to this report, most national survey data severely underestimate hunter spending in Nevada,” continued Jones. “Knowing this, we’re curious to know if that is the same for other outdoor pursuits, or not. If hunting generates almost $400 million per year, are fishing or wildlife viewing bigger economic drivers than we realize? Possibly, but we can’t know without moving forward with a similar effort if we want to know for sure.”

Post: 17 October 2022

Lili Koule

Wolves likely responsible for livestock predation in Colorado What killed 18 cow calves near Meeker, Colorado? The livestock owner reported the depredation last Tuesday to Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). While the deaths could be linked to wolves, it would mean that new wolves “have migrated into the state,” according to The Denver Post. In 2020, CPW said that wolves had returned to the state after a confirmed sighting of six wolves near an animal carcass in Moffat County. The other known wolf pack resides in North Park near Walden with about eight members; however, they went missing after the pack killed “at least five cows and two dogs,” meaning that they were likely “illegally killed,” according to Michael Robinson with the Center for Biological Diversity. Robinson believes the Moffat pack, which has also disappeared, was also likely illegally killed as well. CPW spokesman Travis Duncan said that the current investigation spans two weeks and several miles on White River National Forest lands. Investigators are currently interviewing the livestock owner, “collecting evidence and scouting for scat and tracks in the area.” Should investigators confirm that the depredation was a result of wolves, Duncan said that “given the recent sightings of the North Park pack and the distance to the Meeker area, it is likely that this is a second pack of wolves in Colorado.” Additional information about the depredation and investigation are not available. Stay tuned to GOHUNT for further updates.

Wolves likely responsible for livestock predation in Colorado What killed 18 cow calves near Meeker, Colorado? The livestock owner reported the depredation last Tuesday to Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW). While the deaths could be linked to wolves, it would mean that new wolves “have migrated into the state,” according to The Denver Post. In 2020, CPW said that wolves had returned to the state after a confirmed sighting of six wolves near an animal carcass in Moffat County. The other known wolf pack resides in North Park near Walden with about eight members; however, they went missing after the pack killed “at least five cows and two dogs,” meaning that they were likely “illegally killed,” according to Michael Robinson with the Center for Biological Diversity. Robinson believes the Moffat pack, which has also disappeared, was also likely illegally killed as well. CPW spokesman Travis Duncan said that the current investigation spans two weeks and several miles on White River National Forest lands. Investigators are currently interviewing the livestock owner, “collecting evidence and scouting for scat and tracks in the area.” Should investigators confirm that the depredation was a result of wolves, Duncan said that “given the recent sightings of the North Park pack and the distance to the Meeker area, it is likely that this is a second pack of wolves in Colorado.” Additional information about the depredation and investigation are not available. Stay tuned to GOHUNT for further updates.

Post: 12 October 2022

Lili Koule

Post

Post: 7 October 2022

Lili Koule

It might interest you

Scan the QR code on your phone to download