First they came for the mooses, but I wasn't a moose, so I remained silent. Then they came for ...

one down …

Eco-Nut “scientists” declare moose to be a deadly cause of global warming and call for Norway to “balance” their numbers. Wait until these geniuses figure out that humans cause more global warming than moose; be warned, they will have a solution, and it will be final.

…Wherever they feed, the large mammals trample vegetation, affect tree growth and change soil composition with copious amounts of urine and dung. That’s partly due to their voracious appetites — adult moose can eat up to 60 pounds of food per day.

… Writing in the Journal of Geophysical Research: Biogeosciences, researchers said they analyzed 11 years of data on moose in Norwegian forest areas that had been cleared for lumber. Usually, the forest rebounds, and saplings and bushes quickly grow back. But when moose are on the loose in these areas, they graze on any and all vegetation, snacking on the saplings that would eventually repopulate those areas of forest and sequester carbon.

The moose mostly ate birch, rowan and willow trees. The researchers estimate that by eating up potential carbon sinks, the moose consume the equivalent of 10 percent of the entire Norwegian forestry industry’s annual harvest, cutting carbon storage by up to 60 percent in those areas.

“Now they want to “balance” the moose. I know what that’s a euphemism for, having not fallen off the cabbage truck yesterday.”

…Researchers claim that moose are potentially a leading cause of climate change and that the species should be balanced, suggesting they are “one of the biggest potential single sources of carbon emissions from wooded parts of Norway.”

…The solution suggested to the latest climate change theory was to balance moose numbers and forest management in an effort to limit CO2 emissions. “We don’t only regulate the amount of animals, we very carefully regulate the proportion of females, males and calves. So there’s a stronger management for moose than for most livestock in Norway,” Francesco Cherubini, director of IndEcol Programme said. “I think as we get more of an understanding of how all these different things are interrelated, land managers could come up with an optimal plan. That could be a much-needed win-win solution for climate, for biodiversity and for timber value.”