Why is the WKBGTA proposing a bag limit of 1 elk or 1 moose not both in BC

all of it is science ...just pick your poison. Science can prove that recreational hunters are not needed to manage populations so should we go that way. Just cause some science and data implies one thing does not mean going another way is wrong it is just different is all. So you guys gonna give up sex cause science can create life in a test tube. Really.
Put it this way. Maximum sustainable yield is a management style it has no great virtues there is no law..thou shalt have hunting seasons where you kill as many as possible according to science. Managers can use science for another style as well. MSY is social management just the same as managing for older class males or for less vehicle accidents or for no hunting at all.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WKBGTA_BC

Speaking of insults...let’s not forget what 95% of this thread has been towards the WKBGTA. I strictly joined to clarify the misconception and be on my way.

---

There haven't been insults just a bunch of people pointing out flaws in your proposal and general disagreement with it, big difference. I would say that other than managing exclusively for just trophy animals, most here me included applaud that you want to improve wildlife numbers and would support you on that. We just disagree with you on how to get there. I'd recommend looking in to the main drivers that dictate animals to flourish that have been derived by science based work and not anecdotal and emotional sources. Hunting is waaay down the list of importance for most species. Super conservative regulations and very low harvest opportunities for extremely low to no return in the big picture is a waste of time and likely counter productive in the long haul.

I see how managing "point restriction" also does not help "create trophy sized" game.
4 pointers don't necessarily mean they do the breeding over a mature 3 pointer.
Example:
For the past 3 seasons, I keep seeing the same "big 3 point" mule deer in November around the remembrance
weekend.
I have watched him chase way decent sized 4 pointers.
The last 2 years, he seems to be the guy "getting on top"
This buck obviously will never be a 4 pt, he is genetically set to be 3pt at best, yet he is mature enough, big enough, and strong enough to beat out the competition.
For some reason, he avoids being taken during the "any buck" month of October.
But he is there in November, and "untouchable" due to "point restriction".
So, there is the chance to have more 3pt genes passed down the line....
So much for "trophy sized game" and using point restriction to achieve that....IMO.

As for the rest of this thread...I'm done...heard enough.
If the reports say the Fawn/Doe ratio is normal, then I would never support closing the season during the rut.
Why don't we just change the seasons and hunt deer in June, July and August then.....
Hey, can't eat the antlers anyways!....
Makes about as much sense as "shutting it down".
As for "shutting it down"...don't worry, this government will do everything they can to have that happen anyways,
and not just Gbear.

With respect your dominant three point is not passing a three point gene down anymore then any other buck...
Point restrictions are a tool to maintain buck to doe ratios..which obviously is working according to the stats and according to your anecdote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salty

There haven't been insults just a bunch of people pointing out flaws in your proposal and general disagreement with it, big difference. I would say that other than managing exclusively for just trophy animals, most here me included applaud that you want to improve wildlife numbers and would support you on that. We just disagree with you on how to get there. I'd recommend looking in to the main drivers that dictate animals to flourish that have been derived by science based work and not anecdotal and emotional sources. Hunting is waaay down the list of importance for most species. Super conservative regulations and very low harvest opportunities for extremely low to no return in the big picture is a waste of time and likely counter productive in the long haul.

---

gotta like this !!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fisher-Dude

Too bad Josh doesn't have sex ratio data or pregnancy rate data to back up his proposals.

You know, science and stuff to justify reducing the harvest of surplus male animals, since we know surplus mature males reduce the productivity of herds and cause further reductions in game populations.

No one has produced either of the two criteria above to justify the proposals. Without such data, the proposals become social programs to simply restrict hunter numbers.

---

I asked the powers that be of BC Wildlife management:

Do WILDLIFE BIOLOGISTS recommend hunting restrictions, such as Oct. 31 closing for muley bucks, as a tool for protecting mule deer populations:

The answer: YES

Sorry Bud...point restriction has never been my anecdote.
As for buck to doe ratio, never really bothered with that either...
Don't believe me.... read my post #172, as I mention it's not the main factor.
As long as Does and Cows have fawns and calves to drop come spring time is all I care about.
After that, can enough of them survive Predation.
And, can they get enough nutrition thru the summer, and thru winter to survive.
Pretty simple.
If not enough Females are getting bred in the Fall, then yes, we probably have an issue with not enough males,
which then lends itself to the question....why.
Hunting a factor...yes, if not enough males to breed enough females....then restrictions are needed.
But I have yet to see the logic in any of these statement if there are enough % of fawns each spring.
As for #'s of deer...well, if there ain't enough deer, then yes, you may consider getting rid of a "Doe Season/LEH".
That's when it is important to have the right Buck to Doe ratio, to bring back a population as efficiently as possible,
and to maintain it......
And population can only be as high as habitat supports it.
No reason to believe point restriction would make it better.
As for the 3 point...yes, it doesn't mean he will breed more 3 points, but it is possible since he carries part of that
gene sequence....just depends on the doe as well.
But if I drop that buck, I can guarantee you... 100% ......that he wont be passing any part of that gene on...:p

But bugle you are hunting a four point restriction hunt.lets say they can that regulation do you have confidence that buck/doe ratios will remain optimal? The four point season is actually working for the most part. Science says it is. Other tools that managers have will cramp hunters worse. Ie LEH and shorter seasons. Long seasons in high access areas are hard on bucks you can't get around that.

Has there been any forest fires in the west kootenay within the last 40 years?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 338win mag

Has there been any forest fires in the west kootenay within the last 40 years?

---

Oh yeah. lots of logging as well, lots of browse and grass in the meadows as its just like the okanagan.....very few critters to eat the feed.