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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by steepNdeep

I agree Bugle. I'd like to see more data on predators impacts on ungulate populations. That muley conservation presentation, for instance, was lacking in several ways:

1) They did not specifically study wolves in it. Wolf populations were still relatively new & it would have been very controversial & expensive to cull them in several areas for a study.

2) They only monitored deer populations for 2 years after removal of predators & then it happened to be a severe winter which wiped out the deer population. Skewed the data

3) The study 'marked' & monitored fawns starting at 6 months of age. Many are killed by predators right at birth & in the first 6 months. Maybe they are too hard to mark before that, but I think they are missing a large chunk of data there.

It would be interesting to get some data on the wolves impacts on ungulate populations in Region 3. That place is infected...

---

Steep the lack of response to your points only makes them louder..keep posting them..when you post and there are crickets...It is pretty obvious

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WKBGTA_BC

People of this post and whoever else this may concern,

My name is Josh and I am the President of the WKBGTA. I would like to start off by making an apology, that being it has taken me this long to respond to all of your friendly inquiries about our organization. I started reading this thread over a week ago but have been awaiting registration approval from the administrators to allow me to post.

That being said I am going to dive right into this popular thread and hopefully address all of the questions, complaints and personal attacks on our VOLUNTEER wildlife organization. As far as the document with "our" proposals that you have all reviewed, it is accurate in some ways and completely inaccurate in others. Some of it has been completely misconstrued and false information has been released to the public and I am thoroughly looking into how that happened and who is responsible.

Let's start with the Mule Deer proposal. Yes, we do want to see a shorter season and our reasoning is we would like to see the mature bucks breed the does in peace during the heaviest rut period which we believe falls between November 1-10 (in most cases). We feel that those illusive, mature, breeding bucks dummy up during the rut and get harvested at their highest point of weakness when they are distracted by their harem of does. Another concern for this time of year is the potential for heavy snowfall which pushes these mule deer out of their living rooms and forces them to breed at lower elevations which are easily accessible to all hunters. I can assure you that our proposal had absolutely NOTHING to do with the meat being tainted with swollen, rutted up scent glands. I am a mule deer hunter (along with many other members of our club) and I have sunk my teeth into September bucks right through to November 10th bucks and I have never thrown a morsel of meat into my dog's dish. Our focus for mule deer is NOT to see more "trophy" bucks that will fill our banquet walls as some of you have accused, but to see a healthy, thriving mule deer population again in the West Kootenays and province wide. We are well aware that regulation changes are very low on the priority list when it comes to things needing to be done, however, that is all the biologists asked from us when we drafted this document therefor that is all you have read thus far. What you haven't read is our views on habitat loss, controlled burns, wintering ground restoration, predation and road closures due to high accessibility in the back country, just to name a few.

Next, the Elk/Moose Proposal. Yes, we proposed a combined provincial bag limit for elk and moose to be 1. Our reasoning SOLELY being to take some of the pressure off both species. We feel that by making a hunter choose one of the mentioned big game animals instead of both, it MAY help reduce pressure on the unselected species. Our proposal had absolutely NOTHING to do with families not needing that much meat, we are well aware of how much meat a family can burn through during the off season, especially if wild meat is the only meat on the menu. We are not and will never be an organization that tries to dictate how much meat a family may harvest in a hunting season. Our focus for elk and moose is spot on with mule deer, increase population, decrease calf mortality and create a healthy, thriving population for both species in the West Kootenays and province wide. Again, we realize that regulation changes are low on the priority list but as you can see that is all this document focused on when we were asked to draft our views.

I'm going to address a few questions I've seen regarding our banquet and in return I am going to ask some of my own:
Yes, we do host a "trophy" banquet each year for successful hunters/fisherman to enter their animals/fish into the competition for the opportunity at a trophy or certificate and possibly a free shoulder mount.
Yes, we put up all these entries on display for all to see throughout the night.
Yes, we have a big awards ceremony.

Now I have a few questions for you people:
Did any of you know that we have a junior category for all hunters under the age of 18 where no minimum requirements are necessary in any class?
Did any of you know that the banquet is open for ANYONE to attend and our non-hunter attendance is high and increasing as the years go on?
Did any of you know that we hold a massive fundraiser at the banquet that generates substantial funding for us to donate back into wildlife?
Did any of you know that with that funding, over the last five years...
We purchased a mechanical elk decoy for our local COS?
We purchase 4000 lbs of sheep feed annually for the Bighorn Sheep on the Salmo-Creston Pass, pick it up, deliver it and feed them once a week throughout the entire winter?
We've donated funding to "Beaks" bird sanctuary?
We purchased salt and helicopter fuel for the Mountain Goats in the Slocan Valley and distributed the salt via helicopter high on the mountain range to ensure decreased highway mortality?
We donated money to the East Kootenay emergency deer/elk feed program last winter due to the harsh winter conditions?
We maintain our own local deer feeders in the event of a harsh winter season?
Did any of you know that our organization is 100% VOLUNTEER?
Did any of you know that our organization is over 60 years old and has been giving back to wildlife since the day it started?
Did any of you know that the WKBGTA is part of a Regional wildlife group called the West Kootenay Outdoorsmen where we meet quarterly, hash out concerns and work directly with our local biologists and the BCWF in hopes of correcting some of the many problems this province is experiencing with wildlife?

I could go on but I don't want to ramble, that's not my intent. Things to remember about those proposals are only some of the information was accurate and they were based on our opinion of the WEST KOOTENAYS. We understand that the province has many different sectors that need to be managed separately. I apologize that you were all misinformed and I wish I had answers as to how that happened. I personally drafted our proposals myself and I would be happy to share that document with anyone that would like to see it. As hunters we need to stick together and threads like this are nothing but great ammunition for the anti's and we all know they already have a full magazine. For those of you that were judgmental, confrontational and malicious, I invite you to join our organization and inspire us with your energetic views on areas that need improvement in our organization. Our door is always open to people willing to contribute, suggest new ideas and improvements and dedicate their time to our wildlife. It's easy to sit behind the keyboard and criticize anything and everything someone is doing but it takes a certain somebody to get off the couch and make a difference. Unfortunately, complacency is a huge reason as to why we are here today. Involvement is the only thing that is going to make a difference and that's what we are striving for. Our club is heading over with a truck and car trailer to pick up 4000 lbs of sheep feed for the annual winter feed program on Saturday and then attending the quarterly WKO meeting on Sunday. What are YOU doing this weekend to make a difference? Are you going to be a keyboard hero or a contributor?

I hope this helps clear up any confusion. If you have any other questions or inquiries we have a website and a Facebook page that may help you understand who we really are and what we do behind the scenes.

---

You really need to get Trophy out of your name. You do a tremendous amount of work in our area, and I thank you for that. The problem is that the general public doesn't look that deeply into an organization like yours. They see your name and they begin forming their opinions and making generalizations. 'Trophy' is just fanning the anti-hunting fire.

For example, 'trophy' was used 18 times in this letter (http://bearmatters.com/). Think 'trophy' is a word that's being used to sway public opinion....?
(posted in this thread: http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showth...icers-who-hunt)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by horshur

bugle they have buck/doe ratio targets for scientific reasons. Point restrictions are a tool so is killing Does that is all I have been saying. For the most part managers have used the tools to maintain targets as they should and apparently for the most part buck/doe ratios are okay because of regs.Point restrictions/season duration/leh are other tools to maintain there targets. Pic your poison.

---

I agree...there is "enough poison in the water" already.
Now a R&G club is asking to thro more in to the pool...close the season etc etc.

Again, the OP brought up 3 issues up that were proposed from this R&G.

And again, if you are going to close Oct 31.....then it is because there are not enough Does being bred...low fawn #'s
And again...what is the fawn to doe ratio, in these WK MU's, to support this initiative?
No one wants to answer that!! why...????
If someone can show me that it is consecutively low....then I would agree....something needs to be done.
If not.....then what is the "real intent"...
For F sakes...it's just common sense.....but no one wants to answer it, at least not the ones in support of this
proposal.

Another thing.....if there are not enough Does to begin with....then it should be any Doe LEH's should be dropped..
if that's the case...
But, then you have to also ask....are the Doe #'s low or is it because the "habitat" can't support more deer in the
area.??
One ,ore time...if there are tons of does, and there "not bred" during the rut, and come spring time, only a hand full of does have fawns...then yes...you have a "lack of F'n bucks" in those areas.

So I ask....what is the "real" factor ???
If there aren't enough Mulies....what is the real problem...and address accordingly.

I only hunt deer in the 4 pt season, and I rarely shoot one, because I like looking for big bucks myself.
All I can do, is to pass up on smaller ones....but I don't have the right to tell the next guy beside me to
"do as I do"...just so I can try a see more "big bucks".
That's why I brought up the stupid 6pt elk rule...
All the Guides in my elk hunting area kept spewing "6pt restriction is going to give us the chance to once again
see 350 class bulls!!".....No...it did not happen!!
As H47...he will tell you the same thing...hard to find a big bull.
Why....because soon as it is a 6pt...it gets dropped....simple.
But it may have survived my bullet, if I could have dropped the 3 pt I saw the day before.

Road Restrictions...same thing....they can definitely help...without a doubt, and in some areas, we have way too
many spur roads...for sure...atvs can go everywhere, even where there are no roads...
The thing is...restricting access doesn't work, if it isn't the problem in the 1st place.!!
IF it was the big problem, then there should be elk all over the EK...but their #'s are way down.
The examples I gave, are "restrictions" that have been put in place for years now, it's not like they just got introduced, so we still have to wait to see it come to fruition.
It should of happened by now.. but didn't...so....what is the real problem!!!????
It sure as heck ain't "hunter success"...no way is there 100% hunter success rate up there, not even close.
So be careful what poison you pick is very true....I agree.

Pick the right medicine to treat the particular problem....but you need to know what the problem is 1st...
not just say...let try this little pill over here.

If there has been no counting going on up there...then that needs to get done.
When the #'s show up, lets see what the issue is, there is still time to address it before a season starts.
But just remember, if the overall #'s are down, you may need to ask "can the habitat support more".

As for the word "trophy"...yes, people may want to consider it is becoming a "taboo word" outside of the hunting community.
Seems like any game hunting with the word trophy at the front of it, is coming to an end sooner then you think.
And having a "ruler" in your Logo, it "may" create some problems in the upcoming years.
Put's into question what the "real intent about hunting" is by some, especially those who sit on the fence when it comes to hunting.
I get the concept, I hunt, I know whats all involved when it comes to hunting, etc etc....
But, may want to consider "repackaging", or all the "good deeds" that the club does will just get tossed aside.
Anti's don't want to see the "good" in hunting...but they will look for anything to "show the public" the bad.

When it's comes to the WK, I don't get...
Elk goes GOS, and then some get all upset that there "trophy sized bulls" are all gone.
Now some want to make the deer season shorter...fine...but get the facts 1st.
What about all those resident hunters up there, when they grab the new regs, and see there deer season just
became a whole lot shorter....
Their the ones that are going to ask..."what the hell just happened"?
Better have the facts straight before you impose "your thoughts/strategy" on others is all I can say.
If the facts support it...good to go...

SteepnDeep...your comments that you made on the study and wolves impact...
Yes, it is a very legitimate point you brought up.
Not enough time to really get the full impact on wolves in my opinion as well.
I honestly believe the EK and the wolves there have definetly impacted those elk herds.
But I do know, that pine beetle and lack of fires is probably the "biggest factor" that needs to be addressed.
Mother nature I hope has only just begun to get started in correcting that...meaning more huge fires to come like
the one in White River etc etc.
And yes, wolves in R3 are becoming ever more present, and I am sure the effects of them on deer/moose #'s
is only just starting....I don't think we have seen the "full effect yet"

Actually, R3 maybe a great area to have a study done on "wolf impact"
Lets face, much of that Region hasn't had wolves before...so it would be well worth a study there...IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bugle M In

SteepnDeep...your comments that you made on the study and wolves impact...
Yes, it is a very legitimate point you brought up.
Not enough time to really get the full impact on wolves in my opinion as well.
I honestly believe the EK and the wolves there have definetly impacted those elk herds.
But I do know, that pine beetle and lack of fires is probably the "biggest factor" that needs to be addressed.
Mother nature I hope has only just begun to get started in correcting that...meaning more huge fires to come like
the one in White River etc etc.
And yes, wolves in R3 are becoming ever more present, and I am sure the effects of them on deer/moose #'s
is only just starting....I don't think we have seen the "full effect yet"

Actually, R3 maybe a great area to have a study done on "wolf impact"
Lets face, much of that Region hasn't had wolves before...so it would be well worth a study there...IMO.

---

Which beckons the question......if studies are needed to acquire this data where does the money come from, who pays for it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ourea

Which beckons the question......if studies are needed to acquire this data where does the money come from, who pays for it?

---

I would disagree that studies are needed or would accomplish much....the deer and moose pop are already a fraction of what they were/should be, spend the money on wolf removal instead. Already too much money being spent on consultants/studies. No need to reinvent the wheel

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannybuoy

I would disagree that studies are needed or would accomplish much....the deer and moose pop are already a fraction of what they were/should be, spend the money on wolf removal instead. Already too much money being spent on consultants/studies. No need to reinvent the wheel

---

And again.....where would that money come from (any money for that matter)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ourea

And again.....where would that money come from (any money for that matter)?

---

Instead of pushing for a new organisation(the costs just to set up would be astronomical) the bcwf should be advocating this, spending some money on this,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannybuoy

Instead of pushing for a new organisation(the costs just to set up would be astronomical) the bcwf should be advocating this, spending some money on this,

---

Liberals already committed $5 million to cover the cost for the start up.

That's uncertain with the NDGreens cluster we have now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dannybuoy

Instead of pushing for a new organisation(the costs just to set up would be astronomical) the bcwf should be advocating this, spending some money on this,

---

And how would the NDP support such a move and expenditure knowing that anti hunting and conservation groups fully endorsed their party. They won't bite the hand that fed them.

In regards to setting up an organization that the costs "would be astronomical".......what's your idea of astronomical?
Give me a number