Page 33 of 34 FirstFirst ... 2331323334 LastLast
Results 321 to 330 of 338

Thread: The future of our wildlife management plans.

  1. #321
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    5,494

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    I'm up to 26 tickets sold. 10 were sold to two people. 0 off of this site. lol....

    http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showth...Raffle-Tickets

    Quote Originally Posted by 338win mag View Post
    What/where are these tickets?
    I would say 1500 people showing up at 2 differing events is a pretty decent turnout, (now I'm probably going to make some guys mad again). Of the 100,000 hunters in BC how many are real hunters to begin with? Apathy is an undesireable human trait that some people are quite at ease with because if they only go out on 1 hunting trip a year for a couple weeks and come home with an animal...things are fine and soon return to their regular routine.
    Even the core group are going to have a hard time making such a commitment, lets say 750 for each rally is exellent.
    I'm surprised there are that many showing up to these rallies, and to show up in Victoria? The logistics alone of going to Victoria is a huge commitment that most guys just aren't/cant make.

    Who in Victoria is listening anyways? now would probably be a good time to rally as there is an election coming up and is a good time to "smack em upside the head" and wake them up and quit stealing revenue that should be put back into wildlife initiatives.
    The measure of a man is not how much power he has, it's how he wields it.

  2. #322
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,469

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher-Dude View Post
    We can't grow wildlife populations nor produce harvestable surpluses if we're sacrificing fawn recruitment for adult survival. That's why a population that has harvest across all age and sex classes is healthier, more robust, and can sustain a higher harvest rate than one with buck only or classified (eg 4 pt only) harvest. See the Hatter numbers above.
    This all sounds good in theory and will work in some situations.
    Throw a pack of wolves or a couple cougars into the scenario and watch how fast the deer of the future turn into turds.

    Lets look at this theory another way......
    We all know that moose populations are declining.
    A lot of people are blaming the FN harvest of cow moose for the crash in moose numbers.
    In reality they have initiated the harvest of moose across all age and sex classes.
    By what you're saying the FN harvest of cow moose should be making moose populations healthier and more robust.
    Is this true?

    Like I've said before, science is only as good as the author......how its interpreted is up to the reader.
    Last edited by bearvalley; 02-24-2017 at 10:12 PM.

  3. #323
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    region 9
    Posts
    11,528

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fisher-Dude View Post
    You're on the right track.

    Old does are also hell on fawns on winter range.

    An old dry doe will consume as much scarce feed as 3 fawns. They'll also fight with fawns, causing injury and sometimes death.

    Adults will also kick fawns to more marginal feeding areas. The pecking order is a real bitch.

    What do we want living the following spring? One old doe or 3 healthy fawns?

    We can't grow wildlife populations nor produce harvestable surpluses if we're sacrificing fawn recruitment for adult survival. That's why a population that has harvest across all age and sex classes is healthier, more robust, and can sustain a higher harvest rate than one with buck only or classified (eg 4 pt only) harvest. See the Hatter numbers above.
    Good, true science, read 'whitetail advantage' folks...

  4. #324
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    region 9
    Posts
    11,528

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by wideopenthrottle View Post
    another part of the dynamic that most don't understand is that if there are too many animals heading into a nasty bad winter it is far worse for spring survival rates than if there were too few (less than carrying capacity).....lets say an area can support 100 deer on an average winter with say 60% survival in spring....after two good years there might be say 150 deer going to the area for the winter when a bad winter hits....those 150 will chow down until almost all the food is gone then the vast majority will die of starvation....sometimes it is hard to get your head around the fact that drastically reducing deer numbers (through hunting in the fall) will ensure many more deer in the spring than if none were hunted...
    And more good science, you soaking this all in there bownut??

  5. #325
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    region 9
    Posts
    11,528

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by bearvalley View Post
    This all sounds good in theory and will work in some situations.
    Throw a pack of wolves or a couple cougars into the scenario and watch how fast the deer of the future turn into turds.

    Lets look at this theory another way......
    We all know that moose populations are declining.
    A lot of people are blaming the FN harvest of cow moose for the crash in moose numbers.
    In reality they have initiated the harvest of moose across all age and sex classes.
    By what you're saying the FN harvest of cow moose should be making moose populations healthier and more robust.
    Is this true?

    Like I've said before, science is only as good as the author......how its interpreted is up to the reader.
    Moose are a completely different critter than whitetail....

  6. #326
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,469

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by HarryToolips View Post
    Moose are a completely different critter than whitetail....
    No shit Harry.
    Hate to tell you this...wildlife is wildlife.
    All wildlife is affected by habitat, predation, hunting pressure...etc.
    If this theory should hold true for whitetails it should work for other species.
    It wont always work.

  7. #327
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    428

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by HarryToolips View Post
    And more good science, you soaking this all in there bownut??
    Oh don't worry I have done my homework long before this HBC . science.
    Alternate Prey Studies still has many unanswered questions.
    Read deeper into it and still throwing darts.

    You must think that the latest study is the truth, nature has its way of fooling even the best scientists.
    I remember when they introduced the Mysis Shrimp into the Okanagan Lake thinking they had it figured out, that was based on the science of the time.
    Look where that got us.

    Typical animal behaviour when placed under extreme stress is not as predicable, and this is when science then has to rethink strategies.



    I once watched a White Tail fawn loose its mother to coyotes in the spring who was late raised by a foster parent who had her own fawn, she would come out
    to the field every night and that little fawn would run across the field and nurse from her then leave.
    She raised that orphan to maturity.
    But thanks for your comments any ways.

    I didn't have to read about, I experienced it first hand.
    Last edited by bownut; 02-25-2017 at 08:26 AM.

  8. #328
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    428

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by curly top View Post
    So with hopes of hearing something yesterday or today in regards to Wildlife in The BC liberals new budget ........ Nothing mentioned like Hunting license and tag fees going back into wildlife. Yet again. I guess its into general coffers.

    Tonight the BC Liberals tried to call me, I was on the phone Long Distance, or would have taken their call. They are sure looking for votes given all the publicity lately ....... Yet they keep doing next to nothing for our most troubled populations, and the decline for most ungulates continues. Way to go BC Liberals! Congrats yet again.
    Seems like all the talk is about parks, and funding for more Rangers. Jobs,Jobs, Jobs.

  9. #329
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    428

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by wideopenthrottle View Post
    another part of the dynamic that most don't understand is that if there are too many animals heading into a nasty bad winter it is far worse for spring survival rates than if there were too few (less than carrying capacity).....lets say an area can support 100 deer on an average winter with say 60% survival in spring....after two good years there might be say 150 deer going to the area for the winter when a bad winter hits....those 150 will chow down until almost all the food is gone then the vast majority will die of starvation....sometimes it is hard to get your head around the fact that drastically reducing deer numbers (through hunting in the fall) will ensure many more deer in the spring than if none were hunted...
    We can all agree that habitat loss is on a steady decline, and yes we could create a greater stress on the wintering population if we stock piled wildlife.
    Nature has placed a well tuned predator base to probably take care of any surplus.

    Quality Habitat should be the number one focus so why are we spending so much time worrying about something that may never happen.

    Start getting the handle on the users and nature will take care of the numbers.
    Burns, Access, Hunting Pressure Ect. good starting point.

  10. #330
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,423

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by bearvalley View Post
    This all sounds good in theory and will work in some situations.
    Throw a pack of wolves or a couple cougars into the scenario and watch how fast the deer of the future turn into turds.

    Lets look at this theory another way......
    We all know that moose populations are declining.
    A lot of people are blaming the FN harvest of cow moose for the crash in moose numbers.
    In reality they have initiated the harvest of moose across all age and sex classes.
    By what you're saying the FN harvest of cow moose should be making moose populations healthier and more robust.
    Is this true?

    Like I've said before, science is only as good as the author......how its interpreted is up to the reader.
    The issues with USA stats is so many of the conclusions were made on what could be called a closed system. They had little natural predation and need to be managed kinda like a lake.
    But here is the rub. Local here I could with current regulation ,family and friends make a big dent in cougar population. Just my immediate family we can kill ten..I can catch them too. But that would be stupid. The cougar's been doing a good job keeping the deer numbers down across age classes. I already got a first hand view of winter kill. 75% of fawns just up and died. And on the heels of that winter the wolves moved in and camped. F! Me was that hard to watch. But I will tell you the deer were ripe for the wolves.
    It is clear to me that any predator control has to be matched with compensatory regulations to insure BC hunters take up the slack. Our harvest should be to emulate natural mortality if it's not nature will step in.
    At current time I am not sure hunters are ready for that.
    It is well to try and journey ones road and to fight with the air.Man must die! At worst he can die a little sooner." (H Ryder Haggard)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •