Page 8 of 34 FirstFirst ... 67891018 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 338

Thread: The future of our wildlife management plans.

  1. #71
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    428

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    For sure on that one the first step is to open the books and review the management history and maybe hold some individuals accountable for the actions.
    I don't mean a headhunt but a question and answer meeting.

  2. #72
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    428

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Logging out for now, once again good stuff people.

  3. #73
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    N. Okanagan
    Posts
    14,182

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dannybuoy View Post
    Its this kind of thinking that separates the hunters ..... while there is a limit of wildlife that an area can support , both in quality and quantity , the numbers have shrunk to a minimum ? . If you had been in the Okanagan 20, 30, 40 or more years ago you wouldn't be questioning this fact .
    While I may not know the solution , money isn't going to fix it .
    Yeah maybe I'm out of whack. I can still go to Aberdeen, Pinaus, Silver Hills, upper Kettle and still see the sign I did 10-15 years ago and get my meat, and in the last 5 years have collected my two largest racks ever. but maybe its just me.

    What has changed is the impact of resource extraction. Eliminate that and all this chatter is moot
    Last edited by boxhitch; 02-13-2017 at 12:11 PM.
    Never say whoa in the middle of a mud hole

  4. #74
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    N. Okanagan
    Posts
    14,182

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wild one View Post
    Dont take this the wrong way but I honestly believe a portion of the public would be more likely to pony up the cash if the seen an indepth plan on what the $ was going towards.
    So how would that plan work? To achieve a target of X number of which species? All? And who decides what X should be?
    Plans need realistic achievable targets, and targets have to be justified. We can't just decide to throw as much money as possible to grow as many critters as possible, its not realistic. Nor is it needed.
    The vast majority of hunters are satisfied with the way things are, or the push-back to existing managers would be larger.
    Last edited by boxhitch; 02-13-2017 at 12:06 PM.
    Never say whoa in the middle of a mud hole

  5. #75
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In the bush near a lake
    Posts
    7,198

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by boxhitch View Post
    So how would that plan work? To achieve a target of X number of which species? All? And who decides what X should be?
    Plans need realistic achievable targets, and targets have to be justified. We can't just decide to through as much money as possible to grow as many critters as possible, its not realistic. Nor is it needed.
    The vast majority of hunters are satisfied with the way things are, or the push-back to existing managers would be larger.
    I wonder myself on the plan to solve issues with $ it seems to be what many repeat is needed. I can't give you an answer when I have not heard it myself

    In my opinion I would not say most hunters are satisfied. Most don't push management or even realize it's an option. Most don't even know it is possible to contact a regional Bio even

    I would say opinions on BCs management is not a cut and dry majority in either direction. I would say I large portion don't think of it and only adjust their hunts to what is available

  6. #76
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    N. Okanagan
    Posts
    14,182

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Not poking at you WO, just rambling on
    only adjust their hunts to what is available
    Nice to live in the country The Creator and Ma Nature favours

    A couple problems with BVs vision
    -getting a room full of special interest groups together to come up with a common goal........exercise in futility
    -getting all $$ generated by fish and wildlife back into fish and wildlife......would only be a numbers game. Gov't has commented that they already spend more than is generated, its all in where the lines are drawn
    Gov't never wants to be pinned down on budgeting commitments, they always want the smoke-and-mirrors with shells game
    Local managers just lost some funds that were earlier committed, like they missed the shelf-life label
    Never say whoa in the middle of a mud hole

  7. #77
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    region 3
    Posts
    3,290

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wild one View Post
    I think what he is getting at is he would rather see deer populations benifit from the burns in a fashion that is more likely to increase overall population long term. Personally I could see it being benifical to deer numbers if burns were tougher access.

    Yes this is not overly benifical to hunters unless the population grows to a point the surplus expands beyond the burn. Personally I can see in theory how this could be benifical long term.

    If it could benifit population overall at the cost of tougher access to hunters I would say it is worth it
    Thank you wild one for explaining that, I didn't think it was necessary but ,,,,,game pops go through the roof after a fire, it has a spiraling outward effect, benefiting the region at large. When all the legal game is shot up,,,legally, its not much benefit is it?
    I never said close any area's, walk in and hunt if you need to hunt, thats where many big bucks are hanging out.

    Against vehicle restrictions and deactivating roads and vehicular access...really?

  8. #78
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    In the bush near a lake
    Posts
    7,198

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by boxhitch View Post
    Not poking at you WO, just rambling on
    Nice to live in the country The Creator and Ma Nature favours

    A couple problems with BVs vision
    -getting a room full of special interest groups together to come up with a common goal........exercise in futility
    -getting all $$ generated by fish and wildlife back into fish and wildlife......would only be a numbers game. Gov't has commented that they already spend more than is generated, its all in where the lines are drawn
    Gov't never wants to be pinned down on budgeting commitments, they always want the smoke-and-mirrors with shells game
    Local managers just lost some funds that were earlier committed, like they missed the shelf-life label
    I to see issues with having all interest groups trying to work together with the history between them. If they could play nice yes it could work but I don't trust any of them have the ability to work together at this time. No doubt in my mind there would be dirty deals between each other.

    The $ issue you bring up is interesting

    I personally believe BCs wildlife management could improve but also understand some of the changes man has done to BC and factors from Mother Nature cannot be controlled or changed. I don't see any magic way to improve everything either no matter the $ availible. Reality is no matter what some will not be pleased.

    Truth of the matter is I have watch some populations improve and others crash along with some species expand their range. It has been a mix of negitive and positive over the years. I believe it is many factors that have played a roll in this

    Could things be better yes but my opinion of better may not match the next hunter inline

  9. #79
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    3,423

    Re: The future of our wildlife management plans.

    Quote Originally Posted by 338win mag View Post
    Thank you wild one for explaining that, I didn't think it was necessary but ,,,,,game pops go through the roof after a fire, it has a spiraling outward effect, benefiting the region at large. When all the legal game is shot up,,,legally, its not much benefit is it?
    I never said close any area's, walk in and hunt if you need to hunt, thats where many big bucks are hanging out.

    Against vehicle restrictions and deactivating roads and vehicular access...really?
    no it doesn't. In fact it has negative effect long term on adjacent areas. It is just like what is posted here regular about whitetails. The burn supports a greater population of ungulates which translates to greater population of predators...predators must disperse due to social structure so adjacent poorer habitat has a greater proportional number of predators then would be pre burn..these adjacent areas suffer greater predation then if they had not been near a burn.
    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)

  10. #80
    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
    If we were more efficient harvesters, days per kill data that we have would reflect that.

    It's not the case. DpK data indicates no efficiencies, and points instead to lower kill efficiencies in many areas.

    This is just one example of coffee shop talk that results in the demand for poor decisions in wildlife management.

    When we stick to science, wildlife wins.

    When we demand social results that are designed to benefit one particular user group, wildlife loses.

    When I hear groups start their rationale with "All these hunters come to OUR area from the lower mainland..." I see little benefit for wildlife in the ensuing discussion.
    Exactly....besides, I'll bet the advantages that bownut listed are negated from hunters, in general, being lazier compared to back in the day..

Posting Permissions

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