The future of our wildlife management plans.

[338win mag]

Thanks for responding BV, I'll get back on that!

[Bucksandbeers]

Cory, you should have read the graphs on page 5 of your link.

Increased mule deer numbers suppressed whitetail population growth rates.

Increased whitetail numbers suppressed mule deer population growth rates.

Sometimes, cherry picking will bite you squarely in the ass.

Its not cherry picking at all it's always been my argument that people use so called science when needed and then claim lack of science when it works for them. You can find proof for every argument. In the article you posted last night I read and find non conclusive eveidence of competition. As is most science nothing in the first 30 pages I have read so far is conclusive. This may be a cause, this may be the problem, this may be what is happening. Just like you can cherry pick from what I post I can cherry pick from everything you post. Where does this get us? You need to stop speaking like your science is so definitive. I always try to speak from a Wildlife point of view and try to ask lots of questions, not try to pretend I have all the answers.

[BL77]

The term "un-educated voter" was used in a slightly sarcastically way by me.

I probably understand the drivers behind wolf protectionism as much as any poster on this forum. Most would be damn surprised if they knew the actual names of some of the people that have put our wildlife in jeprody by making management calls that benefit their own personal wants. I have little use for the ones that pretend to be on the hunting teams side while throughout their professional career they have cut our throats.

Maybe instead of the word un-educated I should have said "brainwashed".....that's what's been done in many cases when it comes to wildlife management.
The sheep have been molded by the wolves.

We have been fed a line of ongoing BS when it comes to what's going on with wildlife management.
The ones presently in charge have been able to divert attention by keeping the different stakeholder groups at each other's throats by continually playing the allocation, LEH, quota.....special interest groups favouritism game.
In the meantime we get fed the line that everything is good, numbers are fine......
A lot of this is basked on inadequate or skewed data.

Its not working so good lately because guys from these groups are talking.

As for SSS thinking up the concept of an independent group to manage wildlife...... no offence to SSS.....it wasn't his thought.

This Roundtable approach to wildlife management is desperately needed.
Both forms of wolves will get thinned out then.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Bucksandbeers]

Well said BV!

[Dannybuoy]

This thread is making my head hurt . The more I read , the more I think the "science" based theories are wrong and would be another failed experiment . The best I can hope for is that no changes are made and we take our chances that mother nature manages it for us . cant do a worse job than when biologists and scientists stick their noses in the mix .

[Dannybuoy]

Its not cherry picking at all it's always been my argument that people use so called science when needed and then claim lack of science when it works for them. You can find proof for every argument. In the article you posted last night I read and find non conclusive eveidence of competition. As is most science nothing in the first 30 pages I have read so far is conclusive. This may be a cause, this may be the problem, this may be what is happening. Just like you can cherry pick from what I post I can cherry pick from everything you post. Where does this get us? You need to stop speaking like your science is so definitive. I always try to speak from a Wildlife point of view and try to ask lots of questions, not try to pretend I have all the answers.

For the record . I read that the same .

[Stone Sheep Steve]

The term "un-educated voter" was used in a slightly sarcastically way by me.

I probably understand the drivers behind wolf protectionism as much as any poster on this forum. Most would be damn surprised if they knew the actual names of some of the people that have put our wildlife in jeprody by making management calls that benefit their own personal wants. I have little use for the ones that pretend to be on the hunting teams side while throughout their professional career they have cut our throats.

Maybe instead of the word un-educated I should have said "brainwashed".....that's what's been done in many cases when it comes to wildlife management.
The sheep have been molded by the wolves.

We have been fed a line of ongoing BS when it comes to what's going on with wildlife management.
The ones presently in charge have been able to divert attention by keeping the different stakeholder groups at each other's throats by continually playing the allocation, LEH, quota.....special interest groups favouritism game.
In the meantime we get fed the line that everything is good, numbers are fine......
A lot of this is basked on inadequate or skewed data.

Its not working so good lately because guys from these groups are talking.

As for SSS thinking up the concept of an independent group to manage wildlife...... no offence to SSS.....it wasn't his thought.

This Roundtable approach to wildlife management is desperately needed.
Both forms of wolves will get thinned out then.

None taken. Wasn't my idea just added it to the list you presented. I figured you knew about it but just accidently left it off the list of what approach we need to take.

[GoatGuy]

Here's the best lay book on mule deer. If folks are concerned, suggest you buy it.

https://www.amazon.com/Mule-Deer-Con.../dp/0974241504


Would lend mine out but pretty sure someone on HBC has had my copy for a couple years.........

[Seeker]

It appears we can all agree on two things; i - the desperate need for increased funding and ii- the need for a round table of parties invested in ecosystem preservation and restoration. I think everything else is secondary until we get these two things established.

It sounds like the funding concept is being pushed on the politicians as we speak. It will be tough to convince them to release funds from general revenue, but if so, how can we as individuals or Fish and Game clubs further this agenda to ensure it gets the attention of the politicians that make these or will make these decisions. I believe writing letters is minimally effective, but I will contribute. We need something that carries weight, that froces the politicians to address this issue. Any other ideas that we as a user group can carry out? ex Advertising, Billboards or radio ads? Do we have some "influential" people that can plant a seed or two in the appropriate offices?

The round table, I believe is desperately needed. Can we organize a meeting with representatives from key user groups simply to assess the feasibility of the round table? I think if we can accomplish this alone and invite or notify the minister of FLNRO of such a gathering, that may be enough to get his attention and start him thinking. Heck, he might already be considering such an option, but this would then increase his concern regarding the round table. Another question is how do we get players such as mining and forestry involved when likely all they are going to hear is that you need to financial compensation for habitat degradation? What purpose will the group serve if it still has to go through the ministry once it makes any decisions or recommendations? I think we all know we still have the gatekeeper that will control what will ultimately be allowed to happen regarding crown land.

Just some om my thoughts.

[Ourea]

Seeker is getting it