JT alludes to progress in these researchers desire to reduce and eliminate sheep hunting.
I've spoken with BCWF and BCWSF execs that are not interested or concerned that the science behind these papers is severely flawed.
Some seem to be content in limiting harvest well below sustainable levels. I could only assume from the conversations that the reasoning was to have less sheep hunters on the same hills they climb. Hate to say it, but it is what it is.
Mechanisms and criteria for reaching AH is established with detail in the Sheep management plans.
These protocols are not being followed.
Actually you and We can and must blend Alberta's and BC's "problems" in this matter.
This problem is an international action intending to establish a new wildlife conservation model, known as the "Compassionate Wildlife Management Model.
The new model places hunting as a last means tools to only be used for population control.
The new model desires to be "Compassionate" to wildlife, meaning the end of hunting.
The willingness for these researchers to Conclude and promote extensive restrictions to Sheep hunting based of flawed science is a problem ALL hunters around the world share.
I agree on the "compassionate" issue and we in BC do suffer from the actions of these often foreign zealots.
I also have seen evidence of their pernicious and vile behaviour in AB, while employed there in the AFS. I detest such scum and laugh at the "wildlife bios" they present as "experts" on, for example, BC Grizzlies.
However, I am curious as to your personal qualifications to determine how the current science you refer to above is "flawed"? Which, specific studies are flawed and in what manner?