Lets all create more wildlife together as a team

[Rob Chipman]

^^^^"As I stated earlier the strongest play possible would be to get our FN communities as allies, not enemies."

I can't see any other way either. Not sure how we'll get there, but I can't imagine that any alternative will work. FNs aren't going anywhere, and they've got rock solid claims.

[HarryToolips]

^^^^ Unregulated hunting. That there's gonna be a tough, tough nut to crack. We need to address it, but I'm not sure how. What a minefield.

I will say this: I believe scientists who study wildlife think that higher road density is an overall negative. There's data to support the claim in certain instances, and it would seem self-evident to be detrimental to wildlife populations. I bring that up to reinforce the idea that science would underly our management decisions whether it's roads or predators or whatever.

This is it....some people got to stop thinking it's their God given right to drive every square km in a given area, and be ok with some % of the area being deactivated, then you would see a benefit to wildlife....

[HarryToolips]

That I agree with wholeheartedly. I guess if us old crocs need to figure out a way to bring out a beastie it will be a plus if it will end up helping to increase the animal population. My back hates you but it will have to suck it up.

This is a good guy right here....what is right for wildlife....everybody ask yourself this: in 1982 there was an all time high in BC hunter numbers at over 180,000 IIRC...what impact would the hunting have had back then if they had the access we have now???

[HarryToolips]

Yes. Even understated. At this point the only thing written in stone is the FN right to harvest without restriction, accountability or data collection. As I stated earlier the strongest play possible would be to get our FN communities as allies, not enemies. I am not sure how to go about it, but if a group with no objective other than helping wildlife were to facilitate the natives to put pressure on govt to create more wildlife then you would see the NDP bending over backwards. Then we could bicker about allocation.

Totally agree....

[Ourea]

That I agree with wholeheartedly. I guess if us old crocs need to figure out a way to bring out a beastie it will be a plus if it will end up helping to increase the animal population. My back hates you but it will have to suck it up.

Great attitude and the right attitude goatdancer.
Too many focus on fighting over the crumbs rather than making more cake.
The crumbs r getting harder to come by.
The time has come to help "make" rather than take.

[WWBC]

I would agree with road deactivating and more areas with ATV restrictions. What about. Bow Zones or extended bow seasons. More hunter opertunity lower harvest.

Not it my idea ( read it on this forum) mandatory 2 wolf tails for a moose tag.

[338win mag]

That I agree with wholeheartedly. I guess if us old crocs need to figure out a way to bring out a beastie it will be a plus if it will end up helping to increase the animal population. My back hates you but it will have to suck it up.

Great attitude, love it, theres still going to be lots of access for old guys, lol.

[Wild one]

I would agree with road deactivating and more areas with ATV restrictions. What about. Bow Zones or extended bow seasons. More hunter opertunity lower harvest.

Not it my idea ( read it on this forum) mandatory 2 wolf tails for a moose tag.

Archery seasons are a proven and effective tool used across North America to provide a low impact opurtunities for hunters. Unfortanatly in BC many oppose them so we get LEH or point restrictions instead.

Good way to add opurtunity but not a great tool to grow more wildlife

I agree with promoting predator hunting but if is giving out extra opportunity to target the ungulates we are trying to lower predation on its kinda counter productive. It would also make it a nightmare for calculating allowable harvest for tag numbers given out

[Fisher-Dude]

I would agree with road deactivating and more areas with ATV restrictions. What about. Bow Zones or extended bow seasons. More hunter opertunity lower harvest.

Not it my idea ( read it on this forum) mandatory 2 wolf tails for a moose tag.

If hunting were affecting ungulate numbers, then your idea would have some merit.

However, hunting is not driving ungulate populations, so imposing more restrictions on hunters is absolutely the wrong approach.

We haven't hunted southern caribou for > 30 years, and they are almost extinct.

We went from any buck mule deer Sept 10 - Nov 30 and GOS 3 weeks of does, to 4 point only closing Nov 10 and no doe season, mule deer decline.

We went from any bull moose, 6 week season and GOS cows, to spike fork only for 2 weeks, moose decline.

We went from 3 point bull elk Sept 10 - Nov 15 and some GOS cows, to 6 point only Sept 10 - Oct 20 and no GOS cows, and elk decline.

Restricting hunting further does nothing for ungulate populations. We've had 40 years of more restrictive seasons, we have only 60% of the hunters we had before, and species are in decline.

People need to learn from history and realize that blaming hunting for species declines is an incorrect approach to game management. People are quick to confuse "what's good for me (eg more bow seasons because I'm a bow hunter)" with conservation. It's the wrong approach, proven over and over.

[hawk-i]

Wolf control will help elk and moose, won't do anything for deer.

In 21 studies on the effects of pred control on mule deer, there was one positive population response. With deer it's always about habitat.

Bullderdash ...have personally seen deer population drop to near zero in 1 year when wolves moved in.