Cranbrook Whities

[Dannybuoy]

Habitat competition isn't the driver. Nowhere did I mention that.

The driver is the whitetails keeping the predator load high while mule deer are in decline. In a traditional mule deer population absent whitetail, the predator population will fluctuate with the mule deer, giving the mule deer a chance to recover when preds dip.

When whitetail show up, predator populations can dine on WT as a secondary or even primary prey while MD decline, and that keeps MD on the decline as the preds stay high.

Read this: http://www.cfr.washington.edu/classe...binson2002.pdf

When we combine poor MD habitat, high preds, and high WTs, it's the perfect storm to drive MD down, down, down.

That says to me its a predator problem .Period ! Otherwise the plan is to increase wildlife numbers to feed the wolves, bears, cats and coyotes , if there is a surplus then hunters can have a season if the natives allow ...... hmmm ?
And you wonder why I dont think alot of scientific opinions ?

[Fisher-Dude]

That says to me its a predator problem .Period ! Otherwise the plan is to increase wildlife numbers to feed the wolves, bears, cats and coyotes , if there is a surplus then hunters can have a season if the natives allow ...... hmmm ?
And you wonder why I dont think alot of scientific opinions ?

If you had been paying attention, and watched the Hebblewhite presentation, you would have seen the important point he drove home: without good habitat, predator removal will not increase mule deer populations because of compensatory mortality from bad habitat.

If I have food for 100 MD and kill every predator, I'll still only end up with 100 MD because I don't have the food for any more. In fact, if I throw another 50 MD on that food supply with pred removal, I may well end up with less than 100 at the end of the day, as the entire population ends up with inadequate food. That's been shown in the Montana and Idaho studies when preds were hammered and the deer populations declined.

Pretty basic when you think about it with an open mind.

[Dannybuoy]

If you had been paying attention, and watched the Hebblewhite presentation, you would have seen the important point he drove home: without good habitat, predator removal will not increase mule deer populations because of compensatory mortality from bad habitat.

If I have food for 100 MD and kill every predator, I'll still only end up with 100 MD because I don't have the food for any more. In fact, if I throw another 50 MD on that food supply with pred removal, I may well end up with less than 100 at the end of the day, as the entire population ends up with inadequate food. That's been shown in the Montana and Idaho studies when preds were hammered and the deer populations declined.

Pretty basic when you think about it with an open mind.

True and I didnt miss that , the problem is we have food for 100 mule deer where there is a fraction of that number now there . In some cases even the predators have moved on because of lack of food .
I have been paying attention to all the browse and meadows of grass that dont have any sign of game ....
habitat is a problem ??

[Wild one]

Is there a report of proven success with this management plan FD?

I know the attempt at this management plan in MU 339 in Alberta has been a fail in improving mule deer numbers. I know it was attempted in other MUs but I lack knowledge on them. I also know WT doe harvest has been cut back in many areas out there as of recent

I understand there was study and facts used to come up with this theory but I have yet to see results proving it effective

I have debated the ?able parts of the theory in the past. Long thread over it in the past. BC is also not following all aspects of the theory either we have not reduced mule deer harvest

With this plan put in place in 339 as mentioned it was combined with restrictive mule deer harvest still a fail

Habitat I agree with and that is the only thing that will dictate the future of these species in B.C.. Lots of examples even in B.C. where they consist just but dominate there perfered habitat.

Focus on habitat is the correct answer in my opinion this trying to manipulate WT numbers to improve mule deer is a waste

[HarryToolips]

So it would appear that your Bingo is busted ... hmmmmm

Incorrect.....WT will keep pred numbers artificially high if their population isnt kept in check, and while they can 'bounce back' from high pred numbers relatively quickly, MD cannot..

[horshur]

Comparing the past numbers when there was predator management to today when there is none..does not sound like science to me. It is blind faith.

[horshur]

There have been more big fires in the last 20 years then last 80. So tell me about how hunting was better cause of habitat...

[Elkchaser]

Very interesting thread. Great info being discussed and I appreciate folks keeping it going with some good facts and keeping it civil. I'm still working on my 2017 EK wt, focussing on big buck - today home with flu recovering kids while momma bear works. I've spent a considerable amount of hunting days this year and did have a decent amount of wt action on trail cams, but definitely less than last couple years. Some of the discussion has centered on a few points and that are negatively linked making solutions that more complicated. Set me straight if I'm getting this part wrong.
1. More WT = more preds = less MD.
2. Less WT = less preds = more MD (habitat not withstanding).
I think anybody that's spent decent bush time in EK this year will agree that there are a lot of 4 legged meat eaters moving around. I'm actually shocked by the amount of fresh coyote and wolf tracks I've seen in the last couple weeks on snow in areas where I've taken wt previously and now can't find a fresh deer track. Doesn't mean they all been eaten, but they might be getting pushed into marginal habitat. Another recent field observation (linked to last one) has been in 2014, 2015 habitat burns. Open forest areas holding grass are barren of tracks which I thought would at least see some nocturnal feeding. Track sign is limited to areas where the understory did not burn - burning that understory is usually a primary goal. I'm assuming once forage is consumed in these areas, deer will venture farther from security cover. My take is that there may be ok wt numbers out there right now, but the pressure from both 4 legged and 2 legged preds is keeping them in security cover maybe more than folks have been used to.
I wish the solutions were simple, but I just think the dynamic nature of things around here, including competing stakeholder interests, makes this a challenge. Not helping...Crazy snow winter followed by baking summer that nuked grasses earlier than normal and also killed a lot of young trees without deep roots. I think last summer may still end up impacting survival due to potential winter range degradation??? From my day job stuff I do think one piece of the puzzle to work on are the EK ungulate winter range orders. 4-006 and 4-008 were established around 2004 I believe. It's time to revisit these and to incorporate some current management strategies and directions.
Anyways, hope you didn't mind my anectodal (non scientific) observations. By the way, its a great time to be out in the bush around here right now. Good travelling, relatively few humans around. Wish I could be chasing wt right now!

[Dannybuoy]

Incorrect.....WT will keep pred numbers artificially high IF their population isnt kept in check, and while they can 'bounce back' from high pred numbers relatively quickly, MD cannot..

Oh ? Isnt this the same stratigy being used to save the caribou from predators ? using the moose as a sacrifice . How is that working out ?

[Dannybuoy]

Very interesting thread. Great info being discussed and I appreciate folks keeping it going with some good facts and keeping it civil. I'm still working on my 2017 EK wt, focussing on big buck - today home with flu recovering kids while momma bear works. I've spent a considerable amount of hunting days this year and did have a decent amount of wt action on trail cams, but definitely less than last couple years. Some of the discussion has centered on a few points and that are negatively linked making solutions that more complicated. Set me straight if I'm getting this part wrong.
1. More WT = more preds = less MD.
2. Less WT = less preds = more MD (habitat not withstanding).
I think anybody that's spent decent bush time in EK this year will agree that there are a lot of 4 legged meat eaters moving around. I'm actually shocked by the amount of fresh coyote and wolf tracks I've seen in the last couple weeks on snow in areas where I've taken wt previously and now can't find a fresh deer track. Doesn't mean they all been eaten, but they might be getting pushed into marginal habitat. Another recent field observation (linked to last one) has been in 2014, 2015 habitat burns. Open forest areas holding grass are barren of tracks which I thought would at least see some nocturnal feeding. Track sign is limited to areas where the understory did not burn - burning that understory is usually a primary goal. I'm assuming once forage is consumed in these areas, deer will venture farther from security cover. My take is that there may be ok wt numbers out there right now, but the pressure from both 4 legged and 2 legged preds is keeping them in security cover maybe more than folks have been used to.
I wish the solutions were simple, but I just think the dynamic nature of things around here, including competing stakeholder interests, makes this a challenge. Not helping...Crazy snow winter followed by baking summer that nuked grasses earlier than normal and also killed a lot of young trees without deep roots. I think last summer may still end up impacting survival due to potential winter range degradation??? From my day job stuff I do think one piece of the puzzle to work on are the EK ungulate winter range orders. 4-006 and 4-008 were established around 2004 I believe. It's time to revisit these and to incorporate some current management strategies and directions.
Anyways, hope you didn't mind my anectodal (non scientific) observations. By the way, its a great time to be out in the bush around here right now. Good travelling, relatively few humans around. Wish I could be chasing wt right now!

Good post and probably more on point to the original OP on EK WT