I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with keyboards and forums. - F L Wright
Try and be kind to everyone but fear no one. - Ourea
yes!! i think you nailed it there @Walksalot....i agree forestry practices can be beneficial...but don't see too many logging companies practicing selective timber harvest...whitetails love that clearcut regrowth though...mulies not so much...habitat loss...it's a shame that as the Okanagan human population continues to grow, so will the decline of mule deer continue...
The hypothesis needs to be proved rather then promoted...study should be free of bias.
Not saying your wrong just saying your putting the cart before the horse.
There are multiple factors just as important that must be considered....and it would be much more useful to problem solve rather then finger point. Hindsight is 20/20...
like the caribou .remedial actions such setting aside habitat which has already been altered (ie logged) might be useful long term but not so much short term...you cannot put the genie back in the bottle.
campaigning makes it seem you already made your minds up..study is not even a year along....
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)
Could not agree more and this would be the best thing for credibility of the study(and future studies) and mule deer themselves
One piece of evidence is often not enough to reach a factual conclusion and that is why a study is done. I could debate with facts one point that keeps getting hinted at but that does nothing for the out come of the study. It’s nice to hear factual data that is found during this study though
I will place bets their is multiple factors at play with the decline. It would be a shame to see things groomed towards 1 issue and others ignored. It would be nice to see this study end with results that highlight all possible factors impacting mule deer and the facts used to reach the conclusion.
It’s great to hear this study is being done but it will be even better if it concludes with non bias facts and conclusion
^^^^agree completely... this is critical, otherwise may just be a means to preconceived agenda. Decline may well be largely due to predation and yet if study not thorough enough with significant sample size could easily be spun to be habitat loss. Need enough data over significantly long time to start to see trends and draw conclusions. Doing so prematurely would not be helpful and defeat purpose entirely. I could see this taking a decade or so. If heavy predation is factor that should be obvious much sooner. If is predation may well still be partially related to habitat loss, but at least will be able to start addressing possible short term solutions while the study continues and then monitor how those solutions start to impact survival over the longer term.
Last edited by northof49; 03-09-2019 at 11:46 AM.
In my eyes it seems like we know what the problems are.
Humans destruction of habitat/road access. Which causes both 4 and 2 legged predators to be much more efficient, both due to travelling corridors and high concentrations of deer in pockets which make it easier for predators to seemingly pillage ungulates. The wolves are going to find where the deer HAVE to be, which that area is getting smaller and smaller.
Short term - cull predators, seems to be the only solution (in my eyes)
Long term - which should start immediately. Habitat enhancement, make mining and forestry accountable for restoration projects. Stop development on prime wintering grounds. Then maybe it can turn from culling to manage predators.
What can you do as a hunter, at least short term? Kill any wolf or coyote you see. You hear a pack of wolves howling go from elk hunting to wolf hunting. (Which I'm guilty of just moving on to where I think wolves won't be). Carry a cougar, bobcat and lynx tag. And what I think is most important, go out and shoot some bears. I'll probably get some flack for this, but whatever a problem is a problem. Who cares about sex when it comes to bears, if the idea is to lower numbers. As long as it's legal with no Cubs and predator management is your priority it shouldn't be an issue. Same with sexing a cat, If i ever cross one with no kittens, it probably won't be walking around much longer. This probably sounds cold but there is an issue in this province.
Hopefully I'll be able to follow my own advice this spring when it comes to bears, as that seems to me the only real impactful thing hunters can easily accomplish. If your an accomplished wolf or cat Hunter than great but let's be honest that isn't too realistic.
i along with many will keep my opinions to myself. Time will tell on this study if much money and time are being spent studying the obvious. One smoking gun will not likely be found as we all can agree on this being a complex matter.
I do recall one very important quote that will stand the test of time.
“When we take care of the land we take care of everything”
it is my observation and may others we’ve done a very piss poor job taking care of the land in BC. I’m guilty of this as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zVNNhzkJ-UU&feature=related
Egotistical, Self Centered, Son of a Bitch Killer that Doesn't Play Well With Others.
Guess he got to Know me
Ok I have seen in many areas the MD population decline drastically even the past 7 years. However I did hunt an area this year that held a very healthy population seeing over 14 bucks and close to 80 different does and fawns in a 15 km range. I would love for the bios to go study there except I dont want anyone knowing about this spot