Kootney elk

[HighCountryBC]

they dont like to hang out all day in big giant wild fire burns.

What? That’s exactly what they like to do.

[Husky7mm]

What? That’s exactly what they like to do.

Shhhh, don’t tell the elite hunters where the elk are or they will get them all!

[Bugle M In]

Boxhitch,

Good points and yes, I think it is a big reason why elk are in such poor #'s.
I do think Zone X was a result of all the "complaints" because of what you say.
Throw in the wolves, and they weren't going back up in the Spring, further compounding the issues.

What they didn't pay attention, or weren't listening too, were the hunters on horseback who were saying there were no elk in the backcountry (not like it used to be).

That should have been the "alarm bell" that maybe the zone X was targeting "all the elk, not just some".
(Don't read everything as fact, there were elk in the back 9, just not anywhere like before).

So, it is a combination of no wintering grounds (nobody wants them there and no room).
Its the fact that if they were down there, they were on the "hit" list.
And if they are no longer down there in the winter, there isn't any to go back in the Spring and populate
the back country.
And the few that are, are being hunted hard, or falling prey to preds.

The area I hunt, only had elk counts in the couple hundreds this past survey.
IT should have been in the thousands!
And this is a large MU.

[Bugle M In]

Kootenay Kid,

There are lots of ways to hunt elk and where to.
Many on horses took advantage of elk still in the subalpine from all summer.
(the food is 4X's more nutritious for them than if they stay on a ranchers field.)
But as soon as snow fell, the elk moved out.

Than there are the transition zones and pinch points as these elk start to move out of the sub alpine,
down some of the smaller rivers into the intermediate river valleys.
Generally close to the rut period and generally where most hunters concentrated in.
There will be areas inside this zone that the elk just hang in for breeding.

The last area was the big river valley bottoms.
Which, tends to be where most of the elk are these days and why many say knowing friends with private
property is a big advantage.
(A CO friend confirmed that many of the folks hanging elk got them this way)
This is just a general overview.
I could give you ton of info, how bulls will not only move down river, but will go up river, ad how they pattern their searches for cows when the rut is on, blah blah bla.

I used to be you (except for 1 difference).
Sorry for the chest beating coming next.
From 1990 til 2000, we took 14 bulls (all but 2 were decent 6pts).
I had 9 of them and was present for another 2 (calling/scouting etc)
There were some double headers and a triple in the week.
(YES, back than I was lucky to get 6 full days to hunt, as I am a stupid LM'er!, so that tells you I hiked and scouted my ass off to find elk that quickly!, and "experience" helps over the years)
So, this is at a time where many were saying "the elk are missing"!!?? (the high country elk)
ME, LIKE U, thought "they were nuts and didn't know how to hunt"!
(The BIG DIFFERENCE between you and me was, I was polite/respectful to not just say it out loud!, but I thought it!....but maybe it is a generation difference as I didn't have the I-net at the time, so when I talked my point of view, it was "face to face"!, not just a faceless post on the net...maybe I might have if
it was like it is today???...but I was brought different, so I doubt it)

Back to some facts so "we can all move forward" (as that is all I care about, but we need to know where we have been!!, so we don't go there again....but, somehow we did!!???????)

The one thing in the 90's, while many were saying thing were getting bad (they hadn't seen nothing yet!!)
is that I did agree, we were rarely seeing any COW ELK.
So that part I was seeing and it did scare me and all those cow leh permits year after year were going to be a big issue.
I complained about it, all the time. (I didn't want them gone, just reduced to something normal)
My father before me and my x father in law describe the valley as full of elk in the scree slopes.
Seeing 25 to 50 cow elk from slide to slide was common.
It wasn't the case when I was there!
(So you can see why the cow leh might have been so high when you hear old timers talking about the past, but at some point, it wasn't like that...warning #1).

Than came the "Big Chill" of 96 or 97???
Which now took a bad situation and made it worse.
BUT, did the Ministry over react?????
They removed the Cow LEH (which was an issue before the big chill), so they finally took the right steps
to do something (just ironic that they used a different reason to address the issue than the actual facts!!??)
And did they "Over React" by putting in the 6pt Restriction.
Remember, said all but 2 of our elk were less than 6pt (so was there an issue????).

Now did these changes make it worse...no.
But, I don't think targeting just the mature bulls is a great idea.

So, are we addressing why elk are not moving back to the high country???
Are we addressing what they need to move back to the high country???
Do they have places to survive thru the winter? because we cant have a high elk population if they cant survive the winters with no feed.
Do we have the money?
Is the Habitat right? (might be in a few years with some decent fires, but the ministry isn't doing dick!)


Kootenay Kid, does that answer the "Solutions" part for you??
Those answers have been on HBC for several years now.
Just no money and no incentive by the ministry to do anything.

So, the 1st problem to resolve, is a "#"!
How many elk do we want in the EK??
Then, once that is established, we have to look at the other issues to make it happen.

BIG PROBLEM!...
The Ministry has already stated THEY ONLY WANT APPROXIMATELY 12,000 HEAD OF ELK IN THE EK!
Sorry, but to me as an avid elk hunter and for future generation and to take pressure of other areas that we are seeing, THAT IS NOT ENOUGH!

I am mad, because we cant get thru problem #1 properly.
Only 12,000 head "is a problem, not a solution"!

[wideopenthrottle]

my avatar is my only elk...a few years ago..less than 1km from a GO couple hundred yards from bull river.....I have seen as many grizzly as elk in 3 trips up there..we were a group of 4 for 2 years getting our limit of WT with a bonus elk one year and a bonus goat the next...went 1 more time as a group of 3 the last year of 2 WT does and got our limit but lost one to a grizz...haven't been back to that area for 3 or 4 years now

[Bugle M In]

^^^^yup,
I am now spotting 2 or more gbear every season.
And, they are BIG!
And, from what the GO states, hang in the same areas that the elk are dropping their calves.
Also, see way more cats now too.
(never saw them before, but they like cow calls....so do the gbear….so don't sleep at the tree at high noon, as that is when I have had them come by)

[micus]

If Govt is the problem Why don't we all put our coconuts together and make a petition? I'm sure a rural MLA would sponsor it, lord knows I would sign.

heres the Template:

Petitions A fundamental concept of parliamentary democracy is the right of the public to have access to parliament by way of petition. A petition can be from an individual or group and can relate to the passage of a bill or the government’s consideration of an important public issue. Since the Legislative Assembly is a representative institution, it considers only those matters submitted to it by its own Members and petitions are no exception.
A petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly must be based on the template attached below, be drafted in respectful terms and must comply with the following basic rules:

• All signatures must be original and written directly on the face of the petition, and not pasted or transferred to it. Petitions must be free of erasures or insertions.
• If a petition consists of more than one sheet of signatures, the text of the petition must appear at the top of each sheet. Each person petitioning the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia must print his or her name and address and sign his or her name under the text of the petition.
• Petitions must be written, typewritten or printed, and it is recommended that the paper be standard letter or legal size.
• Petitioners must be residents of British Columbia.
• Petitions must not request any expenditure, grant or charge on the public revenue, whether payable out of the consolidated revenue fund or out of moneys to be provided by the Legislative Assembly.

The form of a petition is prescribed by Standing Order 73 and its accompanying Appendix A.
SAMPLE

To the Honourable the Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia, in Legislature Assembled:
The petition of the undersigned, ____________________________ , of the ____________________ , states that: [here state the object of the petition, briefly setting forth the reasons therefor].
Your petitioners respectfully request that the Honourable House [take such action as may be deemed appropriate.]
Dated __________ day of ____________________ , 20__ .
Name (printed) Address (printed)
Signature


Points I would consider:

-Restrict all Cow limited entry hunting to 1 tag per MU
-Eliminate Antlerless deer hunting where it exists
-a statement of intent wishing to see Elk / ungulate number significantly increased above the current levels for the enjoyment and prosperity of BC residents


I am just thinking out loud. Just saying, seems like lots of people talking about nothing getting done by the govt and hunters getting walked on all the time. Seems kind of like its nut-up or shut up time. Is there a way to voice concerns outside of petitioning? the BCWF online petition for cat hunting got 10000 signatures pretty quick, there are a lot more people invested in ungulate hunting than cat hunting in the province. Why don't we just do the same thing for our antlered friends?

Just sayin.

I hear stories from my uncle about how the EK used to be so ridiculously game-rich ( hes got a couple 360+ bulls hanging in his trophy room) and how he would go out for an afternoon in one of his holes and would be nearly guaranteed something, counting 150 head of mulies in a day, never shooting a WT under 4x4 etc etc. Drives me crazy thinking about it honestly. Anyway, rant over.

Mike.

[Bugle M In]

^^^^definitely a part of the puzzle.
Boxhitch is right, we 1st need to figure out what lands are winter range, what can be made available for winter range and do we (can we) expropriate land that is "vital" for being winter range.
Get it on a map for all to see.
See where the problems lie.

We have to establish exactly "why" game like elk are not travelling back into the back country.
Food(habitat) or preds or both or other.

Establish why are calf recruitment is so pitiful.
Come to some realization that a 6pt restriction may have done more damage than good.
(the survey I saw showed how few 6pt bulls existed, AND, do we know if any are really getting mature, 6 years or older or are they barely hitting 4 years old)

The Cow LEH and, or actually better so, zone x should be scrapped.
(We need to address the real issues, not Cull our breeding stalk because they are staying "in town")

Aerial killing of wolves is a must, and re-establish a GBear season (Fall season also).

As far as logging and the beetle, I have no clue where to start there, so I am not going to act like I do on here.
Only to say some logging is great, but too much is too much and is detrimental.
Something that I honestly believe has caused far greater problems in the "entire province" and why we
see so many different species in different regions getting shit kicked.
(And yes, maybe wolves have been the only real benefactor of this!!?)

BUT, it starts by telling the ministry to F'off and say NO, that game plan of only 12,000 head is not a
solution for hunters, or for wildlife or for future generations.

NOTE: this isn't really a Bio issue
This is a Mandate by the higher ups in the Ministry listening to other Private Sectors, not hunters and outdoorsman/ladies.

This is about changing the entire outlook of Conservation and for once and all, addressing the real issues to have a place with real Conservation in mind.
And that means some stuff has to be left natural, undeveloped.
(It doesn't mean it has to be a National Park)
Just areas that are deemed off limits to development.
But on limits for "enhancement" (unlike parks).

[HarryToolips]

If Govt is the problem Why don't we all put our coconuts together and make a petition? I'm sure a rural MLA would sponsor it, lord knows I would sign.

heres the Template:

Petitions A fundamental concept of parliamentary democracy is the right of the public to have access to parliament by way of petition. A petition can be from an individual or group and can relate to the passage of a bill or the government’s consideration of an important public issue. Since the Legislative Assembly is a representative institution, it considers only those matters submitted to it by its own Members and petitions are no exception.
A petition addressed to the Legislative Assembly must be based on the template attached below, be drafted in respectful terms and must comply with the following basic rules:

• All signatures must be original and written directly on the face of the petition, and not pasted or transferred to it. Petitions must be free of erasures or insertions.
• If a petition consists of more than one sheet of signatures, the text of the petition must appear at the top of each sheet. Each person petitioning the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia must print his or her name and address and sign his or her name under the text of the petition.
• Petitions must be written, typewritten or printed, and it is recommended that the paper be standard letter or legal size.
• Petitioners must be residents of British Columbia.
• Petitions must not request any expenditure, grant or charge on the public revenue, whether payable out of the consolidated revenue fund or out of moneys to be provided by the Legislative Assembly.

The form of a petition is prescribed by Standing Order 73 and its accompanying Appendix A.
SAMPLE

To the Honourable the Legislative Assembly of the Province of British Columbia, in Legislature Assembled:
The petition of the undersigned, ____________________________ , of the ____________________ , states that: [here state the object of the petition, briefly setting forth the reasons therefor].
Your petitioners respectfully request that the Honourable House [take such action as may be deemed appropriate.]
Dated __________ day of ____________________ , 20__ .
Name (printed) Address (printed)
Signature


Points I would consider:

-Restrict all Cow limited entry hunting to 1 tag per MU
-Eliminate Antlerless deer hunting where it exists
-a statement of intent wishing to see Elk / ungulate number significantly increased above the current levels for the enjoyment and prosperity of BC residents


I am just thinking out loud. Just saying, seems like lots of people talking about nothing getting done by the govt and hunters getting walked on all the time. Seems kind of like its nut-up or shut up time. Is there a way to voice concerns outside of petitioning? the BCWF online petition for cat hunting got 10000 signatures pretty quick, there are a lot more people invested in ungulate hunting than cat hunting in the province. Why don't we just do the same thing for our antlered friends?

Just sayin.

I hear stories from my uncle about how the EK used to be so ridiculously game-rich ( hes got a couple 360+ bulls hanging in his trophy room) and how he would go out for an afternoon in one of his holes and would be nearly guaranteed something, counting 150 head of mulies in a day, never shooting a WT under 4x4 etc etc. Drives me crazy thinking about it honestly. Anyway, rant over.

Mike.

Everything looks good Mike, except for the getting rid of the antlerless season as it pertains to whitetails - they are a prolific, risiliant breed unlike any other, yes maybe the 2 doe limit in reg 4 was a bit much, but the current season is not bad at all - if you want to educate yourself on the subject, I suggest reading Whitetail Advantage, cheers...

[micus]

Everything looks good Mike, except for the getting rid of the antlerless season as it pertains to whitetails - they are a prolific, risiliant breed unlike any other, yes maybe the 2 doe limit in reg 4 was a bit much, but the current season is not bad at all - if you want to educate yourself on the subject, I suggest reading Whitetail Advantage, cheers...

I agree, allowing a singular WT doe probably isn't going to mean the end of the world for the POP. There was a time not so long ago that there was a mulie doe hunt in Reg 4 that basically destroyed the population around here.

as far as a petition goes, I think we could leave a lot of requests out and simply put forth a statement of intent wishing the desired ungulate numbers to be increased above current levels. that at least would get the ball rolling and let the powers that be know there is a group of vocal people with a vested interest in the provinces ungulates.