Southern Interior Mule Deer Project Update

[charlie_horse]

Awesome study. Would love to see them collar some around carpenter lake where wolves are 100% predating on mule deer.

[pg83]

Actually the fire actually destroyed good habitat as in the way of fir in the valley the deer eat the lichen of the limbs now it’s all grassland another 10 years and all the burnt timber will be down on the ground . Fire helps and fire hurts. If anything deer numbers have dropped since the fire.

I won't dispute for a second that fire can do both good and bad, but I'd like to know where you have gotten your deer numbers from and for what years you are referring to specifically. Are you certain that deer numbers have dropped or have the deer simply changed their behavior and you are not seeing them as much? I don't spend much time in that area of the province so I am basing my info off the scientific data which shows(to me) that the deer currently collared in this specific area are actually doing pretty good.

[Wild one]

Awesome study. Would love to see them collar some around carpenter lake where wolves are 100% predating on mule deer.

Lots of cougar there too

[Pauly]

Sounds like you and me have hunted the same areas.
I would agree, that in the case of the Ashcroft Reserve Fire, that some areas that burnt were in fact a "bad thing", as it was one some
prime winter range, and yes, lichen is something they like to have in their mouths and which the fore destroyed a lot of and what
MD need thru winter.
Now, on the main Plateau, where so much of it was obliterated by logging, summer range, that would have been a great area to have had
a fire...naturally occurring, but without all the logging already present, would have been ideal.

Some of the fringe areas of the fire, that did burn in winter range, is where I think there were big benefits!
Where, just like spot logging, this combination of mature growth winter fir with lichen and then fresh grasses and plants from the burn
intertwined is perfect, imo.

I think the decline of deer in the area however, already started when the logging got heavy, and then followed by wolves and R5 closure and added hunting pressure.
It is possible that benefits from the burn may take years to see, rather then some areas like the OK fire where many hunters found some
real benefits from it within a year or 2.
The extensive logging makes this different.

Yeah I’m a regular in the area 40 years worth so one tends to see how things change over time. Numbers of deer will rebound .. the new grasslands will be great early spring/summer range now but the loss of winter range is a very real problem. I agree the fringes will hold deer but not to capacity now. Land can only cary so many animals. Be a nice fire to have a year round 4 point only reg.

[Pauly]

I won't dispute for a second that fire can do both good and bad, but I'd like to know where you have gotten your deer numbers from and for what years you are referring to specifically. Are you certain that deer numbers have dropped or have the deer simply changed their behavior and you are not seeing them as much? I don't spend much time in that area of the province so I am basing my info off the scientific data which shows(to me) that the deer currently collared in this specific area are actually doing pretty good.

You are looking at it all wrong my friend. Just because collard deer are doing well means precisely nothing other than they are doing well. Numbers are an entirely different study. The current study is about survivability .. mortality and necropsy that’s it!

[Bugle M In]

I won't dispute for a second that fire can do both good and bad, but I'd like to know where you have gotten your deer numbers from and for what years you are referring to specifically. Are you certain that deer numbers have dropped or have the deer simply changed their behavior and you are not seeing them as much? I don't spend much time in that area of the province so I am basing my info off the scientific data which shows(to me) that the deer currently collared in this specific area are actually doing pretty good.

Yeah I’m a regular in the area 40 years worth so one tends to see how things change over time. Numbers of deer will rebound .. the new grasslands will be great early spring/summer range now but the loss of winter range is a very real problem. I agree the fringes will hold deer but not to capacity now. Land can only cary so many animals. Be a nice fire to have a year round 4 point only reg.

pg83, You are right, neither of us have any concrete proof of numbers.
Honestly, I don't even know if the Ministry does either!?(not sure if they did a winter count of the area where the studies were before they begun? (that would make too much sense for the ministry to have figured out!)

Like Pauly, it's an area I know really well, also for about 40 years now.
IF I go by sign and even activity, there is a change, especially in regards to big bucks.
But, there is also a shortage of Does, in big groups like there once was.

But, I also know the time I go, there is virtually no snow as compared to years ago, and I know that this could make a big difference.

I think more what Pauly and I are seeing, is that many of the areas burnt do not have deer standing in them where they would have been
the year before.
For me, I am also seeing that the Does don't have 2 fawns with them, like in the past.
Which for me, is the most concerning, and not based on the of lack of big bucks etc, that makes me feel not all is well.
Feed has been there in the winter as logging was not an issue but was due to be until the fire squashed that plan (thank god!)
Also, I ran into way more winter kill then ever before yet last winter was mild.

The other comment I made about wanting to see a proper mapping of the collars and the deers movement year round, wasn't about trying to
find new hunting grounds (most know where to go anyways), but to see if their movements where different based on all the logging.
Were they using different corridors to travel down then what I know from experience???

The only problem I suppose with the study is, we have no previous study to look at to see "What is really different now as compared to say
30 years ago".
But hey, we got to start somewhere and this is a great first step to see what the issues are right now.

[dougan]

This whole thing is why a buy a puma tag each year . See one shoot one . 1 deer per week per cat do the math.

[Pauly]

This whole thing is why a buy a puma tag each year . See one shoot one . 1 deer per week per cat do the math.

Absolutely.. cats favourite pray is big old worn out mule bucks. Stumbled across more than a few kills the last couple of years. I saw some very large bucks early in the season through my spotter but all 3 points. We ended up shooting two not bad bucks this year nothing to brag about but happy to fill the freezer. Next year I chase lewie all season

[pg83]

pg83, You are right, neither of us have any concrete proof of numbers.
Honestly, I don't even know if the Ministry does either!?(not sure if they did a winter count of the area where the studies were before they begun? (that would make too much sense for the ministry to have figured out!)

Not sure if they have done a recent inventory, but wildlife has not been a priority for any party in the province for a long time. It's not about making sense or not, it's about dollars.

Like Pauly, it's an area I know really well, also for about 40 years now.
IF I go by sign and even activity, there is a change, especially in regards to big bucks.
But, there is also a shortage of Does, in big groups like there once was.

But, I also know the time I go, there is virtually no snow as compared to years ago, and I know that this could make a big difference.

I think more what Pauly and I are seeing, is that many of the areas burnt do not have deer standing in them where they would have been
the year before.

I'm not surprised there is a change in the sign you are seeing. The recent massive burn has changed the habitat throughout the region. Animals are going to use the landscape differently.
#climatechange is also undoubtedly having an impact on many species and we have no real clue about any of that currently to the best of my knowledge.

For me, I am also seeing that the Does don't have 2 fawns with them, like in the past.
Which for me, is the most concerning, and not based on the of lack of big bucks etc, that makes me feel not all is well.
Feed has been there in the winter as logging was not an issue but was due to be until the fire squashed that plan (thank god!)
Also, I ran into way more winter kill then ever before yet last winter was mild.

Direct quote from the link provided earlier in the thread by you: "As of spring 2019, our team had documented pregnancy rates of 93% and twinning rates of >69%. These metrics are both considered very good for mule deer."

The other comment I made about wanting to see a proper mapping of the collars and the deers movement year round, wasn't about trying to
find new hunting grounds (most know where to go anyways), but to see if their movements where different based on all the logging.
Were they using different corridors to travel down then what I know from experience???

Agreed 100% I'm happy that the bio's do have that data to look at the very least. It is through such information that they can attempt to influence the decision makers above them to provide real change.

The only problem I suppose with the study is, we have no previous study to look at to see "What is really different now as compared to say
30 years ago".
But hey, we got to start somewhere and this is a great first step to see what the issues are right now.

Nothing to say to that besides the fact I wish we had more funding available for wildlife and the wild places they inhabit, period.

[pg83]

You are looking at it all wrong my friend. Just because collard deer are doing well means precisely nothing other than they are doing well. Numbers are an entirely different study. The current study is about survivability .. mortality and necropsy that’s it!

I never made a claim that the numbers were healthy in comparison to historical figures. I simply stated that the numbers from the study showed that the deer captured in the Cache Creek Study Area were doing pretty well. You still haven't provided any back up to your claim about decreasing numbers though. For the record I'm not disputing that claim, I simply like to have statistical data to back it up.