Awesome study. Would love to see them collar some around carpenter lake where wolves are 100% predating on mule deer.
Awesome study. Would love to see them collar some around carpenter lake where wolves are 100% predating on mule deer.
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.
WSSBC Monarch Silver Member
WSF Summit Life Member
RMGA Life Member
The mountains are calling and I must go - John Muir
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.
Last edited by Bugle M In; 12-10-2019 at 07:11 PM.
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.
wonder what’s over the next hill?
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
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.
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.
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."
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.
Nothing to say to that besides the fact I wish we had more funding available for wildlife and the wild places they inhabit, period.
WSSBC Monarch Silver Member
WSF Summit Life Member
RMGA Life Member
The mountains are calling and I must go - John Muir
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.
WSSBC Monarch Silver Member
WSF Summit Life Member
RMGA Life Member
The mountains are calling and I must go - John Muir