southern interior mule deer strategy?

[GoatGuy]

With the tools available, they were probably just as successful as our present Managers, and yet we are still are using the same Counting systems and Questionnaire that they used.
I can't see any great improvements based on that alone, and twenty years from now, there will probably be someone criticizing your practices.

It would be very interesting to have a Independent Review and Audit of our Wildlife Practices in the past 10 years to see how it has progressed.
Wonder if one of these Round Table Meetings will make that suggestion?

Taking inventory is going to be rough on some individuals, specially the ones who don't want to admit when their wrong.

The question was: From your perspective, how successful do you think wildlife management has been over the last 40 years?

You can rate it 1-10; or use a poor, decent, good, great.

Second question is: Why?

[Bugle M In]

Like FD said....
Another simple example of "limiting" hunter opportunities was making EK Elk Hunting "6 Point Only".
So....did that fix the problem......nope...and it didn't take 30 years for it to happen.
Elk are declining in the EK....so .....why??

[bearvalley]

Like FD said....
Another simple example of "limiting" hunter opportunities was making EK Elk Hunting "6 Point Only".
So....did that fix the problem......nope...and it didn't take 30 years for it to happen.
Elk are declining in the EK....so .....why??

How are the elk doing close to the caribou recovery project?

[Bugle M In]

Hows are the elk doing close to the caribou recovery project?

Hey....good question...really...how are they doing?
Isn't J-T apart of some of these studies conducted in the EK.
Bearvalley, do you know?
It would be interesting to know, but, this is one small area, and only one species.
The problems are Province wide.

[bearvalley]

Hey....good question...really...how are they doing?
Isn't J-T apart of some of these studies conducted in the EK.
Bearvalley, do you know?
It would be interesting to know, but, this is one small area, and only one species.
The problems are Province wide.

I've heard some rumors.
The differance between this small area and the rest of the Province is that one lever is being pulled to try and recover caribou.
It would be interesting to know if this is having a positive effect on other species....

[bownut]

Second question is: Why?[/QUOTE]


Wow 40 years, thats a big spread, is that a trick question? I would say in the past management was good to decent, nothing is ever great. That being said there is always room for improvement,
especially in the last 10 years with all the resources available.( poor)


Why Poor:
The Drivers that management speak of need to be reviewed with a better understanding of their Regional effects. Eg. Increase Wolf populations
Management needs to be more peripheral in the decision making and include the non scientific reports. Eg. Hunters, Cattlemen,Farmers
Management needs to practice on more of a Mentorship system so the latest technology can blend with proven procedures.
Rapid changes over shorter periods without review of the effects. Eg. Regulation changes.
A better understanding of the effects of all user groups. eg. Motor Bike clubs, hikers, dog walkers, Rec .Vehicles etc.
Much of the so called science has been based on inconclusive studies that many times state they need further study. eg. Selkirk Study. (funding?)

Summary
As the Hunter Numbers climbs back to acceptable levels after the declines caused by the Gun Registry and other factors, Opportunity no longer needs
to the main tool to needed, management needs to adjust their thinking and stop Data Mining to support that cause.
I don't think that I am the only one that feels this way, judging by the rapid increase in wildlife groups popping up every where.
I understand the funds needed are not available to make all the changes needed, but directing the attention on increasing the Hunter Numbers isn't the answer to finding the funds.

[GoatGuy]

Wow 40 years, thats a big spread, is that a trick question? I would say in the past management was good to decent, nothing is ever great. That being said there is always room for improvement,
especially in the last 10 years with all the resources available.( poor)


Why Poor:
The Drivers that management speak of need to be reviewed with a better understanding of their Regional effects. Eg. Increase Wolf populations
Management needs to be more peripheral in the decision making and include the non scientific reports. Eg. Hunters, Cattlemen,Farmers
Management needs to practice on more of a Mentorship system so the latest technology can blend with proven procedures.
Rapid changes over shorter periods without review of the effects. Eg. Regulation changes.
A better understanding of the effects of all user groups. eg. Motor Bike clubs, hikers, dog walkers, Rec .Vehicles etc.
Much of the so called science has been based on inconclusive studies that many times state they need further study. eg. Selkirk Study. (funding?)

Summary
As the Hunter Numbers climbs back to acceptable levels after the declines caused by the Gun Registry and other factors, Opportunity no longer needs
to the main tool to needed, management needs to adjust their thinking and stop Data Mining to support that cause.
I don't think that I am the only one that feels this way, judging by the rapid increase in wildlife groups popping up every where.
I understand the funds needed are not available to make all the changes needed, but directing the attention on increasing the Hunter Numbers isn't the answer to finding the funds.

So to paraphrase you think wildlife management was good/decent until the last 10 years. You define the last 10 years as poor due to hunting seasons.

Do you have any evidence to support that belief?

[GoatGuy]

I've heard some rumors.
The differance between this small area and the rest of the Province is that one lever is being pulled to try and recover caribou.
It would be interesting to know if this is having a positive effect on other species....

Not measurable yet.

[Fisher-Dude]

Rapid changes over shorter periods without review of the effects. Eg. Regulation changes.

Obviously, you think this review of a regulation change within 4 years of the season's implementation never happened.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife...rov_review.pdf

And I can understand why you think it never happened. And that's because it shows the season to be completely sustainable, and that's contrary to your hoped-for outcome.

[bearvalley]

Not measurable yet.

Right.
I forgot.
Maybe it's just anecdotal evidence.