No more 7a calf season, yay or nay?

[EELK]

I am happy about this but hopefully I get a draw for once in a century, calf season has been turfed in 7a in everywhere but 7-16 and 7-23 except for youth and senior. Hopefully this will boost the moose population, now if they would only get rid of the damn doe season.:mrgreen:

[Fisher-Dude]

Explain to us how it will increase the moose population. Also, while explaining it, tell us why for 3 decades the moose population was stable and growing with the current calf season in place.

[dougal]

Seeing as the calf population will inevitably increase so will the population of those who feed upon them causing a general shift in the wildlife landscape. The impact of reduced or eliminated hunting changes things drastically. Looks like the wolves will be growing again

[Mulehahn]

Explain to us how it will increase the moose population. Also, while explaining it, tell us why for 3 decades the moose population was stable and growing with the current calf season in place.

I will take a shot at it. First, I will gladly acknowledge that in a healthy population there is no doubt that a calf harvest is compensatory. That is to say, it mimics natural mortality. Thus the reason it was put into place, use the resource rather than let it go to "waste" through predation and starvation. However, recent studies, notably some from Ontario, have proven that in areas of low population the effect of predation by wolves and black bears, who primarily target calves, has a greater affect and hunter harvest no longer becomes compensatory, but becomes additive. Further, since the areas is underpopulated the threat of starvation declines, allowing a greater percentage of calves who escape predation to survive the winter. There is no denying that moose population in parts of province have collapsed. Not declined but collapsed. The reasons for this vary, but are known to include loss of habitat, winter ranges, increase in predators, increased in logging do to pine beetle (which has allowed predators, namely wolves, to become more effective), mismanagement, and over-harvest by various groups. Many of these factors have developed, or been exacerbated, within the last decade. As a result practices, that were effective 30 years ago may no longer be viable. To restore moose to a healthy population it is necessary to adapt.

[Fisher-Dude]

Cancelling the calf season is like putting a bandaid on your forehead when you're having a massive heart attack. It can't hurt, right?

The issues that must be addressed are: habitat, predation, and access for unregulated harvest of cows.

The practice of harvesting calves in 7A was effective 5 years ago, as it was 30 years ago. The moose population collapsed in 5 years. What's changed? Habitat, predation, and access for unregulated hunting.

What do we need to fix? A sustainable harvest doesn't need fixing. It's just a social, feel-good reaction (calf season changes) to help some people think they are doing something helpful while wildlife managers duck the bullet of having to take on the ministry across the hall for the current state of habitat, and the ministry down the hall who cower in fear of unregulated hunters.

Wildlife managers and politicians also cower in fear of proven, effective predator management, while regulated hunters are being asked to bear the brunt of reduced opportunity that won't make more moose. You can bet the minister and the bureaucrats in the wildlife branch have their fingers and toes crossed that some miracle will make more moose. Ain't gonna happen any time soon...they are just kicking the can down the road.

In 15 - 20 years, we'll have ingrowth in cutblocks and access degradation, and moose numbers will come back. Anyone here want to wait 15 - 20 years for their next moose burger? I don't. I also don't want to see the $230 million per year that we pump into the economy not being returned TODAY into the resource to address the moose problem.

As hunters and conservationists, I believe the last thing we should do is support bureaucrats who shirk responsibility for this problem back on to our user group that hasn't affected moose populations. Think about whom is being told to modify their behaviour, and then think about who/what affected moose with habitat destruction and unregulated hunting. It wasn't us.

[Timbow]

Yay......it's about time.

[Doublelung]

Never had the old man look across the table and say to me " son we need to increase our herd size, now go out there and shot them calves. We hate for them to grow up and make more, now wouldn't we".

[Gateholio]

When will we see a increase in the moose population due to the cancellation of these calf seasons?

[BCBRAD]

A couple things that may help are a meaningful bounty on wolves and bring back black bear bag limits and conditions like they were 30 years ago. For me the concern is not that cow numbers are reduced and calf allotments may go to kids and seniors or none at all, is that science is not used in herd management and once a hunting opportunity is gone that it will never come back.

[Fisher-Dude]

Never had the old man look across the table and say to me " son we need to increase our herd size, now go out there and shot them calves. We hate for them to grow up and make more, now wouldn't we".

How many wolves are in your rearing pen? How many unregulated hunters can drive through the middle of your rearing pen and shoot calves from the truck? Do you have any thermal cover left in your rearing pen? Is there any food for the calves in the pen?

Your old man dealt with those issues to make more calves. You wouldn't have one extra head of beef if you didn't have food and protection from predators on the farm.

I also wonder why you're holding up a tiny whitetail doe on your facebook page if you're opposed to harvesting young animals.

[Doublelung]

Im not opposed to the harvest of youngs animals. I have harvest several calves over the years with my bow. I see an already dismal population being reduced by the harvest of the young during an open season where any one and everyone hunts. If we where to limit the kill, ie draw only we could control harvest. The doe you see on Facebook comes from a zone in Alberta that allows the harvest of antlerless. I feel it's better to take the fawns then leave them stranded by taking there mom. Understand that on any given day in this area a drive down the 23kms of road in the morning produces sighting of anywhere between 100-200 deer 50-100 elk and over 20 moose.

[Fisher-Dude]

However, the harvest that is being "limited" is going to make no difference to the population.

Hunters are getting suckered by politicians and wildlife managers who refuse to deal with the actual problems causing the decline of the moose.

People that are fist-pumping the season's closure should be in their MLA's office demanding that he/she do something that will make more moose. It's unfortunate that politicians have reduced the heat on themselves by using the smokescreen of the calf season on resident hunters. And does anyone think the guides aren't laughing all the way to the bank as resident hunters sit at home now while non-residents enjoy hunting your areas without your truck ahead of them?

[Timbow]

However, the harvest that is being "limited" is going to make no difference to the population.

Hunters are getting suckered by politicians and wildlife managers who refuse to deal with the actual problems causing the decline of the moose.

People that are fist-pumping the season's closure should be in their MLA's office demanding that he/she do something that will make more moose. It's unfortunate that politicians have reduced the heat on themselves by using the smokescreen of the calf season on resident hunters. And does anyone think the guides aren't laughing all the way to the bank as resident hunters sit at home now while non-residents enjoy hunting your areas without your truck ahead of them?


They listened. Now there is no calf season.

I didn't realize GO are selling calf hunts.

[Fisher-Dude]

They listened. Now there is no calf season.


They made a decision on social wants rather than what the moose need. Little to no cost for them, compared to what should be done. Some people fell for the hype, I guess.


I didn't realize GO are selling calf hunts.

GOs are opposed to calf hunts because they don't like you to be out there spoiling the "quality hunts" they are peddling. You haven't figured that part out yet?

[Gateholio]

When will we see a increase in the moose population due to the cancellation of these calf seasons?

Anybody?

Surely there are projections on this? To close a season I would expect predictions forcasting a dramatic increase.

[Boner]

Well I guess the first place to start would be to ask how old a moose is before it before it can reproduce.

I know shutting down the 2 week calf season isn't the only solution to increasing moose numbers, but I think it'll help.

And a hearty thanks to those guys who go out and shoot wolves. You guys should be getting bounties for those pelts. I've gone out and tried it, it isn't easy.

[Mulehahn]

Moose can do not reproduce til age 3. But it is not until they are 10 they start to produce twins. However their chance of survival increases exponentially once they see their first birthday. Studies have shown while in healthy populations a calf harvest has no impact, in diminished populations it does have a negative affect. However, cutting the calf harvest will have no effect until other measures are taken including predator control and habitat restoration. One of the greatest impacts can be hunting large male black bears. The extended season may help, but only if people take advantage of it. Unfortunately, hunters will never have a meaningful impact on wolves. Trapping and aerial shooting is required and should be pushed by anyone who wants to hunt.

[limit time]

I always find it funny that the OP who starts to troll, never replies to posts.

[604redneck]

I didn't realize this site had so many wildlife biologists. I feel much better now.

[Fred1]

This is a good move....

[HarryToolips]

Cancelling the calf season is like putting a bandaid on your forehead when you're having a massive heart attack. It can't hurt, right?

The issues that must be addressed are: habitat, predation, and access for unregulated harvest of cows.

The practice of harvesting calves in 7A was effective 5 years ago, as it was 30 years ago. The moose population collapsed in 5 years. What's changed? Habitat, predation, and access for unregulated hunting.

What do we need to fix? A sustainable harvest doesn't need fixing. It's just a social, feel-good reaction (calf season changes) to help some people think they are doing something helpful while wildlife managers duck the bullet of having to take on the ministry across the hall for the current state of habitat, and the ministry down the hall who cower in fear of unregulated hunters.

Wildlife managers and politicians also cower in fear of proven, effective predator management, while regulated hunters are being asked to bear the brunt of reduced opportunity that won't make more moose. You can bet the minister and the bureaucrats in the wildlife branch have their fingers and toes crossed that some miracle will make more moose. Ain't gonna happen any time soon...they are just kicking the can down the road.

In 15 - 20 years, we'll have ingrowth in cutblocks and access degradation, and moose numbers will come back. Anyone here want to wait 15 - 20 years for their next moose burger? I don't. I also don't want to see the $230 million per year that we pump into the economy not being returned TODAY into the resource to address the moose problem.

As hunters and conservationists, I believe the last thing we should do is support bureaucrats who shirk responsibility for this problem back on to our user group that hasn't affected moose populations. Think about whom is being told to modify their behaviour, and then think about who/what affected moose with habitat destruction and unregulated hunting. It wasn't us.

I'm not a biologist, but I'm in the bush hiking lots throughout the year and with my observations I agree with this..I've never been up in these areas with poor moose numbers, but I'm sure the tonnes and tonnes of clear cut logging is the habitat degradation you guys are talking about... when goin through old-growth forest I see plenty of deer and moose sign everywhere, they love the old forests, with fallen dead trees and debris everywhere, this is where I'm sure they have the big advantage over the preds...if they left more old-growth forests instead of makin a few extra bucks from loggin I'm sure it would help the moose population out big time...

[EELK]

Im hoping its not a final decision, calf season has always been awesome when I never get a draw, I can tell you there will be a heck of alot less hunters in the no calf regions. I don't see the oppurtunities being dramatically reduced because say half the calves are bulls and half of that live through winter predation etc, that's still a good hand full of immature bulls. Obviously the government is trying to cover their ass while still making money but if this is a temporary change then it can only help.

[EELK]

I always find it funny that the OP who starts to troll, never replies to posts.
was out bear hunting, but am reading and writing thanks for the concern.

[hunter1947]

This is good now the calf's will get to grow up its called recruitment..

[Fisher-Dude]

This is good now the calf's will get to grow up its called recruitment..

No Wayne, the calves we would normally shoot will become wolf shit. Recruitment will not be increased until habitat and predation are dealt with first.

[boxhitch]

It seems like this was maybe driven by a few vocal people that were taken as the voice for the larger group ? Not sure that science was involved , so it must be social . "Stop killing babies " group wins again.

[Boner]

No Wayne, the calves we would normally shoot will become wolf shit. Recruitment will not be increased until habitat and predation are dealt with first.

You named off some factors that collapsed the moose population, but one that wasn't mentioned was higher than normal snow packs. Ungulates can't get around as easy, and when the top hardens, the wolves get around and cover ground. They cruise snowmobile tracks too.

[300rum700]

It seems like this was maybe driven by a few vocal people that were taken as the voice for the larger group ? Not sure that science was involved , so it must be social . "Stop killing babies " group wins again.

I wouldn't say it's the "stop killing babies" part it more like to holy f**K if I get out of my truck I'm going to get shot part that everyone doesn't like. This season brings every r****d in BC out to play and if it was happening in your back yard you might be a little more vocal too.

[Wentrot]

I wouldn't say it's the "stop killing babies" part it more like to holy f**K if I get out of my truck I'm going to get shot part that everyone doesn't like. This season brings every r****d in BC out to play and if it was happening in your back yard you might be a little more vocal too.

So how many people have been shot?

[300rum700]

So how many people have been shot?

Haha I don't know but I have had guys put their rifles on me to "check" while walking through a cut block. When is the last time you came up on a predator hunt in the winter to try and help out with the wolf population?

[OutWest]

I wouldn't say it's the "stop killing babies" part it more like to holy f**K if I get out of my truck I'm going to get shot part that everyone doesn't like. This season brings every r****d in BC out to play and if it was happening in your back yard you might be a little more vocal too.

That's sensationalism if I've ever heard it.

[300rum700]

That's sensationalism if I've ever heard it.

Like it or not it's the biggest complaint about the season. I personally could care less one way or the other my season in region 7 ends on the day of the calf opener.

[Wild one]

With the decrease in moose number it is plain to see the seasons cannot be run as they have in the past with the current conditions habitat/predators. Can't expect to make the same harvest out of a declining population in my opinion.

Will the end to the calf season make a big impact? Doubt it but I can't see it hurting either.

[Timbow]

They made a decision on social wants rather than what the moose need. Little to no cost for them, compared to what should be done. Some people fell for the hype, I guess.



GOs are opposed to calf hunts because they don't like you to be out there spoiling the "quality hunts" they are peddling. You haven't figured that part out yet?

With reduced moose populations at 50-60% in areas of 7a what choice do they have? Have you seen what the MPB harvesting free for all in 7a has left for habitat. What may have worked in the past doesn't work now.

It's funny how the GO's somehow got involved.

[Fred1]

I will take a shot at it. First, I will gladly acknowledge that in a healthy population there is no doubt that a calf harvest is compensatory. That is to say, it mimics natural mortality. Thus the reason it was put into place, use the resource rather than let it go to "waste" through predation and starvation. However, recent studies, notably some from Ontario, have proven that in areas of low population the effect of predation by wolves and black bears, who primarily target calves, has a greater affect and hunter harvest no longer becomes compensatory, but becomes additive. Further, since the areas is underpopulated the threat of starvation declines, allowing a greater percentage of calves who escape predation to survive the winter. There is no denying that moose population in parts of province have collapsed. Not declined but collapsed. The reasons for this vary, but are known to include loss of habitat, winter ranges, increase in predators, increased in logging do to pine beetle (which has allowed predators, namely wolves, to become more effective), mismanagement, and over-harvest by various groups. Many of these factors have developed, or been exacerbated, within the last decade. As a result practices, that were effective 30 years ago may no longer be viable. To restore moose to a healthy population it is necessary to adapt.

Well it look like someone is actually doing the reading... Nice work!! As well as the Ontario studies, there were several studies published about moose/wolf population dynamics in Alaska as well. Yellow Stone too. Good stuff to read. All this management stuff is pretty new to us Canucks. Other than guns per person, this may be the one place where the Americans are way ahead of us. Then again, our brothers south of us didn't harvest the chit out of their moose habitat over a 6 year period... The bottom line is we ***ed it up. We cut down mass areas of habitat leaving piss all for moose to hide in, the wolves thrive in our open landscapes and low population numbers cant absorb their losses to regroup. Now we need to do something about it - yup classic, mans reactive mitigation thinking vs being proactive. So yes closing the calf hunts is a good idea. Is it going to be the end all fix? Prolly not. Its a start. In conjunction with other management strategies we will get it. The whole thing is called a food chain or web of life - right!? Break a link... snip a strand and watch the ripple effect. Well, we did it, now we are seeing it. And who ever pointed out the recovery in 10-15 years due to the clear cut recoveries - you are bang on! My concern with dwindling population numbers it might be more like 20 years for a full population recovery. Lets hope not.
On a good note, we are starting to do something about it (Moose symposiums!!), AAC's (Annual Allowable Cuts) are expected to drop substantially across the province over the next few years, the govt has sunk quite a bit of $$ into the moose as we speak (radio collar/mortality monitoring) and there appears to be quit a few people concerned about our moose populations. These are all positive steps forward! Have some faith in the peeps challenged with mitigating our mess. Change is slow...
Now if we could just get the FN on board.......

[jessbennett]

Haha I don't know but I have had guys put their rifles on me to "check" while walking through a cut block. When is the last time you came up on a predator hunt in the winter to try and help out with the wolf population?
and if you think this only happens in calf season your joking yourself. ...... believe me there is no shortage of dumbasses in the bush whether its calf season or not. lol

[steveo]

Unless unregulated hunting, habitat needs and predator control are dealt with, the with draw of the calf season will not get us where we need and want to be. The closing of the calf season is like putting a big yellow gate on a road that only unregulated hunters and wolves have the key for, nothing more. It is too easy to keep kicking hunters in the nuts with reduced hunting opportunities because it costs nothing and the changes will be followed by lawful hunters. If this province was mismanaged I think it would be an improvement because from what I see the ministry treats wildlife issues with more of a mild neglect than a proactive priority concern.

[300rum700]

The seasons still open........

[ryanhuntslots]

So if the harvest of calves (and the year befores young cows that are shot by twits because they are a little smaller than the cow) has no affect on the over all population, why was 7a the only region with an open season? Surely it is because we have the smartest biologists in the whole province looking after our moose heard here. Why are all the other regions missing the boat? As for the comments about so many on here being biologists, those who think there is nothing wrong with a general open calf season must be biologists too. Maybe all those for the calf kill can take there opinions to all the other regions and show them what they have been missing out on, free moose! I had read once that calf mortality was about 50% the first year, ok so killing as many as we can leaves the rest to the 50% death rate. So I am not a math teacher but I am thinking that if we had 1000 calves and harvested 100 calves, we would be left with 900 calves, 50% die, leaving 450 calves. So let me just sharpen my pencil here, oh ya, that's 50 less calves than if we hadn't shot the 100 during the general open season! But then again, We are the only region with the open season, because we are the only ones with the smart biologists so my math must be flawed!

[hunter1947]

No Wayne, the calves we would normally shoot will become wolf shit. Recruitment will not be increased until habitat and predation are dealt with first.


Well at least they would not be targeted from man this will help out a small amount and yes the wildlife management have to do something on predator control I agree with that part
Pat its a vicious circle in all you would not believe the dead deer carcass I found this spring out shed hunting all in a 20 mile radius all done by cats..

[Fisher-Dude]

Unless unregulated hunting, habitat needs and predator control are dealt with, the with draw of the calf season will not get us where we need and want to be. The closing of the calf season is like putting a big yellow gate on a road that only unregulated hunters and wolves have the key for, nothing more. It is too easy to keep kicking hunters in the nuts with reduced hunting opportunities because it costs nothing and the changes will be followed by lawful hunters. If this province was mismanaged I think it would be an improvement because from what I see the ministry treats wildlife issues with more of a mild neglect than a proactive priority concern.


You are a wise man.

The cheap route for government to shut up the vocal minority was to close the season. Politicians don't want to A.) spend money fixing habitat when they promise balanced budgets, B.) deal with the politics of explaining to latte sippers why we're shooting wolves from helicopters and dropping spiced horse meat for them, and C.) tell the Indians to STFU and get with the program.

It's way easier and cheaper to delete the section in the regs that lets resident white guys shoot a moose.

It won't help the moose numbers (in fact, there will just be fewer dollars to make more moose when guys don't buy moose tags), but that doesn't seem to matter to the guys who don't like seeing someone from Vancouver hunting in "their" spot.

[300rum700]

Maybe the government did it to give more opportunities to the seniors and to recruit more young hunters? Maybe it's time for those of you want this season so much to mentor some young hunters, isn't that what our sport needs? More hunters = more tags = more money for moose. Surely if even half that participated in the calf hunt took a new hunter that would more than make up for any loss in revenue (I know I would have a moose tag in my pocket for that mythical unicorn Spike fork roaming around) or maybe take grandpa out for the weekend, you still get to enjoy the hunt and maybe if your nice enough they might even share some meat. Or do you just enjoy pulling the trigger and to hell with everyone else?

[BCrams]

I am happy about this but hopefully I get a draw for once in a century, calf season has been turfed in 7a in everywhere but 7-16 and 7-23 except for youth and senior. Hopefully this will boost the moose population, now if they would only get rid of the damn doe season.:mrgreen:

plain and simple. It will not increase the moose population.

fisher dude has already stated what we all know. It's a pretty sad state to see this closure.

[hunter1947]

I don't know what some people think its plain and simple if i don't shoot a calf and others don't there has to be more left out there its a now brain er take two out and you have nothing left

I know that there has to be something done about predators but if we take out calf's to me this is just adding to the problem meaning less animals..

[Gamebuster]

I believe this closure was voted on by regional stakeholders with the knowledge it won't fix the issues....like somebody else said...social management is wonderful

[Sitkaspruce]

Stupid, stupid closure!!!

Why do we hunters always blame other hunters for any population declines?? Why do we hunters always want other hunter to be the one to bare the burden of bring back a population?? To all of you on this site who are all for the closure, why do you think that me and all the other hunters who enjoy hunting and the animals we hunt have to pay for the lack of political will that is really needed to correct the problem?? Your really no better than the politicians that make these decisions, head in the sand, a$$ in the air and lets really really hope that saving a few calves will bring back our moose......

Loss or fractures habitat, preds, trains, hwys and unregulated hunting kill more moose than hunters, yet I don't see anyone screaming and pressuring the polictians to work on fixing these major problems. Nope, lets hammer on the our own instead.......much easier and when the politians and anti's see this, it makes it much easier for them to make decisions. You guys actually made it easier for them to make the decision. Again, emotions won out over sound wildlife management, which will not make more moose.

The wolves and unegulated hunters thank you....again.

Really sad to see this happening. And it happened in region 4 as well with the 4pt only season.

And if you don't think the GO are happy about this, then your a$$ is really in the air. It helps them sell the "wilderness" hunt that much easier. Been there, experienced that.

Cheers

SS

[Drillbit]

How many wolves are in your rearing pen? How many unregulated hunters can drive through the middle of your rearing pen and shoot calves from the truck? Do you have any thermal cover left in your rearing pen? Is there any food for the calves in the pen?

Your old man dealt with those issues to make more calves. You wouldn't have one extra head of beef if you didn't have food and protection from predators on the farm.


I don't understand your logic on this one?

The calves in the pen are protected and fed and we don't shoot them to increase a herd. Moose calves aren't protected and fed and we shoot them to increase the herd?


I do however agree the GO's will be wringing their hands together over another closure of GOS hunting.

[OutWest]

I don't know what some people think its plain and simple if i don't shoot a calf and others don't there has to be more left out there its a now brain er take two out and you have nothing left

I know that there has to be something done about predators but if we take out calf's to me this is just adding to the problem meaning less animals..

You're not getting it, Wayne. Those calves would have died anyways. Hunters shooting those calves was compensatory, not additive. There is no science involved in the calf season closure and the only thing that it's going to accomplish is satisfying a vocal minority. It certainly won't make more moose.

[steveo]

So after reading the LEH synopsis there is still 257 cow/calf draws in region 7a and potentially all these draws could be filled with calves but probably not. Add the fact youth and seniors can still harvest calves and any calves that had their moms shot with leh draw would probably die over the winter doesn't seem like a full approach to saving moose calves. Even better lets discriminate all hunters between 19-65 and make them pay the most for a hunting right they don't even get to participate in, a cynical round of applause is going on in my head as I type.

[markomoose]

The season is still open for grandpa and grandson.I applaude that decision.Still gonna be plenty of calves taken.Don't kid yourselves!

[hunter1947]

You're not getting it, Wayne. Those calves would have died anyways. Hunters shooting those calves was compensatory, not additive. There is no science involved in the calf season closure and the only thing that it's going to accomplish is satisfying a vocal minority. It certainly won't make more moose.

I disagree with you thoughts ,,,O ya I am getting it all right I guess its ok if we help the declining calf population by taking out more of them if anyone want to help the declining moose population hang up your guns and do something about getting the predators under control not shooting what we have left out there management would not put a close on the calf season in a region if they new there was a stable number..

Example lets say there are 10 elk left in a region five are taken out from predators three more are taken out from a bad winter from lack of habitat then we humans add to the decline taking out two more elk
whats left 0 there might have been two left out there if we hunters did not take out the last two there might had been two left out there same sample goes if there was a low population of elk in other regions ..

Guess its ok if we go shoot out a few mountain caribou to add to the declining population we do have a wolf problem eating up whats left for caribou does it make a right if we humans shoot a few more ??? I say not..

Anyways got to get going out into the mountains for my shed hunt enough said..

[OutWest]

Here's a little chunk from the Alaska Department of Fish and Game.

"Most calves and fawns will soon die. Only the luckiest and fittest will survive. Therefore either hunters or Mother Nature can take them. The logical harvesting strategy is to take calves or fawns during the fall hunting seasons, before winter can waste them.”
-Valerius Geist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science at the University of Calgary, Alberta, and leading authority on wild ungulates.



Young said biologically, harvesting calves emulates natural mortality more closely than a bull-only hunt. Because fewer calves survive through winter than any other age category, a higher percentage of calves that are harvested by hunters would die over the winter anyway--either from starvation or predators. Biologists call this compensatory mortality. Harvest of adult animals, on the other hand, is called additive mortality because adults are far less likely to die over the winter.

Taking a low percentage of calves can increase hunting opportunity and yield, while having little effect on the population stability. This is an important concept when faced with intensive management. How else can you provide more hunting opportunity, put meat on more tables, yet apply minimal extra pressure on a population?

[blacklab]

I get sick and tired of hearing this rancher and his cows BS argument. How long would a ranch survive if they kept all the calves every year.
They would very soon run out of summer range and winter feed.
To the rancher that says we don't kill our calves, I say BS, just what are in those trucks that leave you ranch every fall. I've never seen a feed lot full of old cows and over mature bulls.

[steel_ram]

How do hunters know which "calves are going to die anyway"? We're trying to anticipate, substitute nature, a preemptive harvest of the surplus. It doesn't seem to be working very well.

[two-feet]

Anybody?

Surely there are projections on this? To close a season I would expect predictions forcasting a dramatic increase.

Well, the proof is in the putting. In 5 years when the moose have not recovered some other emotional scapegoat will be found.

[MB_Boy]

But it is not until they are 10 they start to produce twins.

Not sure where you pulled that out of? 6 years of age....and occasionally younger they will produce twins.

[GoatGuy]

This is interesting.

Curious what's going to save the moose in Region 5 that are down 50-75% and in the North Thompson where that are down by more than 50% as well? Neither one of those regions have a calf season.

Can anyone share?????

[r106]

^^^ yup. You can't blame the calf season in region 7 for a province wide reduction in Moose. I understand the science behind it and it makes sense. But is it not wise to cut back the calf season if numbers are drastically down even though its not the cause?

[GoatGuy]

^^^ yup. You can't blame the calf season in region 7 for a province wide reduction in Moose. I understand the science behind it and it makes sense. But is it not wise to cut back the calf season if numbers are drastically down even though its not the cause?

The managers have run the numbers and said there is no reason to close the calf season. If the calf harvest was higher, then absolutely, but it isn't and recruitment is still good. This is one of those things, like the 4 pt mule deer season in the EK, which will do nothing for wildlife populations. It's a social regulation, just like reducing grizzly bear hunting opportunity. Has nothing to do with science.

It makes sense to try to figure out why the moose declined, and how to bring them back (ie habitat enhancement and predator management), but alas, just like mule deer, elk and white-tailed deer hunting seasons, most of the hunters don't seem to be concerned with increasing the moose population, only reducing the hunter harvest and opportunity.

The difference between managing hunting regulations and wildlife populations is world's apart. Unfortunately many hunters don't get that and more importantly aren't concerned enough about wildlife to bother to find out. When you hear people likening wildlife management to a cattle ranch, you know they've completely and totally lost the plot.

When you read the rhetoric on here it can be mind boggling. People should be trying to make more moose, not trying to regulate hunters. We've been doing that in this province for 40 years and all we end up with every single time is less wildlife.

By the way, this isn't the first reduction in the moose population in Region 5, it's about the 4th. Resident hunters used to harvest 3000 moose a year in the 80s in Region 5, now they harvest less than 1000. They used to have a cow/calf harvest, haven't had one for over a decade and still there's 50% fewer moose - looks like that hair-brained idea of a regulation change might not have worked.

Changing the hunting regulations hasn't, doesn't and won't work if people want more moose.

[GoatGuy]

So, why haven't the moose populations exploded in Regions 3,5,6, and 7b?

What's being missed there?

[GoatGuy]

Ok, how about Region 3,6, 7b?

Or how about region 4? No cow/calf there either.

[boxhitch]

I’m not against hunting cow/calves as long as it can be proven without a doubt that there are simply too many of them for the area to sustain. Not sure what else it takes to 'prove it without a doubt' than the science put forth by studies and decisions by managers based on sound science.

At some point there is a ' tipping point ' where the calf season changes from compensatory to additive , but facts say we are not there .

The main point about the season change would be that hunters loose an opportunity that would be very hard to get back , for no sound reason other than a self-serving feel-good movement by a few vocal people at the expense of all potential calf hunters.

[limit time]

Man...I give you credit! I couldn't do it. It's like, talking guns with Liebrals, they will never get it...

[limit time]

So, why haven't the moose populations exploded in Regions 3,5,6, and 7b?

What's being missed there?

I would like to know as well.

[r106]

I would like to know as well.


Me too.

I don't know a lot about the topic but I am trying to educate myself on it. So far I have learned that people like to approach these topics with a very narrow mind without stepping back and looking at the big picture. This is a perfect example. You simply can't blame the cow/calf season for the decline of moose when that GOS only exists in small part of the province and the issue is almost province wide.

[dana]

Hunters need to be conservationists first before the wants and desires of the kill. Many of the best conservation projects that are supported by hunters are in areas where a hunter doesn't see any gain except for the satisfaction that they did the right thing for the good of the animals. I think there is a current disconnect as hunters want opportunity regardless of what conservation demands. When it comes to moose, there is no shadow of a doubt that we have just experienced a crash. There are a ton of reasons that are known and probably just as many that are unknown. But here we are at the other end of the crash and we feel we must do something even though it is too late. You can talk about habitat and predation but that doesn't change the fact that the crash happened. Mountain Pine beetle happened! And the predator pit of very high wolf populations happened! What has happened has happened.

[dana]

Talking about the North Thompson, we indeed saw a huge increase. Moose pops were amazing! And we never had a calf season and we never had a GOS aside from Spike/fork. What we had was a population that was in the toilet and with some solid management saw bull to cow ratios increase and a population increase every year. Hunter opportunity went from Not a Chance in Hell to Good Chance to Draw every year or two! All because of solid management strategies! Now, due to unforeseen reasons of high predation we are on the other side of a collapse! I have faith in the managers that they will get us back to the good ol days once again. Why? Because they did it before! So while some could complain about lost opportunity with slashed tag numbers, I look at it in a positive light. You need to sacrifice to see results.

[Fisher-Dude]

Of course we'll see an increase, but not until we get 3 m green up in those MPB blocks. It won't be because of any particular hunting regulation.

[dana]

We are seeing 3m Green up in as little as 7 years.

[dana]

IMO predator talk of predator control is too little too late! I was banging that drum years ago and no one was listening, including several posting here right now regarding needing it now. The damage has been done and it is over! The wolves have either moved on or have starved. The record highs are no longer. Remnants remain as they always have! The moose are already starting the recovery!

[rafike]

I live and hunt in PG area and thank God the ministry has started to look at this issue. Our moose populations will recover and this is a great step in the right direction. The next issue should be; changing the mule deer season to a three point or better season, give our deer a chance to grow. Well done ministry.

[Fisher-Dude]

I live and hunt in PG area and thank God the ministry has started to look at this issue. Our moose populations will recover and this is a great step in the right direction. The next issue should be; changing the mule deer season to a three point or better season, give our deer a chance to grow. Well done ministry.

What will concentrating harvest on 3 point+ bucks do to help deer grow? You do understand that harvesting superior genetics leads to smaller antlered bucks in the population over time, right? What sex ratios have been surveyed in the region and what will selective harvest do to overall populations? Hint: it will never make more deer or bigger deer.

[d6dan]

What will concentrating harvest on 3 point+ bucks do to help deer grow. Hint: it will never make more deer or bigger deer.

All the 3pt+ season does is rid the gene pool of those inferior 3pt bucks that will never amount anything bigger.

[Fisher-Dude]

All the 3pt+ season does is rid the gene pool of those inferior 3pt bucks that will never amount anything bigger.

it will also kill off all the young 4 points with the best genetics to grow into class IV bucks. Result: smaller bucks over the longer term.

[d6dan]

it will also kill off all the young 4 points with the best genetics to grow into class IV bucks. Result: smaller bucks over the longer term.

^^^^^^^^^what He said.

[kilometers]

All the 3pt+ season does is rid the gene pool of those inferior 3pt bucks that will never amount anything bigger.
I'm no biologist but it seems to me it would simply allow the bucks to grow older before harvest.

[boxhitch]

I would like to know as well.


Me too.

I don't know a lot about the topic but I am trying to educate myself on it. So far I have learned that people like to approach these topics with a very narrow mind without stepping back and looking at the big picture. This is a perfect example. You simply can't blame the cow/calf season for the decline of moose when that GOS only exists in small part of the province and the issue is almost province wide.You've got it .
Hunter harvest isn't the limiting factor . Those regions listed have a population that fits the habitat or that will grow into it as it develops . Hunters are the minor factor , with the exception of maybe some localized un-regulated hunting . In general hunters give themselves too much credit as to being a force to be reckoned with . It shows in populations and it really shows in the politics of hunting.

[boxhitch]

And we never had a calf season and we never had a GOS aside from Spike/fork. What we had was a population that was in the toilet and with some solid management saw bull to cow ratios increase and a population increase every year. Hunter opportunity went from Not a Chance in Hell to Good Chance to Draw every year or two! All because of solid management strategies! Now, due to unforeseen reasons of high predation we are on the other side of a collapse! I have faith in the managers that they will get us back to the good ol days once again. Why? Because they did it before! So while some could complain about lost opportunity with slashed tag numbers, I look at it in a positive light. You need to sacrifice to see results.What was the 'solid management' and where did it go ?
'Not a Chance in Hell to Good Chance to Draw every year or two' has little to do with harvest but does change some opportunity .

[limit time]

I live and hunt in PG area and thank God the ministry has started to look at this issue. Our moose populations will recover and this is a great step in the right direction. The next issue should be; changing the mule deer season to a three point or better season, give our deer a chance to grow. Well done ministry.
...Grow? As in, more meat to eat? Or bigger antlers?

[Fisher-Dude]

I'm no biologist but it seems to me it would simply allow the bucks to grow older before harvest.

Biologists will tell you that it's unlikely to work that way. Young bucks have super high natural mortality rates. The 80% of hunters who are firstly meat hunters will smack the first legal buck they see, which is often an 18 month or 30 month old deer. In most instances all of those deer are killed every year with the spikes and forkies being the only survivors that will never grow to an impressive size. Over time that means old bucks end up being runts. That's poor herd management.

To quote one of the biologists in the Mule Deer Working Group: I'd rather puke in my hand than use point restrictions.

[d6dan]

I'm no biologist but it seems to me it would simply allow the bucks to grow older before harvest.

You can have a 2nd year buck carrying a 4pt rack.

About 20 yrs ago, there was a couple of areas around Chetwynd that had the "3pt" gene pool happening. Nothing ever grew bigger than a 3pt. Back then the season was 20 days and for 4pt and better mule deer. So by having a 3pt season open, works to rid the inferior 3pt gene pool.

[dana]

What was the 'solid management' and where did it go ?
'Not a Chance in Hell to Good Chance to Draw every year or two' has little to do with harvest but does change some opportunity .

In the late 80's and early 90's moose populations in Region 3 were quite dismal. Low bull to Cow Ratios meant low calf recruitment, particularly twin calves. LEH was implented and bull to cow ratios went up, as a result more cows producing twins, meaning recruitement was higher and the population continued to grow each year. As the population grew, they increased Leh tags per unit giving hunters more opportunity but still being able to maintain good bull to cow ratios. So by solid management practices, they grew the herd and hunting opportunity grew as well. The moose pops were actually booming pre-predator pit! The boom was a direct result of proper management. If you pull some old regs from the 90's and early 2000's you can read articles about the how and why Region 3 was doing what they were doing. So as we sit here post-crash, I have faith that through proper management we will see heathly vigorous moose populations once again and with that, great hunting opportunity once again. While the slashed tag numbers or shortened spike/fork seasons in Region 3 seem to be taking away from hunter opportunity, i can rest assured that as we start the rebuild it will be worth it.

[Dusty Roads]

I never really took much part in the calf season. Never harvested one. So doesn't really bother me that it's gone.
However I can understand that one less opportunity might bug some people.
if it helps boost population I'm in favour, but I haven't done the research.

[Fred1]

This is a great thread! Lots of great points and views out there. The argument for keeping the calf season or wanting to seems to be based on the studies done which lead to the conclusion that calf mortality is high. So lets take em and save them their pending doom and at the same time let hunters pull the trigger. I believe the studies done to reach this conclusion were all done on healthy stable moose populations - I could be wrong? If so doesn't anyone think that when pops are in trouble and numbers are dropping, that closing a calf season just might help? (perhaps there are still enough calves around to warrant hunting them - I hope so!) Has anyone done a study? Prolly not... I do think hunters have the ability to change populations through hunting. (I include the FN as hunters too even though they are not required to report their harvest numbers - which is crap...) We can have huge impacts on wildlife populations. (anyone read proguides's post on killing wolves?) Anyone see a moose out the Private FSR lately?? I also think that overregulating hunters is not going to solve the issue by itself. As said maybe we need to focus on making more moose? Which really comes down to habitat... Nobody is going to make that, time will... So perhaps through smaller changes we can keep some of those moose alive long enough for nature to create it. One thing for certain, no one change, or management plan will fix the situation alone. It may require, less LEH, no cow calf seasons, more predator control, FN compliance, less logging, etc all as part of the solution. Im all for what keeps our wildlife populations viable and healthy. Im pullin for the moose!!

[Drillbit]

So......what if FN's start hunting/killing Only calves, would that increase the moose populations? Sounds like this is the answer in this thread?

[steel_ram]

Why bother having wildlife biologists on the payroll when we have huntingbc.

[OutWest]

So......what if FN's start hunting/killing Only calves, would that increase the moose populations? Sounds like this is the answer in this thread?

Would still be unregulated which is a major part of the problem.

[GoatGuy]

This is a great thread! Lots of great points and views out there. The argument for keeping the calf season or wanting to seems to be based on the studies done which lead to the conclusion that calf mortality is high. So lets take em and save them their pending doom and at the same time let hunters pull the trigger. I believe the studies done to reach this conclusion were all done on healthy stable moose populations - I could be wrong? If so doesn't anyone think that when pops are in trouble and numbers are dropping, that closing a calf season just might help? (perhaps there are still enough calves around to warrant hunting them - I hope so!) Has anyone done a study? Prolly not... I do think hunters have the ability to change populations through hunting. (I include the FN as hunters too even though they are not required to report their harvest numbers - which is crap...) We can have huge impacts on wildlife populations. (anyone read proguides's post on killing wolves?) Anyone see a moose out the Private FSR lately?? I also think that overregulating hunters is not going to solve the issue by itself. As said maybe we need to focus on making more moose? Which really comes down to habitat... Nobody is going to make that, time will... So perhaps through smaller changes we can keep some of those moose alive long enough for nature to create it. One thing for certain, no one change, or management plan will fix the situation alone. It may require, less LEH, no cow calf seasons, more predator control, FN compliance, less logging, etc all as part of the solution. Im all for what keeps our wildlife populations viable and healthy. Im pullin for the moose!!

The selective harvest strategy in 7a was implemented when the moose population had problems. It was plagued by low sex ratios, high bull mortality and cows being bred in the second estrus, which results in late calves and low calf survival.

You have to manage for moose habitat if you want more moose. If you look across the landscape in many areas we are managing for fiber. Not giving any of the loggers or logging companies grief but we could I think there should be a bit more balanced approach.

[Brett]

[QUOTE=Fisher-Dude;1497755]However, the harvest that is being "limited" is going to make no difference to the population.

Hunters are getting suckered by politicians and wildlife managers who refuse to deal with the actual problems causing the decline of the moose.

People that are fist-pumping the season's closure should be in their MLA's office demanding that he/she do something that will make more moose. It's unfortunate that politicians have reduced the heat on themselves by using the smokescreen of the calf season on resident hunters. And does anyone think the guides aren't laughing all the way to the bank as resident hunters sit at home now while non-residents enjoy hunting your areas without your truck ahead of them?[/QUO

"unregulated" how do you define this??
Whats worse than your "unregulated" and needs to be considered is the FLOOD of moose hunters that come to 7a for a chance at a calf and or spiker......Open calf across the Provence or in FDs home.

everyone has there opinions and personally I think those IN 7a have a better idea of whats going on. Just like the LMLers wanted to stop the grizzly hunt... do they drive around these areas, work in them have good scientific data.

comparing 30 years ago to today is a joke!! Access is TOTALLY different.
means of access are TOTALLY different, jet boats quads argos trucks
hunting methods..
And there are WAY more people here and cumming here to hunt!

[300win]

Well here is my stab at it// The moose population in Omineca is under populated by many factors which include, the lack of forest(mountain pine beetle), forest fires etc(poor habitat). We have to many predators now which adds to the higher kill ratios especially winter kill. From what I have been reading most off the calves don't make it through the winter so why not harvest them?? The forest habitat is changing and ELK are taking over in many areas because of the ASPEN is the first to re generate. Everything is cyclic I don't know if this is going to change anything other than hurt the business's along 16. IMHO

[GoatGuy]

"unregulated" how do you define this??
Whats worse than your "unregulated" and needs to be considered is the FLOOD of moose hunters that come to 7a for a chance at a calf and or spiker......Open calf across the Provence or in FDs home.

everyone has there opinions and personally I think those IN 7a have a better idea of whats going on. Just like the LMLers wanted to stop the grizzly hunt... do they drive around these areas, work in them have good scientific data.

comparing 30 years ago to today is a joke!! Access is TOTALLY different.
means of access are TOTALLY different, jet boats quads argos trucks
hunting methods..
And there are WAY more people here and cumming here to hunt!

There were 17,470 resident hunters in 7a in 1979. They spent 97394 days hunting and harvested 3363 moose.

In 2009 there were 11876 hunters who spent 99281 days and harvest 2860 moose.

In 2012 there were 9678 moose hunters who spent 94278 days and harvested 1932 moose.


I always find it interesting when people talk about 30 years ago, and good scientific data when they are simply making things up. Not the way the world works.

[Rob Chipman]

Goat Guy:

Good work on those numbers. Looks like fewer hunters, fewer moose harvested, and fewer moose overall. What's the solution?

I find it hard to get the information/data I'd like to make informed comments, but as you demonstrated, that's' what we need.

What I'd like to understand is:

-How the decision on harvest levels and management is made (both on the side of what gets considered, and who ends up making the decisions);
-what the overall strategy is and how the local strategies fit in;
-what the actual goal of the managers is.

It's obviously a complex issue. Take the target species population (say 1000), subtract the level needed to maintain the population (say 500), subtract what's killed by trains, vehicles, industry (say 200) put aside what FN requires (say 100) and you're left with 200 animals left for potential harvest. Seems straightforward, but:

-What's the success rate (i.e., how many hunters can you let hunt to not exceed the allowable harvest?)
-are we managing for healthy overall populations, or for trophies, or something else?
-do we need to manage one species (say moose or wolves) to protect/promote another (caribou)?


It can get pretty complex pretty quickly, obviously.

I'm pretty sure that there are guys on this forum who understand that stuff pretty well, but I think its fair to say that most of us don't know how it works and that the Ministry of Lands & Forests doesn't get the word out too well.

Can anyone point me in the direction of where I can find out more about management strategies in BC?

One interesting point from the numbers above. Say all 9678 hunters bought a moose tag at $25. That totals just under $250k revenue.

How would that compare to the revenue generated by, say, forestry permits in that area? I know that a budget doc for the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resources I found online mentions caribou, but that's it. I don't think hunting is a big revenue generator for the govt. (I could be wrong - wouldn't be the first time). If I'm right, and we're a small constituency, especially when competing with industry and FN concerns, we need to get a better handle on the information and argue with each other less.

[Fred1]

The selective harvest strategy in 7a was implemented when the moose population had problems. It was plagued by low sex ratios, high bull mortality and cows being bred in the second estrus, which results in late calves and low calf survival.

You have to manage for moose habitat if you want more moose. If you look across the landscape in many areas we are managing for fiber. Not giving any of the loggers or logging companies grief but we could I think there should be a bit more balanced approach.

Agreed!! !

[Brett]

There were 17,470 resident hunters in 7a in 1979. They spent 97394 days hunting and harvested 3363 moose.

In 2009 there were 11876 hunters who spent 99281 days and harvest 2860 moose.

In 2012 there were 9678 moose hunters who spent 94278 days and harvested 1932 moose.


I always find it interesting when people talk about 30 years ago, and good scientific data when they are simply making things up. Not the way the world works.

Well seeing as you've pulled your books out! why don't you give us the the hunter numbers for 7a the area in question not the whole province!! The numbers mean nothing without reference! How many moose hunters in 7a in 1985 compared to today.? I KNOW poaching was WAY more prevalent back then.....so with poaching reduced and hunter numbers reduced and a reduction in FN hunting .. what gives??
there are things that have changed the population that we are not prepared to change. So if your not going to limit forestation and access and a bounty on wolves is meaningless , then what do you do to appease a bunch of concerned residents when you don't have the right answers yourselves.... ??


FD was talking about 30 years ago and moose numbers, my point, and it still stands is things were VERY different here now(in 7a) than 30 years ago

[BCBRAD]

In 1990 you could hardly buy a moose in 7a. By 1994 numbers in the area I hunt were back up. Last year saw 3 moose in 7 days, the year before saw normal amount of moose but no small moose (yearlings /calves) but lots of big bulls, wolf shit everywhere and very few deer.................black bear in extremely healthy numbers. Away from roads , railways and unregulated hunters the 'blame ' can go to predation and changing habitat. As stated before , a bounty on wolves would help with some of it a change the black bear bag limits and conditions as they were in the 80's.

[kebes]

Looks like 7-16/7-23 are gonna be popular this year.

[Fisher-Dude]

FD was talking about 30 years ago and moose numbers, my point, and it still stands is things were VERY different here now(in 7a) than 30 years ago


I was talking about a calf season that has been in place for 30 years and has been very successful and sustainable. The moose population collapsed in the past 5 years both in 7A and also in many other regions with no calf season. That's all the proof you should need to understand calf seasons have nothing to do with the population collapse in 7A.

[GoatGuy]

Well seeing as you've pulled your books out! why don't you give us the the hunter numbers for 7a the area in question not the whole province!! The numbers mean nothing without reference! How many moose hunters in 7a in 1985 compared to today.? I KNOW poaching was WAY more prevalent back then.....so with poaching reduced and hunter numbers reduced and a reduction in FN hunting .. what gives??
there are things that have changed the population that we are not prepared to change. So if your not going to limit forestation and access and a bounty on wolves is meaningless , then what do you do to appease a bunch of concerned residents when you don't have the right answers yourselves.... ??


FD was talking about 30 years ago and moose numbers, my point, and it still stands is things were VERY different here now(in 7a) than 30 years ago

Those numbers are for 7a, hence where it says

There were 17,470 resident hunters in 7a in 1979. They spent 97394 days hunting and harvested 3363 moose.

7a 1985 Resident Hunters

Hunters Days Harvest


11769
82337
2809



If you want to do something for moose go see your MLA - tell your MLA that they are not doing their job. Tell them you want to see more money for wildlife management and you want to see more moose in the bush

[Walking Buffalo]

Fisher-Dude,

Can you name a few biologists and studies that support your claim of genetic shift in Mule deer due to selective harvest regimes ?

I am not suggesting support for an antler point restriction, however your claim of genetic harm leads down a very dangerous path.

[Fisher-Dude]

Fisher-Dude,

Can you name a few biologists and studies that support your claim of genetic shift in Mule deer due to selective harvest regimes ?

I am not suggesting support for an antler point restriction, however your claim of genetic harm leads down a very dangerous path.


Some good reading here: http://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/pdf/mdwg/mdwg-6_point_restrictions.pdf

　
THE BAD
• Antler point restrictions focus all the hunting pressure on the oldest age classes of bucks, gradually decrease the
average age of the buck segment of the population, and make it more difficult for bucks to reach the older age
classes due to the displaced harvest pressure.
• Antler point restrictions have been shown to reduce the number of trophy bucks over time by protecting only the
smaller-antlered young bucks.
• Antler point restrictions do not increase fawn production or population size. Even in herds with very low
buck:doe ratios (<10:100), pregnancy rates are well over 90%. Large increases in buck ratios result in relatively
few, or no, additional fawns.

[Walking Buffalo]

Sorry FD, for some reason I can't get the quote option to work.


I agree with the bolded statement, however that comment doesn't mention anything about genetic selection.

Hunting induced genetic selection is a very big topic in the anti-hunting world and has been championed by a handful of researchers that have found the concept to be readily fundable. The position of many of these researchers is that hunter induced genetic selection is occurring and that "Trophy" hunting needs to be highly curtailed, despite not being able to provide any conclusive data to back up the hypothesis.

I suggest you research this topic a little deeper before concluding and promoting that antler restrictions cause genetic shifts.


Anecdotally I can attest to the lack of genetic shift due to antler point restrictions in Mule deer. Alberta had a three-point minimum general open season on Mule deer for many years. During this period it was very rare for any three point bucks to survive the hunting season in the prairie zones and big old two points were common. As soon as these regulations were changed to an any buck draw season this population again was quickly producing 200" four point typicals and 275" non-typicals. This should not have occurred if hunting induced genetic selection was at play due to the thee-point antler restrictions.

[Fisher-Dude]

It's not so much a "genetic shift" as a failure for runts to meet their genetic potential. Protecting runts (some of which may have good genetics, should make that clear) means we have a high population of bucks that will never have those genetics come to fruition.

From the Mule Deer Working Group paper I referenced:

There are additional reasons why the widespread use of antler point restrictions has not been successful. Research
has shown buck fawns born to does in poor body condition have difficulty outgrowing the effects of poor body condition at birth, and may never reach their genetic potential for antler growth. Regulations protecting these bucks from harvest are counterproductive to the intended benefit.


The other side of it is that high harvest on superior young bucks (4 points at 18 or 30 months) means few will ever achieve "big buck" status.

Post-hunt composition surveys show only about 7% of bucks are 4 points. They "all get shot" during the season.




The collection of mule deer antler/age data between 1983 and 1987 determined that about 25%of the 2 year old bucks were ≥ 4-points. For age classes 3+ years old, greater than 60% of thebucks were≥ 4-points (Table 2). During a post-hunt composition survey flown December 2010 toassess the sustainability of the 4-point season, 536 deer were classified and the sex ratio was 25bucks/100 does. The observed ≥4-point bucks comprised at least 7% of the total observed bucks.

[Ambush]

Put four point or better mule deer on LEH in areas that are restricted to one buck already.

If you have an LEH for a four point+, you cannot shoot anything with less than four points. If you do not have an LEH than you cannot shoot anything with more than three on one side.

That should keep the meat and trophy hunters out of each others way. Meat hunters won't be shooting those young four points that could grow up to be something and trophy hunters won't be bitching about a quality hunt.


I've been hunting moose around PG since 1980. I never had trouble killing a moose every year, even if it was a two point and I've never shot a calf. The steaks from calves are good, but I find the burger mushy.
In the eighties we got five bear tags each and filled them all in the spring, in our moose hunting areas, mostly before the cows dropped. Then tags dropped to two, soon after came the hide or meat removal requirement which quickly changed to a meat removal requirement.

People just quit shooting black bears. Unlike wolf populations which will crash with their prey species, bears just forego their regular opportunistic feeding on calves and carry on with making babies and grabbing the odd calf that does drop. It would be foolish to lay the blame entirely on bears, but I'm sure they get more then the human calf hunters ever do. Biologists in the '80's estimated that bears killed 40% of the new calves in the PG area. That's too close to half of the yearly production to ignore!

Forget the bounty on wolves, they're too hard to target. Get your butt's up here and shoot some spring bears if you plan on hunting moose here in the fall. And you will get in some scouting for your moose hunt at the same time.

[Fisher-Dude]

The only way to reduce the wolf population is to kill 70 - 80% of them every year. The only way to do that is through aerial gunning and poisoning. Hunters can't even dent the population.

[dana]

I would hazard a guess that the wolves in many areas of 7a are now gone. Either moved on to greener pastures or starved. With a dramatic reduction in prey, they can 't stay put or else they will starve to death. Organizing a big wolf cull now is too little way way too late. What is done is done! The wolves peaked in the North Thompson in 2007. I was banging the drum then and many mocked me for it. Banging the drum now is 7 years too late. The collapse has happened!

[dana]

The effects of the ripples are far greater than many even are willing to admit at this time. Hunting will be hard for a few years post collapse. Hunters need to suck it up and live with it. Look at it as a way to
make yourself a better hunter instead of complaining that the easy hunting is over . Anyone can have success in the good times. It is the hard times that will make hunters better hunters as the hone their skills.

[GoatGuy]

I would hazard a guess that the wolves in many areas of 7a are now gone. Either moved on to greener pastures or starved. With a dramatic reduction in prey, they can 't stay put or else they will starve to death. Organizing a big wolf cull now is too little way way too late. What is done is done! The wolves peaked in the North Thompson in 2007. I was banging the drum then and many mocked me for it. Banging the drum now is 7 years too late. The collapse has happened!

There are still wolves, moose densities in those areas are still relatively moderate compared to other parts of the province, just not high for 7a.

You are right, you did bang the drum on wolves and you are right. The big difference now is the wolf population is contiguous across the province, top to bottom.

[GoatGuy]

The effects of the ripples are far greater than many even are willing to admit at this time. Hunting will be hard for a few years post collapse. Hunters need to suck it up and live with it. Look at it as a way to
make yourself a better hunter instead of complaining that the easy hunting is over . Anyone can have success in the good times. It is the hard times that will make hunters better hunters as the hone their skills.

Unfortunately when it's managed through LEH and reduced seasons it more the reduction of opportunity. I'm sure there will be even more pressure to change the LEH system then there will be to make more moose.

[Fisher-Dude]

People have to get a new mindset. Expectations are too high based on past hunts. People will say "10 years ago six of us would get 3 or 4 moose every year." Now they are all pissed off about getting only two moose. I think that's great success compared to other jurisdictions. Ontario has ten guys on a single moose tag! Like dana says the gravy years are over...just get out there and make the best of it until populations can rebuild with better habitat and a downswing in predators.

People also have to get past this mindset that fiddling with regulations will make more moose. It simply won't.

[jessbennett]

well i can tell you that in regio 5 here, since the restrictions were put on mule deer, the population has done reallly well. REALLY well actually. less hunting time/pressure on the lil ones and the population has done well.. but here , our moose population continues to plummet, even though we are strictly on leh? so the "whole hunt less, kill less" theory goes right out the window. of course we have an exessive amount of "unregulated" hunting activity that goes on year round, and unless it stops we are screwed. so unless government steps in, and does something to start regulating/ and set up some sort of restrictions (and enforce them), we will never be truly able to sustain and increase moose numbers. It may be "just me", but The killing of pregnant cows, and cows with yearling calves cant do much for moose populations not just here, but everywhere. Our hunting regulations should be extended to EVERYONE. first nations should have to follow provincial seasons, have to apply for leh, just like everyone else, report their harvests, and follow the guidlines like everyone else. I dont know, but im sure that would "help" the moose population around here anyways. Its definately time that first nations harvests in this province are controlled, monitored, and regulated. It NEEDS to be an ESSENTIAL AND VITAL part of conservation. Its not racist, its a fact.

[Husky7mm]

There were 17,470 resident hunters in 7a in 1979. They spent 97394 days hunting and harvested 3363 moose.

In 2009 there were 11876 hunters who spent 99281 days and harvest 2860 moose.

In 2012 there were 9678 moose hunters who spent 94278 days and harvested 1932 moose.


I always find it interesting when people talk about 30 years ago, and good scientific data when they are simply making things up. Not the way the world works.

Looks like hunter % of success and efficiency are up in recent years. I think its wishful to hope that hunters have nothing to do with the decline.
Even with everything ideal mathematically the omincea model shows a slow and constant decline. I think with leh cow and bull, gos calf and spike fork add in an increase and preds and access and a it's phenomenon there are any moose left there at all.
Sure today there are less moose hunters in 7a they migrated to other regions that offered better moose numbers for the time being. Region 5 used to be a huge moose destination. It's been in the shitter for sometime now.

[Fisher-Dude]

Region 5 has been on restrictive bull only LEH for ages and still the moose have disappeared. Why people think that hunters had any effect on population levels is a real head scratcher.

[GoatGuy]

well i can tell you that in regio 5 here, since the restrictions were put on mule deer, the population has done reallly well. REALLY well actually. less hunting time/pressure on the lil ones and the population has done well.. but here , our moose population continues to plummet, even though we are strictly on leh? so the "whole hunt less, kill less" theory goes right out the window. of course we have an exessive amount of "unregulated" hunting activity that goes on year round, and unless it stops we are screwed. so unless government steps in, and does something to start regulating/ and set up some sort of restrictions (and enforce them), we will never be truly able to sustain and increase moose numbers. It may be "just me", but The killing of pregnant cows, and cows with yearling calves cant do much for moose populations not just here, but everywhere. Our hunting regulations should be extended to EVERYONE. first nations should have to follow provincial seasons, have to apply for leh, just like everyone else, report their harvests, and follow the guidlines like everyone else. I dont know, but im sure that would "help" the moose population around here anyways. Its definately time that first nations harvests in this province are controlled, monitored, and regulated. It NEEDS to be an ESSENTIAL AND VITAL part of conservation. Its not racist, its a fact.

This is an interesting approach as there has always been FN harvest in Region 5, so what has changed??????

Are FN harvesting more moose than they did in the 80s? Back when resident hunters used to harvest 3000 moose per year, versus the less than 1000 they are now.

The only way your theory holds water is if FN are actually harvesting significantly more moose than they were 30 years ago - like thousands more. If that is the case, then that may be the problem. It still doesn't explain when the moose population has crashed in Region 3, or 7a.

[300rum700]

Region 5 has been on restrictive bull only LEH for ages and still the moose have disappeared. Why people think that hunters had any effect on population levels is a real head scratcher.

Region 5 had a good population of Moose 5-10 years ago that rebounded after the gos closure. The any bull season had big impact on moose numbers. It was the southernmost area that still had an any bull season, it got hit hard because of this. I agree that this won't bring back the moose but it will help. If I don't shoot a calf it might live it might not, if I do shoot that calf, it WONT live. You are right that predation and access play the only role in bringing back the moose but the government you elected won't do a thing about wolves and the mountain pine beetle is was it is you can't fix it.

[GoatGuy]

Looks like hunter % of success and efficiency are up in recent years. I think its wishful to hope that hunters have nothing to do with the decline.
Even with everything ideal mathematically the omincea model shows a slow and constant decline. I think with leh cow and bull, gos calf and spike fork add in an increase and preds and access and a it's phenomenon there are any moose left there at all.
Sure today there are less moose hunters in 7a they migrated to other regions that offered better moose numbers for the time being. Region 5 used to be a huge moose destination. It's been in the shitter for sometime now.

The moose hunter numbers are controlled principally through LEH seasons. There are actually fewer moose hunters across the province as there are fewer moose, due to the 'regulations will fix everything' and fewer hunters who hunt moose. This approach is identifical to the gun control argument. No science or fact to back it up, just an ignorant ideology.

Yes, you are correct Region 5 used to be a huge moose destination but the hunters of the day were not concerned with increasing the moose population, only with changing the hunting regulations. So, they changed the hunting regulations, multiple times and guess what: They have fewer moose. The regulations approach hasn't worked.

We've tried all this stuff with Mountain Caribou too. GOS to LEH to closed. Caribou hunting in the southern half of the province has been closed since the 90s and there are FEWER and FEWER and FEWER and FEWER caribou. Must be the hunting seasons.....:wink:

By the way, have the mule deer around Cranbrook exploded? I recall you stated the any buck season was the problem, so the population must be back to 1980 levels now. No doe harvest since 1997, and a 4 pts buck season, which is the most restrictive regulation EVER in the region so mule deer must be everywhere, right? Probably not, it will be silence on that subject.

At the end of the day, the challenge here is getting over beliefs and ideologies - they have absolutely no place in science or wildlife management. Hunters need to transition to a mentality which is focused on INCREASING WILDLIFE POPULATIONS. Hunters haven't been focused on that for the last 40 years, they've been focused on changing hunting regulations and that has not worked for wildlife or hunters.

[GoatGuy]

Region 5 had a good population of Moose 5-10 years ago that rebounded after the gos closure. The any bull season had big impact on moose numbers. It was the southernmost area that still had an any bull season, it got hit hard because of this. I agree that this won't bring back the moose but it will help. If I don't shoot a calf it might live it might not, if I do shoot that calf, it WONT live. You are right that predation and access play the only role in bringing back the moose but the government you elected won't do a thing about wolves and the mountain pine beetle is was it is you can't fix it.

5-10 years ago Region 5 had less than half the moose it had in the 1980s.

Personally, I wouldn't call that "a good population."

You've hit the nail on the head on the last sentence, but hunters are going to have to change that. No one else is going to do that for them. People need to go in and talk with their MLAs and raise some hell about this issue if they want to see more moose.

[Husky7mm]

For the umpteenth time I was not against the "any buck" season ......:roll:
I don't have first hand knowledge of any EK mulie population changes as I moved. Until they collapse the high cat population instead of hundreds of dudes just chasing them around and around I doubt much will change.

[Husky7mm]

I would hazard a guess that the wolves in many areas of 7a are now gone. Either moved on to greener pastures or starved. With a dramatic reduction in prey, they can 't stay put or else they will starve to death. Organizing a big wolf cull now is too little way way too late. What is done is done! The wolves peaked in the North Thompson in 2007. I was banging the drum then and many mocked me for it. Banging the drum now is 7 years too late. The collapse has happened!

"science" lead us to believe if there was a main prey reduction the wolf population would follow. I always believed that to be wishful. This year I spent most of the winter surveying in northeastern alberta and saw wolves and tracks every trip. Never any sign of deer moose or bison. Not a track , not a turd, not a trail or a rub. From fall till a week ago. There simply was not any ungulates there, and for quite some time too. Those wolves stayed and ate beaver, rabbits, and other small game and birds. It's was a shocker seeing how long they are staying after the main prey left or was ate.

[jessbennett]

This is an interesting approach as there has always been FN harvest in Region 5, so what has changed??????

Are FN harvesting more moose than they did in the 80s? Back when resident hunters used to harvest 3000 moose per year, versus the less than 1000 they are now.

The only way your theory holds water is if FN are actually harvesting significantly more moose than they were 30 years ago - like thousands more. If that is the case, then that may be the problem. It still doesn't explain when the moose population has crashed in Region 3, or 7a.

where in my comment did i state that it is the ONLY problem??? the fact that it is unregulated, not monitored, or documented doesnt really help the situation when we are trying to conserve , sustain, and rebuild. I dont care what anybody says, if these things arent looked at, then how are we supposed to accurately know how many moose first nations harvest, or how many moose are harvested here in general? as i said before, shooting pregnant cows, and cows with young calves cant help the situation dont you think? Its not the complete solution, but its a dam good place to start. Place the first nations on L.E.H for moose just like the rest of us, because we all know theres no shortage of deer around to provide "sustenance", if need be.
As you said the resident hunters are harvesting 2000 moose less per year, that we know FOR A FACT. Do i think the first nations are harvesting less? absolutely not. Do i think they are doing anything to help the situation other than blockades and blaming L.E.H'ers? Nope. why would they? Who do they have to answer to? Do i think they are killing more? I'm not entirely sure, its unlikely, but the possibility is there. And because its not regulated, monitored or documented, we will never know truthfully will we? Works out quite favorably for some dont you think?
Also, there is another reason why the moose are down from what they were in the 80's and it is predation. The wolves may be on the decline as stated(which i completely disagree with), but they have done more than their fair share to decimate the moose population not only here in the cariboo, but also the other regions in question as well im sure.(im using region 5 as an example as its close to home and where I hunt). But with all the damage they have done, it has to be expected that it will take time to rebuild. Its not going to happen overnight.

[Husky7mm]

The effects of the ripples are far greater than many even are willing to admit at this time. Hunting will be hard for a few years post collapse. Hunters need to suck it up and live with it. Look at it as a way to
make yourself a better hunter instead of complaining that the easy hunting is over . Anyone can have success in the good times. It is the hard times that will make hunters better hunters as the hone their skills.

Until "more game is made" what's the plan?
If everyone started stepping up their game would ungulate hunting improve or get worse? I think the big rapid population swings we see are significantly related to a well informed, well educated hunter. We have every tool available to make it easier, tons of access, lots of "hunter opportunity" and we're willing to travel. Just look at all the bitching all over the west.
I prolly have to take up hunting ducks and geese just to get some action. lol but not really...

[GoatGuy]

where in my comment did i state that it is the ONLY problem??? the fact that it is unregulated, not monitored, or documented doesnt really help the situation when we are trying to conserve , sustain, and rebuild. I dont care what anybody says, if these things arent looked at, then how are we supposed to accurately know how many moose first nations harvest, or how many moose are harvested here in general? as i said before, shooting pregnant cows, and cows with young calves cant help the situation dont you think? Its not the complete solution, but its a dam good place to start. Place the first nations on L.E.H for moose just like the rest of us, because we all know theres no shortage of deer around to provide "sustenance", if need be.
As you said the resident hunters are harvesting 2000 moose less per year, that we know FOR A FACT. Do i think the first nations are harvesting less? absolutely not. Do i think they are doing anything to help the situation other than blockades and blaming L.E.H'ers? Nope. why would they? Who do they have to answer to? Do i think they are killing more? I'm not entirely sure, its unlikely, but the possibility is there. And because its not regulated, monitored or documented, we will never know truthfully will we? Works out quite favorably for some dont you think?
Also, there is another reason why the moose are down from what they were in the 80's and it is predation. The wolves may be on the decline as stated(which i completely disagree with), but they have done more than their fair share to decimate the moose population not only here in the cariboo, but also the other regions in question as well im sure.(im using region 5 as an example as its close to home and where I hunt). But with all the damage they have done, it has to be expected that it will take time to rebuild. Its not going to happen overnight.

Predation is one of the possible common themes across all three regions.

[GoatGuy]

Until "more game is made" what's the plan?
If everyone started stepping up their game would ungulate hunting improve or get worse? I think the big rapid population swings we see are significantly related to a well informed, well educated hunter. We have every tool available to make it easier, tons of access, lots of "hunter opportunity" and we're willing to travel. Just look at all the bitching all over the west.
I prolly have to take up hunting ducks and geese just to get some action. lol but not really...

The plan is change the hunting regulations, keep doing something hunters have been doing for 40 years which has never changed a thing, and do it again.

There is not 'lots' of hunter opportunity, it's actually at its lowest point across the province. If you go back twenty, thirty, forty or fifty years when there were far more hunters you'll find mule deer doe GOS, cow/calf moose GOS, bull moose GOS and you won't find a 6 pts bull elk or 4 pts mule deer season anywhere in the province. You will find major burns across the province in the 30s, 40s and 50s, controlled burns in the 80s, you will find widespread predator control and you will find more game, hunters and harvest across the province. The retired managers never ever dreamed of the day that bull moose would be on LEH.

We're living in a world where all the ecologists, wildlife researchers and managers are telling us we should be dealing with habitat and predation issues, but hunters just want to talk about regulations. The leading mule deer researcher in North America has said numerous times, deal with the habitat and you will have a pile of mule deer.

FYI it wasn't managers that recommended prey reduction, that was what politicians wanted. All of the researchers involved in caribou recovery recommended and have still recommended to this day predator control.

A couple weeks ago idaho aerial gunned a pack of wolves for elk. You can bet hunters there weren't talking about changing the hunting regulations, they were crawling up their politicians butts and writing them nasty grams on a regular basis to make that happen.

Pretty straightforward stuff.

[dana]

Unfortunately when it's managed through LEH and reduced seasons it more the reduction of opportunity. I'm sure there will be even more pressure to change the LEH system then there will be to make more moose.

With the discusion being about 7a, LEH is nothing new when it comes to moose management. It is a given in areas where moose numbers are drastically down that tag numbers will drop. I agree that the preceived lost opportunity is a hard pill to swallow but with numbers down by 70% in some units, we can not expect business as usual. Hunters are indeed going to have to sacrifice. Hunter opportunity can never be put in front of conservation. I know and you know that hunting in no way shape or form caused the current low moose pops. But expecting no change to seasons after a collaspe is unrealistic. The harvesting of calves could be debated and debated. We know it didn't cause the crash but it may limit the recovery. Seeing that the didn't drop the season but instead limited it to Jrs and Srs tells me they are think about the future. it is very hard to get a season back once it us gone but it is much easier changing the requirements of the season that still exists. I can see that season could easily return to the way it was once a recovery happens.

[ThinAir]

I agree 100%. Well said

[dana]

There are still wolves, moose densities in those areas are still relatively moderate compared to other parts of the province, just not high for 7a.

You are right, you did bang the drum on wolves and you are right. The big difference now is the wolf population is contiguous across the province, top to bottom.

Of course not all the wolves are gone. But the extreme highs of the predator pit have been dispersed as the hunting got harder and harder for them as the prey got less and less. Thus making a large effort at predator control a huge task that borders the unrealistic. Had it been done during the peak, it may have been easier. But the political climate pre2010 olympics was indeed an impossible hurdle. I personally believe BC is a much different political landscape than Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Rural country versus the specialness that is the Vancouver/victoria voter.

[jessbennett]

The plan is change the hunting regulations, keep doing something hunters have been doing for 40 years which has never changed a thing, and do it again.

There is not 'lots' of hunter opportunity, it's actually at its lowest point across the province. If you go back twenty, thirty, forty or fifty years when there were far more hunters you'll find mule deer doe GOS, cow/calf moose GOS, bull moose GOS and you won't find a 6 pts bull elk or 4 pts mule deer season anywhere in the province. You will find major burns across the province in the 30s, 40s and 50s, controlled burns in the 80s, you will find widespread predator control and you will find more game, hunters and harvest across the province. The retired managers never ever dreamed of the day that bull moose would be on LEH.

We're living in a world where all the ecologists, wildlife researchers and managers are telling us we should be dealing with habitat and predation issues, but hunters just want to talk about regulations. The leading mule deer researcher in North America has said numerous times, deal with the habitat and you will have a pile of mule deer.

FYI it wasn't managers that recommended prey reduction, that was what politicians wanted. All of the researchers involved in caribou recovery recommended and have still recommended to this day predator control.

A couple weeks ago idaho aerial gunned a pack of wolves for elk. You can bet hunters there weren't talking about changing the hunting regulations, they were crawling up their politicians butts and writing them nasty grams on a regular basis to make that happen.

Pretty straightforward stuff.

all that habitat isnt going to really mean a whole hell of alot if there isnt anything left to live in it dont you think??? It doesn't get much more straightforward than that. regulations DO need to be changed to give these animals an opportunity to recover. It may not be the cure all, but it sure as hell wouldnt hurt.

[Fisher-Dude]

Build the habitat and they will come. You can close all the seasons you want, but if there's no feedbag or escape terrain, you'll have no animals.

[Sitkaspruce]

all that habitat isnt going to really mean a whole hell of alot if there isnt anything left to live in it dont you think??? It doesn't get much more straightforward than that. regulations DO need to be changed to give these animals an opportunity to recover. It may not be the cure all, but it sure as hell wouldnt hurt.

And when that doesn't work, what is next??

I for one and sick and tired of hunters taking the blame for wildlife population problems and doubley sick of hunter blaming hunters for the same problems.

No wonder it is so easy for the polititions to make decissions on how OUR wildlife is to be managed, all they need to do is listen to us fight and argue about sh*t 99% don't understand or refuse to educate themselves about.

We are our own worst enemy and we will keep fighting each other instead of directing our energy at what is really needed. But i guess it is easier to stick your head in the sand, a$$ in the air and "Hope" what you want to see will work........have you thought about what will happen if it doesn't??? probably just blame more hunters....maybe the ones from VI will be the next one.....

Cheers

SS

[dana]

FD,
So what needs to be done to the habitat in 7a? Seems there is a disconnect on this site to what was the reality of the Mountain Pine Beetle epidemic. Regardless if it was logged or not, it was dead! The blame is not to be placed on the logging companies, the blame should be placed on a tiny little critter that changed our world. Mother nature at her best. And just like other natural disasters, it will take a while to recover. We've seen Change before and will see change again. The ripples are far reaching sometimes. But hope is not lost.

[steveo]

Even if the trees were dead from the pine beetle did they all have to be tipped over. Could have they not stood even for a handful of years so other regeneration could have a start in adjacent logging areas. I wonder if any studies were done in pine beetle forests to see if a dead forest was still viable for moose and other critters or was the wide spread logging just an attempt to control the beetle. I have not heard if efforts in this area are producing desired results, as in the control of the pine beetle.

[jessbennett]

well i suppose your right, lets not change a dam thing, since the way things are going now is working out so well?? obviously theres an issue, whether its harvest, habitat, vacation homes, or whatever the heck you wanna come up with. it doesnt matter what the issue(s) are, there is definately more than one that needs to be adressed, why not do everything we can to help the situation?
Not once was i wagging the finger at anyone or any reason, but rather several reasons. THE MAIN ONE IS PREDATORY. Dogs have brutalized the moose population in the regions disscussed. they may be on the mend now, but the damage has been done, and its going to take time to recover. Seems to me the less that are killed whether is by gun,bow, bus or train for that matter wouldnt hurt the situation any. Thats what im getting at. Sure habitat is a huge factor in the big picture, and is really only second in importance to the most important factor........ The population to put IN the habitat.... but hey thats just how i look at things.

[Fisher-Dude]

I think the scale in 7A is now beyond anything we can do to restore habitat for ungulates. The forest was viewed as fibre, not moose habitat, when the salvage logging was done. Some areas should have been burned instead of made into cultured cattle fields. All we can do is wait on green up now.

Here in 8, when we were in green and red attack, the main licensee continued logging ESSF instead of lodgepole. At one point I counted 3 of 4 main logging shows in spruce stands in TFL 49 while the MPB marched along in green attack. Gotta keep those peeler spruce pumpkins rolling in and let the pine stands dry and check, eh?

Now, with the fibre shortage, apparently 30m riparian zones are being whittled down to 10m and 5m. The last little corridors along the creeks are being creamed for spruce, which just happens to be the swamp donkeys' favourite habitat. I just found RoW ribbons right through the middle of one of my soggy skunk cabbage spots. I guess the Thorlaksons need a few more $$$, and moose and other riparian critters like marten don't need anywhere to live.

I'm the first one on here to beat the development and jobs and economy drum, but this is going (and has gone) too far in many places. Region 8 was lucky enough to get a couple of major fires, but not nearly enough has been done with critter habitat in mind.

[GoatGuy]

all that habitat isnt going to really mean a whole hell of alot if there isnt anything left to live in it dont you think??? It doesn't get much more straightforward than that. regulations DO need to be changed to give these animals an opportunity to recover. It may not be the cure all, but it sure as hell wouldnt hurt.

What you've said is what hunters have been saying for 40 years. There's now less hunters and less wildlife. This is actually the third time it's happened in the Cariboo. They used to harvest 3000 moose per year, now it's less than 1000.

That solution is one that has been tried dozens of times across the province - it doesn't work.

Need to start thinking about making more wildlife, not changing the hunting regulations on the ones we have left.

[GoatGuy]

well i suppose your right, lets not change a dam thing, since the way things are going now is working out so well?? obviously theres an issue, whether its harvest, habitat, vacation homes, or whatever the heck you wanna come up with. it doesnt matter what the issue(s) are, there is definately more than one that needs to be adressed, why not do everything we can to help the situation?
Not once was i wagging the finger at anyone or any reason, but rather several reasons. THE MAIN ONE IS PREDATORY. Dogs have brutalized the moose population in the regions disscussed. they may be on the mend now, but the damage has been done, and its going to take time to recover. Seems to me the less that are killed whether is by gun,bow, bus or train for that matter wouldnt hurt the situation any. Thats what im getting at. Sure habitat is a huge factor in the big picture, and is really only second in importance to the most important factor........ The population to put IN the habitat.... but hey thats just how i look at things.

I think we should do something - try to make more wildlife. Go after politicians and start dealing with habitat and predation issues.

The alternative is we could change the regulations and make fewer moose in the long-run. I'm only interested in things that work, not things that have been tried for 40 years and have never worked.

[GoatGuy]

Even if the trees were dead from the pine beetle did they all have to be tipped over. Could have they not stood even for a handful of years so other regeneration could have a start in adjacent logging areas. I wonder if any studies were done in pine beetle forests to see if a dead forest was still viable for moose and other critters or was the wide spread logging just an attempt to control the beetle. I have not heard if efforts in this area are producing desired results, as in the control of the pine beetle.

If think if they would have burned then fallen over you'd have a pile of moose.

There aren't a pile, but a few of the better documented burns have shown an increase in density of up to 4X pre-burn levels. Increased densities lasted about 40 years. Pretty amazing stuff.

Here's a newspaper article out of AK on what people do when they want to increase moose populations:

http://homertribune.com/2013/03/bog-considers-plight-of-moose-populations/

[GoatGuy]

Of course not all the wolves are gone. But the extreme highs of the predator pit have been dispersed as the hunting got harder and harder for them as the prey got less and less. Thus making a large effort at predator control a huge task that borders the unrealistic. Had it been done during the peak, it may have been easier. But the political climate pre2010 olympics was indeed an impossible hurdle. I personally believe BC is a much different political landscape than Idaho, Montana and Wyoming. Rural country versus the specialness that is the Vancouver/victoria voter.

Yes, that's what everyone says as well. "BC is different," and they are right. BC has the one of the most under-funded wildlife management programs in North America. BC also has the highest biodiversity. We probably have the fewest number of wildlife biologists given the size of the province. We don't invest in habitat enhancement at a landscape level, predator management, or management plans which are aimed at increasing wildlife populations - something everyone else does. That is a direct reflection on the lack of political participation by hunters in BC.

The difference between BC and Alberta, Idaho, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Wyoming, Yukon, PEI, Quebec, Utah, WASHINGTON STATE (the state that is one quarter the size of BC and has 7 MILLION PEOPLE), is that the hunters aren't vocal. Instead of trying to make more wildlife they've been busy changing the regulations for 40 years. This rural urban thing is a bunch of BS. Washington state has an operating budget that is 5 times greater than BC and it is one quarter the size. Idaho collars 1000 mule deer a year, that is more mule deer in one year than BC ever has, EVER. And Washington State has a 'lower mainland', it's called the Seattle Metropolis and it has 3.5 MILLION people in it, which is about 75% of BC's entire population!

Not a big fan of the 'put our hands up in the air' approach, the excuses, and that's the way it's always been approach. It doesn't work for me and it hasn't worked in the past. Need to stop thinking that way and start thinking about making more wildlife.

[guest]

My 2 cents ........ Should have been a mandatory inspection of every one taken and made LEH long ago any way. I too would like to see the wolves Hammered in many different zones throughout the province . Oh well I can't take a calf, no biggy, nice to be out there any way. Guess I best look harder for a little bull.

[Fisher-Dude]

My 2 cents ........ Should have been a mandatory inspection of every one taken and made LEH long ago any way. I too would like to see the wolves Hammered in many different zones throughout the province . Oh well I can't take a calf, no biggy, nice to be out there any way. Guess I best look harder for a little bull.


So you favour using scarce money to inspect harvested moose? Another regulation. And you favour going LEH. Another regulation. And a regulation that reduces revenue as LEH produces less revenue than GOS.

What would more regulations and less money do for moose?

[dellis]

So you favour using scarce money to inspect harvested moose? Another regulation. And you favour going LEH. Another regulation. And a regulation that reduces revenue as LEH produces less revenue than GOS.

What would more regulations and less money do for moose?

I'd like to see where you get your numbers about revenue, not calling you a liar, just curious where you get the information from and how many filters it's been through. You know there are 3 kinds of untruths..........lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I have lived in 7a my whole life, never liked the calf season and am happy to see it changed. Good for old guys and kids to kill baby moose, but too many calves killed with the GOS in my opinion. Too many idiot slob hunters cruising the roads and throwing their beer cans out the window too, and while I am on the rant, let's shut down the atv use for hunting and let a few critters hide in those back out of the way places where the slobs can't/won't access if they have to work at it. The hunt quality will improve if nothing else.
Darcy

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I'd like to see where you get your numbers about revenue, not calling you a liar, just curious where you get the information from and how many filters it's been through. You know there are 3 kinds of untruths..........lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I have lived in 7a my whole life, never liked the calf season and am happy to see it changed. Good for old guys and kids to kill baby moose, but too many calves killed with the GOS in my opinion.


Don't forget to add 'opinions' to that list. Harvest Stats don't support your opinion.

SSS

[GoatGuy]

I'd like to see where you get your numbers about revenue, not calling you a liar, just curious where you get the information from and how many filters it's been through. You know there are 3 kinds of untruths..........lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I have lived in 7a my whole life, never liked the calf season and am happy to see it changed. Good for old guys and kids to kill baby moose, but too many calves killed with the GOS in my opinion. Too many idiot slob hunters cruising the roads and throwing their beer cans out the window too, and while I am on the rant, let's shut down the atv use for hunting and let a few critters hide in those back out of the way places where the slobs can't/won't access if they have to work at it. The hunt quality will improve if nothing else.
Darcy

Depends on one's perspective.

Rather focus on making more moose then spend time on people's drinking habitats and how big the animal they shoot is. There are lots of people that try to regulate what others do - that's how we ended up with gun control in Canada.

[dellis]

That's why I said opinion. Are you ready to open up a GOS in your backyard that welcomes every slob hunter from across the province to come disrespect the place? The people in region 7a should have more say in what the seasons look like in 7a........we have to deal with the fallout. The majority of people I talk to, that live here, are pleased with the change. If you don't like it, lobby for more relaxed seasons in your own region.
Harvest stats be damned, every calf that a hunter kills is one less that might live through the winter. There is tons of winter feed for moose here, so starvation is not a serious problem(for deer yes, but not moose), but between the wolves and the FN, both of which are beyond the reach of regulatory solutions in this political climate, reducing the calf harvest for the rest of us is something that could help improve the moose population.
Now, go ahead and tell me that the stats say I am wrong, I'm just not buying it.

Darcy

[Ricky Bobby]

That's why I said opinion. Are you ready to open up a GOS in your backyard that welcomes every slob hunter from across the province to come disrespect the place? The people in region 7a should have more say in what the seasons look like in 7a........we have to deal with the fallout. The majority of people I talk to, that live here, are pleased with the change. If you don't like it, lobby for more relaxed seasons in your own region.
Harvest stats be damned, every calf that a hunter kills is one less that might live through the winter. There is tons of winter feed for moose here, so starvation is not a serious problem(for deer yes, but not moose), but between the wolves and the FN, both of which are beyond the reach of regulatory solutions in this political climate, reducing the calf harvest for the rest of us is something that could help improve the moose population.
Now, go ahead and tell me that the stats say I am wrong, I'm just not buying it.

Darcy

Glad that you have an open mind. Seems to be alot of this within the hunting community... I believe and therfore it's true.

So for those who want habitat vs restrictions. What are the top 3 things you would suggest? Predator culls are off the table, the political hot topic, not gonna happen for game (just take a read through the wolf management paper), so what 3 things could be done across the board to address moose numbers?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

That's why I said opinion. Are you ready to open up a GOS in your backyard that welcomes every slob hunter from across the province to come disrespect the place? The people in region 7a should have more say in what the seasons look like in 7a........we have to deal with the fallout. The majority of people I talk to, that live here, are pleased with the change. If you don't like it, lobby for more relaxed seasons in your own region.
Harvest stats be damned, every calf that a hunter kills is one less that might live through the winter. There is tons of winter feed for moose here, so starvation is not a serious problem(for deer yes, but not moose), but between the wolves and the FN, both of which are beyond the reach of regulatory solutions in this political climate, reducing the calf harvest for the rest of us is something that could help improve the moose population.
Now, go ahead and tell me that the stats say I am wrong, I'm just not buying it.

Darcy

Haven't hunted in 7a myself since the mid 90's but I do have a good friend who lives there who supports it and happens to be a bio. He supports it from his personal observations and also the data.

One thing a calf GOS closure DOES DO is give more leverage to help get the local FN's on board in changing their habits.


SSS

[jessbennett]

I'd like to see where you get your numbers about revenue, not calling you a liar, just curious where you get the information from and how many filters it's been through. You know there are 3 kinds of untruths..........lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I have lived in 7a my whole life, never liked the calf season and am happy to see it changed. Good for old guys and kids to kill baby moose, but too many calves killed with the GOS in my opinion. Too many idiot slob hunters cruising the roads and throwing their beer cans out the window too, and while I am on the rant, let's shut down the atv use for hunting and let a few critters hide in those back out of the way places where the slobs can't/won't access if they have to work at it. The hunt quality will improve if nothing else.
Darcy
well said.
but apparently all we need is better habitat, and to "make" more wildlife. :confused:.

[jessbennett]

Haven't hunted in 7a myself since the mid 90's but I do have a good friend who lives there who supports it and happens to be a bio. He supports it from his personal observations and also the data.

One thing a calf GOS closure DOES DO is give more leverage to help get the local FN's on board in changing their habits.


^^^^this would definately be a good thing. As i said earlier, we cant even begin to accurately manage our wildlife in this province until we know EXACTLY what FN's are harvesting. Just like everyone else, they need to be monitored, regulated , ENFORCED and have quotas adjusted accordingly, depending on harvests and population.
Im guessing that is just a pipe dream though.....


SSS


^^^^this would definately be a good thing. As i said earlier, we cant even begin to accurately manage our wildlife in this province until we know EXACTLY what FN's are harvesting. Just like everyone else, they need to be monitored, regulated , ENFORCED and have quotas adjusted accordingly, depending on harvests and population.
Im guessing that is just a pipe dream though.....

[r106]

That's why I said opinion. Are you ready to open up a GOS in your backyard that welcomes every slob hunter from across the province to come disrespect the place? The people in region 7a should have more say in what the seasons look like in 7a........we have to deal with the fallout. The majority of people I talk to, that live here, are pleased with the change. If you don't like it, lobby for more relaxed seasons in your own region.
Harvest stats be damned, every calf that a hunter kills is one less that might live through the winter. There is tons of winter feed for moose here, so starvation is not a serious problem(for deer yes, but not moose), but between the wolves and the FN, both of which are beyond the reach of regulatory solutions in this political climate, reducing the calf harvest for the rest of us is something that could help improve the moose population.
Now, go ahead and tell me that the stats say I am wrong, I'm just not buying it.

Darcy

Sounds to me like you just want to regulate out of town hunters in " Your " region. I absolutely hate this attitude. We are all BC'ers and we all have a right to be there. And I bet there are a lot of " slobs that live in 7a as well.

[Sitkaspruce]

I'd like to see where you get your numbers about revenue, not calling you a liar, just curious where you get the information from and how many filters it's been through. You know there are 3 kinds of untruths..........lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I have lived in 7a my whole life, never liked the calf season and am happy to see it changed. Good for old guys and kids to kill baby moose, but too many calves killed with the GOS in my opinion. Too many idiot slob hunters cruising the roads and throwing their beer cans out the window too, and while I am on the rant, let's shut down the atv use for hunting and let a few critters hide in those back out of the way places where the slobs can't/won't access if they have to work at it. The hunt quality will improve if nothing else.
Darcy


That's why I said opinion. Are you ready to open up a GOS in your backyard that welcomes every slob hunter from across the province to come disrespect the place? The people in region 7a should have more say in what the seasons look like in 7a........we have to deal with the fallout. The majority of people I talk to, that live here, are pleased with the change. If you don't like it, lobby for more relaxed seasons in your own region.
Harvest stats be damned, every calf that a hunter kills is one less that might live through the winter. There is tons of winter feed for moose here, so starvation is not a serious problem(for deer yes, but not moose), but between the wolves and the FN, both of which are beyond the reach of regulatory solutions in this political climate, reducing the calf harvest for the rest of us is something that could help improve the moose population.
Now, go ahead and tell me that the stats say I am wrong, I'm just not buying it.

Darcy

Having lived, worked and hunted in 7a for years, never saw a problem with moose. Were always lots around, even we were all killing those "baby calves"......now with the populations crashing across NA, we are not alone in the numbers decreasing, but regulating hunters even more will not help.

As for the NIMBY approach, you are the biggest hurdle we have as hunters. You hate all hunters who come up to "your backyard" and shoot YOUR moose. They are all our moose, the people of BC have a right to see how they are managed. And as for fallout, what are you talking about?? Your not entitled to those moose in 7a so where is the fall out?? Slob hunters are everywhere. I saw more local slobs hunters and recreationalists than out of towners, especially around Fraser Lake and Vanderhoof. Just go walk the rivers and the roads after a winter. You will become rich if your the first person on those areas.


well said.
but apparently all we need is better habitat, and to "make" more wildlife. :confused:.

Defeatist.....give up, lets pick on the easiest target we have, hunters. They are the problem, they shoot too many baby moose. Lets regulate them even more. The unregulated hunting and preds are way to hard to deal with.

Across NA, moose population are colapsing. Check out the moose pops in the eastern US, Manitoba, Ont, and other places. They are dying off and there is a studies galore on the what, why and when. Nothing concrete yet, but reason being looked at are; Pred numbers are up, unregulated hunting, global warming and the passing of brainworm from whitetails to moose along with other diseases. So it is just not here in BC, it is NA wide.

You are either part of the solution or your part of the problem, the way i see a lot of hunters on here is they would rather be part of the problem and than the solution. If you really care about moose and what is happening in your back yard, fight for it and don't quite, get involved, get to know your local Bio's, MLA's and F&G clubs. If you are not a member of either your local clib or BCWF, do it and again, get involved. We as hunter are the only ones who seem to care and as long as we remain quite, the people who make policy and regulations will keep doing what a few sqeeky wheels scream about.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Cheers

SS

[Argali]

I don't think hunters in B.C. are necessarily less vocal than hunters in the states immediately to the south, it is simply about the numbers.

B.C. has about 100K hunting licenses sold and a population of 4.5M, or about 2.2% of the population.

Montana sells about 200K resident hunting licenes in a population of 1M, or about 20% of the population.
Additionally, there are about 50K nonresident licenses sold or about 5% of the resident population.

So the percentage of the nonresident hunters in Montana is twice as high as the resident hunters of B.C., and the percentage of all hunters in Montanta is more than 10 times higher than B.C.

If B.C. had the same percentage of hunters as Montana, there would be an additional million hunters out there! That would certainly create more vocalization and generate at least 10 times the license revenue. However, I would not want to see a million more hunters!

[Fisher-Dude]

I'd like to see where you get your numbers about revenue, not calling you a liar, just curious where you get the information from and how many filters it's been through. You know there are 3 kinds of untruths..........lies, damn lies, and statistics.
I have lived in 7a my whole life, never liked the calf season and am happy to see it changed. Good for old guys and kids to kill baby moose, but too many calves killed with the GOS in my opinion. Too many idiot slob hunters cruising the roads and throwing their beer cans out the window too, and while I am on the rant, let's shut down the atv use for hunting and let a few critters hide in those back out of the way places where the slobs can't/won't access if they have to work at it. The hunt quality will improve if nothing else.
Darcy

Lots of data thru your local fish and game club that shows the difference in revenue streams between 50 people applying for 5 moose tags and what they spend versus 50 people hunting GOS and shooting 5 moose. Common sense, if people bother to use it, also tells you that 5 hunters on LEH spend less on tags and licenses than 50 on GOS.

There are regulations against drinking beer while hunting and throwing cans in the ditch. How are all those regulations working in that regard? Not so good eh? But you want more regulations on moose hunters. Tell us why that will work out differently.

[Timbow]

Good discussions guys...

Coming from a guy with his head in the sand and arse in the air I understand how passionate guys living in the PG area feel about the moose. If I don't (I live in Quesnel) get an LEH for a moose in Region 5 I can simply drive north to 7a (35 min. north) and hunt immature bulls or wait for the calf season. BUT.... I can also hunt muledeer and whitetail bucks, as well 6 point elk. Why would I want to hunt my home area of 5 when 7a offers more opportunity. I am not the only guy in outlying areas of 7a who thinks of this.

I have discussed the calf season restriction in 7a with numerous hunting friends and I yet to hear anyone who hunts 7a say they are disappointed about the changes. Simply put the current moose populations can't sustain the calf hunt. If all limiting factors were addressed now and with the calf season closed how long would it take the moose to rebound? How long would the population take to rebound if the calf season wasn't closed?

The one thing that I have not read from this topic is the tick infestation that knocked back the moose population around '99/'00 that coincided with the MPB outbreak in 5. I remember as we found numerous moose carcasses while laying out blocks. Amazingly numerous carcasses were not touched and just rotted with bones still intact which may have indicated a wolf population at its pre population explosion. Now before anyone jumps me, I am not saying the tick infestation started the wolf outbreak. During these El Nino years with a lack of snow and above warmer weather all prey species flourished and I'm sure the wolves had there work cut out for them.

Everyone agrees that predators and habitat are high on the list.

Another rant, hopefully all hunters fill out their harvest cards. I know of guys who shot nothing and don't even bother filling them out. My point is stats are only good as the data gathered. I am refereeing to the hunter days spent afield.

[jessbennett]

Having lived, worked and hunted in 7a for years, never saw a problem with moose. Were always lots around, even we were all killing those "baby calves"......now with the populations crashing across NA, we are not alone in the numbers decreasing, but regulating hunters even more will not help.

As for the NIMBY approach, you are the biggest hurdle we have as hunters. You hate all hunters who come up to "your backyard" and shoot YOUR moose. They are all our moose, the people of BC have a right to see how they are managed. And as for fallout, what are you talking about?? Your not entitled to those moose in 7a so where is the fall out?? Slob hunters are everywhere. I saw more local slobs hunters and recreationalists than out of towners, especially around Fraser Lake and Vanderhoof. Just go walk the rivers and the roads after a winter. You will become rich if your the first person on those areas.



Defeatist.....give up, lets pick on the easiest target we have, hunters. They are the problem, they shoot too many baby moose. Lets regulate them even more. The unregulated hunting and preds are way to hard to deal with.

Across NA, moose population are colapsing. Check out the moose pops in the eastern US, Manitoba, Ont, and other places. They are dying off and there is a studies galore on the what, why and when. Nothing concrete yet, but reason being looked at are; Pred numbers are up, unregulated hunting, global warming and the passing of brainworm from whitetails to moose along with other diseases. So it is just not here in BC, it is NA wide.

You are either part of the solution or your part of the problem, the way i see a lot of hunters on here is they would rather be part of the problem and than the solution. If you really care about moose and what is happening in your back yard, fight for it and don't quite, get involved, get to know your local Bio's, MLA's and F&G clubs. If you are not a member of either your local clib or BCWF, do it and again, get involved. We as hunter are the only ones who seem to care and as long as we remain quite, the people who make policy and regulations will keep doing what a few sqeeky wheels scream about.

United we stand, divided we fall.

Cheers

SS

newsflash here. im not "picking on" anybody. Its very obvious the predation (whether its dogs or people) ARE NOT HELPING THE SITUATION.... how much plainer can i make that. Itg may not be the ONLY factor, but its definately ONE of them. A calf killed is a calf killed period whether its a hunter or a wolf. why have BOTH killing calves? Its seems pretty plain that any calf that a hunter DOESNT kill, is one more that could make it. And in the grand scheme of things that ONE calf will help in the increase in population would it not???? Im not attacking anybody, wagging the finger at anybody, blaming anybody etc, etc, but some making excuses as to why the calf season ISNT hurting the situation makes no sense really.
different/stiffer regulations, season closures , and changes to present regulations DO work and HAVE worked. All im saying is its worth a try isnt it? Because its OBVIOUS that what is in place until now ISN'T working.

[Fisher-Dude]

Simply put the current moose populations can't sustain the calf hunt. If all limiting factors were addressed now and with the calf season closed how long would it take the moose to rebound? How long would the population take to rebound if the calf season wasn't closed?
.


According to the biologists, it will take the same amount of time for the population to rebound whether calves are harvested or not. According to the locals at Tim Hortons, the calf season in 7a had to be closed because slobs throw beer tins in the ditch. Should have good looking ditches in a few years, but you won't have any more moose than you do now.

[dana]

I think the scale in 7A is now beyond anything we can do to restore habitat for ungulates. The forest was viewed as fibre, not moose habitat, when the salvage logging was done. Some areas should have been burned instead of made into cultured cattle fields. All we can do is wait on green up now.

Here in 8, when we were in green and red attack, the main licensee continued logging ESSF instead of lodgepole. At one point I counted 3 of 4 main logging shows in spruce stands in TFL 49 while the MPB marched along in green attack. Gotta keep those peeler spruce pumpkins rolling in and let the pine stands dry and check, eh?

Now, with the fibre shortage, apparently 30m riparian zones are being whittled down to 10m and 5m. The last little corridors along the creeks are being creamed for spruce, which just happens to be the swamp donkeys' favourite habitat. I just found RoW ribbons right through the middle of one of my soggy skunk cabbage spots. I guess the Thorlaksons need a few more $$$, and moose and other riparian critters like marten don't need anywhere to live.

I'm the first one on here to beat the development and jobs and economy drum, but this is going (and has gone) too far in many places. Region 8 was lucky enough to get a couple of major fires, but not nearly enough has been done with critter habitat in mind.


The Mountain Pine beetle hit the south late and with much less vigour. One thing that was not highly publized is we have also been experiencing significant Spruce Beetle outbreaks over the last 5-8 years as well. The shelf life of dry dead pine is much longer than the shelf life of dead spruce in wetter Essf zones. So that could possibly explain why the spruce was being logged before the pine in the situation you describe. Much of the Cariboo and PG was logged in an effort to stop the beetle as much as humanly possible. With a lot of the OK and Koots spared from all out devastation, one could argue that the war on the beetle was won at the sacrifice of the Cariboo and PG. When the beetle was at it's climax in about 2005, they were worried that it was going to jump the entire county all the way to Eastern Canada and down to the southern States. How do you think the province would look like had we not been aggressive in fighting the battle? what would North America look like? You have green unattacked forests in the OK. do you think you would have those if we had of done things different. One thing we can say, that it was halted. Very very few areas where it is currently active anymore. Spruce Beetle is still having outbreaks as is Fir Beetle.

[kilometers]

According to the biologists, it will take the same amount of time for the population to rebound whether calves are harvested or not. According to the locals at Tim Hortons, the calf season in 7a had to be closed because slobs throw beer tins in the ditch. Should have good looking ditches in a few years, but you won't have any more moose than you do now.
Can you show me a biologist or report that backs your statement up
you seem to be stuck on the calf season not hurting anything. When basic math tells me if you don't harvest an animal theirs one more for next year. Even if it's killed by wolfs their is still one more to survive or be eaten.

[dana]

GG, that is not what you were saying years ago when i was saying we needed to do something about the predator pit we were in. :) My joking about shooting collared wolves was actually taken seriously too! hahaha. with numerous years of living in the pit and now sitting on the other side of the collapse, i've learned a few things and had changes in my thought process as well. What i have seen is nature has a way of surprising us and the rebound is well under way. The amount of cows still with surviving calves this winter that i saw was very exciting. I was seeing moose and moose sign in areas i haven't seen sign in for years. The amount of wolf sign has been very very low compared to a few years ago. And the sign I see is normally just random lone dogs who are etching out an existence on whatever they can find. I am seeing coyotes again. They were almost non-existant during the wolf years. So as the ripples started to diminish, life continues on. I personally am of the mindset that much of what we worry about aren't as big of issues as we make them out to be. Instead of putting so much time and effort non-issues, we should instead work at things we can do something about. While I agree regulation changes normally don't make a bit of difference at growing more moose, I personally don't see this change as a Starter worth a big fight, especially since they handed it to the Jrs and Srs, which is actually giving you exactly what you have been asking for. It is a postive move for hunter recruitment and retention. On top of that, it isn't a bad thing to err on the side of conservation when you are trying to rebuild a herd. My view of the world is slightly different as I am "out there" year round and have been majorly involved in the MPB issues on the ground over the last dozen years. I can assure you the forests of blowdown in the wetter pine types are not moose friendly.

[Fisher-Dude]

Can you show me a biologist or report that backs your statement up
you seem to be stuck on the calf season not hurting anything. When basic math tells me if you don't harvest an animal theirs one more for next year. Even if it's killed by wolfs their is still one more to survive or be eaten.

Hit the Google link on compensatory versus additive harvest and then you can tell us what the biologists say. You won't believe me even if I told you.

Here, I'll even link you to Google. https://www.google.ca/webhp?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8#q=additive+vs+compensatory+harvest+moose

[Fred1]

Some of you here are really on the ball with these issues and have a pretty good understanding of the published material. Some great points being made!! Yes the American population does put some pretty good revenue towards their wildlife management! It sure seems like our govt's are caught up in doing what the loudest voice says instead of what science shows us - or what the Americans have already discovered... I had read the Kenai River Moose article a while back and yes the Yanks are way ahead of us in their wildlife management, the studies and then putting "it"into action. Lately, I have been reading everything I can on moose population dynamics, predator relationships and harvest quotas and how it all intertwines. I am a believer now, with this issue, that management through hunting regulations is the WRONG approach - I did not really doubt it, but needed to ground it with more self education. Some great read on this thread. Thanks for posting! I saw a cow moose today. I did not see a calf with her and she didn't look to still be holding one, but I do hope there was one close by in the willow :)

[bearvalley]

Some good thoughts and opinions here. Over the last couple of years whenever the topic of troubled moose populations comes up the blame is put to altered habitat, predators and unregulated harvest. When the unregulated harvest topic comes up it is always said too many cows are being killed. Does it really matter how many cows are out there if the regulated hunters hammer all the calves? On a stressed moose population that is being managed for recovery every surviving calf is a plus. Shutting down the 7a calf hunt is all the region wildlife staff can do to make a change at this time. Right or wrong, time will tell.
The habitat changes only will be healed by time. The predator issue will carry on. Some on here have commented that the wolves have reached their high a few year ago and either dispersed or declined in numbers. Maybe in small localized pockets but overall in most of BC there are still a hell of a lot of wolves. And bears, both black and grizzly. At this time the management of predators by polititions and Goverment wildlife staff is being dictated by unrealistic environmentalist voters. And most of us as BC resident hunters are too silent. If Idaho, Washington State etc. can cull predators to manage wildlife so can we. As GG said they have no shortage of Granola heads down there. The difference is a more vocal hunters.
Some of the provincial wildlife people I have talked to would very much like to deal with wolves which are the main culprit. And some of the tools are there to deal with them under the Wolf Management Plan when it comes to game populations that need help to recover. The problem is that wildlife has become a political pawn and only the band-aid fixes are being applied.

[Timbow]

The Mountain Pine beetle hit the south late and with much less vigour. One thing that was not highly publized is we have also been experiencing significant Spruce Beetle outbreaks over the last 5-8 years as well. The shelf life of dry dead pine is much longer than the shelf life of dead spruce in wetter Essf zones. So that could possibly explain why the spruce was being logged before the pine in the situation you describe. Much of the Cariboo and PG was logged in an effort to stop the beetle as much as humanly possible. With a lot of the OK and Koots spared from all out devastation, one could argue that the war on the beetle was won at the sacrifice of the Cariboo and PG. When the beetle was at it's climax in about 2005, they were worried that it was going to jump the entire county all the way to Eastern Canada and down to the southern States. How do you think the province would look like had we not been aggressive in fighting the battle? what would North America look like? You have green unattacked forests in the OK. do you think you would have those if we had of done things different. One thing we can say, that it was halted. Very very few areas where it is currently active anymore. Spruce Beetle is still having outbreaks as is Fir Beetle.

Depending on what you would define as winning the war on MPB, they won. The MPB basically ate itself to death. Pretty sad when you see vast pine regeneration blocks attacked by the beetle, trees as young as 10-15 years. The beetle has jumped the Rockies and has destroyed vast pine stands in the peace country. My sister-in-law works with the Ministry of Forests in Alberta and mentioned a large area has been destroyed in the Willmore area, mind you that was a few years ago and she mentioned they aggressively addressed the issue. The days of working in the pine flats are long gone and are a memory. The MPB epidemic was a perfect storm for the Cariboo Region but when you realistically look we will be back in the same state in 70 to 80 years from now because of the monoculture that we have created.

[dana]

Depending on what you would define as winning the war on MPB, they won. The MPB basically ate itself to death. Pretty sad when you see vast pine regeneration blocks attacked by the beetle, trees as young as 10-15 years. The beetle has jumped the Rockies and has destroyed vast pine stands in the peace country. My sister-in-law works with the Ministry of Forests in Alberta and mentioned a large area has been destroyed in the Willmore area, mind you that was a few years ago and she mentioned they aggressively addressed the issue. The days of working in the pine flats are long gone and are a memory. The MPB epidemic was a perfect storm for the Cariboo Region but when you realistically look we will be back in the same state in 70 to 80 years from now because of the monoculture that we have created.
IMO, There still is plenty of pine in North America that is still alive because of our aggressive management. They ate there selves out in the large attack areas like the Cariboo and PG and much of Kamloops. But there still is plenty of food for them outside those areas. Maybe it was just the wind currents that kept them from taking over North America but the war is over. There were heavily casualties but the war for the continent ended here.

As for 80-100 years from now, regardless if it was logged or burned, you will be in the same boat. Just like in the past. If you think this was the first ever MPB aggressive outbreak you are dreaming. It has been around for thousands of years and will be around for thousands of more especially given how fast pine grows.

[dana]

Some good thoughts and opinions here. Over the last couple of years whenever the topic of troubled moose populations comes up the blame is put to altered habitat, predators and unregulated harvest. When the unregulated harvest topic comes up it is always said too many cows are being killed. Does it really matter how many cows are out there if the regulated hunters hammer all the calves? On a stressed moose population that is being managed for recovery every surviving calf is a plus. Shutting down the 7a calf hunt is all the region wildlife staff can do to make a change at this time. Right or wrong, time will tell.
The habitat changes only will be healed by time. The predator issue will carry on. Some on here have commented that the wolves have reached their high a few year ago and either dispersed or declined in numbers. Maybe in small localized pockets but overall in most of BC there are still a hell of a lot of wolves. And bears, both black and grizzly. At this time the management of predators by polititions and Goverment wildlife staff is being dictated by unrealistic environmentalist voters. And most of us as BC resident hunters are too silent. If Idaho, Washington State etc. can cull predators to manage wildlife so can we. As GG said they have no shortage of Granola heads down there. The difference is a more vocal hunters.
Some of the provincial wildlife people I have talked to would very much like to deal with wolves which are the main culprit. And some of the tools are there to deal with them under the Wolf Management Plan when it comes to game populations that need help to recover. The problem is that wildlife has become a political pawn and only the band-aid fixes are being applied.

I am not saying that wolf numbers aren't high across the province. I am saying they are no longer high in the units where the collapse was the hardest, where the moose numbers are down by 50-70%. Suggesting a predator control program for these areas be implemented is way to little and way too late. Good luck seeing success in removing much more than a handful of dogs. For the rest of the province, I agree localized efforts need to be done. But a full scale wolf kill will be extremely hard to have any major impact as the dogs have dispersed from the high concentrations of the peak of the predator pit. Localized predator control will have to be constant and ongoing year after year to have any impact. Politically, the best way to do this is with the help of Local First Nations. Which is totally doable if and when hunters of this province stop blaming them and start working together instead of against. I believe the same thing needs to be done with the GOABC. The battles that resident hunters in the province always pick are against fellow hunters. If we want true change in this province, we need to drop the constant hatred for both groups and start working together for the good of all.

[Fisher-Dude]

Potz, did you think no one would read your link?

And does posting an opinion piece from a guy who invented a fishing lure in 1992 give credence to any argument? I could post opinion pieces from certain guide outfitters that don't think residents should be hunting whitetailed deer, either.

From the link:

Mark Ryckman, senior wildlife biologist with the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters (OFAH) says the OFAH supports calf hunting as it now exists. Cutting the calf harvest in select WMUs may result in more adult tags, but would also reduce the number of overall opportunities for moose hunters.

Ryckman questioned the need to target only licensed moose hunters for change. “If calf recruitment has been identified as an issue in a specific WMU, then we need to look at all causes, including ticks, predation and unregulated harvest,” he said. Ryckman pointed to the many options available to MNR in their moose management tool box, some of which could be used to help populations grow, resulting in more hunting opportunities. “The OFAH recommends that all management options (e.g. predator control) must be fully evaluated and implemented using a targeted (i.e. WMU-specific) approach because calf overharvest is not an issue in all WMUs,” Ryckman said, and added that public input is also required. Eason agreed there are a number of other factors affecting moose populations and adult tag numbers that are just as important as calf over-harvesting.

[dana]

FD,
Careful about attacking one for ignoring science and going with personal opinion because you have been guilty of this in this thread as well. You have attacked forestry and jumped to the conclusions of 'only for $' . Forestry is indeed a science. Do you think your opinions, as you look at things from afar, are indeed correct and the Association of BC Forest Profesionals are wrong? How many degrees in Natural Sciences have imput on the hows and whys in forestry both on the goverment side and on the industry side? Wow many Doctrats? Do you think an entire industry regulated by strict environmental policy set in place by science is wrong? you are doing exactly what you say others shouldn't do?

[Fisher-Dude]

I was in the industry for 14 years. I got a lot of time working beside the POFTERS (RPFs). I think things have slid off the rails a bit with the "self-regulation" era. We were way too far the other way in the 1990s, but I think the pendulum has swung too far and needs to find its way back toward the middle.

Granted, we've been dealt a shitty hand with the current state of the forests, and there's only time that is going to bring it back.

I'd just like to see more planning for wildlife values in prescriptions now. With the current fibre shortage, my belief is that wildlife values are being given short shrift as the scramble to find merch timber reaches deeper into areas that ought to be given more consideration for wildlife. The current move deep into riparian zones for the few remaining spruce pumpkins we have is not what I would call "critter considerate."

And, there's less consultation with wildlife and eco bios than there used to be. When I spoke with one of the local eco bios a couple of years ago, he said he gives his 25¢ on plans, but doesn't think it makes much difference now. That's a problem. RPFs need to consult with wildlife and eco bios better than they are now.

[Timbow]

IMO, There still is plenty of pine in North America that is still alive because of our aggressive management. They ate there selves out in the large attack areas like the Cariboo and PG and much of Kamloops. But there still is plenty of food for them outside those areas. Maybe it was just the wind currents that kept them from taking over North America but the war is over. There were heavily casualties but the war for the continent ended here.

As for 80-100 years from now, regardless if it was logged or burned, you will be in the same boat. Just like in the past. If you think this was the first ever MPB aggressive outbreak you are dreaming. It has been around for thousands of years and will be around for thousands of more especially given how fast pine grows.

I find the "our aggressive management" statement hard to swallow. Aggressive in terms of harvesting but chasing a beetle is hardly a management strategy. But that depends on what you define as management. I'm not sure about your neck of the woods but that is what happened here. The beetle used thermal currents to reach the Peace and even the eastern foothills of Alberta. It is believed a disease finally caught up to the beetle with the combination of mother nature and man in that order thad truly stopped it. Yes, if it had the aggression and numbers that it had in the Cariboo at its peak, it would have continued east and nothing could have stopped it.

Hopefully everyone realizes that this is not the first outbreak. The last large MPB outbreak occurred in the Chilcotin the early '80's that outbreak reached west of Quesnel but it was cold weather that stopped that outbreak unlike this last one we witnessed. Just like the fir and spruce beetle, the pine beetle have been here from the beginning. And yes it will happen again and it will happen again with avengance. Most people haven't even heard of the spruce beetle outbreak that resulted in the Bowron Lake clearcut that started in the late 70's. This area could be seen from space. Now is a large plantation.



It's too bad that we are all led to believe that fire is bad for us. Most people do not know that forest fires are natural, especially in pine dominated stands. Before this last outbreak there were vast pine stands east of Quesnel that were in the 180 to 200 year age category.

[Sitkaspruce]

Dana

You are correct to a certain point. As one of those "Forest Professionals" with the ABCFP, there is some direction on the way we look at forests, and there is some good in what is done with how we treat forests. But in all honesty, other than basic stuff ( protecting streams, some OGMAS, a bit of wildlife habitat and minimizing soil disturbance along with a couple others), things have not really changed from the 23 years I have been in the business.

But, with results based legislation, less and less Professionals doing the audits and inspections and the companies having to report out less and less, we are not following what science dictates as much as we could. The beetles, wood demand, jobs, lobbyist pressure and increased cost of doing business have all undermined what science could be used.
As a good friend of mine, who is a RPF, once said:"You cannot put Ethics and Profits in the same sentence ".

I think we can all figure out what word is followed more.

After watching the beetle wreck havoc across most of Central BC and being on the front lines either in a layout and harvest roll or as a firefighter roll, it is hard to see it now happening in the North Peace with very little that can be done about it.

Cheers

SS

[horshur]

for what it is worth the pine beetle is in the east. perhaps it is not the same exact species we have here but it is already endemic in the east. I was looking at pictures on a houndsmen board from fellow in Maine or maybe in Minnesota and in the background of his picks was what looked to be pine beetle attack..anyway I asked and damn sure that is what it was and he said it was bad all over the state and they were aggressive logging it.....

I like to read biographic/natural history and have a small library of those sort of books at home as well hunted up with the library system others...get a hold of RM Pattersons Biography "A life of great adventure" read it for there in the pages is documented the late 1920's early 30's and the drought conditions with mention of the huge fires even on the lower mainland you can tie in with some of that time several other books that span that time frame and the mention of the fires, hell it were the dust bowl.....1928 I think was the big fire in Wells Grey country a fire that burned like it did in part to a pine beetle outbreak and drought...by the mid 40's the hunting for moose was really picking up and that went on for years afterword.....that is just one instance of what would amount to many more you all probably could date much of the pine country up north last big fire's by aging the pine that is dead....it will have been a huge series of events spanning a relative short time..you can even find mentioned in some literature wolves and Goat posted up an article year or two ago of Giest's that documented wolf numbers being high same time frame of the fires....

all I am getting at is we are part of a huge natural event that has happened before many times it is different in how we have approached for many reasons but still... the moose has been here before.

In Joe Garner's book "Never a time to trust" Chapter "Government and Game" he has a list of some history of Fish and Wildlife branch in BC it is mentioned that by 1910 moose formerly unknown in the interior were increasing steadily and moving south and west
By 1947 James Hatter is mentioned as becoming prominent at the time for his studies of moose relating to ticks and other parisites..... winter ticks rings a bell!! Few moose to parasite issues in 30 years...

[drakfero]

on and on and on about those poor calfs

let them be for 3-5 years and lets see the difference.

in those years lets make some changes in predatory hunting
wolfs, bears , coyotes and the results must come

[dana]

Dana

You are correct to a certain point. As one of those "Forest Professionals" with the ABCFP, there is some direction on the way we look at forests, and there is some good in what is done with how we treat forests. But in all honesty, other than basic stuff ( protecting streams, some OGMAS, a bit of wildlife habitat and minimizing soil disturbance along with a couple others), things have not really changed from the 23 years I have been in the business.

But, with results based legislation, less and less Professionals doing the audits and inspections and the companies having to report out less and less, we are not following what science dictates as much as we could. The beetles, wood demand, jobs, lobbyist pressure and increased cost of doing business have all undermined what science could be used.
As a good friend of mine, who is a RPF, once said:"You cannot put Ethics and Profits in the same sentence ".

I think we can all figure out what word is followed more.

After watching the beetle wreck havoc across most of Central BC and being on the front lines either in a layout and harvest roll or as a firefighter roll, it is hard to see it now happening in the North Peace with very little that can be done about it.

Cheers

SS

SS,
It is my opinion that most RPFs are trying to do the best they can within the framework of the legislation they must work with. The bulk of that legislation came in the 90's under the Code and the LRMP process. Timber harvesting guidelines in wildlife areas such a Critical Winter Range and Species at Risk were developed in those days and have had some fine tuning over the years. In my area the biggest wildlife changes have been with the Southern Mountain Caribou. All FSPs have to be consistent with the higher level plans. While economics does drive the industry, I see most foresters trying to do the best forestry practices because they actually do care about the environment that they are logging. So I am curious what else everyone thinks foresters should do for wildlife and the environment? Please tell me where they are putting profits first and wildlife last as some have indicated in this thread? Just because someones favourite hunting spot gets logged doesn't mean that was bad for the critters that live there. That seems to be the constant bitch on HBC though. How dare they log my hunting spot! And the main reason why logging is bad is because roads are built and now Slob road hunters from the Lower Mainland will be hunting my spot and it will be a slaughter! hahaha!

[dana]

I find the "our aggressive management" statement hard to swallow. Aggressive in terms of harvesting but chasing a beetle is hardly a management strategy. But that depends on what you define as management. I'm not sure about your neck of the woods but that is what happened here. The beetle used thermal currents to reach the Peace and even the eastern foothills of Alberta. It is believed a disease finally caught up to the beetle with the combination of mother nature and man in that order thad truly stopped it. Yes, if it had the aggression and numbers that it had in the Cariboo at its peak, it would have continued east and nothing could have stopped it.

Hopefully everyone realizes that this is not the first outbreak. The last large MPB outbreak occurred in the Chilcotin the early '80's that outbreak reached west of Quesnel but it was cold weather that stopped that outbreak unlike this last one we witnessed. Just like the fir and spruce beetle, the pine beetle have been here from the beginning. And yes it will happen again and it will happen again with avengance. Most people haven't even heard of the spruce beetle outbreak that resulted in the Bowron Lake clearcut that started in the late 70's. This area could be seen from space. Now is a large plantation.



It's too bad that we are all led to believe that fire is bad for us. Most people do not know that forest fires are natural, especially in pine dominated stands. Before this last outbreak there were vast pine stands east of Quesnel that were in the 180 to 200 year age category.

By aggressive management I do mean harvesting. Large clearcuts liquidating pine. One can always look back on things after the fact and come up with better solutions that may have caused a different outcome. In my mind, the government of the day dropped the ball when it first started in Tweedsmuir. They should have heli drip torched the park boundaries in the early spring and then lit up the guts of the park in the heat of the summer. They should have allowed large clearcuts in the beginning and roped in all beetle outside the park. But hindsight is 20/20.

[dana]

FD,
Last week I was at a banquet where the chief forester of BC was the guest speaker. He did say that one thing he would like to see is more public consultation from both government and licensees. He said that is the one thing that has been lacking in the industry in the last few years. He wants to get it back to the local level, so the general public is better informed. I know you are thinking back to the FDP years when things were talked about on a block by block basis. The FSPs are not that specific but the public consultation will give the public a good idea of the company's intentions on a broader level, area specific (drainage or landscape unit).

[Husky7mm]

GG, that is not what you were saying years ago when i was saying we needed to do something about the predator pit we were in. :) My joking about shooting collared wolves was actually taken seriously too! hahaha. with numerous years of living in the pit and now sitting on the other side of the collapse, i've learned a few things and had changes in my thought process as well. What i have seen is nature has a way of surprising us and the rebound is well under way. The amount of cows still with surviving calves this winter that i saw was very exciting. I was seeing moose and moose sign in areas i haven't seen sign in for years. The amount of wolf sign has been very very low compared to a few years ago. And the sign I see is normally just random lone dogs who are etching out an existence on whatever they can find. I am seeing coyotes again. They were almost non-existant during the wolf years. So as the ripples started to diminish, life continues on. I personally am of the mindset that much of what we worry about aren't as big of issues as we make them out to be. Instead of putting so much time and effort non-issues, we should instead work at things we can do something about. While I agree regulation changes normally don't make a bit of difference at growing more moose, I personally don't see this change as a Starter worth a big fight, especially since they handed it to the Jrs and Srs, which is actually giving you exactly what you have been asking for. It is a postive move for hunter recruitment and retention. On top of that, it isn't a bad thing to err on the side of conservation when you are trying to rebuild a herd. My view of the world is slightly different as I am "out there" year round and have been majorly involved in the MPB issues on the ground over the last dozen years. I can assure you the forests of blowdown in the wetter pine types are not moose friendly.
Refreshing view, I dig it!!

[Timbow]

By aggressive management I do mean harvesting. Large clearcuts liquidating pine. One can always look back on things after the fact and come up with better solutions that may have caused a different outcome. In my mind, the government of the day dropped the ball when it first started in Tweedsmuir. They should have heli drip torched the park boundaries in the early spring and then lit up the guts of the park in the heat of the summer. They should have allowed large clearcuts in the beginning and roped in all beetle outside the park. But hindsight is 20/20.

Yes dana hindsight is 20/20. Tweedsmuir should have been broadcast burnt and they should have let Licensees address the situation but the government would not budge. We tried to push boundary sizes to aggressively encase green attack but again the government made us cut back on the opening size. This was in '00 and the government was the NDP. This was another headache inherited by the liberals.

I even remember the MLA (Liberal) for 100 Mile Area even trying to push to have Tweedsmuir logged....could you imagine if this would have happened. I believe in salvaging, not cutting up the landscape that is protected.

But we should get back to the topic....

[Timbow]

FD

I'd just like to see more planning for wildlife values in prescriptions now. With the current fibre shortage, my belief is that wildlife values are being given short shrift as the scramble to find merch timber reaches deeper into areas that ought to be given more consideration for wildlife.

This pretty much sums up the state of Region 5 and 7a with so much country opened up to salvage pine. This is why so many people in the PG and Quesnel area are in favor of the GOS closure on calf. The moose simply don't stand a chance with so much access for both predators and hunters. I totally agree that something needs to be done, but at this stage people think it's too late. I hope in 5 or so years the moose bounce back and you can point at the people who favoured the closure and say "Told you so". When these areas green up to free grow status the moose will once again flourish as they once did.

[Husky7mm]

Being that half the calves will be productive cows the following year its stands to reason that the moose numbers will compound if they are left alone. I get that management believes they have done their job on providing a moose to a person whether its shot as a 4 yr old bull or a 1/2 year old calf but let's see the numbers rebuild. I really can't see that happening any time soon if stock is shot prior to reproduction. People are gonna have to be happy splitting a moose with their grandpa or their lucky hunting partner that received an leh. Even a 1/4 of a moose is a treat, and you still got to go hunting.!

[Husky7mm]

FD

I'd just like to see more planning for wildlife values in prescriptions now. With the current fibre shortage, my belief is that wildlife values are being given short shrift as the scramble to find merch timber reaches deeper into areas that ought to be given more consideration for wildlife.

This pretty much sums up the state of Region 5 and 7a with so much country opened up to salvage pine. This is why so many people in the PG and Quesnel area are in favor of the GOS closure on calf. The moose simply don't stand a chance with so much access for both predators and hunters. I totally agree that something needs to be done, but at this stage people think it's too late. I hope in 5 or so years the moose bounce back and you can point at the people who favoured the closure and say "Told you so". When these areas green up to free grow status the moose will once again flourish as they once did.

If you want your perspective to carry weight around here you have to invent multiple members for yourself so you can reiterate constantly...... Just saying

[Timbow]

If you want your perspective to carry weight around here you have to invent multiple members for yourself so you can reiterate constantly...... Just saying

Yeah, I'm working on that ....:)..... I'm done sounding like a broken record.

[billjc33]

''The harvest within the harvestable surplus is considered compensatory mortality, where the harvest deaths are substituting for the deaths that would occur naturally.''

Compensatory wildlife management in my opinion is garbage. No one can determine the number of calves that will die naturally. Using habitat and starvation as one of the backbones of its arguement is dillusional at best. We are talking about an area where the moose numbers have dropped up to 65%. If the habitat can withstand 65% more animals then food is not an issue. IF you have 10 calves and 4 will die of Starvation/Predation/Naturally and you shoot 2 (in calf season, after they have survived the first 6 months of their life) how many are you left with? Did you only shoot 2 of the 4 that were going to die naturally? IF you did you are pretty special. What if you shot 2 of the 6 that were going to survive, then you are left with 4 not 6 and it is not compensatory any more. The compensatory theory has to many variables to be reliable.

[ryanhuntslots]

sounds good to me!

[300win]

Love to go but what I understand is you need to be guided?? MPOTZOLD-If so can you recommend a GOS//response to Moose hunting Newfoundland

Cheers
300

[r106]

Compensatory wildlife management in my opinion is garbage. No one can determine the number of calves that will die naturally. Using habitat and starvation as one of the backbones of its arguement is dillusional at best. We are talking about an area where the moose numbers have dropped up to 65%. If the habitat can withstand 65% more animals then food is not an issue. IF you have 10 calves and 4 will die of Starvation/Predation/Naturally and you shoot 2 (in calf season, after they have survived the first 6 months of their life) how many are you left with? Did you only shoot 2 of the 4 that were going to die naturally? IF you did you are pretty special. What if you shot 2 of the 6 that were going to survive, then you are left with 4 not 6 and it is not compensatory any more. The compensatory theory has to many variables to be reliable.





I understand your point of view, but that would only explain the plummet of the population in 7a over the last couple years. Why is this happening in Region 5 and into 3 at the same time were there is no calf season? I get what your saying but there has to be more to it for it to be happening around the province. Is it just a coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.

If there is something else thats the cause of the decline in moose populations across the province I would say it would be proof that the calf season has no effect on the population. Would you not agree?

[f350ps]

If you want your perspective to carry weight around here you have to invent multiple members for yourself so you can reiterate constantly...... Just saying
Hahahahaha............that's brilliant!! And I thought I was the only one that knew that, Well done!!! He's the same guy that cries about the NDP stealing from the taxpayers yet posts all day long on his employers dime! If he secretly retired or got fired then I apologize for my oversight. :) K

[Fred1]

Im Batman.....

[Sitkaspruce]

I understand your point of view, but that would only explain the plummet of the population in 7a over the last couple years. Why is this happening in Region 5 and into 3 at the same time were there is no calf season? I get what your saying but there has to be more to it for it to be happening around the province. Is it just a coincidence? Maybe, but I doubt it.

If there is something else thats the cause of the decline in moose populations across the province I would say it would be proof that the calf season has no effect on the population. Would you not agree?

It's just not across the province, it is NA wide. Look at the eastern US, Manitoba, Ontario and other places. Moose populations are crashing and nobody really knows why. The calf season is not the reason. But we look at the easy fixes and penalize the hunters as the win all solution, while not dealing with the real problems. No different than the region 4 mule deer.

Cheers

SS

[ratherbefishin]

With hunting only accounting for about 15%of moose/deer mortality,I am highly skeptical of the value of any of these restrictions.Basically,whether we stopped all hunting,or not it would have little impact on the population.We have had all these restrictions in place for decades now,which were supposed to increase game populations,and combined with that,about a 60 or 70 %decline in hunting!which should theoretically resulted in a huge increase in populations not a decrease?The facts don't validate the theory that 'management' works....

[bridger]

When the present LEH management system was put in place in 7A thirty some years ago the regional biologist said it would only be in place for five years. After which time moose populations would have rebounded sufficiently to go back to GOS. Managing hunters only apparently hasn't worked in 7A.

[kootenayelkslayer]

Sorry if this has already been discussed, as I haven't read thru all 20 pages here. But I think there's a few important things to consider...

I notice that many people buy into the theory that we can harvest calves every year, as there is always a surplus. And I would agree under many conditions that this is true. But I don't think it should be blindly followed like it is a written law. The dynamics between moose populations, habitat, predators, etc. are constantly changing.

I'm sure somebody has already mentioned this, but there is a difference between harvesting calves out of an abundant, high-density population versus harvesting calves from a declining, or low density population. Just this morning at an ecology conference that I'm attending in Alaska, there was a good discussion about moose management. The speaker (a well known wildlife biologist) referred to a paper by Monteith et al (2014) that discusses some of the issues around carrying capacity, abundance, and surplus of calves/fawns. Only when a moose population is high and is nearing carrying capacity do the moose create a surplus of calves. The habitat can't support the excess calves, and that's why a certain percentage perishes every year. Those are the calves we want to harvest, and certainly not long ago in 7A, this was probably the case. But now we're having significant declines in the populations, and the moose are likely no longer at a stage where they are producing more calves than can be supported by the landscape. So in this current situation, it may be advisable to reduce or stop the harvest of calves.

My main point here is that these processes are not static. Just because we've followed certain theories in the past doesn't mean they always hold true. Things are changing and we need to be open-minded about alternative ideas. It always bugs me when people (many folks on here... like FD) state that calves can always be harvested out of a population like it's law. The truth is there is always uncertainty. Believe me, I'm always a proponent of increasing hunting opportunity when populations can support it. But if the moose population in the central-interior is truly in decline, then this so called 'surplus' of calves may not actually be a surplus anymore.

[Fisher-Dude]

^^^ How do you know if the habitat can support even the moose we have now? That's something that hasn't been discussed. Maybe this new, vastly altered habitat we're stuck with for the next 15 - 20 years can only support a minimal number of moose. Maybe we're at carrying capacity right now. Maybe someone can point us to some research that supports or refutes it. That research needs to be more detailed than "I drove by a bunch of willow bushes last week. "

[bridger]

As I said on previous post we have been managing hunters for the last thirty odd years and not habitat. Shutting calf seasons, doe seasons, putting antler restrictions in place etc, is a smoke and mirrors solution Managing hunter harvest alone won't get the job done.

[kootenayelkslayer]

No question that habitat is the by far more important than bickering over hunting regulations. There just doesn't seem to be much thought put into managing the habitat when you look at the way we've gone about logging on the landscape recently.

All I'm saying is that it's time to be a bit more open-minded about our options here. When we fail to regulate habitat loss, predation, and subsistence harvest, we don't have much choice left but to try adjusting the hunter harvest. Closing calf season isn't going to miraculously increase the moose population suddenly, but it may just provide a bit of help at this point.

[Fisher-Dude]

^^^ it will help about as much as putting a bandaid on your forehead during a heart attack.

As Bridger rightly points out, managing hunters does nothing for wildlife. We have decades of data to support that conclusion. It fails every single time. Less hunters and less game to hunt is not the answer.

[ratherbefishin]

Untill we have some idea of what is causing the decline in moose populations,be it loss of habitat,preditors,disease,road and train kill,we're shooting in the dark.I would like to see some scientific evidence on causes of mortality before I jump to any conclusion.One thing we do know and that is hunting contributes very little to the population,either way.
as far as the calf harvest is concerned, a wolf,bear ,or truck or train has no preference

[kootenayelkslayer]

^^^ it will help about as much as putting a bandaid on your forehead during a heart attack.



I know you're set in your ways FD. that's fine. No need to put words in my mouth. I only came on here to point out that the population may no longer be at a point where the moose are producing a surplus of calves.

[bearvalley]

^^^ How do you know if the habitat can support even the moose we have now? That's something that hasn't been discussed. Maybe this new, vastly altered habitat we're stuck with for the next 15 - 20 years can only support a minimal number of moose. Maybe we're at carrying capacity right now. Maybe someone can point us to some research that supports or refutes it. That research needs to be more detailed than "I drove by a bunch of willow bushes last week. "
I highly doubt that the habitat in Regions 7,5 or 3 is at carrying capacity right now. There are a lot of moose surviving in a more treeless environment than here. The main habitat change issue is the amount of access. The other moose reducing factor is predation. With the amount of logging road access created for the 2 and 4 legged hunters the moose didn't have a chance. Closing calf season in 7A will probably help very little as to recovering moose, but shooting calves at this time will help even less. Maybe what's needed are some access closures, both vehicles and atvs.
And a more intensive predator program.

[Husky7mm]

No starving moose in 7a, this is all about what's eating them.

[Husky7mm]

It's just not across the province, it is NA wide. Look at the eastern US, Manitoba, Ontario and other places. Moose populations are crashing and nobody really knows why. The calf season is not the reason. But we look at the easy fixes and penalize the hunters as the win all solution, while not dealing with the real problems. No different than the region 4 mule deer.

Cheers

SS
There has been plenty of habitat improvements in region 4 and they are on the increase. Funny in all that horrible habitat that elk and wt were thriving , so well they had to have very generous and liberal seasons to bring down their population.
Do you have an original thought on any of these topics or or will you just continue being an echo?

[M.Dean]

Hey, even if they shut down Elk all together, along with Moose, Grizz, Deer, Rabbit's and all the Sheep Species, us Hunters can't complain!!! Hell, we've got free Hunt'in, any dam time of year we want for "Ferrel Pig's" "Wall Lizards" and some kind of Turtle I think!!! We can't get too greedy here!!!

[limit time]

There has been plenty of habitat improvements in region 4 and they are on the increase. Funny in all that horrible habitat that elk and wt were thriving , so well they had to have very generous and liberal seasons to bring down their population.
Do you have an original thought on any of these topics or or will you just continue being an echo?
I'm no expert, but elk and wt have different diets than moose and mule deer?

[Sitkaspruce]

There has been plenty of habitat improvements in region 4 and they are on the increase. Funny in all that horrible habitat that elk and wt were thriving , so well they had to have very generous and liberal seasons to bring down their population.
Do you have an original thought on any of these topics or or will you just continue being an echo?

Whats increasing?? echo of what???:wink:

Cheers

SS

[ratherbefishin]

While it is politically incorrect for the government to conduct a predator cull,even though they know it would be effective there is no law against us hunters conducting our own private preditor cull.Chances are reducing preditors ,which have a GOS and kill moose all year long would be far more effective than reducing hunting,where the maximum harvest is one moose,and with about a 30%
success rate amounts to one moose every 3 or 4years

[300win]

"The world weather is a changin", the mountian pine beetle has desimated the forest, the habitat has changed, what is moving in is more conducive to elk and whitetails. The predator population is a general result of the change. Culling an opportunistic animal, though sounds good but will it really help long term??? My only hope is that whatever forest (habitat) takes hold allows the next generations of Omineacans the same enjoyment I've had.
"Take a kid hunting/fishing"

300