whitetail numbers

[bigneily]

Now I know I will be called all kinds of names and told I am doing it wrong and such , But I believe the general open here for whitie doe's in the East koots is having a big effect on the numbers . I know that I am not a biologist but as a guy that has lived and hunted here for 30 yrs I can see a loss. Anyone else seeing my view ? , I am not against a general open for doe's but it should be limited for sure .

[adriaticum]

Would be interesting to hear what Wayne has to say about this.

[sawmill]

I passed on a lot of does till I found a last years single. Every doe I saw had twins and 2 had triplets. I think that with the pressure they are finally getting smarter.

[mastercaster]

Now I know I will be called all kinds of names and told I am doing it wrong and such , But I believe the general open here for whitie doe's in the East koots is having a big effect on the numbers . I know that I am not a biologist but as a guy that has lived and hunted here for 30 yrs I can see a loss. Anyone else seeing my view ? , I am not against a general open for doe's but it should be limited for sure .

Are you a road hunter? If you are you're not likely to a see does anywhere near the roads 1-2 days after they open up. It only takes them a day to adapt,,,,,,they're in the timber anywhere they are being hunted.

[Wild one]

I passed on a lot of does till I found a last years single. Every doe I saw had twins and 2 had triplets. I think that with the pressure they are finally getting smarter.

I have never hunted 4 but this is what is happening else where ^^^

I said it when the doe season started the WT will adapt there habits once the pressure kicks in.

[tuner]

This year was the first year where I have began wondering if the WT doe open season has been detrimental to WT numbers, areas where they were once abundant now seem devoid of them, my observations are my own of course, and do not meet any scientific rigour, but it does make one wonder.(I was up until now,a vocal supporter of the WT doe GOS)

[hoochie]

, I am not against a general open for doe's but it should be limited for sure .

it has been limited.
last year it was 2 does, this year its only 1

[Everett]

Yes there is less WT around and that is good news. The Mule deer are showing up in big numbers once again as a result.

[Wild one]

Yes there is less WT around and that is good news. The Mule deer are showing up in big numbers once again as a result.

My personal experience and opinion WT don't have the impact on mule deer that people in BC believe

But if your seeing more mule deer that is a positive no matter the reason

[adriaticum]

My personal experience and opinion WT don't have the impact on mule deer that people in BC believe

But if your seeing more mule deer that is a positive no matter the reason



I read somewhere that WT have some sort of parasite that is deadly to other ungulates. I be damned if I remember where I read this, but it was recently.
Could be BS too.

[Buckmeister]

This year was the first year where I have began wondering if the WT doe open season has been detrimental to WT numbers, areas where they were once abundant now seem devoid of them, my observations are my own of course, and do not meet any scientific rigour, but it does make one wonder.(I was up until now,a vocal supporter of the WT doe GOS)

I was thinking the same thing this year. I agree about the pressure and the does hiding, but if you start doing some math, the numbers tell a startling story. Now, I'm no biologist, I'm not familiar with fawn or deer mortality rates, so I'm just going to use some round/static numbers here. Try to follow along as this could get tricky.

For this example, before an open season on does, lets say there are 133 deer in an "area", 100 are does, 33 are bucks (this includes all fawns born that year), for 3:1 doe to buck ratio. Now because of fawn/deer mortality, winter kill, disease, predation, hunting pressure, and kills by vehicle collision, the number of deer that survive each and every year is kept steady at 133, keeping up the 3:1 ratio.

Now an open season on does is declared and 10% of the doe population is harvested (leaving 123 deer), leaving only 90 does to possibly get bred. Less breedable does now affects how many deer survive each year, so the number of deer in year number two is actually less than 123 deer, lets say 85 does and 30 bucks for a total of 115 deer.

Season number two takes out 10% of the does again, leaving only 76 does and 24 bucks for 100 deer total for the next year. Basically, the numbers are reduced by 13.5% each year.
Season 3 = 86 deer left for,
season 4 = 74 deer left for,
season 5 = 64 deer left for,
season 6 = 55 deer left for season 7.

As you can see, by year 7 the deer population has been reduced by almost 60% from the original 133 steady population. We are in year 7 right now as open season for does was brought in in 2010. I know I am seeing way less deer the last few years than I did in 2009.

Again, I am no biologist, and my numbers could be way off. BUT, even if I am a bit close, one can see the affect an open season on does has for the deer population.

Now translate these formulas for other species like Moose and Elk, and we can understand why we are seeing less and less game each year overall. I also hesitate to mention that most first nation hunters I know will not hesitate to harvest a cow and/or calf moose/elk.

What is the sustainability of all this??? I don't know. Something to think about for sure. If true, then something will need to change. Killing off the females of a species always has a great effect, a form of genocide if you will.

[jacksondog]

I hunt the exact area as Wayne, I'm usually camped a couple of K's from him and I can say in that area numbers are down. I was in there at the end of October and a large group of guys from Delta had 11 does hanging in camp, how could the numbers not be down.

[Buckmeister]

I hunt the exact area as Wayne, I'm usually camped a couple of K's from him and I can say in that area numbers are down. I was in there at the end of October and a large group of guys from Delta had 11 does hanging in camp, how could the numbers not be down.

Refer to my post above yours. ^^^^^

[jacksondog]

On another note a CO told me this year that the doe season is more about ICBC than something a biologist would put in place.

[jacksondog]

Refer to my post above yours. ^^^^^
I can't argue with that, the numbers make sense give or take a few. There is a place for the doe season but put it back to limited entry and maybe an open season for youth and seniors.

[Wild one]

I read somewhere that WT have some sort of parasite that is deadly to other ungulates. I be damned if I remember where I read this, but it was recently.
Could be BS too.

That ones new to me but would not buy it for 1 sec with the amount of areas that hold healthy populations multiple ungulate species including WT

Tell me how WT co inhabited the kettle valley with mule deer for decades but now WT are suddenly causing mule deer numbers to drop. Lots of examples across North America with healthy populations of both species along with moose and elk in the mix. Hunted many areas with mixed populations of ungulates that include WT. Habitat is the divider nothing more in my opinion.

Things just don't add up

[whognu]

I was thinking the same thing this year. I agree about the pressure and the does hiding, but if you start doing some math, the numbers tell a startling story. Now, I'm no biologist, I'm not familiar with fawn or deer mortality rates, so I'm just going to use some round/static numbers here. Try to follow along as this could get tricky.

For this example, before an open season on does, lets say there are 133 deer in an "area", 100 are does, 33 are bucks (this includes all fawns born that year), for 3:1 doe to buck ratio. Now because of fawn/deer mortality, winter kill, disease, predation, hunting pressure, and kills by vehicle collision, the number of deer that survive each and every year is kept steady at 133, keeping up the 3:1 ratio.

Now an open season on does is declared and 10% of the doe population is harvested (leaving 123 deer), leaving only 90 does to possibly get bred. Less breedable does now affects how many deer survive each year, so the number of deer in year number two is actually less than 123 deer, lets say 85 does and 30 bucks for a total of 115 deer.

Season number two takes out 10% of the does again, leaving only 76 does and 24 bucks for 100 deer total for the next year. Basically, the numbers are reduced by 13.5% each year.
Season 3 = 86 deer left for,
season 4 = 74 deer left for,
season 5 = 64 deer left for,
season 6 = 55 deer left for season 7.

As you can see, by year 7 the deer population has been reduced by almost 60% from the original 133 steady population. We are in year 7 right now as open season for does was brought in in 2010. I know I am seeing way less deer the last few years than I did in 2009.

Again, I am no biologist, and my numbers could be way off. BUT, even if I am a bit close, one can see the affect an open season on does has for the deer population.

Now translate these formulas for other species like Moose and Elk, and we can understand why we are seeing less and less game each year overall. I also hesitate to mention that most first nation hunters I know will not hesitate to harvest a cow and/or calf moose/elk.

What is the sustainability of all this??? I don't know. Something to think about for sure. If true, then something will need to change. Killing off the females of a species always has a great effect, a form of genocide if you will.



next to english, science and geography my math really sucks............yet aren't you missing the +/- 85 fawns born in spring of year 2?

take out 10% of 126 does (assume 50% of new fawns are bucks and 50% does) is 13 does harvested

then next year you get 113 fawns (126 less 13 dead does)

rinse and repeat

so, now whose math sucks more?

(probably mine)

again

whognu

[boxhitch]

I read somewhere that WT have some sort of parasite that is deadly to other ungulates. I be damned if I remember where I read this, but it was recently.
Could be BS too.we're used to that


;)

[j270wsm]

Any time does/cows are shot it will have an affect on the population. To what extent....I can't say for sure, but I agree that we're seeing less and less whitetails and it's been over the last few years. Having groups of hunters kill their 2 doe limit every year has caused the numbers to go down. Question is........is it a bad thing that the numbers are down? We all know how fast the whitetail population can/will rebound and now that the regs have changed to only allow one doe, we should start to see the numbers come back over the next 2yrs

[Buckmeister]

next to english, science and geography my math really sucks............yet aren't you missing the +/- 85 fawns born in spring of year 2?

take out 10% of 126 does (assume 50% of new fawns are bucks and 50% does) is 13 does harvested

then next year you get 113 fawns (126 less 13 dead does)

rinse and repeat

so, now whose math sucks more?

(probably mine)

again

whognu

What I was trying to say was that before there was a doe season, the numbers stayed at an average of 133, despite the number of fawns born or how many deer died or survived in any given year. (In reality, the yearly average will fluctuate up and down more due to amount of food, length of winter, etc...) But then add in a doe season and you will see the numbers go down no matter what, especially if doe harvest is high. In actuality, I would think that the population decrease would be exponential. Meaning, that by year 7 about 75-80% of population is wiped out.

On another hand, you could decrease the doe harvest and increase the allowable buck harvest and the population numbers wouldn't be affected near as much. Less bucks competing for does may actually see more does being bred, as one buck can service many does. (Too many bucks = more fighting and less breeding).

[Ddog]

I DONT CARE what anyone outside of region 4 has to say...(much).. The numbers of deer in the trench alone have been drastically reduced in the last several years, to the point that this year is very concerning, you can sit on your duff and say all you want when you don't actually live here, i have lived and hunted here for the past 12 years and seen such a disgusting display of ethics from hunters its not even funny,,,, when you drive past a camp and stop to talk and see 3 adults with a doe and two fawns hanging in their camp and them being all proud of their accomplishment it gets one into thinking how much more of this takes place. I have seen camp after camp with does hanging , young breeding does, without fawns..now where are those fawns? I have hunted in stands for 20 something years and have observed countless deer and deer behaviour, first year fawns without a mother or in a group DO NOT survive their first winter alone, there have been many studies on this, what i have observed is single motherless , groupless fawns are shunned and beat up by others. Its hard and sad to watch. When you get a group of hunters up that shoot just cause they see a doe and leave the fawn,, its sad.
Its fact that WT numbers are way down and at a concerning level this year, If a bad winter hits like in '96 ( i think) were all in trouble as hunters.
Im all for hunter recruitment, and hunter opportunity , but it should be for youth (like before) and older hunters,
i spend countless hours throughout the trench and countless km in the zones, I have several cams and bait sites out, in wintering areas. Now when your getting 3 does a day and maybe one or 2 bucks,,,,SOMETHINGS WRONG. It used to be LOTS of does,,30+ a day in some areas.
I have been in places last winter that are supposed to be winter zones that are completely devoid of deer. When i first started it was a great spot, not one deer last year on cam on bait!
As stated before i don't care what people think that aren't here, and don't live here and see the impact here...(much)...
The WT population was too many,,now theres to few. Certain areas have been hit so hard i don't know if they will ever make a comeback there. eradication of a species is more like whats happening here. I hope it gets seen and changed before its too late.
JMO...dont get all upset on how i feel and what i know.

[HighCountryBC]

This has been beaten to death. Whitetail are the most studied ungulate in North America. A very conservative doe season like we have in BC is a drop of water in the bucket.

Whitetails are a resilient species that can adapt to pretty much any environment. Many states allow the harvest of multiple does and there are several jurisdictions that require the harvest of a doe before a tag for a buck will even be issued. Even with wide open doe seasons like that, they can't knock the numbers back.

Time to get off the social management train. Yes, now it is difficult to cruise the fsr's and catch one dumb enough to stand around long enough to get shot. Again - whitetails are resilient and adapt better to pressure than any other species we hunt in BC.

[Buckmeister]

I DONT CARE what anyone outside of region 4 has to say...(much).. The numbers of deer in the trench alone have been drastically reduced in the last several years, to the point that this year is very concerning, you can sit on your duff and say all you want when you don't actually live here, i have lived and hunted here for the past 12 years and seen such a disgusting display of ethics from hunters its not even funny,,,, when you drive past a camp and stop to talk and see 3 adults with a doe and two fawns hanging in their camp and them being all proud of their accomplishment it gets one into thinking how much more of this takes place. I have seen camp after camp with does hanging , young breeding does, without fawns..now where are those fawns? I have hunted in stands for 20 something years and have observed countless deer and deer behaviour, first year fawns without a mother or in a group DO NOT survive their first winter alone, there have been many studies on this, what i have observed is single motherless , groupless fawns are shunned and beat up by others. Its hard and sad to watch. When you get a group of hunters up that shoot just cause they see a doe and leave the fawn,, its sad.
Its fact that WT numbers are way down and at a concerning level this year, If a bad winter hits like in '96 ( i think) were all in trouble as hunters.
Im all for hunter recruitment, and hunter opportunity , but it should be for youth (like before) and older hunters,
i spend countless hours throughout the trench and countless km in the zones, I have several cams and bait sites out, in wintering areas. Now when your getting 3 does a day and maybe one or 2 bucks,,,,SOMETHINGS WRONG. It used to be LOTS of does,,30+ a day in some areas.
I have been in places last winter that are supposed to be winter zones that are completely devoid of deer. When i first started it was a great spot, not one deer last year on cam on bait!
As stated before i don't care what people think that aren't here, and don't live here and see the impact here...(much)...
The WT population was too many,,now theres to few. Certain areas have been hit so hard i don't know if they will ever make a comeback there. eradication of a species is more like whats happening here. I hope it gets seen and changed before its too late.
JMO...dont get all upset on how i feel and what i know.

Well said!!! I am seeing a similar affect in region 8, but to a lesser degree as only 1 doe is allowed to be harvested. I'm sure region 3 is seeing similar activity as their season mirrors that of reg 4.

[Ourea]

Now I know I will be called all kinds of names and told I am doing it wrong and such , But I believe the general open here for whitie doe's in the East koots is having a big effect on the numbers . I know that I am not a biologist but as a guy that has lived and hunted here for 30 yrs I can see a loss. Anyone else seeing my view ? , I am not against a general open for doe's but it should be limited for sure .

Couple points bigneily........

WT are the most adaptive ungulate in North America, that is why they are so prolific, so wide spread.
Some states/counties have a doe harvest min before you can hunt bucks.
WT r one of the few ungulates that can boost fawn production (twins, triplets) to meet the habitat carrying capacity.
Ie, start taking out a chunk of the population and they simply make a lot more.
They have been studied to death so the science and data behind WT management is sound.

Some are confusing WT adaptation with a perceived decline in numbers from the doe season in some areas.

In the 3 yrs I started my little WT hunting project, in a heavily hunted area, I seldom see a WT on the drive up or while hiking around checking cams......yet I get them on cam every day.

I quickly learned that using old ways of hunting WT for an "easy one" no longer apply.
They have adapted, that's what they do.

[Buckmeister]

This has been beaten to death. Whitetail are the most studied ungulate in North America. A very conservative doe season like we have in BC is a drop of water in the bucket.

Whitetails are a resilient species that can adapt to pretty much any environment. Many states allow the harvest of multiple does and there are several jurisdictions that require the harvest of a doe before a tag for a buck will even be issued. Even with wide open doe seasons like that, they can't knock the numbers back.

Time to get off the social management train. Yes, now it is difficult to cruise the fsr's and catch one dumb enough to stand around long enough to get shot. Again - whitetails are resilient and adapt better to pressure than any other species we hunt in BC.

Granted, but don't some states have incredibly short seasons (like a week or two)??

[Brambles]

Google the population numbers of the eastern and midwestern states that guys are comparing and quoting.... these states have so many goddamn deer that they have to shoot does...
They shoot more deer in a day than we have in all of BC ....I personally dont see wt populations in Region 4 high enough to have a open wt doe season..back to LEH and control the harvest IMO or some other way to reduce the harvest like moving the season away from the elk season.

[roymil]

Predators excluding man are far more detrimental to the WT population then a doe season, a fact that no one in wildlife management will admit, go figure. Its far easier to blame the lower ungulate populations on hunter harvest , I guess I just don't get it

[adriaticum]

That ones new to me but would not buy it for 1 sec with the amount of areas that hold healthy populations multiple ungulate species including WT

Tell me how WT co inhabited the kettle valley with mule deer for decades but now WT are suddenly causing mule deer numbers to drop. Lots of examples across North America with healthy populations of both species along with moose and elk in the mix. Hunted many areas with mixed populations of ungulates that include WT. Habitat is the divider nothing more in my opinion.

Things just don't add up

Endoparasites
Nose and throat bots occur when adult female bot flies deposit larvae in the nose of deer. The larvae migrate to the sinuses to mature and cause the animal discomfort but are rarely more than a nuisance. Other internal parasites such as adult lungworms can cause respiratory disease in mule deer. On the eastern edge of mule deer range, the meningeal worm occurs naturally in unaffected white-tailed deer; however, mule deer develop neurological signs due to migrating worms in the brain and spinal cord. The arterial worm, transmitted by horse flies, occurs in the carotid arteries of unaffected mule deer, its definitive host. In other ungulate species it can lead to blindness and death. Many other round worms, tapeworms, flat worms and protozoan parasites can occur in mule deer.


https://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/pdf/mdwg/mdwg-11_disease_parasites.pdf

[Ourea]

Be curious to see what the aerial winter counts will be in Reg 4.
If some purporting WT numbers are way down (which may be the case) quantified counts this winter, compared to previous, will either support a population concern, or dismiss it.

[Wild one]

Endoparasites
Nose and throat bots occur when adult female bot flies deposit larvae in the nose of deer. The larvae migrate to the sinuses to mature and cause the animal discomfort but are rarely more than a nuisance. Other internal parasites such as adult lungworms can cause respiratory disease in mule deer. On the eastern edge of mule deer range, the meningeal worm occurs naturally in unaffected white-tailed deer; however, mule deer develop neurological signs due to migrating worms in the brain and spinal cord. The arterial worm, transmitted by horse flies, occurs in the carotid arteries of unaffected mule deer, its definitive host. In other ungulate species it can lead to blindness and death. Many other round worms, tapeworms, flat worms and protozoan parasites can occur in mule deer.


https://wildlife.utah.gov/hunting/pdf/mdwg/mdwg-11_disease_parasites.pdf


This just shows the WT is not affected by this parasite. This is a parasite that can be carried by a number of species.

This is not showing that WT are infecting mule deer causing decline. Issues like this are why many places ban baiting as a worry of deer passing sickness between each other.

But let pass on the high jack so we can let everyone get back to what they are seeing with WT in 4

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Couple of points

This summer/fall was one of the wettest that I can remember....and this fall hasn't turned into winter quite yet.
Fall green-up started early and lasted a long time. Food seemed to be everywhere.

Now add no snow to push the deer to lower elevations.

It has certainly been an unusual year for weather.

[.264winmag]

Doesn't matter how many get shot around here, they just keep coming. Like walkers!

[steveo]

Do any of you guys go out in the field before hunting season starts and see what is out there for numbers or are all your observations based during hunting season?

[Blk Arrow]

The general open season is not something new. It existed in the 1960's. At that time my father asked a game warden. " If I keep my bulls and get rid of my breeding cows in the fall and the next year have the same number of cattle or more, wouldn't the RCMP be asking me some serous questions?" There
is a reason the doe seasons became limited.

[358mag]

Couple of points

This summer/fall was one of the wettest that I can remember....and this fall hasn't turned into winter quite yet.
Fall green-up started early and lasted a time. Food seemed to be everywhere.

Now add no snow to push the deer to lower elevations.

It has certainly been an unusual year for weather.
How true been a very strange year but Yogi Berra said "It ain't over till it's over."

[Ourea]

Do any of you guys go out in the field before hunting season starts and see what is out there for numbers or are all your observations based during hunting season?

10 months a yr.
2 to 3 days a week

[Fisher-Dude]

My personal experience and opinion WT don't have the impact on mule deer that people in BC believe

But if your seeing more mule deer that is a positive no matter the reason

Read this: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wildlife/wsi/reports/5093_WSI_5093_RPT.PDF

[Fisher-Dude]

The general open season is not something new. It existed in the 1960's. At that time my father asked a game warden. " If I keep my bulls and get rid of my breeding cows in the fall and the next year have the same number of cattle or more, wouldn't the RCMP be asking me some serous questions?" There
is a reason the doe seasons became limited.

Stick with farming cattle.

Whitetails are totally different animals.

[Fisher-Dude]

It used to be LOTS of does,,30+ a day in some areas.



What makes you think seeing 30 does a day is indicative of a healthy population?

It's indicative of over population, and led to disease, huge predator populations that have kicked the shit out of your elk, and mass winter die offs.

Some people need to do a little reading and stay away from the old guys at Tim Hortons.

[beeugle]

yup way less deer than there used to be but that stands to reason when you have doe seasons.... and wolves and bears... however..... drive down any street in cranbrook you'll see muleys, whitey's .... they are like lawn furniture

[Wild one]

Read this: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wildlife/wsi/reports/5093_WSI_5093_RPT.PDF

Debated that one to death

my opinion still stands

[rudysteelhead]

I have to agree with the members that suggest the numbers are down. Case-in-point:. I have personally hunted the same spot (walked the same roads, same timber...everything the same) for whitetails since I was 14 (21 years at this spot). The last four years have been getting worse and worse for deer sightings.

I was just up in this region 8 spot and I saw about 15 deer in 5 days of hunting. In total we had 8 cameras out and scented up. Two of cameras had "0" pictures in 5 days. So far from the normal, its actually scary. So few tracks in the snow as well. Not sure what can be done to fix the problem???

[HarryToolips]

What makes you think seeing 30 does a day is indicative of a healthy population?

It's indicative of over population, and led to disease, huge predator populations that have kicked the shit out of your elk, and mass winter die offs.

Some people need to do a little reading and stay away from the old guys at Tim Hortons.
And this is it.....Xmas is coming folks, I suggest you get your loved ones to buy you 'whitetail advantage' and educate yourselves....like Ourea said, they are adapting, I've seen it in my areas, I'm still seeing good pops of WT's...they are prolific breeders..and they keep pred numbers artificially high if you let them..

[Blk Arrow]

Stick with farming cattle.

Whitetails are totally different animals.
They are. Both require males and females to reproduce however. Basic biology. Populations can reproduce with minimal number of males to females. Reduce the number of females and the it reduces the number of the species. (The reproduction rates can change as shown in the case of coyotes habits in Yelllowstone with reintroduction of wolves. They reproduced at faster rate when under pressure from the wolves as a survival strategy.) However if the drop in female survival reaches a critical point the the species cannot sustain itself.

Anecdotally, we drive the same stretch of road in the evening in the summer at the same time of year counting whitetail and mule deer. We started this when our children were preschoolers and now they have graduated University. The goal was is to count 100 deer. We have not broken it down between species. This is the second year we did not attain that number in almost 20 years. The highest we ever counted was 152, 7 seven years ago. This year it was 80. Primarily it is a drop in whitetail.

[Wild one]

I can't help but think it is ironic the amount of people on this forum that were dead set on dropping WT numbers in hopes of improving Mule deer numbers in the past. Now the forum if overwhelmed with threads on how all the WT are disappearing and guys are worried. So what do BC hunters really want?

I called it back then that they will become spooky as hell once pressured and it's not going to be that simple. Said it then hunters will need to adapt their tactics to WT that have changed their habits.

This years lack of snow has them spread out and WT are getting spooky. This is bound to make for lower sightings and less WT in the normal late season locations. No doubt less sign is seen with them spread out. Not real good conditions this season

I support doe seasons in areas with good numbers WT but do not agree with how they are blanketed across BC. I don't buy it will help mule deer numbers either

Some areas the numbers maybe lower and no I don't hunt 4. But I can tell you I hear the samething everywhere in BC a portion of hunters say the numbers have majorly dropped well others agree the WT have just changed

One has to ask why do some have such a difference in opinion?

[HarryToolips]

I was thinking the same thing this year. I agree about the pressure and the does hiding, but if you start doing some math, the numbers tell a startling story. Now, I'm no biologist, I'm not familiar with fawn or deer mortality rates, so I'm just going to use some round/static numbers here. Try to follow along as this could get tricky.

For this example, before an open season on does, lets say there are 133 deer in an "area", 100 are does, 33 are bucks (this includes all fawns born that year), for 3:1 doe to buck ratio. Now because of fawn/deer mortality, winter kill, disease, predation, hunting pressure, and kills by vehicle collision, the number of deer that survive each and every year is kept steady at 133, keeping up the 3:1 ratio.

Now an open season on does is declared and 10% of the doe population is harvested (leaving 123 deer), leaving only 90 does to possibly get bred. Less breedable does now affects how many deer survive each year, so the number of deer in year number two is actually less than 123 deer, lets say 85 does and 30 bucks for a total of 115 deer.

Season number two takes out 10% of the does again, leaving only 76 does and 24 bucks for 100 deer total for the next year. Basically, the numbers are reduced by 13.5% each year.
Season 3 = 86 deer left for,
season 4 = 74 deer left for,
season 5 = 64 deer left for,
season 6 = 55 deer left for season 7.

As you can see, by year 7 the deer population has been reduced by almost 60% from the original 133 steady population. We are in year 7 right now as open season for does was brought in in 2010. I know I am seeing way less deer the last few years than I did in 2009.

Again, I am no biologist, and my numbers could be way off. BUT, even if I am a bit close, one can see the affect an open season on does has for the deer population.

Now translate these formulas for other species like Moose and Elk, and we can understand why we are seeing less and less game each year overall. I also hesitate to mention that most first nation hunters I know will not hesitate to harvest a cow and/or calf moose/elk.

What is the sustainability of all this??? I don't know. Something to think about for sure. If true, then something will need to change. Killing off the females of a species always has a great effect, a form of genocide if you will.
90 does left in the first season, most of them are bred, giving you<or= 180 new deer the next year, minus what you lose to other forms of mortality, then out of those new deer, approximately half are doe fawns, which by the second estrous period of the next year ie about 7 months old, will be ready to breed already, a feat that mulies can't do... and where do we have a GOS for cow elk or moose?? Other than very select antlerless elk seasons in certain parts of reg4?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

They are. Both require males and females to reproduce however. Basic biology. Populations can reproduce with minimal number of males to females. Reduce the number of females and the it reduces the number of the species. (The reproduction rates can change as shown in the case of coyotes habits in Yelllowstone with reintroduction of wolves. They reproduced at faster rate when under pressure from the wolves as a survival strategy.) However if the drop in female survival reaches a critical point the the species cannot sustain itself.

Anecdotally, we drive the same stretch of road in the evening in the summer at the same time of year counting whitetail and mule deer. We started this when our children were preschoolers and now they have graduated University. The goal was is to count 100 deer. We have not broken it down between species. This is the second year we did not attain that number in almost 20 years. The highest we ever counted was 152, 7 seven years ago. This year it was 80. Primarily it is a drop in whitetail.


How often do cattle twin?

[HarryToolips]

What I was trying to say was that before there was a doe season, the numbers stayed at an average of 133, despite the number of fawns born or how many deer died or survived in any given year. (In reality, the yearly average will fluctuate up and down more due to amount of food, length of winter, etc...) But then add in a doe season and you will see the numbers go down no matter what, especially if doe harvest is high. In actuality, I would think that the population decrease would be exponential. Meaning, that by year 7 about 75-80% of population is wiped out.

On another hand, you could decrease the doe harvest and increase the allowable buck harvest and the population numbers wouldn't be affected near as much. Less bucks competing for does may actually see more does being bred, as one buck can service many does. (Too many bucks = more fighting and less breeding).
Short GOS wt doe season that we have = a better buck:doe ratio = better genetic biodiversity = healthier population overall...more bucks to breed the remaining does = more breeding occurring at the same time = more fawns born at the same time = greater fawn survival rates from preds, as fawns are most susceptible in the very early stages of their lives, and more fawns born at once leaves less time for preds to prey on them during this susceptible period of time..and you will see more mature bucks where there is a GOS for does....research folks, the science is not lying..

[Fisher-Dude]

They are. Both require males and females to reproduce however. Basic biology. Populations can reproduce with minimal number of males to females. Reduce the number of females and the it reduces the number of the species. (The reproduction rates can change as shown in the case of coyotes habits in Yelllowstone with reintroduction of wolves. They reproduced at faster rate when under pressure from the wolves as a survival strategy.) However if the drop in female survival reaches a critical point the the species cannot sustain itself.

Anecdotally, we drive the same stretch of road in the evening in the summer at the same time of year counting whitetail and mule deer. We started this when our children were preschoolers and now they have graduated University. The goal was is to count 100 deer. We have not broken it down between species. This is the second year we did not attain that number in almost 20 years. The highest we ever counted was 152, 7 seven years ago. This year it was 80. Primarily it is a drop in whitetail.

How often do cattle breed at 6 months of age?

[Fisher-Dude]

I have to agree with the members that suggest the numbers are down. Case-in-point:. I have personally hunted the same spot (walked the same roads, same timber...everything the same) for whitetails since I was 14 (21 years at this spot). The last four years have been getting worse and worse for deer sightings.

I was just up in this region 8 spot and I saw about 15 deer in 5 days of hunting. In total we had 8 cameras out and scented up. Two of cameras had "0" pictures in 5 days. So far from the normal, its actually scary. So few tracks in the snow as well. Not sure what can be done to fix the problem???

How has that habitat changed in 21 years?

The deer adapted, you didn't, you get skunked.

Common theme arises when people don't understand their quarry.

[HarryToolips]

I would like to also add that in many areas where I see the pockets of WT's, I may see less WT than before thanks to them becoming more cagey from hunting pressure, but I'm still seeing lots and lots of sign....and I'm seeing whitetails in areas that I've never seen them before, so I think they're still expanding their range..

[Fisher-Dude]

Debated that one to death

my opinion still stands

I don't think you've ever read it.

Your opinion isn't shared by any deer biologist in North America. But what do deer bios know about deer?

[wideopenthrottle]

all i know is this year our group did not plan to go up to our normal EK trip with the number of does allowed reduced.....

[Wild one]

I don't think you've ever read it.

Your opinion isn't shared by any deer biologist in North America. But what do deer bios know about deer?


Go dig it up if you like about 3 years back

Have read and understand the threoy also have first hand experience in an area that lowering WT numbers in hopes of bringing back mule deer was attempted. Well let's just say it failed area is still strongly WT and mule deer are still only found in the pockets of habitat better suited to them. Know the area very well my partners and I still hunt it to this day

Threoies even educated ones are only threoies till put to the test. One big flaw is if you want to effect predators by lowering 1 prey item they just switch to their other options. Unfortunately predators would rather target mule deer than WT so lower The numbers of a secondary prey item only adds pressure to the proffered prey animal well predator numbers are high. You would need to crash prey animals overall to get results and that's not worth it.

you want to effect an issue of too many predators don't beat around the bush and target predators directly

how well did the threoy play out lower moose to save caribou

Yes I trust many things that come from bio's but I also do not hesitate to ? Them as well. They are human like everyone else and have even helped assist them with knowledge I could provide they did not have.

As long as I can see potential of a majore flaw I will ? It no matter who it comes from

[hunter1947]

GOS for any antlerless animal in my books is a no no in any region never liked it in all my years I hunted management has to have LEH on WT deer does as for other species in place in all my years hunting I have seen that management opens a windows over years on reducing the female species on all.

If management has LEH for does will help revenue as for knowing how many WT deer will be taken even if all LEH tags were filled for WT deer does ,,I know the management is wanting to have a balance on doe buck ratio as far as I am concerned having a GOS for WT does is not the way to manage the ratio.

Think about it all of you a WT buck in the rut will travel 30k in search of a doe in heat he will mate with many different WT does in the 6 weeks of the rut pregnating most all of them passing his gene pool on.

Many does the next year will have one or two fawns including the mother to increase the population lots of times the doe will give birth to two buck fawns biologist don't know if a doe will have male or doe birth no one knows this .

Just look at regions in the WK for WT deer the population in some areas a very low in numbers reason being is that management has GOS on doe WT deer and my thoughts are is that we are headed in the same direction as the WK if the management don't do something about it now..

As said below after a few years implementing these new changes management can change the buck GOS for opening in the month of Nov.

All and all to make a long story short my thoughts are to increase the populations of WT deer different regions overall are.

PS I was out on sat in a region with a friend of mine to keep him company he was looking for to fill his buck tag he came close to filling his tag but did not succeed
we came across lots of gut bags right beside the main logging road the bucks are stupid at this time of the year in the rut and they are getting put down in big numbers..


#1 LEH on all female species..
#2 No LEH in junior season for does.
#3 Reduce the GOS for WT bucks in
regions that are low in numbers open
Sept 10 to the oct 31
let the bucks mate in Nov
by not being shot in big numbers.

That's my thoughts on how to increase the numbers on WT deer in different regions over all,,H-47.

[blacklab]

You will regret ever starting this thread. Before it's done the computer experts will circle the wagons, and have you convinced you're just a terrible hunter.
Maybe even accused of being one of those "road hunters"
Ask to see some pictures of all the bucks taken by these same people, and all goes quiet.
If you think you've got it bad in the east Kootenay's, try hunting the southern part of region 3.

[HarryToolips]

^^^^^im still seeing decent wt numbers in the south of region 3, and in reg8 , and in the south of reg 4 west koots where I was this season...these seasons have been studied to death folks, in Texas for example, 20% of the overall pops is harvested every year...

[bigneily]

These same bios that say a general season is good ,Are the same bunch that figured a general open for cows and calves was justifiable also . Look at the elk numbers now ? I have never killed a doe before but I don't mind if my son does or other juniors good for them , In 30 yrs I have never not got a whitie buck but it is usually a 4 pt and nothing big its just a limitation that I personally have. I am just stating what I see in my travels and I think it needs to go .

[bigneily]

Seems to a lot of supporters for the doe season here that don't even live here in the area , These must the same guys that have a camp full of doe's hanging .

[Salty]

I've never hunted the east kootenays. But I have a question how can white tails be so scarce yet there's camps with several does hanging?

[bigneily]

They are not scarce , I am just saying that the population is not what it was or maybe should be ?

[Salty]

OK gotcha..

[adriaticum]

These same bios that say a general season is good ,Are the same bunch that figured a general open for cows and calves was justifiable also . Look at the elk numbers now ? I have never killed a doe before but I don't mind if my son does or other juniors good for them , In 30 yrs I have never not got a whitie buck but it is usually a 4 pt and nothing big its just a limitation that I personally have. I am just stating what I see in my travels and I think it needs to go .



Biologists are like assholes.
Everyone's got one.
They are not end all be all. And they are not all the same.
So taking a biologists word without checking with 10 other biologists is bound to lead to errors. They all have different motivations.
Sorry, I'm not a religious man.

Anyway, you will come to the dark side. I feel the disturbance in the force lol

[adriaticum]

GOS for any antlerless animal in my books is a no no in any region never liked it in all my years I hunted management has to have LEH on WT deer does as for other species in place in all my years hunting I have seen that management opens a windows over years on reducing the female species on all.

If management has LEH for does will help revenue as for knowing how many WT deer will be taken even if all LEH tags were filled for WT deer does ,,I know the management is wanting to have a balance on doe buck ratio as far as I am concerned having a GOS for WT does is not the way to manage the ratio.

Think about it all of you a WT buck in the rut will travel 30k in search of a doe in heat he will mate with many different WT does in the 6 weeks of the rut pregnating most all of them passing his gene pool on.

Many does the next year will have one or two fawns including the mother to increase the population lots of times the doe will give birth to two buck fawns biologist don't know if a doe will have male or doe birth no one knows this .

Just look at regions in the WK for WT deer the population in some areas a very low in numbers reason being is that management has GOS on doe WT deer and my thoughts are is that we are headed in the same direction as the WK if the management don't do something about it now..

As said below after a few years implementing these new changes management can change the buck GOS for opening in the month of Nov.

All and all to make a long story short my thoughts are to increase the populations of WT deer different regions overall are.

PS I was out on sat in a region with a friend of mine to keep him company he was looking for to fill his buck tag he came close to filling his tag but did not succeed
we came across lots of gut bags right beside the main logging road the bucks are stupid at this time of the year in the rut and they are getting put down in big numbers..


#1 LEH on all female species..
#2 No LEH in junior season for does.
#3 Reduce the GOS for WT bucks in
regions that are low in numbers open
Sept 10 to the oct 31
let the bucks mate in Nov
by not being shot in big numbers.

That's my thoughts on how to increase the numbers on WT deer in different regions over all,,H-47.


Thanks for your input Wayne, keep them videos coming.

[Ourea]

Biologists are like assholes.
Everyone's got one.
They are not end all be all. And they are not all the same.
So taking a biologists word without checking with 10 other biologists is bound to lead to errors. They all have different motivations.
Sorry, I'm not a religious man.

Anyway, you will come to the dark side. I feel the disturbance in the force lol

The level of ignorance shown on threads like this is embarrassing.

We, as a user group, push for more opportunity.
Longer seasons, more opportunity, more access.....
In other words we, as a user group, have pushed for MSH (maximum sustainable harvest)
We get what we want and then find a way to complain about it.

Regulation is not the key driving factor in hunter success......HUNTERS are.

It kills me how most instantly blame regulation as the number one driver on population shifts and hunter success.

Personally, I don't blame or point the finger.
Regulation is the last thing that limits my success.
A better understanding of the species/area I hunt and subsequent effort is the factor that governs my success.

If you are relying on regulation for your success over effort......well, I don't know what to tell you.

There will always be factors that affect population numbers and behavior.
Industry, Gov, land development, erosion of winter range, FNs, predators, disease, climate.....these are the drivers that affect wildlife. Regulation is way down the list.

[Salty]

Biologists are like assholes.
Everyone's got one.
They are not end all be all. And they are not all the same.
So taking a biologists word without checking with 10 other biologists is bound to lead to errors. They all have different motivations.
Sorry, I'm not a religious man.

Anyway, you will come to the dark side. I feel the disturbance in the force lol

That's a cheap shot and its bull shit. Biologists have an advanced university degree for one thing and if they're working in their field they have more experience than the sum of any 10 internet geniuses or coffee shop wildlife managers.
I worked with bios building roads and rail roads and otherwise tearing up the environment for over 30 years. I've been at odds with them many times because as the construction guy they're not letting me do some things that would make the job go better, but I'm glad they're there and have just about always been impressed with their knowledge of our ecosystems and what mitigation will help us not turn the site in to a moon scape. I actually came to really enjoyed this part of the work actually and especially habitat creation where we've ruined one thing regarding fish and wildlife but as part of the permitting we build some fish spawning beds, or alcoves and cover or wildlife corridors or whatever it is to offset that. I've learned a ton from bios through the years, haven't found many that knows much about construction, but working together we've built some really cool shit that I'm very proud of.

Where people get mixed up is by equating wildlife decision making with biologists. They're not decision makers they're information gatherers and they give advice and options for our hunting regulations and then senior management and more likely politicians these days make the decisions. Competing interests like the cattleman's association, GOABC and other government coffer fillers get more say than any biologist on many issues including bringing down elk numbers in the EK for instance. They've got a very frustrating job.

[adriaticum]

That's a cheap shot and its bull shit. Biologists have an advanced university degree for one thing and if they're working in their field they have more experience than the sum of any 10 internet geniuses or coffee shop wildlife managers.
I worked with bios building roads and rail roads and otherwise tearing up the environment for over 30 years. I've been at odds with them many times because as the construction guy they're not letting me do some things that would make the job go better, but I'm glad they're there and have just about always been impressed with their knowledge of our ecosystems and what mitigation will help us not turn the site in to a moon scape. I actually came to really enjoyed this part of the work actually and especially habitat creation where we've ruined one thing regarding fish and wildlife but as part of the permitting we build some fish spawning beds, or alcoves and cover or wildlife corridors or whatever it is to offset that. I've learned a ton from bios through the years, haven't found many that knows much about construction, but working together we've built some really cool shit that I'm very proud of.

Where people get mixed up is by equating wildlife decision making with biologists. They're not decision makers they're information gatherers and they give advice and options for our hunting regulations and then senior management and more likely politicians these days make the decisions. Competing interests like the cattleman's association, GOABC and other government coffer fillers get more say than any biologist on many issues including bringing down elk numbers in the EK for instance. They've got a very frustrating job.


It's not a cheap shot, or any shot for that matter.
I simply do not subscribe to the infallibility of biologists, or any scientists, especially at the time when information is available from around the globe.
I sit and read.
Biologists hired by fish farms say fish farms don't harm wild salmon and biologists hired by First Nations say they do.
Government biologists say grizzly hunt is sustainable and NDP biologists say it's not.
So why don't you go and work with them to figure this out.

I'm not disagreeing with you majority of biologists are doing great work, but I am not going to dis some guy's observation from the field on account of what some biologists found 20 years ago.
Guess what, we are not living in the 20 years go.
When new information comes out, things change. Biology changes.
Biology is not an exact science. It evolves.

Also, I didn't mean to say biologist are assholes, hopefully nobody took it that way, just meant to say they is more biologists than hairs on my head.

[Salty]

Its no different than any field. You'll get many opinions by doctors on how to treat addiction. You'll get several options on a design build project from engineers, you'll get differing philosophies on how to make money by various accountants.

Like I said biologists they aren't decision makers they're information gatherers and recommenders. But whatever their personal prejudices are aside, bottom line is they know more about how ecosystems work than most that do all the complaining and opinion making. If you think you'll be smarter by sitting and reading fine but you'll be wise to be reading stuff from biologists and not just information from all over the world. And best to read differing opinions not just the ones that sit well with you. BHC is a good example lots of information here a lot of it not worth the bandwidth it uses.

[adriaticum]

Its no different than any field. You'll get many opinions by doctors on how to treat addiction. You'll get several options on a design build project from engineers, you'll get differing philosophies on how to make money by various accountants.

Like I said biologists they aren't decision makers they're information gatherers and recommenders. But whatever their personal prejudices are aside, bottom line is they know more about how ecosystems work than most that do all the complaining and opinion making. If you think you'll be smarter by sitting and reading fine but you'll be wise to be reading stuff from biologists and not just information from all over the world. And best to read differing opinions not just the ones that sit well with you. BHC is a good example lots of information here a lot of it not worth the bandwidth it uses.



We shoot the shit a lot here and to me it's worth the shit that I shit too. Even if I don't agree with your shit ;)

[GoatGuy]

I am just saying that the population is not what it was or maybe should be ?

This is the crux of the issue.

What do people want to see on the landscape?

Start from there and work your way down.

[rocksteady]

Yes, the whitetail population is significantly down in the east koots. Pretty hard not to admit that, after 3 or 4 years of having a 2 doe limit in a 21 day season.

Is it bad for the population? (aka hunting opportunity- probably)
Is it bad for herd health? (don't know, not a biologist)
Is it sustainable? (no- that's why its down to one this year).
Do I participate in the doe hunt? (Yup... Rather take a WT buck and a doe, rather than a muley (not a fan of stinky muley and happy to see their population is coming back).
Do I think the WT will rebound? (I think so, but that's just my opinion)...

[.264winmag]

Not enough experience lately in the EK to comment on current wt pop first hand. One thing I wonder is how the population compares now, to back pre-logging boom. If the landscape was highly modified to support a much larger population of wt, it's quite possible to still have greater pop than years ago. I always hear about the 'game booms' of the 70-80's from logging and slash burning. So was the game 'hunted' out or the habitat is just changing back to a state that can't sustain the high numbers, or easier for them to hide? I realize that the habitat may not have changed radically since the said intro of wt doe season, but I still lean towards factors other than hunter harvest for the majority of pop swings.

So many factors involved, not an easy job for bios.

An old time local told me back in the day it was a big deal to see a wt here, majority of pop was mule deer. Boy how things of changed, and we think we know what the population of each should be and how it should be regulated???

Beyond my pay grade, that I know...

[hunter1947]

This in a short sentence is my thoughts on the reduction,,,habitat on WT deer,,fawn winter kill,,predators,,hunters are one of the big problems on a decline on all prey the wolf being the big chain
eater of all,,it's a big circle on all why the numbers of game animals are declining..

[hunter1947]

Yes, the whitetail population is significantly down in the east koots. Pretty hard not to admit that, after 3 or 4 years of having a 2 doe limit in a 21 day season.

Is it bad for the population? (aka hunting opportunity- probably)
Is it bad for herd health? (don't know, not a biologist)
Is it sustainable? (no- that's why its down to one this year).
Do I participate in the doe hunt? (Yup... Rather take a WT buck and a doe, rather than a muley (not a fan of stinky muley and happy to see their population is coming back).
Do I think the WT will rebound? (I think so, but that's just my opinion)...

Mike I have found that WT deer will rebound quicker than that of mule deer and elk,,,,WT deer have declined from bad winters etc over some years and recovered quite well..

[Salty]

I'm sure a big part of setting hunting regulations is the human factor. How many hunters hunt in area xxx now and how many hunters will hunt in xxx if regulations are changed a certain way. I don't think there's much question that generous hunting regulations will bring more hunters to a given area. From the comments here from EK locals there doesn't seem much question that the two doe bag limit has brought a lot of travelers to the area. So now that its down to one doe I wonder if Joe six pack and crew from Langley or whatever are going to drive all the way out to the Kootenays for a one doe season when they've just driven through region 3 or 8 which has virtually identical deer seasons. It will be very interesting to follow the white tail numbers in the EK over the next while.

[wideopenthrottle]

as others have mentioned, if food/habitat allows for more deer, WT will be healthy/unpressured enough to have 2 or 3 fawns...if there are too many deer for the food, does will not be healthy enough to support 2 or 3 fawns...this is their main reproductive advantage as far as I understand...I also believe mules are easier to catch for predators (at least cougars according to a paper I read that I think FD posted a link to)

[GoatGuy]

One question for folks with trail cams out there. What do you see in terms of a mix of wt, mule deer, elk, moose? Recognizing some places they use different habitat....

[Wild one]

One question for folks with trail cams out there. What do you see in terms of a mix of wt, mule deer, elk, moose? Recognizing some places they use different habitat....

Been noticing a difference on the proffered habitat in species in every location I have run cams or hunted. Yes there is areas that seem to be transitions areas where it is more mixed. Not an elk guy and honestly lost when it comes to elk. I can easily pick out locations when setting cam's for WT and have a really good guess if I will get pics of moose and mule deer well doing so. Can also set location that I know I will get pics of 99% WT.

odds are you already know this can be done by paying attention to the habitat.

[GoatGuy]

as others have mentioned, if food/habitat allows for more deer, WT will be healthy/unpressured enough to have 2 or 3 fawns...if there are too many deer for the food, does will not be healthy enough to support 2 or 3 fawns...this is their main reproductive advantage as far as I understand...I also believe mules are easier to catch for predators (at least cougars according to a paper I read that I think FD posted a link to)

This is correct. You have summarized it well.

[J_T]

We seem to go over this discussion every year.

Whitetail numbers are down. For sure. Down over last year, which was down over the year before. It isn't about Reg 4 hunters being poor hunters and not knowing which road to drive to find one. I believe Region 4 hunters have integrity and are not on here, just spouting off for the sake of spouting off. They are observing something that is of concern to them as conservationists, not opportunists.

I run enough trail cams to know what I see from year to year. It is not, that they have gotten smarter, or are nocturnal. There are less deer.

Whitetail are resilient. No question about it, so as one mentioned, what do the people want? Some want, more bucks, some want trophies, some want caribou, some want less predators, some want more mule deer, or more elk. ICBC want less deer. Less collisions.

The whitetail season was opened up for a few reasons. One was to support hunter recruitment. And, to a large extent, it worked. Hunter numbers are up. Now, with whitetail numbers down, it is harder for a new hunter to be successful. The harvest rate will / is going down. The West Kootenay is a prime example of that. The number of days afield to take a whitetail is high.

Are whitetail threatened. Probably not. Buck harvests remain high. The critical factor will be the onset of a heavy winter. That could further deplete the stock. I have very strong concerns that with current numbers, if we do have that heavy winter, it will be hardship on the population here.

Whitetail are probably caught in a difficult place right now. A resilient pawn in the wildlife management process. As a part of the Caribou recovery. Reduce prey numbers, and predator numbers will follow. Whitetail take the hit. Do hunters 'really' care about the caribou. Yes, as conservationists of course, but they aren't really going to be a huntable population anytime soon. The moose recovery strategy will likely also impact whitetail. Without a solid ungulate strategy and predator management plan, it just isn't clear what to expect, or what the objectives are.

The less animals there are, the greater the rift between the Resident and Non Resident.

There are less WT. Are there solutions? Of course there are.

Habitat - continue to support conservation efforts to acquire critical winter range and manage the landscape, log and burn
Ranchers - high fencing, interrupting movement, and access to good range, creates funnels for predators (including hunters)
Predators - We see the impact locally here on an all to frequent basis, cats, wolves and bears
Transportation corridors - probably responsible for more mortality of all animals than we realize.
Regulatory - Some would say, move the doe season outside of the elk season and prevent the incidental kills. Some would say shorten the season, some would say remove the rifle GOS altogether.

I think the people want more whitetail.

[adriaticum]

Great post J_T, great post!

[Whonnock Boy]

I'm sorry, but I have to laugh. Of course people want more whitetail, but does that work with the current conservation model? They want more whitetail so they can go out and shoot two does a year. Round and round we go......



I think the people want more whitetail.

[J_T]

I'm sorry, but I have to laugh. Of course people want more whitetail, but does that work with the current conservation model? They want more whitetail so they can go out and shoot two does a year. Round and round we go...... I'm confused why you find that funny. I think what it means, is people accept regulations change, population numbers go up and down and opportunities to hunt changes. What people are identifying is that wildlife management needs to be dynamic and not static. Regulations need to adjust accordingly and local hunters here are identifying something that matters. Numbers are down, conservationists see a need now to slow the population reduction down and move through a replenishment objective. Doesn't that make sense?

[Salty]

Does anybody know if and what type of deer counts are planned in the EK this year?

[Wild one]

JT I get what you are saying personally I would not say the public wants truly more WT exactly but they want a hunt with a higher success rate. WT have provided that short term

unfortanatly the conservation model does not support those who would like to see higher WT numbers. In stead the goal is to lower the numbers in HOPE of seeing mule deer population increase because of it

It is clear BC hunters are looking for higher success rate hunts as they chase every opurtunity they can around BC. But BC is still managed to harvest max numbers out of the population. Yes we get lots of days in the field but guys keep complaining about seeing low numbers of legal game.

I don't truly believe hunters are looking for 1 species in general but instead hunts that provide a higher success rate

[adriaticum]

JT I get what you are saying personally I would not say the public wants truly more WT exactly but they want a hunt with a higher success rate. WT have provided that short term

unfortanatly the conservation model does not support those who would like to see higher WT numbers. In stead the goal is to lower the numbers in HOPE of seeing mule deer population increase because of it

It is clear BC hunters are looking for higher success rate hunts as they chase every opurtunity they can around BC. But BC is still managed to harvest max numbers out of the population. Yes we get lots of days in the field but guys keep complaining about seeing low numbers of legal game.

I don't truly believe hunters are looking for 1 species in general but instead hunts that provide a higher success rate


I disagree, I believe hunters want more WT and at the same time more of everything else.
Which is , I believe, the jist of what JT said.

[Wild one]

I disagree, I believe hunters want more WT and at the same time more of everything else.
Which is , I believe, the jist of what JT said.

That is what I am getting at hunters want more game overall WT included. Reality of it is they want this because it will increase success rate of seeing and harvesting a legal animal.

The big goal of improving habitat is what many are betting on to accomplish this in BC.

[bigneily]

In my family of four my son and I are the only hunters , Although my wife and daughter do enjoy wild meat . With him and I both having tags to legally take say two bull elk and six deer this to me is utter piggishness , We normally try each year to put in one elk and two deer which is plenty. My family all eat the game but I see no need to go and shoot the shit out of everything just because we legally could.

[Wild one]

Go back in this forum to when the WT doe season began in BC you will see many wanting to lower WT numbers in hopes of more mule deer as well

Really any promises to BC hunters that includes more of any ungulat species will get support

[Wild one]

In my family of four my son and I are the only hunters , Although my wife and daughter do enjoy wild meat . With him and I both having tags to legally take say two bull elk and six deer this to me is utter piggishness , We normally try each year to put in one elk and two deer which is plenty. My family all eat the game but I see no need to go and shoot the shit out of everything just because we legally could.

It is often those who only have short time to hunt or need to travel that chase any opurtunity that may provide success as they don't get to hunt as often or have limited opurtunity near home. They are not likely to even come close to filling all their tags. I would not say they are piggish as most don't harvest much odds are less than your house hold

I agree someone should only take what they need though

places like the EK definitely attract people do to the GOS available

[adriaticum]

Go back in this forum to when the WT doe season began in BC you will see many wanting to lower WT numbers in hopes of more mule deer as well

Really any promises to BC hunters that includes more of any ungulat species will get support


That was the old BC.

Look now, everyone is concerned about WT in BC, they want more of them.

Roll with the train pal ;)

[Wild one]

That was the old BC.

Look now, everyone is concerned about WT in BC, they want more of them.

Roll with the train pal ;)

Lol your right

Maybe next year it will be ogopogo

[Jagermeister]

I think a lot of people take whitetail deer to lightly. My experiences with them have found them to be right cagey and they are inquisitive too.
In the late 60's or early 70's, a study was done to determine how many whitetail were in a square mile. I recollect this was conducted in Colorado.
A square mile of forested land was fenced off with deer proof fence. Once completed, drivers started from one side and started forward driving the animals before them. On the outside of the other perimeter, others made ready to count deer as they passed through a one-way gate. At the end of the day, the count exceeded 100 deer. This was not a winter time study, but one in late summer.
The result far exceeded the expectation as it was believed that at the most, the number would be around 20.
What was determined is just because you don't see them doesn't mean that they are not there.
I used to hunt an area up on Anarchist Mountain east of Osoyoos. The area was a little over a square mile, bounded on the south and east flank by road, a ravine on the north and fence on the west. I'd birddog those deer and it was a tropical day in the middle of winter before I could drive them out of the area. They never crossed the road, nor the ravine and if really tag teamed, they may jump the fence once in a while. They just did not like to leave their home turf.
They seemed to have a 6th sense. I saw one in a clearing one day and thought that he was a goner. Got down and slithered along like a GI with heavy enemy fire overhead. It took nearly 45 minutes to make the opening upon which I raised my head once again to check if he was still there. Nope...gone. I rolled over onto my back and there he was, 30' away checking me out. Of course in a blink of an eye he was on his way crashing through the brush. Not a chance for a shot, just enough time to think about it.
Sometimes you jump one when it's not expecting it. They let out a snort and whistle and are gone. If you have experienced this, back track your trail 50-100 feet and get off the trail and wait with your focus on your back trail. Chances are he or she will circle around and then come up the trail following you and you get a perfect ambush. Of course if nothing happens in 30 minutes or so, move on.

[bigneily]

It is often those who only have short time to hunt or need to travel that chase any opurtunity that may provide success as they don't get to hunt as often or have limited opurtunity near home. They are not likely to even come close to filling all their tags. I would not say they are piggish as most don't harvest much odds are less than your house hold

I agree someone should only take what they need though

places like the EK definitely attract people do to the GOS available

Well put for sure .

[Whonnock Boy]

Understood, and yes, it does make sense. My point is, some hunters want their cake, and to eat it too! They want more wt so they can go out and shoot more does, and do it more efficiently. When the season is opened up to two does a year, the population begins to decline, at least based on the evidence from local hunters. What I do question is, does the population become static when there is a two doe a year allowance? Will the population continue to decline, or do hunters need to become dynamic?


I'm confused why you find that funny. I think what it means, is people accept regulations change, population numbers go up and down and opportunities to hunt changes. What people are identifying is that wildlife management needs to be dynamic and not static. Regulations need to adjust accordingly and local hunters here are identifying something that matters. Numbers are down, conservationists see a need now to slow the population reduction down and move through a replenishment objective. Doesn't that make sense?

[GoatGuy]

The whitetail season was opened up for a few reasons. One was to support hunter recruitment. And, to a large extent, it worked. Hunter numbers are up. Now, with whitetail numbers down, it is harder for a new hunter to be successful. The harvest rate will / is going down. The West Kootenay is a prime example of that. The number of days afield to take a whitetail is high.

The two doe bag limit was to manage apparent competition in the EK. Mule deer folks were screaming 'crisis' and there was and still is very little support to manage cougars properly in the EK. Managing the wtd downward was and still is the only viable tool for mule deer, because hunters are focused on deer hunting regulations and not the big picture issues.

The days per kill for wtd has been relatively stable (15-21) for the past decade, while the harvest went up from 2012-2014. I believe 2010 was the first year of the antlerless GOS and the harvest actually went down compared to 2009 the year prior.

The number of days/kill was around 18 in 2014, in the range from 2005 onwards which is interesting as wt no doubt responded to the pressure. There would be an expectation that metric would have gone up significantly due to: a) pressure and b)declining populations. And it hasn't.


Are whitetail threatened. Probably not. Buck harvests remain high. The critical factor will be the onset of a heavy winter. That could further deplete the stock. I have very strong concerns that with current numbers, if we do have that heavy winter, it will be hardship on the population here.



This is diametrically opposed to the very basics of wildlife management. Manage wildlife, particularly ungulates, and even more so wt well below carrying capacity and the population will be far more resilient to winter severity and will bounce back far more quickly. This was dealt with when wildlife management was in its infancy and there is a myriad of literature to support that.



Not doubting wt are down in some areas, and less visible in others. That is expected. Wt will respond to pressure and harvest better than any other ungulate in NA.

People need to pick their poison. The EK hunters don't want to manage cougars, wants lots of mule deer, and apparently lots of wtd. Meanwhile doing nothing about habitat, predation, hwy mortality, funding etc, etc, etc,.

This is simply an unrealistic and unworkable outcome. Until hunters provincially, and especially in the EK, get focused on the big picture declining ungulate pops will be situation normal.

[blacklab]

You Kootenay folks are going to have to enlist the help of the Wildlife Management staff from region 3.
We've got so many deer here, we can have a season that lasts 3 months and 10 days (longer than anywhere in the province).
We can take 3 Whitetail 2 antlerless and 1 antlered (more than anywhere in the province).

We're just fortunate that hunters from the Island and Lower Mainland would rather travel to regions 4, 8, or 7 to benefit from the reduced opportunity.

[LBM]

The two doe bag limit was to manage apparent competition in the EK. Mule deer folks were screaming 'crisis' and there was and still is very little support to manage cougars properly in the EK. Managing the wtd downward was and still is the only viable tool for mule deer, because hunters are focused on deer hunting regulations and not the big picture issues.

The days per kill for wtd has been relatively stable (15-21) for the past decade, while the harvest went up from 2012-2014. I believe 2010 was the first year of the antlerless GOS and the harvest actually went down compared to 2009 the year prior.

The number of days/kill was around 18 in 2014, in the range from 2005 onwards which is interesting as wt no doubt responded to the pressure. There would be an expectation that metric would have gone up significantly due to: a) pressure and b)declining populations. And it hasn't.



This is diametrically opposed to the very basics of wildlife management. Manage wildlife, particularly ungulates, and even more so wt well below carrying capacity and the population will be far more resilient to winter severity and will bounce back far more quickly. This was dealt with when wildlife management was in its infancy and there is a myriad of literature to support that.



Not doubting wt are down in some areas, and less visible in others. That is expected. Wt will respond to pressure and harvest better than any other ungulate in NA.

People need to pick their poison. The EK hunters don't want to manage cougars, wants lots of mule deer, and apparently lots of wtd. Meanwhile doing nothing about habitat, predation, hwy mortality, funding etc, etc, etc,.

This is simply an unrealistic and unworkable outcome. Until hunters provincially, and especially in the EK, get focused on the big picture declining ungulate pops will be situation normal.

Ok I will ask since you brought up cougars enough times in your post, what do you mean EK hunters don't want to manage cougars. If your taking about the over harvest of them and the sex and age of the ones being shot then yes you are right.
If your trying to use them as a scape goat for the decline in MD populations I would say wrong, humans directly or indirectly are number 1 and for predators I would say coyotes are the worst find far more coyote kills then from any other 4 legged predator and the majority is yearlings.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Ok I will ask since you brought up cougars enough times in your post, what do you mean EK hunters don't want to manage cougars. If your taking about the over harvest of them and the sex and age of the ones being shot then yes you are right.
If your trying to use them as a scape goat for the decline in MD populations I would say wrong, humans directly or indirectly are number 1 and for predators I would say coyotes are the worst find far more coyote kills then from any other 4 legged predator and the majority is yearlings.

When was the last time there were LEH permits handed out for antlerless mule deer in the east koots?

[LBM]

When was the last time there were LEH permits handed out for antlerless mule deer in the east koots?
Wouldn't have a clue. dont no if there has ever been any.

[Ddog]

GoatGuy:

The days per kill for wtd has been relatively stable (15-21) for the past decade, while the harvest went up from 2012-2014. I believe 2010 was the first year of the antlerless GOS and the harvest actually went down compared to 2009 the year prior.

The number of days/kill was around 18 in 2014, in the range from 2005 onwards which is interesting as wt no doubt responded to the pressure. There would be an expectation that metric would have gone up significantly due to: a) pressure and b)declining populations. And it hasn't.

Just out of curiosity, care to cut and paste (like usual) your information? Where is it that you are reading?

[rocksteady]

Wouldn't have a clue. dont no if there has ever been any.
1995? Maybe

[rocksteady]

Dog... assuming it's from the hunting questionnaire we all get every year

[GoatGuy]

GoatGuy:

The days per kill for wtd has been relatively stable (15-21) for the past decade, while the harvest went up from 2012-2014. I believe 2010 was the first year of the antlerless GOS and the harvest actually went down compared to 2009 the year prior.

The number of days/kill was around 18 in 2014, in the range from 2005 onwards which is interesting as wt no doubt responded to the pressure. There would be an expectation that metric would have gone up significantly due to: a) pressure and b)declining populations. And it hasn't.

Just out of curiosity, care to cut and paste (like usual) your information? Where is it that you are reading?

Formating never works with this software. This is all over Region 4 including the West Koots.

2005-2014

Hunters


7988


8804


9058


9592


10442


10663


10553


10700


9930


10661

Days







68196


80331


80691


90966


101676


108289


107132


114676


106053


110916

Kills






4558


4989


4654


4808


5310


5539


5176


6188


5040


6085

Antlerless Harvest


410


698


931


1202


1487


1385


1553


2661


1966


2495

Days per kill


14.96


16.10


17.34


18.92


19.15


19.55


20.70


18.53


21.04


18.23

[GoatGuy]

1995? Maybe

Last

Last year for mule deer LEH was 1996. 645 does were harvested that year, and 1435 bucks for a total of 2080. Hasn't been a doe season since IIRC.

In 2014 mule deer hunters in Region 4 shot 520 mule deer, one quarter of the harvest in 1996.

Hunting regulations are sure working lol!

[Fisher-Dude]

how well did the threoy play out lower moose to save caribou



It stabilized the caribou in that area.

It's not a long term solution, but it did stop the decline.

I don't think many people are trying to reduce whitetail to aid mulies. I think people are hunting whitetails because they are so prolific that we can harvest them heavily without adverse population effects.

Latest data I have discussed with bios is that we're taking about 4 - 5% of WT does, but that they can withstand at least double that with predation, and triple or quadruple that without heavy predation.

We're not even scratching the surface on whitetails.

[Fisher-Dude]

Are whitetail threatened. Probably not. Buck harvests remain high. The critical factor will be the onset of a heavy winter. That could further deplete the stock. I have very strong concerns that with current numbers, if we do have that heavy winter, it will be hardship on the population here.



You seem to have forgotten why whitetails were decimated in the late 1990s hard winters.

It was because we had stockpiled a shitload of them on the landscape. Not because they were down in numbers - it was because they were high in numbers.

No food = dead deer.

On the bright side, there were loads of turkey vultures the following spring.

[palmer]

Whitetails in my part of 8 are down in the mountains and stable in the no hunting farmland. The main difference we have in BC over the states is snow levels and predators. Most US states that have long doe season have very little snow and short winters and few predators. Now the question is how many whitetails do we need or want ? That's the question we need to answer

[J_T]

This is diametrically opposed to the very basics of wildlife management. Manage wildlife, particularly ungulates, and even more so wt well below carrying capacity and the population will be far more resilient to winter severity and will bounce back far more quickly. This was dealt with when wildlife management was in its infancy and there is a myriad of literature to support that.

Im not sure it is 'diametrically opposed'. In most jurisdictions when we talk about 'critical winter range' we're talking habitat. Here in the EK we're suggesting all of the factors impacting ungulate survival come into play.


A difficult winter were ungulates/whitetail are congregated in small areas, closer to roads and railways, subject to vehicle collisions. We're suggesting predators can pursue the prey in a smaller area and the combination of all these factors - habitat aside - can result in catastrophic consequenses to the population.

I think we're suggesting we need to consider there are a multitude of forces at work and collectively it can wear the deer down.




People need to pick their poison. The EK hunters don't want to manage cougars, wants lots of mule deer, and apparently lots of wtd. Meanwhile doing nothing about habitat, predation, hwy mortality, funding etc, etc, etc,.

Im not sure its "the people of East Kootenay" that need to choose their poison. There seems to be opinions coming in from everywhere. It sounds like many hunters of the EK are expressing common ground here now.


I dont think the people of the EK believe its entirely up to them.
It seems the dissention comes from hunters of other regions suggesting what should occur here.




This is simply an unrealistic and unworkable outcome. Until hunters provincially, and especially in the EK, get focused on the big picture declining ungulate pops will be situation normal.

I agree. It seems difficult to find the one solution. Seems around here hunters place high value on the whitetailed deer. And perhaps they shouldnt be the pawn in all other wildlife decisions.

[J_T]

You seem to have forgotten why whitetails were decimated in the late 1990s hard winters.

It was because we had stockpiled a shitload of them on the landscape. Not because they were down in numbers - it was because they were high in numbers.

No food = dead deer.

On the bright side, there were loads of turkey vultures the following spring. I havent forgotten in the least. I was there in the field. Im confused why your approach to your fellow hunters is always an attack on the other persons integrity, memory or committment.

[Fisher-Dude]

I havent forgotten in the least. I was there in the field.

Oddly, you stated the exact opposite in the post I replied to.

And when corrected by science and facts, you play the victim. How's that working for you?

[j270wsm]

Personally....I don't usually hunt white tail deer anymore but I enjoy taking my son and dad out deer hunting in late October and November. Both dad and I could care less if we shoot a deer, it's all about the kid getting the opportunity to get a deer.

I agree that white tails ( like other animals )will hide when pressured. We've all heard the saying " they don't get big by being stupid ", this saying applys to all animals. I've definatly noticed that does have become extremely skittish since the gos doe season opened. Yes I still see does when we go out but I'd guess that we're seeing 20% of what we used to see 6-8yrs ago.

Question for more knowledgable guys on this site.........if the white tail population isn't a concern then why did the 2 doe season get changed back to only 1 doe?

[GoatGuy]

Ok I will ask since you brought up cougars enough times in your post, what do you mean EK hunters don't want to manage cougars. If your taking about the over harvest of them and the sex and age of the ones being shot then yes you are right.
If your trying to use them as a scape goat for the decline in MD populations I would say wrong, humans directly or indirectly are number 1 and for predators I would say coyotes are the worst find far more coyote kills then from any other 4 legged predator and the majority is yearlings.

If the objective is to manage cougars the focus should be on females and off males.

Currently Region 4 is focusing on males, and off females which doesn't make much sense from most perspectives.

The collar data from the EK, WK, and Washington state from mule deer does points at cougars, not coyotes, or 4 legged predators. Although, what you're probably trying to infer is vehicle collisions is a big problem in areas and that we agree on, but that is not a global issue.

[GoatGuy]

Im not sure it is 'diametrically opposed'. In most jurisdictions when we talk about 'critical winter range' we're talking habitat. Here in the EK we're suggesting all of the factors impacting ungulate survival come into play.


A difficult winter were ungulates/whitetail are congregated in small areas, closer to roads and railways, subject to vehicle collisions. We're suggesting predators can pursue the prey in a smaller area and the combination of all these factors - habitat aside - can result in catastrophic consequenses to the population.

I think we're suggesting we need to consider there are a multitude of forces at work and collectively it can wear the deer down.




Im not sure its "the people of East Kootenay" that need to choose their poison. There seems to be opinions coming in from everywhere. It sounds like many hunters of the EK are expressing common ground here now.


I dont think the people of the EK believe its entirely up to them.
It seems the dissention comes from hunters of other regions suggesting what should occur here.




I agree. It seems difficult to find the one solution. Seems around here hunters place high value on the whitetailed deer. And perhaps they shouldnt be the pawn in all other wildlife decisions.

Managing white-tails at high density really doesn't make sense, particularly as it relates to winter severity. Predators, no predators, it doesn't make a difference. The more you carry, the more you will lose in a bad winter both in proportion and total losses. This has been tried and tested in BC multiple times over the years. Plenty of work has been done here on this in parts elsewhere.

Until we have the money to manage at the ecosystem level, this isn't going to work. Managing species in isolation simply doesn't work.

[palmer]

If the objective is to manage cougars the focus should be on females and off males.

Currently Region 4 is focusing on males, and off females which doesn't make much sense from most perspectives.

The collar data from the EK, WK, and Washington state from mule deer does points at cougars, not coyotes, or 4 legged predators. Although, what you're probably trying to infer is vehicle collisions is a big problem in areas and that we agree on, but that is not a global issue.

Are we talking about TWO legged cougars hunting Mule does....I see most of those in the bars...LOL

[HarryToolips]

You Kootenay folks are going to have to enlist the help of the Wildlife Management staff from region 3.
We've got so many deer here, we can have a season that lasts 3 months and 10 days (longer than anywhere in the province).
We can take 3 Whitetail 2 antlerless and 1 antlered (more than anywhere in the province).

We're just fortunate that hunters from the Island and Lower Mainland would rather travel to regions 4, 8, or 7 to benefit from the reduced opportunity.
Incorrect, the region 3 bag limit for wt is 2, both of which may be bucks, or both of which may be antlerless...

[coach]

Incorrect, the region 3 bag limit for wt is 2, both of which may be bucks, or both of which may be antlerless...

Stop using facts, Harry!

[LBM]

If the objective is to manage cougars the focus should be on females and off males.

Currently Region 4 is focusing on males, and off females which doesn't make much sense from most perspectives.

The collar data from the EK, WK, and Washington state from mule deer does points at cougars, not coyotes, or 4 legged predators. Although, what you're probably trying to infer is vehicle collisions is a big problem in areas and that we agree on, but that is not a global issue.

So if your saying there should be a low quota on males and a lowered quota on females and that they should be by each MU instead of region wide then you are right.
Also curious how many coyotes are collared in the EK and roughly what locations are they in?
Again you cant base your data on the whole region when it is being done in just a few small areas, each area is different some are more prominent mule deer areas, some elk , some whitetail etc.

[J_T]

Managing white-tails at high density really doesn't make sense, particularly as it relates to winter severity. Predators, no predators, it doesn't make a difference. The more you carry, the more you will lose in a bad winter both in proportion and total losses. This has been tried and tested in BC multiple times over the years. Plenty of work has been done here on this in parts elsewhere.

Until we have the money to manage at the ecosystem level, this isn't going to work. Managing species in isolation simply doesn't work. I don't think anyone is saying 'high' density. Simply, hunters feel a need to look at the present population level and consider making adjustments to turn a downward trend.

I understand ecosystem management is key. And so is saving Caribou, and so is managing predators.

[J_T]

Oddly, you stated the exact opposite in the post I replied to.

And when corrected by science and facts, you play the victim. How's that working for you? I doubt you would agree with or support anything I say. Similarly to your approach with so many others on here, you simply can't put your indifference toward someone aside, and contribute positively to a discussion. For the record, I am not a victim. You don't intimidate me in the least. Really, I see you as a non factor, contributing little, while working to have threads shut down that you don't agree with through your obnoxious style.

[Onesock]

Here here Jim!!!!

[GoatGuy]

So if your saying there should be a low quota on males and a lowered quota on females and that they should be by each MU instead of region wide then you are right.
Also curious how many coyotes are collared in the EK and roughly what locations are they in?
Again you cant base your data on the whole region when it is being done in just a few small areas, each area is different some are more prominent mule deer areas, some elk , some whitetail etc.

1) There aren't any coyotes collared in the EK
2) The data is from dead collared mule deer does in the EK (I want to say Yahk and all the way east to the Alberta border), WK, Washington State, Idaho State, and Montana. Personally wouldn't call those a few small areas and find it unlikely coyotes are what has been holding back mule deer since 1997. Certainly they ate a few neonates and fawns, unlikely they are what's limiting the population.

[Ddog]

I doubt you would agree with or support anything I say. Similarly to your approach with so many others on here, you simply can't put your indifference toward someone aside, and contribute positively to a discussion. For the record, I am not a victim. You don't intimidate me in the least. Really, I see you as a non factor, contributing little, while working to have threads shut down that you don't agree with through your obnoxious style.

totally agree J_T

[HarryToolips]

I don't think anyone is saying 'high' density. Simply, hunters feel a need to look at the present population level and consider making adjustments to turn a downward trend.

I understand ecosystem management is key. And so is saving Caribou, and so is managing predators.
Ecosystem and habitat management is definitely number one...and they have made the adjustment: they lowered the wt doe reg 4 bag limit to one - maybe we'll now see a bounce back, time will tell...just look at reg 8, we have the highest numbers of resident hunters in the province, highest road density, and sees quite a bit of hunting pressure from the Lower Mainland as well, yet our wt population, according to what I've heard and seen, is stable and healthy..lets take MU 8-14 for example: it sees an incredible amount of pressure, yet every year when I go there with my buddy, we see decent numbers of whities waving their white flag at us..last season by the end of the season, his trail cam didn't have a single pic of a wt moving during the day, they had gone 100% nocturnal, they did what wt do: adapt..

[adriaticum]

Ecosystem and habitat management is definitely number one...and they have made the adjustment: they lowered the wt doe reg 4 bag limit to one - maybe we'll now see a bounce back, time will tell...just look at reg 8, we have the highest numbers of resident hunters in the province, highest road density, and sees quite a bit of hunting pressure from the Lower Mainland as well, yet our wt population, according to what I've heard and seen, is stable and healthy..lets take MU 8-14 for example: it sees an incredible amount of pressure, yet every year when I go there with my buddy, we see decent numbers of whities waving their white flag at us..last season by the end of the season, his trail cam didn't have a single pic of a wt moving during the day, they had gone 100% nocturnal, they did what wt do: adapt..


At least through my wanderings through region 8 / Princeton/Tulameen, this area is not hit by the pine beetle as badly for some reason.
That was the first thing I noticed a few years ago. While just a hop and skip over the mountains in 3, whole mountains are bare.
Unless maybe it was earlier and then it had time to recover.
But the benefit of pine beetle is you can find firewood anywhere.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

At least through my wanderings through region 8 / Princeton/Tulameen, this area is not hit by the pine beetle as badly for some reason.
That was the first thing I noticed a few years ago. While just a hop and skip over the mountains in 3, whole mountains are bare.
Unless maybe it was earlier and then it had time to recover.
But the benefit of pine beetle is you can find firewood anywhere.

More and more Whities up the plateaux in 3-12 where MPB is prominent.

[HarryToolips]

^^^^yup, my observations in the south of reg3 (where you can shoot 2 bucks OR antlerless WT per licence), is the WT are doing fine....

[adriaticum]

The 5 square km i hunt i am seeing more whitetails now than 3 years ago.
Are there more wt in the area? . Probably not
Are they doing better? Probably not.
Why?
Because the area is reduced to 3 standing pines and 2 poplars. There are few pockets of trees which tells me where to look. Everything else has been razed to ground and exposed those pockets. What hasn't been taken down by forestry went down on its own.
It all about perception.

I wouldn't even trust my own perception alone.
I think it's very hard to make any kind of assessment in an ever dramatically changing landscape.
The more views the better.

[blacklab]

^^^^yup, my observations in the south of reg3 (where you can shoot 2 bucks OR antlerless WT per licence), is the WT are doing fine....
I assume the reference to 2 bucks or 2 antlerless id directed my way. So I screwed up and will admit my mistake. Maybe some wildlife management staff in Kamloops should do the same.

[Salty]

More and more Whities up the plateaux in 3-12 where MPB is prominent.

I poked around there for basically the first time this year and I was wondering about that. Not real surprising its not far east to more traditional areas, GTK.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I poked around there for basically the first time this year and I was wondering about that. Not real surprising its not far east to more traditional areas, GTK.

I wouldn't exactly make it a whitetail destination Like GF, RC or BVD but I certainly wouldn't be caught without a WT tag in my pocket when hunting there.

SSS

[Salty]

Ya I hear you Steve more mule deer country than anything from what I could see. But WT are expanding their range all over the province not surprising they're giving it a go up there too.

[HarryToolips]

I assume the reference to 2 bucks or 2 antlerless id directed my way. So I screwed up and will admit my mistake. Maybe some wildlife management staff in Kamloops should do the same.
No sir, I had already corrected you on that on a previous page:wink:....I was referring to the fact that reg3 has very generous WT GOS's, yet they are still prospering in areas of reg3, the WT have adapted, many hunters have not, the most effective way of harvesting them for many successful wt hunters is to sit your ass down and wait for em, a lot of people just don't have that patience...I'm sure region 4 also sees a larger harvest on wt because as stated previously, it sees a lot of pressure from elk hunters there, a lot from regions 1 and 2 I've heard...hunters don't bag an elk, but they see a wt and don't want to come home empty handed...so why doesn't reg1 have a 6 pt elk GOS? According to the last population estimates, they have a healthy elk population, why couldn't they support it? is it only the guides that are controlling the prov. govt and not allowing this to happen? There's an election coming soon, could we convince the BC Liberals to appease the resident hunter, instead of continually catering to the GOABC? This would definitely alleviate some of the pressure in reg4, and be a win win for the resident hunter...

[HarryToolips]

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/2014_Provincial%20Ungulate%20Numbers%20Oct%2030_Fi nal.pdf

[GoatGuy]

Region 3 white-tailed buck harvest since 1987



99


87


63


107


92


90


70


104


111


137


82


128


147


115


174


164


205


128


213


201


298


301


324


471


415


529


538


584

[HarryToolips]

^^^^for harvests to trend upwards like that, the wt pops in reg3 must definitely be increasing....

[adriaticum]

^^^^for harvests to trend upwards like that, the wt pops in reg3 must definitely be increasing....

Sure, what's also increasing is the number of licensed hunters.

[Wild one]

^^^^for harvests to trend upwards like that, the wt pops in reg3 must definitely be increasing....

Would not jump to that conclusion. Increase in hunter numbers and an increase in WT hunting do to season provided are contributing factors to this. I would say without a doubt WT have increased in BC and spread into new areas in BC. I would think the new season has slowed the WT population growth. They are still spreading to new areas

[Fisher-Dude]

The 5 square km i hunt i am seeing more whitetails now than 3 years ago.
Are there more wt in the area? . Probably not
Are they doing better? Probably not.
Why?
Because the area is reduced to 3 standing pines and 2 poplars. There are few pockets of trees which tells me where to look. Everything else has been razed to ground and exposed those pockets. What hasn't been taken down by forestry went down on its own.
It all about perception.

I wouldn't even trust my own perception alone.
I think it's very hard to make any kind of assessment in an ever dramatically changing landscape.
The more views the better.

Way more whitetail in your little area in R3 than there were 30 years ago.

Remember, I know where you hunt and I happen to live here (as opposed to being a Surrey Warrior). ;)

[J_T]

^^ Perhaps the solution then, is to maintain the more liberal WT seasons in areas of the Province where the infiltration of the WT is not desired and to reduce downward trends - using regulation changes, among other things - of the WT population in areas where WT are native and a valued species.

[Fisher-Dude]

Would not jump to that conclusion. Increase in hunter numbers and an increase in WT hunting do to season provided are contributing factors to this. I would say without a doubt WT have increased in BC and spread into new areas in BC. I would think the new season has slowed the WT population growth. They are still spreading to new areas

Region 3 whitetail population trend is flagged "I" for increasing.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/2014_Provincial%20Ungulate%20Numbers%20Oct%2030_Fi nal.pdf

Harry is right.

[Fisher-Dude]

^^ Perhaps the solution then, is to maintain the more liberal WT seasons in areas of the Province where the infiltration of the WT is not desired and to reduce downward trends - using regulation changes, among other things - of the WT population in areas where WT are native and a valued species.

If harvest levels in BC were a determining factor in WT population trends, then your idea would have some merit.

Harvesting <15% of does annually won't affect the population, and we're nowhere near that anywhere in BC. In region 4 for example, we kill 2,000 does annually out of a 38,000 - 62,000 deer population, for a 3 to 5% harvest.

You may want regulation changes to suit your social wants, but that idea is archaic, does not work, and has been replaced by modern game management.

[adriaticum]

Way more whitetail in your little area in R3 than there were 30 years ago.

Remember, I know where you hunt and I happen to live here (as opposed to being a Surrey Warrior). ;)


I agree that there are more whitetail there.
I don't know from personal experience (other than past 4 years), but from other guys I meet there, they're happy there is more WT.
They are also unhappy there is less MD.
And I'm unhappy there is less forest.

[Fisher-Dude]

I agree that there are more whitetail there.
I don't know from personal experience (other than past 4 years), but from other guys I meet there, they're happy there is more WT.
They are also unhappy there is less MD.
And I'm unhappy there is less forest.

In 5 years you'll be pissed off that you can't see 20 feet into those cutblocks.

My favourite area in 3 has grown in now. It's full of deer, but good luck getting a shot at one.

[adriaticum]

In 5 years you'll be pissed off that you can't see 20 feet into those cutblocks.

My favourite area in 3 has grown in now. It's full of deer, but good luck getting a shot at one.



It's ok, I'll take the forest and change the tactics.
The issue I have is that they are cutting down spruce, pine and everything else and planting only pine because it suits the forestry.
Pine is good for thing.
Other than cheap furniture.

[Wild one]

Region 3 whitetail population trend is flagged "I" for increasing.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/2014_Provincial%20Ungulate%20Numbers%20Oct%2030_Fi nal.pdf

Harry is right.

I 100% agree on a regional level WT are no doubt on the increase observed the WT spread into new areas. In my opinion it is possible the new season has possibly decreased or stabilized populations in some MUs. Many of the smaller pockets are going basically untouched by hunting pressure and these are definitely on the increase.

Because of how much habitat changes from MU to MU in BC looking at things at a regional level is one thing but it no doubt varies in each MU. Add in that most who go to target WT will focus on MUs where WT are in a large portion of the MU vs small pockets within it will vary the impact within the region

[GoatGuy]

^^ Perhaps the solution then, is to maintain the more liberal WT seasons in areas of the Province where the infiltration of the WT is not desired and to reduce downward trends - using regulation changes, among other things - of the WT population in areas where WT are native and a valued species.


Objectives, objectives, objectives. People need to understand the trade-offs they are facing and make informed decisions.

Currently, all of the above is missing and until that gets fixed the system will continue to fail wildlife and those who care about it.

[Salty]

It's ok, I'll take the forest and change the tactics.
The issue I have is that they are cutting down spruce, pine and everything else and planting only pine because it suits the forestry.
Pine is good for thing.
Other than cheap furniture.

Take a close look at the new pine tree stands. You'll find that most of it isn't planted, planted trees will be in more or less straight lines evenly spaced. Pine trees are the dominant natural seeders if you will they cast many more viable seeds than the other species. If there's been a fire, it will be near 100% pine that reforests itself. If no fire there will still be more natural regen of pine than anything else in an area that grows lodge pole pine.

The pine forests come up fast and thick and usually much too close to each other. Over decades nature takes care of this and most of the crowded trees die and the ones that are strongest and can reach the light live. Other species start coming in more too. Basically, lodge pole pine is the fireweed of the evergreens comes in like a weed but that changes over 40 or 50 years.

[Wild one]

In 5 years you'll be pissed off that you can't see 20 feet into those cutblocks.

My favourite area in 3 has grown in now. It's full of deer, but good luck getting a shot at one.


Some of us hunters will take timber over cut blocks any day. This is more of a hunting style preference that varies from hunter to hunter. In 25 years I have only taken 2 animals out of cut blocks. I target different habitat is probably the main reason.

Now old blocks where the trees have reached 15-20+ ft but old skidder trails and roads make semi open strips is another story

[.264winmag]

It's ok, I'll take the forest and change the tactics.
The issue I have is that they are cutting down spruce, pine and everything else and planting only pine because it suits the forestry.
Pine is good for thing.
Other than cheap furniture.

I guess only mule deer love pine stands???

[Salty]

In 5 years you'll be pissed off that you can't see 20 feet into those cutblocks.

My favourite area in 3 has grown in now. It's full of deer, but good luck getting a shot at one.

And there's the dichotomy of hunting a new forest..

[.264winmag]

And there's the dichotomy of hunting a new forest..

Had to look that word up HA

Hunter/huntress gets on google earth to do some 'scouting'. Finds some real nice looking cutblocks to go check out, upon arrival cutblocks are found too overgrown to glass from truck so carries on up the road. Finds more timber patches have been logged off and no game standing out in the wide open shooting gallery. Hunter whips truck around in disgust at GE and the logging companies.

Deer like to feed in the newer cutblocks, at night. Deer do not vacate overgrown cutblocks, they will live in them. But there's 'no deer' and that spot is 'junk'.

Not much better than hunting a nice open stand of timber, but if it weren't for logging and fires there wouldn't be the game there is...

[horshur]

It's ok, I'll take the forest and change the tactics.
The issue I have is that they are cutting down spruce, pine and everything else and planting only pine because it suits the forestry.
Pine is good for thing.
Other than cheap furniture.

Interior Douglas Fir and Montane Spruce the natural successional pathway is Lodgepole Pine.

[adriaticum]

I guess only mule deer love pine stands???

I don't think homogeneous forest is good for anything.

[adriaticum]

Interior Douglas Fir and Montane Spruce the natural successional pathway is Lodgepole Pine.

Would you care to elaborate on that?
From what I understand if you leave things to nature over time, fir-spruce forest will be replaced by pine?

[.264winmag]

I don't think homogeneous forest is good for anything.

Sure seemed to be good for mule deer on my region 3 hunt. Older pine stand that burnt, only pine growing back...

[Salty]

Had to look that word up HA

Hunter/huntress gets on google earth to do some 'scouting'. Finds some real nice looking cutblocks to go check out, upon arrival cutblocks are found too overgrown to glass from truck so carries on up the road. Finds more timber patches have been logged off and no game standing out in the wide open shooting gallery. Hunter whips truck around in disgust at GE and the logging companies.

Deer like to feed in the newer cutblocks, at night. Deer do not vacate overgrown cutblocks, they will live in them. But there's 'no deer' and that spot is 'junk'.

Not much better than hunting a nice open stand of timber, but if it weren't for logging and fires there wouldn't be the game there is...

I try to use G E only after going to an area first. It upsets me too much to make epic plans on the puter only to be ****ed up by reality :mrgreen:

Big 10-4 on logging = game. We don't let enough forest fires burn any more to create high quality feed (new forests) but logging keeps a good cycle on the go. It brings other issues like too much access for us and other preds, but they're getting better at tearing roads up when they're done too. Its all good.

[Salty]

Would you care to elaborate on that?
From what I understand if you leave things to nature over time, fir-spruce forest will be replaced by pine?

Its the other way around. Pine come in like a weed and over time most of them die off and the percentage of other species increases. We've only been planting trees to any degree for about 50 years. Most of the mature trees you see were not planted.

[Fisher-Dude]

I don't think homogeneous forest is good for anything.

When did you join Raincoast?

[.264winmag]

I try to use G E only after going to an area first. It upsets me too much to make epic plans on the puter only to be ****ed up by reality :mrgreen:

Big 10-4 on logging = game. We don't let enough forest fires burn any more to create high quality feed (new forests) but logging keeps a good cycle on the go. It brings other issues like too much access for us and other preds, but they're getting better at tearing roads up when they're done too. Its all good.

I think burning entire slashes would be a great happy medium.

[Salty]

I think burning entire slashes would be a great happy medium.

At least some of them eh? When I was a kid growing up in PG they used to burn entire valleys off! Mind you that's the way they logged back then too. Somewhere between the two is probably the right answer.

[adriaticum]

Sure seemed to be good for mule deer on my region 3 hunt. Older pine stand that burnt, only pine growing back...



winmag, a stand of pine, is different from entire forest of pine. From what I know about pine, it doesn't play well with other vegetation. Makes soil acidic over time from all the needles falling and not many things grow under it.
A stand of pine can provide shelter, but it won't provide food. I think spruce-fir is a little bit more forgiving.
But it's not all about deer. Grouse like spruce too.

What I'm seeing is basically all pine exclusively in lots of cuts areas and the old growth next to them is mixed with majority spruce.
I don't know, maybe I shouldn't be concerned.

[adriaticum]

When did you join Raincoast?

Only to piss you off for voting NDP.

[Salty]

winmag, a stand of pine, is different from entire forest of pine. From what I know about pine, it doesn't play well with other vegetation. Makes soil acidic over time from all the needles falling and not many things grow under it.
A stand of pine can provide shelter, but it won't provide food. I think spruce-fir is a little bit more forgiving.
But it's not all about deer. Grouse like spruce too.

What I'm seeing is basically all pine exclusively in lots of cuts areas and the old growth next to them is mixed with majority spruce.
I don't know, maybe I shouldn't be concerned.

I don't think you should its just nature doing its thing. What you may find with that stand is at some point silviculture crews will come in and do some thinning, probably when the trees are 20 feet tall or so and so thick you can barely move through it. This will speed up the process of a new mainly pine forest to a more mixed forest. Having said all that you are in pine central there highish elevation plateau type area. If you get in to the mountains more or valley bottoms there will be different types of forest.

[GoatGuy]

Would not jump to that conclusion. Increase in hunter numbers and an increase in WT hunting do to season provided are contributing factors to this. I would say without a doubt WT have increased in BC and spread into new areas in BC. I would think the new season has slowed the WT population growth. They are still spreading to new areas

Ok, let's test the logic.

Tell me what you would expect in terms of hunter numbers, harvest and days per kill for mule deer and wt deer.

We have license sales for basic license from 1981-2014, but only for md and wt deer from 1987-2014.

Build your hypothesis and an alternative hypothesis and we can check the data to see if the two line up.

[adriaticum]

I don't think you should its just nature doing its thing. What you may find with that stand is at some point silviculture crews will come in and do some thinning, probably when the trees are 20 feet tall or so and so thick you can barely move through it. This will speed up the process of a new mainly pine forest to a more mixed forest. Having said all that you are in pine central there highish elevation plateau type area. If you get in to the mountains more or valley bottoms there will be different types of forest.

Ok, I'll sleep a little better tonight

[Wild one]

Ok, let's test the logic.

Tell me what you would expect in terms of hunter numbers, harvest and days per kill for mule deer and wt deer.

We have license sales for basic license from 1981-2014, but only for md and wt deer from 1987-2014.

Build your hypothesis and an alternative hypothesis and we can check the data to see if the two line up.

Post 146 is a lot clearer on what my opinion is

overall yes I believe WT are increaseing on a regional and provincial level. Do I believe it is a possibility the season may have decreased or stabilized populations in some MUs yes.

Am I concerned about any of BCs strong WT populations no. Do I believe there should not be a doe season in areas of low WT numbers yes. LEH doe in low number areas would be my choice. But I would rather see WT managed as a valuable game species instead of trying to decrease there numbers. What I would like and managment goals are different

I am not one saying WT are disappearing but yes I would like to see a different managment goal with WT. This is the issue between our thoughts on WT is what the managment goal should be

Our difference of opinion really is on what the goal for WT in BC should be. The rest is no more than nit picking

[Fisher-Dude]

Spoke to an American dude on a plane ride a couple of years ago.

He said in his state/county, he has to kill 5 does before they give him a buck tag.

I don't want BC to be in that situation by failing to manage whitetailed deer numbers properly.

[GoatGuy]

Post 146 is a lot clearer on what my opinion is

overall yes I believe WT are increaseing on a regional and provincial level. Do I believe it is a possibility the season may have decreased or stabilized populations in some MUs yes.

Am I concerned about any of BCs strong WT populations no. Do I believe there should not be a doe season in areas of low WT numbers yes. LEH doe in low number areas would be my choice. But I would rather see WT managed as a valuable game species instead of trying to decrease there numbers. What I would like and managment goals are different

I am not one saying WT are disappearing but yes I would like to see a different managment goal with WT. This is the issue between our thoughts on WT is what the managment goal should be

Our difference of opinion really is on what the goal for WT in BC should be. The rest is no more than nit picking


This doesn't make it clear.

build your hypothesis and we can see if the numbers support it

[Wild one]

Spoke to an American dude on a plane ride a couple of years ago.

He said in his state/county, he has to kill 5 does before they give him a buck tag.

I don't want BC to be in that situation by failing to manage whitetailed deer numbers properly.

we are far from those numbers and compleatly different when it comes to habitat, predators, and available winter feed. BC is more comparible to western Alberta than anything. They share some very simular habitat in western Alberta but BC still has areas that are its own. Yes they have doe harvest but some areas are LEH for both sexes of WT outside of archery in areas that have low numbers. Areas that have high numbers get supplemental doe tags that can only be used in some MUs not all. Years after winter kill the MUs these tags can be adjusted. Things are managed more by MU than region

But BC really needs to find its own managment plan do to the habitat and WT numbers. But this is only if the goal was to manage them as a valuable species

winterkill, predators, and habitat would make it very tough for WT to reach the level of many states so I would not fear that example

I actually like the doe season in areas with good WT numbers as the buck vs doe ratio makes the bucks more competitive. Notice the increase in mature WT bucks taken I would say this is due to the doe season and hunters taking the time to target them. It is only when it is in areas with low numbers I look at it as poor managment of WT

I have even recommended changing BC mule deer bag limit to take pressure off mule deer knowing hunters will target more WT

I would much rather see WT utilized differently in BC. Like I said my views do not match the managment plan in place.

[Wild one]

This doesn't make it clear.

build your hypothesis and we can see if the numbers support it


Well if my stance is not clear to you after time and time again conversations on the species I can't help you lol.

I don't know why you are debating WT numbers that neither of us believe are hurting.

I would not make up far fetched estamated numbers because they would of no use.

I would say without a doubt hunter numbers are on the rebound. Yes once the WT doe season was created more hunters target them. Neither is far fetched

You must really not like that I will not support BCs WT plan

[horshur]

Spoke to an American dude on a plane ride a couple of years ago.

He said in his state/county, he has to kill 5 does before they give him a buck tag.

I don't want BC to be in that situation by failing to manage whitetailed deer numbers properly.

sounds rough, don't think a meat hunter would mind that.

[GoatGuy]

Well if my stance is not clear to you after time and time again conversations on the species I can't help you lol.

I don't know why you are debating WT numbers that neither of us believe are hurting.

I would not make up far fetched estamated numbers because they would of no use.

I would say without a doubt hunter numbers are on the rebound. Yes once the WT doe season was created more hunters target them. Neither is far fetched

You must really not like that I will not support BCs WT plan
A big fan of looking at theories and using logic/#s to see if they're supported. It's not a debate.

[Wild one]

A big fan of looking at theories and using logic/#s to see if they're supported. It's not a debate.

Just as you like to look at numbers I like to look at all possible factors why numbers are what they are. Truth of the matter is like any threoy it is not fact until it can be proven

Only things I can say to suppot my threoy is it is a fact hunter numbers are rebounding, it is common for BC hunters to target seasons they think increase odds, hunter new to a species are more likely to target recommend locationsI have personally had more hunter inquire about WT, and have seen an increase in those wanting to target WT on this forum.

The reasons I stated are why I see a possibility of WT populations in some MUs decreasing or stabilizing. As for numbers those would would involve reaserch into the threoy.

That said I don't see there being enough of an impact on WT to see the effort worth while

[HarryToolips]

^^^^i hope in some areas the wt numbers are stabilizing and not getting too high, they will keep pred numbers high which will affect the other ungulate species....and IMO it's better to keep reg3 a mulies stronghold anyway, even with the 'generous' wt seasons, you still see way more wt than muleys in reg4 and the eastern part of reg8 - they will out compete mulies..

[Wild one]

^^^^i hope in some areas the wt numbers are stabilizing and not getting too high, they will keep pred numbers high which will affect the other ungulate species....and IMO it's better to keep reg3 a mulies stronghold anyway, even with the 'generous' wt seasons, you still see way more wt than muleys in reg4 and the eastern part of reg8 - they will out compete mulies..


Overall I would say we will continue to see WT spread.

As for predators there numbers are high for many reason beyond WT. Very few WT in region 6 but I bet I see way more predator sign than you will in 8 or 3. Many areas in BC with little to no WT and again high predator numbers.

BC has a predator problem not a WT problem. BC needs to address a predator issue

Odd that there are many areas in North America with higher WT density than BC and still you can find healthy populations of elk, mule deer, moose ext

WT also proffer a different habitat than mule deer and there is a lot of habitat in BC better fit for mule deer. They will never take over all mule deer habitat. Lots of places WT coexsist with mule deer in North America. WT also coexisted with mule deer in southern BC for decades with little issue.

Why are WT the end to all hunting in BC and not the rest of the country?

Lots of reasons to ? How much of an impact WT will really have on BC

[Salty]

Nobody is saying exterminate white tail far from it. And being that they're probably the only ungulate that are growing in numbers in BC I'd hardly say they are being unfairly picked on regarding hunting opportunities. Yes they're the only ungulate with an open hunting season for antlerless. But still their numbers increase. Maybe it was a too liberal a doe season in R 4 and that's showing in observations by some locals but that has been cut down to one antlerless from two this year. I fail to see a problem here?

[Fisher-Dude]

I have even recommended changing BC mule deer bag limit to take pressure off mule deer knowing hunters will target more WT


Absolutely no scientific reason to do that.

Mule deer can sustain the current bag limits provincially. Curtailing sustainable hunts would only be for social reasons, and not for herd health and/or conservation reasons.

[HarryToolips]

^^^I agree entirely Salty, it ain't about exterminating them (I love harvesting wt), it's all about managing them...

[Fisher-Dude]

sounds rough, don't think a meat hunter would mind that.

My concern is for the health of the animals over and above what goes into my freezer.

Overpopulated animals are unhealthy and prone to disease and massive winter kill.

[Wild one]

Absolutely no scientific reason to do that.

Mule deer can sustain the current bag limits provincially. Curtailing sustainable hunts would only be for social reasons, and not for herd health and/or conservation reasons.

again this depends on your managment goal. Would be nice to see a better buck vs doe ratio but no it would not increase population. Nothing more than a different goal

I agree mule deer buck harvest is of little issue to overall population. A few MUs I ? Why there is LEH doe harvest

[wideopenthrottle]

it seems to me that there is little doubt that having a 2 doe WT season attracted a pretty large number of hunters and even new hunters to that area....so it is working in our favour to have liberal WT seasons that even rookie or disabled hunters feel good about their chances for success...another side note is that having eaten some WT doe meat, hunters are introduced/reminded of how yummy WT (esp does) are...

[wideopenthrottle]

My concern is for the health of the animals over and above what goes into my freezer.

Overpopulated animals are unhealthy and prone to disease and massive winter kill.

for winter, more specifically of course, there is starvation...many peeps don't understand the fact that if food is in short supply (lets say you have 10,000 deer in an area that only has enough food for 8000 deer...many will think that 2000 will die with the rest being ok)....what they fail to understand is that those 10,000 deer will eat all the food before the end of the season and the vast majority will crash and burn....hence the expression/comment "you cant stockpile deer"

[Fisher-Dude]

for winter, more specifically of course, there is starvation...many peeps don't understand the fact that if food is in short supply (lets say you have 10,000 deer in an area that only has enough food for 8000 deer...many will think that 2000 will die with the rest being ok)....what they fail to understand is that those 10,000 deer will eat all the food before the end of the season and the vast majority will crash and burn....hence the expression/comment "you cant stockpile deer"

Yep.

When all the deer get only 80% of the food they need to survive, mortality is huge, far more than 20%.

In the late 1990s WT winter die off, this translated to an estimated 70% death rate in some areas (region 4 I'm looking at you).

Yet, we still have people that want to go down that road again. They say a 5% doe harvest should be shut down, but don't seem to be cognizant of a 70% death rate in one year.

Those people often confuse their own wants with conservation.

[J_T]

Yep.

When all the deer get only 80% of the food they need to survive, mortality is huge, far more than 20%.

In the late 1990s WT winter die off, this translated to an estimated 70% death rate in some areas (region 4 I'm looking at you).

Yet, we still have people that want to go down that road again. They say a 5% doe harvest should be shut down, but don't seem to be cognizant of a 70% death rate in one year.

Those people often confuse their own wants with conservation.

The region 4 die off was not entirely due to lack of food. Yes, it contributed, no question about it. You keep getting on this high horse of accusation that hunters / conservationists in Reg 4 are saying the sky is falling. That is simply not the case. Collectively they are observing a significant downward trend in WT population in heavily hunted areas and they're identifying it.

With respect to the mid 90's die off, two of the largest contributors to that die off were predators and vehicles. We watched it every day, in fact we patrolled the winter grounds and monitored the deer. They had food, but the predators were able to move quickly on the crusted snow while deer kept falling through. Easy prey. The ungulates increasingly were using highways for easy of movement and the result was they were getting hit by vehicles. In pockets where food source was buried and deer couldn't get at it, hunters coordinated and carried out small thinning projects to bring natural foods within reach of the animals.

I'd simply say, those who live here care, and have a vested interest in wildlife as conservationists. Wildlife is a primary reason people live in the EK.

[Fisher-Dude]

At some point, wildlife management will be dictated by a generation that accepts scientific fact, rather than a generation of "don't kill does" or "those deer are for locals."

[J_T]

At some point, wildlife management will be dictated by a generation that accepts scientific fact, rather than a generation of "don't kill does" or "those deer are for locals." I suspect you are right. And we'll have biologists that see hunters as external to wildlife management. Yes, the new cupcake generation, will successfully remove trophy hunting, soon to be followed by the removal of hunters as wildlife management tools. The only thing they'll accept will be bowhunting. Fair chase.....

[Wild one]

At some point, wildlife management will be dictated by a generation that accepts scientific fact, rather than a generation of "don't kill does" or "those deer are for locals."

That would be great hopefully they also consider all the different managment tools and styles throughout North America

[bigben]

INTERESTING stuff just want to note mule deer int he east kootenay has been slowly increasing and the buck to doe ratio is a credible tool to let antlerless whitetail to be harvested a good buck should only be able to service 5 to 7 does in total as if he is doing more rutting to do more breeding he exhausts himself and gets runned down and it will increase chances of not surviving the winter but also be suspectable to predation by cats and wolves here in the east kootenay we have been managing for predators mainly in the last five years and until the balance is in check on all three species it will be weighing in favour of one or the other hope everyone had a good hunting season putting organic meat in their freezer

[GoatGuy]

The region 4 die off was not entirely due to lack of food. Yes, it contributed, no question about it.

With respect to the mid 90's die off, two of the largest contributors to that die off were predators and vehicles. We watched it every day, in fact we patrolled the winter grounds and monitored the deer. They had food, but the predators were able to move quickly on the crusted snow while deer kept falling through. Easy prey. The ungulates increasingly were using highways for easy of movement and the result was they were getting hit by vehicles. In pockets where food source was buried and deer couldn't get at it, hunters coordinated and carried out small thinning projects to bring natural foods within reach of the animals.


It is called winter kill not food kill.

Very seldom that an ungulate actually starves do death and the principal of managing well below K, particularly for WT, still applies. These are fundamental issues.

If we had the money the science side would be a non-issue.

[swampthing]

Whitetails or coarse deer are expanding and multiplying. Something needs to be done about this as mule deer are getting closer to extinction. I think even more liberal coarse deer seasons are in order.

[Brez]

Now I know I will be called all kinds of names and told I am doing it wrong and such , But I believe the general open here for whitie doe's in the East koots is having a big effect on the numbers . I know that I am not a biologist but as a guy that has lived and hunted here for 30 yrs I can see a loss. Anyone else seeing my view ? , I am not against a general open for doe's but it should be limited for sure .
The only name I would call you is "Smarter than the average bear". If I were to raise cattle or other animals for food, I would not be butchering my cows....unless they got old. You don't get eggs without chickens! Basic biology but most greedy killers ("harvesters") don't get it.

[Salty]

The only name I would call you is "Smarter than the average bear". If I were to raise cattle or other animals for food, I would not be butchering my cows....unless they got old. You don't get eggs without chickens! Basic biology but most greedy killers ("harvesters") don't get it.

No offense but sounds like you should stick to farming. This has been studied to death regarding W T by biologists all over north America and their conclusion doesn't meet yours, and you don't get that I guess.

[HarryToolips]

^^^^^dude, read the whole thread and regarding whitetails, understand the science behind it...again, I recommend the book 'whitetail advantage', - they have been studied to death,,...

[horshur]

The only name I would call you is "Smarter than the average bear". If I were to raise cattle or other animals for food, I would not be butchering my cows....unless they got old. You don't get eggs without chickens! Basic biology but most greedy killers ("harvesters") don't get it.

this is easy....how much hay do you have to winter over how many head? how many cow calves can you hold back? one,two,ten years?

The whitetail doe seasons are fine.

[.264winmag]

this is easy....how much hay do you have to winter over how many head? how many cow calves can you hold back? one,two,ten years?

The whitetail doe seasons are fine.

Bingo
Do they get Spookier? Yes. Because. They. Adapt.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

The only name I would call you is "Smarter than the average bear". If I were to raise cattle or other animals for food, I would not be butchering my cows....unless they got old. You don't get eggs without chickens! Basic biology but most greedy killers ("harvesters") don't get it.


What horshur said plus how often do your cattle twin?

[adriaticum]

Whitetails or coarse deer are expanding and multiplying. Something needs to be done about this as mule deer are getting closer to extinction. I think even more liberal coarse deer seasons are in order.


I don't understand what coarse deer is.
But I'm sure if whitetails are overtaking mule deer habitat it's not because they are dumber or less adaptable.
And they taste better on average anyway.

[Brez]

No offense but sounds like you should stick to farming. This has been studied to death regarding W T by biologists all over north America and their conclusion doesn't meet yours, and you don't get that I guess.
I suppose....I was wrong once before.

[Walking Buffalo]

this is easy....how much hay do you have to winter over how many head? how many cow calves can you hold back? one,two,ten years?

The whitetail doe seasons are fine.

To add in contradiction to those claiming ranchers don't kill cows....

It is standard practice to see cattle go on sale when food crop production is poor and thus expensive.
Ranchers don't stockpile cattle beyond a level that can reliably be fed while maintaining a profit.

In addition, many ranchers understand that keeping their herds below "carrying capacity" is actually more profitable.

Cattle that have an excess of available food put on weight faster than those that are competing for limited resources.
These fat cows are having a higher twin birth rate, with larger calves that from faster.
This all adds up to an increased profit for the rancher.

The smart rancher has learned that it is possible to make more money from 50 fat cows than from 100 skinny ones.

[GoatGuy]

To add in contradiction to those claiming ranchers don't kill cows....

It is standard practice to see cattle go on sale when food crop production is poor and thus expensive.
Ranchers don't stockpile cattle beyond a level that can reliably be fed while maintaining a profit.

In addition, many ranchers understand that keeping their herds below "carrying capacity" is actually more profitable.

Cattle that have an excess of available food put on weight faster than those that are competing for limited resources.
These fat cows are having a higher twin birth rate, with larger calves that from faster.
This all adds up to an increased profit for the rancher.

The smart rancher has learned that it is possible to make more money from 50 fat cows than from 100 skinny ones.


Don't hit me with logic and reason.