Cranbrook Whities

[Grinder]

Thinking of maybe changing our annual whitetail trip from the kettle valley to the Cranbrook area. Heard there were lots of whities and mulies there. Anybody willing to share if its worth going to that area or not. Not looking for spots in particular just wondering about number of animals in the area. Also what time of year is the best there ( rut time)? Thanks.

[rocksteady]

Population is WAY down over past years...

5 years of a 21 day 2 doe season has an impact

[dougan]

Population is WAY down over past years...

5 years of a 21 day 2 doe season has an impactthis is the sad truth. A prime example of our government destroying not managing a population

[Ron.C]

We hunt about an hour north of Cranbrook . I was absolutely amazed at the drop in whitetail deer numbers this year. No BS, if you would have told me before I went that I would have only seen as many deer as we did, I would have said you were on crack. Not trying to protect a secret area or anything. PM me and I'll be happy to tell you where I hunt.

[antlerking]

It always amazes me when hunters go out and shoot does or cows and then a few years afterwards complain that animal populations are way down and we need more funding to figure out what happened ! Shoot females and you are sure to effect overall population,and all those studies that say you need to harvest across the hole population might work in areas that have no winter mortality, cougars,wolves,bears,or FN hunting year round. NOT B.C.

[604redneck]

Thinking of maybe changing our annual whitetail trip from the kettle valley to the Cranbrook area. Heard there were lots of whities and mulies there. Anybody willing to share if its worth going to that area or not. Not looking for spots in particular just wondering about number of animals in the area. Also what time of year is the best there ( rut time)? Thanks.
You should hunt blacktails in region 2 probably about the same odds of success. White tails in 4 and 8 are way down and it is the governments fault by allowing the stupid seasons and bag limits. I live in region 8 and took 1 trip to the kettle this year and its worse than last year and put the nail in the coffin for me on that spot. I shot a 3x3 white tail outside of skookumchuck last year on our hunt which was great eating but realistically 10 days there and we saw half of what we saw the previous years. You may have better luck in creston area but its dwindling there as well. If you dont live in an area or work there its a waste of gas if you actually care about success. If its just about the trip pick somewhere new every year and change the scenery.

[Grinder]

thanks guys for the feedback. appreciate it.

[HighCountryBC]

Population is WAY down over past years...

5 years of a 21 day 2 doe season has an impact

Way down? LOL! Our doe season barely even registers on the radar when you compare it to the majority of places south of the border. They can't kill the things fast enough down there. Even in counties where it's mandatory to shoot a doe before being issued a buck tag they aren't able to knock the numbers back.

Our whitetail doe season is one of the most under-utilized hunts in the entire province. Numbers are fine. I guess it might be a little tougher to drive around and kill one from the truck nowadays though..

[HighCountryBC]

Thinking of maybe changing our annual whitetail trip from the kettle valley to the Cranbrook area. Heard there were lots of whities and mulies there. Anybody willing to share if its worth going to that area or not. Not looking for spots in particular just wondering about number of animals in the area. Also what time of year is the best there ( rut time)? Thanks.

There is a pile of whitetails out there. Head on over and fill your boots. Good luck.

[Pinewood]

I was about an hour north of Cranbrook in October and in 5 days saw 1 Buck cross a road around noon(was driving to a spot, not really expecting to see one and had no shot), saw one Buck after shooting light, and saw about 5 does over those 5 days. 2 I could have shot and decided not to.

[Danny_29]

There is a pile of whitetails out there. Head on over and fill your boots. Good luck.

I've seen lots this year. Just need to get out of the areas that get heavy traffic, I've been seeing over a dozen every day. Big bucks are pretty tricky though.

[antlerking]

What's lots? Have heard that before A hunter sees 10 deer in a weekend and says lots, when normal you see 30 deer a day! Last winter was particular hard on last years fawns= lack of small bucks this year.

[TexasWalker]

Way down? LOL! Our doe season barely even registers on the radar when you compare it to the majority of places south of the border. They can't kill the things fast enough down there. Even in counties where it's mandatory to shoot a doe before being issued a buck tag they aren't able to knock the numbers back.

Our whitetail doe season is one of the most under-utilized hunts in the entire province. Numbers are fine. I guess it might be a little tougher to drive around and kill one from the truck nowadays though..

Nailed it.

[Liveforthehunt]

Nailed it.

Idno I'm not a road hunter but from the cams I set up maybe there patterns changed because I have had half of the deer showing up that have in previous years... let's say around 30 cams set up and have about 8-10 different deer every 2 week period show up multiple pictures 2 regions . This year half the deer total bucks and doe/fawns . I ended up taking my biggest whitey to date but numbers are way down IMO

[Grinder]

How's the mulie population near cranbrook?

[338win mag]

Way down? LOL! Our doe season barely even registers on the radar when you compare it to the majority of places south of the border. They can't kill the things fast enough down there. Even in counties where it's mandatory to shoot a doe before being issued a buck tag they aren't able to knock the numbers back.

Our whitetail doe season is one of the most under-utilized hunts in the entire province. Numbers are fine. I guess it might be a little tougher to drive around and kill one from the truck nowadays though..
Geez, they better keep the season open longer if there is still that many, as the idea of a general opener on WT does is to lower the WT pops in the hope it helps the Mule deer. It sure is working in region 8 as in 7 days hunting I never saw even a doe during the early rut.

I have been hunting the same area for over 40 years, the deer are getting smarter I was told, exellent at calculus and the art of leaving no tracks in the snow.

[Fisher-Dude]

Way down? LOL! Our doe season barely even registers on the radar when you compare it to the majority of places south of the border. They can't kill the things fast enough down there. Even in counties where it's mandatory to shoot a doe before being issued a buck tag they aren't able to knock the numbers back.

Our whitetail doe season is one of the most under-utilized hunts in the entire province. Numbers are fine. I guess it might be a little tougher to drive around and kill one from the truck nowadays though..

^^^ Truth.

In our 9 day trip to the EK in October, least we saw in an outing (morning and evening hunts) was 5, most we saw was 17.

The locals whine because they don't want you hunting "their" deer. The locals also seem to ignore what grows healthy herds and want a 150 class buck around every corner. Thing is, harvest across age and sex classes will result in more fawns surviving and more 150 class bucks than targeting males only, but that doesn't keep LMLers away.

It's one hell of a battle between social constructs and managing whitetailed deer these days.

[604redneck]

Way down? LOL! Our doe season barely even registers on the radar when you compare it to the majority of places south of the border. They can't kill the things fast enough down there. Even in counties where it's mandatory to shoot a doe before being issued a buck tag they aren't able to knock the numbers back.

Our whitetail doe season is one of the most under-utilized hunts in the entire province. Numbers are fine. I guess it might be a little tougher to drive around and kill one from the truck nowadays though..
Guess you forgot to consider all the factors into your equation.

[koothunter]

I love how all the guys saying there is lots of deer here don't actually live here. I work in forestry all around the EK, and numbers are way down from 5-6yrs ago. I'm not saying you won't see any, but way less than there was. Anyone who spends year round in the bush over here will tell you the numbers aren't there. The migration trails in the snow out of the main valleys are non-existent except for a few lone tracks. Liberal doe seasons, and predators have been the whitetails demise around here. I won't start on mule deer because I grew up in southern Alberta and can't convince myself to shoot any small 4pt.

[rocksteady]

i love how all the guys saying there is lots of deer here don't actually live here. I work in forestry all around the ek, and numbers are way down from 5-6yrs ago. I'm not saying you won't see any, but way less than there was. Anyone who spends year round in the bush over here will tell you the numbers aren't there. The migration trails in the snow out of the main valleys are non-existent except for a few lone tracks. Liberal doe seasons, and predators have been the whitetails demise around here. I won't start on mule deer because i grew up in southern alberta and can't convince myself to shoot any small 4pt.


nailed it...

[HighCountryBC]

Guess you forgot to consider all the factors into your equation.

Whitetail are the most studied ungulate in North America. They adapt and thrive in sub-par habitat better than any other species in the province. The complaints have far more to do with the rampant NIMBY attitude in the EK/WK than it does an actual concern for whitetail numbers.

No shortage of literature out there on whitetail. Maybe have a read through some of it.

[rocksteady]

No shortage of literature out there on whitetail. Maybe have a read through some of it.

True, but by spending a lot of time in the woods, not just road hunting, you will definitely notice a decline in the numbers over the past few years.. As per F-D's favorite quote "not a conservation concern", however has been a dramatic reduction..

[Fisher-Dude]

Study by well-known BC biologist Ian Hatter on whitetail management options.


%Male.......%Female....Buck/doe.....Fawn/doe....Stable Herd.....Sustained
harvest.......harvest.......ratio.............rati o.............size............harvest

0%...........0%...........50/100...........24/100.............10,000.............0
25%..........0%..........19/100...........24/100.............10,000..........333
50%..........0%...........9/100............24/100.............10,000..........322
25%.........13%.........43/100............56/100..............8,160........1,242
50%.........25%.........32/100............97/100..............5,875........1,674

[604redneck]

Whitetail are the most studied ungulate in North America. They adapt and thrive in sub-par habitat better than any other species in the province. The complaints have far more to do with the rampant NIMBY attitude in the EK/WK than it does an actual concern for whitetail numbers.

No shortage of literature out there on whitetail. Maybe have a read through some of it.
The habitat has nothing to do with it.....
like i said i dont care where people hunt but you are not getting that the states south of the border with the largest white tail deer populations that allow large doe harvests with no negative affects dont have the same predators or climate.

[Fisher-Dude]

The habitat has nothing to do with it.....
like i said i dont care where people hunt but you are not getting that the states south of the border with the largest white tail deer populations that allow large doe harvests with no negative affects dont have the same predators or climate.

Predation has been shown to have less of an effect on deer populations than we've been led to believe.

Effects are compensatory. High predation gives low deaths from poor habitat while low predation sees deaths from poor habitat go up.

[Dannybuoy]

Study by well-known BC biologist Ian Hatter on whitetail management options.


%Male.......%Female....Buck/doe.....Fawn/doe....Stable Herd.....Sustained
harvest.......harvest.......ratio.............rati o.............size............harvest

0%...........0%...........50/100...........24/100.............10,000.............0
25%..........0%..........19/100...........24/100.............10,000..........333
50%..........0%...........9/100............24/100.............10,000..........322
25%.........13%.........43/100............56/100..............8,160........1,242
50%.........25%.........32/100............97/100..............5,875........1,674
Sorry , but these numbers just dont jive .....more bucks = less pregnant does and less fawns ? What text book is that from .?
The school of reality says something different . Especially with wt .

[Fisher-Dude]

Sorry , but these numbers just dont jive .....more bucks = less pregnant does and less fawns ? What text book is that from .?
The school of reality says something different . Especially with wt .

So data from the best whitetail deer biologists in North America is all wrong?

The data does jive. More surplus bucks on winter range = less fawn survival. More surplus bucks does not equal higher pregnancy rates when we can get >90% pregnancy rates with buck:doe ratios as low as 8:100. That's a simple fact. And that's why we harvest the surplus bucks, to keep herds productive with fawn recruitment.

The same holds true with antlerless harvest. Adults on winter range displace proportionally more fawns and lead to fawn deaths. A 150 lb dry doe will eat the same amount of food as three 50 lb fawns - you recruit fawns and grow or supplement harvest with fawn survival. Keeping surplus adults while your fawns die = a shrinking, dead population.

[Dannybuoy]

Lots of half truths dont equal the truth ...... i never said suplus bucks equal higher pregnacy rates ...... but it doesnt make lower rates either . And survival rate would be determined by lots of factors including hunting . You mention "surplus" deer .... we dont have that luxury ...
Your method may work fine in a controlled environment but ...

[Cyrus]

Hunters have the choice...Just because you can shoot 2 doe deer doesn't mean you have to. Hunters need to be part of the solution or continue to be part of the problem.

[rocksteady]

Hunters have the choice...Just because you can shoot 2 doe deer doesn't mean you have to. Hunters need to be part of the solution or continue to be part of the problem.

I for one am glad it was dropped to one..

Not based on science, just on numbers decreasing that I have been seeing the past few years.

[Liveforthehunt]

It's weird you get all these biology study's yet more than a handful and I'm sure alot more than that have been seeing first hand the decline in pops yet some of you guys continue to argue ...im Def not a biologist but I have alot of SD cards from the past 10 years and the animals must have all moved down yo the state's... 27 cams don't lie or do they ? Maybe they are only picking every second or 3rd animal up .

[koothunter]

Biologists like FD's buddy say that killing moose will save caribou as well. I'm not concerned about having whitetails disappearing here, that will never happen, but it was sure nice to have a choice of decent bucks to take. Now you gotta take the first basket you see.

[antlerking]

Sorry , but these numbers just dont jive .....more bucks = less pregnant does and less fawns ? What text book is that from .?
The school of reality says something different . Especially with wt .
X2 Buck numbers should be 50/50 looks like there including a percentage of fawns into the doe numbers also is predators figured into the numbers? Also the old dry doe eating 3x as much as a fawn makes me think about my teenage sons eating less then their grandfather lol ! Maybe they need to get out of the office more and figure out what's going on in b.c. And not rely on southern US studies.

[Fisher-Dude]

X2 Buck numbers should be 50/50 looks like there including a percentage of fawns into the doe numbers also is predators figured into the numbers? Also the old dry doe eating 3x as much as a fawn makes me think about my teenage sons eating less then their grandfather lol ! Maybe they need to get out of the office more and figure out what's going on in b.c. And not rely on southern US studies.

50/50 bucks/does would cause a rapid population decline.

[antlerking]

How do you start with a population 50/100 when nature gives you a 50/50 chance of male/female

[sawmill]

Like Rock says, we have a one doe, one buck season here now, and no mulie if you get two whities. I get lucky every year and turned down a lot of big does cause they had a fawn or ,a lot of times two. And I haven`t seen any serious big whities for 5 years now. But I`m getting old and lazy too. Got a big dry doe and a real nice 4 Point buck within 3 days. Rather be lucky than good. Being both is even better. But it ain`t like it was 5 or 6 years ago. A lot of it is all the guys coming from away and hunting the shit out of the country in their big motorhomes and quads.

[Dannybuoy]

50/50 bucks/does would cause a rapid population decline.
Really? A quick google search shows some studies find this to be optimum.There are as many opinions as there are studies..... pick which one suits you.

[Fisher-Dude]

Really? A quick google search shows some studies find this to be optimum.There are as many opinions as there are studies..... pick which one suits you.

No it doesn't.

Herd productivity falls rapidly when it consists only of adults. Without fawn recruitment, mortality of adults would see your populations go in the shitter as adults die from various causes.

All that matters is fawn recruitment. Refer to the table above for optimum fawn levels. Anything under 30 - 35 fawns/100 does will result in herd instability.

[Dannybuoy]

How do you start with a population 50/100 when nature gives you a 50/50 chance of male/female
Text books, controlled environment, you know science stuff��

[Fisher-Dude]

How do you start with a population 50/100 when nature gives you a 50/50 chance of male/female

Mortality rate for males is far higher than for females.

[HighCountryBC]

X2 Buck numbers should be 50/50 looks like there including a percentage of fawns into the doe numbers also is predators figured into the numbers? Also the old dry doe eating 3x as much as a fawn makes me think about my teenage sons eating less then their grandfather lol ! Maybe they need to get out of the office more and figure out what's going on in b.c. And not rely on southern US studies.

Even in a completely un-hunted population you wouldn't find a ratio of anywhere near that.

[HighCountryBC]

But it ain`t like it was 5 or 6 years ago. A lot of it is all the guys coming from away and hunting the shit out of the country in their big motorhomes and quads.

This is just a big, steaming pile of horse manure.

[hunter1947]

Population is WAY down over past years...

5 years of a 21 day 2 doe season has an impact


Mike Rocksteady is correct that bad winter last year and other factors has reduced the WT population down in numbers and the mule deer numbers are low as well

[Fisher-Dude]

Mike Rocksteady is correct that bad winter last year and other factors has reduced the WT population down in numbers and the mule deer numbers are low as well

So what you're telling us Wayne is that the years of 4 point only mule deer regulations in the EK haven't helped mule deer populations.

And I agree. That's why we should be burning as much as possible and lobbying for more funding to do so.

[rocksteady]

. That's why we should be burning as much as possible and lobbying for more funding to do so.

Agreed... Burning at the right time of the year in the right place...

[dougan]

So what you're telling us Wayne is that the years of 4 point only mule deer regulations in the EK haven't helped mule deer populations.

And I agree. That's why we should be burning as much as possible and lobbying for more funding to do so.
How can four point or better have any afect at all when all of a sudden they open it up to anybuck and er does open cow elk open all at once. It was a slotter nothing short of it . I hunted the year prior to that taking place and the year after and there was no doubt the affects on deer population’s. So you keep ringing that bell you like to ring FD but your worse than my wife at admitting your wrong .

[Dannybuoy]

How can four point or better have any afect at all when all of a sudden they open it up to anybuck and er does open cow elk open all at once. It was a slotter nothing short of it . I hunted the year prior to that taking place and the year after and there was no doubt the affects on deer population’s. So you keep ringing that bell you like to ring FD but your worse than my wife at admitting your wrong .
Bahahaha.....He's great at deflection as well.

[Fisher-Dude]

How can four point or better have any afect at all when all of a sudden they open it up to anybuck and er does open cow elk open all at once. It was a slotter nothing short of it . I hunted the year prior to that taking place and the year after and there was no doubt the affects on deer population’s. So you keep ringing that bell you like to ring FD but your worse than my wife at admitting your wrong .

Mule deer were declining before the short, recent stint of any buck (two seasons, IIRC).

Mule deer continued to decline after it went back to 4 point.

Mule deer, however, did not decline for the decades when it was any buck for all season, and a long season at that with nearly twice as many hunters as we have now.

1981 region 4 deer regulations:

MULE (Black-talled) DEER
And WHITE - TAILED DEER
Bucks: Sept.10 - Nov.30 2
Bucks: Sept.1O - Dec.10 2
Bucks: Sept.10 - Nov.15 2


Tell me again how a few weeks of any buck for two years devastated the mule deer population a couple of years ago, but a 3 month any buck season with a 2 buck limit didn't cause any population declines before the late 1990s.

[dougan]

Mule deer were declining before the short, recent stint of any buck (two seasons, IIRC).

Mule deer continued to decline after it went back to 4 point.

Mule deer, however, did not decline for the decades when it was any buck for all season, and a long season at that with nearly twice as many hunters as we have now.

1981 region 4 deer regulations:

MULE (Black-talled) DEER
And WHITE - TAILED DEER
Bucks: Sept.10 - Nov.30 2
Bucks: Sept.1O - Dec.10 2
Bucks: Sept.10 - Nov.15 2


Tell me again how a few weeks of any buck for two years devastated the mule deer population a couple of years ago, but a 3 month any buck season with a 2 buck limit didn't cause any population declines before the late 1990s.
I know you like your science but it’s like a custom built rifle in that it only shoots as good as the idiot pulling the trigger. If you think these seasons have had no effect on deer populations than you need to stop drinking the koolaid you have bin drinking:

[dougan]

I’m more of a believe what I can see for myself person than believe some formula someone else has come up with. After spending countless hours and miles In the forest and noting sign left by actual deer and seeing actual deer or what’s left of them in region 4 I will with conviction say numbers are way way down . FD you once argued about fawn mortality of blacktail on vancouver island wich I don’t believe you would have a hint of a clue about in the first place so don’t try selling me your science I’m not buying!!!

[Dannybuoy]

I agree dougan ..... while I am new to the WK , talking with long time residents presents a far better picture (accurate)of whats happening than any biologists view .
The area of the Okanagan I moved from , I don't need a biology degree to see the changes either ....

[LBM]

Mule deer were declining before the short, recent stint of any buck (two seasons, IIRC).

Mule deer continued to decline after it went back to 4 point.

Mule deer, however, did not decline for the decades when it was any buck for all season, and a long season at that with nearly twice as many hunters as we have now.

1981 region 4 deer regulations:

MULE (Black-talled) DEER
And WHITE - TAILED DEER
Bucks: Sept.10 - Nov.30 2
Bucks: Sept.1O - Dec.10 2
Bucks: Sept.10 - Nov.15 2


Tell me again how a few weeks of any buck for two years devastated the mule deer population a couple of years ago, but a 3 month any buck season with a 2 buck limit didn't cause any population declines before the late 1990s.

IMO the decline started back in the 80s so was wondering if you could show the yearly population data from the 80s on mule deer in region 4 just the EK stuff if you want and by MU, since each MU is different.
If you could also show the data showing what MUs people were hunting in at that time would be great as well, for see more hunters now then back then as well.
Thanks

[Islandeer]

I’m more of a believe what I can see for myself person than believe some formula someone else has come up with. After spending countless hours and miles In the forest and noting sign left by actual deer and seeing actual deer or what’s left of them in region 4 I will with conviction say numbers are way way down . FD you once argued about fawn mortality of blacktail on vancouver island wich I don’t believe you would have a hint of a clue about in the first place so don’t try selling me your science I’m not buying!!!

Fd is not saying numbers are aren’t down.
Obviously they are, the culprits? Habitat loss, predators poor winter ranges and likely competition from people and cows in general terms.

And their survival strategies have changed, mature bucks make themselves very scarce.

I have hunted Ek muleys since the early 80ties, and agree they are down considerably in overall numbers.

They need our help, not our bitching.

[Darksith]

It always amazes me when hunters go out and shoot does or cows and then a few years afterwards complain that animal populations are way down and we need more funding to figure out what happened ! Shoot females and you are sure to effect overall population,and all those studies that say you need to harvest across the hole population might work in areas that have no winter mortality, cougars,wolves,bears,or FN hunting year round. NOT B.C.
I don't believe the locals are to blame. I hunt around cranbrook for elk but we leave just before the doe season opens up. My relatives tell me the place turns into a shooting gallery after that, all the out of town hunters come thinking "well at least we will be guaranteed some meat" and the shoot up all of the does. The locals I know won't even take one and they bascially pack up after the doe season starts due to the increased traffic

[Fisher-Dude]

I don't believe the locals are to blame. I hunt around cranbrook for elk but we leave just before the doe season opens up. My relatives tell me the place turns into a shooting gallery after that, all the out of town hunters come thinking "well at least we will be guaranteed some meat" and the shoot up all of the does. The locals I know won't even take one and they bascially pack up after the doe season starts due to the increased traffic

Your relatives are certainly exaggerating. But of course, they just don't like lower mainlanders hunting their areas.

We hunt the EK annually in October. The vast majority of people we see are locals.

This year when we pulled into our forestry campsite a couple of days before the antlerless opening, the only other campers were a couple of lesbian kayakers. One other hunting outfit showed a couple of days later, guys that we meet there every year. The rest that came and went were local fishermen and families picnicking.

8/10 vehicles we see are locals. Don't believe the out-of-towner slaughter bullshit for one minute.

[Darksith]

Your relatives are certainly exaggerating. But of course, they just don't like lower mainlanders hunting their areas.

We hunt the EK annually in October. The vast majority of people we see are locals.

This year when we pulled into our forestry campsite a couple of days before the antlerless opening, the only other campers were a couple of lesbian kayakers. One other hunting outfit showed a couple of days later, guys that we meet there every year. The rest that came and went were local fishermen and families picnicking.

8/10 vehicles we see are locals. Don't believe the out-of-towner slaughter bullshit for one minute.

I don't think they are exaggerating in their spot. They literally do pull out due to frustration of increased traffic where they hunt.

[dougan]

Your relatives are certainly exaggerating. But of course, they just don't like lower mainlanders hunting their areas.

We hunt the EK annually in October. The vast majority of people we see are locals.

This year when we pulled into our forestry campsite a couple of days before the antlerless opening, the only other campers were a couple of lesbian kayakers. One other hunting outfit showed a couple of days later, guys that we meet there every year. The rest that came and went were local fishermen and families picnicking.

8/10 vehicles we see are locals. Don't believe the out-of-towner slaughter bullshit for one minute. how do you know they were lesbians story and pics please.

[rimfire]

Agreed... Burning at the right time of the year in the right place...


gcreek may have an issue with that...

[Fisher-Dude]

how do you know they were lesbians story and pics please.

Pics of them would spoil your fantasy, guaranteed.

[dougan]

Pics of them would spoil your fantasy, guaranteed.lol one was a bull than eh! Yeesh

[rocksteady]

gcreek may have an issue with that...

Doubt it.. he supports enhancement burning

[Salty]

The locals I know won't even take one and they bascially pack up after the doe season starts due to the increased traffic

Sounds like about anywhere that holds deer in the southern interior to me. As soon as all bucks are open plus wt does the parades begin. Plus October is THE traditional month to hunt it always has been, someone should make a reality tv show about Thanksgiving long weekend! lmao. I do my utmost best to avoid hunting weekends in October and I totally disappear from some of the good spots I know until November. Don't want to tip my hand to all the traffic ;) and the decrease to about 10% of October's traffic come November is easy on the nerves.

[hunter1947]

So what you're telling us Wayne is that the years of 4 point only mule deer regulations in the EK haven't helped mule deer populations.

And I agree. That's why we should be burning as much as possible and lobbying for more funding to do so.


You hit the nail dead center Pat..

[hunter1947]

There are so many other reasons why the mule deer are getting lower in numbers its not all about habitat but habitat is one big reason why the numbers have declined..

[LBM]

IMO the decline started back in the 80s so was wondering if you could show the yearly population data from the 80s on mule deer in region 4 just the EK stuff if you want and by MU, since each MU is different.
If you could also show the data showing what MUs people were hunting in at that time would be great as well, for see more hunters now then back then as well.
Thanks
So guessing there is insufficient scientific data to show or back any thing up other then your usual comment there use to be nearly twice as many hunters.

[Fisher-Dude]

I have hunter numbers for mule deer, for region 4.

1986 - 1990:

10623
9857
10231
11980
11351


For the period 2012 - 2016:

6457
5982
5656
6366
6777

Looks to be just about half the number of hunters now as there were then.

[horshur]

I have hunter numbers for mule deer, for region 4.

1986 - 1990:

10623
9857
10231
11980
11351


For the period 2012 - 2016:

6457
5982
5656
6366
6777

Looks to be just about half the number of hunters now as there were then.
Is that hunters who hunted in region 4 or hunters that reside in region 4. Is the data from purchased licence or hunter card survey? What are the % accuracy.

[HarryToolips]

You should hunt blacktails in region 2 probably about the same odds of success. White tails in 4 and 8 are way down and it is the governments fault by allowing the stupid seasons and bag limits. I live in region 8 and took 1 trip to the kettle this year and its worse than last year and put the nail in the coffin for me on that spot. I shot a 3x3 white tail outside of skookumchuck last year on our hunt which was great eating but realistically 10 days there and we saw half of what we saw the previous years. You may have better luck in creston area but its dwindling there as well. If you dont live in an area or work there its a waste of gas if you actually care about success. If its just about the trip pick somewhere new every year and change the scenery.
Where I went in region 4-04 this year I saw lots of WT....contrary to many on this site, over the last several years I have kept close tabs on WT numbers from what I can personally observe, and I have personally observed the numbers to be stable...trail cams don't lie, in heavily pressured areas I find they go nocturnal quick..just my observations..

[Liveforthehunt]

Where I went in region 4-04 this year I saw lots of WT....contrary to many on this site, over the last several years I have kept close tabs on WT numbers from what I can personally observe, and I have personally observed the numbers to be stable...trail cams don't lie, in heavily pressured areas I find they go nocturnal quick..just my observations..

Maybe you are new to hunting only within the past 5-10 years .?.. because yes sir trail cams don't lie ... I even have a few set up in your neck of the woods on the other side of the lake around that fire and I saw deer but not 20-30 a day not once this year

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Wasn't the intent of the two doe limit to reduce the whitetail population?

Mission accomplished so now it's been reduced back to one doe.

Very high populations of whitetail among struggling mule deer numbers isn't good for mule deer.

SSS

[#49]

An argument seems to be able to be made for both sides,but my observations FWIF is that in the WK whitetail #s are way down from 7-10 yrs ago.Unless you count town deer because thats the only place to see them

[Whonnock Boy]

Winner, winner, whitetail doe dinner.



Wasn't the intent of the two doe limit to reduce the whitetail population?

Mission accomplished so now it's been reduced back to one doe.

Very high populations of whitetail among struggling mule deer numbers isn't good for mule deer.

SSS

[Fisher-Dude]

If people want to help mule deer, there are three drivers:

1.) Habitat work (can happen)
2.) Kill piles and piles of female cats to drive the species into obliteration - even this drastic action may produce mixed results as compensatory mortality tends to even things out, unless done in concert with 1.) above. (will never happen)
3.) Shoot whitetails (can happen)

If people want to manage for high whitetail populations, then they will have to make the choice to sacrifice mule deer to do so.

And if that's what people decide, then so be it, but they need to know the outcomes of their decision before making it. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation.

[HarryToolips]

Maybe you are new to hunting only within the past 5-10 years .?.. because yes sir trail cams don't lie ... I even have a few set up in your neck of the woods on the other side of the lake around that fire and I saw deer but not 20-30 a day not once this year
You are correct sir, I started hunting in 2009, and that is when I really started paying attention to deer numbers....from my observations, the whitetails have adapted, yes certain parts of region 4 there has been a noticable decrease, but like SSS said, MOE mission accomplished..where I have hunted around region 8 however, which covers alot of different parts of the region, the numbers I see are for the most part stable...in one area of winter range this year in an agricultural area, in March I counted 350-400 whitetails in one large plot of land - not an excaggeration....in another part of region 8, (8-01, 8-09) in the general area of where your talking about, in early Nov my parnter and I harvested a 4 pt muley - that day we counted 12 WT and 38 muleys in 4 hours of hunting...it's not nessisarilly as dire as some think..

[HarryToolips]

Wasn't the intent of the two doe limit to reduce the whitetail population?

Mission accomplished so now it's been reduced back to one doe.

Very high populations of whitetail among struggling mule deer numbers isn't good for mule deer.

SSS
Bingo.......

[Dannybuoy]

If people want to help mule deer, there are three drivers:

1.) Habitat work (can happen)
2.) Kill piles and piles of female cats to drive the species into obliteration - even this drastic action may produce mixed results as compensatory mortality tends to even things out, unless done in concert with 1.) above. (will never happen)
3.) Shoot whitetails (can happen)

If people want to manage for high whitetail populations, then they will have to make the choice to sacrifice mule deer to do so.

And if that's what people decide, then so be it, but they need to know the outcomes of their decision before making it. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation.

Unless you want to believe the bio's and that Geist character that are not convinced that WT and Mule deer compete for habitat ...... I got that from the Idaho mule deer management web site

[Dannybuoy]

Bingo.......

So it would appear that your Bingo is busted ... hmmmmm

[Fisher-Dude]

Unless you want to believe the bio's and that Geist character that are not convinced that WT and Mule deer compete for habitat ...... I got that from the Idaho mule deer management web site

Habitat competition isn't the driver. Nowhere did I mention that.

The driver is the whitetails keeping the predator load high while mule deer are in decline. In a traditional mule deer population absent whitetail, the predator population will fluctuate with the mule deer, giving the mule deer a chance to recover when preds dip.

When whitetail show up, predator populations can dine on WT as a secondary or even primary prey while MD decline, and that keeps MD on the decline as the preds stay high.

Read this: http://www.cfr.washington.edu/classes.esrm.450/Robinson2002.pdf

When we combine poor MD habitat, high preds, and high WTs, it's the perfect storm to drive MD down, down, down.

[hunter1947]

WT are down in lots of regions in the EK that I have hunted for 47 years they still are stable within lots of EK regions

What I have seen within a few EK regions on my time spent in these region is around about a 20% reduction on WT deer 20 trail
cams out tell what is..

I could not spend the time out there this year to observe but my trail cams did my work for me just a few pictures from so many
that I had on my trail cams..

Its the mule deer reduction that I have seen this year there down in numbers from last year EK need a game bioligist that knows
his stuff in order to increase the population of mule deer and do whatever it takes ..


http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/4651.JPG ......http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/5855.JPG

http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/1598.JPG......http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/16121.JPG

[hunter1947]

http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/4903.JPG..http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/medium/7748.JPG

[Dannybuoy]

Habitat competition isn't the driver. Nowhere did I mention that.

The driver is the whitetails keeping the predator load high while mule deer are in decline. In a traditional mule deer population absent whitetail, the predator population will fluctuate with the mule deer, giving the mule deer a chance to recover when preds dip.

When whitetail show up, predator populations can dine on WT as a secondary or even primary prey while MD decline, and that keeps MD on the decline as the preds stay high.

Read this: http://www.cfr.washington.edu/classes.esrm.450/Robinson2002.pdf

When we combine poor MD habitat, high preds, and high WTs, it's the perfect storm to drive MD down, down, down.


That says to me its a predator problem .Period ! Otherwise the plan is to increase wildlife numbers to feed the wolves, bears, cats and coyotes , if there is a surplus then hunters can have a season if the natives allow ...... hmmm ?
And you wonder why I dont think alot of scientific opinions ?

[Fisher-Dude]

That says to me its a predator problem .Period ! Otherwise the plan is to increase wildlife numbers to feed the wolves, bears, cats and coyotes , if there is a surplus then hunters can have a season if the natives allow ...... hmmm ?
And you wonder why I dont think alot of scientific opinions ?

If you had been paying attention, and watched the Hebblewhite presentation, you would have seen the important point he drove home: without good habitat, predator removal will not increase mule deer populations because of compensatory mortality from bad habitat.

If I have food for 100 MD and kill every predator, I'll still only end up with 100 MD because I don't have the food for any more. In fact, if I throw another 50 MD on that food supply with pred removal, I may well end up with less than 100 at the end of the day, as the entire population ends up with inadequate food. That's been shown in the Montana and Idaho studies when preds were hammered and the deer populations declined.

Pretty basic when you think about it with an open mind.

[Dannybuoy]

If you had been paying attention, and watched the Hebblewhite presentation, you would have seen the important point he drove home: without good habitat, predator removal will not increase mule deer populations because of compensatory mortality from bad habitat.

If I have food for 100 MD and kill every predator, I'll still only end up with 100 MD because I don't have the food for any more. In fact, if I throw another 50 MD on that food supply with pred removal, I may well end up with less than 100 at the end of the day, as the entire population ends up with inadequate food. That's been shown in the Montana and Idaho studies when preds were hammered and the deer populations declined.

Pretty basic when you think about it with an open mind.

True and I didnt miss that , the problem is we have food for 100 mule deer where there is a fraction of that number now there . In some cases even the predators have moved on because of lack of food .
I have been paying attention to all the browse and meadows of grass that dont have any sign of game ....
habitat is a problem ??

[Wild one]

Is there a report of proven success with this management plan FD?

I know the attempt at this management plan in MU 339 in Alberta has been a fail in improving mule deer numbers. I know it was attempted in other MUs but I lack knowledge on them. I also know WT doe harvest has been cut back in many areas out there as of recent

I understand there was study and facts used to come up with this theory but I have yet to see results proving it effective

I have debated the ?able parts of the theory in the past. Long thread over it in the past. BC is also not following all aspects of the theory either we have not reduced mule deer harvest

With this plan put in place in 339 as mentioned it was combined with restrictive mule deer harvest still a fail

Habitat I agree with and that is the only thing that will dictate the future of these species in B.C.. Lots of examples even in B.C. where they consist just but dominate there perfered habitat.

Focus on habitat is the correct answer in my opinion this trying to manipulate WT numbers to improve mule deer is a waste

[HarryToolips]

So it would appear that your Bingo is busted ... hmmmmm
Incorrect.....WT will keep pred numbers artificially high if their population isnt kept in check, and while they can 'bounce back' from high pred numbers relatively quickly, MD cannot..

[horshur]

Comparing the past numbers when there was predator management to today when there is none..does not sound like science to me. It is blind faith.

[horshur]

There have been more big fires in the last 20 years then last 80. So tell me about how hunting was better cause of habitat...

[Elkchaser]

Very interesting thread. Great info being discussed and I appreciate folks keeping it going with some good facts and keeping it civil. I'm still working on my 2017 EK wt, focussing on big buck - today home with flu recovering kids while momma bear works. I've spent a considerable amount of hunting days this year and did have a decent amount of wt action on trail cams, but definitely less than last couple years. Some of the discussion has centered on a few points and that are negatively linked making solutions that more complicated. Set me straight if I'm getting this part wrong.
1. More WT = more preds = less MD.
2. Less WT = less preds = more MD (habitat not withstanding).
I think anybody that's spent decent bush time in EK this year will agree that there are a lot of 4 legged meat eaters moving around. I'm actually shocked by the amount of fresh coyote and wolf tracks I've seen in the last couple weeks on snow in areas where I've taken wt previously and now can't find a fresh deer track. Doesn't mean they all been eaten, but they might be getting pushed into marginal habitat. Another recent field observation (linked to last one) has been in 2014, 2015 habitat burns. Open forest areas holding grass are barren of tracks which I thought would at least see some nocturnal feeding. Track sign is limited to areas where the understory did not burn - burning that understory is usually a primary goal. I'm assuming once forage is consumed in these areas, deer will venture farther from security cover. My take is that there may be ok wt numbers out there right now, but the pressure from both 4 legged and 2 legged preds is keeping them in security cover maybe more than folks have been used to.
I wish the solutions were simple, but I just think the dynamic nature of things around here, including competing stakeholder interests, makes this a challenge. Not helping...Crazy snow winter followed by baking summer that nuked grasses earlier than normal and also killed a lot of young trees without deep roots. I think last summer may still end up impacting survival due to potential winter range degradation??? From my day job stuff I do think one piece of the puzzle to work on are the EK ungulate winter range orders. 4-006 and 4-008 were established around 2004 I believe. It's time to revisit these and to incorporate some current management strategies and directions.
Anyways, hope you didn't mind my anectodal (non scientific) observations. By the way, its a great time to be out in the bush around here right now. Good travelling, relatively few humans around. Wish I could be chasing wt right now!

[Dannybuoy]

Incorrect.....WT will keep pred numbers artificially high IF their population isnt kept in check, and while they can 'bounce back' from high pred numbers relatively quickly, MD cannot..

Oh ? Isnt this the same stratigy being used to save the caribou from predators ? using the moose as a sacrifice . How is that working out ?

[Dannybuoy]

Very interesting thread. Great info being discussed and I appreciate folks keeping it going with some good facts and keeping it civil. I'm still working on my 2017 EK wt, focussing on big buck - today home with flu recovering kids while momma bear works. I've spent a considerable amount of hunting days this year and did have a decent amount of wt action on trail cams, but definitely less than last couple years. Some of the discussion has centered on a few points and that are negatively linked making solutions that more complicated. Set me straight if I'm getting this part wrong.
1. More WT = more preds = less MD.
2. Less WT = less preds = more MD (habitat not withstanding).
I think anybody that's spent decent bush time in EK this year will agree that there are a lot of 4 legged meat eaters moving around. I'm actually shocked by the amount of fresh coyote and wolf tracks I've seen in the last couple weeks on snow in areas where I've taken wt previously and now can't find a fresh deer track. Doesn't mean they all been eaten, but they might be getting pushed into marginal habitat. Another recent field observation (linked to last one) has been in 2014, 2015 habitat burns. Open forest areas holding grass are barren of tracks which I thought would at least see some nocturnal feeding. Track sign is limited to areas where the understory did not burn - burning that understory is usually a primary goal. I'm assuming once forage is consumed in these areas, deer will venture farther from security cover. My take is that there may be ok wt numbers out there right now, but the pressure from both 4 legged and 2 legged preds is keeping them in security cover maybe more than folks have been used to.
I wish the solutions were simple, but I just think the dynamic nature of things around here, including competing stakeholder interests, makes this a challenge. Not helping...Crazy snow winter followed by baking summer that nuked grasses earlier than normal and also killed a lot of young trees without deep roots. I think last summer may still end up impacting survival due to potential winter range degradation??? From my day job stuff I do think one piece of the puzzle to work on are the EK ungulate winter range orders. 4-006 and 4-008 were established around 2004 I believe. It's time to revisit these and to incorporate some current management strategies and directions.
Anyways, hope you didn't mind my anectodal (non scientific) observations. By the way, its a great time to be out in the bush around here right now. Good travelling, relatively few humans around. Wish I could be chasing wt right now!

Good post and probably more on point to the original OP on EK WT

[Fisher-Dude]

Another recent field observation (linked to last one) has been in 2014, 2015 habitat burns. Open forest areas holding grass are barren of tracks which I thought would at least see some nocturnal feeding. Track sign is limited to areas where the understory did not burn - burning that understory is usually a primary goal. I'm assuming once forage is consumed in these areas, deer will venture farther from security cover.

My take on this is that the area is full of whitetails. Those burns were designed for mule deer (and elk), which prefer more open habitat with good sightlines. That's their defense.

The WT tracks you're seeing in the thick is what we expect from them - as a species, they love the thick shit, and rely more on the hide defense than the spot and bolt defense of their cousins.

It's entirely possible that you're not seeing much for tracks in the open because there simply aren't many mule deer there making use of it. You indicate a high pred load, which supports the fact that the WT are supplementing the pred's dinner plate and keeping numbers high.

So, it all ties in with the drivers for mule deer populations.

[Fisher-Dude]

Oh ? Isnt this the same stratigy being used to save the caribou from predators ? using the moose as a sacrifice . How is that working out ?

Pretty good.

However, in the other case in 2003, when the moose population north of Revelstoke, B.C., was reduced slowly using management techniques over 10 years, it stabilized the caribou population. The gradual reduction of moose caused the wolf population to decrease as well, rather than leaving a large population of hungry predators in the area to take down the ailing ungulates.

“That’s kind of a rare success story for caribou in Canada,” he said.

http://www.edmontonexaminer.com/2017/10/10/university-of-alberta-research-says-that-slowly-reducing-the-population-of-competing-herbivores-can-help-stabilize-canadian-caribou-population


The Revelstoke moose
reduction experiment began in 2003 when increased hunting permits were issued for
moose over an area encompassing the Columbia North, Columbia South, and FrisbyBoulder
caribou ranges. Moose declined from 1.5/km2 to less than 0.3/km2 in 2014, the
last reported estimate. Wolf abundance dropped from 25 in 2007 to less than 10 by
2009 and has remained low through 2014. This lowered wolf density translates into
winter densities of 9/1000km2 and summer densities of 5-8/1000km2. The Columbia
North caribou population was declining prior to moose reduction but has now stabilized.

http://cmiae.org/wp-content/uploads/Mountain-Caribou-review-final.pdf

[Dannybuoy]

My take on this is that the area is full of whitetails. Those burns were designed for mule deer (and elk), which prefer more open habitat with good sightlines. That's their defense.

The WT tracks you're seeing in the thick is what we expect from them - as a species, they love the thick shit, and rely more on the hide defense than the spot and bolt defense of their cousins.

It's entirely possible that you're not seeing much for tracks in the open because there simply aren't many mule deer there making use of it. You indicate a high pred load, which supports the fact that the WT are supplementing the pred's dinner plate and keeping numbers high.

So, it all ties in with the drivers for mule deer populations.

Say what ?? Its pretty much the opposite ... Open spaces favour the WT which rely on flight , mulies head for the hills ,thick stuff.
But either way its the preds that are the root cause .
I'll need a moment to look at your last post on the caribou

[Wild one]

Say what ?? Its pretty much the opposite ... Open spaces favour the WT which rely on flight , mulies head for the hills ,thick stuff.
But either way its the preds that are the root cause .
I'll need a moment to look at your last post on the caribou

MD are dominant in the wide open prairie and steep country. Many add thick bush because here in B.C. they do in habit these areas. It is not that it is there ideal habitat but instead they filled the void with no other deer species inhabit it

WT are a bush deer even when they are found in the prairies there is always a form of timber or brush near by. I know this thought comes from seeing them in agriculture areas here in B.C.. They are there for the food and lower pressure then crownland. WT love thick bush but not too steep floater is better because yes they are a sprinter. There is way more WT hiding in BCs thick bush then anywhere else but they go unseen

FD is correct on the habitat

[Dannybuoy]

Pretty good.

However, in the other case in 2003, when the moose population north of Revelstoke, B.C., was reduced slowly using management techniques over 10 years, it stabilized the caribou population. The gradual reduction of moose caused the wolf population to decrease as well, rather than leaving a large population of hungry predators in the area to take down the ailing ungulates.

“That’s kind of a rare success story for caribou in Canada,” he said.

http://www.edmontonexaminer.com/2017/10/10/university-of-alberta-research-says-that-slowly-reducing-the-population-of-competing-herbivores-can-help-stabilize-canadian-caribou-population


The Revelstoke moose
reduction experiment began in 2003 when increased hunting permits were issued for
moose over an area encompassing the Columbia North, Columbia South, and FrisbyBoulder
caribou ranges. Moose declined from 1.5/km2 to less than 0.3/km2 in 2014, the
last reported estimate. Wolf abundance dropped from 25 in 2007 to less than 10 by
2009 and has remained low through 2014. This lowered wolf density translates into
winter densities of 9/1000km2 and summer densities of 5-8/1000km2. The Columbia
North caribou population was declining prior to moose reduction but has now stabilized.

http://cmiae.org/wp-content/uploads/Mountain-Caribou-review-final.pdf

I think these articles were written with the agenda of showing that the actions that they support were correct,
just another case of bio's and newspapers distorting the truth .
You also forgot to mention the enclosed pens (wolf proof ) that were instrumental in the survival of the cows and calves ...? Oh yea and the fact that they shot 73 wolves in the vacinity of the caribou pens

[HighCountryBC]

Say what ?? Its pretty much the opposite ... Open spaces favour the WT which rely on flight , mulies head for the hills ,thick stuff.
But either way its the preds that are the root cause .
I'll need a moment to look at your last post on the caribou

The bolded part is not accurate at all..

[HighCountryBC]

It is no wonder we are so far behind the rest of North America with regards to wildlife. We have hunters who refuse to believe the experts and believe 4 pt seasons for mule deer will save them and that a 1 month doe season is killing off whitetails.

The literature is out there for anyone to read. The science is proven. When hunters in British Columbia stop pushing social measures and start getting behind the science, it is then that we will see meaningful things happen for wildlife.

[Salty]

It is no wonder we are so far behind the rest of North America with regards to wildlife. We have hunters who refuse to believe the experts and believe 4 pt seasons for mule deer will save them and that a 1 month doe season is killing off whitetails.

The literature is out there for anyone to read. The science is proven. When hunters in British Columbia stop pushing social measures and start getting behind the science, it is then that we will see meaningful things happen for wildlife.

This ^

[Dannybuoy]

The bolded part is not accurate at all..


You may be correct in the cranbrook area?In my personal experience in the okanagan, I would be correct.
I have seen Wt out grazing in the wide open fields just as the mule deer do . Same with cut blocks. I have shot maybe 10-15 mulie bucks and 25-30 wt ... no does. less than some more than others .....
It depends on the terrain , but the WT do adapt better if thats your point ?
My point was if the cut blocks dont have deer tracks , I seriously doubt that its because the wt are there but staying in the bushes ....

[Wild one]

You may be correct in the cranbrook area?In my personal experience in the okanagan, I would be correct.
I have seen Wt out grazing in the wide open fields just as the mule deer do . Same with cut blocks. I have shot maybe 10-15 mulie bucks and 25-30 wt ... no does. less than some more than others .....
It depends on the terrain , but the WT do adapt better if thats your point ?
My point was if the cut blocks dont have deer tracks , I seriously doubt that its because the wt are there but staying in the bushes ....

As someone who is die hard on WT yes they are often in that bush unseen in my opinion

I know lots of places that you rarely see WT in the open. With the added pressure of people targeting WT more once the doe season was created it has become even more common. There is tons of feed that does not involve cut blocks

I strictly target thick bush because of this

I would agree numbers are lower in some locations but buck vs doe ratios are better in the past there was way higher doe numbers

[Dannybuoy]

As someone who is die hard on WT yes they are often in that bush unseen in my opinion

I know lots of places that you rarely see WT in the open. With the added pressure of people targeting WT more once the doe season was created it has become even more common. There is tons of feed that does not involve cut blocks

I strictly target thick bush because of this

I would agree numbers are lower in some locations but buck vs doe ratios are better in the past there was way higher doe numbers



I pretty much agree ..... wt are in no danger of being over hunted ..... and yes the big boys do go nocturnal and or stay in the bushes
when pressured .....
Over and out

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I pretty much agree ..... wt are in no danger of being over hunted ..... and yes the big boys do go nocturnal and or stay in the bushes
when pressured .....
Over and out

Whitetail does and bucks are of the same species and will react the same when pressured. We used to rely on the rut to bring the bucks out to find the does in more open terrain but now the game has changed.

[HarryToolips]

Oh ? Isnt this the same stratigy being used to save the caribou from predators ? using the moose as a sacrifice . How is that working out ?
Whitetail are a completely different animal than moose, breed at a far higher rate, and mule deer are different than caribou...predation greatly effects caribou, but what effects them more, is the same old word we've heard so much, habitat....caribou rely heavily on the old growth forests and forage on the lichens etc that exist in those forests, forests that have been reduced - habitat loss..comparing apples to oranges...

[HarryToolips]

You may be correct in the cranbrook area?In my personal experience in the okanagan, I would be correct.
I have seen Wt out grazing in the wide open fields just as the mule deer do . Same with cut blocks. I have shot maybe 10-15 mulie bucks and 25-30 wt ... no does. less than some more than others .....
It depends on the terrain , but the WT do adapt better if thats your point ?
My point was if the cut blocks dont have deer tracks , I seriously doubt that its because the wt are there but staying in the bushes ....
I completely agree that whitetail adapt very well...and yes, you will find a lot of sign in the thick stuff..sign doesn't lie, there's more out there than people think..

[Ourea]

I've been snooping thru this thread and one thing that stands out is how polar the opinions are.

I have contacts that make quick work of does in their annual EK WT trip.
I also read that credible guys that spend a decent amount of hours in the field report traditional and heavily used migration trails and yarding areas showing a perceived downturn in traffic.

The common opinion of those that are reporting numbers being way down instantly point to the doe season as the driver.
Across the border (spitting distance away, very similar timber types, patterns and weather) they have even more liberal WT doe seasons with a greater harvest than adjacent areas in BC. Their populations remain stable.
I will post up their data soon.

My point being, IF WT numbers are way down as reported by some in the E and WK, are we 100% sure it is solely harvest related? Why would an area adjacent to us show different results? Why are all other areas in North America not experiencing what we are reporting (as hunters) ?

To quickly point the finger at Regs is a knee jerk response.
There may be more to this purported downturn of WT in some areas of BC considering neighboring regions do not share the same results.

It is a fact that overall wildlife numbers are imploding in BC, both hunted and non hunted species and sexes.
More to this than seasons and Regs potentially.

[blacklab]

What states allow more than 3 deer two being antlerless?

[Wild one]

What states allow more than 3 deer two being antlerless?

States a fair number

Alberta you can as well

but B.C. does not match these areas for WT population and does not restrict WT doe harvest in some of its lower populations. WT doe harvest is good but I don’t agree with some of the MUs it has been applied

[Ourea]

What states allow more than 3 deer two being antlerless?

We are talking WT in the WK and EK.
Bag limit of one antlerless.

[horshur]

Washington state. 22.7 % public land which amounts to 13000000 acres giving 2.1 acres per person to hunt.

[Fisher-Dude]

What states allow more than 3 deer two being antlerless?

There are zones in Minnesota that are no bag limit for whitetailed does.

[Wild one]

There are zones in Minnesota that are no bag limit for whitetailed does.

Yes and the population is estimated at 1million WT and they only harvest 15% of the population a year

Huge difference in WT population and density

Reality is B.C. needs to apply its WT harvest according to the populations of its MUs not blanket regs across its regions if it wanted to manage the as a valuable game animal. But this is not the management goal

[Dannybuoy]

Whitetail are a completely different animal than moose, breed at a far higher rate, and mule deer are different than caribou...predation greatly effects caribou, but what effects them more, is the same old word we've heard so much, habitat....caribou rely heavily on the old growth forests and forage on the lichens etc that exist in those forests, forests that have been reduced - habitat loss..comparing apples to oranges...
Harry : You missed the point completely ....And I might add don't know what you are talking about ...

[Whonnock Boy]

If we are putting value on wildlife, whitetail deer are the bargain bin of wildlife. At the current rate, we will have nothing but w/t deer in 30 years. There will be lots of them all over the province, and people will still complain that the doe season should be closed.


if it wanted to manage the as a valuable game animal.

[Wild one]

If we are putting value on wildlife, whitetail deer are the bargain bin of wildlife. At the current rate, we will have nothing but w/t deer in 30 years. There will be lots of them all over the province, and people will still complain that the doe season should be closed.

Complaing about doe seasons some always will

As for your other prediction on future WT population in BC that is nothing but fear mongering

[Grinder]

I know we've been hammering the topic of whitetail and mule deer numbers but does anybody know if the grizzlies can be a problem in that area? Never been in that neck of the woods by 4-2, 4-3 before. Just wondering if wall tents are safe or not. Anybody had any issues?

[blacklab]

There are zones in Minnesota that are no bag limit for whitetailed does.

Yup, Minnesota has a lot in common with BC., great comparison.
You should have compared us to North Carolina, I think you can still shoot a deer a day there for the 3 month season.

[Fisher-Dude]

Yup, Minnesota has a lot in common with BC., great comparison.
You should have compared us to North Carolina, I think you can still shoot a deer a day there for the 3 month season.

That's pretty funny, since YOU were the one who first compared us to the US in your post.

Once you got an answer you didn't like, then they became non-comparable.

Only ask a question if you know the answer first.

[Whonnock Boy]

Caribou, Thompson Steelhead, Fraser River Chinook, to some degree, some moose and mule deer pops. It's not really fear mongering when there has been a steady decline of these species over years, or even decades. I'm not suggesting that it is a forgone conclusion, hence "at the current rate", but there are plenty of examples that a person can give. Whitetails are prolific breeders, and they will be the last ones standing if the status quo remains the same.




As for your other prediction on future WT population in BC that is nothing but fear mongering

[Wild one]

Caribou, Thompson Steelhead, Fraser River Chinook, to some degree, some moose and mule deer pops. It's not really fear mongering when there has been a steady decline of these species over years, or even decades. I'm not suggesting that it is a forgone conclusion, hence "at the current rate", but there are plenty of examples that a person can give. Whitetails are prolific breeders, and they will be the last ones standing if the status quo remains the same.

I miss understood your post thought you were suggesting WT would cause a decline of all other species

[Whonnock Boy]

Ahhh... gotchya. All good!


I miss understood your post thought you were suggesting WT would cause a decline of all other species

[drakfero]

And this is exactly what is happening..
People shoot does with fawns next to them so you loose doe to hunter and 2 fawns to predators..




No it doesn't.

Herd productivity falls rapidly when it consists only of adults. Without fawn recruitment, mortality of adults would see your populations go in the shitter as adults die from various causes.

All that matters is fawn recruitment. Refer to the table above for optimum fawn levels. Anything under 30 - 35 fawns/100 does will result in herd instability.

[Fisher-Dude]

And this is exactly what is happening..
People shoot does with fawns next to them so you loose doe to hunter and 2 fawns to predators..

Studies show that there is no significant increase in WT fawn mortality when the doe is taken.

Whitetail are gregarious animals. Fawns are never on their own very long.

One study (https://pagamecommission.wordpress.com/2015/11/23/that-fawn-may-not-be-traveling-with-mom/) found that 49% of fawns were not offspring of the doe they were hanging with.

[Liveforthehunt]

Study's or first hand experience from hundreds of bc res hunters . Lol FD will argue even if he's 100% wrong ... next your going to tell us there is no problems with the salmon pops on the Fraser or in general for that matter :?:

[HarryToolips]

Harry : You missed the point completely ....And I might add don't know what you are talking about ...
Oh? So your saying I'm wrong that WT deer breed at a far higher rate than moose?? Or that mule deer are different than caribou and that the primary cause of the caribou decline is loss of old growth forests and the food loss associated with that??

[Dannybuoy]

2-lips .... You missed the point of comparing the theory that eliminating the moose from the landscape would save the caribou from the wolves
Eliminating the WT will not do much to save the mulies from the wolves
Onyour other points , yes wt are more prolific breeders than moose BUT eliminate the predators and the population thrives
Yes mule deer are indeed different than caribou
No, in bc the primary cause of the caribou is predators , habitat is secondary

[Fisher-Dude]

Study's or first hand experience from hundreds of bc res hunters .

How many orphaned fawns have you watched get killed?

Probably not more than zero.

Sadly, our wildlife managers waste a pile of time and money dealing with the ignorance of much of the hunting community.

[HighCountryBC]

Study's or first hand experience from hundreds of bc res hunters . Lol FD will argue even if he's 100% wrong ... next your going to tell us there is no problems with the salmon pops on the Fraser or in general for that matter :?:

There's a reason most hunter's input ranks low on the list. Most people, even if they don't intend to, end up exaggerating facts and not remembering exactly how things played out or what they saw.

[Fisher-Dude]

Eliminating the WT will not do much to save the mulies from the wolves


Wolves kill about 1% of mule deer.

How much money and effort should we waste on that?

[Dannybuoy]

WTF ?? You guys are the ones that said it was the plan to lower the wt population because it was attracting predators and they were hard on the mulie pop .
This thread thread has gone soooo sideways I,m done !
p.s. post #78

[Fisher-Dude]

WTF ?? You guys are the ones that said it was the plan to lower the wt population because it was attracting predators and they were hard on the mulie pop .
This thread thread has gone soooo sideways I,m done !
p.s. post #78

Cats, not dogs.

All these guys that claim to have watched the Hebblewhite presentation seem to have missed large portions of it. But shit, right at the beginning, the discussion was about wolves' negligible impact on mule deer populations.

[horshur]

Cats, not dogs.

All these guys that claim to have watched the Hebblewhite presentation seem to have missed large portions of it. But shit, right at the beginning, the discussion was about wolves' negligible impact on mule deer populations.
Yeh except I watched dogs kill every day for weeks..posted photos on here..sometimes two deer a day. When he Hebblwhite was doing his study were they trying to eradicate moose at the same time to starve out the wolves?

[338win mag]

Wolves kill about 1% of mule deer.

How much money and effort should we waste on that?
Really? when hunting a wolf infested area some years ago I found no less that one dead and mostly eaten mule deer a day, that would go along with a alarming number of piles of moose fur laying where they were killed.
Seems like a low %.

[blacklab]

That's pretty funny, since YOU were the one who first compared us to the US in your post.

Once you got an answer you didn't like, then they became non-comparable.

Only ask a question if you know the answer first.

I was to responding to Ourea,s post, in relation to states adjacent to BC. Maybe check the regs in Idaho or Washington.
These states are "adjacent" to BC the last time I looked at a map.

[Wild one]

Can someone provide an example where this management style was proven to achieve results?

I have seen where this plan was put in place and failed. Mule deer harvest was restricted at the same time in this area BC has not followed this step

This theory may be based on fact and study but without proven results it is only a theory. If we blindly follow all scientific theories we would be fools. Scientific theories based on fact are brought forward all the time and not all prove true.

Those who blindly follow theories need to understand the prediction on the end result is not scientific fact till proven with results. A Theory is only an opinion that was reached with facts and study this does not mean it can’t be wrong

Now I ask the supporters of this theory can you provide results where it was proven to achieve results the management plan hopes for?

[GreyDog]

I grew up hunting whitetail deer in Idaho and hunt them now near my home in the EK. There are almost certainly a lot more whitetails in Idaho today than there were in 1965 (more elk too). Back then we shot either sex and management was much less focused than it is today. Here, on the west side of Koocanusa lake, there are certainly less whitetails than there were three or four years ago. I think there are more bucks and, possibly, more good bucks but the overall population seems way down. Almost every day, year 'round, I walk within a five mile radius, mostly south and west, of my house. This year, I see far fewer whitetails, about the same number of mule deer (rare) and far fewer elk than in previous years. There are no wolves but an overabundance of coyotes. I think cat numbers may be down as well but, truthfully, unless you hunt for them, you don't see a lot. I do believe whitetails have been over harvested in recent years. I also believe that the combination of elk fencing and the use of these fences by coyotes to take whitetails has had a significant effect. I have not seen much in the way of cougar kills of whitetails in my area for the last three or four years. When it comes to local hunters; to me, local hunters are the half dozen or so of us who live here, everyone else is a non-resident!! GD

[LBM]

I have hunter numbers for mule deer, for region 4.

1986 - 1990:

10623
9857
10231
11980
11351


For the period 2012 - 2016:

6457
5982
5656
6366
6777

Looks to be just about half the number of hunters now as there were then.

Showing numbers for whole region IMO doesn't really help has to be broken down to MU for each is different. In your other post you posted the 1981 deer quota for mulies which was 2 but started your numbers here in 86 were it had all ready changed to 1 I believe.

Now since many feel the decline in mulie numbers started in the 80s your numbers actually may show that hunters had a part in there decline. Interesting.

[LBM]

If people want to help mule deer, there are three drivers:

1.) Habitat work (can happen)
2.) Kill piles and piles of female cats to drive the species into obliteration - even this drastic action may produce mixed results as compensatory mortality tends to even things out, unless done in concert with 1.) above. (will never happen)
3.) Shoot whitetails (can happen)

If people want to manage for high whitetail populations, then they will have to make the choice to sacrifice mule deer to do so.

And if that's what people decide, then so be it, but they need to know the outcomes of their decision before making it. You can't have your cake and eat it too in this situation.

Interesting opinion kill piles and piles of female cats to drive the species into obliteration, hopefully all members of the public are aware of what some hunters are attempting to do.

[LBM]

Habitat competition isn't the driver. Nowhere did I mention that.

The driver is the whitetails keeping the predator load high while mule deer are in decline. In a traditional mule deer population absent whitetail, the predator population will fluctuate with the mule deer, giving the mule deer a chance to recover when preds dip.

When whitetail show up, predator populations can dine on WT as a secondary or even primary prey while MD decline, and that keeps MD on the decline as the preds stay high.

Read this: http://www.cfr.washington.edu/classes.esrm.450/Robinson2002.pdf

When we combine poor MD habitat, high preds, and high WTs, it's the perfect storm to drive MD down, down, down.

If all are sharing the same habitat this may happen , but since none of the 3 you mentioned are being done in conjunction with each other it could be making things worse.
Right now your just killing off the whitetail and cats but the cats that are surviving your forcing to a alternate food source which could very well be the mule deer.
I have seen where having cats and the odd wolf around has actually increased mule deer survival rate in the winters. Not counting humans which are the number one cause of the decline, most mule deer kills I find are from coyotes and typically the yearlings. In the one area we started to see more deer surviving and the coyotes were just about gone the cats and wolves were killing them and keeping them away. Then the rancher came in and killed all of the cats and a few wolves, coyote numbers went back up, deer down again.

[LBM]

Personally would rather have studys showing what happened here, not Idaho, Washington, Montana etc, sure they may give something to go on but could be totally iralivant here.
But in saying that a study now will not show why the numbers started declining we needed things done years ago.
Its not just the mule deer pretty much all species in the EK are on the decline. The whitetails have been declining for years in certain MUs and the doe season did not help them at all.

[LBM]

Wasn't the intent of the two doe limit to reduce the whitetail population?

Mission accomplished so now it's been reduced back to one doe.

Very high populations of whitetail among struggling mule deer numbers isn't good for mule deer.

SSS

Depends who you talk to or what you read, it was even on this site some where that the doe season was to create opportunity and hunter recruitment, people were just not interested if they couldn't kill something.

[Fisher-Dude]

Interesting opinion kill piles and piles of female cats to drive the species into obliteration, hopefully all members of the public are aware of what some hunters are attempting to do.

No one said do that. It has been used in other jurisdictions and I listed the results. But keep spreadin' the shit, Larry.


Personally would rather have studys showing what happened here, not Idaho, Washington, Montana etc, sure they may give something to go on but could be totally iralivant here.


You want studies done here, then you should support the funding model to do the studies.

Instead, you fight against all the people that are trying to make a change for the better.

[hunter1947]

Been following this thread for sometime now,,,,,I am not going to get into a big argument about the decline on prey animals,,,,,,,,,,(My Thoughts sweet and short)...

To many hunter targeting all game species,,youth season takes lots of animals,winter kill,winter kill,cattle take habitat,to long of a GOS,more easy road excess quads trucks etc,road kill,mismanagement,old growth timber being cut predator population big numbers,, just a few pointers on why the game animals on all species have vanished in big numbers,,its a big circle on all why game numbers have depleted

I will leave it at that..

[blacklab]

Read results of a study done in Michigan, predator impact on their deer herds. They found Lynx killed more deer than all other predators.

[HarryToolips]

2-lips .... You missed the point of comparing the theory that eliminating the moose from the landscape would save the caribou from the wolves
Eliminating the WT will not do much to save the mulies from the wolves
Onyour other points , yes wt are more prolific breeders than moose BUT eliminate the predators and the population thrives
Yes mule deer are indeed different than caribou
No, in bc the primary cause of the caribou is predators , habitat is secondary
i know the point your trying to make...from what I read, a high WT pops affects the MD more by keeping a high cougar pops, not wolves as much..we are both right about the caribou, it's habitat and pred numbers that are the prob, beginning with habitat..take note on the article about the other ungulate species keeping the pred numbers up, thus affecting the caribou greatly..I believe that same relationship exists to a point with the whitetails and mule deer..it really does make sense, although like you say, there are many other factors in play..
https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/plants-animals-ecosystems/wildlife/wildlife-conservation/caribou

[horshur]

Harry read fishes crap...cougar are compensatory they only kill what would have died anyway only like 5%.Wolves only 1%. So either they do or they don't just the science of the week club. You need to keep up on this stuff it changes daily. Remember a decade of finest moose management on planet..calf seasons..best data. WTFH? Eh

[horshur]

So the wolves on Vancouver Island. What is there primary prey. Pemberton? Sunshine Coast?.

[HarryToolips]

Harry read fishes crap...cougar are compensatory they only kill what would have died anyway only like 5%.Wolves only 1%. So either they do or they don't just the science of the week club. You need to keep up on this stuff it changes daily. Remember a decade of finest moose management on planet..calf seasons..best data. WTFH? Eh
???what exactly are you trying to say??

[338win mag]

???what exactly are you trying to say??
We need an interpreter over here....

[Wild one]

???what exactly are you trying to say??

Part of what he is getting at is opinions in what is the correct scientific way to manage wildlife change non stop. This is very true and one of the main reason I urge people to not jump and support a management plan as fact till results are proven.

He is also giving a study that shows impact of predators if I understand correctly. It seems like he is stating the study shows a lower impact then many would expect


You are being urged to dig deeper like some of us do already

[LBM]

No one said do that. It has been used in other jurisdictions and I listed the results. But keep spreadin' the shit, Larry.



You want studies done here, then you should support the funding model to do the studies.

Instead, you fight against all the people that are trying to make a change for the better.

Not spreading any ---- just commenting on what you said.
Not fighting anybody been in favour of all funds going back to wildlife from day one, heck would even like
to see an increase in tags and licences, probable long before you guys brought it up.
And as already mentioned to see some studys done as to why the decline in populations are happening.
Studys done on whats happening now are all ready flawed.
More about conservation of wildlife then the opportunity to shoot the last one out there.

[Elkchaser]

another anecdotal comment I should have added to my only other post on this thread. I dropped off my goat to one of the cranbrook taxidermy guys at the beginning of December after getting the CI done. We talked about the tough season it was and he mentioned he had never before only received one local deer to do up. Nothing scientific there, but it does suggest less big bucks were taken. I followed this up tonight with local popular butcher on picking up my goat garlic coil and chilli pepper smokies. He surprisingly only seen one big buck come in this year. So... I'd say my unorthodox population inquiries lead me to believe that last winter was pretty devastating, at least on big bucks. Still trying to find one though, one week left!

[Ourea]

another anecdotal comment I should have added to my only other post on this thread. I dropped off my goat to one of the cranbrook taxidermy guys at the beginning of December after getting the CI done. We talked about the tough season it was and he mentioned he had never before only received one local deer to do up. Nothing scientific there, but it does suggest less big bucks were taken. I followed this up tonight with local popular butcher on picking up my goat garlic coil and chilli pepper smokies. He surprisingly only seen one big buck come in this year. So... I'd say my unorthodox population inquiries lead me to believe that last winter was pretty devastating, at least on big bucks. Still trying to find one though, one week left!

Yet some still look at regulations as to why numbers and harvest appear to be going down.
Fewer animals on the landscape = fewer harvests.

It's that simple people.

Where should the focus be?
Pretty simple answer.

[HarryToolips]

Part of what he is getting at is opinions in what is the correct scientific way to manage wildlife change non stop. This is very true and one of the main reason I urge people to not jump and support a management plan as fact till results are proven.

He is also giving a study that shows impact of predators if I understand correctly. It seems like he is stating the study shows a lower impact then many would expect


You are being urged to dig deeper like some of us do already
I do delve in deep when I have time....but I also try and approach it with as logical thinking as possible - question you gotta ask yourself is, of course predators will cause a big impact on ungulates, other than omnivorous bears, predators are always eating meat...I don't see any link to this study..

[LBM]

Yet some still look at regulations as to why numbers and harvest appear to be going down.
Fewer animals on the landscape = fewer harvests.

It's that simple people.

Where should the focus be?
Pretty simple answer.
Yes fewer animals can lead to fewer harvest but at what point must something be done.
Well I think regs can have an impact on why numbers go down. Take the EK were in some areas
whitetail numbers were already dropping then you throw in the doe season which made it worse.
In doing this it may cause other animals to look for another food source thus causing a possible decline in
other animals, so yes regs can cause a decline in numbers.
Then theres the spike fork moose season.

Where should the focus be, well in lots of areas it should be on conservation.

[Wild one]

I do delve in deep when I have time....but I also try and approach it with as logical thinking as possible - question you gotta ask yourself is, of course predators will cause a big impact on ungulates, other than omnivorous bears, predators are always eating meat...I don't see any link to this study..


The plan being supported for WT failed in Alberta with restricted mule deer harvest. They are now reducing WT doe harvest in same MUs and no improvement to mule deer populations.

No one can show proof of results as planned but proof of failure exists

Dig deeper into WT management and compare density of WT populations where harvest is more liberal on either sex. BCs WT populations are a fraction

[Ourea]

Yes fewer animals can lead to fewer harvest but at what point must something be done.
Well I think regs can have an impact on why numbers go down. Take the EK were in some areas
whitetail numbers were already dropping then you throw in the doe season which made it worse.
In doing this it may cause other animals to look for another food source thus causing a possible decline in
other animals, so yes regs can cause a decline in numbers.
Then theres the spike fork moose season.

Where should the focus be, well in lots of areas it should be on conservation.

LBM, out of curiousity...what is your background?

[LBM]

LBM, out of curiousity...what is your background?

Ive never really looked into it that much but from what I am told Scottish/Ukrainian.
Not sure what that has to do with any thing.

[Ourea]

Ive never really looked into it that much but from what I am told Scottish/Ukrainian.
Not sure what that has to do with any thing.

Yikes, LOL.
Your background, as in a person, what you do/did for a living, what industry/trade/business, and at what capacity.
Curious.

[LBM]

Yikes, LOL.
Your background, as in a person, what you do/did for a living, what industry/trade/business, and at what capacity.
Curious.

Ya starting to creep me out a bit. Thought this was a hunting site not a dating site, I know the younger guys at work
are always talking about a site called Tinder that may be of some help to you.
Not sure how relevant any of your questions are to wildlife conservation are or what your curiousity in to the answers of them is maybe you could explain.

[Ourea]

Ya starting to creep me out a bit. Thought this was a hunting site not a dating site, I know the younger guys at work
are always talking about a site called Tinder that may be of some help to you.
Not sure how relevant any of your questions are to wildlife conservation are or what your curiousity in to the answers of them is maybe you could explain.

Happy to answer.
Whenever a person offers their views on a topic most would like to know if they come from a position of expertise based on their life experiences and working knowledge of the topic.

IE - a person that debates corporate governance, how to run a company better than that of those in charge, yet have never run a company, let alone been in management.....how valued should their opinion be?

Aint a Tinder like question chief.
I like to know what a person is all about before I can take a word they say seriously ( as I try and respect everyone)

[horshur]

???what exactly are you trying to say??

Idaho studies say cougar are not an issue for deer numbers. Then we manage Whitetail under premise that they maintain higher cougar numbers creating higher depredation on mule deer? Except didn't they just say cougar were not the issue? Idaho have whitetail just the same as here.
So have we been deceived to support a season on premise we are helping mule deer from cougar? We have actually according to the top notch bio from Idaho. So the old boys complaing on here are they wrong or right?
There were a lot of good old boys questioning moose management but we "according to some here" had the best data and world renown reputation except it all went to shit...and while it was going to shit the same old tune was played again and again like Nero's fiddle.
The Washington crap on cougar is problematic because the co authors don't even agree. Two of the bios are antis so they are as biased as most of BC's conservation officers. If you look up methodology you can be even more dismayed. Just ponder how you can have a reliable control in an open system and how unrepresentative a control in a closed system is.
So pardon me and my skepticism. And while we are on the topic of Idaho have you any idea of the ORV trail system there? Extensive to say the least.
lastly did anyone care to ask Idaho sportsmen how the hunting has been?

[LBM]

Happy to answer.
Whenever a person offers their views on a topic most would like to know if they come from a position of expertise based on their life experiences and working knowledge of the topic.

IE - a person that debates corporate governance, how to run a company better than that of those in charge, yet have never run a company, let alone been in management.....how valued should their opinion be?

Aint a Tinder like question chief.
I like to know what a person is all about before I can take a word they say seriously ( as I try and respect everyone)

Well no disrespect Ourea but don't see any threads were people have giving out the information you have asked for or
anywhere were you have asked others for such info, well except for Jasmine you seemed to ask her for a lot, and don't
think you respected her much.
Sorry don't have a title before or after my name if that's the sort of thing you need.

[antlerking]

Studies that show reduced predators is off set by more animals starving only works when populations are at max carring capacity! The mule deer presentation showed that weather and predation were the largest killers of fawns.

[antlerking]

1 cougar will kill 1 deer/week one area I hunt the Outfitter treed 28 cougar in one year! Do the math

[Ourea]

Well no disrespect Ourea but don't see any threads were people have giving out the information you have asked for or
anywhere were you have asked others for such info, well except for Jasmine you seemed to ask her for a lot, and don't
think you respected her much.
Sorry don't have a title before or after my name if that's the sort of thing you need.

No offence taken LBM.
As for Jassmine.......I show zero respect for her/him/them as she is a mole on this site.
Total troll.

[Islandeer]

I know we've been hammering the topic of whitetail and mule deer numbers but does anybody know if the grizzlies can be a problem in that area? Never been in that neck of the woods by 4-2, 4-3 before. Just wondering if wall tents are safe or not. Anybody had any issues?
Wall tents are not safe, sometimes they catch on fire nd burn down. Then you have to sleep outside, which is dangerous with all the white tails running around at night.
Lotsa grizz in 4-2, they get a little weird during harvest season.

[hunter1947]

First off the management has to do something about controlling the wolf population there tops on the food chain for the decline of prey animals can any of you members tell me what the
management has done to control the wolfs in the EK or other regions over the past 10 years ??? the only control that I know is trapping and the odd hunter shooting a few wolfs but that's
not enough..