Funded Management for Our Future

[bownut]

Good information for future BC Management Plans.
Click on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pjZpb-KFCk

[Fisher-Dude]

I think we should limit our harvest to 140,000 deer too, whitetails and mule deer combined, just like your story aims for.

That's almost 5 times as many as we harvest over a province that is more than 4 times the size of Minnesota.

Square peg, meet round hole.

[Ourea]

Good information for future BC Management Plans.
Click on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2pjZpb-KFCk

I am curious bownut, and this is not a shot but just a simple question.....

If you were given the audience of game managers and Gov what would you tell them on how to fix our wildlife mess?

[bownut]

I am curious bownut, and this is not a shot but just a simple question.....

If you were given the audience of game managers and Gov what would you tell them on how to fix our wildlife mess?

To direct any funding that we may receive toward proven models. Not to waste the small amount on studies that are already working.
We will have little to work with so we need to get the most out of it.

I said it before and I will say it again, Mandatory Harvest records, Independent Audit, Accountability, this would help everyone understand the mess.

[bownut]

I think we should limit our harvest to 140,000 deer too, whitetails and mule deer combined, just like your story aims for.

That's almost 5 times as many as we harvest over a province that is more than 4 times the size of Minnesota.

Square peg, meet round hole.

I love it, you accused me of plugging my ears and when a Conservative Approach In Management is stated, you take your fingers off the keys and jam them in your head.
Study some of the proven funding models before you request it that's all I wanted to post.
Try to start off with some kindness Pat, you know your friends are limited with your tactics.

[Dannybuoy]

I think we should limit our harvest to 140,000 deer too, whitetails and mule deer combined, just like your story aims for.

That's almost 5 times as many as we harvest over a province that is more than 4 times the size of Minnesota.

Square peg, meet round hole.

WoW ! I used to think you knew what the heck you were talking about ...... Really , is that what you get from that ?
Hint * You need to read how states like Mn got to the point where they can harvest 140,000+ deer in a season .

[Dannybuoy]

Right on bow-nut .... no need to reinvent the wheel .

[bownut]

Here's a ever evolving Harvest Report System to look at.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/outdoor/47738.html

Lets get the money going and the direction steady.

[bownut]

Here's another bit on Harvest Data, Read it over and feel free to speak your minds. Take a good note of Section #9
Click on:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/White-tailedDeer_QAs.pdf

[bownut]

BC Ground Based Study Methods
Click on:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/White-tailedDeer_QAs.pdf

[Dannybuoy]

All those statistics make me realize that its even worse than I thought ..... a couple of years with no doe harvest shpuld be on the agenda (WT) and mule deer does even more so .....
I dont get how they come up with harvest numbers in BC ? I have never been asked and most hunters I know either .

[bearvalley]

All those statistics make me realize that its even worse than I thought ..... a couple of years with no doe harvest shpuld be on the agenda (WT) and mule deer does even more so .....
I dont get how they come up with harvest numbers in BC ? I have never been asked and most hunters I know either .
Thank a few within the Fed.
Remember.....maxinmum opportunity for resident hunters.
With the other wildlife declining factors it’s been a path to eradication.

[bearvalley]

WoW ! I used to think you knew what the heck you were talking about ...... Really , is that what you get from that ?
Hint * You need to read how states like Mn got to the point where they can harvest 140,000+ deer in a season .
No need to blame guys like FD...there’s been a brainwashing program going on for years.
Hes just one of the guys packing the torch.

[Weatherby Fan]

All those statistics make me realize that its even worse than I thought ..... a couple of years with no doe harvest shpuld be on the agenda (WT) and mule deer does even more so .....
I dont get how they come up with harvest numbers in BC ? I have never been asked and most hunters I know either .

I receive a Harvest questionnaire about every other year, I notice when I get one so does everyone in my family.

[Dannybuoy]

I receive a Harvest questionnaire about every other year, I notice when I get one so does everyone in my family.

Only questionaires I have had are when I get a moose LEH and when I got a waterfowl licence . I may have had a few years ago but none in the last 15 years or so ...

[blacklab]

I think we should limit our harvest to 140,000 deer too, whitetails and mule deer combined, just like your story aims for.

That's almost 5 times as many as we harvest over a province that is more than 4 times the size of Minnesota.

Square peg, meet round hole.

Yup, I was really impressed with the Rocky mountains of Minnesota.

[Ourea]

To direct any funding that we may receive toward proven models. Not to waste the small amount on studies that are already working.
We will have little to work with so we need to get the most out of it.

I said it before and I will say it again, Mandatory Harvest records, Independent Audit, Accountability, this would help everyone understand the mess.

Thanks for the input.
There is a shit tonne of data collected over the years, and yes, there needs to be more.....much more.

To drill it down a little deeper, if there was a significant annual budget on enhancing wildlife where should the focus be?
Name your top 5 investments that would provide the greatest impact and bang?

[Weatherby Fan]

Thanks for the input.
There is a shit tonne of data collected over the years, and yes, there needs to be more.....much more.

To drill it down a little deeper, if there was a significant annual budget on enhancing wildlife where should the focus be?
Name your top 5 investments that would provide the greatest impact and bang?

Ill take a stab at it.......

1-3 enhancement, enhancement, enhancement.....through controlled burns
4-a little more enhancement
5 More COs province wide to help control poaching rings

[blacklab]

Here's another bit on Harvest Data, Read it over and feel free to speak your minds. Take a good note of Section #9
Click on:
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/White-tailedDeer_QAs.pdf

Interesting read,Maybe someone can come up more recent numbers based on the same information.

[Ourea]

Ill take a stab at it.......

1-3 enhancement, enhancement, enhancement.....through controlled burns
4-a little more enhancement
5 More COs province wide to help control poaching rings

Wildlife comes down to one key driver.....

HABITAT

[Dannybuoy]

First we have to stop whatever it is that is killing the breeding stock (does, cows) as well as the overall population. Right now we are looking at huge tracts of habitat with small to no wildlife (ungulate) . I dont speak for all BC but the MU 's that I have frequented for the last 30+ years , as well as anecdotal evidence of over 100 years .

[Ourea]

Habitat
Habitat
Habitat

[bearvalley]

Habitat
Habitat
Habitat

Thats a start.
In some instances it will be s long time correcting.

[Weatherby Fan]

Ill take a stab at it.......

1-3 HABITAT enhancement, HABITAT enhancement, HABITAT enhancement.....through controlled burns
4-a little more HABITAT enhancement
5 More COs province wide to help control poaching rings

There I fixed it for you......but that is what I meant.., maybe throw in a little predator control just because !


Wildlife comes down to one key driver.....

HABITAT

[horshur]

There I fixed it for you......but that is what meant.., maybe throw in a little predator control just because !
It is not just because...there is a lot of science even in western Canada. Coles notes the wolves camp on the good burns..which nullified there effect. Yah ha tinda proves it. The ungulates end up using poor habitat instead.

[Ourea]

It is not just because...there is a lot of science even in western Canada. Coles notes the wolves camp on the good burns..which nullified there effect. Yah ha tinda proves it. The ungulates end up using poor habitat instead.

Another bullet in the foot.....

[horshur]

Another bullet in the foot.....
It is science after all.

[Ourea]

It is science after all.

A slice of science.

No species on this planet can thrive without habitat as their primary driver.
Simple as that.

[horshur]

[QUOTE=Ourea;1966642]A slice of science.

No species on this planet can thrive without habitat as their primary driver.
Simple as that.[/QUOTE
if the smoking gun is resource development and the subsequent roads which I am more then willing to consider it still does not nullify the need for predator management. It guarantees its essential not optional.

[Ourea]

[QUOTE=Ourea;1966642]A slice of science.

No species on this planet can thrive without habitat as their primary driver.
Simple as that.[/QUOTE
if the smoking gun is resource development and the subsequent roads which I am more then willing to consider it still does not nullify the need for predator management. It guarantees its essential not optional.

Agreed 1000%

We changed the landscape of this province, and continue to do so.
We make it far worse for some species and much better for others.

[Dannybuoy]

Habitat
Habitat
Habitat

If only it was that simple !! The wildlife wouldnt be in the trouble they are .....

[bearvalley]

If only it was that simple !! The wildlife wouldnt be in the trouble they are .....

A bunch of these guys have been completely brainwashed by the propaganda pushed at them by their “peers”.
The fix is a lot more complex than habitat, habitat, habitat.
Thats the correction that will help future generations.
One that will help right now in many areas to slow up the crash is some form of predator management.
All the funding, science and habitat in we can pile up won’t fix this mess until a hands on commitment takes place.
So far, for the most part......it’s just noise.

[Dannybuoy]

A bunch of these guys have been completely brainwashed by the propaganda pushed at them by their “peers”.
The fix is a lot more complex than habitat, habitat, habitat.
Thats the correction that will help future generations.
One that will help right now in many areas to slow up the crash is some form of predator management.
All the funding, science and habitat in we can pile up won’t fix this mess until a hands on commitment takes place.
So far, for the most part......it’s just noise.
Oh I get that , and there are alot of people that do get what the real problems are ....And its no easy fix if there is one

[New Bow Hunter]

I keep hearing HABITAT. Did you know out of the four Western Provinces, BC is the only one who doesn't have any limit on foreign land ownership?

[Ourea]

A bunch of these guys have been completely brainwashed by the propaganda pushed at them by their “peers”.
The fix is a lot more complex than habitat, habitat, habitat.
Thats the correction that will help future generations.
One that will help right now in many areas to slow up the crash is some form of predator management.
All the funding, science and habitat in we can pile up won’t fix this mess until a hands on commitment takes place.
So far, for the most part......it’s just noise.

I am not part of any "pack" BV.......I just want attention and funding for wildlife to become a priority in BC.

Habitat is a pillar.
Funding is a pillar.
Management working to benefit wildlife will never happen without $$$
Education and awareness of this resource needs to become an absolute priority for this province.

It's obvious from your posts that you have some serious hate on for the Fed and certain individuals.
Put that emotion and energy into the fix, not on the attack.

You call it "noise".
Some see it as an effort.

[2chodi]

Interesting read,Maybe someone can come up more recent numbers based on the same information.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/4r2s6lkrzzhn1og/wtharvest.png?raw=1

[bearvalley]

Dave, there’s places in BC where effort is being made and dollars invested.
The crew you’re hanging your hat with are just making noise.
A lot of people that truly care about wildlife are getting tired of the rhetoric.
But then I guess the noise keeps the dollars flowing into the coffers.
Sheep.

[Ourea]

Dave, there’s places in BC where effort is being made and dollars invested.
The crew you’re hanging your hat with are just making noise.
A lot of people that truly care about wildlife are getting tired of the rhetoric.
But then I guess the noise keeps the dollars flowing into the coffers.
Sheep.

I hang my hat with no one BV.
Get past that.
I wish to underscore it yet again.

Wildlife first chief.

You and I have spoken on the ph over this.
I have little tolerance for the sandbox approach.

[bownut]

Habitat?
With all these fires this year maybe this is the perfect model to keep the access and use down so our Bios can follow the POP. growth.
Chances are the regulations won't change much when Management feels that hunter harvest wont have any effect on Game Pops.

With all our predicted heat waves I don't think Habitat will be the problem, it will be up to us to keep individuals out of those burns and let nature
take care of things. Forestry companies should be on their best behaviour and the Ministry should monitor all involved.

Funding only works with the proper leaders and thats where a "Independent Audit" is a must. We need a review from outside the box and "Accountability" will follow.
Nobody wants to be lead over that cliff especially with a pocket full of money, we will hit the ground that much harder.

[bearvalley]

I hang my hat with no one BV.
Get past that.
I wish to underscore it yet again.

Wildlife first chief.

You and I have spoken on the ph over this.
I have little tolerance for the sandbox approach.

Good way to keep it, Ourea!
Like you say lots, get on the bus or get run over.
The only thing we are missing is the bus......we will be spending more time in the sandbox before that’s sorted out....I’m sure of that.
After we can sit around the campfire singing songs.

[Ourea]

I asked you this once.
I will ask again.

Give us the top 5 priorities that will make a difference in wildlife here in BC.

Accountability?
Who is accountable?
If there is accountability where does their money come from to make that difference?

Be specific.
Not a witch hunt.

[Dannybuoy]

IMO There are only 2 priorities .... 1) Predator control 2) FN control/issues .
Manage those 2 issues and then after a few years if we are lucky we will need to manage for more habitat .
The first is PR , PR and then some PR . The second is federal and I dont know if there is a fix if the FN leaders dont or cant co-operate

[Ourea]

Good way to keep it, Ourea!
Like you say lots, get on the bus or get run over.
The only thing we are missing is the bus......we will be spending more time in the sandbox before that’s sorted out....I’m sure of that.
After we can sit around the campfire singing songs.

Kumbaya cannot come soon enough (*****)
The message is out.

Just need to keep fanning it.....

[338win mag]

Habitat?
With all these fires this year maybe this is the perfect model to keep the access and use down so our Bios can follow the POP. growth.
Chances are the regulations won't change much when Management feels that hunter harvest wont have any effect on Game Pops.

With all our predicted heat waves I don't think Habitat will be the problem, it will be up to us to keep individuals out of those burns and let nature
take care of things. Forestry companies should be on their best behaviour and the Ministry should monitor all involved.

Funding only works with the proper leaders and thats where a "Independent Audit" is a must. We need a review from outside the box and "Accountability" will follow.
Nobody wants to be lead over that cliff especially with a pocket full of money, we will hit the ground that much harder.
Your an intelligent man bownut, but... forest companies on their "best behaviour" I get a chuckle here,, and a full on belly laugh with "the ministry monitoring all involved" this right here has probably more to do with with low ungulate numbers........or perhaps they have created the environs for hunters (and preds) to access the ungulates.
The ministry wont be making sure that forest companies are on their best behaviour, they have been pretending to do that for 40 years now and it isn't working.

[Ourea]

Your an intelligent man bownut, but... forest companies on their "best behaviour" I get a chuckle here,, and a full on belly laugh with "the ministry monitoring all involved" this right here has probably more to do with with low ungulate numbers........or perhaps they have created the environs for hunters (and preds) to access the ungulates.
The ministry wont be making sure that forest companies are on their best behaviour, they have been pretending to do that for 40 years now and it isn't working.

What's your plan then?
How would you fix it?
How much money would it take?
Where would that money come from?
Who would support it and why?

Be specific.

Looking for ideas

[horshur]

1. The numbers in the past were not natural. What hunters grew to expect is not natural. There is a long history of predator control in BC.
2. What we have now without control is not natural either.
3. Were not going back to where nature handles it in the foreseeable future.
4. Hands on management and intervention, mitigation of resource development with results based science.

[HarryToolips]

All those statistics make me realize that its even worse than I thought ..... a couple of years with no doe harvest shpuld be on the agenda (WT) and mule deer does even more so .....
I dont get how they come up with harvest numbers in BC ? I have never been asked and most hunters I know either .
With a WT doe season after what 7 seasons now in my areas I'm still seeing a stable population....do you want the other ungulate populations to suffer with too many whitetails on the landscape???

[338win mag]

What's your plan then?
How would you fix it?
How much money would it take?
Where would that money come from?
Who would support it and why?

Be specific.

Looking for ideas
Still trying to figure out agenda's and who is to be trusted, you know, being a good steward.

A government funded... through an outdoor tax, independant entity steering the ship, not sure who would make up this "entity" but anyone who is paid by donation and political influence shouldn't be. It wont matter which political party gains power, honestly I dont know why wildlife is being used as a political pawn in this province to begin with.
The people managing this entity should be well paid.

Through a tax of this nature everyone would be contributing, anti's, hunters, etc

An "entity" with teeth that has the ability to issue massive fines for forest companies who dont play nice, ie: road de-activation, forest debris cleanup, habitat restoration, etc.

A coalition of hunting groups (if possible) that is in-penetrable by the anti-hunting factions,, who in large part is funded from outside the country (foreigners), a coalition that puts these guys in their "place" for good.
Their "place"...they probably do have a role to play in BC being a watchdog for some of these foreign owned companies bent on destroying everything while reaping massive rewards.

This is going to be the interesting part...hunting groups, why would one group help another?
I'm wondering if they need to support one another, it would be nice but, with an independant entity why would they?

A concern of mine and others is this....put more animals on the ground so FN can shoot even more game?
More animals so G/O can improve their client base with successful hunts?
So resident hunters can fill their bag limits?

Yes to all this, within reason.

[338win mag]

1. The numbers in the past were not natural. What hunters grew to expect is not natural. There is a long history of predator control in BC.
2. What we have now without control is not natural either.
3. Were not going back to where nature handles it in the foreseeable future.
4. Hands on management and intervention, mitigation of resource development with results based science.
Lets say game pops were not historicaly as high as they were in recent years, and i,m not so sure about that, but lets say your right.
Wouldn't it be a feather in the cap for a game management plan if we had historically high ungulate numbers through sound management?

[Dannybuoy]

With a WT doe season after what 7 seasons now in my areas I'm still seeing a stable population....do you want the other ungulate populations to suffer with too many whitetails on the landscape???

Harry you need to think outside of your little windowbox . I'm happy for you that your spots still have some whitetail , I am sure there are spots that still have some mule deer , moose and elk as well.

[blacklab]

With a WT doe season after what 7 seasons now in my areas I'm still seeing a stable population....do you want the other ungulate populations to suffer with too many whitetails on the landscape???

I can see the other ungulate populations are just going through the roof!!!

[dana]

Habitat eh? Hmmm, I've heard that drum beat and beat and beat. Meanwhile, I'm out daily in some of the best habitat this province could ever produce and what do I see. Nothing! Why? Hmmm, good question. Maybe the fact that the managers collared wolves to study them instead of killing them 10 years ago might be a big answer. Easy to sit on the Habitat fence with your eyes closed to what has gone on in this province. But, what you will find, if you don't get on the Predatos, you can have all the habitat in the world but still have sweet F all for critters.

[dana]

How would I focus dollars?
predator control, predator control predator control. Why? Because I have lived through the crash! And it had nothing to do with habitat.

[Ride Red]

How would I focus dollars?
predator control, predator control predator control. Why? Because I have lived through the crash! And it had nothing to do with habitat.

Plus deactivating all the beetle kill spur roads to limit vehicle access.

[Dannybuoy]

Plus deactivating all the beetle kill spur roads to limit vehicle access.
And this would accomplish what ?? If I recall correctly hunter numbers are Not a factor . And even if they were , this can be controlled thru regulation ....
Dana is 100% on target.

[dana]

Plus deactivating all the beetle kill spur roads to limit vehicle access.

That is the one that makes me laugh the most. We are told hunters have little to no effect on wildlife pops. If so, why would any say we need to deactivate roads to limit hunters? Oh, yea, it is because wolves use the roads. If you think wolves are limited by deactivation practices, you need to follow thise dog tracks someday. Oh yea, lets blame logging as a hole. It is the evil logging companies and their greed that has put us here. Hahaha. Did you know that forestry in this province opporates on science based practices? Yup, Science. There is that word that many kick around way way to much. The funny thing is, the very scientific practices that govern forestry were brought about years ago under the direction of the NDP. Hahaha. Other than cutting some very restrictive red tape, the Liberals kept the exact same science based forestry practices for all their years of running the province. But, yup, lets blame forestry for our delima instead of looking to the one thing that has been staring us in the face, the lack of Predator Management

[horshur]

Lets say game pops were not historicaly as high as they were in recent years, and i,m not so sure about that, but lets say your right.
Wouldn't it be a feather in the cap for a game management plan if we had historically high ungulate numbers through sound management?
Do you know California exterminated a entire mule deer herd..best managed..very productive in the name of bio diversity. The herd was not native. These are the world views/philosophy that has creeped in. It is fundamentalist ideology. The animals should be managed for themselves not for us.

[Dannybuoy]

That is the one that makes me laugh the most. We are told hunters have little to no effect on wildlife pops. If so, why would any say we need to deactivate roads to limit hunters? Oh, yea, it is because wolves use the roads. If you think wolves are limited by deactivation practices, you need to follow thise dog tracks someday. Oh yea, lets blame logging as a hole. It is the evil logging companies and their greed that has put us here. Hahaha. Did you know that forestry in this province opporates on science based practices? Yup, Science. There is that word that many kick around way way to much. The funny thing is, the very scientific practices that govern forestry were brought about years ago under the direction of the NDP. Hahaha. Other than cutting so very restrictive red tape, the Liberals kept the exact same science based forestry practices for all their years of running the province. But, yup, lets blame forestry for our delima instead of looking to the one thing that has been staring us in the face, the lack of Predator Management Absolutely correct , most have no idea of forest practice codes etc ... I only know a bit from working in the industry for 30+ years in BC ( not in management ) but I do know that things have inproved drastically in that time period .

[bearvalley]

Habitat eh? Hmmm, I've heard that drum beat and beat and beat. Meanwhile, I'm out daily in some of the best habitat this province could ever produce and what do I see. Nothing! Why? Hmmm, good question. Maybe the fact that the managers collared wolves to study them instead of killing them 10 years ago might be a big answer. Easy to sit on the Habitat fence with your eyes closed to what has gone on in this province. But, what you will find, if you don't get on the Predatos, you can have all the habitat in the world but still have sweet F all for critters.

Well said dana!
Habitats an issue but it sure isn’t what’s caused the crash.
The pathetic part is the sheep hero worship the group that preach the habitat line.
If only these same sheep knew the history behind some of these clowns that they are following.
One of them was bureaucratically famous for putting collars on wolves but dead against killing them.
It’s a joke......

[dana]

Well said dana!
Habitats an issue but it sure isn’t what’s caused the crash.
The pathetic part is the sheep hero worship the group that preach the habitat line.
If only these same sheep knew the history behind some of these clowns that they are following.
One of them was bureaucratically famous for putting collars on wolves but dead against killing them.
It’s a joke......

Funny little HBC story from years ago.

One day after our crew had a run in with a lone cow mountain caribou (from a herd of 6-10), we then Had a run in with a collared wolf very close by. It was summer and our Wolf season was actually open at the time. That night I joked on HBC how I was going to shoot that wolf in the morning and then put the collar on the CN train so the scientists could study it as it raced across the country. I was serious about trying kill that wolf, not serious about the CN part. Well, I suddenly got a phone call from the one and only # king. He actually phoned little ol' nobody me, at home. What an honour eh? He proceeded to tell me I was the laughing stalk amongst the MOE and they all hated me and the garbage I spewed. Hahaha. Why? Because I was saying on HBC that wolves needed to die instead of being studied. I believed then and still believe to this day a collared wolf is going to kill the very last mountain caribou

[bearvalley]

Funny little HBC story from years ago.

One day after our crew had a run in with a lone cow mountain caribou (from a herd of 6-10), we then Had a run in with a collared wolf very close by. It was summer and our Wolf season was actually open at the time. That night I joked on HBC how I was going to shoot that wolf in the morning and then put the collar on the CN train so the scientists could study it as it raced across the country. I was serious about trying kill that wolf, not serious about the CN part. Well, I suddenly got a phone call from the one and only # king. He actually phoned little ol' nobody me, at home. What an honour eh? He proceeded to tell me I was the laughing stalk amongst the MOE and they all hated me and the garbage I spewed. Hahaha. Why? Because I was saying on HBC that wolves needed to die instead of being studied. I believed then and still believe to this day a collared wolf is going to kill the very last mountain caribou

LOL, I know of a similar story that played out years ago.
A collared wolf died in the Cariboo, it’s collar was still being tracked as it headed north of Fort Nelson and into the NWT.
The bioligists were documenting the dramatic treck.....a few government employees(at that time) were chuckling about it, one even asked me if I knew what could get a wolf to head out that far and fast.
He was laughing when he asked!
The # king and his misinformation, or skewed information is only part of the issue.....he’s the bullet.....there’s a silent one behind him loading the gun.
A first class jobs been done of screwing guides, bad mouthing FN’s and trashing wildlife....all under the pretence of being the good old boys riding for the team.

[blacklab]

You guys haven't been listening to the choir, it's the evil whitetail using up all the remaining habitat.
When they are all killed off all will be well.

[guest]

So we ALL know part of building our ungulate numbers back is PREDATOR control. That's a given as part of the equation. And the toughest sell not only to political parties but the public. Culling of Wolves, B and G Bears, Cats. Good luck with that.

we all know proper HABITAT is a huge builder in ungulates, and an easier sell to political parties and the public.

we all know FORESTRY and government combined could do a better job with all aspects of the practice from harvest, to rebuilding to access ...... And so so sell to all involved ........

So now you Experts, BV, BN, Dana ......etc. HOW THE HELL DO YOU DO IT ? Let's hear your plan, or as you say, let's see your blueprint.

You all chastise those trying to convince officials for more funding, which includes some predator control in the equation...... But you all just criticize those trying for the better good off all wildlife for better management, practises and funding.

What Say you EXPERTS ? Your negativity of those trying for the better good has got real old. You toot your horns pointing fingers at X...King ..... Or who ever, And his or her followers Without naming actually who you mean.

If your so high and mighty and correct in your accusations and assumptions of what's wrong and a fix, just why is it you won't put your self out there and call out who and where you think the problems come from ?

Interesting to say the least.

[Dannybuoy]

Curly ... from your last post , you get that predator control is part of the solution ..... and if you think about it , Must be done before any habitat restoration otherwise what's the point ? There is currently excess habitat due to extremely low ungulate numbers in most if not all bc . So the plan shouldnt be to do what's easy But rather what's needed .
I have no idea who the others are talking about so cant answer to that .

[guest]

Curly ... from your last post , you get that predator control is part of the solution ..... and if you think about it , Must be done before any habitat restoration otherwise what's the point ? There is currently excess habitat due to extremely low ungulate numbers in most if not all bc . So the plan shouldnt be to do what's easy But rather what's needed .
I have no idea who the others are talking about so cant answer to that .

DAM right, I KNOW predator control is part of the problem ........ Have tried to do my best to help in hunting of bears, dogs, haven't taken a cat yet. So tell me how the Hell do you sell it to politians and the public? As said part of the equation ........ How do you EXPERTS PLAN ON SELLING IT ? What's your solution DB ? How do you do what's your blue print ?

[Dannybuoy]

DAM right, I KNOW predator control is part of the problem ........ Have tried to do my best to help in hunting of bears, dogs, haven't taken a cat yet. So tell me how the Hell do you sell it to politians and the public? As said part of the equation ........ How do you EXPERTS PLAN ON SELLING IT ? What's your solution DB ? How do you do what's your blue print ?

I would hope that at least some of our wildlife managers could come up with a plan to sell it to the public and politicians , they are in the business ! They should be the Experts !
I do know that nothing much is being done in that dept. I would suggest using the same methods as Raincoast and the ilk .... mainstream media ,(News) stories of horrific killing of livestock , pets and wildlife ?
Social Media ? Google grizzly hunt ban and there are no articles supporting the hunt .

[guest]

All well and good with what you say and I agree, good luck with it though, I hope it happens as part of the funding..... But for those that criticize the attempts of righting the ship ....... BV, Dana, and others all seem to know better.

Lets see the plan, let's see the blueprint . Oh where art thou?

Their negativity grows OLD.

[dmaxtech]

You guys talk of selling the predator hunting to gov and media, how about engaging hunters to reinforce the need for predator management. Encourage all hunters to got to 'their spots' and take out a predator over the winter. I know many would not be able to access their spots but those than can should. I'm going to try this winter to get out and help.

[dana]

Curly, I haven't been here for years. How does my negativity grow old? Hahaha. Is it because I ain't a sheep? Is that why in 3 days of being back, I am already 'old'??? I just told you where I would put money to right this ship. As a matter of fact, I have been belitted for preaching that mantra for a good dozen years or more. Instead, funding went into 'studying' a critter that has been 'studied' to death. Instead of putting funding into the trappers that could have made a difference, the money went to collars because 'it will be fascinating to watch' as wolves decimated the herds.

[horshur]

All well and good with what you say and I agree, good luck with it though, I hope it happens as part of the funding..... But for those that criticize the attempts of righting the ship ....... BV, Dana, and others all seem to know better.

Lets see the plan, let's see the blueprint . Oh where art thou?

Their negativity grows OLD.

habitat habitat habitat is not a plan.

[Ohwildwon]

Speaking of culling wolves, anyone know how that, (govt program) is going this winter?

I'm surprised Horgan hasn't stopped that as well...

[guest]

Curly, I haven't been here for years. How does my negativity grow old? Hahaha. Is it because I ain't a sheep? Is that why in 3 days of being back, I am already 'old'??? I just told you where I would put money to right this ship. As a matter of fact, I have been belitted for preaching that mantra for a good dozen years or more. Instead, funding went into 'studying' a critter that has been 'studied' to death. Instead of putting funding into the trappers that could have made a difference, the money went to collars because 'it will be fascinating to watch' as wolves decimated the herds.

So you say, cull wolves cull wolves, the funding plan model won't work ...... Bla bla.

whats your plan, show the blueprint ....... Don't have one, no surprise, every one knows predator management is a huge rebuilder ........ Yet your negativity towards those trying yes along with B V ...... Is old. Your plan is #1.

wow your hollier then thou attitude continues, even after a three year absence.

[dana]

So you say, cull wolves cull wolves, the funding plan model won't work ...... Bla bla.

whats your plan, show the blueprint ....... Don't have one, no surprise, every one knows predator management is a huge rebuilder ........ Yet your negativity towards those trying yes along with B V ...... Is old. Your plan is #1.

wow your hollier then thou attitude continues, even after a three year absence.

Lets see, I share an opinion in a thread that is counter to the mantra 'habitat habitat habitat' and I am belittled by someone who is 'making a difference' for wildlife? Yup, I see this place hasn't changed much. The bullies are still at work pushing their agenda. I guess the question needs to be asked, if habitat is the 'answer' that has been preached so much over the years, where are the results? Where are the animals that have benefited from years of 'working hard for habitat'. Hmmm, i personally have seen a ton of habitat set aside for wildlife in the last 25 years, but how are those wildlife doing? Lets pick one that isn't even huntable, the southern mountain caribou. 25+ years of talking habitat habitat habitat with tons and tons of habitat protected. Where are all the new caribou? Has the habitat mantra worked?

[pg83]

The hunting community is so far behind when it comes to any kind of organized campaigning for the well-being of wildlife and wild places that we stand little chance of catching up anymore and I believe this poses a greater risk to hunting than predator control and habitat enhancement combined. We are constantly being presented as bloodthirsty savages to the general public and we(at least some of us) are feeding right into it. Far too many of us are either unaware of this war or even worse, don't care about it. It certainly doesn't help that we can't seem to agree on anything and seem far more interested in in-fighting than anything that is actually important. Pull off your tunnel-vision glasses, put your differences aside and get to work together and far more will get accomplished.


It scares me that there is even the slightest possibility of hunting disappearing in this province and it should scare you too because there is absolutely no reason for it. Nature will take care of itself eventually as it has since the beginning of time, but it would be very sad indeed if we were no longer allowed to partake in hunting simply because someone else says so.

[bearvalley]

Curly , there are places where a plan is in place and gaining steam, your “sacred” Fed is at the table...but it sure ain’t the big voice.
As for naming names.... people tend to get banned for speaking out against the chosen ones.
Sheep

[guest]

So we ALL know part of building our ungulate numbers back is PREDATOR control. That's a given as part of the equation. And the toughest sell not only to political parties but the public. Culling of Wolves, B and G Bears, Cats. Good luck with that.

we all know proper HABITAT is a huge builder in ungulates, and an easier sell to political parties and the public.

we all know FORESTRY and government combined could do a better job with all aspects of the practice from harvest, to rebuilding to access ...... And so so sell to all involved ........

So now you Experts, BV, BN, Dana ......etc. HOW THE HELL DO YOU DO IT ? Let's hear your plan, or as you say, let's see your blueprint.

You all chastise those trying to convince officials for more funding, which includes some predator control in the equation...... But you all just criticize those trying for the better good off all wildlife for better management, practises and funding.

What Say you EXPERTS ? Your negativity of those trying for the better good has got real old. You toot your horns pointing fingers at X...King ..... Or who ever, And his or her followers Without naming actually who you mean.

If your so high and mighty and correct in your accusations and assumptions of what's wrong and a fix, just why is it you won't put your self out there and call out who and where you think the problems come from ?

Interesting to say the least.

maybe you need to read again ....... Me a bully ..... Lol love it funny stuff, I'm a tough guy wow haha good Stuff Dana.

Try again answering the repost above. You and a few seem to have all the answers, again where's your blueprint, your plan ?

DUH ....... Yes predator management is a given, just how do ya do it, how do ya sell it?

Call me a bully, halarious ........ Take a look back at the way you BV and others call out #xking ...... And followers, fighting against a new funding model that may include predator management.

As as saud in another thread, don't like to reap what you sow .......Not likely, keep feeding that horse team with a donkey in the middle fighting all the way.

Either put put up or shut up as they say, at least several have steered in the right direction.

So moving back, what's your plan, show your blueprint. And again....... How do you do it?

[guest]

Curly , there are places where a plan is in place and gaining steam, your “sacred” Fed is at the table...but it sure ain’t the big voice.
As for naming names.... people tend to get banned for speaking out against the chosen ones.
Sheep

well I'd sure rather support the Fed and take the high road then hiding in the corner taking stabs from the dark.

Wheres your blueprint BValley, why not show it and get all hunters United ....... Or is it more self serving then you would rather show ?

[elknut]

I'm hearing a real friendly dog fight on HBC about Funded Management for our Future...LOL..Whats it gonna cost ?...What's your plan?...Habitat ...Habitat ..Predator control...Predator control...To be really honest Einstein would have a hard time fixing our Management of Wildlife in BC...Well for starters the Ministry would have to bring back days of old ...Hire biologists ..Hire more CO's ..Oure asks how much money ?..You tell me what reviving the Ministry would cost!...You need boots on the ground that costs " MONEY "...Millions...Wildlife is managed for habitat carrying capacity...Not how many animals can everyone kill..Predator control is the biggest Elephant in the room..Capturing wolves and sterilizing them never accomplished Bugger all ..It never was going to..Because the Anti's voices had preference over the Hunting Community..To be successful we have to create a non political model that everyone has a seat at the table..There has to be a Robertson Pitman act created to fund this..Taking money from our budget won't fly with our current govt or our past govt..Nobody has any interest..Talk about infighting this forum has really got going with a few diehards that haven't seen the complex issue that it is ..MONEY...And where is it coming from?...Public relations regarding predator control is a very big hurdle..The Ministry of Forests mandate is to log every loggable tree in BC ..Does that create good habitat ?...I don't think so..BC is not Minnesota ..Our terrain is more diverse ..On the highways in the eastern US states ..One state kills more deer via vehicle accidents than BC kills in 10 years ..There deer numbers are like jackrabbits..They are everywhere..We have to move to a new model to manage our game but its gonna take more than Habitat and Predator control..Just my two bits..... Dennis

[Ourea]

The 14 million we pay for licensing goes back to wildlife.
Small tax is imposed on all goods and services that generate income from use in the outdoors.

Conservatively that would be 40 million going to wildlife.
If adopted it would be a pretty good start.

With an NDP Gov we start out of the gate with we gotta kill more wolves while the majority of their voting base wants all predator hunting banned. Not the best foot forward.

Funding would help build political will and allow education of the general public.
Get those two rolling it won't be as much of an uphill fight.

[blacklab]

Here's a little dose of reality predator control is NOT going to happen!
I spent 25 years doing government funded predator control,and dealing with the associated political fallout.
If you think today's generation of leaf lickers is going to support killing any animal to support your hunting success, you're dreaming.
If we are going to continue to hunt, we better support those species that can survive high predator numbers, poor habitat and unlicensed year round harvest.

[Weatherby Fan]

Here's a little dose of reality predator control is NOT going to happen!
I spent 25 years doing government funded predator control,and dealing with the associated political fallout.
If you think today's generation of leaf lickers is going to support killing any animal to support your hunting success, you're dreaming.
If we are going to continue to hunt, we better support those species that can survive high predator numbers, poor habitat and unlicensed year round harvest.

There you go, Truer words have never been spoken.....!

Habitat Management is an easy sell to the public and and it helps so of all the necessary evils to support it's the one to go after for funding,

Unlicensed year round harvest is a real issue that effects us Provincially but can only be dealt with Federally for changes unless its in house and that isn't going to happen,

predator management is one you'll have to look after yourselves as a hunter as black lab pointed out you probably have better chances of winning 6/49 as to get any amount of funding or support from our government.

[Weatherby Fan]

I guess Ill just have to donate some prizes for a predator hunting contest to boost the enthusiasm for predator hunting !

[HarryToolips]

IMO There are only 2 priorities .... 1) Predator control 2) FN control/issues .
Manage those 2 issues and then after a few years if we are lucky we will need to manage for more habitat .
The first is PR , PR and then some PR . The second is federal and I dont know if there is a fix if the FN leaders dont or cant co-operate
Agree completely.....though burns are still needed in many parts of the province....

[eric]

A lot of predator control goes on with the GO's, they just never say anything.
Also we should start supporting the trappers that are targeting Wolves, through monetary help.
Trappers get next to nothing for wolves,and it costs a pile of money..
I do believe proguide66, really advocates this approach.
Just need to keep it quiet so the antis don't get ahold of it.

[boxhitch]

Easy to do. Approach a trapper and offer market-plus-$$ for his hides. Fur market prices don't pay for much gas so we need to get the price up to where it makes trapping wolves worth while.

[pg83]

A lot of predator control goes on with the GO's, they just never say anything.
Also we should start supporting the trappers that are targeting Wolves, through monetary help.
Trappers get next to nothing for wolves,and it costs a pile of money..
I do believe proguide66, really advocates this approach.
Just need to keep it quiet so the antis don't get ahold of it.

It's getting harder and harder to do it quietly. Steve is doing his part, but he's also promoting his business and has to deal with a ton of crap over it. I don't even know the guy, but it's obvious to see. Some of the GO's are certainly doing their part in terms of predator control, but it's not enough. We are all in an uphill battle.

[dana]

Here's a little dose of reality predator control is NOT going to happen!
I spent 25 years doing government funded predator control,and dealing with the associated political fallout.
If you think today's generation of leaf lickers is going to support killing any animal to support your hunting success, you're dreaming.
If we are going to continue to hunt, we better support those species that can survive high predator numbers, poor habitat and unlicensed year round harvest.

Actually I wasn't suggesting government sponsered predator control. I was suggesting hunter sponsered predator control. Big difference there. Private money funding current regulation through our trappers would be where I would start. But according to some on this board, i don't have the right to voice my opinion. Hahaha

[dana]

The 14 million we pay for licensing goes back to wildlife.
Small tax is imposed on all goods and services that generate income from use in the outdoors.

Conservatively that would be 40 million going to wildlife.
If adopted it would be a pretty good start.

With an NDP Gov we start out of the gate with we gotta kill more wolves while the majority of their voting base wants all predator hunting banned. Not the best foot forward.

Funding would help build political will and allow education of the general public.
Get those two rolling it won't be as much of an uphill fight.

I could get behind that if habitat enhancement didn't take a backseat for paying for more science to study more things. Could you imagine if one could have taken all the funds that went into the wolf collar program and put it towards true real on the ground habitat enhanment for sheep? If one could ensure the money went towards real on the ground projects instead of paying high wages for some so-called wildlife student to do a thesis on something 'facinating' i could get on that bandwagon.

[Keta1969]

Unfortunately all the points been made here and disagreements that are aired don't give me much hope for the future of wildlife and hunting in B.C. There are many ways a funding model can be constructed but everyone at the table needs to realize they won't get everything they want. There has to be a willingness to listen with an open mind and accept that you will lose some arguments and then STAY at the table. So Dana, Bow Nut, Whonnock Boy,Bear Valley,Fisher Dude, Ourea,BCWF,WKFandGame etc, is this possible? If what's happening on this site is any indication of what to expect it'll never work. The thing with wildlife is it's never one thing not predators not habitat not ranching not logging not access not first nations. All you guys are vocal and passionate about wildlife but can you put your differences aside to work TOGETHER for a better outcome? That's what wildlife needs.

[Brno22F]

An excerpt from the executive summary of a recently posted report on BC govt website entitled DETERMINING FACTORS AFFECTING MOOSE POPULATION CHANGE IN BRITISH COLUMBIA:
TESTING THE LANDSCAPE CHANGE HYPOTHESIS
2017 Progress Report: February 2012–April 2017

Since this project was initiated in 2012, we fitted 388 cow Moose with GPS-radio-collars across five study areas during annual December to March captures. Twenty calf Moose (12 female, 8 male) were fitted with GPS-radio-collars in the Bonaparte study area during January/February 2017. There were 255 cow Moose captured by chemical immobilization using aerial darting and 133 by physical restraint using aerial net gunning. Three configurations of GPS-radio-collars were used: those programmed for one fix/day (
n = 147), 2 fixes/day (n = 107), and >2 fixes/day (n = 134). As of 30 April 2017, of the 388 radio-collars deployed on cow Moose, 215 were active, 101 censored (i.e., dropped at end of battery life, stopped collecting data or slipped from Moose), and 72 were associated with Moose that died. We identified the probable proximate cause of death for the 72 cow mortalities as 36 predation (31 Wolf, 3 Cougar, 2 bear), 12 hunting (1 licensed, 11 unlicensed), 16 health-related (8 apparent starvation, 3 septicemia, 1 peritonitis, 4 unknown health-related - two of which have health tests pending), 3 natural accidents, and 5 unknown. Of the 20 calf Moose radio-collared in 2017, there were 11 mortalities with the proximate cause of mortality being 5 due to predation (4 Wolf, 1 bear), 5 health-related (4 apparent starvation, 1 unknown health-related with health tests pending) and 1 vehicle collision.

[Ride Red]

That is the one that makes me laugh the most. We are told hunters have little to no effect on wildlife pops. If so, why would any say we need to deactivate roads to limit hunters? Oh, yea, it is because wolves use the roads. If you think wolves are limited by deactivation practices, you need to follow thise dog tracks someday. Oh yea, lets blame logging as a hole. It is the evil logging companies and their greed that has put us here. Hahaha. Did you know that forestry in this province opporates on science based practices? Yup, Science. There is that word that many kick around way way to much. The funny thing is, the very scientific practices that govern forestry were brought about years ago under the direction of the NDP. Hahaha. Other than cutting some very restrictive red tape, the Liberals kept the exact same science based forestry practices for all their years of running the province. But, yup, lets blame forestry for our delima instead of looking to the one thing that has been staring us in the face, the lack of Predator Management

So you believe leaving every single access road open is ok?

[Brno22F]

In my view this report shows clearly the need for predator control as part of overall wildlife management strategy.

[blacklab]

Actually I wasn't suggesting government sponsered predator control. I was suggesting hunter sponsered predator control. Big difference there. Private money funding current regulation through our trappers would be where I would start. But according to some on this board, i don't have the right to voice my opinion. Hahaha
We as hunters are the only ones that can make a difference in predator numbers. It won't have a big impact but it sure won't hurt.
How many times have you heard the holier than thou crowd spouting about not shooting something the won't eat.
There were a lot of hunters that supported the bear meat retrieval regulation, and the ban on the sale of bear parts.
These two regulations stopped a lot of bear hunters leading to an increase in bear numbers. Nobody knows how much affect that had on ungulate populations.

[Keta1969]

In my view this report shows clearly the need for predator control as part of overall wildlife management strategy.

While this is true and I believe some predator control is needed the report also shows how diverse the problems are that wildlife face.

[dana]

So you believe leaving every single access road open is ok?

How did you come to that conclusion? We do a ton of deactivation currently. Could more be done? All depends on what the future objectives are. Why would you deactivate something that you plan on using again in a few years? Many dollars can be wasted ripping a road only to rebuild it a few years later.

[dana]

Hey Ourea, clean out your inbox dude.

[Ourea]

How did you come to that conclusion? We do a ton of deactivation currently. Could more be done? All depends on what the future objectives are. Why would you deactivate something that you plan on using again in a few years? Many dollars can be wasted ripping a road only to rebuild it a few years later.

Fly over Reg 8 dana?
Access and habitat fragmentation is a major factor compounded with a strong FN presence in the Okanagan.
(found a poached young bull moose on xmas day)

The regional bio is a good friend and field partner of mine.
He echoes the rd and block density issues in this area.
Getting tough to find old growth that a guy can get lost in.

[Ride Red]

How did you come to that conclusion? We do a ton of deactivation currently. Could more be done? All depends on what the future objectives are. Why would you deactivate something that you plan on using again in a few years? Many dollars can be wasted ripping a road only to rebuild it a few years later.

The roads which I’ve originally alluded to were the pine beetle roads. Those areas have been completely stripped of timber and most likely won’t be used for many years to come, short of a few mains. Saying that road access isn’t a problem is blind.

[dana]

The roads which I’ve originally alluded to were the pine beetle roads. Those areas have been completely stripped of timber and most likely won’t be used for many years to come, short of a few mains. Saying that road access isn’t a problem is blind.

A problem for what? That is what I don't get. If there are water control issues, then maybe they need to be pulled. But if hunting makes little to no impact on the wildlife pops like science says, then how are all these inblock roads hurting wildlife? That is my question. Please let me know. I do know in most of the pine salvage areas I have worked in, many of the roads weren't really much of a road in the first place. Pop some stumps, put culverts in with as little as possible cuts and fills and pull culverts when done. Glorified trails if you really want to call them anything. Many are planted as well as there was very little actual soil compaction. Most logging is rdside now. Very few landings. I know the theory behind wolf movement and I would call BS on anyone that thinks a deactivated road slows a wolf down enough to keep them away from the prey species. So, please tell me. Habitat fragmentation? Hmmm, i was told recently by someone in the know that grizzlies will be exctinct in 20 years due to habitat fragmentation. Of course, logging is blamed for this. Hahaha. I guess a grizzly doesn't cross logging roads or enter cutblks. Hahaha.

[Ride Red]

I’ll use the Merritt/Kamloops area as an example. It looks like the moon in many areas and night hunting has overwhelmed the area. Vancouver has less side streets.

[dana]

I’ll use the Merritt/Kamloops area as an example. It looks like the moon in many areas and night hunting has overwhelmed the area. Vancouver has less side streets.

so what would you rather have, large clearcuts or large blowdown fire traps? Have you ever tried to walk in heavy pine blowdown? I'm lucky, I get to it often in my job. I can assure you wildlife don't enjoy it. So, if we didn't log all that pine, that is indeed what you would have. Think of what the wildfires would have been like this past summer then? Hmmm, i guess that you like watching your house burn maybe. You can tell your wife not to worry, the wildlife habitat created where your house once stood will be amazing? Seriously, you want that. Just because something looks 'fragmented' from the air, doesn't mean that is the fact. Did you know the science behind forestry in this province is to actually mimic natural distubance types? Oh yea, i remember, the only science that counts is the one that so and so is preaching today not the one that is actually used by government for managing trees. We get upset at the antis for not allowing us to manage with science but seems hunters want to do the same when it comes to something they know so little about, forestry. All because it 'looks ugly' hahaha.

[Ride Red]

so what would you rather have, large clearcuts or large blowdown fire traps? Have you ever tried to walk in heavy pine blowdown? I'm lucky, I get to it often in my job. I can assure you wildlife don't enjoy it. So, if we didn't log all that pine, that is indeed what you would have. Think of what the wildfires would have been like this past summer then? Hmmm, i guess that you like watching your house burn maybe. You can tell your wife not to worry, the wildlife habitat created where your house once stood will be amazing? Seriously, you want that. Just because something looks 'fragmented' from the air, doesn't mean that is the fact. Did you know the science behind forestry in this province is to actually mimic natural distubance types? Oh yea, i remember, the only science that counts is the one that so and so is preaching today not the one that is actually used by government for managing trees. We get upset at the antis for not allowing us to manage with science but seems hunters want to do the same when it comes to something they know so little about, forestry. All because it 'looks ugly' hahaha.

My original point was to reduce some of the unwanted spur roads but you choose to go on the defensive and blow this all out of proportion. I’d suggest just reading what I wrote and try not reading too deaply into it. Reducing extra spur roads, predator control ect ect are all problems being faced.

[guest]

My original point was to reduce some of the unwanted spur roads but you choose to go on the defensive and blow this all out of proportion. I’d suggest just reading what I wrote and try not reading too deaply into it. Reducing extra spur roads, predator control ect ect are all problems being faced..

Bullys ..... We're all Bullys haha

[dana]

From what I can see from Ride Red, no personal attacks, just good internet debating. Which is fine and healthy. Personal attacks from you, something totally different. Can you debate without taking things to the personal level? Because if you can't you are a bully no different than that other one that a ton of people have thanked me for standing up to! It is funny that this site is like the school system. The bullies can say what ever they like as they pick on anyone they so choose, but if a kid stands up for themselves, they are themselves called a bully and are kicked out of school. Time to grow up and start dealing with people in a proper manner. Personal attacks is just what got hunters into the distrust and divisions that they currently are in. Especially given that a good vast amount of the personal attacks were flat out, bold faced lies.

[horshur]

Red of course there is issues on the big pine salvage blocks..there will be other issues when they green up and become unhuntable. The pine regen in the 03 burns is tough to hunt now. No way to fix it but time.

[dana]

Red of course there is issues on the big pine salvage blocks..there will be other issues when they green up and become unhuntable. The pine regen in the 03 burns is tough to hunt now. No way to fix it but time.

But not to worry, we were all told by science about a dozen years ago that moose love those 20 year old blocks and 20 year old fires. In 6 years, we are going to be overrun with moose. ;)

[Ride Red]

Red of course there is issues on the big pine salvage blocks..there will be other issues when they green up and become unhuntable. The pine regen in the 03 burns is tough to hunt now. No way to fix it but time.

I do realize this as I’ve hunted western canada for the last 40 years.

[338win mag]

The roads which I’ve originally alluded to were the pine beetle roads. Those areas have been completely stripped of timber and most likely won’t be used for many years to come, short of a few mains. Saying that road access isn’t a problem is blind.
exactly^^^^
The reason to de-activate roads is too keep fat ***** out, ok. I made a good living logging in southern bc, so i have a pretty good idea of what a road every 1-2km can do to make for easy access, where the only access previously was on foot, two legs or four was the only way.

[steepNdeep]

To drill it down a little deeper, if there was a significant annual budget on enhancing wildlife where should the focus be?
Name your top 5 investments that would provide the greatest impact and bang?

Good thread bownut & Ourea! Here are 5:


A campaign (primarily via social media) to educate the public (& politicians) about the necessity of an autonomous SCIENCE-BASED wildlife management system. This system must be guaranteed to run in perpetuity without interference from political whims.

A science-based predator management program. This is the elephant in the room that must be addressed. If there are no animals left, what is the point of wildlife habitat? (See *** below)

Habitat conservation programs to protect wintering grounds, migration corridors, etc. (ie: Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation's Conservation Program)

Habitat enhancement programs. Prescribed by wildlife biologists & implemented by grass roots volunteer groups (ie: WKBGTA (haha)

A private fundraising platform to self-fund these programs. (Sounds alot like BCWF... ; )



*** “Determining Factors Affecting Moose Population Change in British Columbia: Testing the Landscape Change Hypothesis.” READ FULL REPORT HERE (http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs2016_2/603453/factors_affecting_moose_population_in_bc.pdf)

BCWF Summary HERE ( http://www.bcwf.net/files/2016%20AGM/2016%20AGM%20Presentations/Gerry_Kuzyk_FLNRO_-_Update_on_Provincial_Moose_Research_Project_in_Ce ntral_BC.pdf)

Research to date recovered 49 of the collars from moose that had died & determined that predators killed 21 or 45%:
• cougars killed 2 and a bear killed 1
• wolves killed 18 or 86%

>>> I'd like to see these same stats for deer in this region!


http://fluidstudios.ca/UP/moose.jpg

[Brno22F]

The 2017 update of this report was put up on the govt website in early Dec. Numbers have not changed much. Predation is still near 50% of the annual mortality of collared cows/calves. Wolves kill substantially more moose than bears and cougars combined according to the data.
It is a report worth reading. It is embedded in a link in the report below.See the 2017 update

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/2017_moose_fact_sheet.pdf

[Ourea]

Nothing happens until dedicated funding is secured.

These conversations are like asking what you want off the menu.....
Then ask who is going to pay for dinner.

Crickets

[2chodi]

Has anyone read the following? After spending quite a few hours with him at meetings this fall and having the opportunity to talk about wolves, I put it on my reading list.

https://www.dropbox.com/s/lefl63yxyzob5t0/yukonwolves.png?raw=1

[HappyJack]

Good thread bownut & Ourea! Here are 5:


A campaign (primarily via social media) to educate the public (& politicians) about the necessity of an autonomous SCIENCE-BASED wildlife management system. This system must be guaranteed to run in perpetuity without interference from political whims.
A science-based predator management program. This is the elephant in the room that must be addressed. If there are no animals left, what is the point of wildlife habitat? (See *** below)
Habitat conservation programs to protect wintering grounds, migration corridors, etc. (ie: Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation's Conservation Program)
Habitat enhancement programs. Prescribed by wildlife biologists & implemented by grass roots volunteer groups (ie: WKBGTA (haha)
A private fundraising platform to self-fund these programs. (Sounds alot like BCWF... ; )



*** “Determining Factors Affecting Moose Population Change in British Columbia: Testing the Landscape Change Hypothesis.” READ FULL REPORT HERE (http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs2016_2/603453/factors_affecting_moose_population_in_bc.pdf)

BCWF Summary HERE (http://www.bcwf.net/files/2016%20AGM/2016%20AGM%20Presentations/Gerry_Kuzyk_FLNRO_-_Update_on_Provincial_Moose_Research_Project_in_Ce ntral_BC.pdf)

Research to date recovered 49 of the collars from moose that had died & determined that predators killed 21 or 45%:
• cougars killed 2 and a bear killed 1
• wolves killed 18 or 86%

>>> I'd like to see these same stats for deer in this region!


http://fluidstudios.ca/UP/moose.jpg


Funny thing with this pie chart is there is no mention of train kills?? Everyone knows the trains slaughter the moose every winter. I wonder why that is missing?

[Ohwildwon]

No trains in the study area's?

[steepNdeep]

The 2017 update of this report was put up on the govt website in early Dec. Numbers have not changed much. Predation is still near 50% of the annual mortality of collared cows/calves. Wolves kill substantially more moose than bears and cougars combined according to the data.
It is a report worth reading.

Thanks Brno22F. Good info!


1. The numbers in the past were not natural. What hunters grew to expect is not natural. There is a long history of predator control in BC.
2. What we have now without control is not natural either.
3. Were not going back to where nature handles it in the foreseeable future.
4. Hands on management and intervention, mitigation of resource development with results based science.

Well said!


A government funded... through an outdoor tax, independant entity steering the ship, not sure who would make up this "entity" but anyone who is paid by donation and political influence shouldn't be. It wont matter which political party gains power, honestly I dont know why wildlife is being used as a political pawn in this province to begin with. The people managing this entity should be well paid.

Through a tax of this nature everyone would be contributing, anti's, hunters, etc.

An outdoor tax of some kind makes sense. Wildlife management has to be SCIENCE-based & immune to politics.


Habitat eh? Hmmm, I've heard that drum beat and beat and beat. Meanwhile, I'm out daily in some of the best habitat this province could ever produce and what do I see. Nothing! Why? Hmmm, good question. Maybe the fact that the managers collared wolves to study them instead of killing them 10 years ago might be a big answer. Easy to sit on the Habitat fence with your eyes closed to what has gone on in this province. But, what you will find, if you don't get on the Predators, you can have all the habitat in the world but still have sweet F all for critters.

Agreed. If we don't find a way to gain government support for a real predator management program, we are going to have empty habitat...


You guys talk of selling the predator hunting to gov and media, how about engaging hunters to reinforce the need for predator management. Encourage all hunters to got to 'their spots' and take out a predator over the winter. I know many would not be able to access their spots but those than can should. I'm going to try this winter to get out and help.

YES.


To be successful we have to create a non political model that everyone has a seat at the table..There has to be a Robertson Pitman act created to fund this..Taking money from our budget won't fly with our current govt or our past govt..Nobody has any interest..Talk about infighting this forum has really got going with a few diehards that haven't seen the complex issue that it is ..MONEY...And where is it coming from?

Good point.


The 14 million we pay for licensing goes back to wildlife. Small tax is imposed on all goods and services that generate income from use in the outdoors.

With an NDP Gov we start out of the gate with we gotta kill more wolves while the majority of their voting base wants all predator hunting banned. Not the best foot forward.

Funding would help build political will and allow education of the general public. Get those two rolling it won't be as much of an uphill fight.

Yes. Ultimately we, (hunters) who care the most will have to pay for protecting our resource. We will have to fight to gain control of the money that we already pay for hunting through license fees, conservation surcharges, etc. & ensure that it goes back into the resource. Along with an Outdoor Tax of some kind makes sense. In addition, building a private funding platform.

Educating the public about wildlife management & that it must be based on SCIENCE is KEY to gaining any traction on predator managment. If we don't get predators under control soon, hunting is over as we know it...

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Pretty sure that we are going to have to wait until a new govt is formed to get the decision making for wildlife out of hands of govt.

SSS

[boxhitch]

Regulated hunting has little impact, a key word you keep forgetting to add in your statements. Regulated hunting targets the portion of the populations that are surplus to meeting the breeding requirements for the available females. Loosing the breeding stock? There are other reasons

And having more regulated hunters is what the BCWF message is about. The licensed BC hunter is not the enemy.

Will road deactivation have an impact on non-regulated wildlife kills?

[Ride Red]

Regulated hunting has little impact, a key word you keep forgetting to add in your statements. Regulated hunting targets the portion of the populations that are surplus to meeting the breeding requirements for the available females. Loosing the breeding stock? There are other reasons

And having more regulated hunters is what the BCWF message is about. The licensed BC hunter is not the enemy.

Will road deactivation have an impact on non-regulated wildlife kills?

I think we all know the answer to this one, but yes. Limiting access back to pre-pine beetle status will give all animals a wider berth around roads. We were up out of Merritt when they first started stripping the Gordon Creek plateau off and the night sky had more lights flying around than a Las Vegas show. This is only one of the issues that we’re facing right now, but still an important one to keep on the long list back to recovery.

[338win mag]

Will road deactivation have an impact on non-regulated wildlife kills?

Maybe,,,,not everyone is capable of navigating de-activated roads, I have seen roads that are impassible by any means, and it is one more piece of the puzzle that needs to be addressed.

Why dont vehicular restrictions apply to all, its not infringing a section 35 right to hunt, thats all BS by this and any other government that says it is.

Even if hunting isn't/cant be regulated by government, individual FN can absolutely regulate their own hunters.

This is the elephant in the room that they dont want to talk about, FN regulating their own hunting activities.

[Ohwildwon]

I read on FB there were about 100 fN in around Cherryville for a month..

Apparently little deer left..

[bearvalley]

Nothing happens until dedicated funding is secured.

These conversations are like asking what you want off the menu.....
Then ask who is going to pay for dinner.

Crickets

Ourea, there was a proposal that the HCTF be tasked with formulating the framework for a funded wildlife model.
$200,000 was earmarked to go to that organization to draw up a blueprint.

Why did it not happen?
Who shut it down?
Why?

Who and why would someone not want the core user groups (trappers, resident hunters, guides, etc) to be granted the lead in putting together a program that benefitted wildlife?

Who and why would anyone push that the anti hunting groups (such as Raincoast) be at the table before a wildlife funding model was even discussed by the core user groups?

Wildlife was sold out.

It looks like all hunters in this province have been sold out as well.

One question needs answered......WHY?

[bearvalley]

Regulated hunting has little impact, a key word you keep forgetting to add in your statements. Regulated hunting targets the portion of the populations that are surplus to meeting the breeding requirements for the available females. Loosing the breeding stock? There are other reasons

And having more regulated hunters is what the BCWF message is about. The licensed BC hunter is not the enemy.

Will road deactivation have an impact on non-regulated wildlife kills?

Theres an an education program going on there.
FN’s are stepping up to the plate and asking their people for accountability and numbers.
They are taking less game than in the past.
One band I’m aware of that was impacted by last summers fires has even gone as far as signing an MOU that enables the COS to charge any of their members hunting in area that was closed to hunting due to fires.
I think everyone needs to remember that FN’s under our constitution can hunt and kill the share of wildlife granted to them.....without a license if it is within their traditional territory.
Calling a moose, elk or deer “poached” as some do, just because it is found outside the time frame of our licensed season is ludicrous.
Education is the key to correction here....not finger pointing.



I read on FB there were about 100 fN in around Cherryville for a month..

Apparently little deer left..

FB is about as valid as HBC.

[bearvalley]

So now you Experts, BV, BN, Dana ......etc. HOW THE HELL DO YOU DO IT ? Let's hear your plan, or as you say, let's see your blueprint.

You all chastise those trying to convince officials for more funding, which includes some predator control in the equation...... But you all just criticize those trying for the better good off all wildlife for better management, practises and funding.

What Say you EXPERTS ? Your negativity of those trying for the better good has got real old. You toot your horns pointing fingers at X...King ..... Or who ever, And his or her followers Without naming actually who you mean.

If your so high and mighty and correct in your accusations and assumptions of what's wrong and a fix, just why is it you won't put your self out there and call out who and where you think the problems come from ?

Interesting to say the least.

curly top.....I don’t think any of us are trying to claim the status of expert.
Speaking for myself...I work under my own thought process....not the guidance of a pack.
What makes an expert in your eyes....a cut and paste poster boy?
Does the greatest number or internet links attached to your name make you an expert?
I don’t think so.

As for naming actual names....I wasn’t born stupid.
I don’t need to waste my time in court.
You better take a hard look at what went on within your own “sacred” BCWF over the last couple of years.
Lawsuits, revolving executive and staff constantly going out the door.

I was glad to hear a while back that the pending charges against the former Fed president for giving political donations were dropped.
That should be an embarrassment to the organization, and in particular the one club that was front and center in the golf tournament scandal.
I wonder who are members of that fish & game club?

Its a good thing we aren’t on a ship.....someone would be walking a plank.

[Fisher-Dude]

http://fluidstudios.ca/UP/moose.jpg


I'm confused.

According to the research you're promoting, regulated hunting accounts for 2% of moose mortalities.

But just a couple of weeks ago, you were beating the drum to reduce moose hunting bag limits in region 4.

The two don't line up. Hunting regulations = 2%. Why not focus on the 98%?

[guest]

And you BV continue to smash and crash the best organization for the future of fish and wildlife this province has ever seen. Your destructive, you continue to do all you can to destroy anything brought to the table by what you call the sacred fed. Your poison IMO.

as asked before ...... Name one organization that has done more for the future of fish and wildlife in this province, you can't because there is none.

There are some attempts at making big leaps for wildlife, it's future, in this province But in your opinion, and those that follow your thought , it's all bad, because it involves the fed and some individuals you don't like.

You keep stirring the pot ....... Belittling those trying for a bigger better future. Personally, I have zero use for you your type and those that continue with your negativity towards the fed. It's your way or the high way, any and every one associated with the fed is wrong. Brutal.

Good luck rallying the troops with your sell.

[bearvalley]

And you BV continue to smash and crash the best organization for the future of fish and wildlife this province has ever seen. Your destructive, you continue to do all you can to destroy anything brought to the table by what you call the sacred fed. Your poison IMO.

as asked before ...... Name one organization that has done more for the future of fish and wildlife in this province, you can't because there is none.

There are some attempts at making big leaps for wildlife, it's future, in this province But in your opinion, and those that follow your thought , it's all bad, because it involves the fed and some individuals you don't like.

You keep stirring the pot ....... Belittling those trying for a bigger better future. Personally, I have zero use for you your type and those that continue with your negativity towards the fed. It's your way or the high way, any and every one associated with the fed is wrong. Brutal.

Good luck rallying the troops with your sell.

It seems we have opposing thoughts.
Lol!
Wasn’t the world once full of dinasouars curly top.
How’d that work out.
Like I’ve said before and will again.....the Fed has a purpose, it has good solid people active in it and supporting it.
It is presently under manipulation in my belief and many others.
Others have figured out who the poison is.
Its gotta be brutal to be a sheep.

[bownut]

The Funded Model needs to start with "Accountability." If organizations want to continue asking who ate the cookies when their faces are all covered in chocolate then theres no moving forward.
A full open book review of all the past practices and policies of the major players is long over due, without this first step we will continue to wallow in the mud.
All Governments will close the doors on any Funding without a solid "Independent Audit" , this is a must for all stakeholders.
Some heads will fly and others will step forward.

The internet has allowed individuals to form groups of followers based on information fed to them{"Drinking The Koolaid"} as some have said will be a continued quote. As a result many members go through life with blinders on, not willing to think outside the box. Clubs need to take a good look at the mandate of their Organizations and leaders and ask themselves if they feel properly represented? If their not then ask why? It is these F/G clubs that are the backbone
of the major players, without their support and funding groups like the BCWF,WildSheep,Ducks Unlimited,Rocky Mountain Elk, are nothing.

2018 will be the year of change, the clock is running out and all stakeholder need to be held accountable. I am so tired of hearing about that magical "Round Table", it has been more like a Round and Round and Round Table.
Time for some exposure!

[Ourea]

Ourea, there was a proposal that the HCTF be tasked with formulating the framework for a funded wildlife model.
$200,000 was earmarked to go to that organization to draw up a blueprint.

Why did it not happen?
Who shut it down?
Why?

Who and why would someone not want the core user groups (trappers, resident hunters, guides, etc) to be granted the lead in putting together a program that benefitted wildlife?

Who and why would anyone push that the anti hunting groups (such as Raincoast) be at the table before a wildlife funding model was even discussed by the core user groups?

Wildlife was sold out.

It looks like all hunters in this province have been sold out as well.

One question needs answered......WHY?

As I told you on the phone.....my personal view is that the fighting in the sandbox will never end.
I don't see a Kumbya moment to suddenly happen.

One thing is a guarantee - when more resource goes on the table, or less resource....... the entitlement fighting begins.
Bring up allocation and see what happens.

I also struggle that some at the table have openly stated they would crush any attempt at a funding model.....now are converted proponents.

Chief PH cannot be trusted.
I know of the push by FN to take more control over all natural resources in this province.
I fully respect that nothing is going to happen without FN but having a group with a well documented history of ignoring all regulation and law is troublesome. Just how big of a voice is the question. Reconciliation could turn to exploitation.
I guess I struggle with a way to build a league where there are no rules for certain teams.

I bring up these obvious realities as discussion points and not to attack anyone because that is not how I roll.

Key is efforts and discussions are happening at many levels over making wildlife a priority in this province.
How it eventually looks remains to be seen.
I am all for that.

[Fisher-Dude]

All departments of government are independently audited every single year.

Wasting money on a redundant, sour puss witch hunt is just so NDPish.

[horshur]

I'm confused.

According to the research you're promoting, regulated hunting accounts for 2% of moose mortalities.

But just a couple of weeks ago, you were beating the drum to reduce moose hunting bag limits in region 4.

The two don't line up. Hunting regulations = 2%. Why not focus on the 98%?
Cause by the wheel there isn't even 2% available to licensed hunters. It called taking care of your own shit. By that stat is there resident cow tag hunter opportunity available? Really?

[Bugle M In]

I didn't bother reading all these pages...some to get a feel where people were going etc.
I haven't seen any government spend a whole lot of time with putting money into habitat.
I know there are a few on here who do prescribe burns (not sure if they are paid or volunteered??)
Anyways, they all stated they wish the government of the days would have put more funding in to do more burns.
(with all the pine beetle kill...mother nature is going to take care of it)
As far a logging is concerned...well, along with all that "hauling out timber before the beetle got to it" era, that is still continuing on as we speak, it has created a lot of extra roads...seen it in Merrit...seen it in Cache Creek...seen it
in the EK.
All that access does not help, and the access doesn't concern me as much with law abiding hunters, but with those that poach or do not need to claim what they take.
Another thing that I would like to see is accountability on the FN part, so that we do have "better numbers" to throw
into our data, so that "we all" know what tis going on better....hard to use science when the #'s are skewed..IMO.
And if logging had created that prime habitat, we wouldn't be discussing things right now, as god knows we have enough of that in the province, and if that was the case, we should be tripping over game...but were not.
Yes, I also have a friend, a licensed forester, who has practiced for 30 years now....he knows the good...
and the bad with forestry...and there is bad as well.
I may at some point, show what happens, when there are "some clear cuts" present, and they are positive, but I can also describe my experience what happens when new ones are created, right beside an old one (that produced really well when harvesting elk), but then grew up....but, then shortly after a fire came along, on the opposite side of the new cut block and old cut block....well it isn't hard to for me to tell you, the fire won hands down when it came to what the wildlife chose to hang in.
Predators...yup...they need to be "mowed down" to a level that other wildlife can once again begin to thrive in.
Sad point is, many in the ministry feel that the pred #'s should drop the "natural way", and if that's is the case, we will see continued declines in ungulates until a point where we are restricted beyond belief, and finally the preds begin to starve...no idea when that will be, but I think we haven't quite reached the "peak" of pred #'s yet, so we still have time to go and watch it get worse if nothing is done.
Hunter restrictions...sure, go for it!...but...I have seen them applied more and more, year after year, for 40 years now, and at times, they helped...initially....but then the #'s collapsed regardless of all the restrictions.
So...go ahead....restrict away...try and make "trophy sized game" that way.
For those that want only "trophy hunting", maybe restrictions will help...for now...but you will be disappointed down the road when suddenly there is no game around anyways...because other factors, the "real factors", in my opinion,
never got addressed.
And for those that want "meat on the table", good luck....you will be stuck in the middle of the squabble you see right now, where the term "trophy" is being used against you, and your future rights to hunt...or will be liomited in the "experience" of what creatures you will be able to hunt.
The one thing that I have never seen in all the years of hunting, is the government spending "tons of cash" on fixing our habitat...only pennies on the dollars we have spent.
At the same time, I keep watching other user groups coming into an area, that once was only utilized by hunters.
Do I even need to mention Resorts and Condos, and Industry...something that is not going away, will only continue to expand...and yet they pay nothing into it.
All the above is what "I think" is wrong with our Wildlife Situation,...and it is not just 1 thing...but all those things
working against us.
They all need some proper addressing and "implementation" is most certainly needed.
I am all for studies, and better studies....but right now, I would like to see some "action" on the studies we have already done.

[steepNdeep]

I'm confused. According to the research you're promoting, regulated hunting accounts for 2% of moose mortalities.

But just a couple of weeks ago, you were beating the drum to reduce moose hunting bag limits in region 4. The two don't line up. Hunting regulations = 2%. Why not focus on the 98%?

The proposal was 1 moose OR elk which would reduce pressure on the elk. Mostly it was just sticking up for some friends that arent on the forum (who do more for wildlife & habitat conservation than onyone else that I've ever seen). Old habit of sticking up for my friends.

This is a much better thread dealing with the major issues that we all need to focus & work on.

[howa1500]

British Columbia has been notorious for underfunding everything, from health care, judiciary, law enforcement, wildlife management, and habitat.

The solutions are fairly simple, but cost money. Consistent work on improving habitat, with fenced funding from the province for such endeavours. British Columbia needs to become better stewards of the lands. The long drawn out liberal governments placating big business has plundered this province.

[Bugle M In]

British Columbia has been notorious for underfunding everything, from health care, judiciary, law enforcement, wildlife management, and habitat.

The solutions are fairly simple, but cost money. Consistent work on improving habitat, with fenced funding from the province for such endeavours. British Columbia needs to become better stewards of the lands. The long drawn out liberal governments placating big business has plundered this province.

Agreed, I don't know why there was so much bashing about "political parties" on here, and who voted for who.
Truth is, the liberals were in power for a long time, and did nothing to change what other parties did as well, which was nothing..NDP and the old Socred's as well.
Yes, if you want to preservere you hunting species oppurtunities, having a NDP/Green Alliance in power is very bad for us.
Ans I could see the path the Liberals were going, were oppurtunities would end up one day in the hand of small private interest groups...private ownership.
So....lets just drop that!
BUT, what we can do...is force ALL Parties, that are in the power, in the future, to make sure there is a really good funding model present, to help wildlife, it's habitat, and whatever is deemed necessary to establish healthy herd #'s.
To get all user groups, not just hunters, but Eco Tourists, other Eco user groups (cyclists/hikers), as well as big corporations and industry, and as well as the Developers, to start putting into a Fund, that can be used and spent annually.
That is one thing I think we can all agree upon....one thing that we all should be striving for...one voice we should all
have, and something we should be telling anyone who will listen, that that is what is needed.

[Ourea]

British Columbia has been notorious for underfunding everything, from health care, judiciary, law enforcement, wildlife management, and habitat.

The solutions are fairly simple, but cost money. Consistent work on improving habitat, with fenced funding from the province for such endeavours. British Columbia needs to become better stewards of the lands. The long drawn out liberal governments placating big business has plundered this province.

No Gov has made wildlife a priority in BC, just certain practices effected the resource more.
Pointless looking in the rearview mirror, we all agree that a fix is long overdo going forward.

Supporting a plan that commits serious $$ to wildlife needs to be the focus.
I see people already starting to bicker over how to invest it.

Conversation should be how do we help....how can I make a difference.

[Fisher-Dude]

The proposal was 1 moose OR elk which would reduce pressure on the elk. Mostly it was just sticking up for some friends that arent on the forum (who do more for wildlife & habitat conservation than onyone else that I've ever seen). Old habit of sticking up for my friends.

This is a much better thread dealing with the major issues that we all need to focus & work on.

No, you posted about MOOSE populations, and how greedy people would shoot them and ignore conservation, yet the chart you promoted above states that hunting only accounts for 2% of mortalities. The internet has a good memory.


With almost all of the WK on LEH for moose, their populations are not strong & I'm sure most would agree that it's fair to limit to 1 elk or moose. If people are not greedy or selfish and look at it from a conservation perspective, our bag limits are still more than fair with 1 elk or moose.

[horshur]

The chart is in reference to cow moose mortality on the Bonaparte plateau. Not moose hunting in the kootenay region.

[f350ps]

The chart is in reference to cow moose mortality on the Bonaparte plateau. Not moose hunting in the kootenay region.
Actually it's five regions in central B..C. but FD wouldn't know that because he obviously didn't read it, he's too busy trying to belittle people that have things figured out, very typical, if it doesn't fit his narrative it must be wrong! K

[Pemby_mess]

One thing about resource road expansion and access that seems to be missed so far in the conversation; rds don't provide access for just hunters. Licensed hunters having easy access is probably of little relative concern. The statistics being shared so far seem to bare that out.

I'm astonished that some people commenting don't see the connection between rise in predator populations and diminishing habitat. It's not an either or issue.

Roads increase access for wilderness users other than hunters too. Certain types of wildlife will adjust to that pressure by changing how they use the landscape. In some cases it will make them more vulnerable to predators. A pack of wolves is just as functionally exploitative than any group of humans, only they don't have bag limits, and their population explodes when they find an advantage to exploit. Roads in many cases can provide that advantage.

Now, let's combine a rd with use of snowmobiles, or one that is plowed for winter operations. Wolves can now use that road to travel vast distances following game, all while staying aerobically fresh. Well below their thresholds. When they're able to push some game in the area off a rd into the deep snow where a wolf already holds the upper hand, it's over for the prey - whereas they stood a fighting chance but not for the road being accessible.

when it comes to allocating dollars toward wildlife rehab, you're not going to get anywhere if the wildlife doesn't have somewhere to rehab in, and realistically you're not going to cost effectively put a dent in predator populations. On the other hand, Wolves naturally overshoot capacity and go into decline, all the time. In a virgin environment that all the animals have adapted equally to, that overshoot comes much sooner. Humans do have large impacts in sometimes less than intuitive ways and trying to rehab game pops in an environment where wolves have a decided advantage, over and above their pre-existing talents, is a losing proposition. Sure, deer and moose love the cuts, but so do hunters (regulated or otherwise) and all the other predators too!

[bownut]

All departments of government are independently audited every single year.

Wasting money on a redundant, sour puss witch hunt is just so NDPish.

By Who And When?
It's only a witch hunt when someone has something to hide. Oh and just to let you know I didn't vote NDP.
Pat you need to drop the blinders dude, it's time to make some friends>

[bownut]

I didn't bother reading all these pages...some to get a feel where people were going etc.
I haven't seen any government spend a whole lot of time with putting money into habitat.
I know there are a few on here who do prescribe burns (not sure if they are paid or volunteered??)
Anyways, they all stated they wish the government of the days would have put more funding in to do more burns.
(with all the pine beetle kill...mother nature is going to take care of it)
As far a logging is concerned...well, along with all that "hauling out timber before the beetle got to it" era, that is still continuing on as we speak, it has created a lot of extra roads...seen it in Merrit...seen it in Cache Creek...seen it
in the EK.
All that access does not help, and the access doesn't concern me as much with law abiding hunters, but with those that poach or do not need to claim what they take.
Another thing that I would like to see is accountability on the FN part, so that we do have "better numbers" to throw
into our data, so that "we all" know what tis going on better....hard to use science when the #'s are skewed..IMO.
And if logging had created that prime habitat, we wouldn't be discussing things right now, as god knows we have enough of that in the province, and if that was the case, we should be tripping over game...but were not.
Yes, I also have a friend, a licensed forester, who has practiced for 30 years now....he knows the good...
and the bad with forestry...and there is bad as well.
I may at some point, show what happens, when there are "some clear cuts" present, and they are positive, but I can also describe my experience what happens when new ones are created, right beside an old one (that produced really well when harvesting elk), but then grew up....but, then shortly after a fire came along, on the opposite side of the new cut block and old cut block....well it isn't hard to for me to tell you, the fire won hands down when it came to what the wildlife chose to hang in.
Predators...yup...they need to be "mowed down" to a level that other wildlife can once again begin to thrive in.
Sad point is, many in the ministry feel that the pred #'s should drop the "natural way", and if that's is the case, we will see continued declines in ungulates until a point where we are restricted beyond belief, and finally the preds begin to starve...no idea when that will be, but I think we haven't quite reached the "peak" of pred #'s yet, so we still have time to go and watch it get worse if nothing is done.
Hunter restrictions...sure, go for it!...but...I have seen them applied more and more, year after year, for 40 years now, and at times, they helped...initially....but then the #'s collapsed regardless of all the restrictions.
So...go ahead....restrict away...try and make "trophy sized game" that way.
For those that want only "trophy hunting", maybe restrictions will help...for now...but you will be disappointed down the road when suddenly there is no game around anyways...because other factors, the "real factors", in my opinion,
never got addressed.
And for those that want "meat on the table", good luck....you will be stuck in the middle of the squabble you see right now, where the term "trophy" is being used against you, and your future rights to hunt...or will be liomited in the "experience" of what creatures you will be able to hunt.
The one thing that I have never seen in all the years of hunting, is the government spending "tons of cash" on fixing our habitat...only pennies on the dollars we have spent.
At the same time, I keep watching other user groups coming into an area, that once was only utilized by hunters.
Do I even need to mention Resorts and Condos, and Industry...something that is not going away, will only continue to expand...and yet they pay nothing into it.
All the above is what "I think" is wrong with our Wildlife Situation,...and it is not just 1 thing...but all those things
working against us.
They all need some proper addressing and "implementation" is most certainly needed.
I am all for studies, and better studies....but right now, I would like to see some "action" on the studies we have already done.

Good on you, to look at it with both eyes open, Nature is more complexed and isolating a single factor , holes in the bucket, big or small, the ending is the same.
Personally I have come to the conclusion that the "Big Picture" is going to take time, so focusing on Projects that will aid in putting Wildlife back on the landscape, is my focus.
Hopefully the "Big Picture" can catch up.

[boxhitch]

Pemby-mess , saw an example of disturbance on winter range just today, though on a much smaller scale.
A group of snowshoers were out for tromp in an area that generallly gets no winter traffic. They kicked up a bull moose, and continued to pursue it to try and get a picture for FB.
1400 m elevation and about 1.5 m. of snow, cut into his energy reserves maybe?
Small in the big picture sense, but another example of how backcountry and wilderness recreation is changing.


when it comes to allocating dollars toward wildlife rehab, you're not going to get anywhere if the wildlife doesn't have somewhere to rehab in,The goal has to be 'safe habitat'. Agreed, all the food in th eworld is still a death sentence to get to if it isn't safe.

[guest]

Great example above Box.....
Another is the Heli sking companies near Valemount - Blue river. The once abundant caribou, mountain goat are slim pickings...... This combined with G Bear and Wolf Predation...... Terrible for their future...... Then lower down in the valleys and ridges.. Snowmobiles ever where. None of which help the critters, and they pay nothing back into wildlife.

[bownut]

Actually it's five regions in central B..C. but FD wouldn't know that because he obviously didn't read it, he's too busy trying to belittle people that have things figured out, very typical, if it doesn't fit his narrative it must be wrong! K

Another attempt to redirect. Old..... so Old..

Funding and a Plan for the future of wildlife.

Questions:

#1 Why is it that Resident Priority stood front and center for so long and now Wildlife Restoration is the Mandate?
#2 Why is it that the major Organization have lost their teeth?
#3 Why is it that more Wildlife Conservation Groups are forming every year?
#4 Why is it that Stakeholders continue to loose ground?
#5 When was the last major wildlife success story?

Audit, Audit, Audit.....

[Pemby_mess]

Great example above Box.....
Another is the Heli sking companies near Valemount - Blue river. The once abundant caribou, mountain goat are slim pickings...... This combined with G Bear and Wolf Predation...... Terrible for their future...... Then lower down in the valleys and ridges..l Snowmobiles ever where. None of which help the critters, and they pay nothing back into wildlife.



well, to be fair - Heliskiers pay 5 bucks per person per day when they're using a park;-)

[boxhitch]

An audit won't get you anywhere unless there is an objective or target to weigh against.
Same with accountability...........if there is no standard, how can you judge if the goal is correct or not?
Yell all you want ' someone has to be to blame' but in reality, there has been no failures or triumphs because there is no objective to measure against.

[bearvalley]

.........if there is no standard, how can you judge if the goal is correct or not?
Yell all you want ' someone has to be to blame' but in reality, there has been no failures or triumphs because there is no objective to measure against.

This is so true it hurts......

[boxhitch]

Great example above Box.....
Another is the Heli sking companies near Valemount - Blue river. The once abundant caribou, mountain goat are slim pickings...... This combined with G Bear and Wolf Predation...... Terrible for their future...... Then lower down in the valleys and ridges.. Snowmobiles ever where. None of which help the critters, and they pay nothing back into wildlife.Heli ops are/were watched fairly closely, mostly in regard to goats and caribou, they are the only ones at elevation. Some operators have no-fly zones, but I doubt the enforcement is in place.

What really has me pondering is the proliferation of cat skiing operations. They are filling in the checkerboard in terrain that is not heli suitable, and typically are based a low elevations and drive their way to elevation for the snow sliders. They make roads for snocats to carry passengers up and then the downhill ski routes are what ever the guide decides based solely on snow conditions. These are poaching in on ungulate habitat everywhere, and cat ski ops are growing everywhere.
IMO this is the largest, newest travesty to wildlife, of all sorts, to come down the snowy slope.

Locally, the new Keefer Lake Catskiing is running on some of my favourite haunts.
Wildlife impacts? Who knows.........

[LBM]

I didn't bother reading all these pages...some to get a feel where people were going etc.
I haven't seen any government spend a whole lot of time with putting money into habitat.
I know there are a few on here who do prescribe burns (not sure if they are paid or volunteered??)
Anyways, they all stated they wish the government of the days would have put more funding in to do more burns.
(with all the pine beetle kill...mother nature is going to take care of it)
As far a logging is concerned...well, along with all that "hauling out timber before the beetle got to it" era, that is still continuing on as we speak, it has created a lot of extra roads...seen it in Merrit...seen it in Cache Creek...seen it
in the EK.
All that access does not help, and the access doesn't concern me as much with law abiding hunters, but with those that poach or do not need to claim what they take.
Another thing that I would like to see is accountability on the FN part, so that we do have "better numbers" to throw
into our data, so that "we all" know what tis going on better....hard to use science when the #'s are skewed..IMO.
And if logging had created that prime habitat, we wouldn't be discussing things right now, as god knows we have enough of that in the province, and if that was the case, we should be tripping over game...but were not.
Yes, I also have a friend, a licensed forester, who has practiced for 30 years now....he knows the good...
and the bad with forestry...and there is bad as well.
I may at some point, show what happens, when there are "some clear cuts" present, and they are positive, but I can also describe my experience what happens when new ones are created, right beside an old one (that produced really well when harvesting elk), but then grew up....but, then shortly after a fire came along, on the opposite side of the new cut block and old cut block....well it isn't hard to for me to tell you, the fire won hands down when it came to what the wildlife chose to hang in.
Predators...yup...they need to be "mowed down" to a level that other wildlife can once again begin to thrive in.
Sad point is, many in the ministry feel that the pred #'s should drop the "natural way", and if that's is the case, we will see continued declines in ungulates until a point where we are restricted beyond belief, and finally the preds begin to starve...no idea when that will be, but I think we haven't quite reached the "peak" of pred #'s yet, so we still have time to go and watch it get worse if nothing is done.
Hunter restrictions...sure, go for it!...but...I have seen them applied more and more, year after year, for 40 years now, and at times, they helped...initially....but then the #'s collapsed regardless of all the restrictions.
So...go ahead....restrict away...try and make "trophy sized game" that way.
For those that want only "trophy hunting", maybe restrictions will help...for now...but you will be disappointed down the road when suddenly there is no game around anyways...because other factors, the "real factors", in my opinion,
never got addressed.
And for those that want "meat on the table", good luck....you will be stuck in the middle of the squabble you see right now, where the term "trophy" is being used against you, and your future rights to hunt...or will be liomited in the "experience" of what creatures you will be able to hunt.
The one thing that I have never seen in all the years of hunting, is the government spending "tons of cash" on fixing our habitat...only pennies on the dollars we have spent.
At the same time, I keep watching other user groups coming into an area, that once was only utilized by hunters.
Do I even need to mention Resorts and Condos, and Industry...something that is not going away, will only continue to expand...and yet they pay nothing into it.
All the above is what "I think" is wrong with our Wildlife Situation,...and it is not just 1 thing...but all those things
working against us.
They all need some proper addressing and "implementation" is most certainly needed.
I am all for studies, and better studies....but right now, I would like to see some "action" on the studies we have already done.

IMO a lot you say does more damage then good.
You keep bringing up Trophy hunting and how bad it is, personally don't like the term but one way to look at it from a conservation point is
say in a 10 year period a Trophy hunter may take 1or 2 animals were a meat hunter may take 3 a year so 2 vs 30 over a 10 year period, now
since many on here say most people are meat hunters, so in theory which group is harder on the wildlife populations.

[Pemby_mess]

Pemby-mess , saw an example of disturbance on winter range just today, though on a much smaller scale.
A group of snowshoers were out for tromp in an area that generallly gets no winter traffic. They kicked up a bull moose, and continued to pursue it to try and get a picture for FB.
1400 m elevation and about 1.5 m. of snow, cut into his energy reserves maybe?
Small in the big picture sense, but another example of how backcountry and wilderness recreation is changing.

The goal has to be 'safe habitat'. Agreed, all the food in th eworld is still a death sentence to get to if it isn't safe.

Yeah, for sure. I think your example is kinda "small potatoes", compared to a lot of what goes on, but it all adds up. A challenge that recreational use presents, in whatever format it takes, is that it's very hard to control. Especially compared to activities that require some sort of licencing; even if those licenced activities have s broader, more acute impact.

I think the consequences that a single 150km long sled route, with 20-30 sleds per day, heading into mountain caribou habitat, have on ungulate winter survival are pretty hard to under state. People might focus on the noise, and minimal pollution they emanate; but having hard tracks in a world of waist deep snow, and breakable crust - is of paramount understanding to the health of game populations.

It won't be popular with anyone, but the use of wilderness areas really needs a good hard look to assess all the real risks involved. This is why a multi stakeholder round table approach is so vital for figuring out the solutions to this kind of stuff.

[Fisher-Dude]

One thing about resource road expansion and access that seems to be missed so far in the conversation; rds don't provide access for just hunters. Licensed hunters having easy access is probably of little relative concern. The statistics being shared so far seem to bare that out.

I'm astonished that some people commenting don't see the connection between rise in predator populations and diminishing habitat. It's not an either or issue.

Roads increase access for wilderness users other than hunters too. Certain types of wildlife will adjust to that pressure by changing how they use the landscape. In some cases it will make them more vulnerable to predators. A pack of wolves is just as functionally exploitative than any group of humans, only they don't have bag limits, and their population explodes when they find an advantage to exploit. Roads in many cases can provide that advantage.

Now, let's combine a rd with use of snowmobiles, or one that is plowed for winter operations. Wolves can now use that road to travel vast distances following game, all while staying aerobically fresh. Well below their thresholds. When they're able to push some game in the area off a rd into the deep snow where a wolf already holds the upper hand, it's over for the prey - whereas they stood a fighting chance but not for the road being accessible.

when it comes to allocating dollars toward wildlife rehab, you're not going to get anywhere if the wildlife doesn't have somewhere to rehab in, and realistically you're not going to cost effectively put a dent in predator populations. On the other hand, Wolves naturally overshoot capacity and go into decline, all the time. In a virgin environment that all the animals have adapted equally to, that overshoot comes much sooner. Humans do have large impacts in sometimes less than intuitive ways and trying to rehab game pops in an environment where wolves have a decided advantage, over and above their pre-existing talents, is a losing proposition. Sure, deer and moose love the cuts, but so do hunters (regulated or otherwise) and all the other predators too!

Agreed. Lots of study on this has already been done, and the dogs are the biggest, baddest, most effective road hunters out there.


An audit won't get you anywhere unless there is an objective or target to weigh against.
Same with accountability...........if there is no standard, how can you judge if the goal is correct or not?
Yell all you want ' someone has to be to blame' but in reality, there has been no failures or triumphs because there is no objective to measure against.

People like to throw the word "audit" around, but few know what an audit actually is. People who audit for a living know, and groomer dudes know too, evidently!

Again, all government departments are audited annually by professional, independent, licenced auditors. Some people like to wear tinfoil hats and dream of finding someone to blame on issues they don't understand, but in reality, wasting resources doing redundant audits instead of pouring that money into fish and wildlife is just stupid.

[boxhitch]

This is why a multi stakeholder round table approach is so vital for figuring out the solutions to this kind of stuff.
And exactly why it will never work
Every special interest group that is at the table will want things to favour their way
and the answer will be compromise and the result will be a mediocrity that benefits no one.

What we need is champions to leave the table behind and get something done.

[steepNdeep]

No, you posted about MOOSE populations, and how greedy people would shoot them and ignore conservation, yet the chart you promoted above states that hunting only accounts for 2% of mortalities.

It''s a fact that WK moose populations are also weak - thus the LEH. The greedy comment was just to piss off someone that was being an @ss. Apparently, it worked. lol...


Theres an an education program going on there.
FN’s are stepping up to the plate and asking their people for accountability and numbers.
They are taking less game than in the past.
One band I’m aware of that was impacted by last summers fires has even gone as far as signing an MOU that enables the COS to charge any of their members hunting in area that was closed to hunting due to fires.
I think everyone needs to remember that FN’s under our constitution can hunt and kill the share of wildlife granted to them.....without a license if it is within their traditional territory.
Calling a moose, elk or deer “poached” as some do, just because it is found outside the time frame of our licensed season is ludicrous.
Education is the key to correction here....not finger pointing.

Good point bearvalley. I've personally never seen a problem with FN hunters. I understand they they have their own rules & bag limits, which is fine with me. (They lost everything else.) A small tribe came over a couple of times when they first opened up the WK elk & hammered a few big bulls before the opener, but at least they waited until there was an open season.

There's lots of internet rumours, but the FN guys that I know are stand-up guys & awesome hunters. I was stuck on the top of a mountain for a couple of days in the snow & a friend of an associate bent over backwards to help me out & he had just met me. He was FN's & it was in the middle of his cousin's funeral weekend & he spent half a day to help get me off the mountain!

[Pemby_mess]

And exactly why it will never work
Every special interest group that is at the table will want things to favour their way
and the answer will be compromise and the result will be a mediocrity that benefits no one.

What we need is champions to leave the table behind and get something done.

some of that seems defeatest to me. Compromise is the only thing that ever works. Jump right into something, and watch all the people whom have objectives counter to yours, jump in right after you and mess things up. You can start trying to come up with ways to blame them for the failure of your plan, or come up with ways to work together with them and achieve mostly what everybody wants.

That process can sometimes be easy, or not, depending on what's specifically at stake, but I can't think of a single example that involves groups of people getting anything of signifigance done, without being willing to compromise on some level first. If that wasn't the case, we'd just do everything by ourselves, and never cooperate, because it's easier and doesn't involve any higher level social functioning.

Champions are people that love to compromise in order to get things done, but make it look fun and easy.

[boxhitch]

What you say is all true and maybe my outlook is out of line. I must be feeling a bit jaded from a few past events.

The new round table will be different though , in that if it comes together the way Thompson promised, the participants will actually have some funds$$$ to spend
In the past wildlife management discussions have all pointed to the need for data and the need for funding.

BC's HCTF is a good example of how things could work, a good model to use albeit the table would be larger for more participants
The table is to include resource consumers and developers also? , should make for some interesting times for compromise

Onward and forward

[338win mag]

And exactly why it will never work
Every special interest group that is at the table will want things to favour their way
and the answer will be compromise and the result will be a mediocrity that benefits no one.

What we need is champions to leave the table behind and get something done.

Your exactly right here.

[338win mag]

It''s a fact that WK moose populations are also weak - thus the LEH. The greedy comment was just to piss off someone that was being an @ss. Apparently, it worked. lol...



Good point bearvalley. I've personally never seen a problem with FN hunters. I understand they they have their own rules & bag limits, which is fine with me. (They lost everything else.) A small tribe came over a couple of times when they first opened up the WK elk & hammered a few big bulls before the opener, but at least they waited until there was an open season.

There's lots of internet rumours, but the FN guys that I know are stand-up guys & awesome hunters. I was stuck on the top of a mountain for a couple of days in the snow & a friend of an associate bent over backwards to help me out & he had just met me. He was FN's & it was in the middle of his cousin's funeral weekend & he spent half a day to help get me off the mountain!
Where to start here?? Ok you live in an area where there are no FN, no reserves, etc
I usually hunt in "indian" country next to the res and also have never seen to many issue's, I hear rumours to, and depending on who/where they are coming, they are just that, rumours.

Their own bag limits, who decides that?
On the larger planned hunts they have rules no doubt, its billy bob and his cousin who go out and shoot several does for dog food that is a more "controllable" problem. I dont have a problem with reasonable "indian hunting"

The reason they waited for an "open season" is because they had to.
Bearvalley is correct when he says many indian bands are leading the way in accountability for their own hunting activities, good on them for doing so...this really needs to happen right across Canada.

[338win mag]

some of that seems defeatest to me. Compromise is the only thing that ever works. Jump right into something, and watch all the people whom have objectives counter to yours, jump in right after you and mess things up. You can start trying to come up with ways to blame them for the failure of your plan, or come up with ways to work together with them and achieve mostly what everybody wants.

That process can sometimes be easy, or not, depending on what's specifically at stake, but I can't think of a single example that involves groups of people getting anything of signifigance done, without being willing to compromise on some level first. If that wasn't the case, we'd just do everything by ourselves, and never cooperate, because it's easier and doesn't involve any higher level social functioning.

Champions are people that love to compromise in order to get things done, but make it look fun and easy.

Sounds defeatest?? sounds realistic to me, not sure if the United nations approach will work, we will see.

Your idea of a Champion differs from mine, Champions I have known are anything but fun and easy.
I could be completely wrong about human nature, hope so.

[bownut]

an audit won't get you anywhere unless there is an objective or target to weigh against.
Same with accountability...........if there is no standard, how can you judge if the goal is correct or not?
Yell all you want ' someone has to be to blame' but in reality, there has been no failures or triumphs because there is no objective to measure against.

thank you!

[bownut]

Agreed. Lots of study on this has already been done, and the dogs are the biggest, baddest, most effective road hunters out there.



People like to throw the word "audit" around, but few know what an audit actually is. People who audit for a living know, and groomer dudes know too, evidently!

Again, all government departments are audited annually by professional, independent, licenced auditors. Some people like to wear tinfoil hats and dream of finding someone to blame on issues they don't understand, but in reality, wasting resources doing redundant audits instead of pouring that money into fish and wildlife is just stupid.

Why is it the BCWF has spent so much time and money Scratching at Allocation and Resident Priority and now the main focus is on Wildlife Restoration? Was this a complete waste of resources?
It's not about placing blame, it's about looking at the past records and moving forward.
Forget the Government Audit, it starts with your local clubs and Wildlife Organizations. As a paying member we should all ask why?

[Fisher-Dude]

And exactly why it will never work
Every special interest group that is at the table will want things to favour their way
and the answer will be compromise and the result will be a mediocrity that benefits no one.

What we need is champions to leave the table behind and get something done.

Champions from various user groups would be people who first and foremost understand the concept of consensus. Few really do.

But when we look back to the LRMP days and the diverse groups that came together to an agreement and workable plan, we know it has happened in the past.

Groups that want to be part of the process better vet their reps carefully. That will be a challenge with the crazed left wing air of moral and ethical superiority that infests some of the players, so it will be a much more complicated process than the LRMP days of people who were actually concerned about the resource, instead of concerned about "feelings" around crossbows/doe seasons/4 points/grizzly bears/hunting regulations/audits/Christy Clark/quads/spears/cougars/FN/whatever.

[Fisher-Dude]

Why is it the BCWF has spent so much time and money Scratching at Allocation and Resident Priority and now the main focus is on Wildlife Restoration? Was this a complete waste of resources?
It's not about placing blame, it's about looking at the past records and moving forward.
Forget the Government Audit, it starts with your local clubs and Wildlife Organizations. As a paying member we should all ask why?

Your post clearly shows that you do indeed not understand what an audit is, even though you're calling for one (or more?) of something.

Research strategic review. Might help you get your rant on track.

[Walking Buffalo]

Champions from various user groups would be people who first and foremost understand the concept of consensus. Few really do.

But when we look back to the LRMP days and the diverse groups that came together to an agreement and workable plan, we know it has happened in the past.

Groups that want to be part of the process better vet their reps carefully. That will be a challenge with the crazed left wing air of moral and ethical superiority that infests some of the players, so it will be a much more complicated process than the LRMP days of people who were actually concerned about the resource, instead of concerned about "feelings" around crossbows/doe seasons/4 points/grizzly bears/hunting regulations/audits/Christy Clark/quads/spears/cougars/FN/whatever.


Consensus.... general agreement. Isn't that the same as social license? Mob rules?


Such a group could only guarantee protection to minority interests (such as hunting) if these activities are entrenched within a legal protection.


So, if a constitution for this group were to include tenants where hunting could NOT be negatively effected except within specific scientific parameters....

That should reduce applications to sit at the table.

[bearvalley]

Consensus.... general agreement. Isn't that the same as social license? Mob rules?


Such a group could only guarantee protection to minority interests (such as hunting) if these activities are entrenched within a legal protection.


So, if a constitution for this group were to include tenants where hunting could NOT be negatively effected except within specific scientific parameters....

That should reduce applications to sit at the table.

Thats were we need to go but is it achievable?

Since 2002 BC has had the Right to Hunt and Fish Act.....we’ve seen how well that was respected by Horgan & Weaver.

If they can legislate a ban on the grizzly hunt what is to stop them from legislating further bans or even a complete ban on all hunting if the emotion swayed public so demands.

We’ve got a long ways to go before we will have a functioning, hunter friendly table under the concept that some are currently pushing for.

Wildlife might be funded to some degree, more than at present, but pseudoscience and emotional motivation will push hunting values aside.

[bownut]

Your post clearly shows that you do indeed not understand what an audit is, even though you're calling for one (or more?) of something.

Research strategic review. Might help you get your rant on track.

I am confused, if Wildlife Restoration is everyone end goal, why has the BCWF waited so long to put it on top of the list. How much has that cost in time and effort?
The Strategic Process seems to be to put the cart before the horse.

How long do you think the membership will survive when other Wildlife Groups put that money on the ground where it belongs?
There are many on going projects already while this so called strategic plan takes effect.

Audit the Administrative costs vs Funded Projects, this would be a good one to start with.
Let the membership see where there money is going and be their own judge.

[Fisher-Dude]

I am confused, if Wildlife Restoration is everyone end goal, why has the BCWF waited so long to put it on top of the list. How much has that cost in time and effort?
The Strategic Process seems to be to put the cart before the horse.

How long do you think the membership will survive when other Wildlife Groups put that money on the ground where it belongs?
There are many on going projects already while this so called strategic plan takes effect.

Audit the Administrative costs vs Funded Projects, this would be a good one to start with.
Let the membership see where there money is going and be their own judge.

BCWF is audited by KPMG every year. Not sure why you want to witch hunt for something else in an organization that you don't even want to be part of.

And the BCWF and its financial statements has absolutely nothing to do with the wildlife funding model.

You're all over the map.

[HarryToolips]

Fly over Reg 8 dana?
Access and habitat fragmentation is a major factor compounded with a strong FN presence in the Okanagan.
(found a poached young bull moose on xmas day)

The regional bio is a good friend and field partner of mine.
He echoes the rd and block density issues in this area.
Getting tough to find old growth that a guy can get lost in.
This I do agree with...yes, I'm an advocate of the short WT doe season we have, and yes I'm seeing decent populations of other ungulates in the areas I frequent for the most part, but the road density I personally would like to see cut down a bit in region 8, not main FSR's, just some more spur roads..I believe the buck:doe ratio for mule deer in some parts of region 8 is low, which can be attributed to FSR density....and as Ourea said, habitat fragmentation and FN hunting are other factors that have more of an impact by FSR density, and when we finally get our funding plan, I for one would like to see them either implement logging companies to do more deactivation, or fund more ourselves if we are left with no other choice....but I do agree with Dana that a deactivated road ain't gonna stop a wolf, but it's the amount of ground they can cover using them that's the issue I would think..

[HarryToolips]

so what would you rather have, large clearcuts or large blowdown fire traps? Have you ever tried to walk in heavy pine blowdown? I'm lucky, I get to it often in my job. I can assure you wildlife don't enjoy it. So, if we didn't log all that pine, that is indeed what you would have. Think of what the wildfires would have been like this past summer then? Hmmm, i guess that you like watching your house burn maybe. You can tell your wife not to worry, the wildlife habitat created where your house once stood will be amazing? Seriously, you want that. Just because something looks 'fragmented' from the air, doesn't mean that is the fact. Did you know the science behind forestry in this province is to actually mimic natural distubance types? Oh yea, i remember, the only science that counts is the one that so and so is preaching today not the one that is actually used by government for managing trees. We get upset at the antis for not allowing us to manage with science but seems hunters want to do the same when it comes to something they know so little about, forestry. All because it 'looks ugly' hahaha.
This I also agree with to a point....I bushwhack quite often and I find areas of some blowdown literally uninhabitable by ungulates....the calories that they would consume just to get through is too much of a loss for them...but there are other areas of old growth that I find that are great bedding areas and sanctuaries from preds...

[HarryToolips]

Good thread bownut & Ourea! Here are 5:


A campaign (primarily via social media) to educate the public (& politicians) about the necessity of an autonomous SCIENCE-BASED wildlife management system. This system must be guaranteed to run in perpetuity without interference from political whims.
A science-based predator management program. This is the elephant in the room that must be addressed. If there are no animals left, what is the point of wildlife habitat? (See *** below)
Habitat conservation programs to protect wintering grounds, migration corridors, etc. (ie: Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation's Conservation Program)
Habitat enhancement programs. Prescribed by wildlife biologists & implemented by grass roots volunteer groups (ie: WKBGTA (haha)
A private fundraising platform to self-fund these programs. (Sounds alot like BCWF... ; )



*** “Determining Factors Affecting Moose Population Change in British Columbia: Testing the Landscape Change Hypothesis.” READ FULL REPORT HERE (http://www.llbc.leg.bc.ca/public/pubdocs/bcdocs2016_2/603453/factors_affecting_moose_population_in_bc.pdf)

BCWF Summary HERE (http://www.bcwf.net/files/2016%20AGM/2016%20AGM%20Presentations/Gerry_Kuzyk_FLNRO_-_Update_on_Provincial_Moose_Research_Project_in_Ce ntral_BC.pdf)

Research to date recovered 49 of the collars from moose that had died & determined that predators killed 21 or 45%:
• cougars killed 2 and a bear killed 1
• wolves killed 18 or 86%

>>> I'd like to see these same stats for deer in this region!


http://fluidstudios.ca/UP/moose.jpg

I really like this......I witness a lot of necessity with #3 in region 8, where urban development continues to infringe on winter range..

[HarryToolips]

Ourea, there was a proposal that the HCTF be tasked with formulating the framework for a funded wildlife model.
$200,000 was earmarked to go to that organization to draw up a blueprint.

Why did it not happen?
Who shut it down?
Why?

Who and why would someone not want the core user groups (trappers, resident hunters, guides, etc) to be granted the lead in putting together a program that benefitted wildlife?

Who and why would anyone push that the anti hunting groups (such as Raincoast) be at the table before a wildlife funding model was even discussed by the core user groups?

Wildlife was sold out.

It looks like all hunters in this province have been sold out as well.

One question needs answered......WHY?
Simple answer...NDP government....the BC Liberals were going to do it....we all need to move forward together as a team..that starts with all of us and our families voting BC Liberal..

[bearvalley]

Simple answer...NDP government....the BC Liberals were going to do it....we all need to move forward together as a team..that starts with all of us and our families voting BC Liberal..

No, it wasn’t the NDP.

[HarryToolips]

No, it wasn’t the NDP.
The BC Liberals were committed to a funding plan if they got in...so where am I wrong here??? The only thing wildlife related the NDGreenes committed to before the election was removing the G bear hunt, or at least the 'trophy' portion..

[boxhitch]

or at least the 'trophy' portion..the rest they just slipped in while they were back there giving us the reach-around

[HarryToolips]

the rest they just slipped in while they were back there giving us the reach-around
LOL yup...............

[bownut]

BCWF is audited by KPMG every year. Not sure why you want to witch hunt for something else in an organization that you don't even want to be part of.

And the BCWF and its financial statements has absolutely nothing to do with the wildlife funding model.

You're all over the map.

All over the map you say..

The topic is about a future funding model, I am not on "Witch Hunt", just trying to understand where we have been going wrong and what the objective is.
I have been a member of the BCWF for many years and will continue to do so if the true objective is to put more Wildlife on the landscape, if not me and many others
will start looking for better representation.
Many organizations have formed lately and are building strength in numbers, projects are ongoing and Wildlife Restoration is the focus.
How long do you think the Liability Insurance that clubs need will keep the BCWF the leader? Thats my worry, it's not a "Witch Hunt", it's a fact.

[HighCountryBC]

Was going through some old notes and powerpoints from presentations I've attended in the past. Looking at one on mule deer and a particular line from Idaho Fish and Game stood out to me.

“Quality habitat is the most significant factor
determining the size and health of mule deer
populations. All other factors, such as weather,
predators, and human-caused mortality, are mitigated
for or exacerbated by quality of habitat.”

Idaho Fish and Game

We saw that first hand in R8 with a very well known burn. Mother Nature provided 25,000ha of much needed
habitat enhancement. Said habitat supported high prey #'s, high pred #'s and high hunter harvest without issue.
Now, the habitat is declining and could be burned again.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Was going through some old notes and powerpoints from presentations I've attended in the past. Looking at one on mule deer and a particular line from Idaho Fish and Game stood out to me.

“Quality habitat is the most significant factor
determining the size and health of mule deer
populations. All other factors, such as weather,
predators, and human-caused mortality, are mitigated
for or exacerbated by quality of habitat.”

Idaho Fish and Game

We saw that first hand in R8 with a very well known burn. Mother Nature provided 25,000ha of much needed
habitat enhancement. Said habitat supported high prey #'s, high pred #'s and high hunter harvest without issue.
Now, the habitat is declining and could be burned again.

Exactly.
Looking forward to the results of the upcoming Reg 8 mule deer collaring project.

[Ourea]

Was going through some old notes and powerpoints from presentations I've attended in the past. Looking at one on mule deer and a particular line from Idaho Fish and Game stood out to me.

“Quality habitat is the most significant factor
determining the size and health of mule deer
populations. All other factors, such as weather,
predators, and human-caused mortality, are mitigated
for or exacerbated by quality of habitat.”

Idaho Fish and Game

We saw that first hand in R8 with a very well known burn. Mother Nature provided 25,000ha of much needed
habitat enhancement. Said habitat supported high prey #'s, high pred #'s and high hunter harvest without issue.
Now, the habitat is declining and could be burned again.

What???!!!
Kidding aside.....

We watched said area explode within two yrs of that fire.
Pre-fire a guy could hunt hard to see a couple bucks in a day.
Post fire, to see twenty legal bucks in a day during the rut was not uncommon.
Dozens of 190+ bucks came out of that general area.
Success rates were extremely high.

There has been a huge decline in MD numbers since the new habitat matured out around yr nine.
Burn it again and the same results will be achieved.

Habitat.
The better it is the better the numbers.

[HarryToolips]

^^^^yup....aren't mule deer doing better now in the rock creek area now after that fire as well??

[358mag]

Exactly.
Looking forward to the results of the upcoming Reg 8 mule deer collaring project.
Yes going to be very interesting , just hope they can find there 25+ target bucks to hang collars on .

[gcreek]

Was going through some old notes and powerpoints from presentations I've attended in the past. Looking at one on mule deer and a particular line from Idaho Fish and Game stood out to me.

“Quality habitat is the most significant factor
determining the size and health of mule deer
populations. All other factors, such as weather,
predators, and human-caused mortality, are mitigated
for or exacerbated by quality of habitat.”

Idaho Fish and Game

We saw that first hand in R8 with a very well known burn. Mother Nature provided 25,000ha of much needed
habitat enhancement. Said habitat supported high prey #'s, high pred #'s and high hunter harvest without issue.
Now, the habitat is declining and could be burned again.


Is that why so many deer love to live on and near irrigated alfalfa fields?

[Dannybuoy]

Is that why so many deer love to live on and near irrigated alfalfa fields?
Well that and Idaho only listed cougar and coyotes as predators and controlled their populations as needed .

[HighCountryBC]

Habitat is the great equalizer.

The bottom line is that quality habitat will support high numbers of both predator and prey while shitty habitat doesn't.
No point spending a bunch of money pounding predators if the animals you're trying to help out don't have any groceries.
Habitat first. Always.

[Dannybuoy]

Habitat is the great equalizer.

The bottom line is that quality habitat will support high numbers of both predator and prey while shitty habitat doesn't.
No point spending a bunch of money pounding predators if the animals you're trying to help out don't have any groceries.
Habitat first. Always. I agree and we do have more habitat than game so ....
Edit I disagree that you can have a high number of predators esp when its wolf .....

[Rob Chipman]

"Idaho only listed cougar and coyotes as predators and controlled their populations as needed ."

I recall the presentation on Idaho mule deer management actually said they conducted predator suppression experiments, found it reduced predator mortality but not total mortality, and stopped it as too expensive and unproductive.

Gcreek: what about irrigated alfalfa isn't quality habitat? I get that it's man made, but it certainly addresses the nutrition side of things. Again, the Idaho mule deer management presentation stressed weather (i.e. moisture, especially in fall, greeting stuff up, which your alfalfa does) and the role that it plays in nutrition.

[Dannybuoy]

"Idaho only listed cougar and coyotes as predators and controlled their populations as needed ."

I recall the presentation on Idaho mule deer management actually said they conducted predator suppression experiments, found it reduced predator mortality but not total mortality, and stopped it as too expensive and unproductive.


I just read the report and it states quite the opposite saying predator control is relatively cheap and easy because cougar and coyotes are easy to target and control the numbers .

[Pemby_mess]

"Idaho only listed cougar and coyotes as predators and controlled their populations as needed ."

I recall the presentation on Idaho mule deer management actually said they conducted predator suppression experiments, found it reduced predator mortality but not total mortality, and stopped it as too expensive and unproductive.

Gcreek: what about irrigated alfalfa isn't quality habitat? I get that it's man made, but it certainly addresses the nutrition side of things. Again, the Idaho mule deer management presentation stressed weather (i.e. moisture, especially in fall, greeting stuff up, which your alfalfa does) and the role that it plays in nutrition.




I just read the report and it states quite the opposite saying predator control is relatively cheap and easy because cougar and coyotes are easy to target and control the numbers .

but it what you're saying isn't the opposite of what rob is saying at all.

Pedator management may in fact be cheaper than habitat restoration. That doesn't mean it gets the same results. If the result you're after is to reduce predators, than killing the may be cheap and effective. That doesn't mean you will effectively increase the capacity of the habitat to carry a higher population of ungulates. That's what rob means when he says no reduction in total mortality.

[Fisher-Dude]

Wolf and coyote control was found to be compensatory in mule deer survival.

While mortalities from wolves and coyotes dropped, overall mortality remained basically unchanged, and mule deer population levels did not increase.

Once again, it's habitat, habitat, habitat.

[Dannybuoy]

Wolf and coyote control was found to be compensatory in mule deer survival.

While mortalities from wolves and coyotes dropped, overall mortality remained basically unchanged, and mule deer population levels did not increase.

Once again, it's habitat, habitat, habitat. WTF does that even mean .... Are you not paying attention ?

[bearvalley]

Wolf and coyote control was found to be compensatory in mule deer survival.

While mortalities from wolves and coyotes dropped, overall mortality remained basically unchanged, and mule deer population levels did not increase.

Once again, it's habitat, habitat, habitat.

The solution is a combination of both....period.

We can bullshit ourselves forever that habitat is the correction on its own.

The fact is that wildlife numbers are dropping even where habitat has not been severely impacted.
Predation is the issue in these places of suitable habitat.
These are areas that show no disease in wildlife, no hiway or train kills and no negative logging or industrial repercussions.

Ignoring predators will keep game populations in check or declining until we either manage the predators or they run out of groceries and balance themselves out....it’s our choice if we want to wait.

What is the agenda behind some that don’t want to face reality and admit predation is a problem?

Theres a deeply rooted belief that predators should be left untouched, is this due to the anti movement being entrenched deeper than we would like to admit within bureaucracy.

[Ourea]

The solution is a combination of both....period.

We can bullshit ourselves forever that habitat is the correction on its own.

The fact is that wildlife numbers are dropping even where habitat has not been severely impacted.
Predation is the issue in these places of suitable habitat.
These are areas that show no disease in wildlife, no hiway or train kills and no negative logging or industrial repercussions.

Ignoring predators will keep game populations in check or declining until we either manage the predators or they run out of groceries and balance themselves out....it’s our choice if we want to wait.

What is the agenda behind some that don’t want to face reality and admit predation is a problem?

Theres a deeply rooted belief that predators should be left untouched, is this due to the anti movement being entrenched deeper than we would like to admit within bureaucracy.

And there lies the toughest challenge........

[bownut]

Was going through some old notes and powerpoints from presentations I've attended in the past. Looking at one on mule deer and a particular line from Idaho Fish and Game stood out to me.

“Quality habitat is the most significant factor
determining the size and health of mule deer
populations. All other factors, such as weather,
predators, and human-caused mortality, are mitigated
for or exacerbated by quality of habitat.”

Idaho Fish and Game

We saw that first hand in R8 with a very well known burn. Mother Nature provided 25,000ha of much needed
habitat enhancement. Said habitat supported high prey #'s, high pred #'s and high hunter harvest without issue.
Now, the habitat is declining and could be burned again.

Predators and Vimy Ridge may have something to do with it also..

[LBM]

The solution is a combination of both....period.

We can bullshit ourselves forever that habitat is the correction on its own.

The fact is that wildlife numbers are dropping even where habitat has not been severely impacted.
Predation is the issue in these places of suitable habitat.
These are areas that show no disease in wildlife, no hiway or train kills and no negative logging or industrial repercussions.

Ignoring predators will keep game populations in check or declining until we either manage the predators or they run out of groceries and balance themselves out....it’s our choice if we want to wait.

What is the agenda behind some that don’t want to face reality and admit predation is a problem?

Theres a deeply rooted belief that predators should be left untouched, is this due to the anti movement being entrenched deeper than we would like to admit within bureaucracy.

Each region and in many cases MU is different in some it may be a predation issue others not. In some predation may have an affect now but was not the cause of the decline to start with.
Many of the declines are associated with human or human activity. Some of these declines started 30 plus years ago but others didn't care or believe it till it was to late.

[Fisher-Dude]

The solution is a combination of both....period.

We can bullshit ourselves forever that habitat is the correction on its own.

The fact is that wildlife numbers are dropping even where habitat has not been severely impacted.
Predation is the issue in these places of suitable habitat.
These are areas that show no disease in wildlife, no hiway or train kills and no negative logging or industrial repercussions.

Ignoring predators will keep game populations in check or declining until we either manage the predators or they run out of groceries and balance themselves out....it’s our choice if we want to wait.

What is the agenda behind some that don’t want to face reality and admit predation is a problem?

Theres a deeply rooted belief that predators should be left untouched, is this due to the anti movement being entrenched deeper than we would like to admit within bureaucracy.

I don't think your motivations on the predator front are solely for wildlife, and therein lies your inherent bias against the science that indicates something different from what you promote.

I also don't think scarce wildlife funding dollars should be diverted to propping up your primary source of income under the guise of helping mule deer.


https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/img/editorial/2014/01/29/101374915-186501746.530x298.jpg?v=1485533269

[bearvalley]

I don't think your motivations on the predator front are solely for wildlife, and therein lies your inherent bias against the science that indicates something different from what you promote.

I also don't think scarce wildlife funding dollars should be diverted to propping up your primary source of income under the guise of helping mule deer.


https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/img/editorial/2014/01/29/101374915-186501746.530x298.jpg?v=1485533269

Pat, there are zero government wildlife dollars put into predator control around my ranch.

In fact wolf management for both the benefit of wildlife and to stop an excessive livestock predation issue was and is being funded solely me.

What the F*** have you personally contributed other than noise on here.

I would suggest that you, your club and a couple of chosen Fed members have your own agenda and it’s not for the good of any other than your own little circle.

Carry on beating the Goats drum Fisher-Dude....

[bearvalley]

Each region and in many cases MU is different in some it may be a predation issue others not. In some predation may have an affect now but was not the cause of the decline to start with.
Many of the declines are associated with human or human activity. Some of these declines started 30 plus years ago but others didn't care or believe it till it was to late.

This is true.

The entire mess has been created by a combination of negative factors.

Whether resource extraction and the access created, urban expansion, hiways....etc caused the decline, predation has slowed the recovery even in areas that the habitat has or is improving.

In the last 30 plus years wolves & bears have both increased in much of the province....no matter what we want to blame that on, it’s happened.

Habitat will be a slow fix, any form of predator control is off the radar with the current government and probably the next.

One finger no one wants to point is at ourselves.

We cant expect to have our current “oppurtunities” and “access” to wildlife without a change in how predation is managed.

Either the 4 legged predation needs to slow down or the 2 legged will.
The only ones capable of making that choice is us.

It strikes me funny that one organization continually throws out 3 words....priority, oppurtunity and access and then claims to be the saviour of wildlife.

Their blinders are on.

[gcreek]

I don't think your motivations on the predator front are solely for wildlife, and therein lies your inherent bias against the science that indicates something different from what you promote.

I also don't think scarce wildlife funding dollars should be diverted to propping up your primary source of income under the guise of helping mule deer.


https://fm.cnbc.com/applications/cnbc.com/resources/img/editorial/2014/01/29/101374915-186501746.530x298.jpg?v=1485533269




Does it matter? You need to pull your head out of your narrow minded, self serving butt and think about what is best for the whole picture instead of copying the NDP platform concerning the grizzly ban where only a certain group is counted.

What are you trying to protect? GoatGuy's precious predators?

[Pemby_mess]

Wolf and coyote control was found to be compensatory in mule deer survival.

While mortalities from wolves and coyotes dropped, overall mortality remained basically unchanged, and mule deer population levels did not increase.

Once again, it's habitat, habitat, habitat.


WTF does that even mean .... Are you not paying attention ?

It means something out there kills ungulates no matter what. Let's say we fund an incredibly successful initiative to eliminate 90% of the predator load. Ungulates will proliferate the next season, but......if the carrying capacity of the habitat hadn't also grown commensurate with their increased population, they immediately crash through the mechanisms of starvation and disease.

Therefore, the studies state predation has very little impact on overall mortality.

Increase the land's carrying capacity and you'll see a rise in both predator and ungulate numbers. Policies that allow for the periodic culling of predators in abundance certainly won't hurt, but it's not a primary factor behind how many animals the land itself is able to support.

keep in mind, predators aren't exactly in direct competition with human hunters. They tend to target the weak and genetically inferior animals, ultimately benefitting the characteristics and resiliency of the herd as a whole. They can control outbreaks of disease before they start.

Now, of course, since significant habitat disturbance is an ongoing reality, and those disturbances often favor certain predators; some ongoing control is always going to be necessary to achieve widespread results.

when it comes to deciding where to spend money, it makes sense to concentrate on efforts that create a holistically robust system, rather than tinkering at its margins.

with respect to fundraising optics:

hunters advocating for habitat integrity is two rivers of effort meeting at a confluence; whereas advocating for publicly funded predator culling is like trying to swim upstream of said confluence.

[bearvalley]

Does it matter? You need to pull your head out of your narrow minded, self serving butt and think about what is best for the whole picture instead of copying the NDP platform concerning the grizzly ban where only a certain group is counted.


What are you trying to protect? GoatGuy's precious predators?

More like the Goat himself.
It’s called rally the troops or pull in the henchmen....however you want to put it.

[gcreek]

It means something out there kills ungulates no matter what. Let's say we fund an incredibly successful initiative to eliminate 90% of the predator load. Ungulates will proliferate the next season, but......if the carrying capacity of the habitat hadn't also grown commensurate with their increased population, they immediately crash through the mechanisms of starvation and disease.

Therefore, the studies state predation has very little impact on overall mortality.

Increase the land's carrying capacity and you'll see a rise in both predator and ungulate numbers. Policies that allow for the periodic culling of predators in abundance certainly won't hurt, but it's not a primary factor behind how many animals the land itself is able to support.

keep in mind, predators aren't exactly in direct competition with human hunters. They tend to target the weak and genetically inferior animals, ultimately benefitting the characteristics and resiliency of the herd as a whole. They can control outbreaks of disease before they start.

Now, of course, since significant habitat disturbance is an ongoing reality, and those disturbances often favor certain predators; some ongoing control is always going to be necessary to achieve widespread results.

when it comes to deciding where to spend money, it makes sense to concentrate on efforts that create a holistically robust system, rather than tinkering at its margins.

with respect to fundraising optics:

hunters advocating for habitat integrity is two rivers of effort meeting at a confluence; whereas advocating for publicly funded predator culling is like trying to swim upstream of said confluence.


Please Sir, try living where you can see the changes in 40 years and then make comments with your own experience instead of quoting those with a different agenda in mind.

There are 10's of thousands of hecates of prime moose habitat in this area and no moose to speak of left. I've witnessed the changes.

[Pemby_mess]

Wolf and coyote control was found to be compensatory in mule deer survival.

While mortalities from wolves and coyotes dropped, overall mortality remained basically unchanged, and mule deer population levels did not increase.

Once again, it's habitat, habitat, habitat.


Please Sir, try living where you can see the changes in 40 years and then make comments with your own experience instead of quoting those with a different agenda in mind.

There are 10's of thousands of hecates of prime moose habitat in this area and no moose to speak of left. I've witnessed the changes.

it may help trying to understand the differences you see in qualatative terms vs quantative.

for example: although it may seem like there is as much wildlife habitat as there's always been, quantatively; there may be many qualatative details that have changed. Such as; more cattle, more roads, more fences, poorly maintained monocropped forestry stands, pressure on water resources, etc etc.

Im not saying that you do not have a problem with predators as they interact with ungulates like moose; just that it may in fact be the qualatative habitat factors that are exacerbating that problem. With complex wound management, more effective results will be had by treating the underlying systemic cause of the wound's infection, rather than just periodically wiping the pus away, hoping for a better outcome.

[bownut]

The drop in hunters number was the start of the end, BCWF hired on a director to find ways to turn it around. The best tool in their box was to increase hunter opportunity and fast track the process allow it.
Sustainable wildlife populations became a question and now we are where we are. It's too bad that the focus wasn't on Wildlife Restoration at the start, maybe hunter opportunity would never been a concern.

Not many success stories so far, I sure hope his new title gets something happening soon. Like I said before have a look at the past spendings and make some changes.

The clock is ticking, we are one bad winter away from a total meltdown..

[Ourea]

The drop in hunters number was the start of the end, BCWF hired on a director to find ways to turn it around. The best tool in their box was to increase hunter opportunity and fast track the process allow it.
Sustainable wildlife populations became a question and now we are where we are. It's too bad that the focus wasn't on Wildlife Restoration at the start, maybe hunter opportunity would never been a concern.

Not many success stories so far, I sure hope his new title gets something happening soon. Like I said before have a look at the past spendings and make some changes.

The clock is ticking, we are one bad winter away from a total meltdown..

Hashing the past has no impact on the future.
Yesterday is just that, yesterday.

It will take a lot of effort behind the scenes but there is a "will" building.

Funny, we all look to hang blame on someone or group as responsible for a collective problem.
The mirror is the best place to start.

[bearvalley]

Hashing the past has no impact on the future.
Yesterday is just that, yesterday.

It will take a lot of effort behind the scenes but there is a "will" building.

Funny, we all look to hang blame on someone or group as responsible for a collective problem.
The mirror is the best place to start.

Priority, maximum harvest opportunity and continued access are something we all need to think about.
These are not growers of wildlife, even if one group pushes this agenda.

[Ourea]

Priority, maximum harvest opportunity and continued access are something we all need to think about.
These are not growers of wildlife, even if one group pushes this agenda.

That's obvious.
Next issue?

[bownut]

That's obvious.
Next issue?

Funding I guess?
Time to gather up the volunteers the projects are piling up.

[Rob Chipman]

Dannybouy:

"I just read the report and it states quite the opposite saying predator control is relatively cheap and easy because cougar and coyotes are easy to target and control the numbers ."

If we're talking about the same study (I'm talking about one referenced by Dr. Mark Hebblewhite at UBC-Kelowna presentation) he said that total mortality stayed about the same, so despite how cheap the predator control was it didn't create (or save) more deer at the end of the day.

He also said that it could be a way to create more trophy class bucks, but that Idaho F&G did the math and determined that those bucks would be very, very expensive.


So...are we talking the same study? Because, frankly, a study that shows that knocking down preds is effective would be a handy study to have. Can you send me the link? (Saves me getting confused).

[gcreek]

it may help trying to understand the differences you see in qualatative terms vs quantative.

for example: although it may seem like there is as much wildlife habitat as there's always been, quantatively; there may be many qualatative details that have changed. Such as; more cattle, more roads, more fences, poorly maintained monocropped forestry stands, pressure on water resources, etc etc.

Im not saying that you do not have a problem with predators as they interact with ungulates like moose; just that it may in fact be the qualatative habitat factors that are exacerbating that problem. With complex wound management, more effective results will be had by treating the underlying systemic cause of the wound's infection, rather than just periodically wiping the pus away, hoping for a better outcome.

I'm not an expert nor do I claim to have all the high touted eddicashun that all these experts got but I do know what I have witnessed. If you care to discuss this you can pm me your phone number and I'll gladly set you straight. Haha

I do know that in my immediate area, the slaughter of the late 80s and early 90s, the unregulated native hunt on the same road and a governmenr's reluctance to deal with predators are the main factors to the loss of moose here. To a lesser degree, preventing ranchers from burning old swamp grass and brush in the spring might have some effect on the habitat.

There are are no more cows, very few more roads, the cut locks logged between 1986 and 1991 are all thick and 15 to 20 ft tall now and the latest logging has been minimal. There has never been any chemical sprayed here either.

The main factors are wolves and grizzlies.

The longer the experts keep pulling wool over the believers eyes, the longer the studies will last with no conclusion and the less game you will have in the bush.

Just for discussion sake, how much "natural habitat" is on the prairies of Alberta and Sask. where moose are flourishing?

[bearvalley]

That's obvious.
Next issue?

I think we are pointing at 2 different groups.
One, you and I aren’t going to change.
The thinking of the other..........?

[Rob Chipman]

"What is the agenda behind some that don’t want to face reality and admit predation is a problem?"

Speaking for myself, I don't have an agenda. I realize, however, that killing predators is a very touchy subject. Some people may not like that fact (looking at you, bearvalley and gcreek), but fact it is. And as Mark Hebblewhite said (and I think he was pretty reasonable): targeted predator removal can sometimes be effective, but you better make really sure that you've got your ducks in a row, because if it doesn't work the cost in terms of social license is very high.

So, how would you go about making the sale to the general public on predator control? That's what's required, right? We agree on that, at least, I'm sure (cause if you disagree please explain what just happened with the G-bear hunt).


(Speaking for myself I think it's easy to believe that 65,000 or so sq. miles of beetle kill and the subsequent changes to the landscape could easily do many crazy things, including putting a predator load way, way out of whack. Thing is, you don't need to convince me. You need to convince cat ladies in Burnaby).

[Ourea]

I think we are pointing at 2 different groups.
One, you and I aren’t going to change.
The thinking of the other..........?

Change.
Last time I checked that's how progress happens.

[Dannybuoy]

Rob , I was referring to the Idaho mule deer management plan 2008 -2017 www.idaholandcan.org .
It clearly suggests that when the mule deer pop is under carrying capacity (which ours is ) the more dramatic effect each and every
predator kill has ...etc etc .

[Pemby_mess]

Rob , I was referring to the Idaho mule deer management plan 2008 -2017 www.idaholandcan.org (http://www.idaholandcan.org) .
It clearly suggests that when the mule deer pop is under carrying capacity (which ours is ) the more dramatic effect each and every
predator kill has ...etc etc .

degree of predation is part of carrying capacity. Segment and cut off easy access to essential resources and you necessarily increase vulnerability to predators. In that scenario, killing off the predators short of complete eradication and extirpation, only buys you a temporary reprieve. And within that reprieve you have other survival pressures rear up, like disease and starvation.

you're making an assumption that our mule deer are below threshold. What makes you so sure that is the case?

[gcreek]

"What is the agenda behind some that don’t want to face reality and admit predation is a problem?"

Speaking for myself, I don't have an agenda. I realize, however, that killing predators is a very touchy subject. Some people may not like that fact (looking at you, bearvalley and gcreek), but fact it is. And as Mark Hebblewhite said (and I think he was pretty reasonable): targeted predator removal can sometimes be effective, but you better make really sure that you've got your ducks in a row, because if it doesn't work the cost in terms of social license is very high.

So, how would you go about making the sale to the general public on predator control? That's what's required, right? We agree on that, at least, I'm sure (cause if you disagree please explain what just happened with the G-bear hunt).


(Speaking for myself I think it's easy to believe that 65,000 or so sq. miles of beetle kill and the subsequent changes to the landscape could easily do many crazy things, including putting a predator load way, way out of whack. Thing is, you don't need to convince me. You need to convince cat ladies in Burnaby).

The public doesn't need convincing. It just needs to be done, quietly and effectively. If the idea needs a leader, let the Native population claim they are hungry.:smile: All this world needs is a good case of hollow belly to bring us back to basics.

As I told Steve Thompson when he was Minister of Environment, the public will never know how much the Vancouver Olympics cost.

[Dannybuoy]

degree of predation is part of carrying capacity. Segment and cut off easy access to essential resources and you necessarily increase vulnerability to predators. In that scenario, killing off the predators short of complete eradication and extirpation, only buys you a temporary reprieve. And within that reprieve you have other survival pressures rear up, like disease and starvation.

you're making an assumption that our mule deer are below threshold. What makes you so sure that is the case?
Speaking for area,s that myself or family have hunted since before the turn of the century , mule deer numbers are a small fraction of what they are historically . Based partially on wintering and birthing areas (if you know how habitual mulies are you will agree)
I will go so far as to say anyone that says otherwise hasnt got a clue or an agenda as some have implied .
In the area I live now , the locals that I know echo the same sentiments about moose & mulie numbers since wolves moved in ....
wolves have mostly moved on now as there is very little game left

[horshur]

Penny were there or were there not more elk in Yellowstone before wolf introduction?

[bearvalley]

degree of predation is part of carrying capacity. Segment and cut off easy access to essential resources and you necessarily increase vulnerability to predators. In that scenario, killing off the predators short of complete eradication and extirpation, only buys you a temporary reprieve. And within that reprieve you have other survival pressures rear up, like disease and starvation.

you're making an assumption that our mule deer are below threshold. What makes you so sure that is the case?

Quote.....
Idaho Fish & Game; re predator management;

Many factors affect wildlife populations, such as weather, quality and quantity of habitat, harvest by hunters, and predators.

When game populations drop below objectives and the growth level, the department undertakes management actions.

First...
Biologists study all the possible causes of declining game populations, such as the quality and quantity of habitat, weather, the health and reproductive rate of the game animals, harvest levels, and the impact of predators.

Depending on the cause for the decline, Fish & Game undertakes the actions, or combination of actions, most likely to increase game numbers. This includes habitat improvements, changes in hunting seasons, and liberalized trapping & hunting regulations to name a few.

Then...
‘When there is evidence that predators are limiting game populations and regulated harvest of predators is not adequate, a more aggressive approach, guided by a predation management plan is sometimes necessary.

The Goal: Reduction, not elimination.
The long-term goal is to reduce predator numbers enough to allow increased game numbers, increased harvest oppurtunities, and to maintain viable populations of all wildlife, including predators.


This is the difference between Idaho and British Columbia, the former has a plan in place and guidelines, we operate by the seat of our pants or on emotion.

[Fisher-Dude]

Rob , I was referring to the Idaho mule deer management plan 2008 -2017 www.idaholandcan.org .
It clearly suggests that when the mule deer pop is under carrying capacity (which ours is ) the more dramatic effect each and every
predator kill has ...etc etc .

What evidence do you have that our mule deer are below carrying capacity?

Got a link to range analysis that determined this to be so?

By all accounts from our professional wildlife biologists who ARE studying the carrying capacity of our mule deer range, there's no indication that it can support more deer.

[horshur]

Here is how I see it...you got lung cancer from smoking. So you quit smoking to cure cancer? No you endure harsh evasive treatment. The cause was smoking. The cure totally different game.

[Pemby_mess]

Quote.....
Idaho Fish & Game; re predator management;

Many factors affect wildlife populations, such as weather, quality and quantity of habitat, harvest by hunters, and predators.

When game populations drop below objectives and the growth level, the department undertakes management actions.

First...
Biologists study all the possible causes of declining game populations, such as the quality and quantity of habitat, weather, the health and reproductive rate of the game animals, harvest levels, and the impact of predators.

Depending on the cause for the decline, Fish & Game undertakes the actions, or combination of actions, most likely to increase game numbers. This includes habitat improvements, changes in hunting seasons, and liberalized trapping & hunting regulations to name a few.

Then...
‘When there is evidence that predators are limiting game populations and regulated harvest of predators is not adequate, a more aggressive approach, guided by a predation management plan is sometimes necessary.

The Goal: Reduction, not elimination.
The long-term goal is to reduce predator numbers enough to allow increased game numbers, increased harvest oppurtunities, and to maintain viable populations of all wildlife, including predators.


This is the difference between Idaho and British Columbia, the former has a plan in place and guidelines, we operate by the seat of our pants or on emotion.

You might be right about the last part there.

it's clear wildlife policy is light years ahead in the US.

I wasnt trying to make make the case that offing a bunch of wolves isn't going to part of the picture. However, the conversation is about creating objectives to fund. That requires a sales pitch to whomever is doing the funding. Scarce dollars should be dedicated toward winnable battles, where it concerns both efficacy and public optics.

So far, you're allowed to liberally off a whole lot of wolves. Trying to raise money to do more of it, may just bring that activity to a close completely. Even if that occurred only briefly, it would be negative toward the big picture. Therefore focusing on habitat restoration objectives achieves gains in multiple areas;

1. Increases carrying capacity for all large mammals, including ungulates.

2. Creates common ground with mainstream sympathies (very few people outside of farming/ranching/hunting circles will support public funding of wolf culls, and if they do, not for long, and not repeatedly)

3. Leverages existing, non-hunt related funding and potentiall redirects it to initiatives favorited by hunters and wildlife conservationists.

4. Keeps heat off of less palatable solutions to wildlife rehabilitation (wolf culls)



Once again, habitat is always on the menu for public consumption

[gcreek]

Penny were there or were there not more elk in Yellowstone before wolf introduction?

Gee, that's gonna be a tough one.............but they killed the nasty coyotes and black bears off too.

[gcreek]

So far, you're allowed to liberally off a whole lot of wolves.



That's working really well hey?

[gcreek]

What evidence do you have that our mule deer are below carrying capacity?

Got a link to range analysis that determined this to be so?

By all accounts from our professional wildlife biologists who ARE studying the carrying capacity of our mule deer range, there's no indication that it can support more deer.

Sounds like he explained it well using local history. Not by someone trying to keep the study dollars flowing in order to keep their job.

[bearvalley]

So, how would you go about making the sale to the general public on predator control? That's what's required, right? We agree on that, at least, I'm sure (cause if you disagree please explain what just happened with the G-bear hunt).


(Speaking for myself I think it's easy to believe that 65,000 or so sq. miles of beetle kill and the subsequent changes to the landscape could easily do many crazy things, including putting a predator load way, way out of whack. Thing is, you don't need to convince me. You need to convince cat ladies in Burnaby).

Rob, as long as the management of wildlife is left to the emotion molded general public we will continue to have a fail.
Jurisdictions that enact successful wildlife management have put together a system that is distanced from emotional sway.
They have also kept the anti-faction from undermining overall wildlife goals.

Speaking for myself, I beleive if you value wildlife and really care about being able to carry on the heritage of hunting in the future, that you should start scratching your head and helping to come up with a plan so that wildlife does not be used as a political toy in the future, like we just saw with the G-bear issue.
We all need to get to work on convincing Burnaby cat ladies.

[f350ps]

Sounds like he explained it well using local history. Not by someone trying to keep the study dollars flowing in order to keep their job.
Thanks creek, nice too see somebody gets it! K

[gcreek]

Thanks creek, nice too see somebody gets it! K

After witnessing what has happened here over the last 39 years I not only get it, I could likely write it.

Fisher Dude and his cronies don't want the truth to be told or heard so it's all just "anecdotal evidence".............

[bearvalley]

We can fund it, and study it.....study it, and put some more cash in the pile.

The science is there, the studies have been done....it’s just a matter of digging up the one that fits what you need....we need to start using pseudoscience to fight pseudoscience.

The only problem is.....if nobody steps up and has the balls to carry thru on a decision or implement a fix it will just be a continuation of the go nowhere plan.

[f350ps]

After witnessing what has happened here over the last 39 years I not only get it, I could likely write it.

Fisher Dud and his cronies don't want the truth to be told or heard so it's all just "anecdotal evidence".............
Yer preaching to the choir Creek, it's all a science, gotta keep them funds rolling! K

[Dannybuoy]

After witnessing what has happened here over the last 39 years I not only get it, I could likely write it.

Fisher Dud and his cronies don't want the truth to be told or heard so it's all just "anecdotal evidence"............. Yup !
Funny how years and years of ranchers , trappers, hunters and outdoors peoples experiences are anecdotal when they dont meet the required agenda ....

[338win mag]

Rob, as long as the management of wildlife is left to the emotion molded general public we will continue to have a fail.
Jurisdictions that enact successful wildlife management have put together a system that is distanced from emotional sway.
They have also kept the anti-faction from undermining overall wildlife goals.

Speaking for myself, I beleive if you value wildlife and really care about being able to carry on the heritage of hunting in the future, that you should start scratching your head and helping to come up with a plan so that wildlife does not be used as a political toy in the future, like we just saw with the G-bear issue.
We all need to get to work on convincing Burnaby cat ladies.
Yes, take the wildlife out of politics with a separate entity running the show, very clever to do this.

[bearvalley]

Yes, take the wildlife out of politics with a separate entity running the show, very clever to do this.

That’s what has been done in jurisdictions that successfully manage wildlife.

Game commissions and similar management systems have been formed....the key to having success in forming this type of governance is who is at the table.

Fill the seats with the ant-hunting segment and we will be shut out.

[bearvalley]

Yup !
Funny how years and years of ranchers , trappers, hunters and outdoors peoples experiences are anecdotal when they dont meet the required agenda ....

To be an expert you need to master the skills of cut & paste, develope a following of trainable sheep, select the propaganda that supports your cause.......and run with it.

Experience and on the ground knowledge means nothing in today’s world.

If you can get your name attached to a magnitude of internet links you’ve reached the pinnacle of a superstar...Lol!

[Fisher-Dude]

Speaking for area,s that myself or family have hunted since before the turn of the century , mule deer numbers are a small fraction of what they are historically . Based partially on wintering and birthing areas (if you know how habitual mulies are you will agree)
I will go so far as to say anyone that says otherwise hasnt got a clue or an agenda as some have implied .
In the area I live now , the locals that I know echo the same sentiments about moose & mulie numbers since wolves moved in ....
wolves have mostly moved on now as there is very little game left

What were the hunting regulations there 50 years ago when it was teaming with deer?

Has that area burned every 15 years to provide good mule deer habitat since the turn of the century?

Of course not. Classic case of habitat changing but hunters not demanding the habitat be managed for deer, just keep hunting it as it chokes out feed and wonder where the deer went. Let's change hunting regulations, because we don't shoot any deer anymore - yeah, that makes sense.

Landscape changes are too slow and subtle for hunters to see a change in spots they frequent year to year. But when aerial photos are compared from decades ago, the changes are shocking.


https://lifeonabccattleranch.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/figure2.gif

[Rob Chipman]

Dannybuoy:

Thanks for that link!

[bearvalley]

What were the hunting regulations there 50 years ago when it was teaming with deer?

Has that area burned every 15 years to provide good mule deer habitat since the turn of the century?

Of course not. Classic case of habitat changing but hunters not demanding the habitat be managed for deer, just keep hunting it as it chokes out feed and wonder where the deer went. Let's change hunting regulations, because we don't shoot any deer anymore - yeah, that makes sense.

Landscape changes are too slow and subtle for hunters to see a change in spots they frequent year to year. But when aerial photos are compared from decades ago, the changes are shocking.


https://lifeonabccattleranch.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/figure2.gif


My bet is that more aerial photos can be put on the table showing the opposite of what you’ve just provided.
Hectare upon hectare of opened up timberland.....with no wildlife in it.
Fires are only part of the fix.....and after last summer, we don’t need too many for a while locally.

[358mag]

https://lifeonabccattleranch.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/figure2.gif
Seems the 1998 picture has 3 maybe 4 roads going through it

[Fisher-Dude]

My bet is that more aerial photos can be put on the table showing the opposite of what you’ve just provided.
Hectare upon hectare of opened up timberland.....with no wildlife in it.
Fires are only part of the fix.....and after last summer, we don’t need too many for a while locally.

Cutblocks aren't habitat restoration.

The only time they were was when we had a government that let us burn them post-harvest.

That went out when the tulip farmer's reign ended, and the socialists seized power in the 1990s.

And from what I hear, those same socialists today are going to charge companies carbon tax to burn a slash pile in a cut block.

I expect companies won't be burning slash piles, let alone go back to broadcast burning, when the NDP wants to charge them carbon taxes for doing the right thing.

[Pemby_mess]

"The tulip farmer" lol, that's funny.

[bearvalley]

Cutblocks aren't habitat restoration.

The only time they were was when we had a government that let us burn them post-harvest.

That went out when the tulip farmer's reign ended, and the socialists seized power in the 1990s.

And from what I hear, those same socialists today are going to charge companies carbon tax to burn a slash pile in a cut block.

I expect companies won't be burning slash piles, let alone go back to broadcast burning, when the NDP wants to charge them carbon taxes for doing the right thing.

No F-D cut blocks aren’t habitat restoration but managed properly they could provide a hell of a lot more feed than an over mature pine stand.
Carry on being an echo.

[bearvalley]

https://lifeonabccattleranch.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/figure2.gif
Seems the 1998 picture has 3 maybe 4 roads going through it

Do you think F-D will ever admit that the unlimited access that’s been created over the years, combined with the constant demand for increased harvest oppurtunity is part of the problem.
I doubt it.....suddenly the finger will be pointing it him.

[Pemby_mess]

Yup !
Funny how years and years of ranchers , trappers, hunters and outdoors peoples experiences are anecdotal when they dont meet the required agenda ....

Actually, unless the farmers, ranchers, and hunters are applying the scientific method to their observations, their experience is definitively anecdotal.

I think you might be confusing the term "anecdotal", with "not valuable". That's certainly not the case, and it would be unfortunate if decision makers saw it that way. But, anecdotal evidence has a unique and seperate utility vs scientific evidence. Humans are much more apt to mold their memories to fit a preconceived hunch. Heuristic traps are based on anecdotes not the scientific method, and using science is what allows us to see through decision making traps.

[Fisher-Dude]

Do you think F-D will ever admit that the unlimited access that’s been created over the years, combined with the constant demand for increased harvest oppurtunity is part of the problem.
I doubt it.....suddenly the finger will be pointing it him.

We could cut out 30 - 40% of that harvest right away.

The social support for it is pretty strong in BC, and that appears to be all that is needed to get those kinds of changes through.

I don't think you'd be too happy with the results, though.

You might want to consider who is in the more precarious position here, and think more carefully about what and/or whom you need to continue doing what you do, before you alienate everyone except the 220 members of your group.

[Pemby_mess]

No F-D cut blocks aren’t habitat restoration but managed properly they could provide a hell of a lot more feed than an over mature pine stand.
Carry on being an echo.

nature manages mature pine stands in very specific ways. Given, humans feel the need to intervene in obvious ways, and for obvious reasons, we need to find ways of replicating the subtlety of nature and recognize where our methods fall short.

[Rob Chipman]

"come up with a plan so that wildlife does not be used as a political toy in the future"

You are correct. That's exactly what we need, and it's what I'm trying to work on (but Jeezuz, it's a big task with a big learning curve and we're up against opponents who are very capable). Anyway, with the number of people working on that we'll get there.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if we can make conservation untouchable to politicians, that is, create an insulated funding model that they can't raid, with a front person they can't attack (someone akin to an Auditor General, who can say things the government doesn't want to hear without getting attacked on a partisan basis) we'll be able to create plans and objectives.

That's where the calls for social license come in. MLAs that I've talked to, when they give good advice about how to make progress, seem to be saying "get me social license to give you what you want and I'll do it; ask me to do something unpopular? Don't call me, I'll call you". We need to change the conversation, not worry so much about preaching to the choir and get as many of the Burnaby cat ladies as possible onside.

BTW, a lot of times stuff starts us in the face without us always recognizing it. You've brought it up and we should make sure everyone recognizes it, because it's something that people like Raincoast use to counter our argument. Wildlife should not be politicized. That's what we're seeing. So far we've described that as "not using science". They counter "Science can help you execute policy, but it can't tell you what policy should be. What policy should be is determined by public values [public opinion]"

I think we need to stop saying that we need science and start saying we need to get politics out of conservation.

gcreek:

Thanks for making me laugh so hard that I pissed my pants! We don't need public approval for predator reduction in a province that just cancelled the grizzly hunt on the basis of public opinion? We just need government to be quiet and effective? I absolutely want some of that free range organic Chilcotin weed that you've been smoking! :-)

[Bugle M In]

We could cut out 30 - 40% of that harvest right away.

The social support for it is pretty strong in BC, and that appears to be all that is needed to get those kinds of changes through.

I don't think you'd be too happy with the results, though.

You might want to consider who is in the more precarious position here, and think more carefully about what and/or whom you need to continue doing what you do, before you alienate everyone except the 220 members of your group.

I don't think I would be too impressed either.
Firstly, wrong government in power right now for that...IMO.
It's not that I don't agree with the fact that in some areas we need to consider possible reduction harvest, but
how do we ensure the other group that is unregulated does the same.
If they reduce mule deer to 1...well, that's quite the reduction there already...IMO.
I don't hunt all the species in the province, nor do I hunt in every region of every MU, so, I sure as heck don't know exactly what issues lie where etc...but I do know this government is bad news to hunters.

[bearvalley]

We could cut out 30 - 40% of that harvest right away.

The social support for it is pretty strong in BC, and that appears to be all that is needed to get those kinds of changes through.

I don't think you'd be too happy with the results, though.

You might want to consider who is in the more precarious position here, and think more carefully about what and/or whom you need to continue doing what you do, before you alienate everyone except the 220 members of your group.

Pat, ask your rep how that’s working out up north.
Part of the problems been flagged....
You and your buddies carry on with your crusade against outfitters...if and when you succeed in eliminating them you will be next to go.
I notice you’ve picked up your pace since I offended the wildlife Rockstar...sad....lol!

[Bugle M In]

"come up with a plan so that wildlife does not be used as a political toy in the future"

You are correct. That's exactly what we need, and it's what I'm trying to work on (but Jeezuz, it's a big task with a big learning curve and we're up against opponents who are very capable). Anyway, with the number of people working on that we'll get there.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if we can make conservation untouchable to politicians, that is, create an insulated funding model that they can't raid, with a front person they can't attack (someone akin to an Auditor General, who can say things the government doesn't want to hear without getting attacked on a partisan basis) we'll be able to create plans and objectives.

That's where the calls for social license come in. MLAs that I've talked to, when they give good advice about how to make progress, seem to be saying "get me social license to give you what you want and I'll do it; ask me to do something unpopular? Don't call me, I'll call you". We need to change the conversation, not worry so much about preaching to the choir and get as many of the Burnaby cat ladies as possible onside.

BTW, a lot of times stuff starts us in the face without us always recognizing it. You've brought it up and we should make sure everyone recognizes it, because it's something that people like Raincoast use to counter our argument. Wildlife should not be politicized. That's what we're seeing. So far we've described that as "not using science". They counter "Science can help you execute policy, but it can't tell you what policy should be. What policy should be is determined by public values [public opinion]"

I think we need to stop saying that we need science and start saying we need to get politics out of conservation.

gcreek:

Thanks for making me laugh so hard that I pissed my pants! We don't need public approval for predator reduction in a province that just cancelled the grizzly hunt on the basis of public opinion? We just need government to be quiet and effective? I absolutely want some of that free range organic Chilcotin weed that you've been smoking! :-)


This answers my above post.
"we need to get government/politics OUT OF CONSERVATION"
If we really want to see things get better, this is what is needed, and we need a political party that can make this happen, a party that will support this......or it will never get any better for wildlife in the province, as decisions would only be made based on "public pressure"...ie....no wolf culling etc.

[Bugle M In]

Penny were there or were there not more elk in Yellowstone before wolf introduction?

Yes, there were more elk in the park pre wolf intro....
But, remember, no one can hunt elk in the park, and they were starting to experience having "too many elk"
Had hunting been allowed...then yes...no need for wolves....but, it is a park, so they needed "natural reduction".
I don't think you need to worry about most hunters here in this forum, or out in the hunting community, as I believe
most of us "do support culling of Preds"...especially right now.

[Pemby_mess]

We can fund it, and study it.....study it, and put some more cash in the pile.

The science is there, the studies have been done....it’s just a matter of digging up the one that fits what you need....we need to start using pseudoscience to fight pseudoscience.

The only problem is.....if nobody steps up and has the balls to carry thru on a decision or implement a fix it will just be a continuation of the go nowhere plan.

the studies are never "done". A good process never ceases it's need for information. Changes are always occurring.

[bearvalley]

I think we need to stop saying that we need science and start saying we need to get politics out of conservation.


So how do we go about re-branding the echo that’s being put forth by the sheep?