Mule deer study in the Okanagan

[Walksalot]

There is a mule deer study going on in the Okanagan as to why the mule deer are dying. One has to wonder why the any mule deer buck season in region 8 Okanagan is not shut down. I have not hunted mule deer in the Okanagan for years as the numbers, in my opinion, are not there.

[DarekG]

Link to story here: https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/250685/Mule-deer-mystery-case



Wildlife scientists and conservationists are trying to solve the mystery of why mule deer across the Okanagan Valley are dying.


Jesse Zeman, director of the Fish & Wildlife Restoration Program, says the project is in its first year and is the largest collaborative project that B.C. has ever seen.


“We want to know how they are moving across the landscape, what is killing them, and how the habitat is affecting our deer population,” said Zeman.


“We don’t know what’s driving the mortalities so far but that is why we hire these great people from UBCO and the University of Idaho.”


Sophie Gilbert, assistant professor from the University of Idaho and one of her students are in the Okanagan to investigate.


“Nobody can really tell us the reason,” she said.


Gilbert says the original herd they were concerned about was the Boundary herd.


“That historically was the most productive herd in the province and now it is just a shadow of its former self,” said Gilbert.


Deer survival has been really low, much lower than expected, in the boundary area according to Zeman.


The partners in the project include the B.C. Wildlife Federation, B.C. Fish and Wildlife branch, government staff, Okanagan National Alliance, the University of Idaho and UBCO.


“Mule deer are kind of an icon in southern B.C., there has been a lot of concern over the species,” said Zeman. “We’ve been hearing about this since the 1970's.”


Gilbert says they have a bunch of different ideas about what might be driving the decline.


“The absence of fire from the ecosystem is one of those potential drivers, we also see a lot more white-tailed deer in the system they prefer disturbed habitats, old forest. White-tail deer feed predators, predators also eat mule deer,” she said.


Wildfires produce a lot of deer food as the regrowth provides high quality and abundant food.


“I know for people that are hunters that is their food, they go out and hunt mule deer and they want them to be sustainable. And the other thing is that they are an indicator that shows us that we are doing right by our ecosystems,” said Zeman.


As a group, they will collar 30 adult does and 20 fawns per year in their study area.


The deer will be GPS collared so they know where they are moving and health samples are taken.


“We checked to see if the deer was pregnant, in this case, she was. She had two fetuses, two babies and we checked overall body condition,” said Zeman.


The project will take a total of five years and then will give a recommendation on how to restore the mule deer habitat and population


“Our first step is to identify which of these various factors on the landscape are driving the declines and will help stop the decline of mule deer and hopefully bring them back,” said Gilbert.

[Ourea]

There is a mule deer study going on in the Okanagan as to why the mule deer are dying. One has to wonder why the any mule deer buck season in region 8 Okanagan is not shut down. I have not hunted mule deer in the Okanagan for years as the numbers, in my opinion, are not there.

Walksalot, have you looked at the data on pregnancy rates with this project?
It's almost 100%, and, a good percentage are sporting twins.
(they do field ultrasounds on captured deer)

If MD are showing almost 100% pregnancy how will closing any buck seasons help make more deer?
Will they get even more pregnant?
It will only impact age on bucks.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

There is a mule deer study going on in the Okanagan as to why the mule deer are dying. One has to wonder why the any mule deer buck season in region 8 Okanagan is not shut down. I have not hunted mule deer in the Okanagan for years as the numbers, in my opinion, are not there.

While there are buck to doe ratios below the target levels of 20:100 in some MUs in the OK, early results of the study have shown that sperm supply is not an issue (very high pregnancy rates).

Provincially we saw some changes last year reducing the mule buck limit to one buck in the central and southern regions. There is no plan to change the any buck season at this point until the wide spread reduced buck limit proves ineffective.

Areas in the east koots and boundary region have gone to a 4 pt only season and have watched their mule deer numbers continue to go down

SSS

[lovemywinchester]

It's not just Reg 8. Reg 3 is struggling as well. Logan lake is a sanctuary for Mule deer. Last fall there was hardly any deer around. My buddy is born and raised there and he is as in tune with the wildlife as anyone could be. Normally trees around town would be scraped up during the rut but this fall the deer were just not there. I also know a hunting guide and he says mulie #s are down 70% compared to historical levels around Kamloops. The WT are taking a hit as well. He has over 20 cams out and says he didn't get on buck over 160 last fall and saw few bigger deer.
My buddy hunted private land near Kamloops near the end of Nov and saw over 50 MD in one day but only a few were small bucks.
Scary shit.

[Bugle M In]

Walksalot, have you looked at the data on pregnancy rates with this project?
It's almost 100%, and, a good percentage are sporting twins.
(they do field ultrasounds on captured deer)

If MD are showing almost 100% pregnancy how will closing any buck seasons help make more deer?
Will they get even more pregnant?
It will only impact age on bucks.

I see the same thing in R3, in the mu's I hunt.
But, with all that, I still don't see an increase in population (and I think they could sustain higher #'s there)

There is something happening between December, when al these fawns still exist, and after the hunting season!, till the following season.
Maybe it's between Dec and Apr/May.

I am just glad to see that people recognize there is an issue.
And I am glad they have some "quality" people looking into it.
However, I wish they could have collared more deer!, BUT, requires more funding!!??
Looking forward to seeing the results.

All I heard is, there was some "oddity" to a deer's movement etc!?
Something about "not expecting" what they were doing.

Again, shutting down a season might show some "short term" benefits.
But again, if the issue is "not hunting as per their decline", then "long term", we have achieved sweet F'all,
and then you will see their #'s further decline, and no hunting...ever...because you haven't
"addressed the issue that has created the decline"!

Seen that in the EK with elk.
Not addressing the "real issues" is what has screwed up all the game pop's in the Province.
Not hunting

[northof49]

Coyotes, wolves, cougar, bear, vehicle strikes....deal with the issues.

[Bubbacanuck]

Wildfires, loss of habitat due to forestry and increased predator numbers seem to be major factors.

[Ourea]

Wildfires, loss of habitat due to forestry and increased predator numbers seem to be major factors.

As stated in the article, fires help wildlife.

[wideopenthrottle]

all I know on the matter is that when up there last year, we went to a few vineyards and a park on the far side of the lake. I saw 7 or 8 mule deer does and 3 of them were injured on the back end...not sure if it was hit by cars, attacked by dogs, or attacked by predators but it looked like they may have been attacked while giving birth and had their fawns taken as there were no fawns in the groups of 2 or 3 that I saw....I know this anecdotal info means nothing but it did strike me as a bit disturbing seeing so many wounded/injured does

[Walksalot]

On the east side of Penticton there was a pretty substantial migration corridor where there used to be an abundance of mule deer pass through now they have all but vanished.

[Brez]

My question is how can they have let the declines go for this long without research and action!!!???

[northof49]

all I know on the matter is that when up there last year, we went to a few vineyards and a park on the far side of the lake. I saw 7 or 8 mule deer does and 3 of them were injured on the back end...not sure if it was hit by cars, attacked by dogs, or attacked by predators but it looked like they may have been attacked while giving birth and had their fawns taken as there were no fawns in the groups of 2 or 3 that I saw....I know this anecdotal info means nothing but it did strike me as a bit disturbing seeing so many wounded/injured does

coyotes at birthing, car strikes, fence mishaps

[Seeker]

I have participated in collaring some of the deer and this study is beginning to reveal some important information. It will only continue to do so as it continues. AS for collaring more deer, I believe they are doing so this year. I think it is fawns if I remember correctly. As for the fertilization rates, its true that almost all does are impregnated and carrying twins. The buck ratio is where they are targeting, but we are not seeing the mature buck cohort in the population. I love seeing big muley bucks, and it appears they are harder to come by than ever before in region 8. I am all for providing opportunity, but I would love to see more big mature bucks either wandering the woods or being taken by lucky hunters.

I believe we can both provide opportunity and manage for some bigger studs in the bush by reducing the month long general open season from Oct 1st - Oct 31, down to Oct 1 - Oct 15th. In talking to a reputable taxidermist in town, he has records that show a drastic reduction in mature bucks come into his shop since the season went from ending on the 15th to ending on the 31st. His argument has some merit. He believes in the later half of October, those young immature bucks that lack experience will pair up with doe groups before the mature bucks in hopes of beating them to the breeding. That lack of experience results in a disproportionate number of young immature deer being harvested before they reach that 5-6 years needed to mature. JMO, but I think it would lead to better representation of bigger bucks. I also agree with SSS, in that in light of the recent reduction to the provincial bag limit on mule deer, we will not see any further restrictions until we begin to get an idea of how the recent changes affect both deer numbers and hunter habits.

[boxhitch]

The north Ok has lost 2 or 3 good houndsman in the last few years. Is anybody picking up the slack?

[Ourea]

My question is how can they have let the declines go for this long without research and action!!!???

THEY need money, and a lot of it.
Collars, helicopters and expert staff are not free.

[Seeker]

THEY need money, and a lot of it.
Collars, helicopters and expert staff are not free.

Yup and the recent release of the provincial budget is the status quo......sweet FA for wildlife! It's really too bad, but its becoming a broken record.

[Takla]

Seeker Quote;I believe we can both provide opportunity and manage for some bigger studs in the bush by reducing the month long general open season from Oct 1st - Oct 31, down to Oct 1 - Oct 15th

If they reduced the any buck dates in the north Okanogan down to Oct 15th i think there would be a drastic drop off of hunters even bothering to head into the bush to hunt.The mulies dont even start to rut untill the last couple days of Oct and are held up deep in the bush and basically nocturnal until then.I put in 10 days dawn to dusk hunting this last season from the 20th of Oct to the 31st without seeing one buck until shooting a nice 2-point the last day on the 31st,he was well into rut,swollen neck and beating up some scrub brush when encountered
.We were constantly on mulie doe's right thru and many older doe's were without yearlings from the previous yr.Preditation i believe is whats really affecting numbers,we have wolf tracks constantly ,even walking down the road near home the last week...

[northof49]

Predators, predators, predators.....funny how the cariboo herds started to miraculously rebound soon after implementing wolf culls. Who would have ever thought ? Hmmm

[Bugle M In]

Seeker Quote;I believe we can both provide opportunity and manage for some bigger studs in the bush by reducing the month long general open season from Oct 1st - Oct 31, down to Oct 1 - Oct 15th

If they reduced the any buck dates in the north Okanogan down to Oct 15th i think there would be a drastic drop off of hunters even bothering to head into the bush to hunt.The mulies dont even start to rut untill the last couple days of Oct and are held up deep in the bush and basically nocturnal until then.I put in 10 days dawn to dusk hunting this last season from the 20th of Oct to the 31st without seeing one buck until shooting a nice 2-point the last day on the 31st,he was well into rut,swollen neck and beating up some scrub brush when encountered
.We were constantly on mulie doe's right thru and many older doe's were without yearlings from the previous yr.Preditation i believe is whats really affecting numbers,we have wolf tracks constantly ,even walking down the road near home the last week...



Not that I want to take away from the thinking here, as I do believe younger bucks do group up with does "much sooner"
Sadly, this is all I saw in Novemer as well, on a couple of trips, fyi (4 separate 2pt's, all with atleast 6 does in each group)

BUT.....
I thought with the 1MD LIMIT this past season being introduced, that I would see "LESS HUNTERS"..NOPE!!!
I actually saw more hunters during the Novemer/Dec 4 point season, especially the November long weekend.

What I am say is, some who may have taken 2 bucks in previous seasons, 1 being a meat buck I suspect, and then
the other to be a big boy attempt, have made a decision to "not hunt meat bucks"....

It would be very interesting to see how many "less" younger bucks were taken who are not 4 points are harvested in the
next few years "due to the 1 MD limit Change"!
I am betting due to this new limit, less young bucks will be taken.
We may "not need to shorten" that any buck season!!

I have no clue what kind of stats are out there, as to MD harvest, and how many are taken that are not 4 point as
compared to 4 pt in a season.
Maybe they don't exist???

I think the 1 MD change has already changed some hunters thinking and is changing what age bucks are taken because of it.
I bet you there is going to be a decline in the amount of any bucks harvested, as some hunters will take more chances looking for the big one!

I think people...hunters need to realize that we just had a significant regulation change!!!
Does anyone expect that in 1 season of that change there is going to be dramatic changes to what you see out in the woods??!!
Give it some time folks.

More important right now is to figure out what is happening to the "offspring".
Why are they not there by "next season" after this season has ended???
FIX that, and then you will see a difference out there for the better!

[Wild one]

Not that I want to take away from the thinking here, as I do believe younger bucks do group up with does "much sooner"
Sadly, this is all I saw in Novemer as well, on a couple of trips, fyi (4 separate 2pt's, all with atleast 6 does in each group)

BUT.....
I thought with the 1MD LIMIT this past season being introduced, that I would see "LESS HUNTERS"..NOPE!!!
I actually saw more hunters during the Novemer/Dec 4 point season, especially the November long weekend.

What I am say is, some who may have taken 2 bucks in previous seasons, 1 being a meat buck I suspect, and then
the other to be a big boy attempt, have made a decision to "not hunt meat bucks"....

It would be very interesting to see how many "less" younger bucks were taken who are not 4 points are harvested in the
next few years "due to the 1 MD limit Change"!
I am betting due to this new limit, less young bucks will be taken.
We may "not need to shorten" that any buck season!!

I have no clue what kind of stats are out there, as to MD harvest, and how many are taken that are not 4 point as
compared to 4 pt in a season.
Maybe they don't exist???

I think the 1 MD change has already changed some hunters thinking and is changing what age bucks are taken because of it.
I bet you there is going to be a decline in the amount of any bucks harvested, as some hunters will take more chances looking for the big one!

I think people...hunters need to realize that we just had a significant regulation change!!!
Does anyone expect that in 1 season of that change there is going to be dramatic changes to what you see out in the woods??!!
Give it some time folks.

More important right now is to figure out what is happening to the "offspring".
Why are they not there by "next season" after this season has ended???
FIX that, and then you will see a difference out there for the better!

I would agree with this ^^^

It will take time to see results from the change but they should be positive for population and hunting quality in the long run. I am a believer in the theory buck to doe ratios have an impact on fawn health but steps are taken to improve ratios

Fawn survival rate and factors involved are something I hope comes out in this study and I think we all expect predators are a factor

[pg83]

It is scientifically proven that roads cause a significant behavioural change in wild animals and they make it far easier for all predators regardless of how many legs they have to be successful. Check out the road density in the province. Do you think it was always that way?

Winter range is critical to ungulates. Where did it all go?

Lack of fire on the landscape. It wasn't always that way...

These three things are in my opinion, some of the more important issues for our wildlife problems in the province. They are all caused by people, period.
We cannot change what has happened in the past, but we can learn from it and change how we impact the landscape moving forward.

[Bugle M In]

I do have a thought/suggestion that might work/help (you be the judge)
It's obvious there is a lot of "finger pointing" going on even between hunters as to issue, whether it be Predator/Habitat/Land Usage/Hunter Success, and it is creating a big divide between us, and that is not going to help to go forward, especially when hunting as a Tradition is on the line more and more everyday.

So, what could help!!??
I am not a big fan of the hunter harvest questionnaire, not because i don't want to fill it out, but because it is too vague.
Yes, it will tell you how many days one spends in the field, and where and the % of success, and male or female, but that's it.

So, why don't we have a "Mandatory Tooth Inspection for Any Harvested Species"??
Think about it.
If successful, we can download the pdf with the pertanent questions.
Where, When, even how (bow/rifle), Days, Sex and Antler Points.
A tooth will tell us what we are "actually harvesting".
Just because a buck is 4 pt, is he 4 years old, or 10 years old??
Especially females, are they young, 11/2 year old or 10 years old?

This can tell us a lot.
It can tell us what age of animals are really being harvested on average.
We can see by point size what hunters are targeting.
Just because someone took a buck in Oct, doesn't tell you his point size, let alone if he is young or old.
Same goes for females, are most of them young or are we harvesting old ones who have a lot of survival experience.
Heck, we could even maybe tell if some areas are holding males that have a defective gene that never reach 4 pt (deer) or
6pt (elk) status.

We cant tell from our current questionnaire any of these things.
It will never tell us how these species are mainly meeting their demise, but we can help find out what we as hunters
are harvesting rather than speculating!

There is a few issues with this.
The FN don't even tell us now what they harvest let alone get them to enter into a compulsory tooth inspection, but wouldn't it be nice if they would.

Secondly, such a program, with teeth from all species harvested in BC would cost a lot of money.
But there would be some great info for Bio's to use which in the end would benefit all of us, imo.

Might help put some arguments to rest once and for all??

[HarryToolips]

I would think the biggest danger to mule deer numbers in reg 8 is the continuation of development on winter range.....where I hang in central reg 8, numbers I see are good, from my observations anyway..

[Ourea]

Bugle M In

It's worthless data for the most part if numbers keep trending downward.

[Bugle M In]

Bugle M In

It's worthless data for the most part if numbers keep trending downward.

Yes, I know and you are correct, we need to find out what is causing the actual decline...fully agree.
I was just trying to put to rest the division as to if issues are hunters or other.
Tooth inspection might aid in the end, especially for hunters know what other hunters are "actually doing"!
To get rid of this speculation on "oh, we should close this, or we should introduce this reg change etc"
Lets face it FisherDude gets bashed for some of the Stats.
Reason being, the stats are a bit vague.
Not his fault, but again, shows hunters bashing hunters.
This would help the "hunting issues" and what changes might be needed.

The major declines are most certainly outside factors....so I am with you!!

[Ourea]

I've mentioned this on my Whitetail thread.......
if you can't answer 'who, what, why, where and when you will have a hard time consistently killing better animals.

This project is going to answer a lot of questions replacing educated guesses with quantified data.
Better decision making will result.

Where do these captured MD go after leaving their winter range?
How far do they travel?
What are the travel routes, do they avoid certain roadways etc?
What is causing the high mortality specific to each fatality.
When do most of the fatalities happen?
When exactly do they move the most?

Pretty exciting when you think about it.

[Keta1969]

I'm no expert but this seems like a fawn survival problem to me. If the buck to doe ratios are where they should be and the does are all pregnant and some with twins what else makes sense? For a population to increase you need more does of breeding age. For a population to decrease and to decrease rapidly you need a declining and ageing(barren) doe population. If that's happening in conjunction with poor fawn survival, populations will drop fast no matter how many bucks you save.

[Ourea]

I'm no expert but this seems like a fawn survival problem to me. If the buck to doe ratios are where they should be and the does are all pregnant and some with twins what else makes sense? For a population to increase you need more does of breeding age. For a population to decrease and to decrease rapidly you need a declining and ageing(barren) doe population. If that's happening in conjunction with poor fawn survival, populations will drop fast no matter how many bucks you save.

100% correct.

[Walksalot]

The way the mule deer disappeared goes, in my opinion, far beyond predation. Something had decimated the mule deer population and we had better find out what pretty soon. Had a discussion with a forester and we talked about the economic value of our forest and how logging can enhance habitat but I pointed out the poor buggers need a place to hide. As pointed out subdivisions on lower elevations above the valley bottoms are really impacting their winter ranges. My wife is sick of me commenting at every advertisement for residential subdivisions with spectacular views of the valley.

[Bugle M In]

I've mentioned this on my Whitetail thread.......
if you can't answer 'who, what, why, where and when you will have a hard time consistently killing better animals.

This project is going to answer a lot of questions replacing educated guesses with quantified data.
Better decision making will result.

Where do these captured MD go after leaving their winter range?
How far do they travel?
What are the travel routes, do they avoid certain roadways etc?
What is causing the high mortality specific to each fatality.
When do most of the fatalities happen?
When exactly do they move the most?

Pretty exciting when you think about it.

Yes it is.
I think back in the day, we had an idea of their migration habits.
But, lets face it, there has been a ton of changes to our landscapes in many ways.
I think we will see some of those old ways of MD migration etc have changed.
What is happening to fawns is extremely important, and I think we well see that mortality is happening in a lot of
the year where we don't hunt.
And for many, "what" is causing the mortality, especially on HBC where many different opinions exist.

But then, I hope there is money to make the necessary changes!!???????????????????
And will it be applied, not just another study that gets tossed into the storage cabinet!

[Ourea]

When a lot of hunters think of helping wildlife numbers they default to regulation as a magic wand that will help with recovery.

Here is something to chew on......
The boundary country has had an increase in hunting restrictions, rd closures, 4 point only etc, yet numbers continue to fall dramatically.
Simply put, more restrictions allowing the majority of overall bucks not to be hunted has done nothing to slow the decline in numbers and buck to doe ratios.

Harvest data from the region.
Decrease in harvest yet still a decrease in numbers.

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=7335&stc=1

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Not that I want to take away from the thinking here, as I do believe younger bucks do group up with does "much sooner"
Sadly, this is all I saw in Novemer as well, on a couple of trips, fyi (4 separate 2pt's, all with atleast 6 does in each group)

BUT.....
I thought with the 1MD LIMIT this past season being introduced, that I would see "LESS HUNTERS"..NOPE!!!
I actually saw more hunters during the Novemer/Dec 4 point season, especially the November long weekend.

What I am say is, some who may have taken 2 bucks in previous seasons, 1 being a meat buck I suspect, and then
the other to be a big boy attempt, have made a decision to "not hunt meat bucks"....

It would be very interesting to see how many "less" younger bucks were taken who are not 4 points are harvested in the
next few years "due to the 1 MD limit Change"!
I am betting due to this new limit, less young bucks will be taken.
We may "not need to shorten" that any buck season!!

I have no clue what kind of stats are out there, as to MD harvest, and how many are taken that are not 4 point as
compared to 4 pt in a season.
Maybe they don't exist???

I think the 1 MD change has already changed some hunters thinking and is changing what age bucks are taken because of it.
I bet you there is going to be a decline in the amount of any bucks harvested, as some hunters will take more chances looking for the big one!

I think people...hunters need to realize that we just had a significant regulation change!!!
Does anyone expect that in 1 season of that change there is going to be dramatic changes to what you see out in the woods??!!
Give it some time folks.

More important right now is to figure out what is happening to the "offspring".
Why are they not there by "next season" after this season has ended???
FIX that, and then you will see a difference out there for the better!

The summer of 2017 was the driest on record. The winter of 2017/18 was long and tough.
We all know that summer moisture plays a key roll in fawn survival. Add the tough winter and I would bet that we lost a significant portion of the fawns....which the male portion of this would be the yearling bucks in the fall of 2018.

I’m guessing that all those hunters that you saw in the late fall were ones that had a hard time finding a yearling 2 pt to shoot.

SSS

[Ourea]

The way the mule deer disappeared goes, in my opinion, far beyond predation. Something had decimated the mule deer population and we had better find out what pretty soon. Had a discussion with a forester and we talked about the economic value of our forest and how logging can enhance habitat but I pointed out the poor buggers need a place to hide. As pointed out subdivisions on lower elevations above the valley bottoms are really impacting their winter ranges. My wife is sick of me commenting at every advertisement for residential subdivisions with spectacular views of the valley.

Wildlife needs 2 key components to survive let alone thrive.
1) Habitat
2) Security
(One can drill down further under these two headings with factors such as habitat fragmentation, resource extraction, loss of winter range, preds etc.)

And Walksalot, we are destroying both.

[Takla]

Thats what i was thinking as well,heavy snow pack in the Okanogan is detrimental to deer escapeing preditation from cyottes and wolves,especially the young.I hunt moose as well up in region 7 and see lots of doe yearling pairs when out yet our N.Okanogan hunt after moose last yr was almost devoid of seeing yearlings with doe's.Almost ALL dry doe's we encountered.One area in region 8 outside of westwold we seen at least 5-6 dry doe's per day no fawns.Anyone posting on this thread if you dont mind shareing if you had success juring any buck season up to oct 31st so we can get a feel for success rates.
Oct 31 harvested a tall 2-point
Who else had success?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Thats what i was thinking as well,heavy snow pack in the Okanogan is detrimental to deer escapeing preditation from cyottes and wolves,especially the young.I hunt moose as well up in region 7 and see lots of doe yearling pairs when out yet our N.Okanogan hunt after moose last yr was almost devoid of seeing yearlings with doe's.Almost ALL dry doe's we encountered.One area in region 8 outside of westwold we seen at least 5-6 dry doe's per day no fawns.Anyone posting on this thread if you dont mind shareing if you had success juring any buck season up to oct 31st so we can get a feel for success rates.
Oct 31 harvested a tall 2-point
Who else had success?

In the early youth/bow season in reg 3 with my daughter this was the first year that we never saw a single muley buck. We always see yearling bucks ranging from several to 12-15 in a couple days.
Most were yearlings but we see the odd group of older bucks if we are patient and look hard enough.

Last year.... squat

[charlie_horse]

I don't get as hunters why so many are not open to this research and studies AND actually implementing it and are so open to take away opportunities without thinking of other measures. Last I checked and the people I talk to the mule deer population in region 4 is still declining.

[338win mag]

I have been 4-5 days per week, (work related) in a classic Mule deer wintering area in region 3.
Not alot of snow, only 12"-20" of snow, a few Moose tracks and increasing this past week, not sure why.....
Mule deer are sparse although also increasing sign and I think they are simply moving down because of the recent snow we have had.

Odd, no wolf sign but I bet it increases as more game moves in there from the higher ridges, a few cougars but no big deal.
When I was logging in the same area 25 years ago I would see 10-15 deer or more, everyday at this time of year and tracks everywhere.

There is a road every 1-2km and I can see for miles, basically there is FA for game, hasn't been a fire in there in my lifetime, bugs killed all the trees too, no fires will do that.
I think we will pull out of it and it will be good times again so long as we are not regulated to an end....

[Bugle M In]

Sadly I think some have just be trained to think that more regs are the only thing that will help wildlife.
In one way, you cant blame them because for years now, that was the only action left to give us.
For years the money has never been there and talking to some Bio's from days gone by (now retired), a lot of the few
projects they did in the day that were beneficial dried up and stop happening for one reason or other.

Since then, we've been on our own.
Everything changing all around us year in and year out, and all we ever had to address it was with regs.
Short term they can help areas were a species might be hurting.
But long term, they never stand the test of time....proven over and over, again and again.

[HarryToolips]

Aside from more and more loss of winter range due to development in reg 8, I should also state that I'm hearing of an increase in cougar population - and we know that the cats will make a big dent in mule deer pops...these factors along with lack of burns I believe are the biggest contributing factors to mule deer declines in reg 8..

[Treed]

As a preface to my comment, I’ve worked in forestry and still get my paycheck through industry. We have hammered the hell out of the country, look at the current age class distribution, road density, fragmentation, and increasing pressure due to atvs, side by sides etc. Combine this with the beetle and related salvage logging, there are fewer and fewer places for deer to hide out from predation, human or four legged. There are definitely issues related to increases predation on mulies and pred populations associated with whitetail populations as well as inter breeding of mulie does by whitetail bucks, but I don’t think these are the main issues. I thinks it’s habitat and escape cover that was provided by a land with more older age stands and less roads. If we are talking drybelt fir, the historic stand structure after fire was a lot different than the current post logging structure. We’ve pushed them into smaller and smaller areas and predator and hunting success has probably increased. Stress on the deer would be higher as they get bumped from place to place which takes an incremental toll from a caloric/energy perspective. For critters in the bush the auditor never stops keeping track of what went in and what’s coming out. One good reason to have a second thought about shed hunting. If we keep applying more pressure, we are going to be left with a land of whitetail that can take it and much reduced mulies.

[Bugle M In]

The summer of 2017 was the driest on record. The winter of 2017/18 was long and tough.
We all know that summer moisture plays a key roll in fawn survival. Add the tough winter and I would bet that we lost a significant portion of the fawns....which the male portion of this would be the yearling bucks in the fall of 2018.

I’m guessing that all those hunters that you saw in the late fall were ones that had a hard time finding a yearling 2 pt to shoot.

SSS

It's possible.
I don't hunt there very often in the any buck season at all.
However, when I have gone in, we still saw a fair amount of the young bucks.
I think some of the increased traffic may also due to some thinking that year 2 after the fire was going to bring great results.
Sorry to disappoint, but this fire is going to take quite a few years to be any good.
That and after R5 shutting down for 10 days in November really showed me how we as hunters just get squished closer and closer together with every regulation change. (especially when the change happens on the biggest hunting holiday for MD).

Fires were inevitable considering all the beetle kill/windfall and as long as we have hot summers, plenty more to come.
(Merrit comes to mind)
Great for reviving summer range and even what I call transition zones, especially in those winters that are mild as not all animals migrate to their traditional winter grounds if they don't have to.
But not all fires are going to be like the Kelowna/OK fire that burn in some decent winter range.

And that's what still needs to be addressed is some restoration and protection of true winter range areas from all sorts
of development.
Remember the Kettle Valley and all the MD die off that one winter, over 50% mortality the CO's figured from flying around.
And honestly, doesn't seem like it ever recovered from that afterwards, even to this day.

Fires will definitely help, but I would be lying if I were to say that is all that is needed.

[Bugle M In]

As a preface to my comment, I’ve worked in forestry and still get my paycheck through industry. We have hammered the hell out of the country, look at the current age class distribution, road density, fragmentation, and increasing pressure due to atvs, side by sides etc. Combine this with the beetle and related salvage logging, there are fewer and fewer places for deer to hide out from predation, human or four legged. There are definitely issues related to increases predation on mulies and pred populations associated with whitetail populations as well as inter breeding of mulie does by whitetail bucks, but I don’t think these are the main issues. I thinks it’s habitat and escape cover that was provided by a land with more older age stands and less roads. If we are talking drybelt fir, the historic stand structure after fire was a lot different than the current post logging structure. We’ve pushed them into smaller and smaller areas and predator and hunting success has probably increased. Stress on the deer would be higher as they get bumped from place to place which takes an incremental toll from a caloric/energy perspective. For critters in the bush the auditor never stops keeping track of what went in and what’s coming out. One good reason to have a second thought about shed hunting. If we keep applying more pressure, we are going to be left with a land of whitetail that can take it and much reduced mulies.

Just want to say I sure feel for you guys.
Cant be easy to see whats happening while working but at the same time need the paycheck.
And yes, I agree with what is happening due to it as you say.
Escape Cover gone missing was a big change where I hunt MD in R3, and the last remaining stuff is now slated to be logged!
At that point, I have a bad feeling that area is done for the next 30 years as well.
Didn't help that with all the logging in that area for the last 30 years, that area also just lost all it's transplants due to the big fire!!
So now it all starts from "scratch" again!!, but now longer cause some spots did burn hot, but luckily not all.

It will be beautiful country to hunt in 35-50 years though:mrgreen:

[HarryToolips]

As a preface to my comment, I’ve worked in forestry and still get my paycheck through industry. We have hammered the hell out of the country, look at the current age class distribution, road density, fragmentation, and increasing pressure due to atvs, side by sides etc. Combine this with the beetle and related salvage logging, there are fewer and fewer places for deer to hide out from predation, human or four legged. There are definitely issues related to increases predation on mulies and pred populations associated with whitetail populations as well as inter breeding of mulie does by whitetail bucks, but I don’t think these are the main issues. I thinks it’s habitat and escape cover that was provided by a land with more older age stands and less roads. If we are talking drybelt fir, the historic stand structure after fire was a lot different than the current post logging structure. We’ve pushed them into smaller and smaller areas and predator and hunting success has probably increased. Stress on the deer would be higher as they get bumped from place to place which takes an incremental toll from a caloric/energy perspective. For critters in the bush the auditor never stops keeping track of what went in and what’s coming out. One good reason to have a second thought about shed hunting. If we keep applying more pressure, we are going to be left with a land of whitetail that can take it and much reduced mulies.
What you're saying makes sense...

[Walksalot]

My reasoning for thinking the problem goes far beyond predation is that if the predator numbers are increasing then an increase in pictures of the predators would be showing up on trail cameras. My cameras and the cameras of people I talk to, and they amount to a significant amount of cameras, would reflect an increase. So far, from what I can deduce, this is not the case.

[zippermouth]

Age structure and mature bucks are down. Road densities are at an all time high, most hunters own a quad and can cover a ton more ground than before the quad era. I’d wager to guess a lot of mule deer bucks are getting killed, contributing to the lower than 20 bucks per 100 does. There are a lot of black bears, contributing to the fawn mortality. These faws are not part of the study group as they are killed in their first few months on the landscape.

Want to see bigger bucks? Remove the easy access, provide security for bucks.

Want to to see more deer? Remove predators when faws are most vulnerable. Create better habitat. The logging is disgusting in the okanagan right now. Logging happening in the winter range where deer require big timber. Logging also removes the “security” aspect. Pretty easy to see the trends to our deer numbers crashing.

Once the study has run for a few years it will be pretty easy to determine the mortality rate on the fawns being collared. If it’s low, it is pretty easy to determine that the deer are being killed before they are getting collared. If it is high the reason will be revealed when they retrieve the collar.

What hunters can do short term: get two bear tags this spring and kill two black bears. Kill every coyote you see whenever you see them, regardless of if you are hunting other species. Join a local club and volunteer for habitat restoration work.

[LBM]

I've mentioned this on my Whitetail thread.......
if you can't answer 'who, what, why, where and when you will have a hard time consistently killing better animals.

This project is going to answer a lot of questions replacing educated guesses with quantified data.
Better decision making will result.

Where do these captured MD go after leaving their winter range?
How far do they travel?
What are the travel routes, do they avoid certain roadways etc?
What is causing the high mortality specific to each fatality.
When do most of the fatalities happen?
When exactly do they move the most?

Pretty exciting when you think about it.
Yes this is all good, and will help give answers for what is happening currently but wont really give the answer as to why
or what happened in the past. The decline has been on going for years,what were factors in that and what can be done
to help prevent it in the future, if not all ready to late.
It is interesting to talk to some of the bios and hear what they say and to see what some are saying here now, so much of it was said before
by others and told it was not a issue.

[Walking Buffalo]

Aside from more and more loss of winter range due to development in reg 8, I should also state that I'm hearing of an increase in cougar population - and we know that the cats will make a big dent in mule deer pops...these factors along with lack of burns I believe are the biggest contributing factors to mule deer declines in reg 8..

I'm curious as to how the predation evaluation of this study is being done.

Cats may be influencing populations much more than expected.

A recent cougar study in Alberta.
Cougar Kill Rate and Prey Composition in a Multiprey System

http://sci-northern.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/CougarKillRateandPreyComposition.pdf (http://sci-northern.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/CougarKillRateandPreyComposition.pdf)



Knopff is basing his conclusions on data collected from more than 1,500 kill sites while tracking 54 cougars with GPS collars. The collars allowed the University of Alberta researchers, including his wife Aliah, to move in quickly after a kill to identify what was taken and by which lion.

In the journal article Knopff writes that some previous studies “may have failed to identify higher kill rates for large carnivores in summer because methods in those studies did not permit researchers to locate many neonates or because sample size was too small.”

The use of GPS collars enabled Knopff and his colleagues to collect more data. As a result, he found that mountain lions killed more deer, elk and moose during the summer by focusing on juveniles and actually killed fewer animals in winter. The information contradicts previous studies conducted in Idaho.

“The Idaho estimates differed from our summer estimates by as much as 365 percent in terms of frequency of killing and 538 percent in terms of prey biomass,” Knopff wrote. “Because kill rate fundamentally influences the effect predators have on their prey, the discrepancy between studies represents a substantial difference in the capacity for cougars to impact ungulates.”

https://www.africahunting.com/threads/mountain-lion-study.41710/ (http://sci-northern.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/CougarKillRateandPreyComposition.pdf)

[Bugle M In]

Really, went you "physically" look at things in BC, and ask yourself "what has changed"??
Look at Google Time lapse, at your favorite hunting areas.
I bet you, that all of you will "physically see" what has changed.
Logging and no mature growth canopy left has got to contribute to "a change" for wildlife.
I can't see how it would not.
The main Plateau's around Kammy used to get a lot of snowfall during winter time.
But the "Tree Canopy" must have limited how much snow was actually on the ground!
Now, with no tress, these areas have several feet of snow (when it falls during a decent winter).

This has been going on for years, and you could get a sense that #'s were dropping.
This was log before Wolves in the area.
But now you throw this in, and the wolves are just going "thank you!!!" for providing us such great hunting grounds.
I suspect cats are doing their share too! (and they are efficient).

I did post a Road Access Thread, due to all the logging.
Restrictions wont help, but ripping up the roads would, imo.

Don't know how we fix the "missing trees" however????
Preds can be dealt with.

[tracker]

I have been hunting cats in that area for quite a few years now. from Peachland down to the us border, its a waste of gas these days . sure there are some cats there ,but not like it use to be 10 years ago goodluck to the project, I do supported it .
.

[Ourea]

Good info to be aware of...

Mule deer and access
Behaviour changes What it shows
Habitat selection by mule deer during migration: effects of landscape structure and natural-gas development, (Lendrum et al 2012)
Animals move faster through areas of roads, select habitat away from disturbance
Winter habitat selection of mule deer before and during development of a natural gas field (Sawyer et al, 2006)
Reduced/altered habitat use by mule deer out to 3km from site of disturbance
Migrating Mule Deer: Effects of Anthropogenic ally Altered Landscapes (Lendrum et al, 2013)
Development alters movement rate during migration, implications on arrival times, departure times, birthing areas, locomotion cost
Elk and access
Behavioural changes What it shows
Distribution of Mule Deer and Elk in Relation to Roads (Gregory, 1979)

Avoid areas of high road density and high traffic volume. Effect of Forest Roads and Habitat Use by Roosevelt Elk (Witmer 1985) Avoidance of 250, on either side of paved roads, 125m from forestry spur roads and no avoidance of roads closed to motor vehicles. Thresholds in landscape connectivity and mortality risks in response to growing road networks (Frair et al, 2008) As road density increases elk avoid usage of habitat and increased displacement of elk occurs as they potentially seek more secure habitat. Effects of Roads on Elk: Implications for Management in Forested Ecosystmes (Rowland et al, 2005) Avoid 250m on either side of a road, animals lived in smaller herds to avoid detection, more tolerate of disturbance when appropriate cover is available.
Why stress matters
Research Literature What it shows Condition, Survival, and Cause- Specific Mortality of Adult Female Mule Deer in North-Central New Mexico(Bender et al, 2007)
Mule deer with high fat and body condition scores had higher winter survival rates
Effect of Enhanced Nutrition on Mule Deer Population Rate of Change (Bishop et al, 2009)
Increased nutritional quality did not increase pregnancy but did increase winter survival and neonate survival. Relations between nutritional condition and survival of North American elk Cervus elaphus (Bender et al, 2006)
Showed increased risk of non-human caused mortality with reduced body fat and increased muscle metabolized.
Species have road density thresholds
Species Road density Literature
Large ungulates
0.6 km/km2 (apparent threshold value for naturally functioning landscape)

Ecological effects of roads: towards three summary indices an overview for north America. (Foreman et al, 1997) Moose 0.2-0.4 km/km2 apparent threshold of moose in summer and winter respectively

Functional responses, seasonal variation and thresholds in behavioural responses of moose to road density (Hawthorne et al, 2013) Elk 1.0-1.5 km/km2 increased habitat avoidance and emigration of elk seeking secure habitat

Thresholds in landscape connectivity and mortality risks in response to growing road networks (Frairs et al, 2008) Elk 1.9 km/km2 (Density Standard for habitat effectiveness
Wolves and access
Behavioral responses of wolves to roads: scale-dependent ambivalence (Zimmermann et al, 2014)
Wolves use roads to travel 2x as fast. Develop cryptic behaviour to utilize roads without increased visibility
How linear features alter predator movement and the functional response (McKenzie et al, 2012)

Wolves select for travel on seismic lines, increased rate of travel, increase encounter rate. Prey are at higher vulnerability when in areas of high density Caribou encounters with wolves increase near roads and trails: a time- to-event approach (Whittington et al, 2011) Risk of encounter greater around trails
Movement responses by wolves to industrial linear features and their effect on woodland Caribou in Northeastern Alberta. (Latham et al, 2011)
Concluded seismic lines increase wolf predation risk for caribou resulting in avoidance behaviour of caribou Faster and farther: wolf movement on linear features and implications of hunting behaviour (Dickie et al, 2016)
Wolves move up to 3x faster, farther, higher search rate associated with linear features.

https://i.imgur.com/x8gUpVu.png

[Walksalot]

Sometimes we, as hunters and conservationists, have to take matters into our own hands. Granted there is a study going on and all are eagerly awaiting the results but in the mean time if we see there is an alarming drop in numbers of mule deer then quit hunting them. Granted studies done on the imprenation of the does shows a high impregnation rate the bottom line is the animals are still dieing. If all that was left were 100 does and 2 bucks and there is a high impregnation rate it would be immaterial to the survival of the species as, if things don't change, these too will die off.

[Ohwildwon]

Wildlife needs 2 key components to survive let alone thrive.
1) Habitat
2) Security
(One can drill down further under these two headings with factors such as habitat fragmentation, resource extraction, loss of winter range, preds etc.)

And Walksalot, we are destroying both.


Region 8 is pretty big. Fortunately there are areas that are still old growth and prime habitat.

The honey hole I hunt is at or near carrying capacity. Haven't seen any sign of wolves, very few bears.

I estimate a Monster Muley, every 500 yards, having seen 30" spreads after kicking them off their bed.

The size of the prints and shit everywhere is quite remarkable!

https://i.imgur.com/DEmQUql.png

[Ourea]

Enjoy.
Remember that this thread is on the Boundary and Okanagan and calling attention to the project.
Data is irrefutable on the status of MD deer based on annual inventories and collaring data.
Some areas are stable and others are imploding.

Monster mulie every 500 yards......ur killin me.
Are you one of those guys that say 30" this, 190" that, bounced this.....yet has never closed on a hammer but only posts pics of deer shit?
Please tell me you are just joshing with us.

[HarryToolips]

I'm curious as to how the predation evaluation of this study is being done.

Cats may be influencing populations much more than expected.

A recent cougar study in Alberta.
Cougar Kill Rate and Prey Composition in a Multiprey System

http://sci-northern.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/CougarKillRateandPreyComposition.pdf (http://sci-northern.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/CougarKillRateandPreyComposition.pdf)



Knopff is basing his conclusions on data collected from more than 1,500 kill sites while tracking 54 cougars with GPS collars. The collars allowed the University of Alberta researchers, including his wife Aliah, to move in quickly after a kill to identify what was taken and by which lion.

In the journal article Knopff writes that some previous studies “may have failed to identify higher kill rates for large carnivores in summer because methods in those studies did not permit researchers to locate many neonates or because sample size was too small.”

The use of GPS collars enabled Knopff and his colleagues to collect more data. As a result, he found that mountain lions killed more deer, elk and moose during the summer by focusing on juveniles and actually killed fewer animals in winter. The information contradicts previous studies conducted in Idaho.

“The Idaho estimates differed from our summer estimates by as much as 365 percent in terms of frequency of killing and 538 percent in terms of prey biomass,” Knopff wrote. “Because kill rate fundamentally influences the effect predators have on their prey, the discrepancy between studies represents a substantial difference in the capacity for cougars to impact ungulates.”

https://www.africahunting.com/threads/mountain-lion-study.41710/ (http://sci-northern.ab.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/CougarKillRateandPreyComposition.pdf)



Interesting, thanks for posting...

[walks with deer]

those red densitie zones used to be the better moose zones aswell...

i would agree access, lack of winter range,stress,roads and no cover...is a majour factor.
predators its alarming how many fawns a bbear takes...firstbtime i saw it the bear was running with a fawn in its mouth like a retreiver with a duck..

one fawn call and the bear came for the new fawn aswell..unfortunatley for the bear the new fawn sent a 410 grain bullet at 2650fps at him.lol

on my way home tonight i saw where 4 whitetails where running across the road and there was pred tracks behind them..upon inspection two coyotes where chasing them...
there was three in that pack but one was a little slower than the other two.. and he spent to much time at the one of there kill sights..and was dumb enough to stare at me at 80yds..

time to slow the logging a bit and have logging companies deactivate.

[Ohwildwon]

Enjoy.
Remember that this thread is on the Boundary and Okanagan and calling attention to the project.
Data is irrefutable on the status of MD deer based on annual inventories and collaring data.
Some areas are stable and others are imploding.

Monster mulie every 500 yards......ur killin me.
Are you one of those guys that say 30" this, 190" that, bounced this.....yet has never closed on a hammer but only posts pics of deer shit?
Please tell me you are just joshing with us.

Ha Ha!

I haven't been hunting long enough, to to be so lucky to connect on one of these unicorns yet.

I found the place 2 years ago, on the first day I bumped one! He left me a curious 2 point and I went home..

Last fall I spent 3 - 4 day spurts really learning the area.

Found them bedded in the thick coming down, got unlucky with the swirling wind every time.

[Ourea]

Ha Ha!

I haven't been hunting long enough, to to be so lucky to connect on one of these unicorns yet.

I found the place 2 years ago, on the first day I bumped one! He left me a curious 2 point and I went home..

Last fall I spent 3 - 4 day spurts really learning the area.

Found them bedded in the thick coming down, got unlucky with the swirling wind every time.

And how would you react to finding your said honey hole being nothing more than a clearcut or a block and road stuffed right beside it next yr?
Where did your deer go after this?
How did they adapt after their security and habitat was compromised?
Could you adapt?
Did your honey hole deer adapt?
Did numbers just tank or did they relocated without compromise?

[HighCountryBC]

Monster mulie every 500 yards......ur killin me.
Are you one of those guys that say 30" this, 190" that, bounced this.....yet has never closed on a hammer but only posts pics of deer shit?
Please tell me you are just joshing with us.

Duallie is back!

[Ohwildwon]

And how would you react to finding your said honey hole being nothing more than a clearcut or a block and road stuffed right beside it next yr?
Where did your deer go after this?
How did they adapt after their security and habitat was compromised?
Could you adapt?
Did your honey hole deer adapt?
Did numbers just tank or did they relocated without compromise?

So, someone posts some good news, that it s not all doom and gloom out there.

And you turn it around and make it all about yourself.

Nice

[Ourea]

So, someone posts some good news, that it s not all doom and gloom out there.

And you turn it around and make it all about yourself.

Nice

The thread is on a leading edge mule deer project who's goal is to ultimately help in MD recovery in areas where once robust populations are spiraling downward.
You post pics of deer shit from an area that has nothing to do about the topic.
About me?

[slowjo]

The way the mule deer disappeared goes, in my opinion, far beyond predation. Something had decimated the mule deer population and we had better find out what pretty soon. Had a discussion with a forester and we talked about the economic value of our forest and how logging can enhance habitat but I pointed out the poor buggers need a place to hide. As pointed out subdivisions on lower elevations above the valley bottoms are really impacting their winter ranges. My wife is sick of me commenting at every advertisement for residential subdivisions with spectacular views of the valley.

yes!! i think you nailed it there @Walksalot....i agree forestry practices can be beneficial...but don't see too many logging companies practicing selective timber harvest...whitetails love that clearcut regrowth though...mulies not so much...habitat loss...it's a shame that as the Okanagan human population continues to grow, so will the decline of mule deer continue...

[horshur]

The hypothesis needs to be proved rather then promoted...study should be free of bias.
Not saying your wrong just saying your putting the cart before the horse.

There are multiple factors just as important that must be considered....and it would be much more useful to problem solve rather then finger point. Hindsight is 20/20...

like the caribou .remedial actions such setting aside habitat which has already been altered (ie logged) might be useful long term but not so much short term...you cannot put the genie back in the bottle.

campaigning makes it seem you already made your minds up..study is not even a year along....

[Wild one]

The hypothesis needs to be proved rather then promoted...study should be free of bias.
Not saying your wrong just saying your putting the cart before the horse.

There are multiple factors just as important that must be considered....and it would be much more useful to problem solve rather then finger point. Hindsight is 20/20...

like the caribou .remedial actions such setting aside habitat which has already been altered (ie logged) might be useful long term but not so much short term...you cannot put the genie back in the bottle.

campaigning makes it seem you already made your minds up..study is not even a year along....

Could not agree more and this would be the best thing for credibility of the study(and future studies) and mule deer themselves

One piece of evidence is often not enough to reach a factual conclusion and that is why a study is done. I could debate with facts one point that keeps getting hinted at but that does nothing for the out come of the study. It’s nice to hear factual data that is found during this study though

I will place bets their is multiple factors at play with the decline. It would be a shame to see things groomed towards 1 issue and others ignored. It would be nice to see this study end with results that highlight all possible factors impacting mule deer and the facts used to reach the conclusion.

It’s great to hear this study is being done but it will be even better if it concludes with non bias facts and conclusion

[northof49]

^^^^agree completely... this is critical, otherwise may just be a means to preconceived agenda. Decline may well be largely due to predation and yet if study not thorough enough with significant sample size could easily be spun to be habitat loss. Need enough data over significantly long time to start to see trends and draw conclusions. Doing so prematurely would not be helpful and defeat purpose entirely. I could see this taking a decade or so. If heavy predation is factor that should be obvious much sooner. If is predation may well still be partially related to habitat loss, but at least will be able to start addressing possible short term solutions while the study continues and then monitor how those solutions start to impact survival over the longer term.

[charlie_horse]

In my eyes it seems like we know what the problems are.

Humans destruction of habitat/road access. Which causes both 4 and 2 legged predators to be much more efficient, both due to travelling corridors and high concentrations of deer in pockets which make it easier for predators to seemingly pillage ungulates. The wolves are going to find where the deer HAVE to be, which that area is getting smaller and smaller.

Short term - cull predators, seems to be the only solution (in my eyes)
Long term - which should start immediately. Habitat enhancement, make mining and forestry accountable for restoration projects. Stop development on prime wintering grounds. Then maybe it can turn from culling to manage predators.

What can you do as a hunter, at least short term? Kill any wolf or coyote you see. You hear a pack of wolves howling go from elk hunting to wolf hunting. (Which I'm guilty of just moving on to where I think wolves won't be). Carry a cougar, bobcat and lynx tag. And what I think is most important, go out and shoot some bears. I'll probably get some flack for this, but whatever a problem is a problem. Who cares about sex when it comes to bears, if the idea is to lower numbers. As long as it's legal with no Cubs and predator management is your priority it shouldn't be an issue. Same with sexing a cat, If i ever cross one with no kittens, it probably won't be walking around much longer. This probably sounds cold but there is an issue in this province.

Hopefully I'll be able to follow my own advice this spring when it comes to bears, as that seems to me the only real impactful thing hunters can easily accomplish. If your an accomplished wolf or cat Hunter than great but let's be honest that isn't too realistic.

[RobU]

The hypothesis needs to be proved rather then promoted...study should be free of bias.
Not saying your wrong just saying your putting the cart before the horse.

There are multiple factors just as important that must be considered....and it would be much more useful to problem solve rather then finger point. Hindsight is 20/20...

like the caribou .remedial actions such setting aside habitat which has already been altered (ie logged) might be useful long term but not so much short term...you cannot put the genie back in the bottle.

campaigning makes it seem you already made your minds up..study is not even a year along....

i along with many will keep my opinions to myself. Time will tell on this study if much money and time are being spent studying the obvious. One smoking gun will not likely be found as we all can agree on this being a complex matter.
I do recall one very important quote that will stand the test of time.
“When we take care of the land we take care of everything”
it is my observation and may others we’ve done a very piss poor job taking care of the land in BC. I’m guilty of this as well.

[IronNoggin]

i will keep my opinions to myself.

Why don't you actually try living up to that statement for once??
Would be somewhat refreshing.

BTW, How's that CWD paper coming along, and how long before we can all see it posted here?

Wondering...
Nog

[RobU]

Why don't you actually try living up to that statement for once??
Would be somewhat refreshing.

BTW, How's that CWD paper coming along, and how long before we can all see it posted here?

Wondering...
Nog

Your not gonna get anything accomplished sniping at me. I could however send you a hurt feelings report to fill out.

[Liveforthehunt]

Ok I have seen in many areas the MD population decline drastically even the past 7 years. However I did hunt an area this year that held a very healthy population seeing over 14 bucks and close to 80 different does and fawns in a 15 km range. I would love for the bios to go study there except I dont want anyone knowing about this spot;)

[Tim Tam Slam]

Wondering if anyone has the info to contact the researchers doing this study? I’m sure we could rally a few members in here and bcwf / bha guys/gals to help in the collaring etc. if that’s what’s lacking?

or maybe petition these foundations to start a fund directly funding this research attempt? Isn’t better mule deer numbers what we’re all after anyways?

helping this study get the resources it needs to be accurate and comprehensive will not only bring the inadequate funding of this project attention to the powers at be, but will give us a starting point to bring back the loss in population (which at this point seems undeniable)

my two cents... but seriously, if there’s a way to contact them shout it out!

[Ourea]

Wondering if anyone has the info to contact the researchers doing this study? I’m sure we could rally a few members in here and bcwf / bha guys/gals to help in the collaring etc. if that’s what’s lacking?

or maybe petition these foundations to start a fund directly funding this research attempt? Isn’t better mule deer numbers what we’re all after anyways?


helping this study get the resources it needs to be accurate and comprehensive will not only bring the inadequate funding of this project attention to the powers at be, but will give us a starting point to bring back the loss in population (which at this point seems undeniable)

my two cents... but seriously, if there’s a way to contact them shout it out!

If you read any of the pressers or articles on this project it calls out all the parties involved.
Major undertakings like these need funding to happen, they don't come cheap.
Volunteers are well down the priority list on what assets are required to pull projects like this off.

[Tim Tam Slam]

Ahhh i see.

do you think there’s anything we can do to help?

[Wild one]

Just a thought but maybe if you supply volunteers with in-depth information on the project and create avenues they could use to generate $ for these projects you might get a combination of a little funding and public education at the same time

Not my show and understand only so many hands are needed to run the project but a wise man would find a way to utilize FREE man power to generate something beneficial to the cause

Just an idea but like I said not my show

[mike31154]

The Vernon Fish & Game sent out emails last year to all members with contact info for the biologist should we wish to volunteer. I sent him an email offering my services. Received a reply email to the effect, 'thank you, I'll be in touch...'. That was months ago, haven't been contacted since. I reckon they have it covered.

[Tim Tam Slam]

Thanks for the PM Ourea, appreciate shedding more light for me on the issue as I was really in aware of the current info and studies we have out there on this boundary population. Check out this link sent to me:
http://www.bcwf.net/index.php/southern-bc-mule-deer-project
says it’s $2,000 per deer to collar and get more info on. If you look at the report that shows road access within 500m It’s shocking....

good news is looking through the photos on the link, the habitat can recover really quick through the burns and deactivated areas. I’m more convinced now that it’s a habitat loss issue (there’s only so much area they can hide and have safety/ eat/bed comfortably as well as avoid predators (including us hunters). Deactivating more of these roads and seriously studying the road density/effects on the landscape before more forestry/logging is done seems like a sure bet.

I’m not normally a “rally the troops” kind of person (online at least), but man - we could probably do some more on our parts to raise holy stink about this and get it to the attention of More influential people than us! I’ll be posting about this on Social Media trying to get the word out and get some donations going too.

hopefully the chapter of BHA in the lower mainland is doing something about this too, will be reaching out to them too. (Just signed up for the year with them to see what they plan on “doing” with the funds/group).

Hop on the wagon folks!

:-D

[Bugle M In]

Thanks for the PM Ourea, appreciate shedding more light for me on the issue as I was really in aware of the current info and studies we have out there on this boundary population. Check out this link sent to me:
http://www.bcwf.net/index.php/southern-bc-mule-deer-project
says it’s $2,000 per deer to collar and get more info on. If you look at the report that shows road access within 500m It’s shocking....

good news is looking through the photos on the link, the habitat can recover really quick through the burns and deactivated areas. I’m more convinced now that it’s a habitat loss issue (there’s only so much area they can hide and have safety/ eat/bed comfortably as well as avoid predators (including us hunters). Deactivating more of these roads and seriously studying the road density/effects on the landscape before more forestry/logging is done seems like a sure bet.

I’m not normally a “rally the troops” kind of person (online at least), but man - we could probably do some more on our parts to raise holy stink about this and get it to the attention of More influential people than us! I’ll be posting about this on Social Media trying to get the word out and get some donations going too.

hopefully the chapter of BHA in the lower mainland is doing something about this too, will be reaching out to them too. (Just signed up for the year with them to see what they plan on “doing” with the funds/group).

Hop on the wagon folks!

:-D

Yup, it's the habitat loss in my opinion as well.
I have seen areas that had preds like wolves and managed to survive although a constant pounding would do damage.
But back then I think wolves in the area had a large area to move in, thus some areas would get hit one year and then left alone for a couple, but with pops so high, they are so crowded now that they end up sticking in the same area and that's when it gets bad.

But, its the loss of the forests for proper feed, without poisons, and areas for bedding/shelter and avoidance that I think
has created the big problem.
It was right after all the logging, on a large scale that did the area in.
Interesting thing is, access has been denied for years, yet declines happened anyways.
I think the loss of mature growth is the big factor, in several of the areas I go to, and there in different Regions.
With the beetle came to logging, thus the roads and a great path for Preds to move in.
I think that is the order it went that got things so bad.

And when it comes to MD, whats left to winter in if it gets cut down or built on.
Different Regions, different issues but some similarities as well so this study should be a great step.
What I like is the fawn collaring, as that is the key to what happens to them and whether they can repopulate an
area or not.

[bighornbob]

The Vernon Fish & Game sent out emails last year to all members with contact info for the biologist should we wish to volunteer. I sent him an email offering my services. Received a reply email to the effect, 'thank you, I'll be in touch...'. That was months ago, haven't been contacted since. I reckon they have it covered.


Like most things volunteers are only interested in the glory work (not saying this is the case for you or the original poster).

I have organized the volunteers for a few sheep transplants in the Kamloops area and there was never a shortage of people offering their services when it came to handling the sheep under the net. Some people would just show up as a friend mentioned it to them and some were pissed off when they did not get to participate just because they showed up. When I needed some people to look into getting Alfalpha bails or digging holes in the frozen dirt for the posts that hold the net, people were always too busy.

There was a core group of guys (mostly retired) that could be counted on doing all the “dirty work” weeks before the actual sheep capture. Also I only had to make one phone call and I would get 10 guys out to do the dirty work. And I only called one guy and then that guy called two people and so on.

Cant speak directly to this project, but I bet the Bio makes one call to a volunteer that he knows from doing other “dirty work” and the numbers are taken care from there.
Like I said I bet there would be a ton of guys that would love to handle the deer, but not too many that are willing to show up and set up and take down chairs and tables for a meeting about the project.

BHB

[scott h]

As stated in the article, fires help wildlife.

Absolutely fires create perfect areas for wildlife. The problem is when forestry companies spray round up over those same areas to prevent competition for their newly planted conifers. Thousands of acres are sprayed every single year throughout the province and basically removes that browse that feeds deer, elk and moose (basically everything). The practice is insane and yet it will happen again this year.

[338win mag]

Of course fire helps, its the lifeblood of this land, trouble is we cant have massive fires like the ones historically, but when we do have fire the roads are not blocked or access curtailed, its ludicrous.

[Bugle M In]

Even some of those Fire Perimeters which basically are super wide roads are going to creats issues.
The one area I hunt has them all over the place, and some went right smack dab into the honey holes (which sucks for me), but on top
of that, are right in some prime MD winter range.

Some access is great and should be allowed, after all, we use them to get close to our favorite hunting areas, so lets not get hypocritical about
some of the roads, which Forestry industry created.
It's just too many roads in a given area that is killing off the area.
And some of us don't play by the same rules to begin with, so all that access has made it a lot easier for them to experience they're traditional ways.
Removing the entire forest isn't helping either.

There is lots of room to make improvements while at the same time leaving access available.
But yes, at some point you have to leave the vehicle to go hunt areas.
If we did, in time there might be some game closer to the roads where some don't have to get more then a couple steps out from the truck etc.
Leaving things the way they are is just going to make the hunting experience more dismal than it already is.
Change is needed.

[bangbangkhan]

Been hunting region 8 and 3 for the last 5 years and to be honest last season was the worst.

They should set minimum 4 point all season long.

[Bugle M In]

^^^^?I think it depends from MU to MU.
Last season I counted at least 4 2pt's in on weekend, all with 4-6 does.
The issue was not seeing much bigger.
I haven't seen a big change where I go.
one issue I notice is I never really see more than the year before and with the fawns a see with the does, makes me
wonder what happens "post hunting".
Only other issue is not really seeing many large 4 pt bucks for some years now, but smaller ones yes.
Last season post fire, I seen the most deer ever.
Suppose the fire pushed them into the area I go??
I think with all the fires that have happened, and I suspect will continue to happen, we will see game get pushed around.
One area could tank while another increases.

What I hate about changes regs to 4pt, just like elk and 6pt, it doesn't work in the long run,
IF, the issues of decreasing game is due to something other than hunting, which is most certainly the case, imo.
If it is a hunting issue that game drops, than I can see the thinking of trying further restrictions etc.
BUT, it isn't hunting, so why would further restriction make it better??

If this study shows that hunters are dropping the deer, then I will eat my words and admit I am wrong.
But I think this study might just shed some light on what is happening "NOW".
We cant rely on studies and past experience from the 70's.
Too much has changed, our landscape is way different then back then, for many reasons.
We have to see how the deer have "adjusted" and if so, is it working for them, or are they "struggling"?
Everything from feed/diet to breeding and migration and Preds.

I think it's going to be a great start to see what needs to be addressed.
Just worried not much more will happen after we know.

[MattB]

Been hunting region 8 and 3 for the last 5 years and to be honest last season was the worst.

They should set minimum 4 point all season long.

What is that going to solve besides having more hunters spending more days in the field? Right now the problem is predators and access. Remove roads. Impose access restrictions in some of the new fires. Continue to allow people to hunt. Leaving more 2 pts to live isnt going to solve anything except allow alot more food for predators at their current level.

[338win mag]

What is that going to solve besides having more hunters spending more days in the field? Right now the problem is predators and access. Remove roads. Impose access restrictions in some of the new fires. Continue to allow people to hunt. Leaving more 2 pts to live isnt going to solve anything except allow alot more food for predators at their current level.
The simplicity of this post is what makes it a good one.

[Walksalot]

What is that going to solve besides having more hunters spending more days in the field? Right now the problem is predators and access. Remove roads. Impose access restrictions in some of the new fires. Continue to allow people to hunt. Leaving more 2 pts to live isnt going to solve anything except allow alot more food for predators at their current level.

When do we say the numbers are so low we have to NOT hunt them?

[bangbangkhan]

Well access is definitely an issue...road hunting is off the charts.

But if you restrict the 2 pointers then road hunters will automatically go away.

I am not saying to restrict it every where, if people are willing to put in the hard work to access areas in the alpine then those regions should remain as is.

[Wild one]

Well access is definitely an issue...road hunting is off the charts.

But if you restrict the 2 pointers then road hunters will automatically go away.

I am not saying to restrict it every where, if people are willing to put in the hard work to access areas in the alpine then those regions should remain as is.

Then you will have guys complain all the mature bucks are gone and genetics going to crap lol

Its too early to see the results of the new buck limit. Last winter also kicked the crap out of many areas. No need to jump into things right now when steps to improve buck ratio just started. Point restrictions come with negatives as well. Most states and provs ditched this management for a reason. Lower bag limit (like was just implemented last year), less days hunting, rut closures, and LEH were proven far more effective for buck management

Could BC improve management of bucks and see improvement in hunt quality along with improvements in herd health in my opinion yes and there is fact to support it. But to see real improvement in overall population which is truly needed nope

Need to address major issues impacting MD numbers of you want real results and hunting along with any buck season is really low on the list

So implementation of a poor out dated form of buck management that most of North America abandoned is probably not going to achieve the results you are hoping for

[Bugle M In]

When do we say the numbers are so low we have to NOT hunt them?

Wont matter.
The ministry has stopped us for years by giving us tons of restrictions.
And here we are, no game...or less of it.

Do we want to send a message to the government once again to just throw us some more Regs???!!!
OR, do we want to tell them "F off and really fix the real issues"!!!
NO MORE REGS......GIVE US CASH AND AUTHORITY to FIX THIS PROPERLY!

[Ourea]

Handful of collared deer have already gone down to preds in the sample areas.
FYI

[Wild one]

Wont matter.
The ministry has stopped us for years by giving us tons of restrictions.
And here we are, no game...or less of it.

Do we want to send a message to the government once again to just throw us some more Regs???!!!
OR, do we want to tell them "F off and really fix the real issues"!!!
NO MORE REGS......GIVE US CASH AND AUTHORITY to FIX THIS PROPERLY!

BC has been extremely liberal so it makes it seem like there has been big impact on regs

The truth is BC is still running on one of the least restrictive MD management plans in North America. BC has never really put effort into restricting MD it has always been fluffy minimal impact that looks like something. We still run one of the lowest buck to doe ratio management goals in North America. When lower is found the offset with by areas that demand higher ratio.

Things will get tighter

Regardless buck management is a small factor and without predator management and habitat improvement it does not matter.

[LBM]

When do we say the numbers are so low we have to NOT hunt them?
Some areas should probable have been shut down a few years ago, along with some other
species even a few more years then that. Sadly many humans are more worried about there opportunity to shoot something
then the declining populations. There may be some changes coming though on some species some of it has started and some are trying for more.

[Wild one]

Handful of collared deer have already gone down to preds in the sample areas.
FYI

Too bad but not surprised

[LBM]

Handful of collared deer have already gone down to preds in the sample areas.
FYI
They all ways will, and all ways have, that's not new, dont no about this study but the EK one is flawed since they altered the food source before the collaring of the deer,
almost like they planned it that way, but they are seeing the bad side effects of it. Kind of like when they tried the kill the moose to
get rid of the wolves theroy. Again this study may not show what started the decline many years agao.

[338win mag]

When do we say the numbers are so low we have to NOT hunt them?
Hopefully never, and since they haven't done anything yet in regards to restriction in or near fire area's, I would be in agreement with you if in fact some of these other things mentioned are given a chance.

[Bugle M In]

Well, again, we just had a "major regulation" change to MD, to 1.
Think that will be a great start.

If 4 pt restriction is put in place all season, so be it, as I don't take young deer anyways.
But that's just me.

But, then someone "explain why" when it came to elk #'s dropping, that they basically did away with much of the cow leh
AND made it 6pt restriction, AND, they still haven't come back!!?? (in the EK, and don't forget, to take more pressure
off of that area, they opened up the WK to GOS, and, if that wasn't enough, many go to the Peace and have left the EK
on top of that, so many areas the pressure is way down, on top of the restrictions)

So, explain how stop hunting females, and only targeting the prime males has helped that issue?????

Again, short term it worked at first, and then it didn't.
In other words, short term gain for long term pain.

But yes, some will have you believe the hunting pressure is out of control.
Glad I only have x amount of years left.
I might just get to enjoy those "short term gains" then!!
And just around the time I am done with my hunting lifestyle (thank god I got fly fishing), the rest of younger hunters
can really start to enjoy "long term pain".

Address and Fix the real issues.
Get off the merry go round and try something different.
And I say that with a clean conscience, because I do have some young people who are close to me who enjoy hunting.


Maybe some of these "other people" who say it is hunting, might want to explain why they never came back after
those extreme regs???
Oh, I remember now....they don't answer that part.

[Bugle M In]

Handful of collared deer have already gone down to preds in the sample areas.
FYI

Not surprised in the least.
Be interesting to see what % actually make it to breeding season in the fall.
Sounds like they will also know what % fall to hunters.

[Keta1969]

Not surprised in the least.
Be interesting to see what % actually make it to breeding season in the fall.
Sounds like they will also know what % fall to hunters.

Don't know much about the study but how are they tracking fawn survival? I understand it would be natural to lose a percentage of does to preds and with them their unborn fawns, that just means to me that we need strong fawn survival from the remaining does not just initially but to breeding age.

[Scotty76]

Don't know much about the study but how are they tracking fawn survival? I understand it would be natural to lose a percentage of does to preds and with them their unborn fawns, that just means to me that we need strong fawn survival from the remaining does not just initially but to breeding age.

areas with low fawn survival, the ministry should be hitting the preds right before and during the fawn dropping.
Though I would probably win the lottery before the ministry actually did something like that. (They do this in some states apparently, and it makes sense)

[Ourea]

Don't know much about the study but how are they tracking fawn survival? I understand it would be natural to lose a percentage of does to preds and with them their unborn fawns, that just means to me that we need strong fawn survival from the remaining does not just initially but to breeding age.

If one takes a bit of time there is a lot of public information on this project, some of which is posted on this thread.
New fawns will be collared this spring now that some of the pregnant does are collared and being tracked.

Mortality rates will begin to declare themselves area to area.

[northof49]

Any idea how many total collared to date?

[Ourea]

Any idea how many total collared to date?

This info is readily available as stated before.

[338win mag]

This info is readily available as stated before.
I'm ignorant...where?

[Ourea]

http://www.bcwf.net/images/M_images/mule-deer/collaring-900.jpg


1. Collaring:

We will collar 20‐30 mule deer does in each study area (half in burned, half in unburned areas) and, pending HCTF funding, 20 fawns in each area next year. This will give us an idea of migration routes, habitat selection, effect of roads, effectiveness of ungulate winter range protection orders, survival, causes of mortality and effectiveness of highway wildlife crossing structure usage in Peachland study area.


The 20 fawns will be collared this spring.

[Ourea]

I'm ignorant...where?

There is an email blast that goes out to BCWF members monthly.
It is in BC Outdoors magazine every quarter.
It also goes out on social media.
That does not include the 50+ times it's been in the general media which has been shared in those social media and member updated resources.

I am not a BCWF member but have found the info easy to find and have been following things.

[Ourea]

You can even donate to help with the cost of research and equipment needed.
Feel free to contact Jesse direct, I am sure he will be more than happy to talk about the project.
Any pledge thru him can go directly to this project.


http://www.bcwf.net/images/M_images/mule-deer/BCWF-OKANAGAN-REGION-250X199.jpg


The funding received will dictate what we can do to enhance the project.


If you would like to contribute or if you have any questions...

Please contact:
Jesse Zeman
jessezeman@gmail.com
Or call (250) 878‐3799


Thank you for your support.
Donations can be made out to:

BC Wildlife Federation
Please make a note that your donation is for
The Southern Interior Mule Deer Project

Send to BCWF Head Office at:
101‐9706 188 St,
Surrey BC, V4N 3M2


You can also easily donate to The Southern Interior Mule Deer Project online.

Just click the donate button below and select "Southern Interior Mule Deer Project" in the designation drop down on the donation page.


http://www.bcwf.net/images/M_images/mule-deer/donate-now-button-website.jpg (https://bcwf.thankyou4caring.org/make-a-donation)

[338win mag]

Not a bcwf member...dont facebook, but I will find it, thanks.

[Ourea]

Not a bcwf member...dont facebook, but I will find it, thanks.

You are just like me then.
BCWF has a link on their website on the project, good place to start.

FYI, I simply picked up the ph and called local game bios and Jesse to get real time info on the project.
Looking forward to the data myself.

cheers

[338win mag]

Found what I wanted, thanks...I was just wondering if there was data available in real time, thanks again.

[Ourea]

For others looking for some basic info on the project.
Here is a good place to start.

http://www.bcwf.net/index.php/southern-bc-mule-deer-project

[Bugle M In]

Don't know much about the study but how are they tracking fawn survival? I understand it would be natural to lose a percentage of does to preds and with them their unborn fawns, that just means to me that we need strong fawn survival from the remaining does not just initially but to breeding age.

My understanding is they are collaring fawns, not just does this spring.
So, they get to know how many does "got pregnant" (which I understand was 100%) , so we know theres enough bucks to
get it done. (so, hunters aren't blasting every buck around).
And then in the spring, we see how the fawns do.
Where they go, how many survive, and so forth.
As Ourea said, some have already hit the ground due to Preds.
So, that's Does gone and any offspring already.

Be interesting with the changes to the forests that we all know about, how deer are actually using it.

Only wish they had the money to have collared more.
But l do like the areas they chose for the studies, as those are some "heavily hunted spots".

So now some will have to put their money where there mouths are.
Meaning what are this issues.
Feed and Preds...or hunters.

[J_T]

I have to agree that roads to have an impact. I listened to the Government Biologist report and he indicated the buck to doe ratios were low, where road access was higher. I have to think that high fencing and shifting landscape use is having an impact too.

With the data they are collecting and with the comments here that 'hunting is not the reason for the decline, one would think we might be able to re-introduce that lost late season bow only mule deer season. Even as a 4 pt buck season.

[Bugle M In]

Well, with all the trees gone, and all the roads, and the continuing threat of wildfires yet to come.
I suspect things will get worse than better for now.
But, it gives us time to force the government to start allocating decent money into wildlife projects.
Now is the time to look at some of the forestry practices, especially after they have dropped the timber, in regards to
roads and burning/transplanting.
This isn't going to get better over night, but e can use it to our advantage to make these new wildfire areas as productive
as possible for the future.

And yes, I have found areas I hunted MD at one time, that were great areas, and did have hunting pressure to a degree,
were great.
But once all that logging and roads took hold, you could see things declining.
That is not just a coincidence!
Why were the areas so good for years beforehand, only to get bad after that started??

And yes, throw in the newcomers, wolves, and I see big problems that need to get addressed.

Where I go, I don't think we have a high fence issue, but I could be wrong.
But I can see it being an issue elsewhere.
I just don't get the "its okay for cattle, but I don't want any thing else on my property" mentality?
And then there are the wine growers now complaining.

Where else does wildlife have a choice to go?
There aren't any other untouched places left, at least not in the winter time.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

A bit of good new is that there’s a bunch of money heading towards forest fire mitigation including $10 mill for prescribed burns. Where those burns will occur is the big question. Has to be some overlap between interface areas and mule deer winter range.

SSS

[338win mag]

A bit of good new is that there’s a bunch of money heading towards forest fire mitigation including $10 mill for prescribed burns. Where those burns will occur is the big question. Has to be some overlap between interface areas and mule deer winter range.

SSS
That is great news, love the fires especially if there controlled, thanks for the update!

[northof49]

Heres the one planned for Crater Mnt west of Keremeos.
https://globalnews.ca/news/5078109/prescribed-burn-bc-southern-interior/

[Bugle M In]

A bit of good new is that there’s a bunch of money heading towards forest fire mitigation including $10 mill for prescribed burns. Where those burns will occur is the big question. Has to be some overlap between interface areas and mule deer winter range.

SSS

Good...thanks.

[Darksith]

As stated in the article, fires help wildlife.

They provide more feed, they also allow for easier predation for the first say 5 years before cover grows up

[6.5x55mm]

I am going to say a disease of some kind. Yes there are more wolves. Yeah been some fires. etc etc. I have 19 cameras in Kamloops region 3 spread out. Last year I just did not see many mule deer period. Just did a spring drive. In regular wintering areas and fawning areas there is nothing. I honestly put 8 hours behind the wheel with binos and did not see a single Mule deer this week. SCARY.

[Darksith]

As stated in the article, fires help wildlife.

They provide more feed, they also allow for easier predation for the first say 5 years before cover grows up

[HighCountryBC]

They provide more feed, they also allow for easier predation for the first say 5 years before cover grows up


Not necessarily true. Many species, like sheep for example, do better with open sight lines. Fires often create areas of blowdown which benefit mule deer, elk and moose and make it much harder for predators to be successful.

[Ourea]

They provide more feed, they also allow for easier predation for the first say 5 years before cover grows up

That's a generalization but reasonably accurate.
WT and sheep survival from predation relies on early detection more than quick point blank escape like MD.
They don't have the bounding ability of MD so are not as successful escaping preds in thicker timber and blowdown.
They thrive on more open areas that have longer sight lines that their survival strategies have adapted to.

Yes, Md rely more on areas of blowdown, thicker cover and grade to escape predators with their bounding capabilities.
Some interesting reads on this out there.

The collaring data will give up where and when test deer have been killed and by what for the most part.
Going to be very interesting as patterns declare themselves.

[ducktoller]

Have a good gut feeling roadways, poor forestry management, environmental changes and significant lack of fire will be the biggest issue.

[ducktoller]

Mix of pred control, road closures, and even area closures to deer if necessary

[Bugle M In]

I am going to say a disease of some kind. Yes there are more wolves. Yeah been some fires. etc etc. I have 19 cameras in Kamloops region 3 spread out. Last year I just did not see many mule deer period. Just did a spring drive. In regular wintering areas and fawning areas there is nothing. I honestly put 8 hours behind the wheel with binos and did not see a single Mule deer this week. SCARY.

That is.
If I lived close by, I would be out there seeing how its going as well, as I know of a few wintering areas.
And if they aren't there, then it is bad.
I wont know til next fall.

[mark]

My question is how can they have let the declines go for this long without research and action!!!???

"They" were in full denial that there was any problem until just recently....im a very passionate mule deer hunter who spends a lot of time in the field over several regions every year. For the past 10 years ive kept track of the number of bucks id see in a season and that number has been dropping by about 50% annually for the past decade. ive gone from seeing well over 100 legal bucks a season to about 5 the past couple years.(about 50 days a year) I started sounding the alarm about 6-7 years ago, and while all the best hunters I know, guides, taxidermists etc. all agreed with me, the fed guys, who sit behind a computer more than they are in the bush, would show me a graph, or stats, and claimed there was no issue and everything was fine.(heads buried in the sand) In my very experienced opinion, based on what I see out there, we now only have about 10% of deer that we had just 10 years ago, some places id say about 1%. Its only now, just in the past year that everyone seems to agree that we have a problem, and something needs to be done. Better late than never I suppose, but I hope its not too little too late.

[mark]

I have been hunting cats in that area for quite a few years now. from Peachland down to the us border, its a waste of gas these days . sure there are some cats there ,but not like it use to be 10 years ago goodluck to the project, I do supported it .
.

Waste of gas??? maybe if your after boone cats, but there is no shortage of cats! several houndsman ive spoke to agree, stats show they doing very well. I see tracks all the time. I bagged a lion this year in 1 day of hunting as my houndsman buddy assured would happen.

[358mag]

Mix of pred control, road closures, and even area closures to deer if necessary
You for to mention the uncontrolled 24-7 -365 no bag limit hunters . Big issue in Region 8 .

[Wild one]

"They" were in full denial that there was any problem until just recently....im a very passionate mule deer hunter who spends a lot of time in the field over several regions every year. For the past 10 years ive kept track of the number of bucks id see in a season and that number has been dropping by about 50% annually for the past decade. ive gone from seeing well over 100 legal bucks a season to about 5 the past couple years.(about 50 days a year) I started sounding the alarm about 6-7 years ago, and while all the best hunters I know, guides, taxidermists etc. all agreed with me, the fed guys, who sit behind a computer more than they are in the bush, would show me a graph, or stats, and claimed there was no issue and everything was fine.(heads buried in the sand) In my very experienced opinion, based on what I see out there, we now only have about 10% of deer that we had just 10 years ago, some places id say about 1%. Its only now, just in the past year that everyone seems to agree that we have a problem, and something needs to be done. Better late than never I suppose, but I hope its not too little too late.


Basically exactly how things went with moose as well

[j270wsm]

Waste of gas??? maybe if your after boone cats, but there is no shortage of cats! several houndsman ive spoke to agree, stats show they doing very well. I see tracks all the time. I bagged a lion this year in 1 day of hunting as my houndsman buddy assured would happen.

That's the same scenario around the south country with cats. Cats everywhere but no one wants to shoot a male that isn't going to make book and they would get pissed if guys shot females. Our season would be closed after 29 females were shot. With bull river bighorn sheep going on draw last yr lots of guys were pissed and vowed to remove some cats from their winter range. Well this season they removed the female quota for cats and the hounds men pounded the cats in the Pickering hills. A guy I work with has hounds and knows one guy who helped take 10 cats from the sheep wintering grounds and knows other guys who also took cats. Hopefully they keep removing as many cats as possible for the next few yrs. I'm going to get my friend to take me and the kid out next season for 2 cats.

[Bugle M In]

I have been in contact recently with J_T about elk.
He passed on some recent documents and all I have to say is "wow, what a mess".
Calf recruitment is low and bulls are to find to count, let alone any "mature ones".

And yes, I have been saying and arguing with one member here in the past that cats are on the rise.
I see them a lot more then ever before.

We have some serious issues going on.
I don't hunt some areas that others are complaining about, but that tell me that something in their neck of the woods
isn't going good.
And then I wonder why wolves show up in my area where the hunting wasn't bad.
I guess they are just looking for new food sources in new areas.

If you can folks, get out there and cull some preds.
For now, that is all we can really do.
We can really make the forests grow up any faster and some stuff is going to take industries help as well.

But preds we can do something about to balance the forest for our ungulates.

[LBM]

That's the same scenario around the south country with cats. Cats everywhere but no one wants to shoot a male that isn't going to make book and they would get pissed if guys shot females. Our season would be closed after 29 females were shot. With bull river bighorn sheep going on draw last yr lots of guys were pissed and vowed to remove some cats from their winter range. Well this season they removed the female quota for cats and the hounds men pounded the cats in the Pickering hills. A guy I work with has hounds and knows one guy who helped take 10 cats from the sheep wintering grounds and knows other guys who also took cats. Hopefully they keep removing as many cats as possible for the next few yrs. I'm going to get my friend to take me and the kid out next season for 2 cats.

Interesting not what the harvest data shows over the years. Also not what many others are saying that are actually out there including some Bios. Also not the best way to manage them either, just causing more issues. You did get one thing right houndsmen did pound some areas, again causing many more issues.

[Deaddog]

Studies are great. However it is what you do with them that counts. Remember the two million dollars that went to moose studies? Lots of data but zero done as far as helping the species. Let’s hope this is not another replay

[Wild one]

Studies are great. However it is what you do with them that counts. Remember the two million dollars that went to moose studies? Lots of data but zero done as far as helping the species. Let’s hope this is not another replay


Could not agree more without corrective actions the study is a waste. Still seeing no real effort put into moose either.

[HarryToolips]

That's the same scenario around the south country with cats. Cats everywhere but no one wants to shoot a male that isn't going to make book and they would get pissed if guys shot females. Our season would be closed after 29 females were shot. With bull river bighorn sheep going on draw last yr lots of guys were pissed and vowed to remove some cats from their winter range. Well this season they removed the female quota for cats and the hounds men pounded the cats in the Pickering hills. A guy I work with has hounds and knows one guy who helped take 10 cats from the sheep wintering grounds and knows other guys who also took cats. Hopefully they keep removing as many cats as possible for the next few yrs. I'm going to get my friend to take me and the kid out next season for 2 cats.
If you know someone who wants to help a,fellow hunter with taking cats I'm all game, I just don't have hounds and have never hunted cats but I'd love to do my part and nail one....

[HarryToolips]

And to reverse the current trend on this thread, I can honestly say that in my part of reg 8, numbers definitely aren't the highest I've seen but, they ain't in the dumps...I'm seeing decent numbers of mule deer on winter range, and decent yearling recruitment...that said, I'm concerned with the amount of constant development on winter range, and if the preds are moving in like some claim that is definitely a concern, and i will continue to attempt to knock down preds...

[j270wsm]

Interesting not what the harvest data shows over the years. Also not what many others are saying that are actually out there including some Bios. Also not the best way to manage them either, just causing more issues. You did get one thing right houndsmen did pound some areas, again causing many more issues.


What is the data showing?? What is everyone saying?? All the guys I know from jaffray and cranbrook that have hounds keep saying that there are tons of cats between Montana and cranbrook.

[northof49]

I am going to say a disease of some kind. Yes there are more wolves. Yeah been some fires. etc etc. I have 19 cameras in Kamloops region 3 spread out. Last year I just did not see many mule deer period. Just did a spring drive. In regular wintering areas and fawning areas there is nothing. I honestly put 8 hours behind the wheel with binos and did not see a single Mule deer this week. SCARY.

No disease....they just got eaten.

[Husky7mm]

Cats, no bag limit, open season yr round, no tag required just like a coyote and a wolf.....

[J_T]

What is the data showing?? What is everyone saying?? All the guys I know from jaffray and cranbrook that have hounds keep saying that there are tons of cats between Montana and cranbrook.

In one of your earlier posts you mentioned 10 cats in the Pickering. My cat hunter contacts are saying they (and others they know) took 32 in the bottom end of the Bull/Pickering. Even if, that is an inflated statement, it still represents a lot of cats. Cut it in half, and that is still a lot of ungulate consumption.

Have you noticed recently (last couple of years) that the sheep are not grouped up in November and December like normal? I think they're being chased so much they get completely disbursed.

[J_T]

"They" were in full denial that there was any problem until just recently....

but I hope its not too little too late.

I'm not a biologist, but, when I do reach out to them with my concerns, what I hear is... the ratios are good, the harvest trend is static.

I sent this note along to Bugle M In earlier. Seems appropriate now. Again, I am not a biologist...

"In summary, my concern is…… somewhere between 5 and 10 years ago, we saw elk/deer populations decline. For a variety of reasons (urbanization, highway/railway kill, winter snow, high fences, interrupted winter range, whatever). And, we saw an increase in predators. All predators. With ungulate populations trending down, and Government only managing by ratios (Bulls/bucks to cows/does and cow/doe to calve/fawn) we weren’t paying attention to the actual population decline.

And (my assumption/theory) predators, increasing in number, took the ungulate population so low, it is and will, have a hard time to recover.

When Government manage by ratios, they look at harvest numbers of bulls and bucks. When the bull/buck harvest goes down, Government assume a population decline. But, they don’t pay attention to how long (hunter days) those harvests took. Every good hunter, is going to work harder and harder, to get his kill. So we prop up the Government theory that population numbers are ok, because they equate harvest to population and operate on the basis of ratios. Every committed elk or deer hunter knows, it is not the same out there as it used to be."

[Fella]

Heck you don’t have to be terribly experienced to know that it’s not the same. 3 years ago I hunted an area north of Kamloops at the end of October, we counted 400 deer over a 2 week period including a good amount of bucks. The 5 guys who were hunting all tagged out the first week. The last 2 years 5 guys who hunt the area together have managed 3 bucks. The only 3 bucks they saw.

[j270wsm]

In one of your earlier posts you mentioned 10 cats in the Pickering. My cat hunter contacts are saying they (and others they know) took 32 in the bottom end of the Bull/Pickering. Even if, that is an inflated statement, it still represents a lot of cats. Cut it in half, and that is still a lot of ungulate consumption.

Have you noticed recently (last couple of years) that the sheep are not grouped up in November and December like normal? I think they're being chased so much they get completely disbursed.


The 10 cats I mentioned were taken by one houndsman and his drive to have cats removed from prime sheep and mule deer wintering grounds. I don't know this guy or the guys he help with cats but my coworker who I carpool with is good friends with him.
I have also heard that there was over 30 cats taken from that general area. The only 2 cats I know of being taken north of Elkford were taken by my coworker. Neither was huge but they were both solid cats around 150lbs

[Ourea]

I'm not a biologist, but, when I do reach out to them with my concerns, what I hear is... the ratios are good, the harvest trend is static.

I sent this note along to Bugle M In earlier. Seems appropriate now. Again, I am not a biologist...

"In summary, my concern is…… somewhere between 5 and 10 years ago, we saw elk/deer populations decline. For a variety of reasons (urbanization, highway/railway kill, winter snow, high fences, interrupted winter range, whatever). And, we saw an increase in predators. All predators. With ungulate populations trending down, and Government only managing by ratios (Bulls/bucks to cows/does and cow/doe to calve/fawn) we weren’t paying attention to the actual population decline.

And (my assumption/theory) predators, increasing in number, took the ungulate population so low, it is and will, have a hard time to recover.

When Government manage by ratios, they look at harvest numbers of bulls and bucks. When the bull/buck harvest goes down, Government assume a population decline. But, they don’t pay attention to how long (hunter days) those harvests took. Every good hunter, is going to work harder and harder, to get his kill. So we prop up the Government theory that population numbers are ok, because they equate harvest to population and operate on the basis of ratios. Every committed elk or deer hunter knows, it is not the same out there as it used to be."

J_T, there isn't a game bio that is not acutely aware of the challenges facing wildlife in BC

[J_T]

J_T, there isn't a game bio that is not acutely aware of the challenges facing wildlife in BC Correct. I understand that. Finally though, reality has set in.

[Bugle M In]

I'm not a biologist, but, when I do reach out to them with my concerns, what I hear is... the ratios are good, the harvest trend is static.

I sent this note along to Bugle M In earlier. Seems appropriate now. Again, I am not a biologist...

"In summary, my concern is…… somewhere between 5 and 10 years ago, we saw elk/deer populations decline. For a variety of reasons (urbanization, highway/railway kill, winter snow, high fences, interrupted winter range, whatever). And, we saw an increase in predators. All predators. With ungulate populations trending down, and Government only managing by ratios (Bulls/bucks to cows/does and cow/doe to calve/fawn) we weren’t paying attention to the actual population decline.

And (my assumption/theory) predators, increasing in number, took the ungulate population so low, it is and will, have a hard time to recover.

When Government manage by ratios, they look at harvest numbers of bulls and bucks. When the bull/buck harvest goes down, Government assume a population decline. But, they don’t pay attention to how long (hunter days) those harvests took. Every good hunter, is going to work harder and harder, to get his kill. So we prop up the Government theory that population numbers are ok, because they equate harvest to population and operate on the basis of ratios. Every committed elk or deer hunter knows, it is not the same out there as it used to be."

This line FOLKS, is what J_T is "trying to get to every hunters ATTENTION and thru our heads!:

we weren’t paying attention to the actual population decline.

That is what is a big problem as to why things are not improving, let alone the funding to put boots on the ground to
make things better.
There are some hunters trying to blame other parts of our regs and other hunters that "we" are to blame.
As long as we dabble in that arena, we all lose focus on the real issue behind allowing the causes to continue.

Ourea, I am sure the Bio's know, but I don't think all the hunters "get it" or "know".
Again, they don't realize that for example the latest EK ELK strategy coming our way is to "not have populations" like
we had.
12,000 head at best compared to at least 20,000 head.

J_T sent me the stats on some of the more recent elk studies (sorry to deviate from the MD thread but it is relevant imo)
I was surprised to see how low "calf recruitment is"!
Worse, how few Bulls are being counted, and even scarier, very very few "Mature Bulls".
I know you get it.
But I doubt most hunters actually know that!
And as long as the Ministry/Government doesn't want to bring the "overall populations up in a Region", they feel these
Stats are within normal levels as per their objective.

We need to start convincing them that these objectives are "Too Low" to sustain "quality Hunting Opportunity".
Same goes for MD I suspect and the study will give us an idea of reasons for their ever increasing declines.
I am sure this study to some degree can be used across the board to re-evaluate what some of the main causes for ELK
and Moose are as well.

Even if we takes steps like culling etc, and have burns, the Ministry is not at this point in time wanting to bring back
game #'s like before!!

[Ourea]

^^^^^^
Bugle, what do you think the solution is then?

Jesus man, there isn't a bio or anyone in game management that doesn't know habitat fragmentation, habitat exploitation, FN unchecked proclaimed right to hunt year round, road density that is well past documented thresholds that disrupts wildlife, pred loading, erosion of winter range, the list is long and well known.

So, what magic wand do you wave?

What can "they" do (as hunters always blame game management for mismanaging)?

Can game managers change forest practices?
Can game managers rip out roads?
Can game managers change FN self proclaimed entitlement to year round wildlife extraction?
Can game managers stop municipalities from allowing development in sensitive winter range?
Can game managers make Gov invest in all things that will help wildlife recover?
Can game managers make money fall from the sky so they actually have a budget to do something (because currently they have sweet F*** all)?
Can game managers sway public opinion to kill off a significant number of predators in certain areas (let alone have one red cent to pay for it)
Can game managers make the general public demand that wildlife gets significant attention and resources dedicated to put things on a track for recovery, sustainable and long term recovery?

All I see, for the most part, is people on this site pointing fingers and blaming "wildlife management" with most having never talked to a game bio, a political official, FN leaders, folks in resource extraction, to have an accurate understanding and knowledge of how complex the task is and what all the working parts are that need to come into sync.

I think the positive is that hunters are beginning, finally, to understand the facts and science behind what the negative drivers are for wildlife declines.

We can blame everyone and entity you want...won't change one freakin thing IF THERE ARE NO RESOURCES AND FUNDING AVAILABLE TO BE DEDICATED TO THE RESOURCE.

This MD project is a tremendous start.
Without credible empirical data you cannot force Gov to mandate change to resource extraction policies and practices.

The more we get behind these type of projects the better rather than bitch from the sidelines and blame folks that have no resources to do what they only wish they can do.

[Bugle M In]

^^^^I agree.
And yes, we have issues to actually have something done, fully agree.
My point was more to those that think further "hunting restrictions" are actually going to fix this mess.
I know most people get it, but some don't!

If I had a magic wand, there would be some issues I would address.
But, you don't have one and I don't, but I am tired of wasting time dealing with folks that think "if we just change this,
or eliminate that thru regs", that somehow that "their magic wand" is the fix.

My issue wasn't with you or many Bios.
I what I think many are "missing" between the lines is as J_T describes, that there are other forces at work outside of
hunting that don't want to see the return of game #'s like in the past.
Hope that clarifies it????

[Ourea]

You can close all hunting in areas that are seeing MD declines.
It won't change a single thing.

Does are getting pregnant at ratios hovering at 100% in the test areas.

East Koots and The Boundary country have had 4 point only seasons for years along with rd closures.
Does are all carrying fawns. There are virtually no does that do not conceive.

All does are producing fawns.
Only 4 point bucks have a lawful season.
That means the majority of the buck population cannot be hunted.

Sad reality is that buck numbers and overall populations continue to decline.
Someone explain how regulation will suddenly rebound this trend?

Back to the topic......
This project will go a long ways to answer, in specificity rather than speculation, why, where, when and how MD are disappearing.

[Bugle M In]

^^^^yup,
I think in this thread there was 1 individual who stated their hunting area was so bad, they feel it should be 4 pt.
Not sure if on this thread or another, another member stated some species should stop being hunted for 3 years etc.
We both know that wont help a damn thing.
All it will do is defer the government from taking any sort of real action.
And Heyman is more than willing to limit more hunting, if not out right ban it!

So yes, the study is the best thing in a long time.
And we all need to push the government to take action to take results from this study and have a real action plan.
Still think the best way is to actually get some true hunters into politics so that someone with the authority will
actually take the time to address the issues. (Any takers???)

[Deaddog]

This study is no different than countless others UNLESS this study’s data is acted upon . If it’s not acted on then it is more dollars burned for sweet f all . Hopefully there are actionable dollars lined up to act upon the findings from this project . Thus far in bc ‘s history that has not been the case . Fingers crossed

[boxhitch]

So, what magic wand do you wave?

What can "they" do (as hunters always blame game management for mismanaging)?

Can game managers change forest practices?
Can game managers rip out roads?
Can game managers change FN self proclaimed entitlement to year round wildlife extraction?
Can game managers stop municipalities from allowing development in sensitive winter range?
Can game managers make Gov invest in all things that will help wildlife recover?
Can game managers make money fall from the sky so they actually have a budget to do something (because currently they have sweet F*** all)?
Can game managers sway public opinion to kill off a significant number of predators in certain areas (let alone have one red cent to pay for it)
Can game managers make the general public demand that wildlife gets significant attention and resources dedicated to put things on a track for recovery, sustainable and long term recovery?

All I see, for the most part, is people on this site pointing fingers and blaming "wildlife management" with most having never talked to a game bio, a political official, FN leaders, folks in resource extraction, to have an accurate understanding and knowledge of how complex the task is and what all the working parts are that need to come into sync.

Easy, convince every taxpayer and activist that it is important to MAKE MORE WILDLIFE, who in turn convince Gov't, then set target numbers and work towards them.
Until there is a need to make more, things will trundle along as they are, Super Natural

[Ourea]

This study is no different than countless others UNLESS this study’s data is acted upon . If it’s not acted on then it is more dollars burned for sweet f all . Hopefully there are actionable dollars lined up to act upon the findings from this project . Thus far in bc ‘s history that has not been the case . Fingers crossed

This study is a far cry from your average rinse and repeat merry go round.
A person would ask what will they do with the data, why go thru the trouble because "it's just another study"?
The key is that this MD project will/should produce concrete evidence of where and why MD are declining versus just another theory.

That hard data can carry a lot of weight when trying to influence Gov and industry on policy that will limit the negative effects on MD.

[Ourea]

Easy, convince every taxpayer and activist that it is important to MAKE MORE WILDLIFE, who in turn convince Gov't, then set target numbers and work towards them.
Until there is a need to make more, things will trundle along as they are, Super Natural

Appreciate the positivity

[horshur]

They killed eagles for Marmots...killing Barred Owls for spotted. There is always hope.

[Deaddog]

This study is a far cry from your average rinse and repeat merry go round.
A person would ask what will they do with the data, why go thru the trouble because "it's just another study"?
The key is that this MD project will/should produce concrete evidence of where and why MD are declining versus just another theory.

That hard data can carry a lot of weight when trying to influence Gov and industry on policy that will limit the negative effects on MD.

sorry. Same type of study’s have Be done on multiple other species , sheep and caribou in particular as well as the moose study that was pretty much identical to the current mule deer study ,look at the region six sheep study that is ongoing on their summer to winter grounds movement and reasons for population losses during that time . Not taking away from the muledeer study ,but it is at this moment nothing out of the ordinary. I hope the data is acted upon as I do with the other wildlife studies currently going on in the province

what makes you think this one will be acted upon, hard data has been provided by bios for years to no effect, if there is a change coming that would be fantastic!

[Wild one]

If this study will bring out the facts no matter if the public will support it or not it is needed. As long as this study sticks to the facts and recommends the best approach to tackle the issues instead of round about try not to offend management its 100% worth it

As for the public support issue this is an example why hunters need to get active. You don’t want your issues ignored make them heard get involved creating education programs and help execute them. Money wise put in effort into developing fundraising programs. You may not bring in millions but people are more willing to open their wallets when they see effort

Or you can say it won’t work, the public won’t support it, and there is no $. Pretty clear if you want sh!t to change in BC you need to get up and make it change.

[boxhitch]

Appreciate the positivityJust saying, to make a case for making more the need has to be proven

To argue for more ungulates singularly is rather selfish. There are problems in BC for all wildlife to some extent, resource extraction activities and development pressures reach all levels.
Someone mentioned the view from 30,000' ) .
If we want changes to the lumber farming practices, we better be looking beyond deer or moose, and joining hands with other special intetest groups

[boxhitch]

.........The key is that this MD project will/should produce concrete evidence of where and why MD are declining versus just another theory.......for the particular footprint of the study, that is important. To take info from another province or state and try to overlay it on S I BC wouldn't have the same impact as a localized diagnostic

[tracker]

Waste of gas??? maybe if your after boone cats, but there is no shortage of cats! several houndsman ive spoke to agree, stats show they doing very well. I see tracks all the time. I bagged a lion this year in 1 day of hunting as my houndsman buddy assured would happen.

so when you shot that female ,you also killed its kittens. that's why we go after the toms.. you like big muley bucks and I like big toms..

[dougan]

so when you shot that female ,you also killed its kittens. that's why we go after the toms.. you like big muley bucks and I like big toms.. just out of curiosity would only shooting big toms not make the cat population more dense? Do large toms not kill kittens as a lion would do? Therefore removing more cats from the system? . I’m not being a smart ass I’m just curious as I do not know.

[Dannybuoy]

just out of curiosity would only shooting big toms not make the cat population more dense? Do large toms not kill kittens as a lion would do? Therefore removing more cats from the system? . I’m not being a smart ass I’m just curious as I do not know.
That's what happened in the north okanagan/ monashee in the past , not sure how many cat hunters there are now . I used to know several now I can't think of any .... maybe 1

[horshur]

Transient toms are the kitten killers...established dominant Tom has his girls.
Large cat biologists suggested that to crash a cougar population you kill females and dominant Toms. The transient Toms will contribute by killing any kits or at least the male kits during the chaos of the missing Dominant Tom. And then it starts all over. Many areas harvest is heavy enough that a Tom never can establish himself. It is all transient Toms but all the she’s get knocked up anyway. A cat doesn’t need to be very old to breed successfully.

BC manages for high cougar populations by protecting females.

[Ourea]

Just saying, to make a case for making more the need has to be proven

To argue for more ungulates singularly is rather selfish. There are problems in BC for all wildlife to some extent, resource extraction activities and development pressures reach all levels.
Someone mentioned the view from 30,000' ) .
If we want changes to the lumber farming practices, we better be looking beyond deer or moose, and joining hands with other special intetest groups

I am obviously missing something.

I think your narrative of making more ungulates as being selfish is puzzling.
It is more about finding and stopping the key drivers that are evaporating MD off off certain landscapes in this province (this thread is about the Southern Interior MD project)

Making more is not the issue at hand as near 100% pregnancy rates are being achieved.
MD are trying to do their part, yet numbers go down and down.

Box, the issue is to stop the implosion of MD where once robust populations existed.
MD can be perceived as the canary in the coal mine.

Some will nit pick this to death or, on the other hand, get behind something.

[Ourea]

They killed eagles for Marmots...killing Barred Owls for spotted. There is always hope.

You are extremely well versed at pointing fingers, blaming others with little, if ever, anything positive to say.
Always bad decisions being made from your point of view.

[horshur]

Thanks!!!!!

[labguy]

You are extremely well versed at pointing fingers, blaming others with little, if ever, anything positive to say.
Always bad decisions being made from your point of view.

I have to agree with Horshur. There is very little to be positive about when it comes to historical game management.......especially in BC. Why would anyone look at this with colored glasses and expect different outcomes.

This study is a credit to people who actually give a dam however it should be painfully obvious to anyone that's been around more than a few decades that development, over population of humans and commerce will trump most attempts to remediate that damage that's been done.

I sincerely hope that I'm wrong about this but I will get my entire net worth that there will be a continued downhill slide (apart from a few upticks in specific areas that will be short lived) for Mule deer in this Province........

Reality sucks Regards,

[Bugle M In]

Look, as far as the study portion of this convo goes, it is a great thing to have "right now".
Things have changed a lot from say the 80's.
I think everyone agrees with that?.
This study will atleast shed light on "what the real main issues are" these days.
Lets face it, there is lots of debate as to what the issues are! in the hunting community alone.
And worse, there are lots of different opinions how to deal with it like more regs etc.
So, that part of the study is good!

Now, the bigger issue is not the study itself.
It is, how do you we come up with money and government support to deal with the fixes that are needed from the study.
Ourea already said that's the big issue.
Money and Support, and not from the hunting community.

So whats the arguing about??
Part 2 of our issues has always been the problem.
How the hell do you think we got here in the first place.

Money and support truly is the "real issue"!

[mark]

so when you shot that female ,you also killed its kittens. that's why we go after the toms.. you like big muley bucks and I like big toms..

To be clear, we trailed my cat for 5-10 kms. and there was no sign of kittens, the tits were dry. Even if she did have some hiding somewhere, they would become food for others, the intent of my hunt was pop reduction, or predator control.
Each to their own though.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

To be clear, we trailed my cat for 5-10 kms. and there was no sign of kittens, the tits were dry. Even if she did have some hiding somewhere, they would become food for others, the intent of my hunt was pop reduction, or predator control.
Each to their own though.

Good on you mark!

Most of the houndsmen I know see the big picture and have no issues killing females in the situation we are in.

We don’t live in a utopian world with lots of mule deer and lots of big cats running around.

The mulies thank you for contributing to their survival.

SSS

[tracker]

I am all in for better mule deer populations , so the cats will do well also.. mark ,your inexperience about cat hunting shows ..

[LBM]

This study is a far cry from your average rinse and repeat merry go round.
A person would ask what will they do with the data, why go thru the trouble because "it's just another study"?
The key is that this MD project will/should produce concrete evidence of where and why MD are declining versus just another theory.

That hard data can carry a lot of weight when trying to influence Gov and industry on policy that will limit the negative effects on MD.


It will show what is happing now but may not show what caused the declines so many years ago.

[LBM]

Transient toms are the kitten killers...established dominant Tom has his girls.
Large cat biologists suggested that to crash a cougar population you kill females and dominant Toms. The transient Toms will contribute by killing any kits or at least the male kits during the chaos of the missing Dominant Tom. And then it starts all over. Many areas harvest is heavy enough that a Tom never can establish himself. It is all transient Toms but all the she’s get knocked up anyway. A cat doesn’t need to be very old to breed successfully.

BC manages for high cougar populations by protecting females.

I would tend to disagree, maybe in your region but B.C. doesn't protect females in all regions and your other theory doesn't seem to work either.

[LBM]

To be clear, we trailed my cat for 5-10 kms. and there was no sign of kittens, the tits were dry. Even if she did have some hiding somewhere, they would become food for others, the intent of my hunt was pop reduction, or predator control.
Each to their own though.
Again wow and we wonder why they are trying to shut hunting down, and I agree with Tracker on what seems to be your lack of Knowledge on cats.

[LBM]

I'm not a biologist, but, when I do reach out to them with my concerns, what I hear is... the ratios are good, the harvest trend is static.

I sent this note along to Bugle M In earlier. Seems appropriate now. Again, I am not a biologist...

"In summary, my concern is…… somewhere between 5 and 10 years ago, we saw elk/deer populations decline. For a variety of reasons (urbanization, highway/railway kill, winter snow, high fences, interrupted winter range, whatever). And, we saw an increase in predators. All predators. With ungulate populations trending down, and Government only managing by ratios (Bulls/bucks to cows/does and cow/doe to calve/fawn) we weren’t paying attention to the actual population decline.

And (my assumption/theory) predators, increasing in number, took the ungulate population so low, it is and will, have a hard time to recover.

When Government manage by ratios, they look at harvest numbers of bulls and bucks. When the bull/buck harvest goes down, Government assume a population decline. But, they don’t pay attention to how long (hunter days) those harvests took. Every good hunter, is going to work harder and harder, to get his kill. So we prop up the Government theory that population numbers are ok, because they equate harvest to population and operate on the basis of ratios. Every committed elk or deer hunter knows, it is not the same out there as it used to be."
The decline started a lot longer then 10 years ago and wasn't from predators.

[LBM]

In one of your earlier posts you mentioned 10 cats in the Pickering. My cat hunter contacts are saying they (and others they know) took 32 in the bottom end of the Bull/Pickering. Even if, that is an inflated statement, it still represents a lot of cats. Cut it in half, and that is still a lot of ungulate consumption.

Have you noticed recently (last couple of years) that the sheep are not grouped up in November and December like normal? I think they're being chased so much they get completely disbursed.

The data is not complete yet for region 4 for some is still open along with some that may still be taking by the ministry. But as of now the numbers are 17 for region 4-21 and 25 for region 4-22 don't no what part of the region they came from
Is this good management or conservation practices NO all wildlife has to be managed. This will cause future problems, and some have all ready started.

[horshur]

I would tend to disagree, maybe in your region but B.C. doesn't protect females in all regions and your other theory doesn't seem to work either.
Not my theory...science. But of course some populations are sinks and others sources which complicate things.

here have a read
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283025617_Effects_of_male_targeted_harvest_regime_ on_sexual_segregation_in_mountain_lion

[LBM]

Not my theory...science. But of course some populations are sinks and others sources which complicate things.

here have a read
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283025617_Effects_of_male_targeted_harvest_regime_ on_sexual_segregation_in_mountain_lion
I meant to say for all of B.C.

[horshur]

The data is not complete yet for region 4 for some is still open along with some that may still be taking by the ministry. But as of now the numbers are 17 for region 4-21 and 25 for region 4-22 don't no what part of the region they came from
Is this good management or conservation practices NO all wildlife has to be managed. This will cause future problems, and some have all ready started.

What future problems is this going to cause? Come on Dale post up some science to back your vague, don't really say anything comments.

[Tim Tam Slam]

Hey All,

since my my last post I’ve been in communication with a bunch of social media I fluencers and they have started to spread the word about this research project. Ourea gave me some great information and I was able to get in contact with jesse about the project.

Good news to report! I sent the information to BHA and they are going to bring it up at tonight’s Pint Night and look for more volunteers from bHA to help champion getting funds, etc. to keep pushing the project along! Hopefullu bhA will also contribute more funds to this BCWF project and become an official sponsor.

considering it’s the boundary herd, it is data relavent for both Washington residents as well as the Okanagan. maybe some $$$ from bHA in the states will come towards this project as well.

happy to see more and more exposure on the project. Jesse had mentioned the fawns are taking a pretty hard hit already from the ones they’ve captured.

to repeat what Ourea said, you can go to BCWF to get the most recent updates, the BC Outdoors mag had a good section and update of the current fawn and doe survival rates from the deer they collard last year.

[6.5x55mm]

I really dont think so. Thats a lot of moose and deer missing in a short time period.
https://i.imgur.com/0sxDLSn.jpg

[tracker]

wicked trail cam pic 6.5x 55 ,how was the hunting around there ..lol

[6.5x55mm]

LOL Been there for many years. Still are. Thats kinda my point there is more going on that just wolves. To sudden.
https://i.imgur.com/tallL02.jpg

[Wild one]

Some of the past winters have been no help for sure

I keep saying it is more than likely a combination of issues and not a one step fix

[Ourea]

LOL Been there for many years. Still are. Thats kinda my point there is more going on that just wolves. To sudden.
https://i.imgur.com/tallL02.jpg

Great cam pic not in the research area I'm guessing ?

[Tim Tam Slam]

Killer Trail pic! That’s insane.

on the topic at hand, we should message BCWF to send out another e letter to all its members to send awareness again to the MLA’s and provincial gov’t. We just sent one out though for the Cat hunting fiasco that the wildlife defense group is making headlines with...

i wish those kinds of groups groups put the same amount (or more) (1) time and effort into scientific studies and research before they make these kinds of posts and (2) the financial backing us hunters/conservationalists provide through our memberships, tags, licenses, guns etc...

If only every head of kale had a “wildlife tax” on it...