Question for the experts!?!?

[curt]

Hey guys its been awhile since Ive been on here hope everyone is doing well! I have a question I know its likely been bounced around in the past, but I cant wrap my head around it and I know there are some biologists on this site. If the mule deer populations and the moose populations is certain area's are struggling as much as we are led to believe they are..... then WHY are we still giving out female LEH draws for those species??? IMO it is 100% a cash grab??? I have shot a few females early on in my hunting career but I have made a decision over the past few years to stop shooting females and I wont put in LEH for them, it seems completely counter productive to me to shoot the life givers especially if we are in a situation where populations are down..... someone smarter than me please explain the rationale behind this??

[RobU]

Hey guys its been awhile since Ive been on here hope everyone is doing well! I have a question I know its likely been bounced around in the past, but I cant wrap my head around it and I know there are some biologists on this site. If the mule deer populations and the moose populations is certain area's are struggling as much as we are led to believe they are..... then WHY are we still giving out female LEH draws for those species??? IMO it is 100% a cash grab??? I have shot a few females early on in my hunting career but I have made a decision over the past few years to stop shooting females and I wont put in LEH for them, it seems completely counter productive to me to shoot the life givers especially if we are in a situation where populations are down..... someone smarter than me please explain the rationale behind this??


This oughta be good!😂

[Walking Buffalo]

Cash grab? I didn't realize licences were so profitable for the govt...

It might be that there is enough of a population to allow a small harvest while growing the population and maintaining sex ratios.
It might be that maintaining a limited hunt is viable and has the benefit of maintaining the culture of hunting and the benefits it provides to people.
It might be that hunting mortality is often compensatory with natural mortality, thus having a neutral effect.
It might be that managers Want the population to drop. Ya know, starve the wolves into submission.....

[Bugle M In]

Well, this is a loaded question.
Firstly, what areas are you talking about?, entire regions?, MU's or portions of either?

Where I hunt MD, I see a lot of Does every time, and actually probably see more the past few years then before.
But then, does that actually mean more are around?
Do I just hunt better now then before?

I don't doubt some who say MD appear to be down in the areas they hunt.
But then the next guy over in the next valley may not feel that way.

Truth is, we don't "micro manage" populations.
We have large Regions and even large MU's and many mu's inside that region.
The best we get to manage I suppose is inside an MU and even smaller thru Zones in LEH.
So, 3-31 might have lots of does in one corner while in the other part few.

Other thing is, there isn't a whole lot of counting going on out there by the ministry.

Last thing, and probably the most important one, is that I think some who complain about the LEH Does tend to think "Hunters" are the reason for the
"Decline" in #'s.
Where as those that don't concern themselves too much with Doe LEH feel that much of the issues are "other factors" causing decline, if at all.
Again, see above for their thoughts.

The truth is, I don't think the issue is hunters causing declines.
So, if that is true, and it is the other factors (not hunters) than why would limiting hunters "make a difference"??.
Stop hunters, yet the reason for the declines would continue.!!! (that simple)

Now, if you are in the other camp, and it's hunters causing the decline, than I have "1 question for you"!
Explain why after 40 years of more and more hunting restrictions and limitations and even seeing LEH for many species in many areas,
THAT once where open and GOS etc.
Why haven't the Game #'s Increased???
Think about it, we've done a good job of curbing hunters and their success rates all over the place, yet the Game still Declines!

Fix the real issues and I believe the numbers of MD will increase. (pretty simple).
Ban hunting completely if you want, but don't fix the real issues, and just keep watching the MD #'s "continue to drop".

[curt]

Cash grab? I didn't realize licences were so profitable for the govt...

It might be that there is enough of a population to allow a small harvest while growing the population and maintaining sex ratios.
It might be that maintaining a limited hunt is viable and has the benefit of maintaining the culture of hunting and the benefits it provides to people.
It might be that hunting mortality is often compensatory with natural mortality, thus having a neutral effect.
It might be that managers Want the population to drop. Ya know, starve the wolves into submission.....you didn’t know licensing was profitable are you serious it’s all about dollar bills look in the kootenays it well documented there has been a huge elk decline in the last decade yet they give out 1 cow per mu pretty much why bother I’ll tell you why how many thousands of hunters spend 6 dollars and put in for that one draw?? It’s all about $$

[rocksteady]

Just because you will not apply to harvest females, does not mean its not an appropriate management tool.

I am not gender biased.. if they legally allow the harvest of females and i have a valud tag, i harvest.. its about meat, not whats between the legs

[Bugle M In]

Bucks have to survive as well come winter.
And with Wintering grounds becoming less and less abundant due to development and in my opinion some over harvesting of timber, the deer
congregate more and more together and in closer circles which means possibly not enough feed in those prime habitats.
So balancing it out so some bucks survive, mature ones who are wasted from the rut is in my opinion a good idea.

We can talk about limiting Doe Leh down the road when the "real issues" are dealt with to help deer populations rebound quicker, for sure.
But kind of useless if the "Real issues" are not dealt with and we just blame the low #'s on hunting.

So there is 2 camps, imo.
The ones that blame other hunters.
And the ones that blame all the other issues outside of hunters.
Take your pick.

[j270wsm]

you didn’t know licensing was profitable are you serious it’s all about dollar bills look in the kootenays it well documented there has been a huge elk decline in the last decade yet they give out 1 cow per mu pretty much why bother I’ll tell you why how many thousands of hunters spend 6 dollars and put in for that one draw?? It’s all about $$

Seriously, your going to complain about 1 cow elk tag........1 elk tag is nothing compared to the 300 that they were giving out. There are more cows killed every week on the highway for Christ sake.

[Walking Buffalo]

you didn’t know licensing was profitable are you serious it’s all about dollar bills look in the kootenays it well documented there has been a huge elk decline in the last decade yet they give out 1 cow per mu pretty much why bother I’ll tell you why how many thousands of hunters spend 6 dollars and put in for that one draw?? It’s all about $$


You asked a question. I took the time to respond with several potential answers.

And this is all you care to address.

That says a lot.....

[curt]

That was my question is it an appropriate management tool based on declining populations shoot as many females as you want I never said you can’t read the post again it was a valid question for the people who apparently know! Why are people getting so defensive shouldn’t we be considering what best for the resources not your freezer???
Just because you will not apply to harvest females, does not mean its not an appropriate management tool.

I am not gender biased.. if they legally allow the harvest of females and i have a valud tag, i harvest.. its about meat, not whats between the legs

[curt]

It’s not really s loaded question you could apply it to every region for one species or another in all honesty! Valid points for sure it just strikes me funny that they speak of mule deer issues to the point where the reduced the bag limit . moose declining in region 7-and 5 elk disappearing in the kootenays and mule deer out there as well , yet we still shoot females it’s just weird to me? Yes I know predators are a bigger issue but every female shot is probably dozens of animals that will never be born! I could be completely wrong that is why I asked the question funny how everyone get all fired up :)QUOTE=Bugle M In;2101178]Well, this is a loaded question.
Firstly, what areas are you talking about?, entire regions?, MU's or portions of either?

Where I hunt MD, I see a lot of Does every time, and actually probably see more the past few years then before.
But then, does that actually mean more are around?
Do I just hunt better now then before?

I don't doubt some who say MD appear to be down in the areas they hunt.
But then the next guy over in the next valley may not feel that way.

Truth is, we don't "micro manage" populations.
We have large Regions and even large MU's and many mu's inside that region.
The best we get to manage I suppose is inside an MU and even smaller thru Zones in LEH.
So, 3-31 might have lots of does in one corner while in the other part few.

Other thing is, there isn't a whole lot of counting going on out there by the ministry.

Last thing, and probably the most important one, is that I think some who complain about the LEH Does tend to think "Hunters" are the reason for the
"Decline" in #'s.
Where as those that don't concern themselves too much with Doe LEH feel that much of the issues are "other factors" causing decline, if at all.
Again, see above for their thoughts.

The truth is, I don't think the issue is hunters causing declines.
So, if that is true, and it is the other factors (not hunters) than why would limiting hunters "make a difference"??.
Stop hunters, yet the reason for the declines would continue.!!! (that simple)

Now, if you are in the other camp, and it's hunters causing the decline, than I have "1 question for you"!
Explain why after 40 years of more and more hunting restrictions and limitations and even seeing LEH for many species in many areas,
THAT once where open and GOS etc.
Why haven't the Game #'s Increased???
Think about it, we've done a good job of curbing hunters and their success rates all over the place, yet the Game still Declines!

Fix the real issues and I believe the numbers of MD will increase. (pretty simple).
Ban hunting completely if you want, but don't fix the real issues, and just keep watching the MD #'s "continue to drop".[/QUOTE]

[curt]

Why would it be hard to reinstate hunts they are the ones making the rules they can open and close seasons all they want. I think you are giving the ministry a lot more credit than they deserve. if you honestly think they care about your hunting opportunities well you are definitely a positive person good for you! I honestly believe they generate money off the backs of hunter while miss managing our wildlife. Do you even think they really know what’s going on out there I don’t it’s even been said on here they don’t often do counts because it’s costly!! Anyways it was just a question I was hoping for some scientific logic to help me understand QUOTE=boxhitch;2101269]Any idea why they put out a leh hunt op with only one tag?
Its so the hunt stays alive. They have reduced the permit numbers because the pop number target has been achieved and in some cases due to pressure. If they went to zero, the chance of reinstating the hunt when they wanted is far more difficult if not impossible. The permit numbers has to be kept fluid for proper management and to allow opportunity.
Any idea how much the entire LEH process generates for income?
But is has to be about the money , right[/QUOTE]

[Ourea]

A good percentage of MD doe tags are depredation permits to impact deer that are causing havoc on agriculture.
These permits are generally lower elevation and are extremely limited to the size of area the permit is valid.

[curt]

Ok I can see the logic they use there to justify it I still don’t agree but I get that

[curt]

I do appreciate your prospective but I was definitely surprised with your comment about the financial side of the house every decision made has a financial influence I very confident about that!
QUOTE=Walking Buffalo;2101265]You asked a question. I took the time to respond with several potential answers.

And this is all you care to address.

That says a lot.....[/QUOTE]

[curt]

My mom works very closely with the CO’s and has for 20 plus years every decision made is centred around money trust me on that!!

[Nimrod]

I've wondered about this as well but assumed they are trying to balance the buck doe ratio.
I think it still science based with good intentions however one of my favorite spots has had a very noticeable decline in Mulies in the last 10 years but the doe LEH is still disturbingly high. I think the bio's dont have the resources to really understand the population on a micro sub region level and the formula they use to extrapolate population inflated the count in small isolated populations, so applying a broad macro approach to authorizations is causing damage in these areas.

[338win mag]

It most likely wont be a question in anyone's mind as there wont be any LEH in the near future.

[hunterdon]

Great question curt. I'm probably not smarter than you but I'll pipe in anyways. LOL I agree with all that you said. When you look at the antlerless elk draws, 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 and so on a whole pile of regions, coupled with the numbers of applicants for these draws, the financial incentive is huge. One animal per unit will do squat for population control. You're bang on bud. It's all about the money.

Kind of would be nice if a poster can ask a question or make a comment without always having to be on the defensive. Just my 2 cents worth.

[mastercaster]

In regards to mule deer doe LEH draws, I don't quite understand why they've all but been eliminated in Region 8 because of declining mule deer numbers yet for this region they still have plenty of draws for youth hunters, even though they get a full month to harvest a buck compared to just 9 days for the other regions (3, 4, and 5) and no youth hunts in region 5, 6, or 7B.

I'm all for youth hunting but it does seem strange for the lengthier time frame for any buck in Region 8 comparatively when they get great opportunities (excellent odds) with the doe draw. Is this to help balance out doe/buck ratios even though Region 8 has declining mule deer numbers overall? I'm just a little surprised the youth hunt for any buck hasn't been reduced like what the other regions have historically had because of the generous LEH opportunities they've now been given.

Maybe there's just not enough youth hunters to make any difference at all when it comes to the numbers game??

[pro 111]

Hey guys its been awhile since Ive been on here hope everyone is doing well! I have a question I know its likely been bounced around in the past, but I cant wrap my head around it and I know there are some biologists on this site. If the mule deer populations and the moose populations is certain area's are struggling as much as we are led to believe they are..... then WHY are we still giving out female LEH draws for those species??? IMO it is 100% a cash grab??? I have shot a few females early on in my hunting career but I have made a decision over the past few years to stop shooting females and I wont put in LEH for them, it seems completely counter productive to me to shoot the life givers especially if we are in a situation where populations are down..... someone smarter than me please explain the rationale behind this??
I would have to agree with you in both aspects. I believe these LEH draws are a cash grab . .How much of this money goes back into science . Or sustaining wildlife in BC. It goes right back into upgrading street lights in Victoria and shit just like it. Use the states for an example. So many more hunters. Yet they have very healthy game populations all over. The majority of tag money and even portions of gun purchases go straight back into direct management of the wildlife.
I also believe its a bunch of BS to be harvesting cow and calf moose or any female in areas that are way down on there numbers.. You dont have to be a biologist to figure that out.

[pro 111]

Dont get me wrong. BC is the best place on earth to live if you like hunting multiple species . but i think lately to much is just taken for granted , and we are loosing our wildlife at faster rates than all of us hunters are really willing to admit.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Dont get me wrong. BC is the best place on earth to live if you like hunting multiple species . but i think lately to much is just taken for granted , and we are loosing our wildlife at faster rates than all of us hunters are really willing to admit.

I'm Agreeing with you ! Theres a LOT of GREAT country out there FULL of Feed and Shelter with out many animals ! Where the Hell are they ? :icon_frow RJ

[j270wsm]

I do understand what your saying about HIGH numbers of doe/cow tags given out for areas with low populations, but your example of elk in reg 4 isn't an area with high cow tags. 3-10yrs ago.....it would have been an area with high tags.

reg 4 cow elk leh info

2014-15 - 7545 (tel:2014-15 - 7545) applications for 294 tags.... $47,835
2017-18 - 6154 (tel:2017-18 - 6154) applications for 33 tags …… $39,016
2018-19 - 2934 (tel:2018-19 - 2934) applications for 33 tgs ……. $18,601

2014-15 there were 95 tags(1358 applicants) and 110 youth/senior tags given out for 4-23A. These 205 tags would account for 54.5%($10,213) of all money generated from reg 4 cow tags this yr.

personally I wouldnt call $18,601 a money grab!

[curt]

You are absolutely correct they opened up huge numbers of cow draws now they have pulled back to basically none because the population is on a major decline!? So what does that tell me ittells me shooting the cows negatively impacted the herds when coupled with high predation? Think about this 294 cows how many elk could potentially be born based on those numbers in the 4 years since 2015we are talking potentially 1000+ elk when you start factoring in calves of calves and so on!? Just my opinion don’t go getting your feathers all ruffled if you are a female shooter I get it just not for me anymore!�� QUOTE=j270wsm;2101406]
I do understand what your saying about HIGH numbers of doe/cow tags given out for areas with low populations, but your example of elk in reg 4 isn't an area with high cow tags. 3-10yrs ago.....it would have been an area with high tags.

reg 4 cow elk leh info

2014-15 - 7545 (tel:2014-15 - 7545) applications for 294 tags.... $47,835
2017-18 - 6154 (tel:2017-18 - 6154) applications for 33 tags …… $39,016
2018-19 - 2934 (tel:2018-19 - 2934) applications for 33 tgs ……. $18,601

2014-15 there were 95 tags(1358 applicants) and 110 youth/senior tags given out for 4-23A. These 205 tags would account for 54.5%($10,213) of all money generated from reg 4 cow tags this yr.

personally I wouldnt call $18,601 a money grab![/QUOTE]

[250 sav]

Hey guys its been awhile since Ive been on here hope everyone is doing well! I have a question I know its likely been bounced around in the past, but I cant wrap my head around it and I know there are some biologists on this site. If the mule deer populations and the moose populations is certain area's are struggling as much as we are led to believe they are..... then WHY are we still giving out female LEH draws for those species??? IMO it is 100% a cash grab??? I have shot a few females early on in my hunting career but I have made a decision over the past few years to stop shooting females and I wont put in LEH for them, it seems completely counter productive to me to shoot the life givers especially if we are in a situation where populations are down..... someone smarter than me please explain the rationale behind this??

Because if they cancel anything we currently have they can not reinstate it without the permission of a group. Ex. The region 5 bull moose was closed and a few year's latter the biologist wanted to open a general season for spike fork like region 3 but the band's said no

[adriaticum]

One thing that kind of makes me wonder, is that people who don't win draws, consistently don't win draws.
People who win draws, consistently win draws.
Am I out to lunch?

[robert05]

No your not out to lunch but I believe it has to do with the odds for that particular draw that is put in for. My son and I usually get a draw but we pick a draw that has favourable odds. This year the odds are 0.7:1 and it is a November
moose hunt. Is it the best area and time, no but it is a moose draw.
Both sons and I have also been putting for the Buffalo LEH for 15 years with no luck.

[rocksteady]

I do understand what your saying about HIGH numbers of doe/cow tags given out for areas with low populations, but your example of elk in reg 4 isn't an area with high cow tags. 3-10yrs ago.....it would have been an area with high tags.

reg 4 cow elk leh info

2014-15 - 7545 (tel:2014-15 - 7545) applications for 294 tags.... $47,835
2017-18 - 6154 (tel:2017-18 - 6154) applications for 33 tags …… $39,016
2018-19 - 2934 (tel:2018-19 - 2934) applications for 33 tgs ……. $18,601

2014-15 there were 95 tags(1358 applicants) and 110 youth/senior tags given out for 4-23A. These 205 tags would account for 54.5%($10,213) of all money generated from reg 4 cow tags this yr.

personally I wouldnt call $18,601 a money grab!

One thing you are forgetting is there was 2 or maybe 3 years that they had an "any antlerless" season for 10 days in the main trench of the Rocky Mountains, to thin the herds to appease the ranchers. It would not show up in your stats for leh, but it had a HUGE impact on populations.

[Petros65]

Very simple answer to your question.

The ideal wilderness ratio for game is 1-1. Does cannot create more deer by themselves (its takes 2 to tango - biology 101).

Every single bit of research ever conducted indicates that not shooting does has zero effect on population.

The archaic idea that hunters must not shoot does is not based in any reality (probably comes from the Puritanical periods in the USA where females were considered lesser to males)

https://www.wideopenspaces.com/shooting-does-instead-of-bucks/ (makes for a good read)


Then as always look to Southern Africa countries (Botswana, Namibia, Zambia, South Africa, Zimbabwe)---- they hunt everything equally and they have the most successful hunting models yet devised.

[j270wsm]

One thing you are forgetting is there was 2 or maybe 3 years that they had an "any antlerless" season for 10 days in the main trench of the Rocky Mountains, to thin the herds to appease the ranchers. It would not show up in your stats for leh, but it had a HUGE impact on populations.


Im not forgetting anything! My 2 posts we’re in response to Curt’s comment about 33 cow elk tags being a cash grab.
Killing 33 cows over 200sq km will not hurt the population in any way. Harvesting some cows is healthier for the herd as a whole.

High predator numbers were going to destroy the ungulate numbers.....the leh cow season just helped it happen sooner.

Curt....my feathers aren’t ruffled at all. Not that it matters but the last cow elk I killed was in 2005!

[Darksith]

Why would it be hard to reinstate hunts they are the ones making the rules they can open and close seasons all they want. I think you are giving the ministry a lot more credit than they deserve. if you honestly think they care about your hunting opportunities well you are definitely a positive person good for you! I honestly believe they generate money off the backs of hunter while miss managing our wildlife. Do you even think they really know what’s going on out there I don’t it’s even been said on here they don’t often do counts because it’s costly!! Anyways it was just a question I was hoping for some scientific logic to help me understand QUOTE=boxhitch;2101269]Any idea why they put out a leh hunt op with only one tag?
Its so the hunt stays alive. They have reduced the permit numbers because the pop number target has been achieved and in some cases due to pressure. If they went to zero, the chance of reinstating the hunt when they wanted is far more difficult if not impossible. The permit numbers has to be kept fluid for proper management and to allow opportunity.
Any idea how much the entire LEH process generates for income?
But is has to be about the money , right

Who's getting fired up, and whos coming into this conversation with preconceived notions and challenging valid reasons that don't fit your preconceived notions? If you wanted a bunch of yes men to simply agree to your thoughts on the subject, this was the wrong forum haha.
Have you ever sat down with a regoinal wildlife manager or biologist? I find it insulting that you believe these guys would care at all about the money, they certainly don't see any of it unfortunately. They would love to see all of our license and tag fees go directly into their budgets, Ive been told they wouldn't even have the resources to spend that much $, so to say these guys don't care about anything but our money when they are actively out there doing their best to influence policy, make sound decisions and work with politicians when they too are hunters and volunteers is ludicrous. You need to get over your preconceptions and educate yourself as to who does what and how much we contribute. even if its $10 million, staggering number to me and you, but to a province that runs revenue around $59 billion...think about that


My mom works very closely with the CO’s and has for 20 plus years every decision made is centred around money trust me on that!!
The CO's are not the wildlife managers. They both have shit budgets, so ya, the CO's need to watch how much fuel they burn, how much time out in the field they can have, and how many stupid calls they MUST attend to for problems like people encountering a bear in the bush that is being a bear, or a cub on the side of the road cause mom got hit by a car...

[Darksith]

Very simple answer to your question.

The ideal wilderness ratio for game is 1-1. Does cannot create more deer by themselves (its takes 2 to tango - biology 101).

Every single bit of research ever conducted indicates that not shooting does has zero effect on population.

The archaic idea that hunters must not shoot does is not based in any reality (probably comes from the Puritanical periods in the USA where females were considered lesser to males)

https://www.wideopenspaces.com/shooting-does-instead-of-bucks/ (makes for a good read)


Then as always look to Southern Africa countries (Botswana, Namibia, Zambia, South Africa, Zimbabwe)---- they hunt everything equally and they have the most successful hunting models yet devised.

Im not sure where you are getting any of your facts. Ideal ratio's are not 1:1, the bucks would eat up too much of the feed and it would be hard for doe's to remain healthy enough to birth and raise healthy you. A buck will impregnate 120-20 does a year.
South Africa and those successful African nations don't have the most successful hunting models, they have their own challenges but rely heavily on private land owners, and I don't believe there is much local recreational non guided hunting opportunities. That being said their challenges are not comparable to the challenges we have in North America. They are doing a fine job with the tools they have, but to say their model is better than the north american model is flawed at best. The increase in things like turkey, whitetail deer and many other species in north america since we stopped hunting wild came for commercial purposes is second to none

[adriaticum]

Im not sure where you are getting any of your facts. Ideal ratio's are not 1:1, the bucks would eat up too much of the feed and it would be hard for doe's to remain healthy enough to birth and raise healthy you. A buck will impregnate 120-20 does a year.
South Africa and those successful African nations don't have the most successful hunting models, they have their own challenges but rely heavily on private land owners, and I don't believe there is much local recreational non guided hunting opportunities. That being said their challenges are not comparable to the challenges we have in North America. They are doing a fine job with the tools they have, but to say their model is better than the north american model is flawed at best. The increase in things like turkey, whitetail deer and many other species in north america since we stopped hunting wild came for commercial purposes is second to none


He is getting the info from the article.
At first glance 1:1 ration seems wrong and I think that would be the consensus everywhere in BC.
But if you think about it what you are quoting 12-20 does for 1 buck does not say anything about non breeding bucks.
If one buck will breed 12-20 does in season where are non-breeding bucks counted.
Some bucks even though they are sexually mature won't breed because the strongest buck won't let them.
1:1 ratio assumes that if there is 1 buck for every 20 does there may be another 19 young non-breeding bucks.

So 1:1 seems logical.

I mean what is the male/female ratio in other mammals?
Or other ungulates?

[Mudsey]

In the past for moose a bull/cow ratio of 45:100 was optimum. Not sure if this is still the Province's goal.

[J_T]

One thing you are forgetting is there was 2 or maybe 3 years that they had an "any antlerless" season for 10 days in the main trench of the Rocky Mountains, to thin the herds to appease the ranchers. It would not show up in your stats for leh, but it had a HUGE impact on populations.
They have also cancelled the 10 day antlerless archery season Sept 10-19 in zone x. This accounted for 15 animals last year. Do we know how many people participated in that hunt? My message to the Ministry, if we're still hunting 6pts, with rifle, in the rut and we're issuing LEh, we're obviously confused about the best approach to take to manage elk population recovery. Habitat, predation, unlicenced are key factors . And if we're cancelling seasons because of a harvest of 15 elk, we're in much worse shape politically and scientifically than they are willing to discuss.

[curt]

I would have to agree with you I think you’re onto something I don’t think the biologists have a very good finger on the pulse I think they look at very general statistics not specific areas
I've wondered about this as well but assumed they are trying to balance the buck doe ratio.
I think it still science based with good intentions however one of my favorite spots has had a very noticeable decline in Mulies in the last 10 years but the doe LEH is still disturbingly high. I think the bio's dont have the resources to really understand the population on a micro sub region level and the formula they use to extrapolate population inflated the count in small isolated populations, so applying a broad macro approach to authorizations is causing damage in these areas.

[curt]

Awesome thanks for the support again I’m not judging people If it’s legal to shoot does or Cows and people do it so be it I just think it’s very counterproductive and I feel it contradicts what we are trying to do with the populations,And I honestly believe if the biologist would actually listen to the hunters a little bit more our wildlife situation would be Much healthier ;2101317]Great question curt. I'm probably not smarter than you but I'll pipe in anyways. LOL I agree with all that you said. When you look at the antlerless elk draws, 1-1-1-1-1-1-1 and so on a whole pile of regions, coupled with the numbers of applicants for these draws, the financial incentive is huge. One animal per unit will do squat for population control. You're bang on bud. It's all about the money.

Kind of would be nice if a poster can ask a question or make a comment without always having to be on the defensive. Just my 2 cents worth.[/QUOTE]

[curt]

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/blob:http://www.huntingbc.ca/780846dd-fc46-4d9a-9141-edf30b7bff08Makes sense to me

[curt]

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/blob:http://www.huntingbc.ca/0855160b-3e6c-4bba-aa2d-0fc5d702da81

[Bugle M In]

Not sure where we are at in this thread as I have been away. (have tried to read thru all this however).
My understanding of the MD study underway is that all the does were bred/pregnant.
So, we are managing something right if you ask me in regards to buck to doe ratios and having some doe leh etc.
Also tells me that there are other factors "more at work" creating declines than worrying about a few doe leh permits.
Again, just because we were to "eliminate" doe leh, will "not" guarantee an increase in MD population.
Again, you have to deal with the "real issues" causing their declines.
Eliminating doe leh would be like sticking a band aid on a severed artery expecting it to stop the bleeding.

As for the Elk and J-T's thoughts, I hear what he is saying.
Eliminating the archery portion of the hunt is not going to create more elk either.
They eliminated much of the Cow LEH back in the late 90's and on top of that added 6pt restriction.
And that was back when there still were (based on counts) plenty of elk to go around.
All that was needed was a reduction in the cow leh permits, not a closure and all would have been fine.

Why did it fail??
Because no one in the ministry (or more so, the government) wanted to handle the hot potato of a wolf cull.
No one was listening and looking (maybe looked into but didn't care?) into why they were leaving the high country and "not returning".
And then the ranchers got their way and many hunters went along with it because of the "new opportunities"!
And why were hunters eager to hit the new opportunity?
Because they had limited the opportunities in the late 90's.

So yes, I see why some like to view hunters as the issue to many of the declines.
In a way, there is truth in it.
But the real reason is because of poorly managing the big issues that were/are hindering wildlife to recover.
From Preds to over logging and winter range loss.

But go ahead, use the "Band Aid" method and remove the Doe LEH's.
See where it gets you all.

I predict one day because of mis-management and people's beliefs in such factors like removing MD Doe LEH making the difference that the only
way you will be able to hunt is "if you win an LEH" permit for any and every species only.
Which means some will hunt several big game creatures while others sit the season out all together.
So hey, lets cut the Ministry some "more slack!"
Lets give them more options of further Restrictions on hunting for the future.
Look at how well that has worked!!!

Lets see.....
We will kill off the Moose in hopes that the wolves move on as to save the Caribou.
Now that sums up "BC Wildlife Management of the past 40 years"!!!
I wonder how much we hunters humor the "higher ups" when they see/listen/read about us "squabbling with each other" as to what we need to close off and restrict next??!!

[Ourea]

What about areas where MD are imploding where there few if any wolves?

[Bugle M In]

Wolves may only be "one issue" for declines, and yes, in some areas.
Other areas most likely suffer other "human factors".
Been on top of the plateau around Cache Creek/Kammy lately??
Fairly obvious to see the factors there and correlation to of time frame and declines.
Also, its an area that has Doe LEH (not a ranchers area to speak of) and there are no shortages of Does (imo).
Just never see an increase in Population over time even thought Does have fawns.

So, what are the other factors?
Maybe forests in that state (logged out) can only have a certain amount of carrying capacity???

Again, getting rid of the Doe or Cow LEH "can help" replenish stocks faster (that's a no brainer).
It's sort of why they got rid of most of the entire "Cow LEH" in the EK in the late 90's.
There was a concern about not enough Cows and that an implosion of Elk #'s could happen.

THE STUPID PART was, "it was working"!!
So yes, it proves that it can be a "positive" decision.
Lots of hunters would say there was an increase in overall elk by mid 2000's.

BUT, then some "geniuses" decided to go and have them "mowed down" by introducing "Zone X".
INSTEAD of either lifting the 6pt Restriction OR adding a few cows back to LEH or Both.
Worst part is, nobody really looked into what "other issues" were going on.
They just went ahead and applied Zone X and only now do they acknowledge a screw up, yet they still don't acknowledge it enough to fix the
real issues.

Like JT said, they will acknowledge the Blunder by limiting Bow Hunters.
As if that will somehow correct to Big F'up!!????

Was it the Bios?
I don't know?
Don't care anymore either. (I am not friends with them anyways).
I like to think however that Bio's only make "recommendations" based on the science and evidence they have on hand.
And if that is the case, than it tells me we have some real whack jobs right above the Bios in chain of command that are screwing up the province.
But, we hunters like to blame the BCWF and others for not seeing things getting fixed.
The real problem lies in the Minsitry.

I don't think most Bio's supported the Ban of the Grizzly Hunt province wide.
Yet, somehow that got implemented.
Makes one wonder how many other decisions (or lack of) have been made by those "same sort of people" on other policies.
Which in the end creates threads just like this one where hunters point fingers at other hunters.
That sort of same BS started about 40 years ago in many of the EK R&G Clubs.
Thus the road closures etc etc.
And again, after all this time, there is no game in many of the closed areas.

So, now I ask, "why is that"???
Cant blame over-hunting in those areas!

[Ourea]

So Bugle, let's toss the keys of the shop to you for a minute shall we...

We will give you basically no budget, get you to deal with politicians that know f*ckall about wildlife, all stakeholders that only want more yet give nothing, resource extraction that is off the chart (with FN eyeing up that prize) and you are a guy in an office who is passionate about wildlife yet you don't have a hammer let alone a screw driver.

If wildlife management and game bios disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't make one single solitary difference in solving wildlife issues that plague this province. Sooner that most get this thru their head the better.

[Bugle M In]

So Bugle, let's toss the keys of the shop to you for a minute shall we...

We will give you basically no budget, get you to deal with politicians that know f*ckall about wildlife, all stakeholders that only want more yet give nothing, resource extraction that is off the chart (with FN eyeing up that prize) and you are a guy in an office who is passionate about wildlife yet you don't have a hammer let alone a screw driver.

If wildlife management and game bios disappeared tomorrow it wouldn't make one single solitary difference in solving wildlife issues that plague this province. Sooner that most get this thru their head the better.
You said it perfectly.
It is a complex issue, way beyond comprehension anymore, imo.
So many factors that have caused the declines, not just to MD but every big game ungulate we hunt in BC.
I don't blame the Bios.
Their hands are tied.
I suspect the remove the Moose in hopes the Wolves move on to save the Boo was because they were told "Wolf Cull is not an option" to be tabled.
So, in that case, it is the only way they had.
Useless, but that is the truth.

The few #'s of Game remain will most likely mean we will have to pay to get thru the FN gates.
And hunters seem so restricted in their thought that they tend to blame the next guy for shooting their game.
Meanwhile we have other user groups who thinks their shit doesn't smell (just like the LM cyclists) and that they have no impact and that it is us gun
totting hillbillies that have killed off all the game.
Only have to look at J Pod Orcas and all the BS Restrictions that just happened recently.

That is the Trend.
It has always ben the trend!

The only Group of Conservationists to have made a difference in the past 40 years is the Freshwater Society and our BC Lakes and Trout Fisheries.
One reason being because there is no "Economic Industry" involved in "harvesting trout" for commercial reasons.
The 2nd being that Lakes are a "controlled environment" in which to apply "strategies" and "assistance" and at a fairly cheap expense.
And even with that, Lakes suffer from Industrial Repercussions at times. (Logging and PH levels as well as all sorts of other issues, including Cattle,
and water levels.)

Now you take that and multiply by 10,000 towards Land Use and Wildlife and we all can see where the problems lie.
Hunting Restrictions will do sweet F'all to combat the "real problems".
And the government, especially the one in power right now would love to see hunters as one less factor to contend with anyways.

[Bugle M In]

CURT (OP),
With all due respect, I honestly have to say you "question" sucks s***!
Reason being, you lack "merit" in the question as to "what you are experiencing" out in the woods and asking "why do we have a MD Doe LEH".
As far as I see, you have 2 ways to ask it (imo).

1) Why do we have a MD Doe LEH "due" to "a lack of MD population" in general?
2) Why do we have a MD Doe LEH "due" to " a lack of MD Doe" in the population??

Both have very different answers if you ask me, but you have to ask it one way or the other, not in a "general term" without "cause and affect".

If you take #2 (a lack of Doe in the MD population) than your question has some reason.
So, are you noticing a "lack of Doe"??
I know I cant say that is the case foe me where I hunt MD!
I see plenty of Females and for the most part come November, have at least 1 offspring with them.
If I understood Dana when he was on here, he wasn't complaining about lack of Doe, but rather that the wolves were eating them and for the most part
that he could no longer find a decent mature Buck and felt that if it wasn't the wolves shitting them out, that hunters were dropping bucks at a much to
early an age. (that's how I interpreted his comments at the time)
For me, I even see bucks, but would have to admit that finding a mature buck is getting harder.
But Trophy sized buck have "nothing to do with Doe LEH".

An example of Female LEH being an issues is back in the 90's while hunting elk in the EK.
We saw elk, and the #'s were decent.
Issue was, all of us in the area all felt the same.
We were seeing more bulls than females, by a long shot.
That was "not normal"!
Seeing 3 to 4 bulls for every 1 or 2 cows was not right. (should have been atleast 4 to 5 Cows per bull and even as high as 40 per bull back in the good old days)
So yes, I supported having the Cow LEH reduced, if not down right stopped at the time!
(which they did do, but somewhere got the idea that 6pt was needed???? made no sense as no one was complaining about low bull #'s)

So, if you are seeing very few MD Doe, then you have a valid question, imo.
But, I don't hear that as an issue.

So that leaves scenario #1.
A lack of MD in general.
Well then, I ask "Why"???

Again, I refer to the elk in the EK Trench for an example.
Reminding you once again that they basically eliminated to cow leh where I was.
And it helped, we started to see 4 or 5 cows per bull (what it should be, imo)
But then it stopped!
Not just Cows, but Bulls too.
In other words, "No elk"!

So, explain to me, after they removed the Cow LEH (just like you are asking to have the Doe MD LEH removed), why did elk "disappear"???
If you reasoning for "creating more MD" is thru "eliminating" the "MD Doe LEH".
Than tell me why we do not have 20,000 elk in the EK Trench by now??????

Reason being, IT was "OTHER FACTORS" causing the decline.

Cows came back after 1998, slowly at first and then snowballed.
All looked good.
Back then, logging in the area was minimal, and to be honest, they were only doing "spot logging" to try to cut out the beetle from invading.
That spot logging was fantastic for all ungulates at the time.
Never saw so much game then at that time!

But then it changed to "full scale" cutting.
And, starting seeing Bear, both Gbear and BBear and also Cats (something I had never seen, only heard of!).
Wolves, yes, they were there, always!, but seem to be getting more active and higher in #'s.

So, remind me why removing the "Female LEH" of any species will create a huge resurgence in wildlife populations of any of our species when we
now have so many "Other (and real) Factors" now creating the decline!!???

Hope that clarifies my insulting your question.
You have to tell us 1st what issue/s you are "experiencing".

Fix the other issues first and then I totally support removing female LEH for a time to help "pump up" the #'s again!
But absolutely useless to do so if the real issues are left unchecked.
That just gives the Government/Ministry a "way out"!!
The wrong way out!, imo.

[Walking Buffalo]

What about areas where MD are imploding where there few if any wolves?

Following current managment logic, kill the moose, elk and whitetails to starve the cougars and bears....

I imagine Boyce is still having nightmares that he ever suggested putting this theory to the test, watching it become standard practice despite neutral to negative results.

[horshur]

Following current managment logic, kill the moose, elk and whitetails to starve the cougars and bears....

I imagine Boyce is still having nightmares that he ever suggested putting this theory to the test, watching it become standard practice despite neutral to negative results.
Lol........

[horshur]

You cannot have a steady reliable never changing high population ...

[Bugle M In]

You cannot have a steady reliable never changing high population ...

Nope, that is impossible.
Like the MD die off years ago of up to 50% after a bad winter.
There are lots of factors that come into play.
Thing is, when it's mother nature that does the dealing, lots of dead corpses can be found in quick succession.
Thus one can ascertain the problem.

When it come to the last 10 years in the EK and elk, mother nature had very little to do with that.

I did try to show folks here thru google time lapse at one point what the landscape looked like in the mid 80's and how much it changed since then.
One can really see the alterations visually around 2000.
Which is probably around the time many start to wonder what is going on with the game #'s.
And that is only one factor.
Throw in all the other factors that have been mentioned on HBC over the past 5 years and it should be no surprise why things are the way they are.

If we think just stopping the hunting of all female species of ungulates is going to fix this, than some of us truly are lost.

And yes, I am glad I am not a Bio.
I would have been fired years ago because I wouldn't have been able to bite my lip with "upper management".
I really don't have a clue how we undo this rats nest.
Ourea is right, we have to contend with FN, together with Industry (people need jobs), a growing and expanding population in BC as well as a whole
ton of other user groups now, all fighting to have a piece of the pie.
And sadly, mother nature isn't making more property!
I have no idea how wildlife is to survive in the ever shrinking landscape they call home, and filled more and more by the preds designed to hunt them.

I think this is all just the "reality" of humans and wildlife trying to co-habitat.
It just wont work in the end, no matter what we do and we have some folks at the top making decisions which are not making it any easier.
5 years ago we complained about a bunch of issues.
5 years later, we haven't solved any of them and worse, we now have more added to it than back then!

[Bugle M In]

Even the North American Management Plan mentions how "hard it can be" thee days with so many more "new challenges":
https://www.perc.org/2019/06/19/the-north-american-model-of-wildlife-conservation/

And to think we can restore wildlife #'s with "just Hunting Regulations" is in my opinion "asinine"!
It's a tool, not a solution.
The issues we have today require a ton of tools.
All starts with money however.

First big issue is "Get Money"!.
which will mean a Levy on all "Outdoor Rec Equipment" (NOT just Hunting Related Goods, but anything that is used or sold for "outdoor use").

That would be my "First Initiative".
So yes, a tax and tough shit if folks don't like it.