Wildlife Management too Conservative??

[BCrams]

As a resident hunter, do you believe wildlife managers are being too conservative managing our public wildlife resources?

Examples:


Antler point restrictions.
White-tailed deer are the most prolific game species in North America. Why does region 7B have a 4 pt trophy season on them? I know we do not need it.
Managing for trophy animals only (4 pt buck seasons, 6 pt bull elk seasons)
20+ mountain goat tags in zones with 0.5:1 odds

[GoatGuy]

I can't wait to see the results of this one. :lol:

[rocksteady]

Did not choose either option. Too many species specific, zone specific responses to simply reply Y or N...

Some area and species YES, others NO.....Still others MAYBE...

[BCrams]

Did not choose either option. Too many species specific, zone specific responses to simply reply Y or N...

Some area and species YES, others NO.....Still others MAYBE...

Read the question rocky:

Are Wildlife Managers too conservative managing some wildlife species?

[rocksteady]

Read the question rocky:

Are Wildlife Managers too conservative managing some wildlife species?

Define SOME....For the East Kootenay spotted Badger - NO

Give some more specifics...

[BCrams]

Easy -

The East Kootenay Elk population is at or over carrying capacity. Continued management of existing regulations does not serve to benefit the health of the population. The EK elk herd can support increased opportunities for resident hunters to harvest an elk.

[GoatGuy]

Let me refine it:

Elk across the province (Van Isl due to politics)
Moose across most of the province
Mule Deer across the province
White-tailed deer across the entire province
Black Bear across the entire province
Sheep across the province other than a couple of MUs
Goats across the province
Politically - grizzly bear


I don't think it's the managers fault - everyone shares the responsibility. The joys of democracy.

[Mr. Dean]

Let me refine it:

Elk across the province (Van Isl due to politics)
Moose across most of the province
Mule Deer across the province
White-tailed deer across the entire province
Black Bear across the entire province
Sheep across the province other than a couple of MUs
Goats across the province
Politically - grizzly bear


I don't think it's the managers fault - everyone shares the responsibility. The joys of democracy.

But at what point does 'The Boss' stand up and exclaim that its time for things to move on and change with the times???


... Thought my rant was done in the other thread. Guess I'm still working it out.

[rocksteady]

Same agenda, different poll wording, same combatants, same result.....time to move on...:arrow::arrow:

[J_T]

Wildlife managers - to a person that wants to hunt - are going to appear conservative. But until we walk in their shoes and have to balance the stuff they do, I'm not so sure we should be passing judgement on them.

[MRP]

Wildlife Management?
I find them slow to react to change, allways reactive instad of proactive.

[PG_ELK]

BCRAMS - next time I see an executive position posted at MOE, I expect you will be applying? No better way to change things than from within:wink:

[mwj]

anyone else on this thread hunt the ek in the 80's. there were so many people hunting elk that someone opened a buffalo burger joint at the junction of the middle and north fork of the white r. lol. everytime we drove by there was at least half a dozen trucks parked there.

[boxhitch]

It always has been and always will be easier to manage the People than it is to manage the Wildlife.
Access, Hunting pressure, Harvest rates, Enforcement , All are easier when the Hunter numbers are controlled.

[hunter1947]

To much of a mixed bag to put my vote to rest :roll:.

[TPK]

Well, we had three or four biologists (I believe Regional Biologists ??) at the BCWF Convention. As they sat in the front to talk and take questions, one said that he has never seen such conservative wildlife management as what he sees here in BC. He further indicated that the biggest push back when they try to open up more hunting opportunities is usually from hunters !! Hunters in BC seem to be more concerned with over harvesting than in other areas where these folks have worked and to that end, we are too wary of new opportunity. None of the other biologists disagreed with his comments, so I will infer their support for what he said. As we have our own biologists telling us we're too conservative .. ya, I agree we are.

[Mr. Dean]

Well, we had three or four biologists (I believe Regional Biologists ??) at the BCWF Convention. As they sat in the front to talk and take questions, one said that he has never seen such conservative wildlife management as what he sees here in BC. He further indicated that the biggest push back when they try to open up more hunting opportunities is usually from hunters !! Hunters in BC seem to be more concerned with over harvesting than in other areas where these folks have worked and to that end, we are too wary of new opportunity. None of the other biologists disagreed with his comments, so I will infer their support for what he said. As we have our own biologists telling us we're too conservative .. ya, I agree we are.

As FD woud put it, is this the "NIMBY" crowd.... Hunters that don't want to see 'their' areas hunted with the people of 'my' likes (LML'ers)?


WOW.... :shock: :roll:

[TPK]

As FD woud put it, is this the "NIMBY" crowd.... Hunters that don't want to see 'their' areas hunted with the people of 'my' likes (LML'ers)?

I didn't read it like that .. I read it as the biologists saying "Hunters" are not trusting them when they are saying a species can sustain more hunting than the level it is currently allocated at. Now, one could suggest that the push back is from hunters with a "nimby" attitude guised as "concern" for a species .. but that would be pure speculation and I really don't think it's the case.

[GoatGuy]

Wildlife managers - to a person that wants to hunt - are going to appear conservative. But until we walk in their shoes and have to balance the stuff they do, I'm not so sure we should be passing judgement on them.

I think it's the other way around - to managers, hunters appear conservative, and they are. Nevermind they all have some wild perception about what wildlife management should be. Hunters are the ones who are driving regulations today.

As far as the reading I've done it's been an issue since atleast the early 60s in BC. MSY, harvesting the female component, required sex ratios, CC and risks associated are things hunters simply don't know about or choose not to consider.

6616 figures things are changing - I sure hope so!;)

[J_T]

6616 figures things are changing - I sure hope so!:wink:Well, I must admit, I'm an optimist too. I do believe we have a good framework for change happening here now.

[KevinB]

I voted yes. Of course, that is from the point of view that wildlife in BC is supposed to be managed to maximize hunter opportunity and general health/stability of the various species' populations. So, in that context, then yes I think that managers are much too conservative in their management of several species.

But it's important to remember that these managers also work within the framework of the public service, and they have to balance the wishes of the great majority of non-hunting voters, many of whom have markedly different ideas about wildlife management, and think that we should have as many "cute" deer and "majestic" elk as we can possibly have, that they should all be fed, petted, photographed, oggled, etc...and that the dirty rotten hunters shouldn't be allowed to hurt poor Bambi or defenceless Smoky the Bear. From their point of view, managers should be a lot more conservative than they are. i.e that any hunting or wildlife management is too much.

All depends on how you are looking at it...but our (hunters) point of view is the right one of course! :wink:

[wetcoaster]

Easy -

The East Kootenay Elk population is at or over carrying capacity. Continued management of existing regulations does not serve to benefit the health of the population. The EK elk herd can support increased opportunities for resident hunters to harvest an elk.

There are definately populations being managed in a very conservative manner.

I find the term carrying capacity however is used and abused far to often and is used little in modern populatation management.

Do some thinking on carrying capacity from an ecological perspective and you might realize why. Consider out migration, in migration, populations being potential sources or sinks and if a population is absolutely isolated geographically to a finite habitat of static resource before throwing the term out.

[6616]

There are definately populations being managed in a very conservative manner.

I find the term carrying capacity however is used and abused far to often and is used little in modern populatation management.

Do some thinking on carrying capacity from an ecological perspective and you might realize why. Consider out migration, in migration, populations being potential sources or sinks and if a population is absolutely isolated geographically to a finite habitat of static resource before throwing the term out.

I agree, and these are just some of the variables, the social carrying capacity (in the ranchers viewpoint) is much less than the actual biological carrying capacity for elk in the East Kootenay's and determining the actual biological carrying capacity requires extensive on the ground data which is usually not available in sufficient quantities or quality. Also factoring out private ranch land reduces the estimate considerably if one chooses to do that. In the EK we now have 12,000+ Ha of irrigated hay fields behind exclusion fences and factoring this out is obvious.

Calculating carrying capacity for elk in the EK has been attempted using habitat suitability models and also by calculating forage availability on winter ranges, and having good solid data on either is difficult. Forage availability can vary as much as 125% between a dry year and a wet year and can be a major consideration in the drought prone interior regions. Forage utilized by cattle grazing and populations of other competing wild ungulates also has to be considered when determining an optimum socially acceptable elk population. In other words the social carrying capacity is the bottom line, not the biological carrying capacity. All told, determining carrying capacity is a very difficult and inexact task and a "best guess" is about all we can expect without spending millions of dollars.