Promoting Harvesting 'ANY' GRIZZ

[dana]

Saw on another thread where comments were made that too many sow grizz were being killed and hunters need to curb the harvest of females. Got me thinkin', shouldn't the Ministry be promoting the harvest of 'any' grizz, especially within the Mountain Caribou zones? There is no lack of bears in many of the caribou units. The ministry has been increasing the amount of authorizations to 'help' the caribou. It is obvious, in many units, hunter harvest is very poor. I think the selection of 'males only' and the 'trophy' hunt mentality is one reason why harvest objectives are not being met in a lot of these zones. Sure, there are the 'tirekickers' that are talked about on the LEH thread, but I also think the hard-core hunter that can get r done, isn't getting r done, because they are afraid of the social backlash of harvesting a female or smaller bear. Not unlike the recent Goat thread where I posted up pics of my 12 year old son's first goat, a nanny. If we are desiring to save the mountain caribou from utter extinction in the southern part of the province, should we not be encouraging our hunters to do their part and harvest 'a' grizz instead of eating tag soup?

[yukon john]

I agree I have heard that a sow is the same as five boars when it comes to the affect on the population. No matter what the left wing greenies are saying in the media there is many places in BC that are over populated with griz and they need to be harvested. Most guys wouldnt turn down a small or female wolf theres no reason to have a different standard on griz. YJ

[bridger]

you have some good points the reason everyone shies away from sow harvest is that the powers that be have an allowable harvest set on the number of bears that can be taken annuallly from any area. they allow only a certain per centage of the harvest to be sows if that per centage is exceeded the number of leh tags is reduced disproportionatley. ie a sow counts (i think as one and half bears or something similiar) so shooting sows reduces the number of tags available the next year. right or wrong that is the way it is.

[Gus]

I agree for sure. As far as I'm concerned, the "trophy mentality" that you refered to is what is keeping the harvesting of sows down. The serious guys are going to pass up smaller bears, be it sow or boar, in search of that dominant boar. One area that I frequent has a relatively high caribou population and the same goes for the grizzlies. The majority of the bears I saw were sows and cubs so I would definitley like to see the odd sow being taken out. That being said, if I was the one with leh in my back pocket, i'd be gun'n for the boar as well.

[6616]

you have some good points the reason everyone shies away from sow harvest is that the powers that be have an allowable harvest set on the number of bears that can be taken annuallly from any area. they allow only a certain per centage of the harvest to be sows if that per centage is exceeded the number of leh tags is reduced disproportionatley. ie a sow counts (i think as one and half bears or something similiar) so shooting sows reduces the number of tags available the next year. right or wrong that is the way it is.

The rule of thumb currently (right or wrong) is that no more then 30% of the AAH can be females. Each sow shot represents 3 bears of the AAH used up. This is part of the Provincial Grizzly Bear Harvest Strategy and beyond the control of Regions.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

I talked to the CO from Bella Coola last year. He said he would like to see more tags given out in that area and a lot more females shot. Harvesting the boars is fine but the problem bears he deals with are usually females looking for space in an over populated area.

[boxhitch]

As said, everyone has their own definition of a trophy. I don't think most first timers are too worried about size. 5' gbears look good on the wall. And like the nanny, hunter know what it takes to get any bear, so credit is due.
The social stigma would come if the chances of killing a female with cubs was glossed over. Orphans are a high profile media target.

[Dirty]

I heard that ElkmasterC has slayed his fair share of Sows at Roosters and Gabby's. He is discerning though, he usually turns and runs if they have cubs. For the most part, his actions haven't caused him a decrease in quota. He still gets his fair share.:lol:

[dana]

I fully recognize that sows are given more weight in the AAH. Probably a good thing. I would suggest the AAH should be looked at in the caribou zones and tweaked where needed. Just the fact that they are bumping up allocations ever so slightly in these areas means they are starting to tweak them. The point of this thread is that really does no good if no one is harvesting bears. Some of these zones are incredibly tuff to kill 'a' bear, let alone 'a male' bear. Might be easier to get the job done if the Ministry would change their season dates. What good are handing out more tags if you close the season at the end of May and no one could hunt due to no access? If saving the caribou is indeed more than just smoke in mirrors for this government, they need to be helping hunters actually get the job done. With forestry in the tank, there is very little winter logging thus very few plowed roads which then will melt out faster come 'bear season'. Hunters should be encouraged to put aside the 'trophy' mindset and only worry about not harvesting a bear within a family group. We need to be seeing some bears harvested instead of encouraging the tag soup hunts.

[dana]

I agree for sure. As far as I'm concerned, the "trophy mentality" that you refered to is what is keeping the harvesting of sows down. The serious guys are going to pass up smaller bears, be it sow or boar, in search of that dominant boar. One area that I frequent has a relatively high caribou population and the same goes for the grizzlies. The majority of the bears I saw were sows and cubs so I would definitley like to see the odd sow being taken out. That being said, if I was the one with leh in my back pocket, i'd be gun'n for the boar as well.

If I had of pulled a grizz tag this spring, I was going to avoid the 'trophy boar' attitude and just enjoy the tuff hunt that it would be. If I encountered a small boar or lone female, I'd probably take the opportunity at hand. I've never killed a grizz before, so to me 'any' grizz is a trophy.

[Fisher-Dude]

Hunters should be encouraged to put aside the 'trophy' mindset and only worry about not harvesting a bear within a family group. We need to be seeing some bears harvested instead of encouraging the tag soup hunts.

We can/should apply that theory to all class A species. Within the allocation policy, if we don't put our quota of fur on the ground, some foreigner is going to get OUR share of the AAH. It's time to crack some cap!

[guest]

Dana,
I'm thinking along the same lines as you. I too have been putting in my LEH tags for areas where they are trying to save the Caribou. That said, even when speaking with the managers, they do claim the Grizz are getting to many Caribou. As you stated they are bumping the numbers ever so slightly, although I did not get drawn again. I also questioned them on the closing LEH in those areas end of May, well if they want some shot then why not have a June 15th closing. I was told it may be considered for next year.
I would shoot any G bear not in company of another, Sow or Boar, it wouldn't matter to me. Sure I would rather a a big Boar but that may not present it self That said the extra time needs to be taken by all of us to be sure it's not a family unit.
CT

[Gateholio]

As I mentioned on another thread, I've been applying for grizzly tags for years, and I've never even managed to draw a tag!

I am hoping for a nice giant boar (like every other grizzly hunter ) but from what I hear, access is going to be a bitch this year with so much snow, so there will be a limited time to hunt.

Add in I've got torn cartilidge in my knee that hasn't healed yet, which will further inhibit my mobility and the fact i've never had an opportunity to shoot a grizzly before, and..........:lol:

I guess it comes down to how the cards get dealt, but I'm not going to hang my head in shame if I shoot a non-monster grizzly. I probably won't do it on day 1, though.;)

[GoatGuy]

Shoot sows and the odds will sky-rocket or the season could even be closed the next year. Nanny harvest is the same - we'll probably see some sort of a change in the regs in the next couple of years on that (ie reduced opportunities if there's nanny harvest).

The science for grizz is extremely rigorous - it's a condition of having a grizzly hunt. We can all disagree with it but it was that or no grizz hunt. Not much for choices.

The harvest in the caribou recovery zones is significant.

[PGK]

Shoot sows and the odds will sky-rocket or the season could even be closed the next year. Nanny harvest is the same - we'll probably see some sort of a change in the regs in the next couple of years on that (ie reduced opportunities if there's nanny harvest).

The science for grizz is extremely rigorous - it's a condition of having a grizzly hunt. We can all disagree with it but it was that or no grizz hunt. Not much for choices.

The harvest in the caribou recovery zones is significant.

We need browningmirage! :lol: STAT

Lucky bastid

[hunter1947]

I would say have the LEH permits evened out in order to balance the poulation in areas that are hi numbers for sows.

You would have to take a dry sow in this case with no cubs.

[6616]

I fully recognize that sows are given more weight in the AAH. Probably a good thing. I would suggest the AAH should be looked at in the caribou zones and tweaked where needed. Just the fact that they are bumping up allocations ever so slightly in these areas means they are starting to tweak them. The point of this thread is that really does no good if no one is harvesting bears. Some of these zones are incredibly tuff to kill 'a' bear, let alone 'a male' bear. Might be easier to get the job done if the Ministry would change their season dates. What good are handing out more tags if you close the season at the end of May and no one could hunt due to no access? If saving the caribou is indeed more than just smoke in mirrors for this government, they need to be helping hunters actually get the job done. With forestry in the tank, there is very little winter logging thus very few plowed roads which then will melt out faster come 'bear season'. Hunters should be encouraged to put aside the 'trophy' mindset and only worry about not harvesting a bear within a family group. We need to be seeing some bears harvested instead of encouraging the tag soup hunts.

I agree with you Steve regarding the season dates, especially if harvest targets are not being reached.

AAM (Annual Allowable Mortallity) has already been tweaked upwards in many of the caribou recovery areas, however hunting AAH (Annual Allowable Harvest) for grizzlies changes every year depending on the number of females and non-hunting mortalities recorded.

Grizzlies are managed on a five year average and for each sow kill, the next years AAH is reduced by three bears. In 4-25 for example the 5 year AAH was 10, and 3 sows were killed in the first two years of the five year period, so now for 2009 the AAH is only 1 bear (remaining AAH). A result of this is that you cannot go by the numbers in the LEH booklet as they do not tell you what the overall AAM is, just what the remaining AAH in the 5 year period is. One would think upon seeing the number of authorizations available for 4-25 that there has actually been a reduction but that is not the actual case, just a significant harvest in the first two years.

Whether this management regime, the extra weight given to sow mortality, the harvest rate, or the deduction of estimated non-hunting mortality from the AAM is right or wrong is not for me to say, but under the current grizzly bear management strategy if sows are killed, the overall total of bears killed will be far fewer thus possibly resulting in "more" predation on caribou in the short term.

Having said that, over the longer term killing sows is likely to impact the overall productivity rate of a specific population and thus cause a temporary decline, which will of course help with caribou predation for a time.

Perhaps the entire grizzly bear harvest strategy needs a re-think, and I suppose that's probably what you're actually suggesting.

[Gus]

If I had of pulled a grizz tag this spring, I was going to avoid the 'trophy boar' attitude and just enjoy the tuff hunt that it would be. If I encountered a small boar or lone female, I'd probably take the opportunity at hand. I've never killed a grizz before, so to me 'any' grizz is a trophy.

Fair enough, and as the main theme of this thread shows, there should be more of that. Like I mentioned before, I agree there are areas where more sows should be taken out, but as youngfella said, grizzly hunting is pretty much a trophy hunt pure and simple. If guys just wanted bear meat they wouldn't waste their time with draws and expensive tags and they would just go out and kill a couple black bears. Its going to be hard to covince most people who finally draw and purchase a tag for their favourite area to shoot a lesser bear (keeping in mind the definition of "lesser" is personal), especially early in the hunt.

Maybe if some if these high caribou areas went over to a GOS it would illiminate more of the "trophy mentality"?

[6616]

Saw on another thread where comments were made that too many sow grizz were being killed and hunters need to curb the harvest of females. Got me thinkin', shouldn't the Ministry be promoting the harvest of 'any' grizz, especially within the Mountain Caribou zones? There is no lack of bears in many of the caribou units. The ministry has been increasing the amount of authorizations to 'help' the caribou. It is obvious, in many units, hunter harvest is very poor. I think the selection of 'males only' and the 'trophy' hunt mentality is one reason why harvest objectives are not being met in a lot of these zones. Sure, there are the 'tirekickers' that are talked about on the LEH thread, but I also think the hard-core hunter that can get r done, isn't getting r done, because they are afraid of the social backlash of harvesting a female or smaller bear. Not unlike the recent Goat thread where I posted up pics of my 12 year old son's first goat, a nanny. If we are desiring to save the mountain caribou from utter extinction in the southern part of the province, should we not be encouraging our hunters to do their part and harvest 'a' grizz instead of eating tag soup?

This might be a hijack but it's interesting to note that the very same organizations that are criticising the government the most regarding the caribou recovery effort, are actually the same groups that are calling for grizzly hunting to be banned in BC......????? WTF.

They are also the same groups who oppose wolf hunting, are asking for large buffer zones around parks where wolves cannot be hunted, who claim wolves are almost an endangered species, who also oppose cat hunting or any large predator hunting of any kind, etc. Hippocritical idiots IMHO.

[GoatGuy]

Fair enough, and as the main theme of this thread shows, there should be more of that. Like I mentioned before, I agree there are areas where more sows should be taken out, but as youngfella said, grizzly hunting is pretty much a trophy hunt pure and simple. If guys just wanted bear meat they wouldn't waste their time with draws and expensive tags and they would just go out and kill a couple black bears. Its going to be hard to covince most people who finally draw and purchase a tag for their favourite area to shoot a lesser bear (keeping in mind the definition of "lesser" is personal), especially early in the hunt.

Maybe if some if these high caribou areas went over to a GOS it would illiminate more of the "trophy mentality"?

Most people shoot what you're calling a 'lesser bear'. You see the big ones on the internet but the reality is most guys are happy with a bear.

The sow harvest issue has nothing to do with the 'trophy' part - that's about the management strategy.

[Gus]

The sow harvest issue has nothing to do with the 'trophy' part - that's about the management strategy.


You dont think so? I think it has to do with both, and both being inter-related.

[horshur]

Shoot sows and the odds will sky-rocket or the season could even be closed the next year. Nanny harvest is the same - we'll probably see some sort of a change in the regs in the next couple of years on that (ie reduced opportunities if there's nanny harvest).

The science for grizz is extremely rigorous - it's a condition of having a grizzly hunt. We can all disagree with it but it was that or no grizz hunt. Not much for choices.

The harvest in the caribou recovery zones is significant.

exactly why the "science" is not taken serious or even believed for politics rather than science riegn supreme...........

everything is politics

[Kody94]

This might be a hijack but it's interesting to note that the very same organizations that are criticising the government the most regarding the caribou recovery effort, are actually the same groups that are calling for grizzly hunting to be banned in BC......????? WTF.

They are also the same groups who oppose wolf hunting, are asking for large buffer zones around parks where wolves cannot be hunted, who claim wolves are almost an endangered species, who also oppose cat hunting or any large predator hunting of any kind, etc. Hippocritical idiots IMHO.

Those particular ENGOs (or some at least) think everything can be solved with habitat. Lock up VAST tracts of land, exclude humans and let nature run its natural course with wildlife in teeming abundance frolicking in flower filled meadows.

They ignore reality, could care less about socio-economic impacts and only ascribe to the parts of the science that support their theories.

[GoatGuy]

You dont think so? I think it has to do with both, and both being inter-related.

There's nothing in the strategy about size. Just like everything else, shoot too many females and the population will decrease. Grizzlies are slow growing animals. Takes a while to reach sexual maturity, become a 'good' mother etc.

Those are just the facts.

[GoatGuy]

exactly why the "science" is not taken serious or even believed for politics rather than science riegn supreme...........

everything is politics

I agree with the last 3 words. At the end of the day the eco-terrorists don't care about science, they care about stopping hunting. The 'moderate' people (fence sitters) are the people that need to be informed.

[Gus]

There's nothing in the strategy about size. Just like everything else, shoot too many females and the population will decrease. Grizzlies are slow growing animals. Takes a while to reach sexual maturity, become a 'good' mother etc.

Those are just the facts.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what your saying.

The "trophy" aspect means not shooting sows Take that away, more sows get shot. More sows getting shot means implications on what your refered to above. No?

[GoatGuy]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding what your saying.

The "trophy" aspect means not shooting sows Take that away, more sows get shot. More sows getting shot means implications on what your refered to above. No?

There are already a lot of sows that get shot. Anybody that got a grizz LEH this spring should have gotten a note in it about this. Anyways, more sows getting shot means fewer LEH authorizations. Fewer LEH authorizations means higher odds, means you don't get to go hunting.

That's due to population modeling, not the trophy aspect. Just a fact of life.

You know that with all species the harvest is skewed to the male segment. That's why most cow elk, cow moose, antlerless deer are on LEH because they can't sustain high harvest. However the male segment (bucks & bulls) can and that's why they can support a GOS. It's the same with grizzly bears just on a wayyyyyyyyyyy longer life cycle. Plus they got no antlers so putting in a male only regulation is next to impossible.

[boxhitch]

There will continue to be sows shot, as long as the chances of ever getting a second opportunity are so low. As it is a hunter waits for several years to get a permit, finally spies a prime piece of fur with no visible family, the average dude is picking a kill-zone.
Serious big trophy hunters probably make up a small fraction of the hunters. For any species.

Remember the times when G Bear were on GOS ? Populations were good then too. Would be interesting to compare harvest stats.

[GoatGuy]

There will continue to be sows shot, as long as the chances of ever getting a second opportunity are so low. As it is a hunter waits for several years to get a permit, finally spies a prime piece of fur with no visible family, the average dude is picking a kill-zone.
Serious big trophy hunters probably make up a small fraction of the hunters. For any species.

Remember the times when G Bear were on GOS ? Populations were good then too. Would be interesting to compare harvest stats.

You hit the nail on the head!



Good God you're a smart guy.;-)

[BCrams]

I want to see the harvest stats pre-LEH AND post-LEH for grizzly bear. As well as female vs male harvest.

[Fisher-Dude]

I want to see the harvest stats pre-LEH AND post-LEH for grizzly bear. As well as female vs male harvest.

Which region and when did it go LEH? I have 1976 - 2006 by MU, split by male and female harvest.

[BCrams]

Lets start with region 7a ... can't remember exact year it went on LEH though.

[dana]

There are already a lot of sows that get shot. Anybody that got a grizz LEH this spring should have gotten a note in it about this. Anyways, more sows getting shot means fewer LEH authorizations. Fewer LEH authorizations means higher odds, means you don't get to go hunting.


Really??? I'm actually seeing the reverse. The spring unit I apply for has been seeing tag numbers slowly increasing the last few years. And guess what? So has the odds. More people see the higher tag numbers, the more people that put in. My chances were way better at actually getting a tag when they only handed out 1 or 2 a year.

The fact is bear numbers have been climbing and hunter success hasn't been and caribou numbers have been dropping. The caribou need a short term boost. Killing some more sows would help that. If tag numbers drop back down to their historical 2 tags, great. Better chance for me to get drawn. ;)

[dana]

This might be a hijack but it's interesting to note that the very same organizations that are criticising the government the most regarding the caribou recovery effort, are actually the same groups that are calling for grizzly hunting to be banned in BC......????? WTF.

They are also the same groups who oppose wolf hunting, are asking for large buffer zones around parks where wolves cannot be hunted, who claim wolves are almost an endangered species, who also oppose cat hunting or any large predator hunting of any kind, etc. Hippocritical idiots IMHO.

In my opinion, the Ministry does a shitty job promoting the facts. I happen to live beside one of the greatest examples of untouched wilderness that exists within this province.The management strategy of Wells Gray has been to allow nature to take it's course. While hunting is permitted, it is very limited. Wolves, Coyotes, Cougars, and Grizz are closed to hunting. And guess what? The Mountain Caribou are doing better outside the park than within the park. There is no logging, no human habitation, no roads, trails are almost non existant in 90% of the park, and tourism is pretty much limited to the easy access waterfalls. It is a naturalist's paradise. These are the kind of examples the Ministry needs to hold up to the public and show them that life isnt as rosey as the Eco-orgs make it out to be.

[Fisher-Dude]

Lets start with region 7a ... can't remember exact year it went on LEH though.

Sorry about the formatting, this editor sucks ass.

Year Hunters Days Total Male Female Unknown
1976 177 760 43 23 19 1
1977 190 1332 28 17 10 1
1978 174 1024 22 16 6 0
1979 175 975 36 20 15 1
1980 289 2123 44 27 15 2
1981 261 1431 38 20 17 1
1982 271 1475 53 30 21 2
1983 182 1185 44 32 12 0
1984 182 1100 39 29 8 2
1985 169 980 35 23 10 2
1986 158 1092 28 18 10 0
1987 164 1354 32 22 10 0
1988 117 726 23 18 5 0
1989 112 897 22 14 7 1
1990 103 759 23 13 10 0
1991 78 584 19 10 9 0
1992 113 934 29 17 12 0
1993 110 748 16 15 1 0
1994 108 722 23 13 10 0
1995 121 779 17 12 3 2
1996 82 685 21 13 8 0
1997 73 570 13 6 7 0
1998 66 523 11 7 4 0
1999 62 524 18 14 4 0
2000 74 687 15 9 5 1
2001 39 240 5 4 1 0
2002 102 873 16 11 5 0
2003 78 530 14 10 3 1
2004 161 1215 37 29 8 0
2005 303 2522 39 22 16 1
2006 317 2465 32 21 11 0

[bayou]

Can you do region 4 I beleive it went on LEH in 82. Did you also say you have it by MU as well.

[boxhitch]

You hit the nail on the head!
Good God you're a smart guy.;-)
Can't let you stand all alone.

[boxhitch]

F-D, where is the zero-effort year for the moritorium ?

[BCbillies]

Lets start with region 7a ... can't remember exact year it went on LEH though.

Fall 1996 for Region 6 and I believe Region 7. I remember it well . . . just when I was able to actually start hunting for them.

[Fisher-Dude]

Can you do region 4 I beleive it went on LEH in 82. Did you also say you have it by MU as well.

Yes, have it by MU as well, although it would take several pages to post.

Region 4 resident harvest:

Year Hunters Days Total Male Female Unknown
1976 156 1116 24 14 10 0
1977 233 1947 61 37 24 0
1978 272 2275 49 38 11 0
1979 225 1699 39 23 16 0
1980 231 1728 27 20 7 0
1981 313 2467 51 35 16 0
1982 141 1361 42 29 13 0
1983 156 1630 41 24 16 1
1984 165 1559 34 19 14 1
1985 150 1440 40 28 12 0
1986 179 1744 51 31 20 0
1987 170 1879 39 23 16 0
1988 209 2276 47 28 18 1
1989 264 2422 57 34 23 0
1990 228 2193 56 35 21 0
1991 208 2003 55 30 25 0
1992 222 2418 61 47 14 0
1993 194 1894 26 20 6 0
1994 192 1818 40 31 9 0
1995 192 1818 43 31 12 0
1996 179 1810 69 41 28 0
1997 156 1458 41 27 14 0
1998 130 1349 38 18 20 0
1999 86 859 34 22 12 0
2000 156 1289 42 35 7 0
2002 114 1239 34 18 16 0
2003 61 640 19 12 7 0
2004 80 810 42 26 16 0
2005 92 764 34 26 8 0
2006 154 1666 27 18 9 0

[bayou]

Thanks Im guessing why 81 was the highest for hunters is because people may have known it was going on LEH.In later years the hunter numbers jump up and down could this be because of the sow harvest the year before and less LEHS allowed? Is there also anything showing the number of permits each year from 82 on. Would be interested in the 4-26 break down with all the jumbo controversy, as well as 4-23 if not to much trouble.

[BCbillies]

F-D, where is the zero-effort year for the moritorium ?

The moritorium was announced in Feb 2001 so no spring grizz hunt. By late spring the Liberals took over and we were back to killing grizz in the fall of 2001.

[GoatGuy]

Really??? I'm actually seeing the reverse. The spring unit I apply for has been seeing tag numbers slowly increasing the last few years. And guess what? So has the odds. More people see the higher tag numbers, the more people that put in. My chances were way better at actually getting a tag when they only handed out 1 or 2 a year.

The fact is bear numbers have been climbing and hunter success hasn't been and caribou numbers have been dropping. The caribou need a short term boost. Killing some more sows would help that. If tag numbers drop back down to their historical 2 tags, great. Better chance for me to get drawn. ;)

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here?

[6616]

Really??? I'm actually seeing the reverse. The spring unit I apply for has been seeing tag numbers slowly increasing the last few years. And guess what? So has the odds. More people see the higher tag numbers, the more people that put in. My chances were way better at actually getting a tag when they only handed out 1 or 2 a year.

The fact is bear numbers have been climbing and hunter success hasn't been and caribou numbers have been dropping. The caribou need a short term boost. Killing some more sows would help that. If tag numbers drop back down to their historical 2 tags, great. Better chance for me to get drawn. ;)

I've noted a similar phenononem with other LEH hunts. People play the odds driving them up and down in cycles. Too bad applicants didn't have the benefit of knowing the "on the ground" success rates instead of just the odds.

[MOWITCH SLAYER]

Well put dana! I agree on both hunt's

[dana]

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here?

Where did I lose ya? While you might think that more tags is good for hunters, that is only true if there is a even a slim chance at success. What good is adding more tags if no more bears get killed. All it does is add some more money in tag fees to the government coffers. Does it matter if tag allocations will go down if more Sows are killed? Not where the caribou are concerned. It isn't like we are trying to get a huntable population of caribou, instead, we just don't want to see them extinct in the southern regions. The science recommends they just need a few years of reprieve to help with calf recruitment and we should be able to reach the desired numbers. Should hunters sit idly by and eat tag soup when the only bear they see in the unit is a sow, or should they help out the caribou and do their part? You talk about residents losing opportunity all the time. If we sit on our asses, this is exactly what we are doing. The fact is, some paid gunman will do the work on the hush and it will count againt our allocations. Would we rather have residents doing the job or some hired gunman? If the Ministry stopped discouraging sows from being shot and started telling the people the facts instead of playing games, maybe resident hunters can become a tool in the toolbox to actually help save the caribou eh?

[bayou]

Danas last comments bring up another question for me again Im talking about region 4 grizzlys but assuming it would be the same in all regions.
Do grizzlys killed by other reasons then in an allowed hunt(season) go against the AAH or quotas.Like bears killed in the fall,bears deemed problem bears, road kills,trapper killed etc.

[6616]

Danas last comments bring up another question for me again Im talking about region 4 grizzlys but assuming it would be the same in all regions.
Do grizzlys killed by other reasons then in an allowed hunt(season) go against the AAH or quotas.Like bears killed in the fall,bears deemed problem bears, road kills,trapper killed etc.

Non-hunting mortality is deducted from the total AAM to calculate the huntable AAH. It varies from Mu to MU and is based on actual known mortality figures. There is also a small amount deducted for un-reported mortality, usually 1.0 to 1 5 %. All the claw-backs reduce the AAM from about 6 to a hunting AAH of 2.5 to 3.5 of the MU population estimate.

[mark]

Non-hunting mortality is deducted from the total AAM to calculate the huntable AAH. It varies from Mu to MU and is based on actual known mortality figures. There is also a small amount deducted for un-reported mortality, usually 1.0 to 1 5 %. All the claw-backs reduce the AAM from about 6 to a hunting AAH of 2.5 to 3.5 of the MU population estimate.

This is something that has always pissed me off about the management process!!!! :mad: If theres problem bears in the area getting shot by CO's or getting hit by cars, maybe they should up the AAH to reduce numbers in that area, not the opposite! Bella-coola area is the area that first comes to my mind, but it applys to anywhere!
Like someone already said here, use hunters as a tool, instead of paying CO's to shoot bears, they have better things to do with their time! :mad:

[GoatGuy]

Where did I lose ya? While you might think that more tags is good for hunters, that is only true if there is a even a slim chance at success. What good is adding more tags if no more bears get killed. All it does is add some more money in tag fees to the government coffers. Does it matter if tag allocations will go down if more Sows are killed? Not where the caribou are concerned. It isn't like we are trying to get a huntable population of caribou, instead, we just don't want to see them extinct in the southern regions. The science recommends they just need a few years of reprieve to help with calf recruitment and we should be able to reach the desired numbers. Should hunters sit idly by and eat tag soup when the only bear they see in the unit is a sow, or should they help out the caribou and do their part? You talk about residents losing opportunity all the time. If we sit on our asses, this is exactly what we are doing. The fact is, some paid gunman will do the work on the hush and it will count againt our allocations. Would we rather have residents doing the job or some hired gunman? If the Ministry stopped discouraging sows from being shot and started telling the people the facts instead of playing games, maybe resident hunters can become a tool in the toolbox to actually help save the caribou eh?

So what you're saying is more tags didn't = more bears shot and that the LEH odds went up so we should could the tags back to bring the odds down
and more bears would get shot?

Do you have the numbers of bears harvested in the 2 zones you're talking about?

You're also saying we should be promoting a reduction and telling residents to shoot more sows in those zones?

[CanuckShooter]

What you should do is go to GOS :idea:in the MUs where you want to deplete the grizz population in order to protect the Caribou herds that are endangered. You will be able to determine the desired results when grizz hunters quit hunting in the affected MUs because they will hunt:idea: elsewhere once the populations are knocked down too far, and then go back to LEH.

By doing that you temporarily deplete the grizz populations in those areas and in time they would be repopulated :idea:by grizz from adjoining MUs. What better way to protect the Caribou than to heavily hunt the predators that are most affecting them?? :idea: