Reg. 4 changes a go

[benbeckoutfitters]

Hello all
ive got a freind who is an outfitter and he was showing me his quotas for next fall, the quotas include 3-point bull elk. Now im not sure if those are official or not but doesnt look good. as for the other changes we never seen any but we were speaking with a local CO and he was mentioning something about the poor buck numbers foor whitetail. Sounds like they are now looking into doing something there aswell. If anyone can confirm anything, that would be nice. Maybe if theres any reg. 4 outfitters on here maybe they can shed some light. Thanks

[GoatGuy]

Hello all
ive got a freind who is an outfitter and he was showing me his quotas for next fall, the quotas include 3-point bull elk. Now im not sure if those are official or not but doesnt look good. as for the other changes we never seen any but we were speaking with a local CO and he was mentioning something about the poor buck numbers foor whitetail. Sounds like they are now looking into doing something there aswell. If anyone can confirm anything, that would be nice. Maybe if theres any reg. 4 outfitters on here maybe they can shed some light. Thanks

Somebody pass the popcorn.

[Jelvis]

3 point 3 point 3 point bull elk in the Koot$ ! bout time junior. Hey wake up and smell the Wapiti 3 points, this'l get those bio's in trouble whoa - but some will love them now!
Jelly 3 point elk in the KOOT$ tell me much much more now !
talk to me now !
Can you feel it ?
2010 3 pointerzzz in dah Koot$-really better not be bs'n u$
LEH lotto for three's in the breeze around Koot Country it's too good to be true - leh ? this year?
talk to me now

[GoatGuy]

3 point 3 point 3 point bull elk in the Koot$ ! bout time junior. Hey wake up and smell the Wapiti 3 points, this'l get those bio's in trouble whoa - but some will love them now!
Jelly 3 point elk in the KOOT$ tell me much much more now !
talk to me now !
Can you feel it ?

if there's a 3 pt quota that means there's a 3 pt leh. Elk are on GOS and there is no quota.

The reason they have buck:doe <20:100 for wtd is because they don't shoot any does.

The facts are crooked right out of the gate.

This is gonna be another good one.

[Ozone]

IBTL







.

[Jelvis]

I'd try for that in leh, this season, 3 point bull elk up the Lucier, the Whiteswan, the the Gold Creek for a peek at the leh's. The Bull river somebody stop me -- one more the Beaverfoot solid area.
Jel -- B.C. Rock$ --

[frenchbar]

[quote=Jelvis;595892 somebody stop me --
Jel -- B.C. Rock$ --[/quote]
Cant be done:mrgreen:

[Jelvis]

what duz ibtl mean ?
and is this true or not ? 3 point bull ELK leh, in the KOOTS !
are they easier to take than a six point ?
jPrassley - I Was an Oak - Now I'm a Willow I can Bend - only backwards tho-lol-

[6616]

I'd try for that in leh, this season, 3 point bull elk up the Lucier, the Whiteswan, the the Gold Creek for a peek at the leh's. The Bull river somebody stop me -- one more the Beaverfoot solid area.
Jel -- B.C. Rock$ --

Before you go guys start making any plans, find out if this outfitter is in the East Kootenay or the West Kootenay, because if he's from the West Kootenay this means nothing at all (status quo).

[eastkoot]

Jelly----pigs can fly...

[6616]

Hello all
ive got a freind who is an outfitter and he was showing me his quotas for next fall, the quotas include 3-point bull elk. Now im not sure if those are official or not but doesnt look good. as for the other changes we never seen any but we were speaking with a local CO and he was mentioning something about the poor buck numbers foor whitetail. Sounds like they are now looking into doing something there aswell. If anyone can confirm anything, that would be nice. Maybe if theres any reg. 4 outfitters on here maybe they can shed some light. Thanks

Where is your friend's territory Ben?

[J_T]

Why would a GOS 3pt elk make any difference to an outfitter in terms of quota? and what client of a GO wants to be shooting a 'meat' animal?

Ben, I suspect there is more to the story. I'm guessing your friend is reading off of rumour. To my knowledge, the final reg proposals have not been sent in yet.

[Jelvis]

I hope he ain't bs'n cuz man his or her credibility will be shot, so come forward Ben rothin bergur and hic, scuzze me hic. spill the pork it's perty lean for the jelly bean. Things could get ah, hairy if yer spreading scary rumors on the future leh, so come clean soon or it's too late.
JLaw yer zzz kootenay region six point hunters in shock better not be fibbin or litigation 4 damagez lol

[6616]

Why would a GOS 3pt elk make any difference to an outfitter in terms of quota? and what client of a GO wants to be shooting a 'meat' animal?

Ben, I suspect there is more to the story. I'm guessing your friend is reading off of rumour. To my knowledge, the final reg proposals have not been sent in yet.

You're right J_T, it wouldn't make any difference, there is no quota for GOS species, outfitters are not limited by quota on GOS species. I do not believe there is any proposed LEH for elk in the East Kooteny, if there was we'd have heard about it long before now. That's why I suspect this outfitter and this story originates in the West Kootenay where the elk have always been on LEH.

Since the WK LEH is for 3pt or better, so would be the outfitters quota and of course they won't be harvesting any small bulls. The outfitters in 4-32 and 4-38 have always received elk quota, this is not a regulation change, this is the normal time of year for outfitters to be assigned their quota.

Nothing unusual about this at all if this outfitter's territory is in 4-32 or 4-38, just business as usual.

[6616]

if there's a 3 pt quota that means there's a 3 pt leh. Elk are on GOS and there is no quota.

The reason they have buck:doe <20:100 for wtd is because they don't shoot any does.

The facts are crooked right out of the gate.

This is gonna be another good one.


Right on the money GG, not hard to believe the buck doe ratio would be below 20/100 does. We've been killing 3500 to 4500 bucks per year and merely 500 to 1000 antlerless. If the fawn ratio is 30/100 does and the buck ratio was 20/100 does, that would mean the herd is nearly 90% does and fawns. If the buck ratio is below 20/100 does, that means even less then 10% if the population are antlered bucks. Buck ratios are always low in bucks only areas, and with the number of antlerless kills, the Kootenay is essentially as good as a bucks only area.

[duckhunt]

3 point 3 point 3 point bull elk in the Koot$ ! bout time junior. Hey wake up and smell the Wapiti 3 points, this'l get those bio's in trouble whoa - but some will love them now!
Jelly 3 point elk in the KOOT$ tell me much much more now !
talk to me now !
Can you feel it ?
2010 3 pointerzzz in dah Koot$-really better not be bs'n u$
LEH lotto for three's in the breeze around Koot Country it's too good to be true - leh ? this year?
talk to me now

I need a translator :-D

[redcomet]

Right on the money GG, not hard to believe the buck doe ratio would be below 20/100 does. We've been killing 3500 to 4500 bucks per year and merely 500 to 1000 antlerless. If the fawn ratio is 30/100 does and the buck ratio was 20/100 does, that would mean the herd is nearly 90% does and fawns. If the buck ratio is below 20/100 does, that means even less then 10% if the population are antlered bucks. Buck ratios are always low in bucks only areas, and with the number of antlerless kills, the Kootenay is essentially as good as a bucks only area.

Why not just use bull/cow and calf/cow ratios to keep consistnet with the species we are talking about! We're not talking abut deer here. I think it would make the discussion clearer to people.

I'm sure even Jelvis will figure it out. :-D

[6616]

Why not just use bull/cow and calf/cow ratios to keep consistnet with the species we are talking about! We're not talking abut deer here. I think it would make the discussion clearer to people.

I'm sure even Jelvis will figure it out. :-D

Well actually we were, probably should have mentioned that. The original post by Ben spoke of low white tailed deer buck ratios, and that's what GG and myself were commenting on. The numbers for elk are much different, more like 30 bulls per 100 cows and 25 to 30 calves per 100 cows.

[hunter1947]

I just have that gut feeling that there will be a short GOS for bull elk 3 point in the EK regions ,I am usually right when I get that feeling http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif.

[6616]

I just have that gut feeling that there will be a short GOS for bull elk in the EK regions ,I am usually right when I get that feeling http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/icons/icon7.gif.

You must mean a 3pt and better GOS eh Wayne..?

I also think it might be a possibility, but I think if it does happen it might be restricted to just the x-zones.

[sawmill]

Where do you get 30 fawns per 100 does?I saw hundreds of does this fall and almost every one had a fawn,most had twins.Around here at least.
And before any one starts crapping on me remember I live and hunt here.Bucks on the other hand were real hard to come by.If I`m seeing 20 to 30+ deer a day and zero bucks something is wrong.
I want a GOS on does.2 per season,I`m a meat hunter.

[hunter1947]

Where do you get 30 fawns per 100 does?I saw hundreds of does this fall and almost every one had a fawn,most had twins.Around here at least.
And before any one starts crapping on me remember I live and hunt here.Bucks on the other hand were real hard to come by.If I`m seeing 20 to 30+ deer a day and zero bucks something is wrong.
I want a GOS on does.2 per season,I`m a meat hunter.


I agree with you on what you just said Joe ,I saw more fawns then ever before where I hunt up your way ,I wonder how many of them fawns will be bucks with spikes on there heads this up coming year ???.

[hunter1947]

You must mean a 3pt and better GOS eh Wayne..?

I also think it might be a possibility, but I think if it does happen it might be restricted to just the x-zones.


Man o man you sure are on the ball this morning Andy and I see you did your last post after midnight :eek:.

[6616]

Where do you get 30 fawns per 100 does?I saw hundreds of does this fall and almost every one had a fawn,most had twins.Around here at least.
And before any one starts crapping on me remember I live and hunt here.Bucks on the other hand were real hard to come by.If I`m seeing 20 to 30+ deer a day and zero bucks something is wrong.
I want a GOS on does.2 per season,I`m a meat hunter.

I'm with you 100%.

Those ratios usually refer to spring time just before a new crop of fawns are born and are for the entire region including the West Kootenay.

Considering the high twinning rate and even a lot of triplets, I'd guess that in the early summer there's probably close to twice as many fawns as does, and probably by fall still nearly as many fawns as does, but then winter hits and a bunch of them die (instead of going in our freezers).

I don't think there's any doubt we could easily be shooting a whole bunch more does sustainably. We're not killing enough to stabilize the population, probably killing less then 2% of them annually during hunting season, that's why I say it's virtually the same as a bucks only season.

I agree, there's a hell of a pile of WTD and the buck ratio sucks. We're probably killing 20 to 30% of all the bucks every fall and less then 2% of the does, no wonder the buck ratios are so poor. I also suspect we will see a short GOS for WTD does next fall, it's about time IMO.

In the Alberta deer management plan the target harvest is 20% of the bucks and 10% of the does each fall in the mountain blocks and their WTD population continues to grow (but they have deer management). Imagine if we harvested 10% of our does every fall, we could possibly be sustainably harvesting as many as 5000 does per year, that would sure fill a lot of freezers.

[.300WSMImpact!]

Where do you get 30 fawns per 100 does?I saw hundreds of does this fall and almost every one had a fawn,most had twins.Around here at least.
And before any one starts crapping on me remember I live and hunt here.Bucks on the other hand were real hard to come by.If I`m seeing 20 to 30+ deer a day and zero bucks something is wrong.
I want a GOS on does.2 per season,I`m a meat hunter.


just wondering how all these does get bread if there is no bucks:?

[sawmill]

Me too.That`s just what my buddy and I wonder when we see 20 does and 30 fawns.We covered a lot of ground the last month of season and never even saw a spike.Saw hundreds of does and fawns over many different locations.Must be a couple of REALLY tired bucks some where.

[bighornbob]

Where do you get 30 fawns per 100 does?I saw hundreds of does this fall and almost every one had a fawn,most had twins.Around here at least.
And before any one starts crapping on me remember I live and hunt here.Bucks on the other hand were real hard to come by.If I`m seeing 20 to 30+ deer a day and zero bucks something is wrong.
I want a GOS on does.2 per season,I`m a meat hunter.

Last time I was in the koots was about 5 years ago and I was sheep hunting. Well one morning the hills were fogged in so I went for a drive looking to kill a meat buck. I saw about 100 does and not one spike. I thought about it and for the evening hunt I parked my truck and walked about 200m from the truck to the ridge of a gully and slowly walked it. Guess what I saw, 5 different bucks (all 4 points or better). I saw the last one before he saw me:-D

Even going back 10 years or so I remember siting on some fields and have 100 does come out and maybe a spiker. Ther next night coming back from sheep hunting and driving by the fields about an hour after last shooting light and there are 5 big bucks waiting to cross the road to get to the fields. The bucks are there you just have to hunt harder.

Regardless, I am all for a whitetail doe season across the southern half of the province.

BHB

[Everett]

I personaly saw at least 30 WT bucks this year. I took my buck early so I wasn't even looking unless I was with my wife and she passed on at least 4 different small bucks that she had in her sites. Now besides that I do believe the ratio sucks, but there still is alot of WT bucks in the EK. I think Sawmill is right two WT doe limit this year would make my freezer very happy.

[eastkoot]

Just my observations.. Hunted one particular buck for the last 2 weeks of the season and while doing so passed on roughly 10 small bucks. Earlier, I had maybe another 4-5 smaller bucks that I could have taken.. Was seeing maybe 30-40 does per buck, and yes I walked everyday..You also have to remember that for every whitey you see, you probably drive by or "jump" 10 that you don't see or at least can't identify.. They are crafty little buggers.... And yes, most does had fawns with them this year.. Fawns, probably 20-25% of population, just what I observed....

[6616]

I personaly saw at least 30 WT bucks this year. I took my buck early so I wasn't even looking unless I was with my wife and she passed on at least 4 different small bucks that she had in her sites. Now besides that I do believe the ratio sucks, but there still is alot of WT bucks in the EK. I think Sawmill is right two WT doe limit this year would make my freezer very happy.

The proposal that Cranbrook MOE was planning to sent to Victoria for Region 4 deer bag limits:

Eliminate the "deer" cumulative bag limit, and create seperate WTD and MD bag limits.
WTD bag limit - two, only one of which may be a buck.
MD bag limit to stay at one.

[GoatGuy]

Right on the money GG, not hard to believe the buck doe ratio would be below 20/100 does. We've been killing 3500 to 4500 bucks per year and merely 500 to 1000 antlerless. If the fawn ratio is 30/100 does and the buck ratio was 20/100 does, that would mean the herd is nearly 90% does and fawns. If the buck ratio is below 20/100 does, that means even less then 10% if the population are antlered bucks. Buck ratios are always low in bucks only areas, and with the number of antlerless kills, the Kootenay is essentially as good as a bucks only area.

I think that fawn:doe is probably quite a bit higher than that.

[GoatGuy]

Hunted 4E for wt a couple mornings. Had one morning without a buck sighting but averaged 5 bucks/morning; they're around.:wink:

[TyTy]

This is a terrible thread. Looks like rumor mongering/poor speculation. Has anyone actually read the proposed changes from the M.O.E.? Two things are right here though: Outfitters/trophy hunters won't be happy with a 3-point reg. and there are many WT does, and no one is chosing to harvest them. The regs ask you to select a fawn if you are to harvest a doe so the population of breeding female stays high. That is sound management that makes sense. Do your part and take a doe every few years.

[6616]

I think that fawn:doe is probably quite a bit higher than that.

At what time of year?

A fawn survival rate of 30/100 does in Feb/Mar should be enough to grow the herd, if it's higher then that, it's no wonder we're over run by WTD.

The fawns/100 doe ratio would likely be close to 200/100 in June, down to a little less then 100/100 by Sept/Oct, but what is it in Feb/Mar which indicates the approximate recruitment rate?

[J_T]

At what time of year?

A fawn survival rate of 30/100 does in Feb/Mar should be enough to grow the herd, if it's higher then that, it's no wonder we're over run by WTD.

The fawns/100 doe ratio would likely be close to 200/100 in June, down to a little less then 100/100 by Sept/Oct, but what is it in Feb/Mar which indicates the approximate recruitment rate?

Agree. And agree it's the Spring ratio that matters. We used to spend a lot of effort on spring carry-over counts in the EK. I can't remember the ratios. We should be committing to more carry-over counts.

Andy, just a comment on your harvest numbers you mentioned previously. I agree with them, but we also need to factor in, other causes of mortality. Probably less bucks getting taken by highways, railways, bears, coyotes, cougars etc. and hunters are probably the least of the WTD worries when it comes to mortality, taking way less in terms of numbers.

We saw pretty good buck doe ratios this past late season. Some big bucks. Overall, I can't say that I see more deer out there.

[GoatGuy]

At what time of year?

A fawn survival rate of 30/100 does in Feb/Mar should be enough to grow the herd, if it's higher then that, it's no wonder we're over run by WTD.

The fawns/100 doe ratio would likely be close to 200/100 in June, down to a little less then 100/100 by Sept/Oct, but what is it in Feb/Mar which indicates the approximate recruitment rate?

Carry-over, spring counts are probably higher than 30:100 for WTD in 4E.

[6616]

Andy, just a comment on your harvest numbers you mentioned previously. I agree with them, but we also need to factor in, other causes of mortality. Probably less bucks getting taken by highways, railways, bears, coyotes, cougars etc. and hunters are probably the least of the WTD worries when it comes to mortality, taking way less in terms of numbers.


Agreed, and there are some numbers regarding highway kill but no data for losses to predators and I suspect that's a significant number.

[Moose Guide]

we have been hearing and reading about some changes to the gos in the west Kootenay, latest info is 5 point and bigger, wouldn't bet my life on it though(even on the first day of a 10 day hunt it is hard to convince a client "thats not a big bull" and "you don't want it"):cry:

[GoatGuy]

we have been hearing and reading about some changes to the gos in the west Kootenay, latest info is 5 point and bigger, wouldn't bet my life on it though(even on the first day of a 10 day hunt it is hard to convince a client "thats not a big bull" and "you don't want it"):cry:

In the WK you'll either end up with a 6 pt GOS or more LEH authorizations.

[GoatGuy]

Agree. And agree it's the Spring ratio that matters. We used to spend a lot of effort on spring carry-over counts in the EK. I can't remember the ratios. We should be committing to more carry-over counts.

Andy, just a comment on your harvest numbers you mentioned previously. I agree with them, but we also need to factor in, other causes of mortality. Probably less bucks getting taken by highways, railways, bears, coyotes, cougars etc. and hunters are probably the least of the WTD worries when it comes to mortality, taking way less in terms of numbers.

We saw pretty good buck doe ratios this past late season. Some big bucks. Overall, I can't say that I see more deer out there.

Not sure what you're trying to say but predation on bucks is generally higher than it is for does.

Carry-over counts would be good, I know Tara would be keen on organizing that if you guys could get some of the locals together. It's a very good idea.

[Piperdown]

Agree. And agree it's the Spring ratio that matters. We used to spend a lot of effort on spring carry-over counts in the EK. I can't remember the ratios. We should be committing to more carry-over counts.

Andy, just a comment on your harvest numbers you mentioned previously. I agree with them, but we also need to factor in, other causes of mortality. Probably less bucks getting taken by highways, railways, bears, coyotes, cougars etc. and hunters are probably the least of the WTD worries when it comes to mortality, taking way less in terms of numbers.

We saw pretty good buck doe ratios this past late season. Some big bucks. Overall, I can't say that I see more deer out there.

BINGO

Couldn't agee more!

[Islandeer]

I agree with you on what you just said Joe ,I saw more fawns then ever before where I hunt up your way ,I wonder how many of them fawns will be bucks with spikes on there heads this up coming year ???.

Wade in on the Wt buck ratios. Over Newgate way we were seeing up to 100 does a day, that doesnt mean there were no bucks around. More likely it is a healthy population of doe units that have never been shot at. Somebody is impregnating those does, there becoming more nocturnal. I agree that we are seeing way fewer mature bucks the past few years and have been killing 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks. The mature bucks don't make many mistakes and don't live with the rest of the herd. And they don't like traffic!! I am in favour of a liberal WT doe season which may take the pressure of of the younger bucks, but not entirely. The thing about mature whitey bucks is that they are cagey as hell and require a lot of time,scouting,sitting etc. I have one 150 class whitey from the EK in 20 years of chasin...

[bozzdrywall]

i just read through a couple of pages and i was thinkin we should do a earn a buck program like the usa in some states. A hunter must shoot a doe before he can take a buck that might help the numbers of mature bucks runing around. Just a thought

[GoatGuy]

Wade in on the Wt buck ratios. Over Newgate way we were seeing up to 100 does a day, that doesnt mean there were no bucks around. More likely it is a healthy population of doe units that have never been shot at. Somebody is impregnating those does, there becoming more nocturnal. I agree that we are seeing way fewer mature bucks the past few years and have been killing 2.5 and 3.5 year old bucks. The mature bucks don't make many mistakes and don't live with the rest of the herd. And they don't like traffic!! I am in favour of a liberal WT doe season which may take the pressure of of the younger bucks, but not entirely. The thing about mature whitey bucks is that they are cagey as hell and require a lot of time,scouting,sitting etc. I have one 150 class whitey from the EK in 20 years of chasin...


If you bring the overall population back a bit you'll also find the buck:doe ratios improve and the bucks become less nutritionally stressed for winter. As well there is less competition for the resource (food). This results in heavier (healthier) deer and bucks with bigger antlers.

[Moose Guide]

In the WK you'll either end up with a 6 pt GOS or more LEH authorizations.

The info I gave came from the MOE web site and a warden but I got it 2nd hand, I guess we'll see!!!

[6616]

but we also need to factor in, other causes of mortality.

There's a fair bit of room for other mortality considering our current larvest level. Basic WTD biology states that total mortailites should be around 35% per year for stable herd, less than that and the herd will be expanding, more than 35% and the herd will be declining. 35% of total popluation less non-hunting mortalities motality = allowable hunter harvest.

Here's an intersting article. Keep in mind that mortality due to winter kill and predators will be much higher in BC, but mortailities due to highway kill is probably much higher in Alabama.

Biology and Management of White-tailed Deer
By Chris Cook and Bill GrayHERD MANAGEMENT

POPULATION GROWTH POTENTIAL
Deer have the ability to reproduce and expand their numbers at an almost exponential rate. A classic example of deer herd growth potential is documented at the George Reserve in southern Michigan.This area is a 1,200-acre tract enclosed by an eleven-foot deer-proof fence. In 1928, six deer (2 bucks and 4 does) were released inside the area. Six years later, a drive count yielded a minimum population of 160 deer (Hickie 1937). The growth of the George Reserve herd reflects a mathematical model known as the logistical equation (Caughley 1977).
This model is characterized by an S-shaped curve reflecting how factors such as reproductive success and mortality affect a population. During the early stages of population growth, deer numbers are low and quality forage is abundant. Consequently, mortality is low and reproductive output is high. As the population increases, so does competition for quality forage and other habitat components. This increased competition leads to lower reproductive output and fawn survival. The fawn recruitment rate eventually reaches a point where it equals the mortality rate and the population stops growing. Physical condition of the herd is usually poor and disease problems may be chronic. A deer herd at this point has reached absolute carrying capacity or CC K.
The population level at absolute or CC K consists of the maximum number of animals the habitat can support. At any level above CC K, plants in the habitat are utilized at a rate greater than they can sustain. In terms of deer management, the term reasonable carrying capacity (RCC) may more accurately describe the maximum number of animals acceptable relative to herd quality, habitat integrity, and other social constraints. RCC is reached at a population level that is lower than CC K. At RCC, the population level is at the upper limits of the habitat’s capacity to sustain the population in good condition throughout the year. RCC takes into consideration seasonal fluctuations in habitat quality, impacts to other wildlife species, and human considerations.

THE NECESSITY OF HERD MANAGEMENT
The example of the George Reserve relays the importance of controlling deer population levels. Deer managers should be cautioned that maintaining a deer population at carrying capacity is a risky and often costly proposition. The levels at which deer populations should be maintained depend on land use objectives, human dimensions, and overall herd management objectives. It may be desirable to keep deer numbers low in order to reduce problems associated with crop damage, disease, and accidents. Independent of these considerations, deer populations should always be managed to meet some goal relative to management objectives, herd health, and the protection of habitats and ecological integrity.
In the absence of sufficient predator populations, the work of maintaining deer populations at appropriate levels has shifted to the modern hunter. The most effective way to regulate deer populations is through hunting. Failure to control deer numbers always results in overpopulation and habitat degradation that affects not only deer, but also many other animals. For example, many species of neotropical migrant birds are impacted by excessive deer herd densities and the resulting overbrowsing of important food and nesting flora. Proper regulation of deer populations ensures critical habitat components are protected for numerous wildlife species. Hunting should be appreciated for the cultural and societal benefits it provides, as well as the effective management tool it has become.
As with any tool, hunting can be applied improperly or inefficiently. It is the job of state wildlife agencies and biologists to provide the regulatory framework and, along with research universities, the management information that ensures the most efficient application of hunting as a management tool. In the years since subsistence hunting largely disappeared, there have been numerous advances in the field of scientific wildlife management. There also are numerous approaches to the management of deer through legal hunting. Some of these approaches have served the public and the deer herd very well, while other methods have resulted in poorly managed and unnatural deer herds. Today the principles of proper deer management are well defined and effective. Implementing these management techniques often entails overcoming the obstacles of popular deer lore, people’s resistance to change, and user groups with conflicting objectives.

THE BASICS OF HERD MANAGEMENT
The primary objective of deer managers should be to maintain a deer population within the bounds of the reasonable carrying capacity. Beyond this, management objectives may include the production of mature bucks, balancing adult sex ratios, or maintaining a maximum deer harvest. Deer harvest data is most effective in determining whether a population is within the reasonable carrying capacity. If harvest data indicates too many deer for a unit of habitat, an aggressive harvest of deer—especially does—should be implemented to reduce the population to a more compatible level. Continued monitoring of harvest data will assist in determining when the population has been reduced to the appropriate level.
Often, an aggressive doe harvest is the fastest and most efficient method to reduce overall herd densities. In addition to simply removing excess deer numbers, harvest of female deer limits reproductive output and works to balance adult sex ratios. In cases of gross overpopulation, greater numbers of deer should be removed regardless of sex. Once a population has been reduced to a level within reasonable carrying capacity (RCC), approximately one-third of the herd must be harvested each fall to maintain this population level. Within the annual one-third harvest, at least half of the deer taken should be females. Any significant departure from this basic harvest regime will result in population growth and herd densities that exceed RCC.
Deer populations respond to varying mortality rates by decreasing, increasing, or remaining stable. A deer herd will continue to grow with annual mortality rates of less than 35 percent. The rate of growth will depend on how far below 35 percent the annual mortality rate actually is. For example, an annual mortality rate of 20 percent allows for rapid population growth while at 30 percent, population growth may be more gradual. With pproximately 35 percent annual mortality, a population will generally remain stable. With a 40 percent annual mortality rate, the total population will decline; at rates greater than 40 percent this decline becomes more pronounced. The effect annual mortality has on a population also depends on how the population is structured with respect to adult sex ratio and on how the annual mortality is distributed between both sexes. Reproductive output and recruitment also influences the net effect of annual mortality rates.
Population models have shown deer herds produce the greatest sustained yields when maintained at approximately 40 to 80 percent of the estimated carrying capacity (Downing and Guynn 1985). At these herd densities, the highest harvest rates may be achieved without compromising habitat integrity. Reproduction and recruitment will exceed natural mortality significantly at these levels, thereby providing the optimum range for a sustained annual harvest of deer. Studies have shown peak harvest rates are achieved at deer densities of 50 to 60 percent of carrying capacity (Downing and Guynn 1985). At this level, allocation of resources in habitat and fawn production/recruitment is maximized. All deer in the herd will develop to the potential of the habitat’s nutritional ceiling. In areas of suboptimal habitats with inherently lower carrying capacities, this level may be too low to provide acceptable hunting satisfaction because deer sign and sightings may be reduced.

[6616]

we have been hearing and reading about some changes to the gos in the west Kootenay, latest info is 5 point and bigger, wouldn't bet my life on it though(even on the first day of a 10 day hunt it is hard to convince a client "thats not a big bull" and "you don't want it"):cry:

It would be nice if BenBeck would come back on and let us know if the outfitter he spoke to is in 4-32 or 4-38. If he's in one of these MUs, the 3pt elk quota he speaks of is status-quo. The LEH has always been for 3pt or better.

[hunter1947]

What I think the wildlife branch should do in order to reduce the does in hi populated areas is have a longer GOS for WT does and a shorter buck season this would help reduce the does...

[riflebuilder]

i just read through a couple of pages and i was thinkin we should do a earn a buck program like the usa in some states. A hunter must shoot a doe before he can take a buck that might help the numbers of mature bucks runing around. Just a thought

I agree with you on this one

[sawmill]

i just read through a couple of pages and i was thinkin we should do a earn a buck program like the usa in some states. A hunter must shoot a doe before he can take a buck that might help the numbers of mature bucks runing around. Just a thought

X2 on that.I really don`t care if it`s a buck or a doe,I`d take two does every fall no problem.I`m in it for the eatin`.

[6616]

X2 on that.I really don`t care if it`s a buck or a doe,I`d take two does every fall no problem.I`m in it for the eatin`.

Right on you guys, this is a progressive idea, we need to encourage people to take does and get over the old farmer/rancher stigma that it's bad. It's only bad if one is trying to grow the herd, but it's absolutely necessay if one is attempting to reduce or stabilize population density.

I know I'll get dumped on for saying this, but it's a bit ridiculous when hunters who do decide to shoot a doe attempt to hold out for a "dry" doe, these are not sheep, caribou or mountain goats we're talking about, WTD almost multiply like rabbits.

The result will be much "badder" if we enter another winter like 1996/97 with WTD and elk populations at the current peak levels with winter range in the conditions we see in some areas.

It's interesting how long it takes us as hunters (as a whole) to get over the conservative "population recovery" attitude that's seems to be so strongly ingrained in us today, we're going to damage wildlife populations with this antiquated attitude before it's over..

[J_T]

Right on you guys, this is a progressive idea, we need to encourage people to take does and get over the old farmer/rancher stigma that it's bad. It's only bad if one is trying to grow the herd, but it's absolutely necessay if one is attempting to reduce or stabilize population density.

I know I'll get dumped on for saying this, but it's a bit ridiculous when hunters who do decide to shoot a doe attempt to hold out for a "dry" doe, these are not sheep, caribou or mountain goats we're talking about, WTD almost multiply like rabbits.

The result will be much "badder" if we enter another winter like 1996/97 with WTD and elk populations at the current peak levels with winter range in the conditions we see in some areas.

It's interesting how long it takes us as hunters (as a whole) to get over the conservative "population recovery" attitude that's seems to be so strongly ingrained in us today, we're going to damage wildlife populations with this antiquated attitude before it's over.. I agree, but if we're trying to take more does, it doesn't make sense to change the bowhunter harvest. Currently a bowhunter in EK can take two does. The new bag limits will restrict that harvest to 1 buck and 1 doe.

[rocksteady]

I know I'll get dumped on for saying this, but it's a bit ridiculous when hunters who do decide to shoot a doe attempt to hold out for a "dry" doe, these are not sheep, caribou or mountain goats we're talking about, WTD almost multiply like rabbits.

..


Most guys I know will look for a "dry" doe, because they feel that if the doe has fawns and they harvest the doe, that the fawns would have a tougher time surviving the winter.....

I am unsure if that is true or not....Maybe an old wives tale??? (Maybe relating moose/beef/sheep who knows what behaviour to whitetails????)

By Mid Fall, would anything besides a very late dropped fawn not be weaned??

Would the fawns not just "yard up" with other does/fawns and learn from their teachings???

[Onesock]

JT- I don't think you need to worry about the late bow season as it as listed as "OPTIONAL". Besides, the BCWF wants equal opportunity for all hunters in BC. The late bow season will probably turn into a GOS so the rifle hunters can feel that they have the same "opportunity" as those spoiled bow hunters!!! What a f****** joke!!!!!!

[Jelvis]

A dry anything tastes better, remember whitetail fawns breed, where only a very small percentage of muley fawns come into estrus.
Your whitetails are not as vulnerable in the rut because the seasons over before the rut is in full swing, where as the muley buck is centered out in full rut. Whitetails breed later than muley by two weeks. Lengthen the season and get a monster whitey.
jel wanna be bio lol.

[GoatGuy]

I agree, but if we're trying to take more does, it doesn't make sense to change the bowhunter harvest. Currently a bowhunter in EK can take two does. The new bag limits will restrict that harvest to 1 buck and 1 doe.

Only guess is simplification.

Having said that the harvest through the bowhunters is minimal. I would say most of it's about opportunity - that I can understand.

[GoatGuy]

Most guys I know will look for a "dry" doe, because they feel that if the doe has fawns and they harvest the doe, that the fawns would have a tougher time surviving the winter.....

I am unsure if that is true or not....Maybe an old wives tale??? (Maybe relating moose/beef/sheep who knows what behaviour to whitetails????)

By Mid Fall, would anything besides a very late dropped fawn not be weaned??

Would the fawns not just "yard up" with other does/fawns and learn from their teachings???

Yes, they're weaned before hunting season and they usually stick together in maternal families.

Personally, I like yearlings, they're easy to pick out and they taste great.:wink:

[boxhitch]

Increase bag limits to two or more, only one can be a buck.
Two or three does start to add up to a pile of good eating.

[6616]

I agree, but if we're trying to take more does, it doesn't make sense to change the bowhunter harvest. Currently a bowhunter in EK can take two does. The new bag limits will restrict that harvest to 1 buck and 1 doe.

Well I think what we're talking about here is suggesting/promoting a bag limit of two white tailed deer, "only one of which may be a buck".... not "only one of which may be a doe", or that one has to be a buck.

[6616]

By Mid Fall, would anything besides a very late dropped fawn not be weaned??
Would the fawns not just "yard up" with other does/fawns and learn from their teachings???

I think so, I know hunters rarely believe it but biologists claim orphaned fawns do not too badly on their own. It just goes against the grain of what we've been taught from a very young age by our fathers and other mentors, but were they right..?

[6616]

JT- I don't think you need to worry about the late bow season as it as listed as "OPTIONAL". Besides, the BCWF wants equal opportunity for all hunters in BC. The late bow season will probably turn into a GOS so the rifle hunters can feel that they have the same "opportunity" as those spoiled bow hunters!!! What a f****** joke!!!!!!

This WTD situation is not about opportuity alone, I would think that MOE should just do what ever needs to be done to ensure the harvest is large enough to stabilize the herd growth.

[6616]

A dry anything tastes better, remember whitetail fawns breed, where only a very small percentage of muley fawns come into estrus.
Your whitetails are not as vulnerable in the rut because the seasons over before the rut is in full swing, where as the muley buck is centered out in full rut. Whitetails breed later than muley by two weeks. Lengthen the season and get a monster whitey.
jel wanna be bio lol.

Are we not talking about Region 4 where white tails are open until Nov 30th, and mulies close on Nov 15th, at least in the eastern MUs..?

[Jelvis]

Right on 6616 that is probably why it's Nov 15th there, keep up the good posts.
Nov 30th is good for whites
Jel -- you know way more than me on the Koots, I hunt mostly in region 3.

[boxhitch]

I think so, I know hunters rarely believe it but biologists claim orphaned fawns do not too badly on their own. It just goes against the grain of what we've been taught from a very young age by our fathers and other mentors, but were they right..?More likely taught by Mother and Walt Disney :)

[Fisher-Dude]

JT- I don't think you need to worry about the late bow season as it as listed as "OPTIONAL". Besides, the BCWF wants equal opportunity for all hunters in BC. The late bow season will probably turn into a GOS so the rifle hunters can feel that they have the same "opportunity" as those spoiled bow hunters!!! What a f****** joke!!!!!!

As we all know, it's impossible to kill a WT doe with a bow if someone shoots a rifle within 200 miles. :roll:

[J_T]

Well I think what we're talking about here is suggesting/promoting a bag limit of two white tailed deer, "only one of which may be a buck".... not "only one of which may be a doe", or that one has to be a buck. I thought the proposal was the second (1 buck, 1 doe). I asked that question to Garth and Tara. Their comment was that it would change. What you have here works fine of course, but I think we have to stay on them.

GG, I do understand it is about simplification. That makes sense. Still.....

[J_T]

JT- I don't think you need to worry about the late bow season as it as listed as "OPTIONAL". Besides, the BCWF wants equal opportunity for all hunters in BC. The late bow season will probably turn into a GOS so the rifle hunters can feel that they have the same "opportunity" as those spoiled bow hunters!!! What a f****** joke!!!!!! Equal opportunity would suggest respect for all weapons users and hunter types (old, young, ATV, road etc) Bow only is important and I doubt we'll see GOS in December. Don't give Fisher D any ideas.

[J_T]

As we all know, it's impossible to kill a WT doe with a bow if someone shoots a rifle within 200 miles. :roll: Just a question, have you ever seriously hunted with a bow? You always seem to have it in for bowhunters. We're all hunters. Why is it you work so hard to divide us?

[Fisher-Dude]

Just a question, have you ever seriously hunted with a bow? You always seem to have it in for bowhunters. We're all hunters. Why is it you work so hard to divide us?

You'll NEVER guess who authored the new WT deer proposal for region 8 that adds an extra 5 days on to BOW ONLY season.

[benbeckoutfitters]

Okkkkk everyone slow down. This is for the east koot. theres no LEH. hes in the bull river. And this is the first year his quota included that. thats all i know. as i said im not sure if its official or not and neither does he, these were proposed quotas. Im no spredding any rumors or what have you im relaying what i seen. I love elk hunting why would i try n spread a rumor lol?

[6616]

I thought the proposal was the second (1 buck, 1 doe). I asked that question to Garth and Tara. Their comment was that it would change. What you have here works fine of course, but I think we have to stay on them.

GG, I do understand it is about simplification. That makes sense. Still.....

Yes, it would require a change from the original MOE proposal, but I think it would be a good change.

[6616]

Okkkkk everyone slow down. This is for the east koot. theres no LEH. hes in the bull river. And this is the first year his quota included that. thats all i know. as i said im not sure if its official or not and neither does he, these were proposed quotas. Im no spredding any rumors or what have you im relaying what i seen. I love elk hunting why would i try n spread a rumor lol?

Well if it's for the East Kootenay (Bull River area) it certainly opens some discussion points for the rumor mill. There is only guide-outfitters quota on LEH elk hunts.

[Kody94]

Well if it's for the East Kootenay (Bull River area) it certainly opens some discussion points for the rumor mill. There is only guide-outfitters quota on LEH elk hunts.

True, but there is g-o quota on GOS sheep...any reason there couldn't be g-o quota on GOS 3pt elk? It doesn't make a lot of sense though.

[J_T]

You'll NEVER guess who authored the new WT deer proposal for region 8 that adds an extra 5 days on to BOW ONLY season. Was that my question?

I am a bit confused about the proposal. Why would we have our doe season in November (during or after the rut), why not have it before the rut so the bucks aren't wasting their "energy"? Put the hunters out there prior to the rut, Reduce the doe population prior to the rut. Seems in that case the bucks would maximize opportunity and enter the winter healthier.

[OutWest]

I am a bit confused about the proposal. Why would we have our doe season in November (during or after the rut), why not have it before the rut so the bucks aren't wasting their "energy"? Put the hunters out there prior to the rut, Reduce the doe population prior to the rut. Seems in that case the bucks would maximize opportunity and enter the winter healthier.

I like the sounds of that..

[6616]

True, but there is g-o quota on GOS sheep...any reason there couldn't be g-o quota on GOS 3pt elk? It doesn't make a lot of sense though.

Originally outfitters were on quota for LEH species only. Some special management issues in the north that arose during the 1980's ended up in a decision by MOE to place all non-resident sheep hunting in BC on quota. There is a long and complicated story behind this decision and Bridger is the right guy to relate that story as he was directly involved.

Category A species are now defined for the purposes of allocation as species that are either on LEH for residents or on quota for non-residents. Sheep are the single only special case where a resident GOS species is on quota for outfitters.

If there actually is a quota being assigned to outfitters for 3pt elk, that can mean only one thing, that there will be an LEH season for 3 pt bull elk for residents. That is one of the options available to managers as presented in the new elk management plan which is still in the draft stages.

However, there are still some things a little odd about this whole discussion. Letters to outfitters indicating tentative quota usually don't go out until February, and guaranteed quota is assigned at the time of annual guide-outfitter license renewal since quota is written into the annual license. Licenses renewal date is March 31st as far as I know and all quota numbers are considered tentative until an outfitter has that new license in his hands.

Technically there is no reason why a quota would not or could not be issued for a GOS 3pt hunt, but I see this as highly unlikely since quota for the 6pt GOS has never been discussed or contemplated.

[bearass]

6616
Do you think we will have to wait untill the regs come out,to find out about all the changes or will they leak it out before hand?

[Islandeer]

If you bring the overall population back a bit you'll also find the buck:doe ratios improve and the bucks become less nutritionally stressed for winter. As well there is less competition for the resource (food). This results in heavier (healthier) deer and bucks with bigger antlers.

Couldn't agree more GG. Likely not a coincidence that my big buck was shot in 1990, the next year another big one was shot, and each year up to 1996 big mature bucks were killed or seen by our group. A few big bucks since 96 have been seen but since the pop has spiked more 2 and 3 year old bucks. And spikers. We can play with numbers but their is only so much to eat out there, and with high elk and whitey numbers and the cattle doing their thing something WILL give.

The damn thing is cyclic,predictible and so freakin obvious.

[6616]

6616
Do you think we will have to wait untill the regs come out,to find out about all the changes or will they leak it out before hand?

They usually leak out beforehand, but it seems Victoria sometimes has a hard time making up their mind because the leaked info is at times a little different than what comes out in the regs. If they are really contemplating a 3pt elk season it will leak out in some form or another.

[Fisher-Dude]

Was that my question?

I am a bit confused about the proposal. Why would we have our doe season in November (during or after the rut), why not have it before the rut so the bucks aren't wasting their "energy"? Put the hunters out there prior to the rut, Reduce the doe population prior to the rut. Seems in that case the bucks would maximize opportunity and enter the winter healthier.

I expect that they are trying to achieve an aggressive harvest, and are counting on a higher success rate when the deer bunch up for the rut and due to snow conditions.

As far as the stress of the rut on bucks is concerned, would they not have to roam more if the does were fewer/spread out during the rut after the doe population is reduced from an earlier hunt? I think that's another reason they are having the doe hunt during the rut.

Moreover, there's a segment of deer hunters that wait until the rut/snow before they even go hunting, and having does open during that time may tempt them to take one.

[6616]

The timing of a GOS for doe WTD in the EK is of little concern for projected or attaining target harvest, you can see 20 to 50, or more, does a day any time of year pretty much anyplace south of Brisco, and the further south you go, the higher the density gets. My grandson and myself probably didn't hunt more then 20 minutes (at Radium) to put two of them in the back of the truck last fall during the youth/senior season, we didn't even get up the hill as far as the shooting range and we were done.

[GoatGuy]

True, but there is g-o quota on GOS sheep...any reason there couldn't be g-o quota on GOS 3pt elk? It doesn't make a lot of sense though.

Sheep's about the only exception for quota/GOS. As you're well aware there's a good reason for that.

[sawmill]

Increase bag limits to two or more, only one can be a buck.
Two or three does start to add up to a pile of good eating.

Boy, I`ll say!Had me some doe tenderloin steak and eggs for supper last night:-D. I couldn`t stop eating,damn near blew up.!
Like I said ,I have lots of nice racks,I am in it for the meat anymore.

[Onesock]

6616 placed a good article about the deer herds in Alabama. What we need to know about BC is:
1)What are the numbers of white tails in region 4 and 8?
2)What is the mortality rate of the herds in BC right now? 10% 20% What?
3) What will the mortality rate be if we do have a GOS on white tail does? Will the mortality rate be the same in region 4 as it will be in region 8 ?
These questions have to be answered before we declare an all out war on white tail deer. To quote Goatboy What are the real numbers not "oh I saw a hundred does last night".

[Onesock]

6616 placed a good article about the deer herds in Alabama. What we need to know about BC is:
1)What are the numbers of white tails in region 4 and 8?
2)What is the mortality rate of the herds in BC right now? 10% 20% What?
3) What will the mortality rate be if we do ahve a GOS on white tail does?
These questions have to be answered before we declare an all out war on white tail deer. To quote Goatboy What are the real numbers not "oh I saw a hundred does last night".

[Hunter Dog]

6616 placed a good article about the deer herds in Alabama. What we need to know about BC is:
1)What are the numbers of white tails in region 4 and 8?
2)What is the mortality rate of the herds in BC right now? 10% 20% What?
3) What will the mortality rate be if we do ahve a GOS on white tail does?
These questions have to be answered before we declare an all out war on white tail deer. To quote Goatboy What are the real numbers not "oh I saw a hundred does last night".


4) Predator numbers and their survival/mortality rates.

[bforce750]

More likely taught by Mother and Walt Disney :)

X2 that cartoon is soooo anti!!!

[Fisher-Dude]

6616 placed a good article about the deer herds in Alabama. What we need to know about BC is:
1)What are the numbers of white tails in region 4 and 8?
2)What is the mortality rate of the herds in BC right now? 10% 20% What?
3) What will the mortality rate be if we do ahve a GOS on white tail does?
These questions have to be answered before we declare an all out war on white tail deer. To quote Goatboy What are the real numbers not "oh I saw a hundred does last night".

They have doubled in 10 years. They are best harvested at 50% of bucks and 25% of does in relatively stable environments. We don't have enough hunters or access in BC to achieve that.

Kirk, you should read Ian Hatter's presentation on WT deer to understand what harvest is most productive, both in terms of herd health and hunter harvest. The results may shock you. The study culminates many years of studies that have been conducted all across North America.

http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/committees/wildlife/articles/2009-04-whitetail-deer-hatter.pdf

[Onesock]

FD. I will read your suggested report. Could you answer the question I asked?

[GoatGuy]

6616 placed a good article about the deer herds in Alabama. What we need to know about BC is:
1)What are the numbers of white tails in region 4 and 8?
2)What is the mortality rate of the herds in BC right now? 10% 20% What?
3) What will the mortality rate be if we do ahve a GOS on white tail does?
These questions have to be answered before we declare an all out war on white tail deer. To quote Goatboy What are the real numbers not "oh I saw a hundred does last night".

1) ~53,000 in Region 4
~37,500 in Region 8
2) Mortality on wt does is going to be around 10%. Don't worry about bucks.
3) Depends on the bag limit.

You should be asking:
1) What is the condition of the habitat?
2) What is a sustainable harvest rate?

Here's a bit more reading. Bunch on predation and some stuff from BC. You'll have to buy some of these or head to your local university library to get a hold of some of this stuff. Have fun! :wink: When you're done with all that stuff I can send you more.



Ballard, W.B, Lutz, D., Keegan, T.W., Carpenter, L.H., deVos, J.C.Jr. (2001). Deer-predator relationships: a review of recent North American studes with emphasis on mule and black-tailed deer. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 2001, 29(1): 99-115.

Blanchong, J.A., Joly, D.O., Samuel M.D., Langbenberg, J.A., Rolley, R.E., Sausen., J.F. (2006). White-tailed Deer Harvest From the Chronic Wasting Disease Eradication Zone in South-Central Wisconsin. Wildlife Society Bulletin: 34: 725-731.

Brinkman, T.J, Jenks, J.A., DePerno, C.S., Haroldson, B.S., Osborn, R.G. (2004). Surivival of white-tailed deer in an intensively farmed region of Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin 2004, 32(3): 726-731.

Brown, T.L., Decker, D.J., Riley, S.J., Enck, J.W., Lauber, T.B., Cutris, P.D., Mattfield., G.F. (2000). The future of hunting as a mechanism to control white-tailed deer populations. Wildlife Society Bulletin 28:797-807.

Delgiudice, G.D., Fieberg, J., Riggs, M.R., Powell, M.C., Pan, W. (2006). A Long-Term Age-Specific Survival Analysis of Female White-tailed Deer. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 70(6): 1556-1568.

Geist, V. (1998). Deer of the World: Their Evolution, Behavior, and Ecology. Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books.

Rawinski, T.J. (2008). Impacts of White-tailed Deer Overabundance in Forest Ecosystems: An Overview. Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Newtown Square, PA.

Robinson, H.S., Wielgus, R.B., and Gwilliam, J.C. (2002). Cougar predation and population growth of sympatric mule deer and white-tailed deer.

Robinson, H.S. (2002). Movements, survival and mortality of white-tailed deer in the Pend D’oreille River Valley.

Brown, T.L., Decker, D.J., Riley, S.J, Enck, J.W., Lauber, T.B., Curtis, P.D., and Mattfield, G.F. (2000). The future of hunting as a mechanism to control whitetailed deer populations. Wildlife Society Bulleting 28:797-807.

Fielding, H. 1(994). Harvest: An Essential Strategy for White-tailed Deer Management.

Pennsylvania Game Commission. (2003). Population Management Plan for White-tailed deer in Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania Game Comission.

Tonkovich, M.J., Reynolds, M.C., Culbertson, W. L. Stoll, R.J. (2004). Trends in reproductive performance and condition of white-tailed deer in Ohio. Ohio Department of Natural Resources.

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department. Managing for Age in White-tailed Deer. Retrieved from http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/huntwild/wild/game_management/deer/age/ October 30, 2008.

Verme, L.J. (1977). Assessment of natal mortality in upper Michigan deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 41:700-708.

Wishart, W.D. (1984). Western Canada. In L.K. Halls (Editor)., White-tailed Deer: Ecology and Management., (pp. 475-486). Harrisburg PA: Stackpoole Books.

Washington Department of Fish and Widllife. (2007). 2007 Game and trend report. (pp.8). Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington, USA.

Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. (2006). 2006 Game status and trend report. (pp.11). Wildlife Program, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, Olympia, Washington,
USA

[bridger]

when i read all those articles will I be smart?

[GoatGuy]

when i read all those articles will I be smart?

you're already smart. :wink:

[Onesock]

Reading all of your suggested reading won't answer the questions I have about BC? Non of that reading will tell me how many wtd are going to be shot in region 8 when it is only a 4 hour drive from Vancouver regon 8. The harvest in Region 8 will be much higher than region 4 just because of its location. Non of that reading will tell us if the over grazing/loss of habitat of the winter ranges is from cattle,deer or Mrs. Jones' garden patch.
Your answer to question 2 is a guess and you haven't answered question 3. One out of 3 isn't bad I guess.
Season dates and bag limits can't be generalized because of the location of the various regions and the hunting pressure in each region.

[6616]

They have doubled in 10 years. They are best harvested at 50% of bucks and 25% of does in relatively stable environments. We don't have enough hunters or access in BC to achieve that.

Also, one needs to consider that the environment in BC is not stable due to our large predator numbers, suitable harvest rates for BC are probably about 25% of the bucks and 10 to 13% of the does.

Alberta harvests at 25% bucks and 10 to 12 % does which seems to keep the herd population fairly stable at around 60% of carrying capacity and that level is where the maximum sustainable harvest occurs in flutchuating environments.

In the EK (not sure about the OK) we annually harvest about 4000 bucks and 1000 does, which if the buck doe ratio is 15 to 20 bucks per hundred does is probably less then 2% of the doe population so the herd continues to grow towards a serious winter kill potential.

MOE WTD pop estimates were 66,000 for R4, and 44,000 for the R8, but these are several years outdated and both herds are expanding, so they're probably lowball numbers today.

We harvest 4000 bucks annually in R4, if we harvest 25% of the bucks, that means there are about 16000 bucks pre-season and 12,000 post season. If the buck doe ratio is 15 per hundred does there are possibly as many as 80,000 does, and if the recruitmnent rate of fawns is 35 per hundred does there are potentially 28,000 to 30,000 fawns recruited into the adult age classes each spring, at which time about 160,000+ new fawns hit the ground.

Now from these numbers one needs to subtract the non-hunting mortality due to highway losses, predation, natural winter kill (if we knew them). The mortality rate of these new fawns is around 70 to 80% during their first year in the conditions we have in BC. MOE does not have the data for predation losses, they only know that there's been significant deer herd growth over the last decade so higher harvest rates are required.

The real consideration is that if the herd is at 90 to 100% of carrying capacity and there's a very bad winter up to 70 or 80% of them could perish. If the popluation were at 55 to 65% of carrying capacity (optimum density) winter losses in a hard winter would be much less, probably around 30 to 40%.

The overall population numbers are surprizingly not that important. If MOE monitored enough test areas annually to determine if the herd population trend is stable, increasing, or declining, they would actually have enough data to establish reeasonably accurate target harvest levels.

[6616]

Hello all
ive got a freind who is an outfitter and he was showing me his quotas for next fall, the quotas include 3-point bull elk. Now im not sure if those are official or not but doesnt look good. as for the other changes we never seen any but we were speaking with a local CO and he was mentioning something about the poor buck numbers foor whitetail. Sounds like they are now looking into doing something there aswell. If anyone can confirm anything, that would be nice. Maybe if theres any reg. 4 outfitters on here maybe they can shed some light. Thanks

Note, for what it's worth: As of yesterday (pers comm), Garth Mowat says they have not sent out "tentative quota" letters to guide-outfitters for fall 2010 seasons yet.

[GoatGuy]

Reading all of your suggested reading won't answer the questions I have about BC?


Yes, there are 2 or 3 papers that are out of BC in that list - read them. They tackle hunting and predation to a degree. There are also papers from Washington State and Alberta - the deer that live across an imaginary line aren't any different than the ones in BC particularly when the habitat is the same. There's also a paper available on grazing in the EK if you want and promise to read it.



Non of that reading will tell me how many wtd are going to be shot in region 8 when it is only a 4 hour drive from Vancouver regon 8. The harvest in Region 8 will be much higher than region 4 just because of its location. Non of that reading will tell us if the over grazing/loss of habitat of the winter ranges is from cattle,deer or Mrs. Jones' garden patch.

Historically there are actually more wt hunters in Region 4 than in Region 8 and most of the wt hunters congregate strictly in the East Kootenay. Same goes for hunter days. Also the hunter harvest data actually shows the growth rate pretty well particularly after big winter kills. If you want I can send it your way as well and you can draw your own conclusions which can be discussed.

The cattle AUMs have never been as low as they are right now, EVER. There are fewer cattle in the bush then there probably has been since BC was settled. Walk around WT winter range (which also seems to be summer range) and what's left of mule deer winter range in some areas with lots of wt's; it's a huge eye-opener if you know what you're supposed to be looking for. It's beat to a pulp in several areas. So, few cattle, bad habitat, white-tail winter range??

Hunting in the Christian Valley you should have realized and been worried about that more than 15 years ago. Or did you not notice the fire maintained eco-system that you hunt in that hasn't been in 60 years is growing in at a rapid rate and that the deer numbers will decline if we don't control the deer and then think about improving the habitat. The deer will always bounce back, the habitat doesn't.



Your answer to question 2 is a guess and you haven't answered question 3. One out of 3 isn't bad I guess.
Season dates and bag limits can't be generalized because of the location of the various regions and the hunting pressure in each region.

Number 2 is an estimate; nobody knows the exact number of deer/elk or even hunters for that matter. Those estimates are low. The only two guarantees you get in life is that you're gonna pay taxes and one day you're going to die. Aside from that it's all a 'guess'. WT deer are simply too productive and cryptic of an animal to 'declare war' on. They've actually tried that in the states in open habitats, where they're far more vulnerable and it DOESN'T WORK. You could have a GOS 12 months/year no bag limit in BC and you would not eliminate white-tailed deer.

For this to be hit the balance where the harvest could result in widespread population declines using the conservative population estimates basically every single wt deer hunter would have to shoot more than one doe, not a fawn or a yearling, every year and as you're probably well aware that won't happen. Many hunters will not harvest a doe and you will never have 100% success rate on a doe hunt. Even if you did create a decline according to the harvest rates and hunter numbers you will hit a threshold where the deer will stabilize and respond to increased harvest by increasing productivity (greater recruitment rates).



Before this continues down the yellow brick road suggest you sit down and do some research and some reading so that the conversation can at least be mildly intelligible or informed. If you have no intention of coming up with any kind of rational discussion or to read and understand the deer you obviously care about there's absolutely no sense in having a discussion.

[Onesock]

Andy- Thanks for the reply. As stated no one can be sure of the mortality rate of wtd in BC. and no one knows how close to maximum carrying capacity we are. No one knows for sure how many wtd there are right now, except the herds are doing very well. Only guesses!
Goatguy-Historically more hunters in reg 4 than 8. Only until you open up any white tail in region 8 and the hords from Vancouver hit there. The cattle grazing may be down now but what was it 10/20/30 years ago when the damage to the grazing land was done. By your own words habitat doesn't bounce back.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for hunting opportunity and control of game numbers, should they be getting out of hand. What I don't want to see is a mass slaughter of white tail deer and we end up hunting for 2 weeks and seeing 1/2 a dozen deer. Or worse yet more LEH's.Lets start this with a 2 week season on does and adjust from there.

[Fisher-Dude]

Lets start this with a 2 week season on does and adjust from there.

Why two weeks? Is that because it is 50% of the proposed 4 week season? If the season proposal were 8 weeks, would 4 weeks then be the starting point?

I think 2 weeks would concentrate hunters and perhaps lead to the shit show you (and I, and most others) aren't too fond of. I think a longer season (4 weeks, or more) would spread the harvest and hunters out and allow for some "feel good" time out there. I believe that anyone who is intent on coming up from the LML will fit their hunt into whatever season we give them. I don't believe that a 4 week season will see twice as many does harvested as a 2 week season - doe shooters will git'er done regardless of season length being 2 or 4 weeks. I think locals like me can kill a WT doe with a 1 or 2 day season (I watched 11 of them out my office window today :-D )...and with bag limits, once people who want to shoot a doe get one, they are done. I'm not too sure how many guys are going to do an expensive trip to the interior for 40 lbs of meat either.

I'd hazard a guess that half of the guys I know won't shoot a doe based on their misunderstanding of WT deer management and the old "don't kill a doe" attitude. That right there should compensate for a 2 week season being a 4 week season. :wink:

[6616]

Andy- Thanks for the reply. As stated no one can be sure of the mortality rate of wtd in BC. and no one knows how close to maximum carrying capacity we are. No one knows for sure how many wtd there are right now, except the herds are doing very well. Only guesses!

No one has a solid knowledge of the mortality rate, but one can easily dervive that we haven't reached a dangerous level of mortality when the population continues to grow.

The eco-system biologists have a pretty good idea when we're over or near carrying capacity from range evaluations and assessments, what is a little more difficult is to assign blame to a particular species when deterioration is noted, but that's not impossible since there's not a complete overlap in forage species preferences. Also it's fairly easy to determine the species in browsed areas by bite angles and heights, etc.

No one knows exactly how many WTD there are, but a sufficient estimate can be made. We see 4000 bucks harvested annually as a sustainable harvest in R4 so that's in itself a significant clue. A manager doesn't really have to know the exact population to set harvest levels unless it's a new hunt, population trends are the most important and observation and assessment of habitat health is another good source of setting harvest limits.

For example, there isn't even a population target in the Elk Management Plan, the plan recommends harvest regimes should be based on depredation levels, habitat health, and other easily trended data sources.

So, in conclusion, yes there is a lot of estimated data, but educated estimates. And yes, there are information gaps, but MOE is manageing well within accepted scientific conservation parameters, that is easily evident by the obvious upward trend in population density and seasons can be adjusted from year to year to compensate. There is so little danger of an over-harvest due to a doe GOS that we should not be concerning ourselves. White tailed deer are very resiliant. Data gathered in the Kootenay region shows that the population bounced back from the die-off of 96/97 in three years, and that was comparable to a very severe over-harvest. All they have to do is watch the trends, trend are far more important then overall population numbers or mortality rates, so not having hard data on those is not really a valid reason not to try a doe GOS.

[Onesock]

I didn't say not to try a doe GOS i just don't think it should be a month long with a 2 doe limit. At least not to start off.
Thanks very much for your informative response.

[GoatGuy]

Andy- Thanks for the reply. As stated no one can be sure of the mortality rate of wtd in BC. and no one knows how close to maximum carrying capacity we are. No one knows for sure how many wtd there are right now, except the herds are doing very well. Only guesses!
Goatguy-Historically more hunters in reg 4 than 8. Only until you open up any white tail in region 8 and the hords from Vancouver hit there. The cattle grazing may be down now but what was it 10/20/30 years ago when the damage to the grazing land was done. By your own words habitat doesn't bounce back.
Don't get me wrong, I am all for hunting opportunity and control of game numbers, should they be getting out of hand. What I don't want to see is a mass slaughter of white tail deer and we end up hunting for 2 weeks and seeing 1/2 a dozen deer. Or worse yet more LEH's.Lets start this with a 2 week season on does and adjust from there.

It's unlikely that out of regioners (hords from Vancouver as you say) go to Region 4 strictly because of wt deer. They go there for elk hunting. That won't change with parallel seasons. There's plenty of people who go to Region 4 from Region 8 as well. It isn't because of WT deer either. :wink:

Habitat wasn't nearly as huge of a bottle neck as it is now. Most of it's due to forest ingrowth and we've had several consecutive years of mild winters. It's only gonna get worse.

The number of deer you see in a two week period doesn't have anything to do with habitat. If you want to see a lot of deer head to the EK - seeing 50+ deer in a day is only a challenge if you're blind.

[6616]

I didn't say not to try a doe GOS i just don't think it should be a month long with a 2 doe limit. At least not to start off.
Thanks very much for your informative response.

Well the MOE proposal is actually a one doe limit, so it appears that it's the modified proposal that Sawmill, BozzyDW, and myself discussed that you oppose?

That's fine, I have no opposition to a one doe bag limit for a year or two to feel things out, it's a fail safe bag limit, but I still consider it a very conservative approach that may not have the desired effect on herd stabilization.

Here's the scenario I predcit could happen (note I say "could", not "will"):
In two years there will be no noticable effect on the WTD population growth so the bag limit on does will be increased to 2 and after a couple years of that there still won't be any stabilizing effect because we really didn't kill that many more does by increasing the bag limit to 2, and the herd will continue to expand.
So by year 5 there will be 100,000 WTD in the EK and very tough winter will come along and 70,000 WTD will die of starvation on the East Kootenay winter ranges.
Then many hunters will say "see I told you so, the doe season is to blame for this disaster"..., when in actual fact the real reason will be because the harvest was not aggressive enough rather then too aggressive....!

[bridger]

too many deer? To many hunters that is like saying a woman is too beautiful. or a horse runs to fast. many hunters can't wrap their minds around a simple wildlife management principal. If a deer population exceeds the carrying capacity of its winter range bad things happen. it has happened here in the peace twice in my hunting career and will certainly happen in other parts of the province if we don't reduce the population with controlled hunting seasons. We need to have some faith in our wildlife managers.

[Onesock]

Goatboy- I didn't say Region 2 hunters would go to region 4, I said region 8. Closer drive is it not? You don't know what hunters would do if there was a GOS 2 doe limit in region 8. If i do read all of those reports will I become a wildlife biologist in my own mind?

[Onesock]

Andy- I don't doubt that what you say could happen, may in fact happen IF the winter range is over grazed. But wouldn't it be terrible if we had a 2 doe GOS for a couple of years and we decimate the wtd herds for 5 years to come. I agree that there has to be control over the deer population, I wouldn't want to see the control be over aggresive.

[Moose Guide]

our muley and elk herds here in the WK still havn't recoverd from the last moe screw up, ask any farmer how many calves he'll have if he shoots his cows. We had so many mulies that you could turn down big bucks without worry of another opportunity and the hunters came after the elk season and used all the doe tags they could get (we had high predator pop. at the same time)by the time the local gun club could get the moe to act we had no mulies or whitetails left, the whitetails are almost back but the mulies are scarce and now we have wolves to add to the local predators I'm not big on doe tags, we need to be careful!!!

[Fisher-Dude]

our muley and elk herds here in the WK still havn't recoverd from the last moe screw up, ask any farmer how many calves he'll have if he shoots his cows. We had so many mulies that you could turn down big bucks without worry of another opportunity and the hunters came after the elk season and used all the doe tags they could get (we had high predator pop. at the same time)by the time the local gun club could get the moe to act we had no mulies or whitetails left, the whitetails are almost back but the mulies are scarce and now we have wolves to add to the local predators I'm not big on doe tags, we need to be careful!!!

That right there folks is pure bullshit!

[6616]

our muley and elk herds here in the WK still havn't recoverd from the last moe screw up, ask any farmer how many calves he'll have if he shoots his cows. We had so many mulies that you could turn down big bucks without worry of another opportunity and the hunters came after the elk season and used all the doe tags they could get (we had high predator pop. at the same time)by the time the local gun club could get the moe to act we had no mulies or whitetails left, the whitetails are almost back but the mulies are scarce and now we have wolves to add to the local predators I'm not big on doe tags, we need to be careful!!!

So it seems you're indirectly saying the biologists don't know what they're doing and we shouldn't have any confidence in them? If that's the case, who should we hire then to manage our wildlife?

[hunter1947]

I'm all in favor on what the wildlife management do when they decide on how they will reduce regions on overpopulated species.

They are the ones that have gone to university to get where there at.

Example say if a deer biologist came into a new home I was plumbing and he started to tell me how to plumb this home and he had no idea on how to plumb.
It would be the same as me going to him and tell him he should be doing his job this way.

[6616]

Andy- But wouldn't it be terrible if we had a 2 doe GOS for a couple of years and we decimate the wtd herds for 5 years to come. I agree that there has to be control over the deer population, I wouldn't want to see the control be over aggresive.

I don't see decimation as a huge threat, surely MOE will be monitoring harvests and will adjust seasons/bag limits as required to prevent decimation.

I guess what it boils down to is risk management. Considering that the right balance is very difficult to find, and that it's very easy to tip the balance one way or another, what holds the most risk for the WTD population, an agressive management program that has the potential to over-harvest from time to time, or a conservative management program that allows the herd to expand beyond carrying capacity and possibly into a major winter die-off or disease event.

Also worth consideration is the fact that a herd at or near carrying capacity is stagnated at a very low reproduction rate, is very vulnerable to weather or disease related events and has a very small sustainable harvest potential,,,, while a herd at 60% of carrying capacity is vibrant with a high reproduction rate, much lower vulnerability to disease or winter kill events, has a much highest sustainable harvest level, and can bounce back quickly from an over-harvest event.

At 60% of carrying capacity there will be fewer overall deer in the herd, but they'll be healthier, less vulnerable, there will be no concerns about damaging habitat due to over0use, and we can harvest a greater number of deer annually.

Kirk, I'm just suggesting that the long-term risks of overharvest are probably less than the risk potential of under-harvesting.

[boxhitch]

Besides, the two-doe would be a better recruitment tool.
Want to turn someone on to venison ? Give them a chance to put an appreciable amount of meat in the freezer. there will be more interest.

[GoatGuy]

Goatboy- I didn't say Region 2 hunters would go to region 4, I said region 8. Closer drive is it not? You don't know what hunters would do if there was a GOS 2 doe limit in region 8. If i do read all of those reports will I become a wildlife biologist in my own mind?

What two doe bag limit in region 8 are you even talking about?

Proximity to Region 8 isn't the sole factor for hunter migration. If you like I can send you all the numbers, you can run a multiple regression analysis and then tell me what drives demand if you like. It isn't complicated.

If you read some of those reports you should have a general concept of wt deer biology which should also point you in the direction of having an informed discussion - at the very least it would be an improvement. There are several others that I could send your way. It will also improve your abilities and success as a white-tailed deer hunter. Some of those reports will actually tell you where you'll find wt at different times of year, what their breeding behaviour is and why, and what they eat and will key in on. I can assure you that will put you miles ahead of where you are now both in terms of having a discussion and hunting in the interior.

Not reading those reports will however not improve your state of mind and lack of wanting to understand and improve your abilities and knowledge which is undoubtedly the biggest stumbling block that you struggle with when it comes to hunting and your posts.

Through your wanderings and indirectly these reports you might also come upon the realization that cattle and white-tailed deer typically don't compete. While the differences are subtle, grazers and browsers generally don't eat the same food........................

I figured your post would end up this way. This has been, as always, a waste of time. If you have no intention of increasing your knowledge when it comes to hunters, hunting, wildlife and their habitat then that's your choice. However, don't ask for a response with facts if your intent is to rebut them with rhetoric and whimsical posts that are solidly based in bullshit.

[GoatGuy]

I don't see decimation as a huge threat, surely MOE will be monitoring harvests and will adjust seasons/bag limits as required to prevent decimation.

I guess what it boils down to is risk management. Considering that the right balance is very difficult to find, and that it's very easy to tip the balance one way or another, what holds the most risk for the WTD population, an agressive management program that has the potential to over-harvest from time to time, or a conservative management program that allows the herd to expand beyond carrying capacity and possibly into a major winter die-off or disease event.

Also worth consideration is the fact that a herd at or near carrying capacity is stagnated at a very low reproduction rate, is very vulnerable to weather or disease related events and has a very small sustainable harvest potential,,,, while a herd at 60% of carrying capacity is vibrant with a high reproduction rate, much lower vulnerability to disease or winter kill events, has a much highest sustainable harvest level, and can bounce back quickly from an over-harvest event.

At 60% of carrying capacity there will be fewer overall deer in the herd, but they'll be healthier, less vulnerable, there will be no concerns about damaging habitat due to over0use, and we can harvest a greater number of deer annually.

Kirk, I'm just suggesting that the long-term risks of overharvest are probably less than the risk potential of under-harvesting.

WT should be managed at less than 60%

[GoatGuy]

our muley and elk herds here in the WK still havn't recoverd from the last moe screw up, ask any farmer how many calves he'll have if he shoots his cows. We had so many mulies that you could turn down big bucks without worry of another opportunity and the hunters came after the elk season and used all the doe tags they could get (we had high predator pop. at the same time)by the time the local gun club could get the moe to act we had no mulies or whitetails left, the whitetails are almost back but the mulies are scarce and now we have wolves to add to the local predators I'm not big on doe tags, we need to be careful!!!

Repeated mild winters with limited antlerless harvest and very little quality winter range pretty much describes most of the west kootenays to a T. Don't need a crystal ball to see a huge die-off was coming and it was all self-induced.

Hugh Robinson's work tells you why the mule deer haven't bounced back. His work is right out of the Pend D'Oreille.

[Devilbear]

[quote=GoatGuy; While the differences are subtle, grazers and browsers generally don't eat the same food........................

I figured your post would end up this way. This has been, as always, a waste of time. If you have no intention of increasing your knowledge when it comes to hunters, hunting, wildlife and their habitat then that's your choice. However, don't ask for a response with facts if your intent is to rebut them with rhetoric and whimsical posts that are solidly based in bullshit.[/quote]

GG, don't DO this, I laughed so hard that my wife came into our little library-computer room to see if the "old curmudgeon" had finally flipped his wig!!! You are in rare form, today and I enjoy a well written and witty "riposte" like that! Bad bugger!!!! :)

[Ambush]

First off, I don't and never have hunted Reg. 4, so I know nothing about it. That being the case, I feel well qualified to offer an opinion.:mrgreen:

I am one of that strange group of hunters that will drive ten hours just to hunt for a few days. I would consider driving to the Kootenys for a late season bow hunt for does. For the simple reason that it extends my season. I like hunting. The longer the season the better.

There used to be a late archery doe season in Reg 6. We went every year. Sometimes we shot a doe. Mostly we just looked at deer, passsed on them and said the next one gets it. It was a fun hunting opportunity.

But it will not help if you ask on here where one could have a good oppurtunity at a doe in the Koots. Not if your not from there anyway.
I tried that. Only a few offered any advice. Not many wanted me to help with population control.

F D. Do you have a sliding window in your office??

[Fisher-Dude]

F D. Do you have a sliding window in your office??

Yep. I would have to make a shot that chevy would be proud of to hit them, however. Probably a km away on the hillside. I keep an old set of Bushnells in my desk drawer, you know, just to keep an eye on the winter range "during my coffee breaks." :mrgreen:

[Moose Guide]

That right there folks is pure bullshit!

What part of my post do you find to be bullshit, I have lived in this valley for over 40 years and hunted here for 30 years, my house sits in the middle of some of the finest wintering grounds for 60 miles in all directions and during the time when our herds colapsed I spent every spare second in the bush(young and single). We found cougar and coyote kills and road killed deer but no evidence of a die off, I think it's easy to point a finger at a die off , I would hate to think we would jump to quickly without careful planning! just my oppinion!

[Moose Guide]

So it seems you're indirectly saying the biologists don't know what they're doing and we shouldn't have any confidence in them? If that's the case, who should we hire then to manage our wildlife?

I think the biologist should take some advice from the local hunters(gun clubs), he doesn't need to act on it if he doesn't want to but there are some pretty smart people out there, and lets face it, an extra 100 pairs of eyes could be useful to him!

[Fisher-Dude]

What part of my post do you find to be bullshit, I have lived in this valley for over 40 years and hunted here for 30 years, my house sits in the middle of some of the finest wintering grounds for 60 miles in all directions and during the time when our herds colapsed I spent every spare second in the bush(young and single). We found cougar and coyote kills and road killed deer but no evidence of a die off, I think it's easy to point a finger at a die off , I would hate to think we would jump to quickly without careful planning! just my oppinion!

Those animals died because they were over-populated and got hit with a very bad winter. Of course, you think you know more than all the biologists who studied what happened, just because you're against opportunity for resident hunters and want your fat, wealthy, foreign clients to see thousands of animals and no resident hunters. Those biologists have studied this for 12 years - and you try to belittle their professional opinions and say they are jumping too soon when they have smart proposals to rectify the problems.

I was in the Elk Valley shed hunting the following spring after the die off, and the number of winter-killed carcasses was staggering. Some ridges had 30 or 40 dead elk and deer on them. It was sickening to think that many of those animals could have filled the freezers of hunting families, and further sickening to realize that if we had harvested more animals before the bad winter hit that we would have had a much higher survival rate.

We're in an even more precarious situation right now in the Kootenays, as recent inventories have shown us that we have more animals stockpiled than ever. Moreover, we know that we've lost more winter range since the last die off - we're losing thousands of hectares to ingrowth every year. So here we are with more animals and less feed for them than the last time they got wiped out, and people like Moose Guide are lobbying against reducing the populations for their own short-sighted, selfish reasons. What didn't they learn the last time? :?

[Devilbear]

our muley and elk herds here in the WK still havn't recoverd from the last moe screw up, ask any farmer how many calves he'll have if he shoots his cows. We had so many mulies that you could turn down big bucks without worry of another opportunity and the hunters came after the elk season and used all the doe tags they could get (we had high predator pop. at the same time)by the time the local gun club could get the moe to act we had no mulies or whitetails left, the whitetails are almost back but the mulies are scarce and now we have wolves to add to the local predators I'm not big on doe tags, we need to be careful!!!

OK, so which valley do you live in and where do you hunt? You mention the WK in your post here, but, seem to actually be in the Elk Valley????

This confuses me and I would appreciate a clarification. Are you an outfitter or a paid guide or just a resident who is hyer-cautious about management policy?

[Moose Guide]

Those animals died because they were over-populated and got hit with a very bad winter. Of course, you think you know more than all the biologists who studied what happened, just because you're against opportunity for resident hunters and want your fat, wealthy, foreign clients to see thousands of animals and no resident hunters. Those biologists have studied this for 12 years - and you try to belittle their professional opinions and say they are jumping too soon when they have smart proposals to rectify the problems.

I was in the Elk Valley shed hunting the following spring after the die off, and the number of winter-killed carcasses was staggering. Some ridges had 30 or 40 dead elk and deer on them. It was sickening to think that many of those animals could have filled the freezers of hunting families, and further sickening to realize that if we had harvested more animals before the bad winter hit that we would have had a much higher survival rate.

We're in an even more precarious situation right now in the Kootenays, as recent inventories have shown us that we have more animals stockpiled than ever. Moreover, we know that we've lost more winter range since the last die off - we're losing thousands of hectares to ingrowth every year. So here we are with more animals and less feed for them than the last time they got wiped out, and people like Moose Guide are lobbying against reducing the populations for their own short-sighted, selfish reasons. What didn't they learn the last time? :?

I guide 2 hunters a year(other choices for a name were already used)
think of it as a paid vacation
I am ameat hunter and will side with resident hunters every time
I live north of Kaslo and we didn't see the die offs we heard about in the EK
I didn't mean to belittle the biologists, but I am nervous that a mistake (they are human)could have horrible results as our habitat here is very compact and our whitetail herd could be seriously reduced quickly,we also have a healthy wolf population now
I don't lobby for any outfitter or goabc
our populations here are not recoverd from the last crash, we have a good pop of wt but no mulies and less than 1/2 the elk we had around 1990
your right about the ingrowth, probably why the moose are increasing, lots of brush to eat
I apologize if I offended you or anyone else

[Moose Guide]

OK, so which valley do you live in and where do you hunt? You mention the WK in your post here, but, seem to actually be in the Elk Valley????

This confuses me and I would appreciate a clarification. Are you an outfitter or a paid guide or just a resident who is hyer-cautious about management policy?

Lardeau Valley north of Kaslo, guess I am hyper-cautious, I guide for 2 weeks a year for moose only in a fly in area and I am not an outfitter!!!

[GoatGuy]

I guide 2 hunters a year(other choices for a name were already used)
think of it as a paid vacation
I am ameat hunter and will side with resident hunters every time
I live north of Kaslo and we didn't see the die offs we heard about in the EK
I didn't mean to belittle the biologists, but I am nervous that a mistake (they are human)could have horrible results as our habitat here is very compact and our whitetail herd could be seriously reduced quickly,we also have a healthy wolf population now
I don't lobby for any outfitter or goabc
our populations here are not recoverd from the last crash, we have a good pop of wt but no mulies and less than 1/2 the elk we had around 1990
your right about the ingrowth, probably why the moose are increasing, lots of brush to eat
I apologize if I offended you or anyone else

Used to hunt that patch a pile as well. Doubt it will ever get back to where it was in the 90s.

[ram29]

Re: Reg. 4 changes a go

[bforce750]

So because animals die in the winter we should kill them! Newsflash they die all the time! It's people like you that give hunters a bad name, killing for the sake of killing, finding any reason to shoot more or what i like to call an opportunistic hunter - "it's there so I should be able to shoot it". Moreover, there has been no significant winter die off for years, our elk population is as healthy as its ever been so why should we wreck it. There will be no significant changes to the Elk regulations in the Elk Valley so I don't know what biologist you have been talking to! In fact the biologists are very wary on the topic of killing more elk. Six or better still with a senior/junior GOS on cows in a small agricultural area near Sparwood.

I have guided before and I think I speak for most "hobby" guides, we are BC resident hunters first and guides second! So for you to say that we are looking out for our clients intrest first is an ignorant statement! Most resident hunters when your guiding are not competition anyway, and I'm sure most outfitters are not shaking when they see you come up the trail!

Killing more animals does not solve the winter range encroachment problem, it just kills more animals. Animals are going to die in the winter regardless of how many we kill in hunting season, the only way to stop it is to stop winter, ask your local professional.

As hunters it is not our job to decide what the carrying capacity is of a population, the biologists will do that. It is our job to give them some input when we can and let them make the decisions, we won't always agree, but from what I've seen in the last five years or so has been a significant improvement to the slaughter of the eighties and nineties. So lets let the biologists make the the decisions and not base our hunting regulations on some "shed heads" outrageous biological theory!

Never mind arguing,there are a lot of arm-chair bio's on this site :tongue:with there own opinions,agendas,you are wasting your time,just call the regional biologist.

[ram29]

Re: Reg. 4 changes a go

[bforce750]

I'm not an arm chair biologist I'm an educated one! BASC Wildlife Biology!

I wasn't refering to you:-?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

So because animals die in the winter we should kill them! Newsflash they die all the time! It's people like you that give hunters a bad name, killing for the sake of killing, finding any reason to shoot more or what i like to call an opportunistic hunter - "it's there so I should be able to shoot it". Moreover, there has been no significant winter die off for years, our elk population is as healthy as its ever been so why should we wreck it. There will be no significant changes to the Elk regulations in the Elk Valley so I don't know what biologist you have been talking to! In fact the biologists are very wary on the topic of killing more elk. Six or better still with a senior/junior GOS on cows in a small agricultural area near Sparwood.

I have guided before and I think I speak for most "hobby" guides, we are BC resident hunters first and guides second! So for you to say that we are looking out for our clients intrest first is an ignorant statement! Most resident hunters when your guiding are not competition anyway, and I'm sure most outfitters are not shaking when they see you come up the trail!

Killing more animals does not solve the winter range encroachment problem, it just kills more animals. Animals are going to die in the winter regardless of how many we kill in hunting season, the only way to stop it is to stop winter, ask your local professional.

As hunters it is not our job to decide what the carrying capacity is of a population, the biologists will do that. It is our job to give them some input when we can and let them make the decisions, we won't always agree, but from what I've seen in the last five years or so has been a significant improvement to the slaughter of the eighties and nineties. So lets let the biologists make the the decisions and not base our hunting regulations on some "shed heads" outrageous biological theory!

Have you talked to your regional bio lately? No, I'm not referring to the "former" one who now works for the GOABC.:roll:

SSS

[ram29]

Re: Reg. 4 changes a go

[ram29]

Reg. 4 changes a go

[Stone Sheep Steve]

So because animals die in the winter we should kill them! Newsflash they die all the time! It's people like you that give hunters a bad name, killing for the sake of killing, finding any reason to shoot more or what i like to call an opportunistic hunter - "it's there so I should be able to shoot it". Moreover, there has been no significant winter die off for years, our elk population is as healthy as its ever been so why should we wreck it. There will be no significant changes to the Elk regulations in the Elk Valley so I don't know what biologist you have been talking to! In fact the biologists are very wary on the topic of killing more elk. Six or better still with a senior/junior GOS on cows in a small agricultural area near Sparwood.

I have guided before and I think I speak for most "hobby" guides, we are BC resident hunters first and guides second! So for you to say that we are looking out for our clients intrest first is an ignorant statement! Most resident hunters when your guiding are not competition anyway, and I'm sure most outfitters are not shaking when they see you come up the trail!

Killing more animals does not solve the winter range encroachment problem, it just kills more animals. Animals are going to die in the winter regardless of how many we kill in hunting season, the only way to stop it is to stop winter, ask your local professional.

As hunters it is not our job to decide what the carrying capacity is of a population, the biologists will do that. It is our job to give them some input when we can and let them make the decisions, we won't always agree, but from what I've seen in the last five years or so has been a significant improvement to the slaughter of the eighties and nineties. So lets let the biologists make the the decisions and not base our hunting regulations on some "shed heads" outrageous biological theory!


I wasn't referring to the regs that are being talked about but rather the rest of your post.
I'm not sure about everyone else but I've got some "red flags" going off.
IMO-the tone of your post is not that of a BAS Wildlife Bio..at least not of one that has actually worked in a job. Too much emotion....not enough science.
We all know that winter ranges need work.....but what are your opinions on carrying capacities and harvest rates??? Keep them at or near 100% CC ????
Need some facts:-|.


SSS

[ram29]

Re: Reg. 4 changes a go

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Hey, I'm always willing to read someone's opinion and learn something when their opinion is based on facts and not anecdotal information.

No questioning whether the regs are going to change or not.

What are your valid reasons why the seasons should remain the same??? Are the elk numbers in the EV close to that in the Trench??
You don't need to use in depth wildlife terms but I do understand some basic things like carry capacity percentages and so forth.
I have at least half an arm:wink:.

Please educate (me)us:-|.

SSS



Im glad you sensed the tone in my post, thats what I was looking for! I assure you that is from a wildlife biologist and as I am not a public servant I am allowed to voice my opinions and show emotions. The fact is the regulations are not being changed significantly in the Elk Valley. I can talk about the science of harvest rates and carrying capacity all day but you wouldn't understand :tongue:, nor do I want to bore people with numbers in a thread about regulation changes. I think our regional biologists, coal mines, and local fish and wildlife organizations are doing a fantastic job of wildlife management in the Elk Valley and the regulations seem to suit the local hunters in the Valley just fine.

The fact is The regulations are not being changed significantly and I'm not going to get into a battle of wits with an unarmed man.

[Devilbear]

I am also interested and I was working in resource management in the Elk Valley, probably before many posters here were born, however, I am the first to admit that I do not know the current situation well. I do, however, take exception to your comment about ...one armed man... and I would ask, WHY, given your self-confidence in your expertise, do you find it necessary to insult others in this manner, just curious?

I attended a few post-secondary institutions in my life and I am also curious as to where and when you graduated. I have a number of friends, who are currently RPBios, I am not and do not pretend to be, but, I am not an ...armchair...anything and I have never seen the term ...BASC... used in reference to a "baccalaureate" degree, here in B.C. Perhaps, this is a new term, I am simply curious as the people I know hold BSc., MSc. and many hold Phd.s in various "biosciences".

As to ...local hunters..., I was BORN in the Kootenays and lived there until age 35, with a few sojourns for work elsewhere in BC. I consider myself a "local" and a "Kootenay" before a BCer and far ahead of a Canadian. So, since I now live in Vancouver and will for the next 3+ years, would I be a "local", or just who would be?

Do you work in wildlife management now and how many years field experience do you have? My reason for asking is because I know that quite a number of RPBios, people whom I know well, DO put considerable stock in the "anecdotes" of longterm working bushmen and, so do I. Of, course, all such info. must be subjected to rigourous scientific testing.

I am just trying to get a sense of your whole approach here, this is not meant to instigate a pizzing match as anyone here can tell you that I am a mellow old fellow and hardly ever get into it.

[Islandeer]

Well the MOE proposal is actually a one doe limit, so it appears that it's the modified proposal that Sawmill, BozzyDW, and myself discussed that you oppose?

That's fine, I have no opposition to a one doe bag limit for a year or two to feel things out, it's a fail safe bag limit, but I still consider it a very conservative approach that may not have the desired effect on herd stabilization.

Here's the scenario I predcit could happen (note I say "could", not "will"):
In two years there will be no noticable effect on the WTD population growth so the bag limit on does will be increased to 2 and after a couple years of that there still won't be any stabilizing effect because we really didn't kill that many more does by increasing the bag limit to 2, and the herd will continue to expand.
So by year 5 there will be 100,000 WTD in the EK and very tough winter will come along and 70,000 WTD will die of starvation on the East Kootenay winter ranges.
Then many hunters will say "see I told you so, the doe season is to blame for this disaster"..., when in actual fact the real reason will be because the harvest was not aggressive enough rather then too aggressive....!
Exactly, another Pickering hills scenerio. It's an EK classic ....

[ram29]

Re: Reg. 4 changes a go

[muzzy]

[QUOTE]
So because animals die in the winter we should kill them! Newsflash they die all the time! It's people like you that give hunters a bad name, killing for the sake of killing, finding any reason to shoot more or what i like to call an opportunistic hunter - "it's there so I should be able to shoot it". Moreover, there has been no significant winter die off for years, our elk population is as healthy as its ever been so why should we wreck it. There will be no significant changes to the Elk regulations in the Elk Valley so I don't know what biologist you have been talking to! In fact the biologists are very wary on the topic of killing more elk. Six or better still with a senior/junior GOS on cows in a small agricultural area near Sparwood.

I have guided before and I think I speak for most "hobby" guides, we are BC resident hunters first and guides second! So for you to say that we are looking out for our clients intrest first is an ignorant statement! Most resident hunters when your guiding are not competition anyway, and I'm sure most outfitters are not shaking when they see you come up the trail!

Killing more animals does not solve the winter range encroachment problem, it just kills more animals. Animals are going to die in the winter regardless of how many we kill in hunting season, the only way to stop it is to stop winter, ask your local professional.

As hunters it is not our job to decide what the carrying capacity is of a population, the biologists will do that. It is our job to give them some input when we can and let them make the decisions, we won't always agree, but from what I've seen in the last five years or so has been a significant improvement to the slaughter of the eighties and nineties. So lets let the biologists make the the decisions and not base our hunting regulations on some "shed heads" outrageous biological theory!
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=605260) http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/images/buttons/multiquote_off.gif (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=605260)
Finally, someone with common sense.:tongue:

[GoatGuy]

So because animals die in the winter we should kill them! Newsflash they die all the time! It's people like you that give hunters a bad name, killing for the sake of killing, finding any reason to shoot more or what i like to call an opportunistic hunter - "it's there so I should be able to shoot it". Moreover, there has been no significant winter die off for years, our elk population is as healthy as its ever been so why should we wreck it. There will be no significant changes to the Elk regulations in the Elk Valley so I don't know what biologist you have been talking to! In fact the biologists are very wary on the topic of killing more elk. Six or better still with a senior/junior GOS on cows in a small agricultural area near Sparwood.

I have guided before and I think I speak for most "hobby" guides, we are BC resident hunters first and guides second! So for you to say that we are looking out for our clients intrest first is an ignorant statement! Most resident hunters when your guiding are not competition anyway, and I'm sure most outfitters are not shaking when they see you come up the trail!

Killing more animals does not solve the winter range encroachment problem, it just kills more animals. Animals are going to die in the winter regardless of how many we kill in hunting season, the only way to stop it is to stop winter, ask your local professional.

As hunters it is not our job to decide what the carrying capacity is of a population, the biologists will do that. It is our job to give them some input when we can and let them make the decisions, we won't always agree, but from what I've seen in the last five years or so has been a significant improvement to the slaughter of the eighties and nineties. So lets let the biologists make the the decisions and not base our hunting regulations on some "shed heads" outrageous biological theory!

It would be nice to see the managers in Region 4 write the regulations.

Things would look much different.

[Husky7mm]

Goatguy I dont get your last post? I also missed the info on why muledeer didnt recover quite so well? Can you bring me up to speed? Thanks

[igojuone]

3 point 3 point 3 point bull elk in the Koot$ ! bout time junior. Hey wake up and smell the Wapiti 3 points, this'l get those bio's in trouble whoa - but some will love them now!
Jelly 3 point elk in the KOOT$ tell me much much more now !
talk to me now !
Can you feel it ?
2010 3 pointerzzz in dah Koot$-really better not be bs'n u$
LEH lotto for three's in the breeze around Koot Country it's too good to be true - leh ? this year?
talk to me now

Can anybody translate this into English for me? I dare you!:???:

[finish]

uhhhh looks like Jelly's into the sauce!

[GoatGuy]

Goatguy I dont get your last post? I also missed the info on why muledeer didnt recover quite so well? Can you bring me up to speed? Thanks

Short answer is no.

[Husky7mm]

WELL ***C U VERY MUCH, now I have to wade though pages of crap!

[6616]

Exactly, another Pickering hills scenerio. It's an EK classic ....

Well actually, Pickering Hills is a horse (or maybe cow) of a different color.

Traditionally, being recognized by gov as a critical wildlife habitat area, and one of the most important winter ranges in the East Kootenay, Pickering Hills had very few cattle grazing tenures with very modest numbers of AUMs awarded for cattle grazing.

When Koocanusa was flooded quite a number of large grazing tenures, as well as lots of ungulate winter range, were lost and new grazing licenses for Pickering hills were awarded by MOF to make up the shortfall. That was in 1973 and 1974 and Pickering Hills has been over-grazed by cattle for the entire period right up until the last couple of years when AUMs were finally reduced in light of the fact that the range unit has been reduced to dust and Knapweed.

Elk just don't winter there anymore in any significant numbers because there simply isn't much winter forage growing there anymore. Most of the elk that wintered there have moved north into the Peckhams/Norbury Lakes area and Mause/Lost Creek areas. That's why the ranchers in the Mause Creek area are now getting hit so hard by elk.

Of course this situation is further compounded by forest ingrowth and encroachment which has also extensively reduced the viability of the Pickering Hills for either cattle grazing or ungulate winter range. It's a sad situation...!

[6616]

Goatguy I dont get your last post? I also missed the info on why muledeer didnt recover quite so well? Can you bring me up to speed? Thanks

I think it's reasonably safe to say that GG (quoting Hugh Robinson's reports) is saying that the current density of WTD (forage competition) and the high density of predators that the WTD population is maintaining (mule deer are more vulnerable to predation), is the likely reason for the slower growth rate in mule deer populations. I would add that the current elk population is probably also a contributing factor. When grass gets in short supply elk will graze extensively contributing to the competition for forage and the high elk numbers are probably also contibuting to the high numbers of predators.

[horshur]

Goatguy I dont get your last post? I also missed the info on why muledeer didnt recover quite so well? Can you bring me up to speed? Thanks

the mule deer didn't recover so well because the logging block regrowth did.

[Husky7mm]

Thank you 6616. I read in Geist book that mule deer and whitetail dont really compete for food, I can for sure see the preditor factor though as mulies are so laid back and slow to run. I guess thats why theres so few mulie fawns left by the end of winter, and a good portion of whitetails still have at least one left.
The pickering hills must be recovering somewhat as its pretty heavy with game right now, there is lots of grass left too.And the brush is plentyfull. They are all fat too. It sure is getting thick though but I am sure it is on the thinning list as well. Some areas that have been thinned have a ton of feed and very little game useing it YET.

[Fisher-Dude]

Thank you 6616. I read in Geist book that mule deer and whitetail dont really compete for food, I can for sure see the preditor factor though as mulies are so laid back and slow to run. I guess thats why theres so few mulie fawns left by the end of winter, and a good portion of whitetails still have at least one left.
The pickering hills must be recovering somewhat as its pretty heavy with game right now, there is lots of grass left too.And the brush is plentyfull. They are all fat too. It sure is getting thick though but I am sure it is on the thinning list as well. Some areas that have been thinned have a ton of feed and very little game useing it YET.

Probably a bigger factor for WT fawn survival is the twinning rate of WT compared to MD.

[Husky7mm]

Agreed on the twins. They do in even in the off season seem alot faster to flight though and the mulie does will let you walk right up to them.

[Fisher-Dude]

Read this (http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/committees/wildlife/articles/2009-04-whitetail-deer-hatter.pdf) to understand WT deer and how prolific they are.

[6616]

Thank you 6616. I read in Geist book that mule deer and whitetail dont really compete for food, I can for sure see the preditor factor though as mulies are so laid back and slow to run. I guess thats why theres so few mulie fawns left by the end of winter, and a good portion of whitetails still have at least one left.
The pickering hills must be recovering somewhat as its pretty heavy with game right now, there is lots of grass left too.And the brush is plentyfull. They are all fat too. It sure is getting thick though but I am sure it is on the thinning list as well. Some areas that have been thinned have a ton of feed and very little game useing it YET.

So far Pickering Hills is not on the ERP list. They couldn't get funding for ER there unless the cattle grazing situation was dealt with first. I think that has occurred now so maybe soon we'll get some ER prescriptions wrote up for it.

[6616]

Probably a bigger factor for WT fawn survival is the twinning rate of WT compared to MD.

That, coupled with the fact that most WTD yearling does breed and mulie does don't. A significant percentage of the population is yearlings. All things considered WTD are just a heck of a lot more productive than mulies.

[6616]

Thank you 6616. I read in Geist book that mule deer and whitetail dont really compete for food, I can for sure see the preditor factor though as mulies are so laid back and slow to run. I guess thats why theres so few mulie fawns left by the end of winter, and a good portion of whitetails still have at least one left.
The pickering hills must be recovering somewhat as its pretty heavy with game right now, there is lots of grass left too.And the brush is plentyfull. They are all fat too. It sure is getting thick though but I am sure it is on the thinning list as well. Some areas that have been thinned have a ton of feed and very little game useing it YET.

There is some overlap in diet but competition is not just about forage, there's other resources and spacial issues to consider, there's just room for so many deer, and elk also play into the big picture as well. It also depends considerably on the type of eco-system involved and the variety and diversity of forage species that are available. I would think that in the desert like country of the south Cariboo or south Okanagan for example there might be quite a bit of dietary overlap, maybe not so much in the Kootenay's.

[Ambush]

With all the WT hate going on, THIS year when a guy asks for a good spot to kill one, he should be flooded with advice.:-D

I guess last year they weren't a problem.:confused:

[sawmill]

With all the WT hate going on, THIS year when a guy asks for a good spot to kill one, he should be flooded with advice.:-D

I guess last year they weren't a problem.:confused:
W.T. Hate?
I love them!I`m going to eat one tonight!

[riflebuilder]

I love WT right next to the mashed potatoes...yummy