Moose Numbers

[gcreek]

After reading comments on the other thread, decided to open another one and give a perspective from one who has lived in prime moose country for a little over 30 years. Our ranch is located at what was once the end of a backroad in the Anahim Lake area. Pre-logging in 1987 it was nothing to spend a few hours riding at any time of the year and see 40+ moose every time we went out.

When Carrier Lumber moved in here the local GO's were assured that there would be NO Hunting on any of the logging roads built by MOF and MOE. (I am not, nor ever have been a GO but I can sympathize with their shinking incomes due to lower allocations. They are taxed on their income just like the rest of us are. How would you like to see your work-weeks shortened by 50 to 75%? ) Carrier built a 27 km main road the first year they were here past our driveway into an area that had seen very little hunting pressure and none in the form of road hunting. The moose had no reason to fear a vehicle as most had never seen one.

Opening weekend of 1987, over 100 bull moose went past our driveway in 2 days and I'm guessing that there were over 500 by the end of the season in Nov. A GOS stayed in place for another 4 or 5 years, 3 of those years had a 2 day open cow season and then a couple more years of a draw on 50 cows.
I asked a biologist why they had not followed up on the road closures and his reply was that Horsefly was shot out and hunters had to have somewhere to go. That statement made a whole lot of govt. logic sense to me.

Hunters made a lot of complaints when some roads were closed in later years but some don't seem to realize that game does need "safe" areas in order to maintain populations.
Combine this hunting pressure with NO predator management and you have what we see today.
I have read a lot of comments on here about "Don't hunt 5-12, all there is are wolves and Indians." Partly true, the natives do take quite a few moose but their concern over numbers has increased in the last few years and they are internally doing a lot to limit indiscriminant hunting by their members.
What is being seen here this fall is a very high ratio of bulls to cows on fewer moose than ever. Likely more of a wolf and grizzly predation issue as cows and calves are more vulnerable.
Personally, I have flown twice in the last week looking for cattle over an area of about 150 sq. miles. I have seen 4 big bulls and one cow/calf pair. Last year in the same flights at the same time frame we saw 20 or 30 moose in this area. We have 2 stackyards left that are not "moose-proof" so will see in late Nov. how many show up for their free handouts.
Another comparison for you, in 1986 I witnessed 72 moose leaving 2 stackyards in one day when I went to feed our cattle. A neighbor 2 miles across country was feeding about the same number. And the next and the next.
The most I've seen in recent years was 14 in one yard last winter.

During this same time period we have also witnessed an explosion in the population of grizzlies and wolves yet the moratorium on bear hunting in this area stays in place.

Just some observations from an unbiased, opinionated rancher from the sticks. Fire at will.

[BigMoosey]

That's interesting we're seeing less and less moose in 5-04. Been hunting it for the past 10 years but the numbers are down. Maybe the pine kill and associated logging have pushed things on. It's a real shame when you go into the wilderness and have to put up with the sounds of a logging operation during hunting season.

[Ambush]

Yes, yes, that's all very nice, but do you have any feral cows a guy might hunt??:mrgreen::-D

Perhaps it's time for the Cattleman's Assoc. to have a lawyer send the Government a bill for all the livestock that the "Crown's" livestock [ie, grizzlies, wolves] are eating.

Seems hunters and ranchers are in the same boat as far as the politicly inspired management of predators is concerned. Grizzlies and wolves are all just great because they don't bother joggers in Stanely Park.

[Spy]

Yup!:confused: It is a no brainer more roads into the moose's back 40, equates to more moose taken! Add in bad management which = less moose!:icon_frow
A sad reality!
So what has been done, you have obviously spoken with the Biologist for the area,what does he say?
Thanks for posting

[Fisher-Dude]

5-12 is all on LEH with a limited harvest and limited pressure.

A better moose management strategy would be to utilize the 7A model and take moose from across all age and sex classes. You'd have more moose and a higher harvest.

But, since region 5 hunting seasons are set by the GOs, you can bet that ain't gonna happen. We'll keep doing the wrong thing so that hunters stay away and don't disturb some fat Yank sitting on the side of the road with his guide.

[gcreek]

Yup!:confused: It is a no brainer more roads into the moose's back 40, equates to more moose taken! Add in bad management which = less moose!:icon_frow
A sad reality!
So what has been done, you have obviously spoken with the Biologist for the area,what does he say?
Thanks for posting

It is my personal belief that the same folks that want to save all the wolves and bears are also the folks that want to shut hunting down altogether. Add in some Victoria biologists that have the same sentiments. How better to accheive this than by giving out liberal LEHs based on bogus overcounts of moose and deer and no predator management until there is not a sufficient herd to warrant a season.
I have been told that one of MOE's cariboo "management" strategies is to reduce populations of deer and moose that are near cariboo herds. The "logic" is that with fewer prey animals, the wolves will starve to death and the cariboo herds will be saved.
Did some of these bios forget that wolves have noses and legs? That there is also livestock "out there"?

In response to F-D, that open road, open season worked so well here that hunters have to travel farther north to find a moose. How's that workin' for ya?

[CanuckShooter]

5-12 is all on LEH with a limited harvest and limited pressure.

A better moose management strategy would be to utilize the 7A model and take moose from across all age and sex classes. You'd have more moose and a higher harvest.

But, since region 5 hunting seasons are set by the GOs, you can bet that ain't gonna happen. We'll keep doing the wrong thing so that hunters stay away and don't disturb some fat Yank sitting on the side of the road with his guide.

7A is on LEH....we've been out the Blackwater in 7A for the last 2 1/2 weeks and have seen a grand total of one cow moose, and two fresh moose tracks....7A isn't doing all that good!!! :-(

[BigfishCanada]

Thank you for the honest insight, its great reading something that doesnt have a hidden agenda behind it

[lightmag]

well i live in 7A, born and raised, and yes i agree numbers may be down overall, but i can tell you i have seen more moose in th epast 3 years then i have in the years before that. Last year i saw close to 30 cows/calves before taking my 2x2, only saw one other bull that year. This year i have easily seen 6-7 moose , 2 bulls in only 5-6 morning hunts locally. South of PG (7-9) , my buddy has seen 2 bulls, 4 cows and a calf in three days.

So they r there, heavy timber, hard to access swamps, that's where they r hiding from the road hunters that put 200km a day on in their trucks and complain that wolves ate all the moose!!

[Stone Sheep Steve]

When was the last real count done and what were the numbers?

SSS

[OOBuck]

7A is on LEH....we've been out the Blackwater in 7A for the last 2 1/2 weeks and have seen a grand total of one cow moose, and two fresh moose tracks....7A isn't doing all that good!!! :-(

Spent 7 dasys in 7-12 and saw bull/cow that was it.. I was hunting with a local and numbers are WAY down..

[hunterdon]

Must have been great back then, pre roads. Must of us only dream to see so many moose. Sad to hear of such a decline in numbers. In region 8, I can tell you that the grizzly and wolf numbers are wayyyyy up. Spoke with the local CO a few years ago, who confirmed this. Spoke with an old timer a number of years ago and he told me that way back (about 50 to 60 years ago) there were very few grizzles or wolves in the Okanagan. Most were shot/poisoned/trapped. In the last 4 to 5 years I have on many occasions run into grizzlies. One VERY close encounter with a big boar. Didn't sleep well for a few days. The last few years had several encounters with wolves. Spoke with my buddy rancher last week and says he is thinking of not ranching his cattle in the future. Too many losses from the wolves. Some make it back with chunks out of their hind ends. But in our legislators great wisdom, they don't see a problem and there is still absolutely no grizzly or wolf hunting allowed in the okanagan as yet. Not even leh. It's unfortunate, but it seems like a few people have to lose their lives before the light comes on in Victoria. By the way, except for the bottom private land, deer numbers in the hills are not even close to what they were 20 years ago. Proof that wolves don't eat carrots, beans or tomatoes. They eat meat!!!

[gcreek]

I believe the last "official count was about 05-06 winter. I may be mistaken. This year's LEH draw was based on that count and expected natural increase. Word is out that MOE says there are 25,000 moose in area 5-12. I say BS! There are not even 4000 beef cows in 5-12 and how many of them can you see when out and about? Somewhere within MOE there is a hidden adgenda that is not good for hunters, GO's or the ranching community. The GO who's area overlaps our range area has had his quota reduced from 24 moose per year in 1986, to 14 over 3 years in 94, bought an adjoining area in 96 with 14 moose over 3 and they immediately cut him back to the 14 he had. In 2012 MOE is saying he will be cut back to 3 per year. With his operating costs going up it is an effective way for MOE to close his doors forever. They are doing the same thing province wide. FWIW he is a native fellow.

There is getting to be more pressure on Govt. to open an LEH for grizzly in this area. Who knows, maybe in another 10 years we will have one.

[MuleyMadness]

I believe the last "official count was about 05-06 winter. I may be mistaken. This year's LEH draw was based on that count and expected natural increase. Word is out that MOE says there are 25,000 moose in area 5-12. I say BS! There are not even 4000 beef cows in 5-12 and how many of them can you see when out and about? Somewhere within MOE there is a hidden adgenda that is not good for hunters, GO's or the ranching community. The GO who's area overlaps our range area has had his quota reduced from 24 moose per year in 1986, to 14 over 3 years in 94, bought an adjoining area in 96 with 14 moose over 3 and they immediately cut him back to the 14 he had. In 2012 MOE is saying he will be cut back to 3 per year. With his operating costs going up it is an effective way for MOE to close his doors forever. They are doing the same thing province wide. FWIW he is a native fellow.

There is getting to be more pressure on Govt. to open an LEH for grizzly in this area. Who knows, maybe in another 10 years we will have one.

Very interesting, and thank you for your insight into what is going on in the region. I do have to wonder though, how much hunting has to do with declining populations, and how much of it has to do with predators. I have read a lot of info on the web in the last couple of days since myself and Sitka Spruce started talking about this and have found shockingly high predation numbers (now I admit, I should have realized it, but I thought humans had a much higher impact than they appear to have)...with something like (depending on the study the numbers I am quoting are from the Journal of Wildlife Management for the South West Yukon...not exactly the same, but as close as I could find to North 7B). Their studies are showing 50% of calf and adult moose deaths are caused by grizzly predation, wolves account for 26%, and LICENSED hunters accounting for 9%. I have found similar numbers in other studies, which also show black bears and coyotes taking a fair portion of calves, but very seldom any adults. After reading that, I wonder if the seasons and restrictions are effectively irrelevant...and then I wonder, if the Ministry are ever going to do the right thing and start looking at managing the predators the way they manage the prey, for the benefit of everyone, resident hunters, GOs, and First Nations (or whatever you want to call them) hunters.

If they don't start looking at a way to manage the predators effectively, so they aren't decimating the ungulate populations, will there be anything left for us as hunters to take? I mean I go hunting up north and see more grizz and wolf sign on a regular basis than I do moose (not more actual wolves and grizz though)...where in the past I never saw nearly that amount...so it makes me wonder if the scales have already tilted way out of alignment.

[gcreek]

Exactly.

During the time that I spoke about with higher moose numbers there were almost no wolves here. The province was still under the result of the major wolf kill from the 50's. Was that the right way to control wolf predation? I think most of you would know my answer but there is no way that hunting, trapping or incidental kill is ever going to take more than 10% of the population. 10-80 was not done away with completely, there was a moratorium placed on it's use in the early 90's. A stroke of the pen and it can be an effective tool again.
MOE seems to have one study after another on predator species with no evidence of what they are studying for. How long does a beaurocrat have to study a wolf for to have the conclusion that they eat meat, and lots of it.

As I said before, 1 wolf will eat the equivalent of 10 moose in a year, those of you that don't shoot the ones you see are compounding the loss of ungulates.

I was an assisstant guide for a local outfitter in the late 80's, early 90's, about the time we really noticed wolves on the comeback. In 92 I found 42 wolf killed cariboo in a small portion of the Itcha Mtns that were less than 4 months since they had been killed. A packer that takes trail rides in the same area told me they saw 600 cariboo on one trip last July......3 calves in the bunch.
Until govt. understands that predators are eating this province's wildlife and domestic stock from the inside out and pays less heed to world opinion on how they are managed WE are an endangered species.

[horshur]

I spent 10 days hunting with a finnish fellow who told me alot about hunting moose in Finland...you guys can take from it what you want but it is pretty clear that moose hunting is better for the average Finn then it is for the average BC resident.


http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb006/is_39/ai_n29064489/

[Fisher-Dude]

7A is on LEH....we've been out the Blackwater in 7A for the last 2 1/2 weeks and have seen a grand total of one cow moose, and two fresh moose tracks....7A isn't doing all that good!!! :-(


You should read the regs. There is calf GOS, spike/fork GOS, mature cow and mature bull LEH. 7A produces half the moose harvest of all of BC.

Just because your a shitty hunter doesn't mean there are no moose! :wink:


Hunterdon, there is an LEH grizzly in 8-24. Sadly, no wolf season yet, but we're trying hard to get one.

Gcreek, 25,000 moose in 5-12? You sure you got the decimal in the right spot? There are likely fewer than that in all of region 5.

[gcreek]

Gcreek, 25,000 moose in 5-12? You sure you got the decimal in the right spot? There are likely fewer than that in all of region 5.

A good source who knows the right folks told me that was the # MOE used for this year's LEH. He has never BSed me before and I've known him 30 years. It will be interesting what next year's LEH will be for this area.

I agree with you about region 5's population.

My wife and I were coming home from our other place tonight and a couple of the local boys from the Rez stopped us on the road. 2 cows and calves of ours were on the logging road about 5 miles from where they are supposed to be with 3 wolves following them. They had no gun in their truck so got out and made a bunch of noise to scare them off. Then they followed the cows down about 3 miles. It was dark when they left the cows, stopped at the house and then luckily met us. I beat it up there and found the 2 pairs and trailed them home.
They said not far above where the cows started that it looked like the wolves had had a party on the road and there were way more than they saw in the pack. ( there is a skiff of snow just above us)

Can't beat neighbors like those guys.

[CanuckShooter]

[QUOTE=Fisher-Dude;1002659]You should read the regs. There is calf GOS, spike/fork GOS, mature cow and mature bull LEH. 7A produces half the moose harvest of all of BC.

[QUOTE]

Maybe that is why they are so hard to locate this year??

[bc mike]

I heard 7A was a disappointment for many hunters this year. In two weeks we saw about 20 moose...same places where many others said there were none. The wolves were in big numbers and the bears too! The wolves were everywhere I went in the province this year. I wish the trappers a good wolf season.

[panhead]

Had no trouble fillin' the freezer this year. My local "guide" usually puts me onto one though gcreek...

[gcreek]

Had no trouble fillin' the freezer this year. My local "guide" usually puts me onto one though gcreek...

You keep that kind of talk up and you will have everyone on here wanting to be my hay crew for a few weeks. Although not many would want to put the shank's mare miles on that you do.

[Drillbit]

Hey gcreek,

When you flew over the area looking for cows, did you see any wovles or wolf tracks?

I personally think that to fix the wolf problem, they need to be killed efficiently. Either, helicopter, or poison. They are too smart to hunt with "ethical" hunting, methods.

[gcreek]

Hey gcreek,

When you flew over the area looking for cows, did you see any wovles or wolf tracks?

I personally think that to fix the wolf problem, they need to be killed efficiently. Either, helicopter, or poison. They are too smart to hunt with "ethical" hunting, methods.

We were up Dec 5 the last time looking for my last 3 pair. Found 2 of them, I doubt the other is still alive but the flyers here are still keeping an eye out. We saw a pack of 6 wolves that day and lots of tracks in other spots on that flight and previous ones. From what we are seeing on the ground I am estimating that we have a minimum of 30 wolves within a 10 mile radius of our ranch.

[willyqbc]

I personally think that to fix the wolf problem, they need to be killed efficiently. Either, helicopter, or poison. They are too smart to hunt with "ethical" hunting, methods.

Here in lies the crux of the problem. In a recent meeting with the ministry regarding moose in region 5 it was quite apperant how frustrated the local ministry folks were with their superiors. When I asked, I was told that the "non human kills" (predators, trains, winter kill etc) is way more than the resident hunter and native harvest combined with the predators being the major source of "non-human kills". I was also told that the only really effective means of predator control are poison or the use of helicopters as drillbit metioned above. Now the use of predator specific poison (1080) has been outlawed and the use of a helicopter has become politically unpalatable.....so what does that leave our local ministry employees to work with??? I think you will find that your local ministry employees would like nothing more than to get back to effective predator management but are being completely handcuffed by their politically driven superiors.
Personally i think the decline in ungulate populations we are seeing right now is the tip of the iceberg, I think this decline is going to spin out of control in the next five years as predator populations continue to increase. In the face of the number of animals predators take, indiscriminate of sex or age, the number of animals we hunters take is really irrelevant to the problem.....you could shut down hunting/ native harvest all together and the population decline would still continue to the point that the predators switch to domestic animals or starved to death.
The only answer is to get back to the proven methods of predator control used with great success in the past..... but given hunters lack of sway in the political world of this province I don't have a clue as to how we can make that happen.....we just can't muster enough votes to make a difference in the lives of politicians who make these decisions.

Just my thoughts
Chris

[gcreek]

How many hunters, livestock producers, and natives are there in this province?

We are all concerned about this issue and need to put differences aside and unite in lobbying govt. to deal with the problem.

Immediately.

No more exaustive studies that the desk jockeys keep promoting.

[willyqbc]

How many hunters, livestock producers, and natives are there in this province?



In the grand scheme of things.....not enough to be really politically signifigant, specially when we are fragmented each into our own specific groups with our own specific interests. I agree that united is the only way to go but that is a tall order when most interested user groups in this area have interests that are in direct competition with one another.

I suspect that the only way to really get the politicians to sit up and take notice would be if the first nations started demanding a return of predator management to ensure ungulate populations. The first Nations in this province seem to be the only time I have ever seen where a tiny minority of people actually had significant impact on politicians. How to rally the bands of the province behind this and get them actively persuing it???....I have no idea.

Chris

[srupp]

hmmm thinking..is there a report of how many ranchers livestock gets killed by wolves?? It only goes to reason that high mortality by wolves would also include cattle, calfs, sheep, goats etc...??

The numbers should also provide evidence of a overwhlming problem.

The decisions coming from the local office have not been on the side of the big game animals and hunters for many moons..where the decision ultimatley comes from??just bad decisions..

The ranchers..ie gcreek, local hunters, even knowlegable folks like Kyle Lay, and Al Bush deeply involved in the local hunting and trends need to be sought out for sane decison based plans of operatrion..


Steven

[eaglesj]

If people are smart about what they do in the backcountry, there's no reason to have deaths from wolves or grizzlies. The problem is that too many people feel they can do what they want with no regards to the effects on wildlife and the next people that will be coming through. Also, the impression that I get is that the only good bear is a dead bear. They are as much part of the wild as the elk/moose/deer we hunt. If you want a predator free hunt, go find a game farm. They might even rope it for you.



Must have been great back then, pre roads. Must of us only dream to see so many moose. Sad to hear of such a decline in numbers. In region 8, I can tell you that the grizzly and wolf numbers are wayyyyy up. Spoke with the local CO a few years ago, who confirmed this. Spoke with an old timer a number of years ago and he told me that way back (about 50 to 60 years ago) there were very few grizzles or wolves in the Okanagan. Most were shot/poisoned/trapped. In the last 4 to 5 years I have on many occasions run into grizzlies. One VERY close encounter with a big boar. Didn't sleep well for a few days. The last few years had several encounters with wolves. Spoke with my buddy rancher last week and says he is thinking of not ranching his cattle in the future. Too many losses from the wolves. Some make it back with chunks out of their hind ends. But in our legislators great wisdom, they don't see a problem and there is still absolutely no grizzly or wolf hunting allowed in the okanagan as yet. Not even leh. It's unfortunate, but it seems like a few people have to lose their lives before the light comes on in Victoria. By the way, except for the bottom private land, deer numbers in the hills are not even close to what they were 20 years ago. Proof that wolves don't eat carrots, beans or tomatoes. They eat meat!!!

[Fisher-Dude]

Must have been great back then, pre roads. Must of us only dream to see so many moose. Sad to hear of such a decline in numbers. In region 8, I can tell you that the grizzly and wolf numbers are wayyyyy up. Spoke with the local CO a few years ago, who confirmed this. Spoke with an old timer a number of years ago and he told me that way back (about 50 to 60 years ago) there were very few grizzles or wolves in the Okanagan. Most were shot/poisoned/trapped.

Of course, there were basically no moose in region 8 60 years ago either. So the old timer remembers a time when there were no favourite prey species for the wolves, and few wolves as a result.

I saw wolf tracks and saw a grizzly in region 8 over 40 years ago. They were certainly here. There are certainly more of both now, from my experience and observations.

[gcreek]

In the grand scheme of things.....not enough to be really politically signifigant, specially when we are fragmented each into our own specific groups with our own specific interests. I agree that united is the only way to go but that is a tall order when most interested user groups in this area have interests that are in direct competition with one another.

I suspect that the only way to really get the politicians to sit up and take notice would be if the first nations started demanding a return of predator management to ensure ungulate populations. The first Nations in this province seem to be the only time I have ever seen where a tiny minority of people actually had significant impact on politicians. How to rally the bands of the province behind this and get them actively persuing it???....I have no idea.

Chris


Catch up Lad, the bands from Sugarcane (WL) to Ulgatcho (Anahim Lake) are all involved in discussions with govt. about taking lead in a predator reduction program. Daryll Hebert has been employed as their biologist. If they decide to aerial gun or poison as part of their traditional right watch the govt. boys trip over themselves to lead the parade.

[willyqbc]

the bands from Sugarcane (WL) to Ulgatcho (Anahim Lake) are all involved in discussions with govt. about taking lead in a predator reduction program.

Well thats good to hear!!! Thanks for the info gcreek! As i said, i think they are about the only hope right now of bringing back effective predator control!

Chris

[Fishhound]

It is very sad to see our wildlife in such bad shape mostly due to out of control predator populations.

But it is truely troubling to see that the biggest problem is our officials not doing anything in fear of political backlash and condemnation from so called environmental groups.

It is long past time that all affected user groups put aside differences and got together and confronted our officials and collectively demanded that the appropriate actions are taken

[MuleyMadness]

Catch up Lad, the bands from Sugarcane (WL) to Ulgatcho (Anahim Lake) are all involved in discussions with govt. about taking lead in a predator reduction program. Daryll Hebert has been employed as their biologist. If they decide to aerial gun or poison as part of their traditional right watch the govt. boys trip over themselves to lead the parade.

Very interesting, and a great thing to hear. Does anyone, including the BCWF folks or local leaders in those areas have any idea how we, as hunters, can lend support to their plans in an effort to get the government to see that this is a 'cross user' problem, that we are all interested on working on to resolve? I bet dollars to donuts, the multi group support might be all that's needed, and if the go ahead was given, money would pour in from all three of the user groups this is so strongly affecting, including the GOABC, BCWF, and the bands in an effort to support predator control.

Is the BC Cattlemans Association still a major player in these types of things gcreek, and would they as a group, but likely or inclined (in your opinion) to support it?

[drakfero]

stop hunting cows and calfs for 5 years and the numbers will go up , spend 10% hunting for predators of what you were hunting for meat ;)

[Sitkaspruce]

stop hunting cows and calfs for 5 years and the numbers will go up , spend 10% hunting for predators of what you were hunting for meat ;)

Is there a cow/calf season in Region 5??

In region 7a it works well, so leave it alone. Not sure about reg 5 as it seams number are down.

Cheers

SS

[gcreek]

Very interesting, and a great thing to hear. Does anyone, including the BCWF folks or local leaders in those areas have any idea how we, as hunters, can lend support to their plans in an effort to get the government to see that this is a 'cross user' problem, that we are all interested on working on to resolve? I bet dollars to donuts, the multi group support might be all that's needed, and if the go ahead was given, money would pour in from all three of the user groups this is so strongly affecting, including the GOABC, BCWF, and the bands in an effort to support predator control.

Is the BC Cattlemans Association still a major player in these types of things gcreek, and would they as a group, but likely or inclined (in your opinion) to support it?

The Native bands will be able to create the most pressure in getting govt. to act.

BC Cattlemen's has pretty well been nuetered on handling the predator issue, lack of support and funding from Victoria are the main reasons but giving the COS the reins again was the straw that broke the camel's back. The COS thought that they would be given additional funding and staff to do the inefficient job they are doing now and it didn't work out that way.

What can we do? Write letters. Write them to your MLA's. Write them to the newspapers. Write them to BC Cattlemen's and the local Native Bands in your area. Write them to anyone and everyone you think of with your support for an effective reduction of predator numbers in the province. Support MOE being forced to write permits for effective mitigators to trap problem wildlife on crown land. Support the reinstatement of the use of 10-80 for poisoning wolves. Support aerial gunning. Support opening grizzly seasons in areas that can support a hunt now.

Next year may be too late, there will be 30-50% more wolves this coming spring.

As for drakfero, the Natives get enough cows and calves to satisfy your theory and it isn't working. You and Fisher Dud and a few others aren't going to change the fact by whining so maybe it's time you changed your line of thought.

[MuleyMadness]

Is there a cow/calf season in Region 5??

In region 7a it works well, so leave it alone. Not sure about reg 5 as it seams number are down.

Cheers

SS

Nope, no calves, and no cows in 5.

The other guy doesn't know what he's talking about, or what the problem is, at least in 5, and northern 3, where the wolves are coming on like gangbusters. In 7B I would bet it's as much a grizzly problem as a wolf issue, but if you think getting wolf numbers reduced is going to be a tough thing, forget about how hard it will be knocking the g bears down. Either way, 3 and 5 aren't seeing significantly lower counts because of a cow or calf season, first because there is no calf season in either, and 3 doesn't harvest enough cows to even make it worth talking about.

[40incher]

This is one of those threads where I read the first part and can see all the pre-set agendas come into play. The 7A "model" is only for a moose population at carrying capacity. Even so, killing babies that give you less meat than my left leg is a joke.

All the whining about increased access is a guide\exclusivist genda, whether one admits to it or not. BC residents have priority access and we will exercise that right until we are taking 90% of the harvest. Until then, STFU.

You can not manage any species on a "one size fits all" model, but that seems to be the Demarchi/Martin/"name any other retrired bureaucrat" model. The sooner the bureaucrats step aside the better, or maybe they should write a book about how they couldn't accomplish their personal objectives from within government so they had to infiltrate our ranks to complete their legacy. Only in California North eh.....!!!

It's time that decisions were made in the communities again, and that includes everyone not just the select few.

[gcreek]

This is one of those threads where I read the first part and can see all the pre-set agendas come into play. The 7A "model" is only for a moose population at carrying capacity. Even so, killing babies that give you less meat than my left leg is a joke.

All the whining about increased access is a guide\exclusivist genda, whether one admits to it or not. BC residents have priority access and we will exercise that right until we are taking 90% of the harvest. Until then, STFU.

You can not manage any species on a "one size fits all" model, but that seems to be the Demarchi/Martin/"name any other retrired bureaucrat" model. The sooner the bureaucrats step aside the better, or maybe they should write a book about how they couldn't accomplish their personal objectives from within government so they had to infiltrate our ranks to complete their legacy. Only in California North eh.....!!!

It's time that decisions were made in the communities again, and that includes everyone not just the select few.


FYI, I wasn't whining about access, I was stating facts. So until you can add anything constuctive maybe you should STFU.
Right now you sound like the majority of me me me-ers who would shoot the last moose because of some self entitlement logic in your liberal mind.

The rest of your post has merit.

[Fisher-Dude]

The agenda becomes painfully obvious when the issue of resident priority comes up, and people react so strongly. Just another Willy.

[gcreek]

The agenda becomes painfully obvious when the issue of resident priority comes up, and people react so strongly. Just another Willy.

Until you answer my question Fisher Dud, your credibility remains nil.

[TPK]

Is there a cow/calf season in Region 5??

In region 7a it works well, so leave it alone. Not sure about reg 5 as it seams number are down.

Cheers

SS

What we (the majority of those polled) have decided to do in Region 5 is to lobby the MOE for a GOS Spike Fork Season on top of our Mature Bull LEH. As the First Nations groups are already taking more cows and calves than what would be made available in an Omineca style Moose Management plan here in Region 5, if we add their harvest on top of a Mature Bull LEH and a Spike Fork GOS we would in "essence" be attaining the "Omineca" plan. The only difference is the resident hunter would not see an increase in hunting opportunity beyond the Spike Fork GOS.

[300rum700]

What we (the majority of those polled) have decided to do in Region 5 is to lobby the MOE for a GOS Spike Fork Season on top of our Mature Bull LEH. As the First Nations groups are already taking more cows and calves than what would be made available in an Omineca style Moose Management plan here in Region 5, if we add their harvest on top of a Mature Bull LEH and a Spike Fork GOS we would in "essence" be attaining the "Omineca" plan. The only difference is the resident hunter would not see an increase in hunting opportunity beyond the Spike Fork GOS.

So we have a very well known and accepted wolf problem in this region and those that surround them and our "plan" is to open a GOS for spike fork and further reduce moose numbers? Not to mention more pressure on our already dwindling deer population with more pressure in the bush? I'm all for residents being able to hunt GOS but there is a bigger problem that needs to be addressed before any GOS should even be discussed and thats the wolf population and until something happens with it no "plan" will ever work. Wolves need to be brought into balance again before any sort of natural cycle will be accieved.

[35 Whelen]

If the gov't has such a hard time going back to aerial assaults on the wolves, they should really consider this version or airborne firepower. These guys are based in Texas and Australia. The pilot is very good at anticipating the hogs running tactics. But check out this optically aimed firepower. Some kind of helmet mounted aiming devise that is just deadly on these feral pigs. He doesn't miss too many thats for sure.

http://vimeo.com/21181307

[TPK]

So we have a very well known and accepted wolf problem in this region and those that surround them and our "plan" is to open a GOS for spike fork and further reduce moose numbers? Not to mention more pressure on our already dwindling deer population with more pressure in the bush? I'm all for residents being able to hunt GOS but there is a bigger problem that needs to be addressed before any GOS should even be discussed and thats the wolf population and until something happens with it no "plan" will ever work. Wolves need to be brought into balance again before any sort of natural cycle will be accieved.

I simply answered the question posed by SitkaSpruce, the only time the word "plan" was used in my post was in reference to the Ominca "Plan" for Moose Harvest and that we in Region 5 are after a similar plan for Moose Management.

.... but further to your post, I agree there is a wolf problem that needs to be dealt with how ever it is painfully clear that we (hunters/trappers/Guide Outfitters) are the ones that have to step up to the plate and try to deal with it. There is no help from Victoria for obvious political reasons that have already been mentioned and beat to death here. All "Victoria" is willing to do is leave the "no bag limit" for Wolves in place..... and maybe shoot some Moose to feed the Wolves so they leave the Caribou alone ..oh ya, and maybe nueter a few Alfa-Males.

[40incher]

It's not about me gcreek, I choose to protect my personal interests by protecting everyone else's first.

The spike/fork "opportunity" is a recipe for abandoned fivr/four/three spikes. This has been proven ad-nauseum.

Region 5 has a ridiculous number of any-bull LEH's (over 5,000 last time i checked). There are enough bulls obviously to have a 7-day GOS on any bull in some units, coinciding with Region 6 dates, and with fewer LEH's.

As someone else mentioned, we already have the 7A "model", as the Indian/highway/railway/predator kills more than take care of the antlerless portion of the AAH. I guess Region 7 doesn't have any of the latter four issues.

Regarding predators in general (wolves, grizzly, blacks, coyote, cougar) we have a large and growing problem. Where is the "wildlife management" in this province?! A rhetorical question of course as we all know where the BC system stacks up. Too bad, as the potential is so great.

[300rum700]

I wasn't attacking your post just trying to add some insight to people who insist on (again not necessarily you) having more hunting opportunity when really the only way to have more opportunity is to have more animals in the bush.

[TPK]

... The spike/fork "opportunity" is a recipe for abandoned fivr/four/three spikes. This has been proven ad-nauseum.

Has it? What numbers and from where do you have that support this? I keep hearing it .. but just how true is it? Just because there is GOS for Spike Fork suddenly every hunter in the bush is laying down everything they see and checking the antlers later? They no longer properly indentify the animal? I think not and am getting tired of hearing this. The "ethical" hunters will remain ethical hunters and the un-ethical hunters will remain un-ethical .. a new hunting opportunity will not suddenly generate more bad hunters .. it may generate an opportunity for more of them to gather in one place but other than that, I don't believe your claim.

[GoatGuy]

When Carrier Lumber moved in here the local GO's were assured that there would be NO Hunting on any of the logging roads built by MOF and MOE. (I am not, nor ever have been a GO but I can sympathize with their shinking incomes due to lower allocations. They are taxed on their income just like the rest of us are. How would you like to see your work-weeks shortened by 50 to 75%? ) Carrier built a 27 km main road the first year they were here past our driveway into an area that had seen very little hunting pressure and none in the form of road hunting. The moose had no reason to fear a vehicle as most had never seen one.

Guess we can start here. GOs in the Cariboo have not seen shrinking income due to lower allocations. When the GOS was moved to LEH in the 90s residents lost a large part of their allocation - outfitters lost none. Outfitters have never taken a hit for conservation in the Cariboo. That is documented. Conservation came out of residents pocket.

Over the past 3-4 years most outfitters in the cariboo have not been able to give their allocations away to residents for pennies on the dollar, never mind sell them to non-resident hunters for real money. In fact an educated guess puts outfitters in the cariboo harvest at 50-60% of their allocation over the past 5 years including the tags they have given to resident hunters to fill. So to say they've had or will have their income cut by 50-75% is garbage.

You have also missed that part that outfitters income in the Cariboo did increase for other species in the late 90s and 2000s due to significantly increased sales of mule deer and black bear hunts. Hunts that historically they couldn't sell.


So, reading the last line



Just some observations from an unbiased, opinionated rancher from the sticks. Fire at will.

Indicates the opinion is both biased and uninformed.

Kinda kills the rest of the content on the post and makes it tough to see any kind of credibility in any contribution. The facts speak for themselves.

[TPK]

I wasn't attacking your post just trying to add some insight to people who insist on (again not necessarily you) having more hunting opportunity when really the only way to have more opportunity is to have more animals in the bush.

An Omineca Style Moose Management plan accomplishes both.

[300rum700]

An Omineca Style Moose Management plan accomplishes both.

The only thing it will accomplish is a lower moose and deer population without addressing the real issue which everyone just wants to turn a blind eye to as long as they get an "opportunity".

[Fisher-Dude]

The only thing it will accomplish is a lower moose and deer population without addressing the real issue which everyone just wants to turn a blind eye to as long as they get an "opportunity".

Incorrect. Spike/fork and mule deer buck seasons do not reduce moose nor deer populations.

Come back with some science instead of Tim Hortons gossip.

[jeff]

Incorrect. Spike/fork and mule deer buck seasons do not reduce moose nor deer populations.

Come back with some science instead of Tim Hortons gossip.

so if spike fork season was closed and say 20 moose werent shot ,thats not increasing the population .. hhmmmm..

[Fisher-Dude]

so if spike fork season was closed and say 20 moose werent shot ,thats not increasing the population .. hhmmmm..

I would explain it but I doubt you'd listen.

[jeff]

I would explain it but I doubt you'd listen.

curiosity got the better of me .ok explain ,ill listen ..might not agree but ill listen

[mark]

curiosity got the better of me .ok explain ,ill listen ..might not agree but ill listen


Jeff Ask yourself this question........There is no cow moose season, so why isnt there way more cows out there???????

[300rum700]

Incorrect. Spike/fork and mule deer buck seasons do not reduce moose nor deer populations.

Come back with some science instead of Tim Hortons gossip.

You want science go look for yourself. How many dry cows do you see? How many mature mule deer bucks do you see? Now look at the amount of wolf sign. Now I'm no scientist but it seems to me that the two go hand. Spike fork seasons may work in an area that already have a buck to doe ratio in tact that isn't trying to be managed, or a wolf population that isnt through the roof but we arent dealing with that situation.

[Fisher-Dude]

What you saw during a few weekends of hunting has little correlation to scientific management of game populations.

Like I said, go read up on some science and come back to us with something other than rhetoric.

[jeff]

I would explain it but I doubt you'd listen.

would you please explain...ill listen

[300rum700]

Sorry, my season last all year. Just looking to pass something on to the future. More game equals more hunters.

[The Hermit]

Jeff Ask yourself this question........There is no cow moose season, so why isnt there way more cows out there???????

Jeff - go on take a stab at it...

[jeff]

Jeff - go on take a stab at it...

thats a good question and i dont have the answer ..it is kinda strange ,where ive moose hunted for 23 years now .i see more bulls than cows ..but i think thats cuz im there during the rut ,and the bulls are constintly on the move..in reg 8 ive seen way more cows than bulls so thats a complete opposite

[gcreek]

would you please explain...ill listen

Fisher Dud can't even explain who he is or how much time he spends in the bush so do you think he has a clue about anything else.

Some would believe any written material a beaurocrat would feed them.

[jeff]

Fisher Dud can't even explain who he is or how much time he spends in the bush so do you think he has a clue about anything else.

Some would believe any written material a beaurocrat would feed them.

haha ,love it

[gcreek]

Guess we can start here. GOs in the Cariboo have not seen shrinking income due to lower allocations. When the GOS was moved to LEH in the 90s residents lost a large part of their allocation - outfitters lost none. Outfitters have never taken a hit for conservation in the Cariboo. That is documented. Conservation came out of residents pocket.

Over the past 3-4 years most outfitters in the cariboo have not been able to give their allocations away to residents for pennies on the dollar, never mind sell them to non-resident hunters for real money. In fact an educated guess puts outfitters in the cariboo harvest at 50-60% of their allocation over the past 5 years including the tags they have given to resident hunters to fill. So to say they've had or will have their income cut by 50-75% is garbage.

You have also missed that part that outfitters income in the Cariboo did increase for other species in the late 90s and 2000s due to significantly increased sales of mule deer and black bear hunts. Hunts that historically they couldn't sell.


So, reading the last line



Indicates the opinion is both biased and uninformed.

Kinda kills the rest of the content on the post and makes it tough to see any kind of credibility in any contribution. The facts speak for themselves.

Another unarmed person trying to match wits? I will agree that the US economy has made it difficult to sell some hunts but the rest of your blather is just sad.

Tell me, are you self employed or not? A simple yes or no will do.

We'll carry on this conversation when you answer. I can be as open or narrow minded as you like.

What most of this group is missing is that on the predator issue we are all on the same side of the fence, those that choose to diverge may have sore crotches from riding the fence.

[GoatGuy]

Another unarmed person trying to match wits? I will agree that the US economy has made it difficult to sell some hunts but the rest of your blather is just sad.

Tell me, are you self employed or not? A simple yes or no will do.

We'll carry on this conversation when you answer. I can be as open or narrow minded as you like.

What most of this group is missing is that on the predator issue we are all on the same side of the fence, those that choose to diverge may have sore crotches from riding the fence.

Yes, one part of income is self-employed. Almost as if it is germane to the fact that the numbers you used were blatantly incorrect or that it will somehow change the course of your argument. Too late.

Your post in regards to allocation and income was completely incorrect. In fact outfitters in the cariboo have never harvested their current allocation even in the 'hay days'. Feel free to confirm what I posted from F&W staff in Williams Lake or Victoria.


There is no dissagrement on predators - pretty simple concept.


Unfortunately you're credibility stacks up poorly when you come up with a post that has numbers that are completely false. Don't have much time for that approach. Leave that to the tin hats and religious fanatics.

[gcreek]

Yes, one part of income is self-employed. Almost as if it is germane to the fact that the numbers you used were blatantly incorrect or that it will somehow change the course of your argument. Too late.

Your post in regards to allocation and income was completely incorrect. In fact outfitters in the cariboo have never harvested their current allocation even in the 'hay days'. Feel free to confirm what I posted from F&W staff in Williams Lake or Victoria.
There is no dissagrement on predators - pretty simple concept.


Unfortunately you're credibility stacks up poorly when you come up with a post that has numbers that are completely false. Don't have much time for that approach. Leave that to the tin hats and religious fanatics.


The outfitter that hunts my range area has been reduced from 24 moose to 6 per year since 1987. That was the year that Carrier moved in and the resident slaughter started. Pretty simple math. In 1987 they were 95 to 100% success annually.

One of the outfitters I worked for has 2 areas joined together. Separately, these areas in 1987 had yearly quotas of 22 moose each. He is now allotted 14. When I last guided for him in 1993 we were 19 moose for 20 hunters.
Again, pretty simple math. Want me to go on?

How would you deal with the suggestion that someone else wanted any portion of your projected income simply because they thought it was their right and the Govt. came and took it away from you? (I guess that's called taxation!) You get what I mean.
Personnally I could care less who gets what. I'm just trying to broaden a few narrow minds.

And please, don't call me a liar. That is a big insult to my total being. I don't tell untruths as I see them and I don't beat around the bush.

The govt parasites will tell you and I both what we want to hear and they are likely 2 different stories. In my experience they can't even keep their lies straight when dealing with the same person. I have the BCFS paperwork to prove it.

[jeff]

The outfitter that hunts my range area has been reduced from 24 moose to 6 per year since 1987. That was the year that Carrier moved in and the resident slaughter started. Pretty simple math. In 1987 they were 95 to 100% success annually.

One of the outfitters I worked for has 2 areas joined together. Separately, these areas in 1987 had yearly quotas of 22 moose each. He is now allotted 14. When I last guided for him in 1993 we were 19 moose for 20 hunters.
Again, pretty simple math. Want me to go on?

How would you deal with the suggestion that someone else wanted any portion of your projected income simply because they thought it was their right and the Govt. came and took it away from you? (I guess that's called taxation!) You get what I mean.
Personnally I could care less who gets what. I'm just trying to broaden a few narrow minds.

And please, don't call me a liar. That is a big insult to my total being. I don't tell untruths as I see them and I don't beat around the bush.

The govt parasites will tell you and I both what we want to hear and they are likely 2 different stories. In my experience they can't even keep their lies straight when dealing with the same person. I have the BCFS paperwork to prove it.

well said ,i like your style

[gcreek]

By the way Goatguy, thanks for answering my question.

Pardon my ignorance but WTF is Toon Town? Anyone?

[GoatGuy]

The outfitter that hunts my range area has been reduced from 24 moose to 6 per year since 1987. That was the year that Carrier moved in and the resident slaughter started. Pretty simple math. In 1987 they were 95 to 100% success annually.

One of the outfitters I worked for has 2 areas joined together. Separately, these areas in 1987 had yearly quotas of 22 moose each. He is now allotted 14. When I last guided for him in 1993 we were 19 moose for 20 hunters.
Again, pretty simple math. Want me to go on?

How would you deal with the suggestion that someone else wanted any portion of your projected income simply because they thought it was their right and the Govt. came and took it away from you? (I guess that's called taxation!) You get what I mean.
Personnally I could care less who gets what. I'm just trying to broaden a few narrow minds.

And please, don't call me a liar. That is a big insult to my total being. I don't tell untruths as I see them and I don't beat around the bush.

The govt parasites will tell you and I both what we want to hear and they are likely 2 different stories. In my experience they can't even keep their lies straight when dealing with the same person. I have the BCFS paperwork to prove it.

Haha, so this is the equivalent of the 'my friend gets drawn every year and I never get drawn' thread. Pretty microscopic view of a region and species.

You're missing changes in admin guidelines as well as the difference between allocation and quota, but hey it sounds good. Not my cup of tea, although I do find it entertaining. More big picture than dealing with each of the 90,000 resident hunters and 250 outfitters.

Got the predator stuff, the other stuff was a thought killer. If predation was the focus why include the rest of the babble?

And after all the whining my guess is the outfitter allocation in the cariboo will be going up in 2012 not down.

[gcreek]

Allocation or quota, they are the same thing to me.

The nearest guy thinks he will be at 3 per year in 2012. He has had a tough time filling out in the last few years so it is understandable in that situation. With the dwindling moose population I don't think the 3 moose he loses should be allocated to anyone else either.



Diverging a little but still on the subject..... I still can't get over a statement that a bio told me in about 1990.

I asked this fellow why they hadn't restricted the logging roads here to industrial use as they had promised prior to Carrier moving in.
His reply was that Horsefly was shot out and the resident hunters needed somewhere to go. If that isn't true parasite logic tell me differently.

You are beginning to convince me that you are another of the group that wants a GOS to shoot the last moose.

[GoatGuy]

Allocation or quota, they are the same thing to me.

The nearest guy thinks he will be at 3 per year in 2012. He has had a tough time filling out in the last few years so it is understandable in that situation. With the dwindling moose population I don't think the 3 moose he loses should be allocated to anyone else either.



Diverging a little but still on the subject..... I still can't get over a statement that a bio told me in about 1990.

I asked this fellow why they hadn't restricted the logging roads here to industrial use as they had promised prior to Carrier moving in.
His reply was that Horsefly was shot out and the resident hunters needed somewhere to go. If that isn't true parasite logic tell me differently.

You are beginning to convince me that you are another of the group that wants a GOS to shoot the last moose.

I see, because I can support my argument with fact, data and policy I must want to kill all the moose off in the Cariboo. Oppositely, you use hearsay, don't know the difference between allocation and quota, don't support wildlife management based on science, believe outfitters are going broke because of the allocation policy when they cannot sell nor give their allocation away and are probably going get a greater percent of the allocation in 2012 you must be the conservationist in the crowd.

That is certainly a rational thought process and a natural outcome for this discussion.

We should see how many doctors would like to take the heresay approach to medicine? According to your logic we would certainly increase the survival rates of all terminally ill patients if we just ignored science. Maybe take a few youth, give them an exam on 'chicken soup for the soul' then give them a scalpel and send them out to practice medicine. Add in mandatory attendance at the local coffee shop so that everyone can tell you about the old world remedies their aunt told them about and really start saving lives. Sounds like a recipe for success if you ask me!

[gcreek]

Correct me if this quote of yours isn't hearsay........

Over the past 3-4 years most outfitters in the cariboo have not been able to give their allocations away to residents for pennies on the dollar, never mind sell them to non-resident hunters for real money. In fact an educated guess puts outfitters in the cariboo harvest at 50-60% of their allocation over the past 5 years including the tags they have given to resident hunters to fill. So to say they've had or will have their income cut by 50-75% is garbage.

You have also missed that part that outfitters income in the Cariboo did increase for other species in the late 90s and 2000s due to significantly increased sales of mule deer and black bear hunts. Hunts that historically they couldn't sell.

Now please, quit trying to baffle me with BS.


You are quite skilled, are you a parasitic beaurocrat in your other line of work?


Edit,,,, BTW, how do you think modern medicine has and is evolving if not for hearsay and experiment. Try another example.

[6616]

The outfitter that hunts my range area has been reduced from 24 moose to 6 per year since 1987. That was the year that Carrier moved in and the resident slaughter started. Pretty simple math. In 1987 they were 95 to 100% success annually.

One of the outfitters I worked for has 2 areas joined together. Separately, these areas in 1987 had yearly quotas of 22 moose each. He is now allotted 14. When I last guided for him in 1993 we were 19 moose for 20 hunters.
Again, pretty simple math. Want me to go on?


Resident slaughter eh...???

According to your figures, sounds to me like the outfitters were taking a fairly huge number of moose as well. How many outfitters in Region 5..... times 20 moose each = how many dead moose?

Lots of things have changed for everybody since the late '80's and early 90's,,,, but I'd be willing to bet residents have taken a bigger hit on moose harvests than outfitters since those glory years.

[6616]

So my question is: If the moose populations are in the tank and mule deer populations rapidly declining as well, what is maintaining these high wolf populations, what are they eating?

There has to be a wolf die-off pretty soon if the moose are mostly gone,,, right...?

[hunter1947]

These wolves and cougars will continue to clim in numbers as long as they have a few animals left to take down even when the prey numbers of animals drop in population they will find other animals other then moose ,deer ,elk to feed on :icon_frow the predators will try to survive to the bitter end....

[gcreek]

Resident slaughter eh...???

According to your figures, sounds to me like the outfitters were taking a fairly huge number of moose as well. How many outfitters in Region 5..... times 20 moose each = how many dead moose?

Lots of things have changed for everybody since the late '80's and early 90's,,,, but I'd be willing to bet residents have taken a bigger hit on moose harvests than outfitters since those glory years.

I know of no other way to describe the result of hundreds of road hunters descending on thousands of moose that didn't know what vehicles were.
Don't you find it ironic that the GO's had a stable population of moose to sell AND residents who wanted to brave the swamps on foot or drive the limited road network also had very high success rates until access was opened up? There was even a cow season back then, everything the resident hunter crowd wishes for now was there until the entitlement mentality forced the beaurocrats to cave under the pressure. Most of the limited hunting allocation laws of today are a direct result of resident hunting pressure from the past. The natives are killing less moose today than back then also. As with most youth of today there fewer young guys even going out looking.

Predators will kill any food they can until it is gone, then they will start eating each other.

[CanuckShooter]

So my question is: If the moose populations are in the tank and mule deer populations rapidly declining as well, what is maintaining these high wolf populations, what are they eating?

There has to be a wolf die-off pretty soon if the moose are mostly gone,,, right...?

when all the wild animals are eaten, they will eat all the cattle and dogs and cats, then they will eat some little kids waiting for school buses and some drunks passed out in the ditch.......

[CanuckShooter]

Now please, quit trying to baffle me with BS.

You are quite skilled, are you a parasitic beaurocrat in your other line of work?


Spot on.....twisting and turning...trying to muddle you up fur shur.

[frenchbar]

when all the wild animals are eaten, they will eat all the cattle and dogs and cats, then they will eat some little kids waiting for school buses and some drunks passed out in the ditch.......

predators love the taste of a wine soaked drunk..lol

[Steeleco]

well said ,i like your style gcreek has that familiar feeling, like he was punted once before and is still using the same MO under his new name. Time will tell!!!

[bigwhiteys]

gcreek has that familiar feeling, like he was punted once before and is still using the same MO under his new name. Time will tell!!!
If your alluding to GCreek possibly being Willy, he's not. I don't know GCreek from adam but anyone who will tell FD and GG to pound sand is OK. I think he's offered some insight from his experience, as I am sure many others do, and then had the stats and science monkeys come in and tell him how wrong he is on all counts. Familiar feeling... Oh yes, sure is!

Carl

[ROEBUCK]

exactly
lets not make this site, 1 sided !
disagree with the hbc gods at your peril ! YOU COULD GET BANNED !

[TPK]

The only thing it will accomplish is a lower moose and deer population without addressing the real issue which everyone just wants to turn a blind eye to as long as they get an "opportunity".

You are wrong and the science backs this up... and we're talking Moose here, so try and keep on topic, Deer is a different animal. What is the "real issue" that everyone is turning a blind eye too?

In Region 5 the "real issue" is we want and can easily sustain a GOS on Spike Forks. Even the Ministry agrees that if we shot every single Spike Fork we could (and while an exageration that we could .. let's just say we did by some miracle accomplish this) it wouldn't significantly harm the Moose population in any way. How can this be? Keep in mind that not every young bull will be a Spike Fork in year one, two or even three, so harvesting a large number of Spike Forks does not eliminate "all" the young bulls, just the ones that fit the antler configuration known as "Spike Fork".

We're pushing hard for the pilot project (MU's 5-1 and 5-2) and have high hopes science and good game management will prevail and we'll get it.

For those that shake their head and think we're wrong to harvest when the poplutaion is low, and that simply "not shooting animals" is in some way "conservation" , you need to do some reading and research to understand why you are wrong.

[Steeleco]

Chill Gents, twas just a feeling!! Debate is good, it's when the debate crosses the line to "personal" that us "Overbearing Mods" step in.

[willyqbc]

In Region 5 the "real issue" is we want and can easily sustain a GOS on Spike Forks.

We're pushing hard for the pilot project (MU's 5-1 and 5-2) and have high hopes science and good game management will prevail and we'll get it.



I sat in the meeting with the ministry where this option was discussed and I think it is important to mention that this option will not be an increase in moose harvest, but rather it will shuffle where that harvest goes. There is a price to pay for this option as the opening of the spike/fork will result in a 50% reduction in LEH tags available. The ministries reasoning for this was based on numbers taken from southern regions that currently have a spike/fork season. From those numbers they project that a 50% reduction in LEH authorization will be required to still maintain the same amount of bulls harvested. So the end result will theoretically not be more moose shot, but rather 50% less people will have an any bull tag while every hunter will have the opportunity for a spike/fork.

I think it is also important to note that due to the declining moose numbers the ministry also stated that we will be seeing at least a 10% reduction in LEH authorizations even if we stay with a straight LEH system here. As I stated before I don't think either straight LEH or the reduced LEH-spike/fork option will have a whole lot of effect on the problem of declining moose populations here.....I still think it is all going to come down to predator control to put the brakes on this decline. I know there is realistically not much we as individual hunters can do to knock back wolf numbers, but we can ensure we fill our bear tags in the spring as they do kill a signifigant number of moose calves every year.....every little bit we can do will help.

Still not sure where i sit on the spike/fork season question, just thought i would add a bit of info to the debate.

Chris

[Jagermeister]

It is my personal belief that the same folks that want to save all the wolves and bears are also the folks that want to shut hunting down altogether. Add in some Victoria biologists that have the same sentiments. How better to accheive this than by giving out liberal LEHs based on bogus overcounts of moose and deer and no predator management until there is not a sufficient herd to warrant a season.
I have been told that one of MOE's cariboo "management" strategies is to reduce populations of deer and moose that are near cariboo herds. The "logic" is that with fewer prey animals, the wolves will starve to death and the cariboo herds will be saved.
Did some of these bios forget that wolves have noses and legs? That there is also livestock "out there"?

In response to F-D, that open road, open season worked so well here that hunters have to travel farther north to find a moose. How's that workin' for ya?I can appreciate your thoughts on the early times that you speak of, new road access making animals easy prey for hunters. It probably was a mistake of the biologist not to make the¼ mile no shooting zones on the new roads.
However, the entire Region has been under an LEH inclusive hunt since the mid 90s, so you can hardly blame the resident hunters for over-harvesting the region, now can you? And when MOE decided to introduce the 7A model with a fork-horn opening, the indians, induced by the G/O stormed the MOE offices in Williams Lake demanding curtailment of that opening, effective immediately.
It is only natural when you have a population explosion of a prey species, there will be a following population explosion in the predator species, i.e. wolves and bears. Denying the resident hunter an GOS opportunity, has cost the indians and the G/Os their resource, not the other way around.
One poster suggested that the ranchers should sue the government. MOE was only acquiesing to the demands of the indians and G/Os, if anyone should be culpable for livestock loss, blame the G/Os. It was their greed that got them what they wanted in the first place and what they didn't want in the second place.
I have no sympathy for the G/Os in that region.
Your comment to F-D is out of line. The fact as you state was when Carrier opened the road, there was a massive kill, but that was in 1987 or thereabouts by your own admission. The subsequent LEH corrected the moose population numbers in the following years. Also, after about 3 years, moose become acquainted to the presence of the road as was demonstrated in Region 6 with the road south of Vanderhoof. There, the biologist implemented the ¼ mile not shooting corridor.
In actual fact, it was the Region 5 inclusive LEH that forced the resident hunter north.
You might say that this is devine justice for the resident hunter because in the end, no one will be hunting moose because there will not be any.

[Jagermeister]

By the way, this was released this morning. I don't think it will fly given the state of the declining moose popuations in the region.
http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/ahte/hunting/cariboo-moose-regulation-options

[300rum700]

You are wrong and the science backs this up... and we're talking Moose here, so try and keep on topic, Deer is a different animal. What is the "real issue" that everyone is turning a blind eye too?

In Region 5 the "real issue" is we want and can easily sustain a GOS on Spike Forks. Even the Ministry agrees that if we shot every single Spike Fork we could (and while an exageration that we could .. let's just say we did by some miracle accomplish this) it wouldn't significantly harm the Moose population in any way. How can this be? Keep in mind that not every young bull will be a Spike Fork in year one, two or even three, so harvesting a large number of Spike Forks does not eliminate "all" the young bulls, just the ones that fit the antler configuration known as "Spike Fork".

We're pushing hard for the pilot project (MU's 5-1 and 5-2) and have high hopes science and good game management will prevail and we'll get it.

For those that shake their head and think we're wrong to harvest when the poplutaion is low, and that simply "not shooting animals" is in some way "conservation" , you need to do some reading and research to understand why you are wrong.

You agreed with me on my point about the wolf problem didn't you? And you pretty much stated we lost the battle to anti's over predator control, thats not turning a blind eye? The only possible way to ever increase our moose is to reduce wolf numbers. Sorry the last time I checked deer live in the same woods as moose and to put more pressure on something that we are taking an active approach on trying to restore seems totally backwards. It is the same topic the two go hand in hand, less predation equals more ungulate population. Maybe its time you took a look at the big picture and stop worrying about where you are going to hunt next year.

And as far as hunters being polled for a spike fork GOS it must not have made its way past Hope because no one I know has heard hide nor hair of it, but hey i wouldnt expect anything less.

[bigwhiteys]

while every hunter will have the opportunity for a spike/fork.


There it is!!! The Opportunity... lol. Look out baby moose!


Still not sure where i sit on the spike/fork season question, just thought i would add a bit of info to the debate.

We've shot two bulls that fit spike/fork def. and the amount of meat you get leaves a lot to be desired. In my own opinion, it's a hunt for old farts with no teeth left to chew :) or for youth hunters. 1 Baby Moose won't feed my family for very long. 1 of these little Island deer turned into sausage/pepperoni lasted less than 2 months in my house and a Baby Moose not much longer. I'd rather kill one big animal and turn it into burger to fill my freezer every year then have to kill several smaller ones. Then there is the other side of the coin I see... Families shooting 4,5,6,7 or more animals in the same household. How do they justify needing that much meat? Because it's legal? Because they give some away? I'll bet a pile of it goes to waste, gets freezer burned or chucked out every year to make room for the new. I don't give away my Game Meat, other than a few odd packages of sausage because I worked hard for this sh!t when I have it, and you can get your own with a license and tag!!

I think a lot of the conservation issue is something that starts within every single one of us as hunters, not just scientists, biologists and book worms and what they tell us is OK.

Carl

[GoatGuy]

There it is!!! The Opportunity... lol. Look out baby moose!



We've shot two bulls that fit spike/fork def. and the amount of meat you get leaves a lot to be desired. In my own opinion, it's a hunt for old farts with no teeth left to chew :) or for youth hunters. 1 Baby Moose won't feed my family for very long. 1 of these little Island deer turned into sausage/pepperoni lasted less than 2 months in my house and a Baby Moose not much longer. I'd rather kill one big animal and turn it into burger to fill my freezer every year then have to kill several smaller ones. Then there is the other side of the coin I see... Families shooting 4,5,6,7 or more animals in the same household. How do they justify needing that much meat? Because it's legal? Because they give some away? I'll bet a pile of it goes to waste, gets freezer burned or chucked out every year to make room for the new. I don't give away my Game Meat, other than a few odd packages of sausage because I worked hard for this sh!t when I have it, and you can get your own with a license and tag!!

I think a lot of the conservation issue is something that starts within every single one of us as hunters, not just scientists, biologists and book worms and what they tell us is OK.

Carl

If baby moose is not enough and the conservationist in you tells you it's not right, why not wait for a tri-palm/10 pt to walk out? Why would you shoot or even hunt spike-fork?

If the deer are too small why hunt them?
Why not shoot a big island black bear and eat that instead?

Sounds like a contradiction in the making and a branch of the ethics thread. I don't give away my game meat...... other than a few odd packs of sausage. Hahaha.

[panhead]

This is not rocket science. I have been hunting gcreek's area for over 30 years. Never missed a year. Whenever I have been lucky enough to get a draw have usually been fortunate enough to fill my freezer. Moose numbers are now at the point there that you are lucky to see a moose. Let alone a bull. The hay days were just as he speaks. In all the hay day years that I have seen, almost no one was willing to walk. Simply drove to the end of the road and did a 180. The GO's were the only one's that hunted past the tire tracks. Plenty of moose for all who wanted to put on a few miles. Now with the roads - "crickets." See plenty of wolfe sign though - probably cleaning up the last standing. They have no "open season." Same with Ursus Horribilus...Reducing their numbers through an open season seems like a good start to me...
My 2 cents worth...

[6616]

I sat in the meeting with the ministry where this option was discussed and I think it is important to mention that this option will not be an increase in moose harvest, but rather it will shuffle where that harvest goes. There is a price to pay for this option as the opening of the spike/fork will result in a 50% reduction in LEH tags available. The ministries reasoning for this was based on numbers taken from southern regions that currently have a spike/fork season. From those numbers they project that a 50% reduction in LEH authorization will be required to still maintain the same amount of bulls harvested. So the end result will theoretically not be more moose shot, but rather 50% less people will have an any bull tag while every hunter will have the opportunity for a spike/fork.

I think it is also important to note that due to the declining moose numbers the ministry also stated that we will be seeing at least a 10% reduction in LEH authorizations even if we stay with a straight LEH system here. As I stated before I don't think either straight LEH or the reduced LEH-spike/fork option will have a whole lot of effect on the problem of declining moose populations here.....I still think it is all going to come down to predator control to put the brakes on this decline. I know there is realistically not much we as individual hunters can do to knock back wolf numbers, but we can ensure we fill our bear tags in the spring as they do kill a signifigant number of moose calves every year.....every little bit we can do will help.

Still not sure where i sit on the spike/fork season question, just thought i would add a bit of info to the debate.

Chris

I think a 50% reduction in LEH opportunities due to a spike/fork season would be overkill. In R4 the spike/fork harvest is only 25% of the resident LEH harvest, and 20% of the overall resident harvest.

[willyqbc]

I think a 50% reduction in LEH opportunities due to a spike/fork season would be overkill. In R4 the spike/fork harvest is only 25% of the resident LEH harvest, and 20% of the overall resident harvest.

According to the ministry rep at the meeting, the combination of legitimate spike/fork harvest and the dramatic increase in incidents of shot and left due to mistaken point count etc is why they feel the 50% reduction is neccesary. Not saying their numbers are accurate as far as number of moose shot and left in areas where a spike/fork season are present, but if they are accurate, it happens WAY more than I would have thought.

Chris

[ROEBUCK]

According to the ministry rep at the meeting, the combination of legitimate spike/fork harvest and the dramatic increase in incidents of shot and left due to mistaken point count etc is why they feel the 50% reduction is neccesary. Not saying their numbers are accurate as far as number of moose shot and left in areas where a spike/fork season are present, but if they are accurate, it happens WAY more than I would have thought.

Chris

if they are accurate with illegal bulls being shot !
why dont they have a any bull season for say a week long and no other open season on moose ! and reduce LEH to keep the kill ratio the same

[Sitkaspruce]

There it is!!! The Opportunity... lol. Look out baby moose!



We've shot two bulls that fit spike/fork def. and the amount of meat you get leaves a lot to be desired. In my own opinion, it's a hunt for old farts with no teeth left to chew :) or for youth hunters. 1 Baby Moose won't feed my family for very long. 1 of these little Island deer turned into sausage/pepperoni lasted less than 2 months in my house and a Baby Moose not much longer. I'd rather kill one big animal and turn it into burger to fill my freezer every year then have to kill several smaller ones.

Carl

I would have to disagree with you on this one. Even if I shoot a "baby Moose", it still is better than nothing at all, hell it is even better than any deer out there. I personally like the idea of shooting animals across all age and sex classes. I have taken lots of bulls and yes, the bigger ones do add more meat to the freezer, but even a "baby Moose' taste better than anyhting else out there, except maybe sheep.

Then there is the other side of the coin I see... Families shooting 4,5,6,7 or more animals in the same household. How do they justify needing that much meat? Because it's legal? Because they give some away? I'll bet a pile of it goes to waste, gets freezer burned or chucked out every year to make room for the new. I don't give away my Game Meat, other than a few odd packages of sausage because I worked hard for this sh!t when I have it, and you can get your own with a license and tag!!

The "because I can sydrome" runs big in a lot of hunters and, I believe, the LEH system pushes some hunters to this as they have no idea when they will be able to get another tag, so lets load up with as much as I can because you just never know........

The ones I just do not get are the hunters who shoot an animal for DOG FOOD, in the states it has become a real problem as some guys are poaching and selling it to the idiots who know no better.

I think a lot of the conservation issue is something that starts within every single one of us as hunters, not just scientists, biologists and book worms and what they tell us is OK.

Carl

The thing I do not like about the S/F is the possible reduction in LEH authorizations. If this is the case, then it will put even more pressure on regions 3, 5 (the other parts),6 and 7, which I thought was what MOE and others where trying to get away from. I personally would not go to region 5 just to hunt s/f, so how many who usually put in for those areas will not go to other areas or regions??

Cheers

SS

[Jagermeister]

if they are accurate with illegal bulls being shot !
why dont they have a any bull season for say a week long and no other open season on moose ! and reduce LEH to keep the kill ratio the same
This is exactly what got the Region into the mess in the first place. There was a GOS for moose that commenced from the middle to the end of October. Put so many hunters into the area that there virtually was no place for the moose to escape to, when they were fleeing from one hunter, they were running into another. I'm sure the success rate escalated pretty good because shortly after that, moose were totally shutdown with the inclusive LEH exception. That definitely was not and is not the way to go.

[TPK]

You agreed with me on my point about the wolf problem didn't you? And you pretty much stated we lost the battle to anti's over predator control, thats not turning a blind eye?

Sorry the last time I checked deer live in the same woods as moose and to put more pressure on something that we are taking an active approach on trying to restore seems totally backwards. It is the same topic the two go hand in hand, less predation equals more ungulate population. Maybe its time you took a look at the big picture and stop worrying about where you are going to hunt next year.

And as far as hunters being polled for a spike fork GOS it must not have made its way past Hope because no one I know has heard hide nor hair of it, but hey i wouldnt expect anything less.

No one I know is turning a blind eye to the wolf issue. Not sure why you feel that way? All the MOE is willing to do is leave the NBL in place and as mentioned, shoot some Moose for the Wolves so they leave the Caribou alone and maybe nueter a few Alfa-Males. The rest is up to us the hunters, trappers, and GO's. There is no "blind eye" we all know what needs to be done and there is nothing left but the doing. I personally do not have the time or ability to hunt wolves, I'll buy a Bear tag again like I do every year but I do not "actively" hunt bear. If I see one I will harvest one. Same with wolves, if I can lay one down I will. There is nothing more to this story that I'm aware of ... I have lobbyed the MOE, I have sat at round tables and discussed the issue, I have in fact spent too much time away from Wife in pursuit of a solution for the wolf problem in Region 5 from the MOE and there is none coming. Hardly turning a blind eye.


As to your comment about more pressure on a declining population .. the long and short is that science (and real life examples) has proven that a balanced harvest across the board (Mature Bulls, cows/calves, and Spike Forks) does a wondeful job at kicking the Moose population into overdrive. It doesn't matter what the population is to start with, the Omineca plan works. I am concerned about what I'm going to hunt next year and I'm afraid ill-informed arm chair conservationists are going to screw up a good opportunity for a Spike Fork season. I am in fact fighting for the resident hunters ability to not have to rely on an LEH to hunt Moose in their back yard (figuratively speaking), for the "OPPORTUNITY" to take a Spike Fork while out Deer hunting if I see one. Again, even the MOE has no problem with a Spike Fork season. Thank-you Chris for filling in some of the info around that meeting regarding the reduction of LEH's etc. I don't think it will be as bad as 50% if we get a Spike Fork season, but there will be a reduction on top of the already planned 10%.

Feeling left out about not being "polled"? If there is any blame it falls on the shoulders of the MOE. They held open house town hall meetings in 100 Mile, Williams Lake, and Quesnel to talk about Alternative Moose Harvest Stratagies and did very little advertising about it. Some clubs PAID for advertising themselves to get the word out, some people spent a hell of a lot of time on the phone talking to people about it. Some people even put up posters around their town on the public bulletin boards. There was a great discussion on this very board about it. I would say every attempt was made on the part of the local clubs and the BCWF to get the word out. If no one you know heard about this then I can only assume they are not involved in their club, the BCWF, or this site.

[bigwhiteys]

If baby moose is not enough and the conservationist in you tells you it's not right, why not wait for a tri-palm/10 pt to walk out?
Why do you think I am not eating Moose this year? And our two points were shot 12 hours apart on the same trip. Lesson learned, not enough meat!


If the deer are too small why hunt them?

Because as SS stated it's better than nothing and my kids love em'. It's also a hunt I can do WALKING from my home, not dropping a few GRAND in expenses to go off-Island.


Why not shoot a big island black bear and eat that instead?

Hahahahaha.... Why don't you come shoot one and then eat it, the worms too.


Sounds like a contradiction in the making and a branch of the ethics thread. I don't give away my game meat...... other than a few odd packs of sausage. Hahaha.

I am referring to the guys who often mention they "give-away" large amounts of their processed game meat to friends or family under the guise of "charity". Granted it's not a lot, but there are families out there like the below example.

Family of 5

Dad has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Wife has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Child 1 has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Child 2 has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Child 3 has Core and 1 Moose Tag

Does the entire family need a Moose each, then maybe a deer each, how about an Elk or two? Can they really eat it all in a year, or before the meat is freezer burnt crap?


Carl

I would have to disagree with you on this one. Even if I shoot a "baby Moose", it still is better than nothing at all, hell it is even better than any deer out there. I personally like the idea of shooting animals across all age and sex classes. I have taken lots of bulls and yes, the bigger ones do add more meat to the freezer, but even a "baby Moose' taste better than anyhting else out there, except maybe sheep.

Sure disagree. That's fine. If you're going to spend the money and time to kill a Baby Moose you may as well just buy a side of beef or buffalo. You'll probably get more for your $$$.


The "because I can sydrome" runs big in a lot of hunters and, I believe, the LEH system pushes some hunters to this as they have no idea when they will be able to get another tag, so lets load up with as much as I can because you just never know........

Meat only lasts so long until it's freezer burnt garbage. "loading up" with more than you need seems silly and wasteful.


The ones I just do not get are the hunters who shoot an animal for DOG FOOD, in the states it has become a real problem as some guys are poaching and selling it to the idiots who know no better.

Ahhh... The Dog Food. Is this in reference to me legally killing a Black Bear and grinding it up for Dog Food? BECAUSE I CAN!?!?!?! Hahahaha. They aren't category A like Moose and we have no shortage of Black Bears.

Carl

[TSS]

I see, because I can support my argument with fact, data and policy I must want to kill all the moose off in the Cariboo. Oppositely, you use hearsay, don't know the difference between allocation and quota, don't support wildlife management based on science, believe outfitters are going broke because of the allocation policy when they cannot sell nor give their allocation away and are probably going get a greater percent of the allocation in 2012 you must be the conservationist in the crowd.

That is certainly a rational thought process and a natural outcome for this discussion.

We should see how many doctors would like to take the heresay approach to medicine? According to your logic we would certainly increase the survival rates of all terminally ill patients if we just ignored science. Maybe take a few youth, give them an exam on 'chicken soup for the soul' then give them a scalpel and send them out to practice medicine. Add in mandatory attendance at the local coffee shop so that everyone can tell you about the old world remedies their aunt told them about and really start saving lives. Sounds like a recipe for success if you ask me!

Self discription or what?

[300rum700]

maybe you havent turned a blind eye but abandoning it isnt much different. I will have to agree to disagree on the timing of this new seaon. As for the moe, they really dont seem to do anything until its too late and I would hardly call it management more like crowd control, the squeaky wheel getting the grease so to speak. As for your armchair conservationist comment, I spend more time in the field than most biologists that come up with these numbers and believe what I see.

[Sitkaspruce]

Sure disagree. That's fine. If you're going to spend the money and time to kill a Baby Moose you may as well just buy a side of beef or buffalo. You'll probably get more for your $$$.

LOL!!! Thats what the wife told me if I did not get a moose this year, bring home a side of Buffalo!!!!

If I put a dollar figure on anything I love to do, whether fishing, hunting, golf, curling etc.....I would be broke, and getting my three squares in a padded room with a jacket that has no sleeves.....but that is not what "Hunting" is about. Getting an animal on a trip, whether from my back door or accross the province, is a bonus to being out there, spending time in the outdoors and not sitting at home. And bring home a "baby Moose" is still better than any buf or beef.:mrgreen::wink:


Meat only lasts so long until it's freezer burnt garbage. "loading up" with more than you need seems silly and wasteful.

Fully agree, but who am I to say what a families needs are, as long as it is being used, I really cannot complain.

Ahhh... The Dog Food. Is this in reference to me legally killing a Black Bear and grinding it up for Dog Food? BECAUSE I CAN!?!?!?! Hahahaha. They aren't category A like Moose and we have no shortage of Black Bears.



Carl

No reference to you, I had no idea you did. I have a problem with people shooting any animal for dog food. There are folks on here who referenced using the neck and shoulders of deer and moose for their dog and just using the prime cuts for themselves...but as long as it is legal, it is my problem to get over.

Good discussion

Cheers

SS

[gcreek]

I find it odd that MOE is talking about any changes until their counts are completed. Rodger Stuart told me they were to count 5-12b during early Dec. Haven't seen any helicopter activity, does anyone know if it was completed? Started?

I actually saw 2 moose yesterday at our lower ranch, the first from the ground in over 9 weeks. Since the first snow stayed in early November there has been a total of 5 moose cross the 25 km road that gets us to Hwy 20.

I also find it odd that hunters are wanting a GOS for immature bulls in an area that was .9:1 odds in 2011 and lots of hunters still did not kill a moose.
Several stopped in here complaining that there were no moose left in the country. One guy even accused panhead of shooting the last one.

Since Jager still hasn't answered my queries I'm going to ignore his feeble attempts to discredit me. All I can say is that a guide must have really spanked him at one time.

Steeleco, you can put your mind at rest. I am not a poster reincarnate. I didn't even know this site existed until a few days before my first post in late summer of this year. You can be assured that I will speak my mind off the cuff and have no hidden agenda that I need to fortify with lies.
I have no time or inclination to find or quote the BS that MOE desk jockey parasites publish. They are farther from reality than most on here.

I posted somewhere in a thread the need for interested individuals to write letters to newspapers, MLA's, upper office beaurocrats etc. supporting a concerted predator cull and the need for experienced mitigators to be given permits to deal with problem livestock predators on crown land at any time. That IS my agenda as it should be for every hunter, cattleman and Native in this province that depends on natural resource for pleasure, business, or sustenance use.

[TPK]

I find it odd that MOE is talking about any changes until their counts are completed. Rodger Stuart told me they were to count 5-12b during early Dec. Haven't seen any helicopter activity, does anyone know if it was completed? Started? ..

I also find it odd that hunters are wanting a GOS for immature bulls in an area that was .9:1 odds in 2011 and lots of hunters still did not kill a moose.


The Spike Fork season if granted would only be applied to the test area of MU 5-1 and 5-2. That survey has been done.

What do you find odd in hunters wanting to take advantage of a hunting opportunity? Many of us are meat hunters and would be more than happy with an immature bull or at least the opportunity.... and if I could fit the word opportunity in here one more time I would .. but I doubt it would sink in.

[MuleyMadness]

I really think the key to the whole thing, from a conservation standpoint, is that the AAH isn't increased (and possibly decreased if numbers warrant it) with the advent of Spike/Fork seasons, and the most aggressive estimates for how many would be taken (legally and otherwise) in a GOS with a resultant reduction in the LEH's given out. To my understanding, that is essentially what the plan would be, in an effort to spread the harvest out across animals of all sexes and ages. It's a sound policy to do so, because those younger bulls aren't generally breeding bulls, and if you are taking them (when many will be wolf or starvation fodder in their first 2 years) rather than a mature breeding bull, there is actually a net gain in animals.

Think of it this way. (All my numbers are bullshit, but they may help get what I understand to be, the point across)100 bulls are shot in region xyz on the current LEH only system. Because of that, maybe 30% of the 300 cows are not bred in certain areas, because of mature bull decline (call it decimation if you wish) due to hunting and predators. The spike/forks aren't humping their way through Sept/October either way quite likely. The following spring 210 cows (assuming 100% live birth, which obviously again is bullshit, but I need to use a number, and it's the roundest :) ) have a single calf, leaving a total increase of 110 animals (bull and cow). Next hunting season, we have an any bull LEH with 50 animals and an anticipated maximum 50 spike/forks being harvested. That rut, there are still 50 mature bulls roaming around xyz, and as a result, only 5% of the cows go unbred. As a result, the following spring, there are 285 calves born, resulting in a net increase of 185 animals over the year before. Obviously predator control is going to be needed in those situations, because there will be even more prey, but it's the right direction to move in.

That is at least the way the science was explained and appears to me (again, all numbers are fictional), and my understanding of the proposal that was put forth for 5-1 and 5-2. Personally I couldn't give a shit about increased opportunity, if it puts the animals (in a general sense) numbers into jeopardy...in those instances I would rather only get a chance at a bull every 5 years (even though it's my favorite animal to hunt), but I honestly don't believe it would have that impact. In fact, I think a spike/fork with a resultant corresponding decrease in the LEHs available will in fact do the opposite. It seems to be working well in 7a, and even in my neck of the woods the moose populations seem to be doing okay, not great, but definitely not wiped out, and we had a lot less to begin with, and have had this exact system in place for quite some time (less the calf GOS which isn't on the table to my knowledge).

[coach]

I can appreciate your thoughts on the early times that you speak of, new road access making animals easy prey for hunters. It probably was a mistake of the biologist not to make the¼ mile no shooting zones on the new roads.
However, the entire Region has been under an LEH inclusive hunt since the mid 90s, so you can hardly blame the resident hunters for over-harvesting the region, now can you? And when MOE decided to introduce the 7A model with a fork-horn opening, the indians, induced by the G/O stormed the MOE offices in Williams Lake demanding curtailment of that opening, effective immediately.
It is only natural when you have a population explosion of a prey species, there will be a following population explosion in the predator species, i.e. wolves and bears. Denying the resident hunter an GOS opportunity, has cost the indians and the G/Os their resource, not the other way around.
One poster suggested that the ranchers should sue the government. MOE was only acquiesing to the demands of the indians and G/Os, if anyone should be culpable for livestock loss, blame the G/Os. It was their greed that got them what they wanted in the first place and what they didn't want in the second place.
I have no sympathy for the G/Os in that region.
Your comment to F-D is out of line. The fact as you state was when Carrier opened the road, there was a massive kill, but that was in 1987 or thereabouts by your own admission. The subsequent LEH corrected the moose population numbers in the following years. Also, after about 3 years, moose become acquainted to the presence of the road as was demonstrated in Region 6 with the road south of Vanderhoof. There, the biologist implemented the ¼ mile not shooting corridor.
In actual fact, it was the Region 5 inclusive LEH that forced the resident hunter north.
You might say that this is devine justice for the resident hunter because in the end, no one will be hunting moose because there will not be any.


Very interesting and informative post, Jager..

[Steeleco]

Steeleco, you can put your mind at rest. At rest it is!! I like the debate you started, it's good and informative for those of us that don't have access to the info being shared. In the end the biggest issue of me is that the animals come first. I want my unborn grand kids to have the same freedoms in OUR outdoors that we do.

[willyqbc]

Another interesting note on this proposed spike/fork opening..... now the ministry reps have stated that they don't care either way if we keep it straight LEH or go to a reduced LEH with a spike fork opening as they feel the harvest will be the same as long as they reduce the LEH's by the proper amount. So my question to him at the time was " so if we as residents tell you we want the spike/fork option and you go ahead and reduce the LEH's to suit that, can you garauntee that your superiors will stand firm and keep the spike/fork open even if the natives kick up a fuss and throw up raod blocks as they did the last time you tried this in region 5?" His answer was most definately that he had no idea what the higher ups would do if the natives once again tried to get the spike/fork shut down. So obviously my concern is that we as residents push for this opening and give up a whack of the existing LEH's only to have the spike/fork opening run for a week, then get shut down due to pressure from FN's and overall we end up with LESS opportunity for moose in this area. Given the shite storm that happened the last time this season was offered and the FN's rapid success in getting it shut down, I cannot see why they would not do the same thing all over again with likely the same result.

Perhaps our best course of action overall here would be to avoid pushing for something that will put us squarely on the opposite side of the trench from FN's and instead get behind them to help push the gov't to allow effective predator control techniques and once the predators are under control then revisit the spike/fork opportunity??

Just my opinion
Chris

[gcreek]

The Spike Fork season if granted would only be applied to the test area of MU 5-1 and 5-2. That survey has been done.

What do you find odd in hunters wanting to take advantage of a hunting opportunity? Many of us are meat hunters and would be more than happy with an immature bull or at least the opportunity.... and if I could fit the word opportunity in here one more time I would .. but I doubt it would sink in.

Thought I was clear enough on the issue TPK and I was referring only to 5-12b which isn't part of the s/f discussion. The odds here for hunters applying and any bull allocated were even. I don't know what the success rate was but I'm betting it was less than 50%.

Would these numbers lead to a decreased AAH for next year?

[gcreek]

Another interesting note on this proposed spike/fork opening..... now the ministry reps have stated that they don't care either way if we keep it straight LEH or go to a reduced LEH with a spike fork opening as they feel the harvest will be the same as long as they reduce the LEH's by the proper amount. So my question to him at the time was " so if we as residents tell you we want the spike/fork option and you go ahead and reduce the LEH's to suit that, can you garauntee that your superiors will stand firm and keep the spike/fork open even if the natives kick up a fuss and throw up raod blocks as they did the last time you tried this in region 5?" His answer was most definately that he had no idea what the higher ups would do if the natives once again tried to get the spike/fork shut down. So obviously my concern is that we as residents push for this opening and give up a whack of the existing LEH's only to have the spike/fork opening run for a week, then get shut down due to pressure from FN's and overall we end up with LESS opportunity for moose in this area. Given the shite storm that happened the last time this season was offered and the FN's rapid success in getting it shut down, I cannot see why they would not do the same thing all over again with likely the same result.

Perhaps our best course of action overall here would be to avoid pushing for something that will put us squarely on the opposite side of the trench from FN's and instead get behind them to help push the gov't to allow effective predator control techniques and once the predators are under control then revisit the spike/fork opportunity??

Just my opinion
Chris

Now you are making sense.

Better to hold what you have than want something different with no guarantee and end up with less.

[gcreek]

MuleyMadness, Kamloops area and south haven't got a wolf problem yet compared to here.

That was a big factor in the way BCCA dropped the ball concerning predators as most of the decision making directors are from the Kamloops/ Nicola Valley and weren't experiencing losses.
I understand they now are.

[MuleyMadness]

Gcreek....there has been an explosion of wolves, and big cats in these areas in the last few years...the wolf seasons here have been liberalized well before they were in 5, so it's helped, but they are everywhere now, with actual sightings quite common...don't think for a second they aren't thriving here, they most certainly are.

[300rum700]

Better to hold what you have than want something different with no guarantee and end up with less.[/QUOTE]


x2

[Fisher-Dude]

Another interesting note on this proposed spike/fork opening..... now the ministry reps have stated that they don't care either way if we keep it straight LEH or go to a reduced LEH with a spike fork opening as they feel the harvest will be the same as long as they reduce the LEH's by the proper amount. So my question to him at the time was " so if we as residents tell you we want the spike/fork option and you go ahead and reduce the LEH's to suit that, can you garauntee that your superiors will stand firm and keep the spike/fork open even if the natives kick up a fuss and throw up raod blocks as they did the last time you tried this in region 5?" His answer was most definately that he had no idea what the higher ups would do if the natives once again tried to get the spike/fork shut down. So obviously my concern is that we as residents push for this opening and give up a whack of the existing LEH's only to have the spike/fork opening run for a week, then get shut down due to pressure from FN's and overall we end up with LESS opportunity for moose in this area. Given the shite storm that happened the last time this season was offered and the FN's rapid success in getting it shut down, I cannot see why they would not do the same thing all over again with likely the same result.

Perhaps our best course of action overall here would be to avoid pushing for something that will put us squarely on the opposite side of the trench from FN's and instead get behind them to help push the gov't to allow effective predator control techniques and once the predators are under control then revisit the spike/fork opportunity??

Just my opinion
Chris


Put the changes in with a sunset clause. Simple. That avoids any interference from the Indians and allows reversion back to the prior system without the need for "consultation."

Of course the guide outfitters (gc, RUM) on this thread want to keep people on LEH - they have "quality hunts" to sell which means a Yank can ride around in the pickup without seeing any resident hunters.

[TPK]

There has been far more FN's involvement this time round (lesson learned ...? ). We are also staying clear of "west of the river" where the majority of the FN's concerns are. I say we go with the Spike Fork season and if FN's once again kick up a fuss, we can hold the Ministry to their word. They were asked point blank at all three meetings if the FN's have a veto in the Wild Life management of Region 5 and at all meetings the answer was a resounding no. So if there are FN's repercussions to a S/F season and the MOE backs down, we have good reason for action and there will be action. People here keep talking tough talk about the FN's issues and how they would deal with road blocks etc. etc. and now there seems to be a feeling of let's abandon opportunity "in case" FN's take issue with our hunting?? Stand tall people and draw the line in the sand, sound science over politics when it comes to game management.

[willyqbc]

They were asked point blank at all three meetings if the FN's have a veto in the Wild Life management of Region 5 and at all meetings the answer was a resounding no.

they did not have a veto the last time they got this spike/fork opening shut down


So if there are FN's repercussions to a S/F season and the MOE backs down, we have good reason for action and there will be action.

Perhaps you could clarify exactly what that means for me please. I have no problem dealing head on with a roadblock etc to get to a legal open hunting opportunity, but what exactly would the BCWF do if the ministry buckled to the FN's and shut the season down?? Do I go out and poach an immature bull because the ministry agreed to the season originally.....not likely. So what exactly would the BCWF do if this scenario were to play out next year??? What action could be taken against the gov't that would have any real effect???

Not taking issue with you on this TPK.....just still undecided on this issue and would like all possible info before deciding exactly where I'm gonna stand on this.

Thanks
Chris

[300rum700]

Of course the guide outfitters (gc, RUM) on this thread want to keep people on LEH - they have "quality hunts" to sell which means a Yank can ride around in the pickup without seeing any resident hunters.[/QUOTE]

Seriously? I have never guided orhave been intrested in guiding. I am a member of the BCWF, my local rod and gun club and support the Guide Outfitters. All the organizations are trying to accieve the same goal they just take different paths, I dont agree with the far left and the far right of either group and am sick of hearing someone who lives half a province away try and dictate what goes on in my backyard. We have the moose population we do because of leh and I dont see why we should try and fix something that isnt broken, at least until our predator and mule deer population gets back into check.

Your selfish greed is preventing you from looking past your precious spike fork "opportunity". If Willy is even remotely close to actual numbers that the moe proposes change to the leh numbers, how is that a better opportunity for the residents of BC? Say you take 20% of tags from the leh system to facilitate this spike fork season, thats 20% gone from residents who stand a far greater chance at drawing a tag than ever finding a spike fork. If you want more resident hunters in the bush and renewed intrest among new hunters give them an opportunity at success.

[bigwhiteys]

If Willy is even remotely close to actual numbers that the moe proposes change to the leh numbers, how is that a better opportunity for the residents of BC?


This is where I am stuck too... I think the guys hunting the spike/fork GOS will get to watch pickups coming out with their LEH bulls, while they burn gas and boot leather chasing unicorns. But hey, they get to chase something I guess?

"Opportunity" is open for interpretation I guess.

Carl

[TPK]

they did not have a veto the last time they got this spike/fork opening shut down...

Perhaps you could clarify exactly what that means for me please. .. What action could be taken against the gov't that would have any real effect???

Not taking issue with you on this TPK.....just still undecided on this issue and would like all possible info before deciding exactly where I'm gonna stand on this.

Thanks
Chris

Not a problem Chris, I have no issues with your questions what so ever.

"Action" would come in many forms but I can only speak to what I and our club would do, and that is hit all legal means of raising discourse with the local MOE and their bosses in Victoria. The thing that got this ball rolling was the newspaper article in the 100 Mile Free Press where we had 7 ex-Wildlife Managers supporing this move and calling for a review of how things have been managed in Region 5 as whole. It resonated all the way up the chain and while then Minister in charge Barry Penner did not attend our meeting personally, he did dispatch his second in command Tom Ethier. It was at this meeting that Tom committed to a trial and the ground work for these proposed changes were started.

As to what action the BCWF would take ... I do not know but would speculate on the same course of action they usually take, letters and articles pointing out the issue and calling for change/accountability etc. I am in no way advocating violence or illegal activities, those are paths that lead to lose lose scenarios.

[300rum700]

This is where I am stuck too... I think the guys hunting the spike/fork GOS will get to watch pickups coming out with their LEH bulls, while they burn gas and boot leather chasing unicorns. But hey, they get to chase something I guess?

"Opportunity" is open for interpretation I guess.

Carl

Unicorns and baby bucks. But wait we are trying to stabalize our deer heard, oh well lets put more pressure on them and see how it pans out. Oh I almost forgot those increased hunters in the field will surely put a dent in the wolf population. I think it should be renamed to the BC Hunters Foundation, wildlife really doesnt seem to come into the picture anymore as long as some lazy road hunter gets to burn gas.

[TPK]

.. We have the moose population we do because of leh and I dont see why we should try and fix something that isnt broken, at least until our predator and mule deer population gets back into check.

Your selfish greed is preventing you from looking past your precious spike fork "opportunity"..

Not broken? How long have we been on LEH for mature Bulls only while Regions around us enjoy some form of GOS for Moose? Not broken eh .. well try asking the guys and gals that have applied for an LEH year after year and not gotten one if they wouldn't enjoy the "opportunity" for Spike Fork.

As for my selfish greed ... I am representing the 250+ members of our club, and all resident hunters that have expressed a want for change. I happen to agree and would like a Spike Fork season but I would still be advocating this even if I personally didn't want it. That is the job I have, to REPRESENT the members of my club and those resident hunters that have voiced their frusteration with the LEH system. Selfish? Hardly, I pay dearly in time away from my wife, un-paid time off work, and with my personal bank account to fight for resident hunter rights, and not just on this one matter. Selfish is to stick your head in the sand and say the status quo at least gives a few hunters a chance at a big bull. Giving up some of those LEH's for the ability for ALL to have a chance at some Moose meat can hardly be seen to be selfish .. quite the opposite.

[TPK]

.. I think it should be renamed to the BC Hunters Foundation, wildlife really doesnt seem to come into the picture anymore as long as some lazy road hunter gets to burn gas.

How ill informed you are, we are first and formost conservationists. As to your comment about road hunters .. no comment.

Is that it? You have no more intelligent arguments so it's time for venom and name calling?

[300rum700]

[QUOTE=TPK;1046165]Not broken? How long have we been on LEH for mature Bulls only while Regions around us enjoy some form of GOS for Moose? Not broken eh .. well try asking the guys and gals that have applied for an LEH year after year and not gotten one if they wouldn't enjoy the "opportunity" for Spike Fork.

Like it or not LEH brought back the moose population. If people have a problem with LEH then put your effort into that. Those same people bitching about not getting an LEH will be the same ones bitching that there are no immature bulls in two years time.

[300rum700]

TPK you miss read my quote that you are taking great offense to go back and read what fisher due had to say about me. At least im not singling anyone out like he is or you were for that matter. And besides its only name calling if you take offence to it. I personally like lazy road hunting and arm chair conservationism.

[TSS]

I don't understand all the crap in this thread. The harvest allocations are already set in accordance with the allocation policy. The projected numbers for region 5 as a whole unit are 77 moose for the resident and 23 for the non. I'm sure the BCWF has all these numbers at present. Guess they are again holding out on all thier radical members.

[gcreek]

Of course the guide outfitters (gc, RUM) on this thread want to keep people on LEH - they have "quality hunts" to sell which means a Yank can ride around in the pickup without seeing any resident hunters.

Seriously? I have never guided orhave been intrested in guiding. I am a member of the BCWF, my local rod and gun club and support the Guide Outfitters. All the organizations are trying to accieve the same goal they just take different paths, I dont agree with the far left and the far right of either group and am sick of hearing someone who lives half a province away try and dictate what goes on in my backyard. We have the moose population we do because of leh and I dont see why we should try and fix something that isnt broken, at least until our predator and mule deer population gets back into check.

Your selfish greed is preventing you from looking past your precious spike fork "opportunity". If Willy is even remotely close to actual numbers that the moe proposes change to the leh numbers, how is that a better opportunity for the residents of BC? Say you take 20% of tags from the leh system to facilitate this spike fork season, thats 20% gone from residents who stand a far greater chance at drawing a tag than ever finding a spike fork. If you want more resident hunters in the bush and renewed intrest among new hunters give them an opportunity at success.[/QUOTE]

It is amusing what the uninformed, lobotomized idiots will come up with when grasping at straws. I have told Jager twice now my background and asked for his. So far no answer. There is a saying that those who have nothing to hide, hide nothing.

C'mon Jagster, man up. Fisher Dud is in the same boat.

I have a vision of 2 Elmer Fudds hunting wabbits.

[Sitkaspruce]

Pretty sad when another thread becomes a name calling, who has a bigger d*ck show......

No wonder we are and always will be losing the battle against all others who want their share of the pie and those who want us to give up our guns and eat vegetables.

Pretty standard here on HBC.

Some of you are like elementary kids calling each other names.....

The topic is about moose numbers in the Caribou....just in case you forgot.

Cheers

SS

[gcreek]

No I hadn't forgotten, I just have no respect for people that can't justify themselves with personal experience or self gained knowledge.

If people believe everything they are told by govt. and have no thoughts of their own, we will be 1930's Germans before we know it.

Before anyone pulls the racist card I am half German and half Norwiegian. (and a little part bullheaded!)

[Fisher-Dude]

I don't understand all the crap in this thread. The harvest allocations are already set in accordance with the allocation policy. The projected numbers for region 5 as a whole unit are 77 moose for the resident and 23 for the non. I'm sure the BCWF has all these numbers at present. Guess they are again holding out on all thier radical members.


TSS - The Sheep Sherrif.

Coulda chosen something a bit more challenging, Willy.

[Weatherby Fan]

No I hadn't forgotten, I just have no respect for people that can't justify themselves with personal experience or self gained knowledge.

If people believe everything they are told by govt. and have no thoughts of their own, we will be 1930's Germans before we know it.

Before anyone pulls the racist card I am half German and half Norwiegian. (and a little part bullheaded!)

Norwegian and German-2 squareheads on one set of shoulders uufda !

[gcreek]

Norwegian and German-2 squareheads on one set of shoulders uufda !

Quite a combination isn't it?

[Weatherby Fan]

Quite a combination isn't it?

LOL yaw I know how ya feel,my family is from Norway also !

[GoatGuy]

Why do you think I am not eating Moose this year? And our two points were shot 12 hours apart on the same trip. Lesson learned, not enough meat!



Because as SS stated it's better than nothing and my kids love em'. It's also a hunt I can do WALKING from my home, not dropping a few GRAND in expenses to go off-Island.



Hahahahaha.... Why don't you come shoot one and then eat it, the worms too.



I am referring to the guys who often mention they "give-away" large amounts of their processed game meat to friends or family under the guise of "charity". Granted it's not a lot, but there are families out there like the below example.

Family of 5

Dad has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Wife has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Child 1 has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Child 2 has Core and 1 Moose Tag
Child 3 has Core and 1 Moose Tag

Does the entire family need a Moose each, then maybe a deer each, how about an Elk or two? Can they really eat it all in a year, or before the meat is freezer burnt crap?



Sure disagree. That's fine. If you're going to spend the money and time to kill a Baby Moose you may as well just buy a side of beef or buffalo. You'll probably get more for your $$$.



Meat only lasts so long until it's freezer burnt garbage. "loading up" with more than you need seems silly and wasteful.



Ahhh... The Dog Food. Is this in reference to me legally killing a Black Bear and grinding it up for Dog Food? BECAUSE I CAN!?!?!?! Hahahaha. They aren't category A like Moose and we have no shortage of Black Bears.

Carl

This is an interesting perspective.

It is funny that you don't think people should be giving meat to friends/family, but you shoot bear and feed it to your dogs. There is a bit of a contradiction here, but I think what you're saying is black bears aren't as valuable as moose. Fair enough. I have an old friend (see elder) who used to hunt and can't anymore because of bad eyes. He comes out hunting but cannot shoot anything - maybe a moose at 20 yards. Every year after the hunting season I go over to his place and give him meat - is that OK with you? You will note that is how FN hunt as well. Seems with this argument we're headed down the ethics road. Also, by the way, moose in 7b are NOT a category A species.


A couple things on the hunter/management side. First, not all hunters travel from the island to northern BC to hunt moose. There are several people who reside in places like the Okanagan who get to hunt moose in the Okanagan. There are also many people who come to the Okanagan from the island and the LM who hunt moose. In the OKanagan the odds of getting drawn are typically over 35:1 - what that means is without the spike-fork season you'd only get to hunt moose once or twice in your lifetime. There are several people who do not get drawn for moose in the Cariboo as well. If spike-fork moose was open in the Cariboo it would certainly be utilized - the proposal by staff in Region 5 doesn't reflect what goes on in other regions, but that's nothing new. Kind of a sandbag job.

Spending money on buffalo or beef instead of harvesting moose is your choice and brings up another very good point.

Secondly, you also make the trip up north every year to hunt sheep. Two different species, granted, but how do you rationalize the expense for one species and not the other. Value? So you're saying it's ok to feed bears to dogs, not okay to shoot 2 point moose, but okay to drive up north to shoot sheep.

Lastly, we haven't talked about wildlife management. What's best for moose and what best mimicks natural mortality? Yearling mortality is quite high - so long as the harvest isn't excessive many of the yearling bulls would have been lost. We can mimic naturally mortality and let people eat those bulls instead of wolves. Secondly, a big part of the reason for a spike-fork season is to maintain a more balanced age to ensure a synchronized rut and resulting calf drop the following spring. For the moose this means higher over-winter survival for bulls and a higher survival rate for neo-nates (real baby moose) when calving season comes. We can also operate a lower bull:cow ratios while maintaining the same result. What this means in the big picture is that with a spike-fork season we can harvest more bulls than with LEH or any bull GOS due to the selective nature of the regime. More bulls, more hunters, more meat, more moose. A good thing right? Most of this is also applicable to calf moose harvest in the fall. If you feel the need to argue with that, please feel free to pick up the phone and call Val.

[gcreek]

GG, I could agree with your logic if we were discussing a healthy population of moose. That is not the case in my immediate area at this point in time.

How would you manage a moose herd that was in the low thousands 25 years ago, is in the low hundreds today and has exploded populations of wolves and grizzlies eating on it?

I believe it was Jager that said hunters were not to blame for the reduction of numbers. How would you explain the difference when between 1987 and 2000, access and increased hunting (both res & Rez) were the only denominators that changed? Since then the preds have taken off.



Please don't quote any of the "experts".

[LYKTOHUNT]

Well 300rum700 I am not sure if your comment about selfish greed is directed at TPK, but if it is you have never been so wrong about something. TPK work tirelessly for the interests of our rod and gun club and even if he did not agree with an issue if the members were for it he would back it 100%, he spends much time away from home donating his time and money for the well being of our club and to represent the wishes of our club.
He is anything but selfish, he would give you the shirt off his back and if you needed his boots you could have them as well, I have spent much time around camp fires with him and would be hard pressed to find many people better to hunt with.
I know this thread isn,t about bragging about our friends but the selfish greed comment is way wrong.

[40incher]

Wow. When will we ``real`` resident hunters realize it's a mistake to come up to the bait.

I have read all of the previous diatribe and it is obvious gcreek is a guide/assistant guide/preservasionist-when it-comes to-us-poor-resident-hunters/taxpayers. Come on. Give it up ``folks``!!! We are on to you.

The sky-is-falling tactic is getting tired. If there really is a conservation concern let's cut the AAH and adhere to the "new" Allocation Policy and cut the guides as per. Run that one by your buddy's gcreek!!

As for you other gatekeepers that think you can tell us heathens what we can kill and what we can do with it, get over it. The green monster is not a productive avenue to dwell on. All I can offer is, "HUNT HARDER!!!".

Every-size-fits-all is a communist/NDP perspective (have we forgotten about the loss of our grizzly hunt already), and it does nor serve us few free-thinkers well.

The fact of the matter is, when Region 5 went from a 2-week GOS any-bull to total LEH that was a huge mistake. The BCWF can take a large amount of credit for that, they were weak on the issue. A move to a 7-day season would have solved the problem. Now that it`s total LEH ``good luck``. Once something is closed you have to know it will never be opened again. That suits the guides, the left-wing and the fearmongers (likely the same people).

With 5,000 any-bull LEH`s why would you give up half of them for a little wee spike-fork ``opportunity``!!!.

Time to give the old head a shake.

[300rum700]

That was not directed at him at all. I dont drive peoples motives for pushing for this season they come up with thier own justifications and most of that is based on personal intrest (is that better than greed?). Sorry if I dont agree with what is trying to be accomplished but if I got even one person to think outside the box even a little it was worth it.

[GoatGuy]

GG, I could agree with your logic if we were discussing a healthy population of moose. That is not the case in my immediate area at this point in time.

How would you manage a moose herd that was in the low thousands 25 years ago, is in the low hundreds today and has exploded populations of wolves and grizzlies eating on it?

I believe it was Jager that said hunters were not to blame for the reduction of numbers. How would you explain the difference when between 1987 and 2000, access and increased hunting (both res & Rez) were the only denominators that changed? Since then the preds have taken off.



Please don't quote any of the "experts".

Healthy from a biological perspective and your perspective will likely differ significantly. Typically we like to see at least 20 bulls:100 cows before we're 'hurting' the population and around 20-25 calves:100 cows. Typically if the calves are below this it's either because there are too few bulls or the calves are being eaten. If that happens we have a problem.

Until the population density (number of moose/km2) becomes extremely low or the calf:cow drops significantly you can 'manage' it the same way. Then the changes are in calf and cow harvest - changes in bull harvest only happen when you have extremely low density populations.

On the human side you deal with total harvest and bull:cow ratios. Until you get below 20 bulls: 100 cows you won't have a significant negative impact on the dynamics of the herd. With a bull only harvest you aren't affecting when and how the sperm hits the egg. So if your moose population is declining it's habitat or predation or both.

When you look back at the litt on the cariboo you'll find lots of poison and predator control as well as ranchers that lit fires trying to create pasture for cattle and horses. Often instead of grass they got willows because they burned in the wrong places. The result was a mecca for moose. That goes back a long way and without it we've probably got both issues to deal with *IF* the objective is to increase the moose population. Personally far more worried about cariboo in that region and also find them a WAY better species to hang the hat on for predator management!! Whatever floats your boat.

Hunting in the Cariboo and harvest is way down compared to the 80s - probably 30-40% off the top of my head, have to check. As long as there isn't an over-harvest you actually end up with a better distribution of harvest with more roads. More of a tool for GOS than LEH in most cases. Might not be your perspective for your area but on an MU or region wide basis it's nice.

[kebes]

I'm not going to pretend to be overly educated when it comes to biology but does harvesting bulls (unless you're taking a stupid high number) have any effect on overall heard numbers (ie. twenty bulls will breed 100 cows the same way 40 bulls would)? So then - in the area under discussion - isn't the issue back to the fact that maybe there needs to be better predator control as it sounds like cow numbers are down (and in such a case a s/f season wouldn't be detrimental)? And if that's the case why all the fighting between the typical camps...we ring around the circle of who gets what (just like all the sheep threads) when the real issue is predator control? Or, is the real issue just a lack of understanding of what healthy herds actually are....I'd love to be filled in.

[bigwhiteys]

It is funny that you don't think people should be giving meat to friends/family, but you shoot bear and feed it to your dogs. There is a bit of a contradiction here, but I think what you're saying is black bears aren't as valuable as moose. Fair enough.

I like to hunt bears, we have lots here, too many actually. I don't like to eat the bear. My dog however (a family member living under my roof) loves to, so rather than waste the bear by throwing him in the dump my dog eats it. Easy decision and saves me money on Dog Food, it's also my little teeny part of predator control in my own backyard. The wolves here are damn hard to get.


I have an old friend (see elder) who used to hunt and can't anymore because of bad eyes. He comes out hunting but cannot shoot anything - maybe a moose at 20 yards. Every year after the hunting season I go over to his place and give him meat - is that OK with you?

I should have clarified, if your truly providing charity to somebody that needs it good on ya, I was referring to the hunters who use "charity" as a guise for their own excessive killing. Like an Elk, 2 Moose and 3 Deer as an example of one family I know first hand. They cannot eat 1500+ pounds of meat in a year, not even close... Next season all the old sh!t they haven't eaten yet (LOTS) get's the old heave ho, and the killing begins again.

Is that better?


Spending money on buffalo or beef instead of harvesting moose is your choice and brings up another very good point. Secondly, you also make the trip up north every year to hunt sheep. Two different species, granted, but how do you rationalize the expense for one species and not the other. Value?

When I go sheep hunting we go for sheep, during a time when Moose is also open so we don't drive all that way from the Island for less than 100 lbs of sheep meat. If we're lucky we come home with a Moose (any bull) or (2 pnt, 10pnt or tri-palm) and if we're unlucky we come home with nothing and can shoot a Buffalo from a rancher friend so the trip wasn't all for not... If we were limited to only spike/fork up there, I've only seen two in a lifetime of going up there and we killed em both. This year it was a total bust meat wise, not even a Buffalo.

Now that the Kaska are putting some pressure in the area up there it might all change one day too. I know they wanted inspections on Moose for a few regions up there so they can see how many are getting shot... I know at least one group from this very site helped kick some of this into motion with their killing practices and "alleged" accidental shooting and killing of a locals horse a few years ago. This came right out of the mouths of some band members who were there. Can't say I blame the Kaska for wanting it regulated more... It's a sh!t show and getting worse by the year.


So you're saying it's ok to feed bears to dogs, not okay to shoot 2 point moose, but okay to drive up north to shoot sheep.

Sure, feed bear to your dogs. Shoot all the 2 points you want (I said they didn't provide enough meat for MY family!), and heck yes I'll drive north every year for sheep!



Lastly, we haven't talked about wildlife management. What's best for moose and what best mimicks natural mortality? Yearling mortality is quite high - so long as the harvest isn't excessive many of the yearling bulls would have been lost. We can mimic naturally mortality and let people eat those bulls instead of wolves. Secondly, a big part of the reason for a spike-fork season is to maintain a more balanced age to ensure a synchronized rut and resulting calf drop the following spring. For the moose this means higher over-winter survival for bulls and a higher survival rate for neo-nates (real baby moose) when calving season comes. We can also operate a lower bull:cow ratios while maintaining the same result. What this means in the big picture is that with a spike-fork season we can harvest more bulls than with LEH or any bull GOS due to the selective nature of the regime. More bulls, more hunters, more meat, more moose. A good thing right? Most of this is also applicable to calf moose harvest in the fall. If you feel the need to argue with that, please feel free to pick up the phone and call Val.


I am not arguing these points, but as GCreek has mentioned, it's for a healthy Moose population. A few inventory flights (+/- 30%?) and some mathematical formulas to extrapolate the population over a given area doesn't make what you copy/paste anymore concrete then a rancher whos lived in the area forever and a day, observing from the ground under ideal conditions like Moose coming in to feed on his hay stacks in the winter. Jelvis could probably throw out some guesses and be pretty close as well.

Carl

[gcreek]

My experiences this fall have shown a very limited population of moose compared to what I've seen in the last few. Our range area is about 60 sq. kms. 4, 1.5 to 2 hour flights looking for cattle between Oct. 10 and Dec. 5. All were made in early daylight hours before the wind comes up. Roughly 7 hours in the air and saw 26 moose in total. 18 of them were mature bulls and 2 were calves. In my mind that tells me that the big bulls are the ones that are more successful in fighting off the predators. I guess with that ratio we could kill off 17 of those bulls and have the ratio you want. No need for them anyway.
I do realize that we didn't see every moose on our range but enough to get an idea. On our lower ranch there is about 700 acres of brush that the moose have used for a wintering ground since they arrived here. During the last ten years I have seen as many as 20, usually 5 or 6 per day there. This year I am just now seeing a couple of tracks and 2 moose day before yesterday. I would deduce from this that most of them are grizzly or wolf turds now as our last few winters have not been that difficult.

The range burning issue is another of the govt.'s bright ideas of conservation. It is worth a ranch in fines to be caught lighting a fire or having a permitted fire get away. Shame because fire is a good tool for improving feed for both livestock and wildlife if used properly. The willow and Arctic Birch here are getting old and dying off and are not the best moose feed and a lot of brush encroachment has reduced grass in other areas.
The protection approach is creating a worse fire hazard each year.

I still believe that the predator issue is more of a job protection scam than anything. As long as the bios can make the excuse for more studies they will keep the funding rolling in. If they ever make the conclusion that the wolves are eating the game they will be out of a job and another type of expertise will receive the funding.

One thing I found out today was that the funding for the mass poisoning cull on wolves back in the 50's was provided by the Federal govt. to assure sustenance for the Natives. This information was gained from a newspaper clipping that is in the book Crazy Man's Creek by Jack Boudreau.
Maybe it can happen again, we can only hope.

[gcreek]

40 incher, how old are you?

When the logging roads opened this country up in 1987 the GOS for any bull moose was from Sept 10 to Nov. 30. If I remember right there was also a 2 week cow/calf season in late Oct, early Nov. The seasons were left that way for 3 or 4 years and then started to tighten up as the moose pop. declined. The original season was possible because of the limited access and few predators. There were likely more hunters back then (definately a higher success rate) than today.

If you would like to come for a visit I will show you the 2 pack saddles that were used for distributing salt and have been gathering dust for 20 years and the 3 horses and 2 ATVs we use for handling cattle. If you still think I am in the outfitting business when you leave I suggest your next stop be a shrink.

[MuleyMadness]

I'm not going to pretend to be overly educated when it comes to biology but does harvesting bulls (unless you're taking a stupid high number) have any effect on overall heard numbers (ie. twenty bulls will breed 100 cows the same way 40 bulls would)? So then - in the area under discussion - isn't the issue back to the fact that maybe there needs to be better predator control as it sounds like cow numbers are down (and in such a case a s/f season wouldn't be detrimental)? And if that's the case why all the fighting between the typical camps...we ring around the circle of who gets what (just like all the sheep threads) when the real issue is predator control? Or, is the real issue just a lack of understanding of what healthy herds actually are....I'd love to be filled in.

You know, at the end of it all, I think you are right....the predators are the problem, AND I do honestly believe TPK, gcreek, GG, etc all ultimately want the same thing...and that is healthy moose populations to provide top notch hunting (whatever your definintion of top notch hunting is is irrelevant) in the Cariboo. Obviously they disagree about what makes healthy moose populations, but I think they unilaterially agree that predators are ultimately the problem that needs handling...otherwise they will eat their way through the wild game, either eating themselves out of healthy populations, or moving onto livestock and domestic animals.

I wonder though, does anyone disagree that the populations aren't doing great with the current season types in place with the current predator problem. Does it make sense that all the other things being constant, isn't it worth attempting a different type of hunting opening(that is spike/fork) while maintaining or slightly decreasing the current AAH? No one is suggesting increasing the total number of animals taken. Also, most seem agree that the mature bulls seem to be doing better in the face of the wolf/predator problem than the young ones, wouldn't it make sense in that case to reduce the LEH authorizations for the mature bulls and make up the difference with spike/fork harvest (many of whom will be dead from the wolves in a few short months, why not feed people rather than wolves), leaving more mature bulls who seemingly are more resiliant to the threat? I don't think my logic is screwed up on that one...I know I don't live there, but I have hunted the area for 20 plus years (obviously not the same kind of experience most of you have, but still something, and it really doesn't affect the logic, per se).

[GoatGuy]

My experiences this fall have shown a very limited population of moose compared to what I've seen in the last few. Our range area is about 60 sq. kms. 4, 1.5 to 2 hour flights looking for cattle between Oct. 10 and Dec. 5. All were made in early daylight hours before the wind comes up. Roughly 7 hours in the air and saw 26 moose in total. 18 of them were mature bulls and 2 were calves. In my mind that tells me that the big bulls are the ones that are more successful in fighting off the predators. I guess with that ratio we could kill off 17 of those bulls and have the ratio you want. No need for them anyway.
I do realize that we didn't see every moose on our range but enough to get an idea. On our lower ranch there is about 700 acres of brush that the moose have used for a wintering ground since they arrived here. During the last ten years I have seen as many as 20, usually 5 or 6 per day there. This year I am just now seeing a couple of tracks and 2 moose day before yesterday. I would deduce from this that most of them are grizzly or wolf turds now as our last few winters have not been that difficult.

The range burning issue is another of the govt.'s bright ideas of conservation. It is worth a ranch in fines to be caught lighting a fire or having a permitted fire get away. Shame because fire is a good tool for improving feed for both livestock and wildlife if used properly. The willow and Arctic Birch here are getting old and dying off and are not the best moose feed and a lot of brush encroachment has reduced grass in other areas.
The protection approach is creating a worse fire hazard each year.

I still believe that the predator issue is more of a job protection scam than anything. As long as the bios can make the excuse for more studies they will keep the funding rolling in. If they ever make the conclusion that the wolves are eating the game they will be out of a job and another type of expertise will receive the funding.

One thing I found out today was that the funding for the mass poisoning cull on wolves back in the 50's was provided by the Federal govt. to assure sustenance for the Natives. This information was gained from a newspaper clipping that is in the book Crazy Man's Creek by Jack Boudreau.
Maybe it can happen again, we can only hope.

Most of the bios want predator management and habitat enhancement. They know the results, it's politicians that control the strings for that game. Your opinion is out of line on that one.

The problem of funding and management is politics. Politicians are where the money and will comes from.

Changing seasons won't make more moose, neither will allocations. Neither will complaining about biologists, or talking about hope. People are gonna have to knuckle down and get on their politicians case if they want change.

[GoatGuy]

I like to hunt bears, we have lots here, too many actually. I don't like to eat the bear. My dog however (a family member living under my roof) loves to, so rather than waste the bear by throwing him in the dump my dog eats it. Easy decision and saves me money on Dog Food, it's also my little teeny part of predator control in my own backyard. The wolves here are damn hard to get.



I should have clarified, if your truly providing charity to somebody that needs it good on ya, I was referring to the hunters who use "charity" as a guise for their own excessive killing. Like an Elk, 2 Moose and 3 Deer as an example of one family I know first hand. They cannot eat 1500+ pounds of meat in a year, not even close... Next season all the old sh!t they haven't eaten yet (LOTS) get's the old heave ho, and the killing begins again.

Is that better?



When I go sheep hunting we go for sheep, during a time when Moose is also open so we don't drive all that way from the Island for less than 100 lbs of sheep meat. If we're lucky we come home with a Moose (any bull) or (2 pnt, 10pnt or tri-palm) and if we're unlucky we come home with nothing and can shoot a Buffalo from a rancher friend so the trip wasn't all for not... If we were limited to only spike/fork up there, I've only seen two in a lifetime of going up there and we killed em both. This year it was a total bust meat wise, not even a Buffalo.

Now that the Kaska are putting some pressure in the area up there it might all change one day too. I know they wanted inspections on Moose for a few regions up there so they can see how many are getting shot... I know at least one group from this very site helped kick some of this into motion with their killing practices and "alleged" accidental shooting and killing of a locals horse a few years ago. This came right out of the mouths of some band members who were there. Can't say I blame the Kaska for wanting it regulated more... It's a sh!t show and getting worse by the year.



Sure, feed bear to your dogs. Shoot all the 2 points you want (I said they didn't provide enough meat for MY family!), and heck yes I'll drive north every year for sheep!



I am not arguing these points, but as GCreek has mentioned, it's for a healthy Moose population. A few inventory flights (+/- 30%?) and some mathematical formulas to extrapolate the population over a given area doesn't make what you copy/paste anymore concrete then a rancher whos lived in the area forever and a day, observing from the ground under ideal conditions like Moose coming in to feed on his hay stacks in the winter. Jelvis could probably throw out some guesses and be pretty close as well.

Carl
Your arguments are contradictory. It doesn't make sense, you're merely drawing an arbitrary ethical line and believe that everyone else is like-minded. You're also trying to tie a social issue into a conservation issue. Not really the way it works.

On the last item, as I said, if you feel the need to argue pick up the phone and call Val. Nobody's arguing the moose are down.

[gcreek]

Most of the bios want predator management and habitat enhancement. They know the results, it's politicians that control the strings for that game. Your opinion is out of line on that one.

The problem of funding and management is politics. Politicians are where the money and will comes from.

Changing seasons won't make more moose, neither will allocations. Neither will complaining about biologists, or talking about hope. People are gonna have to knuckle down and get on their politicians case if they want change.

There must be someone passing the buck here because when I have talked to the polititians they say that they reley on their staff to give them the information and suggestions for changes to legislation.

[olharley guy]

My experiences this fall have shown a very limited population of moose compared to what I've seen in the last few. Our range area is about 60 sq. kms. 4, 1.5 to 2 hour flights looking for cattle between Oct. 10 and Dec. 5. All were made in early daylight hours before the wind comes up. Roughly 7 hours in the air and saw 26 moose in total. 18 of them were mature bulls and 2 were calves. In my mind that tells me that the big bulls are the ones that are more successful in fighting off the predators. I guess with that ratio we could kill off 17 of those bulls and have the ratio you want. No need for them anyway.
I do realize that we didn't see every moose on our range but enough to get an idea. On our lower ranch there is about 700 acres of brush that the moose have used for a wintering ground since they arrived here. During the last ten years I have seen as many as 20, usually 5 or 6 per day there. This year I am just now seeing a couple of tracks and 2 moose day before yesterday. I would deduce from this that most of them are grizzly or wolf turds now as our last few winters have not been that difficult.

The range burning issue is another of the govt.'s bright ideas of conservation. It is worth a ranch in fines to be caught lighting a fire or having a permitted fire get away. Shame because fire is a good tool for improving feed for both livestock and wildlife if used properly. The willow and Arctic Birch here are getting old and dying off and are not the best moose feed and a lot of brush encroachment has reduced grass in other areas.
The protection approach is creating a worse fire hazard each year.

I still believe that the predator issue is more of a job protection scam than anything. As long as the bios can make the excuse for more studies they will keep the funding rolling in. If they ever make the conclusion that the wolves are eating the game they will be out of a job and another type of expertise will receive the funding.

One thing I found out today was that the funding for the mass poisoning cull on wolves back in the 50's was provided by the Federal govt. to assure sustenance for the Natives. This information was gained from a newspaper clipping that is in the book Crazy Man's Creek by Jack Boudreau.
Maybe it can happen again, we can only hope.


Howdy, just curious -with 7 hours in the air and most likely snow on the ground in Dec. -did you see any wolves, trails-anything? Later

[jeff]

ive been quiet on this thread, just reading and gathering good info off all the posts .just wanna add what i saw this year in reg 7 26....theres this one swamp i hunt well off the beaten path ..its a couple km,s in the bush ..just about every year one of our group bags a moose in this swamp ..we call it ring swamp cuz while cleaning the first moose my buddy took off his wedding ring and placed it on his coat that was laying on the ground .well someone picked up his coat and ring flew somewhere never to be found ...so hence ...ring swamp... anyways been hunting ring swamp for around 15 years .its the only swamp for about 5 to 7 km radius..weve seen so many moose in this swamp is redicolous..ive seen 3 wolves in one end of the swamp as we aproached one time ..ther trail we have cut into it has become a well used game trail ..well in the last 3 years the moose are moved outa there and the wolves moved in ..this year i counted 25 wolf shits on our trail..and the swamp itself is dead .sat there this year and last and saw and heard sqwat..theres defenetly been an explosion in wolves in that particular area...i left my trail cam on the trail this year just too see what is travelling up and down it so much...

[gcreek]

Olharley, we did see 6 wolves from the air on Dec 5. Tracks everywhere. It is 10 km between our 2 ranches, there have not been many days this year that one or more have not crossed or travelled the road. Dec 12 there was a pack of at least 20 went down the main road. We aren't sure if they were traveling through or if they are moved in. Time will tell.
Several smaller packs that we were already whittleing on.

[GoatGuy]

There must be someone passing the buck here because when I have talked to the polititians they say that they reley on their staff to give them the information and suggestions for changes to legislation.

It's the politicians, trust me.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

It's the politicians, trust me.

And since GG is no politician, you CAN trust him.

SSS

[huntingmom]

I don't think the wolves and the bears are the only ones destroying our moose populations...I think the biggest killer is the trains that make the winter runs from PG up to Ft Nelson.
My cousin worked on with CP rail for number of years and he was telling about the moose that he would have to go out and kill becuase it decided to charge at the train. Of course the train would win and now he would have to go out and put the animal down. He said alot of moose like to stay on the tracks which made it easier for the them to get away from the predators, unfortunatley they charge at the trains and change course at the last minute only to the train nail them on the side, breaking their backs and pelvis's and whatnot. He mentioned that through the winter months...a whole generation of moose is gone. Not just from the moose that were living but the future generation of unborn calves that had been killed by these mishaps.
So....I wonder how much more moose we would see if something could be done to prevent these animals getting on train tracks during the winter months. I know bears and wolves probably play part of their role in the moose decline but from what my cousin says....I think the winter kill by trains play a larger role of lowering the moose numbers.

[ianwuzhere]

i agree about high death rates by trains in winter..they are suppose to report the number of moose they hit with the train- one operator told me was around 125 last winter from pg to jasper...
its too bad they couldnt install something on the front of the train to deter the moose- kinda hard when your doin like 70km tho...
-or even just plow a lil path off to one side of the trax or something after they wing the snow...

[gcreek]

It's the politicians, trust me.

I may agree to this statement in part. Polititians are somewhat accountable as we can fire them in an election year. Beaurocrats belong to a union that makes it difficult to get rid of them because of onerus severance pay agreements. There are a lot more of them in this province that are just coasting along, waiting for retirement and creating all kind of little BS hoops for the public to jump through.

Granted, there is a small percentage (and I know some) that actually do care but they are few and far between. I deal with 8 different beaurocracies on a regular basis and some of them aren't very user friendly.

Do you work for govt.?

[gcreek]

I don't think the wolves and the bears are the only ones destroying our moose populations...I think the biggest killer is the trains that make the winter runs from PG up to Ft Nelson.
My cousin worked on with CP rail for number of years and he was telling about the moose that he would have to go out and kill becuase it decided to charge at the train. Of course the train would win and now he would have to go out and put the animal down. He said alot of moose like to stay on the tracks which made it easier for the them to get away from the predators, unfortunatley they charge at the trains and change course at the last minute only to the train nail them on the side, breaking their backs and pelvis's and whatnot. He mentioned that through the winter months...a whole generation of moose is gone. Not just from the moose that were living but the future generation of unborn calves that had been killed by these mishaps.
So....I wonder how much more moose we would see if something could be done to prevent these animals getting on train tracks during the winter months. I know bears and wolves probably play part of their role in the moose decline but from what my cousin says....I think the winter kill by trains play a larger role of lowering the moose numbers.


Ma'am, there ain't no trains in the Chilcotin.

[Sitkaspruce]

I may agree to this statement in part. Polititians are somewhat accountable as we can fire them in an election year. Beaurocrats belong to a union that makes it difficult to get rid of them because of onerus severance pay agreements. There are a lot more of them in this province that are just coasting along, waiting for retirement and creating all kind of little BS hoops for the public to jump through.

Granted, there is a small percentage (and I know some) that actually do care but they are few and far between. I deal with 8 different beaurocracies on a regular basis and some of them aren't very user friendly.

Do you work for govt.?

The grunts and field staff work for the gov union, management of those folks do not. They win their jobs by competing for the job, they may have been grunts of senior field staff at one time. The ADM's are a mix on appointments and winning their job. Most of those people move around from Ministry to Ministry with no real understanding of what is going on other than budgets and staffing.

Most people I know who work in the field really do care about what is going on, but with shrinking budgets, staff #'s and political pressure, it is becoming a thankless job.

Cheers

SS

[Ambush]

Once again the nameless, faceless and sometimes brainless beurocrates that manage these things, will get the job of predator control done. They are working while you sleep at night and whine and worry during the day.

If the moose numbers are a dissmal as is being advanced by bio's and observers alike, then the solution is soon in hand.
Simply by sitting on their hands [and brains] the "managers" have rung the death bell for the maruading wolf packs.

No moose = no food = no wolves!

I can just see the plump middle aged fellow, pushing his comfy office chair back, locking his stubby, pink fingers behind his balding head and letting out a sigh of relief. Gazing out the window at the other cement buildings, he smuggly thinks to himself, "I don't need some goobber from Butt'svill Nowhere to tell me how to manage wildlife. They wanted the wolves all dead and now they are. AND I got a bonus and a promotion"!!

Good things come to those who wait.

[gcreek]

Once again the nameless, faceless and sometimes brainless beurocrates that manage these things, will get the job of predator control done. They are working while you sleep at night and whine and worry during the day.

If the moose numbers are a dissmal as is being advanced by bio's and observers alike, then the solution is soon in hand.
Simply by sitting on their hands [and brains] the "managers" have rung the death bell for the maruading wolf packs.

No moose = no food = no wolves!

I can just see the plump middle aged fellow, pushing his comfy office chair back, locking his stubby, pink fingers behind his balding head and letting out a sigh of relief. Gazing out the window at the other cement buildings, he smuggly thinks to himself, "I don't need some goobber from Butt'svill Nowhere to tell me how to manage wildlife. They wanted the wolves all dead and now they are. AND I got a bonus and a promotion"!!

Good things come to those who wait.


And he also succeded in removing all those evil ranchers from the now completely empty wilderness!

But don't worry, the trusting will wait until some tame wabbits are released so they can continue their entitled right to hunt.

I forgot to add that there won't be any Santy Claws either 'cause his team will be wolf turds too! No Easter Bunny......

[Moose63]

I heard this too. I wonder if some predator audio on the train would work?

[willyqbc]

While train and vehicle collisions certainly play a part.....they were there hitting moose when the moose population was booming here in the cariboo. I really don't think they are what is making the difference now. The predator population is the variable that has changed, along with logging creating more and more open habitat that favours a hunting wolf pack. I had a bio tell me once that in an open logging block the advantage goes to the wolves, in the heavy timber the advantage switches to the moose and deer. With more and more open blocks holding the food the ungulates love it plays right into the predators hands. Not suggesting that logging is evil or anything like that as i make my living from it (millwright), just one of the prices to be paid for logging on the scale we have up here.

Chris

[Telkwa Hunter]

i agree about high death rates by trains in winter..they are suppose to report the number of moose they hit with the train- one operator told me was around 125 last winter from pg to jasper...
its too bad they couldnt install something on the front of the train to deter the moose- kinda hard when your doin like 70km tho...
-or even just plow a lil path off to one side of the trax or something after they wing the snow...

It can be double that number from P.G. - Rupert.

Some "moose fences" have been built along the tracks to keep the moose off the ROW at high use crossing areas. But it doesn't stop them from walking a few hundred yards and just going around the fence.

The railway is a bone yard ..........

[GoatGuy]

While train and vehicle collisions certainly play a part.....they were there hitting moose when the moose population was booming here in the cariboo. I really don't think they are what is making the difference now. The predator population is the variable that has changed, along with logging creating more and more open habitat that favours a hunting wolf pack. I had a bio tell me once that in an open logging block the advantage goes to the wolves, in the heavy timber the advantage switches to the moose and deer. With more and more open blocks holding the food the ungulates love it plays right into the predators hands. Not suggesting that logging is evil or anything like that as i make my living from it (millwright), just one of the prices to be paid for logging on the scale we have up here.

Chris

The train part is correct. Haven't seen too much on large openings or cutblocks but that is how they hunt at times. There is quite a bit coming out on roads and Trails.

It seems roads/trails play a large part increasing wolf success and kill rates. Roads in high use areas create natural transacts for wolves to cover serious ground and box in prey. We're really starting to see it with collared wolves and caribou particularly in the NE corner with all the gas and oil lines. It increases the likelihood of wolves running in to prey species significantly and as a result mortality increases.

All that means for 'us' is that our activities have created an unnatural situation which favors wolves. The public has a perception that nature will take care of itself - in this case we can show that isn't the way it works.

[jessbennett]

I don't think the wolves and the bears are the only ones destroying our moose populations...I think the biggest killer is the trains that make the winter runs from PG up to Ft Nelson.
My cousin worked on with CP rail for number of years and he was telling about the moose that he would have to go out and kill becuase it decided to charge at the train. Of course the train would win and now he would have to go out and put the animal down. He said alot of moose like to stay on the tracks which made it easier for the them to get away from the predators, unfortunatley they charge at the trains and change course at the last minute only to the train nail them on the side, breaking their backs and pelvis's and whatnot. He mentioned that through the winter months...a whole generation of moose is gone. Not just from the moose that were living but the future generation of unborn calves that had been killed by these mishaps.
So....I wonder how much more moose we would see if something could be done to prevent these animals getting on train tracks during the winter months. I know bears and wolves probably play part of their role in the moose decline but from what my cousin says....I think the winter kill by trains play a larger role of lowering the moose numbers.

yes moose get killed by trains each winter. is it the major reason numbers are down? not a chance. the reason the moose are on the tracks is because they are plowed. (the path of least resistance.) they get caught on the tracks, run down the tracks, and eventually get run over. the moose do not charge the trains. they get caught on the tracks, and run down them. and a moose cannot outrun a freight train doing 40 + m.p.h. which would you prefer? to walk in 5-10 feet of snow? or a plowed set of tracks with a solid base to walk on?

there has been trains in the wilderness for years and years and years........... why all the sudden would the population be affected now? the reason is predators. wolf numbers are absolutely through the roof. out where im logging, the wolf numbers are ridiculous. there is more than a few moose kill sites already, and they sure arent from trains.

[Telkwa Hunter]

yes moose get killed by trains each winter. is it the major reason numbers are down? not a chance. the reason the moose are on the tracks is because they are plowed. (the path of least resistance.) they get caught on the tracks, run down the tracks, and eventually get run over. the moose do not charge the trains. they get caught on the tracks, and run down them. and a moose cannot outrun a freight train doing 40 + m.p.h. which would you prefer? to walk in 5-10 feet of snow? or a plowed set of tracks with a solid base to walk on?

there has been trains in the wilderness for years and years and years........... why all the sudden would the population be affected now? the reason is predators. wolf numbers are absolutely through the roof. out where im logging, the wolf numbers are ridiculous. there is more than a few moose kill sites already, and they sure arent from trains.

Trains my not be the # 1 reason but they don't help. With increased train traffic every year going to the port in Rupert there will be more moose killed every year. I see this on a daily basis.
Everything adds up and in the end it means less moose for you and me.

[MuleyMadness]

Yes Telkwa, it is a contributing factor, in those areas, but not in the Carinoo/Chilcotin, where there are no trains. It's been happening since there have been railways, and has never had any real impact of the population numbers. In fact, have a look at the populations in the areas where there a lot of train strikes, the moose populations and densities are very healthy for the most part.

Maybe in some areas it's a contributing factor to population declines..but predators are the problem in the Cariboo/Chilcotin that needs dealing with.

[jessbennett]

Trains my not be the # 1 reason but they don't help. With increased train traffic every year going to the port in Rupert there will be more moose killed every year. I see this on a daily basis.
Everything adds up and in the end it means less moose for you and me.
yet here in the cariboo region there is a decrease in train traffic. so explain to me how the moose population keeps dwindling? as it has been said countless times already, trains have been running in the province for years and years, and years. moose populations have generally always been good. so, now all the sudden trains and other vehicle traffic are the culprit? come on........... its time to quit the sugar coating people. its time to realize that we have a major predator problem QUICKLY on the rise here. and if we dont do something dam soon about it, its going to be to late.
wouldnt hurt for some people who give a dam to go out and try and pop a few of these predators to help and do what they can to ensure there is some moose around for the future. heck, if we dont get a handle on it soon, we arent going to have any deer left around here either.

[Bigbear]

I'll say It Time and Time again , there Can not Be an Accurate Count unless The first nations count is Added to the Total. There will be Ruffled Feathers but it is The truth..The Natives do not have to give up the Numbers killed each year.

As Far as Trains, out of the 35 Years working for BC Rail, an Engineer for 25 years,and a Brakeman Conductor for the Other 10, the Most I ever saw Hit by train in winter between the Lilloett and Williams Lake Corridor was 4. The Williams Lake to Prince George Corridor was 15. That year the snow was very heavy. Bear 2 and Deer were very Little. 5.

The Prince George to the For Nelson was quite a Bit More, There was Elk and Caribou in those Numbers as well.

There is Only 1 Count it 1 train a Day between Williams Lake and Prince Peorge

In The Past few Years if you even see 10 moose in a winter is on the Williams Lake to PG Subdivision is a Treat .So Trains Running in the Caribou is Not a Big Factor in the Total Numbers. So as the saying goes BinDareDunDat.

[Telkwa Hunter]

In the Cariboo trains probably less effect on the moose population than highway traffic. I was referring to the area that I call home that has up to 20 trains per day. On 1 trip I counted 17 dead moose that were hit by trains along a 60mile stretch of track . These were only the moose that were visible from the rails that hadn't crawled away into the bush to die or hadn't yet been covered by snow. Wolves no doubt are a huge problem, but don't discount other factors.

[TPK]

... there can not be an Accurate Count unless The first nations count is Added to the Total.

There has been some headway here and some FN's Reserves are reporting. The MOE takes the numbers that are reported and determines the number of moose per person living on the reserve for that Band. Those numbers (as there are several Bands now reporting) are then taken and used to average and extrapolate the number of Moose taken by non-reporting bands based on the number of registered members living on Reserve in that band. It's not 100% accurate but it's a number and closer than out and out guessing.

For Region 5 the MOE figures FN's are taking half the Moose AAH, that is 1000 for FN's and 1000 for resident hunters and GO's.

[bc mike]

Moose survey tenure for 3-29 and 3-30 is out. Approx. 60 hours of helicopter time is out for bid. They want to fly in Jan and Feb. I hope they count wolves too.

[Fisher-Dude]

How can they do classification counts in Jan and Feb? Numbers, yes, but ratios are impossible at that time.

[GoatGuy]

How can they do classification counts in Jan and Feb? Numbers, yes, but ratios are impossible at that time.

Snatch patch, not too tough for the trained eye.

[longrifle]

How can they do classification counts in Jan and Feb? Numbers, yes, but ratios are impossible at that time.


Snatch patch, not too tough for the trained eye.


I would have figured someone with nine years of post secondary edumaction would know that...But then again, the DUD is just a lowly bean counter.:mrgreen::-D


'rifle

[gitnadoix]

there is another threaf with 41 pages of pics of hunters with their fancy quads........30 years ago that would have been 1 page......combine that with the jet boats and the math gets easy .....


not sayin I aint one of em just sayin we all play our part in it.....

[Fisher-Dude]

Snatch patch, not too tough for the trained eye.

From what I've seen of you at the OK Corral, you need a bit more training!

[6616]

New article:

http://welcometowilliamslake.ca/index.php/the-news/local-news/4923-chilcotin-moose-population.html

[CanuckShooter]

That tells the story, the BC Liberal party is ignoring the alarm calls. We may as well write off moose hunting for the next 20 years if they don't act now!! When the natives start raising the alarm you better pay attention!!

[gcreek]

Kind of fits with what I've been saying all along.............

They're forgetting grizzlies are part of the equation too.

I've now seen 5 moose since Dec 6, one of them was south of Valemount last Monday.

[Steeleco]

I see the chief is taking some flack over his views and the public perception of what else may be causing the reduction. If things are that bad stop ALL hunting by all user groups.

[olharley guy]

I see the chief is taking some flack over his views and the public perception of what else may be causing the reduction. If things are that bad stop ALL hunting by all user groups.

Howdy, stop all hunting by all user groups is what may happen except for the odd poachers out there and I'm sure no one on this sight and a lot more people would never like to see this happen.

That is why there should be some gov't funds avaiable to do a wolf cull in all areas that is needed. Never mind the fly fishers comments and some of the others who as I stated before have probably never seen a wolf except for on Animal Planet or have witnessed a the birth of a moose calf being helped by a friendly wolf.

Should get a few more bands on the bandwagon to the Gov't while the time of the year is right for thinning them out-I said thinning not eliminating!

As far as counting any good biologist/counter should be able to tell the difference of sex in the deep snow by the way the animals are running when approached by a helicopter or airplane and that doesn't mean getting close enough to to see a snatch patch with snow flying all around.

A bull moose runs by just plowing through the deep snow and as maybe 90% of the cows are pregnant they will run lifting legs higher in the air trying not to stumble over dead trees etc. Later

[Husky7mm]

According to the ministry rep at the meeting, the combination of legitimate spike/fork harvest and the dramatic increase in incidents of shot and left due to mistaken point count etc is why they feel the 50% reduction is neccesary. Not saying their numbers are accurate as far as number of moose shot and left in areas where a spike/fork season are present, but if they are accurate, it happens WAY more than I would have thought.

Chris
Not to mention the SOB's who brake off points, we all know how scappy those 1.5yr old bulls are........

[junkyard_g]

7A is on LEH....we've been out the Blackwater in 7A for the last 2 1/2 weeks and have seen a grand total of one cow moose, and two fresh moose tracks....7A isn't doing all that good!!! :-(


could have something to do with being on the most heavily hunted road in all of 7A. sorry if that comes off as snarky lol. I gave up on the blackwater for moose. still do ok for mulies on foot out there though.