LEH to GOS

[flyboy]

I have been hearing one of the reasons why we can't get back to moose GOS is because the province doesn't have enough population numbers due to the fact that cutbacks have cut budgets for surveys. okay whats new there is no money blah blah blah(bc place looks good thou).

so I was wondering if it is as simple as why not throw $1 onto license cost and that goes directly into survey fund.not enviro fund or whatever else is on there now.
not sure of hunter numbers but if there are 80000 licenses being bought, that equals alot of helicopter time to do surveys. maybe have BCWF(or someone) hold that $1 so that it doesn't end up in GENERAL REVENUE. Force that info on some rule makers/GO'S and make them prove why not with real time info.

My guess is the old government likes the $7 from LEH app's alot,and would not like to see that cash cow disapear

just an idea,

I see lots of talk about trying to get back GOS,so any other SERIOUS brain storms. eneryone seems to hate and complain about LEH.

[bandit]

I wouldnt have a problem paying $1 more for a tag if it could be demonstrated to go to good use. At the end of the day license fees are a totally insignificant cost associated with hunting (compared to gas, trucks, rifles, ammo, quads, clothing, camping gear, etc etc etc)

$80,000 doesnt get much helicopter time though!

[MB_Boy]

$80,000 doesnt get much helicopter time though!

You sure don't need to be paying for a helicopter to do population surverys. I am not sure about the differential in price of a helicopter vs a Cessna but I helped my Dad fly surveys years ago in MB counting moose and I recall it being a good amount more than fixed wing. I don't know if the topography here would force you to use a chopper?

Frick....if it comes down to it; add on $2-$3 per license; even if you upped it by $5 for a moose tag it's not going to make guys "stay home". If $5 is enough to sway people from getting out and hunting for a season; me thinks they have bigger things to worry about.

[Fisher-Dude]

It cost about $40,000 to do a comprehensive moose survey in 8-11 last year plus a couple of samples in 2 other MUs, paid for by the BCWF clubs in the area. And at that, the MoE boys said there wasn't enough info to extrapolate anything for the region, so moose seasons remain curtailed based on "expert opinion", which apparently was a whining GO opposed to S/F seasons.

So, get out your chequebook, because it will take a lot of dough to get seasons changed.

I think Barry Penner put it best when he said everyone is screaming for dollars for healthcare, and relatively few are screaming for dollars for fish and wildlife.

[ianwuzhere]

how bout if i volunteer to count- will decrease the cost a bit.. :)

[Jagermeister]

I am not in favour of adding any $ to the cost of the licence for whatever reason. Once on, it will never come off and just go into the general revenue. Just like the supposedly short term LEH which continues today at full bore.

A better bet is for all hunters to add a buck to their R&G Club dues and remit that to the BCWF so we can conduct the surveys. Of course this probably won't fly either. (Region 3 club representatives rejected a per capita levee on the clubs for montary support for the regional costs.)

Anyhow, maybe the BCWF should hire some of those wildlife biologists that are jettisoned by the government. That way the data collected in the surveys will have the un-refutable credibility of a professional.

But, our biggest problem is ourselves. We need to get more of the hunters in the province to become members in affiliated clubs of the BCWF. Too many hunters are sitting on the side lines letting someone else do the work or pay the cost of maintaining a hunter presence at the "table".

Rant over, for the time being!

[flyboy]

sadly after I posted the question I found the results of the Moose survey done last season in the okanagan. survey was paid for not by the governemnt,all the info was there and still the MOE biologist found a way not to take it seriously.not a real count unless done by certified professionals????

total shame... here is a group saving the taxpayers thousands of dollars doing the governments work for them and it is worth nothing. wonder how the local MLA would answer the question of a ministry not using free money??

yep unless it is done by the gods in victoria(without outside influance) forget it

[Fisher-Dude]

sadly after I posted the question I found the results of the Moose survey done last season in the okanagan. survey was paid for not by the governemnt,all the info was there and still the MOE biologist found a way not to take it seriously.not a real count unless done by certified professionals????

total shame... here is a group saving the taxpayers thousands of dollars doing the governments work for them and it is worth nothing. wonder how the local MLA would answer the question of a ministry not using free money??

yep unless it is done by the gods in victoria(without outside influance) forget it


The count was done with MoE bios in attendance. The guys who did the report are well-respected RP Bios too. There was no problem with acceptance of the report - it was just not acted on by the MoE after it was done. The GOs have WAY too much influence in this case, IMO.

[one-shot-wonder]

I am not in favour of adding any $ to the cost of the licence for whatever reason. Once on, it will never come off and just go into the general revenue. Just like the supposedly short term LEH which continues today at full bore.

A better bet is for all hunters to add a buck to their R&G Club dues and remit that to the BCWF so we can conduct the surveys. Of course this probably won't fly either. (Region 3 club representatives rejected a per capita levee on the clubs for montary support for the regional costs.)

Anyhow, maybe the BCWF should hire some of those wildlife biologists that are jettisoned by the government. That way the data collected in the surveys will have the un-refutable credibility of a professional.

But, our biggest problem is ourselves. We need to get more of the hunters in the province to become members in affiliated clubs of the BCWF. Too many hunters are sitting on the side lines letting someone else do the work or pay the cost of maintaining a hunter presence at the "table".

Rant over, for the time being!

I agree hunters should raise the funds and manage them through a club or grass roots level to ensure effective use. Sad reality is the Ministry will never get off the hunter raised funds and start relying on it, much like HCTF funding which is being applied for by MoE to fund wildlife inventories unfortunately not the original intent of the HCTF.

[boxhitch]

Heres something to help understand the MOE prospective.
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/Moose%20Selective%20Harvest_15%20July%202011.pdf

[.300WSMImpact!]

GOS for moose would be a huge mistake, there are a lot of moose around I see them almost every second day in the bush but letting us all have a chance to shoot one would kill them off in two years, double or triple the tags in the LEH system give more chance to get tags, but GOS at least in region 8 would not be good

[Fisher-Dude]

GOS for moose would be a huge mistake, there are a lot of moose around I see them almost every second day in the bush but letting us all have a chance to shoot one would kill them off in two years, double or triple the tags in the LEH system give more chance to get tags, but GOS at least in region 8 would not be good


So can you explain how, with twice the number of hunters that we have today, we had a long GOS any bull season for over 30 years, with no impact on moose conservation numbers?

[.300WSMImpact!]

So can you explain how, with twice the number of hunters that we have today, we had a long GOS any bull season for over 30 years, with no impact on moose conservation numbers?

Gee I thought you would agree with me fishdude, hunter numbers are down but the hunter numbers in region 8 are up,

[Fisher-Dude]

Gee I thought you would agree with me fishdude, hunter numbers are down but the hunter numbers in region 8 are up,

Where are you getting that from?

[gcreek]

So can you explain how, with twice the number of hunters that we have today, we had a long GOS any bull season for over 30 years, with no impact on moose conservation numbers?

Mainly because 30 years ago there were very few wolves in the province, thanks mostly to ranchers and outfitters that successfully lobbied a less bleeding heart, non Liberal/NDP govt. to have a major predator control program.

Who kills the most game, 10,000 hunters or 250,000 wolves?

[.300WSMImpact!]

Where are you getting that from?

not from any books, just from being in the bush and 10 years ago I hardly saw anyone in the woods, now no matter where and when I go out I see people or camps, usually see more people than animals

[Fisher-Dude]

We have 250,000 wolves and only 10,000 hunters in BC? Seems like all the game would be dead in a few weeks if there were 250,000 wolves. :confused:

There's some question in region 8 as to whether there is a huntable wolf population of 100 wolves. There probably are, but they are impossible to inventory.

[.300WSMImpact!]

We have 250,000 wolves and only 10,000 hunters in BC? Seems like all the game would be dead in a few weeks if there were 250,000 wolves. :confused:

There's some question in region 8 as to whether there is a huntable wolf population of 100 wolves. There probably are, but they are impossible to inventory.

I have seen too many wolves this year for my liking, but I couldn't guess how many we have in region 8, but I am sure opening a season would not hurt they are very tough to hunt

[behemoth]

Heres something to help understand the MOE prospective.
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/Moose%20Selective%20Harvest_15%20July%202011.pdf

Hey Boxhitch
Thanks for the link, some good answers to questions I've been pondering

[Fisher-Dude]

not from any books, just from being in the bush and 10 years ago I hardly saw anyone in the woods, now no matter where and when I go out I see people or camps, usually see more people than animals


You would need licencing stats and hunter days to make that conclusion. Anecdotal accounts don't cut it.

Days per kill under GOS any bull during the 1980s averaged 56. In the 1990s it was 60 under a combo of GOS any bull and LEH. In the 2000s it was 77 under a combo spike/fork and LEH. From this, we can (simplistically!) conclude that GOS any bull could see a 37% increase (77/56) in harvest. That's assuming season length for any bull would match the long seasons we had in the 1980s. We can regulate the harvest under an any bull season by shortening the season, effectively maintaining harvest levels at desired AAH levels.

There are other factors to consider, such as having simultaneous openings in all other regions to ensure that localized over-harvest does not occur with isolated GOS openings (see Sitkaspruce's proposal).

Talk of a "slaughter" has been shown to be complete BS in all cases recently as naysayers act on emotion instead of science to predict doom and gloom. WK elk, WT does, and EK cow/calf seasons were all predicted to be "slaughters" by the uninformed, but in all cases, harvest showed the opposite. We just don't have the hunter numbers in BC anymore to greatly affect wildlife populations.

[Fisher-Dude]

I have seen too many wolves this year for my liking, but I couldn't guess how many we have in region 8, but I am sure opening a season would not hurt they are very tough to hunt


Agreed. The goal of a region 8 wolf season is to keep them from settling in to an area and cleaning out localized game. Hunting them will keep them moving and spread their impact out. If we were able to shoot half a dozen in a season here, I'd be surprised.

[.300WSMImpact!]

You would need licencing stats and hunter days to make that conclusion. Anecdotal accounts don't cut it.

Days per kill under GOS any bull during the 1980s averaged 56. In the 1990s it was 60 under a combo of GOS any bull and LEH. In the 2000s it was 77 under a combo spike/fork and LEH. From this, we can (simplistically!) conclude that GOS any bull could see a 37% increase (77/56) in harvest. That's assuming season length for any bull would match the long seasons we had in the 1980s. We can regulate the harvest under an any bull season by shortening the season, effectively maintaining harvest levels at desired AAH levels.

There are other factors to consider, such as having simultaneous openings in all other regions to ensure that localized over-harvest does not occur with isolated GOS openings (see Sitkaspruce's proposal).

Talk of a "slaughter" has been shown to be complete BS in all cases recently as naysayers act on emotion instead of science to predict doom and gloom. WK elk, WT does, and EK cow/calf seasons were all predicted to be "slaughters" by the uninformed, but in all cases, harvest showed the opposite. We just don't have the hunter numbers in BC anymore to greatly affect wildlife populations.

I would love a GOS it just scares me, if I see 30 or 40 bulls a year I am sure everyone else does

[aggiehunter]

I dunno Fisher Dude...would a quad trail into every swamp and cutblock have an impact on moose numbers...I wunder????

[Fisher-Dude]

Access in the 1970s was huge - there were no road deactivations and the first phase of pine beetle logging saw roads punched everywhere. All block roads were left in place. Legislation saw all roads maintained. Reforestation was considerably slower with broadcast burns and natural regen forming a big part of silvicultural plans. Access and sightability were probably as good or better than they are now in much of the region.

You'll be happy to know, Ern, that we've been able to get a bio student to do a study on R8 moose vulnerability this year. Looking forward to the results.

[GoatGuy]

Mainly because 30 years ago there were very few wolves in the province, thanks mostly to ranchers and outfitters that successfully lobbied a less bleeding heart, non Liberal/NDP govt. to have a major predator control program.

Who kills the most game, 10,000 hunters or 250,000 wolves?

The restrictive hunting seasons started to come in 30 years ago - 20 years ago we had very few wolves across most of the province, even 15 in most of the southern half of the province. In many areas there haven't been wolves until the last couple of years - to blame changing provincial opportunity on wolves alone is rediculous.

The uninformed rhetorical drivel has probably done more damage to scientific wildlife management in BC than anything else. The pendulum seems to swing instead of applying a consistent common sense approach - the concept that we should extirpate all predators across the province is just as foolish as the concept that hands-off management is the best approach.

No sense in dealing with science when we can have someone pull a number of 250,000 wolves out of thin air.

[BCrams]

I dunno Fisher Dude...would a quad trail into every swamp and cutblock have an impact on moose numbers...I wunder????

Aggie gives me the best chuckle of the day with his repsonse. Its about as uneducated as it gets.

[flyboy]

so in conclusion, the chances of a GOS any time soon in certain parts of bc is slim. so instead of wasting energy on that why not put the effort into trying to get all LEH's at bare minimum doubled. see how that goes for 3 years then double again.get the odds down and hopefully more people spread around the province. a nice slow controled way back to GOS instead of the "terrifing GOS tomorrow all the moose will die".

easier said then done,,again just throwing ideas..

[boxhitch]

Moe probably has a formula for calculating the number of permits to let out to come close to the desired harvest number
Something based on past hunter effort and success
Of course they have the safety margin in just in case everyone over-achieves in one year. That is usually such a huge margin , the number of permits and resulting harvest will never reach the optimum
Just in case, you know

[boxhitch]

I dunno Fisher Dude...would a quad trail into every swamp and cutblock have an impact on moose numbers...I wunder????Thats just laughable. Can't imagine how this has anything to do with wildlife management

[walks with deer]

I beg to differ region 8 espeacialy the moose are in pockets look how many people apply for leh there between that and close proximatey to the coast they would be hit hard.
Look how many more bucks there are since the 4 point seasons were implamented in region 8

[wsm]

id pay a little more for tags/ licence if they could show that the money was going to the correct place. however im not against leh moose as i have hunted reg 5 for 10 -15 yrs now and have physically seen the moose population get better in the areas i hunt. even with the high wolf population.

[wsm]

Aggie gives me the best chuckle of the day with his repsonse. Its about as uneducated as it gets. maybe educate me then pls. for example if u take roads out of hunting areas i would say a larger number of hunters wouldn't be bothered to venture there. i love to hunt vehicle restricted areas. very few can be bothered to walk . i personally find there is more wildlife where there is less access. i am happy to learn any thing your willing to teach bc rams

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I beg to differ region 8 espeacialy the moose are in pockets look how many people apply for leh there between that and close proximatey to the coast they would be hit hard.
Look how many more bucks there are since the 4 point seasons were implamented in region 8

Those 4 pt restrictions you refer to were implimented after the big die-off in the winter of 96-97. Since then populations have rebounded in most areas. Of course there are going to be more bucks around....there are more deer around. Makes perfect sense....no?

SSS

[JDR]

Well if they aren't going to give us a GOS in region 8, at the very least give us more LEH tags. For the life of me I can't understand why 8-09 numbers were reduced this year for both the October and November hunts. Did this have something to do with the local outfitter? Does anyone know what the justification was for reducing the numbers?

[billjc33]

Thanks for the link as well, it was interesting to see the numbers. Also suprised that the Omineca is the only region in B.C where the numbers of bulls is consistently dropping. That article also stats that harvesting cows in areas effected by large numbers of predations is a bad idea, which leaves me to wonder why there were 1400 cow LEH issued in region 7 in 2011? I'm not a biologist and i may just be speaking an uneducated opinion but I would really like to see the calf season in region 7 either removed or shortened. I do realize the increased number of moose calves would increase the food source for the predators but I think the predator issue should be managed in itself not by decreasing the numbers of a different species. The increased survival rate of the moose calves without an GOS on them would increase the amount of spike/fork bulls the next year creating hunting opportunities there.

Another observation on the moose populations for the omineca was that they estimate 30000 to 50000 in population. How is a guestimate that ranges in 40% of the population credible? It's like the weather man telling us there is a 40% chance of rain. It might rain it might not, their might be moose their might not.

I personally would like to see increased numbers of moose and the trend is going downward.

Bill

[Fisher-Dude]

I beg to differ region 8 espeacialy the moose are in pockets look how many people apply for leh there between that and close proximatey to the coast they would be hit hard.
Look how many more bucks there are since the 4 point seasons were implamented in region 8

How many bucks are required to ensure a healthy population of deer? We're way over the provincial goal of 20 : 100 in most of region 8, and remember that 20 : 100 includes a big margin for wildlife viewing and other non-conservation related measurements. Some states manage deer populations down to 5 to 8 : 100 buck : doe ratio with no conservation concerns. All we need is an adequate sperm supply to ensure does get bred. We could safely harvest way more deer than we already are, and may have a healthier herd than we do right now.

[Fisher-Dude]

Thanks for the link as well, it was interesting to see the numbers. Also suprised that the Omineca is the only region in B.C where the numbers of bulls is consistently dropping. That article also stats that harvesting cows in areas effected by large numbers of predations is a bad idea, which leaves me to wonder why there were 1400 cow LEH issued in region 7 in 2011? I'm not a biologist and i may just be speaking an uneducated opinion but I would really like to see the calf season in region 7 either removed or shortened. I do realize the increased number of moose calves would increase the food source for the predators but I think the predator issue should be managed in itself not by decreasing the numbers of a different species. The increased survival rate of the moose calves without an GOS on them would increase the amount of spike/fork bulls the next year creating hunting opportunities there.

Another observation on the moose populations for the omineca was that they estimate 30000 to 50000 in population. How is a guestimate that ranges in 40% of the population credible? It's like the weather man telling us there is a 40% chance of rain. It might rain it might not, their might be moose their might not.

I personally would like to see increased numbers of moose and the trend is going downward.

Bill


Bill, you need to research the difference between compensatory and additive mortality in moose populations. Calf seasons are compensatory.

You shot a nice moose this year. Why shouldn't others get the same chance with sustainable seasons that fit everyone's goals in moose harvest? More opportunity, as long as it is sustainable (7A seasons have been around for decades and still the region produces half the harvest in BC) is a goal we need to reach.


http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/296388_10150836650270504_521390503_20918123_667954 323_n.jpg

[billjc33]

Yes I got a nice moose because I had an LEH, which had nothing to do with the 15 day gong show called calf season. Everyone that applied for an LEH had the same chance as me. Removing the calf season, shortening it or managing it with Limited entries would insure that everyone has the same if not better chance of harvesting a moose the same as I did. Its just a matter of preference but i would prefer to see more moose in the bush and have higher numbers of spike/fork bulls to hunt then the annual calf slaughtering that goes on around PG

[billjc33]

On a different topic (deer) does anyone know of any studies on the deer population around Prince George? Any buck from sept 10 to nov 15 seems like a strange harvesting plan for a area with isolated pockets of deer. I know most people around PG carry a deer tag while they are moose hunting just in case and then travel to the Peace to do some serious hunting where the rules are stricter and the animals are way more plentiful.

[BCrams]

Bill -

Calf moose season has been around since 1981. (longer than you've maybe been alive) Thats 30 years and 7a is recognized as having one of the most successful moose harvest strategies in North America with a healthy and robust moose population.

If the so called "slaughter" as you put it was detrimental to the successful program, they would have rectified it years ago. Putting it on LEH takes away opportunity to go hunt moose when you do not draw a LEH permit and still put some good eats in the freezer.

[270WIN]

i would be cerious what the success rate for hunters to calf harvest would be. must be high to call it a slaughter. funny thing is I know a few guys that have hunted the calf season with no luck at all.

[Tenacious Billy]

i would be cerious what the success rate for hunters to calf harvest would be. must be high to call it a slaughter. funny thing is I know a few guys that have hunted the calf season with no luck at all.

Plenty of guys go "calfless" during the season. I think the term "slaughter" gets applied partly because of the gong-show that is calf season for 2 weeks in 7A.

[billjc33]

I would say its pretty easy to get a calf in any direction from pg if you put a little bit of time in. But I just don't understand how people say that by eliminating the calf season you are loosing the ability to hunt moose. You will increase the amount of spike/forks drastically.

[Looking_4_Jerky]

I've hunted the calf season in Valemont and it was far from what I'd consider a slaugter! In fact, in the mountainous areas of the province where high, less accessible areas hold a lot of the moose until snow pushes them down, harvest of any moose sex or age doesn't seem excessive on most years.

[Fisher-Dude]

I would say its pretty easy to get a calf in any direction from pg if you put a little bit of time in. But I just don't understand how people say that by eliminating the calf season you are loosing the ability to hunt moose. You will increase the amount of spike/forks drastically.

Not so. Did you research compensatory harvest versus additive harvest?

Let me summarize it for you: calf seasons are compensatory harvest. That means that the harvest is no more than the calves that would have died that winter from wolves, starvation, disease, and other natural factors. Calves have a high over-winter mortality rate, and it doesn't alter the post-winter calf numbers by having a calf season the previous fall. By harvesting calf numbers that would be part of what dies anyway, we allow the remaining calves to be more robust with better feed and better protection by their cows with only one calf to protect from predators (in twinning situations).

Additive harvest is defined as taking animals from the herd that likely would survive the winter, and thus post-winter numbers are lower. Shooting a mature bull, for example, is additive harvest, and reduces the number of animals that are in the herd post-winter.

Thus, calf seasons are one of the most sustainable forms of harvest of any game population. Spike/fork numbers are unaffected by compensatory harvest, despite what you may think happens in the wild. Moose in 7A have been studied extensively, and the research supports keeping the calf seasons to provide opportunity without negative impacts on other age classes of moose.

You should get a copy of "Toward an Improved Moose Management Strategy" by Ecodomain Consulting. I'll email it to you if you want - it will give you the straight facts about 7A moose management and clear up a lot of misconceptions that you may have.

[boxhitch]

Compensatory ? Hmm have to study that some more

scenario - 1000 calves in a zone , hunters take 20 %, and normal winter die off is 20 % leaving 640 not 800.

The management with calf season assumes the remaining calf will all survive over winter because of the fall reduction ?
Maybe the case if starvation was the only or biggest factor of winter mortality , no?
Maybe non-issue if harvest is less than 5%

[billjc33]

REALLY??? so lets make it simple cuz this sound unbelievable. Maybe I'm just a rambling redneck but I don't believe that additive/compensatory stuff for a second.

If you have 10 calves and 5 will die because of (compensatory) then you will have 5 survive. Oh wait but its not compensatory because you still have a calf season on top of that.
So if you have 10 calves and 5 get shot during calf season and 2.5 die do to your compensatory you are now left with 2.5

The same percentage is going to die because of predators, starvation, disease and other natural factors, hunters are not just shooting the ones that aren't going to make it.

And to say cancelling calf season would not increase the number of spike/forks doesn't make any sense even if your try to spin it with your additive/compensatory harvest. If more calves make it through hunting season more will make it through the winter and more will make it to 1 1/2 and a percentage of those will be spike/forks.

I think that my opinion of calf season maybe a littel bias refering to the surrounding management units around PG cuz it really is a gong show out there from the 10th to at least the 18th.

And I think with the amount of new clear cuts and lush moose ground developed by logging starvation and food availability is a non issue. I don't think the compitition for food is that harsh.

[Fisher-Dude]

REALLY??? so lets make it simple cuz this sound unbelievable. Maybe I'm just a rambling redneck but I don't believe that additive/compensatory stuff for a second.

If you have 10 calves and 5 will die because of (compensatory) then you will have 5 survive. Oh wait but its not compensatory because you still have a calf season on top of that.
So if you have 10 calves and 5 get shot during calf season and 2.5 die do to your compensatory you are now left with 2.5

The same percentage is going to die because of predators, starvation, disease and other natural factors, hunters are not just shooting the ones that aren't going to make it.

And to say cancelling calf season would not increase the number of spike/forks doesn't make any sense even if your try to spin it with your additive/compensatory harvest. If more calves make it through hunting season more will make it through the winter and more will make it to 1 1/2 and a percentage of those will be spike/forks.

I think that my opinion of calf season maybe a littel bias refering to the surrounding management units around PG cuz it really is a gong show out there from the 10th to at least the 18th.

And I think with the amount of new clear cuts and lush moose ground developed by logging starvation and food availability is a non issue. I don't think the compitition for food is that harsh.

Wrong. 5 are going to die, hunted or not. Do you want to read the research into this? I've offered to send it to you.

When you talk about "gong shows", it indicates that you're trying to manage the social aspects of hunting, rather than manage the animals. That's a common mistake founded on misconceptions of how game management works.

[billjc33]

HAHA no im not trying to manage the social aspects of hunting don't try and put words in my mouth. I'm not some tree hugger that doesn't want other people to hunt, I love the social aspect of hunting and meeting new people but if you have ever been down the pelican or been down the blackwater or salmon road around pg on oct 10th you would know what i mean by "gong show". And no I don't want to read your research its common sense that if more moose die there will be more that will be dead haha your additive/compensatory research can't change that simple point.

If you have 10 calves and say 5 will die of natuaral causes and 2 of them are shot your left with 3 not 5 get it? its simple

Have you ever looked into predatory aspects of animal populations?

If you have 10 calves and the wolves need to eat 3 to stay full your left with 7. If you have already shot the 3 that you say were going to die anyways and the wolves still need to eat 5 your left with 2 not 5 see you don't have to be a rocket scientist.

[Fisher-Dude]

HAHA no im not trying to manage the social aspects of hunting don't try and put words in my mouth. I'm not some tree hugger that doesn't want other people to hunt, I love the social aspect of hunting and meeting new people but if you have ever been down the pelican or been down the blackwater or salmon road around pg on oct 10th you would know what i mean by "gong show". And no I don't want to read your research its common sense that if more moose die there will be more that will be dead haha your additive/compensatory research can't change that simple point.

If you have 10 calves and say 5 will die of natuaral causes and 2 of them are shot your left with 3 not 5 get it? its simple

Have you ever looked into predatory aspects of animal populations?

If you have 10 calves and the wolves need to eat 3 to stay full your left with 7. If you have already shot the 3 that you say were going to die anyways and the wolves still need to eat 5 your left with 2 not 5 see you don't have to be a rocket scientist.



Obviously, you want to live in ignorance about how game populations respond to mortality. The research is done by some of the most respected moose specialists in BC.

If you have 10 calves and you shoot 2, only 3 will die in the winter, and you're left with 5. If you don't shoot any, 5 will die in the winter and you're left with 5. That's how it works, despite what your friends down at Tim Hortons think.

[BCrams]

And no I don't want to read your research its common sense that if more moose die there will be more that will be dead haha your additive/compensatory research can't change that simple point.

If you have 10 calves and say 5 will die of natuaral causes and 2 of them are shot your left with 3 not 5 get it? its simple

Have you ever looked into predatory aspects of animal populations?

If you have 10 calves and the wolves need to eat 3 to stay full your left with 7. If you have already shot the 3 that you say were going to die anyways and the wolves still need to eat 5 your left with 2 not 5 see you don't have to be a rocket scientist.

You really should take up FD's offer to get a copy of that research and have a little read through.

[chinooker]

not from any books, just from being in the bush and 10 years ago I hardly saw anyone in the woods, now no matter where and when I go out I see people or camps, usually see more people than animals

The difference is back then the season for bulls was from sept to nov with a short rut closure. Now when we get a weeklong opening every hunter in bc is trying to shoot something at the same time. LEH is nothing but a lazy way for MOE to manage the population and line the goverments pockets. If it came right down to it I would rather see a 3 month GOS every two or three years than the crap we put up with now.

[billjc33]

So compensatory deaths are largely based on population density. When the moose reach a density which is too high competition for food etc raises the mortality rate. This research doesn't take into consideration that wolves need to eat. I remember reading on here somewhere that the average wolf in central BC eat 5-7 moose a year. That is not going to go away if there are less calves they will target more adults having an even bigger effect by eliminating prime reproducing animals. In region 7A the moose population has been slowly decreasing for the last 8 years with all the natural aspects contributing. If the moose population is decreasing then density levels are not at their peak leaving room for calves to thrive.

At the end of the day I would just like to to see a few more moose. IF you take away or alter the calf season there are still tons of opportunity to hunt via LEH or other GOS'

I would like to see them eliminate the calf season for one year and see what happens
or
change calf season to a youth only season
or
If you insist the calf season must stay eliminate the late season cow draw to increase the number of prime reproducing animals.

[horshur]

If "hunter effort" modeling is primarily used in a rabidly changing ecosystem( Roads and access due to logging) some of the data is skewed for as new areas open up they become the main source of the data. As change moderates and there are less newly opened areas the numbers may remain for some time because of the vast access and new productivity but this in no way reflects what once was or what it could be or maybe even is and this in my oppinion is the contention with the users of the resource.

People remember what it once was and when it is no longer they question and this is completly reasonable.......If there once was good moose hunting up the road from their home and now there is not the answer seems pretty obvious and the culprits as well.

I think what resident hunters need to realize is that the managers are not in the business to make more Moose but to keep the herd healthy and this objective probably is not in the best intrest of folks who would like to kill a Bull every year on a GOS..

what once was, wasn't really..what is, is temporary...what will be, won't always.

[levind]

Ministry of Environment file:///C:/Users/kevin/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gifinfrared photo moose survey file:///C:/Users/kevin/AppData/Local/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif
Fixed Wing Charters (non medical)


Summary Details:
Please provide a quote for aerial infra-red video survey coverage at a scale suitable for
detecting and counting moose, in the Prince George area of British Columbia, during December
2011 or January 2012. Quote as cost per hour or per km2 plus any additional expenses such
as positioning the aircraft and report preparation. I anticipate needing about 25 hours or
about 400 km2 of survey work. The contractor will be able to radio real-time moose
detection locations to a nearby helicopter for verification. In addition, the contractor
will provide the coordinates and time for each moose counted within the designated survey
block within a month of survey completion.



Looks like they might spend a little bit of money in the pg area this year. There is also another one for helicopter survey. As much as i would love a gos for moose i dont think it will ever happen again where it would be open for 2 months maybe a week or 2 gos but at the very least there should be a lot more lehs issued.

[Fisher-Dude]

So compensatory deaths are largely based on population density. When the moose reach a density which is too high competition for food etc raises the mortality rate. This research doesn't take into consideration that wolves need to eat. I remember reading on here somewhere that the average wolf in central BC eat 5-7 moose a year. That is not going to go away if there are less calves they will target more adults having an even bigger effect by eliminating prime reproducing animals. In region 7A the moose population has been slowly decreasing for the last 8 years with all the natural aspects contributing. If the moose population is decreasing then density levels are not at their peak leaving room for calves to thrive.

At the end of the day I would just like to to see a few more moose. IF you take away or alter the calf season there are still tons of opportunity to hunt via LEH or other GOS'

I would like to see them eliminate the calf season for one year and see what happens
or
change calf season to a youth only season
or
If you insist the calf season must stay eliminate the late season cow draw to increase the number of prime reproducing animals.


IF there's a problem (there isn't, but let's assume you're right) you have to identify it before you make season changes, in order to make the correct choice from the alternatives. If there's a breeding problem, what will disappear is spike/fork and LEH bull seasons to restore the sperm supply. Is that what you want? Remember, once that S/F and LEH bull is gone, it won't be back, as the Indians will veto any attempt to reinstate it. Again, is that what you want?