PDA

View Full Version : Region 8 moose survey



fireguy
02-07-2012, 10:04 PM
Thanks to Slinky Pickle here is a link to the report

http://www.ospreydesign.ca/forum_pics/Okanagan%20Moose%20Inventory%20Jan%2017%202012.pdf


Using the revised moose winter habitat suitability mapping (Fig. 5), and the moose strata densities from only the past 5 years (Table 6), the regional winter moose population estimate was 3470 with a 90% confidence interval of 32% (Table 7). This figure is considerably higher than the previous habitat-based estimate of 2174 moose (Gyug 2007). No estimate of the confidence interval was available for the 2007 estimate.

RECOMMENDATIONS
Survey-based moose winter range population estimates in 2010-2012 did not match those derived from habitat suitability in 2007, with numbers generally increased by up to double the 2007 estimates. Even once habitat suitability was revised, and current (<5-year old) density estimates used, population estimates derived by the two methods were not necessarily a good fit on an MU by MU basis except for the surveys conducted in 2011-2012. On that basis, I recommend:
1. Where survey-based population estimates are available, these should be used as the basis for any revisions in hunting regulations.
2. The moose winter population estimates developed based solely on habitat suitability by MU should be treated with caution, and not used for revising hunting regulations unless these can be confirmed with further SRB surveys.
3. Further SRB moose surveys in the next two years in 3 to 6 MUs would yield much higher confidence in the habitat-based estimates, after which the fit of the habitat-based estimates to the survey-derived estimates should be re-evaluated, and their use in possible revision of hunting regulations considered.
4. First priority for future SRB surveys should be 8-08 as the last of the MUs surveyed in 1999 which has yet to be resurveyed.
5. Other priority MUs for SRB surveys in any given year should include some of those never surveyed with >100 moose predicted to be present (8-01, 8-07, 8-09 and 8-15), and those previously surveyed >5 years ago with >100 moose predicted to be present, and where past estimates are out of line with current (2012) habitat-based estimates including (in no particular order): a. 8-06 (last surveyed in 2001),
b. 8-14 (last surveyed in 2001),
c. 8-23 (last surveyed in 2003),
d. 8-24 (last surveyed in 2003).
 
6. Flight time allotted for SRB per MU will range from 15 to 30 hours, with 20-25 hours used as a target for future planning. This assumes that in-the-field refuelling of helicopters can be arranged using fuel caches to minimize ferry time.

Fisher-Dude
02-07-2012, 10:59 PM
The survey shows a lot more moose than we thought we had. Again.

It's odd that we fret over sex ratios and curtail seasons because we're a bull or two below 30 : 100, yet the population continues to expand at a surprising rate. Perhaps the 30 : 100 target that includes "representative age class wildlife viewing opportunities" needs a revision to concentrate on conservation levels while allowing "enhanced harvest opportunities for resident hunters." :wink:

Maverick
02-08-2012, 03:46 PM
From what info was Posted not sure that I would agree with
There being more moose. It just makes
One question the reliability Of the study

Stone Sheep Steve
02-08-2012, 04:13 PM
Here's the short version of the actual counts....

MU 8-25 increased moose estimate from 98 to 205
MU 8-10 from 236 to 270
MU 8-12 from 261 to 389

Flinch
02-08-2012, 04:13 PM
Maverick,
Not sure which study's reliability you are questioning. The old habitat-model based study predicted 2200ish moose, the current study where they actually went and flew the areas and counted moose comes up with alot more. I would suggest that inventory flying is much more reliable than habitat modelling, although they both have their place.

bowhunterbruce
02-08-2012, 04:16 PM
does anyone have the link to read the full report,i'd love to read it all.
thanks
bhb

Slinky Pickle
02-08-2012, 05:56 PM
I would like to see the actual report too. If it's available for public release can I host the file and share it out?

Fisher-Dude
02-08-2012, 06:25 PM
Email comin' your way BHB.

fireguy
02-08-2012, 06:25 PM
edited, link at top

Slinky Pickle
02-08-2012, 06:43 PM
Here's a link to the file. Fireguy, can you edit your top post to include it.

http://www.ospreydesign.ca/forum_pics/Okanagan Moose Inventory Jan 17 2012.pdf

kootsroots
02-08-2012, 07:05 PM
With such low numbers being reported for spike-forks and less then half of the Cows having yearlings does anyone think we will see a change from the GOS on Spikes in the Okanagan? I am confused by the numbers as to why there is a GOS on spikes and a LEH on Matures when the numbers seem to suggest the opposite should be happening. Can someone with more wisdom and insight on this matter please enlighten me........

Fisher-Dude
02-08-2012, 07:48 PM
Much of the spike/fork harvest is compensatory rather than additive mortality. The count was done post-hunt, and one would expect lower s/f counts at that time. Also, only about 35 - 40% of first year bulls are spike/forks, so 60% of first year bulls would be classified as non-s/f.

There's no conservation concern with an s/f hunt.

kootsroots
02-08-2012, 07:55 PM
Ah I think I get it, Cheers