Moose numbers Sweden vs BC

[scott h]

I was just doing a little reading on a moose hunt in Sweden and found a few things interesting. For a country that is half the size of BCs 950,000 sq. kms vs 450,000 sq. kms they have 300-400,000 moose vs BC's 170,000. Seems like they they are doing a much better job at maintaining a valuable resource than we are.

[huntingfamily]

I'm guessing less predators.

[Wild one]

Sweden does have wolves and bears but don’t know how they compare density wise

[steel_ram]

Sweden doesn't have special groups with special rights.

[ACE]

Did they have programs where a calf was harvested rather than a bull ?
The older cows tend to drop twins for some time . . . making them a very valuable asset in game management.
Does Sweden have a population segment that harvests everything all year ?
Feed . . . ?

[ghunter4x4]

Ace and Steel_Ram nailed it.

[RyoTHC]

That’s what happens when 1 percent of the population takes a very disproportionate number of the game animals and have no discretion whether it had antlers or didn’t.

[finngun]

Sweden doesn't have special groups with special rights.

Wrong,,saamis are spec.group in northern part of Sweden and Finland,, Norway too..but hunting right are controlled diff.way than here..a wayy better...no..landsleepers b.s...:roll:

[scott h]

Did they have programs where a calf was harvested rather than a bull ?
The older cows tend to drop twins for some time . . . making them a very valuable asset in game management.
Does Sweden have a population segment that harvests everything all year ?
Feed . . . ?

Maybe it is something too due with feed. I remember seeing a pie chart someone posted and being surprised that in a huge area the sizeof BC, with our sparse population that there was a percentage of moose dying of starvation. Pretty embarrassing for us. Sweden also has 10 million people vs our 5 million and they harvest 100,000 moose a year.

[Hunter gatherer]

We have idiots running our province and country

[REMINGTON JIM]

We have idiots running our province and country

YUP and soon to to have the Natives looking after F&W in BC its COMING ! :icon_frow :twisted: RJ

[moosinaround]

Habitat use is different in Sweden. When's the last time you have heard of progressive clear cuts that span 100-10,000's of hectares? How about broadcast applications of pesticides? How about road access for resource extraction? Similar boreal, and sub boreal ecosystems, different use of the landscape! Not to mention the other stuff! Moosin

[wos]

I think its fair to say bc is no where close to reaching its maximum potential for game numbers. Can you imagine what it could be like if everyone had a common goal?

[REMINGTON JIM]

I think its fair to say bc is no where close to reaching its maximum potential for game numbers. Can you imagine what it could be like if everyone had a common goal?

Yes we still have LOTs of GREAT Habitat left yet and LOT's to grow up in the next 20 years too ! jmo RJ

[Ride Red]

I think Greta saved them all :roll:

[webley]

I think Greta saved them all :roll:
well that made me laugh. good one.Steve!

[saskbooknut]

If you really want to understand the difference between Sweden and BC Moose population, you simply have to Google the topic.
Sweden has local management, highly managed forests, low predation, highly managed hunting, much of the harvest is calves, good winter survival rates, a hunters pay way more for their opportunity.
Does BC have any of these? Not really.

[finngun]

Yep,,,but at least 2things are way better here...we have way more grown land here..free hunting areas,,sweden mostly private land..another is hunting cost,,,way cheaper here..I'm talking about licensing..if ya dont own a land...hunting opportuning might be limited.

[albravo2]

well that made me laugh. good one.Steve!

What he said... well played.

[Sirloin]

I found this:

https://www.thelocal.se/20180608/sweden-licensed-wolf-hunt-banned

8 June 2018

There will be no licensed wolf hunt in Sweden this winter, after the Environmental Protection Agency said it could not take place due to dwindling numbers of wild wolves.
The Swedish Hunting Association (Svenska Jägareförbundet) has criticized the ban, and said that stopping the legal wolf hunt will just lead to an increase in illegal killing of the animals.

The wolf population in Sweden has fallen during the past three years, with just 305 of the predators left in the wild, according to the latest figures. In 2016, the country's Supreme Administrative Court ruled that there must be at least 300 wolves in the country for conservation of the species.

However, despite the ban on the licensed hunt, a 'protective' hunt can still go ahead if county administrative boards deem it necessary, for example in order to protect farm animals from attacks.

"When we have as few wolves as we have, there's no scope for a licensed hunt," said Marcus Öhman from the Environmental Protection Agency. "The population has fallen over the past three years -- by 14 percent in the past year alone. We see a strong downward trend, and that's very worrying."

---------------------

and BC (https://news.gov.bc.ca/factsheets/mountain-caribou-and-wolves)

"The wolf population in B.C. is stable to increasing. Grey wolves are not an endangered or threatened species. The estimated median population of wolves is 8,500."

So it's estimated BC has about x28 times the total amount of wolves compared to Sweden while only having about x2 times the land mass.

[RyoTHC]

I found this:

https://www.thelocal.se/20180608/sweden-licensed-wolf-hunt-banned

8 June 2018

There will be no licensed wolf hunt in Sweden this winter, after the Environmental Protection Agency said it could not take place due to dwindling numbers of wild wolves.
The Swedish Hunting Association (Svenska Jägareförbundet) has criticized the ban, and said that stopping the legal wolf hunt will just lead to an increase in illegal killing of the animals.

The wolf population in Sweden has fallen during the past three years, with just 305 of the predators left in the wild, according to the latest figures. In 2016, the country's Supreme Administrative Court ruled that there must be at least 300 wolves in the country for conservation of the species.

However, despite the ban on the licensed hunt, a 'protective' hunt can still go ahead if county administrative boards deem it necessary, for example in order to protect farm animals from attacks.

"When we have as few wolves as we have, there's no scope for a licensed hunt," said Marcus Öhman from the Environmental Protection Agency. "The population has fallen over the past three years -- by 14 percent in the past year alone. We see a strong downward trend, and that's very worrying."

---------------------

and BC (https://news.gov.bc.ca/factsheets/mountain-caribou-and-wolves)

"The wolf population in B.C. is stable to increasing. Grey wolves are not an endangered or threatened species. The estimated median population of wolves is 8,500."

So it's estimated BC has about x28 times the total amount of wolves compared to Sweden while only having about x2 times the land mass.

Id be willing to bet there are over 300 wolves in a 100km radius of my house.... probably 50km lol

[Sirloin]

I think its fair to say bc is no where close to reaching its maximum potential for game numbers. Can you imagine what it could be like if everyone had a common goal?

Exactly. Listen to biologist Valerius Geist describe what the spatsizi plateau used to be like back in the day, compared to now...and why.

http://thehuntingcollective.libsyn.com/ep-79-predator-pits-riding-moose-and-fighting-for-the-north-american-model-with-dr-valerius-geist

[Sirloin]

Id be willing to bet there are over 300 wolves in a 100km radius of my house.... probably 50km lol

Aerial gunning hurts.

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/4bd11b_c150a969d316441e8b11884badbc63aa~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_477,h_396,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/Aerial%20gunning_bullet%20holes.webp

More of Dr. Valerius Geist talking about the devastation wolves are having on the landscape:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa0SLi1kNlU

[huntingfamily]

Did they say why the wolves were declining?
Seems odd with all of the moose there...

[RyoTHC]

Did they say why the wolves were declining?
Seems odd with all of the moose there...

rapid onset lead poisoning.

[guest]

Aerial gunning hurts.

https://static.wixstatic.com/media/4bd11b_c150a969d316441e8b11884badbc63aa~mv2.png/v1/fill/w_477,h_396,al_c,q_80,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/Aerial%20gunning_bullet%20holes.webp

More of Dr. Valerius Geist talking about the devastation wolves are having on the landscape:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wa0SLi1kNlU

Thanks for posting Sirlion.......
Here I thought I knew some things about Wolves........ HOLY CRAP MAN !!!! The things brought up in this video infuriate me more than ever that out Sr. Managers and Sr Bios, Government staff, Sr. Decision makers continue to turn a blind eye to proper management of ALL WILDLIFE than just the chosen Cuddly Fur bearers like Wolves Bears and Cats.

Shame on all the ANTI Pred hunt idiots that are winning the World over with their mis information and untruths...... I really hoping they start stirring up that Wolf shit and breathe in them eggs. That would be great Karma.

Thanks Dr. Giest for your hard work and dedication to healthy Wildlife Species of ALL types...... rather than the picked on poor Big Bad Wolf.

[Redthies]

We have idiots running our province and country

Truer words were never spoken!

[HappyJack]

Sweden doesn't have special groups with special rights.

Funny, this year all I saw was white guys, a few east indians and a couple of oriental guys....none of those special rights people were killing a thing?

[Grumpa Joe]

I was just talking about this with I guy I know in Sweden from an Elkhound site. Very low wolf numbers, although they are increasing. He lives in an area that the Samik people do reindeer herding and they make sure that no wolves get established, threatening their herds. Their system is different there. Landowners have hunting rights and hunters will often arrange to have multiple landowners together so that they can hunt their combined lands. His group is allowed to harvest, wait for it, 6 adult moose and 6 calves a year and any member of the group can shoot as many as he likes within that quota. Not just bulls, yet they have a far greater population than we do.

Another acquaintance says the same is true in Finland, another high moose population region. Finland eradicated wolves over a century ago and the populations flourished. Recently, wolves have started to enter from Russia and they are starting to experience problems again with the numbers of moose and hunting dogs that they are killing. The Finnish guy estimates that he has shot over 300 moose in his hunting career.

Look at Newfoundland. Moose were introduced in 1878 and 1904, 4 animals. It is estimated that they have approximately 110,000 moose on the island. They have so healthy a population that they annually harvest over 20,000 moose. They also allow harvest of cows and calves in addition to bulls. They also offer a $25 bounty on coyote hides. Wolves were also eliminated there but they are moving back onto the island, causing the government biologists to make plans to restrict their numbers.

Better predator control and science based management, don't just take out the males, have resulted in more abundant animal populations wherever these systems have been employed, including in the US with Whitetails.

[2tins]

Probably also has something to do with people who actually know what they are doing when it comes to managing a resource.

[pro 111]

We have idiots running our province and countryExactly!! Nail on the head . wham!!!

[338win mag]

Funny, this year all I saw was white guys, a few east indians and a couple of oriental guys....none of those special rights people were killing a thing?
Thats because they hunt in august and then again after resident hunters season is over, thats what happens here.

[Wild one]

Thats because they hunt in august and then again after resident hunters season is over, thats what happens here.

Yup most FN hunting is done outside of the fall hunting season. I can say though some chiefs seem to be trying to limit harvest lately. Unfortunately the ones that really abuse their rights don’t listen when the chief says they are band from hunting.

I know for a fact one chief has told his band members no hunting moose without pleading your case with the chief first to see if it’s approved of. Also shooting cows is a no no. But there is those with statues who don’t acknowledge or even know the band’s request do to not being involved with the band. Then there are the ones who just don’t give a shit what the chief says because there is no real consequences for their actions. The bad ones do major damage example last year this chief caught a member selling meat that shot over 15 moose. Chief said he was no longer allowed to hunt but from what I heard that has not stopped him

There is definitely an issue with FN over harvest but I would say it’s way more complicated then most see it. The real issue I see is the bad FNs cannot be held accountable by our government or even their chief when they abuse their rights. Then add in the slob with status that does not even acknowledge the band but exploits the hunting rights. This is usually some guy who is 1/2 or 1/4 FN and all he knows is his status lets him get away with it

It’s definitely a mess and varies from area to area.

[dino]

Funny, this year all I saw was white guys, a few east indians and a couple of oriental guys....none of those special rights people were killing a thing?

The other group are nocturnal. There is just to many wolves. I didnt want to believe it but they are now in the area i hunt and would have never thought it would happen.

[338win mag]

Funny, this year all I saw was white guys, a few east indians and a couple of oriental guys....none of those special rights people were killing a thing?
You slag Don Cherry, then.... say this^^^^^^^^ idiot.

[MB_Boy]

My Dad spoke at the International Moose Conference in Sweden a number of years back but I recall some of what he told me when he was there.

The hunting clubs are very invested in the management of the population. I remember him saying something about not shooting mature breeding bulls; selective harvest etc. I'll ask him more when I speak to him next.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Exactly!! Nail on the head . wham!!!

YUP and they Just Keep SHOWING up More and More everywhere ! :sad: RJ

[cpwrestler]

Aside from the predator issues we face in BC which are obviously a massive issue... Possibly the biggest issue, in BC we prioritize access and opportunity. In Sweden (and much of Europe), where the vast majority of land is private, free access isn't an option. Simply put, to hunt, you have to pay, often big bucks. So the access that we cherish doesn't exist.

Second, opportunity is far more limited and restricted. Unlike in North America, most of Europe--Sweden included I believe--the wildlife are owned by the landowners, not the public like here in Canada. Given that the landowners own the wildlife and that they manage them in such a way as to profit off of them, they have an incentive to maximize populations. Land owners charge for the right to hunt and monitor/manage populations very closely. This approach is similar to our outfitting concessions in BC where concession owners have incentive to maintain healthy populations since they know that they have exclusive access to hunt the game in the future (residents notwithstanding). As a result, BC, the Yukon, and NWT typically have better trophies than most Alaskan outfitters where they don't have a concession system and it's basically an outfitters free-for-all.

My point is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The only lever BC hunters want to talk about pulling is the predator control one. That will most certainly help, but we could also reduce opportunity and/or access and have more/bigger wildlife. Alternatively we can have access and opportunity and have less wildlife overall. I'm not saying we need to abandon the North American Wildlife Model, but we could follow the lead of most western states and move to multiple 2 week seasons instead of one 6-12 week system, more leh, etc. but it doesn't seem like that's what people in BC want. (let the flames begin)

[bearvalley]

Aside from the predator issues we face in BC which are obviously a massive issue... Possibly the biggest issue, in BC we prioritize access and opportunity. In Sweden (and much of Europe), where the vast majority of land is private, free access isn't an option. Simply put, to hunt, you have to pay, often big bucks. So the access that we cherish doesn't exist.

Second, opportunity is far more limited and restricted. Unlike in North America, most of Europe--Sweden included I believe--the wildlife are owned by the landowners, not the public like here in Canada. Given that the landowners own the wildlife and that they manage them in such a way as to profit off of them, they have an incentive to maximize populations. Land owners charge for the right to hunt and monitor/manage populations very closely. This approach is similar to our outfitting concessions in BC where concession owners have incentive to maintain healthy populations since they know that they have exclusive access to hunt the game in the future (residents notwithstanding). As a result, BC, the Yukon, and NWT typically have better trophies than most Alaskan outfitters where they don't have a concession system and it's basically an outfitters free-for-all.

My point is that you can't have your cake and eat it too. The only lever BC hunters want to talk about pulling is the predator control one. That will most certainly help, but we could also reduce opportunity and/or access and have more/bigger wildlife. Alternatively we can have access and opportunity and have less wildlife overall. I'm not saying we need to abandon the North American Wildlife Model, but we could follow the lead of most western states and move to multiple 2 week seasons instead of one 6-12 week system, more leh, etc. but it doesn't seem like that's what people in BC want. (let the flames begin)

Interesting post with some valid points brought forth.

That said....it might be a winner for all if outfitters were allowed more input in game & predator management within their guide territories.
The harvest numbers are already set thru the allocation/quota process.
What would it look like if landscape populations were set for how many of what species we wanted to see within a specific area?

The wild card that creates the most division is that everyone wants access to harvest wildlife that is at present being managed to zero......thanks to the mentality of the “maximum opportunity and access” drum that was beat far too long.

I bet the flames just got turned into a forest fire........

[Arctic Lake]

I really hope for biologist's who know there specific species and who have facts and sound science and are listened to by government and implement the needed actions . It would be fantastic to be able to keep Public Lands Public and let B.C. resident hunters enjoy nature and harvest this Provinces game . Guess I'm a dreamer !
Arctic Lake

[boxhitch]

Unlike in North America, most of Europe--Sweden included I believe--the wildlife are owned by the landowners,Not everywhere. Mostly the wildlife belongs to the country, landowners get quotas by permit and manage their lands and wildlife to a formal, approved, management plan.

[boxhitch]

The wild card that creates the most division is that everyone wants access to harvest wildlife that is at present being managed to zero......thanks to the mentality of the “maximum opportunity and access” drum that was beat far too long.
I bet the flames just got turned into a forest fire........ feeding the pyromania ? .......nice

[2chodi]

I've heard that largest contributor to the high density of moose in Sweden is "moose friendly silviculture practices." I've read that the forest industry in Sweden is complaining because they are having trouble growing trees because of the numbers of moose.

Fewer predators and competing species also helps.

[bearvalley]

I've heard that largest contributor to the high density of moose in Sweden is "moose friendly silviculture practices." I've read that the forest industry in Sweden is complaining because they are having trouble growing trees because of the numbers of moose.

Fewer predators and competing species also helps.

The damage done in BC by logging practices won’t be corrected for several decades.
No one wants other ungulate species removed from the landscape to enhance other species.
So 2chodi.......what’s the fix that can put more moose back in BC the quickest?

[bearvalley]

feeding the pyromania ? .......nice

No....maybe fanning the smoke just a bit.

boxhitch, past game management hasn’t worked real well.

Maybe what I proposed about letting outfitters manage wildlife species within their guide territories has some merit.
The thought wasn’t mine...it came from a wildlife researcher and a few provincial bios support the concept.
This line of thinking is backed up thru conversations with a young fellow I know who’s father is on Norway’s game management team.
Norway, like Sweden has a healthy moose population....the ticket there is that Norwegian wolf numbers are kept in check at 100....no more, no less.

For example X outfitter area can support a certain number of moose, elk, caribou, deer, sheep or goats and the ratio of predators is maintained to a level where the ungulate species expand and hold at a target level with a hunter harvest also taking place.
That’s called game management.....what we have now is a crap shoot at best.

[boxhitch]

Oh I see
turn game management into a business model
with habitat-, feed-, predator-, access-, competition-, resource extraction/replacement-, -controls all in place
with each area working in collaboration with each of the neighbouring areas to a common goal
at a common pace with common investment and commitment


What colour would the sky be ?

[bearvalley]

Oh I see
turn game management into a business model
with habitat-, feed-, predator-, access-, competition-, resource extraction/replacement-, -controls all in place
with each area working in collaboration with each of the neighbouring areas to a common goal
at a common pace with common investment and commitment


What colour would the sky be ?

LMAO.....let’s just carry on down the path of the common fail.......

[HappyJack]

You slag Don Cherry, then.... say this^^^^^^^^ idiot.

Well Don Cherry is a blow hard so yup he got slagged, we don't all worship the silver spoon crowd and that's why so many of us don't vote Trudeau..

[HappyJack]

No....maybe fanning the smoke just a bit.

boxhitch, past game management hasn’t worked real well.

Maybe what I proposed about letting outfitters manage wildlife species within their guide territories has some merit.
The thought wasn’t mine...it came from a wildlife researcher and a few provincial bios support the concept.
This line of thinking is backed up thru conversations with a young fellow I know who’s father is on Norway’s game management team.
Norway, like Sweden has a healthy moose population....the ticket there is that Norwegian wolf numbers are kept in check at 100....no more, no less.

For example X outfitter area can support a certain number of moose, elk, caribou, deer, sheep or goats and the ratio of predators is maintained to a level where the ungulate species expand and hold at a target level with a hunter harvest also taking place.
That’s called game management.....what we have now is a crap shoot at best.

Outfitters are in a business for profit, their profit, may as well let the fox manage the hen house.

[Deaddog]

Outfitters are in a business for profit, their profit, may as well let the fox manage the hen house.

Hmmm. So if you have hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars invested in a business, one would think you would strive to keep it profitable ie. ensure wildlife is plentiful ! Bearvalley has a point, thus far gov and our “res” mouth pieces have been epic fails for wildlife. Perhaps time to try another way

[2chodi]

The damage done in BC by logging practices won’t be corrected for several decades.
No one wants other ungulate species removed from the landscape to enhance other species.
So 2chodi.......what’s the fix that can put more moose back in BC the quickest?

The suggestions out of the Moose Solutions Roundtable and Gorley Report, if implemented by gov would be a good place to start. Roundtable: 1) Predator control, 2) restrict access to roads and fireguards created in salvage logging and fighting fires and 3) get better data and use it to inform appropriate adaptive management at the landscape level.

Gorley:

PART 2 – MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Recommendation 5 - Coordinated access management
Recommendation 6 - Predator management
Recommendation 7 - Management of moose hunting
Recommendation 8 - First Nations’ harvest management
Recommendation 9 - Compliance and enforcement
Recommendation 10 - Protecting existing habitat
Recommendation 11 - Silviculture practices
Recommendation 12 - Habitat enhancement

[bearvalley]

The suggestions out of the Moose Solutions Roundtable and Gorley Report, if implemented by gov would be a good place to start. Roundtable: 1) Predator control, 2) restrict access to roads and fireguards created in salvage logging and fighting fires and 3) get better data and use it to inform appropriate adaptive management at the landscape level.

Gorley:

PART 2 – MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Recommendation 5 - Coordinated access management
Recommendation 6 - Predator management
Recommendation 7 - Management of moose hunting
Recommendation 8 - First Nations’ harvest management
Recommendation 9 - Compliance and enforcement
Recommendation 10 - Protecting existing habitat
Recommendation 11 - Silviculture practices
Recommendation 12 - Habitat enhancement




2chodi, if those tools are applied we’ll rebuild moose populations.

[180grainer]

2chodi, if those tools are applied we’ll rebuild moose populations.

You'll never get recommendation 6 or 8. You'll get a hell of a lot of recommendation 7.

[bearvalley]

You'll never get recommendation 6 or 8. You'll get a hell of a lot of recommendation 7.
Time will tell......

[boxhitch]

With the BC study entering the second five-year term ending in 2023, I bet no drastic changes will come about until Gov has all their cards in hand
So far the study only points to causation while identifying a number of knowledge gaps
Nice to see the commitment to further the study, bad that action won't take place sooner

[bearvalley]

Outfitters are in a business for profit, their profit, may as well let the fox manage the hen house.

Exactly HappyJack....everybody does their job striving for a profit.
So what’s wrong with applying that line of thinking to wildlife management......if it’s a success everyone gains.

The path of bureaucratical management where pay checks are handed out even if the management of wildlife is an epic fail is a real winner.

Of coarse the advice on wildlife management given by retired taxi drivers and school teachers trumps anything an outfitter might know.

[HappyJack]

Exactly HappyJack....everybody does their job striving for a profit.
So what’s wrong with applying that line of thinking to wildlife management......if it’s a success everyone gains.

The path of bureaucratical management where pay checks are handed out even if the management of wildlife is an epic fail is a real winner.

Of coarse the advice on wildlife management given by retired taxi drivers and school teachers trumps anything an outfitter might know.

As an outfitter I know that in order to manage the game properly we need to give 75% of game allocations to outfitters, outlaw the use of motorized vehicles for hunting [no trucks, no atvs, no jet boats] which would quickly manage the identified access issues and just to really manage for profit all resident hunters will be restricted to hunting one species per season.....yes lets let profiteers manage our game, no thanks.

[bearvalley]

As an outfitter I know that in order to manage the game properly we need to give 75% of game allocations to outfitters, outlaw the use of motorized vehicles for hunting [no trucks, no atvs, no jet boats] which would quickly manage the identified access issues and just to really manage for profit all resident hunters will be restricted to hunting one species per season.....yes lets let profiteers manage our game, no thanks.

So...as a resident hunter knowing that 50% of the annual moose harvest is allocated to licensed hunters and 75 to 90% of that share goes to residents (10 to 25% to licensed non residents).......along with the fact that available access in some areas of moos decline is extreme........we’ve done a real good job of managing towards zero.

How would you make it better HappyJack?

[HappyJack]

So...as a resident hunter knowing that 50% of the annual moose harvest is allocated to licensed hunters and 75 to 90% of that share goes to residents (10 to 25% to licensed non residents).......along with the fact that available access in some areas of moos decline is extreme........we’ve done a real good job of managing towards zero.

How would you make it better HappyJack?

Cull the predators, limit the availability of tag #s by MU or Region, lower outfitter allocations to a max 5%, stop the spraying of poison, and legislate the railroads to take measures to stop the outrageous numbers of winter kills for starters.

[pro 111]

The suggestions out of the Moose Solutions Roundtable and Gorley Report, if implemented by gov would be a good place to start. Roundtable: 1) Predator control, 2) restrict access to roads and fireguards created in salvage logging and fighting fires and 3) get better data and use it to inform appropriate adaptive management at the landscape level.

Gorley:

PART 2 – MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Recommendation 5 - Coordinated access management
Recommendation 6 - Predator management
Recommendation 7 - Management of moose hunting
Recommendation 8 - First Nations’ harvest management
Recommendation 9 - Compliance and enforcement
Recommendation 10 - Protecting existing habitat
Recommendation 11 - Silviculture practices
Recommendation 12 - Habitat enhancement


Some good ideas here. I also think we all have to get on board with the first nations and manage it together instead of letting the government drive a huge wedge between us all. Pretty sure they have not all supported shutting down a grizzly bear hunt in BC. Pretty sure they would support a wolf cull in there traditional areas if there was some funding and some good education brought forward. Like what Giest had to say. That video should go to all the bands here in BC.
I just look at where I live.. Black bear hunting was shut down here and I know many native guys here that think that is totally rediculous. But knowone ever speaks up in time and these things get passed without the majority of people even knowing whats going on.
My opinion for today.

[bearvalley]

Cull the predators, limit the availability of tag #s by MU or Region, lower outfitter allocations to a max 5%, stop the spraying of p
oison, and legislate the railroads to take measures to stop the outrageous numbers of winter kills for starters.
You most likely will get most of the spray shut down....but then again even clear cuts that were not sprayed contain willows etc with very little nutritious value.
I doubt you’ll get far with the railroads.
Good luck on the predators unless you can get FN’s support and you’re a real wise one if you think cutting outfitters to 5% is a cure all.
For that matter if all harvested species in BC are lumped outfitter harvest is already under 5%...go do the math.
All that you have left is to reduce resident tags within MU’s.....well thought out fix HappyJack!

[Walking Buffalo]

The suggestions out of the Moose Solutions Roundtable and Gorley Report, if implemented by gov would be a good place to start. Roundtable: 1) Predator control, 2) restrict access to roads and fireguards created in salvage logging and fighting fires and 3) get better data and use it to inform appropriate adaptive management at the landscape level.

Gorley:

PART 2 – MANAGEMENT TOOLS
Recommendation 5 - Coordinated access management
Recommendation 6 - Predator management
Recommendation 7 - Management of moose hunting
Recommendation 8 - First Nations’ harvest management
Recommendation 9 - Compliance and enforcement
Recommendation 10 - Protecting existing habitat
Recommendation 11 - Silviculture practices
Recommendation 12 - Habitat enhancement





Can you provide further detail to these recommendations, particularly #11.
Are herbicide application policies considered?



You most likely will get most of the spray shut down....but then again even clear cuts that were not sprayed contain willows etc with very little nutritious value.
I doubt you’ll get far with the railroads.
Good luck on the predators unless you can get FN’s support and you’re a real wise one if you think cutting outfitters to 5% is a cure all.
For that matter if all harvested species in BC are lumped outfitter harvest is already under 5%...go do the math.
All that you have left is to reduce resident tags within MU’s.....well thought out fix HappyJack!

Huh?


Quite possibly herbicide applications are having a MUCH bigger effect on moose and deer populations that acknowledged.
This could be the linchpin in restoring game numbers in many areas.

A new argument for banning herbicide use in our forests is gaining steam.
WildFire control.
This concern could gain much more attention of the general populace than fewer moose for the hunters....



A worthwhile watch for those that are interested and invested in wildlife.


Presentation on the effects of glyphosate on deer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGtcm26vdd0

[scott h]

I've heard that largest contributor to the high density of moose in Sweden is "moose friendly silviculture practices." I've read that the forest industry in Sweden is complaining because they are having trouble growing trees because of the numbers of moose.

Fewer predators and competing species also helps.

I would imagine that BC could get it's moose population up pretty dam quick if it was a priority. There has been a huge amount of acreage burnt in the last few years and if those lands were allowed to regenerate properly, without spraying of the deciduous trees we'd be off to a pretty good start. It makes absolutely zero sense that in an area as big as BC we have moose (and other ungulates) starving to death. WTF !!!!

[scott h]

You'll never get recommendation 6 or 8. You'll get a hell of a lot of recommendation 7.

You would get 8 if you implemented number 5. Natives mostly hunt where they can drive their trucks (frequently at night). If they had to walk into hunt an area they'd never go there. Those areas would be left to those that were'nt scared to sweat and would in fact become breeding sanctuaries producing animals that migrate out to other areas.

[bearvalley]

Can you provide further detail to these recommendations, particularly #11.
Are herbicide application policies considered?




Huh?


Quite possibly herbicide applications are having a MUCH bigger effect on moose and deer populations that acknowledged.
This could be the linchpin in restoring game numbers in many areas.

A new argument for banning herbicide use in our forests is gaining steam.
WildFire control.
This concern could gain much more attention of the general populace than fewer moose for the hunters....



A worthwhile watch for those that are interested and invested in wildlife.


Presentation on the effects of glyphosate on deer

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGtcm26vdd0

I’m not disputing the fact that herbicide use is a problem but a recent study done in BC shows that browse growing in large clear cuts is inadequate in nutrition levels to keep ungulates alive.
It seems there’s a correlation between shade, browse and nutrition/protein levels.
Moose are starving to death with guts full of browse in areas with no spraying taking place.
Go figure.

[2chodi]

Can you provide further detail to these recommendations, particularly #11.
Are herbicide application policies considered?

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/Restoring-and-Enhancing-Moose-Populations-in-BC-July-8-2016.pdf

Glyphosate use is part of it, but cut block size and shape are also important as is planting for monocultures.



Huh?


Check out the following talk on nutritional values in cut blocks: https://video.unbc.ca/media/The+abundance+of+scarcityA+landscape+change%2C+pro tein+limitation%2C+and+moose+population+dynamics+i n+north-central+BC.+Dr.+Jeff+Werner%2C+BC+Ministry+of+Fore sts%2C+Lands%2C+Natural+Resource+Operations%2C+and +Rural+Development+-+October+18+2019/0_pbu2wpdw/19801

[bearvalley]

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/Restoring-and-Enhancing-Moose-Populations-in-BC-July-8-2016.pdf

Glyphosate use is part of it, but cut block size and shape are also important as is planting for monocultures.





Check out the following talk on nutritional values in cut blocks: https://video.unbc.ca/media/The+abundance+of+scarcityA+landscape+change%2C+pro tein+limitation%2C+and+moose+population+dynamics+i n+north-central+BC.+Dr.+Jeff+Werner%2C+BC+Ministry+of+Fore sts%2C+Lands%2C+Natural+Resource+Operations%2C+and +Rural+Development+-+October+18+2019/0_pbu2wpdw/19801

Thanks 2chodi.

[scott h]

I’m not disputing the fact that herbicide use is a problem but a recent study done in BC shows that browse growing in large clear cuts is inadequate in nutrition levels to keep ungulates alive.
It seems there’s a correlation between shade, browse and nutrition/protein levels.
Moose are starving to death with guts full of browse in areas with no spraying taking place.
Go figure.

You have to take into consideration that the landscape isn't evenly regenerated with each species. If an area wasn't sprayed it was because there was a very low amount of deciduous trees in that area. The areas that have low amounts of good quality moose browse don't get sprayed. On the other hand if it's a veritable moose banquet table it will get poisoned off. Forests in BC are managed for timber only. Wildlife are not part of the equation.

[bearvalley]

scott h...I’ve been on the anti spray team since it was nothing more than a whisper on this site.
What I’m pointing out is that logging and silviculture practices in the interior of BC has hung wildlife out to dry.

[HappyJack]

You most likely will get most of the spray shut down....but then again even clear cuts that were not sprayed contain willows etc with very little nutritious value.
I doubt you’ll get far with the railroads.
Good luck on the predators unless you can get FN’s support and you’re a real wise one if you think cutting outfitters to 5% is a cure all.
For that matter if all harvested species in BC are lumped outfitter harvest is already under 5%...go do the math.
All that you have left is to reduce resident tags within MU’s.....well thought out fix HappyJack!

Outfitters to 5%, well where I live they get 25% of the AAH of bull moose, I've been lucky enough to win a bull moose LEH exactly once in the last 24 years, so I'm thinking it would be fair to cut the non resident hunters share down [at least around here] until the population recovered...then they could have more, until then BC residents should have more priority without cutting the guides out completely.

[bearvalley]

Outfitters to 5%, well where I live they get 25% of the AAH of bull moose, I've been lucky enough to win a bull moose LEH exactly once in the last 24 years, so I'm thinking it would be fair to cut the non resident hunters share down [at least around here] until the population recovered...then they could have more, until then BC residents should have more priority without cutting the guides out completely.

HappyJack....explain to me how the transfer of allocation share makes more moose.

[Deaddog]

http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by HappyJack http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=2133689#post2133689)
Outfitters to 5%, well where I live they get 25% of the AAH of bull moose, I've been lucky enough to win a bull moose LEH exactly once in the last 24 years, so I'm thinking it would be fair to cut the non resident hunters share down [at least around here] until the population recovered...then they could have more, until then BC residents should have more priority without cutting the guides out completely.







HappyJack....explain to me how the transfer of allocation share makes more moose.

Happy jack
reducing allocation for outfitters would not be of any benefit to wildlife. It simply would reduce another group who supports our way of life to a point that they wouldn’t exist on the landscape . Some might think this would be good, but really. Let’s add up the dollars put towards wildlife in this province and see where a large percentage of it comes from? If you do Some research you will see hundreds of thousands of dollars a year donated by outfitters. We do have groups in bc like wild sheep society that are also heavily investing, however other than that not much comes from residents. I get the frustration over leh, however the solution is there. Ie Gorley report, we just need pressure put on politicians to implement them. Fighting with people who enjoy and support our way of life ( similar to the crossbow thread) simply pushes us to zero faster.

[338win mag]

http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by HappyJack http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=2133689#post2133689)
Outfitters to 5%, well where I live they get 25% of the AAH of bull moose, I've been lucky enough to win a bull moose LEH exactly once in the last 24 years, so I'm thinking it would be fair to cut the non resident hunters share down [at least around here] until the population recovered...then they could have more, until then BC residents should have more priority without cutting the guides out completely.








Happy jack
reducing allocation for outfitters would not be of any benefit to wildlife. It simply would reduce another group who supports our way of life to a point that they wouldn’t exist on the landscape . Some might think this would be good, but really. Let’s add up the dollars put towards wildlife in this province and see where a large percentage of it comes from? If you do Some research you will see hundreds of thousands of dollars a year donated by outfitters. We do have groups in bc like wild sheep society that are also heavily investing, however other than that not much comes from residents. I get the frustration over leh, however the solution is there. Ie Gorley report, we just need pressure put on politicians to implement them. Fighting with people who enjoy and support our way of life ( similar to the crossbow thread) simply pushes us to zero faster.
Alot of money comes from residents, its directed elsewhere, we know that.

[Deaddog]

Yup. We pay in taxes , tags etc. Politicians spend it elsewhere as res don’t have a credible org to advocate for hunters/wildlife. Point still being is wildlife needs all the dollars it can get

[Fennemonster]

Too many cow moose getting killed in BC... because of certain groups.

[HappyJack]

HappyJack....explain to me how the transfer of allocation share makes more moose.

It makes more moose tags available for RESIDENT HUNTERS, part of what I said was to have tags assigned/sold by MU...which means tighter controls over RESIDENT HUNTERS, in order to make that palatable we should also level out the imbalance in the allocations. I would suspect it would actually help the moose population because RESIDENT HUNTERS aren't professionals and the success rates would be lower.

[HappyJack]

Too many cow moose getting killed in BC... because of certain groups.

Trains, wolves, bears, coyotes, cougars....and the odd poacher.

[moosinaround]

I've heard that largest contributor to the high density of moose in Sweden is "moose friendly silviculture practices." I've read that the forest industry in Sweden is complaining because they are having trouble growing trees because of the numbers of moose.

Fewer predators and competing species also helps.

You just wait, CAFOR now has ties to Swedan, hello Glyphosate, good bye moose habitat! Moosin

[Deaddog]

It makes more moose tags available for RESIDENT HUNTERS, part of what I said was to have tags assigned/sold by MU...which means tighter controls over RESIDENT HUNTERS, in order to make that palatable we should also level out the imbalance in the allocations. I would suspect it would actually help the moose population because RESIDENT HUNTERS aren't professionals and the success rates would be lower.

moose numbers as well as ungulates of other species have declined in areas where there are no active outfitters as well as full closures. Given that it isn’t nor has it ever been that harvest rates from legal harvests negatively impact the overall populations. Going back to fighting over a diminishing population only plays into the hands of antis and bureaucrats, keeping the focus away from the actual scientific drivers that dictate wildlife populations. Many outfitters in the province, are long standing resident family’s. Spend some time getting to know a few of them and you will find that you and them will agree on most of the solutions to wildlife pop challenges

[325]

moose numbers as well as ungulates of other species have declined in areas where there are no active outfitters as well as full closures. Given that it isn’t nor has it ever been that harvest rates from legal harvests negatively impact the overall populations. Going back to fighting over a diminishing population only plays into the hands of antis and bureaucrats, keeping the focus away from the actual scientific drivers that dictate wildlife populations. Many outfitters in the province, are long standing resident family’s. Spend some time getting to know a few of them and you will find that you and them will agree on most of the solutions to wildlife pop challenges

Very well said!