Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum

Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum (http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/index.php)
-   Hunting Discussion (http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/forumdisplay.php?f=3)
-   -   White tail supplemental season (http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=334749)

Wayner 12-04-2017 08:47 PM

White tail supplemental season
 
Living in Hinton Alberta we have seen our white tail deer population all but disappear. Our Fish & Wildlife Department has, along with a large cougar population basically wiped out our white tail deer population with these ridiculous supplemental seasons in WMU 342 and 344.
It is a real surprise to see a white tail deer in either of these WMU now.
How do we convince Government to stop the killing of white tail does in these two WMU. We need a complete closure of white tail doe hunting here for at least 3 to 5 years in order to build up the population to where it once was.
Is anyone else having the same issues?
Thank you

Battle Rat 12-04-2017 09:13 PM

I've seen the introduction of supplemental doe tags and the issuing of two MD doe tags following brutal winters that severally reduced the population.
F&W are one or two years behind in some decision making at times.

walking buffalo 12-04-2017 09:16 PM

Deer population reductions in this area IS the plan.

Slicktricker 12-04-2017 09:25 PM

I was sent by many ppl a online petition to stop the supplemental season I'm for it

Ultimate Predator 12-04-2017 09:25 PM

Dont fill them unless its youth

dfrobert 12-04-2017 09:42 PM

If the government won't reduce or get rid of the supp tags in zones that the deer numbers are still dismal then the hunters need to wake up and do there part as well. Stop shooting all the does. Go shoot some dogs. Kill a cow elk if you want to fill the freezer.

Lots of guys who are the first to complain about deer numbers are the first to shoot 3 deer a year. :snapoutofit:

Slicktricker 12-04-2017 09:46 PM

If ppl want a doe I have no issues with it, my issue is the guys driving around shooting a deer finding out it isn't anterless it's got 4" spikes and leaving it, past 4 years I've called in 8-9 found shot and left, that part ****es me off

openfire 12-04-2017 09:56 PM

This is my problem with the anti hunters, they think public opinion should dictate policy instead of science.
if your not an expert on what the carrying capacity is, then I say let the biologists do their job.

dfrobert 12-04-2017 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by openfire (Post 3682532)
This is my problem with the anti hunters, they think public opinion should dictate policy instead of science.
if your not an expert on what the carrying capacity is, then I say let the biologists do their job.

That is laughable.

Wayner 12-04-2017 10:27 PM

Supplemental white tail tags
 
This is not laughable in our are and the biologists are not getting out in the woods to see the situation they have partly caused.

dfrobert 12-04-2017 10:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayner (Post 3682556)
This is not laughable in our are and the biologists are not getting out in the woods to see the situation they have partly caused.

Imagine my shock....

dfrobert 12-04-2017 10:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayner (Post 3682556)
This is not laughable in our are and the biologists are not getting out in the woods to see the situation they have partly caused.

Write a letter to Minister Shannon Phillips. Let us know if and what you hear back.

walking buffalo 12-04-2017 11:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayner (Post 3682556)
This is not laughable in our are and the biologists are not getting out in the woods to see the situation they have partly caused.


Have you spoken with the regional biologist?
Asked what the management plan is and why?

It may be enlightening, and frustrating.

iliketrout 12-05-2017 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by walking buffalo (Post 3682574)
Have you spoken with the regional biologist?
Asked what the management plan is and why?

It may be enlightening, and frustrating.

I am interested WB. Can you share why deer population reduction is the goal? Is it an effort to reduce predator population?

PM me if you don't want to get into a debate on a live thread. Thanks!

crownb 12-05-2017 08:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayner (Post 3682556)
This is not laughable in our are and the biologists are not getting out in the woods to see the situation they have partly caused.

The last time I put faith into the biologists in my area was when they put out the aerial survey. It was done in early January. I can't remember the numbers but the number of bulls to cows was really off. The survey showed nearly no bulls. This is the information they use to base our special license tags. Now I am not a biologist but I think I can tell you that the majority if not all the bull would have dropped their antlers by then. I was stunned by their numbers, my wmu went from 2-3 years for a bull moose draw to 10-11. This is not anywheres close to a trophy zone either. Sad really. I have beeen told that these aerial surveys are done every 5 years, so it looks like my zone will be 10-11 year priority till then. Frustrating.
As far as th supplemental does go they need to be reeled in for a few years.

hwy_6363 12-05-2017 08:17 AM

I have land and hunt in 348 and this fall definitely saw less deer and moose than years past, and I believe my area in 348 (north part of the zone towards hwy 43) has been declining for the past few years, for what ever reason. Several of my neighbours in the area concur.
I am against the supplemental deer tags for this zone based on what I'm seeing. They are still available but myself and the neighbours have all opted not to purchase supplemental tags or shoot does.
But with that, the tags are available and it's a legal hunt so no one is breaking laws by harvesting on supplemental tags.

bear crossing 12-05-2017 08:21 AM

Itotally agree with WAYNOR,same thing in my area numbers way down,something has to be done soon to help numbers get back up.

BCSteel 12-05-2017 08:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wayner (Post 3682462)
Living in Hinton Alberta we have seen our white tail deer population all but disappear. Our Fish & Wildlife Department has, along with a large cougar population basically wiped out our white tail deer population with these ridiculous supplemental seasons in WMU 342 and 344.
It is a real surprise to see a white tail deer in either of these WMU now.
How do we convince Government to stop the killing of white tail does in these two WMU. We need a complete closure of white tail doe hunting here for at least 3 to 5 years in order to build up the population to where it once was.
Is anyone else having the same issues?
Thank you

If by "real surprise" you mean seeing 2 to 8 deer per day then yes, I agree. Unless this is one of those threads where you're trying to throw everyone off the trail of good hunting? I can never tell.

Sent from my HTC One M9 using Tapatalk

Donkey Oatey 12-05-2017 10:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bear crossing (Post 3682715)
Itotally agree with WAYNOR,same thing in my area numbers way down,something has to be done soon to help numbers get back up.

Once again read what WB posted. Deer population reduction is the goal. You need to talk to the regional bio and find out what the goal is and why.

The answer will surprise and frustrate you.

Long story short in those zones they want to get rid of the whitetail. Which is contrary to what many hunters want.

So the goal is working, just pizzing off hunters that want whitetail deer there.

Sooner 12-05-2017 10:44 AM

Back in the day, my Northern go to WMU was loaded with WT(looking back, most likely above average numbers), some Mule deer, decent moose numbers if you got away from the roads. General tag for WT, either sex. Dad would shoot either, I a buck. No biggie. 2 deer taken each year. Then supplemental doe tags came out. Now you could take 2 does and still have a general tag. Most camps seen had only does hanging while they waited for a decent buck. Dad and I continued with our 2 deer. Well in a few seasons, we noticed the deer numbers were dropping. Can't take out that many breeders without some consequences. Then the wolves increased, followed by some brutal deep snow winters.

5 years running, numbers are still super low. Used to see many outfitter tower stands, not anymore. Even the hunter numbers dropped. I haven't even hunted there 2 yrs running now. I still sled our haunts and go where most can't before freeze up a couple times each winter, all species sign and sightings are still low.

I agree that in some WMU's, we could go back to general tag, either sex and drop the supplemental for a few years. Other zones and farmlands, all good to keep numbers in check. Each zone could use some dedicated surveys but we all know there is no cash for that.

So I assume the WT reduction has something to do with keeping another ungulate strong? I know where I hunt, the Caribou range is supposed to hit the Norther portion yet I have never seen any so far in 20 plus years. Am I correct in my assumption? The local guide I got to know well in that WMU mentioned this to me years ago.

walking buffalo 12-05-2017 10:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iliketrout (Post 3682692)
I am interested WB. Can you share why deer population reduction is the goal? Is it an effort to reduce predator population?

PM me if you don't want to get into a debate on a live thread. Thanks!

I haven't been updated on the regional plan, hopefully Wayner will make the call as he is very concerned and wants to find a path to his desires.

But yes, WT population reduction is the goal for the purpose of starving wolves.





Quote:

Originally Posted by Donkey Oatey (Post 3682781)
Once again read what WB posted. Deer population reduction is the goal. You need to talk to the regional bio and find out what the goal is and why.

The answer will surprise and frustrate you.

Long story short in those zones they want to get rid of the whitetail. Which is contrary to what many hunters want.

So the goal is working, just pizzing off hunters that want whitetail deer there.


What pizzes me of is the government USING hunters without being open and honest about what and why they are doing these actions.


It took some digging to reveal that biologists were purposefully using licenced hunting to reduce moose and deer populations in a vast area for the purpose of wolf control under a plan based on an unproven theory.

When I have confronted F&W regarding this management plan, asking WHY they would take such action without informing the hunting community, telling them that I thought it was a disgraceful and deceitful move, all that I ever received was silence. I think they understood and were bare'assed.

I'm pretty sure most hunters don't mind being used as a management tool, but at least be honest with us with how we are going to be used.

We have a major problem in Alberta where the regional biologists are not accountable to F&W Policy, nor to the hunting community. No public record of management status, goals, plans and concerns are offered nor required.

This situation leads to issues such as what is happening here. I hope to see this change, there are reverberations within F&W to make this happen in due course. Having concerned hunters calling their regional bio and respectfully demanding full disclosure will help.

35 whelen 12-05-2017 11:04 AM

Is there a list of biologist somewhere for Alberta thank you

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

iliketrout 12-05-2017 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by walking buffalo (Post 3682809)
I haven't been updated on the regional plan, hopefully Wayner will make the call as he is very concerned and wants to find a path to his desires.

But yes, WT population reduction is the goal for the purpose of starving wolves.








What pizzes me of is the government USING hunters without being open and honest about what and why they are doing these actions.


It took some digging to reveal that biologists were purposefully using licenced hunting to reduce moose and deer populations in a vast area for the purpose of wolf control under a plan based on an unproven theory.

When I have confronted F&W regarding this management plan, asking WHY they would take such action without informing the hunting community, telling them that I thought it was a disgraceful and deceitful move, all that I ever received was silence. I think they understood and were bare'assed.

I'm pretty sure most hunters don't mind being used as a management tool, but at least be honest with us with how we are going to be used.

We have a major problem in Alberta where the regional biologists are not accountable to F&W Policy, nor to the hunting community. No public record of management status, goals, plans and concerns are offered nor required.

This situation leads to issues such as what is happening here. I hope to see this change, there are reverberations within F&W to make this happen in due course. Having concerned hunters calling their regional bio and respectfully demanding full disclosure will help.

Thanks WB. I fully agree with your sentiments on this one.

If wolf population was the goal, I would think there are many more effective methods to do so.

CritterCommander 12-05-2017 11:15 AM

contacts for Peace District
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by 35 whelen (Post 3682816)
Is there a list of biologist somewhere for Alberta thank you

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

https://www.alberta.ca/albertaFiles/...levelID=118370

Salavee 12-05-2017 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dfrobert (Post 3682517)
If the government won't reduce or get rid of the supp tags in zones that the deer numbers are still dismal then the hunters need to wake up and do there part as well. Stop shooting all the does. Go shoot some dogs. Kill a cow elk if you want to fill the freezer.

Lots of guys who are the first to complain about deer numbers are the first to shoot 3 deer a year. :snapoutofit:

Exactly !

purgatory.sv 12-05-2017 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 35 whelen (Post 3682816)
Is there a list of biologist somewhere for Alberta thank you

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk


Contact information.

The first link is from the alberta government,the second is a map.
Click on the second link and it should open a map ,click on the title of the area and it should provide contact information?

http://aep.alberta.ca/about-us/conta...-contacts.aspx

http://aep.alberta.ca/about-us/conta...ap-Mar2015.pdf

35 whelen 12-05-2017 12:54 PM

Thank you

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

Unregistered user 12-05-2017 01:29 PM

Any truth to the rumors that insurance companies are behind it to reduce wildlife collision claims?

matt1984 12-05-2017 02:15 PM

[QUOTE=crownb;3682703]The last time I put faith into the biologists in my area was when they put out the aerial survey. It was done in early January. I can't remember the numbers but the number of bulls to cows was really off. The survey showed nearly no bulls. This is the information they use to base our special license tags. Now I am not a biologist but I think I can tell you that the majority if not all the bull would have dropped their antlers by then. QUOTE]



From my observations the elk aren't dropping their antlers until April here.

TAK Precision 12-05-2017 03:56 PM

We have this exact same problem in 236. They did a couple of huge culls then add a couple of bad winters and now the whitetail population is scarce. They should switch whitetail to draw or get rid of the season for a couple of years to give them a chance to come back. As Mule deer are a dime a dozen here.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.