February suffield cow elk quota hunt

[lone wolf]

While I understand why additional opportunities are being offered, it really begs the question as to why double tags were not issued to everyone who was drawn for the regular Suffield herd reduction seasons.

[buck]

if the goal is to reduce numbers and there is
people saying not sure if can get time off or would want to shoot 2 elk
but will apply any ways so then if drawn and can't go or only shoot one when 2 could be shot then it just takes away the chance for people who can and will go
and shoot both maybe there should be a 250$ fee or what ever amount
deemed large enough that will get people to show up and use these
tags so when drawn you would need to pay with in
in 24 hrs etc or tags reassigned to some one else
then when both animals shot money returned
only one shot only half or less returned just a thought
to have tags bought and used rather then wasted by people
not showing up anything beats a mass slaughter like the
cwd culls of past and this gives a lot of people a good chance to fill freezers
this is just my opion and thoughts to have people there and tags used

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by buck

if the goal is to reduce numbers and there is
people saying not sure if can get time off or would want to shoot 2 elk
but will apply any ways so then if drawn and can't go or only shoot one when 2 could be shot then it just takes away the chance for people who can and will go
and shoot both maybe there should be a 250$ fee or what ever amount
deemed large enough that will get people to show up and use these
tags so when drawn you would need to pay with in
in 24 hrs etc or tags reassigned to some one else
then when both animals shot money returned
only one shot only half or less returned just a thought
to have tags bought and used rather then wasted by people
not showing up anything beats a mass slaughter like the
cwd culls of past and this gives a lot of people a good chance to fill freezers
this is just my opion and thoughts to have people there and tags used

You would be amazed how many tags are pulled and never purchased....

LC

[winger7mm]

Originally Posted by stickflicker

If you get the draw you can shoot two cows. No one else can shoot them. If you want to apply with your buddy you will either get two tags and he gets two tags, or you both get none. There is no partner tag.

Then why bother putting 2 people down on one app. Personally if I somehow manage to get in ill need to have one of my buddies with me. loading up 2 cow elk alone by hand is going to be a very time consuming activity. If he helps me out ill help fill his freezer. Never said anything about 2 shooters.

[Hawckeye]

Originally Posted by Icon

You are not allowed to leave the approved roads while hunting unless you are on foot. Once an animal is down, supposedly, you are allowed to then use your vehicle.

Yes you have to use approved routes however once the animal is down you can check with range control. They will either clear a route for you or they will bring the animal to you. Due to safety concerns they are the only ones authorized to use Atv and snow machines. They are very willing to help.

[Hawckeye]

Originally Posted by TBark

Some people posting here seem familiar with the lay of the land on the base.
What do you guys feel the success rate would be for the Feb hunt ? 50-75% of tags filled ?
Are some of the access roads near the base perimeter ?
As that seems to be where the elk travel would be according to some of the landowners bordering the base.
Would that be a strategy to considder, hang in the fringe of base boundary and private land ?

TBark

The success rate will ultimately depend on the weather and the actual areas open for the harvest I don't believe there are any areas off the base open in Feb to hunt so you are hunting on the base. Historically the Elk are on the boarders of the base however most of this is out of bounds as it is NWA however the Elk move from this area into the hunting zone so driving these roads will increase your success.

[WilsonMS]

Originally Posted by Hawckeye

Historically the Elk are on the boarders of the base however most of this is out of bounds as it is NWA however the Elk move...

What is "NWA"?

[WilsonMS]

Originally Posted by elkhunter1234

I personally would like to see anyone that applied for the regular draw but was unsecsefull get first crack at these tags and the left over tag go on a lottery draw..

This wouldn't be feasible for 2 reasons. 1) the technology to do this would be too complicated. 2) how would they know if a un-drawn hunter could even go now if awarded?

Also, week 6 of the draw (jan 26-29) went under-subscribed. Anyone who didn't get drawn in other weeks could have purchased one of these as soon as they went on sale. They did sell out in about an hour, but that was plenty of time for whoever really wanted one.

[brobinson]

Originally Posted by Hawckeye

Yes you have to use approved routes however once the animal is down you can check with range control. They will either clear a route for you or they will bring the animal to you. Due to safety concerns they are the only ones authorized to use Atv and snow machines. They are very willing to help.

When we were out last year we were told in our briefing that if there was already a trail, ex.) a tank trail, Or a landrover trail, if you thought that your vehicle could make it, that you could take it. However, range control would not be coming to pull you out if you got stuck. It was basically, if there's a trail, take it, but know you limits. I don't know if that has changed for this year, but that's what we were told.

[Flatlandliver]

Originally Posted by WilsonMS

What is "NWA"?

National Wildlife Area. No hunting, no military activities. Just snakes, owls, pronghorns and elk.

[stickflicker]

Originally Posted by winger7mm

Then why bother putting 2 people down on one app. Personally if I somehow manage to get in ill need to have one of my buddies with me. loading up 2 cow elk alone by hand is going to be a very time consuming activity. If he helps me out ill help fill his freezer. Never said anything about 2 shooters.

I understood you to mean two shooters on one tag. Hunter=shooter, no?

Some put multiple hunters on their apps so that everyone in their group can shoot an animal. They risk not getting a tag for anyone but that's their choice. It's the same for regular seasons draws too.

[bigredviking]

The rules here are the same as they have been for years. I am quite surprised to find out so many do not know them. If you want to hunt apply. If you don't, leave the opportunity for those of us who do.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter1234

I personally would like to see anyone that applied for the regular draw but was unsecsefull get first crack at these tags and the left over tag go on a lottery draw..

I disagree, why should those folks be given precedent in a "draw"? I think these opportunities should show no favoritism whatsoever....these situations are "unique" and finite, all Albertans who hunt and who are going to show up to hunt this special opportunity should have a equal and fair crack at the tags.

If I don't fill my draw moose tag I don't get special consideration the following year....

It's unfortunate that you didn't fill the tag first time around....that's hunting.

LC

[WilsonMS]

Originally Posted by bigredviking

The rules here are the same as they have been for years. I am quite surprised to find out so many do not know them. If you want to hunt apply. If you don't, leave the opportunity for those of us who do.

Very well said.

For those that are so confused open the regs up and educate yourself on the difference between a "group draw application" and a "partner license" and a Suffield "hunter helper" (or just read previous posts here where they are clearly explained.) Most of the confusion is from people that do not understand these terms.

If you are just joining this thread, you can find the answers on previous pages. The rules for this hunt are really quite simple if you understand the regs.

[WilsonMS]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I disagree, why should those folks be given precedent in a "draw"? I think these opportunities should show no favoritism whatsoever....these situations are "unique" and finite, all Albertans who hunt and who are going to show up to hunt this special opportunity should have a equal and fair crack at the tags.



If I don't fill my draw moose tag I don't get special consideration the following year....



It's unfortunate that you didn't fill the tag first time around....that's hunting.



LC

I think what he saying is that he applied for the draw and did not get drawn, not that he didn't fill the tag.

Regardless, I agree with you LC, it doesn't need to be more complicated. Its great they are opening to everyone.

[elkhunter1234]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I disagree, why should those folks be given precedent in a "draw"? I think these opportunities should show no favoritism whatsoever....these situations are "unique" and finite, all Albertans who hunt and who are going to show up to hunt this special opportunity should have a equal and fair crack at the tags.

If I don't fill my draw moose tag I don't get special consideration the following year....

It's unfortunate that you didn't fill the tag first time around....that's hunting.

LC

I never said the guys that got drawn and never shot one, I said the guys that put in for the regulor draw and were not drawn. I can garinty you that there will be guys that put in for the regular draw that were drawn and have already shot one elk, now they might get drawn for the quote hunt and will shot 2 more, where some guys "not me" put in for the original draw and were not drawn.. But hay it looks like I'm out numbered on this anyways..
What I'm saying is Freerider put in the regulor draw and was not drawn..

[WilsonMS]

Originally Posted by elkhunter1234

I never said the guys that got drawn and never shot one, I said the guys that put in for the regulor draw and were not drawn. I can garinty you that there will be guys that put in for the regular draw that were drawn and have already shot one elk, now they might get drawn for the quote hunt and will shot 2 more, where some guys "not me" put in for the original draw and were not drawn.. But hay it looks like I'm out numbered on this anyways..

What I'm saying is Freerider put in the regulor draw and was not drawn..

I see your point man. But the biggest reason that I imagine that they're not using the regular draw process is because the regular draw process opens once per year. If they reapply the drawl process now, the people who don't get drawn would get two points in the same year, and people that are not up on this hunt would not be aware that there's an extra draw mid-year.

Its good they are being consistent with the process. If they had foreseen the need for these two extra weeks (which is another topic entirely, lets not go down that path here) I'm sure they would've been part of the original draw process last summer.

[Leafy]

Originally Posted by brobinson

1800 elk out of a herd of even 10000, that's 18% of the herd. That's a pretty good start as far as a population control goes.

On to your ideas about why they are only allowing cow tags. The only way to control a herd of animals is to remove the females. If there are less females to be bred, that directly translates into less calves being born. If it were bull tags being handed out, it would not affect the overall number, the rest of the bulls in the herd would just breed more cows.

The only thing I have a question about is what are you getting at in the terms of mystery money? What here is costing millions of dollars?

Unfortunately the 18% you reference does nothing in reducing numbers, won't even account for the new calves hitting the ground next spring.

Regarding cows only, if ESRD figures that dynamics of male to female ratio is nothing to worry about, well the rest of Alberta's wildlife resources are in BIG trouble. Basic math here, too many boys or girls is not a responsible approach to any management objective.

The mystery money I refer too is a complete loss to myself. We all know that budgets have been slashed to the point where we have little to no enforcement, terrible wildlife counts, fisheries taking a beating, ext. So, where did this golden goose come from to support the cost associated with CFB ? If you don't think this fiasco will cost millions you have blinders on..

How many individuals are involved to make this opportunity happen ? Fish and wildlife officers, biologists, base personal, range control, civil servants, ext. These people do get paid, they also require materials to conduct their respective roles in this hunt. Who's paying the overtime, fuel, maintenance of trucks, ext ?

I hope we can agree this effort will continue for years and costs will add up very quickly here. Something as simple as only the testing of these heads is already in the hundreds of thousands, this just scratches the surface of costs.

Is there any other species in Alberta that receives this sort of attention, manpower and money to manage ?

To my understanding, the greater sage grouse program has federal support when they deemed these a "species at risk". Conservation groups, federal money, and other interest groups provide the backing on this program. I'm sure there is provincial money as well, but not to the extent of the CFB elk.

What will happen at CFB if they do get this herd down to the original 800 - 1000 projected holding target ? Opportunity, well yes when it was out of control, but then pretty much nothing ? Worst case of wildlife management I can think of, please correct me if I am wrong thou..

Just so I am understood, the millions upon millions of dollars spent at CFB cleaning up a mess that should never have been is a travesty of funds that SHOULD be allocated to ALL species in Alberta. Will these magical funds dry up if these groups reach their target in the future ? I assume they will as I can not find a single source as to where this money is coming from...

[YoungGun77]

What I think is happening is that they are trialling the proposed changes for next year. There's another post with a link to the ESRD December AGM Agenda, where the 2 tag idea was going to be presented as a recommendation for the next hunting system. They need to understand if issuing 125 licenses with 2 tags each is more effective than simply increasing the number of licenses each week. Also, they will get the opportunity to see if 125 hunters per week is manageable, compared to the current 100 per week.

In the end it comes down to herd reduction and what is the most effective and safe means to accomplish this.

I do agree that they still need to come up with a Management Plan, but these things take time and thoughtful planning. They don't want to repeat what has already happened. When they come out with something, we can only hope that it will have taken into consideration all parameters.

[Leafy]

Originally Posted by YoungGun77

In the end it comes down to herd reduction and what is the most effective and safe means to accomplish this.

I do agree that they still need to come up with a Management Plan, but these things take time and thoughtful planning. They don't want to repeat what has already happened. When they come out with something, we can only hope that it will have taken into consideration all parameters.

Not picking on ya Young, but they have had nearing two decades to come up with a management plan.... There was one in place when the original 230 were introduced, wonder what happened to that napkin

[Flatlandliver]

I do agree that they still need to come up with a Management Plan, but these things take time and thoughtful planning. They don't want to repeat what has already happened. When they come out with something, we can only hope that it will have taken into consideration all parameters.[/QUOTE]

Seriously?
Its been 17 years!
Reactive instead of proactive is how this mess has been handled from the getgo including the horses.
Good news is the guys in charge now seem to heading in the right direction.
Lots of catchup to do though.
Enjoy the opportunity while it lasts.

[george 1979]

I think this is a great opportunity for hunters to get some good meat. I myself was drawn for January hunt. Like others have said this is a quota hunt so if you don't know 100% if you can make it or don't want 2 elk, please do not apply and wreck if for someone that wants the meat and can make the hunt. Us as hunters have been given the opportunity to try and help manage someone else's mistake lets do a good job so a mass kill is prevented where no one gets the meat! Just my two cents, happy hunting.

[walking buffalo]

Leafy,

Where and how are these Millions of dollars being spent and by who?

I'll suggest that CFB Suffield required a few seasons of hunting to get a better feel for how to manage it. I suspect that their confidence in having hunting on the base is growing and becoming accepted. Along with political pressure the doors are now open to make a true management plan work.


Remember that half of those 2015 calves will be bulls. If cow harvest is greater than the recruitment of cow calves, the future recruitment rate will drop.

Is 1000 cows a large enough harvest to start a decline in population growth? What is the recent population survey sex ratios?


From the available info.
Population 7000
Recruitment 22% - 1540
cow recruitment - 770

Killing 770 cows a year plus natural mortality ( 100% from old age lol..) should be enough to stabilize or slightly reduce the population growth. And let's not forget to include mortality from those wealthy Indians.

Not including a possible addition of another quota hunt in 2015/16, the proposed 1200 cow licences and 600 bull licences for next year shows me that there are enough licences being issued to start reducing the herd size as long as success rates remain strong.

Has anyone heard what the new population goal is?

[Leafy]

Originally Posted by Flatlandliver

I do agree that they still need to come up with a Management Plan, but these things take time and thoughtful planning. They don't want to repeat what has already happened. When they come out with something, we can only hope that it will have taken into consideration all parameters.

Seriously?
Its been 17 years!
Reactive instead of proactive is how this mess has been handled from the getgo including the horses.
Good news is the guys in charge now seem to heading in the right direction.
Lots of catchup to do though.[/QUOTE]

From the surface, but history here has shown many bodies cycle in and out which no doubt will happen again many times over.

[bigredviking]

Originally Posted by Leafy

I hope we can agree this effort will continue for years and costs will add up very quickly here. Something as simple as only the testing of these heads is already in the hundreds of thousands, this just scratches the surface of costs.

We do not agree. A simple start, based on a quick look through CWD requirements, there is no requirement for elk head submission and thus no cost. As for the federal component by CF Suffield, this is a training exercise and a quality part of it. This gives them a unique opportunity to work with and manage the "public"; something they would typically not have opportunity for.

As hunters and residents of Alberta, we expect our natural resources to be managed - clearly this will have a cost associated with it. Though I believe you are grossly overestimating the cost of managing the Suffield elk population not to mention the off-set cost an un-managed population would have on the grass/ranching resource in and adjacent to the base.

[Leafy]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Leafy,

Where and how are these Millions of dollars being spent and by who?

I'll suggest that CFB Suffield required a few seasons of hunting to get a better feel for how to manage it. I suspect that their confidence in having hunting on the base is growing and becoming accepted. Along with political pressure the doors are now open to make a true management plan work.


Remember that half of those 2015 calves will be bulls. If cow harvest is greater than the recruitment of cow calves, the future recruitment rate will drop.

Is 1000 cows a large enough harvest to start a decline in population growth? What is the recent population survey sex ratios?


From the available info.
Population 7000
Recruitment 22% - 1540
cow recruitment - 770

Killing 770 cows a year plus natural mortality ( 100% from old age lol..) should be enough to stabilize or slightly reduce the population growth. And let's not forget to include mortality from those wealthy Indians.

Not including a possible addition of another quota hunt in 2015/16, the proposed 1200 cow licences and 600 bull licences for next year shows me that there are enough licences being issued to start reducing the herd size as long as success rates remain strong.

Has anyone heard what the new population goal is?

WB,

The numbers you posted are skewed to appear lesser than what is known to be factual. Even the 22% recruitment is at the bottom end of the range between 22 - 28 %.

Costs, well even 1000 heads will be hundreds of thousands. This is factual, and I think they are shipped to Saskatoon as this is the only lab I am aware of.. Factor in ALL the costs on these heads, they don't hitch hike there themselves

Did we hire more bodies to pick up the slack of the CO's and Bio's who now pretty much have half their year at CFB ?

The go forwards proposal of issuing more licences will just add to the costs, create more unrest with adjacent land owners and require more bodies to succeed.

I actually disagree with your hunter confidence statement, the reports from this area and the activities our group have been caught do, well I sure don't want to be labelled in this group.

We may see a death come out of this mess, I hope we don't but the chance of it is very real. Can't imagine if some of these people had a 400 plus bull going on, the need to succeed would be something else

I may come across as being jerk, but I am a realist, not an opportunist. Those who think leafy needs to have a snickers, well this is the way I am programmed !!! LOL

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bigredviking

We do not agree. A simple start, based on a quick look through CWD requirements, there is no requirement for elk head submission and thus no cost. As for the federal component by CF Suffield, this is a training exercise and a quality part of it. This gives them a unique opportunity to work with and manage the "public"; something they would typically not have opportunity for.

As hunters and residents of Alberta, we expect our natural resources to be managed - clearly this will have a cost associated with it. Though I believe you are grossly overestimating the cost of managing the Suffield elk population not to mention the off-set cost an un-managed population would have on the grass/ranching resource in and adjacent to the base.

A very good post that requires one correction.

There is a requirement for these elk heads to be turned in for cwd testing.

The potential for cwd within the herd is a concern effecting both the urgency in obtaining a population reduction and a reason why these animals can Not be relocated.

[Leafy]

Originally Posted by bigredviking

We do not agree. A simple start, based on a quick look through CWD requirements, there is no requirement for elk head submission and thus no cost. As for the federal component by CF Suffield, this is a training exercise and a quality part of it. This gives them a unique opportunity to work with and manage the "public"; something they would typically not have opportunity for.

As hunters and residents of Alberta, we expect our natural resources to be managed - clearly this will have a cost associated with it. Though I believe you are grossly overestimating the cost of managing the Suffield elk population not to mention the off-set cost an un-managed population would have on the grass/ranching resource in and adjacent to the base.

From my understanding, YES all heads are submitted for prion testing.

You must not be familiar with CFB, BATA's works with civilians every day and has for the inception of this agreement on these lands. Did they remove all the oil and gas activity there when I wasn't looking ? These as well are the public and are worked with each and every day.

Look back 20 years ago and the costs to manage this beautiful area, look at todays cost.... There is no off set cost here, never was until these elk were introduced, them jumping fence wild horses really were not an issue

[bigredviking]

Originally Posted by Leafy

From my understanding, YES all heads are submitted for prion testing.

You must not be familiar with CFB, BATA's works with civilians every day and has for the inception of this agreement on these lands. Did they remove all the oil and gas activity there when I wasn't looking ? These as well are the public and are worked with each and every day.

Look back 20 years ago and the costs to manage this beautiful area, look at todays cost.... There is no off set cost here, never was until these elk were introduced, them jumping fence wild horses really were not an issue

I defer to those seem to know different on the CWD head submission. Is it part of the WMU732 package?

I am firmly aware of the oil and gas at Suffield - I have worked there myself. There are lease fees paid to offset these costs and the communication in this case is a dialogue. Hunters, especially at $9.00 for a pair of tags, can only be contributing through their taxes and their wildlife certificate. A different kind of public.

I don't disagree there is an issue with the elk population and it needs resolution. This is not unique, as our good intentions often over achieve. A similar elk issue is likely to loom in 102/104 in the next 10 years.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter1234

I never said the guys that got drawn and never shot one, I said the guys that put in for the regulor draw and were not drawn. I can garinty you that there will be guys that put in for the regular draw that were drawn and have already shot one elk, now they might get drawn for the quote hunt and will shot 2 more, where some guys "not me" put in for the original draw and were not drawn.. But hay it looks like I'm out numbered on this anyways..
What I'm saying is Freerider put in the regulor draw and was not drawn..

My bad misunderstood

....I thought you wanted another crack after being drawn and unsuccessful....

LC