Suffield Elk

[Flatlandliver]

ESRD is not responsible for wildlife management decisions on the Suffield military base.[/QUOTE]

Kind of;
CFB Suffield NWA is managed under Delegation of Authority from Environment Canada by the Department of National Defence as part of the CFB Suffield. The Department of National Defence is working to develop a sustainability plan (Suffield Sustainability Management Plan) for all of CFB Suffield, including the NWA.

The Elk herd at CFB Suffield is managed as a provincial resource by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development in conjunction with the Department of National Defence.

Quote:
Also if they ever did allow foot access no one would haul an elk miles out of the sand hills. So again good luck with that.

People haul them off mountains and isnt Wainwright and some grazing leases foot access only?

[Full Curl Earl]

An elk is just the sum of his parts, packing elk sucks, but packing out sheep,
Antelope and even pack rats sucks!lol

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Justin

Once again the facts seem irrelevant in light of your incessant desire to badmouth ESRD.


ESRD is not responsible for wildlife management decisions on the Suffield military base.

Name is not Justin.


I think you should check more in to that. SRD is and does participate in managing suffield. SRD has screwed up a lot in the last 20 years. Yes they have done some good but more bad.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by Flatlandliver

ESRD is not responsible for wildlife management decisions on the Suffield military base.

Kind of;
CFB Suffield NWA is managed under Delegation of Authority from Environment Canada by the Department of National Defence as part of the CFB Suffield. The Department of National Defence is working to develop a sustainability plan (Suffield Sustainability Management Plan) for all of CFB Suffield, including the NWA.

The Elk herd at CFB Suffield is managed as a provincial resource by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development in conjunction with the Department of National Defence.

Quote:
Also if they ever did allow foot access no one would haul an elk miles out of the sand hills. So again good luck with that.

People haul them off mountains and isnt Wainwright and some grazing leases foot access only?[/QUOTE]







Packing stuff out I would guess 90% of people are not going to do so back to the same thing. Elk will use it to there advantage while people run around the base. But hey if someone kills one in there I guess it is good.

[Flatlandliver]

Residentguide, got any suggestions? just hearing complaints so far. Whats done is done and it's time to figure out what to do next.

[Carson13]

Saw the interview and the fellow certainly was not well spoken... Interesting too that I haven't heard of any reductions in cattle being allowed to graze on the nearby lease lands one would think this would be the major complaint. But as it isn't. I assume the issue is fence damage? Is this correct?

[madatter]

Originally Posted by residentguide

Kind of;
CFB Suffield NWA is managed under Delegation of Authority from Environment Canada by the Department of National Defence as part of the CFB Suffield. The Department of National Defence is working to develop a sustainability plan (Suffield Sustainability Management Plan) for all of CFB Suffield, including the NWA.

The Elk herd at CFB Suffield is managed as a provincial resource by Alberta Sustainable Resource Development in conjunction with the Department of National Defence.

Quote:
Also if they ever did allow foot access no one would haul an elk miles out of the sand hills. So again good luck with that.

People haul them off mountains and isnt Wainwright and some grazing leases foot access only?

I hiked the sand hills looking for my cow elk....saw an elk,thought it was a cow but turned into a small bull.
Looking back I'm thinking there is no way I'm shooting a cow elk off in the sandhills....no way.

Bull tag maybe but since it's cows they want dead and years away from a bull tag it doesn't matter.
People who have not wandered the sand hills really have no idea how much fun it actually is.....as in sweaty up n down scratchy bushes everywhere type of fun.





Packing stuff out I would guess 90% of people are not going to do so back to the same thing. Elk will use it to there advantage while people run around the base. But hey if someone kills one in there I guess it is good.[/QUOTE]

[spirit4u]

To me any effort to cull or process this hugh population of Elk with man power would end up costing about $3000 per animal if you calculate the costs from planning,administration,implimentation,transportat ion,processing and final distribution of the meat.
The ranchers and land owners have every right to be upset. This is a problem that has come to their back porch and is not going away.They are loosing money and need compensation through exsisting programs.
I see two things that need to be done to correct this problem. The first one, most of you reading this might disagree with, but a relocation of a breeding pair of wolves to the base or a pack if that is even possible. The effect won't be immeadiate but the wolves will disperse the herds from the base. Yes it will be easy pickings for them at first and it should be. The wolves will need to be protected at first while they learn the border of the base.
Secondly, the herds that are chased off the base by the wolves are now in zones that the big game hunters can access. A definite increase in tags available would be required with staggered hunting days to help slow the see-saw effect of chasing all the elk back into the base needlessly.
This is a man made problem in which no one looked into the long range effects of. Wolves were wiped off the praires before and can be done so again if it is required in the future. Just my thoughts.

[dshaw]

Originally Posted by spirt4u

To me any effort to cull or process this hugh population of Elk with man power would end up costing about $3000 per animal if you calculate the costs from planning,administration,implimentation,transportat ion,processing and final distribution of the meat.
The ranchers and land owners have every right to be upset. This is a problem that has come to their back porch and is not going away.They are loosing money and need compensation through exsisting programs.
I see two things that need to be done to correct this problem. The first one, most of you reading this might disagree with, but a relocation of a breeding pair of wolves to the base or a pack if that is even possible. The effect won't be immeadiate but the wolves will disperse the herds from the base. Yes it will be easy pickings for them at first and it should be. The wolves will need to be protected at first while they learn the border of the base.
Secondly, the herds that are chased off the base by the wolves are now in zones that the big game hunters can access. A definite increase in tags available would be required with staggered hunting days to help slow the see-saw effect of chasing all the elk back into the base needlessly.
This is a man made problem in which no one looked into the long range effects of. Wolves were wiped off the praires before and can be done so again if it is required in the future. Just my thoughts.

I don'y agree with the wolves. There are too many other species (moose, deer) that they can target as well that don't need to be. Over years just like yellowstone the wolves will increase and the elk will decrease until the there aren't enough elk for wolves and they turn to ranchers cattle which are way easier prey. I think ranchers would rather deal with broken fences than lost livestock. I wish I knew what the answer is out there but its a tough decision for sure.

[dmcbride]

Maybe the military can do some exercises on the base during hunting season that will push some of the elk off the base? I haven't been there so maybe it isn't possible. Just a thought.

[spirit4u]

RE; dshaw. I would love to see the wolves chase some of those 5 point 200+ drop point mulie bucks off the base too!! Suffield is an odd protection place for Elk. Yellow stone needed the balance. Whenever nature is missing an element weird things happen, like too many elk and no food for them. I'm sure the ranchers will have their "protecting livestock" guns ready and would only hope they go with the 'shoot,shovel and shut up' approach.

[dshaw]

Originally Posted by spirt4u

RE; dshaw. I would love to see the wolves chase some of those 5 point 200+ drop point mulie bucks off the base too!! Suffield is an odd protection place for Elk. Yellow stone needed the balance. Whenever nature is missing an element weird things happen, like too many elk and no food for them. I'm sure the ranchers will have their "protecting livestock" guns ready and would only hope they go with the 'shoot,shovel and shut up' approach.

Your right, weird things happen in nature when its out of balance, too many elk and not enough feed well elk will die. how nature does that is up to it. yellowstone needed a balance in the park and now there are not many elk left and wolves not only there but everywhere else where they didn't want them. If we mess too much with nature we end up worse than we started.

[grinr]

I don't get why the military is so uncooperative with allowing hunting access?
I grew up/spent most of my life in NB,less then 20min from the boundary of CFB Gagetown,and spent hundreds(probly 1000+?)of days hunting,fishing,quadding,sledding on CFBG.
Yes there were certain rules to hunting on base,but nothing like the BS that I've read about Suffield access.Daily sign-in,list of open/closed areas on any given day...have at'er.Artillery impact areas or "red zones" are off limits at all times with the possibility of unexploded munitions present,but aside from that,80% of the base is open at least periodically for recreational use.
So with that said,WTF is the big deal with Suffield,and maybe to a lesser degree Wainright?Why so restrictive?Especially in light of the elk problem at Suffield,DND should be far more cooperative and accommodating IMHO,hunters ARE the solution to this ill-conceived elk project,the ONLY sensible and cost effective/feasible solution really?Theres no justifiable reason in my experience at least why they can't allow far more hunting opps on base,with staggered seasons and generous quotas running from September thru January,hunters would welcome the opportunity to reduce this herd to a sensible size,and could get'er done in one or two years max.
From my perspective and experience at least,it seems rediculous that were even having this debate.....give out the tags...get'er done....simple.Perhaps 1000 tags/month next fall Sept-thru to Feb....pick your month when you apply.The military's needs for land use would obviously take priority,but there's no way in hell they use the entire base every day nor even most of it a fraction of the time.Just like Gagetown,daily closures and restrictions to certain areas,and other areas are open to hunting,some of those are rarely ever closed.

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by spirt4u

I'm sure the ranchers will have their "protecting livestock" guns ready and would only hope they go with the 'shoot,shovel and shut up' approach.

Why would they do that when its perfectly legal for them to shoot wolves year round already?

[spirit4u]

RE; mike. It was just my thoughts that IF wolves were introduced to Suffield they would be protected in that area until they were established.

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by spirt4u

RE; mike. It was just my thoughts that IF wolves were introduced to Suffield they would be protected in that area until they were established.

Gotcha.

[SteveY66]

Originally Posted by mich

With an attitude like that I wouldn't let you hunt on my property either.....

You really need to take a drive out there, the elk herds are huge, even running north of the river

Hey my attitude is like that for good reason. I don't think the elk deserved to be culled. The farmers get catered too and by every right they should but I do not like the ones that consistently complain about the animals but then don't allow any hunting or asking for paid access behind doors.

If the elk are a problem there are many different resources to take place rather than a cull. I respect the elk so much I'd hate to say them do that.

[fish_e_o]

please contact Jeff Lewandoski for permission

[4x4bowhunter]

Not sure if they would ever consider this, but I know a few years back, in areas where the SRD wanted to reduce the mule deer heard, They gave out 2 and sometimes 3 mulie doe tags per drawn hunter. With potentially 600 hunters targeting cow elk on the base this year, If sucesful hunters were given the opertunity at a second elk, I would bet almost every one would take the opportunity to shoot a second. I shot one on the base last year and it was the best eating elk I have ever shot. I could have easilly shot a second elk. Not that my freezer can hold a second elk but I have a big family that all love elk meat. I know I would have no problem giving away that awesome meat.

[IR_mike]

Originally Posted by 4x4bowhunter

Not sure if they would ever consider this, but I know a few years back, in areas where the SRD wanted to reduce the mule deer heard, They gave out 2 and sometimes 3 mulie doe tags per drawn hunter. With potentially 600 hunters targeting cow elk on the base this year, If sucesful hunters were given the opertunity at a second elk, I would bet almost every one would take the opportunity to shoot a second. I shot one on the base last year and it was the best eating elk I have ever shot. I could have easilly shot a second elk. Not that my freezer can hold a second elk but I have a big family that all love elk meat. I know I would have no problem giving away that awesome meat.

Why not bring back mandatory registration and allow unsuccessful general tag holders the option of a tag after Nov 30th.

[bigbfidaddy]

Looked like it was the butchers idea. Theyv said they would round up the elk cull 1500 every year until "managed" and the meat would be processed and donated to needy families. The guy is going to make large butchering 1500 elk.

[Warrior]

I asked why last year why they have the season so late in Nov when the cows are in the large winter herds. I was told that the British military who primarily use the base are then till approx Nov 11....
Not sure if that is a good reason, but that's what I was told....

Originally Posted by grinr

I don't get why the military is so uncooperative with allowing hunting access?
I grew up/spent most of my life in NB,less then 20min from the boundary of CFB Gagetown,and spent hundreds(probly 1000+?)of days hunting,fishing,quadding,sledding on CFBG.
Yes there were certain rules to hunting on base,but nothing like the BS that I've read about Suffield access.Daily sign-in,list of open/closed areas on any given day...have at'er.Artillery impact areas or "red zones" are off limits at all times with the possibility of unexploded munitions present,but aside from that,80% of the base is open at least periodically for recreational use.
So with that said,WTF is the big deal with Suffield,and maybe to a lesser degree Wainright?Why so restrictive?Especially in light of the elk problem at Suffield,DND should be far more cooperative and accommodating IMHO,hunters ARE the solution to this ill-conceived elk project,the ONLY sensible and cost effective/feasible solution really?Theres no justifiable reason in my experience at least why they can't allow far more hunting opps on base,with staggered seasons and generous quotas running from September thru January,hunters would welcome the opportunity to reduce this herd to a sensible size,and could get'er done in one or two years max.
From my perspective and experience at least,it seems rediculous that were even having this debate.....give out the tags...get'er done....simple.Perhaps 1000 tags/month next fall Sept-thru to Feb....pick your month when you apply.The military's needs for land use would obviously take priority,but there's no way in hell they use the entire base every day nor even most of it a fraction of the time.Just like Gagetown,daily closures and restrictions to certain areas,and other areas are open to hunting,some of those are rarely ever closed.

[pdfish]

Originally Posted by spirt4u

To me any effort to cull or process this hugh population of Elk with man power would end up costing about $3000 per animal if you calculate the costs from planning,administration,implimentation,transportat ion,processing and final distribution of the meat.
The ranchers and land owners have every right to be upset. This is a problem that has come to their back porch and is not going away.They are loosing money and need compensation through exsisting programs.
I see two things that need to be done to correct this problem. The first one, most of you reading this might disagree with, but a relocation of a breeding pair of wolves to the base or a pack if that is even possible. The effect won't be immeadiate but the wolves will disperse the herds from the base. Yes it will be easy pickings for them at first and it should be. The wolves will need to be protected at first while they learn the border of the base.
Secondly, the herds that are chased off the base by the wolves are now in zones that the big game hunters can access. A definite increase in tags available would be required with staggered hunting days to help slow the see-saw effect of chasing all the elk back into the base needlessly.
This is a man made problem in which no one looked into the long range effects of. Wolves were wiped off the praires before and can be done so again if it is required in the future. Just my thoughts.

According to the one rancher we chatted with, there were 4 neutered wolves released there 2-3 years ago. All got shot outside of the base within a month. He had a pic somewhere but I didn't want to take up any more of his time to look for it.

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by pdfish

According to the one rancher we chatted with, there were 4 neutered wolves released there 2-3 years ago. All got shot outside of the base within a month. He had a pic somewhere but I didn't want to take up any more of his time to look for it.

No there wasn't.

[spirit4u]

If you happen to google it. 'IT' being wolves released in Suffield. There are threads from this very site in 2010 of wolves being killed around the base.

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by spirt4u

If you happen to google it. 'IT' being wolves released in Suffield. There are threads from this very site in 2010 of wolves being killed around the base.

Haha, ya I read it on AO so it has to be true..

There are wolves in the area, but certainly not transplanted. Could have killed a big black in 2012, chose to let him walk as it was nice to see in these parts.

[casual observer]

Originally Posted by Sledhead71

Haha, ya I read it on AO so it has to be true..

There are wolves in the area, but certainly not transplanted. Could have killed a big black in 2012, chose to let him walk as it was nice to see in these parts.

Don't you know anything? Get with it man. They were in the same horse trailers that brought the Cougars.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by residentguide

that is basically a national park. Good luck. Also if they ever did allow foot access no one would haul an elk miles out of the sand hills. So again good luck with that. Not trying to be negitive but this whole topic is a joke just like SRD and all there screw ups in the last 20 years.

You wouldn't, you barely get out of your truck as it is.... alot of guys have no problem hiking, hunting and hauling. ...

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

You wouldn't, you barely get out of your truck as it is.... alot of guys have no problem hiking, hunting and hauling. ...

Lol. Funny comment as I don't know you and you don't know me. By the sound of it though you are someone that sure thinks they are special. Back to the topic.

[Springer]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

You wouldn't, you barely get out of your truck as it is.... alot of guys have no problem hiking, hunting and hauling. ...

Definitely there would !! Myself included . It wouldn't be my first and certainly not my last time packing quarters out...