Sheep Question

[SLH]

Was just browsing facebook and went to the page concerned with the management changes for our bighorns and saw again that Geist's rebuttal to the Nature editorial was been run out there as ammo to keep the 4/5 rule.

Why do people think Geist would favor 4/5's over full curl based on his writings including that rebuttal?

[Justahunter]

He supports the 4/5 rule because there is no evidence to support a full curl regime. In fact there is evidence that a full curl situation is truly harmful to a population. The only real support for the full curl seems to come from the sheep hunters that think they will see BIGGER Rams by eliminating the harvest of average Rams. The biologists that want to eliminate hunting . And those gullible enough to think that the sheep surveys are any where near accurate. What we very much need are surveys that are done correctly and at the right time of the year

[Roughneck Country]

Another point to consider when people say full curl works in BC, If you read the regs in BC the full curl for big horn is actually measured from the bottom of the back base to the mid point of the nose. This essentially makes our Alberta 4/5 "full curl" in BC.

They also have a reg for "trophy full curl" that is a true full curl ram.

[albertadave]

Originally Posted by SLH

Was just browsing facebook and went to the page concerned with the management changes for our bighorns and saw again that Geist's rebuttal to the Nature editorial was been run out there as ammo to keep the 4/5 rule.

Why do people think Geist would favor 4/5's over full curl based on his writings including that rebuttal?

Which facebook page?

[mountainascent]

If you mean this group:

https://www.facebook.com/SASH2015?fref=ts

I see where someone posted it on March 19 but all they said was it was an interesting read and there were no comments. I can't find where anyone said it was an argument against full curl. It was an interesting read.

[albertadave]

Very interesting timing that, out of the blue, you would just "happen" to be browsing that particular page, and feel the need to start a thread on AO yesterday about a post that was made on Facebook about this particular subject three months ago! Very interesting timing indeed.

SLH, who are you? Calling you out.

[hawken]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Another point to consider when people say full curl works in BC, If you read the regs in BC the full curl for big horn is actually measured from the bottom of the back base to the mid point of the nose. This essentially makes our Alberta 4/5 "full curl" in BC.

They also have a reg for "trophy full curl" that is a true full curl ram.

I'm not sure what you mean.
Page 4 http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife...ncial_2014.pdf
http://albertaregulations.ca/huntingregs/gameregs.html
Looks the same for full curl??

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Another point to consider when people say full curl works in BC, If you read the regs in BC the full curl for big horn is actually measured from the bottom of the back base to the mid point of the nose. This essentially makes our Alberta 4/5 "full curl" in BC.

They also have a reg for "trophy full curl" that is a true full curl ram.

Huh? You sure bout that?

[bdub]

Originally Posted by SLH

Was just browsing facebook and went to the page concerned with the management changes for our bighorns and saw again that Geist's rebuttal to the Nature editorial was been run out there as ammo to keep the 4/5 rule.

Why do people think Geist would favor 4/5's over full curl based on his writings including that rebuttal?

Because they are clueless. Not sure how they come to that conclusion other than wishful thinking.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Justahunter

He supports the 4/5 rule because there is no evidence to support a full curl regime. In fact there is evidence that a full curl situation is truly harmful to a population. The only real support for the full curl seems to come from the sheep hunters that think they will see BIGGER Rams by eliminating the harvest of average Rams. The biologists that want to eliminate hunting . And those gullible enough to think that the sheep surveys are any where near accurate. What we very much need are surveys that are done correctly and at the right time of the year

Let's see the evidence of that statement. Pure BS like the rest of your post.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by albertadave

Which facebook page?

The page where most of the outfitters/guides et al post their displeasure with the full curl idea.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by albertadave

Very interesting timing that, out of the blue, you would just "happen" to be browsing that particular page, and feel the need to start a thread on AO yesterday about a post that was made on Facebook about this particular subject three months ago! Very interesting timing indeed.

SLH, who are you? Calling you out.

Probably a concerned sheep hunter in support of a change to full curl not afraid to speak their mind would be my guess. Not a sheeple for sure.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by albertadave

SLH, who are you? Calling you out.

LOL! Who do you think he is?

[RZR]

Originally Posted by bdub

Pure BS like the rest of your post.

Pot meet kettle!

[albertadave]

Originally Posted by bdub

[/B]
Probably a concerned sheep hunter in support of a change to full curl not afraid to speak their mind would be my guess. Not a sheeple for sure.

Originally Posted by crazy_davey

LOL! Who do you think he is?

Exactly the kind of BS we've come to expect from this little full curl clan. Honestly, I could not care less who SLH is. Doesn't interest me in the least. What I AM concerned about is where/who he's getting his information from.

[SLH]

Originally Posted by Justahunter

He supports the 4/5 rule because there is no evidence to support a full curl regime. In fact there is evidence that a full curl situation is truly harmful to a population. The only real support for the full curl seems to come from the sheep hunters that think they will see BIGGER Rams by eliminating the harvest of average Rams. The biologists that want to eliminate hunting . And those gullible enough to think that the sheep surveys are any where near accurate. What we very much need are surveys that are done correctly and at the right time of the year

I'm a farmer, hunter and research tech. Trained biologist who has a great deal of experience in range management and reclamation and I get a kick out of responses like justahunter. Makes me believe he hasn't read the piece.

I get my info from pieces like Geists I like to read that type of stuff and try to educate myself. Why the interest anything you'd like to add. Any insight into Geists work?

[Ryry4]

To all you who support the full curl rule I ask you this question:

How well has it worked in 400?

I hVe spent many days hunting sheep in 400 and seen many, many, mature 4/5's Rams. I've seen a total of 2 rams that would make full curl in approx 100 days of hunting.

Many mature Rams broom off and won't ever meet the full curl rule. Spend some time in the mountains and you'll realize that.

This has nothing to do with sheep conservation and everything to do with a select few wanting to shut sheep hunting down. Just like what happened with the grizzly hunt.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

To all you who support the full curl rule I ask you this question:

How well has it worked in 400?

I hVe spent many days hunting sheep in 400 and seen many, many, mature 4/5's Rams. I've seen a total of 2 rams that would make full curl in approx 100 days of hunting.

Many mature Rams broom off and won't ever meet the full curl rule. Spend some time in the mountains and you'll realize that.

This has nothing to do with sheep conservation and everything to do with a select few wanting to shut sheep hunting down. Just like what happened with the grizzly hunt.

Well somebody is finding full curl Rams in that tiny zone according to the harvest data. I agree some may broom off and never reach full curl but many will broom off and make it as well.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by SLH

Was just browsing facebook and went to the page concerned with the management changes for our bighorns and saw again that Geist's rebuttal to the Nature editorial was been run out there as ammo to keep the 4/5 rule.

Why do people think Geist would favor 4/5's over full curl based on his writings including that rebuttal?

Uh, cause Geist calls out Coltman's and Bianchet's genetic harm research conclusions as bull crud.... ?

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Uh, cause Geist calls out Coltman's and Bianchet's genetic harm research conclusions as bull crud.... ?

So because he disagrees with their research you conclude he is therefore against full curl? I've read everything he has written on the subject of sheep that I could get my hands on, several times over, and I would be very much surprised if he is not in favour of a full curl restriction or some form of change that keeps us from harvesting so many younger class rams. I would love to hear his opinion on the matter as he is probably the greatest thinker on the subject so far imo.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bdub

So because he disagrees with their research you conclude he is therefore against full curl? I've read everything he has written on the subject of sheep that I could get my hands on, several times over, and I would be very much surprised if he is not in favour of a full curl restriction or some form of change that keeps us from harvesting so many younger class rams. I would love to hear his opinion on the matter as he is probably the greatest thinker on the subject so far imo.

There are two claims of concern offered by those within F&W that support the full curl proposal, Low Legal ram (4/5) percentages in some SMAs and hunting induced genetic selection. Geist gave his opinion many times in reference to the hunting induced genetic selection claim, including in this response to the Nature article. Geist repeatedly refutes the genetic harm research and theory behind it when applied to the Alberta sheep meta-population. I would say that Geist has given his opinion, the genetic harm claim is false and thus any regulatory changes based on this claim are unwarranted.

Geist's colleague in many of his sheep studies is a biologist named Bill Wishart. Based on the writings of both these researchers, it would be strange to admire one and not the other as they are very like minded. Bill attended the last sheep meeting to express his opposition for the full curl regulation based on the ram% and genetic harm reasonings....

[SLH]

If I'm reading the rebuttal right he says they tested a theory and got the results they were looking for, now the test should be to put it back the way it was. He says it will come back hence why he does not believe in genetic harm. Fish and wildlife have also backed away from the genetic harm theory (ask a bio) but they still have issues with to few rams making the hunting season and smaller rams over all. (I'm sure some of you have crunched the numbers).

Wishart is a great mind and he has his ppoints as well and we have to incorporate his expertise as well. The thing here though is that if you believe we're at carring capacity we need evidence. Degraded range, low birthrates... do we? Anyway back to Geist

His recipe for a trophy sheep management strategy goes something like this;

Keep ram harvest below 3/4 of replacement (below 8 percent total)

Harvest old rams 10 years or older probably full curl

Keep females below carring capacity (Wishart type stuff)

Shoot for a natural age distribution in the herd and remove poor quality rams that are small bodied and small horned (some genetic manipulation stuff there).

Improve habitat where needed and keep herds on historic ranges by not disturbing them.

I truly believe there is a belief that genetic harm is the same as hunter induced selection. The genetics can be fine but still express an"inferior" trophy animal.

Anyway I still haven't seen where Geist favors 4/5 over full curl and as yet no one has shown me otherwise.

[Ryry4]

Originally Posted by bdub

Well somebody is finding full curl Rams in that tiny zone according to the harvest data. I agree some may broom off and never reach full curl but many will broom off and make it as well.

A very small few.

People need to be talking about improving habitat and predator control.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Ryry4

A very small few.

Originally Posted by Ryry4

People need to be talking about improving habitat and predator control.

I guess it depends on what you call very few. Several seasons have seen 8 full curl rams per year come out. The average is probably close to 6 a year out of a very small zone, a zone you could walk end to end in a day or two and across in one. What is even more significant is the number of trophy rams being seen post season, well over the sheep management plans original goal of 5%. We are seeing numbers double the goal. How do we explain those numbers on predators and habitat.

No doubt there is work to do on habitat everywhere and predator problems in places, but to try and blame them for us being sub 5% for years and in almost every zone is just sticking our collective heads in the sand in regards to this problem especially when you see the results in 400?

[mountainascent]

So why is the average age of rams harvested in WMU400 lower than the provincial average if full curl is working so well??

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by mountainascent

So why is the average age of rams harvested in WMU400 lower than the provincial average if full curl is working so well??

It isn't. Since the full curl rule in SMA1 was implemented the average harvested age increased right along the provincial average. What many people have not accounted for is that SMA1 was the greatest contributor or 4,5 year old rams in the provincial harvest. With both the population crash in the 80's and the full curl rule in '95 these young rams "Disappeared" from the harvest stats, which some are now screaming as evidence of "Hunting induced Genetic Selecetion"....

SMA is experiencing the same ram horn growth/age conditions experienced elsewhere in the province. Since 1995 (full curl rule), rams are taking longer to become legal and the average horn length is getting shorter.... SMA1 sheep populations have flatlined, there is no population growth. Even under the full curl rule we are seeing signs of density dependance issues.... The only thing full curl regs do is stockpile lots of mature but illegal rams, keeping hunting harvest well under sustainable harvest levels....

Originally Posted by bdub

[B]

I guess it depends on what you call very few. Several seasons have seen 8 full curl rams per year come out. The average is probably close to 6 a year out of a very small zone, a zone you could walk end to end in a day or two and across in one. What is even more significant is the number of trophy rams being seen post season, well over the sheep management plans original goal of 5%. We are seeing numbers double the goal. How do we explain those numbers on predators and habitat.

No doubt there is work to do on habitat everywhere and predator problems in places, but to try and blame them for us being sub 5% for years and in almost every zone is just sticking our collective heads in the sand in regards to this problem especially when you see the results in 400?

SMA1 harvest has crashed the last couple of years, just four rams in the last two years, less than 1% of the population. This is 1/3rd of the sustainable harvest level.... These few legal full curl rams are also taking longer to reach legal age and have shorter horns....

SMA1 since '95 has shown the classic signs of a herd under carrying capacity reaching stagnation.... This herd has stopped growing. Even Jon Jorgenson is calling for a ewe harvest here to get the herd back under carrying capacity. But now Jorgenson has to explain how to justify a ewe harvest due to population levels when the mature ram component is nearly 11% of the population and he still wants the full curl rule. lol....

SMA 1 is turning out to be a great example of why the full curl regulation does not work, unless your desire is to eliminate hunting harvest opportunity.

[kujoseto]

I know very little on this subject, or where people get all their info on it, but I certainly think that if mountainascent has an accurate claim, that question has some great insight. To take it further, it would be interesting to note the % of harvested 400 rams that are broomed off compared to % of harvested rams in the rest of the province that are broomed off. I think that could be interesting data alongside the average age mountainascent mentioned.

Edit: I left my reply open on my phone really long and wb already stated the age claim is inaccurate...I have no idea if it is or isn't

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by kujoseto

I know very little on this subject, or where people get all their info on it, but I certainly think that if mountainascent has an accurate claim, that question has some great insight. To take it further, it would be interesting to note the % of harvested 400 rams that are broomed off compared to % of harvested rams in the rest of the province that are broomed off. I think that could be interesting data alongside the average age mountainascent mentioned.

Edit: I left my reply open on my phone really long and wb already stated the age claim is inaccurate...I have no idea if it is or isn't

My information is from analysis of the provincial harvest data.

From '71-94 the median average age of a ram harvested in SMA1 was 6 yrs old. This average was a statistical flatline for the 23 years of data. After the full curl rule was implemented the first year of harvest in 2001 through 2014 the average age increased from 6.8 to 8.4 yrs on the median. Horn length has remained the same.

FYI, provincial data does not account for booming, which will obviously skew the data from from actual total horn growth when modelled for analysis.... another reason why the claims of genetic harm research is invalid.

[kujoseto]

You seem very knowledgeable and up to date with many issues. Are there places you are involved in bringing the voice of hunters to conservation? Do you have suggestions on what we all could do to improve things?

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

It isn't. Since the full curl rule in SMA1 was implemented the average harvested age increased right along the provincial average. What many people have not accounted for is that SMA1 was the greatest contributor or 4,5 year old rams in the provincial harvest. With both the population crash in the 80's and the full curl rule in '95 these young rams "Disappeared" from the harvest stats, which some are now screaming as evidence of "Hunting induced Genetic Selecetion"....

SMA is experiencing the same ram horn growth/age conditions experienced elsewhere in the province. Since 1995 (full curl rule), rams are taking longer to become legal and the average horn length is getting shorter.... SMA1 sheep populations have flatlined, there is no population growth. Even under the full curl rule we are seeing signs of density dependance issues.... The only thing full curl regs do is stockpile lots of mature but illegal rams, keeping hunting harvest well under sustainable harvest levels....

Are you saying horn length of harvested Rams in 400 is shorter since implementing full curl? Really? In one sentence you say it has remained the same and in another it has decreased. A better measure would be horn mass or some measure that accounts for brooming. Perhaps BC scoring.

The population has flatlined, no growth. This point can be argued to apply to the entire province, not just 400. It is a habitat issue. Forest encroachment etc has kept the entire provinces sheep population at the same level for years. We can do a couple things to improve herd health. Burn some bush to expand habitat or increase the ewe harvest to keep the herd under carrying capacity (yet folks are screaming and hollering we have to much predation.)


SMA1 harvest has crashed the last couple of years, just four rams in the last two years, less than 1% of the population. This is 1/3rd of the sustainable harvest level.... These few legal full curl rams are also taking longer to reach legal age and have shorter horns....

Two seasons are now the new trend? Ok. How about several previous seasons of 8 Rams a year? Harvest level/Hunter success varies due to several factors, sheep hunting isn't shooting cattle in the pasture.

SMA1 since '95 has shown the classic signs of a herd under carrying capacity reaching stagnation.... This herd has stopped growing. Even Jon Jorgenson is calling for a ewe harvest here to get the herd back under carrying capacity. But now Jorgenson has to explain how to justify a ewe harvest due to population levels when the mature ram component is nearly 11% of the population and he still wants the full curl rule. lol....

I agree with this point and think it applies virtually province wide. We need to keep the herd under carrying capacity thru hunting of ewes or habitat expansion if we want healthy vigorous sheep herds. Another advantage of having mature Rams left over post season ( something lacking in the rest of the provinces) is they lead younger Rams away from the ewes winter range so they don't compete with them for limited feed at that time.

SMA 1 is turning out to be a great example of why the full curl regulation does not work, unless your desire is to eliminate hunting harvest opportunity.

Fear mongering, tinfoil hat stuff.