Sheep Question

[bdub]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Full curl is not a solution...but a step in the direction between today and full draw....and perhaps no sheep hunting!

It all depends how far you can see and read between the lines!

You know what Peter you are so wrong on that account. It's the only thing standing between us and draw now. I got hope that you will see the truth of what is happening some day soon.

Status quo we go on draw sooner or later. Manage the herd on a scientific basis like Geist says and we stay off draw but have a few lean years ahead. Open your eyes guys and don't let the KCs, RCs and WBs etc push us down the road of draw and screwed up sheep herds.

[bdub]

Bump this letter because it is important for our sheep herd.

To ***** ***********

Dear *****,

Sorry, I am behind on all mail. As to the Alberta problems with bighorns: I am in the not-so-happy position of saying: I TOLD YOU SO!
Managing for ¾ curls is very bad, and it defies science. Yes, you read me right: it's unscientific! It defies what your managing biologists should know about bighorn sheep biology, but obviously do not. Maybe they do not even care. And what I am say in is nothing new. I wrote it down in clinical detail and it was published over 40 years ago, but your mangers do not read, so you and your colleagues will have to do it for them. Forget all the trendy questions that are being raised. The case is of brutal simplicity and hinges on some basic facts about bighorn sheep biology.
Here is a bit of history: over 40 years ago, bighorns contientally were in trouble. The Boone & Crockett Club called a meeting of interested parties in Missoula, and yours truly was given the honor of making a key note address on the management of mountain sheep. I did that in clinical detail, and it was published – but largely in vain because so many biologists simply do not read. I re-read it and I would not change a word! So, my problem is how to get it into your hands. And I suggest you and several of your colleagues read it, and discuss it so that you are prepared. (See pp. 77-97 in James B. Trefethen, Editor, The Wild Sheep in Modern North America. Boone & Crockett Club. V. Geist, On the management of mountain sheep: Theoretical considerations).
The gist of it all is that if you kill off your old rams, and with a ¾ curl rule you kill off ALL the old and the most active breeding rams as well, leaving sub-2/4 curl youngsters. These take over the rut. However, because there are nor older rams to thwart the enhanced activity of the youngsters, they go overboard chasing ewes, fighting and utterly exhausting themselves. LARGE RAMS PREVENT THAT. When the – totally - exhausted youngsters enter the hard winter ahead, they suffer exhaustion- mortality. THEIR MORTALITY GOES UP! You have set in motion a ram-killing machinery, depleting rams. The result is fewer rams, poor body growth and poor horn growth. In short, with a 3.4 curl regulation hunters kill FEWER rams than with a full curl regulation – besides damaging rams. If that is a smart way of managing sheep, you better define the meaning of smart.
And I will make you a bet: your managing biologists do not even know about the above. Try them! The one who does know, who actually studied what the full curl rule did is Wayne Heimer from Alaska. And it works like a charm. You retain reasonably natural populations, and horn size does not decrease. Invite him to speak!
So, in addition to shrinking horn-size due to poorer body growth, you also have the negative selection effect of vigorous rams being quickly eliminated by hunters as soon as they turn legal. Nothing controversial here either – at least not from the perspective of wild sheep biology or science. Nothing new to history either, because the effect of reduced trophy size due to hunter selection was experienced – and remidiated! - in Europe over and over again. You read me right: REMIDIATED. This decade old mismanagement in Alberta can be REVERSED. However, it will take time and there is not guarantee that ignorance will not triumph once again.
When I was active in Alberta my views on management were not heeded, so I have no illusions that they will be in the future, and I predict you will see wasted a lot of time on irrelevant questions. Poor sheep!
What I can do for you is first of all get into your hands – somehow – a copy of that summary paper on sheep management. Read it, please, preferably with several buddies. Secondly, you can always e-mail me or call on the phone. It's difficult for me to get away as somebody needs to look after this place in my absence. Please say a warm hello to my old friend and comrade in arms, Bill Wishart.
Before I sign off, I would like to make yo aware of what science does when applied. Said conference in Missoula tried to answer, in part, why sheep failed to spread to available habitat. The short answer is that young sheep do not explore a place to live as do deer or moose, but rely closely on a tradition of using specific habitat patches as passed on by the the female to her daughter, or full curled rams to younger rams. There is no option but to place sheep yourself on the mountains, which was done, increasing by 2000 the sheep population by nearly 50%. It could have been better had one introduced them smartly, as – independently – Tom Bergerud did with 19 populations of Newfoundland caribou, however, I will not quibble. This policy of course flooded the Boone & Crockett club with record heads, for obvious reasons.
The only other time when your's truly had a say was via a wonderful graduate student I had called Mrs. Beth MacCallum. She is the genius behind creating custom mountain sheep habitat from a strip mine near Hinton. We had a chance to put into practice our knowledge about mountain sheep. The weight of females doubled with in 15 years. It generated the largest bighorn rams in North America seen since the end of the Pleistocene. When you see somebody grinning over a huge Alberta record ram, remember where it came from. Did your Alberta mangers appreciate it? Did they? We created a virile oasis of life there. Are any more mines being rehabilitated in to superior wildlife let alone superior bighorn habitat? And if not, why not?
I mention the above case because if you act on knowledge, real knowledge, the knowledge we justly call science, the knowledge you get from detailed, ongoing field observations, as well as a contrast to history, well you get results. And the ¾ curl rule is based on ignorance!
Sincerely, Val Geist

[WildernessWanderer]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Full curl is not a solution...but a step in the direction between today and full draw....and perhaps no sheep hunting!

It all depends how far you can see and read between the lines!

Please share your insight.

[ram crazy]

We haven't hunted 3/4 curl Rams for a long time, and isn't most of the breeding done by the 3-4 yr. old sheep. I think Eastman had some films out that even stated that. As for Cadomin having bigger sheep isn't it more about genetics and habitat that is responsible for that. So what some of you guys are saying is that by putting the entire province on full curl is going to produce massive Rams everywhere in this province, heck I'm all in if we are going to have big Rams running all over the mountains. Is BC on full curl and how many Rams do they have in the book. Where did the montana River break Rams come from, wasn't it Cadomin?

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

We haven't hunted 3/4 curl Rams for a long time, and isn't most of the breeding done by the 3-4 yr. old sheep. I think Eastman had some films out that even stated that. As for Cadomin having bigger sheep isn't it more about genetics and habitat that is responsible for that. So what some of you guys are saying is that by putting the entire province on full curl is going to produce massive Rams everywhere in this province, heck I'm all in if we are going to have big Rams running all over the mountains. Is BC on full curl and how many Rams do they have in the book. Where did the montana River break Rams come from, wasn't it Cadomin?

I am going to ask you to read this if you missed it, the answers are right there:

To ***** ***********

Dear *****,

Sorry, I am behind on all mail. As to the Alberta problems with bighorns: I am in the not-so-happy position of saying: I TOLD YOU SO!
Managing for ¾ curls is very bad, and it defies science. Yes, you read me right: it's unscientific! It defies what your managing biologists should know about bighorn sheep biology, but obviously do not. Maybe they do not even care. And what I am say in is nothing new. I wrote it down in clinical detail and it was published over 40 years ago, but your mangers do not read, so you and your colleagues will have to do it for them. Forget all the trendy questions that are being raised. The case is of brutal simplicity and hinges on some basic facts about bighorn sheep biology.
Here is a bit of history: over 40 years ago, bighorns contientally were in trouble. The Boone & Crockett Club called a meeting of interested parties in Missoula, and yours truly was given the honor of making a key note address on the management of mountain sheep. I did that in clinical detail, and it was published – but largely in vain because so many biologists simply do not read. I re-read it and I would not change a word! So, my problem is how to get it into your hands. And I suggest you and several of your colleagues read it, and discuss it so that you are prepared. (See pp. 77-97 in James B. Trefethen, Editor, The Wild Sheep in Modern North America. Boone & Crockett Club. V. Geist, On the management of mountain sheep: Theoretical considerations).
The gist of it all is that if you kill off your old rams, and with a ¾ curl rule you kill off ALL the old and the most active breeding rams as well, leaving sub-2/4 curl youngsters. These take over the rut. However, because there are nor older rams to thwart the enhanced activity of the youngsters, they go overboard chasing ewes, fighting and utterly exhausting themselves. LARGE RAMS PREVENT THAT. When the – totally - exhausted youngsters enter the hard winter ahead, they suffer exhaustion- mortality. THEIR MORTALITY GOES UP! You have set in motion a ram-killing machinery, depleting rams. The result is fewer rams, poor body growth and poor horn growth. In short, with a 3.4 curl regulation hunters kill FEWER rams than with a full curl regulation – besides damaging rams. If that is a smart way of managing sheep, you better define the meaning of smart.
And I will make you a bet: your managing biologists do not even know about the above. Try them! The one who does know, who actually studied what the full curl rule did is Wayne Heimer from Alaska. And it works like a charm. You retain reasonably natural populations, and horn size does not decrease. Invite him to speak!
So, in addition to shrinking horn-size due to poorer body growth, you also have the negative selection effect of vigorous rams being quickly eliminated by hunters as soon as they turn legal. Nothing controversial here either – at least not from the perspective of wild sheep biology or science. Nothing new to history either, because the effect of reduced trophy size due to hunter selection was experienced – and remidiated! - in Europe over and over again. You read me right: REMIDIATED. This decade old mismanagement in Alberta can be REVERSED. However, it will take time and there is not guarantee that ignorance will not triumph once again.
When I was active in Alberta my views on management were not heeded, so I have no illusions that they will be in the future, and I predict you will see wasted a lot of time on irrelevant questions. Poor sheep!
What I can do for you is first of all get into your hands – somehow – a copy of that summary paper on sheep management. Read it, please, preferably with several buddies. Secondly, you can always e-mail me or call on the phone. It's difficult for me to get away as somebody needs to look after this place in my absence. Please say a warm hello to my old friend and comrade in arms, Bill Wishart.
Before I sign off, I would like to make yo aware of what science does when applied. Said conference in Missoula tried to answer, in part, why sheep failed to spread to available habitat. The short answer is that young sheep do not explore a place to live as do deer or moose, but rely closely on a tradition of using specific habitat patches as passed on by the the female to her daughter, or full curled rams to younger rams. There is no option but to place sheep yourself on the mountains, which was done, increasing by 2000 the sheep population by nearly 50%. It could have been better had one introduced them smartly, as – independently – Tom Bergerud did with 19 populations of Newfoundland caribou, however, I will not quibble. This policy of course flooded the Boone & Crockett club with record heads, for obvious reasons.
The only other time when your's truly had a say was via a wonderful graduate student I had called Mrs. Beth MacCallum. She is the genius behind creating custom mountain sheep habitat from a strip mine near Hinton. We had a chance to put into practice our knowledge about mountain sheep. The weight of females doubled with in 15 years. It generated the largest bighorn rams in North America seen since the end of the Pleistocene. When you see somebody grinning over a huge Alberta record ram, remember where it came from. Did your Alberta mangers appreciate it? Did they? We created a virile oasis of life there. Are any more mines being rehabilitated in to superior wildlife let alone superior bighorn habitat? And if not, why not?
I mention the above case because if you act on knowledge, real knowledge, the knowledge we justly call science, the knowledge you get from detailed, ongoing field observations, as well as a contrast to history, well you get results. And the ¾ curl rule is based on ignorance!
Sincerely, Val Geist

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Full curl is not a solution...but a step in the direction between today and full draw....and perhaps no sheep hunting!

It all depends how far you can see and read between the lines!

You truly are wrong in your assumptions Peter.

You wouldn't believe me many posts back when I said Geist was in favor of a full curl regulation, and for good reason. Now that I have proven it to you, twice, you start in with the anti hunting bull****. Read between the lines all you want, maybe you should be looking at and asking why the WSFA would hide the opinion of one of our most respected sheep biologist's?

Maybe it is time you start reading the lines instead of trying to read between them. Geist is not anti hunting as much as you would like to believe he is. Read what was posted, try and understand it. Geist is far more knowledgeable on the subject than you are no matter what you say.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by crazy_davey

I am going to ask you to read this if you missed it, the answers are right there:

He published something 40 yrs. ago when there was the 3/4 rule for hunting. We then changed the regs to 4/5 and the numbers have stabilized within those 40 yrs. give or take a few SMA's, but overall they have been good. I ask you this what has happened to his sheep River herd where he did some of his studies don't forget there is no hunting in the Sheep River sanctuary.

[Roughneck Country]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

We haven't hunted 3/4 curl Rams for a long time, and isn't most of the breeding done by the 3-4 yr. old sheep. I think Eastman had some films out that even stated that. As for Cadomin having bigger sheep isn't it more about genetics and habitat that is responsible for that. So what some of you guys are saying is that by putting the entire province on full curl is going to produce massive Rams everywhere in this province, heck I'm all in if we are going to have big Rams running all over the mountains. Is BC on full curl and how many Rams do they have in the book. Where did the montana River break Rams come from, wasn't it Cadomin?

My understanding is that Cadomine is just a bunch of bush rams not genetically superior in any way, it is just high quality feed that has allowed them to grow like they do.

[Diamondhitch]

No time to post right now but here is my data compilation. This includes all LEGALLY KILLED rams during the specified periods. Pickups, road kills and out of season native kills are not included.

See what you think and I will post my thoughts later.

Enjoy.

BTW sorry for the crappy pdf. This is much easier to follow in excel.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by crazy_davey

So recently I emailed Dr. Valerius Geist to ask him his current opinion on the subject. He stated to me that he recently sent an email to WSFA and in his words he called it a very blunt response. He sent it to me and I asked him if I had his permission to post it here.

Here was his response:

So here it is exactly as he sent it to me, name omitted:

I would have to wonder why this was not posted on the WSFA website for all to read.

You do realize that Geist is talking about the 3/4 curl rule?

Geist did not make one comment regarding 4/5 vs full curl regulations.


Your actions show either a very poor understanding of what Geist wrote or a very poor attempt to baffle by BS, but either way, this is now expected from you and your "source"....

[Xbolthunter]

I have a question what does 4/5 curl mean? I no the antlers have to have a straight line from base to eye and tip has to be beyond that point to be legal correct? Sorry first time sheep hunting

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

My understanding is that Cadomine is just a bunch of bush rams not genetically superior in any way, it is just high quality feed that has allowed them to grow like they do.

And Cadomin is one area showing signs of concern. The population has dropped significantly along with poor recruitment over the last few years. Yet another example of a previously young vigorous herd while under carrying capacity now reaching maturity and showing density dependance effects resulting in a decline of overall herd health, and horn size.

It's ok though, just let the wolves solve the problem, no human intervention is allowed with the new compassionate sheep management plan.

[Diamondhitch]

Harvest Observations: 2000-2014 (not all zones were affected equally by any perceived trends)

1) Number of rams harvested was steady before 2000 and has dropped steadily since.
2) Number of rams harvested in most SMAs was highest at the end of el nino’.
3) Age and size of rams in most SMAs was highest at the tail end and just following el nino’.
4) Historically there were a few 3yr old rams taken but none were recorded in this period.
5) No rams over 12yrs old recorded in southern zones. Many rams up to 15yrs old recorded in northern zones.
6) Only 3 rams taken in SMA5.

Harvest Observations: Full curl zones Pre-Post full curl legislation.
1) Only 2 rams ever killed in WMU 302.
2) No rams killed in WMU 302 since 1978.
3) Average age of rams increased post full curl. In WMU 400 pre full curl was below provincial average. Now = provincial average.
4) Average size of rams increased post full curl.
5) Average size of rams taken from each age class increased post full curl.
6) Only 1 ram was killed in the 6 years following full curl legislation.
7) Average number of rams taken dropped by 50% post full curl (after initial 6yr adjustment period).

Horn Growth Observations: 1971-2014

1) Base diameter is a poor indicator of age, 3rd ¼ diameter would be more indicative of older rams.
2) Average size of horns has decreased steadily, both in length and base.
3) Provincially the largest number of registrations are 6yr old sheep. SMAs from 4b south are at least 1 year older with SMAs 2-3 being 2 yrs older.
4) Average size of bases decreases with age of rams harvested.

All the above are facts taken directly from harvest records without bias. What they mean is open to interpretation.



My thoughts:

1) Full curl regs definitely reduce hunter success but I think most would agree that the opportunity to hunt, regardless of chance of success, is more important than higher odds to harvest on a draw only regime. For most sheep hunters it is a culture and more about the hunt than the kill, which is why we pass young rams for years, patiently waiting for that monster and why even the 1 timers are willing to hunt for 10-12 years in some cases just to take 1 ram. The right to hunt each season is worth it.
2) The goal is to harvest older rams, which full curl regs have proven to do. However it appears that this reg culls rams with the greatest horn potential at a younger age and therefore their chance of breeding is less. As an alternative to full curl, maybe the minimum could be one horn that is at least 4/5 curl and broomed. The other side could be either broomed too short or long with a lamb tip, the horn used for judging legal would be the longest broomed horn. This should nearly eliminate 4-5 year old rams and most 6 yr old rams from the legal pool and satisfy both those wanting older rams and those who worry about rams that will never reach full curl.
3) As far as records keeping goes, F&W should start recording 3rd ¼ measurements to give a far more accurate picture of horn size. After all a 34” ram with 14.5” bases and 11” 3rd ¼ measurements is far bigger than a 38” ram with a 7” 3rd ¼ measurement no matter how big his bases are. Years ago I killed a 36”x15 ½” 11 yr old ram that by those measurements would sound like a book (or close to it) ram, he scored 163 and had lamb tips. A 3rd ¼ measurement would paint the correct picture of that inferior ram and identify any trend that may occur towards that type of genetic.

A the end of the day I want to be able to hunt a healthy herd of sheep whenever I choose, regardless of what that does to my chance of success. No draw!!!!!!!!!!

[Diamondhitch]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

And Cadomin is one area showing signs of concern. The population has dropped significantly along with poor recruitment over the last few years. Yet another example of a previously young vigorous herd while under carrying capacity now reaching maturity and showing density dependance effects resulting in a decline of overall herd health, and horn size.

It's ok though, just let the wolves solve the problem, no human intervention is allowed with the new compassionate sheep management plan.

Upper Rock Creek is a perfect example of what an expanding population can do. The horn growth on those rams while establishing was phenomenal! 4 yr old 190s, and those sheep came from us.

Cadomin is a bit of a golem. What do you do? They were seriously overpopulated with nowhere anywhere near as good to go so why leave? Cant hunt on the mine. Opening the mine up for hunting may drive them back up into the mountains and we know there is not enough habitat for them there.

Many mini-Cadomins throughout the sheep range would allow the herd to really thrive. Can you imagine what allowing just 5% of the high country to go to grass would do?

Give em plenty of food (greatly reduced in overmature forest) and they will grow big and thrive.
Let em live long enough to breed and pass on learned social patterns and they will thrive.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

You do realize that Geist is talking about the 3/4 curl rule?

Geist did not make one comment regarding 4/5 vs full curl regulations.


Your actions show either a very poor understanding of what Geist wrote or a very poor attempt to baffle by BS, but either way, this is now expected from you and your "source"....

If you can't grasp what Geist is saying here there isn't much hope for you to ever get it. Your understanding is the one that is lacking.

Do you miss exactly who the source is?

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bdub

If you can't grasp what Geist is saying here there isn't much hope for you to ever get it. Your understanding is the one that is lacking.

Do you miss exactly who the source is?

Please point out where in the letter that Geist states any opinion of the 4/5 vs full curl regulations.

Or are you are claiming that Geist meant something different from what he wrote?


Geist is talking about the general season 3/4 rule regulation, which we moved away from in 1968....





I know, I know... Geist's letter doesn't actually fit with what you wanted and claimed for it to say. Now it is time for you to squirm out of the hole you guys dug for yourselves.

Man this is funny. You guys got all excited about intercepting a private letter from Geist then started this thread with a big show of mystery and the promise of a big finish. But nope, you guys screwed up understanding the letter. Pizzed on your own firecracker.



Oh, many know the identity of the "Source".

[crazy_davey]

That email came from Geist to me yesterday as we were having an email conversation about this very topic. I personally asked his permission to post it and he said yes.

Please, ask Geist about it. If anyone cares to ask him if he sent that to me yesterday I will send you his email address. There is no source other than the man himself. I have nothing to hide about this, if I did I never would have posted it.

[bdub]

WB you should do a little lessand a little more. Why don't you write Mr Geist about his thoughts. I'm willing to wager you will be disappointed with his reply.

[ram crazy]

What makes you think Geist is God on sheep, when he is still stuck in the past with 3/4 curl. Maybe it time to start thinking outside the box.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

What makes you think Geist is God on sheep, when he is still stuck in the past with 3/4 curl. Maybe it time to start thinking outside the box.

Oh brother. You guys on this side of the debate are unreal. You go on to attack any and every biologist that doesn't agree with your opinion. Yet you will listen to the nonsense coming from WB et al. I suppose WB is the God on Sheep in your opinion. Perhaps we should manage our wildlife by popular opinion instead of science? That would be really outside the box. Exactly what box do you think we should be looking out of? Please continue.

[Don K]

Honestly, what's the diference between a 3/4 and 4/5ths ram...

In the past we had a 4pt rule for Mule deer and a 3pt rule for Whitetail. The difference between 3/4 and 4/5ths is like a 3pt Whitetail and a 3.25pt Whitetail. Not much, and it likely doesn't change a thing!

Full curl makes a lot more sense. The logic seems much better to go in that direction. I think greedy hunters and guys that just want to whack something are the ones that fight this. Maybe the answer is to go general full curl with a limited entry draw for a few 4/5th rams?

Reinstituting a bouny on wolves, upping cougar allocations and controlled burns (or let wild fires burn when safe to do so) would make a huge difference.

Following these threads on sheep and staying mostly on the sidelines it's funny how intense and ingrained some of the opinions are.

Alas this topic along with CWD, natives, shooting 'to many' does, and SRD mismanagement are things we will argue about and never all see eye to eye on!!

[Roughneck Country]

Originally Posted by Diamondhitch

Harvest Observations: 2000-2014 (not all zones were affected equally by any perceived trends)

1) Number of rams harvested was steady before 2000 and has dropped steadily since.
2) Number of rams harvested in most SMAs was highest at the end of el nino’.
3) Age and size of rams in most SMAs was highest at the tail end and just following el nino’.
4) Historically there were a few 3yr old rams taken but none were recorded in this period.
5) No rams over 12yrs old recorded in southern zones. Many rams up to 15yrs old recorded in northern zones.
6) Only 3 rams taken in SMA5.

Harvest Observations: Full curl zones Pre-Post full curl legislation.
1) Only 2 rams ever killed in WMU 302.
2) No rams killed in WMU 302 since 1978.
3) Average age of rams increased post full curl. In WMU 400 pre full curl was below provincial average. Now = provincial average.
4) Average size of rams increased post full curl.
5) Average size of rams taken from each age class increased post full curl.
6) Only 1 ram was killed in the 6 years following full curl legislation.
7) Average number of rams taken dropped by 50% post full curl (after initial 6yr adjustment period).

Horn Growth Observations: 1971-2014

1) Base diameter is a poor indicator of age, 3rd ¼ diameter would be more indicative of older rams.
2) Average size of horns has decreased steadily, both in length and base.
3) Provincially the largest number of registrations are 6yr old sheep. SMAs from 4b south are at least 1 year older with SMAs 2-3 being 2 yrs older.
4) Average size of bases decreases with age of rams harvested.

All the above are facts taken directly from harvest records without bias. What they mean is open to interpretation.



My thoughts:

1) Full curl regs definitely reduce hunter success but I think most would agree that the opportunity to hunt, regardless of chance of success, is more important than higher odds to harvest on a draw only regime. For most sheep hunters it is a culture and more about the hunt than the kill, which is why we pass young rams for years, patiently waiting for that monster and why even the 1 timers are willing to hunt for 10-12 years in some cases just to take 1 ram. The right to hunt each season is worth it.
2) The goal is to harvest older rams, which full curl regs have proven to do. However it appears that this reg culls rams with the greatest horn potential at a younger age and therefore their chance of breeding is less. As an alternative to full curl, maybe the minimum could be one horn that is at least 4/5 curl and broomed. The other side could be either broomed too short or long with a lamb tip, the horn used for judging legal would be the longest broomed horn. This should nearly eliminate 4-5 year old rams and most 6 yr old rams from the legal pool and satisfy both those wanting older rams and those who worry about rams that will never reach full curl.
3) As far as records keeping goes, F&W should start recording 3rd ¼ measurements to give a far more accurate picture of horn size. After all a 34” ram with 14.5” bases and 11” 3rd ¼ measurements is far bigger than a 38” ram with a 7” 3rd ¼ measurement no matter how big his bases are. Years ago I killed a 36”x15 ½” 11 yr old ram that by those measurements would sound like a book (or close to it) ram, he scored 163 and had lamb tips. A 3rd ¼ measurement would paint the correct picture of that inferior ram and identify any trend that may occur towards that type of genetic.

A the end of the day I want to be able to hunt a healthy herd of sheep whenever I choose, regardless of what that does to my chance of success. No draw!!!!!!!!!!

You should read the results of the full curl rule in BC. It increased average age by under 1 year. There is a good research paper on it you can find online

[mad mountain mike]

Originally Posted by Don K

Full curl makes a lot more sense. The logic seems much better to go in that direction. I think greedy hunters and guys that just want to whack something are the ones that fight this

Don I'm not sure that sheep hunters who are against full curl are necessarily greedy but more concerned about the short leap from full curl to full draw.

[Keeleclimber]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

You should read the results of the full curl rule in BC. It increased average age by under 1 year. There is a good research paper on it you can find online

Good point!

The age average for all rams harvested under Alberta's full curl rule is a disappointing 7.2! Thats pitiful!

That tells me full curl does not promote the harvest of older rams.

1) Habitat Enhancement
2) Predator Prey Balance
3) Update our data collection and analysis.

These three items would put Alberta back on the map.
After reading the new sheep management plan draft, our wildlife managers are not interested in the first two points. Right now the Bighorn Sheep greatest threat is the proposed sheep management plan from the AEP.

[Diamondhitch]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

You should read the results of the full curl rule in BC. It increased average age by under 1 year. There is a good research paper on it you can find online

If it is on thinhorns. The biology will be similar but horn curl restrictions can not be simply dumped on bighorns, they grow too differently. A very large percentage of thinhorns die with barely lamb tips brushed off. That would be extremely unusual for a bighorn.

[Diamondhitch]

[QUOTE=Keeleclimber;2881013]Good point!

The age average for all rams harvested under Alberta's full curl rule is a disappointing 7.2! Thats pitiful!...QUOTE]

Agreed, full curl is proving to only slightly increase age by itself and to remove the rams with the best genetics at a younger age. That is why I think a combo of length restriction and broomed horn requirement of some sort makes sense. I also still feel the age based ineligibility period would get many to pass on a younger legal ram in favor of increased future hunting privileges (for himself).

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by crazy_davey

You truly are wrong in your assumptions Peter.

You wouldn't believe me many posts back when I said Geist was in favor of a full curl regulation, and for good reason. Now that I have proven it to you, twice, you start in with the anti hunting bull****. Read between the lines all you want, maybe you should be looking at and asking why the WSFA would hide the opinion of one of our most respected sheep biologist's?

Maybe it is time you start reading the lines instead of trying to read between them. Geist is not anti hunting as much as you would like to believe he is. Read what was posted, try and understand it. Geist is far more knowledgeable on the subject than you are no matter what you say.

Dave, i do read the lines.....i see points on both sides, then i see what i see on the slopes...maybe im luckier than most in the field, because things dont match up... all i was saying is i see full curl a fast track way to full draw...just how im understanding it.... nothing
more.... as far giest, i do respect his work and i never said i was more knowledgable ....

Dave, help me respect you.... plx dont add or put words in my mouth. If you dint understand something i say, ask for clairity.

Originally Posted by mad mountain mike

Don I'm not sure that sheep hunters who are against full curl are necessarily greedy but more concerned about the short leap from full curl to full draw.

Theres a guy who gets it.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Diamondhitch

If it is on thinhorns. The biology will be similar but horn curl restrictions can not be simply dumped on bighorns, they grow too differently. A very large percentage of thinhorns die with barely lamb tips brushed off. That would be extremely unusual for a bighorn.

The data is for BC Rocky Mountain Bighorns.


And the same researchers that are claiming hunting induced genetic selection in Alberta are also calling for greater restrictions on the BC full curl regulations. They want BC to shorten seasons, create more areas off limits to hunting, for more general full curl seasons to go on to a draw, and for current draw seasons to offer fewer licences.

The end goal of this proposed Alberta full curl season is blatantly obvious, to end sheep hunting bit by bit.

The new Alberta Sheep Management Plan Draft is proposing management strategies that will place all Sheep hunting on a draw, along with more areas to be eliminated from any hunting. That's right, the new plan includes thresholds that will place much of our general seasons, even those on a full curl regulation, onto a draw.

Those that thought these researchers would be happy with a general full curl season are sadly mistaken.

Welcome to the new Compassionate Sheep Management model.... no hunting allowed.

[Pixel Shooter]

If people cant stop posting without making it personal, not only will thread go down the tubes but people will be taking a vacation, tired of this crap. how hard it is it , really......

[Justahunter]

Consider this .We currently have nearly 12000 sheep in Alberta. It is estimated that in the 1800`s there was approx. 10000 sheep in Alberta. This is a time when it could be argued that the sheep herd was in a balance NOT affected by man so likely near carrying capacity. That means we have 2000 more then 100 years ago living on the same land base. Except we have lost a lot of habitat to a variety of reasons plus we have had MANAGEMENT. Long story short is MAYBE we are experiencing a habitat issue more then anything.
Do some math but first try to believe that a three day fly over of all of Alberta sheep ranges can be any where near accurate . We are at around 4.5% mature rams for 11750 total pop. Reduce that total pop to 10,000 as in 1850 and we then have a mature ram ratio of nearly 5.3%%. Well within the guidelines. Our problem is not overharvest of Mature Rams ,it may be an underharvest of sheep in a balanced fashion. Let the first timers shoot a sheep. Then if some of them want a BIG sheep great but some of us just want to hunt. BUT most of all I want a system that is honest and legitimate not what we have been getting all along the eastern slopes under the guise of management. Anyone that wants to argue Elk ,Moose ,Deer etc. on the Eastern Slopes are well managed and in fine shape better worry that the same people want to manage the sheep the same way.