24hourcampfire.com
24hourcampfire.com
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Campfire Oracle
Offline
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Wouldn't stop me from making a hole.


If you take the time it takes, it takes less time.
--Pat Parelli

American by birth; Alaskan by choice.
--ironbender
BP-B2

Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 999
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 999
The suplement says fall is tentive and spring is for sure? I thought the bears had taken over? Cant imagine it can be that hard of a hunt?

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Campfire Oracle
Offline
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Fall is tentative because it depends on the level of mortality - DLP, HBC...hit-by-car, mistaken ID, hunting kills, etc. and how close to the mortality allowed by the faulty model that's in place.

The calendar starts fresh in Jan.


If you take the time it takes, it takes less time.
--Pat Parelli

American by birth; Alaskan by choice.
--ironbender
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
But, but, but... they run on a special calendar that starts July 1 for EVERYTHING else!


Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,908
K
Campfire Outfitter
Offline
Campfire Outfitter
K
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 7,908
Originally Posted by kk alaska
Out over $200 again for nothing? Congrats Art! They cancelled the Cow moose hunts and kept the money don,t seem right if my information is right.


F&G is going to refund the money for cancelled Cow moose hunts in SC AK.


kk alaska

Alaska 7 months of winter then 5 months of tourists
IC B2

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Never could understand cow hunts when the population is too low to start...


Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 999
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 999
Originally Posted by ironbender
Fall is tentative because it depends on the level of mortality - DLP, HBC...hit-by-car, mistaken ID, hunting kills, etc. and how close to the mortality allowed by the faulty model that's in place.

The calendar starts fresh in Jan.


Is there any documentation on the registration hunt? The only thing I've seen is the BOG approved the proposal.

I figured the fall hunt was tentative, I believe it has been since this hunt started. I presume the registration hunt will only be held if the harvest quota is higher than the permit number? The F&G also increased the permit numbers by 22, from 15-37. I'm thinking the registration hunt might not happen this year?

I'm not sure I understand the faulty model reference? Why doesn't the harvest rate reflect a large bear population? From the way some talk I should be able to swing a dead cat and hit a bear. smile I like those odds. I've seen a fair number of brownies down there, but not that many. Talked to one guy that spent a lot of time hunting it and never saw one.

I'm going to have fun trying to kill one that's for sure.

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Campfire Oracle
Offline
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
The number of permits for 7 & 15 is 61. That's for DB; 301 (8), 303 (3), 305 (10), 307 (3), 309 (37).

The faulty model reference is to the model from the mat-su being used on the KP in spite of different population dynamics, different human interaction, different topography, different food sources, etc. Other than that, it's a perfect fit.

Getting F&G to loosen up permits and help moose in other ways (wolf reduction) is like pulling teeth, but nearly as tough as getting the refuge to do habitat improvements.

The BOG approved wolf reduction (aerial ungulate enhancement) in 15A and 15C to begin Mar. 1. 15A is to be conducted by the Dept. and 15C is to be conducted by permitted public. From what I have heard, the Dept has not yet moved toward 15A operations nor 15C permitting.

As an aside, I would request folks write to the Governor to require F&G to get this AUE started this winter.

To put that in perspective, the BOG instructed the department to formulate a plan for intensive management of moose and bring that to the BOG. It was sent back 3TIMES before the fourth was acceptable to the board.

The refuge has done a barbwire hair-DNA brown bear population study that the results of which so far has been closely held. A lot of people have been trying for a long time to get F&G to do a true brown bear population study on the KP. F&G does not believe it is necessary in spite of saying that knowing the true population would greatly alter their brown bear management. Even if this study had Dept. support, it estimated to cost about $2M.

Brown bears "can" be hard to find on the western KP for much the same reason that black bear baiting (spring) is important - dense foliage growth. In spite of the aggressive, full-blown charge belief, brownies would just as soon avoid humans.


If you take the time it takes, it takes less time.
--Pat Parelli

American by birth; Alaskan by choice.
--ironbender
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,554
Campfire Ranger
Offline
Campfire Ranger
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 20,554
Originally Posted by Sitka deer
Never could understand cow hunts when the population is too low to start...


Especially this year with all the road and train kills.


That's ok, I'll ass shoot a dink.

Steelhead

Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Campfire Oracle
Offline
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964

Last edited by ironbender; 02/22/12.

If you take the time it takes, it takes less time.
--Pat Parelli

American by birth; Alaskan by choice.
--ironbender
IC B3

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Originally Posted by ironbender


None of which is pertinent to the areas involved...


Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
Campfire Oracle
Offline
Campfire Oracle
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 85,964
OK. I'll assume we were looking at the same 5 lines in a 12 page document.
What is the difference?


If you take the time it takes, it takes less time.
--Pat Parelli

American by birth; Alaskan by choice.
--ironbender
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,241
B
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
B
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,241
As I understand it, the DFG manager has the ability to allow for up to 50 brown bears taken by all means. Of course, dlp's count and also the # of females taken will apply.

With that said, pressure is mounting for the ADFG to apply ALL of the tags...

We shall see?


"You've been here longer than the State of Alaska is old!"
*** my Grandaughters

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Why would they stabilize the population well below the capacity? That is a proven way to allow the forage to outgrow its usefulness for moose...

Reduce hunting pressure on bulls? Hunters in the field are going to do about as much to bulls as antlerless... Maintaining a bull:cow ratio that is badly skewed is more than a little condescending.

Maintain intensive harvest goals??? Like opening an EMERGENCY hunt for bulls in 13 because there were too many moose?!?!? Gaseous colloids into a ticklish orifice comes to mind.

Reduce moose vehicle interaction... Well why not just kill them all if that is how you determine carrying capacity of a given area?

If the population is still way below carrying capacity the last reason does not apply...

Well, that would be how I would respond to the reasons based on the areas where they are giving out cow tags...


Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,973
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,973
Originally Posted by Sitka deer
Why would they stabilize the population well below the capacity? That is a proven way to allow the forage to outgrow its usefulness for moose...

Reduce hunting pressure on bulls? Hunters in the field are going to do about as much to bulls as antlerless... Maintaining a bull:cow ratio that is badly skewed is more than a little condescending.

Maintain intensive harvest goals??? Like opening an EMERGENCY hunt for bulls in 13 because there were too many moose?!?!? Gaseous colloids into a ticklish orifice comes to mind.

Reduce moose vehicle interaction... Well why not just kill them all if that is how you determine carrying capacity of a given area?

If the population is still way below carrying capacity the last reason does not apply...

Well, that would be how I would respond to the reasons based on the areas where they are giving out cow tags...


One thing to bear in mind, is that you can't hold a sub-population at total carry capacity in a northern ecosystem. Another thing to keep in mind, is the productivity of a sub-population based on its composition and, the subsequent behavioral characteristics of a specie based on composition of cohorts within the population. What that all means is, that in a northern ecosystem it's better to manage below carry capacity and to distribute a healthy equilibrium among cohorts in order to have healthy productivity.

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Nice bio-babble, but the fact is the units in the Mat-Su valley are seriously below carrying capacity for an average year. When the population is way down it is time to limit the bull kill to achieve a better bull:cow, not increase the cow kill.

Not enough browsers allows the willows (especially) to outgrow their usefulness as browse and reduce the carrying capacity. As a kid I saw the Knik River flats absolutely covered with moose every winter. We are not within an order of magnitude of those days in the moose population.


Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,973
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,973
Originally Posted by Sitka deer
Nice bio-babble, but the fact is the units in the Mat-Su valley are seriously below carrying capacity for an average year. When the population is way down it is time to limit the bull kill to achieve a better bull:cow, not increase the cow kill.

Not enough browsers allows the willows (especially) to outgrow their usefulness as browse and reduce the carrying capacity. As a kid I saw the Knik River flats absolutely covered with moose every winter. We are not within an order of magnitude of those days in the moose population.


Contrary to what you perceive, it isn't bio-babble. But, the question is; what would you consider an adequate and/or productive bull:cow ratio? I mean, if you reduce the number of bulls, does that thereby make a sub-population more productive and much more healthier? I'd like to know your reasoning on that, to know where in the heck you're coming from in reference to a sub-population's productivity.

Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Campfire Kahuna
Offline
Campfire Kahuna
Joined: Feb 2001
Posts: 50,591
Your earlier bio-babble:
"One thing to bear in mind, is that you can't hold a sub-population at total carry capacity in a northern ecosystem. Another thing to keep in mind, is the productivity of a sub-population based on its composition and, the subsequent behavioral characteristics of a specie based on composition of cohorts within the population. What that all means is, that in a northern ecosystem it's better to manage below carry capacity and to distribute a healthy equilibrium among cohorts in order to have healthy productivity."

As I stated in my post the carrying capacity is determined based on an average winter. Total carrying capacity can be based on a number of factors and can be much higher than average winter numbers. But the bigger question is what does that have to do with the Mat-Su currently? The moose population is no where close to carrying capacity no matter how you calculate it.

As to cohorts and behavioral considerations... Seriously? This is the same outfit that thinks 14A should remain full curl only despite the behavioral evidence to the contrary. Three and four year old rams would not be stressing if there were enough big old rams to keep them in check. Lots of guys were happy to kill 3/4 curl for years before that brainchild came along. And it was known what would happen and it was to be an "experiment" with a sunset clause.

But back to moose... I clearly stated that if the bull:cow ratio is too low you reduce the killing of bulls until you have enough to work with...

When a predator pit is not the issue killing cows to equalize the fact you killed too many bulls is backwards. Killing cows to maintain a healthy population is obviously a great plan... hammering the cows because you bow to public pressure and kill too many bulls is stupid, but par.

Now, when bio-babble does not address the issues extant it simply shows the intent to hide behind language because the facts are not running your way. The language is nowhere near adequate to cover the bullshit.


Mark Begich, Joaquin Jackson, and Heller resistance... Three huge reasons to worry about the NRA.
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,241
B
Campfire Tracker
Offline
Campfire Tracker
B
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 4,241
Point, set, and match to Sitka.

The only time cow hunts were allowed (historically) was when the population was exploding and, in an effort to maintain a less than 30 percent (maximum) bio-mass (browse) destruction by the population, F&G issued the order. It was clear then that the twinning rate and overall size of the less than 36 month animals was suffering. The key words found above are "exploding" and bio-mass destruction."

I certainly do not believe these two events are taking place there today. I cannot believe that the cow hunt is...



"You've been here longer than the State of Alaska is old!"
*** my Grandaughters

Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,973
Campfire Regular
Offline
Campfire Regular
Joined: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,973
Bear Hunter & Odocoileus Fan:

I can appreciate both your concerns about antlerless moose hunts. The hunts are being held because the extrapolated population exceeds carry capacity. That's fact. Carry capacity isn't estimated on an annual basis and never was, so you're wrong in that regard. Population density isn't estimated annually, either, but it is estimated as frequently as possible when late fall weather is optimum for composition counts. Currently, antlerless hunts are based on the most recent data and the most recent data clearly indicates that the extrapolated population exceeds carry capacity. If you have issues with management strategy and/or allocation of resources, make your complaint(s) known to the BOG and stop whining online in a nebulous venue.

Maverick

Page 4 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6

Moderated by  RickBin 

Link Copied to Clipboard
YB23

Who's Online Now
145 members (257 mag, 10Glocks, 300jimmy, 01Foreman400, 10gaugeman, 257robertsimp, 11 invisible), 1,438 guests, and 823 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums81
Topics1,187,590
Posts18,397,904
Members73,815
Most Online11,491
Jul 7th, 2023


 







Fish & Game Departments | Solunar Tables | Mission Statement | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | DMCA
Hunting | Fishing | Camping | Backpacking | Reloading | Campfire Forums | Gear Shop
Copyright © 2000-2024 24hourcampfire.com, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5
(Release build 20201027)
Responsive Width:

PHP: 7.3.33 Page Time: 0.135s Queries: 15 (0.002s) Memory: 0.9074 MB (Peak: 1.0650 MB) Data Comp: Zlib Server Time: 2024-03-28 09:39:58 UTC
Valid HTML 5 and Valid CSS