Moose in Southern Alberta and Science

[Brucekawadi]

My friend wants to take the hunter training course, I said I would lend him my textbook. Then I thought, "gee this book is 10 years old, maybe he should buy a new one with more up to date info". Then I thought that maybe I should buy a new one too, it is always good to have a book to reference rather than whatever some guy writes on wikipedia. So, I found a contact number on this website, http://aheia.com/ , and I asked if my buddy needed a new textbook for the course because mine was rather old. The guy said, "If it is the one with the man and the kid holding a shotgun it is the right textbook." I thought that was rather strange, considering my university textbooks are updated every other year. Then I checked the publication date, 1982 eh, well that explains the moustached men in the illustrations. Moose seem pretty simple, this half page probably sums them up nicely. I guess we know all we need to know about them eh. However, I am priority 15, I know a guy who is priority 18, so, what gives. The moose aren't doing so well it would seem. Maybe we're missing something, we must not be doing so well with the whole conservation thing. Then I had an idea! Maybe, moose are just slow reproducers in comparison to other critters. I checked the textbook, hmm nothing there. I tried the google machine, a bunch of kids web sights. So, I searched the University library database. Looks like someone did some research 6 years ago! Yay science!

so Xu and Boyce (2010), developed a model for moose conservation. Are we using it? If yall can access the article, tell me what you think. Xu and Boyce (2010) seem to report something like a 40% calf mortality rate (citing sources from the 90's and early 2000's). Here is the quote: "When fitting the model, we assumed that approximately 40% of calves were subjected to predation annually before winter aerial surveys (see Ballard and Van Ballenberghe 1998), and considered female and bull mortality by predation or aboriginal harvest to be part of natural mortality." Isnt that incredibly high? They, cite more outdates sources stating that harsh winters and increased predation contribute greatly to population density. It has been so warm castle mountain had to close early last year, grizzly bears are endangered, there is a $500 dollar bounty on wolves in the surrounding counties. Idk what I think, Im not a biologist.

So, why are there so few moose tags given out in western Alberta zones (wmu 400, 402 etc)? Are there just to many hunters now-a-days?


References:
Xu, C., & Boyce, M. S. (2010). Optimal harvesting of moose in alberta. Alces, 46, 15.

[LKILR]

I didn't mind the 17 year wait

[Newview01]

This has puzzled me too. I have hunted up north (ft Mac/fox creek) a few times now, and while there is most certainly moose up there, I did not see near as many as down south from Waterton up to 404 or so. Even in the low 300s there seems to be plenty.

[slopeshunter]

Originally Posted by LKILR

I didn't mind the 17 year wait

That is a beautiful bull. It sucks that we all have to wait so long though.

[LKILR]

If they gave out 40 tags per year instead of 9 then this class of bull might not survive long enough to get that big. Lots of moose in 402? Yes but I don't see a lot of cow calf pairs so make me think mortality rates on calves are high. Not to mention hunting pressure from FN. I'm not sure but I think that nobody keeps a count on how many moose are harvested by FN therefore we cannot manage the populations.So I think that they only allow 10 tags per year in 402.

[jrileyw]

The main reason why it takes so long to be drawn for moose in these zones is they are general elk and whitetail zones and everyone and their relatives gets across the counter tags and applies for moose and mule deer in these same areas. I can't wait for ESRD to put all species on draw in this province. Then possibly everyone will understand the privilege they have to go hunting.

[walking buffalo]

Don't forget that Moose very often have twins. A 40% calf mortality can still effect an overall population growth.


I recall when that paper was released. I even posted a link to it here on AO to highlight the exact quote you used. Except my focus was with the wording used to describe the types of moose mortality.

"When fitting the model, we assumed that approximately 40% of calves were subjected to predation annually before winter aerial surveys (see Ballard and Van Ballenberghe 1998), and considered female and bull mortality by predation or aboriginal harvest to be part of natural mortality."

Now that is a "scientific" perspective that we need to be concerned about.