Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Trapping Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 12-21-2014, 11:33 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicaragua View Post
and really caribou do not live in those habitats- caribou live where few of us go and few other animals.
No kidding! Then explain this.



I photographed that Caribou just a few miles outside the town of Manning, in the middle of farmland.
It's part of a small herd that has been there for many years.

Don't look like no old growth forest to me and it is seen almost every day by a good number of people. In fact these Caribou have on occasion came right into local yards, several days in a row.

See that's the problem with science. It can't seem look beyond the initial research. It seem true enough that their preferred habitat is as you say, old growth forests where few humans go but it seems they can and do adapt to other environments.

And, suggesting that they inhabit areas few other animals utilize is far off the mark. The places where I've seen Woodland Caribou or where I've seen Caribou tracks was some of the most productive trapping areas in the north. Home to surprisingly wide range of animals.

To be fair I've read all the same things you say, in supposedly factual papers. I believe the real truth is that science really knows far less then they think they know.

I do know that these Caribou and for that matter, most of the animals of the north have been studied very little. For example, no one has ever undertaken a study such as Jane Goodall and others have conducted on great apes.
I would go further and say that in comparison, the animals of the north have not been studied at all. The few studies that have been done were very limited in scope and duration.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 12-22-2014, 09:06 AM
Big Grey Wolf Big Grey Wolf is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 6,224
Default caribou

Keg, I believe you can explain the Manning caribou herd being near farm land with the same reason we now have so many elk and moose in farming areas bordering the boreal forest. They have learned that their is limited wolf preditation near the farm sites and usually feed is better.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 12-22-2014, 09:36 AM
Liberman Liberman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 16
Default

Looks to me like Keg and Wolf have solved the caribou problem. They have just moved from the habitat they have used for thousands of years out into farmland and peoples lawns to get away from WOLVES and find better feed. It's convoluted and divisive thinking like this that allows industry and government to do what they want. Not even trappers who are supposed to be those closest to the land can agree to try and save the Smoky herd, instead fly off in a dozen directions that have nothing to do with anything and at best can only add confusion.

Work with the trappers local and Stewart with a single voice and you may be able to accomplish something. The combination of science and SOLID opposition is the only hope. If they get away with the Smoky charade look for the same or worse to continue everywhere else in the province.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 12-22-2014, 10:55 AM
nicaragua nicaragua is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bdub View Post
Thanks for your knowledge and the information posted.

If it is bears preying on caribou calves, which I believe 100%, how many do you think we need to remove to make a difference on calf survival to see an increase the caribou herd? From what I've noticed from working and hunting in the area and talking to others who also spend hundreds of days a year in the area is that grizzly numbers are very, very high.

Do you think the government would consider the research and use it to support reinstating a grizzly hunt to help the caribou or is it a hopeless cause in your opinion? Do we know where the caribou calve and could we target bears just in that area or would that be unworkable?

I believe they also use the area as a dumping ground for problem bears from other areas so that can't be helping.
Well I will share with you what we are working on. We have developed a suite of potential deterrents which we had opportunity to test the delivery system with bears and any other predator that cared to visit.

We designed a caribou calf decoy. it was wired with an electric fence charger and motions sensors to turn the fence unit on or off and to also control a small speaker that sounds like a bleating calf. We also has external speakers that simulated a moose calf in distress. These were placed in the field in places where bears frequented and when a bear touched the decoy he or she got zapped. We tested this from early July through to mid-October. We used trail cams to monitor activity. We has several bears, racoons, fishers, deer and elk visiting our sets. Bears were quite expected response- bite the decoy and get 10000 volts. We believe that this has potential to reduce bear predation and over time could be a highly effective means to alter behaviour. I do believe however that stepping up voltage to the highest pain threshold is important- I personally tyook the 10000The answer is of course range dependent and tied to the combination of moose and bear populations in the area, but they could take up to 60% of moose calves in some ranges. Bears are opportunistic feeders and their behaviour is linked to plant phenology in the spring. Phenology refers to the timing of plant events, so if you have an early spring and popular and aspen flower early, bears have a food source that could distract them from habitats where moose and/or other ungulates may be calving. I did a lot of research on phenology back in the 1970s and we demonstrated over a 19 year period the range in days between early and late spring green up and it was more than 30 days- to foraging wildlife that is a lot.

There is also research from alberta where bears have been shown to be the primary predator of elk calves. A bear does not discriminate a calf of one species from another.

I am going to give you a posting of some videos to watch that were taken by people just out in the bush and the opportunity they had to observe bears in action

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDEW-nIg844

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dLLd5OOgL8Q

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y60doLjqeu0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tfAIQGk2Bh8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xt-Eqrvp4B0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5SqqG_LUss0

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBBmdays-c4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ap4A2A_3WJY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M12HHvXSKno

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7AjLFLeW34

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iCzcazLOUs


If people are interested I can post access to a number of excellent articles on bear predation of calves of all sorts
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 12-22-2014, 11:08 AM
nicaragua nicaragua is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 30
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
No kidding! Then explain this.



I photographed that Caribou just a few miles outside the town of Manning, in the middle of farmland.
It's part of a small herd that has been there for many years.

Don't look like no old growth forest to me and it is seen almost every day by a good number of people. In fact these Caribou have on occasion came right into local yards, several days in a row.

See that's the problem with science. It can't seem look beyond the initial research. It seem true enough that their preferred habitat is as you say, old growth forests where few humans go but it seems they can and do adapt to other environments.

And, suggesting that they inhabit areas few other animals utilize is far off the mark. The places where I've seen Woodland Caribou or where I've seen Caribou tracks was some of the most productive trapping areas in the north. Home to surprisingly wide range of animals.

To be fair I've read all the same things you say, in supposedly factual papers. I believe the real truth is that science really knows far less then they think they know.

I do know that these Caribou and for that matter, most of the animals of the north have been studied very little. For example, no one has ever undertaken a study such as Jane Goodall and others have conducted on great apes.
I would go further and say that in comparison, the animals of the north have not been studied at all. The few studies that have been done were very limited in scope and duration.
That is quite interesting and wildlife never ceases to humble us. There are some woodland caribou groups outside the boreal lowlands that live in association with pine etc, but a mixed land use group as you describe confounds what we appreciate of this species. Caribou for the most part are found in association with habitats that support lichens. I am not talking about old growth forests but the expanses of lowland bogs which are wetlands with stunted black spruce and tamarack. These bogs are very wet and used by many groups year round and others may move to uplands in winter. I am quite interested to learn more about this sub-population. What kind of forest surrounds the farmland there?
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 12-22-2014, 11:10 AM
nicaragua nicaragua is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 30
Default

the software is a little flaky- was working on a reply and it got attached to an old message of mine
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 12-22-2014, 01:48 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nicaragua View Post
That is quite interesting and wildlife never ceases to humble us. There are some woodland caribou groups outside the boreal lowlands that live in association with pine etc, but a mixed land use group as you describe confounds what we appreciate of this species. Caribou for the most part are found in association with habitats that support lichens. I am not talking about old growth forests but the expanses of lowland bogs which are wetlands with stunted black spruce and tamarack. These bogs are very wet and used by many groups year round and others may move to uplands in winter. I am quite interested to learn more about this sub-population. What kind of forest surrounds the farmland there?

From what I know the Manning herd has both, Muskeg, and their preferred food and Lichens. It seems they spend most of their time in a small patch of Muskeg, lowland bog, surrounded by farm fields.
I have not seen this patch myself but my BIL claims they spend most of their time in a bog in the middle of one of his fields. He describes this bog as being about 20 acres in size. The herd is from 10 to 20 animals in number.
There are no forests in the traditional sense anywhere close to them and certainly none that they frequent. There is a drainage to the East of them that is forested but I wouldn't call it a forest. The whole valley is less then half a mile wide for most of it's course through the area.
The next closest expanse of trees is the Peace River valley several miles further east. I have not heard any accounts of this herd traveling that far from their home quarter. They have been seen at a farm about two miles north, but there are few reports of them ranging further then that.

I suspect they eat more Canola then Lichens but that's just a guess.

Byron Schram with ASRD in Manning could probably tell you a whole lot more then I can. He may well correct a lot of what I've said, I get my information second or third hand. I've only seen them once but I've been hearing about them from others for over twenty years.

I suspect that Big Gray Wolf is correct about how they came to be there.
Although the local wolf population was relatively low when they first appeared there were wolves in the area. But back then those wolves seldom ventured far into farm country. Those that did, seldom left on their own power.
I've watched both Moose and Deer take advantage of this phenomenon many times over the years. Even when Wolves were relatively rare in the area, Moose and Deer would move into farm land to drop their young in the spring.

Then bill C68 was dropped on us and most local farmers put their rifles away for good. Soon after the Deer population started to balloon and with it the Wolf population. And Wolves started moving into the farming area.
Doing so was no longer a death sentence for those that did and so we wind up where we are today.

Until very recently I knew of two packs that were living within ten miles of my place, right in the heart of the local farmland. They made one big mistake however, they killed several of a neighbors livestock and a couple of his dogs. I no longer hear or see them in the area.

I think there is a great deal about this area that science does not know.
Some years ago I found, what so far as I can determine, is truffles growing wild in the hills along the Peace River. I wrote to several excerpts on the subject, searched every book I could lay my hands on and nowhere could I find anyone who knew what they were or any description in any book that came anywhere close to what I had held in my hands.
I know of no research being done on the Least Weasel or the Harvest Mice that live in this area.
The research I know of that was done on species local to this area was conducted on animals living in rather different environments. Mostly in BC and the Yukon.

It comes as no surprise to me that any species confounds science.
In my experience science basis their conclusions on books often written by people who's only exposure to the creatures they write about, came from books they had read. And to be fair, from research, the little research that has been done.
All of which is in of itself not an issue, or in any way wrong. The problem comes in when science takes the stance that they and they alone know anything and everything there is to know. Which they do.

Remember those truffles I found? No one, I mean no one is interested in them. A species apparently unknown to science. A species with only one known relative in North America and science is not interested.
Why? I can only conclude it is because I am not a scientist and therefor science does not believe such a species exists.
One thing is for certain. Had a scientist found those truffles and if they are indeed what they appear to me to be, then there would be front page accounts of the find in newspapers across the globe and TV documentaries trumpeting the new find.

Unknown to science means just that. Unknown to science. Not unknown to everyone, not untrue, not not existing, just unknown to science.

There is a wealth of knowladge among the old trappers, old natives, old farmers and it will be lost like has happened for generations. Because it is unknown to science.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 12-22-2014, 02:05 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberman View Post
Looks to me like Keg and Wolf have solved the caribou problem. They have just moved from the habitat they have used for thousands of years out into farmland and peoples lawns to get away from WOLVES and find better feed. It's convoluted and divisive thinking like this that allows industry and government to do what they want. Not even trappers who are supposed to be those closest to the land can agree to try and save the Smoky herd, instead fly off in a dozen directions that have nothing to do with anything and at best can only add confusion.

Work with the trappers local and Stewart with a single voice and you may be able to accomplish something. The combination of science and SOLID opposition is the only hope. If they get away with the Smoky charade look for the same or worse to continue everywhere else in the province.
Actually doing the same old same old has never solved any problem.
Thinking outside the box is supposed to what science is all about.

The Caribou herd I spoke of may well hold the key to solving this problem.
Stewart is smart enough to recognize that. He knows like I know, killing wolves is a feel good exercise.
You might manage to exterminate all the wolves but it will solve nothing.
There are other predators that threaten the Caribou. Habitat loss threatens the Caribou, disease threatens the Caribou.

A single focus approach is a narrow minded fruitless approach. Not worthy of any wildlife manager or any scientist.
The more we know the better our chances of success. In any endeavour.

I rail against the use if Strychnine partially because it is part of a one focus strategy that doesn't appear to look at the big picture. But also because it is a repugnant and unnecessary tool.

If Caribou could be introduced in non traditional habitats like Moose were east of Edmonton, and in other areas, there may be hope for the species.

Doing what has always been done, kill the predators, has not worked in the past and it will not work now.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 12-22-2014, 03:08 PM
Liberman Liberman is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 16
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
Actually doing the same old same old has never solved any problem.
Thinking outside the box is supposed to what science is all about.

The Caribou herd I spoke of may well hold the key to solving this problem.
Stewart is smart enough to recognize that. He knows like I know, killing wolves is a feel good exercise.
You might manage to exterminate all the wolves but it will solve nothing.
There are other predators that threaten the Caribou. Habitat loss threatens the Caribou, disease threatens the Caribou.

A single focus approach is a narrow minded fruitless approach. Not worthy of any wildlife manager or any scientist.
The more we know the better our chances of success. In any endeavour.

I rail against the use if Strychnine partially because it is part of a one focus strategy that doesn't appear to look at the big picture. But also because it is a repugnant and unnecessary tool.

If Caribou could be introduced in non traditional habitats like Moose were east of Edmonton, and in other areas, there may be hope for the species.

Doing what has always been done, kill the predators, has not worked in the past and it will not work now.
Well said. I agree 99.9%, only disagreeing that you "might" be able to exterminate wolves. As I have said before it's impossible in this day and age.
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 12-22-2014, 11:11 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Liberman View Post
Well said. I agree 99.9%, only disagreeing that you "might" be able to exterminate wolves. As I have said before it's impossible in this day and age.
Actually I think we may be 100 percent in agreement. I too have grave doubts that eliminating all the Wolves could be accomplished.

I say it might be possible more to recognize that it is what some think should be done then because I think it's a possibility.
And it's another reason I think poisoning is a ill conceived plan.

I have no issues with those who wish to hunt Wolves for whatever reason.
I don't agree with any effort to totally exterminate them. But I see no problems with either efforts to reduce their numbers or hunting them for sport.

What I do have a problem with is bad science being used to support a feel good program that has little chance of accomplishing the stated goals.

It does occur to me that I may be giving some the wrong impression.
Let me be clear. I believe there are a lot of very good scientists out there.
It's not scientists per say that I have a problem with. It's the system they must work within.

It's a system where those who commission research get to dictate what that research may show. It's a system that seeks to silence any dissenting voices. It's a system that categorically rejects local knowladge.

In short it is a system that is in effect the opposite of good science.

I also believe that most scientists find the present situation as troubling or very likely, more troubling then I do. But a good many find themselves in a no win situation. They have to please their bosses or give up on science altogether.

I suspect that most of the people involved in this poison use program find it as repugnant as I do. They are seeing up close and personal what this stuff does. And does not do.

I also answer to government agents through my job. I know all too well how fruitless it is to try to reason with bureaucrats.
I know more then I'd like to know about government best practices.
Most of all I know how some bureaucrats and politicians like to use science and how they like to misrepresent the truth to further their personal agenda, to the detriment of good management and good science.

Think about it people. We know now that the Red Queen was robbing us blind. Is it really realistic to believe that she wasn't pushing her own personal agenda on government departments?

She may be gone but many of her colleagues remain in place.
This snake can live on without it's head. It simply grows a new head.
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 12-23-2014, 08:11 AM
bill9044 bill9044 is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 968
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KegRiver View Post
What I do have a problem with is bad science being used to support a feel good program that has little chance of accomplishing the stated goals.

It does occur to me that I may be giving some the wrong impression.
Let me be clear. I believe there are a lot of very good scientists out there.
It's not scientists per say that I have a problem with. It's the system they must work within.

It's a system where those who commission research get to dictate what that research may show. It's a system that seeks to silence any dissenting voices. It's a system that categorically rejects local knowladge.

In short it is a system that is in effect the opposite of good science.

I also believe that most scientists find the present situation as troubling or very likely, more troubling then I do. But a good many find themselves in a no win situation. They have to please their bosses or give up on science altogether.

I suspect that most of the people involved in this poison use program find it as repugnant as I do. They are seeing up close and personal what this stuff does. And does not do.

I also answer to government agents through my job. I know all too well how fruitless it is to try to reason with bureaucrats.
I know more then I'd like to know about government best practices.
Most of all I know how some bureaucrats and politicians like to use science and how they like to misrepresent the truth to further their personal agenda, to the detriment of good management and good science.

Think about it people. We know now that the Red Queen was robbing us blind. Is it really realistic to believe that she wasn't pushing her own personal agenda on government departments?

She may be gone but many of her colleagues remain in place.
This snake can live on without it's head. It simply grows a new head.
You said it quite well. As dealing with bureaucrats and any professionals their book says and what they say is the rule. But if any issues arise they are the first to point fingers.
Drives a guy nuts.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 12-24-2014, 10:41 AM
ffw12 ffw12 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 100
Default

This is why we trap wolves. Get the trappers involved. They are holding the traplines that others including myself would like to have. If you cant manage the wolves on your line, get out of the business. The excuse is that they take too long to skin, they smell...there is no money in wolves... make money off the marten, lynx, fisher, wolverine, etc. The trapper is responsible for managing the fur on their lines. Too many people have lines that shouldn't. A trap line is a way for a city person (not all of them) to feel like a bushman.
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 12-24-2014, 10:48 AM
ffw12 ffw12 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2014
Posts: 100
Default

I am against poisoning. Hire some people to trap wolves. If the local trappers are not interested, put a bounty on them...get people interested. The problem is the registered trap lines are hard to get on. Unless there is an amendment or a local senior registered trapper is willing to take on a bunch of junior partners, the government could make an amendment to allow persons eligible to trap the opportunity to trap the area to be poisoned and have a bounty. The bounty system would be cheaper then a chopper. It might not be an overnight fix, but I believe it could get numbers under control.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 01-14-2015, 04:25 PM
RockyMountainMusic RockyMountainMusic is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 595
Default At least some have a clue!

Here is a great article from the Edmonton journal today about the subject! Hopefully the link works! Sad watching the helicopters out here right now!


http://www.edmontonjournal.com/touch...ref_map=%5b%5d
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 01-14-2015, 04:29 PM
RockyMountainMusic RockyMountainMusic is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 595
Default

I can't believe the attention and news coverage over a legal coyote shoot and yet this people just accept and turn a blind eye! There is talk about a province sales tax and yet the can afford thousands of dollars an hour to fly choppers for this and look for animal tracks...... My vent for the day!
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 01-14-2015, 09:19 PM
ElkhairC ElkhairC is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 52
Default

Hi I am reading Kevin Van Tighems book The Homeward Wolf, he discusses much of research about wolves and our love hate relationship with them. If you want a volunteer to do research I would be happy to help. Just message me.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 01-18-2015, 11:39 PM
KegRiver's Avatar
KegRiver KegRiver is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: North of Peace River
Posts: 11,346
Default

Quote:
If you fly between Edmonton and Vancouver on a clear day, the destruction of Alberta’s foothill forest is shocking to see. Hills and valleys are scarred with clearcuts, roads, seismic lines and oil well sites.
Habitat fragmentation is the main reason the woodland caribou is in decline. The problem has frequently been reported in the Journal, and the province has been severely criticized for continuing to issue permits for more industrial activity.
However, provincial biologists have zeroed in on an old scapegoat, the wolf.
From 2005 to 2012, in a 10,000-square-km treatment area northwest of Hinton, government crews have shotgunned 579 wolves from helicopters and poisoned 154 more with strychnine. Furthermore, to attract the wolves to the poison, the biologists shot 177 moose and 16 elk to serve as bait. The campaign is ongoing and the current toll of wolves alone can be expected to exceed 1,000. In addition, 167 wolves were snared by private trappers.
The above data were published in the Canadian Journal of Zoology, but there is only a partial list of the many collateral casualties of poisoning, including ravens, foxes, martens and lynxes.
Yet researchers report they’ve met with limited success. After seven years, the increase in adult caribou was insignificant and the low recruitment rate of calves was unchanged.
A million-dollar killing spree has largely been in vain.
That about says it all.
And we are supposed to believe they know what they are doing????????
WIth Strycnine!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
__________________
Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 01-19-2015, 09:10 AM
dsh352 dsh352 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 44
Default

Exactly what KegRiver said.
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 01-22-2015, 05:12 PM
MooseRiverTrapper MooseRiverTrapper is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyMountainMusic View Post
https://secure.sierraclub.ca/node/1559

They did a great job with this and took most of the work out of it for people to have a voice! There has been some great talk and input on here so far let's keep the ball rolling!
yikes no thanks

I'm on board for habitat protection but no #savethewolves that is anti hunting/trapping
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 01-22-2015, 05:37 PM
RockyMountainMusic RockyMountainMusic is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 595
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MooseRiverTrapper View Post
yikes no thanks

I'm on board for habitat protection but no #savethewolves that is anti hunting/trapping
I hear you and I thought before posting this link because most just look at this as a wolf problem and not the big picture with the poison and everything else! Sad truth is that we are so busy fighting each other the anti get the upper hand! I'm gonna remove this cause I don't want to take the focus off the big issue here! Or maybe I won't remove it cause it won't let me lol

Last edited by RockyMountainMusic; 01-22-2015 at 05:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 01-22-2015, 06:06 PM
RockyMountainMusic RockyMountainMusic is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 595
Default

I guess the whole point of starting this thread is to try to show people all the wrong the gov is doing and masking it by saying it's a wolf problem! The 200 healthy elk and moose shot for bait, the use of poison, the cost involved, not one tree saved in a dozen years but they are heros for killing wolves! I guess some people just can't look past the cover! It's hard to witness that's all
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 01-22-2015, 06:07 PM
BorealGhost BorealGhost is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 9
Default

Hi Nicaragua, thank you so much for your input. I for one have seen stuff written about bears being predators of ungulate calves in many areas. I agree with your reasoning regarding the bears. And, definitely something that should be looked into. And I totally disagree with poisoning and those spray stories.
I've talked to biologists working in the forestry industry, they are not happy with the gov't and bemoan that the gov't won't listen to them regarding what is replanted, it certainly isn't what was cut down. Pretty sure the gov't is not listening to them regarding the culling and poisoning. If they are they need new biologists. Just my nickels worth guys. It's an emotional issue all around.
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 01-22-2015, 06:43 PM
MooseRiverTrapper MooseRiverTrapper is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 1,902
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyMountainMusic View Post
I guess the whole point of starting this thread is to try to show people all the wrong the gov is doing and masking it by saying it's a wolf problem! The 200 healthy elk and moose shot for bait, the use of poison, the cost involved, not one tree saved in a dozen years but they are heros for killing wolves! I guess some people just can't look past the cover! It's hard to witness that's all
Yes I agree. Your at ground zero.
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 01-22-2015, 08:11 PM
dsh352 dsh352 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 44
Default

RockyMountainMusic is right. This is so far past being a wolf issue it's not even funny. If the GOA was just killing wolves the locals would not be so concerned. What people are seeing is the damage the strychnine is causing. Loss of all canines,all scavengers including Eagles, wolverines and all other fur bearers.
Killing wolves is one thing but poisoning everything and destroying the entire ecosystem is another.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 01-22-2015, 08:16 PM
dsh352 dsh352 is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 44
Default

Everything should not have to die in the name of caribou. That what we are seeing on the ground after many years of poison.
Most involved would like to see the poison portion stopped. Most wolves are killed by aerial shooting anyways. Stop the poison.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 01-22-2015, 10:08 PM
Freddy Freddy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 71
Default

Crap like this went out fifty years ago.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 02-03-2015, 09:09 AM
RockyMountainMusic RockyMountainMusic is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 595
Default

http://blog.wildernessprints.com/201...nting.html?m=1
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 02-03-2015, 09:52 AM
Torkdiesel's Avatar
Torkdiesel Torkdiesel is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North of the Kakwa
Posts: 3,973
Default

I have heard rumours of the cull being expanded now into other areas of the province. Has anybody talked to a biologist that can confirm or deny this.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 02-03-2015, 10:10 AM
jim summit's Avatar
jim summit jim summit is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Birch Mt to Fort Vermilion
Posts: 937
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RockyMountainMusic View Post
Read some of this guys blog, does not sound like he is a friend of the trapper either.....

tough row to hoe.

Quote

"In case you missed it on yesterday's blog, Alberta has killed more than 1,000 wolves since 2005 using a variety of super humane methods (take your pick from strangling to death in a trapper's snare, getting poisoned with strychnine, or being gunned down from a demon machine chasing you through the snow from above) in efforts to save the Little Smoky caribou herd in the west central part of the province. How successful has it been? To date they've spent millions of dollars (I'm guessing at this, as I believe ten years of hired guns and helicopters isn't cheap), killed a thousand wolves, and seen the Little Smoky caribou herd's population increase by almost...pardon me, what?! They haven't increased at all in that whole time?!"
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 02-03-2015, 11:33 AM
RockyMountainMusic RockyMountainMusic is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 595
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkdiesel View Post
I have heard rumours of the cull being expanded now into other areas of the province. Has anybody talked to a biologist that can confirm or deny this.
Yes from what i have found out they do plan to expand this to other areas of AB where caribou live!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:04 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.