Big sheep changes

[sage 13]

By the looks of the canmore ram just posted broomed rams can make it to full curl and beyond.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Hagar

WB is right we need to know what the concerns are before we can make any choice on what needs to be done. Habitat and predation are very big concerns,If we look at Cadomin we can see how important that is.With great habitat and a lack of predators the survival rate of sheep is greatly increased as well as horn size. Another good idea that has been stated is the idea of increased wait times for harvesting young rams over older ones and having dedicated offices for the measuring and registering ,by trained and experienced CO's,of harvested rams. But before there are any changes we need to hear what are the concerns,we need disclosure from SRD first!

Pretty clear what the concerns are.

From the 93 plan and restated in the 2012 plan.

The Management Plan for Bighorn Sheep in Alberta (1993) indicates that the harvest level of trophy rams will generally be limited to 50% of the total number of available rams and shall not exceed 70%. At normal recruitment rates and desirable harvest rates, approximately 5% of the population should remain as trophy rams during the post-hunting season aerial surveys in the south and 4% in the north. Heavy harvest of mature rams may affect the survival of young rams (Geist 1971, Heimer et al. 1984). Ensuring the survival of some mature rams is necessary to allow for the transfer of knowledge on seasonal range use to younger rams, and to manage trophy quality.
Using the 1971 to 2011 harvest and population surveys, eight of the 10 sheep management areas were under the desired 5% goal (Figure 3). SMAs 6, 7 and 8 were all above the 4% guideline for the north. The SMA that contains Cadomin is well over because there is a reservoir of rams that is rarely available to hunt and the Clearwater - Ram SMA is above the 5% in the long-term average but has averaged only 3.4% since 2000. The Ram Mountain bighorn sheep research program have given us 30 years’ worth of data to determine the annual recruitment of trophy rams into the population each year. At our current harvest rates, more than 90% of new trophy rams are being harvested in most SMAs annually. In some SMAs, the entire group of new trophy rams plus many of the surviving trophy rams from previous years are also being harvested.

The management plan guideline is that the harvest level of trophy rams available should not exceed 70%. This means that our current harvest strategies need to be brought into closer alignment with the management objective. The only exceptions are Ram–Shunda which has full curl regulations and Cadomin which has a protected reservoir of rams at the mine site. It is also worth noting that in WMU 400, since the implementation of full curl regulations in 1996, the post- hunting season aerial survey data show an improvement in total rams and an increased percentage of trophy rams (4/5 plus), though it is still currently below the 5% target.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Hagar

WB is right we need to know what the concerns are before we can make any choice on what needs to be done. Habitat and predation are very big concerns,If we look at Cadomin we can see how important that is.With great habitat and a lack of predators the survival rate of sheep is greatly increased as well as horn size. Another good idea that has been stated is the idea of increased wait times for harvesting young rams over older ones and having dedicated offices for the measuring and registering ,by trained and experienced CO's,of harvested rams. But before there are any changes we need to hear what are the concerns,we need disclosure from SRD first!

Lack of predators. That's the best one I heard all day. Real knee slapper. Good one. Thanks for the laugh.

[Lr1000]

With out a doubt bdub. You make some very strong points and are more knowagable then most on the conservation on sheep. Maybe it's because I just recently got into sheep hunting and don't want to give it up so easily. I acknowledge I'm being greedy this way. However I just can not support the trend I see happening here of sheep heading to draws. Right now I'm in my 30s with out a doubt I could be drawn once. After my names been pulled once and I start from the bottom again, who knows what the wait time will be... 20-30 years. To think I could only sheep hunt a few more times in my life with out paying for it, I will never wrap my head around. Never mind may never being able to share this excperiance with my kids. I understand its only full curl on the table right now. However if in 5 years this doesn't help I'm sure it will quicky be on draw. All before they touch on helping habitat and predators. I'm sorry I just don't believe the system is so broke now it needs to be changed.

[Pudelpointer]

Comment deleted.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Lr1000

With out a doubt bdub. You make some very strong points and are more knowagable then most on the conservation on sheep. Maybe it's because I just recently got into sheep hunting and don't want to give it up so easily. I acknowledge I'm being greedy this way. However I just can not support the trend I see happening here of sheep heading to draws. Right now I'm in my 30s with out a doubt I could be drawn once. After my names been pulled once and I start from the bottom again, who knows what the wait time will be... 20-30 years. To think I could only sheep hunt a few more times in my life with out paying for it, I will never wrap my head around. Never mind may never being able to share this excperiance with my kids. I understand its only full curl on the table right now. However if in 5 years this doesn't help I'm sure it will quicky be on draw. All before they touch on helping habitat and predators. I'm sorry I just don't believe the system is so broke now it needs to be changed.

I hear what your saying. The last thing I want to see is sheep on draw. I really beleive the answer for better sheep hunting and avoiding a draw is full curl with a provision to harvest older broomed but short rams. There is no doubt going to be some short term pain for both us residents and the outfitters as harvest levels will decrease for a while. Check out the 1993 draft and you can see how long it took for harvest levels to come back from the change from 3/4 to 4/5 curl. It really wasn't that long. Certainly short enough for us to see it and enjoy it easily. I expect harvest levels will follow that curve as well. The big positive I see is that we will allow or sheep to have a more normal rutting season that benifits ram survival and recruitment to that upper age class as well as better reproduction. I strongly encourage you to check out the research I posted for starters and if you can find a copy of Valerious Giests book on sheep behaviour, check it out as well.
Cheers LR

[walking buffalo]

Bdub

You nor I Know what ESRD is claiming to be the concern. Perhaps your guess will prove correct, but until ESRD speaks up, you are just guessing.

As a suggestion, read up on Festa Bianchet, Pelettier, Hoggs, Hubbs, and Jorgenson on ram physiology, phenology, mortality, breeding success, hunting induced genetic selection. ...

This group of researchers have been claiming trophy hunting induced genetic harm as a Proven concern requiring a dramatic reduction in ram harvest. "Coincidentally", this is the same group that compiled the historical ram data being used by ESRD.

Funny thing has happened with this data. As it is in the hands of contracted researchers there are legal restrictions on access to this information.

Wanna guess when the data will be released? Do you think it will be released during consultation with the AGMAG meetings?

How about August 14, 2015 ?

Wouldn't that be convenient for the anti-trophy hunting gang to push their aganda through without having to let anyone vet the research?

Have a look. Here is the data, locked up for another year....

http://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10...4f6b?show=full

[Acesneights]

Originally Posted by sage 13

By the looks of the canmore ram just posted broomed rams can make it to full curl and beyond.

That ram is super tight curl and most Rams in k country would not be that tight and there for would not make full curl. There was a big ram with mine when I shot mine and he was broomed and was to close on the line that with the time I had I wasn't going to make that call.

[Lr1000]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Bdub

You nor I Know what ESRD is claiming to be the concern. Perhaps your guess will prove correct, but until ESRD speaks up, you are just guessing.

As a suggestion, read up on Festa Bianchet, Pelettier, Hoggs, Hubbs, and Jorgenson on ram physiology, phenology, mortality, breeding success, hunting induced genetic selection. ...

This group of researchers have been claiming trophy hunting induced genetic harm as a Proven concern requiring a dramatic reduction in ram harvest. "Coincidentally", this is the same group that compiled the historical ram data being used by ESRD.

Funny thing has happened with this data. As it is in the hands of contracted researchers there are legal restrictions on access to this information.

Wanna guess when the data will be released? Do you think it will be released during consultation with the AGMAG meetings?

How about August 14, 2015 ?

Wouldn't that be convenient for the anti-trophy hunting gang to push their aganda through without having to let anyone vet the research?

Have a look. Here is the data, locked up for another year....

http://datadryad.org/resource/doi:10...4f6b?show=full

I just don't get how they can do this reaserch off of registered sheep, when half of them are probably not aged properly. They data is false in my mind. This is on reason I am for the register stations, so accurate data can be collected.

[Acesneights]

I haven't read that anyone has pointed out the fact that when you look at a ram in a 4/5 zone and you have to judge if it's legal or not that a ram will turn his head back and forth giving you a perfect profile view no matter if your a little higher or lower than the ram. When you look at a ram in a full curl zone you have to be on the exact same plane as them to make sure they are legal which never happens when your in the mountains. So my point is that you may have more bad calls by hunters who are not willing to let a ram "go " on a maybe call. Just this year alone I've heard of two Rams that were shot short. Would this increase or decrease if it went to full curl ??

Not trying to derail a thread. Just wanted to make a point.

[bdub]

WB. I've stated on this thread that I don't believe in Coltmans BS Research. Neither does Giest and he has clearly stated this in published articles in major newspapers on the BS of Coltmans et als theories.

As for how ESRD and the conservation organizations in this province operate and communicate you know more than I do how that operates. I just know what Giest research says. I am stating what I believe on the subject in this thread in the hopes that sheep hunters can voice an educated opinion on the subject.

[Young Eldon]

Further to some of WB's questions for me, I offer these personal comments;

I doubt that ESRD will ever have all the solid data we need to optimize sheep management in each WMU. The current year's surveys are seldom completed in time to change the regulations for the upcoming hunting season. Determining natural mortality/age tables for all ranges has never been done due to small sample sizes, number of uncontrollable variables and high costs.

I don't consider forest encroachment on sheep range to be one of the worst problems because I have never seen or heard of many of our sheep dying of starvation alone. Most of our sheep ranges are above our petroleum plays and logging areas. Certainly increasing the size of our existing ranges could increase carrying capacities and horn growth rates.

I think we could manage OK with the 4/5 limit. I have never been a strong supporter of the full curl minimum since it is almost impossible to enforce (who can find the rear base of the horn on a live ram?).

The proposals to allow hunters to shoot young rams and then make them abstain for more years strike me as nonsense since some sheep hunters would try to hide the small ram if a bigger one showed up and quite a few hunters would not be overly interested in trying to get a second ram years later. The mortality rates of young rams is relatively low so shooting any of them is not conducive to getting more older rams into the population.

Hunters do not have to just «*suck up*» regulation changes that other hunters and biologists propose. However, they should not have great hopes that the current politicians in Alberta give a dam about any hunting regulations. We Alberta hunters are less than 4% of the population so there is little if any political will to keep us happy in any way*!

[Acesneights]

I hope that everyone on here that feels so strongly writes to the minister. I will be.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Young Eldon

Further to some of WB's questions for me, I offer these personal comments;

I doubt that ESRD will ever have all the solid data we need to optimize sheep management in each WMU. The current year's surveys are seldom completed in time to change the regulations for the upcoming hunting season. Determining natural mortality/age tables for all ranges has never been done due to small sample sizes, number of uncontrollable variables and high costs.

I don't consider forest encroachment on sheep range to be one of the worst problems because I have never seen or heard of many of our sheep dying of starvation alone. Most of our sheep ranges are above our petroleum plays and logging areas. Certainly increasing the size of our existing ranges could increase carrying capacities and horn growth rates.

I think we could manage OK with the 4/5 limit. I have never been a strong supporter of the full curl minimum since it is almost impossible to enforce (who can find the rear base of the horn on a live ram?).

The proposals to allow hunters to shoot young rams and then make them abstain for more years strike me as nonsense since some sheep hunters would try to hide the small ram if a bigger one showed up and quite a few hunters would not be overly interested in trying to get a second ram years later. The mortality rates of young rams is relatively low so shooting any of them is not conducive to getting more older rams into the population.

Hunters do not have to just «*suck up*» regulation changes that other hunters and biologists propose. However, they should not have great hopes that the current politicians in Alberta give a dam about any hunting regulations. We Alberta hunters are less than 4% of the population so there is little if any political will to keep us happy in any way*!

Good info Eldon. Thank you.

I still disagree on the habitat issue. Lol.... perhaps we already are at a population density that is creating smaller sheep. ?

With little question the recent burns in Spray and Banff parks are holding some tremendous rams that no longer leave these areas....

How about a regulation change that all sheep licences come with two tags, a pack of cigarettes and a book of "never go out" matches?

[Hagar]

Bdud I understand what you are saying and I am glad you had a good laugh,so now let me explain.The Cadamin sheep life in an artificial inviroment,one that through the reclamation work done in the area produces a higher quality of habitat for sheep and the sheep tend to hang out in these areas most of the year.This activity also helps to drive some,not all,of the predators away.Thus you have improved habitat and some predator control.Then you mentioned how WMU 400 was below the target goals of the 1993 sheep report projections and goals.Some of the reasons for this was that this area had a disease out break that almost wiped out the entire population and from which it has never fully recovered.Add to that the FN poaching ( I use the term loosly) that would result in up to 5-6 immature rams being taken for nothing more then their heads and capes.This brought about gated roads at the close of hunting season to restrict access.Now you don't think that might have something to do with the numbers.I to would like to see greater numbers of larger sheep with out going to a draw and one of the things I see a lot of is regardless of curl restrictions many hunters are still going to shoot the first legal ram they see.I have seen sheep guides take young rams that just barely make curl,other hunters that have 4-5 rams that are young and just barely make curl.So curl restrictions do not work.Several years ago I put forth the idea of a special education course for sheep hunters in an attempt to try and get hunters not to target young sheep through education and was meat with great resistance,almost getting banned a few times.I still believe that habitat and predation are major factors as well as the way sheep are viewed as "as long as it's legal" mentality.But all this is just speculation we need to know what SRD's concerns are.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bdub

WB. I've stated on this thread that I don't believe in Coltmans BS Research. Neither does Giest and he has clearly stated this in published articles in major newspapers on the BS of Coltmans et als theories.

As for how ESRD and the conservation organizations in this province operate and communicate you know more than I do how that operates. I just know what Giest research says. I am stating what I believe on the subject in this thread in the hopes that sheep hunters can voice an educated opinion on the subject.

Then please note that while Coltman seems to have changed his views on the genetic harm theory, the continued efforts of Bianchet, Pelletier and Jorgenson to get their agenda into regulations is still in play. And these are the researchers compiling/analyzing the sheep data
and making the regulation change proposal.

Conflict of interest?

Of course we can't see the data used..... nice play on the system to ram this through....

[dshaw]

Originally Posted by Hagar

Bdud I understand what you are saying and I am glad you had a good laugh,so now let me explain.The Cadamin sheep life in an artificial inviroment,one that through the reclamation work done in the area produces a higher quality of habitat for sheep and the sheep tend to hang out in these areas most of the year.This activity also helps to drive some,not all,of the predators away.Thus you have improved habitat and some predator control.Then you mentioned how WMU 400 was below the target goals of the 1993 sheep report projections and goals.Some of the reasons for this was that this area had a disease out break that almost wiped out the entire population and from which it has never fully recovered.Add to that the FN poaching ( I use the term loosly) that would result in up to 5-6 immature rams being taken for nothing more then their heads and capes.This brought about gated roads at the close of hunting season to restrict access.Now you don't think that might have something to do with the numbers.I to would like to see greater numbers of larger sheep with out going to a draw and one of the things I see a lot of is regardless of curl restrictions many hunters are still going to shoot the first legal ram they see.I have seen sheep guides take young rams that just barely make curl,other hunters that have 4-5 rams that are young and just barely make curl.So curl restrictions do not work.Several years ago I put forth the idea of a special education course for sheep hunters in an attempt to try and get hunters not to target young sheep through education and was meat with great resistance,almost getting banned a few times.I still believe that habitat and predation are major factors as well as the way sheep are viewed as "as long as it's legal" mentality.But all this is just speculation we need to know what SRD's concerns are.

X2! The population of first time hunters for sheep is growing every year and every first time sheep hunter I know of will shoot a just barely legal ram all day long. So I think horn restrictions don't work that well either.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by Hagar

Bdud I understand what you are saying and I am glad you had a good laugh,so now let me explain.The Cadamin sheep life in an artificial inviroment,one that through the reclamation work done in the area produces a higher quality of habitat for sheep and the sheep tend to hang out in these areas most of the year.This activity also helps to drive some,not all,of the predators away.Thus you have improved habitat and some predator control.Then you mentioned how WMU 400 was below the target goals of the 1993 sheep report projections and goals.Some of the reasons for this was that this area had a disease out break that almost wiped out the entire population and from which it has never fully recovered.Add to that the FN poaching ( I use the term loosly) that would result in up to 5-6 immature rams being taken for nothing more then their heads and capes.This brought about gated roads at the close of hunting season to restrict access.Now you don't think that might have something to do with the numbers.I to would like to see greater numbers of larger sheep with out going to a draw and one of the things I see a lot of is regardless of curl restrictions many hunters are still going to shoot the first legal ram they see.I have seen sheep guides take young rams that just barely make curl,other hunters that have 4-5 rams that are young and just barely make curl.So curl restrictions do not work.Several years ago I put forth the idea of a special education course for sheep hunters in an attempt to try and get hunters not to target young sheep through education and was meat with great resistance,almost getting banned a few times.I still believe that habitat and predation are major factors as well as the way sheep are viewed as "as long as it's legal" mentality.But all this is just speculation we need to know what SRD's concerns are.

I am aware of the die off that occurred in 82-83 in 400. However the harvest statistics for the entire province still showed some of the highest harvest levels from the period of 83-93, over 230 Rams/year. In comparison from 92-11 we have averaged 179 and that is including the high harvest years of 273 in 92 and 229 in 93 and 203 in 94.

I agree with you thoughts on FN, predators and habitat absolutely. I also agree with your ideas on hunter education. It would be interesting to see that thread from the past and see what the main opposition to your ideas was. We do need to encourage letting those younger sheep mature. I can't understand why you would get somuch resistance to the idea.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bdub

I am aware of the die off that occurred in 82-83 in 400. However the harvest statistics for the entire province still showed some of the highest harvest levels from the period of 83-93, over 230 Rams/year. In comparison from 92-11 we have averaged 179 and that is including the high harvest years of 273 in 92 and 229 in 93 and 203 in 94.

I agree with you thoughts on FN, predators and habitat absolutely. I also agree with your ideas on hunter education. It would be interesting to see that thread from the past and see what the main opposition to your ideas was. We do need to encourage letting those younger sheep mature. I can't understand why you would get somuch resistance to the idea.

There is an easy way to investigate possible reasons for the peak ram harvest years.

Allow access to the ram harvest data.

It will show where the rams were killed and where the reduction in harvest occured. From there it would be possible to develop some insight to causes of the high ram harvest.


Once again this discussion remains conjecture simply because ESRD and the researchers behind the genetic harm/anti trophy hunting agenda have locked away this public information. ....


Btw Bdub,

Geist became quite the proponent of NOT killing the old males. His thoughts on where to focus hunting harvest is in effect supportive of hunting the younger rams.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by bdub

I am aware of the die off that occurred in 82-83 in 400. However the harvest statistics for the entire province still showed some of the highest harvest levels from the period of 83-93, over 230 Rams/year. In comparison from 92-11 we have averaged 179 and that is including the high harvest years of 273 in 92 and 229 in 93 and 203 in 94.

I agree with you thoughts on FN, predators and habitat absolutely. I also agree with your ideas on hunter education. It would be interesting to see that thread from the past and see what the main opposition to your ideas was. We do need to encourage letting those younger sheep mature. I can't understand why you would get somuch resistance to the idea.

Wildlife corridors, ecological reserves (plateau in 2000), spray lakes park , gun registry were created, which easily explain the loss in sheep kills.

Once definitive proof is unveiled, then and only then, should we start talking about solving problems. ..right now there is only smoke and b.s.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

There is an easy way to investigate possible reasons for the peak ram harvest years.

Allow access to the ram harvest data.

It will show where the rams were killed and where the reduction in harvest occured. From there it would be possible to develop some insight to causes of the high ram harvest.


Once again this discussion remains conjecture simply because ESRD and the researchers behind the genetic harm/anti trophy hunting agenda have locked away this public information. ....


Btw Bdub,

Geist became quite the proponent of NOT killing the old males. His thoughts on where to focus hunting harvest is in effect supportive of hunting the younger rams.

Ok. Not sure where you found this in regards to sheep. I am all ears if you can point me to it. Here is a part of an article he wrote on sheep hunting management. Perhaps you are thinking of antlered game.


2) I dealt with how the biology of mountain sheep dictated a totally different management compared to that applied to the ever popular white-tailed deer. It focused on how to hunt trophy rams without hurting the population (based on ancient European understanding). This also was effective, as it was now a science-based approach to mountain sheep management. Hunting old, large-horned males after that had done most of their breeding was the goal. Let me explain: rams grow horns massively early in life, and less and less after about seven years of age. However, some horn growth occurs throughout life. The peak of rutting activity resides with six years old rams carrying ¾ curled horns. They become full curls at 9-10 years of life, although there is variation. Many rams, especially the most vigorous, those with the best horn growth, do not survive the fatal stresses and strains of reproduction and die before 9 years of age. Roughly 50% of the rams survive to that age. That is, natural selection for large horns is limited by the early death of rams with vigorous horn growth. Taking a small fraction of the remaining full curled rams would thus do least damage (breeding is not the only thing full curls can still do, they also are key to leading young rams to distant habitat patches, maintaining the populations tradition of range utilization. They also “police” rutting, subduing excessive activity by young rams and thus allowing them to enter winter in better body shape, increasing their growth next year, and reducing their mortality. Most breeding is done by vigorous, young full curls. Old full curls drop off in breeding activity.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Wildlife corridors, ecological reserves (plateau in 2000), spray lakes park , gun registry were created, which easily explain the loss in sheep kills.

Once definitive proof is unveiled, then and only then, should we start talking about solving problems. ..right now there is only smoke and b.s.

Do you have the dates on these different parks and corridors being formed you can post and the area affected. Can it explain the big drop in the mid 90s? Just wondering. Not sure how the gun registry affected anything as license sales were pretty steady.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

There is an easy way to investigate possible reasons for the peak ram harvest years.

Allow access to the ram harvest data.

It will show where the rams were killed and where the reduction in harvest occured. From there it would be possible to develop someh insight to causes of the high ram harvest.


Once again this discussion remains conjecture simply because ESRD and the researchers behind the genetic harm/anti trophy hunting agenda have locked away this public information. ....


Btw Bdub,

Geist became quite the proponent of NOT killing the old males. His thoughts on where to focus hunting harvest is in effect supportive of hunting the younger rams.

From the Book Return of Royalty by Giest and Toweill on managing sheep hunting.
1. Focus harvest on the oldest segment of the population. This will need to be evaluated for each herd , since dispersal phenotypes do not live as long, on average as maintenance phenotypes. Experience in Alaska has shown that harvests can be increased when minimum harvestable age was raised from 3/4 curl to full curl.
2. Maintain a total harvest of less than 75 percent of the natural annual recruitment rate. For most herds that will mean less than 10 percent of the mature Rams in a herd, and it will mean that a number of Rams approximately equal to or slightly greater than the number of legally harvested Rams will die a natural death. This is essential to ensure that the harvest does not eliminate that segment of the population necessary to the social well-being of herds.

[bdub]

[QUOTE=walking buffalo;2655645]There is an easy way to investigate possible reasons for the peak ram harvest years.

Allow access to the ram harvest data.

It will show where the rams were killed and where the reduction in harvest occured. From there it would be possible to develop some insight to causes of the high ram harvest.



Exactly what kind of harvest data are you looking for? By wmu? Or more specific. Drainages?

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by bdub

I am aware of the die off that occurred in 82-83 in 400. However the harvest statistics for the entire province still showed some of the highest harvest levels from the period of 83-93, over 230 Rams/year. In comparison from 92-11 we have averaged 179 and that is including the high harvest years of 273 in 92 and 229 in 93 and 203 in 94.

I agree with you thoughts on FN, predators and habitat absolutely. I also agree with your ideas on hunter education. It would be interesting to see that thread from the past and see what the main opposition to your ideas was. We do need to encourage letting those younger sheep mature. I can't understand why you would get somuch resistance to the idea.

Originally Posted by bdub

Do you have the dates on these different parks and corridors being formed you can post and the area affected. Can it explain the big drop in the mid 90s? Just wondering. Not sure how the gun registry affected anything as license sales were pretty steady.

Spray lakes provincial park 2000
Plateau ecological reserve 2000

Those are two that come right off the top of my head. I'm not sure when the corridors came into play, but they where introduced at some point in that period, according to the old generation, that hunted there.

As far as the gun registry, Can you show that sales were steady and the dates?

So why do you believe, that the ram harvest fell to avg 179 in that period?

[pottymouth]

Bdub, really you believe this?


Hunting Trophies Increasingly Rare


Sherbrooke, le 10 décembre 2013 – Sheep "as large as a horse with horns so big that it was a marvel to see." That's how explorers described bighorn sheep 500 years ago. Today, biologist Marco Festa-Bianchet fears that hunting will erode the legendary majesty of the "lord of the Rockies." A native of the Italian Alps, Marco Festa-Bianchet lived for 13 years in Alberta's Rocky Mountains. He's quite familiar with snowy, rugged landscapes. "Few species are as well adapted to the mountains as bighorn sheep," points out Marco Festa-Bianchet. The male, called a ram, has long been one of the trophies most coveted by hunters because of its impressive curved horns. But for how much longer?

"The animal's horn size has been shrinking as evidenced by harvested animals," indicates the biologist, who has studied these ungulates for more than 30 years. In a study recently published in the Journal of Wildlife Management, he examined data collected on more than 7000 rams killed over the last 37 years in Alberta. The investigation was conducted with his colleague Fanie Pelletier, from the Department of Biology in the Faculty of Science, and wildlife managers with the Alberta government. "Of even greater concern," states Festa-Bianchet, "is that harvested rams are now older than those taken 30 years ago. That suggests that the horns are growing more slowly."

From 1980 to 2010, the average age of harvested rams rose from 6.8 to 7.5 years. The research team also noted a decline in the proportion of the harvest made up by males aged 4 to 5 years: from 25% in 1980 to fewer than 10% today. Average horn length has shortened by about 3 cm, representing a 3.5% loss. The researchers suggest that this apparently small reduction is most likely an underestimate, since it is illegal to kill rams with short horns. Small-horned rams are excluded from the harvest sample, as demonstrated by a 2012 study by the same team published in Biology Letters.

In Alberta, bighorn hunting is governed by the “4/5-curl” rule, which requires that the horns of harvested animals form at least 4/5 of a curl. Any Alberta resident can buy a permit to kill one ram. Successful hunters must wait a year before becoming eligible for another hunt. The season starts in late August / early September and closes at the end of October. Rams meeting the 4/5 curl criterion are rare; only 5% to 8% of hunters annually manage to get their ram.

In addition, about 80 permits are issued annually to out-of-province hunters. The law restricts these hunters to specific areas and they must hire the services of a guide, at a cost of $25,000 to $30,000. "Nonresident hunters covet the best trophies and that's understandable," explains the biologist, who hunted bighorn sheep when he lived in Alberta. They have a success rate of about 50%. Surprisingly, however, these hunters do not harvest rams with horns larger than those taken by Alberta residents. "That flies in the face of popular belief," claims Festa-Bianchet. There is no difference between the size of the horns taken by residents and those taken by tourists who spend huge sums to be able to hunt here."

While his study doesn't confirm his hypothesis beyond all doubt, Festa-Bianchet maintains that selective hunting has acted to the detriment of the individuals best equipped to maintain a vigorous population. "There are practically no more large-horned mature individuals," said the researcher, "who have achieved their full reproductive potential with well-developed horns." Under normal conditions, natural selection favors mature, robust individuals, who have strong genes and are highly successful reproductively. These superbreeders have offspring that are larger than average, incuding mothers-to-be with robust constitutions. "These are the physiological characteristics that tend to be eliminated by selective hunting," said Festa-Bianchet.

In addition, the number of rams harvested annually has dropped by 35% in comparison to the cohorts born between 1975 and 1982, while the total bighorn population in Alberta remained relatively stable. "That suggests that there are now fewer rams with large horns," added the biologist, who chairs the expert group on mountain ungulates for the International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Rams whose horns develop rapidly suffer under the current system. Their horns reach legal length by summer's end, just in time to make them legal for the hunt when the season opens a few weeks later. "Our data show that rams whose horns grow quickly have a short life expectancy and low reproductive success, because most are harvested." Fortunately, bighorn sheep are not endangered in Alberta, with a population that has hovered around 6000 in recent decades.

Marco Festa-Bianchet is convinced that the pressure caused by hunting must be reduced in order to extend the life expectancy of bighorns that can pass on their genetic heritage. One solution is to close the hunting season two weeks earlier, so that rams that live in protected areas will not be at risk of harvest. "When rutting around mid-October," explained Festa-Bianchet, "these rams cover long distances, moving outside of national parks, looking for females." These travels often come at the cost of their lives, since the hunting season runs until the end of October. "Shortening the hunting season would give these well-developed rams a chance to reproduce and pass on their DNA to future generations of bighorns," explains Festa-Bianchet.

Another solution could be to increase the minimum legal horn size to full curl. "That could add a year or two to the lives of reproductive males," indicates the biologist. What is most needed, he added, is for hunters and wildlife managers to understand that hunting, as it is currently practised, has a selective impact on the bighorn population. There will be a price to pay to rectify this situation.

[bdub]

No Potty, I do not as I stated earlier. In at least two posts. Neither does Geist. Nice try though.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Spray lakes provincial park 2000
Plateau ecological reserve 2000

Those are two that come right off the top of my head. I'm not sure when the corridors came into play, but they where introduced at some point in that period, according to the old generation, that hunted there.

As far as the gun registry, Can you show that sales were steady and the dates?

So why do you believe, that the ram harvest fell to avg 179 in that period?

Thanks for the info on the parks.

Licences sales for trophy sheep have averaged 1958 from 92-11 and trending upward from 2006.

As for the drop in the harvest, and why such a quick drop after 92 I wish I knew. I don't understand that part. I would have thought it would have been a gradual change instead of something sudden. And why hasn't it returned to previous levels. Habitat degradation, overharvest, predators, FN, poaching, disturbance of sheep on there winter range, a pathogen, access or a combination of factors. I am all ears to any thoughts on the reason.

[bdub]

I think Blanchets finding are more a further indication of the consequences of concentrating the ram harvest on class 3 Rams. I think he misunderstood what he is seeing. No wonder horn growth is slowing as younger rams are doing the majority of the breeding in the absence of mature class 4 rams being available after hunting season. It also explains the increase in average age of harvested rams as it is taking longer for the Rams to make 4/5 curl as they are burning so much energy during the rut in the absence of mature class 4 Rams. It has nothing to do with selective hunting and everything to do with the herd not having a natural rut.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by bdub

No Potty, I do not as I stated earlier. In at least two posts. Neither does Geist. Nice try though.

I'm trying anything there. What Esrd wants to do, and is planning, looks like exactly what Marco Festa-Bianchet wants to happen! In regards to full curl, and reducing the season by 2 weeks. Isn't that exactly what Esrd is shooting for?

All on the premise that hunters have caused a drop in horn size.... on bogus research?

Whatever your reasoning is, doesn't matter, especially when these new proposals, are being brought to fruition, on the concept brought forward first by the genetic harm gang. It's not for the sheep, its to reduce or eliminate hunting....