Is there any Whitetails left around Wainwright???

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

Well what does that have to do with herd strength and numbers?

IMHO....it doesn't mean anything about numbers. One trophy deer taken in an area tells me a cagey white tail made a mistake, but it doesn't correlate a strong population or a strong herd.

LC

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Vingiu

The number of mature bucks in a deer population can be a reasonable indicator of the overall health and strength of said population lots of old bucks with good genetics = strong population

Lots of mature deer may but a single mature deer doesn't

LC

[Vingiu]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Lots of mature deer may but a single mature deer doesn't

LC

Ah. I didn't look at the previous post(s). Just laying out a possible correlation. Cheers

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Lots of doom and gloom but here is Shedcrazys number from surveys in Wainwright base as you can see the number are up if you want more numbers he posted some


Food for Thought

David

Here are some numbers of the last and first survey of the base:

2012 Survey (Dec 17/18): 3438 deer(1280 WT, 2158 MD), Moose 312, Elk 402
Hunters:572 Harvest:302 Hunter success:51.8

1980 (first full survey): 1487 (1266 WT, 212 MD), Moose 0, Elk 0
Hunters:598 Harvest:125 Hunter success:20.9

See you at the hunt.

S
also Quote

2010: 2876 (1008 WT, 1868 MD)
Hunters:604 Harvest:465 Hunter success:76.2

2007: 3932 (1480 WT, 2452 MD)
Hunters:645 Harvest:603 Hunter success:92.4

2000: 2006 (816 WT, 1190 MD), moose 160-170
Hunters:561 Harvest:281 Hunter success:50.1

1995: 2754 (1484 WT, 1270 MD)
Hunters:713 Harvest:341 Hunter success:47.8

Not necessarily.

I was in Waiunwright through most of those years and the general attitude a few years back was... don't shoot the first one ya see.

Guys had so many tags many didn't want to fill those base tags unless it was a huge animal.

For instance... in 2007 I had 11 tags including the base landowner tags.

I filled one of those with a doe to free up a chance at a buck (as was the rule)but then passed on a lot of bucks... animals that were fine but not huge.

In the end I filled 9 tags that year... the base hunt was just sideshow for me and for a lot of others.
Most didn't try that hard to fill tags...they knew another deer would come along at any moment. They were there for a trophy and meat was secondary because they knew darn well that they could get an average deer anytime.

That is not the case now.

Guys hit that base in hopes of getting a deer that they can't find on the other side of the fence.
The season is shorter and they know they have to work harder so do.

Also the last surveys do not appear to break down the success rate by species.

[Speckle55]

Here is me in 1993 and last years picture of deer taken that I took.. been in Wainwright hunts a few times and did some re-con

not far from Wainwright they did a winter cull and took out 1800 plus deer(most to all 10 miles)and that next summer count was 975

next year bumper crop and number rebound

last year I heard the same Doom and Gloom and the hunt numbers were high and I was there also tracks don't lie

David

[Lefty-Canuck]

David....the point is last year is not this year.

Yes there are SOME good deer there but numbers are way down, Shedcrazy even said it....it's a different ball game now.

The hunt numbers do not distinguish between does, fawns, yearlings, or bucks....just deer numbers.

I scout there many days before season, hunt archery and rifle season, and hunt coyotes there in the winter....I am relaying what I see with my own eyes. Not to be a dick but to portray what I see with my own two eyes.

LC

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

David....the point is last year is not this year.

Yes there are SOME good deer there but numbers are way down, Shedcrazy even said it....it's a different ball game now.

The hunt numbers do not distinguish between does, fawns, yearlings, or bucks....just deer numbers.

LC

I'm not sure why we are arguing about this...all ya have to do is talk to some land owners...the locals and go for a drive yourself to know that numbers are down.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

I'm not sure why we are arguing about this...all ya have to do is talk to some land owners...the locals and go for a drive yourself to know that numbers are down.

Good point! I will just let the guy who shot deer in 1993 and took pictures of a truck with a good deer in it tell me what's up

LC

[Speckle55]

k I bite its the ups and downs of Mother Nature .. Deer numbers are up as a whole if you trend them in Alberta

here is last years post on Wainwright some doom and gloom there too

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...nwright&page=4

2010 number 2800
2012 number 3400

David

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

k I bite its the ups and downs of Mother Nature .. Deer numbers are up as a whole if you trend them in Alberta

here is last years post on Wainwright some doom and gloom there too

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...nwright&page=4

2010 number 2800
2012 number 3400

David

Again...when was the count done?

Seems to me a couple years earlier that same chap did a count in March only to have his numbers buggered by a spring storm in May that killed off half the herd.
Perhaps the same thing happened again?

I would agree that numbers do seem to be up in some other areas...west of here for instance and thats great but the numbers are down east and there is no way you'll convince me otherwise.

Spread sheets are all well and fine but they don't matter much to folks that walk the ground and see for themselves.

All I know is that you would be hard pressed to find many folks from out that way that would agree with you on this point.

[trigger7mm]

The aerial surveys are done by helicopter in early December, before the worst of the winter takes it's toll on the deer herds. Like someone already mentioned, all you have to do is talk to some locals and see what they tell you. They are the ones that are around the deer every day. I think they should do their surveys, that help them make their management decisions, at the end of March or early April. That would be a much better indicator of how our deer herd has done.

[Don K]

Wow.
The bios are idiots... I think they skipped the day in grade 1 where the teacher taught how to count. That or the old bugger needs new glasses. Lol
I've been there either myself or with guys in 5 of the last 6 years and the numbers are going way down or the deer have learned how to dig holes and hide. The tracks aren't there like they used to be either, elk and moose yes but deer not so much.
Anyone that says deer numbers are anywhere near what they were since 2000 is seriously misguided.
That zone along with so many others are being SERIOUSLY MISMANAGED. I spent much of the last week wading through snow half way up my thigh in multiple zones that have 300-500 md doe tags and they can't sustain that harvest with the winters we are having.

[xxclaro]

A few consecutive mild winters would probably help most, but we can't control that. All we can really control is harvest numbers, and that doesn't seem to be happening. If the bio's won't do it, its not going to get done. Hunters will not police themselves and reduce their harvest, at least not enough of them to make a difference. I wish it wasn't true, but it is. Seems like everyone I talk to is intent on filling every last supplementary tag they can get their hands one. If they can drive a few hours and shoot another deer, they'll do that to.

I've talked to some who agree that the numbers are low compared to 5-10 years ago, and harvest numbers should be reduced, but they still need to go get their sausage deer, their jerky deer, etc. The opinion seems to be that if I don't shoot it someone else will so I may as well take it. They may be right too, but I feels it's worth trying.

Another thing to consider is hunter numbers. I wonder how many more hunter s are out in the field now compared to even 10 years ago? Population has certainly increased significantly, and likely a good number of hunters in there too. This seems likely to continue for the foreseeable future as well.

Hope something changes, but not going to count on it. As usual, things will probably need to be FUBAR before any attempt is made to find a solution.

[Lefty-Canuck]

I sure hope the bios look at the threads on here and see that hunters are concerned....some hunters anyhow.

Supplementals are a tool for management but they should be pulled during years of decline....they can shut down a bison hunt due to bad winters but why can't they shut down antelope and supplemental harvests??!! in areas that need the reductions.

LC

[remmy300]

Originally Posted by Don K

Wow.
The bios are idiots... I think they skipped the day in grade 1 where the teacher taught how to count. That or the old bugger needs new glasses. Lol
I've been there either myself or with guys in 5 of the last 6 years and the numbers are going way down or the deer have learned how to dig holes and hide. The tracks aren't there like they used to be either, elk and moose yes but deer not so much.
Anyone that says deer numbers are anywhere near what they were since 2000 is seriously misguided.
That zone along with so many others are being SERIOUSLY MISMANAGED. I spent much of the last week wading through snow half way up my thigh in multiple zones that have 300-500 md doe tags and they can't sustain that harvest with the winters we are having.

Oh I agree... Here here! Well said chap.

[trigger7mm]

Originally Posted by remmy300

Oh I agree... Here here! Well said chap.

X2!

[Snap Shot]

I'm wondering what the totals are for first season base hunt. I bet it's a all time record low.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Snap Shot

I'm wondering what the totals are for first season base hunt. I bet it's a all time record low.

According to the spreadsheet there has to be thousands in there! You can't be serious.....

LC