Big sheep changes

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by MooseRiverTrapper

Sheep changes aren't happening now. Enough push stopped them.

Can you clarify that more... where did you hear that? Do you have anything you can post up?

[Roughneck Country]

Originally Posted by bdub

Any mention of habitat improvement, predator control of any other info?

I'm guessing with oil tanked the well has gone dry for anything like that to happen now.

Mooserivertrapper, where did you hear the changes were stopped that's the first I have heard of it?

[martinnordegg]

Originally Posted by MooseRiverTrapper

Sheep changes aren't happening now. Enough push stopped them.

That's not what ESRD said in the Sundre input meeting last night. It is still up in the air on what changes will be implemented but it looked like the full curl option was on top of the pile. It was great to see the WSFA President and additional members in attendance and their input.

[Lr1000]

I have also heard the regulation change is still on the table.

[Lr1000]

With out a doubt the regs will be changing, with the email I received today from our esrd minister. What a joke. I doubt this guy has ever hunted or fished a day in his life.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Lr1000

With out a doubt the regs will be changing, with the email I received today from our esrd minister. What a joke. I doubt this guy has ever hunted or fished a day in his life.

Please post up the Minister' s reply. This is very important information that we all need to know.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Please post up the Minister' s reply. This is very important information that we all need to know.

It basically says they want to go ahead with the full curl rule to allow Rams to survive to an older age before harvesting. A shortened season in 302-400 would be temporary and at the end of the season due to the expected increase in pressure. They state that in 400-302 the harvest declined for a few years before returning to a sustainable harvest level of Rams.

That's the gist of it.
Will be nice to see some bigger Rams outside of park and mine Rams in a few years and good news for a more normal rut and a healthier sheep herd imo.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bdub

It basically says they want to go ahead with the full curl rule to allow Rams to survive to an older age before harvesting. A shortened season in 302-400 would be temporary and at the end of the season due to the expected increase in pressure. They state that in 400-302 the harvest declined for a few years before returning to a sustainable harvest level of Rams.

That's the gist of it.
Will be nice to see some bigger Rams outside of park and mine Rams in a few years and good news for a more normal rut and a healthier sheep herd imo.

You've missed the purpose of posting the minister's reply.

[pottymouth]

It talks about to many 4-5 year old rams being harvested, and trying to reduce the number of rams in total being killed...but especially in th 4-5 year range.

It also talks about...they are using 400 and 302 as their example of how it has been proven to work.... but in the same breath, he says that they are shorting the season in those same example zones...temporarily. ...until full curls are being harvested elsewhere. ..

Like i said before and no one listened... after season reduction comes full draw...then closed season. 400 and 302 will always dictate what the whole province is in for in the coming years... this isnt about sheep...its about hunters and removing hunting eventually.

[albertadave]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Please post up the Minister' s reply. This is very important information that we all need to know.

Everyone that wrote in got the same rubber stamped response that was quite likely written by someone other than Mr. Fawcett.

~~
Office of the Minister
M LA, Ca/gflly-Kiein

Dear albertadave
Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding your concerns with proposed
changes to bighorn sheep hunting in certain wildlife management units in Alberta.
The Government of Alberta's first priority is to ensure that we maintain healthy and
viable bighorn sheep populations, which will sustain high quality hunting opportunities
throughout the sheep range in Alberta. Trophy bighorn sheep are a limited resource,
and proposed changes to management are required to meet bighorn sheep
conservation needs and provide sustainable hunting opportunities.
Proposed changes will reduce the overall harvest of rams, as well as reduce the
number of four and five-year-old rams being harvested. The proposed change to only
permit hunting of full curl rams, and to prohibit harvest of four fifth curl, aims to help fastgrowing
rams reach sexual maturity and reproduce before being harvested. This
measure is proven to have worked in WMUs 302 and 400 when implemented in 1996.
While harvest initially declined, within a few years trophy rams were again being
successfully harvested in these areas. Our department hopes to see a similar
sustainable harvest of mature rams in these additional hunting areas.
Environment and Sustainable Resource Development also proposes to shorten the
hunting season in WMUs 302 and 400, as we expect hunting pressures to increase in
these areas with fewer opportunities in other areas. The shortened season will occur at
the end of October when rams are more susceptible to hunting pressures due to the
breeding season. The shortened season would be a temporary measure until full curl
rams are harvested elsewhere.
Sincerely,
Kyle Fawcett
Minister

[Lr1000]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

It talks about to many 4-5 year old rams being harvested, and trying to reduce the number of rams in total being killed...but especially in th 4-5 year range.

It also talks about...they are using 400 and 302 as their example of how it has been proven to work.... but in the same breath, he says that they are shorting the season in those same example zones...temporarily. ...until full curls are being harvested elsewhere. ..

Like i said before and no one listened... after season reduction comes full draw...then closed season. 400 and 302 will always dictate what the whole province is in for in the coming years... this isnt about sheep...its about hunters and removing hunting eventually.

Exactly!

I would really like to know the numbers of 4-5 year old Rams are taken each year and where they come from. I would suspect the Willmore do to the tight curls on them. Also is the horn length any different other 4-5 year old Rams or is it just the tightness of the curl. In which case I would debate if that's a better genetic ram!

[Acesneights]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

It talks about to many 4-5 year old rams being harvested, and trying to reduce the number of rams in total being killed...but especially in th 4-5 year range.

It also talks about...they are using 400 and 302 as their example of how it has been proven to work.... but in the same breath, he says that they are shorting the season in those same example zones...temporarily. ...until full curls are being harvested elsewhere. ..

Like i said before and no one listened... after season reduction comes full draw...then closed season. 400 and 302 will always dictate what the whole province is in for in the coming years... this isnt about sheep...its about hunters and removing hunting eventually.

Well said. That is what I'm worried about for all of our future. Write the minister and your local MLA. Maybe if we flood their inbox they will listen. But I doubt it.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Lr1000

Exactly!

I would really like to know the numbers of 4-5 year old Rams are taken each year and where they come from. I would suspect the Willmore do to the tight curls on them. Also is the horn length any different other 4-5 year old Rams or is it just the tightness of the curl. In which case I would debate if that's a better genetic ram!

Thanks for posting up the minister's reply. Now everyone can read it.


Time for round two of questions/letters for the minister.

Ask the minister if he will commit that esrd will provide to the public all the data used to decide that a regulation change needs to be made.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Thanks for posting up the minister's reply. Now everyone can read it.


Time for round two of questions/letters for the minister.

Ask the minister if he will commit that esrd will provide to the public all the data used to decide that a regulation change needs to be made.

The data they are going to provide to support the change is post season survey showing that the number of trophy Rams remaining below the sheep management plans goal of 5%. Its already out there and has been out there for some time. They know that this is not a healthy level by past research.

I find it hard to believe it takes them this long to act on something they knew long ago. We as hunters are affecting the health of the sheep herd by what regulations allow us to harvest. We need to shift the bulk of the harvested Rams to an older age class. We can argue up and down about all the crap about some Rams this and some Rams that etc etc but the fact remains that sheep herd will be better off if we can accomplish this goal somehow.

[rut]

I would like to NOT see the same people on the mountain every year. There should be a 3 or 4 year wait time between being allowed to hunt rams during the general season. The term hunt: to follow or pusue. Therefore if they wait 4 years to get a licence they have no business on the mountain between hunts with licencing.

[dshaw]

Originally Posted by rut

I would like to NOT see the same people on the mountain every year. There should be a 3 or 4 year wait time between being allowed to hunt rams during the general season. The term hunt: to follow or pusue. Therefore if they wait 4 years to get a licence they have no business on the mountain between hunts with licencing.

Good luck with that, no matter the wait times dedicated sheep hunters will be on the mounting "scouting" for their next sheep or for somebody else they are helping that has a tag. I do the same thing scouting deer and elk.

[LCCFisherman]

All bighorn should be draw no more general season.. sorry boys.

[shooter]

Originally Posted by LCCFisherman

All bighorn should be draw no more general season.. sorry boys.

Based on what?

The huge success rate? The dwindling population?

Is there need for any change at all? I don't see it or the research to back a change.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by rut

I would like to NOT see the same people on the mountain every year. There should be a 3 or 4 year wait time between being allowed to hunt rams during the general season. The term hunt: to follow or pusue. Therefore if they wait 4 years to get a licence they have no business on the mountain between hunts with licencing.

Then stay home!

Originally Posted by LCCFisherman

All bighorn should be draw no more general season.. sorry boys.

Fishing section is two sections down!

Originally Posted by shooter

Based on what?

The huge success rate? The dwindling population?

Is there need for any change at all? I don't see it or the research to back a change.

We will find out on march 4th what there problem is, but it sounds we might get access to their data!

But from what I'm seeing, it's all about Money, Agenda's and restricting hunters !

AND it doesn't help we have dumb people who are sending in their proposals, on how the sheep should be managed, without knowing what the problem is!

[Acesneights]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Then stay home!



Fishing section is two sections down!



We will find out on march 4th what there problem is, but it sounds we might get access to their data!

But from what I'm seeing, it's all about Money, Agenda's and restricting hunters !

AND it doesn't help we have dumb people who are sending in their proposals, on how the sheep should be managed, without knowing what the problem is!

Touché

[Lr1000]

I've seen some dumb comments as far as this topic goes. However some of today's take the cake....

Yup lets shut down sheep hunting every 3-4 years. You know it's the same 2100 ppl buying tags every year right..

Ya lets just put in draw!! There is no need for change! Why the hell would you put in draw!

No there is not sheep on every mountain and around every corner. There never will be and there doesn't have to be. There is however some full curl Rams in nearly every zone if you know where to go or are lucky enough to find one and there is good trophy ram population. The numbers have been extremely steady for many years. Much more then other animals in this province. But hey i don't like hunting around this guy or I hate hunting sheep, guys should only do it once every thirty years.

[bdub]

Some more info.


http://www.wsfab.org/pdfs/esrdfeb2.pdf

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bdub

Some more info.


http://www.wsfab.org/pdfs/esrdfeb2.pdf

This highlights how poor the survey data is.

How can any decisions be concluded from such weak data?
I guess it doesn't matter when the goal is different from the stated concern.

[bdub]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

This highlights how poor the survey data is.

How can any decisions be concluded from such weak data?
I guess it doesn't matter when the goal is different from the stated concern.

What data is so weak? Do you want them to collar every sheep in the province to make it good enough for you. For someone that comes off as knowledgable on sheep behaviour etc I find it confusing why you have have such a hard time accepting Geists research on the matter?

[SLH]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

This highlights how poor the survey data is.

In what sense?

[Titanium79]

Originally Posted by bdub

Some more info.


http://www.wsfab.org/pdfs/esrdfeb2.pdf

Well acording to this it shows that in a non hunted area such as banff the total % of rams is 5% show how is it going to be that high when a % of rams get shot every year. This is common sense and a truly poor peice to try and make a change. According to these numbers we should pull all outfitters tags and quit selling raffle tickets for the minister raffle and stop auctioning off the sheep tags as we don't want to hurt the herds in the parks either. These late season tags hurt numbers out of parks because these November rams killed are out of parks. The outfitters kill more rams then residents and so should be the ones having change. Changeling does not change % of rams that are legal. It will change nothing other than making a whole bunch of animal unable to ever be harvested.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by SLH

In what sense?

For starters, The enormous variables from year to year.The Clearwater/Ram SMA count went from 398 to 1568 in one year.....

Secondly these surveys are taken well after the rut. Migration studies are showing that many rams will travel much farther during and after the rut than previously accepted. There is a good reason to suspect that many rams simply are not on dedicated survey grounds when the counts are made. Sheep not physically within the survey area are noted, but not officially accounted for in the tally.

The rest of the province has not had any aerial surveys for four years. Does that build confidence in their numbers?

" Anne presented me with Ram/Clearwater aerial survey results from March, 2014 and Jan. 11-13, 2015. This region makes up 25-30% of the total sheep population of the province!! 

March/2014 Results: Provincial Lands - Total sheep=398, total rams = 72 (8 legal or 2%), rams/100 ewes = 35.2 and lambs/100 ewes = 35.
Banff Park - Total sheep = 56, total rams = 15 (3 legal or 5.4%), rams/100 ewes = 53.6, and lambs/100 ewes = n/a – no lambs seen 

Jan. 11-13/15 Results: Provincial Lands – Total sheep = 1568, total rams = 260 (48 legal or 3.1%), rams/100 ewes = 28.2, and lambs/100 ewes = 37.7.
Banff Park – Total sheep – 288. Total rams = 87 (29 legal or 10.1%), rams/100 ewes = 59.2, and lambs/100 ewes = 36.7

[winged1]

Originally Posted by LCCFisherman

All bighorn should be draw no more general season.. sorry boys.

and a raffle at that

[SLH]

Did anyone ask why the difference from totals in 2014-2015

[SLH]

Where are the rest of the rams, will they show up in a count somewhere else?