Well to follow up and address these last two posts; I also understood what he was saying.
The reason for pulling out the comments from him as I did was to point out that, as these changes stand this is not all bad and in fact may be a necessary step. Originally when this started it was driven by the questionable findings of Fiesta-Bianch and Coltman that made assumptions and narrowly looked at some rather dubious data. They then concluded that only a limited hunt could solve this issue. The ministry started listening to them. All hell broke loose (and rightly so) and some clearer heads decided to hold off and review some of this.
Now today we still have the environment that lead to those conclusions, if we can step back from the issues of two years ago and look at things today where do we stand? People are still fighting any change because it is associated with the genetic harm theory, yet we still have some concerns on the ground and a ministry wanting to address them.
In my opinion we have a zone in Alberta that is doing very well based on a full curl restriction. “If” something “has” to be done this looks like an answer. As a management strategy I will always fall on the side of a healthy herd based on individual and herd health and correct age distribution, to which this type of restriction makes possible.
For hunters this also keeps me in the mountains year after year with no loss of opportunity. Some will argue we are losing opportunity in that fewer animals are available to hunt, which is true short term and most likely moving forward, but it will still be an opportunity saved from what would be a LEH that would take many years and possibly once in a lifetime to achieve. Personally I can’t stand hearing that “Any legal ram is a good ram” this mindset is one of the reasons these changes are needed.
If successful the possibility of non-trophy hunts becomes a reality as well along with LEH trophy hunts within the general season (ie any male under full curl). In fact if zones are managed like Wishart suggested and implemented way back on Ram Mt they would be necessary.
Are these the only steps to help the herd? NO! Habitat, predator control, vehicle access, illegal harvesting are all contributors that need addressing, but considering the financial reality of the ministry easy is what they are going for.
So this is why I found it “Curious”. Should we fight something that might actually be good for us and the herd?
The reason for pulling out the comments from him as I did was to point out that, as these changes stand this is not all bad and in fact may be a necessary step. Originally when this started it was driven by the questionable findings of Fiesta-Bianch and Coltman that made assumptions and narrowly looked at some rather dubious data. They then concluded that only a limited hunt could solve this issue. The ministry started listening to them. All hell broke loose (and rightly so) and some clearer heads decided to hold off and review some of this.
Now today we still have the environment that lead to those conclusions, if we can step back from the issues of two years ago and look at things today where do we stand? People are still fighting any change because it is associated with the genetic harm theory, yet we still have some concerns on the ground and a ministry wanting to address them.
In my opinion we have a zone in Alberta that is doing very well based on a full curl restriction. “If” something “has” to be done this looks like an answer. As a management strategy I will always fall on the side of a healthy herd based on individual and herd health and correct age distribution, to which this type of restriction makes possible.
For hunters this also keeps me in the mountains year after year with no loss of opportunity. Some will argue we are losing opportunity in that fewer animals are available to hunt, which is true short term and most likely moving forward, but it will still be an opportunity saved from what would be a LEH that would take many years and possibly once in a lifetime to achieve. Personally I can’t stand hearing that “Any legal ram is a good ram” this mindset is one of the reasons these changes are needed.
If successful the possibility of non-trophy hunts becomes a reality as well along with LEH trophy hunts within the general season (ie any male under full curl). In fact if zones are managed like Wishart suggested and implemented way back on Ram Mt they would be necessary.
Are these the only steps to help the herd? NO! Habitat, predator control, vehicle access, illegal harvesting are all contributors that need addressing, but considering the financial reality of the ministry easy is what they are going for.
So this is why I found it “Curious”. Should we fight something that might actually be good for us and the herd?
