Sheep Changes Coming
- Thread starter sheephunter
- Start date
Unfortunately I beleive that the change is inevitable, and hunters are going to bend over and take it up the rear like a inmate. However I will send in my letters fighting this issue until the regs are changed.
My question is when is ESRD going to deal with the real problem and realize we have a over abundance and predators in the mountains and foot hills. Not only doing its number in sheep herds but our other animal herds as well. When are they going to put forward a plan to get these predator pops in check? And stop using hunters as a easy scape goat.
My question is when is ESRD going to deal with the real problem and realize we have a over abundance and predators in the mountains and foot hills. Not only doing its number in sheep herds but our other animal herds as well. When are they going to put forward a plan to get these predator pops in check? And stop using hunters as a easy scape goat.
Shrinking horn size can also be explained by the low number of class 4 Rams post season. Rams going into winter post rut in poor shape equals slower horn growth and higher mortality. Something that happens to many class 3 Rams in the absence of a healthy number of class 4 Rams participating in the rut. I don't agree with the genetic harm theory.
Sheephunter
I averaged five years in the late 90s, 95-99 versus five years up to 2011, 2007-2011 and came up with an increase of 390. I didn't cherry pick my numbers but averaged it to give a better representation. I noticed you picked an abnormally high year for licence sales to make your argument look more favourable. Why didn't you pick the 97 year where 1710 licences were sold instead of the 96 year where 1960 licences were sold? Licence sales per year have increased significantly from the late 90's till now.
I averaged five years in the late 90s, 95-99 versus five years up to 2011, 2007-2011 and came up with an increase of 390. I didn't cherry pick my numbers but averaged it to give a better representation. I noticed you picked an abnormally high year for licence sales to make your argument look more favourable. Why didn't you pick the 97 year where 1710 licences were sold instead of the 96 year where 1960 licences were sold? Licence sales per year have increased significantly from the late 90's till now.
And what do you think will be the next step after full curl? Don't kid yourself they will have no problem putting it on draw if they don't get the result they are looking for in short order. Especially if they get little resistance with this change.
Full curl has delivered their desired results. That's why they are wanting this change.
Outfitters are pushing hard for a draw.
Hi lr1000. I think without going full curl or some variation of, the next step would be draw. They have a mandate to increase the number of trophy Rams post season to a level that is healthy. In the absence of change we are going to see exactly what we have been seeing for many years, the number of trophy Rams post season below the goal of 5%. I know I would rather see opportunity remain despite a few lean years as the changes take affect, than to be forced into a draw situation to achieve the goals of the sheep management plan.
Bvw. The way you worded your sentence we should be at 16000 sheep tags sold. If it's increasing 400-450 per year since the 90's....
Most new ram hunters spend years before they ever see their first ram, let alone tagging up on one. You just have to look at Rams harvested over the years. Hasnt changed much since the 90's considering the growth of the population in alberta.
How many of you guys that are all for full curl have 1+ sub full curl Rams on your wall? I'd be interested to know if you always sang the same tune?
It's not just Rams from our hunting ranges that partake in the rut. Sheep move out of the parks and BC that ups our mature ram average during this season. I know where I hunt I see a healthy number of ewes lambs and young Rams every year. So no I don't believe that young Rams being active during the rut is affecting the number of sheep reproduction.
The amount of kills by predators on our winter and lambing ranges I believe has much more of an effect then young Rams being involved in the rut.
I can believe that. Draw would be the best solution for the outfitters. Much less resident pressure, horn restriction remains at 4/5 means better success rates. It's a win win for them and a loose for resident hunters. If it goes the other way and we implement a full curl regulation, outfitter success goes way down (along with the resident success for a few years). Not very good for business and don't kid yourself, sheep outfitting is a business. No wonder the influence of outfitters through not only APOS but other organizations like the WSFAB is pushing so hard to retain the status quo. The next logical step in the absence of full curl is draw. Exactly the best option for them.
I get I didn't word that sentence quite right.
As I have matured as a hunter and learned more about sheep behaviour I have changed my tune over the years. As a younger sheep hunter I was all about the hunt and killing Rams. As I've aged I tend to think more about what is best for the sheep herd while still allowing us to enjoy the thrill of hunting sheep. I'm not a greedy as I once was I guess or maybe I am. I want to see a healthy sheep herd and enjoy the opportunity to hunt sheep till I can't do it anymore. I don't want to be restricted by having to get drawn for a ram tag.
Bvw. I agree. With what you are saying here. I to would rather see full curl before draw. However I don't see the sudden need for any change with the harvest numbers what they are at. I also have a problem saying that sub full curl are not class 4 rams, when bighorns are so prone to brooming under full curl or growing loopy and taking 9-10 years to get there with lamb tips. Since there is nothing on the table about age or double broom, just something allowing us to still harvest class 4 rams that haven't or never will get full curl I can't get behind this change.
I don't think there is many sheep hunters that don't have the best interest of the sheep at heart. If you don't take care of your resource there will be know resource that's a fact. There maybe guys that go on a sheep hunt that don't give a $&!" But I wouldn't consider them a sheep hunter. The fact is I believe we have a stable, healthy heard of sheep in AB. Maybe not in all zones but in general. I have not seen the numbers to counter that thought so I'm for no change.
Just one more thought. Without opening up more habitat for sheep and increasing the pop will these sheep not be fighting for nutrition in turn slow the growth of horn?
I don't think there is many sheep hunters that don't have the best interest of the sheep at heart. If you don't take care of your resource there will be know resource that's a fact. There maybe guys that go on a sheep hunt that don't give a $&!" But I wouldn't consider them a sheep hunter. The fact is I believe we have a stable, healthy heard of sheep in AB. Maybe not in all zones but in general. I have not seen the numbers to counter that thought so I'm for no change.
Just one more thought. Without opening up more habitat for sheep and increasing the pop will these sheep not be fighting for nutrition in turn slow the growth of horn?
I believe they have the numbers that they aren't reading their goal of 5% carryover in the areas that are slated for change. It's not all zones since Willmore and Cadomin are meeting their goals.
LR there are for sure Rams that are sub full curl or even sub 4/5 curl that are no doubt class 4 Rams. On the flip side there are Rams that may be full curl but they are not class 4 rams. Such is the nature of how sheep are very much individuals in there horn development and the limitation of harvesting them based on horn criteria. It's the best we can do unless we could teach sheep hunters to harvest based on age which isn't going to happen.
The concern with the population is not about increasing it. The sheep numbers have remained stable. What the issue is is the low numbers of trophy Rams left after the season. We should have a much better mix of older Rams left over.
No doubt if we could burn most of the mountain country in alberta we would see a huge increase in sheep and other ungulate numbers and an increase in horn growth. It would be a similar affect as the Cadomin mine or the sheep introduction in the river breaks in Montana. As sheep expand into new habitat, horn growth is faster on average. That's how sheep are and that's why they have killed relatively young monster Rams in those areas. We should be pushing for more burns in the mountains and letting the fires that do start do there thing instead of putting them out. But that probably is not going to happen.
The concern with the population is not about increasing it. The sheep numbers have remained stable. What the issue is is the low numbers of trophy Rams left after the season. We should have a much better mix of older Rams left over.
No doubt if we could burn most of the mountain country in alberta we would see a huge increase in sheep and other ungulate numbers and an increase in horn growth. It would be a similar affect as the Cadomin mine or the sheep introduction in the river breaks in Montana. As sheep expand into new habitat, horn growth is faster on average. That's how sheep are and that's why they have killed relatively young monster Rams in those areas. We should be pushing for more burns in the mountains and letting the fires that do start do there thing instead of putting them out. But that probably is not going to happen.
I would like to see the ratio of young full curls in relation to loopy or broomed off Rams tho. That ratio would not even come close to =... Especially taking the tight Willmore Rams out of the equation.
By not harvesting sheep the pop will grow that's a fact. If we are at capacity then it will have a down side on horn growth over the long run without opening up new ranges.
