Wilderness Trapping and Living


No Profanity *** No Flaming *** No Advertising *** No Anti Trappers *** No Politics
No Non-Target Catches *** No Links to Anti-trapping Sites *** No Avoiding Profanity Filter


Home~Trap Talk~ADC Forum~Trap Shed~Wilderness Trapping~International Trappers~Fur Handling

Auction Forum~Trapper Tips~Links~Gallery~Basic Sets~Convention Calendar~Chat~ Trap Collecting Forum

Trapper's Humor~Strictly Trapping~Fur Buyers Directory~Mugshots~Fur Sale Directory~Wildcrafting

Trapper's Tales~Words From The Past~Legends~Archives~Kids Forum~Lure Formulators Forum


~Dobbins' Catalog~

ATS
(Please support Ted's Fur Shed, our sponsor for the Wilderness Page)


Alaska Trappers Association

Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857104
04/27/20 10:38 PM
04/27/20 10:38 PM
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,514
juneau, alaska
A
alaska viking Offline
"Made it two years not being censored"
alaska viking  Offline
"Made it two years not being censored"
A

Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,514
juneau, alaska
There is no doubt that old growth spruce and hemlock is beneficial to many animals. Particularly in winter. I am not going to list the hows and whys, because if you don't know, you need to learn, prior to having an opinion.
Habitat diversity, as in cover, open areas, and edges are all important, and logging can provide 2 of those. None is more important than another, in a balanced, healthy eco-system.
Like most things, balance and moderation are key.


Made it almost 3 years without censor!

Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: nvwrangler] #6857151
04/28/20 12:28 AM
04/28/20 12:28 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,153
Alaska and Washington State
W
waggler Offline
trapper
waggler  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,153
Alaska and Washington State
Originally Posted by nvwrangler
Look at any true old growth forest and you'll see a dying forest. As they say a healthy forest is a black forest. Logging can replace some of those benefits.

nvwrangler
I'm sorry to correct you, but that is an old mantra that may sound good, but isn't true. The young forests (typically mono-culture) are about the most sterile forests there are. Any time spent trapping in both a second growth forest and an old-growth forest will reveal how much more wildlife and diversity there is in an old-growth forest.

A "black forest" or dark forest is good for growing a lot of timber volume, but not good for growing much else except maybe mushrooms.

And I'm no tree hugger; I'm currently logging 120 acres of second growth forest. And I have logged and will log some old-growth forest in the future.


"My life is better than your vacation"
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857159
04/28/20 12:57 AM
04/28/20 12:57 AM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,270
james bay frontierOnt.
B
Boco Online content
trapper
Boco  Online Content
trapper
B

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,270
james bay frontierOnt.
From my perspective,I agree with waggler,lots of furbearers and other game animals depend on areas with older growth bush.
The best areas will have several different age class bush and all the edge habitat that goes along with that.
Where I am fires create that type of habitat.
Loggers try to emulate that but it doesnt work that well.At least not like a natural fire where nothing is really removed.
I dont know much about coastal rainforest though.


Forget that fear of gravity-get a little savagery in your life.
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857162
04/28/20 01:12 AM
04/28/20 01:12 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Y
yukon254 Offline
trapper
yukon254  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
I dont think logging can replicate what burns do, but in my country there is no doubt that the old burns ( newer growth) hold a lot more wildlife of all kinds including furbearers than the old growth stuff. I've got a lot of old growth in places where it has never burned and some of the spruce are 4-feet in diameter and 4-500 years old judged by counting the rings. I catch very little fur in those areas, but the old burns are just the opposite.

They did a marten study in the southeast back in the early 90s, and although they never did finish the study, they did find that the old growth that they thought would be the best marten habitat, turned out not to be the case. They found elevations of 3000-3500 feet the best by far. Lots of old burns at those elevations

There is no doubt that the logging in northern BC has been good for the moose population, and deer and elk, but like Ken said, it did and does give more people access which is never a good thing. Moose dont eat spruce, they like new growth and will travel many miles to find it.

Last edited by yukon254; 04/28/20 01:21 AM.

do unto others as you would have them do unto you

www.grizzlycreeklodge.com
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857169
04/28/20 01:38 AM
04/28/20 01:38 AM
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,270
james bay frontierOnt.
B
Boco Online content
trapper
Boco  Online Content
trapper
B

Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 45,270
james bay frontierOnt.
[Linked Image]
This is old growth here and core marten habitat.Notice all the coarse woody debris and standing dead chicots.
Lynx are here also,but a bit old for core lynx habitat.


Forget that fear of gravity-get a little savagery in your life.
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: waggler] #6857433
04/28/20 01:03 PM
04/28/20 01:03 PM
Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,822
Nevada
N
nvwrangler Offline
trapper
nvwrangler  Offline
trapper
N

Joined: Sep 2013
Posts: 4,822
Nevada
Originally Posted by waggler
Originally Posted by nvwrangler
Look at any true old growth forest and you'll see a dying forest. As they say a healthy forest is a black forest. Logging can replace some of those benefits.

nvwrangler
I'm sorry to correct you, but that is an old mantra that may sound good, but isn't true. The young forests (typically mono-culture) are about the most sterile forests there are. Any time spent trapping in both a second growth forest and an old-growth forest will reveal how much more wildlife and diversity there is in an old-growth forest.

A "black forest" or dark forest is good for growing a lot of timber volume, but not good for growing much else except maybe mushrooms.

And I'm no tree hugger; I'm currently logging 120 acres of second growth forest. And I have logged and will log some old-growth forest in the future.


Waggler you misunderstood what I wrote black meaning burnt not closed canopy. Tree plantations or reseedings are not true young forests in my opinion I'm talking about true multilabel layer canopy type forests with all age classes of trees and forage. Old growth forests generally don't allow much sunlight to reach the forest floor ( single closed canopy level) there by reducing the forage and browse plants needed for large game species like the deer mentioned at the start of this thread. Smokey the bear was the biggest disaster to hit timber and the eco systems, the 100% fire suppression hurt the balance of everything lots of the forest types were fire dependent to create new growth and openings for wildlife. That got removed then logging got stopped and further reduced those benefits to wildlife.

Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857453
04/28/20 01:51 PM
04/28/20 01:51 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Y
yukon254 Offline
trapper
yukon254  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Some of the best big game country in the world is found throughout the Rocky Mountain Trench in northern BC. Old time outfitters used to burn that country every year. Of course it was illegal back then but that didnt stop them. Nowdays it still happens but the forest service gives out permits. Amazing wildlife country that has to be seen to be believed.


do unto others as you would have them do unto you

www.grizzlycreeklodge.com
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857974
04/28/20 11:40 PM
04/28/20 11:40 PM
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,420
Idaho
B
bearcat2 Offline
trapper
bearcat2  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,420
Idaho
It depends on the type of forest. I grew up in coastal rainforest, and old growth there is sterile. Yeah quite a bit of game uses if for cover. . . if they have somewhere adjacent for feed. But there isn't any feed in it, so there isn't the prey for the predators. Start moving inland and the forests open up and aren't as sterile. Logging used to include slash burning the clearcuts after they were logged, this released a lot of nutrients back into the soil and promoted growth a LOT better than the practice nowadays of either not burning at all, or piling slash into a few big piles and only burning those.
There is a lot of diversity on this continent and you need to look at the specific area before making blanket statements. But in my experience logging and then burning the clearcuts makes the best habitat available, especially if there is a variety of different age cuts in an area, from old growth or second growth ranging down through reprod to newer cuts with just grasses and forbs growing up, to brand new cuts. Depending on the area, and how long since it has been logged or burned, fires without logging first can burn so hot with so much fuel as to sterilize the ground so nothing grows, and if a few hundred thousand acres burn, that doesn't leave much diversity. Plus the logging and then burning provides most of the benefits of fire, without most of the detriments and provides us with all the timber products we use in our daily lives. I'm pretty sure the vast majority of you reading this live in a wood framed house and hopefully use toilet paper on a regular basis.

Yukon254,
We're going to have to disagree. I don't think providing access is detrimental to most species, although it does provide competition for hunting or trapping. And I'm speaking as someone who has spent a fair amount of time hunting and guiding in both wilderness areas where there is not only no motorized access but no use of anything motorized such as a chainsaw allowed; and in well roaded open public access areas. I have been more successful in the roaded and logged areas, even though it can be frustrating having some idiot on an atv drive by you and your client right at prime time.
As an outdoorsman I certainly appreciate access and will always argue against restricting it.

Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6857982
04/28/20 11:49 PM
04/28/20 11:49 PM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,489
Moved to Fbks, Ak.
M
martentrapper Offline
trapper
martentrapper  Offline
trapper
M

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,489
Moved to Fbks, Ak.
I,ve seen the effect of very hot fires burning down into the dirt. Wilderness black spruce forests often do this, leaving few nutrients in the soil for plant regeneration. Long slow process to get back to an environment that supports a diversity of critters.
mt

Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858002
04/29/20 12:24 AM
04/29/20 12:24 AM
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,153
Alaska and Washington State
W
waggler Offline
trapper
waggler  Offline
trapper
W

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,153
Alaska and Washington State
Ease of access is becoming a hotly debated topic. Gating of roads in order to reduce access is pretty controversial. I have mixed feelings about it. I suppose it depends where you are talking about. I have a section of land that is reached by going through 15 miles of private gated road. The amount of elk in that area is phenomenal when compared with the numbers on adjacent Forest Service that is easily accessed. And yes, the private gated landowners allow free hunting access to anyone as long as you walk or bicycle in.


"My life is better than your vacation"
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858006
04/29/20 12:25 AM
04/29/20 12:25 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Y
yukon254 Offline
trapper
yukon254  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Here our fires dont burn dont to the dirt in general. In every fire there might be spots like that but very few. We had a huge fire that almost burned us out last year and by fall the moose were already using it.

Bearcat2 I have a feeling our wilderness is a bit different than what your used too. The area I guide in, no one, and I mean not one other person ever gets into, and this area is hundreds of square miles in size. The nearest village is over 150 air miles away. Access brings in more hunters, more hunters = more game taken in every scenario. The ranch I grew up on in northern BC is a good example. Backwhen I was a kid the hunting was as good as it gets. Then logging, and oil/gas exploration hit. The roads and cutlines that came with that, opened up the country to hordes of hunters from southern BC. You couldnt find a good bull there now if you hunted all season. So my point is, its probably what your used too. If you dont know what real wilderness hunting is, then you might not understand, but access does change things up a lot.


do unto others as you would have them do unto you

www.grizzlycreeklodge.com
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858010
04/29/20 12:35 AM
04/29/20 12:35 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Y
yukon254 Offline
trapper
yukon254  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon

Here are a few pictures of the fire we had right on our doorstep last spring. You can see how black it burnt. By fall, the willows were 3-feet high already and the moose had already moved back in. By this fall, the new growth will be over your head. This was a huge fire and it will be great hunting and trapping for many years to come.




[Linked Image]
[Linked Image]
[Linked Image]
[Linked Image]
[Linked Image]


do unto others as you would have them do unto you

www.grizzlycreeklodge.com
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858238
04/29/20 10:56 AM
04/29/20 10:56 AM
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 35,129
McGrath, AK
W
white17 Offline OP

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
white17  Offline OP

"General (Mr.Sunshine) Washington"
W

Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 35,129
McGrath, AK
You have a lifetime of dry firewood Dave !


Mean As Nails
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858243
04/29/20 11:07 AM
04/29/20 11:07 AM
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,489
Moved to Fbks, Ak.
M
martentrapper Offline
trapper
martentrapper  Offline
trapper
M

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 3,489
Moved to Fbks, Ak.
Originally Posted by white17
You have a lifetime of dry firewood Dave !


My thoughts exactly!
mt

Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858245
04/29/20 11:09 AM
04/29/20 11:09 AM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Y
yukon254 Offline
trapper
yukon254  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Originally Posted by white17
You have a lifetime of dry firewood Dave !


And hopefully enough morels to pay the bills this summer since it looks like they are going to keep our clients from getting here!!


do unto others as you would have them do unto you

www.grizzlycreeklodge.com
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6858291
04/29/20 12:03 PM
04/29/20 12:03 PM
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,420
Idaho
B
bearcat2 Offline
trapper
bearcat2  Offline
trapper
B

Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 2,420
Idaho
Yes waggler, it depends on what area you are talking about. Which I tried to say, but did so poorly. I've seen areas where fires are beneficial, so I know it isn't all environmentalist BS, but I've seen more areas where they are detrimental. Why I think locals should be the ones making decisions, not somebody in an office half a continent away.

Yukon,
I've no doubt they are different. And I like hunting the wilderness where there are no other people, but in my experience the game per square mile is much higher in areas where it is managed for timber. I'm not a horn hunter, I'd rather have more opportunities at game than a possible chance at a big bull. And so would the vast majority of the clients I've guided. Granted, that has a lot to do with the fact that I've always guided in areas with over-the-counter tags and so the clients booked are those looking for an opportunity to go hunting at the time they choose, rather than spending years trying to draw a tag for a one time opportunity at a truly big bull.
Idaho has 4.8 million acres of designated wilderness and another 9 million of roadless, not sure how that compares to the Yukon or BC, but it is second only to Alaska in the US. I don't doubt that you have some bigger areas of wilderness, although I'm not sure if they are as tightly controlled as far as what you are allowed to use in them, but we have areas plenty big enough to not see another hunter in. I guess I will always look at it as a waste though. Those are areas owned by all of us (public land) but most people will never be able to use them, due to lack of access, and then our taxpayer and fish and game dollars go to keeping the Average Joe with a full time job and a few days off a year out of it. Plus instead of logging, mining, etc. the areas and creating an income for the USFS they are an expense to keep them unused ground.

I may think it is not the wisest decision but am more or less ambivalent to leaving roadless/wilderness areas the way they are. I am very strongly opposed to reducing/restricting access to areas that already have it, however.

Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: bearcat2] #6858326
04/29/20 12:43 PM
04/29/20 12:43 PM
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Y
yukon254 Offline
trapper
yukon254  Offline
trapper
Y

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 4,421
Yukon
Originally Posted by bearcat2
Yes waggler, it depends on what area you are talking about. Which I tried to say, but did so poorly. I've seen areas where fires are beneficial, so I know it isn't all environmentalist BS, but I've seen more areas where they are detrimental. Why I think locals should be the ones making decisions, not somebody in an office half a continent away.

Yukon,
I've no doubt they are different. And I like hunting the wilderness where there are no other people, but in my experience the game per square mile is much higher in areas where it is managed for timber. I'm not a horn hunter, I'd rather have more opportunities at game than a possible chance at a big bull. And so would the vast majority of the clients I've guided. Granted, that has a lot to do with the fact that I've always guided in areas with over-the-counter tags and so the clients booked are those looking for an opportunity to go hunting at the time they choose, rather than spending years trying to draw a tag for a one time opportunity at a truly big bull.
Idaho has 4.8 million acres of designated wilderness and another 9 million of roadless, not sure how that compares to the Yukon or BC, but it is second only to Alaska in the US. I don't doubt that you have some bigger areas of wilderness, although I'm not sure if they are as tightly controlled as far as what you are allowed to use in them, but we have areas plenty big enough to not see another hunter in. I guess I will always look at it as a waste though. Those are areas owned by all of us (public land) but most people will never be able to use them, due to lack of access, and then our taxpayer and fish and game dollars go to keeping the Average Joe with a full time job and a few days off a year out of it. Plus instead of logging, mining, etc. the areas and creating an income for the USFS they are an expense to keep them unused ground.

I may think it is not the wisest decision but am more or less ambivalent to leaving roadless/wilderness areas the way they are. I am very strongly opposed to reducing/restricting access to areas that already have it, however.


bearcat2 Here in Yukon we have no logging and very little hunting pressure in most areas. Residents are free to hunt wherever they want to go. Our wilderness areas as you might expect are huge. Literally miles and miles of country that is never hunted. BC is quite different though. Lots of logging and oil gas exploration has opened the country up. During hunting season the roads and rivers are packed with southern hunters. Two years ago an outfitter friend of mine was flying over the Ketcheka river on the opening day of elk season. He counted 92 large jet boats all on the river that day. Those were elk hunters. That area has been virtually hunted out now. The same thing has happened all over the province actually. Logging in BC hasn't helped either. The logging companies spray the cut blocks after they log it and re-plant. The spray is designed to kill the new growth that comes up ( willows and poplar) and give the new trees they planted a head start. This of course is not what happens in a natural burn, and it takes away the feed moose need. So logging has done way more harm in that province than good as far as wildlife is concerned. I agree that we all have a right to be out on the land, but limiting access ( think ATVs Jet boats etc) can help. Jet boats are death on spawning grayling.....and yes I do use them but sparingly...


do unto others as you would have them do unto you

www.grizzlycreeklodge.com
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: yukon254] #6858727
04/29/20 08:35 PM
04/29/20 08:35 PM
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 52
Colwell Lake, Manitoba
Bravo Bad Back Offline
trapper
Bravo Bad Back  Offline
trapper

Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 52
Colwell Lake, Manitoba
bearcat2 Here in Yukon we have no logging and very little hunting pressure in most areas. Residents are free to hunt wherever they want to go. Our wilderness areas as you might expect are huge. Literally miles and miles of country that is never hunted. BC is quite different though. Lots of logging and oil gas exploration has opened the country up. During hunting season the roads and rivers are packed with southern hunters. Two years ago an outfitter friend of mine was flying over the Ketcheka river on the opening day of elk season. He counted 92 large jet boats all on the river that day. Those were elk hunters. That area has been virtually hunted out now. The same thing has happened all over the province actually. Logging in BC hasn't helped either. The logging companies spray the cut blocks after they log it and re-plant. The spray is designed to kill the new growth that comes up ( willows and poplar) and give the new trees they planted a head start. This of course is not what happens in a natural burn, and it takes away the feed moose need. So logging has done way more harm in that province than good as far as wildlife is concerned. I agree that we all have a right to be out on the land, but limiting access ( think ATVs Jet boats etc) can help. Jet boats are death on spawning grayling.....and yes I do use them but sparingly...[/quote]

That 'spray' (which is Glyphosate, the same active ingredient as they put in Round-up) is pure evil. Thankfully i'm too far away for any logging for it to be used near my trapline BUT it's poison and it's in the fish and bush meat wherever they are spraying. I consistently go to our town meeting when the timber company holds an open forum and make people aware that they can, in Manitoba, request that they minimize the amount of spray used on their lines.Although a request is supposed to suspend spraying, albeit temporarily, till a plan can be arranged to benefit both the trapper and timber company mutually .... they NEVER honor it and spray with impunity. It's sad. I'm absolutely not against timber harvesting but i am 100% against spraying so that the timber harvest is 'easier'. It's insanity.

https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1646671427703


Trapline #53 - Split Lake
Northern Manitoba
Re: Wolf Wackos Again [Re: white17] #6872681
05/14/20 09:13 PM
05/14/20 09:13 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 446
Southeast, AK
R
rosscoak Offline
trapper
rosscoak  Offline
trapper
R

Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 446
Southeast, AK
Ktoo...liberal news media , just had an article where the regional supervisor , Tom Schumacher stated the wolf number's on Pow werebased off a hair board sampling from 2013!!!!!!

I really hope the BOG asks some serious questions as to the department's research numbers and methods....I wouldn't doubt there is wrong side business happening within.

Page 2 of 2 1 2
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

Moderated by  akntrpr, Ol' Blister, otterman 

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1