kwackkillncrew wrote:Dont want to side track the fishing thread to much but what do you think caused the moose decline (I have no idea so I am not setting anything up)
Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
They haven't declined in the Northeast. 2006 was a peak number for the Moose population in the survey, which I would say is an "outlier" year. No wildlife population should be managed based off A) a peak survey count B) in a knee-jerk fashion based on the most recent survey year. The most inaccurate and unreliable data when it comes to wildlife surveys is the most recent year. Wildlife surveys are meant to track longterm population trends.....they were never supposed to give an exact number, and especially aren't meant to give an exact number the current year. It takes at least 3-5 years to be able to see if any survey is worth a shit. It is very common for wildlife surveys to take a shit every so often.....sampling methods get skewed and produce survey results that indicate the population being much higher or lower relative to what it is. These years are easy to see when charted on a graph a decade or two later......there's the line tracking the actual population being illustrated....and there's a dot way the fukc off the line a year or two.....outliers....the years sampling was fukced due to weather conditions or a million other factors man isn't even aware of that could throw it way off.
2006 was such a year for the Moose population.....that year the sampling methods sampled a lot more of the population than in previous years and once extrapolated to produce the survey count......it reported a number that was heavily skewed on the high side.
Thus, when they closed the season based off "an alarming decrease" it was the DNR being retards. The population has been stable for twenty five years.....it's actually the highest now it's been since 2006, and is most likely higher than it was that year since it was a clear outlier. The calf to cow ratio looks great.....shows a very healthy number compared to ten years ago.....not just a sustaining population but a growing one.
So to answer your question.....nothing caused the decline because there never was one.
I could give you a whole list of ways to increase Moose numbers.....kill wolves, clean up our shit forests so they resemble what they were like over a century ago, but one thing is for certain.....
....climate change doesn't have a fukcing thing to do with it. Northern MN is one of the few blips on the globe where temperatures have gotten colder. Even if they'd gone up a degree....who fukcing cares? Animals can handle a degree change....it's not a big deal. The climate has always changed. It's not getting warmer.....so bullshit excuse.....but even if it was?
Williston, ND has a burgeoning Moose population....there's a shit ton of them there that exploded in the last quarter century.....a Moose population boom......
That took place while the Bakken oil boom took place....land was fragmented with roads, people, and vehicles freaking everywhere at all hours.....enough flared wells to make night no longer be night, in a place that gets twelve to fifteen inches less rainfall than Northeast MN and is much hotter on average, due to scorching summers.......
Yet low and behold the Moose population exploded there.......
.....so if it can happen in a place much warmer with all kinds of industrial shit taking place to alter the entire landscape, then it kind of makes the DNR look like fukcing retards for thinking Moose are declining in places like the BWCA due to climate change, doesn't it?
But what else do we expect from the same fukcing idiots who fukced up and said there was a decline in the first place.....might as well have a fake fukced up reason like climate change be what's causing their fake fukced up Moose decline......
