Antlerless moose hunts and transplanting Sitka Blacktail deer

Tomorrow is Christmas Day! You already have the tree decorated and even some presents wrapped and sitting under it. Your dinner’s main course is thawing in the refrigerator, and you’re looking forward to all the excitement of tomorrow’s gift exchange and dinner with friends and family. Stop and reflect on why we celebrate this day and thank God for the Gift of His only Son to us so He could reconcile our sinful ways with the Father.

Last week, during our regular monthly meeting of the Matanuska-Susitna Borough Fish and Wildlife Commission (MSBFWC), we had two Fish and Game department, game division biologists give us presentations on two pending topics: antlerless moose hunts and transplanting Sitka Blacktail deer to the Mat-Su Valley.

Governor Dunleavy has asked Fish and Game to explore the possibility of transplanting the blacktail deer into the Valley with the goal of eventually having a huntable population. This new “meat supply” would improve food security issues for Alaskan residents.

The biologist making this presentation said the program was just getting started with the department tasked to determine if there is public support to make this introduction and whether, biologically, the deer could survive here in the Mat-Su. The department will be reaching out in various meetings and formats to ascertain if public support exists. I expect the public will definitely support this idea.

In my opinion, the main problem with this proposal will arise with the biology. Sitka blacktails are currently doing nicely in Southeast Alaska and around the Kodiak area and certain places in Prince William Sound. These areas are all influenced by a maritime climate, which moderates winter temperatures. These areas rarely experience subzero winter temperatures, and if they do happen, the cold usually doesn’t last longer than a day or two. Large trees provide good canopy cover, and the vegetation is of the lush, rainforest variety.

The Mat-Su regularly experiences long-term periods of subzero temperatures, sometimes as cold as fifty degrees below zero. We don’t have large trees contributing to a dense canopy of cover, blocking snow accumulation on the ground, and the vegetation is not as lush as the maritime areas.

I don’t think this transplant will work. The deer are not hardy enough to survive our winters. Canadian whitetailed deer might make it because they live in a climate and under similar conditions to what we have here. However, whitetails carry diseases which are transferable to moose. I hope the department puts a lot of thought into this situation and can suggest another species more adapted to our climate and situation.

The other presentation regarded the current population status of moose in GMUs 13, 14, and 16. There is a motion in front of the MSBFWC to request Fish and Game to not hold the late season antlerless moose hunts (November and December area-wide), or at least reduce the drawing permit numbers significantly when population numbers are below population objectives. There’s a secondary motion to ban the shooting of cows with calves or calves by themselves in the late season.

The department biologist addressed both issues. Using the best data available, the moose population in GMU 14A appears to be almost one thousand animals over the population objective established by the department. The calf/cow ratio is healthy, as is the bull/cow ratio.

The biologist stated that when the cow in a cow/calf pair is lost during the winter, for whatever reason, the calf will usually survive. Department studies have concluded that if the calf survives into the fall/early winter, the calf will normally survive whether the cow is present or not.

If the population numbers shrink far enough, antlerless moose hunting will be restricted, if not eliminated. Drawing permit numbers are already being reduced in areas where lower moose numbers have been documented. The department has noticed a decline in moose numbers recently and is monitoring the situation and will make corrections as appropriate.

Both motions may be coming back at the next meeting of the MSBFWC in January with revised wording. I argued against both motions since all they were doing was requesting the department to do what they are already doing. I don’t see any advantage to pressuring the department to do what they are already telling us they plan to do.

Most people don’t understand population dynamics. I was taught that to grow an ungulate population (deer family), only harvest males. Once the population is stable or over objective, harvest bulls, cows, and calves. That’s where we are right now.