Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you Sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

  • Announcements

    • Rick

      Members Only Fluid Forum View   08/08/2017

      Fluid forum view allows members only to get right to the meat of this community; the topics. You can toggle between your preferred forum view just below to the left on the main forum entrance. You will see three icons. Try them out and see what you prefer.   Fluid view allows you, if you are a signed up member, to see the newest topic posts in either all forums (select none or all) or in just your favorite forums (select the ones you want to see when you come to Fishing Minnesota). It keeps and in real time with respect to Topic posts and lets YOU SELECT YOUR FAVORITE FORUMS. It can make things fun and easy. This is especially true for less experienced visitors raised on social media. If you, as a members want more specific topics, you can even select a single forum to view. Let us take a look at fluid view in action. We will then break it down and explain how it works in more detail.   The video shows the topic list and the forum filter box. As you can see, it is easy to change the topic list by changing the selected forums. This view replaces the traditional list of categories and forums.   Of course, members only can change the view to better suit your way of browsing.   You will notice a “grid” option. We have moved the grid forum theme setting into the main forum settings. This makes it an option for members only to choose. This screenshot also shows the removal of the forum breadcrumb in fluid view mode. Fluid view remembers your last forum selection so you don’t lose your place when you go back to the listing. The benefit of this feature is easy to see. It removes a potential barrier of entry for members only. It puts the spotlight on topics themselves, and not the hierarchical forum structure. You as a member will enjoy viewing many forums at once and switching between them without leaving the page. We hope that fluid view, the new functionality is an asset that you enjoy .
Sign in to follow this  
BuckSutherland

UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!!!!!!

Recommended Posts

If you care about the MN moose please click the link and proceed to scratch your head as I did.

http://minnesota.cbslocal.com/video/8299888-high-tech-research-targets-moose-mortality-mystery/

RIGHT FROM THE DNR:

Quote:

Data collected during the first nine months of the DNR's moose mortality project has given wildlife researchers an unprecedented view into the lives and deaths of Minnesota moose.

In many instances, researchers know what killed a particular moose. From locations transmitted by high-tech GPS collars, researchers have watched an animal's movements in the days and hours leading up to its death. For a select group of moose, researchers were able to observe fluctuations in the animals' temperatures as injury, trauma or sickness occurred and life slipped away.

As yet, there isn't enough data to answer with certainty why Minnesota's moose population has dropped 52 percent since 2010. And it's far too early in the study for researchers to even consider possible solutions that might slow the precipitous decline.

Science is a slow process. Data must be collected during the course of multiple years so variations in weather, habitat, physiology and behavior can be factored in. Collected data must be analyzed and compared. Only then can likely causes can be determined and potential solutions offered.

DNR researchers do know that 88 of the 100 adult moose collared in winter 2013 still roam northeastern Minnesota. Only 10 of the 34 moose calves collared in May survive. Researchers have retrieved most of the dead animals from the field and subsequently determined the causes of their deaths.

More adult and newborn moose will be collared in 2014 during the second year of the project. Additional funding for a third year is being sought so this first-of-its-kind study can continue. Without the information and insight the study can provide, there is little hope that these massive and majestic animals will continue to be a source of awe in Minnesota's north woods.

Please note the printed version says only 12 of the 100 died, but the graph says that 19 died. Nice proofreading of the propaganda. Three quarts of the calf deaths and over half the adult deaths come from wolves. REALLY?!?!?! Do we even need to proceed with another expensive study?? And they act like they have NO CLUE what is going on. Trying to blame it on weather too?? Give me a break. There little study has ZERO "weather" deaths. THE TWO BIGGEST KILLERS OF THE MOOSE are THE WOLVES AND THE DNR. Hope you wolf loving fools are happy.

full-40170-42241-adultmort.gif

full-40170-42242-calfmort.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical DNR response - "lets milk this to the max".....and continue to misuse the funds and taxpayer money.

Truly classic!

And the DNR wonders why no one trusts them or believes anything they say or document?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like an interesting study to me, pretty tough to come to a conclusion after only one season,and our tax dollars have been wasted on far less important studies than this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like an interesting study to me, pretty tough to come to a conclusion after only one season,and our tax dollars have been wasted on far less important studies than this.

Have you ever thought of applying for DNR commissioner? Sounds like you could step right in without missing a step.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there is overlap in the 19 dead vs. 12 dead. I went to a seminar where they explained that they try to have 100 adults currently wearing collars. The 19 dead may include moose collared at other times. "88 of 100 collared in 2013 currently alive" The data may include moose which were recovered but collared in 2012. I agree that it is contradictory but I don't think that this shows, somehow, that all of the data is then bogus.

And I don't think the data can be used as is and this soon to directly come to terms with why their numbers are declining. A stressed population and individuals will be more vulnerable to predation. Liver flukes, winter ticks, changing weather patterns all might be playing a part in weakening moose. I don't see this as a waste of money. I see it as a genuine attempt to understand why our moose population is failing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this were a private company doing research as to where money their is being lost/wasted the 'study' would be O.V.E.R. The only way this 'study' continues is when someone elses money is being spent.

More importantly what do YOU suggest they do about this crisis??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this were a private company doing research as to where money their is being lost/wasted the 'study' would be O.V.E.R. The only way this 'study' continues is when someone elses money is being spent.

Unlikely. Usually private companies in the research game employ scientists that take a methodical approach at asking the question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bucky,

Since you have found fault in this study and feel no need for it to go any further, please explain to us your take on the situation and what needs to be done to fix our MN Moose population..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bucky,

Since you have found fault in this study and feel no need for it to go any further, please explain to us your take on the situation and what needs to be done to fix our MN Moose population..

What do you think my answer will be??? I might as well not say it since it will just get deleted or my post will get altered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quote:
What do you think my answer will be??? I might as well not say it since it will just get deleted or my post will get altered.

Oh come on now quiet being a poor sport, throw your ideas out there, you provide us with other peoples graphs, charts, timelines ect. but id'e like to hear your ideas..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, other wolves.

I fail to see in the data you provided where that determination can be made. IMO to get more accurate information a full autopsy should be done to determine if there were any other underlying factors that "allowed" the wolves to kill them.

Dont get me wrong, I am a firm believer that wolves have an impact, but in order to make sure the wolve huggers do not cry foul with the research, they better cover their bases really well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a firm believer that wolves have an impact, but in order to make sure the wolve huggers do not cry foul with the research, they better cover their bases really well.

right on. when a new lawsuit is filed every year it seems to put them back on the endangered list, it should be nice to have a study such as this saying why they should be kept in check.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you guys but the true answer is....Wolves, Wolves and Wolves.

The Minnesota study shows it (first rendition)...We all know it. Same thing is happening in Idaho and Montana with Elk herds in certain areas. Why waste the time and money?

Calves are being killed/eaten - there is nothing bringing up the rear so to speak as far as the population diversity. All the remaining animals are older adults or few young adults that made it past the teeth of the wolves.

Please note, I am not saying "destroy and hunt the wolves to zero".

I have said it before.....I like the wildlife diversity of everything Minnesota has to offer - wolves included. I got them around my where we live and deer hunt. Kinda cool seeing them from time to time.

Now if they get into my 3 labs, I'm sure my opinion will change - as I have seen the number on what they do to hounds out West in Idaho...not pretty.

We just have too many (wolfs) and they need to be thinned and kept in check....hence, we had our second wolf season in Minnesota. I think we need to keep at it for a while.

I dont think nor trust what the MN DNR says about the wolf population in MN. In 1989 they said it was about 2,000 animals. Two years ago, they said it was about 2,500. So in 23 yrs, the wolf population only went up by 500 animals. Really? C'mon now!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unlikely. Usually private companies in the research game employ scientists that take a methodical approach at asking the question.

At a minimum, 60% of the moose killed this year were by wolves. If Best Buy (for example) finds out that 60% of it's losses are coming from one area, how long until they take corrective action? Not very long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At a minimum, 60% of the moose killed this year were by wolves. If Best Buy (for example) finds out that 60% of it's losses are coming from one area, how long until they take corrective action? Not very long.

I generally use statistics and whatnot to support my scientific conclusions. I don't have a copy of Best Buy's corporate operating protocol at the lab bench. Just saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wolf population up - moose population down. Natural Resources 101 at any college would teach them this ?

Wolves will have a tough time with a healthy adult moose, but the calves are a primary source of food.

I guess many would argue that along the Northern Tier - wolves have knocked back the whitetails to the point that they need to eat moose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  



  • Posts

    • That's because this is the cooking thread and not Silly Town. Plenty of whining be-oches to argue with over there all day!
    • You guys must have a nicer wife than I've got. By the end of the day I'm worn out from arguing with her and come here for a break. Seems like the opposite on here sometimes. 
    • Yes, we buy the spray cans of olive oil,canola or whatever. I personally haven't tried fish but with breaded chicken I'm not a big fan. It works great when I make wings and non battered chicken. Just my personal experience.
    • That is a thing of beauty. I am speechless and if you know me........
    • Those are cool but I enjoy the amount of water that mixes with my whiskey when I put 2 or 3 cubes of ice in it.
    • That's why my wife is getting one for Winter Solstice too!
    • Milton’s put 1/8 on your house? Was that the new owner? Mines Miltona, 4 years old and came with either 1/4 or 5/16, not 100% sure but it wasn’t 1/8. 
    • I get what Del is saying to a certain extent. I would never buy a bottle of Pappy for $2000. There's no way that any whiskey can taste 40-50 times better than a $30-$50 bottle. I actually rarely buy anything over $35/bottle but that's just me being cheap. I do like to try the $50 stuff but have rarely found anything that I like better than Eagle Rare, Buffalo Trace or Maker's Mark. Actually one of my favorite Bourbon's is Jim Beam Black for only about $25 a bottle. That being said I couldn't care less what other people drink or what they pay for their whiskey, beer, wine or whatever. If you have a job and make your own money, buy and drink what you want. I don't know if that's true or not but I sometimes wonder the same thing about all the people who claim to like really hoppy beers.
    • Between the frig and stove its only about 2 steps    My kinda program !!!
    • like any addiction..........there are the 12 steps!!!!!!!!!!
  • Our Sponsors