» Advanced

Go Back   Shooters Forum > General > General Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Donate Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-12-2005, 08:51 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7
White Moose - Not Albino


Registered Users do not see the above ad.


Hey all.... wandering what kind of response other hunters would get from pic's like these.











Those are all wild moose about 20 miles from my home. They're not albino.

Who would shoot them if they were moose hunting and could legally do it?

Here's a link to a bunch of cool moose hunting pic's from an outfitter in Ontario.

http://airivanhoe.com/MooseHunting/MooseMaster1.htm

Joel
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 02-12-2005, 09:35 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Lone Star State
Posts: 47
How do you know they're not albino? Just curious. I would have assumed they were if I had just seen them. I think I'd just let one walk, but not knowing all the details I guess I can't say for sure. Don't think I'd shoot an albino whitetail either, or a black one. Maybe I'm just getting soft. Talked to a guy who shot a melanistic whitetail this year. Appearantly there are some decent populations of them some places.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-14-2005, 06:33 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Thayer, Missouri
Posts: 160
If they are albinos they will have red eyes.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-19-2005, 08:21 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: north minnesota
Posts: 7
I seen some in alaska and was told they are albinos not all albinos have red eyes
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-19-2005, 10:35 AM
muzzell's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 162
ya know i think they are albinos, albinos tend to have pink eyes but not always. What needs to be done in find the cow that gave birth to these and take it along with these. They are cool to look at but they can create unwanted genetic traits in there off spring, and with out high preditor populations that take game that is odd and can't comoflage them selves they are left free to multiply. Someone (fish and game) needs to eleminate this or capture them as specimens.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-19-2005, 07:11 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: PA
Posts: 608
All true albino's have pink/red eyes ALL of them, if they lack that trait then they still have pigment in them and are there for not full albinos.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-20-2005, 08:17 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7
Red eyes...

Quote:
Originally Posted by zzirg
I seen some in alaska and was told they are albinos not all albinos have red eyes

Is this for real? I've never heard such a thing. I was under the impression that it was a requirement that they lacked the pigment in their eyes to be considered albino, and that these guys as such, couldn't be considered albino..?

Does anyone else know?

Joel
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-20-2005, 08:23 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7
Good WORK on the note..

Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzell
ya know i think they are albinos, albinos tend to have pink eyes but not always. What needs to be done in find the cow that gave birth to these and take it along with these. They are cool to look at but they can create unwanted genetic traits in there off spring, and with out high preditor populations that take game that is odd and can't comoflage them selves they are left free to multiply. Someone (fish and game) needs to eleminate this or capture them as specimens.
I've actually been trying very hard to get the government to capture them and get them into a large, fenced in park, where they can be studied.

Also, white moose in the white snow seems to be good camo to me. Further, I didn't post the pic's of the bull which was shot about 20 miles from my home, but it seemed to exhibit some melanistic traits. We may be in a situation where if we allow a live capture, and our scientists are able to do a good job, like earlier generations did with dog breeding, we can end up with a breed of moose which are white in the winter and brown in the summer.

who knows?

Check out this bull. Both pic's are the same animal...




Kind of interesting color pattern EH...

Joel
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-24-2005, 03:56 AM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 47
I live in NC so we have no moose, but its not too uncommen to see a py bald, melanistic deer. The mointain deer that i hunt tend to have black mains when older. In fact the buck I shot this year had a black stripe down its back. Saw a spotted deer crossing the road on the way to Lowes one morning.

Nice pics,
Brandon
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-28-2005, 05:30 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: CA,USA
Posts: 2
The term is "Luesistic" they are as close to true albinoism without the pink eyes. They do have dark color eyes and if I recall there are supposed to be penned up "White Deers" in CA. As for Pibald has more like white patches like someone painted them (kind a cool looking on Ball Pythons like someone dipped them in white paint). Then there are others with Hypomelanistic which is more like a "peroxide blonde" all in all genetics are fun.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-28-2005, 07:13 AM
Irv S's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Colorado/Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by muzzell
What needs to be done in find the cow that gave birth to these and take it along with these. They are cool to look at but they can create unwanted genetic traits in there off spring, and with out high preditor populations that take game that is odd and can't comoflage them selves they are left free to multiply. Someone (fish and game) needs to eleminate this or capture them as specimens.
I STRONGLY disagree. They are merely a different color phase caused by a mutated gene. The different color phases common among black bears are caused by similar mutations that occurred many years ago. The white "glacier bear" color phase is now highly sought after as a trophy.

Not all mutations are deletarious, some are adaptive. If the white color phase of the moose pictured is advantageous, the color phase will become more common through selection for the trait. If it is deleterious, it will remain rare or disappear (one of my qualifications to say this is a Ph.D. in Zoology). The post by the thread originator(Joel@Whitemoose) on 2/20/05 of a harvested partially white bull suggests that, if the trait is neutral or advantageous, mature bulls of this color phase will be fantastic trophies .

These animals should be left alone (or even temporarily protected) to determine whether the trait is advantageous or deleterious, not destroyed. I also disagree with capturing them and moving them to a large enclosure because in captivity the "natural" selection would be compromised to some extent by "artificial" selection. It is unlikely the scientists who would study them in an enclosure could develop a strain of moose that would change color with the seasons as the snowshoe hares do. That would require yet another mutation and we do not yet have the technical capability to induce desired mutations on demand.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 02-28-2005, 09:33 AM
muzzell's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Wy
Posts: 162
Tu- sha, I like your thinking and the more I though about this and looked at them my thought has changed, and I totaly agree with you Irv.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-28-2005, 10:37 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7
Question

"I also disagree with capturing them and moving them to a large enclosure because in captivity the "natural" selection would be compromised to some extent by "artificial" selection."

- Is anyone thinking that dogs, horses, cows, or chickens are bad? I'm getting to the point that all of these animals were at one time wild, and it was through 'artificial' selection that the desired traits were brought out. Maybe the 'snow shoe' mutation has already occurred, but is just not extremely visually apparent. Has anyone seen pic's of a deer with the odd apparent color change as is shown by the pic's of the bull?

There are 2 ways that I've found to look at the situation.
1- These guys are nothing special, just bad defects (not my view).
2- These guys may be an evolutionary link (more along the lines I'm thinking).

Scenario 1: These animals would still be more valuable in a large park, where they can be viewed and increase in numbers. Also, we should separate these bad genes from the rest of the herd.

Scenario 2: They should be protected to see what happens. However, due to unnatural forces like trains, automobiles, and human hunters, relying on natural selection to ensure the long term survival of this strain (if it is beneficial) seems tough to accept. Furthermore, concepts of natural selection by predators may be well adapted to large open plains, but no so well suited for dense areas, where mountain lions can leap from tree's onto the backs of these animals.

Through my work, I've seen plenty of very healthy moose which were taken by wolves and mountain lions, but I fail to see how this is 'natural selection' rather than bad luck for the moose.

So basically, it seems that either way, a live capture and relocation into a large park seems to be a good idea.

Irv S. , I believe we'll be in contact for a while.

Comments... Thoughts...?
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 02-28-2005, 02:37 PM
Irv S's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Colorado/Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,426
Quote:
Originally Posted by joel@whitemoose
- Is anyone thinking that dogs, horses, cows, or chickens are bad? I'm getting to the point that all of these animals were at one time wild, and it was through 'artificial' selection that the desired traits were brought out. Maybe the 'snow shoe' mutation has already occurred, but is just not extremely visually apparent.

There are 2 ways that I've found to look at the situation.
1- These guys are nothing special, just bad defects (not my view).
2- These guys may be an evolutionary link (more along the lines I'm thinking).

Scenario 1: These animals would still be more valuable in a large park, where they can be viewed and increase in numbers. Also, we should separate these bad genes from the rest of the herd.

Scenario 2: They should be protected to see what happens. However, due to unnatural forces like trains, automobiles, and human hunters, relying on natural selection to ensure the long term survival of this strain (if it is beneficial) seems tough to accept. Furthermore, concepts of natural selection by predators may be well adapted to large open plains, but no so well suited for dense areas, where mountain lions can leap from tree's onto the backs of these animals.

Comments... Thoughts...?
Dogs, horses, cows, and chickens have been domesticated and most are now ill suited for living in the wild. The feral animals of these species that manage to survive in the wild will quickly (over the course of generations) revert to resemble more closely the wild forms from which these domesticated animals have been derived. My concern with the large enclosure approach is that some degree of domestication will occur which will render the offsping several generations later less fit to thrive in the wild. I don't view domestic animals as bad, I just believe wild moose are more valuable in their natural habitat than partially domesticated moose in zoos or animal farms. A captive segment of the white moose population bred to provide animals to supplement the wild population could be a viable option if sufficient genetic interchange between the captive and wild animals is maintained. I am however opposed to schemes under which the entire whit colored segment of the wild population is confined so that "natural" selection is severely restricted.

Our concept of what is a "good" or "bad" mutation has no value to animals in the wild. A "good" mutation from the viewpoint of the population is one that enhances survival and/or reproduction while a "bad" one reduces it relative to the original gene. Evolution proceeds by selective forces spreading "good" genes throughout a population's "gene pool" and eliminating mutations causing "bad" ones from it. Predators are not the only force in natural selection. There may be other traits (of which we are not aware) associated with the color mutation that affect the survival and/or reproduction of the individuals having the mutated gene that may (will?) respond differently to natural selection than to artificial selection. For example, the gene for albinoism (which is not what these these moose have) has a severe detrimental affect on vision. Trains and automobiles are now a part of what was "natural" habitat in the past and will be a factor in evolution of the species. My suggestion of "temporary protection" was aimed at reducing disparate mortality by hunters preferring this color phase as a trophy over the normal colored moose before the color phase becomes common enough to sustain a harvest.

I've used the word "population" loosely above in referring to the "white moose population". From a "population genetics" perspective, the "population" is actually the entire assemblage of the moose that are interbreeding and the white moose are a "sub-population" of that assemblage.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 03-01-2005, 06:47 AM
MikeG's Avatar
The Hog Whisperer (Administrator)
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 27,051
My thought is, if white moose were a substantial improvement to the species, we'd be covered up in them by now. Doesn't take Mother Nature long to sort out the good from the bad.

I don't see being white as helping the moose in the wild. Most predators (that can take on a moose, anyway) hunt with their noses, not their eyes.

Human predation of moose is limited (mostly) by tags/permits, and seasons, so color of moose is a moot point for human hunters. If they're harder to take, we'll issue more tags; if it's easier, we'll issue fewer.
__________________
MikeG

Quote:
Originally Posted by faucettb
Welcome to the forum. Rules are simple, be nice and join in.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 03-05-2005, 10:31 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7
"Human predation of moose is limited (mostly) by tags/permits, and seasons, so color of moose is a moot point for human hunters. "

- What about trains and trucks...
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 03-17-2005, 09:11 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Alaska
Posts: 5,228
In at least one Game Management unit here in Alaska, GMA20C, "white phased or partial albino(more than 50% white)may not be taken".
__________________
Wild Sheep Federation - Life Member
OVIS/Grand Slam Club - Life Member
Safari Club International - Life Member
National Rifle Association - Life Member
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 03-24-2005, 02:38 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 7
Cc: Joel T.
Sent: Wednesday, March 23, 2005 11:50 PM
Subject: White Moose - Recent News & Pic's...


Mr. Bob Johnston,

I would like to begin by stating that I've been highly impressed by the efforts of your staff and yourself to help me establish a walleye hatchery on Nemegosenda lake. It is my sincere hope that your team will perform with the same excellence in regards to the white moose projects. Fortunately for your team, the first task requested by my group will require little "work" other than a pen stroke with your signature. The document should indicate that as the individual with express authority from the Minister of Natural Resources to protect the White Moose in WMU 30 and 31, you authorize removal of moose (which are more than 50% white)

from the hunting roster for 2005.



You had indicated that such an act would require consultation with a team of biologists and no protection could be afforded without determining these animals to be a new species. However, this requirement was not needed to afford protection to the kermode (spirit) bears of BC. Nor was it needed to protect white moose in such jurisdictions as Alaska or Labrador. The apparent view of those responsible for implementing hunting regulations in these areas (and others) is that such rare animals are more valuable to the public alive, as the best viewing and photography opportunities come to an abrupt halt if the animal perishes. I, and thousands of others, see no valid reason why the same type of legislation would not be enacted to help protect these extremely rare animals. In fact, Resolution 05-66 was passed by City of Timmins on March 7, 2005 to formally request of the Minister of Natural Resources to regulate the hunting of White Moose and afford them a protected status as a unique symbol of Northern Ontario.

I should note that by no means am I asking for a permanent removal of moose, which are more than 50% white, from the hunting roster in Ontario. When the Armstrong strain of white moose is no longer such a rarity, the hunt should be re-opened and regulated. There should be permits issued specifically for White Moose. I'm proposing that Ontario begin to finally make use of its resources to their fullest potential and place these animals under tempory protection, similar to putting money in a bank to allow it to grow.

My research has indicated that no such legislation has been enacted because the MNR would prefer these animals removed from the general population, seemingly out of fear that they will spread faulty genes to the general herd. Personally, I don't think that evolution has simply stopped because humans have become so technologically advanced. These genes may actually be a blessing. A white moose would seem to have a distinct advantage over a brown moose during the winter months. Furthermore, if it is true that wolves hunt with their noses in the summer, white moose would seem to suffer no great disadvantage to brown moose. More interestingly, this strain appears to have an odd variation involving grey guard hairs (even on the calves) which i've not seen on other strains of white moose. Is it really that far fetched that this strain may have the genetic ability (with a little luck) to produce moose which can molt from brown to white seasonally, similar to a snow shoe rabbit? Due to the uniqueness of these animals, it would seem that the best way to protect them is a live capture and relocation into a large, mixed composition, fenced in, park. Given the fact that trains, automobiles, natural hazards (like falling through the ice), and natural predators are factors beyond our control, a fence is seemingly a temporary necessity.

If it is the case that these animals are merely genetic defects as the MNR apparently believes to be the case, separation from the herd would seem to be the most sensible solution. However, given the immense value in terms of creation and diversification of employment opportunities that could be created by these animals (in an area largely devoid of industry), a live capture and relocation into a large fenced in, mixed habitat, park would seem to be the most logical solution. Interestingly, both of our opinions lead to the same conclusion regarding the best course of action.


So, the second request that I am making of you is that you have your staff start the paper work process (which I and others will gladly assist) to issue the permits for a live capture and relocation of the White Moose in WMU 30 and WMU 31. Ordinarily, I would believe that only the Minister of Natural Resources would be capable to authorize such a live capture, but given my reciept of a recent letter from the Honorable David Ramsay (the current Minister of Natural Resources), it would seem that this authority has been delegated to your person. I will be providing more details very shortly regarding the proposed transfer location for captured white moose.

Thank you for your time and I am eager to continue working with you for the betterment of Northern Ontario.

Sincerely yours,

Joel Theriault


Edited to remove email addresses.

Kdub
Moderator

Last edited by kdub; 03-24-2005 at 04:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 03-24-2005, 03:15 PM
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 511
Do the folks whose emails you posted a favor and take their emails down before a spammer's bot rips this page and finds them.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 03-24-2005, 04:51 PM
Jack Monteith's Avatar
Beartooth Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Saskatchewan
Posts: 7,788
I deleted the email addresses in the 2nd post above.

Posting your own email address isn't a good idea, especially when emailing through Beartooth and Presonal Messages are available. Posting other peoples emails without, I assume, their permission is out of bounds.

Bye
Jack
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Terrible Moose Story alyeska338 My Neck-Of-The-Woods 7 02-23-2005 04:22 PM
Anchorage skier shoots moose alyeska338 My Neck-Of-The-Woods 14 07-06-2004 10:46 AM
Testy moose alyeska338 My Neck-Of-The-Woods 1 03-14-2003 07:35 PM
Bad Moose alyeska338 My Neck-Of-The-Woods 0 01-23-2003 08:14 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:41 AM.

< Contact Us - Shooters Forum - Archive >

 
 

All Content & Design Copyright © 1999-2002 Beartooth Bullets, All Rights Reserved
View Privacy Policy | Contact Webmaster | Legal Information
Website Design & Development By Exbabylon Internet Solutions
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2