Changes To Archery Mule Deer.

[packhuntr]

I have heard some things regarding the new changes to our mules and our archery hunts but dont know whats up for sure. Anyone know the particulars on this deal?

[gramps73]

From what I have heard it will be draw starting next season, no more general tag for mule buck..
IMO just shut it down to out of province and things will work them self out..

[H380]

From what I have heard it will be draw starting next season, no more general tag for mule buck..
IMO just shut it down to out of province and things will work them self out..

Sorry Gramps , that would be too simple .

[gramps73]

just saying, but i know what you mean..

[H380]

Maybe just a rumor but I heard that all outfitter mule tags have been pulled as a result of the new draw . May or may not be true , but I am willing to give up my general tag if that is correct .

[wbl170]

Outfitter tags pulled? I wish but highly doubt it.

[Martyn6]

allot of outfitter tags where pulled this year not just mule deer!

[sheephunter]

From what I have heard it will be draw starting next season, no more general tag for mule buck..
IMO just shut it down to out of province and things will work them self out..

A large number of WMUs are scheduled for draw but not all.

[pottymouth]

A large number of WMUs are scheduled for draw but not all.

The pressure that's gonna create on those non draws is going to be scary.

I also heard that the draw will be one muley draw for bowhunters and rifle guys. For at least 2 years, until the Ibm contract is up. Then they may consider splitting the two, like the antelope draw.

This draw is just plain dumb!!!

[sheephunter]

The pressure that's gonna create on those non draws is going to be scary.

I also heard that the draw will be one muley draw for bowhunters and rifle guys. For at least 2 years, until the Ibm contract is up. Then they may consider splitting the two, like the antelope draw.

This draw is just plain dumb!!!

Ya, no doubt surrounding general WMUs will quickly surpass the 15% minimum. I'm not sure a decision has been made on the draw type yet but I know ESRD recommended one draw as it is now.

[Huevos]

When I was a kid we had a 3 point rule on mule deer. If we are worried about numbers of deer, why not just start with some restrictions on what you can harvest? For starters, currently, I can shoot any mule deer with a bow, why?
Wouldn't it make more sense to leave it general season to collect all the revenue from all the guys who buy tags and change the animals to 4 point or better? Another option is to shorten the season. Maybe another is to limit landowner tags. As a land owner, why should I have the option of buying a mule buck tag every year I don't get drawn? Nice for me, but hardly fair. So many options, why a draw? Just a thought, but i am no biologist.

[IR_mike]

When I was a kid we had a 3 point rule on mule deer. If we are worried about numbers of deer, why not just start with some restrictions on what you can harvest? For starters, currently, I can shoot any mule deer with a bow, why?
Wouldn't it make more sense to leave it general season to collect all the revenue from all the guys who buy tags and change the animals to 4 point or better? Another option is to shorten the season. Maybe another is to limit landowner tags. As a land owner, why should I have the option of buying a mule buck tag every year I don't get drawn? Nice for me, but hardly fair. So many options, why a draw? Just a thought, but i am no biologist.

Very well said.

Remove access to mulie, moose, antelope, bighorn, and mountain goat from non residents.

Manage the landowner tags for trophy quality in regards to mule deer.

[ishootbambi]

i posted this a while back, and honestly, im stunned that there was so little response to it. ill copy and paste.....




For 2011, there were 58,924 completed surveys for all licence types, which was 26% of all licences purchased (222,957 in total).*

In regards specifically to the “General Mule Deer licence” (the licence used during the archery only season for antlered mule deer), 4,183 people responded to the survey for this licence type. There were a total of 14,501 licences sold, meaning 29% of hunters who purchased this licence responded to the survey.

Using the survey results and the actual harvest numbers, the estimated harvest for each WMU is determined. From these numbers and the response of hunters to the questions regarding the weapon used, the archery harvest is estimated. If the survey results have a low sample size, the results are taken with a grain of salt and their accuracy is questionable. For the purpose of determining the archery harvest and allocation of antlered mule deer harvest for bow hunters, SRD only looks at the number of antlered mule deer harvested by the General Mule Deer Licence during the archery only season. Bowhunters who harvested a mule deer under the authority of a Special Licence obtained in the draw process are not counted as part of the general mule deer harvest for this analysis.


. Data is for the 2011 hunting season and is for WMUs 108, 208 and 357. Harvest is only for bow hunter kills during the archery only season and does not take into account youth bow hunter harvest (which occurred in all zones). Estimated total harvest includes bow hunter harvest from General and Youth Licences, Special Licences (the draw) and Landowner Licences.


WMU Bowhunter
Respondent
Per WMU Estimated
Bowhunters Reported Antlered
MUDE Bhtr Harvest Est Bow hunter Harvest Est Total Harvest Est % Bow Hunter Harvest
108 64 222 14 49 157 31.2
208 58 201 10 35 85 41.2
357 54 187 6 21 66 31.8

In calculating the numbers (using the stats from WMU 108 as an example), the 64 bowhunters who responded on the game harvest survey who had a general mule deer tag is divided by the total of 4,183 people who responded (all bowhunters, and rifle hunters who had the general mule deer tag). This (1.53 % or .0153) is the actual percentage of hunters with this licence who bowhunted in WMU 108. This is then multiplied by the overall number of hunters who bought a general mule deer license (.0153 x 14501) to come up with the estimated number of bowhunters who bowhunted WMU 108 (222). To estimate the bowhunter harvest, the actual reported bowhunter harvest (14) is divided by the total bowhunter respondents (64) and this (.22 or 22%) is then multiplied by the estimated number of bowhunters (222 from calculation above) to get the estimated bowhunter harvest of 49 buck mule deer. This is then divided into the overall estimated harvest (includes bow hunter harvest from General and Youth Licences, Special Licences (the draw) and Landowner Licences)(49/157)(calculated using the same type of formulas) to determine the estimated bowhunter harvest (which is limited to 15% as per current policy – bowhunters account for app 15% of the overall hunting population).




now, as i said, this is a summary of the complete report that will be in the upcoming ABA newsletter. thanks to the ABA for allowing me to present the data early here to AO. for a full report, be sure to join the ABA to keep up to date on this and other important issues concerning archery hunting in alberta. if you are a bowhunter in this province, it really is in your best interest to belong to this organization to have your voice heard.


****edit*** the numbers in the chart didnt translate in chart form, so read that part closely to decipher the info.
__________________

[ishootbambi]

according to what i have been told, these are the wmus that will be on draw for 2013.....


For 2013, archers will need the draw to bowhunt mule deer in the archery season in the following WMUs – this is a direct result of the trend where bowhunters harvested more than our 15% share (according to the harvest surveys).

100 WMU Series- 104, 108, 110, 130, 132, 134, 138, 140 and 156

200 WMU Series- 206, 208, 210, 214, 216, 220, 221, 222, 224 and 226

300 WMU series – 300, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308 314, 318, 320, 322, 324, 332, 337, 357, 358, 359 and 360

400 WMU Series – 400 and 402

500 WMU Series - 502, 504, 506, 509, 510, 521, 522, 523, 526 and 527

[killerbren]

I dont know if you guys got this in your email box about a week ago but this is from the alberta bowhunters association.



AGMAG Dec 5, 2012 Meeting Highlights



The following is a brief outline of the two proposals for regulation change for the 2013 hunting season that will affect bowhunters the most. All items were discussed by the stakeholders and ESRD senior people. If anyone would like to see the individual proposals in their entirety send me an email and I will forward them to you – some are very lengthy.


Antlered mule deer archery to draw – this issue has been on the horizon for several years and we have been attending various stakeholder/ESRD meetings during that time. We have distributed lots of information to the ABA membership, to bowhunters in general to allow them to better understand the information out there, the harvest survey data collection system, the data itself, the ramifications if this proposal did happen. We have gotten lots of feedback and have brought that feedback to ESRD people and to the other stakeholders.

For 2013, archers will need the draw to bowhunt mule deer in the archery season in the following WMUs – this is a direct result of the trend where bowhunters harvested more than our 15% share (according to the harvest surveys).

100 WMU Series- 104, 108, 110, 130, 132, 134, 138, 140 and 156

200 WMU Series- 206, 208, 210, 214, 216, 220, 221, 222, 224 and 226

300 WMU series – 300, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308 314, 318, 320, 322, 324, 332, 337, 357, 358, 359 and 360

400 WMU Series – 400 and 402

500 WMU Series - 502, 504, 506, 509, 510, 521, 522, 523, 526 and 527



Separate archery draw regime – we presented strong arguments to implement a separate archery draw for antlered mule deer (and broaden that to other species/WMUs where you now need a draw to bowhunt them in archery seasons). We have preliminary support from some stakeholders for this idea. The current proposal suggests bowhunters will enter the general draw pool. The idea for a separate draw cannot happen for two years as the current draw system contract is almost up and tenders have been sent to two companies to rework/update the system.

ALL outfitter archery non-res allocations for antlered mule deer in these affected WMUs have been pulled. Can use one of their general mule deer allocations.

Landowner tags for antlered mule deer has seen lots of discussions and there is lots of concern over this – more discussion will take place. Currently there is no way to determine the actual harvest of landowners on this tag (which is in effect a general tag). Could possibly add a box on the online harvest survey.

[albertadave]

For 2013, archers will need the draw to bowhunt mule deer in the archery season in the following WMUs – this is a direct result of the trend where bowhunters harvested more than our 15% share (according to the harvest surveys).

100 WMU Series- 104, 108, 110, 130, 132, 134, 138, 140 and 156

200 WMU Series- 206, 208, 210, 214, 216, 220, 221, 222, 224 and 226

300 WMU series – 300, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308 314, 318, 320, 322, 324, 332, 337, 357, 358, 359 and 360

400 WMU Series – 400 and 402

500 WMU Series - 502, 504, 506, 509, 510, 521, 522, 523, 526 and 527

I have a really hard time believing that the archery harvest exceeded 15% in ALL those WMU's. Not saying I don't believe it, just having a really hard time making myself believe it.

[C Taylor]

There wasn't a problem when srd hired clubs to phone everyone and get results. Now this emailing info I'm sceptical of. I'm thinking it's a lot of. If I get one brag about it but if I don't I don't want to talk about it. Regardless to weather the surveys right or wrong I'm not a fan of being in the same draw as rifle. I have no problem on how antelope are set up an if they can't do the same for mule deer then leave it alone until they can.

[Icefisher2885]

Looks like the SE zones are going to get swarmed with guys this year. That's swell. I don't get this half ***** thinking - if you're going to put mules on draw then put them on draw. Now zones around here that were well within the harvest alotment will have half the archers from lethbridge west crammed into em. Bowhunting is low impact ane ill stamd by that to the end, but putting 10x the guys into 1 area is just flat out stupid. This entire operation has been a joke from the start, and the stats and method that Bambi posted are just icing on the cake. Who in gods name is actually being paid to produce drivel like that? At least hire someone who knows how to properly run stats.

[bowtech3006]

I have a really hard time believing that the archery harvest exceeded 15% in ALL those WMU's. Not saying I don't believe it, just having a really hard time making myself believe it.

'estimated 15%' that leaves room for HUGE errors. I would have liked to see all zones province wide on a separate draw for archery only. I bowhunt mules every year and that's my opinion. I can't wait to see the estimated harvests from the zones still under a general tag. I'm betting there going to exceed 15% and more draws as a result. We need more f&w presence during rifle season to reduce the bucks killed in draw zones on general, or no tag. If there was no general tag the 'I shot it in wmu ***' would no longer be a valid excuse. IMO scrap all general tags for md, cut outfitters to archery only & put more officers on the backroads. Now let's all sing kumbaya!:sHa_shakeshout:

[ASAT1]

When I was a kid we had a 3 point rule on mule deer. If we are worried about numbers of deer, why not just start with some restrictions on what you can harvest? For starters, currently, I can shoot any mule deer with a bow, why?
Wouldn't it make more sense to leave it general season to collect all the revenue from all the guys who buy tags and change the animals to 4 point or better? Another option is to shorten the season. Maybe another is to limit landowner tags. As a land owner, why should I have the option of buying a mule buck tag every year I don't get drawn? Nice for me, but hardly fair. So many options, why a draw? Just a thought, but i am no biologist.

I'll have to agree with you 100% ,make it a 3 or 4 pt rule if it's 4 pt then at least there's a better chance of more mature bucks being harvested, I believe in BC it's a 4 pt rule ,correct me if I'm wrong, and some of the bucks there that I've seen taken there are beauties,and I know that there are a ton of awesome bucks taken this year in Alberta, but just imagine if there was a 4 pt rule.

[Rhino81]

Maybe just a rumor but I heard that all outfitter mule tags have been pulled as a result of the new draw . May or may not be true , but I am willing to give up my general tag if that is correct .not true at all. 2014 will implement a handful of zones go on draw. By 2015 province wide. Reliable source. Sorry, outfitters will not be affected.

[motox208]

What a bunch of bs being spewed from the butthole of our government

[Fer-Tak-Er]

I seen this happen in WMU's west of Caroline many years ago. It used to be a general antlered moose for archery only. The problem was, when someone calls you, or you get an e-mail asking you if and when you shot something. So many hunters that I know Brag,Brag,Brag. Even if they didn't shoot something. Are they going to belittle themselves? I personally know many that have Bull****ed the system. And now with these "I" phones. Everyone knows what you shot.

[Deer Hunter]

IIRC wmu138 has more outfitter and landowner tags than it did resident draws for antlered mule deer. Now residents need to draw there to bowhunt so it's nice to know what priorities residents have in this province.

Any zone with a very small resident draw population is at risk to go over 15% on the bowhunting side. What is with the 15% number anyways?? Why is it written in stone? And of course it isn't really known what percentage is harvested because the data is poor.

Another sad day for resident hunters. Almost starting to get used to it now.

[missingtwo]

When I was a kid we had a 3 point rule on mule deer. If we are worried about numbers of deer, why not just start with some restrictions on what you can harvest? For starters, currently, I can shoot any mule deer with a bow, why?
Wouldn't it make more sense to leave it general season to collect all the revenue from all the guys who buy tags and change the animals to 4 point or better? Another option is to shorten the season. Maybe another is to limit landowner tags. As a land owner, why should I have the option of buying a mule buck tag every year I don't get drawn? Nice for me, but hardly fair. So many options, why a draw? Just a thought, but i am no biologist.

By shooting only 4 pointers, the trophy quality goes down.
Make landowner tags antlerless only.
SHUTDOWN non-resident tags for draw species.

[deadeye]

Make landowner tags antlerless only.
SHUTDOWN non-resident tags for draw species.
x2

[sheephunter]

i posted this a while back, and honestly, im stunned that there was so little response to it. _____

I've heard a few people in places of influence say they were shocked at how little resistance there was to this change. People need to start speaking up through membership in groups like the ABA in this instance and by getting involved personally by writing letters and making phone calls. While this board is a great resource, it seems many people's outrage never leaves here.

[fast_pass88]

By shooting only 4 pointers, the trophy quality goes down.
Make landowner tags antlerless only.
SHUTDOWN non-resident tags for draw species.


Sheep is a general tag in lots of zones, with horn restriction rules. I've read a fair bit and there's no facts suggesting that it diminishes trophy quality....I can't see why it'd be any different for mule deer....if you believe trophy hunting deceases trophy quality then were talking about a different issue.
I agree with you about the land owner tags!
I was chasing some mulies this fall and the landowner said there's a real mature one in there and he was thinking of picking up a landowner tag. I waited 5yrs to hunt this zone! And he's just gonna walk in and go pick up a tag! Grrr....

[WildCanuck]

agreed to the above... it's been a pet peeve of mine for years. Landowners should be antlerless, plain and simple.

WildCanuck

[jr_80]

I agree with you about the land owner tags!
I was chasing some mulies this fall and the landowner said there's a real mature one in there and he was thinking of picking up a landowner tag. I waited 5yrs to hunt this zone! And he's just gonna walk in and go pick up a tag! Grrr....[/QUOTE]

Nothing is stopping you from buying some land and doing the same. As a land owner I apply on the draw and have never purchased a land owners tag. I could, but I choose not to. My choice as a landowner. Otherwise sit in whatever city you live in and go on the forum and whine and cry about opportunities gained or lost on private land.

[walking buffalo]

Nothing is stopping you from buying some land and doing the same. As a land owner I apply on the draw and have never purchased a land owners tag. I could, but I choose not to. My choice as a landowner. Otherwise sit in whatever city you live in and go on the forum and whine and cry about opportunities gained or lost on private land.


Do you realize that at present, Landowner Licences are offered on an Unlimited Quota? Available Draw Licences are being reduced in some WMUs because of the number of Landowner licences being issued. Resident Hunters are losing opportunity to hunt Public land because they cannot get a tag, as these tags are going to Landowners.

If this trend continues, the only Mule deer tags available will be through Outfitters or Landowners. :thinking-006:

^^^ See the light Boys.... ;)




When Landowner Licences were first introduced, they were limited to 10% of the tags available through the draw system. It is time to get Landowner Licences back on a quota.

[WhiteyChaser]

The idea of a 4 point rule is ridiculous, there are a ton of 2 year old deer that are young 4x4s and by killing them you just dwindle the good genetics out of the deer herd

[jr_80]

Do you realize that at present, Landowner Licences are offered on an Unlimited Quota? Available Draw Licences are being reduced in some WMUs because of the number of Landowner licences being issued. Resident Hunters are losing opportunity to hunt Public land because they cannot get a tag, as these tags are going to Landowners.

If this trend continues, the only Mule deer tags available will be through Outfitters or Landowners. :thinking-006:

^^^ See the light Boys.... ;)




When Landowner Licences were first introduced, they were limited to 10% of the tags available through the draw system. It is time to get Landowner Licences back on a quota.

WRONG! Read the Draw booklet. Pg 31.

http://albertaregulations.ca/2012-Alberta-Hunting-Draws.pdf

I see no mention of unlimited quota. The licence availability is managed by F&W.

[walking buffalo]

WRONG! Read the Draw booklet. Pg 31.

http://albertaregulations.ca/2012-Alberta-Hunting-Draws.pdf

I see no mention of unlimited quota. The licence availability is managed by F&W.


Because you "see no mention of unlimited quota", it does not mean I'm wrong. :sign0161:



The licence availablity is managed by the local Bio. He/She can limit the number of Landowner licences issued in a WMU, but until the local Bio, say "No More Landowner tags", the MD quota is Unlimited.

I have the Landowner Licences Stats from AF&W. It was a biatch to get, but perseverance and some knowledge of the Freedom Of Information process paid off. The document states the WMU quota is Unlimited for both Antlered and Antlerless MD.

[jr_80]

Because you "see no mention of unlimited quota", it does not mean I'm wrong. :sign0161:



The licence availablity is managed by the local Bio. He/She can limit the number of Landowner licences issued in a WMU, but until the local Bio, say "No More Landowner tags", the MD quota is Unlimited.

I have the Landowner Licences Stats from AF&W. It was a biatch to get, but perseverance and some knowledge of the Freedom Of Information process paid off. The document states the WMU quota is Unlimited for both Antlered and Antlerless MD.
Please post this for all to view Buffalo. Perhaps on a new thread because we seem to have hijacked one on changes to archery mule deer

[missingtwo]

The idea of a 4 point rule is ridiculous, there are a ton of 2 year old deer that are young 4x4s and by killing them you just dwindle the good genetics out of the deer herd

Exactly. All that will be left is giant 2 and 3 pointers.

[bobalong]

Do you realize that at present, Landowner Licences are offered on an Unlimited Quota? Available Draw Licences are being reduced in some WMUs because of the number of Landowner licences being issued. Resident Hunters are losing opportunity to hunt Public land because they cannot get a tag, as these tags are going to Landowners.

If this trend continues, the only Mule deer tags available will be through Outfitters or Landowners. :thinking-006:

^^^ See the light Boys.... ;)




When Landowner Licences were first introduced, they were limited to 10% of the tags available through the draw system. It is time to get Landowner Licences back on a quota.

So are you suggesting that the people who own the land where these deer eat, have shelter, reproduce should not have priority over someone who owns nothing that helps the game population, and with the exception of a small licence fee, contrubutes nothing to the overall health of the population. They only take from it?????

You do realize there are lots of land owners who are members on this site..... try using your idea in your opening next time when you ask for permisssion.

Why is it so hard to realize that even though land owners do not own the game, they own the land (talking private land ) that the game live on and it is not your right to access this land when ever you please. With the growing number of attitudes and comments that continue to attack land owners, and those that seem to "feel" good doing it, I can assure you that hunter opportunities on private land are going to continue to decline. You will however be left with that warm fuzzy feeling that you "sure told them".

[Brock1]

IIRC wmu138 has more outfitter and landowner tags than it did resident draws for antlered mule deer. Now residents need to draw there to bowhunt so it's nice to know what priorities residents have in this province.

Any zone with a very small resident draw population is at risk to go over 15% on the bowhunting side. What is with the 15% number anyways?? Why is it written in stone? And of course it isn't really known what percentage is harvested because the data is poor.

Another sad day for resident hunters. Almost starting to get used to it now.



I see you holding a lion in your photo, you prob shot in africa as a non resident because you can obviously afford it. How many african residents do you think harvested lions in the area of africa you were in?

hmmmm...:thinking-006:

[Deer Hunter]

I see you holding a lion in your photo, you prob shot in africa as a non resident because you can obviously afford it. How many african residents do you think harvested lions in the area of africa you were in?

hmmmm...:thinking-006:

Africa is unique alright. Anyone in the world can pay to kill animals there. It is no secret that they are for sale. Resident, non residents, a dog if he could pull the trigger or whomever. Its clearly advertised on websites. Generally it is privatized to some sort of degree and the opportunity is on the level for whomever can save up... Thats just the way it is. I didnt come up with the system.

Alberta doesnt sell game animals, or at least it doesnt to residents. You apply or buy a tag and the entire opportunity to do so is in the hands of the govt, in this case SRD. They let you draw or buy a tag based on their statistics. Their data has put residents behind non residents in terms of opportunity regardless of price, taxation contribution or home province. This is where i disagree with the system, not the fact that people from other places want to hunt here. Its how the govt puts their interests in front of the resident.

[grinr]

So are you suggesting that the people who own the land where these deer eat, have shelter, reproduce should not have priority over someone who owns nothing that helps the game population, and with the exception of a small licence fee, contrubutes nothing to the overall health of the population. They only take from it?????


Ummmm...NO,they should not have priority,they don't own the wildlife.
I really don't have any problem with landowner tags,and won't begrudge some guy that wants to put a doe in the freezer,sure why not,have at'er,as long as it's managed in a fair and equitable manner for all of the stakeholders.That however is not what I'm gleaning from this thread??When landowner tags are cutting directly in to the quotas,thus reducing opportunities for everybody else,then something is wrong with that picture.I don't care if you own 20 sections and have 300 deer utilizing that habitat for at least some portion of the year,they're still not YOUR deer,and every landowner tag given out affects the entire WMU quota and reduces opportunity for others to draw a tag.Or in another scenario,maybe you own only one section and I have permission to hunt those same deer on the surrounding 8 sections,but I can't draw a tag because every landowner in the county that owns a 1/4 section believes it's his God given right to shoot a trophy muley buck EVERY YEAR just because they happen to hop over your fence once in awhile....it ain't right.
Again,I'm not gonna begrudge the guy that wants to put some of that free meat that walks across his back forty in the freezer,but it should be antlerless only.They should have to draw for antlered game,just like EVERYBODY else.
I'm not gonna pretend that I know the history of Landowner tags,when they were introduced,or how that PRIVELAGE was lobbied for,but I'm willing to bet my favorite rifle that crop damage and population control was cited as one of the top reasons that landowners should get special consideration,and if that's
the case(likely?),doesn't it make sense that they should be taking out the females?further to that,if the issue is free meat,again,you can't eat antlers,does taste just as good or better than a rutted up old buck,antlers are just a trophy that have nothing to do with food or crop damage,and a trophy that is coveted by most of the hunting community at that.I can't think of a single legit reason why landowners should be able to harvest bucks when everybody else has to draw for them,and at the same time,the very act of them taking bucks reduces the quota for everybody else.

[walking buffalo]

My Reply in Red

So are you suggesting that the people who own the land where these deer eat, have shelter, reproduce should not have priority over someone who owns nothing that helps the game population, and with the exception of a small licence fee, contrubutes nothing to the overall health of the population. They only take from it?????

No. :sign0161:






You do realize there are lots of land owners who are members on this site.....Yes, and what is your point?


try using your idea in your opening next time when you ask for permisssion.

I do have this conversation with Landowners whose land I hunt on, and they agree with me. I have never been denied Access because of my position on Landowner Licence Quotas.



Why is it so hard to realize that even though land owners do not own the game, they own the land (talking private land ) that the game live on and it is not your right to access this land when ever you please.

I don't tresspass. Again, what's your point?


With the growing number of attitudes and comments that continue to attack land owners, and those that seem to "feel" good doing it, I can assure you that hunter opportunities on private land are going to continue to decline. You will however be left with that warm fuzzy feeling that you "sure told them".

I don't buy this "threat" a few put out there. Keeping Landowner Licences to a set Quota will not make any Landowner deny access for hunting EXCEPT from those Landowners who already deny the general public access. No net loss of access, IMO.







Now think about this. If Landowner Licences continue to be available on an Unlimited Quota, while Draw Licences are reduced to keep the Species Allocation in balance for conservation, What happens when Landowner Licence applications increase?

Obviously, Draw Licences must continue to be reduced.

Less Draw tags results in More Landowner tag applications. And so on goes the inward spiral.

In other words, keeping the Landowner Licence on an unlimited Quota has the direct effect of reducing Resident Draw hunting opportunity, Exactly what you say the concern is if a Quota was set at a limited percentage. :sign0161:


This is no sidetrack to the OP. Unlimited Landowner Licences has had a direct effect within the Allocation prosess and thus the proposed Archery Draw.


BTW,

2010 Antlered MD Landowner Licences - 925

2010 Antlerless MD Landowner Licences - 17

[J.B.]

For those of you who think there has been little resistance to this I know several ppl representing archery clubs who have put in countless hours arguing with rob Corrigan over the FACT that the data is very inaccurate. He refuses to back down on making a change to mule deer management immediately...long story short, the user groups have been told too f***ing bad this is what is going to happen. Corrigan is beyond reasoning and if there is too be any hope for wildlife management in alberta he must lose his job. Seriously...

[walking buffalo]

For those of you who think there has been little resistance to this I know several ppl representing archery clubs who have put in countless hours arguing with rob Corrigan over the FACT that the data is very inaccurate. He refuses to back down on making a change to mule deer management immediately...long story short, the user groups have been told too f***ing bad this is what is going to happen. Corrigan is beyond reasoning and if there is too be any hope for wildlife management in alberta he must lose his job. Seriously...

Hmmm.

The flimsy data used by AF&W does give me heartburn.

I recall Rob telling me that AF&W does not keep track of the number of Landowner Licences issued. :scared:

Yah, this is feeling dirty....


I do believe the true agenda behind having MD on Draw is simply to entrench yet another secies completely into the draw system, for Hunter management, not Wildlife management. Our loss, whether you hunt with a bow or not.

[sheephunter]

For those of you who think there has been little resistance to this I know several ppl representing archery clubs who have put in countless hours arguing with rob Corrigan over the FACT that the data is very inaccurate. He refuses to back down on making a change to mule deer management immediately...long story short, the user groups have been told too f***ing bad this is what is going to happen. Corrigan is beyond reasoning and if there is too be any hope for wildlife management in alberta he must lose his job. Seriously...

I wasn't saying that some people hadn't put up a considerable fight...far from it....I was just saying that there wasn't a very loud voice from a lot of people....not compared to the amount that complain on here anyhow. It's a problem endemic of the entire hunting community it seems. Just look at how many people aren't even aware of what's going on.......they need to become involved! The ABA was at the table...imagine if their voice was 15,000 strong.

[packhuntr]

Sheephunter. I dont care how you rationalize things like this. The problem in entirety is this,, we are paying for the job of fisheries, wildlife and habitat management. What we are getting is a fockn gong show. The job is simply not being done. To imply that we after paying should have to spend our time fighting is simply out of touch wih reality. Our wildlife are being let down, and so are we. Its just about enough slim. When will we just demand accountability and move fockn on. While people dyck around in little political fiascos and back handed bs, our wildlife lose. Why cant things just get done right here. Shes past the point of embarrasing now in this province, has been for some time.

[C Taylor]

If every bowhunter joined aba the voice would definitely be louder.
One thing to consider when slamming landowner tags. If a farmer wants to shoot a good deer but doesn't get drawn an cant get a tag. Why would he allow someone else to hunt his land. He could just as easily put up NO HUNTING signs and wait until he does get drawn. Anybody that doesn't think this would happen is kidding themselves. Hard enough to have permission now on land of a farmer that hunts but if you take his privledges away he's not going to welcome everyone with open arms. I never got a landowners tag because I had a general tag. All srd is doing is shooting themselves in the foot

[sheephunter]

Sheephunter. I dont care how you rationalize things like this. The problem in entirety is this,, we are paying for the job of fisheries, wildlife and habitat management. What we are getting is a fockn gong show. The job is simply not being done. To imply that we after paying should have to spend our time fighting is simply out of touch wih reality. Our wildlife are being let down, and so are we. Its just about enough slim. When will we just demand accountability and move fockn on. While people dyck around in little political fiascos and back handed bs, our wildlife lose. Why cant things just get done right here. Shes past the point of embarrasing now in this province, has been for some time.

So we throw out hands in the air and quit? You've identified a problem for sure....I'm more about solutions :)

[The Spruce]

Muledeer draw everywhere would be okay if the tags are issued for rifle and archery. I bowhunt Muledeer myself, and don't agree that I should be able to shoot a deer every season with my bow. They should make it like sheep where you could only shoot a muley every other year with a bow. I have not heard that any changes are written in stone yet, just talk right now. At least that's what my buddy that sitar on the round table said anyways.

[albertadave]

.......The idea for a separate draw cannot happen for two years as the current draw system contract is almost up and tenders have been sent to two companies to rework/update the system.........


Is anyone else here completely blown away by this???? ( if it is in fact true ). Our wildlife management strategies, and hunting opportunities, are being dictated by a contract, with a private company, that is in place to basically hande the EF'N paperwork???? Am I understanding this correctly?

[packhuntr]

So we throw out hands in the air and quit? You've identified a problem for sure....I'm more about solutions :)

I suppose im not as optimistic as you are Sheephunter. Im hard wired to be, but after seeing the potential of this outfit, my time is better spent taking, you know, while its still here to be had lol. Ya, looks like we all are capable of being no good cok sukers, except we are pushed there and given no choice.

Ya it sorta looks that way doesnt it Dave. Quite a deal aint it... Pizz poor.

[sakogreywolf]

Perhaps a house cleaning is part of the solution.

[bobalong]

If every bowhunter joined aba the voice would definitely be louder.
One thing to consider when slamming landowner tags. If a farmer wants to shoot a good deer but doesn't get drawn an cant get a tag. Why would he allow someone else to hunt his land. He could just as easily put up NO HUNTING signs and wait until he does get drawn. Anybody that doesn't think this would happen is kidding themselves. Hard enough to have permission now on land of a farmer that hunts but if you take his privledges away he's not going to welcome everyone with open arms. I never got a landowners tag because I had a general tag. All srd is doing is shooting themselves in the foot

This is what I was trying to suggest in my previous post, but some people have blinders on when it comes to thinking what they will "make" land owners agree to.

[H380]

Do you realize that at present, Landowner Licences are offered on an Unlimited Quota? Available Draw Licences are being reduced in some WMUs because of the number of Landowner licences being issued. Resident Hunters are losing opportunity to hunt Public land because they cannot get a tag, as these tags are going to Landowners.

If this trend continues, the only Mule deer tags available will be through Outfitters or Landowners. :thinking-006:

^^^ See the light Boys.... ;)




When Landowner Licences were first introduced, they were limited to 10% of the tags available through the draw system. It is time to get Landowner Licences back on a quota.

I agree with most of your post WB , however I can't figure this one . Just cause Landowner licences are on an unlimited basis , it doesn't mean that all landowners get one or even fill the tag ! Kinda like saying there could be too many drivers so let's stop making cars . As to posts on here saying that landowners think they own the wildlife on their property , maybe a few have that attitude but for the most part the majorety of ranchers do a decent job of allowing hunters on their property to shoot " their deer ' . If the landowner tag is dropped I know a fair amount of land that is gonna go " NO HUNTING ' until the owner gets a chance to get drawn , and I don't blame em .

[shedcrazy]

Well I think there will be changes in the landowner tags next year as well...from what I am hearing.

[whitetail Junkie]

Well I think there will be changes in the landowner tags next year as well...from what I am hearing.

One of the head biologists wanted Mule buck & bull elk landowner tags scrapped many moons ago,however he told my DaD to his face that the Lethbridge fish and game association put a stop to it,because local Ranchers in turn wouldnt allow hunting on there land.Ive brought this up on here before,so either the Lethbridge fish and game is lieing or the biologist is lieing.....Who The "F" knows?

[pottymouth]

Land owners should have the right to shoot a muley ever year, it's their land...
Wait, natives should have rights to all land, it's their land first......
No, the government should control all land and make us all pay to access it....
Heck only people with money should hunt, let's raise prices to everything......

After all that really who's left to hunt. Let's just join PETA and then we will all finally have equal opportunity. Zero hunting for everyone!

[sheephunter]

I suppose im not as optimistic as you are Sheephunter. Im hard wired to be, but after seeing the potential of this outfit, my time is better spent taking, you know, while its still here to be had lol. Ya, looks like we all are capable of being no good cok sukers, except we are pushed there and given no choice.

Ya it sorta looks that way doesnt it Dave. Quite a deal aint it... Pizz poor.

Some days you make a lot of sense pack....others not so much......

[Alta_Redneck]

I'll have to agree with you 100% ,make it a 3 or 4 pt rule if it's 4 pt then at least there's a better chance of more mature bucks being harvested, I believe in BC it's a 4 pt rule ,correct me if I'm wrong, and some of the bucks there that I've seen taken there are beauties,and I know that there are a ton of awesome bucks taken this year in Alberta, but just imagine if there was a 4 pt rule.

Sorry but that's a horrible idea, there's an awful lot of hunters that just look to fill the freezer. If these guys go around shooting the first 4 point buck they see, these deer won't have time to mature taking out any deer with potential in its future. Right now there's plenty of people that are happy getting spikers, 2 points and 3 points, take all of these hunters and have them bagging 4 pointers quality is sure to suffer. I have no problem with meat hunters but the way it is now is the best for trophy potential and who wouldn't want to bag that deer of a life time.

[remmy300]

I think the landowner tags are a joke. I put in my mule deer draw and after 5 years get the opportunity to hunt. We own land in a great area. I do not put in for a landowner tag as we don't live there. This year while hunting we ran into 2 different landowners more than 10 miles from their land and openly state they are hunting mule deer. Hard to prove when they also have a whitetail tag in their pocket? The whole system is screwed up. Landowner tags are to hunt your own land.

It's more than the system. I think that the amount of poaching has escalated. Tonight my dad had a talk with the fish cops who were pulling a dead md out of the ditch. Head cut off, and no sign of car parts. There was a bullet in the shoulder though.

I don't have the answers. There are a lot of variables, with bowhunters on the rise and a couple bad winters, it's a puzzle that's gonna take some time to put back together.

I predominantly bowhunt. It makes me a little crazy that mule deer is going to be put on draw in both zones where our family owns land. If it means the chance shooting good deer again, I'm all for it.

I think it should be like saskabush. Look at resident only hunting. Implement what the Yukon has as far as term of a resident prior to getting a license. Anyways, just my .02

[jr_80]

Ummmm...NO,they should not have priority,they don't own the wildlife.
I really don't have any problem with landowner tags,and won't begrudge some guy that wants to put a doe in the freezer,sure why not,have at'er,as long as it's managed in a fair and equitable manner for all of the stakeholders.That however is not what I'm gleaning from this thread??When landowner tags are cutting directly in to the quotas,thus reducing opportunities for everybody else,then something is wrong with that picture.I don't care if you own 20 sections and have 300 deer utilizing that habitat for at least some portion of the year,they're still not YOUR deer,and every landowner tag given out affects the entire WMU quota and reduces opportunity for others to draw a tag.Or in another scenario,maybe you own only one section and I have permission to hunt those same deer on the surrounding 8 sections,but I can't draw a tag because every landowner in the county that owns a 1/4 section believes it's his God given right to shoot a trophy muley buck EVERY YEAR just because they happen to hop over your fence once in awhile....it ain't right.
Again,I'm not gonna begrudge the guy that wants to put some of that free meat that walks across his back forty in the freezer,but it should be antlerless only.They should have to draw for antlered game,just like EVERYBODY else.
I'm not gonna pretend that I know the history of Landowner tags,when they were introduced,or how that PRIVELAGE was lobbied for,but I'm willing to bet my favorite rifle that crop damage and population control was cited as one of the top reasons that landowners should get special consideration,and if that's
the case(likely?),doesn't it make sense that they should be taking out the females?further to that,if the issue is free meat,again,you can't eat antlers,does taste just as good or better than a rutted up old buck,antlers are just a trophy that have nothing to do with food or crop damage,and a trophy that is coveted by most of the hunting community at that.I can't think of a single legit reason why landowners should be able to harvest bucks when everybody else has to draw for them,and at the same time,the very act of them taking bucks reduces the quotaom for everybody else.

Hey Grinr, from Calgary. Do you want to come and hunt mule deer on my 20 quarters of land I own along the red deer river valley from Rumsey to Drumheller? Never seen you here asking for permission. Sorry I don't have 20 sections. Tough to buy that much land at 32 years of age.
As I said before, I do not purchase land owner tags, I apply on the draw as do other hunters in my area.I do not hunt to put something in the freezer, and could not shut down hunting on my privately owned land and hunt on others. I do trophy hunt. My freezer is full of beef as well as an elk that I got 350 km away on private land that I had permission on.

For those that do not accept my stance-come talk to me. Ask permission. I never turned anyone down. And if you we're to conduct yourself the way some on the forum do, I will give you directions to the quickest rout to access public land.

[pottymouth]

Seriously, if anyone believes that limiting or cutting out landowners tags, is going to get severe back lash from landowners, is crazy. Realistically, if you have good relations with your landowners, you need not worry. Family, friends and long standing hunters will still be able to hunt. I'm certain of that.

Yes there will be a few, that will close hunting to everyone. But like anything, give it a couple of years, and they will get over it.

[missingtwo]

Seriously, if anyone believes that limiting or cutting out landowners tags, is going to get severe back lash from landowners, is crazy. Realistically, if you have good relations with your landowners, you need not worry. Family, friends and long standing hunters will still be able to hunt. I'm certain of that.

Yes there will be a few, that will close hunting to everyone. But like anything, give it a couple of years, and they will get over it.

abso-phukking-lutely

[209x50]

But like anything, give it a couple of years, and they will get over it.
This is EXACTLEY what SRD thinks about bow hunters.

[ASAT1]

[QUOTE=Alta_Redneck;1753159]Sorry but that's a horrible idea, there's an awful lot of hunters that just look to fill the freezer. If these guys go around shooting the first 4 point buck they see, these deer won't have time to mature taking out any deer with potential in its future. Right now there's plenty of people that are happy getting spikers, 2 points and 3 points, take all of these hunters and have them bagging 4 pointers quality is sure to suffer. I have no problem with meat hunters but the way it is now is the best for trophy potential and who wouldn't want to bagthat deer of a life time.[/QUO


I know what what your saying but if some guys just want meat then apply for doe tags and buy supplemental tags ,Trophy hnters usually know what their looking for and they usually pass on alot of the immature bucks, I remember 3 pt general season and there was still some huge bucks out there so hard to say what to do.But I agree they should keep it to residents only

[ASAT1]

Sorry but that's a horrible idea, there's an awful lot of hunters that just look to fill the freezer. If these guys go around shooting the first 4 point buck they see, these deer won't have time to mature taking out any deer with potential in its future. Right now there's plenty of people that are happy getting spikers, 2 points and 3 points, take all of these hunters and have them bagging 4 pointers quality is sure to suffer. I have no problem with meat hunters but the way it is now is the best for trophy potential and who wouldn't want to bag that deer of a life time.


I know what what your saying but if some guys just want meat then apply for doe tags and buy supplemental tags ,Trophy hnters usually know what their looking for and they usually pass on alot of the immature bucks, I remember 3 pt general season and there was still some huge bucks out there so hard to say what to do.But I agree they should keep it to residents only

[st99]

Exactly. All that will be left is giant 2 and 3 pointers.

Guys in bc were crying the same argument 10+ years ago when they put elk on a 6 pts minimum. NOW the population has double, hunting elk is great with alot of sightings and actions..... and NO the place doesn't crawl with many giant 5 pts.

On an other note, I hate to count so I'm not really in favor for a 4 pts rule, especially that too many guys shooting and count after.

[pottymouth]

I fixed it for you! You know it's no secret, why hide the fact about it? Why not tell people your one of the leading voices advocating the mule deer draw? Are you not the SCI representative at the agmag meeting?

[missingtwo]

Guys in bc were crying the same argument 10+ years ago when they put elk on a 6 pts minimum. NOW the population has double, hunting elk is great with alot of sightings and actions..... and NO the place doesn't crawl with many giant 5 pts.

On an other note, I hate to count so I'm not really in favor for a 4 pts rule, especially that too many guys shooting and count after.

And it was tried with a 3 point or more mule deer season in Alberta once already. Proven to not work.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Unfortunately it seems many people cannot field judge or count as it is....I have come upon several dead spiker mule deer that have been shot, mistaken for does. Also several mule does shot mistaken for white-tails where mule does are not in season. Identification is not some peoples strong suit....

LC

[Deer Hunter]

I fixed it for you! You know it's no secret, why hide the fact about it? Why not tell people your one of the leading voices advocating the mule deer draw? Are you not the SCI representative at the agmag meeting?

Is this true?

[209x50]

I fixed it for you! You know it's no secret, why hide the fact about it? Why not tell people your one of the leading voices advocating the mule deer draw? Are you not the SCI representative at the agmag meeting?
No I'm not, never have been.

[sheephunter]

Is this true?

Potty has his tinfoil hat on a bit tight today...SCI is not part of AGMAG....look it up for yourself.

[pottymouth]

Potty has his tinfoil hat on a bit tight today...SCI is not part of AGMAG....look it up for yourself.

Just what I heard! Hence, why I asked the question .

[Sledhead71]

IBTL on this one.. Post count, plus 1 :sHa_shakeshout:

[sheephunter]

Just what I heard! Hence, why I asked the question .

LOL....you need more reliable sources.

[missingtwo]

I fixed it for you! You know it's no secret, why hide the fact about it? Why not tell people your one of the leading voices advocating the mule deer draw? Are you not the SCI representative at the agmag meeting?

This is probably not far from the truth though, according to his posts. I'm assuming you mean the archery draw.

[Deer Hunter]

LOL....you need more reliable sources.

That is the problem. So many details regarding everything to do with resident success, landowner tags and outfitter allocations is not being properly released to joe public.
SRD's changes affect everyone, yet details are being hoarded and analyzed by some group called AGMAG.
Who in this group looks after resident hunters exclusively and entirely? AFGA?? Not very well imo.

[sheephunter]

That is the problem. So many details regarding everything to do with resident success, landowner tags and outfitter allocations is not being properly released to joe public.
SRD's changes affect everyone, yet details are being hoarded and analyzed by some group called AGMAG.
Who in this group looks after resident hunters exclusively and entirely? AFGA?? Not very well imo.

I agree with most everything you said other than the AFGA is one hell of a voice for residents at the table. They may not always get their way but they are well entrenched in the fight. Doug Butler should be on every resident's Christmas card list for the time and dedication he shows.

[jwilson]

I sure hope it all goes to draw. I'm tired of finding dead, ate up deer with arrows in em, picking broad heads out of our cows feet, tired of guys parking in front of our gates to glass, tired of guys pounding the road allowances. And most of all I'm tired of seeing every joe blow take 130 class bucks cause they can't find a good one. Pretty soon there's not gonna be a lot of good ones left.

[missingtwo]

I sure hope it all goes to draw. I'm tired of finding dead, ate up deer with arrows in em, picking broad heads out of our cows feet, tired of guys parking in front of our gates to glass, tired of guys pounding the road allowances. And most of all I'm tired of seeing every joe blow take 130 class bucks cause they can't find a good one. Pretty soon there's not gonna be a lot of good ones left.

you need a rest.

[LongDraw]

I sure hope it all goes to draw. I'm tired of finding dead, ate up deer with arrows in em, picking broad heads out of our cows feet, tired of guys parking in front of our gates to glass, tired of guys pounding the road allowances. And most of all I'm tired of seeing every joe blow take 130 class bucks cause they can't find a good one. Pretty soon there's not gonna be a lot of good ones left.

Welcome to the forum and stellar first post. LOL!

[Deer Hunter]

I agree with most everything you said other than the AFGA is one hell of a voice for residents at the table. They may not always get their way but they are well entrenched in the fight. Doug Butler should be on every resident's Christmas card list for the time and dedication he shows.

Im unaware of the time that is put in, by who and for what projects.

Unfortunately i am aware of the AFGA's results with respect to putting resident hunters first.

Sheephunter: Arent you staff on the AFGA's payroll?

[jwilson]

No missingtwo, you need to pick a few broad heads out of a cows foot a couple times and then lose however many dollars a head when it comes time to sell due to crippled cattle. The draw will help cut the number of guys out there flinging arrows around.

[pottymouth]

No missingtwo, you need to pick a few broad heads out of a cows foot a couple times and then lose however many dollars a head when it comes time to sell due to crippled cattle. The draw will help cut the number of guys out there flinging arrows around.

Pics or it didn't happen!

Nice first post. Why not post with your original handle?

[LongDraw]

No missingtwo, you need to pick a few broad heads out of a cows foot a couple times and then lose however many dollars a head when it comes time to sell due to crippled cattle. The draw will help cut the number of guys out there flinging arrows around.

You run your cattle on public land or private?

[jwilson]

@longdraw- both, so I'm sure you can understand the frustration, it just sucks to have to bring a cow out of the forestry who can barely walk cause she's got someone's broad head lodged between her toes. And then have guys see a deer on our place driving by and just step out and fling one at him, jump back in and drive off. Then there's another arrow laying on the ground that I might find in a truck tire or another cows foot later on.

[brendan's dad]

@longdraw- both, so I'm sure you can understand the frustration, it just sucks to have to bring a cow out of the forestry who can barely walk cause she's got someone's broad head lodged between her toes. And then have guys see a deer on our place driving by and just step out and fling one at him, jump back in and drive off. Then there's another arrow laying on the ground that I might find in a truck tire or another cows foot later on.

Truck hunting with a bow? Now that would be something to see. LOL

[KBF]

No missingtwo, you need to pick a few broad heads out of a cows foot a couple times and then lose however many dollars a head when it comes time to sell due to crippled cattle. The draw will help cut the number of guys out there flinging arrows around.

So picking broadheads out of cows feet is a regular occurence?

[heretohunt]

Are you a hunter jwilson?

[Pudelpointer]

Im unaware of the time that is put in, by who and for what projects.

Unfortunately i am aware of the AFGA's results with respect to putting resident hunters first.

Sheephunter: Arent you staff on the AFGA's payroll?

I am confused by your view of the AFGA... I definitely do not agree with every position the AFGA takes, nor do I think they are the 'end all, be all' when it comes to advocating for Alberta outdoorsmen, however, having been to the annual conference a number of times I have no doubt that the AFGA has ONLY the best interest of Alberta's hunting and fishing community behind every decision they make.

What is you think the AFGA has done (or failed to have done) with regards to resident hunter's interests?

[Deer Hunter]

It is my impression that they have not pushed or questioned SRD to consider all the other options rather than just decreasing resident tags or pushing for more draw only hunts. These other options include decreasing outfitter/NR tags and looking into the landowner allocations before slapping residents with decreased opportunity.

Also, the AFGA would be the perfect place to push for statisical transparency of these numbers so that the members would see what we are dealing with. Spreadsheets of resident draw stats, landowner tags and NR/outfitter tags per WMU would be a nice start. Are these #'s a secret?

It is nice to see their stance on the S.Sask Regional Plan through their letter to the Premier...did they get a reply? I wonder what else they have planned?

[Pudelpointer]

Why have you come to that impression?


As for "transparency" of the numbers, I have a resolution asking for just that from ESRD. It was supposed to have been voted on last year, but someone dropped the ball.

The AFGA is involved in the 5 year review of guide / outfitter allocations. Just because there are AFGA voices at the table, does not mean that they agree with the outcomes of a meeting. Contrary to popular belief, just because the AB government has invited you to voice your opinion, it does not mean they give a rat's a** what you have to say.

As for the AFGA, remember that it is a volunteer organization. There are a handful of paid individuals who take care of different parts of running the organization, but 100% of the policies and most activities of the AFGA are driven by / undertaken by volunteers.

[waterninja]

after a long hiatus from big game hunting i got back into it 2 years ago. i was amazed at the reg. changes that had occured. one significant change in particular is that hunters who live in alberta seem to come in a poor 2nd place to non-resident hunters. i have many relatives that live on the farm and one common complaint is that outfitters seem to get an unlimmited supply of tags for out of province hunters. it seems to me that resident hunters should get 1st chance at general and draw tags. the way it's set up now seems a little corrupt with money being first priority and wildlife mngt. and albertan hunters rights a low priority.
i could understand if we were a poor province and needed all the non-resident cash that we could get but i doubt the added revenue makes that much difference in albertas budget, meanwhile hunters that live and work here seem to be getting screwed.

[walking buffalo]

Why have you come to that impression?


As for "transparency" of the numbers, I have a resolution asking for just that from ESRD. It was supposed to have been voted on last year, but someone dropped the ball.

.

A very important Question!

AFGA and other groups that sit at AGMAG need to learn and listen to the answers to this question provided from the public and their members. Non member opinion is VERY important, where else can they recruit from?


IMO, a significant reason for people not joining or supporting AFGA and other groups is that Very little information or feedback is provided to the general public. This leaves a lot of questions on the table as to where they stand on a issue, and what they are actually doing about it.

In the information age, groups like AFGA need to get up to speed.



The "transparency" of hunting licences is a great example of the problem. AFGA knows that this government information is PUBLIC information. It would be a simple affair for them to obtain (I'm assuming they don't have it :scared:) and post it online. The fact that it takes a resolution and a multi year long process to make a decision to even get involved, produces a grey mouldy fruit no one wants. ;)


When a single person working independantly can produce results ten times faster than that same person doing the work through an organization.... :1041:

[Deer Hunter]

Why have you come to that impression?


As for "transparency" of the numbers, I have a resolution asking for just that from ESRD. It was supposed to have been voted on last year, but someone dropped the ball.

The AFGA is involved in the 5 year review of guide / outfitter allocations. Just because there are AFGA voices at the table, does not mean that they agree with the outcomes of a meeting. Contrary to popular belief, just because the AB government has invited you to voice your opinion, it does not mean they give a rat's a** what you have to say.

As for the AFGA, remember that it is a volunteer organization. There are a handful of paid individuals who take care of different parts of running the organization, but 100% of the policies and most activities of the AFGA are driven by / undertaken by volunteers.

Considering that they knew that this year would invlove changing the 5 yr outfitter allocations, putting archery mule deer on draw, more reduced resident draw allocations due to hard winters, the sheep decision etc .... It wasnt very good timing to "drop the ball".

Im not sure my impression will change.

[flyguyd]

Truck hunting with a bow? Now that would be something to see. LOL

Happens all the time down here in the south west

[sheephunter]

Sheephunter: Arent you staff on the AFGA's payroll?

Nope! I do some contract work for them. It's nice to be in a position where you only have to work with organizations you really believe in. I really believe in them. You should bring yourself up to speed a bit about the hours that Doug puts in and the dedication he has...I know you'd be impressed. He is one of the good guys working hard for resident hunters. If you are looking for a group that's always going to get their way you'll be very disappointed...if you are looking for a group that fights very hard for you....well there are a few of them but for resident hunters first....it's definitely AFGA. :)

[Eze]

Ism a landowner and have some great animals, reason is i control who hunts it. Many mule deer and some great ones over the years.

I think they should shut the season down period for 5years. I Will on my land lol

Everyone wants to hunt where they see big ones. Well buy your own land and hunt them, don't complain because the landower gets a tag, hell, he feeds them , he shouldn't even need a tag. My opinion

[ishootbambi]

.if you are looking for a group that fights very hard for you....well there are a few of them but for resident hunters first....it's definitely AFGA. :)

ive said it before....too many guys beetch and whine about what oughta be done, but fail to join and support groups like AFGA and ABA who actually have a voice for us. those groups dont always win...but at least they are there trying.

thats a broad statement by the way....not just aimed at deer hunter.

[H380]

ive said it before....too many guys beetch and whine about what oughta be done, but fail to join and support groups like AFGA and ABA who actually have a voice for us. those groups dont always win...but at least they are there trying.

thats a broad statement by the way....not just aimed at deer hunter.

So true ISB , without organisations like these we as hunters would have no voice or input at all .

[missingtwo]

Nope! I do some contract work for them. It's nice to be in a position where you only have to work with organizations you really believe in. I really believe in them. You should bring yourself up to speed a bit about the hours that Doug puts in and the dedication he has...I know you'd be impressed. He is one of the good guys working hard for resident hunters. If you are looking for a group that's always going to get their way you'll be very disappointed...if you are looking for a group that fights very hard for you....well there are a few of them but for resident hunters first....it's definitely AFGA. :)

http://afga.org/html/content/staff/

[209x50]

I fixed it for you! You know it's no secret, why hide the fact about it? Why not tell people your one of the leading voices advocating the mule deer draw? Are you not the SCI representative at the agmag meeting?
Not the first time you had no idea what you are talking about.

[jryley]

Not the first time you had no idea what you are talking about.

Lol. Give pouttymouth a break. Poor guy didnt and wont get what he feels hes entitled to, so let the feet stomping begin. Cant say im upset about it though!

[packhuntr]

Lol. Give pouttymouth a break. Poor guy didnt and wont get what he feels hes entitled to, so let the feet stomping begin. Cant say im upset about it though!


Hey easy now slick, what if it was rifle huntin under the gun here would you care? Do you care that there is a trend in this province, and it isnt a good one. You might wanna check yourself. You are out of touch with reality and out of line slim.There is nothing wrong with concern and questions.I wont and wouldnt place fault on anyone here but as well am concerned over this situation, as should you be.

[ishootbambi]

im goiing to point this out again.....IF archery hunters are taking more than their 15% allotted...it should go to draw. the math srd is using to get their numbers is seriously flawed.....aim the anger at the right place here people!

[pottymouth]

Not the first time you had no idea what you are talking about.

I didn't say anything that was wrong! You do want mule deer on draw, because you believe bowhunters shouldn't have that opportunity.... the last sentence was a question...hence the (?)....

Lol. Give pouttymouth a break. Poor guy didnt and wont get what he feels hes entitled to, so let the feet stomping begin. Cant say im upset about it though!

Actually your wrong again, there will be no stomping of the feet ! Only one zone out of the 5 I hunt will go only draw! So I'll still be chasing big ones again! And If that changes down the road, well I'll buy my self a pretty little section and hunt my landowners tags...Heck we might end up being neighbors...lol:love0025:

[sheephunter]

http://afga.org/html/content/staff/

Ya, I'm well aware of that and I'm telling you I am not staff but a contractor.....If it's really bothering you that much perhaps call the office tomorrow for clarification. They will tell you exactly what I told you here. :)

[209x50]

It amazes me that the ABA never asked for support from other organizations. it also amazes me theys went to the last AGMAG not fighting for proof of the archers exceeding the 15% cap but rather went in to negotiate the new draw.

[ishootbambi]

It amazes me that the ABA never asked for support from other organizations. it also amazes me theys went to the last AGMAG not fighting for proof of the archers exceeding the 15% cap but rather went in to negotiate the new draw.

after seeing the info, im not surprised. there is nothing to argue when the numbers are what they are. i have never doubted that some zones are over the 15%.....what i do doubt and am arguing is the method of calculation. while i believe some zones are over....i dont believe many others are.

after explaining in a few pms....more guys are getting it, but im still stunned by the lack of response to the statistical method i posted. i dont buy that for a second.

[H380]

Question I have is where did SRD come up with the magical allowed number of 15 % ? If the number of bowhunters is higher than 15 % of the hunting population , why would the allowance number not be raised as well ?

[sheephunter]

Question I have is where did SRD come up with the magical allowed number of 15 % ? If the number of bowhunters is higher than 15 % of the hunting population , why would the allowance number not be raised as well ?

If I'm not mistaken....bow hunter licence sales represent about 15.8% of wildlife certificate sales.

[missingtwo]

If I'm not mistaken....bow hunter licence sales represent about 15.8% of wildlife certificate sales.

Thats good info. But, what is really needed is archery mule deer tags compared to the total # of mule deer tags.

[packhuntr]

Question I have is where did SRD come up with the magical allowed number of 15 % ? If the number of bowhunters is higher than 15 % of the hunting population , why would the allowance number not be raised as well ?

People want challenge with thier outdoor adventure. Alberta doesnt want that i guess no matter how effective the tool is. When the goal is Resource destruction, archers dont produce good enough results? We need everything dead except bighorns, goats, and grizzlys? That is a good question H380...

[H380]

People want challenge with thier outdoor adventure. Alberta doesnt want that i guess no matter how effective the tool is. When the goal is Resource destruction, archers dont produce good enough results? We need everything dead except bighorns, goats, and grizzlys? That is a good question H380...

Well we already know there aren't enough Grizz to susbstantiate the need for a hunt so that only leaves goats and sheep .. Sounds like the sheep season is gonna get screwed up too and Goats ? Well there's another once in 2 lifetime tag .... If you're lucky .

[ishootbambi]

Thats good info. But, what is really needed is archery mule deer tags compared to the total # of mule deer tags.

be careful what you wish for....in some zones from what ive seen, archery participation would change those numbers for the worse. the point is that archers should be getting their representative percentage of harvest. in some zones archers account for higher percentage, and some cases lower. although some wmus may benefit from actual numbers....others would suffer.

that doesnt apply to mules only by the way.

[H380]

If I'm not mistaken....bow hunter licence sales represent about 15.8% of wildlife certificate sales.

Sorry , shoulda clarified , I'm talking all these zones that can't exist without a draw . Maybe bowhunter numbers in these zones are higher ?

[missingtwo]

Thats good info. But, what is really needed is archery mule deer tags compared to the total # of mule deer tags.

Actually, the real # to know is archery mule deer harvest compared to the total harvest

[Lefty-Canuck]

Actually, the real # to know is archery mule deer harvest compared to the total harvest

These are the numbers that are "extrapolated for an entire populace due to an insufficient sampling size" in SOME cases.

LC

[338Bluff]

Honestly, I think we started this thread about 6 months to early. Its only December 16th for Pete's sake. This is gonna fizzle and we are going to have to spend the rest of the winter arguing about ballistics or why the .270 is the best ever........

All kidding aside when I heard what kind of math they were using to arrive at the stats....I know what they can do with their upcoming survey this year.

[J.B.]

It amazes me that the ABA never asked for support from other organizations. it also amazes me theys went to the last AGMAG not fighting for proof of the archers exceeding the 15% cap but rather went in to negotiate the new draw.

Bull! Aba and saba have worked hand in hand on this and the aba was representing all archers at the agmag. Like I stated earlier Corrigan doesn't give a fok that the data is false and archers have come to the conclusion it might be better ttying to negotiate a separate archery draw rather than a method of reliable data collection.
Corrigan has made it quite clear he doesn't give a fok who's right or wrong, things are happening his way, right now.
This proposal is hurting all user groups and there are many better solutions to a problem were not even sure exists!!!!

[jryley]

I didn't say anything that was wrong! You do want mule deer on draw, because you believe bowhunters shouldn't have that opportunity.... the last sentence was a question...hence the (?)....



Actually your wrong again, there will be no stomping of the feet ! Only one zone out of the 5 I hunt will go only draw! So I'll still be chasing big ones again! And If that changes down the road, well I'll buy my self a pretty little section and hunt my landowners tags...Heck we might end up being neighbors...lol:love0025:

I wis the forum had a sarcasm button! Shoulda elaborated a but more! Was just poking fun at ya potty! All ingood fun. As i said before, youre obviously a smart guy with a common passion for the sport that i share! We disagree to a certain extent, but not entirely. I will say it sucks for the guys that pursue mule in said zones responsibly. Lets hope it doesnt last too long and numbers are through the roof in a couple years!0

[sheephunter]

Doesn't anyone find it a bit odd that the big threat that SRD used with the crossbow question was that if crossbow were permitted that some WMUs would likely go on draw for mule deer when apparently they already knew that some WMUs were headed for a draw? While we were busy fighting among each other and pointing fingers, we were being easily manipulated. You think we'd learn from past mistakes but if this thread is any indication, we haven't learned a thing. Sad.

[Deer Hunter]

im goiing to point this out again.....IF archery hunters are taking more than their 15% allotted...it should go to draw. the math srd is using to get their numbers is seriously flawed.....aim the anger at the right place here people!

It amazes me that the ABA never asked for support from other organizations. it also amazes me theys went to the last AGMAG not fighting for proof of the archers exceeding the 15% cap but rather went in to negotiate the new draw.

Question I have is where did SRD come up with the magical allowed number of 15 % ? If the number of bowhunters is higher than 15 % of the hunting population , why would the allowance number not be raised as well ?

If I'm not mistaken....bow hunter licence sales represent about 15.8% of wildlife certificate sales.


15% of the number of resident hunters buy a bowhunting tag. Yet they include the game bird and pheasant tags in the total... So the 15% based on # of resident hunters isnt a good number to use.

I pulled some public info and suggest that at least 25% of the hunters that hunt big game also bowhunt.

Anyone care to comment on this sheet? I believe the 15% number represents very little with respect to a useful cap.

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/Frommywildalberta_zpsd1de0e63.png

http://www.mywildalberta.com/BuyLicences/AnnualSalesStatistics.aspx

[sheephunter]

You can't just eliminate the bird hunters as a large number of them also big game hunt. Where it also gets confusing is that most of those bow hunters are also rifle hunters. 95% if I'm not mistaken.

[grinr]

Re:data collection,wouldn't a very simple solution to collecting accurate harvest data be to simply require all big game harvests to be registered,either in person,online,or by phone?
I would think such a system would be pretty simple to set-up?

[Deer Hunter]

You can't just eliminate the bird hunters as a large number of them also big game hunt. Where it also gets confusing is that most of those bow hunters are also rifle hunters. 95% if I'm not mistaken.

Agreed but you just cant include them as big game resident hunters and split up the big game bowhunting share based on their numbers. The 15% take is extremely low and I beleive that it is beyond 25% that bowhunt.

Also, based on the stats, resident bowhunter numbers have increased 12% between 2011 and 2008 wheras total resident hunters have only increased 4.4%. Obviously a growing population which is important in maintaining overall numbers.

[pottymouth]

You can't just eliminate the bird hunters as a large number of them also big game hunt. Where it also gets confusing is that most of those bow hunters are also rifle hunters. 95% if I'm not mistaken.

How do we know that 95% are dual hunters?

[IR_mike]

Re:data collection,wouldn't a very simple solution to collecting accurate harvest data be to simply require all big game harvests to be registered,either in person,online,or by phone?
I would think such a system would be pretty simple to set-up?

You are makeing too much sense...stop that!! :)

Also have to figure in roadkill, subsistence, and illegal harvest.

[IR_mike]

Doesn't anyone find it a bit odd that the big threat that SRD used with the crossbow question was that if crossbow were permitted that some WMUs would likely go on draw for mule deer when apparently they already knew that some WMUs were headed for a draw? While we were busy fighting among each other and pointing fingers, we were being easily manipulated. You think we'd learn from past mistakes but if this thread is any indication, we haven't learned a thing. Sad.

Well said and very true.

[sheephunter]

Agreed but you just cant include them as big game resident hunters and split up the big game bowhunting share based on their numbers. The 15% take is extremely low and I beleive that it is beyond 25% that bowhunt.

Also, based on the stats, resident bowhunter numbers have increased 12% between 2011 and 2008 wheras total resident hunters have only increased 4.4%. Obviously a growing population which is important in maintaining overall numbers.

Lots of valid points...I was only saying you can't eliminate all the bird hunters....I suspect a very large percentage also big game hunt so I'm not sure how you figure more than 25%. By eliminating them all you only got to 25% and we know we can't do that.

[sheephunter]

How do we know that 95% are dual hunters?

ABA membership poll. Truthfully, the percentage of dual weapon hunters is likely even a bit higher in the general hunting population.

[Deer Hunter]

Lots of valid points...I was only saying you can't eliminate all the bird hunters....I suspect a very large percentage also big game hunt so I'm not sure how you figure more than 25%. By eliminating them all you only got to 25% and we know we can't do that.

Based on the 2012 (i couldnt find 2011 but it will work for arguement sake) draw stats there was 24,427 resident mule deer hunters that were drawn (assume they were all rifle only hunters). The 2011 resident mule hunters from the stats above are 36,589. The remaining 12,162 i would hazard to believe were made up of mostly bowhunters grabbing a general tag as their are very few places that offer mule deer on rifle general tag anymore (and they usually dont have high hunter or deer numbers imo). Sure you can state the assumptions are flawed but they balance out against each other too.

So 12,000 over 37,000 is nearly 32%. So thats how I get to over 25%.

So would you agree that the 15% cap isnt a good number to use???

[sheephunter]

Based on the 2012 (i couldnt find 2011 but it will work for arguement sake) draw stats there was 24,427 resident mule deer hunters that were drawn (assume they were all rifle only hunters). The 2011 resident mule hunters from the stats above are 36,589. The remaining 12,162 i would hazard to believe were made up of mostly bowhunters grabbing a general tag as their are very few places that offer mule deer on rifle general tag anymore (and they usually dont have high hunter or deer numbers imo). Sure you can state the assumptions are flawed but they balance out against each other too.

So 12,000 over 37,000 is nearly 32%. So thats how I get to over 25%.

So would you agree that the 15% cap isnt a good number to use???

A few flaws in your calculations but my first question is:
Does the 24,427 drawn include antlerless draws as well?

I did some looking and it appears it does so you are likely right that the percentage of bowhunters pursuing mule deer is higher than 15% but that number does not represent the general hunting population...just those pursuing mule deer. Considering, as you pointed out, opportunity for general mule deer is very limited and bow tags are general, this shouldn't come as much surprise but you can't compare a group on restricted draw to one that is not, when figuring out a percentage of participation overall. That's the major flaw.

[H380]

Based on the 2012 (i couldnt find 2011 but it will work for arguement sake) draw stats there was 24,427 resident mule deer hunters that were drawn (assume they were all rifle only hunters). The 2011 resident mule hunters from the stats above are 36,589. The remaining 12,162 i would hazard to believe were made up of mostly bowhunters grabbing a general tag as their are very few places that offer mule deer on rifle general tag anymore (and they usually dont have high hunter or deer numbers imo). Sure you can state the assumptions are flawed but they balance out against each other too.

So 12,000 over 37,000 is nearly 32%. So thats how I get to over 25%.

So would you agree that the 15% cap isnt a good number to use???

Last line ...My point exactly .

[grinr]

.

[Deer Hunter]

Does the 24,427 drawn include antlerless draws as well?

Yes.

[sheephunter]

Yes.

I edited above.....I see how you reached the conclusion you did but it really isn't representative of the general hunting population as I pointed out above. You are comparing a population on draw to one not on draw......that doesn't work when calculating number of participants other than in the one instance which is weighted because the number of participants drawn. Look at how many applied.

The numbers we know for absolute certainty are the number of wildlife certificates and the number of bowhunting licences...what is not known for sure is how many bird hunters also big game hunt but we do know for sure that the number of bow hunters in the general big game hunting population is less than 25%...that is not even arguable. How much less is open to some speculation. But you still haven't factored in the fact that most bow hunters are dual weapon hunters.....not bow hunters only...that's where things get muddy. We also know for fact that nearly 16% of all hunters in Alberta bow hunt to some degree.

[grinr]

Based on the 2012 The remaining 12,162 i would hazard to believe were made up of mostly bowhunters grabbing a general tag as their are very few places that offer mule deer on rifle general tag anymore (and they usually dont have high hunter or deer numbers imo). Sure you can state the assumptions are flawed but they balance out against each other too.

So 12,000 over 37,000 is nearly 32%. So thats how I get to over 25%.


That's assuming quite alot considering that most(all?)of the 400's and alot of the 300's have General/no draw Mule seasons.I didn't bowhunt at all this year but I bought a mule tag.Did most of my hunting off of the FTR between Cochrane and RMH,open for mule pretty much everywhere on both sides of road iirc?

[Deer Hunter]

I edited above.....I see how you reached the conclusion you did but it really isn't representative of the general hunting population as I pointed out above.

The general overall hunting population has no affect on mule deer stats yet it is being used as the base in which mule deer caps are implemented.

You are comparing a population on draw to one not on draw......that doesn't work when calculating number of participants other than in the one instance which is weighted because the number of participants drawn. Look at how many applied.

The numbers we know for absolute certainty are the number of wildlife certificates and the number of bowhunting licences...

One of these numbers is semi-useful and the other isnt.


what is not known for sure is how many bird hunters also big game hunt but we do know for sure that the number of bow hunters in the general big game hunting population is less than 25%...that is not even arguable.

Post how you came up with your unarguable numbers as i am interested in your approach. My numbers appear to be arguable whereas yours are not??:snapoutofit:

How much less is open to some speculation. But you still haven't factored in the fact that most bow hunters are dual weapon hunters.....not bow hunters only...that's where things get muddy. We also know for fact that nearly 16% of all hunters in Alberta bow hunt to some degree.

At least 16% bowhunt so lets cap it at 15%... dumb math by the uninformed people who make the rules...



^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

[sheephunter]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

My numbers are not arguable because they respresent a known number...pretty simple....we know how many people buy wildlife certificates and bow hunting licences. Those are the only certanties in this whole discussion so far.

The mule deer numbers only work if both groups have the same oportunity opportunity to hunt ...they don't. If you want to use the mule deer numbers, use the number of applicants...not the number that were drawn. Even then there are too many other variables.

This is pretty simple math.

[Deer Hunter]

This is pretty simple math.

Math is fine but digging into the problem is before using math is a better approach.

People think that bow hunters are getting too many mule deer. Then someone like yourself jumps into math as a solution without looking at the real problems or other solutions.

So 15% is the targeted resident bowhunting cap. That's a mistake due to the numbers used but fine.

Outfitters and landowners are consuming, on average 34%, of the antlered mule deer in the 200 zones scheduled to be put on resident archery draw.

Now there is the problem. But the solution is being rammed down our resident throats by math experts using meaningless numbers.

I like to think my numbers have more thought put into them and you have blown big holes in them (which I cannot argue..), so why not switch sides and call the current approach a pile of garbage???

[sheephunter]

Math is fine but digging into the problem is before using math is a better approach.

People think that bow hunters are getting too many mule deer. Then someone like yourself jumps into math as a solution without looking at the real problems or other solutions.

So 15% is the targeted resident bowhunting cap. That's a mistake due to the numbers used but fine.

Outfitters and landowners are consuming, on average 34%, of the antlered mule deer in the 200 zones scheduled to be put on resident archery draw.

Now there is the problem. But the solution is being rammed down our resident throats by math experts using meaningless numbers.

I like to think my numbers have more thought put into them and you have blown big holes in them (which I cannot argue..), so why not switch sides and call the current approach a pile of garbage???

LOL...I was helping you understand the 15% number.....not making a case for anything else. I happen to have a pretty strong background in stats. Some stats are arguable...some aren't. No point wasting your time on the ones that aren't. There are enough in this situation that are...it's important to know the difference or all of your thoughts are easily dismissed by the government. Arguing that 32% of the big hunting population are bow hunters will quickly have all of your thoughts dismissed......

I was honestly trying to do you a favour and help you understand.....that's why I was so patient....so you can pout because I pointed out the folly of your arguement or you can say thanks and be better armed to fight this when speaking with the government. You pick..........

I didn't know brining up facts put you on a side......lol....this site cracks me up sometimes. I don't agree with your flawed math so I'm against you....interesting. Perhaps I was just trying to help you............

[pottymouth]

So the number they are using, based off of bow permits? Which is 15.8% of the population. What happens when bow permits go to 20% or more, does that mean that they will be adjusting the allowance to 20% or more as well?

[sheephunter]

So the number they are using, based off of bow permits? Which is 15.8% of the population. What happens when bow permits go to 20% or more, does that mean that they will be adjusting the allowance to 20% as well?

Good question for ESRD.

[Deer Hunter]

LOL...I was helping you understand the 15% number.....not making a case for anything else. I happen to have a pretty strong background in stats. Some stats are arguable...some aren't. No point wasting your time on the ones that aren't. There are enough in this situation that are...it's important to know the difference or all of your thoughts are easily dismissed by the government. Arguing that 32% of the big hunting population are bow hunters will quickly have all of your thoughts dismissed......

I was honestly trying to do you a favour and help you understand.....that's why I was so patient....so you can pout because I pointed out the folly of your arguement or you can say thanks and be better armed to fight this when speaking with the government. You pick..........

I didn't know brining up facts put you on a side......lol....this site cracks me up sometimes. I don't agree with your flawed math so I'm against you....interesting. Perhaps I was just trying to help you............

I figured you as a self-proclaimed expert alright so the background in stats comes as no surprise.

Glad you could experience some folly and "crack up". Now you know how I feel when I last read one of your articles.:)

Maybe I'll take a course before I throw up any alternatives to the governments train of thought. Anyways, thanks for listening to my spew!

[sheephunter]

I figured you as a self-proclaimed expert alright so the background in stats comes as no surprise.

Glad you could experience some folly and "crack up". Now you know how I feel when I last read one of your articles.:)

Maybe I'll take a course before I throw up any alternatives to the governments train of thought. Anyways, thanks for listening to my spew!

I see you chose the first option...lol

This thread is so indicitive of of the problems we face as hunters in this province. You'd rather spend all afternoon arguing that 2+2=9 than learn a little something to better arm yourself to take the government to task. We spend so much time fighting our personal little battles on here and pointing fingers at individuals that the big picture soon gets forgotten. We are so proud that we are unable to learn and facts that might not 100% support our position terrify us.

I'm sure the boys at SRD delight in this stuff while they slip into their Grinch suits for Christmas happily knowing that all the whos in whoville are busy arguing amoungest themselves and won't notice that they are once again stealing all the hunting opportunities from beneath the tree. We really deserve what we get.

At some point we need to let go of our petty little grievances and learn from each other and realize that we likely won't agree on all points of a situation but there is likely common ground in there somewhere that will make us all stronger, if we can shut up long enough to listen. I can honestly say that the unity shown among groups over the sheep changes is indeed refreshing and something foreign to the Alberta hunting community. With a little coaltion, you might be surprised what could be done. Or you can whine about how the hunting groups are doing nothing and keep arguing that 2+2=9. It's refreshing that there is life outside of this board....life that doesn't let their ego get in the way of what's good for all. Life that is willing to be quiet and learn when they need to and speak up when they should. Sadly, we are becoming a pretty heavy anchor around their feet. Enjoy the trip down...............

[LongDraw]

Validity of the data aside, An archery mule deer draw should be a separate draw code. Seems to work well for Antelope.

SRD can absolutely control hunter numbers, and hunters can manage their draws.

[pope]

One only needs to spend time in some zones to see a mule deer archery draw is BS. Take 305 for example - since they got rid of the 3 point rule this area boasts a healthy polulation of mule deer of all sizes year after year. Now to put it on a draw for archery is ridiculous. Applying simple math to every zone will do nothing but needlessly reduce hunting opportunity.

[super7mag]

I see you chose the first option...lol

This thread is so indicitive of of the problems we face as hunters in this province. You'd rather spend all afternoon arguing that 2+2=9 than learn a little something to better arm yourself to take the government to task. We spend so much time fighting our personal little battles on here and pointing fingers at individuals that the big picture soon gets forgotten. We are so proud that we are unable to learn and facts that might not 100% support our position terrify us.

I'm sure the boys at SRD delight in this stuff while they slip into their Grinch suits for Christmas happily knowing that all the whos in whoville are busy arguing amoungest themselves and won't notice that they are once again stealing all the hunting opportunities from beneath the tree. We really deserve what we get.

At some point we need to let go of our petty little grievances and learn from each other and realize that we likely won't agree on all points of a situation but there is likely common ground in there somewhere that will make us all stronger, if we can shut up long enough to listen. I can honestly say that the unity shown among groups over the sheep changes is indeed refreshing and something foreign to the Alberta hunting community. With a little coaltion, you might be surprised what could be done. Or you can whine about how the hunting groups are doing nothing and keep arguing that 2+2=9. It's refreshing that there is life outside of this board....life that doesn't let their ego get in the way of what's good for all. Life that is willing to be quiet and learn when they need to and speak up when they should. Sadly, we are becoming a pretty heavy anchor around their feet. Enjoy the trip down...............

Well maybe the mayans had it right and we can all Kiss our butts good bye, Cause thats twice this week I agree with Sheep!! he was right about keeping the thread on Sandy Hook on track( which got derailed rather quickly) and he is right about in fighting. the competitvness about the next big rack has left hunting with much less commradery and more plain competition. Instead of woorying about what WE can hunt next year maybe we should worry about what our kids can hunt in future years.
The srd is smoke and mirrors, I stayed out of the baiting thread and this one until it came to much, they are linked by the cwd fears and silent culls , if you cant see this well....... If I shut down a zone just out of edmunchuck, or callgry and open it up on the border where oh where will all the hunters roam. smoke and mirrors.

[Lefty-Canuck]

If I shut down a zone just out of edmunchuck, or callgry and open it up on the border where oh where will all the hunters roam. smoke and mirrors.

I know that you know that the extended seasons in the eastern border zones became a gong show those extra weeks they were open in December....land owners I know dreaded those last couple weeks more than the entire season combined. All the road warriors who were unsuccessful accross the province flocked there to cull...or err I mean for the "extra opportunity" :) Not to mention they still had WT supplementals there.....thank goodness those are no longer handed out in border zones. Was nice to see for the first time in a long time that mule doe was not undersubscribed this year either....

I am just worried they are going to build the population up only to beat it down again in a few years...

LC

[Deer Hunter]

I see you chose the first option...lol

This thread is so indicitive of of the problems we face as hunters in this province. You'd rather spend all afternoon arguing that 2+2=9 than learn a little something to better arm yourself to take the government to task. We spend so much time fighting our personal little battles on here and pointing fingers at individuals that the big picture soon gets forgotten. We are so proud that we are unable to learn and facts that might not 100% support our position terrify us.

I'm sure the boys at SRD delight in this stuff while they slip into their Grinch suits for Christmas happily knowing that all the whos in whoville are busy arguing amoungest themselves and won't notice that they are once again stealing all the hunting opportunities from beneath the tree. We really deserve what we get.

At some point we need to let go of our petty little grievances and learn from each other and realize that we likely won't agree on all points of a situation but there is likely common ground in there somewhere that will make us all stronger, if we can shut up long enough to listen. I can honestly say that the unity shown among groups over the sheep changes is indeed refreshing and something foreign to the Alberta hunting community. With a little coaltion, you might be surprised what could be done. Or you can whine about how the hunting groups are doing nothing and keep arguing that 2+2=9. It's refreshing that there is life outside of this board....life that doesn't let their ego get in the way of what's good for all. Life that is willing to be quiet and learn when they need to and speak up when they should. Sadly, we are becoming a pretty heavy anchor around their feet. Enjoy the trip down...............

20,000 posts telling people what they are doing wrong, and then talks about getting a life outside this board? Nobody on here is as confrontational as this guy and so quick to pass the blame. Time somebody looked in the mirror. :)

Here is some data that I was given on the 300 Draw WMU's in 2010. IMO we are worrying about the wrong group here, bowhunters at 15 or 25% really make little difference when you compare their low success rate to the higher percentage groups shown here.

By WMU which some will claim isnt representitive for outfitters, but it sure is for resident hunters. Shows the variances in percent of the total antlered mule deer allocations. The remaining percent is made up of the resident draw. Of course archery mule deer tags could not be counted per WMU as they were general.
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/Capture2_zpsf77a0368.png

[sheephunter]

Here is some data that I was given on the 300 Draw WMU's in 2010. IMO we are worrying about the wrong group here, bowhunters at 15 or 25% really make little difference when you compare their low success rate to the higher percentage groups shown here.



You are a smart guy deer hunter and you undoubtedly know lots of things about things that I don't have a clue about. I'm a smart guy and I likely know lots of things about things you dont have a clue about. There's a time to talk and a time to listen......:)

Good info you just posted :)

[H380]

Thanx for the info Deer Hunter . I had no idea that outfitter allocations are that much higher than landowner tags , not that I have any problem with landowner tags , seems some people point fingers at them too fast .I wonder what the ratio is in say the 100 and 200 zones .

[missingtwo]

20,000 posts telling people what they are doing wrong, and then talks about getting a life outside this board? Nobody on here is as confrontational as this guy and so quick to pass the blame. Time somebody looked in the mirror. :)



. There's a time to talk and a time to listen......:)



Agreed.
Deerhunter, could you p.m. the source of this info. I would also like to see the 100/200 zones.

[sheephunter]

Agreed.
Deerhunter, could you p.m. the source of this info. I would also like to see the 100/200 zones.

What was your name before you got banned last time? ;)

[whitetail Junkie]

What was your name before you got banned last time? ;)

:evilgrin: The capitalization on individual words in some of his posts, gave him away a while back....

On topic.....Deer hunter that chart makes me sick :( I knew the 100 wmus were bad,but had no idea that the 300's were that rough,yuck!

Maybe Paaaaackhunter can give us his opinion on the wmu 300 series outfitter muledeer allocation #'s........

[packhuntr]

Whitetail Junkie, there are issues in this province. Becsuse you hate the thought of someone else delighted with an outdoor experience here, maybe you should stop railing me over it and give YOUR 2 bits,,, after trying to iron out why residents are being denied ability to be delighted with a low impact archery outdoor experience in this province...

[packhuntr]

If archers are being shut out for 2013, mule deer management must be back on the menu... I will be very happy to see a SUBSTANTIAL decrease in rifle tags for the upcoming fall. What a joy it finally is to see that extirpation of a species is no longer the mandate.

[209x50]

Arguing over math at this juncture is pointless. By negotiating a draw the ABA has approved SRD's proclaimed findings and worse has vetted this entire cocked up process. It is impossible to appeal or complain about an outcome that you were involved in forging.

[grinr]

Am I reading that graph correctly,or am I missing something here??
Outfitter allocations actually account for up to 70% of the available tags??WTF!!!
.....that's just ridiculous

[sheephunter]

If archers are being shut out for 2013, mule deer management must be back on the menu... I will be very happy to see a SUBSTANTIAL decrease in rifle tags for the upcoming fall. What a joy it finally is to see that extirpation of a species is no longer the mandate.

There won't be "rifle" tags in most WMUs this fall if ESRD gets their way....just tags that can be used in archery and/or rifle season for those that draw. I suspect you'll see at least a 15% increase in the number of tags available.

You are dreaming if you think this is about managing mule deer.....it's about managing hunter numbers.

[bobbypetrolia]

There won't be "rifle" tags in most WMUs this fall if ESRD gets their way....just tags that can be used in archery and/or rifle season for those that draw. I suspect you'll see at least a 15% increase in the number of tags available.

You are dreaming if you think this is about managing mule deer.....it's about managing hunter numbers.

I think you're actually closer to agreeing than disagreeing. Can you not effectively manage a species by managing the hunters (via tags available)?? If not, I'd like to hear.

[sheephunter]

I think you're actually closer to agreeing than disagreeing. Can you not effectively manage a species by managing the hunters (via tags available)?? If not, I'd like to hear.

I think you like a lot of people seem to be totally missing the point of what ESRD is doing here. This has nothing to do with managing deer numbers. They have never said it does. The harvest isn't going to change.....just which hunter group gets allocated which percentage of the existing harvest. It has zero to do with managing deer numbers and everything to do with managing hunters.

[bobbypetrolia]

I think you like a lot of people seem to be totally missing the point of what ESRD is doing here. This has nothing to do with managing deer numbers. They have never said it does. The harvest isn't going to change.....just which hunter group gets allocated which percentage of the existing harvest. It has zero to do with managing deer numbers and everything to do with managing hunters.

I'm not missing any point here. I have read all the info on this thread and found most of it interesting, and some of it knowledgable. What did I say that would lead you to believe I am missing some kind of point?!? I actually never even commented on what ESRD is doing.
What I said was, and I will type slower; Can you not effectively manage a species' population by managing the number of hunters of said species? YOU said this isnt about managing mulie numbers; it was about managing hunters numbers. I was wondering what the difference was.

[Lefty-Canuck]

I'm not missing any point here. I have read all the info on this thread and found most of it interesting, and some of it knowledgable. What did I say that would lead you to believe I am missing some kind of point?!? I actually never even commented on what ESRD is doing.
What I said was, and I will type slower; Can you not effectively manage a species' population by managing the number of hunters of said species? YOU said this isnt about managing mulie numbers; it was about managing hunters numbers. I was wondering what the difference was.

I think the point SH was making is that the opportunity is decreasing for some hunters....and increasing for others. Thus the same amount of tags are being handed out, arguably with more rifle hunters the success rate (harvest numbers) will increase.

So the resource is not being managed at all as the same number of deer are expected to be killed....it is not like archery tags are going away and that percentage of harvest is being removed as well.

LC

[sheephunter]

I'm not missing any point here. I have read all the info on this thread and found most of it interesting, and some of it knowledgable. What did I say that would lead you to believe I am missing some kind of point?!? I actually never even commented on what ESRD is doing.
What I said was, and I will type slower; Can you not effectively manage a species' population by managing the number of hunters of said species? YOU said this isnt about managing mulie numbers; it was about managing hunters numbers. I was wondering what the difference was.

And I'll type slower...they are not trying to manage mule deer numbers with this change. It has absolutely zero to do with managing the mule deer population. They are just redistributing the same harvest amoung different hunter groups. They are managing hunters to redistribute the same harvest. That's what you and others seem to be missing.

Truthfully, I suspect packhunter's comments were somewhat sarcastic as I'm sure he knows this has zero to do with game management.

In other cases sure ESRD manages hunter numbers to manage game but that is not the intent nor the result in this case.

[bobbypetrolia]

I think the point SH was making is that the opportunity is decreasing for some hunters....and increasing for others. Thus the same amount of tags are being handed out, arguably with more rifle hunters the success rate (harvest numbers) will increase.

So the resource is not being managed at all as the same number of deer are expected to be killed....it is not like archery tags are going away and that percentage of harvest is being removed as well.

LC

This is the answer to the question I was asking. Thank you LC.

[sheephunter]

I think the point SH was making is that the opportunity is decreasing for some hunters....and increasing for others. Thus the same amount of tags are being handed out, arguably with more rifle hunters the success rate (harvest numbers) will increase.

LC

I doubt we'll see a significant increase in tag numbers but we could add 20% more tags to the draw and see no increase in harvest I'm sure, 15% more for absolute certainty. I suspect wait times will decrease a bit for those in the draw as well.

[sakogreywolf]

I think you like a lot of people seem to be totally missing the point of what ESRD is doing here. This has nothing to do with managing deer numbers. They have never said it does. The harvest isn't going to change.....just which hunter group gets allocated which percentage of the existing harvest. It has zero to do with managing deer numbers and everything to do with managing hunters.

Agreed. In reallity any zones put on this draw format that were actually under the 15% archery success rate would more than likely have an increase in harvest due to greater success with a rifle would they not?

[sheephunter]

Agreed. In reallity any zones put on this draw format that were actually under the 15% archery success rate would more than likely have an increase in harvest due to greater success with a rifle would they not?

Only if they increase the number of tags available in the draw. If archers were taking 15% of the harvest on a general tag, they could add at least 15% more tags to the draw with no change in harvest and I suspect closer to 20% more as not all hunters are successful.

[sakogreywolf]

And if they don't increase the tags available by draw, even the rifle hunters will lose due to increased wait times. It's a lose - lose for everyone.:confused:

[sheephunter]

And if they don't increase the tags available by draw, even the rifle hunters will lose due to increased wait times. It's a lose - lose for everyone.:confused:

I can't see wait times increasing much if at all if they don't increase tag numbers as the number of applicants isn't likely to increase much but there is no reason not to increase tag numbers by an absolute minimum of 15% if there is no concern over the number of animals currently being harvested in a WMU.

[albertadave]

Only if they increase the number of tags available in the draw. If archers were taking 15% of the harvest on a general tag, they could add at least 15% more tags to the draw with no change in harvest and I suspect closer to 20% more as not all hunters are successful.

15-20% increase in the number of tags, with no increase in hrarvest? Wasn't it already stated in this thread somewhere that most bow hunters are also rifle hunters? And rifle hunters are generally more successful than bow hunters. So how would the harvest numbers not change? I would think the actual harvest would likely increase by about 15%, wouldn't it?

[pope]

Only if they increase the number of tags available in the draw. If archers were taking 15% of the harvest on a general tag, they could add at least 15% more tags to the draw with no change in harvest and I suspect closer to 20% more as not all hunters are successful.


So why change anything?
And what is the need to change things if they are only managing hunters not the deer? Who is complaining?

[jrs]

I can't see wait times increasing much if at all if they don't increase tag numbers as the number of applicants isn't likely to increase much but there is no reason not to increase tag numbers by an absolute minimum of 15% if there is no concern over the number of animals currently being harvested in a WMU.

I think it would decrease the wait in the zones i hunt. Id say archers taking 30% of the harvest over the past few seasons would be a very conservative estimate where i hunt. As all bow hunters i know also rifle hunt (generally wait to pull a tag elsewhere and hunt the local zones with the bow) there will be less pressure on the local deer and more tags (assuming 15% is added) with the same number of applicants. I also wonder if the draw isn't being backed by many landowners down here, several guys commented on how busy archery season is getting last year and again this fall. More archers than rifle hunters this year by far as draw tag cuts have been drastic.

[whitetail Junkie]

Whitetail Junkie, there are issues in this province. Becsuse you hate the thought of someone else delighted with an outdoor experience here, maybe you should stop railing me over it and give YOUR 2 bits,,, after trying to iron out why residents are being denied ability to be delighted with a low impact archery outdoor experience in this province...

MY 2 BITS is that your the one on here licking the outfitter gouch,when it comes to them not having there allocations reduced or taken away(god willing)! look at deer hunters wmu 300 chart,did it ever occur to you that archery muledeer would'nt be going on draw if there were no outfitter allocations!....lick away pack,lick away.....

[sheephunter]

15-20% increase in the number of tags, with no increase in hrarvest? Wasn't it already stated in this thread somewhere that most bow hunters are also rifle hunters? And rifle hunters are generally more successful than bow hunters. So how would the harvest numbers not change? I would think the actual harvest would likely increase by about 15%, wouldn't it?

Nope, harvest is controlled by draw. Under current system.....let's use the example that draw accounts for 85% of harvest and the general tag (archers) account for 15% of target. If we remove the general opportunity we remove 15% of the harvest. Now we can add at least 15% more tags and still end up with same harvest even if rifle hunters are 100% successful.

[sheephunter]

So why change anything?
And what is the need to change things if they are only managing hunters not the deer? Who is complaining?

SRD has a policy that says archers only get 15% of harvest...apparently they are exceeding that 15% in some WMUs.

[albertadave]

Nope, harvest is controlled by draw. Under current system.....let's use the example that draw accounts for 85% of harvest and the general tag (archers) account for 15% of target. If we remove the general opportunity we remove 15% of the harvest. Now we can add at least 15% more tags and still end up with same harvest even if rifle hunters are 100% successful.

Gotcha. It took a minute, but I see it now. Just finished my 14th straight night shift. Brain's a little tired lol.

[duffy4]

And I'll type slower...they are not trying to manage mule deer numbers with this change. It has absolutely zero to do with managing the mule deer population. They are just redistributing the same harvest amoung different hunter groups. They are managing hunters to redistribute the same harvest. That's what you and others seem to be missing.

Truthfully, I suspect packhunter's comments were somewhat sarcastic as I'm sure he knows this has zero to do with game management.

In other cases sure ESRD manages hunter numbers to manage game but that is not the intent nor the result in this case.

I think you are missing something in this.

X number of draw tags in a WMU and Y number of deer taken by bow hunters on a general tag.

The number of draw tags is controlable by F&W. However the number of general tags and the success of bow hunters (both of which contribute to increas in harvest) is not controled.

So in order to control harvest all hunters have to go on a controled number of draw tags.

A controlled number of draw tags IS part of mule deer management.

[sheephunter]

Gotcha. It took a minute, but I see it now. Just finished my 14th straight night shift. Brain's a little tired lol.

LOL...I hear ya...burning some midnight oil myself these days.

[sheephunter]

I think you are missing something in this.

X number of draw tags in a WMU and Y number of deer taken by bow hunters on a general tag.

The number of draw tags is controlable by F&W. However the number of general tags and the success of bow hunters (both of which contribute to increas in harvest) is not controled.

So in order to control harvest all hunters have to go on a controled number of draw tags.

A controlled number of draw tags IS part of mule deer management.

Not necessarily....they could have just kept reducing the number of draw tags to accommodate the increased archery harvest. It truly is just about managing the distribution of the harvest among various user groups...not managing deer numbers.

[Rocks]

I think there will be some increased pressure in the draws as a result of this, especially in the northern zones, there are quite a few guys like me who have never drawn for mule deer, instead utilizing general tags in the non draw zones and some of the zones where archery was general, who will now be applying for a draw.

[pope]

Not necessarily....they could have just kept reducing the number of draw tags to accommodate the increased archery harvest. It truly is just about managing the distribution of the harvest among various user groups...not managing deer numbers.

Its a poor attempt to distribute harvest between archery and rifle. Archery success rates are no where near rifle. So lumping archery and rifle in one draw just won't work. Again - this will greatly reduce hunting opportunities in the province.

[sakogreywolf]

As well, I feel that as a result of this there will be more than a few archers that in past would have let certain bucks go, but may not in the future (bow or rifle), due to greatly decreased oppurtunity. Higher success equals reduced tags.

[Lefty-Canuck]

I think there will be some increased pressure in the draws as a result of this, especially in the northern zones, there are quite a few guys like me who have never drawn for mule deer, instead utilizing general tags in the non draw zones and some of the zones where archery was general, who will now be applying for a draw.

The other thing this does is start to tie up our draw system....adding people into the fray.

I can guarantee quite a few bow hunters who only hunt with the bow and who used general tags during the archery season have no priority points built up.....now add all those guys into our draw system and in a few years the draw pools for higher priorities will increase wait times for all.....rifle and archery guys.

We saw this occur in the zones where moose went from general archery to draw.....it forces the archery guys to put in for draws where before they never had to.

LC

[KBF]

All I know is if the grizzly season opens backup, they better put that on draw too or us bowhunters are gonna kill to many bears and upset the otherguys.:argue2:

[sheephunter]

The other thing this does is start to tie up our draw system....adding people into the fray.

I can guarantee quite a few bow hunters who only hunt with the bow and who used general tags during the archery season have no priority points built up.....now add all those guys into our draw system and in a few years the draw pools for higher priorities will increase wait times for all.....rifle and archery guys.

We saw this occur in the zones where moose went from general archery to draw.....it forces the archery guys to put in for draws where before they never had to.

LC

You are right, that is the great unknown number. I can't see applicants increasing by 15% but who knows I guess.

[Rocks]

Arguing over math at this juncture is pointless. By negotiating a draw the ABA has approved SRD's proclaimed findings and worse has vetted this entire cocked up process. It is impossible to appeal or complain about an outcome that you were involved in forging.

Why the swipe at the ABA? They've been the primary opposition to this from the start. I understand you were at the last AGMAG meeting, who were you representing and what's your position on the draw?

[duffy4]

Not necessarily....they could have just kept reducing the number of draw tags to accommodate the increased archery harvest. It truly is just about managing the distribution of the harvest among various user groups...not managing deer numbers.

Its all about managing deer numbers.

With draw opportunities and open general opportunities the only control of numbers harvested was on the draw side. the general harvest was a wild card.

With ALL HARVEST controled by number of draw permits there is more control on harvest numbers.

F&W is mainly concerned with game population management. The hunters happieness is a secondary concern. They do not care if a mule deer is killed with a gun or a bow or a pick-up. They mainly just want to know the population, the recrutment and the mortality

[sheephunter]

Its all about managing deer numbers.

With draw opportunities and open general opportunities the only control of numbers harvested was on the draw side. the general harvest was a wild card.

With ALL HARVEST controled by number of draw permits there is more control on harvest numbers.

F&W is mainly concerned with game population management. The hunters happieness is a secondary concern. They do not care if a mule deer is killed with a gun or a bow or a pick-up. They mainly just want to know the population, the recrutment and the mortality

If they don't care how it's killed then why the 15% cap policy for archers? In many cases I'd agree with you Duffy but in this case it has zero to do with managing wildlife and everything to do with managing hunters or more accurate the distribution of harvest among different hunter groups.

[L.O.S.T.Arrow]

*Whistle*..Maybe they should ban bale/binder twine also as it takes more toll than I did with my mule tag and bow this year...tag will make a nice xmas tree decoration, hanger included...:)

http://forums.mathewsinc.com/images/userpix/6673_GEDC0101lockedJPG_1.jpg

For the slammers..no im not serious..yes I am joking..lighten up lol

For those who remember back in the three point mule days in Alberta...there were two point deer lying all over...I dont think that is an logical option...

If I see mule draws in any of the CWD zones I am gonna raise as much poo as I can...

The draw system for rifle in any of the CWD monitered zones is all these areas need for healthy herds...or in better words ..quaility herds
there is no need for srchery draws...
JMHO
Neil

[Pudelpointer]

Its a poor attempt to distribute harvest between archery and rifle. Archery success rates are no where near rifle. So lumping archery and rifle in one draw just won't work. Again - this will greatly reduce hunting opportunities in the province.

Yup.


Consider this everyone:

The percentage of harvest occurring with archery tackle will, without a doubt, drop from >15% to <5%, and I will predict <3% in any zone where this is implemented, unless there is a "Archery Mule Deer" license created.

Does that seem fair to all the "put archery mule deer on draw" guys?

[209x50]

Why the swipe at the ABA? They've been the primary opposition to this from the start. I understand you were at the last AGMAG meeting, who were you representing and what's your position on the draw?

And agin ill say I wasn't at AGMAG. I wish I had been. I would have attempted to take SRD to task over the unsubstantiated numbers. I would never have agreed to any draw for archery mule deer.

[pikergolf]

Would make more sense to have a seperate draw for archery, and control the kill that way, rather than throw them in with a general draw, not? That way a lot more of them could participate.

[Jamie]

So, how is all this going to work?
Just md on draw, use what ever tool is legal?

Or wi the Bow guys have their own Draw?

[sheephunter]

So, how is all this going to work?
Just md on draw, use what ever tool is legal?

Or wi the Bow guys have their own Draw?

Proposal right now is that seasons remain the same but everyone enters the same draw to get a tag. Basically, if you draw you can hunt archery season, rifle season or both. It's the same as elk and moose draws with no general archery season.

[LA_bowhunter]

I find it funny that people are referring to the AFGA as a voice for bowhunters and fighting mule deer being on draw when the Lethbridge Fish and Game was fighting to have archery mule deer eliminated in the zones around Lethbridge (108, 128 and 130) and were successful in reducing our seasons for the last 10 years to just October (recently it was switched back to Sept/Oct in 2010). For this reason, I would never trust my bowhunting priviledges/rights etc to the Alberta FIsh and Game Association and prefer to put my resources behind the Alberta Bowhunters Association.

[pikergolf]

So, how is all this going to work?
Just md on draw, use what ever tool is legal?

Or wi the Bow guys have their own Draw?

Well they want to cut down on the mules taken by archers, so if they want to cut 10% of the mules killed by archers, cut the archers by 10%. If you have 100 archers in a zone and want to cut it by 10% then have a draw for just archers and 90% still get to hunt. Those odds are way better than going into the general mule draw. This would be MD specific.

[sakogreywolf]

Well they want to cut down on the mules taken by archers, so if they want to cut 10% of the mules killed by archers, cut the archers by 10%. If you have 100 archers in a zone and want to cut it by 10% then have a draw for just archers and 90% still get to hunt. Those odds are way better than going into the general mule draw. This would be MD specific.

If archery MD has to go on draw this would be the sensable approach. The current proposal is....unbelievable!

[sheephunter]

Just curious what people think about a separate draw for archery. Should it work like antelope where you can apply and build priority in both the archery and rifle draws or should you have to choose one or the other, say like bighorn sheep.

As most archers are multi-weapon hunters I suspect I know the answer but a one or the other scenario sure would make drawing an archery tag a breeze. I'm sure it would be a virtual guarantee every year in most zones. What do people think?

[Rocks]

And agin ill say I wasn't at AGMAG. I wish I had been. I would have attempted to take SRD to task over the unsubstantiated numbers. I would never have agreed to any draw for archery mule deer.

Sorry, I thought I had read on here you were going to be attending the Dec 5 meeting, my mistake.

I got a document through our local F&G club yesterday from the area SRD biologist, where they stated since this issue has been brought up, support for this change has not been unanimous on AGMAG, with primarily the ABA opposing it. Sounds like everyone else is OK with it?

If the change was going through anyways it seems the ABA might want to negotiate details of the draw, no?

[Deer Hunter]

I received some numbers on this stuff from a really good source and put together some graphs, even though I tried for accuracy, I did this in a hurry so please go easy if there are errors that you catch. I cannot guarantee the numbers but have an extremely good feel that they are real.
The ** besides the WMU represent the ones that are apparently going on draw for archery mule deer. WMU's that are general for mule deer have no percentage info as the number of resident hunters are unknown. These zones still have many outfitter allocations which are presumably a large percentage, but not shown here.

2011 is being worked on and appears to be much worse from a resident hunters point of view.

Thanks goes to the people who provided me the info.

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/100WMU_zpsb8317438.jpg
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/200WMU_zps7bfb8da2.jpg
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/300WMU_zps217a2894.jpg
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/400WMU_zpsd167dc02.jpg
http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/500WMU_zpsf47dd73c.jpg

[LA_bowhunter]

Just curious what people think about a separate draw for archery. Should it work like antelope where you can apply and build priority in both the archery and rifle draws or should you have to choose one or the other, say like bighorn sheep.

As most archers are multi-weapon hunters I suspect I know the answer but a one or the other scenario sure would make drawing an archery tag a breeze. I'm sure it would be a virtual guarantee every year in most zones. What do people think?

I am on the fence on this but I think I would lean more to having to choose, it would help eliminate alot of the weekend warrior bowhunters who fling arrows from the road. A person choosing the archery route would certainly work on their skills if this was their only possibilty to hunt MD. That said though, I would hate to eliminate myself from ever having a rifle tag again.

[sheephunter]

Deer Hunter....Just so I'm reading the graph right, have you added the two percentages together on the same line?

Say in WMU221 for example are outfitters getting 27% of the tags and landowners are getting 34% of the tags for a total of 61%?

[Lefty-Canuck]

That said though, I would hate to eliminate myself from ever having a rifle tag again.

X2....would be nice to build priority in several draws just like antelope...

If mule deer HAS TO go on draw....

Right now as it stands you CAN draw an antlerless and an antlered mule deer tag in the same year....if they made it more like Antelope draws, then you could maintain the same harvest numbers (combined buck and doe) and therefore if a person could only hold ONE tag (like it is with antelope and other species) instead of possibly holding 2 tags.....you would spread out opportunity to all hunters to get at least 1 mule deer buck or doe.

LC

[Deer Hunter]

Deer Hunter....Just so I'm reading the graph right, have you added the two percentages together on the same line?

Say in WMU211 for example are outfitters getting 27% of the tags and landowners are getting 34% of the tags for a total of 61%?

Where is WMU 211?

[sheephunter]

Where is WMU 211?

Ooops, should put my glasses on....WMU 221

[sakogreywolf]

Just curious what people think about a separate draw for archery. Should it work like antelope where you can apply and build priority in both the archery and rifle draws or should you have to choose one or the other, say like bighorn sheep.

As most archers are multi-weapon hunters I suspect I know the answer but a one or the other scenario sure would make drawing an archery tag a breeze. I'm sure it would be a virtual guarantee every year in most zones. What do people think?

:) I suspect you know the answer as well. I am a 95%er who would prefer to be able to apply for both in a given year, while only able to draw one in a given season. However, unlike antelope, why should you not be able hunt with bow in bow season on years that you hold the rifle draw?

[pikergolf]

Just curious what people think about a separate draw for archery. Should it work like antelope where you can apply and build priority in both the archery and rifle draws or should you have to choose one or the other, say like bighorn sheep.

As most archers are multi-weapon hunters I suspect I know the answer but a one or the other scenario sure would make drawing an archery tag a breeze. I'm sure it would be a virtual guarantee every year in most zones. What do people think?

I think it will end up being one or the other so I think it's a no brainer for the archers to support building priority in both. It's not like they need to slash numbers, probably a small percent that needs to get cut. Having said that taking away NR tags would probably eliminate for a while, the need for a draw, but eventually the archer pop. will over take the supply again.

[sheephunter]

I think it will end up being one or the other so I think it's a no brainer for the archers to support building priority in both. It's not like they need to slash numbers, probably a small percent that needs to get cut. Having said that taking away NR tags would probably eliminate for a while, the need for a draw, but eventually the archer pop. will over take the supply again.

That brings up an interesting point....I wonder how much the archery population will grow...or shrink.....if mule deer goes on draw. I can't imagine we'll see the growth rates that we now do.

If you can apply in both, wait times will go up substantially for archers.

[Deer Hunter]

Ooops, should put my glasses on....WMU 221

9 resident tags were drawn from 163 applicants
6 total outfitter allocations
8 landowner tags were given out

And resident bowhunters are proposed to go on draw here.

[sheephunter]

9 resident tags were drawn from 163 applicants
6 total outfitter allocations
8 landowner tags were given out

And resident bowhunters are proposed to go on draw here.

So the two percentages are added together on the same line to give an aggregate total of landowner and outfitter tags...thanks...that's all I wanted to know. A very interesting look at tag distribution in Alberta.

[pikergolf]

That brings up an interesting point....I wonder how much the archery population will grow...or shrink.....if mule deer goes on draw. I can't imagine we'll see the growth rates that we now do.

If you can apply in both, wait times will go up substantially for archers.

Why would wait times for archery be big, I can't see them needing to cut much. Even if they had to cut 15% that's still an 85% chance of getting an archery tag. So you sit out every 8th year. If it went to one or the other, I doubt archers would even miss a year.

[Deer Hunter]

So the two percentages are added together on the same line to give an aggregate total of landowner and outfitter tags...thanks...that's all I wanted to know. A very interesting look at tag distribution in Alberta.

Just think of it as the remainder above the two groups shown is the resident draw group, and potentially now the resident bowhunters.

[sheephunter]

Just think of it as the remainder above the two groups shown is the resident draw group, and potentially now the resident bowhunters.

Yup, got it now...makes sense....thanks.

I would think the number of resident draw tags will increase slightly (15-20%) in the WMUs where archery goes on draw but some WMUs sure favour the landowners and outfitters...very interesting stuff.

[Lefty-Canuck]

IMHO....

Resident hunter tag numbers should never be lower than allocated landowner or outfitter tags (as individual user groups) in ANY WMU.

....especially if the WMU is on draw....

LC

[Deer Hunter]

some WMUs sure favour the landowners and outfitters...very interesting stuff.

These zone are what is refered to by the govt as "trophy zones" where the govt favors oufitters by keeping residents out (low numbers of draw tags and now archery on draw). Zones like 138 are perfect examples. Even the leaseholders there dont want anything to do with resident public access as i found out first hand this year. Keeping it for their landowner tags...

[sheephunter]

These zone are what is refered to by the govt as "trophy zones" where the govt favors oufitters by keeping residents out (low numbers of draw tags and now archery on draw). Zones like 138 are perfect examples. Even the leaseholders there dont want anything to do with resident public access as i found out first hand this year. Keeping it for their landowner tags...

No doubt some big holes in the system.....your graphs demonstrate that well.

[Pudelpointer]

That brings up an interesting point....I wonder how much the archery population will grow...or shrink.....if mule deer goes on draw. I can't imagine we'll see the growth rates that we now do.

If you can apply in both, wait times will go up substantially for archers.

If ESRD continues to use the defective math they are applying to estimate archery harvest, then you are likely correct. However, if they utilize statistics to project a (for sake of argument) 12% archery harvest for mule deer in each of these zones - which is exactly what they should be doing - then wait times would probably very short to non-existant in all but a handful of zones.


Deer Hunter, the graphs you posted make it very clear that there is a problem in AB, and it is not bow hunters. However, just so I am clear, are the percentages the landowner/guide allocation harvest as a percentage of total harvest? Or is it the percentage of resident harvest? Or are we looking at number of tags, and not actual harvest at all?

If it is the last option above, I would suggest that the guide/LO harvest as a percentage of total harvest would be substantially higher.

[Deer Hunter]

Numbers of landowner tags, resident /non resident draw tags and outfitter allocations is all that is in those charts. I should have been more clear.

[sheephunter]

If ESRD continues to use the defective math they are applying to estimate archery harvest, then you are likely correct. However, if they utilize statistics to project a (for sake of argument) 12% archery harvest for mule deer in each of these zones - which is exactly what they should be doing - then wait times would probably very short to non-existant in all but a handful of zones.


.

Ya, guess I was thinking that there will definitely be a few very popular zones with archers.

[sheephunter]

Numbers of landowner tags, resident /non resident draw tags and outfitter allocations is all that is in those charts. I should have been more clear.

Have you sent these graphs to any of the groups on AGMAG? To ESRD?

Not to make a ton more work for you but it would be interesting to see the average of these numbers from the five-year period 2008-2012 as allocations are based on a five year cycle.

Not criticizing either but it might be simpler to understand if each of the three groups had its own vertical line for each WMU. This is some very useful info.

[H380]

Thanx for the extra work on compiling the stats for all the zones Deer Hunter .. very interesting .

[pottymouth]

If you archery hunt, during a general season , why would you have to purchase a bow permit?

[sheephunter]

If you archery hunt, during a general season , why would you have to purchase a bow permit?

Pretty sure the bow hunting licence was requested by archers as a means of tracking their numbers. I doubt anyone makes any money off of it other than IBM so if it really bothers you it might be a good time to lobby to have it removed although then there would be no means of tracking bow hunter numbers.

[209x50]

If the change was going through anyways it seems the ABA might want to negotiate details of the draw, no?
That is exactley the response that SRD is hoping for. After you lay down and roll over they can easily claim that you were in agreement as you DID agree and negotiate the terms. The ABA or any other group is just kidding themselves if they think they are getting anything they want from the negotiations. SRD is giving them what the intended all along. So why make it easier for them?

[LongDraw]

That is exactley the response that SRD is hoping for. After you lay down and roll over they can easily claim that you were in agreement as you DID agree and negotiate the terms. The ABA or any other group is just kidding themselves if they think they are getting anything they want from the negotiations. SRD is giving them what the intended all along. So why make it easier for them?

Are you an ABA member?

[Deer Hunter]

http://www.bowhunters.ca/files/Download/Antlered%20MUDE%20Special%20Licence%20for%20Archer y.pdf

Here are some numbers as to the 15% cap. 8% of big game hunters bowhunt mule deer and yet contribute to over15% of the harvest in some zones. A good read anyways.

[209x50]

Are you an ABA member?
no I'm not and I'm not criticizing the ABA. I'm just saying i don't agree with their course of action.

[pikergolf]

http://www.bowhunters.ca/files/Download/Antlered%20MUDE%20Special%20Licence%20for%20Archer y.pdf

Here are some numbers as to the 15% cap. 8% of big game hunters bowhunt mule deer and yet contribute to over15% of the harvest in some zones. A good read anyways.

Where is this from, is it a Gov. doc.?

[Deer Hunter]

Where is this from, is it a Gov. doc.?

ABA website.

[J.B.]

no I'm not and I'm not criticizing the ABA. I'm just saying i don't agree with their course of action.

The course of action being taken by the ABA is because ESRD is hell bent on making a change to mule deer this year wether or not the numbers make sense. I guess their logic is that some justice (for lack of a better word), is better than no justice at all...
Basically ESRD just doesn't care what's right or wrong, reasonable or responsible, or pretty much anything...I wonder who thier brown-nosing now because EVERYONE is losing with this proposal...
Maybe there are antis working in ESRD??? :thinking-006:

[pikergolf]

So it says it will be under draw code 13 which is the Mule deer draw. Archers should have their own draw, just to get the numbers of animals back below 15%, having to go into the main draw seems to be a little overkill, not?

[J.B.]

Try get that through to ESRD pikergolf...

[pikergolf]

The course of action being taken by the ABA is because ESRD is hell bent on making a change to mule deer this year wether or not the numbers make sense. I guess their logic is that some justice (for lack of a better word), is better than no justice at all...
Basically ESRD just doesn't care what's right or wrong, reasonable or responsible, or pretty much anything...I wonder who thier brown-nosing now because EVERYONE is losing with this proposal...
Maybe there are antis working in ESRD??? :thinking-006:

Proposal seems pretty reasonable to me other than the draw system, I think the archery season should have it's own draw to get the harvest no's down. With their own draw, the success rate for being drawn should be fairly high as most WMU's are not at a harvest rate that is way above the 15% harvest threshold.

[LongDraw]

Whether or not you think archers should or shouldn't draw, the "new" theme with SRD has been to take away resident opportunity to "balance the books" whilst the non resident hunter has less and less competition as time goes on.

This is now the new norm as hunters we recruit new hunters that know no other system.

Thanks for the charts deer hunter, hopefully the clarity you have provided creates enough outrage to get more letters written to SRD, ABA and AFGA.

[J.B.]

Proposal seems pretty reasonable to me other than the draw system, I think the archery season should have it's own draw to get the harvest no's down. With their own draw, the success rate for being drawn should be fairly high as most WMU's are not at a harvest rate that is way above the 15% harvest threshold.

That's if you belive thier numbers...once you look at the data a little closer you realize most of the numbers are very unrealistic...I do believe certain zones are over 15% harvest but not by much and certainly not all the zones identified...a grade 3 student could do the math ESRD bases thier harvest data upon-trust me its not because kids are so smart these days. If sound data indicated there was indeed over harvest by all means implement a separate archery draw. Its only the responsible thing to do. But the numbers are rediculous, and so is the proposed change - hence the anger and frustration by so many hunters...

[sheephunter]

That's if you belive thier numbers...once you look at the data a little closer you realize most of the numbers are very unrealistic...I do believe certain zones are over 15% harvest but not by much and certainly not all the zones identified...a grade 3 student could do the math ESRD bases thier harvest data upon-trust me its not because kids are so smart these days. If sound data indicated there was indeed over harvest by all means implement a separate archery draw. Its only the responsible thing to do. But the numbers are rediculous, and so is the proposed change - hence the anger and frustration by so many hunters...

But yet we as hunters follow along and offer suggestions to soften the blow. At some point we need to draw a line in the sand and say no..............who knows if it would help but at least there is recourse then. If we comply and help build the future it pretty negates our voice in the future. ESRD has long used AGMAG as proof that it's meeting its responsibilities for public input and ultimately cooperative solutions to management. It will be interesting to see how the bighorn sheep issue plays out. Regardless, there will be room for recourse. Not so much in this case I don't think. It's time hunters and the groups that represent them start thinking differently and not believe that softening the blow is a victory.

[trophyboy]

What would be wrong with this idea other than the fact that it may be to complicated for SRD to manage.

Designate some zones as bow hunting only for a few years then alternate back to rifle accordingly. This way we could develop some trophy quality in some of the zones due to low bow hunter success and allowing the deer to actually get some age on them. The designated bow zones could then be put back into the rifle draw category and then designate new bow zones for a few years again and so on. This could also help take a bit of pressure off of landowners as per vehicle traffic since bow hunters must typically walk longer distances to attain success.

Could be a win-win situation if managed properly. Would this idea work?

[J.B.]

But yet we as hunters follow along and offer suggestions to soften the blow. At some point we need to draw a line in the sand and say no..............who knows if it would help but at least there is recourse then. If we comply and help build the future it pretty negates our voice in the future. ESRD has long used AGMAG as proof that it's meeting its responsibilities for public input and ultimately cooperative solutions to management. It will be interesting to see how the bighorn sheep issue plays out. Regardless, there will be room for recourse. Not so much in this case I don't think. It's time hunters and the groups that represent them start thinking differently and not believe that softening the blow is a victory.

I believe thats what was done sheep...and it didn't help...so now the ABA is trying to soften the blow as you call it.
Maybe it is time the user groups dig in thier heels, say enough of this bullchit already, and take legal action against a blatant and deliberate disregard for the residents of Alberta. I personally would love to see some house cleaning in ESRD, and I know biologists who are passionate about thier work and would do a much better job than what is or is not being done now.

[trophyboy]

oops

[Deer Hunter]

IMO the bowhunting harvest is not the real problem wrt growing trophy quality. Outfitting is. Let them outfit anything that residents dont have to stand in line for. If we do, pull the allocation completely. And see how that works for trophy quality after a few years. Just ask Saskatchewan.

[sheephunter]

I believe thats what was done sheep...and it didn't help...so now the ABA is trying to soften the blow as you call it.
Maybe it is time the user groups dig in thier heels, say enough of this bullchit already, and take legal action against a blatant and deliberate disregard for the residents of Alberta. I personally would love to see some house cleaning in ESRD, and I know biologists who are passionate about thier work and would do a much better job than what is or is not being done now.

But that's not what was done if negotiations are underway how to soften the blow. The first rule of parenting is that no needs to mean no....it sounds like it didn't here. I'm not criticizing anyone just saying that at some point, no actually needs to be our final answer. I think it is time user groups dig in their heels and say enough of this BS...but actually mean it. It's what the groups are doing regarding sheep. It new ground for sure. If we get something rammed down our throats we have recourse...everyone in ESRD has a boss. If we comply to the ramming in the hopes they do it softer...what can we say?

[J.B.]

Edit. Dbl post.

[trophyboy]

Deer Hunter, I completely agree with you regarding the outfitters. No one can convince me that it's fair for residents to wait while outfitters take non-residents every year. I highly doubt that will change though since SRD seems to be in love with APOS for some strange reason. Maybe it's due to the disproportionate amount of outfitter offences which puts tons of dough into the provincial coffers in the form of fines for their violations.

[J.B.]

But that's not what was done if negotiations are underway how to soften the blow. The first rule of parenting is that no needs to mean no....it sounds like it didn't here. I'm not criticizing anyone just saying that at some point, no actually needs to be our final answer. I think it is time user groups dig in their heels and say enough of this BS...but actually mean it. It's what the groups are doing regarding sheep. It new ground for sure. If we get something rammed down our throats we have recourse...everyone in ESRD has a boss. If we comply to the ramming in the hopes they do it softer...what can we say?

Well myself along with many other members of SABA have gotten to the point where we are willing to take far more action than letter writing and negotiations. And it not just the mule deer issue we have problems with, but its definitely what is driving the notion now...

[sheephunter]

Well myself along with many other members of SABA have gotten to the point where we are willing to take far more action than letter writing and negotiations. And it not just the mule deer issue we have problems with, but its definitely what is driving the notion now...

It seems you aren't alone..............it's a good time to unite!

[pikergolf]

That's if you belive thier numbers...once you look at the data a little closer you realize most of the numbers are very unrealistic...I do believe certain zones are over 15% harvest but not by much and certainly not all the zones identified...a grade 3 student could do the math ESRD bases thier harvest data upon-trust me its not because kids are so smart these days. If sound data indicated there was indeed over harvest by all means implement a separate archery draw. Its only the responsible thing to do. But the numbers are rediculous, and so is the proposed change - hence the anger and frustration by so many hunters...

So they have done surveys, what else are they supposed to, hold the press because the interest group involved doesn't like the results? They have to base the decision on something, whether you trust it or not it's all they have. Rifle hunters have an iron in the fire here as well, I'm sure there was some complaining going on somewhere, although we haven't heard much from them. The only frustration I'm seeing is from the archer's and I can understand that, but I think you'd be further ahead arguing that archers deserve a separate draw than arguing their survey is wrong.

[duffy4]

we've come a long way...

The people with Fish and Wildlife are trained professionals whose job it is to manage fish and wildlife populations and also to provide and manage some hunting and angling opportunities for resident and non residents.

At some point in the past, possibly as the result of demands from the public, the government started doing more "public information and input" in their decision making.

Sometimes I think it is going too far as the public seems to have the idea that the government cannot make any moves without allowing all kinds of public input or partnerships with various organizations.

It is the job of F&W to manage mule deer and I reckon they are going to remove a lot of general tag archery seasons and have all hunting in those WMUs on a draw for all hunters. Just as they have done in the past with Moose.