Why is there no separate draw pool for Non-residents?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Just like the title....why is this?

LC

[Redfrog]

Maybe no one ever asked for it?
Or presented it?
Or insisted on it?
Or beat the drum for it?
Or no one cares enough to do the heavy lifting?

It is much easier to sit at a key board and bash out a rant about outfitters and APOS>

[Pudelpointer]

Huh? Are you asking why we don't have draws for non-res aliens? Or are you asking if we have a separate draw system for non-res Canadians?


While it is true that NRCs enter the same draws as residents for some species, it appears they are limited to how many can get drawn in any one zone for a specific species. Case in point: this past draw, I put in for Antlered Mule Deer for my buddy from BC and myself in 308. I had 6 years priority, buddy 5 years. Another resident friend had 3 years priority, but he put in separately. He was drawn while NRC friend and I were unsuccessful.

There appears to be a cap on the percentage if NRC tags available.... at least for AMD in 308!

[LongDraw]

But how would they run a business without guaranteed tags? LOL!!

[fingershooter]

Just like the title....why is this?

LC
The only reason I can think of is that we (non-resident Canadians) have to apply with a resident. Otherwise they could do it like the trophy bighorn draw.

[Deer Hunter]

Huh? Are you asking why we don't have draws for non-res aliens? Or are you asking if we have a separate draw system for non-res Canadians?


While it is true that NRCs enter the same draws as residents for some species, it appears they are limited to how many can get drawn in any one zone for a specific species. Case in point: this past draw, I put in for Antlered Mule Deer for my buddy from BC and myself in 308. I had 6 years priority, buddy 5 years. Another resident friend had 3 years priority, but he put in separately. He was drawn while NRC friend and I were unsuccessful.

There appears to be a cap on the percentage if NRC tags available.... at least for AMD in 308!

I would sure like it if esrd would provide these numbers to see who else is in competition for the ever decreasing resident draw tags. There seems to be as many BC plates antelope hunting as Albertans.

Forget the non-residents separate draw altogether. I think Alberta shoudl follow Saskatchewans lead and make draws for residents, and because its a very long wait, remove non residents and outfitters from these opportunities. But you probably already knew my opinion.:)

[flyguyd]

But how would they run a business without guaranteed tags? LOL!!

Alot of the tags in the states require you to be drawn or they have a few quaranteed landowner tags availible for a hefty dollar.

The outfitters there appear to be running a business and doing ok:thinking-006:

Once you draw a tag you can either go it alone without a clue or hire an outfitter to improve your odds.:thinking-006:

[albertadave]

Just like the title....why is this?

LC

Because a system like that would just make waaaaaay too much sense.

[walking buffalo]

Just like the title....why is this?

LC


Please be more specific....

Are you asking about having a draw for Outfitter allocations, for NR Canadian Hunter hosted Draw Licences, Hunter Hosted General licenses, or all of them?







Huh? Are you asking why we don't have draws for non-res aliens? Or are you asking if we have a separate draw system for non-res Canadians?


While it is true that NRCs enter the same draws as residents for some species, it appears they are limited to how many can get drawn in any one zone for a specific species. Case in point: this past draw, I put in for Antlered Mule Deer for my buddy from BC and myself in 308. I had 6 years priority, buddy 5 years. Another resident friend had 3 years priority, but he put in separately. He was drawn while NRC friend and I were unsuccessful.

There appears to be a cap on the percentage if NRC tags available.... at least for AMD in 308!


DId you check out the 2012 Draw results?

In 308, ALL applicants with a priority 4 or greater were successful.
:confused:

In reviewing the 2012 Antlered MD Draw stats, it appears that absolutely ZERO applications were rejected for reasons other than the quota was full....

Weird.....



I have yet to see such a notice, but supposedly NR applicants rejected due to the mysterious NR Draw cap recieve a letter explaining why they were not drawn.... Another mystery.....



Redford promised more openness and transparency with the Red Queen's Government. :huh:

Will AESRD finally release data showing the number of NR Canadians applying and being drawn for hunting licences?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Maybe I am mistaken in how things work....but non-residents can apply along with residents as part of hunter host...right?

Thus the non-residents with friends and/or family are entered into the same pool and can build the same priority as residents....right?

So lets say out of a pool of 20 available tags....the residents and the non-residents have equal opportunity at all 20 tags.....or is that not how it works?

....I would suggest if I was "in the know" to have a separate pool set aside only for Non-resident hunters. So lets say out of the air 15%....non-residents could then put in but "their pool" would only represent 15% of all available tags...so out of 20 tags they would have a pool of 3 tags...

If a resident wanted to partner a non-resident on say a moose tag then that is their perrogative....but it is only one tag between the 2 hunters and not 2 tags...one for each.

LC

[ishootbambi]

im with you lefty. if ALL hunters from outside alberta were in the draw pool, the numbers could easily be kept to 5% or 10% or whatever is decided to be appropriate. there would be no cases of NR tags EVER outnumbering alberta residents, and better yet.....there would be no reason for outfitters to be paying landowners for sole access to private property.....or even more offensive, public land held under grazing leases. the guides who consistently produce results would still get their fair share of work as supply and demand still dominates, and the slugs that should be out of business would be as no guaranteed tags would eliminate their place in the world.

the fly in the ointment though is that APOS has been given the license to steal from us at their will, and nobody in government seems to give a rats arse about wildlife, or resident hunters.

the biggest problem is that the system is so far facked up that i dont even know where you would begin to start sorting it out. its easy to say just yank allotments, but by allowing them to be sold at inflated prices means guys will be getting cornholed on their investment. even if anyone in government cared enough to make changes, i dont see how to come up with a fair solution to resolve the way it is.

[walking buffalo]

Maybe I am mistaken in how things work....but non-residents can apply along with residents as part of hunter host...right?

Thus the non-residents with friends and/or family are entered into the same pool and can build the same priority as residents....right?

So lets say out of a pool of 20 available tags....the residents and the non-residents have equal opportunity at all 20 tags.....or is that not how it works?

....I would suggest if I was "in the know" to have a separate pool set aside only for Non-resident hunters. So lets say out of the air 15%....non-residents could then put in but "their pool" would only represent 15% of all available tags...so out of 20 tags they would have a pool of 3 tags...

If a resident wanted to partner a non-resident on say a moose tag then that is their perrogative....but it is only one tag between the 2 hunters and not 2 tags...one for each.

LC


Ok, I take it you are asking why Hunter Hosted NR Canadians do not have a separate Draw....


Supposedly NR Canadians applying in the draw are limited to 10% of available tags.


So in a way, they do have a separate draw, while the present system retains access to this 10% quota for Resident applicants.


eg. If the first 10% of applicants drawn are NR, then that allocation is full, all remaining tags will go to Residents.


But if Residents are drawn for 100% of the draw quota first , then the NR will not recieve any portion of the possible 10% NR Allocation.


A separate NR Canadian Draw would actually prevent Residents from accessing this portion of the quota.



Another complication in separating NR out of the combined draw is the subsequent need to eliminate the requirement for NR to apply with a resident (not a bad thing in my mind) and it may complicate the Hunter Host requirement as NR applicants would now be applying alone, (again, not neccessarily a bad thing imo).

[Lefty-Canuck]

I think one good first step is to take all non-residents no matter what the priority they have and place them in their own pool of a specific %age base of tags available....then upon successful draw they need to provide either a resident name of who is taking them out, or an outfitter they are hiring to hunt with on the successful tag.

It is WIN, WIN, WIN situation in my mind. First off they can hunt the great Alberta experience....outfitters can be hired based on the allocation area outside of their usual allocation. A resident can still have the opportunity to hunt with a friend or family member from out of province when they have a successfuly draw....

As it stand now everytime a non-res is successful there is a resident tag attached to it, so effectively the usage of tags become 2 fold whenever one of these hunting "parties" is drawn.

This way residents are not "losing out" and non-resident numbers are more tightly contained.

I guess having to compete for tags with non-resident hunters is a bit disconcerning in my eyes...also do what our friends to the East do....and certain species are simply off limits to those who do not live in the Province.

LC

[Lefty-Canuck]

Thanks for the insight into how it works currently WB...I was not aware of the 10% quota style...read my post after yours and see if it makes some sense as a "change " in the system we currently have.

LC

[ishootbambi]

the hunter host system is dumb. it provides protection for outfitters and that sucks imo. NR and NRA in the same pool for draws would solve a ton of whats wrong with hunting in this province. i think even whitetails and bears should be managed the same way. its the only way to have real numbers and real control of whats going on.

[Lefty-Canuck]

the hunter host system is dumb. it provides protection for outfitters and that sucks imo. NR and NRA in the same pool for draws would solve a ton of whats wrong with hunting in this province. i think even whitetails and bears should be managed the same way. its the only way to have real numbers and real control of whats going on.

Yup I agree

LC

[pottymouth]

Landowners should also have a separate pool for landowner tags, instead of an unlimited quota, especially after they are denied in the resident pool!

Time to get the numbers and get the under control, without decreasing resident opportunity .

[Lefty-Canuck]

Landowners should also have a separate pool for landowner tags, instead of an unlimited quota, especially after they are denied in the resident pool!

Time to get the numbers and get the under control, without decreasing resident opportunity .

Yes they should....and I agree with this too.

LC

[ishootbambi]

Yes they should....and I agree with this too.

LC

careful lefty...you an i can agree...you and him can agree....but all three of us?!?!?!? maybe the mayans were right but just off by a few days. :sHa_sarcasticlol:

aw crap....i agree.:sHa_shakeshout:



im going to the outdoor rink to play some hockey with the smartarse teenagers aound this house. maybe when i get back ill have regained my senses.....:scared0018: more likely ill just hurt.....

[Deer Hunter]

I think one good first step is to take all non-residents no matter what the priority they have and place them in their own pool of a specific %age base of tags available....then upon successful draw they need to provide either a resident name of who is taking them out, or an outfitter they are hiring to hunt with on the successful tag.

It is WIN, WIN, WIN situation in my mind. First off they can hunt the great Alberta experience....outfitters can be hired based on the allocation area outside of their usual allocation. A resident can still have the opportunity to hunt with a friend or family member from out of province when they have a successfuly draw....

As it stand now everytime a non-res is successful there is a resident tag attached to it, so effectively the usage of tags become 2 fold whenever one of these hunting "parties" is drawn.

This way residents are not "losing out" and non-resident numbers are more tightly contained.

I guess having to compete for tags with non-resident hunters is a bit disconcerning in my eyes...also do what our friends to the East do....and certain species are simply off limits to those who do not live in the Province.

LC

So then if they have their own draw, they could be hunting areas more often then residents could because their priority, number of applicants, and tags allocated to them. A non resident could be hunting every 2 years wheras the resident might be 10. This is wrong, again giving them advantages over residents regardless of a percentage.

Building a draw system around non residents/outfitters is a flawed approach. Start with the residents and if and only if there is extra tags, then consider the non residents/outfitters. As it stands with mule deer and antelope, residents might be waiting 25+ years to get drawn.

Trophy antelope has 27,000 applicants in the que with only 140 tags given out through the draw. (190 years here if nothing changes going forward). There is no room for non residents and outfitters here imo.

WMU 134 Antlered Mule deer has 5 tags given out for 253 applicants (not including the 999's which add another 25% to the pool) (60 years if nothing changes) Again, there is no room for non residents and outfitters here imo.

Keeping non residents and outfitters in the system will mean that you and your children may only hunt these sought after, winter sensitive species once in your life. Think about it.

[Lefty-Canuck]

So then if they have their own draw, they could be hunting areas more often then residents could because their priority, number of applicants, and tags allocated to them. A non resident could be hunting every 2 years wheras the resident might be 10. This is wrong, again giving them advantages over residents regardless of a percentage.

Building a draw system around non residents/outfitters is a flawed approach. Start with the residents and if and only if there is extra tags, then consider the non residents/outfitters. As it stands with mule deer and antelope, residents might be waiting 25+ years to get drawn.

Trophy antelope has 27,000 applicants in the que with only 140 tags given out through the draw. (190 years here if nothing changes going forward). There is no room for non residents and outfitters here imo.

WMU 134 Antlered Mule deer has 5 tags given out for 253 applicants (not including the 999's which add another 25% to the pool) (60 years if nothing changes) Again, there is no room for non residents and outfitters here imo.

Keeping non residents and outfitters in the system will mean that you and your children may only hunt these sought after, winter sensitive species once in your life. Think about it.

I see what you are saying DH....good points. What about a lockout period after a successful drawing? (3-5 years) Do the non-resident hunters have to come up here every other year?

I alkso agree that certain draws for ccertain species should not even be an option for a non-resident unless they want to pay the big bucks for an outfitter allocation tag.

LC

[walking buffalo]

Thanks for the insight into how it works currently WB...I was not aware of the 10% quota style...read my post after yours and see if it makes some sense as a "change " in the system we currently have.

LC



I think one good first step is to take all non-residents no matter what the priority they have and place them in their own pool of a specific %age base of tags available....then upon successful draw they need to provide either a resident name of who is taking them out, or an outfitter they are hiring to hunt with on the successful tag.

It is WIN, WIN, WIN situation in my mind. First off they can hunt the great Alberta experience....outfitters can be hired based on the allocation area outside of their usual allocation. A resident can still have the opportunity to hunt with a friend or family member from out of province when they have a successfuly draw....

As it stand now everytime a non-res is successful there is a resident tag attached to it, so effectively the usage of tags become 2 fold whenever one of these hunting "parties" is drawn.

This way residents are not "losing out" and non-resident numbers are more tightly contained.

I guess having to compete for tags with non-resident hunters is a bit disconcerning in my eyes...also do what our friends to the East do....and certain species are simply off limits to those who do not live in the Province.

LC

As I showed in the previous post,
Separating NR Canadians out of the Draw will eliminate the availabilty of these tags to Residents. A net LOSS of Resident hunter opportunity.

Now you are talking about combining Outfitter Allocations into the Draw. This is a different Dragon.

But it is an idea worth considering as a technique to keep Outfitter tags variable throughout the years to keep them equitable due to conservation needs. At the moment, the fixed 5 year Outfitter Allocation quota ends up putting ALL of the conservation cutbacks squarely on the shoulders of Resident/hunter hosted Non-Resident Canadians.

[Deer Hunter]

Here is an antlered mule deer graph done by taking the 2012 total applicants (grossed up 25% due to the 999 group) and divided over the successful draw applicants per WMU, giving a rough idea of how many years it will take to get drawn at the current rate if you started to apply today. Only WMU's over 5 years were included.

Better keep your schedule open in 115 years when you pull your 358 mule buck tag (5 pulled from 458 applicants plus 25% gives 572 or 115 years).

Or move to BC and apply, it might be easier.:angry3:

http://i272.photobucket.com/albums/jj188/AlbertaFleaBags/New%202013/2012numberofyearstodraw_zps4383e25b.png

[Lefty-Canuck]

As I showed in the previous post,
Separating NR Canadians out of the Draw will eliminate the availabilty of these tags to Residents. A net LOSS of Resident hunter opportunity.

Now you are talking about combining Outfitter Allocations into the Draw. This is a different Dragon.

But it is an idea worth considering as a technique to keep Outfitter tags variable throughout the years to keep them equitable due to conservation needs. At the moment, the fixed 5 year Outfitter Allocation quota ends up putting ALL of the conservation cutbacks squarely on the shoulders of Resident/hunter hosted Non-Resident Canadians.

This shouldn't happen if they are held to a specific percentage of tags in the WMU's they are looking at being drawn in...would have to do away with hunter hosts putting in for the draws at the same time...

This is just a bit of a brainstorm....wondering why things are done certain ways vs not done other ways :)

LC

[Lefty-Canuck]

careful lefty...you an i can agree...you and him can agree....but all three of us?!?!?!? maybe the mayans were right but just off by a few days. :sHa_sarcasticlol:

aw crap....i agree.:sHa_shakeshout:

im going to the outdoor rink to play some hockey with the smartarse teenagers aound this house. maybe when i get back ill have regained my senses.....:scared0018: more likely ill just hurt.....

LOL....maybe we are all having too much holiday cheer :)

LC

[FCLightning]

I think it is a good idea if NR and NRA tags go on a draw.

[walking buffalo]

This shouldn't happen if they are held to a specific percentage of tags in the WMU's they are looking at being drawn in...would have to do away with hunter hosts putting in for the draws at the same time...

This is just a bit of a brainstorm....wondering why things are done certain ways vs not done other ways :)

LC


NR are supposedly capped right now.

Your separate draw suggestion would put these tags out of bounds to Residents, resulting in a LOSS to Resident hunters.



A big problem with making changes to the Draw system is the contract that AESRD has with IBM. Right now, IBM will F us all raw for any changes, and as a result, AESRD cannot justify the financial cost of ammending the system at the moment. An example is how the proposed MD Archery draw will initially be a combined Archery/Rifle tag for two years, until the IBM contract expires, and a new contract is tendered. AESRD cannot afford to pay for the proposed Archery MD Draw to be a separate draw under the present agreement.


I imagine that when the contract with IBM is over in two years, there will be many dramatic changes made to the Draw system....

[Lefty-Canuck]

I honestly have a really tough time with this "guaranteed tags" notion....if that is the case the Government should have mandated a fixed rate that the outfitters could charge for the tags...

Things typically are supply and demand, and markets shift over time....etc. As far as I know the outfitter tags are on a free market system so they can charge what ever people are willing to pay! Where do I sign up for that?

So not only are they guaranteed tags....they can charge whatever people are willing to pay...wow.

LC

[whitetail Junkie]

Just like the title....why is this?

LC

The Big change of the guard, is coming to them aswell in the near future,in regards to hunting certain big game animals in our province!

[Pudelpointer]

The graph you posted Deer Hunter is overly "chicken little" IMO.

We have had a considerable decline in many ungulate populations in AB the last few years; a number of reasons for the decline, but for the most part weather is the big culprit. Deer and antelope numbers are already recovering quite well in many areas, and will take a few extra years in some others.

Yelling that the "sky is falling" unless there is a complete overhall of the system is not, in my opinion, as useful as pragmatically focussing on the continuing inequity of outfitter allocations and landowner tags. It appears (from my earlier example) that NRC tags are already capped at a specific percentage of resident tags (though that percentage does not appear to be written down anywhere....). Outfitter and Landowner tags, however, are not capped!

Again, IMO, going after our family and friends' opportunity to hunt here is a waste of time. It will do very little to address the fact that in many areas of this province resident hunters are relegated to a distant 3rd place when it cones to allocation of tags.

When (if?) ungulate populations rebound, and tags are being handed out like stale candy at Halloween, all will be forgotten. Then, when weather (CWD, poor management or whatever else people will blame) beats the s**t out of our wildlife again, we will still have the situation we have now; where landowners and guides have 80% of tags in some zones!


Think of it this way: using some of the 100 and 300 zones as examples, if there are less then 10 tags available in a draw, a NRC cannot be drawn as that would exceed the (probable) 10% cap, however in the exact same zone 35 landowner tags and 15 outfitter tags might be available.

Could we 'tweak' the NRC draws... sure. I wouldn't have a problem with a 'once-in-a-lifetime' Antelope draw for Canadians, or a 2-3 year 'time out' for Antlered Mule Deer, etc. But I think lumping NRCs with NRAs is a waste of energy.

[Mutter87]

There should be 0 nonres draws!

[Deer Hunter]

To poodle pointer:

Yours is a case of take theirs but not mine. NR are part of the problem, not part of the solution so should be removed until such time as tags are given out like candy as you put it.

The sky isn't falling,it has already come crashing down. And if you think the good old days are just a couple years down the road again...

Years of greedy outfitters and poor representation by resident groups are the norm now. And require distinctive changes, not ***** footing around with waits and more blame on winters thinking things will work themselves out. That is what got us in this mess.

[michaelmicallef]

Maybe no one ever asked for it?
Or presented it?
Or insisted on it?
Or beat the drum for it?
Or no one cares enough to do the heavy lifting?

It is much easier to sit at a key board and bash out a rant about outfitters and APOS>

Actually your not 100% correct. As a result of someone's post on the A.O.F. regarding the fairness of new proposed license fees. One of our local fish and game associations has made recommendation to S.R.D that new hunting and license fees be increased( if implemented) to fairly reflect resident, non res. and Canadian non-res. So sometimes you never know who is reading these posts. Which also brings to point the people on here need to remember to watch what they say and how they say it. I think that point has been brought up before. And Redfrog is 100% correct in implying that if something does not seem fair to someone "do something about it". Joining a fish and game club is a good place to start.

[Okotokian]

Why would anyone want to give aliens or non-residents FASTER acess to tags than residents? That's all a separate pool would do. A separate pool means you are setting aside tags that residents can no longer access.

The proper way to manage things is simple. Put non-residents and residents in the same pool. If residents are having to wait too long for a tag, simply make non-residents ineligible to draw for that tag... make it a resident-only tag.

Personally, I'd make the rule that non-residents can only hunt on general licenses. If game is so scarce it has to be put on a draw system, then only residents should get that scarce opportunity.

[albertadave]

Why would anyone want to give aliens or non-residents FASTER acess to tags than residents? That's all a separate pool would do. A separate pool means you are setting aside tags that residents can no longer access.

The proper way to manage things is simple. Put non-residents and residents in the same pool. If residents are having to wait too long for a tag, simply make non-residents ineligible to draw for that tag... make it a resident-only tag.

Personally, I'd make the rule that non-residents can only hunt on general licenses. If game is so scarce it has to be put on a draw system, then only residents should get that scarce opportunity.

^^Many many flaws in this post^^:)

The idea of creating NR draw would be to get rid of the allocations. No current oppourtunity to residents would be lost.

If they went into the same pool then they would be competing with residents for the same tags. In theory you could get the tags from an enitre draw being held by nonresidents.

The reason a species is put on draw is so they can be properly managed, not because they're scarce. If they were actually scarce, there wouldn't be any hunting season for them at all, for resident or non-res.

[pikergolf]

Personally, I'd make the rule that non-residents can only hunt on general licenses. If game is so scarce it has to be put on a draw system, then only residents should get that scarce opportunity.

This is what we should be pushing for, or wildlife is worth more the the lowest common denominator, money.

[Duk Dog]

IMO we keep missing the boat. I don't feel the answer is always about simply taking away or eliminating opportunity from people - whether they be residents, non residents, archers, rifle hunters etc.. Could things be tweaked? For sure, no question, but I feel there is much more to the equation than simply managing people - what about dealing with access issues, as well as habitat, and predator management to name a few. Managing people rather than dealing with some of the other critical issues sure seems like taking the easy way out.

[Okotokian]

^^Many many flaws in this post^^:)

The idea of creating NR draw would be to get rid of the allocations. No current oppourtunity to residents would be lost.

If they went into the same pool then they would be competing with residents for the same tags. In theory you could get the tags from an enitre draw being held by nonresidents.

The reason a species is put on draw is so they can be properly managed, not because they're scarce. If they were actually scarce, there wouldn't be any hunting season for them at all, for resident or non-res.

I'm afraid I don't quite follow your logic Dave. If there is a separate draw for non-residents there must be some tags allocated to that draw... ergo an "allocation", tags set aside for non-residents. How would you have a separate draw without any tags for those successful in that draw?

And "management" regardless of "scarcity"? Makes no sense. The draw system limits hunting opportunities. It puts a cap on the number of animals that can be taken. It's designed to do so. If there were no concern about numbers the animal in question would have a general season in the particular WMU. Now we can argue about what "scarce" means. You may say that 5,000 deer in a WMU doesw not reflect scarcity, but it does if the WMU is 30 miles from Calgary and 50,000 hunters want tags there. I still say let non-residents hunt on a general tag where there are no scarcity, or "management", concerns.

[albertadave]

.
I'm afraid I don't quite follow your logic Dave. If there is a separate draw for non-residents there must be some tags allocated to that draw... ergo an "allocation", tags set aside for non-residents. How would you have a separate draw without any tags for those successful in that draw? What I meant was, go to a NR draw and get rid of the outfitter allocations, which we already have, which already are supposed to account for 5% of the tags in any WMU. Problem is that those current allocations are a set, hard number, so if the number of tags available in a draw is dropped from year to year then the number of NR tags will account for more than 5% (actual numbers have been posted in other threads recently). If NR were on draw, the number of tags available to them could be changed from year to year, still maintaining the 5% (5% that in theory is already been taken out and accounted for when the number of tags available to residents is determined), and would not affect the number of tags available in the resident draw. Right now outfiiter allocation numbers are only reviewed every 5 years.
And "management" regardless of "scarcity"? Makes no sense. Where did I say that? Wildlife populations can, and should, be managed whether they are "scarce", or not. Management (draws) can be, and is, used to maintain healthy populations, not just to "save" populations that are "scarce". The draw system limits hunting opportunities. It puts a cap on the number of animals that can be taken. It's designed to do so. That's where the management is supposed to come in. Animal populations can be managed without them being scarce. If there were no concern about numbers the animal in question would have a general season in the particular WMU. Now we can argue about what "scarce" means. You may say that 5,000 deer in a WMU doesw not reflect scarcity, but it does if the WMU is 30 miles from Calgary and 50,000 hunters want tags there. I still say let non-residents hunt on a general tag where there are no scarcity, or "management", concerns. So you're suggesting that NR's and NRA's should be able to purchase unlimited licences, over the counter, and hunt our general zones with no restrictions on numbers?

[Okotokian]

.

OK, so your main complaint about the current system is that outfitter allocations are too fixed and become a "right". I can agree with that. They should be more responsive to year-to-year management needs and also the rights of resident hunters. We agree on that, but I don't mind NRA's being forced to use guides. It contributes some $ to the provincial economy.

As for your question of whether NR's and NRA's should be able to purchase "unlimited" general licenses, well, how many General whitetail licenses can you buy? ONE. I'm fine with a NRA buying one too. Now if so many are purchased by NRA's that the number cannot be sustained and Resident hunter availability is threatened, then the right for an NRA to buy that license would be restricted or withdrawn. But in areas whre there is already a restriction by way of a draw, I'd say NRA's should be ineligible.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Good points being brought up...

One good point is that species on draw currently for residents should be off the table for NR and NRA.....if they want one bad enough....go through an outfitter (ie. Moose)

Another point is if there was a separate draw pool for these folks...after a successful draw the institute a lockout period.

I think the message should be look after our own first and others second...another thing I would like to see changed is a time frame before being considered a resident (1 or 2 year....much like the North is)

These strategies seem to work for some other provinces...(Ie. Saskatchewan)

LC

[ishootbambi]

i have no problem with sharing. there SHOULD be some opportunity for NR and NRA to hunt here. the current system sucks though, and a draw would solve a ton of issues. for those that think somehow residents would lose.....i suggest looking at the nunber a little more closely. it would reduce and better manage outsiders....not increase it.

[albertadave]

OK, so your main complaint about the current system is that outfitter allocations are too fixed and become a "right". I can agree with that. They should be more responsive to year-to-year management needs and also the rights of resident hunters. We agree on that, but I don't mind NRA's being forced to use guides. It contributes some $ to the provincial economy.

As for your question of whether NR's and NRA's should be able to purchase "unlimited" general licenses, well, how many General whitetail licenses can you buy? ONE. I'm fine with a NRA buying one too. Now if so many are purchased by NRA's that the number cannot be sustained and Resident hunter availability is threatened, then the right for an NRA to buy that license would be restricted or withdrawn. But in areas whre there is already a restriction by way of a draw, I'd say NRA's should be ineligible.


I never suggested that NRA's shouldn't have to employ a outfitter/guide. Not sure where that statement came from. Absolutely they should have to use a guide if they're hunting here.

And I was talking about the number of NRA's being unrestricted, not the number of tags any particular individual could purchase. Please don't twist my words.

[albertadave]

i have no problem with sharing. there SHOULD be some opportunity for NR and NRA to hunt here. the current system sucks though, and a draw would solve a ton of issues. for those that think somehow residents would lose.....i suggest looking at the nunber a little more closely. it would reduce and better manage outsiders....not increase it.

X2
I've hunted out of province, with an outfitter, in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. I appreciate having that oppourtunity, and have no problem sharing what we have here, within reason. And you're right bambi, the system we currently have sucks.

[Okotokian]

I never suggested that NRA's shouldn't have to employ a outfitter/guide. Not sure where that statement came from. Absolutely they should have to use a guide if they're hunting here.

.

Ok, but you said get rid of outfitter allocations. So you want to take away outfitter allocations, take those tags and have a separate NR and NRA draw, then require them to use a guide. Seems like six of one, half a dozen of the other. It does get around the current long-term fixed allocation but you could address that by simply making the allocations turn over every two years instead of five. Your suggestion doesn't do anything for me, the resident hunter, that I can see, unless you lower the NR and NRA hunting opportunities altogether.

[albertadave]

Ok, but you said get rid of outfitter allocations. So you want to take away outfitter allocations, take those tags and have a separate NR and NRA draw, then require them to use a guide. Seems like six of one, half a dozen of the other. It does get around the current long-term fixed allocation but you could address that by simply making the allocations turn over every two years instead of five. Your suggestion doesn't do anything for me, the resident hunter, that I can see, unless you lower the NR and NRA hunting opportunities altogether.

Yes, I said get rid of the allocations. I didn't say get rid of the outfitters. If a NRA was successful in a draw under the system I'm proposing, then he would hire the outfitter of his choice to take him on his hunt.
And yes, it would do something for you as a resident. It would keep the number of tags available to NRA's at a constant 5%, or whatever percentage is deemed appropriate, keeping it fair for those that live and hunt here, while still maintaining an oppourtunity for those from other countries that want to come and share a little bit of what we're lucky enough to have here.

[ishootbambi]

Your suggestion doesn't do anything for me, the resident hunter, that I can see, unless you lower the NR and NRA hunting opportunities altogether.

how about the fact that without guaranteed tags, outfitters wouldnt have the same incentive to pay landowners for sole access for the perpose of hunting. given where you live and the known outfitters doing it, i suggest you might see some benefit immediately. how about the fact that a 5 or 10 percent cap on tags for non albertans would free up some game for hunting by residents. the italics at the end of your quote is exactly what would happen.


edit....oops sorry dave...you got it already.

[packhuntr]

Ok guys. So as it is it costs huge dollars to hold afew allocations. Great, make it so otfitters dont have guaranteed tags, draw your non res and nra's, and where will they book a hunt? Who will have a tag for them. Who will have a business running that is able to operate Annually on hopes and dreams? I guess if free market and noone needs to be a licenced outfitter with investment into a solid business plan and ability to execute it, where will the professionals come from that all of you are currently demanding in the field each fall???? There has to be a give take guys.

[albertadave]

Ok guys. So as it is it costs huge dollars to hold afew allocations. Great, make it so otfitters dont have guaranteed tags, draw your non res and nra's, and where will they book a hunt? Who will have a tag for them. Who will have a business running that is able to operate Annually on hopes and dreams? I guess if free market and noone needs to be a licenced outfitter with investment into a solid business plan and ability to execute it, where will the professionals come from that all of you are currently demanding in the field each fall???? There has to be a give take guys.

Pack, with the exception of the outfitters operating in the mountains, most of these guys are only running sideline businesses as it is. I'm guessing that most of them don't really have a solid, long term business plan. Lots of them are currently running with an allocation, a pick up truck, and a key to a hotel room. With the internet it would be very easy for a nra, who has drawn a tag, to find and book a reputable outfitter familiar with the zone he has drawn in. It's already working in lots of the states.

[ishootbambi]

Ok guys. So as it is it costs huge dollars to hold afew allocations. Great, make it so otfitters dont have guaranteed tags, draw your non res and nra's, and where will they book a hunt?

this is already in place in many US states. a guide is an option, not a requirement. there are lots of guiding operations that run full time and do quite well. they earn their money based on hard work and success, not owning the tags.

Who will have a tag for them.

the guides that want to be in the guiding business....more for the love of the hunt than the love of the dollar.


Who will have a business running that is able to operate Annually on hopes and dreams? I guess if free market and noone needs to be a licenced outfitter with investment into a solid business plan and ability to execute it, where will the professionals come from that all of you are currently demanding in the field each fall???? There has to be a give take guys.

here are a couple examples of guys running reputable businesses on hard work producing consistent results. no doubt there is some paid hunting going on, but a good chunk of what they do is on public land.

http://mossback.com/



this one offers paid hunts as well as hunts when you draw....read what they have to say about the draws....

http://trophyoutfitters.com/

some good examples have been recounted on this forum. ryry drew his desert sheep tag and paid a few thousand dollars for his guide. gunslinger bought his hunt and paid 70some thou if i remember right. another good argument to be made in my opinion is that it allows the average guy to be able to get in on some of the types of hunts that most hunters can only dream of. right now i hear sheep hunts are selling for around 30k in alberta. i like the thought of a carpenter from kentucky or a school teacher from kansas being able to afford a sheep hunt in alberta.