.............

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Bowhunter102

I am a non resident too. I hunt in the USA and in other parts of Canada. So should I ban nr? No as if they did the same I would not be hunting in other places.

I don't think anyone said to ban NR hunters....just place more restrictions and limitations on them like other places have, ie. Saskatchewan....for certain species in certain areas.

LC

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Sorry for the delay. Numbers coming up in a bit. I've been too busy trying to get AFGA to wake up, I even made coffee.





Regarding Bowhunter102. He is an admitted "do nothing". We have had private conversations, and 102 stated that he will not lift a finger, he just doesn't care.

We have more important business than to respond to this guy, whom by admission is basically just trolling for self entertainment....





Here you go Pikergolf,


First set of numbers is for 2011/12, second set is for 2012/13.

Antlered Mule Deer

Non Resident Canadian Hunter Hosted
Archery 4 5
Draw 123 108
General 178 191



Non Resident Alien Hunter Hosted
Archery *not calculable from the gov. data
General 27 35




Non Resident Canadian Outfitter Allocation
* No catagory exists within the government data. Possibly the NR Canadians are included in the NR Alien totals, or maybe not....

Non Resident Alien Outfitter Allocation
Archery ( Class B) 179 189
General weapon (Class O) 651 602

Thanks for that, numbers are a little higher than I had thought. So far the only response I've gotten is from the leader of the opposition. That's gotta hurt.

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I don't think anyone said to ban NR hunters....just place more restrictions and limitations on them like other places have, ie. Saskatchewan....for certain species in certain areas.

LC

Can even compare. If we were like them there would be no problems. As we woul have no non res hunters for the most part.

[elkhunter11]

I don't think anyone said to ban NR hunters....just place more restrictions and limitations on them like other places have, ie. Saskatchewan....for certain species in certain areas.

Exactly, put residents first, then if you have extra opportunities, that the residents don't have to wait in line for years to draw tags for, share them with the non residents. Alberta has a better priority system, but Saskatchewan has a better system for managing outfitting, and Canadian resident hunting.

Can even compare. If we were like them there would be no problems. As we woul have no non res hunters for the most part.

Do you have any idea how many non residents hunt whitetail deer, bear, or game birds in Saskatchewan? It's a far cry from no non resident hunters.

http://www.environment.gov.sk.ca/adx....pdf&l=English

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Exactly, put residents first, then if you have extra opportunities, that the residents don't have to wait in line for years to draw tags for, share them with the non residents. Alberta has a better priority system, but Saskatchewan has a better system for managing outfitting, and Canadian resident hunting.



Do you have any idea how many non residents hunt whitetail deer, bear, or game birds in Saskatchewan? It's a far cry from no non resident hunters.

http://www.environment.gov.sk.ca/adx....pdf&l=English

Yes I know how many. How many nr muledeer tags?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Bowhunter102

Yes I know how many. How many nr muledeer tags?

In Sakatchewan I believe there are 0 NR mule deer tags....unless they do minister draws....

NR can hunt other species though....which is fine, most NR want to hunt "the BIG Alberta WT Buck" anyhow right?

LC

[thumper]

Just a suggestion - by posting old fashioned paper letters (rather than emails), I've tended to get better attention and responses to issues I've raised with politicians. My best responses have been to HANDWRITTEN letters - imagine that!

[Mutter87]

I am all for banning NR opportunities if Residents have to wait for a tag.

[Rhino81]

some zones do need work, that I will agree with most of you. But it isn't going to. No matter how many letter you write. I am a res hunter and a guide and things are fine in %75 of the province. It is going to stay the same and that comes from a pretty reputable source to whom which he like to remaine anonymous.

[Deer Hunter]

Here are the 2012 Antlered Mule Deer Draw and current Outfitter Allocations by WMU. Outfitters had 2351 total Antlered Mule Deer Allocations in 2012.

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

In Sakatchewan I believe there are 0 NR mule deer tags....unless they do minister draws....

NR can hunt other species though....which is fine, most NR want to hunt "the BIG Alberta WT Buck" anyhow right?

LC

Good one LC. .

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

Here are the 2012 Antlered Mule Deer Draw and current Outfitter Allocations by WMU. Outfitters had 2351 total Antlered Mule Deer Allocations in 2012.

So go back 5 years and post up same info. Be a little different. Add in a bad winter and SRD giving way to many tags to us residents. Also all outfitters loose there bow tags in zones that are going on draw.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Bowhunter102

So go back 5 years and post up same info. Be a little different. Add in a bad winter and SRD giving way to many tags to us residents. Also all outfitters loose there bow tags in zones that are going on draw.

I don't think they lose them outright at all, if that was the case there would be a big outcry.....they get converted to rifle tags if I am not mistaken?

Bowhunter102.....just curious are you a guide? or do you have friends who are guides?

LC

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

In Sakatchewan I believe there are 0 NR mule deer tags....unless they do minister draws....

NR can hunt other species though....which is fine, most NR want to hunt "the BIG Alberta WT Buck" anyhow right?

LC

So I wonder if residents would be willing to exchange Mule deer opportunities for non-residents with SRD/APOS increasing Whitetail allocations since they are over the counter ? I know a lot of outfitters in our area would jump at that option.

[Deer Hunter]

There are already 60% more outfitter allocations province wide for WT deer compared to MD. In 2012 outfitters had 3769 WT deer allocations which is 3.1% of the total WT tags, which seems to fit the current Alberta Outfitter-Guide Policy quite well. As it should.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I don't think they lose them outright at all, if that was the case there would be a big outcry.....they get converted to rifle tags if I am not mistaken?

Bowhunter102.....just curious are you a guide? or do you have friends who are guides?

LC

They certainly won't get converted to Rifle tags lefty, I would say they will be absorbed as a cost of doing business

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I don't think they lose them outright at all, if that was the case there would be a big outcry.....they get converted to rifle tags if I am not mistaken?

Bowhunter102.....just curious are you a guide? or do you have friends who are guides?

LC

No they do not get more class o tags in lue of. All archery tags gone according to SRD. Yes I am a guide and soon maybe an outfitter. Well I see torque beat me to it.

So mr deer hunter what should outfitters and nr get for tags? Also what are you willing to give up as you just want more and give nothing. Also who is the stat man as I do not think you are the guy coming up with any of this info. I think you are just the guy skewing the info for your own benefit.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

There are already 60% more outfitter allocations province wide for WT deer compared to MD. In 2012 outfitters had 3769 WT deer allocations which is 3.1% of the total WT tags, which seems to fit the current Alberta Outfitter-Guide Policy quite well. As it should.

But there is no draw, so it's not taking away from any residents opportunity to hunt which I gather from everybodies comments on here is the biggest concern. So it shouldn't matter if they doubled the WT allocations, it would not affect residents at all. As far as opportunity.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

But there is no draw, so it's not taking away from any residents opportunity to hunt which I gather from everybodies comments on here is the biggest concern. So it shouldn't matter if they doubled the WT allocations, it would not affect residents at all. As far as opportunity.

There is a WT draw in the WMU 404,406,408 where there have been 353 res/NR drawn out of 2300 applicants. And outfitters already hold 39 WT deer tags here or exactly 10%.

Adding any allocations should be done only as per the current policy, which in my interpretation, should only allow 3% of the allowable harvest to go to the outfitters on sought after tags such as antelope, MD, moose.

For non draw hunts like most of the WT hunting in Alberta, the Policy should be used to come up with the allocations as well. The way I read it, should be near 5% of the harvest. Taking the harvest % to a tag % should give outfitters much less than 5% of the overall tags in allocations given their sucess rates.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

There is a WT draw in the WMU 404,406,408 where there have been 353 res/NR drawn out of 2300 applicants. And outfitters already hold 39 WT deer tags here or exactly 10%.

Adding any allocations should be done only as per the current policy, which in my interpretation, should only allow 3% of the allowable harvest to go to the outfitters on sought after tags such as antelope, MD, moose.

For non draw hunts like most of the WT hunting in Alberta, the Policy should be used to come up with the allocations as well. The way I read it, should be near 5% of the harvest. Taking the harvest % to a tag % should give outfitters much less than 5% of the overall tags in allocations given their sucess rates.

So what your saying is to you it's not really about taking away from resident opportunity it's more about keeping the animals strickly for residents, unless there's something you don't want, then the outfitters can have that.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

So what your saying is to you it's not really about taking away from resident opportunity it's more about keeping the animals strickly for residents, unless there's something you don't want, then the outfitters can have that.

There are rules to follow. They are called a Policy. Even though they have not been followed in the past, they should be in the future.

The Policy deals with resident and outfitter demand/use/availability. The intent of the Policy, how i read it, is to ensure future resident opportunity.

Are you suggesting that Outfitters dont need to abide by this Policy?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

They certainly won't get converted to Rifle tags lefty, I would say they will be absorbed as a cost of doing business

Well the cost of doing business for the resident hunters in the past how ever many years has been more things going on draw and tag numbers reduced....every group who has a stake in this game needs to realize that the old days are over and new days are coming.....we all have to drink the kool-aide and eat the humble pie.

LC

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

There are rules to follow. They are called a Policy. Even though they have not been followed in the past, they should be in the future.

The Policy deals with resident and outfitter demand/use/availability. The intent of the Policy, how i read it, is to ensure future resident opportunity.

Are you suggesting that Outfitters dont need to abide by this Policy?

Oh course not, I was simply offering up a solution to " main issue " I've been reading about in most of these post, non-residents shouldn't get any tags if residents can't buy a tag over the counter. I didn't truly expect anybody to actually go alone with it when they realised that non-residents would be getting something more.

Everybody keeps using Sask as an example of how great things could be, lots of WMU's in the northern half of the province have 3-400 Whitetail allocations per zone. I bet if you asked those residents they would complain about that too.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Well the cost of doing business for the resident hunters in the past how ever many years has been more things going on draw and tag numbers reduced....every group who has a stake in this game needs to realize that the old days are over and new days are coming.....we all have to drink the kool-aide and eat the humble pie.

LC

I truly don't think the outfitters that really care about game populations recovering would have a problem with there allocation numbers being reduced until said game population recovers. I know I wouldn't.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

I truly don't think the outfitters that really care about game populations recovering would have a problem with there allocation numbers being reduced until said game population recovers. I know I wouldn't.

It is fine to say that.....but how many of the guys you work beside feel that way?

.....right now this year knowing what you know about population how many tags are you willing to hold onto and not use?

No one tells you what you need to charge for your tags, and you have a guarantee at the numbers. Using basic principles of supply and demand....if you have less tags you just charge more to end up even or ahead...

What have outfitters given up in the past 5 years under the current tag allocations?

Compare that to what has been dictated to the resident hunter.....

LC

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

It is fine to say that.....but how many of the guys you work beside feel that way?

.....right now this year knowing what you know about population how many tags are you willing to hold onto and not use?

No one tells you what you need to charge for your tags, and you have a guarantee at the numbers. Using basic principles of supply and demand....if you have less tags you just charge more to end up even or ahead...

What have outfitters given up in the past 5 years under the current tag allocations?

Compare that to what has been dictated to the resident hunter.....

LC

I agrre with you 100% Lefty it should be an equal ruduction across the board. 5 years is too long, 2 years would be much better. That way you would be able to still conduct the hunts you've sold but would know far enough out to not book allocations you are going to loose.

I would be willing to hold off on not booking hunts if the populations got in trouble and the other outfitters I call my friends I'm sure would do the same. That being said I'm sure some would not as there are bad seeds in all aspects of our human population.
I don't outfit for deer anymore because resident pressure got too high in our area but that's a personal choice and it was my own. No bitterness towards anybody. Luckily my moose and bear populations are doing well, if there comes a time when they are not I will certainly put them above my own personal gain.
Unfortunatly for those that are loosing allocations Lefty it's not as simple as raising prices. There is lots of competition for clients in all our canadian provinces and it's a very competitive market. But that is the cost of doing business.

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

There is a WT draw in the WMU 404,406,408 where there have been 353 res/NR drawn out of 2300 applicants. And outfitters already hold 39 WT deer tags here or exactly 10%.

Adding any allocations should be done only as per the current policy, which in my interpretation, should only allow 3% of the allowable harvest to go to the outfitters on sought after tags such as antelope, MD, moose.

For non draw hunts like most of the WT hunting in Alberta, the Policy should be used to come up with the allocations as well. The way I read it, should be near 5% of the harvest. Taking the harvest % to a tag % should give outfitters much less than 5% of the overall tags in allocations given their sucess rates.

less than 5% really. I see greed only from this post. I agree with lefty that tags should be done annually to keep it fair. I still think all antelope tags for a couple years should have been put on hold. As for certain zones there should be big changes. I also see the need for Changes to hunter host as that is more abused than any outfitter tags.

[Wiz]

Well done!

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Bowhunter102

No they do not get more class o tags in lue of. All archery tags gone according to SRD. Yes I am a guide and soon maybe an outfitter. Well I see torque beat me to it.

So mr deer hunter what should outfitters and nr get for tags? Also what are you willing to give up as you just want more and give nothing. Also who is the stat man as I do not think you are the guy coming up with any of this info. I think you are just the guy skewing the info for your own benefit.

Until the Allocation agreement is done, this is just guesswork.

APOS and ABA are touting F&W's suggestion that B class allocations in MD Archery draw wmu's will be pulled. Enjoy the candy.... This means absolutely nothing until the number of O class allocations are determined.


102, you are conveniently forgetting that Resident hunters have already taken cuts to licences for conservation reasons. It is the Outfitters turn.


So far, APOS is holding the line at zero to very minimal cuts, requesting new allocations to replace any cuts, and have already threatened Legal action for market value compensation for any cuts.... A decent business position, but one that shows a complete disregard for the public resource.

[Mark]

Not to stir the pot, but I guess I'm going to. The fact that Outfitter are given any allotments for antelope is criminal. The fact is that a non residence should never be able to have access to a resource where a resident has to wait almost a decade to access the same resource. Currently during a resident’s waiting period between tags, a non resident could potentially access that resource more than a resident could in his or her entire life time.
The fact that they are even considering and negotiating Outfitter tags on antelope is repugnant.

I've just sent another batch of letters out stating this position. Jim Allen at least has had the courtesy of reply. My MLA, Allison Redford, hasn't even acknowledged receipt of one of my four letters to her.