Harvest report surcharge $15.75😡😡😡

[KBF]

Correct. I like it. It was well advertised this would be the deal.

[Pioneer2]

Originally Posted by FortMac

Would like go see Mandatory reporting within 3 days of harvest like what some states do. Failure to do so results in 1 years loss of hunting privileges.

They are proven incompetent at game management. Isn't there enough rules already.

[vic1]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

unless everyone reports all kills, it serves no purpose. That being said, will fill out my harvest surveys, to avoid the extra charges.

x 2

[ganderblaster]

Some people might even put the correct data into their reports. Most people I talk to are scared if they admit a harvest it will reduce opportunity…. Best method is to have actual biologists doing counts every year.

The bird game poll is a massive joke because there isn’t even categories to enter the correct data. It forces some hunters to put in false data in order to submit the report as everything is capped at 8 a day and 24 for possession (forget about snow geese) where if anyone eats a duck or goose between September 1 and December 16 they can’t include that data lol

[FortMac]

Originally Posted by ganderblaster

Some people might even put the correct data into their reports. Most people I talk to are scared if they admit a harvest it will reduce opportunity…. Best method is to have actual biologists doing counts every year.

How does this help out? Everyone lies, tags stay the same, then they do a count and realize the numbers are depleted, they cancel the season, everyone gets mad.

Should be mandatory within 3 days of harvest for everyone to report and for the numbers to be updated weekly.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by FortMac

How does this help out? Everyone lies, tags stay the same, then they do a count and realize the numbers are depleted, they cancel the season, everyone gets mad.

Should be mandatory within 3 days of harvest for everyone to report and for the numbers to be updated weekly.

Mandatory harvest reporting only helps if everyone reports. The problem is, that in some wmus, unlicensed hunters kill more game than licensed hunters, making the data pretty much worthless.

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Mandatory harvest reporting only helps if everyone reports. The problem is, that in some wmus, unlicensed hunters kill more game than licensed hunters, making the data pretty much worthless.

We can beat this drum till the leather is worn through, poaching and lost game amounts to far more loss than the group you refer too. Accurate reporting if used properly only benefits our group.

[Phil McCracken]

Originally Posted by Sledhead71

We can beat this drum till the leather is worn through, poaching and lost game amounts to far more loss than the group you refer too. Accurate reporting if used properly only benefits our group.

Unfortunately...this will never happen...

[Moosetalker]

Used to be a chance at a special draw for people that filled out the harvest report.
Not that I would ever win Never got drawn for Bison either LOL

[badbrass]

X-2

Originally Posted by Phil McCracken

Unfortunately...this will never happen...

[270person]

Originally Posted by Sledhead71

We can beat this drum till the leather is worn through, poaching and lost game amounts to far more loss than the group you refer too. Accurate reporting if used properly only benefits our group.

If wildlife sustainability is the goal why is only one part of the hunting populace mandated to report? Kind of interesting when the only ones putting money into the system are the ones mandated to report no?

Let's just call it what it really is ok? A great big nothing burger gouge.

[sir_charlie]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Mandatory harvest reporting only helps if everyone reports. The problem is, that in some wmus, unlicensed hunters kill more game than licensed hunters, making the data pretty much worthless.

I doubt unlicensed hunters are submitting more accurate data than licensed hunters... And if the data is reliable, its likely being combined with the data from licensed hunters to make informed decisions and policy.

Bottom-line is the government is not using the harvest reporting data in isolation. They are using this, as well as wildlife survey data, first nation harvest, F&W data, assumptions on recruitment rates, predatory kills etc. Then they are using statistics and assumptions to come to reasonably defensible conclusions on proper tag allocations to support a sustainable population.

Anyone who can get their hands on a copy of Jack Ondrack's "Big Game Hunting Alberta" should read it. Too many hunters, not enough wildlife has been a problem since europeans came to Alberta. The only thing that saved wildlife was smart decisions by smart hunters and conservationist recognizing limits to hunting needed to be put in place at different times for different reasons.

Purposefully not reporting, or falsifying your data, for the selfish purpose of trying to protect or better your chances to continue to hunt more, is counter-productive. And the mentality that since not everyone doesn't give good data, the data is no good, is also counter-productive. If a season gets closed in a WMU because there's a concern of low population numbers and too high a harvest, first thing most hunters on this forum will do is complain. And I would bet money the first to complain are its the same hunters who are not filling out their harvest reports accurately or at all because its "pointless".

If you believe in ethical hunting, which I hope everyone on here does, then you should support and hep with the collection of as much hunting related data as possible. If not for better tag and sustainable allocations for hunting, then do it to keep hunting legal. Anti-hunting activities will continue to fight us by using emotions (not data) to get the general public on their side to shut down more predator hunting (eg. the grizzly in BC was just the start) and eventually hunting all together. Good data is the one thing that might help us so do your part regardless if others are or not.

[270person]

Originally Posted by sir_charlie

I doubt unlicensed hunters are submitting more accurate data than licensed hunters... And if the data is reliable, its likely being combined with the data from licensed hunters to make informed decisions and policy.

Bottom-line is the government is not using the harvest reporting data in isolation. They are using this, as well as wildlife survey data, first nation harvest, F&W data, assumptions on recruitment rates, predatory kills etc. Then they are using statistics and assumptions to come to reasonably defensible conclusions on proper tag allocations to support a sustainable population.

Anyone who can get their hands on a copy of Jack Ondrack's "Big Game Hunting Alberta" should read it. Too many hunters, not enough wildlife has been a problem since europeans came to Alberta. The only thing that saved wildlife was smart decisions by smart hunters and conservationist recognizing limits to hunting needed to be put in place at different times for different reasons.

Purposefully not reporting, or falsifying your data, for the selfish purpose of trying to protect or better your chances to continue to hunt more, is counter-productive. And the mentality that since not everyone doesn't give good data, the data is no good, is also counter-productive. If a season gets closed in a WMU because there's a concern of low population numbers and too high a harvest, first thing most hunters on this forum will do is complain. And I would bet money the first to complain are its the same hunters who are not filling out their harvest reports accurately or at all because its "pointless".

If you believe in ethical hunting, which I hope everyone on here does, then you should support and hep with the collection of as much hunting related data as possible. If not for better tag and sustainable allocations for hunting, then do it to keep hunting legal. Anti-hunting activities will continue to fight us by using emotions (not data) to get the general public on their side to shut down more predator hunting (eg. the grizzly in BC was just the start) and eventually hunting all together. Good data is the one thing that might help us so do your part regardless if others are or not.

Since when do first nations or metis submit harvest reports? Around the same timing as them putting a nickel into provincial wildlife coffers?

[sir_charlie]

Originally Posted by 270person

Since when do first nations or metis submit harvest reports? Around the same timing as them putting a nickel into provincial wildlife coffers?

They make assumptions on that harvest which is also incorporated into their tag allocation - methodology was shared earlier this year in some presentations. I never said they submit harvest reports. But good to see as always forum members are drawn to the favourite demographic to blame our hunting woes on.

Above a post was taken down because it was condescending. I suspect the quoted post here though will stay on despite being derogatory and offensive to First Nations. Every other one on this forum is still up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sledhead71]

Originally Posted by 270person

If wildlife sustainability is the goal why is only one part of the hunting populace mandated to report? Kind of interesting when the only ones putting money into the system are the ones mandated to report no?

Let's just call it what it really is ok? A great big nothing burger gouge.

There is no gauging here, those who purchased the wildlife certificate all had the opportunity to fill out the harvest report. The ones who didn't incurred additional charges, where is the problem with a fair and equal system ?

Do bother bringing in the argument of those who don't pay, this is above both our pay grades and nothing to do with the discussion...

[waldedw]

The bottom line is that hunter harvest reports are part of the wildlife certificate and hunting licenses, it's simple if you don't want to fill them out then don't just pay the $15 fee and carry on or take the 2 minutes and fill them out, I don't see the problem, other than the fact that some people hate being told what they have to do

[270person]

Originally Posted by sir_charlie

They make assumptions on that harvest which is also incorporated into their tag allocation - methodology was shared earlier this year in some presentations. I never said they submit harvest reports. But good to see as always forum members are drawn to the favourite demographic to blame our hunting woes on.

Above a post was taken down because it was condescending. I suspect the quoted post here though will stay on despite being derogatory and offensive to First Nations. Every other one on this forum is still up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It wasn't meant to be derogatory at all. I'm simply pointing out that if some hunters are not buying tags, entering draws, buying wildlife certificates or mandated to submit harvest reports, then they provide zero revenue or viable information towards the very thing we are trying to preserve. Even a potential $15 non participant penalty doesn't come into play. So what do harvest reports from only a portion of the participants accomplish outside of potentially generating additional revenue from those that do all but one of the above?

Do you see words bemoaning who can and can't and who should and shouldn't be allowed to harvest? Nope. Just ones stating that without 100% participation by ALL who do hunt and fish, the entire harvest report exercise is a massive load of nothingness. Basically a typical government undertaking designed largely to generate potential revenues from those already contributing revenue, that can then also be wasted. But they'll take what little meaningful information these reports generate and determine policies with it. Amazing.

How about just funding the biology side adequately instead? Let them do their jobs properly. It'll be a lot more accurate information than a bogus selective report.

[ganderblaster]

Originally Posted by waldedw

The bottom line is that hunter harvest reports are part of the wildlife certificate and hunting licenses, it's simple if you don't want to fill them out then don't just pay the $15 fee and carry on or take the 2 minutes and fill them out, I don't see the problem, other than the fact that some people hate being told what they have to do

The big game draw reports make sense to some degree. Especially in CWD zones there is a way to catch the ones who lie by matching head submission data to harvest reports. However there are really no checks or balances to the info in many cases and look at how residence status gets abused without checks or balances so inaccurate info is basically worse then nothing. If they do actual counts like years ago they would have a much better idea on game numbers.

The game bird report is a big joke and a hunter can’t even put in accurate data if he wants to unless you only hunt 3 times a year. That one needs to be changed or axed in my opinion.

[leo]

If you guys keep bitching about native hunters, I’m going to close the thread, after I suspended a few of you! Native hunting rights will not change, so drop it.