Letter to the ministers to reduce draw wait times.

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Then if you draw 6 tags in one year are you going to be upset?

....because if that happens you are P0 for six draws...

LC

wouldn't happen anyways, but no i would not be upset at all, as a matter of fact i'd be very happy

[Hat in the Cat]

Originally Posted by Roughneck Country

Just guessing but Whitetail likely is high because of cost to hunt them and availability everywhere in NA. Sheep are rated as one of the top trophy species because of the difficulty of the hunt and the relative scarcity of them compared to other species.

I think sheep are considered the top species by the hunting community in general though. Look what a ministers or governors sheep tag sells for vs the elk or deer tags at those auctions.

I think where the WT comes in its because with all the opportunity and availability for people to hunt, finding a trophy WT (specifically a record booner) are slightly rare. It's like breaking a sports record in a popular sport versus a sport most don't know exist. The bar is already high. Big Horns on the other hand are rare hunts but through obscurity most don't know when to drop their jaw at a trophy as they have never hunted one and have no comparison.

[Don K]

Originally Posted by chuck

I'm going to send a letter to the Minister of SRD and Finance in regards to wait times for draws. I have the support of several like minded individuals and will be getting their signatures on the letter. If anyone has a suggestion on any additions let me know. Here are the points I will be making or requesting a change to.

1. Increase draw application fees with a suggestion of $10. This will insure those that feel the need to apply for themselves, their dog, their wife, and their aunt Gertrude just because they can to cover all bases and see what they can draw for will at least think about it first. And maybe they will decide what species they really want to hunt. It will also encourage a bit of research into the tag being applied for.

2. Increase tag fees for special licence "trophy" animals with a suggestion to start at $150. This will also ensure a second thought on what they want to hunt as well. It will also have me personally staggering draws to stay married and solvent. This in and of itself will decrease wait times. Despite the opinion of the 999 detractors. Again, this will also encourage a bit of research into the tag being applied for.

3. Either a mandatory purchase of the tag successfully drawn for within a certain time frame or a mandatory requirement to leave a CC # at the time of application and the automatic purchase upon successful application.

4. The mandatory reporting of harvest or non harvest and use of your tag. You will have to report within 30 days of the close of your season or will automatically forfeit your ability to apply for any draw or purchase of any tag the following year. If you forget, to bad, and you likely won't do it twice.

I'd even make the fees higher... They are in the states...

[roper1]

Originally Posted by residentguide

Wrong? How are they? Either way the outfitter tags have nothing to do with resident tags. One is based off the other. Resident tags are bases on animals numbers. Maybe all NR licenses should be only through outfitters then would fix a lot of the NR problems. Landowner tags have people in the draw jumping ahead of the line. I don't care what they do or don't do for the wildlife. Take the mass amounts of tags given out and put them in the pot and you would see a big difference on a few species.

Without landowner tags, the deer on my place will get really, really big & you can harvest them w your Nikon from the road!!! 3 out of the last 4 really tough winters & I am very sure I saved deer & upland lives. When you come ask me for permission, please bring along your quote.

[antlerguy]

Originally Posted by Don K

I'd even make the fees higher... They are in the states...

There is also high fence hunting and paid access in the states. I guess we should do that also.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by roper1

Without landowner tags, the deer on my place will get really, really big & you can harvest them w your Nikon from the road!!! 3 out of the last 4 really tough winters & I am very sure I saved deer & upland lives. When you come ask me for permission, please bring along your quote.

Good for you. I still do not think you should jump the line on an antlered animal. Just goes to show even more greed and entitlement from everybody in Alberta. I am starting to feel sick to be an Albertan. Yes I was born here.

[dmcbride]

With this Proposal the people who don't have any priority aren't going to start entering the draw unless they are serious.IMHO 10 years just to start entering the draws. It's not the fairest deal for the guy's who have the high priority, but at least they get there names entered the most into the draw so in reality they still do have more priority.

Issue for Discussion – changes to
draw system for high priority draws
• Some Special Licence draw codes will never offer a
realistic opportunity except to those who applied first
year.
• Youths just entering into hunting will never have
opportunity for some Special Licences;
– WMU 437 sheep – 420 years to get through current
applicants
– WMU 444/446 – 470 years to get through current
applicants
• When applicants reach a priority of 10, then enter the
random draw on a “weighted” basis;
– 10 years =10 times name entered in random draw,
– 11 years = 11 times name entered in random draw
– 12 years = 12 times name entered in random draw



I don't know what the best options are after reading this thread. Plain and simple there just isn't enough animals to go around with the amount of people entering this province. I do agree with raising the cost to enter the draw, but only to say $15.00 max. and the extra money goes to more FW in the field. The animals are a public resource and we shouldn't be putting them out of reach. Also agree with enforcing residency, and having to purchase the tag if you are drawn. If your not prepared to pay, don't enter the draw. If you buy hockey tickets and can't make it to the game do you get your money back?

If all of these things are done it could make a difference. Just doing one or the other is going to have little impact. Any other Idea's that could help with the problem, that don't exclude people or aren't self serving?

[honda450]

Too many easterners here now. I moving to BC. And its just gonna get worse. I feel sad actually. My ancestors been here in Alberta for well over 100 years.

My grand pappy was born here in the District of Alberta, NWT.

I will let you guys fight over the tags. Most of ya are easterns anyhow have at it.

[MooseRiverTrapper]

Originally Posted by honda450

Too many easterners here now. I moving to BC. And its just gonna get worse. I feel sad actually. My ancestors been here in Alberta for well over 100 years.

My grand pappy was born here in the District of Alberta, NWT.

I will let you guys fight over the tags. Most of ya are easterns anyhow have at it.

Sad and true I am thinking Yukon.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by residentguide

Good for you. I still do not think you should jump the line on an antlered animal. Just goes to show even more greed and entitlement from everybody in Alberta. I am starting to feel sick to be an Albertan. Yes I was born here.

So how do you feel about non residents hiring an outfitter, in order to jump the line on an antlered animal?

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

So how do you feel about non residents hiring an outfitter, in order to jump the line on an antlered animal?

I don't care as those tags don't effect the draw pool. If a NR wants to waste money so be it. But those tags should be a deprecate draw or a wait time in between years like sheep but longer.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by residentguide

I don't care as those tags don't effect the draw pool. If a NR wants to waste money so be it. But those tags should be a deprecate draw or a wait time in between years like sheep but longer.

They certainly do effect the draw pool, in that if they were eliminated, more residents could draw tags,to have the same number of total tags available. That in itself may slightly shorten the waiting time to draw a tag.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

They certainly do effect the draw pool, in that if they were eliminated, more residents could draw tags,to have the same number of total tags available. That in itself may slightly shorten the waiting time to draw a tag.

I disagree as I think NR hunting should be aloud across North America if it is limited to were residents are first. Sask needs to be left out as they don't allow us there.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by residentguide

I disagree as I think NR hunting should be aloud across North America if it is limited to were residents are first. Sask needs to be left out as they don't allow us there.

If you are a guide, that profits from having non residents hunt in Alberta, then of course you think that non residents should have as much opportunity as possible.

As to Saskatchewan, they do allow non residents for species, where they have an excess of animals, but unlike Alberta, they don't allow non residents to hunt species that their own residents have to wait in line to draw tags for.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by residentguide

I disagree as I think NR hunting should be aloud across North America if it is limited to were residents are first. Sask needs to be left out as they don't allow us there.

Their allocation HAVE to change. Some of the zones I hunt have more than 1/3 of the tags allocated to non residents.

[super7mag]

Well Chuck how's that letter coming along? 12 pages some fluff , some good ideas, and lots of sportsmen bashing sportsmen. I'm sure many politicians are just chomping at the bit to weigh in on this one .

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by super7mag

Well Chuck how's that letter coming along? 12 pages some fluff , some good ideas, and lots of sportsmen bashing sportsmen. I'm sure many politicians are just chomping at the bit to weigh in on this one .

It's strengthened my position.

[58thecat]

I have gone over this thread and wow is all I can say I would not want to be the person (Ministers) who has the final say, hated, loved...can't please 'em all but I do know one thing that I will support is as long as the wildlife's welfare is the first concern I don't give a rats butt if I wait three, four years etc to be drawn. I enjoy the hunt, the fishing, the outdoors not whether or not I/we got our bull moose or the limit of fish each...just being outdoors.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by MathewsZ7

So at $80,000/year a guy cant afford $83/month for a $1000tag or $42/month for a $500tag???? Thats the issue, guys dont need to prioritize or care because they can put in for as many as they want and then throw the ones they want away because they invest nothing and the tags mean nothing to them.

And that is only premium hunts like the 438 TS, Suffield Antlered elk, Goat, Buffalo etc. It stops no one from hunting as there are very few of these tags offered and thousands of OTC tags that are still cheap and way higher odds of getting drawn odds tags guys can draw every few years. We're Not suggesting every tag be $1000!!!! But there is definitely a spot on some tags for an increase and them coveted tags need it. And the fact is in this day and age there are just going to be stuff guys can't afford, myself included!!

What you are talking about is reducing the amount of people applying by pricing them out of the opportunity.
That mentality is wrong. Plain and simple.

You should really rethink what you are trying to accomplish and why.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by residentguide

I disagree as I think NR hunting should be aloud across North America if it is limited to were residents are first. Sask needs to be left out as they don't allow us there.

Saskatchewan needs to be brought up because they have a great model. It's Just not a great model for outfitters.

[diamonddave]

Originally Posted by MooseRiverTrapper

Sad and true I am thinking Yukon.

lol You lost your Native accent, you wont fit in very well with the Native and Inuit population anymore!!

[BigJon]

Originally Posted by honda450

Too many easterners here now. I moving to BC. And its just gonna get worse. I feel sad actually. My ancestors been here in Alberta for well over 100 years.

My grand pappy was born here in the District of Alberta, NWT.

I will let you guys fight over the tags. Most of ya are easterns anyhow have at it.

I find this stuff truly hilarious. What country did your great grand pappy immigrate from?

Is 100 years of roots the magic number that should entitle you to more?

I must be really screwed b/c I didn't have roots in this country 'til '77.

After all these pages I will say what I have said on here before. I think that we should have some sort of financial change to the draws. Perhaps buying the license in order to put in for the draw. If successful you can then buy the tag. Or an automatic credit card billing when drawn...I like that too. I think the "super tags" should come with a higher price as well. Oh yeah...and I am far from rich, If I threw my wallet into the air it would probably float away but I can see to it that I can afford what I want to apply for and afford to make the hunt.

Something I find interesting on here as of late is all the banter about ways to make tags more available. That's great. If we could generate this much interest/discussion about ways to protect valuable habitat and enhance some of the degrading habitat I think we'd be starting to get on the right track. That doesn't seem to interest many folks on here for some reason.

[bergman]

I disagree wholeheartedly with increasing costs for tag applications or purchases whatsoever, and would fight you tooth and nail against any significant price increases.

If you want to increase hunting opportunities it isn't done by restricting them for some people, so you can have more. There should be equal opportunities for all, not limited by socio-economic status.

The primary mover of increased hunting opportunities means increased habitat preservation. And the main area where that is currently under-performing (in my opinion) in is farmland and private land. We need substantial incentives for private land owners to establish and maintain good animal habitat on their land. Something like this was done in the 70's with the Buck for Wildlife program, and is currently done all over the states, particularly successful in increasing pheasant populations.

A simple per acre subsidy payment for bush land would increase all sorts of deer moose and elk numbers. For those draws that are currently out of control, they should be set on a straight lottery (ie. the impossible sheep draws) the same as goats are - the decision needs to be made with a substantial leeway, so those with priority can have a chance to exercise their priority if they want - it needs to be done in good faith - but I would announce the changeover to a straight lottery planned to begin in 5 or 10 years, and then when the time is up, switch it over.

Habitat destruction or creation is the biggest predictor of animal populations, and by association, hunting opportunities.

So, no, I don't support the OP petition as it stands, and would fight against it if it came to that. Hunting opportunities should NOT be limited by a person's finances. I think that is going about the wrong way. I would rather have an increasing resource with more hunters than a diminishing resource and have hunters fight over it. Let's be proactive, folks.

[shooter]

Originally Posted by bergman

I disagree wholeheartedly with increasing costs for tag applications or purchases whatsoever, and would fight you tooth and nail against any significant price increases.

If you want to increase hunting opportunities it isn't done by restricting them for some people, so you can have more. There should be equal opportunities for all, not limited by socio-economic status.

Again, an increase in cost is hardly going to have an impact on serious outdoors people when it come to draws on license purchase. It's the smallest expense hunters have in the larger picture of gear, fuel, butchering etc etc...

The only limited economic status I could see offering a reduced cost license to would be youths and seniors.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

With this Proposal the people who don't have any priority aren't going to start entering the draw unless they are serious.IMHO 10 years just to start entering the draws. It's not the fairest deal for the guy's who have the high priority, but at least they get there names entered the most into the draw so in reality they still do have more priority.

Issue for Discussion – changes to
draw system for high priority draws
• Some Special Licence draw codes will never offer a
realistic opportunity except to those who applied first
year.
• Youths just entering into hunting will never have
opportunity for some Special Licences;
– WMU 437 sheep – 420 years to get through current
applicants
– WMU 444/446 – 470 years to get through current
applicants
• When applicants reach a priority of 10, then enter the
random draw on a “weighted” basis;
– 10 years =10 times name entered in random draw,
– 11 years = 11 times name entered in random draw
– 12 years = 12 times name entered in random draw



I don't know what the best options are after reading this thread. Plain and simple there just isn't enough animals to go around with the amount of people entering this province. I do agree with raising the cost to enter the draw, but only to say $15.00 max. and the extra money goes to more FW in the field. The animals are a public resource and we shouldn't be putting them out of reach. Also agree with enforcing residency, and having to purchase the tag if you are drawn. If your not prepared to pay, don't enter the draw. If you buy hockey tickets and can't make it to the game do you get your money back?

If all of these things are done it could make a difference. Just doing one or the other is going to have little impact. Any other Idea's that could help with the problem, that don't exclude people or aren't self serving?

there should be no increase for any of the charges to residents. NR yes big time. As for the sheep tags they should change it to a lotto as mentioned above after all at the top priority draw there tags. Fair is fair and those people have a very long time invested in these draws. After that go straight lotto for all bighorn tags.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If you are a guide, that profits from having non residents hunt in Alberta, then of course you think that non residents should have as much opportunity as possible.

As to Saskatchewan, they do allow non residents for species, where they have an excess of animals, but unlike Alberta, they don't allow non residents to hunt species that their own residents have to wait in line to draw tags for.

First off we ain't talking about Sask. We are talking about Alberta. As for guiding NR or residents I don't care. My first priority is residents as this is what effects me. I can go guide anywhere in the world and make money if I choose to. You and all other people need to realize that APOS and outfitter tags are never going away so worry about other things that can change to help out the draw problems in this province. The biggest problem here is people getting residency to easy to hunt and SRD mismanaging our wildlife for the last 10+ years. All the talk about more tags all the time blows me away as there is less than half what there use to be when tag numbers were half in the 90's.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by chuck

Their allocation HAVE to change. Some of the zones I hunt have more than 1/3 of the tags allocated to non residents.

That is wrong and I will agree on that note only.

[residentguide]

Originally Posted by shooter

Again, an increase in cost is hardly going to have an impact on serious outdoors people when it come to draws on license purchase. It's the smallest expense hunters have in the larger picture of gear, fuel, butchering etc etc...

The only limited economic status I could see offering a reduced cost license to would be youths and seniors.

Why is this? Don't you pay enough taxes?? Not one red cent goes to F&W so why should we pay more to pay some other crooked politicians pension or there retarded salary as they lie cheat and steal from taxpayers?

[bergman]

Originally Posted by shooter

Again, an increase in cost is hardly going to have an impact on serious outdoors people when it come to draws on license purchase. It's the smallest expense hunters have in the larger picture of gear, fuel, butchering etc etc...

The only limited economic status I could see offering a reduced cost license to would be youths and seniors.

And that alone is enough of a reason to not have any increase. You, too, will be in your sixties one day, and maybe even have a scrap of a pension. We all will be there, if we are lucky enough to live that long.

But you are not including low income hunters, either - not everyone shoots a brand new top of the line Weatherby or Tikka. Some people shoot our grandpappy's rifle with cheap off the shelf ammo and do their own butchering. Doesn't mean they don't deserve the same opportuities as the people who drop big money into the latest gear.

Economics should not be a barrier to participation (at least as far as purchasing tags are concerned).

Habitat improvement and lotteries for high demand/low animal tags are the only fair and equitable solution I see. (Like I said above lotteries should be announced YEARS in advance, so people who have priority have a chance to use it - they have a lot of effort put into that priority, and deserve the chance to use it)

Personally I would also support bilateral hunting/fishing opportunity agreements between provinces, too - it sounds like the Sask big game policy is a lot like the BC fishing policy - Alberta allows BC anglers in at a cheap license rate, but BC charges out-of-province anglers an arm and a leg. Should be fair both ways, IMO.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by residentguide

That is wrong and I will agree on that note only.

No it is not wrong. In fact, one zone has more outfitter allocations than resident allocations.