Changes to Alberta Fish & Wildlife

[270person]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

100%
People don’t understand that when a resident pays next to nothing for their tag
That gives the resource virtually zero value
Why should the govt invest in something, when the people who use it, don’t pay for a fraction of the cost of managing it

As privileged as some of us might be.....at least we contribute "something." There's other problems as well.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by fatboyz

Well said, also the vast majority of the funding from hunting and fishing licenses goes to the ACA. They then fund their own pet projects and put gas in their trucks so their employees can drive them back and forth from home to work. The biologists see almost zero of the license money. We should lobby to do away with the ACA and put hunters money back into wildlife management and habitat improvement.

Not the direction I am talking about but more direction of how money generated through licensing and tags would be an improvement. I would even say that there are outdoorsman who do benefit from at least a portion of the ACA projects

The reality is that a new revenue stream as presently the money generated from tags/licenses is not going to do much even if redirected. As unpopular as some might find it the money would have to come out of the pockets of those who utilize F&W and those who utilize the outdoors. About the only other thing you would stand a chance with is lobbying for a small environmental fee from resource extraction that could be directed towards habitat enhancement for F&W. This is only worthwhile with legislation protecting theses funds from any other use than improving F&W populations and their habitat

But this is talking BS on a forum and to accomplish this you would need it to be brought forward with proper representation, political support to get legislation and of course solid support from the outdoors community

The fact of the matter is the best way to accomplish this is to get as many user groups as possible on board. This means Anglers, hunters, outfitters, fishing guides, any outdoors enthusiasts, and if possible FN

At this time I see people more willing to **** and moan about each user group than try to focus on something bigger. Odds are everyone will continue to point fingers and think they can push the other group out they don’t agree with instead of realizing common ground is needed to have a positive future

Like I mentioned earlier I am a fan of the Pittman act in the US and the result it gets this is the direction needed but it’s not free

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

100%
People don’t understand that when a resident pays next to nothing for their tag
That gives the resource virtually zero value
Why should the govt invest in something, when the people who use it, don’t pay for a fraction of the cost of managing it

Mark

if you read my last post my sights are much higher then peanuts from tag increases that still need to have their funds properly directed

Before any form of increase or tax or fee could have an impact controlling the direction of that money through legislation to protect is needed

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

Mark

if you read my last post my sights are much higher then peanuts from tag increases that still need to have their funds properly directed

Before any form of increase or tax or fee could have an impact controlling the direction of that money through legislation to protect is needed

I know where your coming from

[pope]

Seems like some folks don’t fully understand where the funds go. Too much goes to general revenue that paid for things such as Kenney’s high end scotch. So right from the 2022 Regs:

Where did your 2021/22 Hunting Licence Dollars go?

A total of $19.6M in revenue was collected from the sale of hunting licences, hunting draw applications and WiN cards.
Over 45% of hunting licence revenue goes directly to the Alberta Conservation Association levy in support of programming (For more information please visit www.ab-conservation.com).
Licence and administration fees accounted for just over 17% and provides compensation to licence issuers, pays for licensing services including the annual hunter harvest & effort survey delivered through AlbertaRelm.com
Over 1.3% Alberta Professional Outfitter Society levies are applied to all outfitted licences.
The Government of Alberta receives 36.4% of hunting licence revenue collected; 70% goes to General Revenue while 30% of goes to a dedicated fund to deliver wildlife management programs such as annual ungulate surveys. For more information visit: Alberta.ca and search “wildlife survey”.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by pope

Seems like some folks don’t fully understand where the funds go. Too much goes to general revenue that paid for things such as Kenney’s high end scotch. So right from the 2022 Regs:

Where did your 2021/22 Hunting Licence Dollars go?

A total of $19.6M in revenue was collected from the sale of hunting licences, hunting draw applications and WiN cards.
Over 45% of hunting licence revenue goes directly to the Alberta Conservation Association levy in support of programming (For more information please visit www.ab-conservation.com).
Licence and administration fees accounted for just over 17% and provides compensation to licence issuers, pays for licensing services including the annual hunter harvest & effort survey delivered through AlbertaRelm.com
Over 1.3% Alberta Professional Outfitter Society levies are applied to all outfitted licences.
The Government of Alberta receives 36.4% of hunting licence revenue collected; 70% goes to General Revenue while 30% of goes to a dedicated fund to deliver wildlife management programs such as annual ungulate surveys. For more information visit: Alberta.ca and search “wildlife survey”.

Hence the need for legislation to control of how funds are distributed. Every province in Canada (as far as I know anyway) has a large chunk of license fees going to general revenue. This is a well known issue

It would still not go far even if the money going to general revenue was redirected to F&W

Either way I don’t see much work being done to correct this and my personal life is too full to consider even being involved in anything so I am done preaching

[Twobucks]

I feel like this thread is missing the point. We’re now in a situation where the management of fish and wildlife is split between 4 ministries. There’s duplication of costs. There’s dilution of expertise and institutional knowledge.

Does the government not owe us an explanation? Shouldn’t they have to explain why? Seems especially weird for a government that came in so much talk (and a ministry!) of red tape reduction. On its face this is adding all kinds of red tape for no apparent benefit.

There are a lot of good points in this thread, but I just don’t see how this is good management. If it is, someone needs to explain it clearly.

[WinefredCommander]

There’s only one person to blame for this. Our new premier.

[DirtShooter]

Originally Posted by WinefredCommander

There’s only one person to blame for this. Our new premier.

Well if you vote in Notley you can kiss your hunting goodbye along with many other things.

[wind drift]

Originally Posted by DirtShooter

Well if you vote in Notley you can kiss your hunting goodbye along with many other things.

Why? Looking for real evidence, not rhetoric. Is Notley an anti-hunter? What many other things are kissed goodbye? Why would a government that gives an outfitter responsibility for wildlife management be worth our support or trust? Does that seem like good governance?

[Smoky buck]

Anyone who thinks this can be solved by voting NDP just needs to look west.

F&W is a mess across the country regardless of the party running the province. You just get different flavors of mismanagement. They are all seeing cutbacks or restructuring to save money. This is far from just a UCP issue or Alberta issue

You are not able to presently vote the problem away

[MountainTi]

Originally Posted by wind drift

Why would a government that gives an outfitter responsibility for wildlife management be worth our support or trust? Does that seem like good governance?

Good point. Why would anyone want a minister who is actually a hunter and might have a clue about wildlife management in charge.
Be like having an ag minister with a background in agriculture

#orangecrush

[cody j]

Yeah we need to be more like Ottawa and give out the most important jobs in the land to people based on skin colour and gender, it’s working great so far. Right?

[wind drift]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

Good point. Why would anyone want a minister who is actually a hunter and might have a clue about wildlife management in charge.
Be like having an ag minister with a background in agriculture

#orangecrush

My point is about the poor judgement in making a decision to allow a Minister with apparent conflict of interest the authority over fisheries and wildlife management policy and legislation, not whether he’s familiar with the subject matter.

[Twobucks]

I don’t see what this has to do with the NDP: they’re not in power. Is it good policy or not? Has the government explained its thinking or not?

For all the grumbling about the state of democracy I hear these days, there’s a lot of letting governments off the hook for treating us like chumps simply because we like the other parties even less.

I don’t see how this is good for wildlife management in the province and so far the people making the decisions are telling us to shut up and mind our own business.

[pope]

This thread is not about UCP vs NDP. It’s about the current government splitting up F&W without explanation. Anyone would be hard pressed to justify this as good management.
The idea of an outfitter being in charge is just a pure conflict of interest. Plain and simple. Not saying he would or wouldn’t do something stupid, but the point is anything he does will be construed as conflict of interest.
I never believed politicians would be so stupid to drink openly unmasked on a roof top unmasked during Covid lock down, or call the cops to have their ticket fixed, or interfere with criminal charges, or give their buddies contracts, etc etc etc, but here we are.

[I’d rather be outdoors]

Originally Posted by MountainTi

Good point. Why would anyone want a minister who is actually a hunter and might have a clue about wildlife management in charge.
Be like having an ag minister with a background in agriculture

#orangecrush

X2 love it. Sour grapes at play from the bios.

[Pekan]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

Canadian hunters want good wildlife management but don’t want to invest money to get it. It doesn’t matter what party is in power the problems are across the country and it doesn’t matter Cons, liberals or NDP funding is getting pulled.

The money is not there and the only way things will improve is if $ to fund fish and wildlife is generated

Been said many times look at the US and the Pittman act. The money it generates for fish and wildlife is benefiting them huge

Every tag you buy, every license, bowhunting permit needs to stay in the system. Alberta puts that money into general revenue. That at least would be a good start.
I listen to a lot of US based hunting podcasts, and it sounds like if you call up a state biologist asking for info on an area you've drawn a tag. They are more apt to offer advice and details on local conditions. Ever try that in Alberta? We don't get treated like customers spending money.
Rant over...

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Pekan

Every tag you buy, every license, bowhunting permit needs to stay in the system. Alberta puts that money into general revenue. That at least would be a good start.
I listen to a lot of US based hunting podcasts, and it sounds like if you call up a state biologist asking for info on an area you've drawn a tag. They are more apt to offer advice and details on local conditions. Ever try that in Alberta? We don't get treated like customers spending money.
Rant over...

Money going to general revenue is a problem for all Canadian outdoorsmen and won’t change without push from organized push back/lobbying.

I have not spoken to Alberta biologists but when I lived in BC I got mixed results some were great some were not. I would expect if I went through bio’s in Alberta in would be the same maybe a different % of good and bad

The US is different story because outdoorsman are valued more, better representation, and contribute more to F&W. Of course they will get better service from their government employees because they have a stronger voice