Number of Guide/Outfitter Tags Issued

[Deer Hunter]

Here is a draft of the old Outfitter and Guide Policy framework, for discussion.

The amount of outfitter allocations were dependent on a number of factors, the most important being resident draw demand.

Because it was a draft, it is obviously not written in stone. I don't believe there is an implemented O&G Policy currently. Maybe someone can post it if there is...

It shows that the intent was to reduce outfitter allocations when resident draw demand increased, which is occurring today.

[Ranger CS]

Originally Posted by huntwat

There is a plan for new policies ongoing right now. Contact ESRD with your concerns. RIGHT NOW is the time.

Do you know if there is any specific committee dealing with this review and how I might contact them directly? I suggest other member on this Forum who have concerns regarding outfitter draw allotments should be contacting this organization as well to voice your opinions as resident hunters.

[GFY]

Not trying to take away from your outfitter bashing here but landowner tags are more responsible for less resident tags on mule deer . The moose tags are out to lunch to but that is by allowing non residents to hunt the south and mountains areas . I do agree there should be stuff off limit to non residents .

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by GFY

Not trying to take away from your outfitter bashing here but landowner tags are more responsible for less resident tags on mule deer . The moose tags are out to lunch to but that is by allowing non residents to hunt the south and mountains areas . I do agree there should be stuff off limit to non residents .

And is it just coincidence that most of the best mule (and whitetail) deer hunting in this province is in zones with high percentages of private farmland ownership? Maybe,,, just maybe,,, the presence of crop and hayland provides additional food sources that allow the mule deer and other game to thrive which in turn provides more total available tags for everybody (residents,,, landowner,,, and non res alike).

And on the subject of "resident hunters", is not the landowner who lives there year around and "shares" his crop and forage with the mule deer perhaps even "more resident" than the hunter who lives three hours away?

[GFY]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

And is it just coincidence that most of the best mule (and whitetail) deer hunting in this province is in zones with high percentages of private farmland ownership? Maybe,,, just maybe,,, the presence of crop and hayland provides additional food sources that allow the mule deer and other game to thrive which in turn provides more total available tags for everybody (residents,,, landowner,,, and non res alike).

And on the subject of "resident hunters", is not the landowner who lives there year around and "shares" his crop and forage with the mule deer perhaps even "more resident" than the hunter who lives three hours away?

You are correct and was way before landowner tags were created. So what is your point ? There is no reason landowners should get a tag every year just the same as outfitters shouldn't. 95% of landowners that can get this tag don't . The other 5% more than likely don't let people on anyway . These tags directly affect draw tag numbers and lock down lands .

[Ranger CS]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

And is it just coincidence that most of the best mule (and whitetail) deer hunting in this province is in zones with high percentages of private farmland ownership? Maybe,,, just maybe,,, the presence of crop and hayland provides additional food sources that allow the mule deer and other game to thrive which in turn provides more total available tags for everybody (residents,,, landowner,,, and non res alike).

And on the subject of "resident hunters", is not the landowner who lives there year around and "shares" his crop and forage with the mule deer perhaps even "more resident" than the hunter who lives three hours away?

I believe the point may have been made before but warrants repeating.
Just because the areas you refer to are lush with good habitat and more abundant with game, does not justify outfitters being eligible to far exceed the 10% quota, as in some WMU's where outfitters are getting possibly as high as 50% of the draw tags. They justify this by taking far less than 10% in other WMU's that are devoid of game anyway.
As for landowners, I have absolutely no issue with their eligibility for tags. After all, it is these people who are the stewards of the land where our wildlife live and flourish, this often happens at the expense of land owners, eating from their croplands, haystacks, etc.

[GFY]

Originally Posted by Ranger CS

I believe the point may have been made before but warrants repeating.
Just because the areas you refer to are lush with good habitat and more abundant with game, does not justify outfitters being eligible to far exceed the 10% quota, as in some WMU's where outfitters are getting possibly as high as 50% of the draw tags. They justify this by taking far less than 10% in other WMU's that are devoid of game anyway.
As for landowners, I have absolutely no issue with their eligibility for tags. After all, it is these people who are the stewards of the land where our wildlife live and flourish, this often happens at the expense of land owners, eating from their croplands, haystacks, etc.

You have it wrong. Outfitter tags are suppose to be a % of all tag numbers . Landowner tags directly effect all tag numbers given to all Albertans . Which jumps people ahead of the line and makes longer wait times . If people acctuallg listened and checked how these tags are actually distributed to everybody they would have a problem with the current system behind outfitter allocations .

[Ranger CS]

Originally Posted by GFY

You have it wrong. Outfitter tags are suppose to be a % of all tag numbers . Landowner tags directly effect all tag numbers given to all Albertans . Which jumps people ahead of the line and makes longer wait times . If people acctuallg listened and checked how these tags are actually distributed to everybody they would have a problem with the current system behind outfitter allocations .

I did not refer to how landowner tags are granted, I simply stated that I do not have a problem with landowners getting landowner tags.
Maybe you can enlighten us on exactly how landowner tags are issued.

[GFY]

Originally Posted by Ranger CS

I did not refer to how landowner tags are granted, I simply stated that I do not have a problem with landowners getting landowner tags.
Maybe you can enlighten us on exactly how landowner tags are issued.

Ok well if there is only 10 tags avalible for your zone . 9 landowners the year before applied for a landowner tag . That means there is only 1tag left for the draw(this is how it actually works) . But you are ok with landowner tags? To me I see lots of bitching about outfitter tags but they do not directly affect you. These tags do. The only tags the outfitters may is moose. A lot of these should not be availible to outfitters and non res Canadians. Just like all the elk in the 100's and along the whole Saskatchewan border .

[Ranger CS]

Originally Posted by GFY

Ok well if there is only 10 tags avalible for your zone . 9 landowners the year before applied for a landowner tag . That means there is only 1tag left for the draw(this is how it actually works) . But you are ok with landowner tags? To me I see lots of bitching about outfitter tags but they do not directly affect you. These tags do. The only tags the outfitters may is moose. A lot of these should not be availible to outfitters and non res Canadians. Just like all the elk in the 100's and along the whole Saskatchewan border .

You are wrong about outfitters only getting moose tags. They acquire deer, and elk as well.
The system is far from perfect as it is. We can only hope that enough dissatisfied resident hunter will step forward and express their concerns to those who are in a position to make some positive changes.

[GFY]

Originally Posted by Ranger CS

You are wrong about outfitters only getting moose tags. They acquire deer, and elk as well.
The system is far from perfect as it is. We can only hope that enough dissatisfied resident hunter will step forward and express their concerns to those who are in a position to make some positive changes.

I know they get tags for everything . I am saying that is the one that stands out . Next is mule deer and antelope. But these tags are not affecting us as much as you think . Yes there should be a cap per emu instead of a sma .

You talk about dissatisfied hunters but again you are ok with how our land owner tags are . I for one think this is the biggest problem. This year we will be like other places where residence will be fixed. You will have to be a resident for 1 year prior to being eligible to hunt .

[deerguy]

Originally Posted by GFY

I know they get tags for everything . I am saying that is the one that stands out . Next is mule deer and antelope. But these tags are not affecting us as much as you think . Yes there should be a cap per emu instead of a sma .

You talk about dissatisfied hunters but again you are ok with how our land owner tags are . I for one think this is the biggest problem. This year we will be like other places where residence will be fixed. You will have to be a resident for 1 year prior to being eligible to hunt .

Outfitters should not get ANY tags that are on a draw for resident.

I believe there was a link posted last year that actually had the amount of Outfitter tags distributed. I can't recall the link name or I would look it up.

Anyone know the link?

Edit : this sort of has an answer

http://www.afga.org/pdf/Hunting/Hunt...tions-2014.pdf

877 Moose tags, that a lot of Moose tags that could lower wait times for some zones by a good chunk.

Also somewhat concerning, 1/4 people do not purchase their Antelope Archery draw tag and 40% of people don't buy there 438 Sheep tag

Overall species wide, 1/5 people do not buy their tag that they are drawn for.

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by GFY

You are correct and was way before landowner tags were created. So what is your point ? There is no reason landowners should get a tag every year just the same as outfitters shouldn't. 95% of landowners that can get this tag don't . The other 5% more than likely don't let people on anyway . These tags directly affect draw tag numbers and lock down lands .

There always seems to be those hunters who experience this private land "lock down" more than others,,,,, I wonder why???

[GFY]

Originally Posted by deerguy

Outfitters should not get ANY tags that are on a draw for resident.

I believe there was a link posted last year that actually had the amount of Outfitter tags distributed. I can't recall the link name or I would look it up.

Anyone know the link?

Edit : this sort of has an answer

http://www.afga.org/pdf/Hunting/Hunt...tions-2014.pdf

877 Moose tags, that a lot of Moose tags that could lower wait times for some zones by a good chunk.

Also somewhat concerning, 1/4 people do not purchase their Antelope Archery draw tag and 40% of people don't buy there 438 Sheep tag

Overall species wide, 1/5 people do not buy their tag that they are drawn for.

Maybe we should change the system to you buy your tags by a certain date or goes back in the pool to be drawn again.

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by GFY

Ok well if there is only 10 tags avalible for your zone . 9 landowners the year before applied for a landowner tag . That means there is only 1tag left for the draw(this is how it actually works) . But you are ok with landowner tags?

Has this ever actually happened?

Landowner mule deer tags in all but a select few prairie WMUs have typically been less than 10% of the total tags given out. And if tag numbers are so low that a handful of landowner tags significantly alter the draw structure to that degree, would eliminating them statistically make much difference in getting drawn given the high number of applicants.

And if tag numbers are indeed that low, then it also begs the question as to who should be given priority, the landowner or the hunter three hours away with little or no contact to the area?

[GFY]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

There always seems to be those hunters who experience this private land "lock down" more than others,,,,, I wonder why???

I dint have this problem in the area I hunt as we all are buddies and I help out all year long to do things to help out with the farms. Some do have this problem you are correct . You sound like one of them .

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by GFY

Maybe we should change the system to you buy your tags by a certain date or goes back in the pool to be drawn again.

Better yet, charge the applicant as soon as they are drawn, then the people that just apply for every draw they can because it's so cheap, might actually look at what they are applying for, and what would be involved to actually go on the hunt if they draw. Or disqualify people from the next years draw until they pay for all tags that they drew this year.

[GFY]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

Has this ever actually happened?

Landowner mule deer tags in all but a select few prairie WMUs have typically been less than 10% of the total tags given out. And if tag numbers are so low that a handful of landowner tags significantly alter the draw structure to that degree, would eliminating them statistically make much difference in getting drawn given the high number of applicants.

And if tag numbers are indeed that low, then it also begs the question as to who should be given priority, the landowner or the hunter three hours away with little or no contact to the area?

Wow . That is the biggest bull**** comment I have ever herd.

[elkhunter11]

And if tag numbers are indeed that low, then it also begs the question as to who should be given priority, the landowner or the hunter three hours away with little or no contact to the area?

Regardless of how far away an Alberta resident lives, he still pays the taxes that pay for wildlife management in Alberta.

[GFY]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Better yet, charge the applicant as soon as they are drawn, then the people that just apply for every draw they can because it's so cheap, might actually look at what they are applying for, and what would be involved to actually go on the hunt if they draw. Or disqualify people from the next years draw until they pay for all tags that they drew this year.

Hey elk . Pretend you are in the middle class for a second. No everybody can afford that hit at once . Most do live pay cheque to pay cheque . So this in not an option. Why is it I should not be able to apply for what ever I want? That is right. I can because there is no two teared system so guys cant go to the front of the line .

[deerguy]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Better yet, charge the applicant as soon as they are drawn, then the people that just apply for every draw they can because it's so cheap, might actually look at what they are applying for, and what would be involved to actually go on the hunt if they draw. Or disqualify people from the next years draw until they pay for all tags that they drew this year.

This won't do anything to prevent people from still wasting the tags unless you increased the fees a substantial amount which I am in favor of. Wonder how many people waste the $3000 Malay gap elk tag in Arizona? Lol

some sort of option that would have the guy next in line get it would be nice.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Better yet, charge the applicant as soon as they are drawn, then the people that just apply for every draw they can because it's so cheap, might actually look at what they are applying for, and what would be involved to actually go on the hunt if they draw. Or disqualify people from the next years draw until they pay for all tags that they drew this year.

I agree...But why not do like many States do, put up the money upon entry. If drawn it is paid out for the tag immediately if not it is refunded.

A buddy puts out a couple thousand of dollars a year putting in for tags in the U.S. He gets most of it back unless he pulls a tag, this year he hunted Arizona Coues Deer tag cost was right around $600. At least if they choose to not use the tag, the money for the tag goes back into the system.

LC

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by GFY

Hey elk . Pretend you are in the middle class for a second. No everybody can afford that hit at once . Most do live pay cheque to pay cheque . So this in not an option. Why is it I should not be able to apply for what ever I want? That is right. I can because there is no two teared system so guys cant go to the front of the line .

I am actually retired and living off of a pension, so I am in the middle class. If you can't afford to pay $100 for a couple of draw tags at one time, then you can't afford to pay to fuel up a truck to go hunting, let alone the other expenses associated with hunting.

I agree...But why not do like many States do, put up the money upon entry. If drawn it is paid out for the tag immediately if not it is refunded.

A buddy puts out a couple thousand of dollars a year putting in for tags in the U.S. He gets most of it back unless he pulls a tag, this year he hunted Arizona Coues Deer tag cost was right around $600. At least if they choose to not use the tag, the money for the tag goes back into the system.

I am just not overly thrilled about advancing the government money, and then having to wait for a refund. And with our present government, I feel even more strongly about this.

[deerguy]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I agree...But why not do like many States do, put up the money upon entry. If drawn it is paid out for the tag immediately if not it is refunded.

A buddy puts out a couple thousand of dollars a year putting in for tags in the U.S. He gets most of it back unless he pulls a tag, this year he hunted Arizona Coues Deer tag cost was right around $600. At least if they choose to not use the tag, the money for the tag goes back into the system.

LC

This would be a good idea too. Most states you don't get a "999" option. You just apply for the hardest draw possible to build your points.

This would work good here. Would prevent people from putting in for all 15 draws with no intentions of using the tag if they drew it. Would make you actually need to have intent to hunt that animal and plan it out.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I am actually retired and living off of a pension, so I am in the middle class. If you can't afford to pay $100 for a couple of draw tags at one time, then you can't afford to pay to fuel up a truck to go hunting, let alone the other expenses associated with hunting.



I am just not overly thrilled about advancing the government money, and then having to wait for a refund. And with our present government, I feel even more strongly about this.

I am pretty sure the money is returned immediately on the draw completion if not successful. I am ok with this because I entered the draw because I wanted to get picked...I think it would cause people to evaluate more closely their options.

Originally Posted by deerguy

This would be a good idea too. Most states you don't get a "999" option. You just apply for the hardest draw possible to build your points.

This would work good here. Would prevent people from putting in for all 15 draws with no intentions of using the tag if they drew it. Would make you actually need to have intent to hunt that animal and plan it out.

Prior to the 999 option people figured out how to up their priority without pulling tags too

LC

[GFY]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

I am actually retired and living off of a pension, so I am in the middle class. If you can't afford to pay $100 for a couple of draw tags at one time, then you can't afford to pay to fuel up a truck to go hunting, let alone the other expenses associated with hunting.



I am just not overly thrilled about advancing the government money, and then having to wait for a refund. And with our present government, I feel even more strongly about this.

Not stating I can't afford it. Trust me how you talk elk you are far from middle class. You got money and that should not matter in the slightest. My biggest problem is where would all this money go? To our wildlife or to to donate more tax money that gets wasted .

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Regardless of how far away an Alberta resident lives, he still pays the taxes that pay for wildlife management in Alberta.

Does he pay the property taxes where that deer happens to live? Does he lose income when that deer eats his hay bales, eats the crop or craps in the swath (deer droppings in the sample can cause significant down grading even to the point of rejection of the load) And for those who think otherwise, wildlife damage compensation from deer is very hard to collect!!!

My point is you can take this resident thing even further and consider the local who lives and works in the zone in question year round,,, and is then expected to allow equal access to a bunch of nameless / faceless strangers doing the Rambo thing through his fields and pastures to hunt the deer he has fed all year round with out any recompense whatsoever.

I have taken advantage of the landowner tag on three different occasions and killed one deer. If you think my 3 tags in 15 years to hunt mule deer on my own land is causing resident hunters significant hardship, then imagine the hardship done by the posting of my land to no hunting of whitetails, mules, moose, elk, geese, ducks. grouse, huns, coyotes, etc will cause the resident hunter!!!

It is all about respect,,, we as landowners cannot charge for hunting access yet we are expected to provide room and board for the "queen's game". The ability to take advantage of the odd landowner tag at least shows some respect from the "queen".

[deerguy]

Originally Posted by Pikebreath

Does he pay the property taxes where that deer happens to live? Does he lose income when that deer eats his hay bales, eats the crop or craps in the swath (deer droppings in the sample can cause significant down grading even to the point of rejection of the load) And for those who think otherwise, wildlife damage compensation from deer is very hard to collect!!!

My point is you can take this resident thing even further and consider the local who lives and works in the zone in question year round,,, and is then expected to allow equal access to a bunch of nameless / faceless strangers doing the Rambo thing through his fields and pastures to hunt the deer he has fed all year round with out any recompense whatsoever.

I have taken advantage of the landowner tag on three different occasions and killed one deer. If you think my 3 tags in 15 years to hunt mule deer on my own land is causing resident hunters significant hardship, then imagine the hardship done by the posting of my land to no hunting of whitetails, mules, moose, elk, geese, ducks. grouse, huns, coyotes, etc will cause the resident hunter!!!

It is all about respect,,, we as landowners cannot charge for hunting access yet we are expected to provide room and board for the "queen's game". The ability to take advantage of the odd landowner tag at least shows some respect from the "queen".

By looking at the link I posted, 95% of Land owner Mule deer tags were Antlered with Antlerless being an option that they passed on. If landowners want tags they should be Antlerless with antlered tags either being OTC or draw.

[Pikebreath]

Originally Posted by GFY

I dint have this problem in the area I hunt as we all are buddies and I help out all year long to do things to help out with the farms. Some do have this problem you are correct . You sound like one of them .

Helping out on the farm to gain favour for hunting access is really no different than paying for access. Between the two, I'd rather the take the money,,,, but I know that none of that is gonna happen.

What I (and most every other landowner that makes their living off the land) really want is respect for being habitat stewards and the access and opportunity we provide. Strangely enough, the hunters I know who show this respect always seem to find places to hunt, but those who don't have problems.

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by GFY

Hey elk . Pretend you are in the middle class for a second. No everybody can afford that hit at once . Most do live pay cheque to pay cheque . So this in not an option. Why is it I should not be able to apply for what ever I want? That is right. I can because there is no two teared system so guys cant go to the front of the line .

I agree that a lot of people would not be able to pay upfront for draws they might be awarded, esp. if you get 1 or 2 that you were not expecting (but hopeing) to get.
I know that I stagger buying my licences and tags as the season progresses.
I'm glad that some of you guys are not in charge of home buying, or even new truck buying. "Can't afford to pay in full upfront? You obviously can't afford it".
Something else to consider is that a lot of draws are for seasons that could be months away. If something were to occur in a persons life that would prevent him from hunting that draw, then not only is he out his priorty points, but also the money he paid up front.