Outfitter allocations

[whitetail Junkie]

Why is it the Government won't show us how many outfitter allocations there are for every species in every WMU.......? Surely this information must exist????

The government posts the Yearly draw summary reports showing the allotted alberta resident/canadian resident tag numbers per wmu and species...

Do records of outfitter allocations of every species in every wmu not exist?

[KCL]

Originally Posted by ESOXangler

Bang on!

I want my son to experience things in his province! More so than Some jack ass from Iowa!

Lol, not sure why but I just think it's funny you picked Iowa.

[albertadeer]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

More like 14 NR tags and 70 Resident tags, plus unlimited landowner tags (historically in the 30-40 range)
MSo the outfitter (Byron) actually gets pretty close to 10% of the total "tags" for this zone.


One thing nobody talks about is all the zones where outfitters are well below the 10% magic number. Lots of WMU's only have a couple moose allocations and there are no Elk allocations in many southern WMU's. What if they increased outfitter allocations in every zone where the numbers are low ? Then what ?

I stand corrected, maybe a few years ago it was less? I thought I recall it being 10-15, and I thought there was over 20 allocations for 357? I could be mistaken though. Not my science anymore. I see 358 is 11. How many mule deer allocations are in 358?

[reddeerhunter]

Originally Posted by JD 848

When the pulp and paper crashed in Ontario,guys who had worked like dogs their whole life lost everything over night and I was one,but that's the way the ball bounces when you work for your self..

You pic up your feet and move on and start doing something else and if that doesn't work out and you fail with no fault of your own,you pick up your feet and keep on kicken.

If hunting conditions have slowed down for some outfitters ,that's the way the cookie crumbles,you pick up your feet and try some other venture or go get a day job. No one should pay for any buy outs for any business,that's the chance you take in life,that's it.

Hey man, very humbling. Jesus Christ we have a new Premier. 100% nail on head. Serious.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Brock1

Which biologistS and what are their names please.

You are losing credibility fast.

Oh and what zones and where did u get the data in 5 mins again?

Oh right you won't tell us.

I'm done. Thx.

Are you willing to put money on it Brock? Here's a hint. Call Greg Hale and ask him. Tell us what you find out tomorrow.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by whitetail Junkie

Why is it the Government won't show us how many outfitter allocations there are for every species in every WMU.......? Surely this information must exist????

The government posts the Yearly draw summary reports showing the allotted alberta resident/canadian resident tag numbers per wmu and species...

Do records of outfitter allocations of every species in every wmu not exist?

Call APOS. They give that information out. But yes, the government has that info at their fingertips.

[huntwat]

Some have stated that outfitter allotments are lower than the 10 percent.
The way I see it their percentages should be 0 for any game that requires a resident draw. Give them as many tags a they want for a general tag. And just to be nice, first choice on undersubscribed tags.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by huntwat

Some have stated that outfitter allotments are lower than the 10 percent.
The way I see it their percentages should be 0 for any game that requires a resident draw. Give them as many tags a they want for a general tag. And just to be nice, first choice on undersubscribed tags.

That's a interesting idea. Every year I listen to residents cry about waterfowl outfitters tying up all the fields and having nowhere to hunt and there's only 4 outfitters max in each WMU.
Now you want to give us/them unlimited whitetail, elk, sheep and archery moose allocations as long as there isn't a draw ???

Could you imagine the Whaaaaa factor then lol

People will cry and bitch no matter what the numbers are. No it's not perfect in every zone but over all it's close to 10% across the province. I hear a lot of greed in many of these posts and that's pretty sad.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

I hear a lot of greed in many of these posts and that's pretty sad.

Really? That's your angle. Greed?

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by chuck

Really? That's your angle. Greed?

I think 10% is fair

Others resort to temper tantrums and want 0% for NR. I think that's greedy so yes that's "my angle" I guess.

Many of these guys hunt in other provinces or countries and have no issue with taking those tags from residents. My "angle" on that is they are greedy and hypocritical !

[hal53]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

I think 10% is fair

Others resort to temper tantrums and want 0% for NR. I think that's greedy so yes that's "my angle" I guess.

Many of these guys hunt in other provinces or countries and have no issue with taking those tags from residents. My "angle" on that is they are greedy and hypocritical !

I would suggest it is greed when a guy wants to run a part time business for his monetary gain at the expense of a resident being able to hunt in a particular area

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

I think 10% is fair

Others resort to temper tantrums and want 0% for NR. I think that's greedy so yes that's "my angle" I guess.

Many of these guys hunt in other provinces or countries and have no issue with taking those tags from residents. My "angle" on that is they are greedy and hypocritical !

Here are the numbers TD. This is why I don't like what I'm seeing. In WMU 302 there are 18 outfitter allocations and 13 resident tags for Mule Deer. In WMU 400 there are 15 outfitter allocations and 11 resident tags for Mule Deer. That isn't 10%. That isn't even close to 10%. This is where I hunt. This is where my kids will hunt (or won't hunt). So tell me why that is greedy.

If nothing else, they could at least increase the resident tags to make it even. 11 tags in 400? Wow.

[Pathfinder76]

So Brock, where are you?

[FCLightning]

Originally Posted by hal53

I would suggest it is greed when a guy wants to run a part time business for his monetary gain at the expense of a resident being able to hunt in a particular area

That's the right sentiment.

[dmcbride]

If an outfitter has more than 10% of tags in a particular WMU it needs to change. Until it does, there will always be a wedge between residents and outfitters and the attacks will continue. Also APOS really needs to do something about the outfitters that have been convicted of poaching, it is a disgrace to allow them to still practice outfitting. All of this is self inflicted by APOS.

[cougar bait]

That's where the problem is dmcbride!! Why does there have to be a wedge between residents and outfitters over this?? The outfitters have the exact same control over this that u do. They Just sit and wait for srd to tell them what's gonna happen to there business for the next five years. I total understand your frustration but point it at the right people! sure glad not all zones are like this

[hal53]

Originally Posted by cougar bait

That's where the problem is dmcbride!! Why does there have to be a wedge between residents and outfitters over this?? The outfitters have the exact same control over this that u do. They Just sit and wait for srd to tell them what's gonna happen to there business for the next five years. I total understand your frustration but point it at the right people! sure glad not all zones are like this

If 1 zone is like that, it's too many....

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by chuck

Here are the numbers TD. This is why I don't like what I'm seeing. In WMU 302 there are 18 outfitter allocations and 13 resident tags for Mule Deer. In WMU 400 there are 15 outfitter allocations and 11 resident tags for Mule Deer. That isn't 10%. That isn't even close to 10%. This is where I hunt. This is where my kids will hunt (or won't hunt). So tell me why that is greedy.

If nothing else, they could at least increase the resident tags to make it even. 11 tags in 400? Wow.

Are those this year's numbers Chuck?

It is pretty self explanatory why ESRD (or whatever acronym represents wildlife management these days) does not want to publish the allocation numbers. You have every right to be ****ed off.

[Dr Death]

To rub salt in the wound of this issue, an outfitter who holds wmu 400 mule deer tags was recently convicted of baiting bears (for non residents) in a no baiting zone west of sundre. I'm sure he'll keep his tags.

[elkhunter11]

That's where the problem is dmcbride!! Why does there have to be a wedge between residents and outfitters over this?? The outfitters have the exact same control over this that u do. They Just sit and wait for srd to tell them what's gonna happen to there business for the next five years. I total understand your frustration but point it at the right people! sure glad not all zones are like this

According to ESRD they consult with APOS to set the allocation numbers for the various zones. ESRD certainly doesn't consult with the resident hunters to set the allocation numbers, so no, resident hunters do not have the same control over allocation numbers.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

Are those this year's numbers Chuck?

It is pretty self explanatory why ESRD (or whatever acronym represents wildlife management these days) does not want to publish the allocation numbers. You have every right to be ****ed off.

Those are last years resident numbers. I have been told this years look the same. But what if they give out five more tags? It's still very frustrating.

[Kurt505]

Does anyone have access to the numbers gathered from their aerial studies that supposedly helps in determining the amount of allotted tags for both resident and non resident hunters?

[Snap Shot]

Originally Posted by pikeslayer22

Wasn't to long ago someone was crying the blue's about guys from Edmonton hunting in his territory

Hahahaha. You beat me to it.!! No one else is allowed in the GP area or down certain rds according to ol' alberta deer.

[Snap Shot]

Originally Posted by whitetail Junkie

Why is it the Government won't show us how many outfitter allocations there are for every species in every WMU.......? Surely this information must exist????

The government posts the Yearly draw summary reports showing the allotted alberta resident/canadian resident tag numbers per wmu and species...

Do records of outfitter allocations of every species in every wmu not exist?

I would like to know this information as well. I bet it would shocking in some WMU's.

[Snap Shot]

Originally Posted by Dr Death

To rub salt in the wound of this issue, an outfitter who holds wmu 400 mule deer tags was recently convicted of baiting bears (for non residents) in a no baiting zone west of sundre. I'm sure he'll keep his tags.

Unreal,
It's crazy that these guys can keep there allocations.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Does anyone have access to the numbers gathered from their aerial studies that supposedly helps in determining the amount of allotted tags for both resident and non resident hunters?

http://www.ab-conservation.com/go/de...veys/overview/

[Pathfinder76]

Where did Brock go?

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by chuck

Here are the numbers TD. This is why I don't like what I'm seeing. In WMU 302 there are 18 outfitter allocations and 13 resident tags for Mule Deer. In WMU 400 there are 15 outfitter allocations and 11 resident tags for Mule Deer. That isn't 10%. That isn't even close to 10%. This is where I hunt. This is where my kids will hunt (or won't hunt). So tell me why that is greedy.

If nothing else, they could at least increase the resident tags to make it even. 11 tags in 400? Wow.

I didn't say wanting the numbers to meet the 10% mark was greedy, I said the people who want outfitting in Alberta obolished were greedy.
If those are in fact the numbers for those two zones Chuck then I agree with you 100% that something should be done to correct that. I realize it affects you directly so you're interested in seeing it change.

How many WMU's have numbers out of balance where the NR get above the 10% mark ?

How many WMU's have numbers where the NR get below the 10% mark ?

Should WMU's with general whitetail, elk and sheep have increased NR allocations if they are below the 10% mark ?
Many WMU's only have 4 sheep or elk allocations where hundreds of residents hunt. Should we be creating 16 new sheep allocations or elk allocations if 200 residents are hunting a specific zone to keep in line with the 10% target number ???
I bet if the outfitters were asking for all these WMU's to be adjusted you would be losing your ****.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by whitetail Junkie

Why is it the Government won't show us how many outfitter allocations there are for every species in every WMU.......? Surely this information must exist????

The government posts the Yearly draw summary reports showing the allotted alberta resident/canadian resident tag numbers per wmu and species...

Do records of outfitter allocations of every species in every wmu not exist?

Yes, I have a copy of the new 2013-2017 allocation summary. Unfortunately this forum does not support the file type to allow me to attach it here. There are too many pages for me to show the individual wmu totals but here is a chart comparing the old 2008-2012 province wide totals.





Chuck, have you spoken with Matt Besko and Dave Kay? These people are who I would suggest you need to talk to regarding your concerns.


There are changes on the horizon for wildlife management policies that will effect Residents, non residents and outfitters. If things go as planed, there will soon be a new Alberta Wildlife Allocation Policy (something that we have never had) which will cover the distribution of ALL wildlife allocations for all user groups. Additionally there will be a new Outfitter Policy. Both of these documents are supposed to be presented to the public this fall for review before being implemented.

There could be profound changes within these policy documents such as a complete revision of how Outfitter allocation caps are calculated, namely from the current soft cap calculated on a Species Management Area (SMA) to a more refined hard cap at the WMU level.


Another significant change may involve the the sale and transferability of allocations between individuals. If effected, eliminating selling of allocations on the open market will remove potential claims of private property and demands for market value compensation. In essence this change would bring an allocation to a similar legal position as we have with all other hunting licences, i.e.. such as we cannot sell our hunting licence to another person....

IMO, Matt and Dave at F&W are trying to finally complete missing policy that was supposed to have been done back in the early 90's, and they are doing a great job at considering how these policies must reflect the public nature of the resource. I give these guys two thumbs up, at least for now (haven't seen the policy drafts yet) .

I am hopeful that we are finally on the right track to have concise and binding policy that will allow for a balanced distribution of allocations between all user groups. Time will tell....

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

I didn't say wanting the numbers to meet the 10% mark was greedy, I said the people who want outfitting in Alberta obolished were greedy.
If those are in fact the numbers for those two zones Chuck then I agree with you 100% that something should be done to correct that. I realize it affects you directly so you're interested in seeing it change.

How many WMU's have numbers out of balance where the NR get above the 10% mark ?

How many WMU's have numbers where the NR get below the 10% mark ?

Should WMU's with general whitetail, elk and sheep have increased NR allocations if they are below the 10% mark ?
Many WMU's only have 4 sheep or elk allocations where hundreds of residents hunt. Should we be creating 16 new sheep allocations or elk allocations if 200 residents are hunting a specific zone to keep in line with the 10% target number ???
I bet if the outfitters were asking for all these WMU's to be adjusted you would be losing your ****.

Have you read the current Outfitter Policy Agreement?

Doesn't sound like it.