Changes to Sheep Hunting Regulations

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Parks and Rec. They want hunting out of the mountains and Wildlands. Y2Y is part of this picture.

.

It's definitely a lot easier to kick half as many people out. A classic example of systematically dividing and conquering.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Of the three options, it's certainly the best case scenario for outfitters.

not if the south changes some zones to draw while the north remains general. outfitters would gain nothing but possibly more resident competition. that aint all bad....more residents killing those sheep instead of shipping them out.

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

not if the south changes some zones to draw while the north remains general. outfitters would gain nothing but possibly more resident competition. that aint all bad....more residents killing those sheep instead of shipping them out.

I take it you are being sarcastic....

The only scenario that offers total gain and no potential loss for outfitters is the province wide draw....assuming their tags will not be reduced that is.

[Justin.C]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I take it you are being sarcastic....

The only scenario that offers total gain and no potential loss for outfitters is the province wide draw....assuming their tags will not be reduced that is.

But if a province wide draw manages to happen then all outfitters should be payed out a pecentage of the tag for a couple years and disolve them... I for one dont see why we should have to pay outfitters anything.. Accourding to our bs gov we need a change.. The first change should be to say bye bye to outfitters and non residents tags.... Then if that dont work then change our system... till non resident are not aloud screw the government and there bs change......

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I take it you are being sarcastic....

The only scenario that offers total gain and no potential loss for outfitters is the province wide draw....assuming their tags will not be reduced that is.

only half sarcastic. what i said is true though. if the south zones go to draw, then some more resident hunters will go north assuming they are left general. some more of those residents would take the legal rams available there, rather than so many going to outfitters. no way would they support that scenario. province wide draw they would love though.....i dont see that happening.

actually, its what i thought would be the best change. those genetically superior southern sheep could grow up....residents drawn would have a better quality sheep hunt, and most of the province would remain open to those who want to hunt every year. the only loser in that is the resident in the south who would have to travel a little farther......guys like me.

Originally Posted by spurly

To the best of my knowledge. the outfitter tags are lifetime allocations, that cannot be taken away, without compensation. they own these tags, and can sell or lease the rights to them, but they cannot have them taken away.they may, open up new zones to outfitters, if they are willing to transfer their tags to a new zone.

I'm not sure if that's the case or not spurly but if it is, maybe it's time the Government addressed a system that does not allow for management. If that means buying those tags back for market value...so be it. Let's get out of this disaster before it gets worse!

[Justin.C]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I'm not sure if that's the case or not spurly but if it is, maybe it's time the Government addressed a system that does not allow for management. If that means buying those tags back for market value...so be it. Let's get out of this disaster before it gets worse!

I agree 100%

[steve]

In another thread it was stated that allocations are owned by the crown and come with conditions.

Originally Posted by steve

In another thread it was stated that allocations are owned by the crown and come with conditions.

That's what I always thought too but either way, when populations warrant resident tags or opportunity being cut, the system has to allow for the same with non-resident tags.

[steve]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

That's what I always thought too but either way, when populations warrant resident tags or opportunity being cut, the system has to allow for the same with non-resident tags.

I hate to say it.... But I fully agree with you

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

That's what I always thought too but either way, when populations warrant resident tags or opportunity being cut, the system has to allow for the same with non-resident tags.

Yes it does and I totally agree, but it will NEVER happen.

On another note, SRD is the main drive behind these changes and push for draw and as you can see by their numbers they will do anything they can to succeed at it.

[mad mountain mike]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

That's what I always thought too but either way, when populations warrant resident tags or opportunity being cut, the system has to allow for the same with non-resident tags.

Maybe in a just world, but so far I have heard no talk of outfitter allocations being reduced.

Originally Posted by mad mountain mike

Maybe in a just world, but so far I have heard no talk of outfitter allocations being reduced.

Me neither while SRD attempted to answer a lot of my questions, that was one they seem to have overlooked.

[drake]

We as hunters are going to have to stay informed and do everything in our power to lobby against changes that unfairly impact resident opportunity. I would love to see sheep numbers and quality improve but I don't think the recommended changes were created to address these issues. It sounds like there is a group/groups out there who have some political muscle and have motives that aren't in the best interest of average alberta sheep hunters. Thanks to everybody on this thread for their thoughtful contributions.

Originally Posted by Justin.C

But if a province wide draw manages to happen then all outfitters should be payed out a pecentage of the tag for a couple years and disolve them... I for one dont see why we should have to pay outfitters anything.. Accourding to our bs gov we need a change.. The first change should be to say bye bye to outfitters and non residents tags.... Then if that dont work then change our system... till non resident are not aloud screw the government and there bs change......

Personally I'd hate to see all outfitter tags gone and I know that's another issue but I think they are valuable to hunting in Alberta beyond the monetary contributions but I also believe that if residents lose opportunity that's it's only fair that non residents lose the same percentage as well.

[mad mountain mike]

I don't know how individuals can lobby Drake. Sheep hunters are fairly passionate about their sport, and I am sure that by now most of us have already written atleast one letter but beyond writing letters and talking to people i am not sure what else to do. A group of individuals fighting against organized groups is an up hill battle to say the least(hense the grizzly hunt).

Originally Posted by mad mountain mike

I don't know how individuals can lobby Drake. Sheep hunters are fairly passionate about their sport, and I am sure that by now most of us have already written atleast one letter but beyond writing letters and talking to people i am not sure what else to do. A group of individuals fighting against organized groups is an up hill battle to say the least(hense the grizzly hunt).

It can get frustrating but look at the flip flop the government did on extending the Minister's Special Licence season due to pressure from individuals. Your voice matters. Also make sure the groups you belong to that are part of AGMAG are representing your voice. We lose some and it's easy to dwell on them but we win a lot.....

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

It can get frustrating but look at the flip flop the government did on extending the Minister's Special Licence season due to pressure from individuals. Your voice matters. Also make sure the groups you belong to that are part of AGMAG are representing your voice. We lose some and it's easy to dwell on them but we win a lot.....

That's because what they did there was illegal. They got caught with their pants around their ankles. They had absolutely no choice.

[Justin.C]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Personally I'd hate to see all outfitter tags gone and I know that's another issue but I think they are valuable to hunting in Alberta beyond the monetary contributions but I also believe that if residents lose opportunity that's it's only fair that non residents lose the same percentage as well.

Well I am if we get this draw. Like stated a million time anybody non resident can pay to have a tag every year on anything other than a sheep as they have to wait the same as us. Sorry that has never been rite. I don't care if it is an antelope or a sheep or even a muledeer. They should have to wait like we do. Period. And I think a longer wait. Or a once in a life. Sorry to all outfitter but I don't agree how we have to wait and $$$$ changes it for them.

Originally Posted by chuck

That's because what they did there was illegal. They got caught with their pants around their ankles. They had absolutely no choice.

Show me where it was illegal. Public pressure spoke...period! Take it as a victory.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Show me where it was illegal.

Employees of SRD CANNOT alter a season at their whim. It is not within their legal right to do so. The minister is the only one that can do that and it is clear in this case that he did not.

[mad mountain mike]

Originally Posted by Justin.C

Well I am if we get this draw. Like stated a million time anybody non resident can pay to have a tag every year on anything other than a sheep as they have to wait the same as us. Sorry that has never been rite. I don't care if it is an antelope or a sheep or even a muledeer. They should have to wait like we do. Period. And I think a longer wait. Or a once in a life. Sorry to all outfitter but I don't agree how we have to wait and $$$$ changes it for them.

I like the system some states have where you have to draw a tag first then go looking for an outfitter, the outfitters are not king of the tags.

Originally Posted by chuck

Employees of SRD CANNOT alter a season at their whim. It is not within their legal right to do so. The minister is the only one that can do that and it is clear in this case that he did not.

He likely would have rubber stamped it though...without the letters he received from individual Alberta hunters. Again, hold your head up, it was a good day for democracy. It occasionally works.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Show me where it was illegal. Public pressure spoke...period! Take it as a victory.

Remove your head from the sand. Seriously. These are in no way shape or form the same thing. This is a MUCH bigger fight and it will take a much bigger hammer to crush.

Originally Posted by chuck

Remove your head from the sand. Seriously. These are in no way shape or form the same thing. This is a MUCH bigger fight and it will take a much bigger hammer to crush.

Yup, I agree...we need a lot more voices. Either that or we just throw our arms in the air and take what we are given. I'd rather go down with a fight. I seem to remember a little fight in southern Alberta called RAMP that began as Open Spaces......I guess everyone could have said nothing and taken that one too. Seriously chuck, you need to quit being so negative. Feel free to sit around and do nothing and mock those that speak up...it's really helping a lot more than those that are speaking up

[Justin.C]

Originally Posted by mad mountain mike

I like the system some states have where you have to draw a tag first then go looking for an outfitter, the outfitters are not king of the tags.

that is how it should have been from day one...

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Yup, I agree...we need a lot more voices. Either that or we just throw our arms in the air and take what we are given. I'd rather go down with a fight. I seem to remember a little fight in southern Alberta called RAMP that began as Open Spaces......I guess everyone could have said nothing and taken that one too. Seriously chuck, you need to quit being so negative. Feel free to sit around and do nothing and mock those that speak up...it's really helping a lot more than those that are speaking up

Your memory is short. I believe I was one of the first ones that came here kicking and screaming about RAMP and you sir told me I should get my facts straight and quit jumping to conclusions. That was after I had spent considerable time on the phone to the minister, SRD and many others. To this day I cannot bring myself to forgive you for that. DO NOT tell me I'm sitting on my hands.

Now I'm seeing red.

Originally Posted by chuck

Your memory is short. I believe I was one of the first ones that came here kicking and screaming about RAMP and you sir told me I should get my facts straight and quit jumping to conclusions. That was after I had spent considerable time on the phone to the minister, SRD and many others. To this day I cannot bring myself to forgive you for that. DO NOT tell me I'm sitting on my hands.

Now I'm seeing red.

Nope, I actually have a pretty good memory for an old guy. Actually I'd give you the same advice again It likely would have saved a lot of pointless fighting among ourselves.

No sense in fighting rumour and speculation. So far I've got my facts straight on this one and I see enough to be concerned about. Truthfully, I'm not fighting anything right now, just gathering some facts and hoping others do the same so if there is a fight to be waged it can be done based on those facts. You do harbour a grudge a long time My point was that individual voices can make difference and thanks for confirming that and pointing out how important it is to indeed have the facts.

[walking buffalo]

My Cut and Paste skill are on Fire! Just for the "special" boys on the board.

Originally Posted by steve

In another thread it was stated that allocations are owned by the crown and come with conditions.

Originally Posted by steve

In another thread it was stated that allocations are owned by the crown and come with conditions.

And I thought so too.

However, a 2009 Court decision may have changed that.

Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta
Citation: Stout & Company LLP v. Chez Outdoors Ltd., 2009 ABQB 444http://www.albertacourts.ab.ca/jdb%5...09abqb0444.pdf


The Minister does have the abilty to increase the Outfitter Trophy Sheep Allocation price paid to the Province up from the present $225.00.

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Look at the stakeholders.

I think SH has SRD correct, they seem to be on a drive to put ALL Big Game hunting on Draw.

APOS- That's obvious.

Parks and Rec. They want hunting out of the mountains and Wildlands. Y2Y is part of this picture.

The upcoming Public Land Public Access Plan in conjunction with the Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan both desire to severely restrict access in many areas. A part of the technique is to limit hunting through limiting licences to Draw only.

Originally Posted by sheephunter

It's definitely a lot easier to kick half as many people out. A classic example of systematically dividing and conquering.

We are focused Too much here on the Outfitters. Parks wants hunting out of the mountains. The proposed 402 Elk draw fits the mold.


The Alberta Chapter of the Wildlife Society IS pro-hunting as a management tool when the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. Perhaps they could be a strong ally at AGMAG in dealing with Parks and the Outfitters.

A recently released Position Statement by the International Wildlife Society on Hunting.


http://joomla.wildlife.org/documents...07-Hunting.pdf

The policy of The Wildlife Society in regard to hunting is to:

1. Endorse the principle that hunting, when properly regulated following biological principles, is an appropriate means of managing wildlife populations.

2. Encourage decision makers to weigh the biological, societal, cultural, and economic considerations when making decisions on hunting and the welfare of wildlife.

3. Encourage hunter education programs that allow hunters to increase their knowledge of wildlife ecology and management and to emphasize hunter ethics and responsibilities.

4. Support greater education of the public about the biological, ecological, cultural, and economic necessity of regulated hunting to the conservation and integrity of natural resources.

5. Support access management that provides for appropriate opportunities for hunting and other compatible uses in a manner consistent with the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.

Approved by Council March 2010. Expires March 2015.

[Pathfinder76]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Nope, I actually have a pretty good memory for an old guy. Actually I'd give you the same advice again It likely would have saved a lot of pointless fighting among ourselves.

No sense in fighting rumour and speculation. So far I've got my facts straight on this one and I see enough to be concerned about. Truthfully, I'm not fighting anything right now, just gathering some facts and hoping others do the same so if there is a fight to be waged it can be done based on those facts. You do harbour a grudge a long time My point was that individual voices can make difference and thanks for confirming that and pointing out how important it is to indeed have the facts.

Yep that's you.

I've been telling people this has been coming for years and have spoken with Jim Allen about it, at length, at least two years ago. Welcome aboard. As usual you're a day late and a dollar short but you'll have your ducks in a row just in time to see it a reality. Congratulations. SRD and their inability or complete refusal to think outside the box have been running this issue into a corner for a long time. The tragedy? They won't run out of funding for this one.