Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:43 PM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkdiesel View Post
So number 1 being at the top of your list I'll ask you a question about that one. So if you took away all the moose, mule deer, elk, antelope from the outfitters what would we do with species that aren't on draw.

Increase Whitetail to 400-500 allocations per zone where 5000 residents currently hunt ?

Elk to a couple hundred allocations where it's currently over the counter

What about sheep, non draw zones bumped up to 30-40 allocations ?

Bears ? Some outfitter areas in Saskatchewan are only 4 townships and have 30 bear allocations. That means almost all of the WMUs in the 300's and 500's should have 500+ allocations per WMU.

Are you good with shifting the pressure onto other animals to reduce the draw times by 6-10% possibly ?

Or do you want everything else to stay the same, just change for your benefit ?
Obviously if the allocations were increased by the amounts that you suggest, the result would be more draws within a year or two. And for each new draw, there would be less opportunity remaining for outfitting. Within a few years, everything everywhere would be on draw, and there would be no opportunities left in Alberta to outfit.

Given that , I would suggest maintaining allocations at levels that would keep the game populations healthy, while still allowing general seasons.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #122  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:47 PM
huntwat huntwat is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkdiesel View Post
So number 1 being at the top of your list I'll ask you a question about that one. So if you took away all the moose, mule deer, elk, antelope from the outfitters what would we do with species that aren't on draw.

Increase Whitetail to 400-500 allocations per zone where 5000 residents currently hunt ?What are whitetail allocation presently? Why would it change?

Elk to a couple hundred allocations where it's currently over the countersame as above

What about sheep, non draw zones bumped up to 30-40 allocations ? same as above

Bears ? Some outfitter areas in Saskatchewan are only 4 townships and have 30 bear allocations. That means almost all of the WMUs in the 300's and 500's should have 500+ allocations per WMU. I didn't know Saskatchewan was involved, sorry

Are you good with shifting the pressure onto other animals to reduce the draw times by 6-10% possibly ?

Or do you want everything else to stay the same, just change for your benefit ?
...
Reply With Quote
  #123  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:52 PM
Torkdiesel's Avatar
Torkdiesel Torkdiesel is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North of the Kakwa
Posts: 3,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deerguy View Post
Could the trophy quality handle that many new allocations? Most outfitters but a 130 minimum on their deer harvest.

And why would outfitters get more? They would still be held to their 10% maximum, just now it would be for non draw species.
I'm not sure if all zones could handle it, outfitter success rates are historically a lot higher then residents.

So you would take away 50% of the allocations and give the outfitters nothing in return ?

And what would the 10% be of ? OTC zones see huge fluctuations in game numbers killed. Also most aren't tracked accurately

The Saskatchewan comment was because many people have said they would love Alberta to follow suite.
Reply With Quote
  #124  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:54 PM
huntwat huntwat is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11 View Post




You can live in the wmu without being a farmer or rancher, and without being affected by the game, so simply having your legal address in a certain wmu. should not give you any priority in that wmu.
You have to own a minimum amount of land to get a landowner tag. Or be an employee named by the landowner to use his/her tag. Or family.

So a renter, or an acreage owner is not eligible.
Reply With Quote
  #125  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:56 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntwat View Post
You have to own a minimum amount of land to get a landowner tag. Or be an employee named by the landowner to use his/her tag. Or family.
How many guys actually harvest the deer on their own land named when they obtain the tag? I know of many who use a landowner tag to hunt in the entire WMU And don't even think twice about it.

LC
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #126  
Old 01-03-2016, 09:58 PM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,825
Default

Quote:
So you would take away 50% of the allocations and give the outfitters nothing in return ?
Why should outfitters get anything in return? Resident hunters now have to draw tags where we could purchase over the counter tags, only a few years ago, and the wait times for some draws have doubled and tripled. The residents have already made sacrifices, now it is the outfitters turn to make some.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
  #127  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:01 PM
huntwat huntwat is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
How many guys actually harvest the deer on their own land named when they obtain the tag? I know of many who use a landowner tag to hunt in the entire WMU And don't even think twice about it.

LC
Yes, it is abused. Maybe if it was just antlerless tags, the ones on their own land would be tasty enough...
Reply With Quote
  #128  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:03 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

The real problem with tag allocation regarding mule deer is the current lack of deer compared to past years reducing the overall numbers of tags.

In 2012, 9588 resident antlered mule deer tags (Draw code 13) were issued from an active pool of 48417 applicants for a success rate of 19.8 (essentially a 5 year wait in average).

There were 1043 landowner tags issued (just under 10% of the total resident tags given out.). Adding those 1043 tags into the draw allocation means 10631 total mule resident tags were given out. Giving the landowner allocation to the draw would have meant a 21.9% success rate, (still pretty close to a 5 year wait). Or in other words in 50 years of applying you would likely be drawn 11 times instead of 10 times.

However, if we go back to 2008, there were 15634 resident mule buck tags given out from 53600 applicants for a 34.9% application success rate,,, or just under a 3 year average wait time (you would likely be drawn be drawn 17 times in 50 years with those odds).

I do not know the number of landowner tags in 2008 but higher tag numbers would statistically reduce the number of land owner tags by a significant margin,.. First off you would have less landowners applying for landowner tags as they now have to be drawn in the first place,,, and conversely as tag allocations are reduced, the number of landowners applying for land owner tags will increase as wait times become longer.
Reply With Quote
  #129  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:05 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
How many guys actually harvest the deer on their own land named when they obtain the tag? I know of many who use a landowner tag to hunt in the entire WMU And don't even think twice about it.

LC
And all non land owning resident hunters only hunt on land they have permission to hunt on?

I know lots of resident hunters who don't think twice about hunting without permission as well!!!
Reply With Quote
  #130  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:12 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deerguy View Post
The landowner tags are there so they can shoot problem deer, not trophy hunt. You could essentially grow 180" mule deer every year and never need a draw tag.
So how many actually do shoot 180" deer every year?

And if you want to pick nits, where do the biggest bucks typically hang out during the summer and early fall? We see far more mature backs "living" in our unharvested canola and pea field than does with fawns!
Reply With Quote
  #131  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:15 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
And all non land owning resident hunters only hunt on land they have permission to hunt on?

I know lots of resident hunters who don't think twice about hunting without permission as well!!!
That goes without saying, but two wrongs don't make a right

Both parties are equally to blame for skirting the rules if you get down to the nuts and bolts.

LC
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #132  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:17 PM
Torkdiesel's Avatar
Torkdiesel Torkdiesel is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North of the Kakwa
Posts: 3,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by elkhunter11 View Post
Why should outfitters get anything in return? Resident hunters now have to draw tags where we could purchase over the counter tags, only a few years ago, and the wait times for some draws have doubled and tripled. The residents have already made sacrifices, now it is the outfitters turn to make some.
Eliminate 50% of a 100 year old industry and give the business owners nothing ?

That doesn't sit well with me, sounds like a chapter from the NDP playbook
Reply With Quote
  #133  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:19 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntwat View Post
You have to own a minimum amount of land to get a landowner tag. Or be an employee named by the landowner to use his/her tag. Or family.

So a renter, or an acreage owner is not eligible.
Just a point of clarification, the landowner may pass his allocation on to the farming renter if the property qualifies.
Reply With Quote
  #134  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:23 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
That goes without saying, but two wrongs don't make a right

Both parties are equally to blame for skirting the rules if you get down to the nuts and bolts.

LC
Exactly, but if you wish to use the argument that antlered mule deer landowner tags should be disallowed becuz of real and perceived abuses, then I can say we should ban all mule deer tags for the same reason.
Reply With Quote
  #135  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:23 PM
huntwat huntwat is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
Just a point of clarification, the landowner may pass his allocation on to the farming renter if the property qualifies.
Yes, he can. The renter can't directly apply for it.
Also, I believe it doesn't matter if you own one section or a township, your only allowed one tag???
Reply With Quote
  #136  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:25 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
Exactly, but if you wish to use the argument that antlered mule deer landowner tags should be disallowed becuz of real and perceived abuses, then I can say we should ban all mule deer tags for the same reason.
No you are putting words in my mouth...I just mentioned that folks should follow the rules and conditions of the landowner tags, as much as everyone should respect all the other rules.

Never did I say they should be disallowed because of abuse, I was pointing out abuse occurs and it is fairly common place.

LC
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #137  
Old 01-03-2016, 10:30 PM
roper1 roper1 is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Strathmore
Posts: 5,573
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
How many guys actually harvest the deer on their own land named when they obtain the tag? I know of many who use a landowner tag to hunt in the entire WMU And don't even think twice about it.

LC
I know a couple, ( not many), & their success rate is probably average, their success rate on really good deer is negligible at best. Why should the guys who use the landowner tag properly pay for the minority's screw-ups?? What we are describing is better left in the poaching laws IMO.

As an afterthought, when I apply for my landowner tag, I present my county tax bill to F&W.
Reply With Quote
  #138  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:05 PM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntwat View Post
Yes, he can. The renter can't directly apply for it.
Also, I believe it doesn't matter if you own one section or a township, your only allowed one tag???
The renter makes the application with a letter from the landlord authorizing the transfer of his allocation to the renter along proof of ownership (title certificate or tax notice).

Yes, only one landowner tag can be issued to one qualified owner/ employee / farming occupant for all the property concerned. You cannot split the holdings for the purposes of receiving extra tags.
Reply With Quote
  #139  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:10 PM
deerguy deerguy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,718
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkdiesel View Post
Eliminate 50% of a 100 year old industry and give the business owners nothing ?

That doesn't sit well with me, sounds like a chapter from the NDP playbook
Do outfitters have to repurchase their allocations? If so, how often? If not, then the allocations for the majority of outfitters have been paid back ten fold. I understand the frustration, but times have changed. If I need to wait 5 years to draw a tag then someone outside of Alberta should not be able to jump informs of me for a few thousand unless I have that same opportunity.

Also, why could the outfitter not guide people who draw the tag? Lots of places in the US do that, you wait 2-15 years, draw the tag and go with an outfitter.

We could easily get rid of the hunter host program and make it so anyone who does draw a tag and is not an Alberta resident needs to hire an outfitter to hunt.

The outfitter, now with no non res tags for draw animals can offer his services to residents and market with them.
Reply With Quote
  #140  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:24 PM
deerguy deerguy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,718
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntwat View Post
Well this turned into something other than outfitter tags didn't it??
I see lots of good ideas on here.
Since the time is now to contact ESRD, please do. ( They will direct you to the proper people).
My list is going to be:
1. NO tags for non-res for any species that is on a draw.
2. NO Antlered landowner tags.
3. Throw out the 10% outfitter tags as it will not be needed.
4. Add Sunday hunting to wmu 100's
5. Minimum 223 for deer size or smaller game.
6. Charge for tags as soon as they are drawn.

Arguing on here does nothing. CONTACT ESRD Now.
#1 - No allocations for any species on draw for outfitters
#2 - Abolish the hunter host system, have non residents unable to draw any license with a projected wait time of longer then 5 years with all tags drawn by non residents requiring use of a licensed guide
#3 - Landowner tags only for Antlerless animals with proof that landowner allows hunting by Joe public on his land
#4 - Create a Split draw between general weapons seasons and Archery only seasons.
#5 - increase draw fees to $30 per application, Increase tags fees sans Whitetailed deer/Mule deer to a minimum 5x the current price with the Tag price need to be paid upfront prior to draw.
#6 - Change resident status requirements to a minimum of two years with no period longer then 14 days out of province unless for work
#7 - Do away with online draw system and resort back to mail in draw system with results and information still posted online, require proof of residency every 3 years by proof of valid Alberta government identification
#8 - Turkey and Antelope change to once in a lifetime lottery draw, but maintain priority points as amount of times name entered in draw.
#9 - take away last two weeks of September of general archery season and add a 2 week season at the end of December of Archery only hunting, in zones that are applicable.
#10 - Allow use of "bait" for deer.
Reply With Quote
  #141  
Old 01-03-2016, 11:57 PM
Torkdiesel's Avatar
Torkdiesel Torkdiesel is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: North of the Kakwa
Posts: 3,973
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by deerguy View Post
Do outfitters have to repurchase their allocations? If so, how often? If not, then the allocations for the majority of outfitters have been paid back ten fold. I understand the frustration, but times have changed. If I need to wait 5 years to draw a tag then someone outside of Alberta should not be able to jump informs of me for a few thousand unless I have that same opportunity.

Also, why could the outfitter not guide people who draw the tag? Lots of places in the US do that, you wait 2-15 years, draw the tag and go with an outfitter.

We could easily get rid of the hunter host program and make it so anyone who does draw a tag and is not an Alberta resident needs to hire an outfitter to hunt.

The outfitter, now with no non res tags for draw animals can offer his services to residents and market with them.
***Edit***

I honestly hope that you are not in business for yourself

As for the rest of it, if your opinion reflects what Joe Albertan is thinking these days then God help the guys still outfitting in Alberta. I am so glad I made the move when I did

When a level of greed reaches a point where 90% isn't enough, 100% wouldn't make a difference. You'll just turn on each other then
Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 01-04-2016, 12:01 AM
Ranger CS Ranger CS is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Pincher Creek
Posts: 921
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by huntwat View Post
Well this turned into something other than outfitter tags didn't it??
I see lots of good ideas on here.
Since the time is now to contact ESRD, please do. ( They will direct you to the proper people).
My list is going to be:
1. NO tags for non-res for any species that is on a draw.
2. NO Antlered landowner tags.
3. Throw out the 10% outfitter tags as it will not be needed.
4. Add Sunday hunting to wmu 100's
5. Minimum 223 for deer size or smaller game.
6. Charge for tags as soon as they are drawn

Arguing on here does nothing. CONTACT ESRD Now.
Thank you Huntwat for attempting to get this discussion back to the intent of my initial post. Clearly it is the number of outfitter tags relative to resident tags that concerns me. The whole landowner issue can be discussed on another thread.
I too, strongly encourage individuals to submit their concerns and recommendations to ESRD a.s.a.p. I strongly agree with the proposal that no outfitter tags be available for any species on draw first and foremost.
__________________
Ranger
Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 01-04-2016, 01:10 AM
deerguy deerguy is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,718
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkdiesel View Post
***Edit***

I honestly hope that you are not in business for yourself

As for the rest of it, if your opinion reflects what Joe Albertan is thinking these days then God help the guys still outfitting in Alberta. I am so glad I made the move when I did

When a level of greed reaches a point where 90% isn't enough, 100% wouldn't make a difference. You'll just turn on each other then
It's not really greed, it is my resource. I would be more then happy if I had the opportunity to pay the outfitter every year for a prarie mule deer hunt or antelope hunt, however I can't, so why should someone who does not live in the province get more opportunity then me?

I hope I do not come across as rude, as that is not , my intention
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 01-04-2016, 01:28 AM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

One thing lost in all this noise, is one of the reasons landowner tags were introduced for mule deer bucks was unscrupulous priority builders were applying in zones with few available tags and the high likelihood of not being drawn just to build priority if they didn't want the tag that year. Then when they did want to draw a tag they would switch to zones where their higher priority would pretty much guarantee a tag.

Imagine the frustration of local landowners in these high priority zones now having to wait years to get drawn becuz of these priority building WMU jumpers who had no intention of ever hunting in that zone!

Originally the landowner tags were available on a first come first served basis and capped at 10% of the total tag allocation. Since the number of land owner tags hardly ever reached the 10% cap, the cap in practice was no longer applied and it has only been in the last few years that the 10% allocation has come close to being filled or exceeded in some zones.

Landowner tags still didn't stop the practice of priority building WMU hoppers, so the 999 option was brought in in the early 2000's to allow applicants the chance to build priority and manage their draws without displacing serious applicants who actually wished to be drawn.

At first the 999 option was slow to catch on with the general hunting population as relatively few applicants used it, but it did remove some applicants from the real draw pool for a few years, and along with increasing deer populations meaning higher numbers of available tags, typical wait times for tags was every 2 -4 years.

Eventually, the 999 concept started catching on and more and more hunters started entering the draw just to build priority,. This past season over 24000 antlered mule deer hunters used the 999 option. This practice has encouraged higher participation rates in the draw system and eventually the chickens do come home to roost in the form of large numbers of high priority applicants finally jumping into the draw with many more priority points than what was previously need to get drawn. In other words the guys jumping in with a priority 6 - 8 are now displacing priority 3- 5's which may have gotten drawn in previous years. It's called "priority creep " folks.

Throw in a 50% increase of resident hunters in Alberta since the year 2000 and priority creep can only get worse under the current system.

What has been fairly constant through this time frame is the allocation of the harvest amongst the various user groups, Landowner tags have not exceeded the original 10% allocation (overall) and the same holds true for outfitter and hunter hosted non resident hunters.

Blaming landowner and non res allocations for this priority creep simply doesn't hold water when the real problem is larger numbers of resident applicants and fewer overall tags due to lower deer numbers.

Yes it is time to examine the allocations given to to landowners and non residents to ensure they stay within their allotment,,, and even perhaps the way these allocations are given out,,,, but to eliminate them purely on the "general principles of non land holding residents first and only" will only release a couple thousand tags into a pool already over 70000 strong when you consider all the applicants (including 999) which translates to one more tag in 35 years per resident hunter!!!

Last edited by Pikebreath; 01-04-2016 at 01:48 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 01-04-2016, 01:57 AM
Pikebreath Pikebreath is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,257
Default

[QUOTE=deerguy;3092468#3 - Landowner tags only for Antlerless animals with proof that landowner allows hunting by Joe public on his land
[/QUOTE]

Can I add a "3B"?

Resident hunters can only apply for tags in the white zone WMUs if they have written proof of permission to hunt from a landowner within that particular zone for that particular species!
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 01-04-2016, 04:23 AM
TBark's Avatar
TBark TBark is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Fort Sask, AB
Posts: 4,910
Default

*
Originally Posted by huntwat
Yes, he can. The renter can't directly apply for it.
Also, I believe it doesn't matter if you own one section or a township, your only allowed one tag???

Originally Posted by pikebreath
The renter makes the application with a letter from the landlord authorizing the transfer of his allocation to the renter along proof of ownership (title certificate)

Yes, only one landowner tag can be issued to one qualified owner/ employee / farming occupant for all the property concerned. You cannot split the holdings for the purposes of receiving extra tags.


I was told by F&W one tag can be designated by a landowner for every quarter he / she owns.
Designate to be family, renter, farmhand etc, but they must have been undrawn for that species in that zone.
That can be a lot of tags if many quarters of land are in same persons name.
Tag states species and sesson of course and WMU, but not LSD.
The tag application shows LSD, but not the license nor tag itself.
So any or all tags can be filled in any of the quarters the landowner owns in that WMU.

TBark
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 01-04-2016, 08:07 AM
GFY GFY is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
One thing lost in all this noise, is one of the reasons landowner tags were introduced for mule deer bucks was unscrupulous priority builders were applying in zones with few available tags and the high likelihood of not being drawn just to build priority if they didn't want the tag that year. Then when they did want to draw a tag they would switch to zones where their higher priority would pretty much guarantee a tag.

Imagine the frustration of local landowners in these high priority zones now having to wait years to get drawn becuz of these priority building WMU jumpers who had no intention of ever hunting in that zone!

Originally the landowner tags were available on a first come first served basis and capped at 10% of the total tag allocation. Since the number of land owner tags hardly ever reached the 10% cap, the cap in practice was no longer applied and it has only been in the last few years that the 10% allocation has come close to being filled or exceeded in some zones.

Landowner tags still didn't stop the practice of priority building WMU hoppers, so the 999 option was brought in in the early 2000's to allow applicants the chance to build priority and manage their draws without displacing serious applicants who actually wished to be drawn.

At first the 999 option was slow to catch on with the general hunting population as relatively few applicants used it, but it did remove some applicants from the real draw pool for a few years, and along with increasing deer populations meaning higher numbers of available tags, typical wait times for tags was every 2 -4 years.

Eventually, the 999 concept started catching on and more and more hunters started entering the draw just to build priority,. This past season over 24000 antlered mule deer hunters used the 999 option. This practice has encouraged higher participation rates in the draw system and eventually the chickens do come home to roost in the form of large numbers of high priority applicants finally jumping into the draw with many more priority points than what was previously need to get drawn. In other words the guys jumping in with a priority 6 - 8 are now displacing priority 3- 5's which may have gotten drawn in previous years. It's called "priority creep " folks.

Throw in a 50% increase of resident hunters in Alberta since the year 2000 and priority creep can only get worse under the current system.

What has been fairly constant through this time frame is the allocation of the harvest amongst the various user groups, Landowner tags have not exceeded the original 10% allocation (overall) and the same holds true for outfitter and hunter hosted non resident hunters.

Blaming landowner and non res allocations for this priority creep simply doesn't hold water when the real problem is larger numbers of resident applicants and fewer overall tags due to lower deer numbers.

Yes it is time to examine the allocations given to to landowners and non residents to ensure they stay within their allotment,,, and even perhaps the way these allocations are given out,,,, but to eliminate them purely on the "general principles of non land holding residents first and only" will only release a couple thousand tags into a pool already over 70000 strong when you consider all the applicants (including 999) which translates to one more tag in 35 years per resident hunter!!!
Landowner tags had nothing to do with priority jumpers and 999 . The landowner tag was introduced to open up lands to hunting but imo has had a reverse effect. Per allocations allot of zones are over there 10% and should be lowered to 5% . The real problem is people have pushed for more tags for so long we have a giant shortage of deer . Then add in CWD culls and massive amount of people move here or abusing the system and hunted as a resident even though they just worked here . Then we have had all bow hunters loose there 15% of the harvest do to sed giving out to many tags for years and blaming it on archery hunters so now they are all lumped in to a very small percent of the zones still opened and they are now hunting these zones to death. The whole system in this province is a bust and needs to be revamped.
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 01-04-2016, 08:12 AM
GFY GFY is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pikebreath View Post
Can I add a "3B"?

Resident hunters can only apply for tags in the white zone WMUs if they have written proof of permission to hunt from a landowner within that particular zone for that particular species!
How about land owners can't hunt there own land? Sounds just as ridiculous as your statement . Get over yourself already .
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 01-04-2016, 08:18 AM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

You guys realize that 999 folks wait to build priority and basically pass or defer a tag every time they enter the 999 pool.

What does that do?

It allows people who want to pull a tag with the required priority to pull it. Many folks have 999'd themselves out of one, two or maybe more tags. So a person who 999's for many years has basically stood in a line and allowed other folks to go ahead in front of them. What is wrong with that?

It is better than under the old system where you HAD to pick a zone if you wanted to increase priority. That caused issues because low and behold sometime people would get picked when they knew they couldn't go. Human nature is they didn't want to miss out on a priority point so they would enter a low likelihood of being drawn zone. Instead of not entering at all and keeping the same priority level, there was this little way of growing priority and not being picked by picking low likelihood zones. You can still do it now if you want too....but that's what the 999 code is for.

999 actually helps other lower priorities get drawn. AND when a high priority decides they want to draw instead of growing priority, they deserve to because they waited as long or longer than most. Keep in mind once they draw the priority resets. So those who do not 999 likely pull more tags more often than those who do 999.

Explain what is wrong with that?

It is just "math" more hunters, more "resident" hunters, less tags...tough winters....herd dynamics have changed....culls....etc. have all had a hand in Extended wait times and changing things from "the good old days" when a guy could shoot a moose or a mule deer on a general tag almost province wide.

LC
__________________

Last edited by Lefty-Canuck; 01-04-2016 at 08:36 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 01-04-2016, 08:50 AM
elkhunter11 elkhunter11 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Camrose
Posts: 44,825
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
You guys realize that 999 folks wait to build priority and basically pass or defer a tag every time they enter the 999 pool.

What does that do?

It allows people who want to pull a tag with the required priority to pull it. Many folks have 999'd themselves out of one, two or maybe more tags. So a person who 999's for many years has basically stood in a line and allowed other folks to go ahead in front of them. What is wrong with that?

It is better than under the old system where you HAD to pick a zone if you wanted to increase priority. That caused issues because low and behold sometime people would get picked when they knew they couldn't go. Human nature is they didn't want to miss out on a priority point so they would enter a low likelihood of being drawn zone. Instead of not entering at all and keeping the same priority level, there was this little way of growing priority and not being picked by picking low likelihood zones. You can still do it now if you want too....but that's what the 999 code is for.

999 actually helps other lower priorities get drawn. AND when a high priority decides they want to draw instead of growing priority, they deserve to because they waited as long or longer than most. Keep in mind once they draw the priority resets. So those who do not 999 likely pull more tags more often than those who do 999.

Explain what is wrong with that?

It is just "math" more hunters, more "resident" hunters, less tags...tough winters....herd dynamics have changed....culls....etc. have all had a hand in Extended wait times and changing things from "the good old days" when a guy could shoot a moose or a mule deer on a general tag almost province wide.

LC
Exactly,I have used the 999 option several times when I had more than enough priority points to draw a tag. In the meantime, people with less priority were drawing tags as a result of me choosing 999 instead of drawing tags. I actually draw less tags in a given time period, because I choose to use the 999 option.
__________________
Only accurate guns are interesting.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:27 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.