The Future Of Hunting In Alberta

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by albertadave

Outfitters are already operating south of Hwy.1 They're guiding resident sheep hunters. Lots of them.

I'm curious why you say that a draw would result in non-resident allocations being opened up for south of Hwy 1. That's the first of heard of that. Can you elaborate?

There's two directors on the WSFA website that mention ties to sheep outfitting. One comes from an outfitting family, and his only involvement is to help guide a hunt or two every year. The other is an actual outfitter, but I know for a fact that he has no sheep allocations, so he would not benefit from a sheep draw. With that said, again, I'm curious why you keep saying that WSFA is pushing for a draw. Do you have anything to substantiate that? Or is it just your own theory?

Read Post 15. These are all the things that are being talked about in the meetings and he said WSFA is pushing for draws and that outfitter allocations south of highway 1 are all on the table in the meetings.

[albertadave]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

Read Post 15. These are all the things that are being talked about in the meetings and he said WSFA is pushing for draws and that outfitter allocations south of highway 1 are all on the table in the meetings.

What "meetings" are you talking about?
Post 15, Ram94 referred to a resolution put forward by one of the F&G clubs proposing sheep go on draw. I believe he's correct, and that I saw the same thing. It actually happens just about every year. But that has nothing to do with WSFA. AFGA and WSFA are two completely separate organizations.

[walking buffalo]

The potential for outfitters being able to hold allocations south of the Bow has to do with the Wildlife Allocation policy discussions, not the Sheep management discussions.

Putting sheep on a draw will reduce Resident harvest and Outfitter allocations.
I recall the "old" number mentioned for a draw was 150 resident licences, 30 for outfitters (20%).

This would immediately put sheep into the "Maybe once in 4-5 Lifetimes" draw category for Residents.
60,000-100,000 applicants, 150 tags.

[NCC]

The only way I would support sheep going on draw is if that means that trophy sheep are no longer available to subsistence hunters because the population cannot support an unregulated hunt.

If it goes on draw as is, the exact same thing will happen to the rest of the province that has already happen in 446 and 438. Any rams that survive long enough to get big will be targeted and killed by subsistence hunters.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by NCC

The only way I would support sheep going on draw is if that means that trophy sheep are no longer available to subsistence hunters because the population cannot support an unregulated hunt.

If it goes on draw as is, the exact same thing will happen to the rest of the province that has already happen in 446 and 438. Any rams that survive long enough to get big will be targeted and killed by subsistence hunters.

LOL. So all problems in your view are fixed by removing first nations rights?

[Ram94]

Originally Posted by R3illy

LOL. So all problems in your view are fixed by removing first nations rights?

I believe he’s saying that putting sheep on a draw but leaving them open for unregulated slaughter is counter productive. From what I gather.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by Ram94

I believe he’s saying that putting sheep on a draw but leaving them open for unregulated slaughter is counter productive. From what I gather.

he said any rams that get big get targetted by sustinence hunters. He placed all the blame on one cause. Seems overly simplified if you ask me.

[Savage3006]

The people who hunt are already hunting. I dont see a significant rise in guns and bows out there.

I wonder what this place would look like if the same conservation attitude was applied to resource extraction as game extraction...

[Ram94]

Originally Posted by Savage3006

The people who hunt are already hunting. I dont see a significant rise in guns and bows out there.



I wonder what this place would look like if the same conservation attitude was applied to resource extraction as game extraction...

You’re right, they are “hunting”. Now there are many more people out “harvesting”. There’s a big difference that lies in regulations that protect wildlife populations and manage hunter opportunity.

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by Savage3006

The people who hunt are already hunting. I dont see a significant rise in guns and bows out there.

I wonder what this place would look like if the same conservation attitude was applied to resource extraction as game extraction...

Might not see a significant rise in bows and guns
But there is definitely a rise in animals harvested

It’s a shame that a healthy ungulate population, conservation and equality among sportsmen gets put on the back burner

[NCC]

Originally Posted by R3illy

LOL. So all problems in your view are fixed by removing first nations rights?

The problem is that some people think there are more hunters than mature rams. If that’s the case, putting sheep on draw only makes sense if the unregulated hunting is also stopped. Have you been to 446? What do you think happens to the rest of the rams that aren’t killed by the 6 tag holders?

If the population is threatened Or vulnerable to the point where it needs to be put on draw, why bother if the subsistence hunters are Still allowed uncontrolled hunting? As I understand the treaty, the government is well within its rights to limit First Nation hunting in order to protect vulnerable populations.

Are you denying that some “subsistence” hunters are strictly hunting for horns and antlers? How is driving past 1000 mule deer does to shoot a ram in a coal mine considered subsistence hunting?

[R3illy]

It seems you've pin pointed the issue and have the only solution that makes sense. Treaty hunters are the problem.

With that in mind I'll ask you a question. Why are they blamed for everything here? Their the reason animal numbers are low. Their the reason people dont want to fill their harvest surveys. Their the problems at CFB wainwright or suffield.

Every thread treaty hunters are the problem. Maybe that's the case with this(I dunno) but I'll point out it sure seems like an easy cop out that people like to jump on.

Eventually as hunters keep blaming first nations for everything when there is an actual issue that needs to get addressed it will get lost in all the other whining.

[ram crazy]

There are easy solutions to fix the problem.
1. They have to follow the same seasons as everyone else.
2. Only harvest non-trophy animals in areas that are over populated.
3. Make it a mandatory registration of all animals that are harvested by them and cut up all horns and antlers when registration takes place.
4. They are only allowed to hunt on reserve lands when all seasons are closed for that species.

[last minute]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

There are easy solutions to fix the problem.
1. They have to follow the same seasons as everyone else.
2. Only harvest non-trophy animals in areas that are over populated.
3. Make it a mandatory registration of all animals that are harvested by them and cut up all horns and antlers when registration takes place.
4. They are only allowed to hunt on reserve lands when all seasons are closed for that species.

I like number three except for cutting all antlers and horns
I'm not a horn guy but no way in hell cut up God's creation.

As for 1, 2 and 4 someone said a no-fly zone in this thread or somewhere else I have to agree. I believe number three would work for "everybody" you never going to know unless you try

[Ronaround]

Hey just give them all Casinos and smokes,Booze tax free to sell to the rest, and they can all eat Angus steaks instead. As we do in the States.

[ram crazy]

Ah, #3 if you cut the horns up you would stop the hunting for trophy because remember it's supposed to be about sustanance!! As far as the rest of my purposals, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that 95% don't even know a thing about their heritage. It's time to get with the times. Now let's see who does the whining!!

[last minute]

[QUOTE=ram I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that 95% don't even know a thing about their heritage. It's time to get with the times. Now let's see who does the whining!![/QUOTE] I get it it's easier to criticize I'm guessing you're just trolling for a fight well good luck with that

[zabbo]

Originally Posted by Ronaround

x 100

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by last minute

I get it it's easier to criticize I'm guessing you're just trolling for a fight well good luck with that

I'm not trolling at all, sometimes the truth hurts!

[last minute]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

I'm not trolling at all, sometimes the truth hurts!

So that limb you're on you said"
95% "is there any statistics for this percentage.??????

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

Ah, #3 if you cut the horns up you would stop the hunting for trophy because remember it's supposed to be about sustanance!! As far as the rest of my purposals, I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that 95% don't even know a thing about their heritage. It's time to get with the times. Now let's see who does the whining!!

As you're not trolling,

You are highlighting your ignorance.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

As you're not trolling,

You are highlighting your ignorance.

How many use traditional hunting methods?

[NCC]

[QUOTE=R3illy;4075557]It seems you've pin pointed the issue and have the only solution that makes sense. Treaty hunters are the problem.

With that in mind I'll ask you a question. Why are they blamed for everything here? Their the reason animal numbers are low. Their the reason people dont want to fill their harvest surveys. Their the problems at CFB wainwright or suffield.

Every thread treaty hunters are the problem. Maybe that's the case with this(I dunno) but I'll point out it sure seems like an easy cop out that people like to jump on.

Eventually as hunters keep blaming first nations for everything when there is an actual issue that needs to get addressed it will get lost in all the other whining.[/QUOTE

Putting one group of hunters on draw because the ram population is under duress while allowing another group to continue to kill whatever, whenever they want makes no sense. If you can explain where all of the mature rams from 446 went, I’d like to hear it. I’d also like to hear your justification for driving by a cow elk to kill a trophy ram and how that meets the definition of subsistence hunting; call trophy hunting what it is, regardless of who pulls the trigger.

I’d also love to hear your explanation for what happened to all of the moose in Manitoba while they’re thriving on private land in Alberta. Anyone who believes that completely unregulated hunting is sustainable with modern weapons and transportation is, in my opinion, a fool. This isn’t Native bashing, it’s a reality check.

[DerekVTX]

Leave the Natives alone. A deal is a deal. The Aboriginal people that were here signed the treaties so that their descendants could still live off the land as they were. Deal is a deal.

Outfitters.....get a real job. Instead of Outfitter getting a bunch of licenses for their American clients, any outsiders should have to apply to get tags to hunt in alberta, and if they don't have a friend that hunts in AB, then they can find someone that will help them for a fee....but they should be responsible to apply for their own tags and not have priority over Albertan people.

And you people buy a Poppie

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by DerekVTX

Leave the Natives alone. A deal is a deal. The Aboriginal people that were here signed the treaties so that their descendants could still live off the land as they were. Deal is a deal.

Outfitters.....get a real job. Instead of Outfitter getting a bunch of licenses for their American clients, any outsiders should have to apply to get tags to hunt in alberta, and if they don't have a friend that hunts in AB, then they can find someone that will help them for a fee....but they should be responsible to apply for their own tags and not have priority over Albertan people.

And you people buy a Poppie

Were Métis a part of that deal? Maybe French people should be included as well?

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by DerekVTX

Leave the Natives alone. A deal is a deal. The Aboriginal people that were here signed the treaties so that their descendants could still live off the land as they were. Deal is a deal

Then use primative ways then if a deals a deal. That means any means of transportation and weaponry that should work!

[cody j]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Were Métis a part of that deal? Maybe French people should be included as well?

I would assume the the French were in Canada before the Metis, so yes I guess

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by cody j

I would assume the the French were in Canada before the Metis, so yes I guess

I mean, it’s only fare fight?

[last minute]

Originally Posted by last minute

So that limb you're on you said"
95% "is there any statistics for this percentage.??????

Ram crazy did you find any of those statistics for that 95% you stated still waiting.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by DerekVTX

Leave the Natives alone. A deal is a deal. The Aboriginal people that were here signed the treaties so that their descendants could still live off the land as they were. Deal is a deal.

Outfitters.....get a real job. Instead of Outfitter getting a bunch of licenses for their American clients, any outsiders should have to apply to get tags to hunt in alberta, and if they don't have a friend that hunts in AB, then they can find someone that will help them for a fee....but they should be responsible to apply for their own tags and not have priority over Albertan people.

And you people buy a Poppie

How many descendants are living off of the land as their forefathers did? Their forefathers didn't have 4x4 trucks, atvs, scoped rifles, laser rangefinders etc. Their forefathers didn't drive hundreds of miles to spend a weekend trying to shoot a trophy bull or ram, so that they could brag to their friends, and post pictures on Facebook. Their forefathers didn't live in homes with running water, central heat and electricity, and they didn't watch television, surf the net, and order their hunting gear online. As to the deal, read the terms of the treaties, the deal might not be what you think it is.

As for outfitters, they are selling the opportunities that should be enjoyed by our tax paying residents, but they are actually closer to living off the land than the unregulated hunters, because they actually make part of their living because of hunting.

The fact is, that opportunity for resident hunters will continue to dwindle, as the outfitters and the unregulated hunters try to save more opportunity for themselves, at the expense of resident hunters.