Why Mandatory Harvest Reports ?

[bluetick]

I am having a hard time swallowing a force fed reporting system ! This is a true license killer .
We all know there a large number of draws placed by and awarded to anti groups or individuals.
This will ensure we are getting false numbers on kill reports causing the biologist to believe the numbers of animals killed are too great ,therefore reducing licenses available in many areas.
I have a feeling this is already occurring and believe it will get worse .
I also believe many reports may be false ,I am not convinced everyone reporting their harvests are being 100 percent honest.

[elkhunter11]

Not to mention the fact, that unless the harvest reports are mandatory for every hunter, they are meaningless. One unregulated hunter could kill a significant percentage of the harvest in a certain wmu, and if it isn't reported, the stats could be skewed significantly.

[alacringa]

Originally Posted by bluetick

We all know there a large number of draws placed by and awarded to anti groups or individuals.

We do!? I don't. Please cite sources for this information, so I can check it out!

Originally Posted by bluetick

I also believe many reports may be false ,I am not convinced everyone reporting their harvests are being 100 percent honest.

What on earth would be the point of this? I just don't understand why anyone would lie on a harvest report.

I'm not convinced that mandatory reporting will be effective, but I don't have a problem with it, personally. I always fill out my harvest reports anyways.

[walking buffalo]

How else will F&W know that Outfitters are not getting short shafted?

[bobalong]

As I have said before nothing but an attempt by the govt. to appear to be doing something. Spend the money do the aerial counts so you have at least somewhat accurate numbers. There can and will be so many inaccuracies and people not even doing these harvest reports they will be completely useless, but the govt. know this.

[ghostguy6]

I'm sure the government will somehow influence the questions to skew the results towards their own agenda's. What better way to get results than make them mandatory.
What will happen if a person does not or refuses to do the survey?

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by ghostguy6

I'm sure the government will somehow influence the questions to skew the results towards their own agenda's. What better way to get results than make them mandatory.
What will happen if a person does not or refuses to do the survey?

Or a person could simply state that they didn't hunt the species to avoid the rest of the questions.

[Byron]

They could easily make it mandatory, have it set up that if all harvest reports aren't completed your not eligiable to apply for draws. Harvest reports will get completed if that became the case.

The only situation where I could see people not completing harvest reports or not doing them accurately would be for people who chose not to submit heads in CWD mandatory zones.

[last minute]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

One unregulated hunter could kill a significant percentage of the harvest in a certain wmu, and if it isn't reported, the stats could be skewed significantly.

Do you mean overtime or per year.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by last minute

Do you mean overtime or per year.

If a person really was opposed to the survey, they could state that they never hunted the species every year. Unless the animals must be registered, how would anyone know any different?

They could easily make it mandatory, have it set up that if all harvest reports aren't completed your not eligiable to apply for draws. Harvest reports will get completed if that became the case.

That would force people to fill them out, but a person could still state that they never hunted that species that year. I have purchased licenses in the past, and due to work or health reasons, I never got to hunt that species.

[normanrd]

Harvest reporting is absolutely meaningless for use in wildlife management unless all shareholders are bound to report. This means Native and Metis need to be reporting. Then some real meaningful management decisions can be made. Until this happens, reporting is a waste of time and money, analyzing and collecting incomplete data

Jmo,

Norm

[Byron]

Yes this is true but the first question they ask in the survey was did you hunt this species/tag if you answer no then the survey is over.

I liked the incentive to be in a lottery draw for a tag like they've done in the past, but this shouldn't be necessary.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by normanrd

harvest reporting is absolutely meaningless for use in wildlife management unless all shareholders are bound to report. This means native and metis need to be reporting. Then some real meaningful management decisions can be made. Until this happens, reporting is a waste of time and money, analyzing and collecting incomplete data

jmo,

norm

exactly

[KyleSS]

I know a lot of the counties in different states have check in stations. This type of check in station, if made applicable to all hunting groups, would be the best source of data collection. They could even go as far as pulling an incisor tooth to preform age testing.

I do understand this would take a huge increase of man power on the government side of things as registering a sheep can take days or weeks sometimes. This would be the only way to get a honest grasp on harvest.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by KyleSS

I know a lot of the counties in different states have check in stations. This type of check in station, if made applicable to all hunting groups, would be the best source of data collection. They could even go as far as pulling an incisor tooth to preform age testing.

I do understand this would take a huge increase of man power on the government side of things as registering a sheep can take days or weeks sometimes. This would be the only way to get a honest grasp on harvest.

And that would only work if all hunters, including the non regulated hunters, were forced to participate.

[KyleSS]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

And that would only work if all hunters, including the non regulated hunters, were forced to participate.

yupp......that's why I said "if made applicable to all hunting groups"

[charves]

I think this has to start somewhere.

The more annual data that can be collected, the more easily trends can be identified and accounting for false reporting can be more easily addressed and compensated for.

We are so lucky to have the amount of species and variety of hunting we have.....and to keep it that way, data collecting is even more important.

At least it's an attempt to do something that is trying to make hunting better and monitoring harvest as best possible in Alberta.

If the regs stated that the government has passed a policy that it will NEVER do harvest reports for anyone hunting in Alberta, there'd be mass complaints of how the government is contributing to the decimation of animal numbers and our hunting opportunities.

So in my opinion, it's a choice contribute to the system or not, but if not...then no complaining.

Same idea as this: If you don't vote in an election, then you can't complain about the government.

The monitoring system isn't perfect and likely never will be, but we should all be pressuring each other to contribute to make it the best it can be.

If we don't try.....then nothing will change!

[normanrd]

Originally Posted by charves

I think this has to start somewhere.

The more annual data that can be collected, the more easily trends can be identified and accounting for false reporting can be more easily addressed and compensated for.

We are so lucky to have the amount of species and variety of hunting we have.....and to keep it that way, data collecting is even more important.

At least it's an attempt to do something that is trying to make hunting better and monitoring harvest as best possible in Alberta.

If the regs stated that the government has passed a policy that it will NEVER do harvest reports for anyone hunting in Alberta, there'd be mass complaints of how the government is contributing to the decimation of animal numbers and our hunting opportunities.

So in my opinion, it's a choice contribute to the system or not, but if not...then no complaining.

Same idea as this: If you don't vote in an election, then you can't complain about the government.

The monitoring system isn't perfect and likely never will be, but we should all be pressuring each other to contribute to make it the best it can be.

If we don't try.....then nothing will change!

If we make decisions based on mis- representative and generally poor data, the results will be poor and mis-representative as well. We dont need to do just "something" we need to do the "right" thing. Just doing "something" is a symptom of society, and usually results in a less than satisfactory result. Case in point - politics in general, lol. As I said before, reporting by 1 user group only is waste of time and resources. Legislate a broad reporting requirement for all user groups, despite the screaming and crying, and then make decisions based on that data. At least they will be representative and based on a viable data set and actually benefit the game management system.

Jmo,

Norm

[bmac]

Like walking buffalo stated,it’s all for the SRD to find out how many animals are harvested by resident hunters so they can juggle the tags around so APOS can keep 10 percent of the harvest. And until the indidginous people have to register their harvest,the exercise is absolutely pointless.
It is all about blaming everything on the resident hunters

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by normanrd

If we make decisions based on mis- representative and generally poor data, the results will be poor and mis-representative as well. We dont need to do just "something" we need to do the "right" thing. Just doing "something" is a symptom of society, and usually results in a less than satisfactory result. Case in point - politics in general, lol. As I said before, reporting by 1 user group only is waste of time and resources. Legislate a broad reporting requirement for all user groups, despite the screaming and crying, and then make decisions based on that data. At least they will be representative and based on a viable data set and actually benefit the game management system.

Jmo,

Norm

Abso-freaking-lutely well said.

Like has been discussed, bad data is bad data...incomplete data is bad data...skewed data is bad data...false data is bad data.

All stakeholders need to be held to the same standards...

LC

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by charves

I think this has to start somewhere.

The more annual data that can be collected, the more easily trends can be identified and accounting for false reporting can be more easily addressed and compensated for.

We are so lucky to have the amount of species and variety of hunting we have.....and to keep it that way, data collecting is even more important.

At least it's an attempt to do something that is trying to make hunting better and monitoring harvest as best possible in Alberta.

If the regs stated that the government has passed a policy that it will NEVER do harvest reports for anyone hunting in Alberta, there'd be mass complaints of how the government is contributing to the decimation of animal numbers and our hunting opportunities.

So in my opinion, it's a choice contribute to the system or not, but if not...then no complaining.

Same idea as this: If you don't vote in an election, then you can't complain about the government.

The monitoring system isn't perfect and likely never will be, but we should all be pressuring each other to contribute to make it the best it can be.

If we don't try.....then nothing will change!

OR they could just do aerial counts..........you know like they should be doing. I am not sure how many surveys, reports etc. you are familiar with but when has the govt. even once actually listened to what hunters are trying to tell them. This is nothing but another "feel good" idea that has nothing to do with helping hunters or the wildlife in this province.
I am not suggesting to anyone not to contribute, do so if you like but don't be upset when basically nothing comes of it.

[elkchaser]

1 if the biologists are doing there job we shouldn’t have too !
2. Why don’t that police people that put in for draws but never by tags !
3 . What if you don’t actually have a computer . I buy my tags at the counter and only have a IPAD NEVER BEEN ABLE TO COMPLETE ONE IN YEARS .

[Xbolt7mm]

How could anyone possibly think that a mandatory harvest report could be a bad thing😳. Yes, all harvesters should report and not just the licenced hunters. Could there possibly be a better system to manage populations? I would gladly participate in this

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

How could anyone possibly think that a mandatory harvest report could be a bad thing😳. Yes, all harvesters should report and not just the licenced hunters. Could there possibly be a better system to manage populations? I would gladly participate in this

It’s not bad...but if it’s incomplete, and the data can be skewed by leaving a major stakeholder out is it good?

LC

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

How could anyone possibly think that a mandatory harvest report could be a bad thing😳. Yes, all harvesters should report and not just the licenced hunters. Could there possibly be a better system to manage populations? I would gladly participate in this

Good luck gett9ng all harvesters to participate.

[R3illy]

Really?!?!? If so and so doesnt report theirs then why should I????

This is such a petty kindergarten type of response.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Really?!?!? If so and so doesnt report theirs then why should I????

This is such a petty kindergarten type of response.

One unregulated hunter could kill five or ten animals, which could be enough to make the results of a study based on the harvest reports worthless. I worked with several unregulated hunters that killed several moose each every year, as many as fifteen or twenty regulated hunters would kill in a year.

[58thecat]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

And that would only work if all hunters, including the non regulated hunters, were forced to participate.

But that ain't going to happen so a incomplete survey that will spit out inaccuracies.

Hmmmm

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by 58thecat

But that ain't going to happen so a incomplete survey that will spit out inaccuracies.

Hmmmm

That could happen, if everyone was truly interested in proper game managed for future generations, but everyone isn't interested in proper game management, so some people will refuse to take part, and will be exempted from any regulation requiring mandatory harvest reports.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by R3illy

Really?!?!? If so and so doesnt report theirs then why should I????

This is such a petty kindergarten type of response.

Read post 11 and maybe you'll understand.

I agree it is a petty kindergarten move that so and so won't agree to fill out a harvest report. Do you know how many hundreds or even thousands of moose so and so's kill every year?

Me either, but it's not just 10 or 20 it's hundreds, or more likely thousands. Don't you think that would be a just little helpful information in order to get a remotely accurate count?

Seriously???