Non-resident allocation too high

[bearvalley]

I think some believe that habitat and wildlife would be better off if resident hunters and guide outfitters were not "in this together" in the way that the "trophy" hunting industry is weighing us down in our efforts. I am quite certain that there are other user groups and stakeholders that would allow us to be looked upon with a more favourable light if we were partnered with them. Public opinion holds a lot of weight these days, and the outfitting industry is severely tainted. Resident hunters are bringing far more to the table than guide outfitters, then throw in the allocation percentages, and it would seem that we are getting the short end of a very long stick regardless of what shape our animal populations are in. All this of course is in my humble opinion.

You know Troy, the more this dividing and weakening of hunters goes on the more I truly believe that there is a hidden agenda by some.
A good example to base my thoughts on is what has gone on in the US with a former Wildlife Director now being the CEO of a wolf hugger group.
Can you honestly tell me that the group you are part of really supports hunting?
All 50,000 plus members.
I have to laugh at the questioning and scrutiny that is being put on the fact that an MOU was signed by groups to move forward on wildlife issues.
I know this thread is on allocation but since it was started by Langegger and he was the one that questioned the signing of the MOU it makes a guy wonder.
I'm thinking maybe the guys that take our privilege to hunt in this province serious and want it to continue should rally together, flush the toilet full of past agendas and start a real organization to represent ALL HUNTERS IN BC.
I wonder if Glaicar might be the man to get it up and running with a bit of help.
An interesting thought.

[Wild one]

You know Troy, the more this dividing and weakening of hunters goes on the more I truly believe that there is a hidden agenda by some.
A good example to base my thoughts on is what has gone on in the US with a former Wildlife Director now being the CEO of a wolf hugger group.
Can you honestly tell me that the group you are part of really supports hunting?
All 50,000 plus members.
I have to laugh at the questioning and scrutiny that is being put on the fact that an MOU was signed by groups to move forward on wildlife issues.
I know this thread is on allocation but since it was started by Langegger and he was the one that questioned the signing of the MOU it makes a guy wonder.
I'm thinking maybe the guys that take our privilege to hunt in this province serious and want it to continue should rally together, flush the toilet full of past agendas and start a real organization to represent ALL HUNTERS IN BC.
I wonder if Glaicar might be the man to get it up and running with a bit of help.
An interesting thought.

This has my attention and know many others it would as well

[Fisher-Dude]

Definitely not going after the guide outfitters with that scenario, they could still guide hunters for species that are NOT on LEH, like spike fork moose, black bear, wolf, mule deer, white tail deer, elk, well you get the idea. And this still provides opportunity for guided hunts!! What the idea does address is resident priority as resident hunters would get 'first dibs' until game populations had recovered enough to return to allocating some of those species to outfitters.

Which game species in BC are declining because of hunting?

[LBM]

Which game species in BC are declining because of hunting?

It would have to be broken down further to region and MU but hunting has a contributing factor in
the decline of some species.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

Normally I would agree and support your comment. However, ask where was it back in 2007 and beyond when the BC commercial hunting industry split the hunting community by acting in bad faith and reneging on the 2007 wildlife allocation policy they agreed to.

Their priority then was clearly to lobby gov't and shift a greater % of resident allocation to non-residents against policy agreements, and splitting the hunting community was of NO concern to many GO's to meet this objective. Now that residents are questioning wildlife allocation decisions between residents and non-residents put in place by the past gov't this is?

I am pretty sure you dodged the whole question! What have you done lately for wildlife? .........that's what I thought.

[Whonnock Boy]

Honestly, why is it so hard to believe that people may actually think that a relationship with guide outfitters is not in the best interest of resident hunters or wildlife and habitat? I'm just thinking out loud here, no hidden agendas, and I'm certainly not going to join a wolf hugger group. That there is pretty funny.

Does the the membership of the BCWF really support hunting? We could probably have a pretty good discussion about whether they do or not. Coming up with a definitive answer would be difficult.

Flush the toilet? That lever has already been pulled, and just a few more need to go for a ride down the whirlpool.

That said, my opinion and comments are those of mine, and mine only. I don't speak on behalf of my club, region, or the entire BCWF. I encourage the membership of all organizations to voice their concerns and opinions openly and transparently.

You know Troy, the more this dividing and weakening of hunters goes on the more I truly believe that there is a hidden agenda by some.
A good example to base my thoughts on is what has gone on in the US with a former Wildlife Director now being the CEO of a wolf hugger group.
Can you honestly tell me that the group you are part of really supports hunting?
All 50,000 plus members.
I have to laugh at the questioning and scrutiny that is being put on the fact that an MOU was signed by groups to move forward on wildlife issues.
I know this thread is on allocation but since it was started by Langegger and he was the one that questioned the signing of the MOU it makes a guy wonder.
I'm thinking maybe the guys that take our privilege to hunt in this province serious and want it to continue should rally together, flush the toilet full of past agendas and start a real organization to represent ALL HUNTERS IN BC.
I wonder if Glaicar might be the man to get it up and running with a bit of help.
An interesting thought.

[LBM]

I am pretty sure you dodged the whole question! What have you done lately for wildlife? .........that's what I thought.

Im just curious and not really my place to ask since your question was to some one else but what have you done for wildlife lately?

[kebes]

You know Troy, the more this dividing and weakening of hunters goes on the more I truly believe that there is a hidden agenda by some.
A good example to base my thoughts on is what has gone on in the US with a former Wildlife Director now being the CEO of a wolf hugger group.
Can you honestly tell me that the group you are part of really supports hunting?
All 50,000 plus members.
I have to laugh at the questioning and scrutiny that is being put on the fact that an MOU was signed by groups to move forward on wildlife issues.
I know this thread is on allocation but since it was started by Langegger and he was the one that questioned the signing of the MOU it makes a guy wonder.
I'm thinking maybe the guys that take our privilege to hunt in this province serious and want it to continue should rally together, flush the toilet full of past agendas and start a real organization to represent ALL HUNTERS IN BC.
I wonder if Glaicar might be the man to get it up and running with a bit of help.
An interesting thought.

I think most of us would love to see everyone pulling on the same rope. That doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of resident hunters that are miffed - to say the least - about GOABC's antics in regard to allocation (and if it doesn't matter now why did it matter two years ago). Once again, the point stands... allocation and wildlife enhancement are two separate issues. Enhancement is more important (as far as I'm concerned) but that doesn't mean allocation is unimportant.

[srupp]

Im just curious and not really my place since your question was to some one else but what have you done for wildlife lately?

Lol..that's the funniest ones ever..
Hmmmm spend 12 months each year preparing for spring fall..raising, vetting, training his canines to predator hunt..removing bears, lynx, cougars that prey on the deer, moose, caribou, goat..coming in as a predator specialist in his region..
Trapping predators..in that "free time"...helping resident hunters out time after time with his knowledge, skills and precious little free time.
Sitting on boards trying to make this whole hunting situation better for all..not just a few..
Hosting Wounded Warriors hunting preditors"
Chilcotin has the same 24 hours in his day as do we how he a comp is he's it? Hard work..long days...short nite. .
Oh recently he picked up a ax, shovel and organized the community volinteer and worked like HELL saving a large piece of BC..than wildlife call home...unfortunately you picked the wrong example..Doug leads by example..try and keep up..good luck.
Doug is not a bragger nor a talker..he is however a doer...
What hasn't he and his family done for wildlife?

C H" doesn't need my help, nor anyone's. .but with a home, family, buissnes, and all the above mentioned daily commitments. .thought I would help you with some facts..
Cheers
Srupp

[btridge]

Gilson, as a partner in a GO'ing business your self proclamation of getting the big picture is questionable. Although I do admire your tenacity and effort to distract from the allocation issue at hand that's harming residents, trying to confuse the issue by posting your rhetoric and attacks?

The big picture is a host of issues that residents clearly get and see viewing the many posts. Yes, building more wildlife, habitat, and increased funding are a big part of that, and was the overriding principle behind the establishment of the 2007 Wildlife Allocation Policy (review post #43). I again ask who was the group responsible for that falling flat on its face, only to focus on shifting a greater portion of resident allocation to non-residents?

Funny how that works from the GO's perspective, building more wildlife was of low priority and gaining increase non-resident allocation % was the top of the list. Now that GO's successfully lobbied gov't and set at 25% and 40% minimum share wildlife guarantees (unheard of in any North American jurisdiction) GO's like yourself try to distract from this harsh reality and injustice, knowing this is only policy and can change with the stroke of a pen.

This post was started to discuss wildlife allocation and a series of increased restrictions proposed on residents because of it. If you wish to discuss wildlife funding, habitat,... all credible topics please start another post and stop trying to change the topic of this one.

Your "entitlement" comment and many others you've posted on this forum clearly paint the picture of who those are that feel that way, take a look in the mirror with your counterparts, and reflect on your own quote "NEVER DO THEY ADMIT THEY MIGHT BE PART OF THE PROBLEM".

Our wildlife is public common property to be shared, not privatized to cater exclusively to the rich and influential! With current non-resident allocations guaranteed at 25% - 40% (pending on species), removed right out of the hands of public and into the hands of private enterprise. Is that the big picture you see Gilson, possibly further expansion on those %. If that's your big picture idea residents will make every effort to prevent it from getting painted so that our wildlife can be enjoyed by future generation of average working class British Columbians. If from your perspective this is considered "entitlement", then I guess your right, and will continue to fight for resident priority, resident access, resident opportunity, building more wildlife for all users, habitat protection, improved funding....

My personal opinion.

An opinion that many resident hunters support, me included.