Most recent allocation propaganda

[Fisher-Dude]

Everybody, and I mean everybody, that gets this email from Ethier needs to respond to it.

I believe it's simply a fishing expedition by Steve and Christy to see where public sentiment is.

If there are no responses, they'll assume it has died down.

Respond now. Tell them you're just getting started on this fight and that the Thomson Gift is not acceptable to you nor your friends and family.

[2chodi]

Interesting that it is a letter from a bureaucrat that renews the discussion of this topic. Tom Ethier was the principal bureaucrat from Victoria that was involved in the discussions that led to the 2007 allocation policy. There were many broken promises over the next five years and he is all too familiar with what a fiasco this has turned into.

Here is just one example:

Tom when we last met in Vancouver in January the message that we felt we could not trust ministry staff was loud and clear. Your decison on stone sheep in region 7b is a perfect example why those of us who have been around for awhile have no faith in the integrity of ministry staff. resident hunters have been screwed on stone sheep allocaton for 15 years in 7b. the federation has brought it to your personal attention and to the personal attention of Al Martin several times over the last 2 1/2 years as we renegotiated the allocation policy. You refused to believe us, so I am assuming you either have no respect for us or you guys just give a damn about resident hunters. Personally I am begiining to believe its some of both. In talking with local outfitters the last couple of days it is clear that you and Andy had already made the decision and told the outfitters their new quota's before we had the meeting in Vancouver.

One of the first things that Al Martin said when we started negotiations was that the new policy was going to be transparent and fair. Unfortunately we forgot bull shit is not transparent. rich petersen

And the reply:

Hi Rich,


The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. The collective guide quota is being reduced and after this 5 year transition period the new allocation split will be fully applied. A tentative quota was provided to the guides the week of January 20th. At the January 12th meeting I assumed status quo for this hunt was correct.


The direction in this allocation decision is in favour of the residents. We made a decision that for these next 5 years the changes would not cause undue economic hardship. After the 5 years we move to full implementation.


I will counter your assertion that there is a lack of transparency. By being transparent we are dealing with these big issues and making the appropriate changes. There will likely be other difficulties but we will follow the policy and apply it fairly and openly.


I look forward to being able to speak to you directly about this.

[The Dawg]

This looks like Thomson is saying "I dont have time to deal with the Resident Hunter anymore, here, Tom, you do it"

Is that how we want to be treated?

Fire up those letters and say so!

[Whonnock Boy]

Thomson thinks so highly of resident hunters that he thought best to pawn us off on Tom Ethier. Same drum, different player. As FD says, everyone needs to respond asap.

[GoatGuy]

Keep sending letters to the MLAs.

They are using the bureaucrats as human shields on this one. The ADM is being told what to say by the premier and it's a load of bs.

Tell your MLA: "You are my elected representative - you are supposed to represent me. Quit hiding behind bureaucrats and do your job."

[bigdogeh]

Got my letter also today and made a reply. basically said sorry, not good enough, tired of the canned responses, the 60 animals is political crap and spin. and I will do my best to see your party defeated in 2017... and also seems to be that you guys are trying for the same. doing your best to be defeated.

[The Dawg]

Interesting that it is a letter from a bureaucrat that renews the discussion of this topic. Tom Ethier was the principal bureaucrat from Victoria that was involved in the discussions that led to the 2007 allocation policy. There were many broken promises over the next five years and he is all too familiar with what a fiasco this has turned into.

Here is just one example:

Tom when we last met in Vancouver in January the message that we felt we could not trust ministry staff was loud and clear. Your decison on stone sheep in region 7b is a perfect example why those of us who have been around for awhile have no faith in the integrity of ministry staff. resident hunters have been screwed on stone sheep allocaton for 15 years in 7b. the federation has brought it to your personal attention and to the personal attention of Al Martin several times over the last 2 1/2 years as we renegotiated the allocation policy. You refused to believe us, so I am assuming you either have no respect for us or you guys just give a damn about resident hunters. Personally I am begiining to believe its some of both. In talking with local outfitters the last couple of days it is clear that you and Andy had already made the decision and told the outfitters their new quota's before we had the meeting in Vancouver.

One of the first things that Al Martin said when we started negotiations was that the new policy was going to be transparent and fair. Unfortunately we forgot bull shit is not transparent. rich petersen

And the reply:

Hi Rich,


The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. The collective guide quota is being reduced and after this 5 year transition period the new allocation split will be fully applied. A tentative quota was provided to the guides the week of January 20th. At the January 12th meeting I assumed status quo for this hunt was correct.


The direction in this allocation decision is in favour of the residents. We made a decision that for these next 5 years the changes would not cause undue economic hardship. After the 5 years we move to full implementation.


I will counter your assertion that there is a lack of transparency. By being transparent we are dealing with these big issues and making the appropriate changes. There will likely be other difficulties but we will follow the policy and apply it fairly and openly.


I look forward to being able to speak to you directly about this.

"The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. "


Well if 14 sheep is undue hardship, sign me up for some!


This is an outfitter in 7b

[Whonnock Boy]

I count 16 sheep. How old is that pic dawg?

"The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. "


Well if 14 sheep is undue hardship, sign me up for some!


This is an outfitter in 7b

[The Dawg]

I count 16 sheep. How old is that pic dawg?

Yes, 16 sheep.

14 moose.

I got distracted by feeling bad for them going broke .



Its 2-3 years old....so well within the 'allocation hardship' talked about

[Fisher-Dude]

Yes, 16 sheep.

14 moose.

I got distracted by feeling bad for them going broke .



Its 2-3 years old....so well within the 'allocation hardship' talked about

Some quick math:

Sheep success in 7B for foreigners is about 68% last few years. 16 sheep kills/.68 success = 24 hunters @ $40,000 = $960,000
Moose success in 7B for foreigners is about 58% last few years. 14 moose kills/.58 success = 24 hunters @ $11,000 = $264,000

Then add in the elk and 'bou and g-bears and everything else.

Going broke running that kind of cash through a business in a couple of months? Hard to fathom.