Allocation evolution - This should have been posted early on

[Wagonmaster]

This table tells the whole story. Check out your areas and see just how you will be affected. Your letters to MLA's can then contain facts pertaining to you instead of generalizations that may or may not be true. By looking at the LEH synopsis which will give you a good idea of the total animals available for your hunt (resident plus guide outfitter) you can calculate how much poorer your chances of success will be for your particular hunt. Looking at Region 1 Island Elk, is it worth bothering to apply again? Twenty plus years with no success. Guide allocations have gone from 2% to 10 to 13 to 20. Other hunts not affected nearly as much, but a few per cent here and there will add up.




Area
Hunt
Prior to Allocation Policy 2007

2007-2012 Allocation Period

2012 -2016 Allocation Period

2014 Advise to Minister

2014 Minister Decision





%Residents
% Guides
%Residents
% Guides
%Residents
% Guides
%Residents

%Residents
% Guides


1
Bull Elk
98
2
90
10
87
13
87
13
80
20


1
Elk Achery
64
26
74
26
70
30






1
Either Sex Elk






70
30
80
20


1
Grizzly Bear
47
53
65
44
60
40
60
40
60
40


2
Bull Elk
80
20
90
10
81
19
81
19
80
20


2
Mountain Goat
n/a
n/a
75
25








3
Mountain Goat
74
26
69
31
71
29
71
29
65
35


3
Grizzly Bear
70
30
88
12
87
13
87
13
60
40


3
Moose
95
5
90
10
90
10
90
10
80
20


3
Big Horn Sheep
70
30
76
24
77
23
77
23
70
30


4
Big Horn Sheep
75
25
71
29
68
32
68
32
GOS
GOS


4
Mountain Goat
75
25
71
29
69
31
69
31
65
35


4
Grizzly Bear
70
30
70
30
74
26
74
26
60
40


4
Bull Moose
78
22
79
21
79
21
79
21
80
20


5
Moose Cow only
n/a
n/a
98
2








5
Moose
78
22
98
2
77
23
77
23
75
25


5
Bull Caribou
80
20
76
24
71
29
79
21
75
25


5
Grizzly Bear
62
38
70
30
73
27
73
27
60
40


5
Mountain Goat
57
43
63
37
67
33
67
33
65
35


6 North
Thin Horn Sheep
60
40
55
45
64
36
64
36
60
40


6 South
Moose
81
19
77
23
75
25
75
25
75
25


6 North
Moose
na
na
n/a
n/a
70
30
70
30
75
25


6 South
Mountain Goat
75
25
70
30
71
29
71
29
65
35


6 North
Mountain Goat
63
37
n/a
n/a
65
35
65
35
65
35


6 North
Caribou
53
47
60
40
73
27
73
27
75
25


6 South
Grizzly Bear
50
50
60
40
64
36
64
36
60
40


6 North
Grizzly Bear
50
50
60
40
64
36
64
36
60
40


7 A
Bull Moose
85
25
82
81
80
20
73
27
75
25


7A
Cow only
95
5
98
2








7B
Thin Horn Sheep
50
50
57
43








7 A
Grizzly Bear
50
50
60
40
64
36
64
36
60
40


7 B
Mountain Goat


70
30
73
27
73
27
65
35


7B
Elk Either sex




78
22






7 B
Elk Anterless
90
10
98
2
98
2
98
2
98
2


7 B
Grizzly Bear
50
50
60
40
64
36
64
36
60
40


7 B
Bison
80
20
84
16
82
18
82
18
80
20


8
Bull Moose
81
19
85
15
84
16
84
18
80
20


8
Big Horn Sheep
67
33
73
26
71
29
71
29
70
30


8
Mountain Goat
68
33
70
30
73
27
71
29
65
35


8
Grizzly Bear
60
40
60
40
75
25
75
25
60
40

[Gateholio]

This is great. Easy to read and understand, awesome

[Gateholio]

Any chance of putting that into a PDF or something to email?

[Wagonmaster]

I felt all along that in order to assess the new numbers you needed to know the old. They never seemed to appear. I put out a request a couple of days ago and Deaddog was good enough to send me an email. I don't think Deaddog would mind me forwarding the email to you Gatehouse and then you could see what you could do. Let me know.

[Whonnock Boy]

GG had showed another chart for Kootenay moose that went back to the early 90's, maybe even into the 80's. The evolution, or I should say erosion of our allocation didn't start in the 21st century.

[Whonnock Boy]

To note as well, those numbers regarding Island elk appear minuscule, however they translate into 20 animals per year, or 20 hunts of a lifetime per year.

[Island Redneck]

Your numbers for Roosevelt Elk in region one are wrong, in the mid 80's I had a quota of 7 elk per year, which was 5-6% of the total allocation in my guide area and I was the only outfitter on the Island to have an Elk allocation at that time.

[adriaticum]

Any chance of putting that into a PDF or something to email?

Has been posted.
I can email you a PDF of JPG if you like.


http://www.huntingbc.ca/photos/data/500/Allocation.jpg

[Rackmastr]

What you posted is different adriaticum.....the previous post has several different years and not just the 2014 allocation policy

[Rackmastr]

On a related note, it would be interesting to see this information on a graph....showing the rise in GO Allocations and the drop in Resident allocations over the years!

[coach]

Your numbers for Roosevelt Elk in region one are wrong, in the mid 80's I had a quota of 7 elk per year, which was 5-6% of the total allocation in my guide area and I was the only outfitter on the Island to have an Elk allocation at that time.

So that would make it less than 2% then? Did you have archery elk as part of that 5-6%?

[Gateholio]

On a related note, it would be interesting to see this information on a graph....showing the rise in GO Allocations and the drop in Resident allocations over the years!

Along with resident hunter numbers increasing and foreign hunters decreasing.

[Everett]

The number that always jumps out at me is Guides getting %20 of the moose in region 4. Moose are basically a once or twice in a lifetime hunt in the Kootenays so why are we allowing any foreign hunting? I know guys in there 50's who have never hunted moose in there home region.

[adriaticum]

What you posted is different adriaticum.....the previous post has several different years and not just the 2014 allocation policy

This is what was initially released and there are changes.
I think BCWF website will have the numbers updated and posted.
Last night at the meeting they said they would post everything shortly.

[Rackmastr]

This is what was initially released and there are changes.
I think BCWF website will have the numbers updated and posted.
Last night at the meeting they said they would post everything shortly.

I know what you're saying. What I am pointing out is the JPG that you have posted is JUST the 2014 Allocation Policy, not the evolution of years from back in 2007 forward. And yes I am hoping the evolution information that Wagonmaster has posted gets shared in every way possible.

[BRvalley]

I have that document deaddog distributed at the PG meeting last night...I can PDF it when I get home, if nobody beats me to it..feel free to PM me

[Wagonmaster]

Island Redneck. I'm not sure the numbers for prior to 2007 are meant to reflect those going way back to the mid 80's. But, nevertheless consider the following. Government documentation states that there were 237 permits available through LEH in 1985. Add your 7 to that number and your percent allocation works out to 2.8%. Add in the native allocation, and the results would come even closer to the 2 % number in the chart. Seems pretty accurate to me.

[Seeker]

This is great. Easy to read and understand, awesome

I agree completely, is there any way we can take this a step further and get the actual number of permits, along or instead of the percentages. I think this the type of information that the general public hunters can understand. We loose a lot of people in the intricacies of the allotment process.

[steveo]

To note as well, those numbers regarding Island elk appear minuscule, however they translate into 20 animals per year, or 20 hunts of a lifetime per year.
How did you come up with 20 elk per year? Perhaps that number is what Island Redneck is referring to when he said your numbers are wrong.

[Island Redneck]

Island Redneck. I'm not sure the numbers for prior to 2007 are meant to reflect those going way back to the mid 80's. But, nevertheless consider the following. Government documentation states that there were 237 permits available through LEH in 1985. Add your 7 to that number and your percent allocation works out to 2.8%. Add in the native allocation, and the results would come even closer to the 2 % number in the chart. Seems pretty accurate to me.

I dont recall the exact number of resident permits allotted in all of Region 1 but only MU 09-10-11-12 & 13 had a non-resident elk quota and I got between 5&6% of the total bull allocation. (I did not want any cow quota)

I had 7 bull elk and when the native allocation came about, I lost 1 elk, It was returned to me a couple of years later. If you include the native's in the resident allocation, the non- resident allocation would be 10% or less on elk and moose.

[steveo]

I dont recall the exact number of resident permits allotted in all of Region 1 but only MU 09-10-11-12 & 13 had a non-resident elk quota and I got between 5&6% of the total bull allocation. (I did not want any cow quota)

I had 7 bull elk and when the native allocation came about, I lost 1 elk, It was returned to me a couple of years later. If you include the native's in the resident allocation, the non- resident allocation would be 10% or less on elk and moose.
Pertaining to present day island elk allocations, what would your best guess be for the guides annual take? Do you think 20 elk per year is accurate?

[Fisher-Dude]

I dont recall the exact number of resident permits allotted in all of Region 1 but only MU 09-10-11-12 & 13 had a non-resident elk quota and I got between 5&6% of the total bull allocation. (I did not want any cow quota)

I had 7 bull elk and when the native allocation came about, I lost 1 elk, It was returned to me a couple of years later. If you include the native's in the resident allocation, the non- resident allocation would be 10% or less on elk and moose.

Natives aren't in the resident allocation. I know GOs are trying to plead this to dilute their greed, but the allocation is AFTER natives' needs are met. The natives do not enter the split figures in the Thomson Policy at all.

Moreover, EVERY Canadian province has a native component to harvest. And still BC is exponentially higher to the non-resident side than any other province in the country in allocation.

[Island Redneck]

Pertaining to present day island elk allocations, what would your best guess be for the guides annual take? Do you think 20 elk per year is accurate?

There is approx. 165 bull elk allocated on the Island to residents in the 2014/15 synopsis plus whatever is allocated to non-residents now, (I'm not sure of the number) some of the zones will be 1 or 2 elk every 5 years and some of the zones will be 8 elk over 5 years. I believe it will average over 25 bull elk per year.

[Fisher-Dude]

GG had showed another chart for Kootenay moose that went back to the early 90's, maybe even into the 80's. The evolution, or I should say erosion of our allocation didn't start in the 21st century.


This one:

Moose Allocations in Region 4

Year ........................1986......1989......1991.. ....1992......1994.....2000.....2006..... 2010......Change 86-10
Moose Pop Est ...........7400.......7315......7305.....6650..... 7635..... 4010..... 5970..... N/A....... -19.32%
Res Hunter Harvest........ 592...... 620....... 216....... 293....... 301....... 158....... 212....... 258....... -56.42%
Non-res Hunter Harvest.... 20........ 23.........5.......... 11........ 8......... 23........ 52.........37....... +85.00%
Guide-outfitter
Allocation........................................ ........5....................15............74..... ....80.........68



Some good history on the changes that have occurred to your (you being a resident moose hunter) share of moose harvest in region 4.

Residents' harvest has decreased by (56.42%) while non-residents' harvest has increased by +85.00%.

Please excuse my inability to post a fancy table in this software! But I think you get the picture.

[Fisher-Dude]

There is approx. 165 bull elk allocated on the Island to residents in the 2014/15 synopsis plus whatever is allocated to non-residents now, (I'm not sure of the number) some of the zones will be 1 or 2 elk every 5 years and some of the zones will be 8 elk over 5 years. I believe it will average over 25 bull elk per year.


Large difference between authorization in an LEH synopsis and outfitter quota.

Synopsis numbers are inflated to account for success factors for resident hunters, which is necessary to achieve harvest. Eg if success is 50% then for residents to harvest 5 elk, 10 authorizations must be given out.

That's not the same as outfitter quota, as quota is the number of animals to be killed, thus the two numbers are not comparable, even though some outfitters may quote them to make residents think they are getting a larger share than they actually are.

[Island Redneck]

Large difference between authorization in an LEH synopsis and outfitter quota.

Synopsis numbers are inflated to account for success factors for resident hunters, which is necessary to achieve harvest. Eg if success is 50% then for residents to harvest 5 elk, 10 authorizations must be given out.

That's not the same as outfitter quota, as quota is the number of animals to be killed, thus the two numbers are not comparable, even though some outfitters may quote them to make residents think they are getting a larger share than they actually are.

I believe the success numbers for bull elk on the Island were considered to be 75%, I havent been involved for awhile so I dont know what they are now, but different MU. have different success rates.

FD. how many elk are allocated to the guides on the Island now, I was told they have a total quota of 16 per year, is this correct?

[Wagonmaster]

I believe the success numbers for bull elk on the Island were considered to be 75%, I havent been involved for awhile so I dont know what they are now, but different MU. have different success rates.

FD. how many elk are allocated to the guides on the Island now, I was told they have a total quota of 16 per year, is this correct?
There are currently 7 Guide Outfitters with territories on Vancouver Island, all of which receive an elk allocation. During the 2007-11 Allocation Period, Guide Outfitters received 12% of the non-First Nations antlered elk allocations, and 40% of the archery allocations (as determined by the Allocation Policy: ) Guide Outfitters will receive 13% and 30% of the bull and archery elk allocations respectively during the 2012-16 Allocation Period. For the 2011 season, the number of elk allocated to resident hunters and Guide Outfitters was as follows: Bull elk – 118 residents/16 Guide Outfitters; Archery elk – 9 residents/5 Guide Outfitters.

Regards,

This direct from the ministry a short while ago, before the great GO lobby, was the allocations that were to carry on through 2016

[boxhitch]

By looking at the LEH synopsis which will give you a good idea of the total animals available for your hunt (resident plus guide outfitter) you can calculate how much poorer your chances of success will be for your particular hunt. Not sure I follow this . The leh paper shows tentative authorizations to the resident hunter applicant . The g/o doesn't have to go through the process .

[Wagonmaster]

Not sure I follow this . The leh paper shows tentative authorizations to the resident hunter applicant . The g/o doesn't have to go through the process .


I agree my wording there could be clearer. Where I'm heading is that using the LEH synopsis, one can determine what the first choice odds were last time around - (X applications for 118 animals out of the 134 available for guides and residents). Assuming the total number of animals for residents and outfitters that will be available will be the same the following year, and the guides quota rises to 20% from 13%, approximately 9 animals will shift from residents to guides. 25 Roosevelt's going to foreigners is total bull shit, not right, and no guide can in all good conscience say that it is fair. Resident odds are high enough now. Island Elk is a unique situation and most tags should be available to residents. Take the Americans up north for grizzly bear or whatever in areas that the average resident cannot afford to go.

[steveo]

I agree my wording there could be clearer. Where I'm heading is that using the LEH synopsis, one can determine what the first choice odds were last time around - (X applications for 118 animals out of the 134 available for guides and residents). Assuming the total number of animals for residents and outfitters that will be available will be the same the following year, and the guides quota rises to 20% from 13%, approximately 9 animals will shift from residents to guides. 25 Roosevelt's going to foreigners is total bull shit, not right, and no guide can in all good conscience say that it is fair. Resident odds are high enough now. Island Elk is a unique situation and most tags should be available to residents. Take the Americans up north for grizzly bear or whatever in areas that the average resident cannot afford to go.
Yes it is a little confusing keeping " annual harvest allocations " and " LEH authorizations " separate and understood. You can't judge how much opportunity resident hunters are losing by looking at the LEH synopsis because the hunts that are available are stated as number of authorizations and you can't tell by these tags how many animals are allocated for harvest. If we use the number 25 for annual elk allocation for non-resident hunters and then take those 25 allocations and give them to resident hunters it could translate into potentially 45 authorizations added to the draw, give or take. I based this off of a 60% resident hunter success rate.

[Whonnock Boy]

How did you come up with 20 elk per year? Perhaps that number is what Island Redneck is referring to when he said your numbers are wrong.


Sorry, I missed this. I am quite certain that is the number GG crunched, and showed us last night.

[Bugle M In]

This has probably been touched on, but GOS for Bighorn Reg 4....for both Residents and GO's???????????????????????????????????WTF!!!
Too many different threads going on for me, but I guess I just woke up!!!
That should sum it all up right there!!

[steveo]

That is probably an accurate number, more than believable.

[goinghunting]

So thinhorn sheep in region 6 is a 60/40 split but why no numbers for region 7?

[Fisher-Dude]

So thinhorn sheep in region 6 is a 60/40 split but why no numbers for region 7?

The 7B regional manager took sheep off category A as a gift to his friends in the GOABC. Now they can kill every last ram on the mountain to pay their mortgages off sooner.

[goinghunting]

The 7B regional manager took sheep off category A as a gift to his friends in the GOABC. Now they can kill every last ram on the mountain to pay their mortgages off sooner.

Wow thats garbage!

[bigwhiteys]

The 7B regional manager took sheep off category A as a gift to his friends in the GOABC. Now they can kill every last ram on the mountain to pay their mortgages off sooner.

Yeah, I am sure that's their goal. Kill every last ram. More sensational propaganda.

[BCrams]

Carl,

Do you think they may increase quota for some outfits as a result? Seeing as what is happening with the embarrassment regarding mismanagement in reg 4 for bighorns.

[boxhitch]

The 7B regional manager took sheep off category A as a gift to his friends in the GOABC. Now they can kill every last ram on the mountain to pay their mortgages off sooner.Thinhorns were removed from Cat. A by the region manager so he didn't have to work within the policy. He still sets quotas , but at his own discretion.
Amazing how much control the regions have

[2chodi]

Thinhorns were removed from Cat. A by the region manager so he didn't have to work within the policy. He still sets quotas , but at his own discretion.
Amazing how much control the regions have

Yes, guides are still on quota in 7b, unlike the proposal for region 4 sheep.

in region 7b the Annual Allowable Harvest has been increased from around 189 in 2007 to 250 in 2014. The non-resident quota is now 100.

They are still getting Stone Sheep data in for 2014 but it looks like the harvest is about 206 combined.

[2chodi]

Here is the table as a pdf:

http://residentpriority.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/EvolutionOfAllocationSplits.pdf

[brno375]

Here is the table as a pdf:

http://residentpriority.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/EvolutionOfAllocationSplits.pdf

Thanks 2chodi

[Avalanche123]

Thinhorns were removed from Cat. A by the region manager so he didn't have to work within the policy. He still sets quotas , but at his own discretion.
Amazing how much control the regions have

Thanks Boxhitch for a sensible response as opposed to the one you quoted above.

[2chodi]

Must be aworking copy prepared at 7:00 AM!:-)
Quick lookat the table saw 6 mistakes(#’s don’t add up to 100%):o


Yes there are a few issues with the numbers - I don't know who prepared the table initially.

[40incher]

This has probably been touched on, but GOS for Bighorn Reg 4....for both Residents and GO's???????????????????????????????????WTF!!!
Too many different threads going on for me, but I guess I just woke up!!!
That should sum it all up right there!!


Once again, I guess I need to repeat myself:

Why can't guides be on quota for bighorns while residents still have a full-curl GOS?? Sounds like resident priority to me!!

The guides and their shills need to know (pay attention now), ... you're not fooling anyone anymore!!

The GOABC has made a big mistake ... Perhaps you should cut your losses now! Not likely though ... the light's are not on !!!

[Bugle M In]

I don't think Reg 4 Bios feel that a GOS for Bighorn is sustainable at this current time, and probably why it has been LEH.
AS much as like having GOS, sometimes an LEH is needed where Evident.
Don't think the Bios agreed to GOS, but the Liberals and the GOABC do.
Just showed me how corrupt this entire decision and process has become!
cheers