A Concerned Hunter

[Whiteychaser]

I realize my opinion is largely in the minority around here, but thanks to free speech I will voice it anyway. I am a guide, have held a guide license for 10 years in both Alberta and British Columbia. I have worked for hardworking and honest outfitters, and contrary to popular belief, I have made a good living for myself and my family, this is more then a job to me it is my lifestyle.
In the past decade the number of hunters in both of those Provinces has been growing at a rapid rate. Because of this rapid growth it is my opinion that our wildlife management is behind the curve. Reactive instead of proactive. In the past 10 years Alberta has gone from a top destination for bighorns, to a foot race every opening day to kill the ram that turned legal that year (usually a 6 year old sheep). I've seen the same thing in northern B.C where once you could expect to harvest a mature 10-12 year old ram, where now rams are getting cropped off the season after they hit full curl, usually a 7 year old ram. Shooting a ram at half their life expectancy is not conservation, and it is not wildlife management. The same rings true for mule deer, moose, and elk. Shooting a moose for meat every year, without giving anything back to habitat enhancement and wildlife conservation, is like taking from a jar of cash and not putting anything back, if everyone does it there would be no moose and no cash. LEH wait times are only getting longer with our population growth and will continue to do so regardless of outfitters. I respect the B.C residents who are fighting for their kids to have the opportunity to hunt, but do so by investing in conservation groups like WSF and SCI or their local affiliates ,not by fighting against an industry that is creating jobs, dumping money into conservation , and managing their areas for the long term benefit of everyone. Doubt me? Please try and find a mainstream outfitter that doesn't donate expensive hunts to these organizations as fundraisers, or are lifetime members themselves. Most donate every year.
I am surprised at the amount of anti "trophy hunters" opinions there are on here. Last time I checked a trophy is usually considered the most mature male of a species. The ones that are biologically the least important to a species survival. The ultimate trophy is that bull or that ram that isn't going to make the winter, can you show me a better method of conservation through hunting than that?
Trying to shutdown and boycott outfitting because it brings in foreign money is like shutting down trapping because most of the fur buyers are Chinese, or shutting down logging because a lot of our timber leaves the country, or perhaps our oilfield because or oil just gets shipped overseas. Or mining because a lot of our mines are now Chinese owned. Like it or not, our wildlife is for sale, Just as our wood is for sale, our oil, and our minerals. At least our wildlife is a renewable resource that can be managed for future generations.
The outfitters were pioneers. They opened up British Columbia's wild places with horse trails and landing strips, and believe it or not they know a lot more about wildlife management and conservation then the average joe that holds a BC hunting license every year. It is their livelihood to know more and to manage with the allocations they are given. I am not ignorant to the fact that some outfitters are crooks, just as in all walks of life. But the anti outfitter stigma helps no one, and it certainly does nothing for our wildlife. If everyone put as much time and effort into conservation efforts as they do into this outfitter battle we would have a lot less to be concerned about.
Yours Truly,
A concerned hunter

[Ambush]

While a valid sentiment on some levels, the GOABC has brought this stinking mess to their own doorstep. They alone are responsible for the up rising of regular joe's.

Sorry, but no sympathy for a back stabbing "partner" in conservation.

[Wentrot]

Pound sand

[Gateholio]

I think we would all prefer if GOABC hadn't made back room deals and pulled dirty tricks to screw resident hunters. If they hadn't taken this approach, we coukd all be concentrating on conservation instead of allocation. Instead, GOABC stabbed us in the back so we have to concentrate on this first.

So, take your concerns to GOABC and demand to know why they were so arrogant and greedy to demand so much of our wildlife, and forcing us to take this route.

[Daybreak]

At this point and particularly after todays show of consolidation of RH's in West Kelowna I am in no mood to hear any guide orientated BS.

Don't come on here once every 6 years and try to tell us how to fix the problems your unsustainable industry has created for the RH.

Talk till you are blue in the face, I for one, am not listening.

[Camp Cook]

No sympathy from me either.

[bridger]

Some valid points, but you have missed the mark. This issue of fairness in allocation has to be settled once and for all. The BCWF and resident hunters support working for wildlife and put the resource first. Guide outfitters who put the resource first should quit trying to subsidize their business by reducing our hunting opportunities. If you really want to work together quit beating on resident hunters.

[Everett]

Sorry dude but GOABC started this war and hopefully you and your fellow guides will be unemployed as a result. Free advice find a new industry to work in.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Imagine how impressed resident hunters would have been if the GOABC donated most of the money collected from the Hunter preservation fund back into habitat enhancement instead of lobbying the government.

It was their choice to take the low road.

SSS

[Lillypuff]

Nobody was trying to shut down the Guide Outfitters! Now that might not be the case! When we have 100,000 hunters and 4500 foreigners and they get up to 40% of any animal I see a major problem. I hope all members of GOABC come to their senses. GIve back what is ours! But the seem to think they are ENTITLED to another hand out

[flyboy]

you seem to have forgotten to mention that at $20000 a sheep outfitters are also in that opening day foot race not just residents.

Your right all the Resources of BC are being sold to the highest foreign bidder. Is that right? probably not as a lot of jobs leave BC when that happens.
A big difference in your argument is there is a huge amount of money generated for the province in the sale of gas/oil/minerals/lumber. Whereas the sale of hunts to foreign interest doesn't even come close to that. You can't argue that the money your industry generates helps the people of BC in any way close to these natural resources you mention.

I am glad you mentioned the Outfitters take on trophy hunting and what actually a trophy means. I too put some thought into this and if that is actually truly how the outfitters feel then maybe part of the new allocation policy would include the stipulation that outfitters can only take trophy classed animals. Start with 10 points or more moose. No more, what do outfitters call them? Oh right MEAT HUNTS. Is meat hunts trophy classed conservation?

It is the outfitters livelihood to manage the allocation they are given, well seems they are having problems MANAGING the allocation they WERE given and needed to DO some behind the scenes work to fix that. Oh is this what is meant by MANAGING THE ALLOCATIONS?

In the end I am 100% on board to see the two sides work together, but that can't happen till both sides want that. Actions have proven one side is not interested in that.

[fireguy]

Obviously you have no idea how much the "average joe hunter" does or knows about wildlife management or conservation. You have no idea how many hours that same "joe" might put in towards wildlife habitat enhancement and how much money he spends on his outdoor activities every year.

These average joe hunters spend a whole lot of money to have the privilege of using the outdoors. Guides use these same outdoors for a profit and don't want that "joe" bothering them or their hunters because it might cut into their profits. That "joe hunter" might work harder to get into a spot than a "tourist hunter" and might shoot that animal that the guide wanted to sell his high paying tourist. That's what this boils down to.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Imagine how many old rams there would be if the guides were cut back to 10% where they belong.

[Ltbullken]

I'm not sure I understand your point. Are you suggesting that guide outfitters are better conservationists therefore deserve more allocation? Why give more allocation to GO's when you can't even sell the hunts you have now? GO hunt numbers are on the decline. That's an economics issue and I am not going to give up my or my family's access to hunting to benefit relatively few others. At the same time we need to properly resourced science to guide our hunting season's. If GO's are going broke then economics would indicate that there needs to be fewer GO's. Yep, a backroom deal brought the stink on so deal with it.

[Foxton Gundogs]

Speaking as a former member of the guiding industry i can tell you that by the strength of the monoply alone the guiding indusrt holds over non resident hunters alone (a luxury no other business in this Province has) the industry is guaranteed viability. IMO only bad business practises and a poorly run representing organization thats practises an eliteist, multi-tiered system that puts more value on some of it's members than others has created any hardship factual or percieved. IMO the industry under the leadership of the GOABC is badly broken and the resident hunters, their families and friends as well as the average citizens of this great Province will not let the GOABC fix their internally created problems on the backs and to the detrement of resident hunters. If you want to fix the problems your industry has, you need to start a little closer tqo home!

[bridger]

As for the money outfitters bring into the province, how about the money they take out? How about the outfitter from Alberta that has a large area in bc? He hires all his guides and wranglers from Alberta. Doesn't want any bc guides to know where his sheep camps are. Buys his trucks, supplies and even av gas in Alberta. Comes to BC for 45 days a year and takes his money back to Alberta. Great for the BC economy. He is only one there are lots others.

[Ride Red]

GOABC opened this can of worms by trying to screw the honest tax payer of this province. Stealing what we have worked for all these years with back room deals is plain bullshit and we're not standing for it anymore. If they would have come to the table in good faith, we all would have been happy to work with them. Karma is a bitch and she's on her broom, maybe looking for a new career will teach anybody involved with GOABC to play it straight from now on.

[Whiteychaser]

Could not agree more bridger, the issue of allocation fairness absolutely needs to be resolved, whether that look like a resident/nonresident set in stone ratio or however it would be, I have no idea what goes on at those lobby meetings, but I can say I have seen nonresident quotas drop like a rock the last 10 years while resident licenses remained open in the area I work it's been going that way for quite some time. Are they wrong in standing up for their quota? There were 6 rams shot on one ridge august 1st this year by resident hunters, and that is not putting the resource first. Either people need to be educated or restricted. If they aren't they will take as long as they can until there is nothing left. I don't think it's unreasonable for an outfitter to lobby for 10 sheep tags in hopes of getting 8. That system is the same with any business, and any government dealings. Resident hunter opportunity is going to continue to drop with our population increase. As a resident I would rather have the sheep thrive and wait a little longer between tags then have it open and race to shoot the first legal ram. The outfitters I know that have cut back on hunters have done so for the betterment of the resource then not being able to book

[Everett]

Imagine how many old rams there would be if the guides were cut back to 10% where they belong.

Or how many will die of old age if we kill the industry off for good.

[boxhitch]

The outfitters I know that have cut back on hunters have done so for the betterment of the resource then not being able to book don't drink that koolaid

[BTF]

Imagine how impressed resident hunters would have been if the GOABC donated most of the money collected from the Hunter preservation fund back into habitat enhancement instead of lobbying the government.

It was their choice to take the low road.

SSS

Exactly! now imagine that!

[Wild one]

Pushing for a larger quota for outfitters does not support conservation. This is no more than wanting a larger piece of the pie.

My self I believe big changes are needed in wildlife management in BC to benefit all hunters and wildlife. What the GOABC has brought forward does not accomplish this at all. If the GOABC was bringing forward options for habitat improvement they would not be met with such opposition. If it is truly sheep numbers that are the concern how about decreasing opportunity for both residents and outfitters a like.

Personally I have no problem with the industry existing but it needs a revise as well. For starters from an economy stand point start by making so only BC residents can own and operate guide outfits. This will at least keep the $ generated by BC wildlife in BC. If the industry is in trouble it needs change in how it operates.

With what the GOABC has brought forward all it has done is put a big divide between residents and outfitters. It has also woke up a lot of residents hunters who would normally stay out of these disputes. Like you said resident hunter numbers are increasing so you the GOABC is picking a fight with a group that is increasing in power

If conservation is truly your concern as a guide you should urge the GOABC to drop the greed and step up to work with resident hunters on the big picture instead of screwing them.

Not going to get much support from resident hunters at this time well the GOABC is sticking a knife in our backs.

[DawsonCreedmoor]

Is your anonymity important to you, or would you mind telling us which outfit is yours?

[tuner]

So it appears as though the benevolent guiding industry has a monopoly on conservation knowhow and efforts. This is the equivalent of hiring hitler to eradicate anti- semitism.

[Ambush]

This is the equivalent of hiring hitler to eradicate anti- semitism.

Or letting Colonel Sanders baby sit your chickens.

[kebes]

There were 6 rams shot on one ridge august 1st this year by resident hunters, and that is not putting the resource first. Either people need to be educated or restricted. If they aren't they will take as long as they can until there is nothing left.


By restricted you mean restricted to LEH right? There's already a restriction on Stone's, it's called full curl/8 year old rams.

What you're promoting isn't conservation, it's more space for high paying non-resident hunters. Have to make sure they get a quality experience!

[Gateholio]

Could not agree more bridger, the issue of allocation fairness absolutely needs to be resolved, whether that look like a resident/nonresident set in stone ratio or however it would be, I have no idea what goes on at those lobby meetings, but I can say I have seen nonresident quotas drop like a rock the last 10 years while resident licenses remained open in the area I work it's been going that way for quite some time. Are they wrong in standing up for their quota? There were 6 rams shot on one ridge august 1st this year by resident hunters, and that is not putting the resource first. Either people need to be educated or restricted. If they aren't they will take as long as they can until there is nothing left. I don't think it's unreasonable for an outfitter to lobby for 10 sheep tags in hopes of getting 8. That system is the same with any business, and any government dealings. Resident hunter opportunity is going to continue to drop with our population increase. As a resident I would rather have the sheep thrive and wait a little longer between tags then have it open and race to shoot the first legal ram. The outfitters I know that have cut back on hunters have done so for the betterment of the resource then not being able to book

Sounds like six happy resident hunters taking legal animals ! Great!

[Doostien]

If we want to 'save' more animals, shouldn't we reduce hunting opportunities for BOTH residents and guides? Re-allocating from one pool to another isn't reducing the number of animals killed.

What's the success rate for a guided hunt?I bet its alot higher than resident hunts. If thats true then it means by re-allocating more animals would be removed from the ecosystem.

A huge way for guides to show they care about conservation would be for them to burn half of their allocated tags on opening day.

[Apolonius]

A resident hunter that is the rightful owner of wildlife get one tag,and sometimes waits for (like me) 20 years to get an Elk in the island.And an outfitter gets how manny?FOR SALE!!!

[boilerroom]

I realize my opinion is largely in the minority around here, but thanks to free speech I will voice it anyway. I am a guide, have held a guide license for 10 years in both Alberta and British Columbia. I have worked for hardworking and honest outfitters, and contrary to popular belief, I have made a good living for myself and my family, this is more then a job to me it is my lifestyle.
In the past decade the number of hunters in both of those Provinces has been growing at a rapid rate. Because of this rapid growth it is my opinion that our wildlife management is behind the curve. Reactive instead of proactive. In the past 10 years Alberta has gone from a top destination for bighorns, to a foot race every opening day to kill the ram that turned legal that year (usually a 6 year old sheep). I've seen the same thing in northern B.C where once you could expect to harvest a mature 10-12 year old ram, where now rams are getting cropped off the season after they hit full curl, usually a 7 year old ram. Shooting a ram at half their life expectancy is not conservation, and it is not wildlife management. The same rings true for mule deer, moose, and elk. Shooting a moose for meat every year, without giving anything back to habitat enhancement and wildlife conservation, is like taking from a jar of cash and not putting anything back, if everyone does it there would be no moose and no cash. LEH wait times are only getting longer with our population growth and will continue to do so regardless of outfitters. I respect the B.C residents who are fighting for their kids to have the opportunity to hunt, but do so by investing in conservation groups like WSF and SCI or their local affiliates ,not by fighting against an industry that is creating jobs, dumping money into conservation , and managing their areas for the long term benefit of everyone. Doubt me? Please try and find a mainstream outfitter that doesn't donate expensive hunts to these organizations as fundraisers, or are lifetime members themselves. Most donate every year.
I am surprised at the amount of anti "trophy hunters" opinions there are on here. Last time I checked a trophy is usually considered the most mature male of a species. The ones that are biologically the least important to a species survival. The ultimate trophy is that bull or that ram that isn't going to make the winter, can you show me a better method of conservation through hunting than that?
Trying to shutdown and boycott outfitting because it brings in foreign money is like shutting down trapping because most of the fur buyers are Chinese, or shutting down logging because a lot of our timber leaves the country, or perhaps our oilfield because or oil just gets shipped overseas. Or mining because a lot of our mines are now Chinese owned. Like it or not, our wildlife is for sale, Just as our wood is for sale, our oil, and our minerals. At least our wildlife is a renewable resource that can be managed for future generations.
The outfitters were pioneers. They opened up British Columbia's wild places with horse trails and landing strips, and believe it or not they know a lot more about wildlife management and conservation then the average joe that holds a BC hunting license every year. It is their livelihood to know more and to manage with the allocations they are given. I am not ignorant to the fact that some outfitters are crooks, just as in all walks of life. But the anti outfitter stigma helps no one, and it certainly does nothing for our wildlife. If everyone put as much time and effort into conservation efforts as they do into this outfitter battle we would have a lot less to be concerned about.
Yours Truly,
A concerned hunter

As a fairly new hunter I am confused about a couple of your statements and hope that you can clarify:

If GOABC members are concerned that sheep are being taken before they fully mature, does this mean that you and other guides won't take the 8 or 9 year old sheep but wait until they are older and more of a "trophy"?

I've read that declining numbers of non-resident hunters have left guides with unused tags - is this true? When a guide donates one of these tags/trips to one of the conservation groups are they able to get a receipt for a tax write-off?

Thanks for bringing clarity,
boilerroom

[Murder]

I haven't followed this issue closely enough to know all the ins and outs, however I get the jest of it. How about F**k the Guide Outfitters, and all non-resident hunters. They should be second, not first. This is FOOD for a ton of people in BC, it shouldn't be a for profit industry where the resource is sold to the highest bidder. What happened to looking after your own BC? I am dead set against any policy that takes from me, you and any other British Columbian who wants to hunt here. The firearms and hunting issues in this Province blow my mind. Guide Outfitters need to find a new line of work if they can't make ends meet just like anyone else in business.

If there truly is an issue with resource management, how is it possible that allocating more tags to GO's would fix anything? Way more BC resident hunters who get a tag, leave it unfilled than any Outfitter I'm sure. Not ALL jobs created in the province are worth their impact, in whatever capacity that is, although sometimes it seems like economists and governments are blind to this.

[TPG]

The comparison in the original post of B.C.'s wildlife and the oil, lumber and mining industries is BS. We sell off large amounts of lumber, minerals and oil to other provinces and countries, but it is not creating a shortage for our residents. There is an abundance of all three of these things for anyone who wants them. However giving a larger allocation of game to the GOABC will create a direct shortage for residents who not only want those tags but often depend on them. The GOABC being compared to these other larger exporting industries is like comparing apples to oranges.

[spear]

Imagine how many old rams there would be if the guides were cut back to 10% where they belong.
Exactly what I was thinking, spent 14 days right in the backyard of a major sheep outfitter this year, saw some great rams and my partner managed to harvest one, we were surprised we didnt see more BIG rams. We were in where possibly no resident hunters make it, so how many mature big rams was that outfitter allowed to kill? Do you think he had clients who paid 40k + US dollars pass up 8yr old full curl rams???

I think the OP had some great points, lots og outfitters out there with integrity, but dont start drinking the GOABC Kool-aid

[1/2 slam]

A resident hunter that is the rightful owner of wildlife get one tag,and sometimes waits for (like me) 20 years to get an Elk in the island.And an outfitter gets how manny?FOR SALE!!!

I'm at 30 years. What a pile of BULLS&#t. If I had $20,000, like a buddy did, I could buy a hunt in my own province.

[kawdy]

I for one think it's great having a guide come on here stating his support for the GOABC and their agenda.

What better way to have insite into the mindset of our adversary. It's like reading vogue to understand your wife, painful but educating :)

In the last month I have learnt more about the inner workings of the allocation process and the players that are involved. Make no mistake they will never stop coming at the resident hunters. The GOABC are always lobbying the government for more of the pie and the recent allocation debacle isn't the only or even the greatest issue we as residents face, IMO. After attending the Victoria meeting and having talked to a few people with their fingers on the pulse, I now am more concerned about (tenure). Maybe someone in the know can explain exactly what this could mean to the resident hunter.

I am in the fight for the long haul now. They will never stop coming at us and I will never stop pusing back.
Thanks GOABC, you have motivated me to a level I never thought I was capable of.

[Daybreak]

I feel it was a ploy to detract from a good step forward today. Nothing but a distraction. Look at the timing, frequency and interests of the poster... 6 years ago and showing an interest in buying hunting areas.

[Ride Red]

I for one think it's great having a guide come on here stating his support for the GOABC and their agenda.

What better way to have insite into the mindset of our adversary. It's like reading vogue to understand your wife, painful but educating :)

In the last month I have learnt more about the inner workings of the allocation process and the players that are involved. Make no mistake they will never stop coming at the resident hunters. The GOABC are always lobbying the government for more of the pie and the recent allocation debacle isn't the only or even the greatest issue we as residents face, IMO. After attending the Victoria meeting and having talked to a few people with their fingers on the pulse, I now am more concerned about (tenure). Maybe someone in the know can explain exactly what this could mean to the resident hunter.

I am in the fight for the long haul now. They will never stop coming at us and I will never stop pusing back.
Thanks GOABC, you have motivated me to a level I never thought I was capable of.

I agree with your statements. Here again proves that the guide outfitters are grasping at straws to prove their case, but they spew the same old bullshit over and over again. It's as though we have just received another form letter from a politician. We can't and won't let up now or again, United We Stand, Divided We Fall.

[HarryToolips]

Hey whiteychaser this is what happens when you guys try and stab us in the backs...and besides, other similar jurisdictions in North America only give a maximum of 10% to their guides, a number you guys already get. So if your industry is really suffering your not running your businesses efficiently are ya?

[Whonnock Boy]

There are a couple things discussed this weekend that may need closer scrutiny. First, why should there be any difference based on species? Is this not unfair to those outfitters who do not hold high dollar animals? All species should be valued the same regardless of their perceived dollar value. They all die just the same, and they should all be the same, 10%..... Second, it is known by many that numerous outfitter surplus tags are being given to family, friends, and guide workers. Lots of tags! This is taking away from our opportunity. Those animals were not meant for these people, and should be going to resident hunters as a whole.

With that said, how many animals has the the op harvested under the guide outfitters quota? Are you more privileged than the rest of us?

[180grainer]

Obviously you have no idea how much the "average joe hunter" does or knows about wildlife management or conservation. You have no idea how many hours that same "joe" might put in towards wildlife habitat enhancement and how much money he spends on his outdoor activities every year.

These average joe hunters spend a whole lot of money to have the privilege of using the outdoors. Guides use these same outdoors for a profit and don't want that "joe" bothering them or their hunters because it might cut into their profits. That "joe hunter" might work harder to get into a spot than a "tourist hunter" and might shoot that animal that the guide wanted to sell his high paying tourist. That's what this boils down to.

You picked up on it. This idea that "they" are the true conservationists.....makes me puke. Well pardon me, I the unwashed would like to hunt too master.

[bridger]

If guides are true conservationists as the op says why then did they ask to take kootenays bighorns off quota? They were on quota for conservation concerns in the first place. They were killing too many rams! That simple!

[REMINGTON JIM]

Whiteychaser - did the GOABC send you here to appeal to us ? or just try and BS us ? :tongue: LOL RJ

[Sitkaspruce]

Whiteychaser

As a past guide that worked in the industry, I note that you seem to be drinking the same GO koolaid that Michael, Sonny and Scott hand out at the annual convention, the same stuff that Christy, Steve and Bill drink.

I bet you work in Northern BC, where the guides have the sheep, moose, caribou, grizz and goats, limited access and GOS. Those few territories are the the only true stand in their own feet businesses that can survive as a livelihood. If you were told draw a line from FSJ to Terrace, pretty well every business south of there is NOT a full time, stand alone, raise your family business. They were designed as part time businesses, for the old time ranchers and loggers to supplement they yearly earnings. Now, because they paid over inflated prices for them, the GO seem to think that they should have a bigger piece of the pie as they cannot make it full time with what they had. Bad business decisions should not be out on the shoulders of the RH, which is what they want to happen.

As for GO looking after their area for conservation of animals......where have you seen this and what were they doing to enhance the local population?? And if you say burns, well that is BS as some of my tax $$$ along with local club $$$ goes to towards those burns. And in all my time as a guide, I have never met a GO that says they let animals go because of conservation.....if the Paying Client says he want to shoot that animal, and it is legal, it is shot. Hell a bunch of the GO used to tell me that they would deliberately over book clients so that they would always fill their quota of hunts, most of which they sold as meat hunts, not trophy hunts (amazing what was said when the booze was flowing and the food was good!!!). It will always come down to the all mighty $$$ and never about conservation, especially on those part time outfits.

So before you start standing up for the GO, get know a bunch, especially the ones in the Omenica, East Koots and Caribou, you will find most HATE resident hunters, LOVE LEH and do very little with conservation.

Oh and while you are at it, ask your boss where all the Hunting Preservation Fund $$$ they collect really goes to. Bet you will be surprised that it has probably lined the Liberals pockets......

Cheers

SS

[bassplayer]

Second, it is known by many that numerous outfitter surplus tags are being given to family, friends, and guide workers. Lots of tags! This is taking away from our opportunity. Those animals were not meant for these people, and should be going to resident hunters as a whole. With that said, how many animals has the the op harvested under the guide outfitters quota? Are you more privileged than the rest of us?
Funny you say that. I met a guide here in region 8-09 behind Naramata who had his daughter with him last October and was trying to help her fill her LEH moose tag.

[r106]

If we want to 'save' more animals, shouldn't we reduce hunting opportunities for BOTH residents and guides? Re-allocating from one pool to another isn't reducing the number of animals killed.

What's the success rate for a guided hunt?I bet its alot higher than resident hunts. If thats true then it means by re-allocating more animals would be removed from the ecosystem.

A huge way for guides to show they care about conservation would be for them to burn half of their allocated tags on opening day.

Close but not quite. If there is a consevation issue they should cut back on guide quota and then only cut back on residents if further action is required. BC wildlife belongs to British Columbians. Period.

[bridger]

Whiteychaser

As a past guide that worked in the industry, I note that you seem to be drinking the same GO koolaid that Michael, Sonny and Scott hand out at the annual convention, the same stuff that Christy, Steve and Bill drink.

I bet you work in Northern BC, where the guides have the sheep, moose, caribou, grizz and goats, limited access and GOS. Those few territories are the the only true stand in their own feet businesses that can survive as a livelihood. If you were told draw a line from FSJ to Terrace, pretty well every business south of there is NOT a full time, stand alone, raise your family business. They were designed as part time businesses, for the old time ranchers and loggers to supplement they yearly earnings. Now, because they paid over inflated prices for them, the GO seem to think that they should have a bigger piece of the pie as they cannot make it full time with what they had. Bad business decisions should not be out on the shoulders of the RH, which is what they want to happen.

As for GO looking after their area for conservation of animals......where have you seen this and what were they doing to enhance the local population?? And if you say burns, well that is BS as some of my tax $$$ along with local club $$$ goes to towards those burns. And in all my time as a guide, I have never met a GO that says they let animals go because of conservation.....if the Paying Client says he want to shoot that animal, and it is legal, it is shot. Hell a bunch of the GO used to tell me that they would deliberately over book clients so that they would always fill their quota of hunts, most of which they sold as meat hunts, not trophy hunts (amazing what was said when the booze was flowing and the food was good!!!). It will always come down to the all mighty $$$ and never about conservation, especially on those part time outfits.

So before you start standing up for the GO, get know a bunch, especially the ones in the Omenica, East Koots and Caribou, you will find most HATE resident hunters, LOVE LEH and do very little with conservation.

Oh and while you are at it, ask your boss where all the Hunting Preservation Fund $$$ they collect really goes to. Bet you will be surprised that it has probably lined the Liberals pockets......

Cheers

SS

outstanding post SS. Right on the nose!

[Drillbit]

Is your anonymity important to you, or would you mind telling us which outfit is yours?

He won't have the nuts.

[Paulyman]

5254Sounds like goabc members are a little unedjumucated, it seems like more sugar coating and twisting the facts and numbers to make this all seem palatable

[TARCHER]

He won't have the nuts. Absolutely no cahoonas. Can't be chicken all your life.

[brian]

I've seen the same thing in northern B.C where once you could expect to harvest a mature 10-12 year old ram, where now rams are getting cropped off the season after they hit full curl, usually a 7 year old ram. Shooting a ram at half their life expectancy is not conservation, and it is not wildlife management.


I am surprised at the amount of anti "trophy hunters" opinions there are on here. Last time I checked a trophy is usually considered the most mature male of a species. The ones that are biologically the least important to a species survival. The ultimate trophy is that bull or that ram that isn't going to make the winter, can you show me a better method of conservation through hunting than that?


and believe it or not they know a lot more about wildlife management and conservation then the average joe that holds a BC hunting license every year.

Your own grasp on wildlife population management seems to be a little shaky. The truth is all males are biologically less important to the survival of their species than the females as long as a good ram ewe ratio is maintained. In fact nothing you posted here is about wildlife management or conservation. To be brief in BC wildlife management is generally about establishing the surplus population from an existing herd and taking enough animals annually from that surplus to guarantee a healthy herd going on into the future. Conservation is about making sure that our policies or actions are not endangering the herd and that we are investing in habitat renewal/protection so that the herd will be able to thrive. Neither of these goals is affected by whether you kill a male half way through his life or at the end of his life. Trophy or non-trophy, the concern of wildlife management is that you are not taking more animals than is biologically feasible to sustain a healthy population. Now if you are talking about management for trophy quality then that is a different matter that I can not speak off nor care that much about. But trophy management is NOT herd management. I hope that guides in general do know more about conservation than the average joe hunter does but unfortunately this is not reflected in your post.

[REMINGTON JIM]

He won't have the nuts.

I BET your right ! :wink: RJ

[olympia]

He won't have the nuts.

then maybe you got the nuts to tell us who you both are? I think not lol

[GoatGuy]

I realize my opinion is largely in the minority around here, but thanks to free speech I will voice it anyway. I am a guide, have held a guide license for 10 years in both Alberta and British Columbia. I have worked for hardworking and honest outfitters, and contrary to popular belief, I have made a good living for myself and my family, this is more then a job to me it is my lifestyle.
In the past decade the number of hunters in both of those Provinces has been growing at a rapid rate. Because of this rapid growth it is my opinion that our wildlife management is behind the curve. Reactive instead of proactive. In the past 10 years Alberta has gone from a top destination for bighorns, to a foot race every opening day to kill the ram that turned legal that year (usually a 6 year old sheep). I've seen the same thing in northern B.C where once you could expect to harvest a mature 10-12 year old ram, where now rams are getting cropped off the season after they hit full curl, usually a 7 year old ram. Shooting a ram at half their life expectancy is not conservation, and it is not wildlife management. The same rings true for mule deer, moose, and elk. Shooting a moose for meat every year, without giving anything back to habitat enhancement and wildlife conservation, is like taking from a jar of cash and not putting anything back, if everyone does it there would be no moose and no cash. LEH wait times are only getting longer with our population growth and will continue to do so regardless of outfitters. I respect the B.C residents who are fighting for their kids to have the opportunity to hunt, but do so by investing in conservation groups like WSF and SCI or their local affiliates ,not by fighting against an industry that is creating jobs, dumping money into conservation , and managing their areas for the long term benefit of everyone. Doubt me? Please try and find a mainstream outfitter that doesn't donate expensive hunts to these organizations as fundraisers, or are lifetime members themselves. Most donate every year.
I am surprised at the amount of anti "trophy hunters" opinions there are on here. Last time I checked a trophy is usually considered the most mature male of a species. The ones that are biologically the least important to a species survival. The ultimate trophy is that bull or that ram that isn't going to make the winter, can you show me a better method of conservation through hunting than that?
Trying to shutdown and boycott outfitting because it brings in foreign money is like shutting down trapping because most of the fur buyers are Chinese, or shutting down logging because a lot of our timber leaves the country, or perhaps our oilfield because or oil just gets shipped overseas. Or mining because a lot of our mines are now Chinese owned. Like it or not, our wildlife is for sale, Just as our wood is for sale, our oil, and our minerals. At least our wildlife is a renewable resource that can be managed for future generations.
The outfitters were pioneers. They opened up British Columbia's wild places with horse trails and landing strips, and believe it or not they know a lot more about wildlife management and conservation then the average joe that holds a BC hunting license every year. It is their livelihood to know more and to manage with the allocations they are given. I am not ignorant to the fact that some outfitters are crooks, just as in all walks of life. But the anti outfitter stigma helps no one, and it certainly does nothing for our wildlife. If everyone put as much time and effort into conservation efforts as they do into this outfitter battle we would have a lot less to be concerned about.
Yours Truly,
A concerned hunter
I am concerned for you as well.

Seen this movie before. Start with the solution, then figure out ways to rationalize it.

The issue in BC is this - GOABC has lobbied to have resident hunter allocations reduced for 20+ years. GOABC has lobbied to reduce resident hunter opportunity and access to wildlife. Now this is coming back to bite them. GOABC should have worked on wildlife management..... to increase wildlife populations....... but it didn't.


None of this would have occurred if GOABC would have tried to make more wildlife, instead of taking it from residents.

This isn't about "all outfitters", it is mostly about a few.

Lastly, outfitters don't bring in foreign dollars --- non-resident hunters do.

[Whonnock Boy]

I wanted to quote this just so everyone really saw, and understood what was said here. We don't need outfitters to bring in non-resident hunter income. Understood?;)




Lastly, outfitters don't bring in foreign dollars --- non-resident hunters do.

[Bugle M In]

Hey OP!...go kiss my A**!
All I hear from you Guides is TROPHY, TROPHY, TROPHY!
How your clients don't want to shoot small bears, so you don't hunt them...and than you bitch there are no elk and no whities...and bitch that the trapper isn't doing his part with the wolves.
Instead of going out there and dropping a few bears that are hitting the elk hard during the spring calving period....(as per discussion I had with Outfitter in an area I hunt, and says the elk are all gone!?, but says he hasn't hunted Grizz in 7 years, but they are right there where the elk are dropping)
Nope...my client wants TROPHY SIZE!!!!!!!!!
You hide behind the words Conservation, but not for the reasons you imply, ... Conservation and Trophy size have nothing to do with each other....
Trophy size is a Guide Outfitters way of preventing some BC Residents from hunting in particular areas, that's all!
And I know of severl outfitters who took out multiple Nannies instead of Billies, all for the sake of CASH!!, NOT CONSERVATION!! (thankfully they got kicked out of the territory of few years back)
Nothing good ever comes from putting a price tag on anything, Wildlife included, and GOABC is not trying to conserve anything from their new policy arrangement, other than grabbing more CASH!,
and at the same time TAKING AWAY BC RESIDENT OPPURTUNITY!!
It's real simple, and all I can say about your post and my personal opinion to outfitters is....
Get lost!, we don't need that type of BS in BC anymore

[btridge]

Hey OP!...go kiss my A**!
All I hear from you Guides is TROPHY, TROPHY, TROPHY!
How your clients don't want to shoot small bears, so you don't hunt them...and than you bitch there are no elk and no whities...and bitch that the trapper isn't doing his part with the wolves.
Instead of going out there and dropping a few bears that are hitting the elk hard during the spring calving period....(as per discussion I had with Outfitter in an area I hunt, and says the elk are all gone!?, but says he hasn't hunted Grizz in 7 years, but they are right there where the elk are dropping)
Nope...my client wants TROPHY SIZE!!!!!!!!!
You hide behind the words Conservation, but not for the reasons you imply, ... Conservation and Trophy size have nothing to do with each other....
Trophy size is a Guide Outfitters way of preventing some BC Residents from hunting in particular areas, that's all!
And I know of severl outfitters who took out multiple Nannies instead of Billies, all for the sake of CASH!!, NOT CONSERVATION!! (thankfully they got kicked out of the territory of few years back)
Nothing good ever comes from putting a price tag on anything, Wildlife included, and GOABC is not trying to conserve anything from their new policy arrangement, other than grabbing more CASH!,
and at the same time TAKING AWAY BC RESIDENT OPPURTUNITY!!
It's real simple, and all I can say about your post and my personal opinion to outfitters is....
Get lost!, we don't need that type of BS in BC anymore
Well said! If GOs were true conservationists, they would be the FIRST group to take Fewer animals. Instead they feel entitled to More tags at the expense of BC RESIDENT HUNTERS. This is a BC resource for the good of BC residents first, It is time for BC residents to come first. It is time the government looked at other jurisdictions and stopped lining the pockets of GOs at the expense of our wildlife and resident opportunity. All allocations to GOs should be cut to no more than 10% in all areas where the wildlife is on a General open season and areas the wildlife is on LEH, the allocation should be cut to 0% to 5% at most depending on how restricted the LEH area is. It is time for a total rewrite of BC's outfitter industry, keep it in BC resident hands and for the betterment of BC, Not out of province interests.

[XPEIer]

A 2 minute google search:

http://contributions.electionsbc.gov.bc.ca/pcs/SA1SearchResults.aspx?FilerSK=(ALL)&EDSK=0&FilerTypeSK=0&Contributor=guide+outfitters&PartySK=0&ED=(ALL)&FilerType=(ALL)&Filer=(ALL)&Party=(ALL)&DateTo=2014%2f12%2f31&DateFrom=2010%2f01%2f01&DFYear=2010&DFMonth=01&DFDay=01&DTYear=2014&DTMonth=12&DTDay=31

[Drillbit]

then maybe you got the nuts to tell us who you both are? I think not lol

His thread, not mine.

He should take some more pride in it, and his name.

He's proud enough to tell his opinion, but why isn't he proud enough to make it valid and say who he is, and where he comes from?

An anonymous opinion doesn't mean shit. It's pretty easy to "astroturf" if nobody knows who you are.


And me. I'm just the "the average joe that holds a BC hunting license every year". My opinion doesn't meant shit either.

[Whonnock Boy]

Come in, and leaves unwilling to defend his statement. Makes me wonder what his intentions are.

[Drillbit]

^just to get us fighting amongst ourselves is my best guess.

[troutseeker]

Imagine how many old rams there would be if the guides were cut back to 10% where they belong.Yep, what goofs always wanting more, more, more! Greedy bunch of bass tards they are.

[Whonnock Boy]

^just to get us fighting amongst ourselves is my best guess.

Honestly, I think we have been doing very well since all the ex-guides, ex go's, and outfitter lovers have moved on. It has been quite pleasant.

[Ltbullken]

Could not agree more bridger, the issue of allocation fairness absolutely needs to be resolved, whether that look like a resident/nonresident set in stone ratio or however it would be, I have no idea what goes on at those lobby meetings, but I can say I have seen nonresident quotas drop like a rock the last 10 years while resident licenses remained open in the area I work it's been going that way for quite some time. Are they wrong in standing up for their quota? There were 6 rams shot on one ridge august 1st this year by resident hunters, and that is not putting the resource first. Either people need to be educated or restricted. If they aren't they will take as long as they can until there is nothing left. I don't think it's unreasonable for an outfitter to lobby for 10 sheep tags in hopes of getting 8. That system is the same with any business, and any government dealings. Resident hunter opportunity is going to continue to drop with our population increase. As a resident I would rather have the sheep thrive and wait a little longer between tags then have it open and race to shoot the first legal ram. The outfitters I know that have cut back on hunters have done so for the betterment of the resource then not being able to book

This begs more questions than it answers. You might say that 6 rams were taken off a mountain, but those rams are legal. How many were there, how many did GO's take and how many rams survived to breed? How many rams at what age are needed to ensure a sustainable population or, as you say, needed to thrive? What science is there to show that taking those animals makes the overall population less healthy? Simply quoting '6 rams' says nothing of any value. Your point is more emotional than it seems to be based in any science. Again, your suggestion is that RH's are just ignorant and greedy hunters who need to have their allocation taken away and given to the GO's as a way to safeguard wildlife. That is not going to make any headway with any of us. If it is an issue that full curl rams is not a good enough benchmark for a healthy population, that is a different conversation entirely and does not mean that RH allocation needs to be reduced and GO's increased. Saying GO quota's have dropped is not believable. GO's hunts have certainly dropped but that is due to economics and not a saintly sacrifice on the part of GO's. To say that GO's have voluntarily left their quota unharvested is very anecdotal and begs numbers with valid, believable, independently verifiable data to support them. Maybe some have done so, and I commend them, but to suggest the drop in non-resident hunts is all due to voluntary cut back is not really credible.

[Ltbullken]

This isn't about "all outfitters", it is mostly about a few.

Lastly, outfitters don't bring in foreign dollars --- non-resident hunters do.

And the many that are foreign owned or owned by operators out of province don't keep the dollars here in BC.

[BEAVERBRUCE]

Is your anonymity important to you, or would you mind telling us which outfit is yours?
he says he is guide. he works for outfitters .outfitters own the area or represent the foreigner with $.

[bigstew]

Fair points being made, but to be completely honest , complaining about a non bc resident owning a outfit is like complaining about any other business(Walmart, Safeway, Sears etc) owned by someone from another province or the states.... Big deal! You make the choice where you shop.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I would guess the outfit he works for is in Region 6 since they don't take enough rams to fill their quota. If so, it's not for conservation...it because of the 'Skeena Formula' falsely inflating their quota for many years.

SSS

[bridger]

I would guess the outfit he works for is in Region 6 since they don't take enough rams to fill their quota. If so, it's not for conservation...it because of the 'Skeena Formula' falsely inflating their quota for many years.

SSS


Inflated quota's? Surely you jest! Lol.

[lange1212]

I would guess the outfit he works for is in Region 6 since they don't take enough rams to fill their quota. If so, it's not for conservation...it because of the 'Skeena Formula' falsely inflating their quota for many years.

SSS
Your absolutely right on this one.

Although the Skeena formula is no longer used the inflated quotas that were a result of it still are. There's a reason why guides target the first 3 weeks of August for sheep, because after that the mature rams are so thinned out and harvest success drops right off.

Nothing like sending home a client that paid $30,000 empty handed and in many cases not even seeing a mature ram. That's bad for business and why they shift to other species of lesser value and leave quota unused. Make no mistake it has nothing to do with conservation!

Sheep quota in the Skeena for the most part is a misnomer as it is so high its as if they were on GOS anyway.

Advice for residents wanting to hunt sheep in the Skeena, if you want to have the highest chance of success you need to be on the mountain August 1st.

[40incher]

The GOABC agenda is hoping to BC put residents on LEH for every high-end/$$ species once they get their 40% split legislated.

Arguing there are no old rams out there because of resident hunters is BS. Having killed 5 stone rams in recent years, that averaged 10 years old, tells me so!

Obviously this guide is not being very selective. Time his quota went down to 10% of the allowable harvest instead of increasing it to 40% as proposed. Sounds like a plan to me!!

[325 wsm]

40 incher….5 Rams averaging 10 years old is very good….congrats. It also speaks that the sheep areas you hunt in have healthy populations. As I haven't been able to find any previous threads of yours (maybe I missed them) showing these rams it would be great if you could post a few pics of them or even stories of the hunts. If an outfitter is averaging rams that are only 6 years old they definitely need to have there quotas reduced regardless of any previously legislated numbers.

[The Dawg]

I would guess the outfit he works for is in Region 6 since they don't take enough rams to fill their quota. If so, it's not for conservation...it because of the 'Skeena Formula' falsely inflating their quota for many years.

SSS


Remember what GG says....be happy the Dawg is on our side ;)

Josh Johnson of Ceasar Lake Outfitters,Blue Bronna and Tuchodi River Outfitters, is that YOU? :D


https://www.facebook.com/joshua.johnson.1800?fref=ts

[1899]

Fair points being made, but to be completely honest , complaining about a non bc resident owning a outfit is like complaining about any other business(Walmart, Safeway, Sears etc) owned by someone from another province or the states.... Big deal! You make the choice where you shop.

No, not true. The big "selling" point the GOABC is trying to use is that the GO business brings money into BC, and therefore benefits all British Columbians. What is the benefit to British Columbians if a GO, who lives outside of BC, comes here when the season opens - with non-BC resident guides in tow - and then leaves for home with his earnings when the season is over? What is the advantage to BC residents when a Guiding Certificate is held in trust for a foreign investor who, in all likelihood, takes the profits of the business out of the Province/Country at the end of the season?



And on the sheep thing, almost 50% of the sheep actually taken in BC are killed by non-residents. So put aside allocation and quota for one second and look at the number of animals ON THE GROUND. And then you have the audacity to come on here and complain about there being a foot-race on the mountain???? Give your head a shake - it is not our responsibility to ensure that you have the "lifestyle" you desire.

[835]

How does taking tags from me and giving them to you help conservation?

This is a very simple question. It is fundamentally the whole premis of your statement. So if you can tell me how taking tags from Residents and giving the same tags to guide will help conservation i will be impressed...
What about all the untenured land? what about the fact GOABC wants to open rights to guides for all this land and have the same right to lock it that you have to lock your yard?

i am trying to contain myself in hopes you will at least do your best to awnser my first question if not both.



This whole arguement is not about conservation..... it is about who gets to kill the tags. A non resident or a resident.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Remember what GG says....be happy the Dawg is on our side ;)

Josh Johnson of Ceasar Lake Outfitters,Blue Bronna and Tuchodi River Outfitters, is that YOU? :D


https://www.facebook.com/joshua.johnson.1800?fref=ts

I always knew GG was a smart man!

If it's Tuchodi, then I'm wrong on Reg 6.

[Argali]

Fair points being made, but to be completely honest , complaining about a non bc resident owning a outfit is like complaining about any other business(Walmart, Safeway, Sears etc) owned by someone from another province or the states.... Big deal! You make the choice where you shop.

Yes but these other businesses primarily serve BC residents, are staffed by BC resident employees, and pay tax/benefits in BC. There are few businesses in BC that that cater nearly 100% to non-residents and in some cases are also staffed and owned by non-residents. So really, BC residents do not "make the choice where they shop" - the non-residents do, and their agenda is clearly distinct from the residents.

There is comparatively little local economic benefit derived from seasonal businesses that serve nonresidents and are owned and staffed by nonresidents, so it is legitimate to investigate alternatives that might provide higher return.

[fowl language]

whitey chaser, if you made a good living for you and your family why do you feel you need more allocation from the residents as it does not come out of thin air.....it almost sounds to me it is all about greed....fowl

[bridger]

40 incher….5 Rams averaging 10 years old is very good….congrats. It also speaks that the sheep areas you hunt in have healthy populations. As I haven't been able to find any previous threads of yours (maybe I missed them) showing these rams it would be great if you could post a few pics of them or even stories of the hunts. If an outfitter is averaging rams that are only 6 years old they definitely need to have there quotas reduced regardless of any previously legislated numbers.

Along with pictures please include co-ordinates or is that asking toooo much. Lol

[chilcotin hillbilly]

whitey chaser, if you made a good living for you and your family why do you feel you need more allocation from the residents as it does not come out of thin air.....it almost sounds to me it is all about greed....fowl


Paint all us members with the same brush? I hope not. The only animal i have on quota is moose from which I am down 66% from when I bought this area. Non tenured areas taken out the equation took the biggest toll. It would seem that the BCWF thinks animals don't cross the lines on a map.

[kebes]

Paint all us members with the same brush? I hope not. The only animal i have on quota is moose from which I am down 66% from when I bought this area. Non tenured areas taken out the equation took the biggest toll. It would seem that the BCWF thinks animals don't cross the lines on a map.

Just out of curiosity do you mind sharing what year you bought in and what the quota situation was like at that point?

[srupp]

Hmm Doug we should not be grouping all guides ..outfitters in the same soup..your treatment of your clients..that pay your bills and feed your familly..you are equally wonderful with resident hunters deer, moose, grizzly, deer, black bear...as well as freely giving to Wounded warriors in Canada and USA .
Betty Franks was also a fair person with resident hunters as was Doug when he ran Swan Lake outfitters..
Right now we need to figure out allocation...it isnt about success, harvest...having $25k per sheep allows for horseback scouting for weeks..or by scouting by aircraft...seen that done all over the north of the province for sheep.
Tempers are edgy words are harsh....hope this gets settled soon....
Steven Rupp

[bridger]

Paint all us members with the same brush? I hope not. The only animal i have on quota is moose from which I am down 66% from when I bought this area. Non tenured areas taken out the equation took the biggest toll. It would seem that the BCWF thinks animals don't cross the lines on a map.

kinda like canfor straying over onto Georgia Pacific's tree farm and cutting a few trees. Eh!

[bridger]

Chilcotin hillbilly / srupp.. you are right we should not lump all outfitters in together, what has been going on here is a small group of people at the top of GOABC have created a situation that is untenable for all involved. We need to be clear there are great outfitters out there, hopefully they will get rid of those who have created this mess. Look to the below to see who/what are the problems and why we are at this point.

So lets get this straight, ... the past president and current vice president of GOABC are both registered lobbyists??

The VP, of GOABC is a registered lobbyist who worked directly on MLA Morris's campaign

GOABC received 80,000 dollars from gov't and in turn gave 120,000 back to the party???

AND THEN TO TOP IT OFF, .... as GOABC has been crying the blues, saying they have lost success factor (see last few interviews) all along they have known and therefore been misleading the public as they in 2013 had an order in council passed, ALLOWING THEM TO EXCEED THEIR QUOTA WITHOUT PENALTY , AT WILL???????

This would be like a resident shooting a moose off their tag and then shooting one more.. but having a pass and not get charged??? If a resident shot more than there tag allowed it would be called POACHING. How pray tell is this any different.

This Order in Council is the most disgusting move I have seen GOABC partake in.. How in good conscious can these people cry to the residents of BC about loss of success factors, while having a "take what I want with no consequence" card in their back pocket.


If each outfitter took one extra animal a year (which as history shows if they can they will) that would be 240 per year. If I were GOABC I would hang my head in shame for such a sham.

Lets make sure our MLA's know that the public is now aware of some of the shenanigans that have gone on by GOABC. Who knows what is left to uncover. simply sickening.

There are some good outfitters for sure and they need to start distancing themselves from the Goabc. Silence is acceptance not golden in this instance.

[180grainer]

Chilcotin hillbilly / srupp.. you are right we should not lump all outfitters in together, what has been going on here is a small group of people at the top of GOABC have created a situation that is untenable for all involved. We need to be clear there are great outfitters out there, hopefully they will get rid of those who have created this mess. Look to the below to see who/what are the problems and why we are at this point.

So lets get this straight, ... the past president and current vice president of GOABC are both registered lobbyists??

The VP, of GOABC is a registered lobbyist who worked directly on MLA Morris's campaign

GOABC received 80,000 dollars from gov't and in turn gave 120,000 back to the party???

AND THEN TO TOP IT OFF, .... as GOABC has been crying the blues, saying they have lost success factor (see last few interviews) all along they have known and therefore been misleading the public as they in 2013 had an order in council passed, ALLOWING THEM TO EXCEED THEIR QUOTA WITHOUT PENALTY , AT WILL???????

This would be like a resident shooting a moose off their tag and then shooting one more.. but having a pass and not get charged??? If a resident shot more than there tag allowed it would be called POACHING. How pray tell is this any different.

This Order in Council is the most disgusting move I have seen GOABC partake in.. How in good conscious can these people cry to the residents of BC about loss of success factors, while having a "take what I want with no consequence" card in their back pocket.


If each outfitter took one extra animal a year (which as history shows if they can they will) that would be 240 per year. If I were GOABC I would hang my head in shame for such a sham.

Lets make sure our MLA's know that the public is now aware of some of the shenanigans that have gone on by GOABC. Who knows what is left to uncover. simply sickening.

There's a story the media might like to sink their teeth into.

[curt]

I will actually applaud his well written moderately educated opinion however, the part that makes my shake my is when they comment on how much money they generate into the economy. Guide outfitters bring in a marginal amount of income to local economies, however most of it goes into the pocket of the guide making one person or family "well to do" for little work done. That pales in comparison to what resident hunters bring to the local economies. So if you are going to argue your point don't play the income bullshit because it doesn't wash. This scenario is no different than the commercial fishery... the sports fishermen is paying way more per pound for salmon than a commercial fisher and putting considerably more into local economies..... as is the resident hunters and if there were more tags available to the people who should be entitled US THE RESIDENTS!!! then we would be contributing even more. Unfortunately that isn't the case currently because the outfitters bought their support with a back door, back stabbing, crooked spineless liberal government. Honestly why any of you bother to get own here and try to justify the current decision is really a complete waste of your time as well as ours. THATS THE REALITY

[chilcotin hillbilly]

kinda like canfor straying over onto Georgia Pacific's tree farm and cutting a few trees. Eh!

When the difference is , 80% of all the moose shot in this MU are shot in my concession. The huge land mass taken out of the calculation equation is hardly hunted by residents. This makes a huge difference.

[Wydtrak]

Chilcotin hillbilly / srupp.. you are right we should not lump all outfitters in together, what has been going on here is a small group of people at the top of GOABC have created a situation that is untenable for all involved. We need to be clear there are great outfitters out there, hopefully they will get rid of those who have created this mess. Look to the below to see who/what are the problems and why we are at this point.

So lets get this straight, ... the past president and current vice president of GOABC are both registered lobbyists??

The VP, of GOABC is a registered lobbyist who worked directly on MLA Morris's campaign

GOABC received 80,000 dollars from gov't and in turn gave 120,000 back to the party???

AND THEN TO TOP IT OFF, .... as GOABC has been crying the blues, saying they have lost success factor (see last few interviews) all along they have known and therefore been misleading the public as they in 2013 had an order in council passed, ALLOWING THEM TO EXCEED THEIR QUOTA WITHOUT PENALTY , AT WILL???????

This would be like a resident shooting a moose off their tag and then shooting one more.. but having a pass and not get charged??? If a resident shot more than there tag allowed it would be called POACHING. How pray tell is this any different.

This Order in Council is the most disgusting move I have seen GOABC partake in.. How in good conscious can these people cry to the residents of BC about loss of success factors, while having a "take what I want with no consequence" card in their back pocket.


If each outfitter took one extra animal a year (which as history shows if they can they will) that would be 240 per year. If I were GOABC I would hang my head in shame for such a sham.

Lets make sure our MLA's know that the public is now aware of some of the shenanigans that have gone on by GOABC. Who knows what is left to uncover. simply sickening.

So how much would it cost to have this information on the front page of all the major BC newspapers? The OIC information alone is enough to get some MLA's back pedaling. I will donate to that!

[The Dawg]

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?114649-Its-time-to-blow-this-up

[chilcotin hillbilly]

You are not allowed to over harvest your MU allocation without penalty, I am not sure where you are getting this info from Deaddog. This is definitely not the case in Region 5

You guys keep pushing claiming the GOABC are spin doctors, you guys need to get your stories straight as well.

[180grainer]

So how much would it cost to have this information on the front page of all the major BC newspapers? The OIC information alone is enough to get some MLA's back pedaling. I will donate to that!

Shouldn't cost us a dime. Wasn't there a reporter on this site looking for a story about Grizzly hunting? Here's the real story, where is that guy?

[goatdancer]

You are not allowed to over harvest your MU allocation without penalty, I am not sure where you are getting this info from Deaddog. This is definitely not the case in Region 5

You guys keep pushing claiming the GOABC are spin doctors, you guys need to get your stories straight as well.

Read the info in the link in post #94.

[Fisher-Dude]

When the difference is , 80% of all the moose shot in this MU are shot in my concession. The huge land mass taken out of the calculation equation is hardly hunted by residents. This makes a huge difference.


Wow, the self-entitlement attitude of some GOABC members is off the charts.

[Gamebuster]

Paint all us members with the same brush? I hope not. The only animal i have on quota is moose from which I am down 66% from when I bought this area. Non tenured areas taken out the equation took the biggest toll. It would seem that the BCWF thinks animals don't cross the lines on a map.

For everyone that wanders in, there would be on average one that wanders out. Outfitters shouldn't get a piece of the pie that doesn't exist in a territory. How does that make sense?

[bridger]

When the difference is , 80% of all the moose shot in this MU are shot in my concession. The huge land mass taken out of the calculation equation is hardly hunted by residents. This makes a huge difference.

I understand that the difference is they are not in your tenured area. Quotas that were the result of Regional averaging we're the brain child of a couple of regional managers that resulted from pressure from the goabc. They were artificial from the get go and unrealistic. Regional averaging in the kootenays and caribou caused a real mess. In reality the issue of harvest shares is not the root cause of the problem. It's much deeper and that's what we should address the hassle over shares was settled back in 2007.

[kebes]

Chilcotin, I'm still interested to know the year you bought in. What does that 66% amount to in actual number of moose?

[Whonnock Boy]

Is it a picture of a camo'ed up hunter bent over?


but I think I'm starting to get the picture.

[TPG]

Is it a picture of a camo'ed up hunter bent over?

Haha, you read my mind

[Paulyman]

Thread should be renamed A confused hunter...

[chilcotin hillbilly]

Chilcotin, I'm still interested to know the year you bought in. What does that 66% amount to in actual number of moose?

I have owned my operation for 5 years, I had 18 over 5 years which was cut to 6 over 5 years shortly after I bought.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

For everyone that wanders in, there would be on average one that wanders out. Outfitters shouldn't get a piece of the pie that doesn't exist in a territory. How does that make sense?

To really make it a fair split the allocation should be split into different zones. With fractional areas 5-05a and 5-05b and the tenured areas as 5-05c this would make the most sense, splitting up the hunting pressure over the land mass not concentrating it in one area.

[bridger]

Not to cover old ground, but regional averaging artificially increases the population within an outfitters area, which in turn creates an artificial quota. Artificial quotas also tend to artificially inflate market value of the certificate. This is one scenario we were trying to avoid when we re did the allocation policy in 2007 and went with defined percentages.

Regional averaging and inflated quotas are are one of the roots of this fight we are having now. Is it fair to reduce residents hunting opportunities because artificial quotas inflated prices of guide outfitter certificates? In my mind and obviously in the minds of 102,000 resident hunters the answer is no. Artificial quotas in region 4 & 5 are the direct result of decisions made by regional managers that apparently had their own agendas. We are now seeing the unfortunate results of those actions.

[GoatGuy]

To really make it a fair split the allocation should be split into different zones. With fractional areas 5-05a and 5-05b and the tenured areas as 5-05c this would make the most sense, splitting up the hunting pressure over the land mass not concentrating it in one area.

So being able to get animals from the fractional areas before and harvesting them in your area was OK, but now that you don't have access to them that is not ok?

You get the non-resident share of the wildlife that exists in your territory.

Resident hunters get their share of moose at either the MU or PMU level.

That is all.

No idea when you bought your area, but everyone knew in 2007 the quotas were going to be cut in Region 5 effective 2009 hunting season. If you didn't know that someone sold you a 20 year old racehorse.

[bridger]

Lol 20 year old race horses are long odds.

[Fisher-Dude]

No one cares about conservation, Rich. They want to use regional averaging to hammer every moose on the face of the earth. You know, to stay "viable," same way they want to hammer every legal ram in the Kootenays.

When a shitty businessman pays way too much for his operation without understanding the dynamics of his product supply and the demand volatility of his market, he should fail.

Asking for corporate welfare on the backs of resident hunters and taxpayers because of his inability to understand his business is ridiculous.

[1899]

None of this would matter if a portion of the AAH for non-residents would be available only through a draw and there were no exclusive territories. A draw that would, by the way, cost double of whatever we have to pay for LEH, and which funds would go straight into wildlife management.

[bridger]

No one cares about conservation, Rich. They want to use regional averaging to hammer every moose on the face of the earth. You know, to stay "viable," same way they want to hammer every legal ram in the Kootenays.

When a shitty businessman pays way too much for his operation without understanding the dynamics of his product supply and the demand volatility of his market, he should fail.

Asking for corporate welfare on the backs of resident hunters and taxpayers because of his inability to understand his business is ridiculous.

guide outfitters are "stewards of the land". Says so on their website! Lol

[bridger]

None of this would matter if a portion of the AAH for non-residents would be available only through a draw and there were no exclusive territories. A draw that would, by the way, cost double of whatever we have to pay for LEH, and which funds would go straight into wildlife management.

all non resident tags should be on leh. Would generate significant funds for wildlife. Once he has a tag the non resident hunter could book with a guide. Or not! Lots of places in the province non residents could navigate just fine without being guided. Works in Alaska, Montana, Wyoming etc. Why not here?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

all non resident tags should be on leh. Would generate significant funds for wildlife. Once he has a tag the non resident hunter could book with a guide. Or not! Lots of places in the province non residents could navigate just fine without being guided. Works in Alaska, Montana, Wyoming etc. Why not here?


Why? Because that would mean more revenue for the government but not the BC Liberal Party. Hopefully the next party in power will consider what's best for the taxpayers instead of what's best for the party.

[goatdancer]

The guy starts a thread, then adds 1 short post. In the mean time, this thread is at post 114. Not another peep. I'm thinking the stir stick must have started to stink. Obviously the guy isn't as "concerned" as he tried to tell us.

[Whonnock Boy]

The guy starts a thread, then adds 1 short post. In the mean time, this thread is at post 114. Not another peep. I'm thinking the stir stick must have started to stink. Obviously the guy isn't as "concerned" as he tried to tell us.

I don't doubt he is concerned, unfortunately for him, he was bitch slapped back to the province in which he came. ;)

[40incher]

Excellantay!!

That's Spanish BTW!

In BC you can now buy a territory and bring your guides in from Mexico, or wherever, and run it like a hunting club. And ... assistant guides no longer need to be licensed ... sounds like a good plan for us poor sucks.

I think it's time we realized Crispy has sold us poor resident taxpayers/hunters out at every level to promote "enterprise"! Apparently resident hunters contribute 0.00 $$ to our provincial economy. Guess my $50,000.00 jet boat doesn't count.

At the rate things are going one (that would be 1) billionaire could own every guide territory in BC!!

[44inchStone]

As well there are BC residents who own Large Territories in the Yukon, and Sask. It's no wonder he is only involved with Outfitting Bears on Vancouver Island. Does it really matter to him if we residents loose our quota of critters? Nope. It should, he to is a BC resident.
We are being sold to the highest bidder. AGAIN!

[Drillbit]

DoubleTap, sorry

[Drillbit]

^Shockey.........gag..........Colorado Buck #2