Time to expose Thompson's Fib

[40incher]

Watched Lord Thompson on Global throwing his feeble "it's only a difference of 60 animals" excuse out there and expecting that to fly ... yeah, like a penguin bud!

Time to change the game!

In South Skeena (Bulkley/Lakes LEH zones 6-04, 6-05, 6-06, 6-08 and 6-09) the bull moose Annual Allowable Harvest is 900 animals. These are very high-demand hunts for BC residents and, over time, we would have ended up with 90% of that AAH if the 2007 policy was followed through on ... that amounts to 810 bull moose per year for resident hunters. That's why the guides needed the policy rescinded!

Thompson's December 10th dictum guarantees the South Skeena guides 25% of "our" moose in perpetuity ... that amounts to 225 bull moose per year for them and leaves resident hunters with just 675. That's a loss of 135 bull moose every year ... forever.

Last time a checked 135 is a lot higher than Thompson's 60.

This hunt represents just a small portion of Skeena Region's moose hunting and only one species. Take into account the mtn. goat, sheep, caribou, grizzly, etc ... and we are likely in the many hundreds of lost resident-harvest opportunities every year.

Province-wide the difference between 40%/20% and 25%/10% as the guides minimums will be in the thousands of animals. Again, the guides know this to be true ... and again, that's why they convinced the Liberals to deep-six the policy.

Time for the truth to come out and to put the fibbers and the apologists in their place!

[Spy]

Wow good stuff ! Lets work it out for every region and add it up ;-)

[fearnodeer]

Good meeting you today Spy/Mike I don't come on here often anymore but would like to thank you personally for putting in a great effort today.

Cheers
Chris

[HarryToolips]

Great work there 40.....can we put this example in the papers???

[rgn5hunt]

Using 2013 stats, Region 5 would loose roughly 135 moose with this forced Clark/Ellis Policy. Residents here have seen their harvest of moose drop 48% in 25 years, outfitters 3% loss in 25 years. OR is it Ellis Clark Policy?.

[40incher]

Great work there 40.....can we put this example in the papers???

You bet ... it's all well-documented data that I can forward on.

If each Region can supply their own estimates of our potential losses, even for one species, that would be tough to ignore.

[tuner]

If you were to go by any of the reports on the rally,this allocation is only about 60 animals. Not one reporter has done their due diligence and looked at anything in depth,they have just parroted what Thomson and the GOABC have quoted.The media has no interest in this matter,they are completely complacent in their coverage. Somewhere along the the line they have failed to see the big picture,and the broader issues,such as the transfer of public resources into private hands,the mismanagement of wildlife, the unethical use of public funds as payback for partisan political donations,etc.The writing is on the wall,the government is steadfast in their defence of the policy,and will not budge, the media will not hold them accountable. The only avenue left to RH's now will be a sledge hammer in the form of an election ballot.

["No Choke"Lord Walsingham]

I believed it was originally many animals (when the initial new policy was announced and uproar started) and was not pleased, in the least. Then, after the changes were made, I heard the "60 animals" bit from Thompson & co and have been having a bit of a hard time finding much further concerning satisfactory information. As such, I went on the little information I had since the changes were made to the new policy and found it acceptable.

Here's why ~

Ultimately I get both sides and am neutral as I appreciate the economic benefits to small town B.C in particular (which generally are pretty hurting economically these days) and the boost to B.C's Hunting reputation internationally and throughout the rest of Canada that non-residents Hunting provides. I also may want to actually get an LEH draw in the future myself and certainly appreciate others getting drawn. I want everyone who wants to Hunt, resident or no to at least have a chance to experience the phenomenal opportunities B.C. has to offer.

If anyone can provide links to current data and sources of specific animals and present an informative package for all (including media) to see, it would be helpful. So far, everywhere I look there is one source or another trying the slant things their way, which is typical of any issue anywhere really I suppose. Yet here in particular, I feel I tend to find more insults to people whom are not dedicated anti-GO than solid research I can believe in.

[bighornbob]

We should demand a list of the 60 animals. If it's that few, there must be a list i.e. Two moose from MU 8-10 go to guide etc.

Bhb

[Cordillera]

I think the issue is what the new numbers are compared to. The new allocation would have a big impact compared to the proposed 2007 allocation rules, but those splits that would have moved towards higher resident splits were never implemented. The comparison Thomson is making is to last years allocation. I don't know if it's exactly 60 animals across the province but for Skeena moose it's almost no change compared to last season. So is he lying or is he using a different benchmark? The easiest way to find out is do a freedom of information request on the data staff prepared for the minister.

[Steeleco]

60 animals divided amongst 230 outfitters. That's marginally more than a quarter each. How the hell is that supposed to save a failing business.
How about we cut the allocation by 60 animals. As we all know supply and demand causes the price of things to go UP. So less animals will net more money for less work.

[Whonnock Boy]

I understand your thought process here but, he is spinning it his way, the Liberal way. It is not in relation to 10%, it relates to last years percentages as noted in this chart that I have linked. BUT, your calculations represent what we ARE fighting for, and the number of animals we stand to gain back if we push this to the bitter end. In my mind, we have no choice but to vigorously fight this new policy, and demand a 90/10 split across the board, no negotiation.

http://bcwf.net/images/stories/Committee/Wildlife/Allocation/Allocations-Evolution-Summary.pdf

[Sofa King]

If you were to go by any of the reports on the rally,this allocation is only about 60 animals. Not one reporter has done their due diligence and looked at anything in depth,they have just parroted what Thomson and the GOABC have quoted.The media has no interest in this matter,they are completely complacent in their coverage. Somewhere along the the line they have failed to see the big picture,and the broader issues,such as the transfer of public resources into private hands,the mismanagement of wildlife, the unethical use of public funds as payback for partisan political donations,etc.The writing is on the wall,the government is steadfast in their defence of the policy,and will not budge, the media will not hold them accountable. The only avenue left to RH's now will be a sledge hammer in the form of an election ballot.

I agree.
unfortunately it won't happen, but the best, most powerful route would be to have the support of the Indians.
unlike us, they are allowed to roadblock and hold the country hostage.
with them on board, one could completely shut down the goabc probably.
block every access they have into the bush, even the airports.
and the media pays attention to them, unlike these rallys where they get minimal coverage.
the news today had play-by-play moments all morning news of two idiots who got stranded hiking and had to be airlifted out.
why didn't they send grace to the rally?

[tuner]

This is about lost opportunities for RH's.Getting drawn for an LEH is an opportunity whether you're successful or not.These opportunities shouldn't taken away to benefit a tiny minority,especially as the demographics have changed in the last number of years. In fact the only reasonable argument is to scale back non resident opportunity in order to meet residents needs.

[40incher]

I think the issue is what the new numbers are compared to. The new allocation would have a big impact compared to the proposed 2007 allocation rules, but those splits that would have moved towards higher resident splits were never implemented. The comparison Thomson is making is to last years allocation. I don't know if it's exactly 60 animals across the province but for Skeena moose it's almost no change compared to last season. So is he lying or is he using a different benchmark? The easiest way to find out is do a freedom of information request on the data staff prepared for the minister.

The issue is ... it's time to change the game!!

Fibber is just repeating what he's been spoon fed by the guides.

I think that I know the history of South Skeena very well ... too well for the guide apologists and the detractors. To say the December 10th decision means no change in South Skeena is either uninformed or calculated ... cuz it's dead wrong.

Take the blinders off and look down the road ... way down. We are needing to understand what these legislated splits mean for our kids and grandkids. That will be in the thousands of animals.

In South Skeena the guides are only killing 73% of their existing quotas at this point in time ... why do they need an increase in quota? Because they are greedy and want to increase their value when they flip the territory.

Fibbers game has been exposed ...

[rgn5hunt]

Fibber is a body guard for Clark. Forget Fibber , direct your argument at Clark. Clark has a soft spot for this GOABC . She doesn't even have a clue about allocation numbers or splits, she is being told what to direct fibber to say.

[Ohwildwon]

Yea, how does 60 animals spread out over 230 GO's put them back in the black?

Hate how these sound bites are not questioned..

[Apolonius]

You see, we do again what they want us to do.They like numbers true or not because it doesn't sound as bad as the percentages.And in my opinion it is time we stopped being nice guys.This guys have no fear from us.We come along as Liberal supporters that one way or the other we will still vote for them,out of fear for the NDP.Start a policy i like to call "scorched earth".Boycott Global TV ,burn your liberal memberships,boycott anyone that supports the liberals ,be it a business or News.Support the ones that don't support the Liberals.Between the hunters ,wives ,and friends we are over 300,000 voters.And we got no voice or pull.Put fear in their heart.VOTE/RECALL the Liberals out.And don't expect the reporters to "do" their homework,we got to do it for them.And make a bumper sticker "CRISTY AND THE LIBERALS SELLING BC OUT".Dont sell it ...give it for free.

[Ride Red]

I'd like to see the real numbers come out for the entire province in a simple, easy to understand one page document that we could get released in all the newspapers in BC. I'm ready to inject some cash into this too, so all British Columbians who read the paper can see what the actual uproaor is about.

[Wild one]

It's not 60 animals that needs to be looked at but your lose of opportunity to go out and try and hunt these animals. You are loosing more than 60 opportunities to hunt for resident hunters the 60 animals is smoke and mirrors to make this look like no big deal.

You will be loosing more than 60 LEH tags to be applying for.

Again this comes back to the issue of overuse of LEH making it easy to affect RH with this kind of proposals.

Look past the 60 animal BS being thrown out and look at how this really is effecting RH's

[Wentrot]

You see, we do again what they want us to do.They like numbers true or not because it doesn't sound as bad as the percentages.And in my opinion it is time we stopped being nice guys.This guys have no fear from us.We come along as Liberal supporters that one way or the other we will still vote for them,out of fear for the NDP.Start a policy i like to call "scorched earth".Boycott Global TV ,burn your liberal memberships,boycott anyone that supports the liberals ,be it a business or News.Support the ones that don't support the Liberals.Between the hunters ,wives ,and friends we are over 300,000 voters.And we got no voice or pull.Put fear in their heart.VOTE/RECALL the Liberals out.And don't expect the reporters to "do" their homework,we got to do it for them.And make a bumper sticker "CRISTY AND THE LIBERALS SELLING BC OUT".Dont sell it ...give it for free.

Fully agree-being the nice guys has not and will not get us anywhere. Letting bozo the clown speak made us look like even larger pussies than we already did.

[Ride Red]

Fully agree-being the nice guys has not and will not get us anywhere. Letting bozo the clown speak made us look like even larger pussies than we already did.

We're you in Victoria Wentrot?

[Foxton Gundogs]

Mr. Thompson has said time and again that HE had to make the decision because the GOABC and BCWF could not come to an agreement. My first question to him would be what degrees does he have that make him qualified to make that decision without consultation with the scientists that the government pays our tax dollars to actually know the score.

[itsy bitsy xj]

This info needs to be brought to the attension of the general public. Its great that we all know but in order to put the pressure on EVERYONE in the province needs to see how he's lying

[bangbangkhan]

big ups to the researcher on this...there is a misleading article on the province it says 60 as John Rustad claims...i used your stats in the comment...hope thats okay.

http://www.theprovince.com/news/Smyth+Resident+hunters+real+target+favouritism+gov ernment+showing+foreigners/10855954/story.html (http://www.theprovince.com/news/Smyth+Resident+hunters+real+target+favouritism+gov ernment+showing+foreigners/10855954/story.html)

[HarryToolips]

If you were to go by any of the reports on the rally,this allocation is only about 60 animals. Not one reporter has done their due diligence and looked at anything in depth,they have just parroted what Thomson and the GOABC have quoted.The media has no interest in this matter,they are completely complacent in their coverage. Somewhere along the the line they have failed to see the big picture,and the broader issues,such as the transfer of public resources into private hands,the mismanagement of wildlife, the unethical use of public funds as payback for partisan political donations,etc.The writing is on the wall,the government is steadfast in their defence of the policy,and will not budge, the media will not hold them accountable. The only avenue left to RH's now will be a sledge hammer in the form of an election ballot.
Exactly, we need to vote them out, plain and simple

[boxhitch]

135 is a lot higher than Thompson's 60.great example , thanks
and that is every year

[bridger]

In region 7b the stone sheep AAH is presently 250 rams. The 2007 policy guaranteed an outfitter allocation of 20% or 50 rams. Thomson guarantees them 40% /100 rams. Loss of 50 animals. Right now residents are on GOS but that will change in a couple of years as we hit the AAH. Not only are we going to lose 50 rams we are also going to lose a GOS.

[lange1212]

In region 7b the stone sheep AAH is presently 250 rams. The 2007 policy guaranteed an outfitter allocation of 20% or 50 rams. Thomson guarantees them 40% /100 rams. Loss of 50 animals. Right now residents are on GOS but that will change in a couple of years as we hit the AAH. Not only are we going to lose 50 rams we are also going to lose a GOS.

I would think this is their strategy, 1st get the splits they want allocated, then legislated (privatized). Then they'll come after GOS and have residents put on LEH driving resident opportunity and participation down, then they'll lobby to have all antlerless hunts shut down (look at their viability paper the plan is in print).... Today they shout, look at all the GOS, unallocated species, and hunting opportunities residents have today (which has nothing to do with allocation), next they drive their "privatization" and "exclusivity" agenda home by pushing to have more unallocated hunts allocated. Remember once a hunt is shifted from unallocated to allocated they get their splits no matter the #'s harvested, or demand by residents. With the Thomson allocation decision we lose today, and our children and grandchildren will lose even more tomorrow. My opinion.

[bigdogeh]

I would think this is their strategy, 1st get the splits they want allocated, then legislated (privatized). Then they'll come after GOS and have residents put on LEH driving resident opportunity and participation down, then they'll lobby to have all antlerless hunts shut down (look at their viability paper the plan is in print).... Today they shout, look at all the GOS, unallocated species, and hunting opportunities residents have today (which has nothing to do with allocation), next they drive their "privatization" and "exclusivity" agenda home by pushing to have more unallocated hunts allocated. Remember once a hunt is shifted from unallocated to allocated they get their splits no matter the #'s harvested, or demand by residents. With the Thomson allocation decision we lose today, and our children and grandchildren will lose even more tomorrow. My opinion.

You know this is their agenda.
eventual privatization basically of the complete resource. this is the direction they've been going. pretty damn conniving and unethical.

[boxhitch]

In region 7b the stone sheep AAH is presently 250 rams. The 2007 policy guaranteed an outfitter allocation of 20% or 50 rams. Thomson guarantees them 40% /100 rams. Loss of 50 animals. Right now residents are on GOS but that will change in a couple of years as we hit the AAH. Not only are we going to lose 50 rams we are also going to lose a GOS.Good that the aah was bumped from 200 to 250 or we would be there already.
Higher AAH and coming off Cat. A , 7B thinhorns must be in good shape.

[bridger]

Good that the aah was bumped from 200 to 250 or we would be there already.
Higher AAH and coming off Cat. A , 7B thinhorns must be in good shape.

not sure about that!

[40incher]

It's good to see this thread is still on track.

My comparison of South Skeena moose is the same as Bridger's for 7B Stones ... the guides want their minimums doubled for sheep and more-than doubled (2.5 times) for moose. Can't be made any simpler than that!

So far, by exposing the end results of just two species-specific hunts, resident hunters stand to lose 185 animals per year when comparing the clear percentages of the 2007 policy to the Liberals weak and total-false downplaying of the effects.

Thompson et al have been convinced by the guides to stand by this obvious lowballing of the true consequences ... as such, this may prove to be of the most infamous diversions of a common-property resource to private interests. The fact that many of these interests are foreign owned makes it even more unbelievable in a democratic society!

This issue of lost hunting opportunity will be with us each and every hunting season after the legislation of the misinformed decision. For years ... for decades ... forever.


As others have alluded, this is just the beginning of the guide's agenda of exclusion ... soon to be followed by total LEH for all high-end ($$$) species. Once on total LEH the backroom lobbying will intensify ... to ensure we can't achieve our reduced allocation through too-few authorizations. We'll be lucky to be taking 30%-40% of the kill down the road.


So ... I would encourage more resident hunters from all regions of B.C. to examine how many animals we are talking about when you compare 10% to 25% for moose and elk ... and when sheep, mtn. goat and grizzly minimums for the guides go from 20% to 40%. That's what this issue is really about!!