Points systems offer false hope, poorer odds

[Fisher-Dude]

Fool’s Gold: Points systems offer false hope, poorer odds

Ryan Hatfield
July 8, 2016

http://i1.wp.com/www.themeateater.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Screen-Shot-2016-07-08-at-10.26.21-AM.png?resize=700%2C%20456

Now that most of the big game permit draw results are out, those of us who didn’t draw something special are feeling pissed off.
Ryan Hatfield, from Western Hunter, feels your pain.
Here he explains what’s wrong with the draw systems, and how to fix the situation. –SR



Up in Anchorage, there is a famous bar/institution called Chilkoot Charlie’s. It’s one of those go-to places. They have a tongue-in- cheek motto they print on their shirts that says, “We cheat the other guy and pass the savings on to you!”

Somehow, when they came up with that, they must have had bonus/preference points systems in the backs of their minds. A better quote simply couldn’t exist on the subject.

On its surface, the idea of a points system sounds decent enough. Everyone grab a number, take your spot in line, and we’ll all get treated “fairly”. It’s hunting’s version of socialism. The problem with most things of a socialistic nature, though, is that people quickly learn to rely on it and exploit it.

Those who are proponents of such a system tend to look at the more immediate benefit rather than the long-term effects. “If I get in on the ground floor, it’ll put me at the front of the line and I’ll be guaranteed a tag.”

But what about after the first round? What happens then?

There are two overlying assumptions about bonus points. The first is that it always works in all scenarios. The second is that there is no net increase in applicants. Simply put, neither is true.

Let’s back up a second, though. There are a few questions we should be asking to see whether the idea of these points passes the basic litmus test of whether it makes it more likely that you will draw the tag. 1) Does a points system put more deer/elk/sheep on the mountain? The answer is obviously, “No”; 2) Does a points system increase the number of tags? Again, the answer is, “No”; 3) Does a points system make for fewer people putting in for the tag? And that question, folks, is where the light bulb should have just come on.

Let’s address that question in detail. In my home state of Idaho, we don’t have a points system. Along with New Mexico, we’re the last holdouts. Because there is no specific impetus to either put in or risk falling behind in your point totals, there is a percentage of people who are very casual about applying – those who just kind of got busy, or didn’t really have the heart or money this year, or think, “I never draw; screw it, I’m just going to keep my $10 this year.” Under a points system, that percentage of people would now have much more motivation to keep putting in or risk falling behind. My guess is that alone counts for at least a 10% increase in applicants.

Another situation arises in points scenarios where savvy but perhaps less scrupulous hunters will use the system to their advantage by putting in non-hunting friends and family, with the strategy of building up their points over time so that eventually they can put in with them in a party, split/average the points, and draw tags at a faster rate. This creates two problems. First, a person draws tags at an unfair and manipulated rate. Second, that tag that was drawn by the non-hunter either goes straight into the trash can (and right out of the pocket of a deserving hunter) or it ends up going to a person who couldn’t care less about the tag, rather than to a hunter who may have cared deeply about having that tag.

The net result of either scenario, though, is the same. Once you’ve gone through your first round of drawing and now come back in at the bottom, you now have more people in the draw than you would have without a points system. The final net effect is that you have adopted a system that has the same number of tags, with more people in the draw, which ultimately just permanently lowered your chances and/or rate of drawing a tag.

So, we instituted our points system and thus encouraged more people into the draw for the same number of tags. How’s it working so far?

There’s another situation here that makes points a bad idea. What about any group that comes into the draw at a later date? Those who didn’t get in on the ground floor? The one group that we as hunter-conservationists have a proud history of fostering is our youth. “Pass it on” has been a mantra starting from Teddy Roosevelt and now carried today by the likes of the RMEF. This type of points system shoves our youth into a black hole that can take them half or more of their lifetimes to escape.

The longer these points systems stay in place, the more it turns into its own sideshow. Every state that has them has multiple examples where there is still no ceiling. Utah, Colorado, Arizona, and others all are in the mid-20s and still climbing, with no end in sight. They have turned many tags into once-in- a-lifetime tags (at best) by default.

Soon, this nebulous, nefarious patchwork quilt will have new rules adopted on how to deal with “end of life” points debacles. Grandpa will likely be “willing” his 45 sheep points to the grandson of his choice. Families will be fighting over how his points will be split.

Sound ridiculous? Well, it is, but sadly, truth might be stranger than fiction on this one.

Hunting isn’t fair. Of all the endeavors you will pursue in your lifetime, hunting – guaranteed – will be the least fair of them all. That’s why we love it. Each day brings the promise that it only takes once, and today could be that day. It’s the enticement of hope that keeps us going.

With a simple lottery, everyone has that chance, and they have that chance every year. With a simple lottery, the net odds of all of the most interested parties drawing a tag go up, rather than a net decrease or that non-interested parties have tags in their hands. This is a prime example of using the KISS approach and not over complicating the obvious.

http://www.themeateater.com/2016/fools-gold-points-systems-offer-false-hope-poorer-odds/

[two-feet]

I get it. Keep the points system out of BC

[guest]

One of the main ways to put more animals on the mountain, or more fish in our rivers, lakes or oceans is ACCOUNTABILITY. Something local and federal government have little of.

Do do they force ALL USERS Of the system to report all catch or harvest. NO they do not, there are specific groups that do not report ANY harvest or catch at all. Yet they tske take take and when things get tough they even want more.

I am all for reporting all success be it fishing or hunting to officials. Everybody! Make it part of licensing or part of the rights to harvest. This would certainly help in more accurate counts of both fish and wild life. Be accountable for everyone's sake. Be it recreational, commercial or ceremonial or sustenance. Bring on more habitat restoration in our forests, rivers oceans and streams.

Stop the commercialization and big business of our fish and wildlife. Quit catering to the chosen few and serve the general public with the same set of rules.

until Federal, Provincial and local governments realize the demise is happening at their own hands, we will continue down this same path of less and less wanted by more and more. Grow a pair and realize what a treasure we had, and what a treasure we can have, with proper accountability and management of the many many problems at hand.
Stand up and make a change, be it even constitutional, our natural resources are being raped with Governments seal if approval. With there own hands and rules.

The gifts and rights of special groups is bringing our fish and wildlife near points of no returns. WAKE UP !

CT

[northof49]

Solution....modified points system. Each year you enter you increase a level for the species you submit similar to Alberta system. But modify it so you get increased number of entires based on your priority level. Similar concept to buying more tickets to a raffle. The more tickets you have the better your odds of being drawn and yet even some one who only has one raffle ticket (entry) can still be drawn (ie new hunters). The more years you go without being drawn the more chances you get, and yet everyone still has a chance of being drawn each year.

[barry1974w]

Our system works alright. It's not perfect, but it's fair. Just leave it the way it is.

[bridger]

Our system works alright. It's not perfect, but it's fair. Just leave it the way it is.


X2 I agree. Points system not as rosy as it seems.

[Norwestalta]

I happen to like our points system. Got drawn for cow elk and bull moose. It's a pretty safe bet that I'd get a cow elk tag every year and a calling season bull moose tag every 5 years. If I wanted the post rut season a 3 year wait in between is not unreasonable. My friend has been putting in for island elk for 18 or so years. Never even had a sniff of a tag.

[kebes]

I happen to like our points system. Got drawn for cow elk and bull moose. It's a pretty safe bet that I'd get a cow elk tag every year and a calling season bull moose tag every 5 years. If I wanted the post rut season a 3 year wait in between is not unreasonable. My friend has been putting in for island elk for 18 or so years. Never even had a sniff of a tag.

comparing island elk to cow elk/bull moose in Alberta (I'm assuming?) is probably not accurate.

[guest]

I happen to like our points system. Got drawn for cow elk and bull moose. It's a pretty safe bet that I'd get a cow elk tag every year and a calling season bull moose tag every 5 years. If I wanted the post rut season a 3 year wait in between is not unreasonable. My friend has been putting in for island elk for 18 or so years. Never even had a sniff of a tag.

To many in this province have been putting in for those Rosie tags for as long as they have been on LEH and still never drawn ....... Some have had it a number of times ...... Yet 25% are sold to the rich ....... Does this seem right or fair. IMO ...... Not at all. BC Wildlife should not be for corporate greed as these Politicians have made it. Some tags should be ...... Once in a life time. Rosie, Bison, Sheep . Not for the deep pockets of those that have done nothing for the resource, or put a head tax that puts say 40% of the price into inhancement of said animal. CT

[allan]

...... So your saying with the points system if I get my 4 non hunting kids and wife to start collecting points, plus make all my employees get hunting license's and get them to start collecting points then after awhile use their points in a group draw that would increase my chances of a bison and Rosie draw..... COUNT ME IN!
:roll: :roll:

[Husky7mm]

I can tell you first hand that I was hunting more often with the lottery system than I am with the "line system" (point system). The system that everyone thought was so fair and reliable is really showing its flaws here in Alberta as time goes on. It will be 10 plus years for moose and mulie in a half decent unit in no time. As its stand my kids are all screwed.

[northof49]

I can tell you first hand that I was hunting more often with the lottery system than I am with the "line system" (point system). The system that everyone thought was so fair and reliable is really showing its flaws here in Alberta as time goes on. It will be 10 plus years for moose and mulie in a half decent unit in no time. As its stand my kids are all screwed.

See post #4 for solution. Modified points approach and newcomers/kids could get drawn first year but someone who has been applying for awhile would still have better odds.

[Gateholio]

There is nothing more fair than the lottery system. The last thing BC needs is to go into a points system where you have to apply every year from 18 years old to 80 to finally get a Rosie Elk draw.

[Lastcar]

If only BC had a decent GOS.

[.264winmag]

There is nothing more fair than the lottery system. The last thing BC needs is to go into a points system where you have to apply every year from 18 years old to 80 to finally get a Rosie Elk draw.
But at least you know you'll get it eventually...

[.264winmag]

I can tell you first hand that I was hunting more often with the lottery system than I am with the "line system" (point system). The system that everyone thought was so fair and reliable is really showing its flaws here in Alberta as time goes on. It will be 10 plus years for moose and mulie in a half decent unit in no time. As its stand my kids are all screwed.
So, much the same odds as I'm running in bc currently...

[.264winmag]

We are hunting more often in bc because of the GOS, not the bs lottery system.

[steveo]

I understand this thread is the debate between points and no points but the real issue is predator management and habitat enhancement which I don't think either address.

[.264winmag]

I understand this thread is the debate between points and no points but the real issue is predator management and habitat enhancement which I don't think either address.
I'd like to see more controlled burning for sure!

[hunter1947]

My thoughts are that should be that when a name comes up that that person has been picked for a species on LEH that year this person is declined for five years then that person is entitled to get picked for any animal for LEHafter the five years has gone by ???.

[Norwestalta]

comparing island elk to cow elk/bull moose in Alberta (I'm assuming?) is probably not accurate.

I realize this but how can one justify putting in for a Rosie elk for a lifetime and never getting drawn when others have drawn the tag on more than one occasion. Maybe I'm not greedy and prefer to wait for my turn so everyone will get a chance to hunt a moose or what have you.

[steveo]

I have often thought of a shared Rosie elk hunt and why it wouldn't work.

[kebes]

I realize this but how can one justify putting in for a Rosie elk for a lifetime and never getting drawn when others have drawn the tag on more than one occasion. Maybe I'm not greedy and prefer to wait for my turn so everyone will get a chance to hunt a moose or what have you.

I don't think it's greedy to prefer the lottery system. The fact is that Island elk is an incredibly unique situation within the LEH. Hypothetically it could sustain a GOS for 6 point bulls and everyone could hunt but of course that would be a slaughter ;)

[Norwestalta]

I don't think it's greedy to prefer the lottery system. The fact is that Island elk is an incredibly unique situation within the LEH. Hypothetically it could sustain a GOS for 6 point bulls and everyone could hunt but of course that would be a slaughter ;)

You're right it's not greedy to prefer the lottery system. I think it's greedy to bitch about our points system and not getting a tag every year here in Alberta. Like I said I don't mind waiting a 5 years for a moose tag or even 12 years for a antelope tag. At least I know I'll get one one day.

[358mag]

I don't think it's greedy to prefer the lottery system. The fact is that Island elk is an incredibly unique situation within the LEH. Hypothetically it could sustain a GOS for 6 point bulls and everyone could hunt but of course that would be a slaughter ;)
They said the say thing about Castlegar elk when it went from LEH to GOS , the elk seem to survive . Sure the dumb ones get shot off in the first few years , hunting pressure is a gong show .
But after all isn't all about hunter opportunity . Open the Island elk to GOS .:smile::smile:

[Fisher-Dude]

But at least you know you'll get it eventually...

Not so. As the article states, the goalposts can keep moving, and you'll never catch up.

How many years would it take to get a 100:1 Roosey draw?

The only thing you know is that you'll die eventually without the chance to go hunting.

[Fisher-Dude]

They said the say thing about Castelgar elk when it went from LEH to GOS , the elk seem to survive . Sure the dumb ones get shot off in the first few years , hunting pressure is a gong show .
But after all isn't all about hunter opportunity . Open the Island elk to GOS .:smile::smile:

It could be done sustainably. Only thing that really prevents it is social pressure not to.

Oh, and economic viability for the guiding industry to avoid crying on the phone and divorces. ;)

[Norwestalta]

Not so. As the article states, the goalposts can keep moving, and you'll never catch up.

How many years would it take to get a 100:1 Roosey draw?

The only thing you know is that you'll die eventually without the chance to go hunting.

Just to clarify. Is this a actual number or made up?

[ishootbambi]

The author is correct in his assessment for where he lives. Here in Canada the system works very well for some species but fails miserably in others. In BC lets go with the Roosevelt elk being talked about. At 100:1 odds, I didn't research but assume that's right...that means it would take 100 years for everyone in the top pool to draw. In Alberta we have a few draws that are like this. Lottery is the only thing that'll work in that situation. If you are in the top pool you are still in a lottery, but if you missed year one you will never draw. I'm surprised them Rosie's aren't a once in a lifetime deal. Seems pretty lame someone can draw multiple while others never get it. Alberta woke up too late on that one as one guy drew Cadomin sheep 3 times here before it was fixed. Of course he had a cheat code the first two times. ��

Now for for moose and mule deer, the priority system works well in that if you wait your turn, you WILL get your tag. Some zones in high demand you may wait longer, but you definitely won't watch another guy pull 4 tags while you get nothing. Of course there is some abuse going on too. Like the guy that got his dog a WIN number and carried tags in his mutts name. Ever been checked for licenses? They ask for a license and tag but not for ID to show its your license.

And then life is always dynamic as the hunting population increases and ages. An example in Alberta is the turkey hunt. The priority system has worked in the past...but rapid increase in applicants has pushed it into a pointless venture. Little Johnny just turned 12 today but by virtue of 12000 people ahead of him in line, he will get his turn when he's around 140 years old. Our government doesn't seem smart enough to do that arithmetic and fix it.

In short, yes the priority system is much better so long as your hunting population isn't too far exceeding the game populations. When you get there, lottery is the only thing that will work.

[Norwestalta]

I agree with you Bambi. A 1% chance at a Rosie elk is better than our .5% of a bison. A once in a lifetime tag for such things would be welcome.

[ishootbambi]

Actually I am going bison hunting this year! My hunting partner got it and I will be there.

[Fisher-Dude]

Just to clarify. Is this a actual number or made up?

Here's the belly section of VI elk draws.



2031 Vancouver Island 1-03 A Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 2 131.8:1
2032 Vancouver Island 1-03 B*** Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 1 N/A
2033 Vancouver Island 1-04 B*** Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 2 209.0:1
2034 Vancouver Island 1-04 C*** Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 1 N/A
2035 Vancouver Island 1-05 A*** Oct 8-Nov 27 Bull only 4 122.6:1
2036 Vancouver Island 1-05 B*** Oct 8-Nov 27 Bull only 1 250.0:1
2037 Vancouver Island 1-05 C*** Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 1 N/A
2038 Vancouver Island 1-06 D Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 1 186.0:1
2039 Vancouver Island 1-09 A Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 7 100.9:1
2040 Vancouver Island 1-09 B Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 4 70.7:1
2041 Vancouver Island 1-09 C Oct 10-Oct 20 Bull only 2 81.0:1
2042 Vancouver Island 1-09 C Oct 24-Nov 5 Bull only 2 64.0:1
2043 Vancouver Island 1-09 C Nov 9-Nov 25 Bull only 1 41.0:1
2044 Vancouver Island 1-09 D Oct 10-Oct 20 Bull only 3 57.7:1
2045 Vancouver Island 1-09 D Oct 21-Nov 20 Bull only 2 61.0:1
2046 Vancouver Island 1-10 A Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 4 139.0:1
2047 Vancouver Island 1-10 B Oct 10-Oct 20 Bull only 4 143.3:1
2048 Vancouver Island 1-10 B Oct 21-Nov 20 Bull only 3 122.3:1
2049 Vancouver Island 1-10 C Oct 10-Oct 20 Bull only 5 71.5:1
2050 Vancouver Island 1-10 C Oct 21-Nov 20 Bull only 4 89.9:1
2051 Vancouver Island 1-10 H Sept 10-Sept 30 Bull only 3 111.7:1
2052 Vancouver Island 1-10 H Oct 1-Oct 20 Bull only 2 95.5:1
2053 Vancouver Island 1-10 D** Oct 10-Nov 10 Bull only 2 101.0:1
2054 Vancouver Island 1-10 D** Nov 11-Nov 30 Bull only 2 22.5:1
2055 Vancouver Island 1-10 D** Dec 1-Dec 20 Bull only 2 53.0:1
2056 Vancouver Island 1-10 E Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 3 66.6:1
2057 Vancouver Island 1-10 F Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 6 117.6:1
2058 Vancouver Island 1-10 G Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 5 56.0:1
2059 Vancouver Island 1-10 I Oct 10-Nov 20 Bull only 3 91.5:1
2060 Vancouver Island 1-11 A Oct 1-Nov 20 Bull only 2 127.5:1
2061 Vancouver Island 1-11 B Oct 1-Oct 15 Bull only 7 107.9:1
2062 Vancouver Island 1-11 B Oct 16-Nov 20 Bull only 6 99.2:1

[Fisher-Dude]

I agree with you Bambi. A 1% chance at a Rosie elk is better than our .5% of a bison. A once in a lifetime tag for such things would be welcome.

From the guy who used to manage BC's LEH:

One suggestion we have considered relates to periods of ineligibility.
For example, we could decide that once a person has drawn a particular
species, they are not allowed to apply for some period of time.
Unfortunately, for many hunts, even once in a lifetime opportunities
don't help much. Using bison as an example, up to 2006, 38,153 people
have applied for bison in all of the draws that have ever been offered,
but only 1,454 have ever been drawn. If those 1,454 individuals were
barred from ever applying again, that would still leave 36,699 people
applying for 79 licences in the 2006 draw... not much of an improvement.

[Norwestalta]

Actually I am going bison hunting this year! My hunting partner got it and I will be there.

Nice. That'll be a good trip

[Norwestalta]

If I read this right fisher dude 100-1 is a understatement.

[northof49]

I have put in for bison every year since it opened and even the lower odds late season draws; put in for Rosies for about 25yrs. Put in 7 draws every and none pulled since 2000 even going after lower odds. Thats 16yrs no draw success in BC. See post #4 for solution. Lottery system where you get more entries equal to number of years you enter with no draw success by species. (ie Gov tracks entry level like in AB). This system would be like lotto still but your odds would increase for each species the more years you go without being drawn. First timers could also still be drawn with this system.

[Buckmeister]

From the guy who used to manage BC's LEH:

One suggestion we have considered relates to periods of ineligibility.
For example, we could decide that once a person has drawn a particular
species, they are not allowed to apply for some period of time.
Unfortunately, for many hunts, even once in a lifetime opportunities
don't help much. Using bison as an example, up to 2006, 38,153 people
have applied for bison in all of the draws that have ever been offered,
but only 1,454 have ever been drawn. If those 1,454 individuals were
barred from ever applying again, that would still leave 36,699 people
applying for 79 licences in the 2006 draw... not much of an improvement.

At least it's an improvement! A lottery system with very few entries IS the fairest way to serve the masses. Restricting the previously drawn for a length of time makes it even fairer. But hey, life isn't fair the best of times and never will be. Our schools teach fairness, and you end up with a bunch of people who are bitter and angry and complain about inequality. The real world is much different.

Here are a few thoughts about changing things up. Along with restricting for a length of time those who have drawn (and perhaps for just that one species they drew), why not reserve a number of tags for specific age groups? Say youth and seniors? Give the kids and old pharts a better chance at getting something?

[Buckmeister]

I have put in for bison every year since it opened and even the lower odds late season draws; put in for Rosies for about 25yrs. Put in 7 draws every and none pulled since 2000 even going after lower odds. Thats 16yrs no draw success in BC. See post #4 for solution. Lottery system where you get more entries equal to number of years you enter with no draw success by species. (ie Gov tracks entry level like in AB). This system would be like lotto still but your odds would increase for each species the more years you go without being drawn. First timers could also still be drawn with this system.

Wouldn't that be cool if they did that for 6/49 or LottoMax? :roll:

[bearvalley]

From the guy who used to manage BC's LEH:

One suggestion we have considered relates to periods of ineligibility.
For example, we could decide that once a person has drawn a particular
species, they are not allowed to apply for some period of time.
Unfortunately, for many hunts, even once in a lifetime opportunities
don't help much. Using bison as an example, up to 2006, 38,153 people
have applied for bison in all of the draws that have ever been offered,
but only 1,454 have ever been drawn. If those 1,454 individuals were
barred from ever applying again, that would still leave 36,699 people
applying for 79 licences in the 2006 draw... not much of an improvement.

To put this in perspective...out of the 36,699 unsuccessful applications, how many of the people are repeats throughout the years that the bison hunt was available. The odds get a lot better when the numbers are presented properly.
Pedator management and habitat enhancement needs to be the priority.
Trying to get an enhanced opportunity to hunt a limited species is not much better than flogging a dead horse.
I do believe some of the more coveted hunts should be 1 in a lifetime, and some of the others have a 1 in 3 or a 1 in 5 rule for all hunters, both resident and non resident.

[guest]

At least it's an improvement! A lottery system with very few entries IS the fairest way to serve the masses. Restricting the previously drawn for a length of time makes it even fairer. But hey, life isn't fair the best of times and never will be. Our schools teach fairness, and you end up with a bunch of people who are bitter and angry and complain about inequality. The real world is much different.

Here are a few thoughts about changing things up. Along with restricting for a length of time those who have drawn (and perhaps for just that one species they drew), why not reserve a number of tags for specific age groups? Say youth and seniors? Give the kids and old pharts a better chance at getting something?


And Disabled hunters added with better odds .

[btridge]

Is it time to take a page from saskatchewan management of wildlife and go to an outright ban on non resident hunts where a species is in a condition that severly restricts the number of tags for harvest? Saskatchewan does this with mule deer, elk and antolope, why couldn't BC do this with Island elk, moose, sheep and goats?

[Norwestalta]

And Disabled hunters added with better odds .

Better include all the other minorities as well . Maybe a white straight male will get a chance then.

[kebes]

Is it time to take a page from saskatchewan management of wildlife and go to an outright ban on non resident hunts where a species is in a condition that severly restricts the number of tags for harvest? Saskatchewan does this with mule deer, elk and antolope, why couldn't BC do this with Island elk, moose, sheep and goats?

Sure wouldn't hurt my feelings... Even a non resident leh would be better than the GOABC monopoly :D

[bearvalley]

Sure wouldn't hurt my feelings... Even a non resident leh would be better than the GOABC monopoly :D
Yeah, those damn game hog guides.
Who could we blame the present decline in wildlife on if it wasn't for those damn guides, or the First Nations hunters, or the wolves and bears.
Of course us residents can't be contributing to this decline because there's a whole bunch less of us out there in the bush than there was 25 years ago.
But then 25 years ago not everyone had an ATV tied to their butt, a logging road every 1/2 mile, a pocket full of technological gadgets, game cams to do the scouting and a 20X scope on a rifle that's sighted in for 800 yards.
Do you think maybe we've gotten the upper hand on the animals and tipped the scale?

[The Hermit]

Yeah, those damn game hog guides.
Who could we blame the present decline in wildlife on if it wasn't for those damn guides, or the First Nations hunters, or the wolves and bears.
Of course us residents can't be contributing to this decline because there's a whole bunch less of us out there in the bush than there was 25 years ago.
But then 25 years ago not everyone had an ATV tied to their butt, a logging road every 1/2 mile, a pocket full of technological gadgets, game cams to do the scouting and a 20X scope on a rifle that's sighted in for 800 yards.
Do you think maybe we've gotten the upper hand on the animals and tipped the scale?

All of the above plus forestry, mining, pine beetle, climate change. Diddling around with the LEH is well... diddling around!

[Whonnock Boy]

I completely understand where you are coming from, but btridge does have a point. We are selling animals that the residents of BC most likely will never get to hunt, unless they have funds to do it. $25-$30,000 for an Island elk, $80,000 if you would like a combo sheep/goat hunt in the Okanagan.


Yeah, those damn game hog guides.
Who could we blame the present decline in wildlife on if it wasn't for those damn guides, or the First Nations hunters, or the wolves and bears.
Of course us residents can't be contributing to this decline because there's a whole bunch less of us out there in the bush than there was 25 years ago.
But then 25 years ago not everyone had an ATV tied to their butt, a logging road every 1/2 mile, a pocket full of technological gadgets, game cams to do the scouting and a 20X scope on a rifle that's sighted in for 800 yards.
Do you think maybe we've gotten the upper hand on the animals and tipped the scale?

[Geo.338]

But at least you know you'll get it eventually...

Wrong .264 . There are not enough of Roosevelt Elk or sheep for this to work .

Get rid of enhanced odds and no points systems . Lets face it everybody can't win the lottery,
and some will never have a tag for a Roosevelt .

[kebes]

Yeah, those damn game hog guides.
Who could we blame the present decline in wildlife on if it wasn't for those damn guides, or the First Nations hunters, or the wolves and bears.
Of course us residents can't be contributing to this decline because there's a whole bunch less of us out there in the bush than there was 25 years ago.
But then 25 years ago not everyone had an ATV tied to their butt, a logging road every 1/2 mile, a pocket full of technological gadgets, game cams to do the scouting and a 20X scope on a rifle that's sighted in for 800 yards.
Do you think maybe we've gotten the upper hand on the animals and tipped the scale?

I knew I'd get you to bite, but that was faster than I anticipated;)

[btridge]

Yeah, those damn game hog guides.
Who could we blame the present decline in wildlife on if it wasn't for those damn guides, or the First Nations hunters, or the wolves and bears.
Of course us residents can't be contributing to this decline because there's a whole bunch less of us out there in the bush than there was 25 years ago.
But then 25 years ago not everyone had an ATV tied to their butt, a logging road every 1/2 mile, a pocket full of technological gadgets, game cams to do the scouting and a 20X scope on a rifle that's sighted in for 800 yards.
Do you think maybe we've gotten the upper hand on the animals and tipped the scale?

Not what I said at all, but thank you for pointing out the obvious. The pressures on BC wildlife are many and severe and the answer to game recovery is to tackle all of the problems causing the decline. My comment on looking to the saskatchewan management model was to say that there is a way to reduce the harvest of those species that are no longer available in numbers to support hunts by non-residents. The government just needs to have a look at the saskatchewan precedent.

Hence my comment:

Is it time to take a page from saskatchewan management of wildlife and go to an outright ban on non resident hunts where a species is in a condition that severly restricts the number of tags for harvest? Saskatchewan does this with mule deer, elk and antolope, why couldn't BC do this with Island elk, moose, sheep and goats?

[btridge]

Wrong .264 . There are not enough of Roosevelt Elk or sheep for this to work .

Get rid of enhanced odds and no points systems . Lets face it everybody can't win the lottery,
and some will never have a tag for a Roosevelt .

So lets restrict Island elk to a resident hunt only like saskatchewan has done with mule deer, elk and antelope.

[steveo]

Wrong .264 . There are not enough of Roosevelt Elk or sheep for this to work .

Get rid of enhanced odds and no points systems . Lets face it everybody can't win the lottery,
and some will never have a tag for a Roosevelt .If the Roosevelt elk hunt was treated as a once in a lifetime and everyone drawn were taken out of the system and the ministry offered a shared hunt like moose, everyone in the system right now would get a draw within 40 years.

[barry1974w]

So, much the same odds as I'm running in bc currently...

??????????????

[barry1974w]

My thoughts are that should be that when a name comes up that that person has been picked for a species on LEH that year this person is declined for five years then that person is entitled to get picked for any animal for LEHafter the five years has gone by ???.


Dont you think we have enough undersubscribed hunts already?

[barry1974w]

I have put in for bison every year since it opened and even the lower odds late season draws; put in for Rosies for about 25yrs. Put in 7 draws every and none pulled since 2000 even going after lower odds. Thats 16yrs no draw success in BC. See post #4 for solution. Lottery system where you get more entries equal to number of years you enter with no draw success by species. (ie Gov tracks entry level like in AB). This system would be like lotto still but your odds would increase for each species the more years you go without being drawn. First timers could also still be drawn with this system.

just as a curiosity question, do you ever apply for low odds hunts in areas that are harder to access?

[Fisher-Dude]

Do you think maybe we've gotten the upper hand on the animals and tipped the scale?


Nope. Harvest was in steady decline before the Popeil Pocket Deer Blaster and other assorted tech gizmos ever hit the market in any real numbers.

Regulated harvest still falls way on the conservative side of sustainability for BC's meat and potatoes species.

We've got other issues that are affecting populations, but since correcting those will take money, people want to put further regulation restrictions on hunters because it's cheap and quick to do, and silences the ignorant.

More regs won't make more game, as we've tried that for 40 years and ended up with less game. Maybe we should try something different this time around.

[barry1974w]

At least it's an improvement! A lottery system with very few entries IS the fairest way to serve the masses. Restricting the previously drawn for a length of time makes it even fairer. But hey, life isn't fair the best of times and never will be. Our schools teach fairness, and you end up with a bunch of people who are bitter and angry and complain about inequality. The real world is much different.

Here are a few thoughts about changing things up. Along with restricting for a length of time those who have drawn (and perhaps for just that one species they drew), why not reserve a number of tags for specific age groups? Say youth and seniors? Give the kids and old pharts a better chance at getting something?

i especially like the idea of reserving a few tags for new hunters. There's already a few draws just for kids

[Fisher-Dude]

If the Roosevelt elk hunt was treated as a once in a lifetime and everyone drawn were taken out of the system and the ministry offered a shared hunt like moose, everyone in the system right now would get a draw within 40 years.

I'll probably be dead in 40 years.

I'd rather just go hunting.

[barry1974w]

I'll probably be dead in 40 years.

I'd rather just go hunting.

I pretty sure I'll be dead in forty years.

[Fisher-Dude]

At least it's an improvement! A lottery system with very few entries IS the fairest way to serve the masses. Restricting the previously drawn for a length of time makes it even fairer. But hey, life isn't fair the best of times and never will be. Our schools teach fairness, and you end up with a bunch of people who are bitter and angry and complain about inequality. The real world is much different.

Here are a few thoughts about changing things up. Along with restricting for a length of time those who have drawn (and perhaps for just that one species they drew), why not reserve a number of tags for specific age groups? Say youth and seniors? Give the kids and old pharts a better chance at getting something?

Fair? Like everyone gets a ribbon, even the fat kid who couldn't do one pushup?

Problem with that in this case is that we don't have enough ribbons to go around, even if Chubs stays home. Either we make more ribbons or Chubs and many others are going to be SOL.

[bearvalley]

Fair? Like everyone gets a ribbon, even the fat kid who couldn't do one pushup?

Problem with that in this case is that we don't have enough ribbons to go around, even if Chubs stays home. Either we make more ribbons or Chubs and many others are going to be SOL.

Fisher-Dude, give us your idea of what it's going to take to make more "ribbons" and why the number of "ribbons" is getting less.
Remember you've already shot down my theory that we may have tipped the scale negatively for wildlife through lack of predator management and to much access that in turn leads to unsuitable habitat.
The 20X power scopes on the long range rifles, the ATV's, the GPS's and game cams are all non issues as far as your concerned in what's caused the decline in wildlife and I don't disagree entirely.
So what's the problem and how do we make more "ribbons"?

[Husky7mm]

When I was a BC res I never put in for island elk, I knew i waa never likely to make time for the trip.... But if it was a priorty point system I would for sure as eventually my time would come for sure so I would. The waiting time would be increased beyond comprehension. Its a line system, even shit units would increase because great units were unatainable. The priority system is broken as time roles on.

[Husky7mm]

just as a curiosity question, do you ever apply for low odds hunts in areas that are harder to access?

Ding, ding ding!!! This would, and does get folks out hunting more. You need to be willing to travel , and look outside the box and the handy close to home hunts where you saw some moose. Lots od opportunity ro be had, explore! The high odds hunts are a distraction from opportunity.

[hunter1947]

Dont you think we have enough undersubscribed hunts already?


There is always a way to find better methods to improve the LEH system the personal just have to find a better way to stop repeaters in the LEH system and yes it can be done
I am no expert on how to stop repeaters but it can be done I am sure of that..

[northof49]

Recall there was reduced odds in Gbear hunts the year after a person is drawn so wouldn't be too difficult to do same with other species if desired or add a few years. I suggest opposite tho where you would get increased odds each year you go without getting drawn. Example if you have gone 4 years without being drawn for goat, you get 4 entries into the draw for goat the next year and so on, while successful applicants return to 1 entry the year after. Same concept as having more raffle tickets for a draw. Evryone has a chance of being drawn, but those who have gone the longest without being drawn would have increased odds. Essentially it would be a true lotto system where you get increased odds the longer you go for each individual species without being drawn.

The difference from points system and why it would work is you don't draw from the top level first like in Alberta and work your way down priority levels until no more allocations left. Instead simply hold the draw for the zone and those with higher priority have increased chance of being drawn, but everyone still has a chance. Doesn't exclude anyone that way and the longer you go without being drawn the better your chances are the next year.

[btridge]

Recall there was reduced odds in Gbear hunts the year after a person is drawn so wouldn't be too difficult to do same with other species if desired or add a few years. I suggest opposite tho where you would get increased odds each year you go without getting drawn. Example if you have gone 4 years without being drawn for goat, you get 4 entries into the draw for goat the next year and so on, while successful applicants return to 1 entry the year after. Same concept as having more raffle tickets for a draw. Evryone has a chance of being drawn, but those who have gone the longest without being drawn would have increased odds. Essentially it would be a true lotto system where you get increased odds the longer you go for each individual species without being drawn.

The difference from points system and why it would work is you don't draw from the top level first like in Alberta and work your down priority levels until no more allocations left. Instead simply hold the draw for the zone and those with higher priority have increased chance of being drawn, but everyone still has a chance. Doesn't exclude anyone that way and the longer you go without being drawn the better your chances are the next year.

It would work and everybody would still have a chance, I like it.

[Husky7mm]

Not a bad idea.

[Fisher-Dude]

Fisher-Dude, give us your idea of what it's going to take to make more "ribbons" and why the number of "ribbons" is getting less.
Remember you've already shot down my theory that we may have tipped the scale negatively for wildlife through lack of predator management and to much access that in turn leads to unsuitable habitat.
The 20X power scopes on the long range rifles, the ATV's, the GPS's and game cams are all non issues as far as your concerned in what's caused the decline in wildlife and I don't disagree entirely.
So what's the problem and how do we make more "ribbons"?


1.) funding for wildlife management
2.) predator control
3.) habitat enhancement


Harvest has declined, even before we decided game populations had declined. If super game cams and heat-detecting 1000 cc quads were giving us the upper hand in harvest, harvest would be going up or at least staying steady while populations declined, which hasn't been the case.

Regulated hunting is not a problem. We're taking less than we used to and have piled a shitload of restrictions and short seasons on, yet populations continue to decline. More regulations and more restrictions won't change anything, as we've taken this route for 40 years and all we have is less hunters and less game.

For fawn and calf recruitment which is key to rebuilding populations, we need more food, more shelter, and fewer predators. Simple answer, but where's the will to make it happen?

[.264winmag]

Wrong .264 . There are not enough of Roosevelt Elk or sheep for this to work .

Get rid of enhanced odds and no points systems . Lets face it everybody can't win the lottery,
and some will never have a tag for a Roosevelt .

Not enough Elk on the Island? There's all kinds man! Cut the Indians off and slow down on the bloody outfitter tags ffs! Loike has been said, its the guys that get it 2 or more time that pisses me off.

[bearvalley]

1.) funding for wildlife management
2.) predator control
3.) habitat enhancement


Harvest has declined, even before we decided game populations had declined. If super game cams and heat-detecting 1000 cc quads were giving us the upper hand in harvest, harvest would be going up or at least staying steady while populations declined, which hasn't been the case.

Regulated hunting is not a problem. We're taking less than we used to and have piled a shitload of restrictions and short seasons on, yet populations continue to decline. More regulations and more restrictions won't change anything, as we've taken this route for 40 years and all we have is less hunters and less game.

For fawn and calf recruitment which is key to rebuilding populations, we need more food, more shelter, and fewer predators. Simple answer, but where's the will to make it happen?

I don't disagree with your post for the most part, in fact I'm 100% in favour of predator control, habitat enhancement and calf recruitment.
When it comes to suitable wildlife habitat I also think the unlimited amount of road access in some areas is a huge negative factor.
Do you think that maybe if we kill some predators, let a few fires go, shut down some roads and change silvaculture practices to include wildlife values that we might grow some game?
This makes more sense to me than printing more "shit tickets" that are stamped LEH.
"Where's the will to make this happen?"....I think it's there Pat, we just need to push a bit to see that its
carried out.

[Brez]

Our system works alright. It's not perfect, but it's fair. Just leave it the way it is.
I respectfully disagree. If you are lucky, you win - if not, you lose. I'll take the points system any day as my results in point system places over our lottery bears out. Some places use a combined system that is worth looking at.

[kebes]

Recall there was reduced odds in Gbear hunts the year after a person is drawn so wouldn't be too difficult to do same with other species if desired or add a few years. I suggest opposite tho where you would get increased odds each year you go without getting drawn. Example if you have gone 4 years without being drawn for goat, you get 4 entries into the draw for goat the next year and so on, while successful applicants return to 1 entry the year after. Same concept as having more raffle tickets for a draw. Evryone has a chance of being drawn, but those who have gone the longest without being drawn would have increased odds. Essentially it would be a true lotto system where you get increased odds the longer you go for each individual species without being drawn.

The difference from points system and why it would work is you don't draw from the top level first like in Alberta and work your way down priority levels until no more allocations left. Instead simply hold the draw for the zone and those with higher priority have increased chance of being drawn, but everyone still has a chance. Doesn't exclude anyone that way and the longer you go without being drawn the better your chances are the next year.

Would you not end up with a similar issue in the end? A butt load of guys with 25-30 entries and the new comers with 1 and no chance of ever really catching up? I would suggest capping it but then you eventually don't really get an advantage.

[steveo]

Would you not end up with a similar issue in the end? A butt load of guys with 25-30 entries and the new comers with 1 and no chance of ever really catching up? I would suggest capping it but then you eventually don't really get an advantage.It depends on interest and number of authorizations so your example could happen but there are other hunts where this would work. Biggest draw-back I can see with a points system is for the newbie hunter that started hunting when he/she was 50-55.

[kebes]

It depends on interest and number of authorizations so your example could happen but there are other hunts where this would work. Biggest draw-back I can see with a points system is for the newbie hunter that started hunting when he/she was 50-55.

I think it's the same problem still though. The super low odds hunts (island elk, Buffalo, grouse in region 7) will end up clogged up with a bunch of people at 20-30 or even more draws in.

I think either system would work for hunts with less demand (moose/deer draws) but I just don't see it as a solution for the hunts that are 1:50 or worse.

edit: I do think it's better than points but not really a solution to the issue.

[steveo]

High subscribed hunts won't work on a points system like roosevelt elk, bison, sheep, region 7 grouse and any other high odds hunt. With island elk it would be considered to be a " once in a life time hunt " so make it that way and pull the successful guys out of the system. Make island elk a shared hunt so people like Fisher Dude and others who don't think they will live another 40 years can participate on a shared hunt. If you don't see yourself as a " we " got a draw hunter and see yourself as an " I " got a draw hunter, you can still enter the draw as an individual with no penalties. I don't know how many island elk can be stock piled through predator management and habitat enhancement and with the high interest from hunters a different approach to giving out draws may have to be implemented.

[curt]

I have friends from Alberta and Saskatchewan and their priority points system seems to work far better than our system..... the reality is by about year 5 of being unsuccessful you will get a draw, that's moving up through the pools seems fair to me. What doesn't seem fair is sitting back watching someone get 2 shared moose hunts in 4 years in the same area with odds pushing 40:1 . Great for him of course but how about everyone else who year after year get nothing. I have friends that are relatively new hunters 5-6 years max they have put in every year for multiple animals and got FA???? Now the way I understood things the odds of new hunters for at least the first year was supposed to be increased I call BS the reality is our system sucks its always sucked and until its over hauled and somewhat following a prairie type system it will always suck there is nothing fair about it. At least in Alberta and Saskatchewan every year you dont get drawn you know you are one year closer to getting a draw, to a max of going about 5 yrs of being unsuccessful!!! Here you could go a lifetime and get FA so tell me how that is fair???

[Rob Chipman]

A points system looks good in a "the grass is always greener" way, but if it's run the same way the current system is there would be plenty of complaints about it too, I think.

There's no question more LEH's sold in order to build up points would generate an income stream for wildlife management....if we could trust or force government to dedicate those funds. That's not a gimme. Funds generated from a points system could allow the wildlife budget to be cut other ways, which translates into point system income just going to general revenue.

The problems that get complained about most are, I think, not being able to get drawn for highly subscribed hunts, and not getting drawn year after year while other people get drawn repeatedly. I haven't got a moose draw in 6+ years; my wife got a draw last year and this year, and another buddy got two drawn last year and the year before, so we know it happens. The solution we've used is to apply individually and then effectively treat it like a shared hunt (tough to hunt and pack out moose alone anyway, so it works).

Changing the LEH system doesn't put more animals in the mix, and doesn't increase hunting opportunity. It just cuts up the pie a different way. I'd be happy to buy multiple LEH tages to build up points *if* i knew the money went to habitat, etc, and could see the new management work being done. I'd look at it like a voluntary tax and throw a few bucks that way (I already do that with the bison and sheep tags - if I get them they're a bonus).

So...if a good points system could be instituted, great, but the real issues, I think, are continued access, FNs increasing control and role and how we respond, and better management leading to bigger populations.

[Walking Buffalo]

I have friends from Alberta and Saskatchewan and their priority points system seems to work far better than our system..... the reality is by about year 5 of being unsuccessful you will get a draw, that's moving up through the pools seems fair to me. What doesn't seem fair is sitting back watching someone get 2 shared moose hunts in 4 years in the same area with odds pushing 40:1 . Great for him of course but how about everyone else who year after year get nothing. I have friends that are relatively new hunters 5-6 years max they have put in every year for multiple animals and got FA???? Now the way I understood things the odds of new hunters for at least the first year was supposed to be increased I call BS the reality is our system sucks its always sucked and until its over hauled and somewhat following a prairie type system it will always suck there is nothing fair about it. At least in Alberta and Saskatchewan every year you dont get drawn you know you are one year closer to getting a draw, to a max of going about 5 yrs of being unsuccessful!!! Here you could go a lifetime and get FA so tell me how that is fair???


Curt,

There are concerning reasons why we (interest groups and the government) here in Alberta are currently drafting changes to our draw system.

It only works well in specific circumstances, basically in instances where there are lots of tags available to keep required priority levels low.

For tags with limited availability, the priority system does not work well.

In Alberta, we have an increasing number of draw hunts that have become impossible for any new hunter to ever draw in their lifetime.
As wildlife management models become more and more conservative in allowable harvest, every year the problems with the priority system get worse. The dynamics of this draw model can't do anything about it.

In Alberta and in several states, the hunting community is awakening to the reality the priority system will prohibit our youth from every having a chance to access much of the hunting opportunity. Obtaining those special tags is becoming the exclusive domain of senior citizens.

Stay wise BC, do not fall into the Priority point pit. 8-)

[bridger]

Curt,

There are concerning reasons why we (interest groups and the government) here in Alberta are currently drafting changes to our draw system.

It only works well in specific circumstances, basically in instances where there are lots of tags available to keep required priority levels low.

For tags with limited availability, the priority system does not work well.

In Alberta, we have an increasing number of draw hunts that have become impossible for any new hunter to ever draw in their lifetime.
As wildlife management models become more and more conservative in allowable harvest, every year the problems with the priority system get worse. The dynamics of this draw model can't do anything about it.

In Alberta and in several states, the hunting community is awakening to the reality the priority system will prohibit our youth from every having a chance to access much of the hunting opportunity. Obtaining those special tags is becoming the exclusive domain of senior citizens.

Stay wise BC, do not fall into the Priority point pit. 8-)
Very good points. Well said!

[Surrey Boy]

I like our current tag distribution system; it mirrors our medical system.

Indians get whatever they want.
We get what's left over and draw straws when there's a shortage.
Rich folks have the American Option to pay lots of money and get whatever they want under the best conditions.

[Gateholio]

A points system simply will NOT work with any draw that is about 5-1 or higher odds.

You think a points system will get you a Island elk or sheep draw? Forget it, sorry won't happen. :)

[quadrakid]

I get so tired of people crying about never getting the island elk tag. I live on the island and most of these complainers have never read the regs and don,t even realize they can buy an elk tag and hunt elk in bc every year.They all cry about thirty years with no island elk and they have never gone elk hunting.And its so unfair that a miniscule number of guys have drawn twice,guess what,lifes not fair.Buy an elk tag and get at er.

[kebes]

I get so tired of people crying about never getting the island elk tag. I live on the island and most of these complainers have never read the regs and don,t even realize they can buy an elk tag and hunt elk in bc every year.They all cry about thirty years with no island elk and they have never gone elk hunting.And its so unfair that a miniscule number of guys have drawn twice,guess what,lifes not fair.Buy an elk tag and get at er.

To be fair, it is a unique hunt as opposed to elk in the rest of the province. It's also nice for guys who would like to be able to hunt in their backyard instead paying an arm and a leg to cross the ferry.

[barry1974w]

Recall there was reduced odds in Gbear hunts the year after a person is drawn so wouldn't be too difficult to do same with other species if desired or add a few years. I suggest opposite tho where you would get increased odds each year you go without getting drawn. Example if you have gone 4 years without being drawn for goat, you get 4 entries into the draw for goat the next year and so on, while successful applicants return to 1 entry the year after. Same concept as having more raffle tickets for a draw. Evryone has a chance of being drawn, but those who have gone the longest without being drawn would have increased odds. Essentially it would be a true lotto system where you get increased odds the longer you go for each individual species without being drawn.

The difference from points system and why it would work is you don't draw from the top level first like in Alberta and work your way down priority levels until no more allocations left. Instead simply hold the draw for the zone and those with higher priority have increased chance of being drawn, but everyone still has a chance. Doesn't exclude anyone that way and the longer you go without being drawn the better your chances are the next year.

pretty sure you can draw a moose tag in BC every year if you want to(I don't currently have the LEH booklet open, so I could be very wrong).

[barry1974w]

I respectfully disagree. If you are lucky, you win - if not, you lose. I'll take the points system any day as my results in point system places over our lottery bears out. Some places use a combined system that is worth looking at.

Youre allowed to disagree with me😀. It seems to me that most of the poor odds hunts would take 40 years to draw with a points system. As it is, if you want a bull draw next to a major city, you have to wait and play the odds, but if you want a draw every year or so, apply for the ones with those odds.
I do reasonably well with LEH, but I mostly apply for hunts with reasonable odds. I'd like to chat with some of the guys who haven't drawn a tag in twenty five years just to find out what hunts they've applied for.

[Gateholio]

To be fair, it is a unique hunt as opposed to elk in the rest of the province. It's also nice for guys who would like to be able to hunt in their backyard instead paying an arm and a leg to cross the ferry.

I think all of us would like to get local LEH's, not just Islanders :)

[kebes]

I think all of us would like to get local LEH's, not just Islanders :)

Im just saying... That ferry fee is killer for those guys :D

[Husky7mm]

Youre allowed to disagree with me. It seems to me that most of the poor odds hunts would take 40 years to draw with a points system. As it is, if you want a bull draw next to a major city, you have to wait and play the odds, but if you want a draw every year or so, apply for the ones with those odds.
I do reasonably well with LEH, but I mostly apply for hunts with reasonable odds. I'd like to chat with some of the guys who haven't drawn a tag in twenty five years just to find out what hunts they've applied for.

Exactly! I have live in both BC and Alberta and wheels are falling of the priority system imo. It used to work but its been abused and over worked plus the population has gone up major in the last decade or so. It needs a revamp. Many disagree but they have never been apart of the system, they are just outside looking in. I did good with the lottery system and hunted moose every year or two. Thats better than 4-6 for a nothing special unit and 10-12 for a good zone.

[Surrey Boy]

Im just saying... That ferry fee is killer for those guys :D

Nature of living on an island. I used to commute on those ferries.

[Gateholio]

Im just saying... That ferry fee is killer for those guys :D

Wherever you live, there are trade offs. Next we will hear that LML'ers deserve more draws closer to home because they can't afford gas after paying their mortgage! :)

[J_T]

The LEH system works fine. It generates good revenue for Government and it meets the objective of reducing hunters which meets commercial/foreign interests and is supports the quietly spoken social agenda to eliminate hunting (doesn't support hunter recruitment).
LEH is necessary conservation approach in some situations. Not all. But hunters don't want to hear about solutions. They don't want change, unless it means more. It's in their nature to whine about it though.

[wideopenthrottle]

I understand this thread is the debate between points and no points but the real issue is predator management and habitat enhancement which I don't think either address.

yep...otherwise we are just fighting over how divide up a smaller and smaller pie

[wideopenthrottle]

one change that might help the "fairness" of our system...how bout if you were only allowed to get one species leh in a year...if leh's were done in a specific order (say like they are listed in the book or say highest odds to lowest or zone by zone whatever works to allow people to skip some draws to favour others....if moose is drawn before elk for example, I might skip applying for moose if I want get an elk...I think it would reduce the frivolous entries and would prevent 1 guy from getting 3 draws at the price of others getting none...that to me seems more "fair"

[Fisher-Dude]

one change that might help the "fairness" of our system...how bout if you were only allowed to get one species leh in a year...if leh's were done in a specific order (say like they are listed in the book or say highest odds to lowest or zone by zone whatever works to allow people to skip some draws to favour others....if moose is drawn before elk for example, I might skip applying for moose if I want get an elk...I think it would reduce the frivolous entries and would prevent 1 guy from getting 3 draws at the price of others getting none...that to me seems more "fair"

Won't change anyone's chances of getting an animal in the freezer.

Only one thing that helps: more animals available for the freezer.

The rest is just window dressing.

[guest]

Our Provincial government is just as lame with our management of game as our Federal government is about managing our west coast fisheries.
No one has the guts or the balls to stand up and make sound management decisions. No guts to hold All users accountable.
No big over all plan to increase or improve habitat, fish and game populations. It's just big time greed by many users and commercializations of our resources.
The future looks very bleak for the future of our kids and grand kids.
Until both Governments take a stand and make huge changes in management it will continue to grab what you can well you can, have at ER ........ It's not going to last. You have already seen the better of times.
Unless things change for ALL USERS.
So very sad to see gutless politicians that make these decisions and get paid for it taboot.
CT

[wideopenthrottle]

Won't change anyone's chances of getting an animal in the freezer.

Only one thing that helps: more animals available for the freezer.

The rest is just window dressing.

yep....as others have mentioned it's habitat habitat habitat that makes the real difference to animal numbers from wiki:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat ( A habitat is made up of physical factors such as soil (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil), moisture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moisture), range of temperature (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature), and light (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light) intensity as well as biotic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotic_index) factors such as the availability of food (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food) and the presence or absence of predators (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predation). Every organism has certain habitat needs for the conditions in which it will thrive, but some are tolerant of wide variations while others are very specific in their requirements)...

I only spoke to the perceived "fairness" improving if the total number of hunters that got 1 leh increased...it seems to be the peeps that get multiple draws in one year that are drawing the ire of those that get none...

[Xenomorph]

Better include all the other minorities as well . Maybe a white straight male will get a chance then.

Thanks man, this had me laughing out loud in the middle of the office.


Nope. Harvest was in steady decline before the Popeil Pocket Deer Blaster and other assorted tech gizmos ever hit the market in any real numbers.

Regulated harvest still falls way on the conservative side of sustainability for BC's meat and potatoes species.

We've got other issues that are affecting populations, but since correcting those will take money, people want to put further regulation restrictions on hunters because it's cheap and quick to do, and silences the ignorant.

More regs won't make more game, as we've tried that for 40 years and ended up with less game. Maybe we should try something different this time around.

What I don't get is why the vast majority of us aren't even exercising the predator control function available to us. Since we don't have a coherent common voice I can see why the aforementioned methods are so eagerly utilized by our policy makers. Imagine sitting down at the table and actually putting down facts and common sense methods to deal with the real issue, now that would be the day.



Not enough Elk on the Island? There's all kinds man! Cut the Indians off and slow down on the bloody outfitter tags ffs! Loike has been said, its the guys that get it 2 or more time that pisses me off.

I have no desire to create animosity and BS, but weren't the Rosies an introduced specie on VI? By that, shouldn't everyone abide by the LEH system?



Wherever you live, there are trade offs. Next we will hear that LML'ers deserve more draws closer to home because they can't afford gas after paying their mortgage! :)

I'm more and more tempted to live on a boat, buy plots of land across the province and forget about this whole cash dump that Vancouver's becoming ...wait, has already become.

[steveo]

yep....as others have mentioned it's habitat habitat habitat that makes the real difference to animal numbers from wiki:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habitat ( A habitat is made up of physical factors such as soil (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soil), moisture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moisture), range of temperature (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Temperature), and light (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Light) intensity as well as biotic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biotic_index) factors such as the availability of food (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food) and the presence or absence of predators (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predation). Every organism has certain habitat needs for the conditions in which it will thrive, but some are tolerant of wide variations while others are very specific in their requirements)...

I only spoke to the perceived "fairness" improving if the total number of hunters that got 1 leh increased...it seems to be the peeps that get multiple draws in one year that are drawing the ire of those that get none...In theory more animals on the ground and habitat enhancement are good for improved hunting but with island elk specifically it may not be the case. With lots of land now privatized, the ability to manage for wildlife may be greatly reduced and the carrying capacity for the land may not allow for too many more elk. Supposedly numbers are at record highs or close to it and the scenario in regards to the number of authorizations may not improve too much with those factors present. To reach perceived fairness a revamping of how island elk are harvested may be necessary.

[curt]

Interesting points I havent heard that from either friend hunting both Alberta ans Sask the reality is here though with this current system you could go a life time without a draw too so whats the solution. I am a prime example I put in for a rosie and Vancouver Island last year 1st time ever..............I got the draw the manager from Island Timber lands told me has has been putting in for that draw since the inception of it and has been unsuccessful how is that reasonable 20+ yrs with no luck 1 year I get the draw something wrong with that system IMO
Curt,

There are concerning reasons why we (interest groups and the government) here in Alberta are currently drafting changes to our draw system.

It only works well in specific circumstances, basically in instances where there are lots of tags available to keep required priority levels low.

For tags with limited availability, the priority system does not work well.

In Alberta, we have an increasing number of draw hunts that have become impossible for any new hunter to ever draw in their lifetime.
As wildlife management models become more and more conservative in allowable harvest, every year the problems with the priority system get worse. The dynamics of this draw model can't do anything about it.

In Alberta and in several states, the hunting community is awakening to the reality the priority system will prohibit our youth from every having a chance to access much of the hunting opportunity. Obtaining those special tags is becoming the exclusive domain of senior citizens.

Stay wise BC, do not fall into the Priority point pit. 8-)

[Fisher-Dude]

Interesting points I havent heard that from either friend hunting both Alberta ans Sask the reality is here though with this current system you could go a life time without a draw too so whats the solution. I am a prime example I put in for a rosie and Vancouver Island last year 1st time ever..............I got the draw the manager from Island Timber lands told me has has been putting in for that draw since the inception of it and has been unsuccessful how is that reasonable 20+ yrs with no luck 1 year I get the draw something wrong with that system IMO

Some people win millions with one 6/49 ticket while big lotto groups that have played for years win no more than $10.

That's the nature of random chance.

The solution is more animals available for harvest, which comes from funding, habitat enhancement, and predator control. Full stop.

[.264winmag]

Rosies' were not introduced to VI, not sure why everyone thinks that...

[wideopenthrottle]

Rosies' were not introduced to VI, not sure why everyone thinks that...

http://www.geog.uvic.ca/viwilds/iw-elk.html

I found a good blurb about roosies on VI supporting 1. not introduced, 2. high population density, 3. habitat problems

[Walking Buffalo]

Interesting points I havent heard that from either friend hunting both Alberta ans Sask the reality is here though with this current system you could go a life time without a draw too so whats the solution. I am a prime example I put in for a rosie and Vancouver Island last year 1st time ever..............I got the draw the manager from Island Timber lands told me has has been putting in for that draw since the inception of it and has been unsuccessful how is that reasonable 20+ yrs with no luck 1 year I get the draw something wrong with that system IMO


There is a significant difference within these two systems in how the "potential to Not draw in a lifetime" is established.

In Alberta with the straight priority point system, some draws have become IMPOSSIBLE for new hunters to ever obtain the tag in their lifetime.
In the BC system, for every applicant, it is ALWAYS possible to draw.

Solution. Stay with the system you have.

[curt]

I wish your solution was the answer but i dont think the current is the most efficient system and as time goes on and more people start putting in the likelyhood of never being drawn is a very viable possibility in BC too and that sucks
There is a significant difference within these two systems in how the "potential to Not draw in a lifetime" is established.

In Alberta with the straight priority point system, some draws have become IMPOSSIBLE for new hunters to ever obtain the tag in their lifetime.
In the BC system, for every applicant, it is ALWAYS possible to draw.

Solution. Stay with the system you have.

[Fisher-Dude]

I wish your solution was the answer but i dont think the current is the most efficient system and as time goes on and more people start putting in the likelyhood of never being drawn is a very viable possibility in BC too and that sucks

I don't think you get what WB was telling you.

Under a points system, it WILL take you 100 years to get a draw.

Under a random system, you have a chance to be drawn every year.

Which is the better system for you?

[Ourea]

In my mind a "hybrid" system is the way to go.
Nobrainer.
Take the best of both systems.
Eliminate the faults.

A predictable system where odds are realistic.

Continue to roll the dice on high odd hunts where a "get in line" system is unrealistic.

Everything in life and business can be improved.
Our LEH can be improved.
What a novel concept. :roll:

Continue to tweak and modify as numbers declare patterns and odds.
Applying a static system to a fluid environment makes no sense to me.

[Fisher-Dude]

In my mind a "hybrid" system is the way to go.
Nobrainer.
Take the best of both systems.
Eliminate the faults.

A predictable system where odds are realistic.

Continue to roll the dice on high odd hunts where a "get in line" system is unrealistic.

Everything in life and business can be improved.
Our LEH can be improved.
What a novel concept. :roll:

Continue to tweak and modify as numbers declare patterns and odds.
Applying a static system to a fluid environment makes no sense to me.


Reality check: you're asking government to make a good choice and a financial investment.

[J_T]

^^ Sorry guys, I just want to add, we as hunters need to see LEH for what it is, and it is not always warranted. It gets used for a number of social or revenue reasons. And we need to work to reduce the go to decisions of LEH where we can. If more people could "find their hunt" without a lottery, I think it would ease the pressure in many ways and create the reality of more opportunity.

[Ourea]

Reality check: you're asking government to make a good choice and a financial investment.

And FD that's why we, talk to government, meet with our MLA's and game managers.
And yes, I am asking government.
Meeting scheduled for the 22nd.

That's my "REALITY CHECK" chief.

[Darksith]

Solution....modified points system. Each year you enter you increase a level for the species you submit similar to Alberta system. But modify it so you get increased number of entires based on your priority level. Similar concept to buying more tickets to a raffle. The more tickets you have the better your odds of being drawn and yet even some one who only has one raffle ticket (entry) can still be drawn (ie new hunters). The more years you go without being drawn the more chances you get, and yet everyone still has a chance of being drawn each year.

You just open it up to the people with the deepest pockets then though...if there are 100 hunters entering a draw now, you are 100:1 odds, but if there are 100 hunters and some buy 100 tags, now your odds are 2000:1...no thank you sir, no thank you.

[Darksith]

So, much the same odds as I'm running in bc currently...

you are simply putting in for the wrong areas then...if you think 20:1 is decent odds you are your own worst enemy. I am getting pulled for moose on average once every 3 years. We do shared hunts always, we put in for 20:1 sometimes (usually our low odd years) then we switch to better odd hunt, or a sure thing 1:1 hunt and we go moose hunting where we want when we want. Im not married to putting in for 1 MU only, Im willing to drive 8-12 hours, and I pull LEH every 3 years or so on average. Go for an adventure already ;)

[Norwestalta]

There is a significant difference within these two systems in how the "potential to Not draw in a lifetime" is established.

In Alberta with the straight priority point system, some draws have become IMPOSSIBLE for new hunters to ever obtain the tag in their lifetime.
In the BC system, for every applicant, it is ALWAYS possible to draw.

Solution. Stay with the system you have.

What tags are you talking about? The only ones I can figure are sheep.

[steveo]

Reality check: you're asking government to make a good choice and a financial investment.What ever route we go government will have to be involved unless you have a different proposal.

[Fisher-Dude]

And FD that's why we, talk to government, meet with our MLA's and game managers.
And yes, I am asking government.
Meeting scheduled for the 22nd.

That's my "REALITY CHECK" chief.

If I were a chief, I wouldn't care about LEH. ;)

Good job getting an audience. I know our bios want to do the right thing, but our MLAs tend to have other idea$.

[BiG Boar]

They should raise the LEH cost to get rid of antis putting in and wives and family members not really interested in the hunt, but people put in for them. I bet odds would significantly increase if they were $25 per draw. Plus you should automatically be debited when you get drawn for the cost of the tag. You know how many grizzly draws or even elk draws that never have a tag bought for the winner?

[Ohwildwon]

They should raise the LEH cost to get rid of antis putting in and wives and family members not really interested in the hunt, but people put in for them. I bet odds would significantly increase if they were $25 per draw. Plus you should automatically be debited when you get drawn for the cost of the tag. You know how many grizzly draws or even elk draws that never have a tag bought for the winner?

Good idea:idea:

[barry1974w]

In my mind a "hybrid" system is the way to go.
Nobrainer.
Take the best of both systems.
Eliminate the faults.

A predictable system where odds are realistic.

Continue to roll the dice on high odd hunts where a "get in line" system is unrealistic.

Everything in life and business can be improved.
Our LEH can be improved.
What a novel concept. :roll:

Continue to tweak and modify as numbers declare patterns and odds.
Applying a static system to a fluid environment makes no sense to me.

so, what do you consider a high odds hunt?

[Ourea]

so, what do you consider a high odds hunt?

With any proposed regulation, or amendments, a language is required.

A language would be needed for any changes in LEH prior that defines such terms as "High Odds" etc.

Have no time to start a debate online on this issue.
My discussions will be had behind closed doors.

Some "off the cuff" suggestions that could be platformed on a higher odd hunt....hunts that you would never realistically be drawn for in a lifetime of applying in a priority system.....


In a hybrid system......

If there are 10 permits allocated to an area that draws 1000 applicants.... lets break down those 10.

Make a percentage of the tags open ..... random selection for those that have applied say 3 yrs or fewer.
Those that have applied 3 to 5 yrs...their odds r increased.
Those that have applied 5 to 10 yrs they have a higher probability of being drawn
It remains a roll of the dice, so to speak, but odds will favor those that have been committed to a particular draw for a longer period

To summarize.....
if you are a new applicant ur odds are 1 in 100 of being drawn in the above scenario.
If you are a 3 to 5 yr applicant ur odds could be 1 in say 50.
If u r a 5 to 10 yr applicant ur odds could be 1 in 25.
My calculations are speculative but u get what I am suggesting.

Every applicant "has a shot" at being drawn (pun intended).
The longer u apply the better ur odds yet "everyone" has a chance.
Thus the hybrid suggestion.

[northof49]

You just open it up to the people with the deepest pockets then though...if there are 100 hunters entering a draw now, you are 100:1 odds, but if there are 100 hunters and some buy 100 tags, now your odds are 2000:1...no thank you sir, no thank you.

No you misunderstood. You cant buy entries......the number of entries would only be equal to your priority levelfor each species similar to AB system (ie numbers of yrs applying for species without being drawn), but unlike AB system all applicants would be included in draw instead of only highest priortiy applicants first. See my other posts.

[Fisher-Dude]

They should raise the LEH cost to get rid of antis putting in and wives and family members not really interested in the hunt, but people put in for them. I bet odds would significantly increase if they were $25 per draw. Plus you should automatically be debited when you get drawn for the cost of the tag. You know how many grizzly draws or even elk draws that never have a tag bought for the winner?

Incorrect.

If there are any antis in the pool of applicants, the wasted tags show in harvest trends and the tags are adjusted upward to compensate and achieve harvest.

The number of animals to be harvested determines your odds, which will be the same whether "antis" are weeded out or not.

Now, if your goal is to weed out the casual hunters or the less affluent by making things unaffordable, which I know it is, then your scheme will benefit you. It won't benefit wildlife, and it won't benefit hunting, but short-sightedness and personal greed never stopped schemers before.

[barry1974w]

With any proposed regulation, or amendments, a language is required.

A language would be needed for any changes in LEH prior that defines such terms as "High Odds" etc.

Have no time to start a debate online on this issue.
My discussions will be had behind closed doors.

Some "off the cuff" suggestions that could be platformed on a higher odd hunt....hunts that you would never realistically be drawn for in a lifetime of applying in a priority system.....


In a hybrid system......

If there are 10 permits allocated to an area that draws 1000 applicants.... lets break down those 10.

Make a percentage of the tags open ..... random selection for those that have applied say 3 yrs or fewer.
Those that have applied 3 to 5 yrs...their odds r increased.
Those that have applied 5 to 10 yrs they have a higher probability of being drawn
It remains a roll of the dice, so to speak, but odds will favor those that have been committed to a particular draw for a longer period

To summarize.....
if you are a new applicant ur odds are 1 in 100 of being drawn in the above scenario.
If you are a 3 to 5 yr applicant ur odds could be 1 in say 50.
If u r a 5 to 10 yr applicant ur odds could be 1 in 25.
My calculations are speculative but u get what I am suggesting.

Every applicant "has a shot" at being drawn (pun intended).
The longer u apply the better ur odds yet "everyone" has a chance.
Thus the hybrid suggestion.


And it it still takes 100 years for the original 1000 applicants to get a tag. I think that puts it into the unlikely to be drawn in your lifetime category.

[JAGRMEISTER]

Back to school, you didn't study math or were out hunting during math class?

[bighornbob]

What I find funny about reading all these posts about the flawed system is people’s expectations that they should be drawn.

Why is just because one has applied for 20 years they think they deserve a tag more then the guy that just starting hunting.
Sure it would be nice to get a rosie or bison draw, but it would also be nice to not have to work like some people, or date the prom queen or make money on every stock they buy.

Why don’t I see people lobbying the government to restrict people that have already made $500,000 on the stock market to only be allowed to buy one stock every five years or to never play the stock market again because that may improve the odds of someone else making some money. Or how about you are only allowed to have sex with a good looking woman or man once every five years because there are others who have never had the chance.

I can only imagine what goes through some MLA’s mind (who does not hunt) once he reads a letter from a hunter complaining that the laws needs to be changed because he has not had the chance to kill XX animal in 20 years while his neighbor has killed two.

BHB

[GoatGuy]

Lots of proposed 'fixes' here - but no one has identified what the (or their) problem is........................................

Like buying a set of sandals for a trip to winnipeg in January, makes no sense.

[Ourea]

And it it still takes 100 years for the original 1000 applicants to get a tag. I think that puts it into the unlikely to be drawn in your lifetime category.

No.
They will increase their odds the longer they put in.
The longer u put in the odds get better - ur chances go up.
The math/equation is pretty darn simple

I am looking at ways to reward those who have been putting in for years with increased odds of being drawn yet still afford every applicant a chance.
Again, best of both systems.

[guest]

Lots of proposed 'fixes' here - but no one has identified what the (or their) problem is........................................

Like buying a set of sandals for a trip to winnipeg in January, makes no sense.

Answer - complete fail of sound management at the Hands of Big Business government. They could care less if the bottom falls out in regards to fish and wildlife . But hey ........ Our homes are worth more so quit complaining.

How truly sad to see what was go in the dumper. Get it while YA can because NO ONE THAT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN GOVERNMENT IS LISTENING.

CT

[Ourea]

What I find funny about reading all these posts about the flawed system is people’s expectations that they should be drawn.

Why is just because one has applied for 20 years they think they deserve a tag more then the guy that just starting hunting.
Sure it would be nice to get a rosie or bison draw, but it would also be nice to not have to work like some people, or date the prom queen or make money on every stock they buy.

Why don’t I see people lobbying the government to restrict people that have already made $500,000 on the stock market to only be allowed to buy one stock every five years or to never play the stock market again because that may improve the odds of someone else making some money. Or how about you are only allowed to have sex with a good looking woman or man once every five years because there are others who have never had the chance.

I can only imagine what goes through some MLA’s mind (who does not hunt) once he reads a letter from a hunter complaining that the laws needs to be changed because he has not had the chance to kill XX animal in 20 years while his neighbor has killed two.

BHB

Understand ur point bhb.
Duly noted.
Challenge being wildlife is a limited public resource. not a private investment.
Sorry, but I c no similarities with that comparative.

[Ourea]

Back to school, you didn't study math or were out hunting during math class?

Ha ha.
Obviously the initial applicants odds would have to be more than 1 in 100, in the scenario presented, in order for those "ahead" of them to have their odds increased and stand a better chance of being drawn.

Maybe it's my business mind that wants to reward those that show up and pay their dues to be rewarded vs those that want the same results without investing.

[Walking Buffalo]

What tags are you talking about? The only ones I can figure are sheep.


Turkey, moose, mule deer and Pronghorns draws are all developing in this direction.
One needs to look at the trend over time, not just what happened in the past or what the current draw requirement is.

Turkey was a 4-5 year priority to draw, now there are over 15000 people in the system that offers 125 tags/year. This is now a 1 in 125 year draw for those new applicants.

Pronghorn was a 4-5 year wait not long ago, now it could take over 50 years to work through the current applicant pool.

There are mule deer and moose draws that will take 30+ years for those just entering the system now to ever even have a chance a drawing in those wmus.



There are several reasons for the increased wait times, the least of which is due to hunter recruitment, but the trend has been consistent. In general , every year it takes longer to draw a tag.


The strict priority system works great when draw waits are counted in single digits.
After that, it becomes a liability to the hunting community.


--------------

[bighornbob]

Turkey, moose, mule deer and Pronghorns draws are all developing in this direction.
One needs to look at the trend over time, not just what happened in the past or what the current draw requirement is.

Turkey was a 4-5 year priority to draw, now there are over 15000 people in the system that offers 125 tags/year. This is now a 1 in 125 year draw for those new applicants.

Pronghorn was a 4-5 year wait not long ago, now it could take over 50 years to work through the current applicant pool.

There are mule deer and moose draws that will take 30+ years for those just entering the system now to ever even have a chance a drawing in those wmus.



There are several reasons for the increased wait times, the least of which is due to hunter recruitment, but the trend has been consistent. In general , every year it takes longer to draw a tag.


The strict priority system works great when draw waits are counted in single digits.
After that, it becomes a liability to the hunting community.


--------------

With waits getting longer and longer, I wonder how long before residents start complaining about non-residents (BC folks) coming and getting tags even though they may have waited just as long.

BHB

[GoatGuy]

Turkey, moose, mule deer and Pronghorns draws are all developing in this direction.
One needs to look at the trend over time, not just what happened in the past or what the current draw requirement is.

Turkey was a 4-5 year priority to draw, now there are over 15000 people in the system that offers 125 tags/year. This is now a 1 in 125 year draw for those new applicants.

Pronghorn was a 4-5 year wait not long ago, now it could take over 50 years to work through the current applicant pool.

There are mule deer and moose draws that will take 30+ years for those just entering the system now to ever even have a chance a drawing in those wmus.



There are several reasons for the increased wait times, the least of which is due to hunter recruitment, but the trend has been consistent. In general , every year it takes longer to draw a tag.


The strict priority system works great when draw waits are counted in single digits.
After that, it becomes a liability to the hunting community.


--------------

This was predicted quite some time ago.

Part of developing a successful system is being able to look ahead and seeing it under changing conditions, on both the supply and demand side.

[Walking Buffalo]

With waits getting longer and longer, I wonder how long before residents start complaining about non-residents (BC folks) coming and getting tags even though they may have waited just as long.

BHB


Lol.... no need to wait for that.

Some have been complaining for years.... without knowing how many NR are receiving tags.





This was predicted quite some time ago.

Part of developing a successful system is being able to look ahead and seeing it under changing conditions, on both the supply and demand side.


Absolutely. This situation in Alberta is no surprise.
The concern was brought up at the stakeholder/gov level years ago.
Concern recognized and debated. Decisions nearly made....

Just another hamster stuck on the wheel....


These types of changes have to be thoroughly analyzed, excepting where others have gone wrong.
Recognize ALL legal concerns when selling "incentives". This is one of those big future concerns that has not been mentioned other than in the OP's article.....

[IronNoggin]

With waits getting longer and longer, I wonder how long before residents start complaining about non-residents (BC folks) coming and getting tags even though they may have waited just as long.

Already happening to some extent Bob. I don't personally find the waits nearly as long as WB suggests above, and I only target zones that I am familiar with and that Produce Very Well. Took only 5 years to draw an Alberta Muley Buck, and I KNEW I would draw it this time. Took even less for the moose (2 years), and I strongly suspect I'll draw antelope next season (at 5 years). Be a year or 3 now for elk, but I am patient knowing that I will indeed eventually draw. And down the road I'd be surprised should it take much more than 5 or 6 to land another Muley, and 3 or 4 for another moose. Interesting side line over there is one can hunt many of the LEH zones / species with a bow under GOS terms... something I find quite fascinating and do take advantage of from time to time.

Even with the shorter waiting times I noted, I've had a few nasty comments tossed my way regarding drawing in Alberta and being from BC. And if you wander through their hunting forums, you will see the odd thread that alludes to the same. Gotta admit though, not nearly as Nasty as the comments / attitude over me hunting there with a crossbow of all things... ;)

This entire thread is based upon a rather circular argument - as can be directly seen from the now 13 pages of comments.
I disagree with the assessment of the original quoted author and do believe that a good case can be made for priority based draw systems - speaking the medium to lower demand hunts here. From practical experience I know I greatly prefer understanding just when I will draw (and the fact that I will do so) even when that wait translates to several years. Obviously in the cases of Kamloops Sheep and Island Elk the priority system would fail miserably...

Several Western States have recognized this situation implicitly. They have gone to a priority system for medium / lower demand hunts, and maintain the higher demand hunts on a lottery basis. I have seen some interesting comments here on a modified lottery system that might work well in BC's case... Likely the best route to go IMHO...

That said, some have also touched on the underlying issue. That being instead of discussing just how to allocate the ever decreasing pieces of the proverbial pie, to actually increase those pies and pieces overall. Damn GREAT thoughts here. Unfortunately I do not believe our current government has any thoughts whatsoever in that direction - simply not on their agenda / radar. Maybe sometime down the road... at least one can hope...

In the meantime I'll be headed off to Alberta (yet again) this fall to Enjoy the rewards their priority system has once again delivered into my hands... :D

Cheers,
Nog

[Ourea]

Already happening to some extent Bob. I don't personally find the waits nearly as long as WB suggests above, and I only target zones that I am familiar with and that Produce Very Well. Took only 5 years to draw an Alberta Muley Buck, and I KNEW I would draw it this time. Took even less for the moose (2 years), and I strongly suspect I'll draw antelope next season (at 5 years). Be a year or 3 now for elk, but I am patient knowing that I will indeed eventually draw. And down the road I'd be surprised should it take much more than 5 or 6 to land another Muley, and 3 or 4 for another moose. Interesting side line over there is one can hunt many of the LEH zones / species with a bow under GOS terms... something I find quite fascinating and do take advantage of from time to time.

Even with the shorter waiting times I noted, I've had a few nasty comments tossed my way regarding drawing in Alberta and being from BC. And if you wander through their hunting forums, you will see the odd thread that alludes to the same. Gotta admit though, not nearly as Nasty as the comments / attitude over me hunting there with a crossbow of all things... ;)

This entire thread is based upon a rather circular argument - as can be directly seen from the now 13 pages of comments.
I disagree with the assessment of the original quoted author and do believe that a good case can be made for priority based draw systems - speaking the medium to lower demand hunts here. From practical experience I know I greatly prefer understanding just when I will draw (and the fact that I will do so) even when that wait translates to several years. Obviously in the cases of Kamloops Sheep and Island Elk the priority system would fail miserably...

Several Western States have recognized this situation implicitly. They have gone to a priority system for medium / lower demand hunts, and maintain the higher demand hunts on a lottery basis. I have seen some interesting comments here on a modified lottery system that might work well in BC's case... Likely the best route to go IMHO...


That said, some have also touched on the underlying issue. That being instead of discussing just how to allocate the ever decreasing pieces of the proverbial pie, to actually increase those pies and pieces overall. Damn GREAT thoughts here. Unfortunately I do not believe our current government has any thoughts whatsoever in that direction - simply not on their agenda / radar. Maybe sometime down the road... at least one can hope...

In the meantime I'll be headed off to Alberta (yet again) this fall to Enjoy the rewards their priority system has once again delivered into my hands... :D

Cheers,
Nog

Good perspective Nog

[Seymourarm]

We have point system in alberta, I like it, seems popular here? In zone where I hunt moose it's 100% every third year, and over 50% every two. In 3-36 when I was bc resident, went 8 years without bull moose draw

[Fisher-Dude]

We have point system in alberta, I like it, seems popular here? In zone where I hunt moose it's 100% every third year, and over 50% every two. In 3-36 when I was bc resident, went 8 years without bull moose draw

We have moose draws in BC that a person can get drawn in every single year if they want.

[Mulehahn]

In some zones in BC there is no wait. Straight GOS. Really depends on how far a person is willing to travel. What is the average wait time for a moose in Southern Alberta? Let's compare apples to apples. Cold Lake vs Fort St. John resident. Who can hunt hunt a moose first?

[Seymourarm]

We have moose draws in BC that a person can get drawn in every single year if they want.
The area I hunt is farly close to peace river, in bc I'd bet it would be 10 to one at least, and success on a week long hunt for us has been 100%

[barry1974w]

No.
They will increase their odds the longer they put in.
The longer u put in the odds get better - ur chances go up.
The math/equation is pretty darn simple

I am looking at ways to reward those who have been putting in for years with increased odds of being drawn yet still afford every applicant a chance.
Again, best of both systems.

what I'm pointing out is that even if you don't allow anyone else to enter the draw, at ten tags a year it takes 100 years for the original applicants to get a tag.

[barry1974w]

No LEH bull moose in FSJ, just GOS up there.

[Mulehahn]

No LEH bull moose in FSJ, just GOS up there.

If this was directed at me, that is my point. People sat that I know I can draw a moose every 3 years in Alberta. I know that I can go hunt a moose every year here in BC. I just have to travel a bit. Same as the guy who who has to wait 3 years, I can just plan whenever I want.

[Ourea]

what I'm pointing out is that even if you don't allow anyone else to enter the draw, at ten tags a year it takes 100 years for the original applicants to get a tag.


No no no no .....
Ur not getting the math and/or the scenario I platformed.
Everyone has a chance.
Odds improve with time if u consistently enter.
No guarantee....because its a draw.

A first time applicant can be drawn.
A 5 yr applicant can be drawn....his odds r just higher.

[northof49]

No no no no .....
Ur not getting the math and/or the scenario I platformed.
Everyone has a chance.
Odds improve with time if u consistently enter.
No guarantee....because its a draw.

A first time applicant can be drawn.
A 5 yr applicant can be drawn....his odds r just higher.

You are selling same system I suggested back in 2010 and again near start of this post. It would work well in BC and is simply a combination of BC and AB system....best both wolds. Could easily improve odds even more by adding a cooling off period for those who get drawn like some have suggested. Shorter for moose/deer and longer for the more cherrished hunts such as Rosies, sheep, griz etc. The beauty of hybrid system is that anyone can be drawn any year unlike in AB, but the longer you go without being drawn the better your odds would get unlike current BC system.

Ar the end of the day I really don't care that much if it changes, simply offering what I see as an easy solution to the complaints I hear year after year for 30yrs now. I have no problem getting a moose, elk, deer every year if/when want and regularly travel the entire province to do so. That said I still like the chance of what I consider a bonus hunt if I am lucky to get drawn (ie Rosies, bison, sheep, goat, griz).

[boxhitch]

Someone had posted up stats last year iirc, showing less than 2% ? are repeat back-to-back winners for any species.
Not really an issue in the big scheme

[Fisher-Dude]

Could easily improve odds even more by adding a cooling off period for those who get drawn like some have suggested.

Nothing improves odds except an increase in annual allowable harvest. Period.

[northof49]

Nothing improves odds except an increase in annual allowable harvest. Period.

Not true. Odds for a draw is function of allocation and number of entrants for a specific draw. Increase allocation relative to number of entrants = better odds of getting drawn; or reduce number of entrants relative to allocation = better odds.

[Fisher-Dude]

Not true. Odds for a draw is function of allocation and number of entrants for a specific draw. Increase allocation relative to number of entrants = better odds of getting drawn; or reduce number of entrants relative to allocation = better odds.

Oreo's suggested system states "everyone has a chance." Thus, you're not reducing the number of applicants. And thus, only allocation increases will give better odds.

[Ourea]

Not true. Odds for a draw is function of allocation and number of entrants for a specific draw. Increase allocation relative to number of entrants = better odds of getting drawn; or reduce number of entrants relative to allocation = better odds.

Yup.........

[barry1974w]

If this was directed at me, that is my point. People sat that I know I can draw a moose every 3 years in Alberta. I know that I can go hunt a moose every year here in BC. I just have to travel a bit. Same as the guy who who has to wait 3 years, I can just plan whenever I want.

nothing directed at anybody, somebody asked how long to draw in Alberta compared to FSJ.

[barry1974w]

No no no no .....
Ur not getting the math and/or the scenario I platformed.
Everyone has a chance.
Odds improve with time if u consistently enter.
No guarantee....because its a draw.

A first time applicant can be drawn.


A 5 yr applicant can be drawn....his odds r just higher.

i understand what you're saying. I just don't think it'd work in bc. I had a quick (absolutely unscientific ) look at the moose odds in southern bc. Looks like about a 20 to 1 average. So figure it at twenty years to draw

[steveo]

Why not offer shared hunts for all LEH and let hunters decide how much meat they want in their freezer. For example, raise the number of hunters to 3 for a moose hunt and only give them one moose or raise it to 6 hunters and give them only 2 moose. Every one participating has bought a moose tag just like now but there is more tags bought with more hunters or even up the cost of the tag a bit so the successful applicants are paying a little more instead of most of the revenue being generated by the unsuccessful applicants.

[Mulehahn]

nothing directed at anybody, somebody asked how long to draw in Alberta compared to FSJ.

Thanks, didn't mean anything by it. I just really don't understand the circular arguments of this thread. On insanely long odds, such as Rosie, Kamloops Sheep, Bison, easy access grizzly, etc a points system will not work and a hybrid system wouldn't really change anything. If 200 people enter the first year you enter there are still 200 people with the same odds as you; it doesn't matter if you have 1 out of 200 or 5 out of 1000 your odds are the same. Then throw in all the others who apply after and nothing changes.

To me, if you really wanted to hunt moose you would plan now for 2017 and go north. It is worth the drive alone let alone hunting up there. Sheep opens in about 2.5 weeks, to late to get in shape this year but again, 2017. Elk are open from South to North the whole way, deer are open province wide. We should count ourselves lucky we can even hunt grizzly, even on LEH. One of the last places in North America that can.

[barry1974w]

Thanks, didn't mean anything by it. I just really don't understand the circular arguments of this thread. On insanely long odds, such as Rosie, Kamloops Sheep, Bison, easy access grizzly, etc a points system will not work and a hybrid system wouldn't really change anything. If 200 people enter the first year you enter there are still 200 people with the same odds as you; it doesn't matter if you have 1 out of 200 or 5 out of 1000 your odds are the same. Then throw in all the others who apply after and nothing changes.

To me, if you really wanted to hunt moose you would plan now for 2017 and go north. It is worth the drive alone let alone hunting up there. Sheep opens in about 2.5 weeks, to late to get in shape this year but again, 2017. Elk are open from South to North the whole way, deer are open province wide. We should count ourselves lucky we can even hunt grizzly, even on LEH. One of the last places in North America that can.


Hallelujah!

[riflebuilder]

Hallelujah!

X2 this is the best hunting for big game in North America....get out there and do it

[Gateholio]

How about a priority points system based on how many hours you contribute to conservation ? Those that show up get rewarded with more points. Those that don't get a general lottery. Set a maximum amount of points and a reasonable amount of time to earn those points that anyone can achieve if they want to.

Have a scale whereby 1 specified period = 1 point. To a maximum of 25 points or whatever.

[TPK]

How about a priority points system based on how many hours you contribute to conservation ? Those that show up get rewarded with more points. Those that don't get a general lottery. Set a maximum amount of points and a reasonable amount of time to earn those points that anyone can achieve if they want to.

Have a scale whereby 1 specified period = 1 point. To a maximum of 25 points or whatever.

Sounds good BUT we end doing the work that should be done by the folks taking our money for hunting licenses and tags ... and this could exclude some of the older or less able to help out in a conservation role. Sure they could still throw in for a general lottery but they shouldn't take a backseat (less opportunity) if they simply can not help out. I'm fine with our current system and a three year reduction of odds for those previously drawn.

[Ourea]

How about a priority points system based on how many hours you contribute to conservation ? Those that show up get rewarded with more points. Those that don't get a general lottery. Set a maximum amount of points and a reasonable amount of time to earn those points that anyone can achieve if they want to.

Have a scale whereby 1 specified period = 1 point. To a maximum of 25 points or whatever.

Are you suggesting we try and reward those that make a difference by them investing time and effort!!?
Gates...that's the stupidest concept ever!

It is totally unfair to those that do f*ck all and want just as much as those that contribute.

[Fisher-Dude]

How about a priority points system based on how many hours you contribute to conservation ? Those that show up get rewarded with more points. Those that don't get a general lottery. Set a maximum amount of points and a reasonable amount of time to earn those points that anyone can achieve if they want to.

Have a scale whereby 1 specified period = 1 point. To a maximum of 25 points or whatever.

Works for me.

Guess I'll help pack Zeman's Kamloops sheep to the truck.

[J_T]

^^What's a dead wolf worth?

[steveo]

What is a dead bear worth or a cougar or even a coyote?

[Ourea]

Works for me.

Guess I'll help pack Zeman's Kamloops sheep to the truck.


You don't pack anything.
Sure you could run the winch though
:smile:

[Fisher-Dude]

You don't pack anything.
Sure you could run the winch though
:smile:

I'm the Charlie Daniels of the snatch-block.

[Husky7mm]

Already happening to some extent Bob. I don't personally find the waits nearly as long as WB suggests above, and I only target zones that I am familiar with and that Produce Very Well. Took only 5 years to draw an Alberta Muley Buck, and I KNEW I would draw it this time. Took even less for the moose (2 years), and I strongly suspect I'll draw antelope next season (at 5 years). Be a year or 3 now for elk, but I am patient knowing that I will indeed eventually draw. And down the road I'd be surprised should it take much more than 5 or 6 to land another Muley, and 3 or 4 for another moose. Interesting side line over there is one can hunt many of the LEH zones / species with a bow under GOS terms... something I find quite fascinating and do take advantage of from time to time.

Even with the shorter waiting times I noted, I've had a few nasty comments tossed my way regarding drawing in Alberta and being from BC. And if you wander through their hunting forums, you will see the odd thread that alludes to the same. Gotta admit though, not nearly as Nasty as the comments / attitude over me hunting there with a crossbow of all things... ;)

This entire thread is based upon a rather circular argument - as can be directly seen from the now 13 pages of comments.
I disagree with the assessment of the original quoted author and do believe that a good case can be made for priority based draw systems - speaking the medium to lower demand hunts here. From practical experience I know I greatly prefer understanding just when I will draw (and the fact that I will do so) even when that wait translates to several years. Obviously in the cases of Kamloops Sheep and Island Elk the priority system would fail miserably...

Several Western States have recognized this situation implicitly. They have gone to a priority system for medium / lower demand hunts, and maintain the higher demand hunts on a lottery basis. I have seen some interesting comments here on a modified lottery system that might work well in BC's case... Likely the best route to go IMHO...

That said, some have also touched on the underlying issue. That being instead of discussing just how to allocate the ever decreasing pieces of the proverbial pie, to actually increase those pies and pieces overall. Damn GREAT thoughts here. Unfortunately I do not believe our current government has any thoughts whatsoever in that direction - simply not on their agenda / radar. Maybe sometime down the road... at least one can hope...

In the meantime I'll be headed off to Alberta (yet again) this fall to Enjoy the rewards their priority system has once again delivered into my hands... :D

Cheers,
Nog


To be fair, its easy for you from the outside looking in to sing the praises of the priority system. The entire hunt is pure bonus for you. You still have a generous BC gos season to hunt and all of your BC leh hunts as well. There is no general rifle season in Alberta for moose. Its all leh and the lines get longer every year. Because of the heavy strain on the priority system there are many units with waits well over 10 yrs. Because of that there is lots of shotgun applicants into the nothing special units and it pushes them up to 3-5 yrs because the list are so long for a decent unit or one that is handy to some of the larger cities. If it were lottery most people would be putting the units they really new or wanted to hunt cause they all felt they had as much of a chance as te next guy every year. The wait times in the mediocre units or difficult access units would go way down. People willing to put in the time and effort would be out more often, way more.
If BC allowed non res in their draws many Albertans would be very excited about the loto system or just a whole other chance and pulling some tags, right??

As for hunting with a crossbow there should be a few things clairifed for those that dont know.
A crossbow is not recognized as archery tackle in Alberta.
( special permission is required to use a crossbow outside of rifle season) There are a few units that still have a general archery mule deer season. There are basically no general rifle seasons in Alberta for mulie, its all draw other than a tiny handful of units near the northern mountains that dont really hold mule deer. There would have been a few folks that particially read nogs mule deer story and made some assumptions.

[Gateholio]

Sounds good BUT we end doing the work that should be done by the folks taking our money for hunting licenses and tags ... and this could exclude some of the older or less able to help out in a conservation role. Sure they could still throw in for a general lottery but they shouldn't take a backseat (less opportunity) if they simply can not help out. I'm fine with our current system and a three year reduction of odds for those previously drawn.

I think if you are physically able to hunt, you should be physically able to help. Not all conservation work is done in the field, anyway.

I'm fine with our system too, but if people want a points system, it should be based on something other than just filling out a LEH application for multiple years. That's truly the worst reason ever to be "rewarding" someone.

[TPK]

....well that's the problem I was getting at, not all hunters are physically able, some require assistance and special permits to allow them the ability to hunt from a vehicle etc. so they can continue with their passion. They should not be at reduced odds in an LEH because of their disabilities.

[Ourea]

....well that's the problem I was getting at, not all hunters are physically able, some require assistance and special permits to allow them the ability to hunt from a vehicle etc. so they can continue with their passion. They should not be at reduced odds in an LEH because of their disabilities.

Hunt Whitetail :(

[Gateholio]

....well that's the problem I was getting at, not all hunters are physically able, some require assistance and special permits to allow them the ability to hunt from a vehicle etc. so they can continue with their passion. They should not be at reduced odds in an LEH because of their disabilities.

I understood your point. A person in a wheelchair can still contribute. Just in a different way than a 25 year old in perfect physical condition. Not all conservation work is done in the field.

[curt]

I read something on here I cant remember who wrote it but I liked the idea as "part of a solution" obviously wont solve everything but for starters.... the exclusive very hard to acquire hunts should be 100% limited to BC residents only .....Bison, VI Rosie elk, Lower Mainland Elk, some sheep draws I'm sure you get the point. We the residents should 100% be the priority over any foreigners shooting our animals and if limiting some draws to residents only helps reduce the odds and put more draws in our pockets then thats what they should do. IMO