Letter re: Region 5 Mule Deer Seasons

[Fisher-Dude]

April 16, 2009

Mr Rodger Stewart
Regional Manager – Cariboo Ministry of Environment
400 – 640 Borland Street
Williams Lake, BC V2G 4T1


Dear Mr Stewart,

I was shocked and dismayed to learn of your recommendations for changes to the mule deer hunting seasons and bag limits in Region 5 for the 2009 season. Surely, you are aware of the Provincial Allocation Policy’s requirements to satisfy, in order, the following needs: conservation concerns, First Nations, resident hunters, and lastly, non-resident hunters. The changes you have recommended squarely place the needs of resident hunters behind those of trophy hunting foreigners.

We cannot rationalize these changes to the mule deer season which are designed only to placate wealthy foreigners using the services of guide outfitters, who are selling our wildlife based on “trophy hunts” and “quality experiences”. Those “quality experiences” being sold by the guide outfitters have obviously been interpreted by your office as “no resident hunters will be encountered”. These changes are contrary to the Provincial Government’s own recruitment and retention strategy, as they will certainly result in fewer new hunters taking up our heritage of hunting, and more established hunters abandoning hunting, because of your removal of harvest opportunity for residents in favour of creating trophy opportunities for foreigners.

Let’s review your recommendations and rationale based on the principles of the wildlife allocation hierarchy discussed above (conservation, First Nations, resident, and non-resident):

1.) Recent mule deer inventories have placed the Region 5 buck:doe ratio at 19.3:1, which is statistically consistent with the provincial target of 20:1. Moreover, depredation of crops and animal/vehicle collisions continue to increase as the mule deer population grows. How much are we, as BC taxpayers, subsidizing the agriculture industry for this crop depredation, and paying in ICBC claims for vehicle damage? What is the cost to our health care system for people injured in these collisions?

Your rationale for the season and bag limit changes is to increase the number of class III bucks, however, it is proven in many mule deer population studies that all we need to sustain robust population numbers is a sperm supply, and that is irrespective of the class of buck doing the breeding. The genetics of a 2 ½ year old breeding buck do not change when he is breeding as a class III buck at 4 ½ years of age, and his ability to sire healthy offspring is not dependent on his age. Also, only 1% to 1.5% of Region 5 mule deer harvest is the “second deer” allocated in the two buck bag limit, so a reduction to a one buck bag limit will have little effect on the post-hunt buck:doe ratio. Based on the foregoing, there is no conservation concern for mule deer in Region 5, and therefore that cannot be cited in your recommendations for the season and bag limit changes.

2.) First Nations’ harvest of mule deer in Region 5 is easily met by the strong numbers of deer throughout the region. Unbound by antler and sex harvest restrictions, our First Nations people are enjoying excellent hunting to meet their ceremonial and sustenance requirements in their traditional territories. Therefore, you are unable to base your recommendations for changes on the needs of First Nations not being met.

3.) This is the point where your failure to meet the needs of resident hunters is evident. Surveys of our resident hunters (Zeman, 2006, “The Precipitous Decline of Resident Hunters in the Okanagan”) indicate that the overwhelming majority of resident hunters are meat hunters. Four distinct types of hunters, with different expectations and goals, were identified in Zeman’s focus group. The four different types of resident hunters are: meat hunters (37%), meat, then selective (41%), selective (18%) and trophy hunters (3%). Clearly, close to 80% of BC’s resident hunters are meat hunters first and foremost, and only 3% are true trophy hunters. However, your changes to the Region 5 mule deer seasons and bag limit are designed to meet the needs of only 3% of resident hunters, and ignore the desires of the remaining 97%. You’ve cited your desire to increase the number of class III bucks as a reason for changing seasons and bag limits, however only 3% of resident hunters see this as their priority in hunting mule deer. Thus, you cannot assert that you are meeting the needs of resident hunters ahead of non-resident trophy hunters.

4.) Non-resident trophy hunters, and the guide outfitters who pressured you for these changes, are undoubtedly elated at your decision. Granting them a promise of more trophy bucks so that they can lop off the head and antlers for an impressive display back home in their foreign countries, with no regard to what happens to the meat of the animal, is no doubt meeting their desires. Moreover, restricting seasons to discourage resident hunter participation will help the guide outfitters sell “quality experiences” to their wealthy foreign clients, as resident hunters will be conspicuously absent from the woods. In doing so, you’ve ignored what a quality experience is to 97% of resident hunters – their quality experience is putting meat in their freezers to feed their families. This move of yours to meet non-residents’ demands before those of BC residents is in clear violation of the terms of the Provincial Allocation Policy and the Hunter Recruitment and Retention Policy.

Mr Stewart, I am not a resident of Region 5. I live in Region 8. I do, however, make an annual hunting trip with my hunting companions to Region 5 for mule deer hunting. We provide much-needed economic support to the small community where we stay, spending money at motels, restaurants, service stations, and convenience stores. We each spend between $1,000 and $1,500 on our trips, and those dollars are certainly welcomed in this rural community that has been hard hit by the downturn in the economy, and in particular the severe downturn in our forest industry. Discussing the changes that you have made to the mule deer season with my hunting partners the other day, we have decided not to make our trip to Region 5 this year. We are meat hunters, that 97% of BC hunters whom you have forsaken in favour of wealthy foreign hunters. Meat hunters utilize wildlife resources to feed their families, not to hang antlers on their walls for bragging rights. My family does not eat deer antlers, so your attempt to grow antlers for foreigners does not meet our needs as resident hunters.

I would like to know, Mr Stewart, when you plan on managing mule deer in Region 5 based on sound, scientific game management principles instead of bowing to political influence from the Guide Outfitters’ Association to sell our animals to wealthy foreigners. I’m looking forward to your answer, as the moment you do adopt the North American Conservation Model in your decision making, and abide by the terms of the Provincial Allocation Policy, we’ll go hunting again.

Yours in conservation,

XXXXXXXXXXXXX

cc: Premier Gordon Campbell
The Honourable Barry Penner, Minister of Environment
Mr Tom Ethier, Director, Fish and Wildlife Branch
Mr Doug Konkin, Deputy Minister
Mr Bob Simpson, MLA, Cariboo North
Mr Charlie Wyse, MLA, Cariboo South

[Steeleco]

Well written letter Sir. Lets hope they read it and do something about it.

[Stillhunting]

Great letter FD, my sentiments exactly. My hunting party will also be foregoing our annual region 5 mule deer hunt this year, thanks to the myopic Mr. Stewart.

[CooperSscat]

Kudos Fisher-Dude!

Jeremy

[Squirrelnuts]

Well done F-D. Looking forward to Mr. Stewart's reply....

[Elkhound]

Well written letter Sir. Lets hope they read it and do something about it.


x2......very well written

[mcrae]

x2......very well written

x3 I hope someone reads it and realizes something is wrong with the recent decision.

[hunter1947]

Well stated letter FD ,looking forward to what they say in the returned letter.

[huntcoop]

Only a fellow Red Wing fan could have the intellect, tact and couth to compose such an intelligent synopsis of the "political" changes to Region 5. Well written. Go Wings Go.

[Seeadler]

Nice letter. I do take issue with the use of the trophy hunter cliche though. Hunters have enough image problems without the whole chopping off the head stereotype being dragged out.

[Buck]

Excellant letter this will be the first year in 25 that i will not be hunting region 5.They need to rethink this .Sept Leh For doe would have helped alot.This will do nothing for hunter recruitment thats for sure.

[Elkhound]

Only a fellow Red Wing fan could have the intellect, tact and couth to compose such an intelligent synopsis of the "political" changes to Region 5. Well written. Go Wings Go.

I think I am going to puke....lol

[6616]

Yah good letter Pat,,,,,,,,,,,,

,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,but


Go Canucks go...............!!!!!!!!!

[6616]

I think I am going to puke....lol

I already did...........!!!

[brad ferris]

this thread is very one sided,so therefore i will throw my 2cents in.not sure where you got your 97% figure.i also noticed you you used the "food on my families table"point while at the same time told us you drop $1000 to $1500 dollars on this trip.i guess groceries are pretty expensive in region 8.you incinuate that a large population of deer is the cause of wildlife impacts and rising insurace premiums.i think these impacts are caused by excessive speed,driver error and just a general misconception that we have the right to travel through a wildlife rich province at 100km/h.
i'm all for hunter recruitment and conservation.and you do raise some interesting points on these issues.i would also like to mention to you that these foriegners are also hunters and if we are busy fighting each other who's going to fight peta,greenpiece,the u.n. and the hundreds of other organizations out there whos mandate is to end our lifestyle.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Clear, concise and factual!

Well written, FD!:cool:

Brad Ferris.

They don't sell deer meat at the supermarket...in case you haven't noticed. :wink:
FD usually harvests his 3 meat bucks annually which takes him out of region out of necessity.

SSS

[brad ferris]

Clear, concise and factual!

Well written, FD!:cool:

Brad Ferris.

They don't sell deer meat at the supermarket...in case you haven't noticed. :wink:
FD usually harvests his 3 meat bucks annually which takes him out of region out of necessity.

SSS
i am aware of that.just making the point that we don't need to eat wild game, we choose to. and i accept that is why many hunt. all i ask is that everyone else out there accepts that i may hunt for other reasons.and my wants are everybit as valid as the next guys or gals. i'm sure that i am not the only bc resident who places more value on the quality of the hunt than the amount of spaced used in my freezer every fall.
i guess i would have liked the original letter more if it didn't contain all those emotion grabbing statements such as the lopping off the head thing.but i guess if thats what it takes to get your point across to your politition thats your perogative.after all the greenies have been using the same tactics for years

[Gateholio]

i am aware of that.just making the point that we don't need to eat wild game, we choose to. and i accept that is why many hunt. all i ask is that everyone else out there accepts that i may hunt for other reasons.and my wants are everybit as valid as the next guys or gals. i

Nobody is stopping you from "trophy" hunting when there is a GOS on something. People are still free to be as choosy as they want. However, when there are antler restrictions, it *is* stopping someone from hunting as they want if they happen to be after "any" deer and don't care about 4 pts.


'm sure that i am not the only bc resident who places more value on the quality of the hunt than the amount of spaced used in my freezer every fall.

I think every hunter places quite a bit of value on the quality of the hunt, it's just that different people have different ideas about what quality is.



i guess i would have liked the original letter more if it didn't contain all those emotion grabbing statements such as the lopping off the head thing.but i guess if thats what it takes to get your point across to your politition thats your perogative.after all the greenies have been using the same tactics for years

It's mostly the truth, though. Many non resident hunters that are mostly concerned with trophy hunting don't take the meat home with them.

[Chuck]

I only wish that we could all live like that Mexican, then this sort of thing wouldn't be happening. I understand the problems, but I wish I was as accomplished as an orator as well. I somehow doubt that this row will ever be easy to hoe. Lots of countries have had to opt for the trophy hunt method of regulation. A disappointing 2 cents - I know.

[Kody94]

Very well written letter F-D. Excellent job.

I absolutely don't want to take away from it at all, but I have been wondering about the all the statements I have seen recently related to your point #3, copied below, and have a question or two about it, for your or GoatGuy's (or others) clarification...



3.) This is the point where your failure to meet the needs of resident hunters is evident. Surveys of our resident hunters (Zeman, 2006, “The Precipitous Decline of Resident Hunters in the Okanagan”) indicate that the overwhelming majority of resident hunters are meat hunters. Four distinct types of hunters, with different expectations and goals, were identified in Zeman’s focus group. The four different types of resident hunters are: meat hunters (37%), meat, then selective (41%), selective (18%) and trophy hunters (3%). Clearly, close to 80% of BC’s resident hunters are meat hunters first and foremost, and only 3% are true trophy hunters. However, your changes to the Region 5 mule deer seasons and bag limit are designed to meet the needs of only 3% of resident hunters, and ignore the desires of the remaining 97%. You’ve cited your desire to increase the number of class III bucks as a reason for changing seasons and bag limits, however only 3% of resident hunters see this as their priority in hunting mule deer. Thus, you cannot assert that you are meeting the needs of resident hunters ahead of non-resident trophy hunters.


IIRC, in the original survey, the respondents were asked to self-identify in one of those 4 groups without a specific definition for reference.

Particularly given the negative connotation associated with the term "trophy hunter", isn't it likely that many of the folks that hold out for a decent 4 point muley every year (but not necessarily a booner) would identify themselves as "selective"?

Also, the categories were not specific by species and was only a survey of Okanagan residents. I would think it would be somewhat difficult to extrapolate the results to a specific season for a specific species, particularly outside of the same area (although in this case, Reg 5 is probably quite similar to Reg 8, given the preponderance of mule deer and mule deer hunters). What I am saying here, I guess, is that it could be possible that even a number of the "meat, then selective" folks might be quite selective on muley bucks and get their meat elsewhere (moose, doe/cow LEHs, whitetails, etc).

While I agree overall with your letter and the general message, I am just trying to sort out in my mind how accurate it really is to say that a season designed to create more class III bucks only caters to 3% of residents?

I would probably classify myself as "selective, then meat" (I know that was not one of the 4 options!). The meat is important, but I am willing to gamble a little and hold out for a "nice buck/bull/ram/etc" for a while, then near the end of the season take a legal animal to fill the freezer. Or, alternatively, I'll pop the first legal deer or two at the beginning of the season for insurance, then be selective on other species. Or, maybe the first little six point bull elk will get it, then I'll be really selective for a big deer, knowing the freezer is already overstocked.

I know I am not in the majority, but I assume I would have a lot in common with the other folks that called themselves "selective" and probably quite a few of the guys that called themselves "meat, then selective". Based on the number of folks that turned out at the "Big Game Trophy Competition Banquet", I know there are quite a few folks that are way more trophy oriented than me!!

I think its very clear that the proposed season change eliminates opportunity for residents when there is no conservation concern. I think that in and of itself could and probably will have an impact on recruitment/retention. It definitely won't help anyway. I also see that it MUST be outfitter motivated, which I do not favor at all (what other reason could there be?..it's fixing something that is not broken for most residents). I am just having difficulty in thinking and saying out loud that it actually alienates 97% of resident hunters. It is still a relatively long season, with a month of opportunity for 'any buck', and presumably increased odds of finding a half-decent buck (not necessarily record book...which is how I define the objective for a true "trophy hunter"....but at least more nice 4 points for the selective folks) ....you'd have to think that the "selective" and even some "meat, then selective" guys would be into it or at least un-affected by it?

Anyway, F-D, your well written letter has inspired me to follow suit, but until I get my mind wrapped around the stats better I think I'd have to leave out that part.

Cheers
4Ster

[bridger]

very well written letter. thank you for expressing what many of us feel. I have written a letter to mr. stewart and that is something we must all be doing.

[brad ferris]

ok gatehouse you make a very valid first point about antler restrictions preventing one type of hunter from hunting the way they choose while not haveing restrictions does not keep me from being selective.this is provided sound science and conservation are used to establish management policy.as i'm fairly certain we are both in favor of that i have no further argument. however in your third point you stated something as "mostly the truth" and with a statement like that i can't help but wonder are you seeking election on may 12th.i have hunted with many of these same hunters who you may think are simply here to lop the head and antlers off for bragging rights and it's my oppinion they are here for the hunting experience.if i had to put a number to it 3 out of 120+ non resident alien hunters were just looking to collect a trophy.this is based on actual people and not "scientific models"
thank you for helping to safeguard our way of life.

[Gunner]

ok gatehouse you make a very valid first point about antler restrictions preventing one type of hunter from hunting the way they choose while not haveing restrictions does not keep me from being selective.this is provided sound science and conservation are used to establish management policy.as i'm fairly certain we are both in favor of that i have no further argument. however in your third point you stated something as "mostly the truth" and with a statement like that i can't help but wonder are you seeking election on may 12th.i have hunted with many of these same hunters who you may think are simply here to lop the head and antlers off for bragging rights and it's my oppinion they are here for the hunting experience.if i had to put a number to it 3 out of 120+ non resident alien hunters were just looking to collect a trophy.this is based on actual people and not "scientific models"
thank you for helping to safeguard our way of life.We all enjoy the hunting experience,that's no reason for non resident aliens to enjoy it in BC at the exspence of Resident hunter opportunity. Gunner

[GoatGuy]

Very well written letter F-D. Excellent job.

I absolutely don't want to take away from it at all, but I have been wondering about the all the statements I have seen recently related to your point #3, copied below, and have a question or two about it, for your or GoatGuy's (or others) clarification...



IIRC, in the original survey, the respondents were asked to self-identify in one of those 4 groups without a specific definition for reference.

Particularly given the negative connotation associated with the term "trophy hunter", isn't it likely that many of the folks that hold out for a decent 4 point muley every year (but not necessarily a booner) would identify themselves as "selective"?

Also, the categories were not specific by species and was only a survey of Okanagan residents. I would think it would be somewhat difficult to extrapolate the results to a specific season for a specific species, particularly outside of the same area (although in this case, Reg 5 is probably quite similar to Reg 8, given the preponderance of mule deer and mule deer hunters). What I am saying here, I guess, is that it could be possible that even a number of the "meat, then selective" folks might be quite selective on muley bucks and get their meat elsewhere (moose, doe/cow LEHs, whitetails, etc).

While I agree overall with your letter and the general message, I am just trying to sort out in my mind how accurate it really is to say that a season designed to create more class III bucks only caters to 3% of residents?

I would probably classify myself as "selective, then meat" (I know that was not one of the 4 options!). The meat is important, but I am willing to gamble a little and hold out for a "nice buck/bull/ram/etc" for a while, then near the end of the season take a legal animal to fill the freezer. Or, alternatively, I'll pop the first legal deer or two at the beginning of the season for insurance, then be selective on other species. Or, maybe the first little six point bull elk will get it, then I'll be really selective for a big deer, knowing the freezer is already overstocked.

I know I am not in the majority, but I assume I would have a lot in common with the other folks that called themselves "selective" and probably quite a few of the guys that called themselves "meat, then selective". Based on the number of folks that turned out at the "Big Game Trophy Competition Banquet", I know there are quite a few folks that are way more trophy oriented than me!!

I think its very clear that the proposed season change eliminates opportunity for residents when there is no conservation concern. I think that in and of itself could and probably will have an impact on recruitment/retention. It definitely won't help anyway. I also see that it MUST be outfitter motivated, which I do not favor at all (what other reason could there be?..it's fixing something that is not broken for most residents). I am just having difficulty in thinking and saying out loud that it actually alienates 97% of resident hunters. It is still a relatively long season, with a month of opportunity for 'any buck', and presumably increased odds of finding a half-decent buck (not necessarily record book...which is how I define the objective for a true "trophy hunter"....but at least more nice 4 points for the selective folks) ....you'd have to think that the "selective" and even some "meat, then selective" guys would be into it or at least un-affected by it?

Anyway, F-D, your well written letter has inspired me to follow suit, but until I get my mind wrapped around the stats better I think I'd have to leave out that part.

Cheers
4Ster

Lets put it this way. Anytime you introduce antler/horn restrictions hunters quit going - that simple. For those that remain, such as this season, you end up with over-crowding issues in the any buck season instead of a spread out harvest.

Self-identification can be difficult however when you back it up with secondary data things become fairly clear. Look at a mule deer season, see when most of the hunting and harvest occurs - it's during the any buck portion in most WMRs.


With 4 pt restrictions you usually end up with a bit better buck:doe ratios but not more trophy class bucks because the hunters that remain shoot the first 4 pt they see. Further to that you end up creating more 'selective' hunters, thus further reducing the 'trophy compenent' creating more competition for the people looking for big bucks. In the long run you end up shooting yourself in the foot - already documented and researched in the US.

You don't necessarily make all the other hunters quit but you will have some hunters quit and others stuffed into a shorter timeframe.

The change in seasons was not intended to increase Class III bucks it was about trophy bucks - there's a huge distinction.

Regardless of all that, especially in Region 5 where they have no hunting season other than mule deer the only hope they have for filling the freezer is mule deer bucks so that brings in another twist. While you can shoot a Wt in region 4, unless the resident in 5 gets a moose/mule doe draw the only source of meat is a mule buck.

After all is said and done this is just another reason to stick to conservation when it come to managing wildlife.

Without it we'll end up on LEH every single time and I doubt there are too many people, although there will be some, who want to put in for mule deer buck LEH.

[GoatGuy]

ok gatehouse you make a very valid first point about antler restrictions preventing one type of hunter from hunting the way they choose while not haveing restrictions does not keep me from being selective.this is provided sound science and conservation are used to establish management policy.as i'm fairly certain we are both in favor of that i have no further argument. however in your third point you stated something as "mostly the truth" and with a statement like that i can't help but wonder are you seeking election on may 12th.i have hunted with many of these same hunters who you may think are simply here to lop the head and antlers off for bragging rights and it's my oppinion they are here for the hunting experience.if i had to put a number to it 3 out of 120+ non resident alien hunters were just looking to collect a trophy.this is based on actual people and not "scientific models"
thank you for helping to safeguard our way of life.

Stick to conservation and nobody will have a problem.

The changes to this season and the other 4 before that had nothing to do with conservation and everything to do with trophy potential. These seasons will kill participation off this year.

Things would tick along at a good pace if it was just about hunting.

[beeker]

well said FD

[Kody94]

Lets put it this way. Anytime you introduce antler/horn restrictions hunters quit going - that simple. For those that remain, such as this season, you end up with over-crowding issues in the any buck season instead of a spread out harvest.

Self-identification can be difficult however when you back it up with secondary data things become fairly clear. Look at a mule deer season, see when most of the hunting and harvest occurs - it's during the any buck portion in most WMRs.


With 4 pt restrictions you usually end up with a bit better buck:doe ratios but not more trophy class bucks because the hunters that remain shoot the first 4 pt they see. Further to that you end up creating more 'selective' hunters, thus further reducing the 'trophy compenent' creating more competition for the people looking for big bucks. In the long run you end up shooting yourself in the foot - already documented and researched in the US.

You don't necessarily make all the other hunters quit but you will have some hunters quit and others stuffed into a shorter timeframe.

The change in seasons was not intended to increase Class III bucks it was about trophy bucks - there's a huge distinction.

Regardless of all that, especially in Region 5 where they have no hunting season other than mule deer the only hope they have for filling the freezer is mule deer bucks so that brings in another twist. While you can shoot a Wt in region 4, unless the resident in 5 gets a moose/mule doe draw the only source of meat is a mule buck.

After all is said and done this is just another reason to stick to conservation when it come to managing wildlife.

Without it we'll end up on LEH every single time and I doubt there are too many people, although there will be some, who want to put in for mule deer buck LEH.

We are on the same page with all of that, GG.

My only issue was the interpretation of and assertion that 97% of hunters are meat hunters first, and would therefore be against that season.

While I do agree that 97% of hunters probably should be against that season, if they knew and/or cared what was good for them and hunting in the big picture, it seems to me that it is inflammatory to say that it "ignores the desires of the other 97%". Where FD says that it caters to the 3% of hunters that are interested in Class 3 bucks, one could easily make the case that it caters to at least 21% (trophy + selective) and maybe more (some of the meat, then selective folks that like to shoot a decent buck if they can). If I am going to criticize a season to a Regional Manager, I want to try to avoid opening myself up to a counter argument by stating facts that aren't really facts, and so I was looking for your opinion (and others) on it.

Anyhoo, not a biggie as far as I'm concerned. There is no shortage of argument against the season without getting into whether its negative to 97%, 79%, or even 50% of resident hunters.

Cheers
4Ster

[GoatGuy]

We are on the same page with all of that, GG.

My only issue was the interpretation of and assertion that 97% of hunters are meat hunters first, and would therefore be against that season.

While I do agree that 97% of hunters probably should be against that season, if they knew and/or cared what was good for them and hunting in the big picture, it seems to me that it is inflammatory to say that it "ignores the desires of the other 97%". Where FD says that it caters to the 3% of hunters that are interested in Class 3 bucks, one could easily make the case that it caters to at least 21% (trophy + selective) and maybe more (some of the meat, then selective folks that like to shoot a decent buck if they can). If I am going to criticize a season to a Regional Manager, I want to try to avoid opening myself up to a counter argument by stating facts that aren't really facts, and so I was looking for your opinion (and others) on it.

Anyhoo, not a biggie as far as I'm concerned. There is no shortage of argument against the season without getting into whether its negative to 97%, 79%, or even 50% of resident hunters.

Cheers
4Ster

Understood.

[Gateholio]

ok gatehouse you make a very valid first point about antler restrictions preventing one type of hunter from hunting the way they choose while not haveing restrictions does not keep me from being selective.this is provided sound science and conservation are used to establish management policy.as i'm fairly certain we are both in favor of that i have no further argument. however in your third point you stated something as "mostly the truth" and with a statement like that i can't help but wonder are you seeking election on may 12th.i have hunted with many of these same hunters who you may think are simply here to lop the head and antlers off for bragging rights and it's my oppinion they are here for the hunting experience.if i had to put a number to it 3 out of 120+ non resident alien hunters were just looking to collect a trophy.this is based on actual people and not "scientific models"
thank you for helping to safeguard our way of life.

When I say that it's "mostly the truth" I coudl have been more clear.

What I mean is that it is "mostly the truth" that they arent' here for meat. Most of them come for the hunt, keep the hide/antler/horns but don't take the meat.

[TheDuckinator]

We all enjoy the hunting experience,that's no reason for non resident aliens to enjoy it in BC at the exspence of Resident hunter opportunity. Gunner

I agree with you all the way

And great letter, guessing you did pretty good in gr.12 english ;)

[dana]

Given the lack of response I've received from the Kamloops North Thompson Liberal candate, Terry Lake, I'm thinkin that the Liberals need to be sent a strong message come election day, what do you think?

[Gunner]

I agree with you all the way

And great letter, guessing you did pretty good in gr.12 english ;)Actually,I did,but my spelling has slipped a bit in the ensuing 40+ years!:biggrin: Gunner

[Fisher-Dude]

Given the lack of response I've received from the Kamloops North Thompson Liberal candate, Terry Lake, I'm thinkin that the Liberals need to be sent a strong message come election day, what do you think?

Hey Dana, did you send it to the NDP candidate too? It would be interesting to see if he/she sends any answers to you. ;)

[Jelvis]

The NDP fella's name is Doug Brown, in Kamloops riding, send him the same email and find out his response, then compare.

[born2hunt]

very well written

[steepNdeep]

Wow you can actually speak for yourself... good letter. I thought you were just Goatguy's echo... ;)

[dana]

Hey Dana, did you send it to the NDP candidate too? It would be interesting to see if he/she sends any answers to you. ;)

FD,
I posted up an update on my Concerns of a Rural Voter thread. Terry Lake did finally get back to me. Here's what he said.

"On the hunting issue - I have discussed this with several constituents and
will bring this up with the MOE. While we encourage hunting tourism, we
simply cannot exclude our own residents."

I just sent an email to New Democrat Doug Brown and Green Party April Snowe. Pretty much the same letter I sent to Terry Lake except I edited the hunting portion just a tad. Here is the edited version of the hunting portion of the letter. Looking forward to reading their responses.

"The second issue I'd like you to address is yet another rural issue, one of being able to provide good, wholesome, organic food for my family through sustenance hunting. It has come to my attention that there is a direction in the Ministry of Environment where they are giving priority to the tourist hunter from Europe or the USA over those of us that actually live here. The negotiated Allocation Policy states that resident hunters are to be given priority over non-resident hunters, yet this is not happening in much of the province. While the resident hunter has to wait years and years to draw a moose tag to put meat in his freezer, the wealthy Yank can purchase a hunt with a guide/outfitter with no wait at all. The Guides and Outfitters Association of BC (GOABC) has been pushing for more tags and more Trophy style hunts so they can make more money on our publically owned wildlife. The MOE has been giving the GOABC what they want at the expense of the resident hunter. The BC Liberal government set it a priority to increase resident hunters within this province through the Hunter Recruitment and Retention Strategy ( http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/ds/docs/070607_HunterRecruitment-RetentionStrategy.pdf (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/ds/docs/070607_HunterRecruitment-RetentionStrategy.pdf) ), but the MOE has been going counter to that. They are now even proposing Limited Entry on Mule Deer bucks to create more trophies. This is the mainstay species for the resident meat hunter. My wife's great grandparents homesteaded in the Blue River area and were avid hunters and outdoorsmen and women. My wife and I are raising our kids in that same great heritage. My kids are 5th generation hunters within this valley. I strongly feel that kids that hunt, trap and fish do not grow up to mug little old ladies. I do NOT want to see our hunting legacy sold off to the highest bidder while the resident hunters of this province get the shaft and have to wait years and years for a Limited Entry tag. My question to you is, what will you do to assure that the resident hunters within this province get the priority that they deserve? Do you support the Allocation policy that puts conservation first, First Nations second, resident hunters third and non-resident aliens last? Do you support the Hunter Recruitment and Retention Strategy? Much of your constituency is rural and many hunt to put food on their tables. The health benefits of wild organic meat and the cost benefits of being able to hunt locally is of utmost importance to us. Because of the rich diversity of game and the beauty of this valley, many resident hunters from other areas of BC come here to hunt. Many stay in our motels, eat in our restaurants and buy our local goods. Given the extreme downturn of the forestry sector, this provides a much needed stimulas to the local economy."

[GoatGuy]

FD,
I posted up an update on my Concerns of a Rural Voter thread. Terry Lake did finally get back to me. Here's what he said.

"On the hunting issue - I have discussed this with several constituents and
will bring this up with the MOE. While we encourage hunting tourism, we
simply cannot exclude our own residents."

I just sent an email to New Democrat Doug Brown and Green Party April Snowe. Pretty much the same letter I sent to Terry Lake except I edited the hunting portion just a tad. Here is the edited version of the hunting portion of the letter. Looking forward to reading their responses.

"The second issue I'd like you to address is yet another rural issue, one of being able to provide good, wholesome, organic food for my family through sustenance hunting. It has come to my attention that there is a direction in the Ministry of Environment where they are giving priority to the tourist hunter from Europe or the USA over those of us that actually live here. The negotiated Allocation Policy states that resident hunters are to be given priority over non-resident hunters, yet this is not happening in much of the province. While the resident hunter has to wait years and years to draw a moose tag to put meat in his freezer, the wealthy Yank can purchase a hunt with a guide/outfitter with no wait at all. The Guides and Outfitters Association of BC (GOABC) has been pushing for more tags and more Trophy style hunts so they can make more money on our publically owned wildlife. The MOE has been giving the GOABC what they want at the expense of the resident hunter. The BC Liberal government set it a priority to increase resident hunters within this province through the Hunter Recruitment and Retention Strategy ( http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/ds/docs/070607_HunterRecruitment-RetentionStrategy.pdf (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/ds/docs/070607_HunterRecruitment-RetentionStrategy.pdf) ), but the MOE has been going counter to that. They are now even proposing Limited Entry on Mule Deer bucks to create more trophies. This is the mainstay species for the resident meat hunter. My wife's great grandparents homesteaded in the Blue River area and were avid hunters and outdoorsmen and women. My wife and I are raising our kids in that same great heritage. My kids are 5th generation hunters within this valley. I strongly feel that kids that hunt, trap and fish do not grow up to mug little old ladies. I do NOT want to see our hunting legacy sold off to the highest bidder while the resident hunters of this province get the shaft and have to wait years and years for a Limited Entry tag. My question to you is, what will you do to assure that the resident hunters within this province get the priority that they deserve? Do you support the Allocation policy that puts conservation first, First Nations second, resident hunters third and non-resident aliens last? Do you support the Hunter Recruitment and Retention Strategy? Much of your constituency is rural and many hunt to put food on their tables. The health benefits of wild organic meat and the cost benefits of being able to hunt locally is of utmost importance to us. Because of the rich diversity of game and the beauty of this valley, many resident hunters from other areas of BC come here to hunt. Many stay in our motels, eat in our restaurants and buy our local goods. Given the extreme downturn of the forestry sector, this provides a much needed stimulas to the local economy."




Heck of a good job. Well done!

[dana]

Just got a reply from April Snowe of the Green Party. I think many of you will be surprised by her response. Not bad for a 23 year old Artist.


Dear Mr. Dana,

First let me thank you for your email and the opportunity to answer your questions. The concerns of rural voters are very important to me, and I appreciate you taking the time to express them to me.

On the subject of hunting: The Green Party of BC firmly believes in encouraging the provision of natural, organic, and local sustenance to citizens as an issue of both health, ecology, and the strength of local economy. I have read the Strategy for Resident Hunter Recruitment and Retention in British Columbia, and can gladly say that I support the Big Six Recommendations. I personally believe that resident hunters should be given priority over tourist and trophy hunters, and would actively lobby for their rights in Assembly. I myself grew up in Prince George, and my father provided us with healthy meat that he hunted for himself, so I can honestly say that I feel strongly and personally about this issue. The hunting issues you've presented would be of clear priority for this region, and I would immediately put them on the table and fight for the government to follow the policies that it outlined for itself.

I hope that I have answered your questions to your satisfaction, and would gladly answer any more that you have, or further discuss these issues with you. I hope that you will be able to attend the All Candidates Forum in Clearwater on April 27th, at 7:00, where we could meet in person. Thank you again.

Sincerely,
April Snowe
Green Party of BC
Candidate for the Kamloops North Thompson

[Ambush]

That's a pretty straight forward reply from Ms. Snowe. Even sounds sincere. But then she is young and probably still idealic.

What is the party's official stance on hunting?

But you are at least getting some answers Dana. {for us to}

[Fisher-Dude]

I hope that you will be able to attend the All Candidates Forum in Clearwater on April 27th, at 7:00, where we could meet in person. Thank you again.


Good letter Dana. I am indeed surprised by her response.

She's a voluptuous young redhead - maybe you better go meet her in person. :p


http://photos-g.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc1/hs022.snc1/2460_53504919891_53503589891_1521966_4660868_n.jpg (http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=1614494&id=53503589891)

[Angel]

IS that the only response that anyone has got yet? If so thats a bit of a joke nice to see how public opinion and conservation concerns go without care by our reps. If any response's are sent please post them up as it would be nice to see what our reps hve to say.

[Kody94]

Jesus Christ you're one creepy b@stard FD

I can't comment on that since I don't know him, but I'll bet that I am not the only one that thought..."April Snowe...interesting name...hippy or stripper?" ;) Based on the pic, I blame the parents. :)

I will give her credit for a great response to Dana. Too bad she's with the Green Party. We need politicians that know where meat comes from, and even better yet, grew up eating wild meat. That's a rare breed in "the Leg' ". Our local MLA says he's sure that he is one of only a couple of MLAs in BC that own an ATV!!!

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I can't comment on that since I don't know him, but I'll bet that I am not the only one that thought..."April Snowe...interesting name...hippy or stripper?" ;)

I think if she was stripper her name would be April Showers......Shower! Shower! Shower!!;)

FD misses the Willow:-P

SSS

[Kody94]

I think if she was stripper her name would be April Showers......Shower! Shower! Shower!!;)

FD misses the Willow:-P

SSS

:) The Willow was 'memorable'...or so I hear.

[mcrae]

Guys listed below is the email I received in reply from the Liberal candidate Josh Smienk for the Nelson/Creston riding. I don't live in region five but I raised concerns in regards to the problems in region five and the other issues we as hunters are having currently. Below is his response. I emailed the NDP candiate as well with the same question but she so far has declined to respond.

"Hi Jason and Erin Franklin,
I believe that hunting and fishing are an essential part of why we live in rural BC. I am not personally a hunter but I do raise my own cattle and butcher them myself while this isn't the same I do shoot my own cows. When growing up in southern Alberta our neighbor was a trapper and when he got too old I helped him on his trap line I spent many a winter trapping for beaver, muskrat and ermine. My nephew is also a conservation officer who recently received a posting to Fort Nelson. I mention these because I want you to know I have a feel and understanding of our history and how important hunting is to us in BC even if the lower mainland is not on the same page.
Josh Smienk "...

[6616]

Guys listed below is the email I received in reply from the Liberal candidate Josh Smienk for the Nelson/Creston riding. I don't live in region five but I raised concerns in regards to the problems in region five and the other issues we as hunters are having currently. Below is his response. I emailed the NDP candiate as well with the same question but she so far has declined to respond.

"Hi Jason and Erin Franklin,
I believe that hunting and fishing are an essential part of why we live in rural BC. I am not personally a hunter but I do raise my own cattle and butcher them myself while this isn't the same I do shoot my own cows. When growing up in southern Alberta our neighbor was a trapper and when he got too old I helped him on his trap line I spent many a winter trapping for beaver, muskrat and ermine. My nephew is also a conservation officer who recently received a posting to Fort Nelson. I mention these because I want you to know I have a feel and understanding of our history and how important hunting is to us in BC even if the lower mainland is not on the same page.
Josh Smienk "...



He sounds like a good one.

[Goliath]

Wow, excellent thread.

The fact that many of you bicker between each other means the hunting tradition (whatever that means) is important to you. I pray we'll still have these discussions/arguements 50 years from now.

[Sitkaspruce]

Great Letter FD!!!

nice to see some responses coming back.

here is a link to my letter and the responses so far.

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?t=34278

Lets keep posting the replies

Cheers

SS

[dana]

So how many hunters from the Cariboo have talked to their canditates yet regarding this issue? Seems to me the Liberals lost these 2 ridings the last election by a small margin. They now want them badly, so much so, the Premier has already done 2 trips to the Cariboo since the campaign began. Maybe you need to get them to kick the Region 5 MOE's asses and get hunting in the region back on track? Have the NDP MLA's from the Cariboo been doing their job over the last term by being the thorns in the flesh to the Liberals and sticking up for the issues of their voters? Time to ask them what they have been doing and will do now to resolve this issue? Time to start writting letters boys and girls. Time to start going to all-canditate forums and voicing your concerns. I've never been much for getting involved in politics except for just going to the polls on election day. With the BS that has been going on in the MOE as of late, I feel I must finally get off my ass and get involved or else I may loose what I hold near and dear to my heart. Come on people, lets call some politicians and get the word out that we are not impressed with how we are being treated.