region 5 response

[born2hunt]

I just got this response from the letter i sent in regards to region 5 changes, This was there response.

Thank you for your recent email regarding the mule deer hunting regulations in Region 5. Concerns have been expressed about mule deer populations and buck hunting in this region by Wildlife Program staff, resident hunters and guide outfitters. These concerns clearly indicated that a change in the mule deer hunting regulations was required for 2009.
The regulation change for 2009 was developed through a structured decision making (SDM) process. SDM is a common-sense framework that emphasizes the integration of scientific analyses with value-based information and interests expressed by stakeholders. Through the SDM process, a number of regulatory options for mule deer were developed. These options were assessed based on 5 objectives that included mule deer population management, harmonization of regulations between regions, simplicity in regulation structure, hunting opportunity, and management costs.
The approved hunting season allows for the harvest of “4 point bucks” during September, “any antlered buck” in October and “4 point bucks” in November. It also includes a hunting closure from November 11 to 20th in order to protect bucks when they are most vulnerable to hunters during the rut. This regulation was considered to perform the best of the 6 options that were considered, including those that were put forward by the BC Wildlife Federation and the Guide Outfitter’s Association of BC. While it is true that 1of the 13 sub-objectives identified in the SDM process was to provide trophy hunting opportunities, the remaining 12 sub-objectives addressed other values and interests.
The approved season is not a trophy buck season. To the contrary, 4 point seasons reduce the abundance of trophy animals. The 4 point season does, however, help to guard against an overharvest as they provide additional protection to younger bucks. Trophy buck seasons, on the other hand, greatly reduce hunter opportunity by imposing a low harvest rate through Limited Entry Hunting (LEH). The approved season for Region 5 is very similar to the mule deer buck hunting seasons in Region’s 3, 4 (West Kootenays) and 8. This season structure thus promotes harmonization without adversely affecting hunting opportunity (81 days of hunting opportunity are provided, including 31 days to harvest any buck).
Under the new regulation the regional mule deer bag limit is 2, but no more than 1 buck may be harvested. The second deer must be an antlerless animal which is available under LEH. This change also makes the mule deer buck bag limit consistent with other regions. Our analysis shows that from 2003 to 2007, very few hunters harvested 2 bucks in this region in any given year. Thus, the bag limit change should have a relatively small impact on most hunters.
While there is not a conservation concern with mule deer in Region 5 at this time, there are concerns that the current buck/doe ratios have fallen below the provincial minimum standard of 20 bucks per 100 does. Surveys conducted from 2005 to 2007 in 3 different survey areas showed an average of 19 bucks/100 does, with 25 bucks/100 does counted in 2005, 18 bucks/100 does in 2006 and 15 bucks/100 does in 2007. Extensive counts in 2003 showed an average of 24 bucks/100 does in the same 3 survey areas. As you can see, the trend in the buck/doe ratios over the past few years has been steadily downward. Unfortunately, there has not been a survey since 2007, but based on the declining trend, we believe the buck/doe ratio is now substantially below 20/100 and is likely to remain so under current regulations. The 2009 mule deer regulation has a high likelihood of increasing the buck/doe ratio back above
20 bucks/100 does, and over time, this should provide additional buck hunting opportunities.
I wish to emphasize that the approved mule deer regulation is not about providing more
non-resident hunters with trophy hunting opportunities. Rather, it is about attempting to achieve a variety of objectives. This regulation is also consistent with our policy that residents have priority of use over non-residents.
Finally, I would like to point out that we are in a transitional period for mule deer management, in that we are trying to align our Southern Interior mule deer strategies and regulations. However, in Region 5, we felt it was in the best interests of resources and the public to act now. In the future we will be striving to provide a balanced set of regulations for all Southern Interior mule deer reflective of both conservation and stakeholder values.

Thank you again for taking the time to voice your concerns.
Sincerely,
Original Signed By

Tom Ethier
Director
Fish and Wildlife Branch
Environmental Stewardship Division

[Russell]

The approved season for Region 5 is very similar to the mule deer buck hunting seasons in Region’s 3, 4 (West Kootenays) and 8. This season structure thus promotes harmonization without adversely affecting hunting opportunity (81 days of hunting opportunity are provided, including 31 days to harvest any buck).


If they want harmonization of regulations in region 5 , why have they been dragging their feet for so long on the moose regulations they are way out of sync with other regions.

[Dirty]

I got the same, lame, email.

[PGK]

Based on my brief conversations with ministry in WL, there is a problem with the buck:doe ratio and the number of out of region hunters using doe draws as an excuse to hammer small bucks and take a doe as a last resort.

Fact appears to be that the HBC bios whom are saying a 17:1 or 18:1 doe:buck ratio is OK are wrong.....

[GoatGuy]

Based on my brief conversations with ministry in WL, there is a problem with the buck:doe ratio and the number of out of region hunters using doe draws as an excuse to hammer small bucks and take a doe as a last resort.

Fact appears to be that the HBC bios whom are saying a 17:1 or 18:1 doe:buck ratio is OK are wrong.....

Hahahahaha, too funny.

Ask the bios in any other region of the Province or a mule deer biologist and you'll hear a very different story.


Or you can call the ungulate specialist or the head of science in Victoria.

Ask them about conservation.

[horshur]

I got the same response.

[dime]

Follow closely here. There is a shortage of sperm. Sperm shortage. Not enough bucks.

.


There are record numbers of deer, so if you have fewer bucks, why not have a GOS on does or have more LEH's to correct any imbalance? Would this not correct the "problem" of the ratio? Given the fact that the number of deer is higher than it has been in the past this arguement that we need to implement changes to get the number of bucks in alignment is horse crap.

[ruttinbuck]

I got the same response.
X2 must have been "bulk bullshite the angry hord day!!!"

[dime]

I have sent the following letter to Tom Ethier and the rest of his cronies:

Dear Tom,
The response you have provided has several flaws in reasoning, which I will review here:
Firstly, you have admitted that region 5 doesn't have a conservation problem with mule deer at this time. In fact the number of mule deer are at record highs, as evidenced by many different measures. If there is a "problem" with a buck:doe ratio, would it not make more sense to expand the LEH allocation for females, or better yet implement a general open season to bring the numbers in to alignment with the provincial standard?
Secondly, you say that the decisions made " should have a relatively small impact on most hunters" but this statement is based on the flawed logic. It is incorrect to assume harvest success will be directly correlated to number of hunting days. This is certainly not the case if the number of deer that are available to hunt during the four point or better season is dramatically smaller than the number during an any buck season. As 50 out of the total of 81 days have this restriction how can you reasonably claim that the opportunities are not lessened.
Finally the change from a regional bag limit of two bucks to one will also have a negative impact on a hunters ability to provide for their families.

Perhaps when formulating these arguments you should think of the small business owners who depend on the money generated by hunters traveling to the Cariboo/Chilcotin, the diminished ability of local hunters to provide for their families and the current economic crisis that sees this decision come at the worst possible time.

The decision has clearly already been made, but I think that it is shameful to try to dupe the hunting public into believing that there is sound scientific logic behind the changes you have made, and not a political agenda.

Sincerely,
XXXXXX



Feel free to paraphrase or copy, and send to the following people:

Rodger.Stewart@gov.bc.ca <Rodger.Stewart@gov.bc.ca>

Tom.Ethier@gov.bc.ca <Tom.Ethier@gov.bc.ca>

bob.simpson.mla@leg.bc.ca <bob.simpson.mla@leg.bc.ca>

charlie.wyse.mla@leg.bc.ca <charlie.wyse.mla@leg.bc.ca>

[GoatGuy]

Based on my brief conversations with ministry in WL, there is a problem with the buck:doe ratio and the number of out of region hunters using doe draws as an excuse to hammer small bucks and take a doe as a last resort.

Fact appears to be that the HBC bios whom are saying a 17:1 or 18:1 doe:buck ratio is OK are wrong.....


Let me quote right out of the letter:

"While there is not a conservation concern with mule deer in Region 5 at this time, there are concerns that the current buck/doe ratios have fallen below the provincial minimum standard of 20 bucks per 100 does."

[Fisher-Dude]

I have sent the following letter to Tom Ethier and the rest of his cronies:

Dear Tom,
The response you have provided has several flaws in reasoning, which I will review here:
Firstly, you have admitted that region 5 doesn't have a conservation problem with mule deer at this time. In fact the number of mule deer are at record highs, as evidenced by many different measures. If there is a "problem" with a buck:doe ratio, would it not make more sense to expand the LEH allocation for females, or better yet implement a general open season to bring the numbers in to alignment with the provincial standard?
Secondly, you say that the decisions made " should have a relatively small impact on most hunters" but this statement is based on the flawed logic. It is incorrect to assume harvest success will be directly correlated to number of hunting days. This is certainly not the case if the number of deer that are available to hunt during the four point or better season is dramatically smaller than the number during an any buck season. As 50 out of the total of 81 days have this restriction how can you reasonably claim that the opportunities are not lessened.
Finally the change from a regional bag limit of two bucks to one will also have a negative impact on a hunters ability to provide for their families.

Perhaps when formulating these arguments you should think of the small business owners who depend on the money generated by hunters traveling to the Cariboo/Chilcotin, the diminished ability of local hunters to provide for their families and the current economic crisis that sees this decision come at the worst possible time.

The decision has clearly already been made, but I think that it is shameful to try to dupe the hunting public into believing that there is sound scientific logic behind the changes you have made, and not a political agenda.

Sincerely,
XXXXXX



Feel free to paraphrase or copy, and send to the following people:

Rodger.Stewart@gov.bc.ca <Rodger.Stewart@gov.bc.ca>

Tom.Ethier@gov.bc.ca <Tom.Ethier@gov.bc.ca>

bob.simpson.mla@leg.bc.ca <bob.simpson.mla@leg.bc.ca>

charlie.wyse.mla@leg.bc.ca <charlie.wyse.mla@leg.bc.ca>

Awesome response Dime! Thanks for sticking up for science and conservation.

I haven't received Tom's "form letter" yet in response to my letter.

[PGK]

I sure hope the definition of ''conservation concern'' hasn't been extended to include the appropriate designation of buck:doe ratios.

I'm telling you right up. The people in the WL MOE office are not out to screw resident hunters. What you choose to believe is up to you...

[Fisher-Dude]

I got my response from Mr Ethier today in the mail. It's word for word the same as the one born2hunt got.

I just CAN'T get past this phrase, Mr Ethier:

While there is not a conservation concern with mule deer in Region 5 at this time...

[PGK]

Ethier sends out form letters. Thats his job. You arent talking to the right people.


I got my response from Mr Ethier today in the mail. It's word for word the same as the one born2hunt got.

I just CAN'T get past this phrase, Mr Ethier:

While there is not a conservation concern with mule deer in Region 5 at this time...

[Fisher-Dude]

Ethier sends out form letters. Thats his job. You arent talking to the right people.

I talked to Premier Gordon Campbell, Minister Barry Penner, Tom Ethier, Deputy Minister Doug Konkin, Region 5 Head Bio Rodger Stewart, MLA Charlie Wyse, and MLA Bob Simpson.

Got any better ideas?

[horshur]

The form was a pretty pathetic reply to my letter...cause i did not doubt the state of things but called in question those who would let it get this way..... I do not think we should lose sight of this. It wreaks of incompetence!!!

It has come to my attention the changes to regulations in region 5. Is it possible that these drastic moves are the direct result of poor decisions by management in the past??? Has anyone been taken to task about this??
Many uneducated laymen saw the possibilities that have now come to fruition and voiced there concerns however they fell on deaf ears.
Now residents of region 5 and all the province have lost opportunity because goverment officials short sightedness. Does not the province expect better? The managers of region 5 should be fearing there jobs in my oppinion.

Andy Dana

[oldtimer]

I got the same response. I voiced my concern to Premier Campbell but have not got a response. A lot of political "Bafflegab " Mike

[kgriz]

Come on...I like to argue and complain more than most, but tell me it doesn't truly surprise you that politicians are not "that" concerned with hunters' opinions however scientifically based....especially with the election looming ( at least when this started ). I'm thinking that they have more important issues to think about ....like if people are going to lose their houses or something. I think stepping back and putting the animal management for hunting issues etc. ( ie. a recreational activity for most) into perspective is often in order......Is some of this really worth the effort and stress in light of world conditions these days? Like I said....I bitch about this stuff as much or more than many but lately have come to the realization that most of the time what I think is important due to its closeness to my heart is really quite insignificant in the large scale of things and its no wonder that my concerns fall on deaf ears that are often too busy dealing with larger issues.

[Squirrelnuts]

Come on...I like to argue and complain more than most, but tell me it doesn't truly surprise you that politicians are not "that" concerned with hunters' opinions however scientifically based....especially with the election looming ( at least when this started ). I'm thinking that they have more important issues to think about ....like if people are going to lose their houses or something. I think stepping back and putting the animal management for hunting issues etc. ( ie. a recreational activity for most) into perspective is often in order......Is some of this really worth the effort and stress in light of world conditions these days? Like I said....I bitch about this stuff as much or more than many but lately have come to the realization that most of the time what I think is important due to its closeness to my heart is really quite insignificant in the large scale of things and its no wonder that my concerns fall on deaf ears that are often too busy dealing with larger issues.

But... there are people whose jobs are to look after these things. And all we're getting from them is lip service. Just because the economy happens to be shitty doesn't mean that every other issue should get short shrift. It could be argued that taking away meat-hunting opportunities (for questionable reasons) in a tough economic climate will hurt those of us who count on hunting to put food on the table. Granted, there's an economic benefit to the province from guided hunts, but there are also (I'd suggest greater) benefits from BC residents out enjoying the resource that they share ownership of. As far as I'm concerned, economics and good wildlife management should be two very different issues anyway...

We can stay quiet now and wait for the economy to improve in hopes of people paying attention, and it'll be too late. For those of us in Region 5 it looks like we're already screwed, but maybe we can send a strong enough message so this kind of crap doesn't happen in your region.

[PGK]

But... there are people whose jobs are to look after these things. And all we're getting from them is lip service. Just because the economy happens to be shitty doesn't mean that every other issue should get short shrift. It could be argued that taking away meat-hunting opportunities (for questionable reasons) in a tough economic climate will hurt those of us who count on hunting to put food on the table. Granted, there's an economic benefit to the province from guided hunts, but there are also (I'd suggest greater) benefits from BC residents out enjoying the resource that they share ownership of. As far as I'm concerned, economics and good wildlife management should be two very different issues anyway...

We can stay quiet now and wait for the economy to improve in hopes of people paying attention, and it'll be too late. For those of us in Region 5 it looks like we're already screwed, but maybe we can send a strong enough message so this kind of crap doesn't happen in your region.

:lol:

Define meat hunt for me, please. How bout putting in for a doe draw and using that for meat instead of shooting a spike buck and adding to the problem. If all the 'meat hunters' in the province actually hunted for meat, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

[Fisher-Dude]

:lol:

Define meat hunt for me, please. How bout putting in for a doe draw and using that for meat instead of shooting a spike buck and adding to the problem. If all the 'meat hunters' in the province actually hunted for meat, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

According to the guides' proposal, we (residents) should be killing off the spikes because they will never grow big antlers. The guides want residents to shoot spikes, while their wealthy clients can shoot big bucks. What a deal. :-(

I've put in for doe draws since they started, and have never been drawn once. I wouldn't count on ANY LEH to put meat in my freezer.

[kgriz]

Hey, I applaud your efforts and also recognise that maybe people are not doing a good job, mostly my point was that although I do some complaining or even investigation and letterwriting, I think some people are consumed in doing this and that is the majority of the effort they put in to increase hunting or its image.....I just think that the majority of that effort and energy should be used to take a kid out or a new hunter and things would probably be a lot farther ahead and less confontational....don't get me wrong, arguing etc can be fun and rewarding sort of but not as effective in the long run.

[PGK]

Hey, I applaud your efforts and also recognise that maybe people are not doing a good job, mostly my point was that although I do some complaining or even investigation and letterwriting, I think some people are consumed in doing this and that is the majority of the effort they put in to increase hunting or its image.....I just think that the majority of that effort and energy should be used to take a kid out or a new hunter and things would probably be a lot farther ahead and less confontational....don't get me wrong, arguing etc can be fun and rewarding sort of but not as effective in the long run.

Amen. The problem with 99% of these discussions are assumptions and fear mongering.

[Fisher-Dude]

Hey, I applaud your efforts and also recognise that maybe people are not doing a good job, mostly my point was that although I do some complaining or even investigation and letterwriting, I think some people are consumed in doing this and that is the majority of the effort they put in to increase hunting or its image.....I just think that the majority of that effort and energy should be used to take a kid out or a new hunter and things would probably be a lot farther ahead and less confontational....don't get me wrong, arguing etc can be fun and rewarding sort of but not as effective in the long run.

Great idea. However, I guess you're unfamiliar with the guides' stance on the hunter recruitment and retention plan then? They want the gov't to toss the R&R plan and not provide opportunities for youth hunters. They don't want any more youth hunters, as they feel this could result in more people in the bush and detract from the "quality experience" they are selling to their fat-assed clients. The gov't has delayed implementation of the R&R plan because of this pressure.

Does that give you a better understanding of why we are doing what we are doing now?

[kgriz]

Yes I am unfamiliar with that, I haven't met many guides that I like or that haven't tried to push me around in the mountains but on the other hand I suppose they are easy enough to avoid when they have their "fat lazy" clients with some harder climbing,walking or riding....I would look into some of this paperwork a little harder but the kids are almost done their nap so that we can go smash a big black bear this evening and maybe even a Griz tommorrow, thats if they don't take away my tags by then.

[boxhitch]

I'm thinking that they have more important issues to think about ....like if people are going to lose their houses or something. I think stepping back and putting the animal management for hunting issues etc. ( ie. a recreational activity for most) into perspective is often in order......Is some of this really worth the effort and stress in light of world conditions these days? Like I said....I bitch about this stuff as much or more than many but lately have come to the realization that most of the time what I think is important due to its closeness to my heart is really quite insignificant in the large scale of things and its no wonder that my concerns fall on deaf ears that are often too busy dealing with larger issues.The size of the issue is scaled according to how large the voice is. Gov't would like nothing better than for everyone to shut up and let them spend our dollars as they see fit.
I could go on about the declining numbers, more heads in the sand, the nimbys etc, but you know the picture.

[kgriz]

I don't think its unreasonable to think ( and expect ) that wildlife and recreation issues are going to take a backseat to economic and larger scale environmental issues at this point in time....I'm not saying that these issues are not important on a personal or small community size scale, I just think that that cannot realistically be projected onto larger scale decision makers ie. the Premier etc and expect results other than PFO letters or some patronization ( best case scenario).

[kgriz]

Oh and as far as region 5 hunter fighting the good fight so that this doesn't happen in region 7.....please:rolleyes: a little melodramatic perhaps??? Letters written like the ones shown always make the writer feel powerful and smart ( at least in one's own mind ) but really.....where are the teeth? If the small businesses are hit so hard like stated where is the statement of support from this Chamber of Commerce or that one; that might actually have an impact, or maybe endorsement from a Major Club?
Its all a catch 22......we need to be a unified voice with deep pockets to actually make an impact but in creating this, we often try to fight one beauracratic nightmare with one we create. ( No examples named of course:-P)

[GoatGuy]

I don't think its unreasonable to think ( and expect ) that wildlife and recreation issues are going to take a backseat to economic and larger scale environmental issues at this point in time....I'm not saying that these issues are not important on a personal or small community size scale, I just think that that cannot realistically be projected onto larger scale decision makers ie. the Premier etc and expect results other than PFO letters or some patronization ( best case scenario).

It was a handful of people who had the grizz hunt shutdown.

It ain't hard - just need to be organized. There's 85,000 resident hunters in this Province.

Be heard.

[horshur]

:lol:

Define meat hunt for me, please. How bout putting in for a doe draw and using that for meat instead of shooting a spike buck and adding to the problem. If all the 'meat hunters' in the province actually hunted for meat, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

sir I have applied for a doe draw along with my wife and not got one in 18 years...she has had one in 18 years.....never worse than 1 in 5 odds

if I relied on an LEH for meat.....

[kgriz]

Whatever, I hunt all of the regions...when one is being particularly poorly managed and a pain to be in, I'll go to another....instead of spending my time letterwriting, I'll spend it earning more to get gas money to get to the seasons I want....they are not all stupid at the same time:-P I guess when hunting is gone, then I'll fish......bang your head on the wall all you want.

[kgriz]

Oh, I better go.....I've got to get to my PAC meeting.....yeah right.

[GoatGuy]

:lol:

Define meat hunt for me, please. How bout putting in for a doe draw and using that for meat instead of shooting a spike buck and adding to the problem. If all the 'meat hunters' in the province actually hunted for meat, we wouldn't be having this discussion.




Ask any other manager in the Province about mule deer in Region 5 and you will get a completely and totally different story.

One word:

accountability.

[Gateholio]

Writing a letter takes less time than watching a re run of Seinfeld...

While I prefer watching TV to letter writing, it's a worthwhile endeavor. There is nothing wrong with taking out new hunter AND spending 20 minutes writing a letter....