Do you support a "BC Resident Advantage" for Stone Sheep?

[budismyhorse]

I've noticed that during the discussion regarding implementing some kind of BC Resident Advantage, be it a special season or designated area, there seems to be very few hunters that are willing to put in a solid response either way.

I know there are many options to this situation, however, treat this poll as if Yes or No, do you support a BC Resident Advantage for Stone Sheep. .........future polls can be about different options, this one is intended to be regarding support for the "idea" of an advantage.

There are the obvious vocal fellas on both sides, but as we know, there are quite a few sheep hunters on this site that aren't saying squat.

This may be a way for a few more people to get to put forth an opinion without fear of being called a wimp or being told they don't know what they are talking about.....

Please vote.

[Devilbear]

Good post, excellent idea and point.

I am in favour of a major "resident's advantage" system, a.s.a.p.

[bridger]

yes preferably a resident only season

[d6dan]

yes preferably a resident only season


X2 here...

[Moose Guide]

I feel residents should come first with all species!

[yamadirt 426]

I support anything and everything resident period . But you should really just make a poll of it. So yes. Except we shouldn't have just a couple of acres here and there. Should be anywhere we want for the whole season. Give the outsiders a week tops. That way we can say they still had a chance and how many could they take in a week? I love the anti threads lol

[peterrum3]

I feel residents should come first with all species!


...DITTO...

[BlacktailStalker]

Fact, I am a resident.
Fact, I am not a GO or non resident who has to hunt with a GO.
Having a resident only season wouldn't be bad because I am a resident so yes.
Doesnt mean I am going to go during that time or to a prescribed area though.
Hard to imagine there not being a catch or twist of some sort should it happen.

Always skeptical.

Resident hunters of BC should have the advantage of hunting in BC first and foremost to anybody else.
$ figures, pay cheques and trophy quality/numbers for non residents shouldn't be deciding factors on what we are entitled to but if one thing is good for the game management then it is good for all users of the sport (Residents, GOs and non residents)
There should be no arguement there.

[dutchie]

I would support it 100%. I think that it should be before the G/O's season starts.

If they could get a take the success rate from a guided hunt (say if it is 80%) and the number of successful non-guided resident hunters (say 200 sheep harvested by non-guided resident hunters) I think they should have that alotment of tags for the next year. in this case there would be 250 tags allotted to G/O's. (Especially in reg. 6)

This will give an equal opertunity for the resident hunters IMO by matching the G/O's harvest to the resident harvest.

Just a thought

Dutchie

[Husky7mm]

i did not read this post, just the title on the thread but i 100% support an advantage to the resident against the non resident or non resident alien over us, any time, any where.

[willy442]

i did not read this post, just the title on the thread but i 100% support an advantage to the resident against the non resident or non resident alien over us, any time, any where.

I strongly oppose anything that puts more pressure on the Sheep. I think Sheep hunters should start being happy about the freedom we have to hunt in BC. Fight with the G/O's all you want, but are they really the problem. Resident area's fine
, but with in the present GOS

[bigwhiteys]

We need to make more sheep first. Then everybody wins.

1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

After 5 years of the above we'll all be trying to figure out what to do with all of our sheep. Then we can devise plans to help us kill more.

Carl

[hunter1947]

We the BC resident should always be the first ones over any others to harvest any kind of big game animals ,I would be stupid to think other..

[riflebuilder]

We need to make more sheep first. Then everybody wins.

1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

After 5 years of the above we'll all be trying to figure out what to do with all of our sheep. Then we can devise plans to help us kill more.

Carl

X2 good respose Carl

[Fisher-Dude]

I strongly oppose anything that puts more pressure on the Sheep. I think Sheep hunters should start being happy about the freedom we have to hunt in BC. Fight with the G/O's all you want, but are they really the problem. Resident area's fine
, but with in the present GOS

I don't think anyone is suggesting more pressure on sheep. The AAH wouldn't change. The residents would get their share of allocation with the extra time of resident only hunting, and the GO would have to scale back their meet their allocated harvest.

Overall, the same sized pie is eaten, it's just that the portions are changed so that the fat kid starts eating 2 weeks later than the svelte one.

[MadCat]

We need to make more sheep first. Then everybody wins.

1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

After 5 years of the above we'll all be trying to figure out what to do with all of our sheep. Then we can devise plans to help us kill more.

Carl

Good post, this is the way that we need to be thinking.

[MadCat]

And NO I do not support the season.

[Devilbear]

We need to make more sheep first. Then everybody wins.

1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

After 5 years of the above we'll all be trying to figure out what to do with all of our sheep. Then we can devise plans to help us kill more.

Carl

The usual excellent and realistic ideas from Carl. I think that a "hunter's campaign" should begin, "Carl for Premier"!

[frenchbar]

Total shut down of all sheep hunting for 3 years............:wink:are sheep the real big issue the 2 sides are fighting about:-? Dam curly horns anyway!

[lange1212]

Excellent posts.

Region 6 has requested the development of a cycling burn program and is fully supported by GO's. Unfortunatly the MoE has not taken action even with concensus.

Wildlife management has to get back to the basics habitat enhancement, predator control, up to date inventories...instead of the current direction of exclusively manageing people.

I'm in strong support of a "BC resident advantage" for stone sheep. I've reviewed decades of MoE harvest stats. for the Skeena Region and is justified, with merit and sustainable.

It needs to be noted that the resident only season would also apply to GO's and would be an added opportunity for them. The only restriction being that they can only cater to resident hunters during the resident only season. As a further bonus residents would not remove quota from any GO as they would be hunting under their own licence or LEH permit. Anyone out there have any clue why GO are adamantly opposed to the application of a resident only season, paticularly when they also benefit from it?

[boxhitch]

100% support resident BCers priority.
But I am skeptical of what compensation may be negotiated by the g/o's. They are already trying to have the adjustment period extended beyond 2012, and have suggested changes to allow them on an equal playing field.

Hurdles to achieve allocation should be removed, but neither side wants to feel disadvantaged.

Has reg6 made any attempt to comply with the Allocation Policy ?

[bridger]

X2 good respose Carl

not being contreversial here as these are excellent, but not new ideas. both the fed and the goabc have worked on getting predator control back in the air. it ain't gonna happen in todays world. the government has threatened go's with the loss of their areas if they do any "private programs" like the old days. It appears that the only acceptable way of reducing wolves is by trapping and that is an enourmous task given the vastness of the northern sheep regions. opening up the elk season in the remote areas of 7b is something we are also working on and making some progress, but the reality is that the areas are so remote you can't get enough hunters into the areas to accomplish a large harvest and as far as reducing guide sheep quota's in accessible areas that is what the current scrap is all about and has been for a long time. we really need the ministry of environment to step up to the plate and provide some leadership something they are really short on.

[yamadirt 426]

Excellent posts.

Region 6 has requested the development of a cycling burn program and is fully supported by GO's. Unfortunatly the MoE has not taken action even with concensus.

Wildlife management has to get back to the basics habitat enhancement, predator control, up to date inventories...instead of the current direction of exclusively manageing people.

I'm in strong support of a "BC resident advantage" for stone sheep. I've reviewed decades of MoE harvest stats. for the Skeena Region and is justified, with merit and sustainable.

It needs to be noted that the resident only season would also apply to GO's and would be an added opportunity for them. The only restriction being that they can only cater to resident hunters during the resident only season. As a further bonus residents would not remove quota from any GO as they would be hunting under their own licence or LEH permit. Anyone out there have any clue why GO are adamantly opposed to the application of a resident only season, paticularly when they also benefit from it?

This is a good post. I don't think the G/O's realize this as a good opportunity for PR with in the resident communitys as well as making some money.

[bigwhiteys]

not being contreversial here but these are excellent, but not new ideas.

I am not trying to pass anything off as a new idea...

I just really don't think we need to figure out how to try and kill more sheep. When really we just need more sheep period.

When we have more than we know what to do with we can talk about making them easier for us to kill.


but the reality is that the areas are so remote you can't get enough hunters into the areas to accomplish a large harvest

And that's a problem with sheep. We as residents simply DONT access and utilize the most remote back country to hunt them (most of us can't). We concentrate on pockets of sheep... And the sheep lose.



we really need the ministry of environment to step up to the plate provide some leadership something they are really short on.


Rich... I don't think it's just the MOE that lacks some leadership. I think there are several guilty parties involved. If our sheep population is halved again in the next few decades then we'll all be singing a different tune.

I voted NO to the special season.

Carl

[boxhitch]

Region 6 has requested the development of a cycling burn program and is fully supported by GO's. Unfortunatly the MoE has not taken action even with concensus.
I heard of a reg6 burn plan from MOE years ago. Not off the ground yet ? I could understand why, when the regional office feels there are enough sheep and money is very tight.


I've reviewed decades of MoE harvest stats. for the Skeena Region and is justified, with merit and sustainable. Willing to put up that info for others ? a new thread is due.......

[BCrams]

I strongly oppose anything that puts more pressure on the Sheep. I think Sheep hunters should start being happy about the freedom we have to hunt in BC. Fight with the G/O's all you want, but are they really the problem. Resident area's fine
, but with in the present GOS


More pressure? I don't know if it will add more pressure. The only difference (in particular to front country areas and many back country 'accessible' areas - i.e., float plane) may be that instead of the GO's harvesting these rams within these areas, it will be the resident shooting these rams instead.

A resident only area, while on paper is a good idea, it would still only be limited to such a small area in the grande scheme of things when we're looking at sheep range across the board. A 2 week resident only season is better as it disperses the hunters as opposed to a resident only area.

The resident only season does not have to start July 16th, before August 1st. :wink:

Why not bump the GO's down to an August 15th start? Keep the August 1st start for residents only for 2 weeks. The pressure would then be reduced on the sheep that you speak of without adding 2 weeks to the season.

It is still well before most of the prime big game hunting GO's conduct. Many present GO's advertise prime time for moose and caribou as being September 15-October 15.

[yama49]

We need to make more sheep first. Then everybody wins.

1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

After 5 years of the above we'll all be trying to figure out what to do with all of our sheep. Then we can devise plans to help us kill more.

Carl

Agree 100%, we need group wolve hunts.. Have sleds, willing to travel...

[BCrams]

Good post Carl!


1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

Controversial indeed and quite effective. I would not be surprised some GO's are doing some form of predator control today that no one knows about.


2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

Last spring at the sheep banquet there was a presentation on prescribed burns in the Peace region. Lots of it has been done the last couple years.

However, I have mixed feelings over burns given what we have seen happened with elk expansion into traditional sheep range and the impact they have on sheep winter range. Hind sight being 20 / 20 .... if we knew back in the old days what we know now ...... would the aggressive burns have happened? Maybe not.

Did predator control and burns artificially inflate sheep numbers beyond what was probably normal??? Did the burns in the valleys like the Kechika inflate and enhance moose which were followed by an increase of predators which in turn resulted in predator control so they would leave the sheep alone?? Some things to think about before we go promoting aggressive burn campaigns.


3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

Defies logic logic why they won't open it right up. See other response. Great for elk, good for sheep in short term but not long term because of the spin off results of the burns. Increased ungulates (elk) --> increased predators --> and you get the idea.


4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

Has already happened and the status quo is still a higher ratio of GO harvest over residents. I support GO businesses' but rather than reduce GO quota's (except in regions like 6 where its really messed up), why not enhance the opportunity for residents to achieve their harvest percentage with a resident only season. This enables potential harvest of rams that the GO would otherwise get first because of their knowledge of the territory. (i.e., a GO may take only 1 or 2 days to get a particular ram on a mountain in an accessible area whereas with a resident in a resident only season may take 3, 4 or 8 days but eventually may take that said ram.......this in turn will force GO into the inaccessible backcountry, cutting new horse trails etc to access sheep he or residents have not been hunting......so really, everyone wins)


Just my thoughts.

[BCrams]

I heard of a reg6 burn plan from MOE years ago. Not off the ground yet ? I could understand why, when the regional office feels there are enough sheep and money is very tight.

.

There's a burn program being done in Spatsizi with a 2000 hectare burn conducted right on the mountain above Hyland Post in 2008.

Done to enhance winter / spring habitat and improve escapre terrain visibility.

Fund source: MOE, Wild Sheep Society of BC, BC Parks, Foundation North American Wild Sheep and the GO - Collingwoods, Tahltan Nation

[bigwhiteys]

Why not bump the GO's down to an August 15th start? Keep the August 1st start for residents only for 2 weeks. The pressure would then be reduced on the sheep that you speak of without adding 2 weeks to the season.

That is certainly an alternative with some merrit. It would be better than 2 weeks added to the season. And I do see your point about spreading the hunters out... But given the country sheep are in and the limited access most of us have... Do you think it would really spread us out?

Carl

[chilcotin hillbilly]

I agree with burns, and predator control, this helps more then sheep. The bottom line is the residents already have the advantage with a very liberal stone sheep season. Even with more advantages I don't think the resident harvest would increase a whole lot as very few residents are willing to spend the money to do the hunts and the majority although interested really won't ever take the next step and put the backpack on. Guys that hunt sheep are a different breed then the weekend warrior who talks about it.

[Rubicon500]

Id support a resident advantage...But really do we need it ? I think its more that its the people hunting are uncapable, not the current conditions we have. We can hunt them from August 1 till October 15, if your having problems harvesting a ram or at least seeing legals your doing something wrong. 2 and a half months and you cant find 1 legal ram ? How many residents actually hunt the last 2 weeks of the season ? Hmm next to nothing, you just here its to cold, or the weathers to unpredictable. If we dont utilize the season we already have why bitch about getting it legnthed. Seems like everyone wants a ram given to them without putting in the time or effort. How many guys shoot trophy muleys if they only hunt/scout 2 weeks a year ? Why would sheep be any different.

[bigwhiteys]

Seems like everyone wants a ram given to them without putting in the time or effort.
Amen... It's hard work to harvest a ram. And even harder to harvest a good one. We have ample time to get'r done.

Carl

[BCrams]

That is certainly an alternative with some merrit. It would be better than 2 weeks added to the season. And I do see your point about spreading the hunters out... But given the country sheep are in and the limited access most of us have... Do you think it would really spread us out?

Carl

I do. (look beyond the Alaska Highway)

Looking at the current sheep harvest numbers, I doubt all are taken within accessible highway areas (i.e., Alaska Highway). There's a tonne of backcountry float plane access areas many many residents fly into and are unsuccessful. This resident only season would bump up the harvest of these rams in the 'accessible backcountry' areas too. There's accessible front country and there's accessible backcountry. Like the prior example, lets use Moodie Lake, instead of the GO harvesting the ram within a couple miles of the lake on August 1st or 2nd, a resident only season may have that resident harvesting that ram on August 5 or 8th.

This forces the GO when his season starts to give his wranglers instructions, "Ok, you and you are going to go spend a few days to a week re-cutting / clearing that trail to "x" basin so we can get our sheep hunter in there on horses." GO still gets his ram.

The ratio's are now maybe tipped in favour of residents and everyone is happy and even the GO may grumble a little 'cause he had to pay time to get some trails cleared into new areas or areas he neglected to go to :-D

[bigwhiteys]

I do. (look beyond the Alaska Highway)

Are you telling me where to hunt sheep...? Now That's funny :-D

I really am not sold on this "residents advantage"

Carl

[BCrams]

Id support a resident advantage...But really do we need it ? I think its more that its the people hunting are uncapable, not the current conditions we have. We can hunt them from August 1 till October 15, if your having problems harvesting a ram or at least seeing legals your doing something wrong. 2 and a half months and you cant find 1 legal ram ? How many residents actually hunt the last 2 weeks of the season ? Hmm next to nothing, you just here its to cold, or the weathers to unpredictable. If we dont utilize the season we already have why bitch about getting it legnthed. Seems like everyone wants a ram given to them without putting in the time or effort. How many guys shoot trophy muleys if they only hunt/scout 2 weeks a year ? Why would sheep be any different.

Remember that fly in hunt you did. The GO took a ram damn near within site of the lake you went to before you had a chance to hunt due to the rains. Now if it were a resident only season then, your odds of taking that ram went up and the GO would have had to go into the more remote parts you couldn't have really gotten too anyways. This happens all the time.

Its not from a lack of trying or hunting hard, the GO holds a big advantage and he'll shoot legal rams in those areas before residents have that chance.


Seems like everyone wants a ram given to them without putting in the time or effort.

You hunt sheep now. You've met a lot of sheep hunters (myself included) and I think most are pretty serious. I know one thing, the fellows I've hunted with and I have busted our asses everytime we go sheep hunting!!

Its not about having sheep handed to hunters. They still have to hunt irregardless to take one and a resident only season does not 'hand hunters a ram'. Need to get residents the opportunity to up their harvest without knocking the outfitters back next to nothing in their quotas.

[BCrams]

Are you telling me where to hunt sheep...? Now That's funny :-D

I really am not sold on this "residents advantage"

Carl

:-D Never!! :tongue:

Like your example of the resident only area....I see it has merrit but the problem is that it goes beyond the highway. Lots of hunters 'do' fly into backcountry areas. Are we going extend resident areas only within 5-10km of all popular fly in lakes?

[budismyhorse]

Greg,

To me, your Moodie example is exactly what those opposed have been saying.....simply trying to make it easier for residents to just kill a ram for the sake of killing one.

If you have done all your research and all you have come up with is fly in to Moodie and shoot one just off the lake?? Maybe you don't really deserve a stone sheep....no?

You are making it sound like if that guide takes out that ram the hunt is over.......for me I'd be happy seeing that guide fill his tag early, that means he is gone for the rest of my hunt, I lace em up and go find a ram....I have 10 days, I'll do my best to make it happen.

Not only that, after the first few days, all bets are off and the rams could be anywhere, guides or no guides present. It comes down to skill after that.

Plus, we all know that under an advantage season, Lakes like Moodie would be like Pearl Harbour and you'd be seeing a heck of a lot more resident pressure on those places. Which may not be a good thing.

At this point, the only compelling reason I have read for an advantage type season is what Lang1212 is saying regarding R6.

[BCrams]

I think you're still missing the point (as are most).

What solution (other than knocking the GO quota right down even more) is there to rectify the resident priority for ram harvest?So if a few 'easy' (to us) rams are taken by some hunters .... who are you to say they don't deserve a Stone's ram? There are mountains that would take me only hours to get up and cover in a day or two and then take another guy 1 full exhausting day to get up and take 4 or 5 days to cover.


To me, your Moodie example is exactly what those opposed have been saying.....simply trying to make it easier for residents to just kill a ram for the sake of killing one.

Tell me how a resident only season makes it easier for residents to hunt and kill a ram?? Remember, we want residents to harvest rams.


If you have done all your research and all you have come up with is fly in to Moodie and shoot one just off the lake?? Maybe you don't really deserve a stone sheep....no?

Next time you hear a bull elk screaming from the off load site and you decide to see if he comes in .... he does and its a 360 bull elk while unloading your horse trailer - make sure you or your partners don't shoot him because you don't deserve him until you're 20 km up the valley with your horses / camp. :wink:


You are making it sound like if that guide takes out that ram the hunt is over.......for me I'd be happy seeing that guide fill his tag early, that means he is gone for the rest of my hunt, I lace em up and go find a ram....I have 10 days, I'll do my best to make it happen.

Sounds like me. I hunt irregardless and I am 99% of the time hunting where even the GO has a bitch of a time to get a client into.


Not only that, after the first few days, all bets are off and the rams could be anywhere, guides or no guides present.

Not always. Had a good conversation with a sheep guide on a sheep hunt who told us that once they pressured the rams on the mountain we were on, the mature rams went to a little timbered hillside with some bluffs a few miles down the valley (he was telling us because he knew darned well we couldn't get there).

I know enough from talking to other more experienced sheep hunters and from work experience that sheep are highly traditional and utilize the same habitat. GO's typically know where the rams go when pressured.


Plus, we all know that under an advantage season, Lakes like Moodie would be like Pearl Harbour and you'd be seeing a heck of a lot more resident pressure on those places. Which may not be a good thing.

Instead of the GO taking an easy ram within the accessible areas by the lake...... at least a resident hunter will take that ram instead. The GO will just have to take his equipment and go to the more remote areas to get his ram. Thats the point. Get the resident harvest up.

Either that, or reduce the GO quotas more.

[tackdriver]

:wink:
X2 here... x3:wink:

[bigwhiteys]

I think the increase in resident pressure in the common areas would negate the benefit of not having the GO's present.

Again... Not sold on the benefits you lay out Greg. Why are we trying to kill MORE sheep when there is LESS sheep?

Carl

[BCrams]

Again... Not sold on the benefits you lay out Greg. Why are we trying to kill MORE sheep when there is LESS sheep?

Carl

Given the statement. Sounds like we need to knock back the quota's of the GO's in order to align the harvest rates don't we :-D

I am all for this as well without having a resident only season.....as long as resident priority is met.

[Rubicon500]

Remember that fly in hunt you did. The GO took a ram damn near within site of the lake you went to before you had a chance to hunt due to the rains. Now if it were a resident only season then, your odds of taking that ram went up and the GO would have had to go into the more remote parts you couldn't have really gotten too anyways. This happens all the time.
Darwins boys hadnt been there yet, Bill said strait up they werent hunting in there till the 15th, we flew in 1 day before or eles it was opening day So I doubt they already shot a ram. Must be thinking of different lake ?
Its not from a lack of trying or hunting hard, the GO holds a big advantage and he'll shoot legal rams in those areas before residents have that chance.




You hunt sheep now. You've met a lot of sheep hunters (myself included) and I think most are pretty serious. I know one thing, the fellows I've hunted with and I have busted our asses everytime we go sheep hunting!!
Was talking about other hunters I know not you guys greg. Christ we got members on here going on 3 day sheep hunts :mrgreen:

Its not about having sheep handed to hunters. They still have to hunt irregardless to take one and a resident only season does not 'hand hunters a ram'. Need to get residents the opportunity to up their harvest without knocking the outfitters back next to nothing in their quotas.
Alot of residents arent after the first legal ram they see though ? How many rams have you passed up over the years ? Alot.. ya know what I mean if we all shot dinky rams over the years our harvest numbers would be alot higher.

[Devilbear]

BCRams has made some excellent points here and I would add two others.

I will be 64 next hunting season and have made my BC background clear; I cannot do what I used to in the mountains, but, still hike, climb, snowshoe and hunt/fish as I enjoy it. Is, someone here going to presume to inform me that due to age, OR ANY OTHER FACTOR, I somehow ...do not deserve a ram...? Oh, really.

IF, this kind of attitude gets widely known by the substantial number of members of the public who are utterly opposed to ANY "non-resident alien" hunting in BC, what will the reaction be? It would be SO easy to shut down "n.r.a" hunting in this province now that some here need to THINK before posting comments such as the above, because it CAN and DAMM WELL MIGHT happen, when people get hacked off by such arrogance.

I think that Willy, Carl, BCR and several others are making some very good points here and I am learning a lot, BUT, in many respects, Willy, is right and We hunters NEED to stick together. If, we all HELP each other and I am willing to do just that, the sheep, resi's, guides and non-resi's will ALL benefit. If not, we will see the end of non-resi. hunting here a lot sooner than many seem to think..................

[BCrams]

Alot of residents arent after the first legal ram they see though ? How many rams have you passed up over the years ? Alot.. ya know what I mean if we all shot dinky rams over the years our harvest numbers would be alot higher.

Point taken :wink: Maybe its time we start shooting them. Use it or lose it. If we don't start taking them, the percentage will transfer over to the GO's.

Let rams go every single hunt so far except 1 dall trip and 1 stone's trip where we didn't see any legal rams.

[bigwhiteys]

Given the statement. Sounds like we need to knock back the quota's of the GO's in order to align the harvest rates don't we :grin:

Sure... Why Not? The price of their hunts could just go up to compensate... that's supply vs. demand.

If a guy wants a stone for his Grandslam then I am sure $50,000 wouldn't be unreasonable to sell one for. One of the business lessons I learned pretty quickly was that the higher my price, the LESS people I had to deal with (for the same if not more $$$ at the end of the year)

GoatGuy is right when he says some of these outfits need to diversify and maybe look at other ways to replace the lost sheep revenue. That's called running a business. Sometimes shit changes and you need to adapt instead of backing into a corner and trying to fight it. I would be for reduced GO quotas BEFORE I would be for a special resident season or even special resident areas.

Carl

[Everett]

I will throw out another option instead of an early resident season or resident only areas. Only allow Non residents to hunt sheep every other year that way there would be no friction with the guide outfitters. You could also stagger it one year region 6 is open to non residents the next year its region 7b. That way residents would always be able to hunt thin horn sheep without having to compete with non residents and there would always be someplace for non residents to hunt. This would drive up the price of sheep hunts so the outfitters could make more money of killing less sheep. Win win as far as I can see.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I'm in favour of 2 week headstart for resident. I'm not in favour of resident only areas. Would be a gong show to sort out and may just concentrate the pressure more.

Reg 6 needs help for residents much more that Reg7....although having a widespread early start would help to spread out some residient effort and simplify enforcement.

Speaking about Reg 7.......If an early start led to residents harvesting too many rams, then we could be throttled back with a 1 in 3 rule for rams under 8. I would expect the GOs would be in favour of that.
A little give-and-take if you will.

SSS



SSS

[budismyhorse]

I think you're still missing the point (as are most).

What solution (other than knocking the GO quota right down even more) is there to rectify the resident priority for ram harvest?This IS the point for me......I think the advantage season is in fact missing the point. The quota levels (in some areas) combined with limiting factors like habitat, winter range and preds may be what needs attention.

Like Carl keeps saying, you'd be trading competition with the guides for front loaded competition with even more resident hunters.....

Tell me how a resident only season makes it easier for residents to hunt and kill a ram?? Remember, we want residents to harvest rams.

it WOULDN'T, that is my point. But the "ducks" that get whacked in the first day or two in the easier spots off popular lakes would get it for sure. Which would raise the resident take by only a small margin. Worth the trouble? I'm not convinced yet.


Next time you hear a bull elk screaming from the off load site and you decide to see if he comes in .... he does and its a 360 bull elk while unloading your horse trailer - make sure you or your partners don't shoot him because you don't deserve him until you're 20 km up the valley with your horses / camp. :wink:

Your taking that way too literally. I only mean that there are PLENTY of spots out there that hold sheep in good numbers.......why would anyone want to go into Moodie blind and fight the stiff competition????.... Because they have heard it is an easy spot to kill a ram and therefore, if that is where your research has led you.....maybe you should look into some other spots, research harder, and find a spot off the grid. Take some chances and it'll work out eventually, it will be that much sweeter in the end.



Thanks for more specifics to the arguement Greg, its appreciated.

I guess I just don't know any stone sheep hunters that have been victim to this apparent problem in the early part of the season. Each hunter I talk to comes back with more stories about lots of fellas in the bush, but I can't think of any that say the guides waaaay down at the bottom of the mountain watching up from the horses have made any impact on their trip at all.

I also think that under a special resident season, guides would make damn sure not too many rams were taken, this is the reality of the situation.

I think if there were more rams around to be hunted, this wouldn't be a topic of discussion at all.

[bigwhiteys]

I think if there were more rams around to be hunted, this wouldn't be a topic of discussion at all.
And that is pretty much my take on the issue as well...

Carl

[yukon john]

We need to make more sheep first. Then everybody wins.

1. Bring back predator control (hush hush and FAST) You can kill a lot of wolves in 10 days. Well, so I've heard. Do it without Paul Watson catching wind.

2. Bring back some controlled burning... It helped in someways, caused issues in others. Most of the oldtimers did it... And we still hunt elk/sheep/deer in them today.

3. Open up the elk hunting in the Northern areas of 7B that can handle it. (tons of elk! - partial result of the burning! )

4. Reduce G/O quotas in areas that receive moderate/heavy resident pressure. (They have the tools to access the most remote backcountry and should be utlizing them 100%)

After 5 years of the above we'll all be trying to figure out what to do with all of our sheep. Then we can devise plans to help us kill more.

Carl



awesome post Carl once again you are a voice of reason

[PGK]

You can't just "do" predator control. You can't just do it under the radar and hope nobody notices. If that was an option, it would have been done already. And on top of that, it's SHORT TERM. It will only have an effect for about five years, after which there will be more wolves than ever before because you left the food on the landscape. If you commit to predator control, you commit to it for long term, and that just is not feasible.

[yukon john]

This whole tread sounds a little like a class of 6 year olds voting against the teacher. ''but teacher we dont wanna work so hard'' cry me a river GOABC has the money, money equals power and all the online ranting will never touch them. Im sure all residents would like no competition especially when that competition is generally a league above them, if I wasnt busy packing fat americans up the mountain in august I would want to hunt sheep without competition to but it aint gonna happen boys

[budismyhorse]

I am just trying to get these arguments straight and concise:

So, essentially, the heart of the movement towards a resident advantage season or territory begins and ends with trying to get the BC resident take higher, percentage wise.

So can it be said that the BC resident advantage would then replace the push towards pred control, habitat improvement or quota adjustment?

making the best of the situation in front of us, without really improving the circumstances that led to our current Stone Sheep hunting situation?

[lange1212]

The bottom line is the residents already have the advantage with a very liberal stone sheep season.

I don't see any resident advantage when GO's and their non-resident clients are offered equal status regarding season? If anything residents are held at a disavantage as GO's know where the rams are, when, pre-season scouting, boats, planes horses tool of the trade...all a funtion of their business. The only way to give a resident half a chance to improve harvest is to implement the resident only sheep pre-season. The harvest scale is grossly imbalanced paticularly in region 6 in favor of commercial non-resident sheep hunting interests and regulatory change is long over due to level the playing field. No critisism towards GO's here, their simply effective and have the advange that results from the nature of their business. This being said the nature of their business is no excuss for the MoE not to remove the chains and shackles on resident opportunity and ability to harvest.

[Kody94]

I voted yes for the BC resident two week season, but there is one problem with it (in Reg 7) that BigWhiteys keeps pointing out (directly and indirectly), and others have mentioned as well. For clarity here's how I see it....

For Reg 7 the objective is to keep the harvest at or near 180 rams. We are currently there, but the split is off...we need a higher percentage of resident kills and a lower percentage of non-resident kills.

If you implement a two-week season where the residents don't have to compete with outfitters, the resident harvest should go up.

But here's the rub...will the non-resident harvest go down? If they are hunting deeper into their territories etc, they may find the rams...but is that sustainable? I don't think thats what we want.

If, for this to work, Outfitters can't kill their quota, then their quota should decrease.

So, to reiterate, I think the only way to really achieve what we residents want in Reg 7 will be to reduce the quotas. And follow the strategy to get more sheep on the mountains so that quotas can rise again, within the right allocation split.

Region 6 is different, if the rams that we are targetting with the current "AAH" is really there (I understand there isn't an AAH, but you know what I mean). If those rams exist, the two week head start could help. If the rams aren't there, we should be addressing the quota problem directly. I personally suspect the latter.

In either case, if quotas get addressed, the "two week headstart" for residents might still help residents achieve their portion of the AAH. That's why I voted "yes".

[budismyhorse]

I don't see any resident advantage when GO's and their non-resident clients are offered equal status regarding season? If anything residents are held at a disavantage as GO's know where the rams are, when, pre-season scouting, boats, planes horses tool of the trade...all a funtion of their business. The only way to give a resident half a chance to improve harvest is to implement the resident only sheep pre-season. The harvest scale is grossly imbalanced paticularly in region 6 in favor of commercial non-resident sheep hunting interests and regulatory change is long over due to level the playing field. No critisism towards GO's here, their simply effective and have the advange that results from the nature of their business. This being said the nature of their business is no excuss for the MoE not to remove the chains and shackles on resident opportunity and ability to harvest.

So your argument is that the special resident season would then level the playing field, not be an advantage?

To call it an advantage would then be incinuating the playing field is already level.

[bigwhiteys]

So, to reiterate, I think the only way to really achieve what we residents want in Reg 7 will be to reduce the quotas. And follow the strategy to get more sheep on the mountains so that quotas can rise again, within the right allocation split.

Yes... Exactly. More sheep and we'd all be happy. I refuse to believe what others suggest about our stone sheep pops. being at historical highs. My Grandpa started hunting sheep in 7B in 1958... He paints a different picture from his decades of experience as a pilot, guide and outfitter.

Carl

[Devilbear]

This whole tread sounds a little like a class of 6 year olds voting against the teacher. ''but teacher we dont wanna work so hard'' cry me a river GOABC has the money, money equals power and all the online ranting will never touch them. Im sure all residents would like no competition especially when that competition is generally a league above them, if I wasnt busy packing fat americans up the mountain in august I would want to hunt sheep without competition to but it aint gonna happen boys

I think that you seriously underestimate many of the posters here and are tending to a view of this situation that is biased by your current occupation. No offence intended, at all, but, there are some very knowlegable, highly experienced and skillful mountain hunters here and they may well have a much greater impact, over time, on "non resident alien" hunting and GO quotas in BC than you seem to realize.

As a longterm serious mountain backpacker, I just gotta ask, what is your favourite pack for packing those ...fat Americans up the mountain...???

Sorry, just couldn't resist! :)

[lange1212]

So your argument is that the special resident season would then level the playing field, not be an advantage?

To call it an advantage would then be incinuating the playing field is already level.

The field is certainly not level and resident sheep hunters in the Skeena Regions are in fact held at a disadvantage. Over two decades of MoE harvest stats. dictate this not me. Year after year in region six 70% of the rams harvested are taken by non-residents. Thats right resident only harvest 30% and yes they way out number non-residents hunters. Now consider that the combined harvest does not equate to 50% of the cumulative quota given to GO's alone. That's right GO's and their non-residents clients harvest 70% of the rams and do not achieve 50% of their culmulative quota. Do you think there's a problem here? Do you think residents are on a level playing field? Do you think that the legal rams exist in Region 6 to accomodate GO quotas?

I don't!

[lange1212]

So can it be said that the BC resident advantage would then replace the push towards pred control, habitat improvement or quota adjustment?

Absolutly not!

There's wildlife management and then there's regulatory management they are intertwined

Unfortunate today there's a lack of political will to ensure effective management of our revered wildlife resource. Lack of funding, inadequate man power to get the job done, inventory work out dated, lacking in habitat enhancement....

Just think of the $$$ wasted on the Olympics and if a fraction of the money spent was dedicated to wildlife management the good that could have been accomplished.

MoE needs to get back to basic, manage wildlife first and foremost, then manage regulations to achieve desired goals and ensure sustainable use. I realize managing people is a cheaper approach, but its not the right or ethical way to manage our wildlife

[BCrams]

What solution (other than knocking the GO quota right down even more) is there to rectify the resident priority for ram harvest?
This IS the point for me......I think the advantage season is in fact missing the point. The quota levels (in some areas) combined with limiting factors like habitat, winter range and preds may be what needs attention.

Like Carl keeps saying, you'd be trading competition with the guides for front loaded competition with even more resident hunters.....


A resident only area he also suggests would be worse than a 2 week headstart across the board without inviting heavy concentration of hunters to an area.


Tell me how a resident only season makes it easier for residents to hunt and kill a ram?? Remember, we want residents to harvest rams.

it WOULDN'T, that is my point. But the "ducks" that get whacked in the first day or two in the easier spots off popular lakes would get it for sure. Which would raise the resident take by only a small margin. Worth the trouble? I'm not convinced yet.


You said easy ram.....which the 2 week headstart would invite. It isn't easy. Those 'ducks' you're referring to would be rams the Guide Outfitters would otherwise have taken. So in essence, we're letting the residents have "priority" by harvesting those rams. If its as such that the GO cannot find other rams in the "remote" areas. Then a further reduction of his quota will reflect a resident priority in overall harvest. Thats the goal.


Your taking that way too literally. I only mean that there are PLENTY of spots out there that hold sheep in good numbers.......why would anyone want to go into Moodie blind and fight the stiff competition????.... Because they have heard it is an easy spot to kill a ram and therefore, if that is where your research has led you.....maybe you should look into some other spots, research harder, and find a spot off the grid. Take some chances and it'll work out eventually, it will be that much sweeter in the end.

LOL .... by naming Moodie you assume thats where my research has led me. Nothing could be further from the truth but better to let everyone think so :) btw .... that aside, Moodie is an excellent location to fly into if you know where to go to get away from that competition you speak of ;)



I guess I just don't know any stone sheep hunters that have been victim to this apparent problem in the early part of the season.

Maybe you don't know enough. Bridger gives classic examples!!
Know a few myself and when I was up there working, the GO's were off loading their equipment to hit all the front country areas first before pulling back into the more remote areas.


I also think that under a special resident season, guides would make damn sure not too many rams were taken, this is the reality of the situation.

The guys that will do this already do it. While it has happened, most guides I have run into have been really friendly ....

I doubt it will 'impact' hunters as you mentioned above.

[Devilbear]

Absolutly not!

There's wildlife management and then there's regulatory management they are intertwined

Unfortunate today there's a lack of political will to ensure effective management of our revered wildlife resource. Lack of funding, inadequate man power to get the job done, inventory work out dated, lacking in habitat enhancement....

Just think of the $$$ wasted on the Olympics and if a fraction of the money spent was dedicated to wildlife management the good that could have been accomplished.

MoE needs to get back to basic, manage wildlife first and foremost, then manage regulations to achieve desired goals and ensure sustainable use. I realize managing people is a cheaper approach, but its not the right or ethical way to manage our wildlife

Exactly, agree 110%.

[40incher]

The time has come for MOE to do the right thing and go ahead with the "resident only" preseason for Stones. Even a week would make a huge difference.

Most of the rams we have taken over the years (8 out of 10) have been in the first 5 days of the season. The guides know this will give us an advantage, that's why they are fighting it so hard.

We as residents have priority on paper, it's time to make it a reality.

[willy442]

More pressure? I don't know if it will add more pressure. The only difference (in particular to front country areas and many back country 'accessible' areas - i.e., float plane) may be that instead of the GO's harvesting these rams within these areas, it will be the resident shooting these rams instead.

A resident only area, while on paper is a good idea, it would still only be limited to such a small area in the grande scheme of things when we're looking at sheep range across the board. A 2 week resident only season is better as it disperses the hunters as opposed to a resident only area.

The resident only season does not have to start July 16th, before August 1st. :wink:

Why not bump the GO's down to an August 15th start? Keep the August 1st start for residents only for 2 weeks. The pressure would then be reduced on the sheep that you speak of without adding 2 weeks to the season.

It is still well before most of the prime big game hunting GO's conduct. Many present GO's advertise prime time for moose and caribou as being September 15-October 15.

I voted no on the poll for reasons that have already been tossed out there. However here are my reasons again.

1. No matter what you do with seasons you will not disperse hunters over the majority of sheep habitat. The Ministry has one option to accomplish this and that is LEH. I would suggest you be careful on this, because unlimited access and over harvest will bring these hated three letters to being quicker than you may realize. The dispersement of hunters alone would increase thier harvest numbers.
2. If you give the resident a 2 week advantage on the season, this will definately increase hunting pressures on the exact area's that are of concern now with being over hunted due to access. The fact alone of a special season would draw many new people. In the ong term people may give up on these area's and no doubt the battle we see being refered to now will reappear as the resident harvests these area's off and desire to move back more.
3. Taking the first 2 weeks of the season away from the sheep G/O's, cuts 15 potential earning days off of thier limited time to conduct business. The fight and defeating the guide on this would not be easy. The suggestion that the guide may take residents is valid, but this will in no way compensate him for his losses. The system as it is now allows the guide to hunt sheep only in August maximizing his earning potential. Then moving on doing the same for mixed bag hunts after September 1st. To remove hunting days from them is removing income period. By removing quota, price adjustments become compensary. To a G/O the difference is huge.
4. Any special season or area, will most likely only be a short term fix due to the disappointing lack of ability to manage as exhibited by the MOE. Without predator control and range enhancement our populations are sure to continue declining. Leaving cause to continue the resident G/O battle in the future to continue on as it has for the past 25 years. The only thing new is a few of the names involved.
5. As men and hunters it would seem that we would all put our best efforts forward to accomplish our goals. For me as a resident hunter to even suggest that I needed a special season over the next guy would tell me that I should probably either give it up or become better at what I was doing. "Not crying" I can't get a Ram because that guy's a better equipped and skilled hunter than I am. My point is. WE ARE ALL HUNTERS and we damn well need to start portraying that to the rest of the world.
6. There is not one person out there that is incappable of acquireing the neccessary equipment to get back and compete with the guide in the more remote area's. Example. I drive a 2009 F350 King Ranch and John Doe can only acquire a Honda Civic. Does this mean my income should be split with him so he can aquire a truck? I guess not but if you see my point and lay your hunting greed aside, you may see how stupid this fight is.
I do support resident only area's only due to the reasoning that he must become the conservationist once this happened. The guide would no longer be involved and over harvest would bring on LEH. Which I support whole heartedly for Sheep, Goat and Grizzly bear at this time.

[silvicon]

why do we need an "advantage" to get sheep?
just be there before the season opens, scout and be ready on the opening day.
i do it, so why not you?
how many of you are sheep hunters, or just bs'er?

[Deadshot]

We as residents have priority on paper, it's time to make it a reality.

Is this "priority" that everyone speaks of something new? Or is it something that's been around for awhile?
Could someone explain it, so I & probably others can understand a little bit better.
This is some good $hit being discussed.:-D

[Devilbear]

Here we go again, a guide, "silvicon", making derisive remarks about resident hunters and the members of HBC justly concerned about OUR RIGHT to OUR game.

This, in a nutshell, is why I tend toward a simple and total ban on "non-resident alien" hunting of all types here in BC, which I honestly think will happen within the coming decade.

Willy DOES have a point in his post, BUT, if we can only "manage" our available sheep, goats, etc. by LEH, which denies opportunity to most resident hunters, then, we DO NOT have populations large enough to sustain ANY non-resident hunting at all.

The GOs, guides and their few supporters here have to realize that, if, it becomes commonly understood among the majority of BC citizens just how the GOABC has been and is acting against the best interests of resident hunters, the result WILL be a campaign that could well eliminate all non-resident hunting and all commercial hunting.

I would estimate that over 75 % of the resident hunters I have discussed this issue with in recent years, all over BC, ALREADY are against non-resident hunting and non-hunters are not likely to differ.

If, we need a reduction in harvest, then, we must sharply cut GO quotas or this situation will simply result in a battle over hunting which may well hurt us all.

[willy442]

Here we go again, a guide, "silvicon", making derisive remarks about resident hunters and the members of HBC justly concerned about OUR RIGHT to OUR game.

This, in a nutshell, is why I tend toward a simple and total ban on "non-resident alien" hunting of all types here in BC, which I honestly think will happen within the coming decade.

Willy DOES have a point in his post, BUT, if we can only "manage" our available sheep, goats, etc. by LEH, which denies opportunity to most resident hunters, then, we DO NOT have populations large enough to sustain ANY non-resident hunting at all.

The GOs, guides and their few supporters here have to realize that, if, it becomes commonly understood among the majority of BC citizens just how the GOABC has been and is acting against the best interests of resident hunters, the result WILL be a campaign that could well eliminate all non-resident hunting and all commercial hunting.

I would estimate that over 75 % of the resident hunters I have discussed this issue with in recent years, all over BC, ALREADY are against non-resident hunting and non-hunters are not likely to differ.

If, we need a reduction in harvest, then, we must sharply cut GO quotas or this situation will simply result in a battle over hunting which may well hurt us all.

I do not suggest that our population numbers are so low, we need LEH. What I'm saying is the MOE will succeed in appearing to manage wildlife through LEH. Which really is only a tool for managing people. In the short term it may be what we need on some spiecies. It may buy the time we need to get our shit together, because if keep screwing up LEH will be shoved down our throats at a point when nothing is left to harvest.

[willy442]

Just a thought. Whats wrong with res only area's, within the present season. Take the areas everyone thinks the guides are affecting and make them res area only for the first week or two of the season.

[Slee]

This all sounds good and would hopfully even things out. but is this just a pipe dream or is something like this possible??

[PGK]

Just a thought. Whats wrong with res only area's, within the present season. Take the areas everyone thinks the guides are affecting and make them res area only for the first week or two of the season.

Resident only areas would concentrate pressure. We're not trying to get more sheep killed, we're trying to allow residents the opportunity to shoot sheep instead of non residents. Limiting non residents temporally allows much greater opportunity than limiting non residents spatially....

Plus as has been said, this is already effectively done because residents often do not have the ability to access the areas further back.

[Devilbear]

Dutchie, Willy left the GO business in the early '90s and now is involved in other business endeavours. I think, no offence intended, that you have misunderstood what he was getting at in these comments. Perhaps, review the relevant posts in context and you might get a different impression?

[dutchie]

Dutchie, Willy left the GO business in the early '90s and now is involved in other business endeavours. I think, no offence intended, that you have misunderstood what he was getting at in these comments. Perhaps, review the relevant posts in context and you might get a different impression?


No offence taken, I will do that!

Thanks DB

[bridger]

Just a thought. Whats wrong with res only area's, within the present season. Take the areas everyone thinks the guides are affecting and make them res area only for the first week or two of the season.


that is possible solution. do you think it is possible that it would concentrate the pressure as oppossed to spreading hunters out with a two week head start over the entire management unit.

[BCrams]

When I look at my maps of the entire Stone's sheep range and a 'resident' only area. I just cannot agree with it and it does not make sense. It would concentrate hunters far more than any other 2 week GOS area across the board.

Better to spread the hunting out and let hunters choose where they want to hunt during the resident head start (if they choose to hunt during that time and many will continue to hunt later in the year because they want the mixed bag hunt or better capes etc).

[BCrams]

I voted no on the poll for reasons that have already been tossed out there. However here are my reasons again.

[quote]1. No matter what you do with seasons you will not disperse hunters over the majority of sheep habitat.

What the early season may accomplish is an increase in resident harvest of rams. Rams in the easier access areas whether off highway or fly in lakes or jetboat areas that are otherwise taken by the GO may be taken by residents. Maybe balance out the screwed up harvest ratios.


2. If you give the resident a 2 week advantage on the season, this will definately increase hunting pressures on the exact area's that are of concern now with being over hunted due to access. The fact alone of a special season would draw many new people.

New sheep hunters! Why not!! They have more right than a non-resident.

As you know, there are x number of rams which may be harvested and many mature rams in the areas of concern are taken by the GO himself. Maybe the GO just won't be able to harvest one because a resident will have taken that mature ram instead.


3. Taking the first 2 weeks of the season away from the sheep G/O's, cuts 15 potential earning days off of thier limited time to conduct business.

Thats ok.....switch it back to the 2 weeks before August 1st. He will still have his sheep hunts etc.


4. Any special season or area, will most likely only be a short term fix due to the disappointing lack of ability to manage as exhibited by the MOE.

You think so??




5. I guess not but if you see my point and lay your hunting greed aside, you may see how stupid this fight is.


Not greed at all!! Just looking at potential solutions which best get the harvest ratio's aligned to reflect resident priority for sheep in BC. Nothing more. 70/30 is what it should be iirc.....getting close for Reg. 7b but Region 6 is a whole mess aside right now.



Which I support whole heartedly for Sheep, Goat and Grizzly bear at this time.


LEH kills off resident hunters. But you knew that didn't you ;)

[willy442]

that is possible solution. do you think it is possible that it would concentrate the pressure as oppossed to spreading hunters out with a two week head start over the entire management unit.

No, I don't belive it will do a damn thing for spreading out the resident. The only thing accomplished is to give the resident a slight advantage without inducing any more pressure on the Sheep. IE hunting days stay the same. Resident will be able to harvest those easy access rams, which is what you are after is it not? The trick would be to determine a decent cross section of country to be available. Everything along the highways in both regions plus some of the lakes and other areas typically producing resident Rams. It still allows the G/O to move back deeper and hunt the out of way spots.

[willy442]

[quote=willy442;602658]I voted no on the poll for reasons that have already been tossed out there. However here are my reasons again.



What the early season may accomplish is an increase in resident harvest of rams. Rams in the easier access areas whether off highway or fly in lakes or jetboat areas that are otherwise taken by the GO may be taken by residents. Maybe balance out the screwed up harvest ratios.



New sheep hunters! Why not!! They have more right than a non-resident.

As you know, there are x number of rams which may be harvested and many mature rams in the areas of concern are taken by the GO himself. Maybe the GO just won't be able to harvest one because a resident will have taken that mature ram instead.



Thats ok.....switch it back to the 2 weeks before August 1st. He will still have his sheep hunts etc.



You think so??




Not greed at all!! Just looking at potential solutions which best get the harvest ratio's aligned to reflect resident priority for sheep in BC. Nothing more. 70/30 is what it should be iirc.....getting close for Reg. 7b but Region 6 is a whole mess aside right now.



LEH kills off resident hunters. But you knew that didn't you ;)


BC Rams; I for one do not believe you have any real interest in what the ratio is along with many others.
People keep refering to region 6 and how out of line the harvest and quota's are. Let me ask you. Why do you think the G/O's fail to fill the quota they have? What is wrong with thier quota if they self police and don't fill it. Does the accessability for the resident, affect his ability to kill sheep and to what degree? Is Access the largest part of the problem? Do you think if the guide threw conservation out the window and hunted, could he fill his quota for a few years, before populations decrease to levels he would have to cut back? What is the resident going to do if flights are no longer available in the region? How then is he going to kill his share and bring the numbers to what you call in line?
I believe the issue here is no different than deer season in the Peace and the gong show over hunting fields and private property. Most wanting the special season really have no regard for the Sheep. Thier concern is personnel gain. The reason I say this is you and others are argueing over something that really has no merit because you have no idea what's out there for sheep. The animal is my concern not the hunter. I believe hunters in this province have the most liberal hunting in North America and that is what we should be looking after. Not arguing over 3 or 4 sheep that really don't affect anyone! The answer lays in the fact that maybe the resident should put out a little more effort to disperse and harvest the number rams they want in stead of crying about unfair treatment.

I spend alot of time in Alberta. It is 100% LEH or Draw on everything and most people I see are quite happy with the system. It is used here to disperse hunters and accomplishes just that. It was intrduced here while game populations were still decent, which in turn left fairly large numbers of tags available. If used in BC it could accomplish the same. Your claim to the fact that it reduces hunter numbers is only valid in areas that have very limited draws available. It is a tool for the MOE to disperse hunters as I said.

[GoatGuy]

BC Rams; I for one do not believe you have any real interest in what the ratio is along with many others.
People keep refering to region 6 and how out of line the harvest and quota's are. Let me ask you. Why do you think the G/O's fail to fill the quota they have? What is wrong with thier quota if they self police and don't fill it. Does the accessability for the resident, affect his ability to kill sheep and to what degree? Is Access the largest part of the problem? Do you think if the guide threw conservation out the window and hunted, could he fill his quota for a few years, before populations decrease to levels he would have to cut back? What is the resident going to do if flights are no longer available in the region? How then is he going to kill his share and bring the numbers to what you call in line?
I believe the issue here is no different than deer season in the Peace and the gong show over hunting fields and private property. Most wanting the special season really have no regard for the Sheep. Thier concern is personnel gain. The reason I say this is you and others are argueing over something that really has no merit because you have no idea what's out there for sheep. The animal is my concern not the hunter. I believe hunters in this province have the most liberal hunting in North America and that is what we should be looking after. Not arguing over 3 or 4 sheep that really don't affect anyone! The answer lays in the fact that maybe the resident should put out a little more effort to disperse and harvest the number rams they want in stead of crying about unfair treatment.

The splits are fairly clear in the policy - minimum 60% on the resident side for sheep. The policy also states that barriers to acheiving that harvest must be removed. The degree of regulation in BC compared to other places isn't relevant - the issue is the harvest as it is in other jurisdictions. Harvest available drives regulations. :wink:

I personally don't see this type of concept as an 'advantage'. Residents and non-residents aren't even on the same 'competitive level' when it comes to sheep hunting or harvest. That's a fact of life. This is a matter of policy.

The quotas over there are self-regulating so I don't see a over-harvest as a concern even with a resident only season or what have you.

The what if's are great to discuss but the point at this time is to deal with the problem, identify the most effective solutions and start implementing them. Once the solutions are exhausted we can all sit back and talk about the what if's, what is and what you term 'person[a]l' motivations, the problem remains the same. Hopefully there will be something to learn from it.

I can assure you, I don't have any 'person[a]l' motivations with this concept, nor does access deter my hunting. I take my holidays in September and unless I get a good stretch of regular days off I won't be heading north in August. Don't much like bugs. :wink:

Also, as long as the harvest is sustainable, more people hunting sheep is actually good for sheep IMO. As you know, I think, the more people care about animals the more they'll try to take care of them and more importantly their habitat.


I spend alot of time in Alberta. It is 100% LEH or Draw on everything and most people I see are quite happy with the system. It is used here to disperse hunters and accomplishes just that. It was intrduced here while game populations were still decent, which in turn left fairly large numbers of tags available. If used in BC it could accomplish the same. Your claim to the fact that it reduces hunter numbers is only valid in areas that have very limited draws available. It is a tool for the MOE to disperse hunters as I said.

Alberta is not 100% LEH.

Alberta went to LEH for antelope because the harvest wasn't sustainable. Even the antelope LEH now is an extremely crowded hunt unless permission is for exclusive land; it does not spread hunters out. It can be and often is a very competitive hunt with multiple parties chasing and shooting at the same bucks on opening day.

Mule deer went to LEH because there was nothing but 2 pts left during post season counts (they tried antler restrictions). The reason mule deer are so suceptible to over-harvest is because of sightability (evolution). Again, even there in the LEH hunts, which are as short as a couple of 4 day 'weekends' for rifle you will run into other hunters and there are increasing complaints of hunter crowding due to high numbers of tags. There are also many GOSs for both mule deer bucks and some for does in Alberta - most of the GOS is in forested areas, similar to those found in most of BC.

WTs are general open season either sex, with high bag limits across the province, other than for does in the prairie MUs. There's LEH on wainright but that's a special case.

Sheep have some LEH and some GOS starting in August.

Elk are GOS and draw, again generally draw in the prairies. In some GOS they have 3 point to boot in relatively easily accessed areas. Antlerless harvest is high through LEH.

Moose are prinicipally LEH.

On top of all that you have to throw issues with landowners (farmers) into the mix as it's a driving force due to all of the private property (4 day seasons). It's a big industry and a big issue that doesn't affect us nearly as much in BC but it also drives regulations over there.

Your conclusions are a little ways off in regards to Alberta's LEH draw (alberta is 100% LEH on everything) and the reasons for it at least when you review the history, talk to the those who manage[d] the wildlife and those who manage[d] the draw. It's quite a story really.

[MadCat]

The answer lays in the fact that maybe the resident should put out a little more effort to disperse and harvest the number rams they want in stead of crying about unfair treatment.

This is the best statement in this whole thread. If you want to kill a ram BUCK UP and hunt it. Don't wine that the outfitter killed your sheep. Or that you could have killed a sheep if there wasn't an outfitter in the area. Sheep aren't supposed to be easy, thats why we love to hunt them, the challange. You want a ram, hunt hard, hunt long and put in the effort. Thats why they kill the sheep, whats stopping you from doing it.

Madcat

[GoatGuy]

The answer lays in the fact that maybe the resident should put out a little more effort to disperse and harvest the number rams they want in stead of crying about unfair treatment.

This is the best statement in this whole thread. If you want to kill a ram BUCK UP and hunt it. Don't wine that the outfitter killed your sheep. Or that you could have killed a sheep if there wasn't an outfitter in the area. Sheep aren't supposed to be easy, thats why we love to hunt them, the challange. You want a ram, hunt hard, hunt long and put in the effort. Thats why they kill the sheep, whats stopping you from doing it.

Madcat

What does 'we' and 'you' have to do with this?

This isn't about one or two people or out-competing outfitters. Residents don't or can't compete with outfitters as a whole. That's simply a fact of life.

Why should residents even have to compete with outfitters? I thought the challenge of hunting was with mother nature. I was also under the impression that residents had priority to the wildlife over outfitters and that the resource was owned by the people of BC.

Residents are supposed to harvest a minimum of 60% of the sheep in Region 6.

How does that happen?

[Devilbear]

[quote=BCrams;602977]


BC Rams; I for one do not believe you have any real interest in what the ratio is along with many others.
People keep refering to region 6 and how out of line the harvest and quota's are. Let me ask you. Why do you think the G/O's fail to fill the quota they have? What is wrong with thier quota if they self police and don't fill it. Does the accessability for the resident, affect his ability to kill sheep and to what degree? Is Access the largest part of the problem? Do you think if the guide threw conservation out the window and hunted, could he fill his quota for a few years, before populations decrease to levels he would have to cut back? What is the resident going to do if flights are no longer available in the region? How then is he going to kill his share and bring the numbers to what you call in line?
I believe the issue here is no different than deer season in the Peace and the gong show over hunting fields and private property. Most wanting the special season really have no regard for the Sheep. Thier concern is personnel gain. The reason I say this is you and others are argueing over something that really has no merit because you have no idea what's out there for sheep. The animal is my concern not the hunter. I believe hunters in this province have the most liberal hunting in North America and that is what we should be looking after. Not arguing over 3 or 4 sheep that really don't affect anyone! The answer lays in the fact that maybe the resident should put out a little more effort to disperse and harvest the number rams they want in stead of crying about unfair treatment.

I spend alot of time in Alberta. It is 100% LEH or Draw on everything and most people I see are quite happy with the system. It is used here to disperse hunters and accomplishes just that. It was intrduced here while game populations were still decent, which in turn left fairly large numbers of tags available. If used in BC it could accomplish the same. Your claim to the fact that it reduces hunter numbers is only valid in areas that have very limited draws available. It is a tool for the MOE to disperse hunters as I said.


There is what is consistently wrong with Willy's attitude and posts, the never-ending attempts to vilify other posters and impugn the personal credibility of persons whom he probably does not know and has never met in order to advance his own agenda. Willy, will not hesitate to use falsehoods, as with the Albertan-LEH comment, slurs upon others and even slagging the families of other posters, as he sits behind his computer, spewing his pro-GO rants.

Willy seems to think that the GOs are all conservation-concerned, selfless and noble fellows who all simply love sheep and want only what is best for them, while resident hunters are a bunch of ...couch potatoes, ...greedy... and so on, "ad nauseum". However, Willy "hangs out" in Alberta and is not likely to make his nasty comments to the face of anyone here with whom he disagrees and I think that shows exactly what kind of man he really is.

The ONLY legitimate and easily-policed method of gaining the advantage for residents that is OUR RIGHT, IMHO, is to make large, permanent and immediate cuts to the quotas of all the GOs in BC. This, should accomplish what is appropriate, however, further and far more drastic action concerning the GOs might well be an option that is of even greater benefit to we BC residents in the long term.

My priorities are, first, the wildlife and the portion of the biosphere we share with them, second, licenced BC resident hunters, third, sound management at the least cost of tax monies, fourth, some sort of "hunter-host" programme to allow a few non-residents to hunt here who are relatives and friends of BCers, fifth, having wildlife for the tourists to take photos of, sixth, some allowance for "transplants" to other jurisdictions of animals they are trying to re-establish and I have zero concern for aboriginals, GOs and foreign hunters.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

The residents already have the advantage. 80 000 hunters have the ability to hunt sheep compared to the tight quota system the outfitters deal with. Is this not already an advantage?

From what I see in responses in this topic the sheep hunters that get it done are not complaining it is the wantabes that want change. A real sheep hunter knows what it takes to harvest a nice ram, a wantabe sheep hunter dreams of shooting a ram within sight of their truck!!!

[Devilbear]

Well, Doug here is a GO, so, I suppose that we must expect this type of ignorance and pretentious bullshit; too bad, I actually respect some of Doug's opinions and abilities. However, if this kind of slagging of resident hunters is going to continue to be a consistent feature of GO attitude and posts on HBC, I fully expect that the animosity toward GOs here will greatly increase, spread into the general public and this WILL result in a permanent ban on non-resident hunting here in BC.

I honestly hesitate to argue against any native BCer's attempts to operate a business and live the lifestyle he/she desires, however, once the campaign to close down the GO "industry" begins in earnest, it WILL happen, VERY quickly and foolish comments such as Doug's last post can only assist in that process.

If, the GOs, like Doug, really WANT to have a sustainable business over the long term, they are going to have to realize and accept that THEY NEED US and MUCH MORE than we need them. But, WTF, if they want to "self destruct", why should any of us care?

[GoatGuy]

The residents already have the advantage. 80 000 hunters have the ability to hunt sheep compared to the tight quota system the outfitters deal with. Is this not already an advantage?

From what I see in responses in this topic the sheep hunters that get it done are not complaining it is the wantabes that want change. A real sheep hunter knows what it takes to harvest a nice ram, a wantabe sheep hunter dreams of shooting a ram within sight of their truck!!!

Outfitters don't fill half of their quota, I wouldn't call that 'tight', I would call that pretty loose.

Sheep hunting's specialized, there's no advantage in 'sheer numbers'; the argument's pretty ridiculous really.

Just like cat hunting, it requires some knowledge that the average resident hunter doesn't have and a hunter's certainly more successful with mechanical advantages (planes/horses/riverboats) and personnel (extra guides/wranglers). To top it all off residents are not paid to kill animals, or buy those kinds of advantages, it is not their job/profession; for resident hunters it's a form of recreation. As a 'professional' you have defacto placed yourself on a higher pedestal than resident hunters. That's why there's the NHL and men's league. Different skill sets, different abilities and maybe most impotantly different compensation.

Having worked as a guide and hunted sheep with those kinds of advantages I can assure you most resident hunters, even the good ones, aren't nearly as successful as most good outfitters. Guides are told where to go and they grow up as wranglers learning their craft. Residents decide to take up sheep hunting and hopefully have a mentor who has hunted sheep; it's unlikely that mentor will be someone who has the experience of being in on 50 dead rams. The success rate shows that all on it's own: resident sheep hunter success rate is around 15%, it's around 59% for non-residents.

The allocation policy's pretty simple. Residents come in well ahead of non-residents. What that means is after conservation and FN, resident hunters decide how and when it happens as long as it's sustainable; what's left after that is for guide-outfitters. There's really no reason why residents have the same season as non-residents in the first place. Resident only seasons/bag limits/species and areas are common place in most of the jurisdictions across North America, it isn't anything new. That's simply life.

In this case residents are to harvest a minimum of 60% aah, it's really that simple. Residents haven't actually asked to take anything away from guide-outfitters despite that being well within their right as reflected by resident priority. Having said that, if there's a problem with the AAH we'll adjust it. It's time to create regulations that help make that happen.

[yama49]

The residents already have the advantage. 80 000 hunters have the ability to hunt sheep compared to the tight quota system the outfitters deal with. Is this not already an advantage?

From what I see in responses in this topic the sheep hunters that get it done are not complaining it is the wantabes that want change. A real sheep hunter knows what it takes to harvest a nice ram, a wantabe sheep hunter dreams of shooting a ram within sight of their truck!!!

Time all 80,000 of us hunters, worked to together, then we would have the advantage, and things could b acomplished.....

[MadCat]

What does 'we' and 'you' have to do with this?

This isn't about one or two people or out-competing outfitters. Residents don't or can't compete with outfitters as a whole. That's simply a fact of life.

Why should residents even have to compete with outfitters? I thought the challenge of hunting was with mother nature. I was also under the impression that residents had priority to the wildlife over outfitters and that the resource was owned by the people of BC.

Residents are supposed to harvest a minimum of 60% of the sheep in Region 6.

How does that happen?

I know that It's hard to compete with outfitters but we do and thats a fact of life. Why can't we compete with outfitters? Why don't people? Mabey thats the proplem, it seems nowadays most hunters want it easy. They want the valley to themselfs, they don't want to walk the little extra way to get in there they want to drive in, they don't want to compete with anyone. If you want to push the outfitters off the fronts and into the backcountry kill those rams before them. It will only take a few shot in front of a hunter and he'll hit that backcountry the next time. I know that it wont be as easy as having our own season but hey you never know.

[Devilbear]

Time all 80,000 of us hunters, worked to together, then we would have the advantage, and things could b acomplished.....

IF, and when we could ever actually accomplish this, such as having EVERY hunter in BC a member of the BCWF, we would have a LOT of serious "political clout" and would soon find the politicians far more willing to act in OUR best interests than has been the case.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

If the outfitters don't fill their quotas each year the risk having their quota reduced. This has happened many times over the years.

The number of sheep hunters would not increase by much if the seasons changed in favor of the residents the guys who hunt sheep ,hunt sheep. The guys who don't are mostly meat hunters.

Devilbear, You have no idea what my thoughts are on resident hunters. I happen to give resident hunters a big break on costs of a cat hunt. I always sold the hunts for the same price the yankees payed but in canadian dollars. This was a big hit in the pocket book some years. This year I reduced prices for canadians wanting to chase cats. We work just as hard as the foriegners for our money so a break is deserved. I am a resident first and a guide second. I enjoy being able to travel the province and hunt the species I want with a liberal season to do it in. Part of the reason I only guide cats is the fact I enjoy the general hunting season BC has to offer.

Sheep hunters put their money where there mouth is and buy specialized gear, they also keep in shape. Not everyone has the desire to do this but we all have the opportunity.

[GoatGuy]

I know that It's hard to compete with outfitters but we do and thats a fact of life. Why can't we compete with outfitters? Why don't people? Mabey thats the proplem, it seems nowadays most hunters want it easy. They want the valley to themselfs, they don't want to walk the little extra way to get in there they want to drive in, they don't want to compete with anyone. If you want to push the outfitters off the fronts and into the backcountry kill those rams before them. It will only take a few shot in front of a hunter and he'll hit that backcountry the next time. I know that it wont be as easy as having our own season but hey you never know.

The issue in Region 6 has been going on forever. The original quotas were too high, it isn't anything new for all resident hunters nowadays wanting a handout (although it may appear that way), more that the data and facts are coming to light. Region 6 has always been a problem.

That is the way things used to be in 7B before there were quotas in the late 70s. Residents were harvesting very few sheep - ironically the same arguments came out of guide-outfitters back then. Things have since turned around, there are more resident hunters than the 70s and early-mid 80s and residents are taking 50% of the harvest now that the quotas are under control. The implementation of meaningful quota appears to have worked ensuring there are enough rams left for residents to harvest.

In Region 6 quotas are too high, but there's no money and no willingness to get an idea of exactly how many sheep are out there and have meaningful quotas. A resident only season along with the 8 yr rule on quota keeps the harvest sustainable and will should allow residents the opportunity to harvest more of their share. If it doesn't there's no loss.

"Getting out there and competing with outfitters" don't cut 'er. For residents who already hunt sheep in 7B they're already at an 'advantage' compared to residents who hunt 6 - the quotas are 'meaningful', there's more of a surplus. Residents have been "getting out there" for 30 years in Region 6 and nothing's really changed, including quotas. It's worked in 7B, why wouldn't it work in 6?

Need to start working through solutions that allow residents to achieve their share, that's the bottom line. Meaningful quotas are the first choice, but if that isn't going to happen a resident only season with sustainable harvest may be the way to go.

[GoatGuy]

If the outfitters don't fill their quotas each year the risk having their quota reduced. This has happened many times over the years.

The number of sheep hunters would not increase by much if the seasons changed in favor of the residents the guys who hunt sheep ,hunt sheep. The guys who don't are mostly meat hunters.


Sheep hunters put their money where there mouth is and buy specialized gear, they also keep in shape. Not everyone has the desire to do this but we all have the opportunity.

Outfitters haven't filled half of their quota in Region 6 since christ was a cowboy and they've been getting increases. If think you may be talking about 7B, they're on a totally different program and that has also changed although the utilization side of the allocation policy will kick in. It is however minor as outfitters in 7B don't seem to have a problem achieving their allocated harvest.

This is not necessarily about the number of sheep hunters, it's about harvest. Having said that, I completely disagree, you would certainly find more sheep hunters in Region 6 if there was a resident only season or real changes to quota. You may not create too many 'new sheep hunters', although there will be some. You might also take some pressure off of 7b. As I said, the number of hunters still isn't relevant.

The 'opportunity' and the 'actuality' will always be different when it comes to be paid for something and doing it as a recreational user. 'Increased' opportunity will also result in more use.:wink: We can dance around that fire all day.

The allocated harvest is 60% of the AAH. Any way you slice it that's the problem that needs a solution.

[Devilbear]

If the outfitters don't fill their quotas each year the risk having their quota reduced. This has happened many times over the years.

The number of sheep hunters would not increase by much if the seasons changed in favor of the residents the guys who hunt sheep ,hunt sheep. The guys who don't are mostly meat hunters.

Devilbear, You have no idea what my thoughts are on resident hunters. I happen to give resident hunters a big break on costs of a cat hunt. I always sold the hunts for the same price the yankees payed but in canadian dollars. This was a big hit in the pocket book some years. This year I reduced prices for canadians wanting to chase cats. We work just as hard as the foriegners for our money so a break is deserved. I am a resident first and a guide second. I enjoy being able to travel the province and hunt the species I want with a liberal season to do it in. Part of the reason I only guide cats is the fact I enjoy the general hunting season BC has to offer.

Sheep hunters put their money where there mouth is and buy specialized gear, they also keep in shape. Not everyone has the desire to do this but we all have the opportunity.

Doug, my friend, I can only judge by what you posted and, no offence intended, it WAS pretty pretentious and not worthy of a guy like you whom I respect, even when we disagree and are ready to put the "corks" to each other's stubborn skulls. I have very little to no issue with YOU, but, my general premise "vis'a'vis" the GO industry is factual as BC is changing and ALL of we who hunt are a TINY minority.....the eventual result of this fact is pretty obvious.

As to spending money on specialized gear, I currently own 12 very highend backpacks alone and several tents, Zeiss and Leica optics, half a dozen custom knives and so many BC bought and built hunting rifles that I am almost ashamed to number them. I have three rooms in my humble old house full of the best gear money can buy and I USE it ALL. At 63, no, I am not capable of the kinds of long, wilderness highspeed treks I used to do to clear my hangover on a Sunday, BUT, I do backpack and can carry a 100 lb. pack....but kinda SLOWLY....

I have NEVER even sat on an ATV of any type, never used a Skidoo except a little when in the Forest Service over 40 years ago and have no horses, mules, tack or jetboats, Argos, motorbikes or even a simple mountain bike. I do it by foot, rarely hire a horsepacker and have spent my share of time alone in the most remote wilderness we have in BC.

So, I do not agree with your accessment of resident hunters. Sure, some are jerks who shoot squirrels, leave beer bottles and litter and never walk over 100 yards from a motor vehicle. Some GOs/guides are poachers and phonies who book hunters that they KNOW cannot shoot a quota animal and still they take the guy's money. YOU would not do that, but, what about BM and the others like him over the past years here in BC?

Anyway, you are a guy who can do a LOT for BC hunting and I hope you will read this as it is honestly intended, not, as a slight upon you or other GOs like you, the "good guys" in many respects.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

Devilbear I appreciate the kind words. Although we disagree often I do think about you comments and respect your opinion.

Goatguy I have only hunted Area 6 once for sheep and was told by a local outfitter where to go. Although it was in his area he did not hunt there. If it wasn't for my own mistakes I would have had a beauty of a ram , exceeding 40 inches. North of Dease Lake there is tons of opportunity for harvesting rams on both side of the highway, no need for fly in camps just some strong legs and a strong mind. Park your truck and go, it may take a few days of hiking and glassing but there are good rams within reach for a dedicated hunteer.

[lange1212]

Wow! A lot of response to this thread sine I last reviewed it. Too many responses to quote and respond to I will just comment in general.




The resident only pre-season sheep hunt was formally proposed in the Skeena Region and will not go further on facts, figures or justification as it has been outlined at various points through the thread. What I would like to do is educated as to what was asked for by residents in greater detail. First off GO’s did openly expressed that removing the first 2 weeks of August for non-residents would impact them and is with merit. In an effort to address the GO’s concern the proposal was altered requesting that the last 2 weeks of July be implemented as a resident only pre-season sheep hunt in the Skeena Region. Further to this the resident proposal did not exclude, but included GO’s in the extended season, however restricted them to only catering to BC resident sheep hunters if they so chose. So the reality is that the resident only season would also benefit GO’s willing to cater to residents who wish to be guided or outfitted. Yet many GO’s continue to lobby against the resident only season and have concluded from some of the comments read, they’re simply not willing to work with residents.
The resident only season needs to apply across the Region. This will disperse hunters preventing certain populations from being negatively impacted by creating “target” harvest zones. I see for the most part those that support the smaller resident only areas appear to have commercial motives not sheep or residents in mind. Creating small resident only zones rather than a generalized resident only season over the region could create a conservation concern forcing residents on LEH in such areas. This appears to be what GO’s want and as we all know it is the LEH system that is the underlining cause of dwindling resident hunter numbers, cause of resident under utilization and creates a Shangri-La for non-residents and GO’s. No wonder they love it so much but don’t want it imposed on non-residents.
Skeena Region Quota – There is statistical evidence that MoE has set commercial quota too high. When the combined resident + non-resident harvest does not add up to 50% of what is allocated to Skeena Region Sheep outfitters alone is a cause to raise red flags. I won’t repeat other statistics that have been already quoted in the thread. I read a GO argument about managing their harvest and not taking their entire quota, as it would result in dwindling population trends. That in it self supports concerns of over allocations occurring in the form of quota and another cause of resident under utilization.
Putting the shoe on the other foot. If I were a GO and had an annual sheep quota of 10 (30 over a 3 year period) each valued at $35,000, that’s $350,000 per year or $1,050,000 over 3 years. Considering the demand, having administrative guidelines and that most sheep GO’s have waiting list of clients. I would be prioritizing my business plan to capitalize and fully utilize this quota, by not doing so means one of two things. Stupid businessman or simply do not have the product to sell (over allocated). I think the later is more likely. So if over 3 years only 50% of quota was used this would equate to $525,000 of lost revenue. The question, if you were a GO, had the sheep in your territory would you turn your back on $525, 000 over 3 years? I’m thinking the only reason not to be that the sheep do not exist. We all know sending non-residents home without a good ram will kill one reputation in the GO industry in a hurry. A generalization but a perspective with merit non the less.

[willy442]

The splits are fairly clear in the policy - minimum 60% on the resident side for sheep. The policy also states that barriers to acheiving that harvest must be removed. The degree of regulation in BC compared to other places isn't relevant - the issue is the harvest as it is in other jurisdictions. Harvest available drives regulations. :wink:

I personally don't see this type of concept as an 'advantage'. Residents and non-residents aren't even on the same 'competitive level' when it comes to sheep hunting or harvest. That's a fact of life. This is a matter of policy.

The quotas over there are self-regulating so I don't see a over-harvest as a concern even with a resident only season or what have you.

The what if's are great to discuss but the point at this time is to deal with the problem, identify the most effective solutions and start implementing them. Once the solutions are exhausted we can all sit back and talk about the what if's, what is and what you term 'person[a]l' motivations, the problem remains the same. Hopefully there will be something to learn from it.

I can assure you, I don't have any 'person[a]l' motivations with this concept, nor does access deter my hunting. I take my holidays in September and unless I get a good stretch of regular days off I won't be heading north in August. Don't much like bugs. :wink:

Also, as long as the harvest is sustainable, more people hunting sheep is actually good for sheep IMO. As you know, I think, the more people care about animals the more they'll try to take care of them and more importantly their habitat.



Alberta is not 100% LEH.

Alberta went to LEH for antelope because the harvest wasn't sustainable. Even the antelope LEH now is an extremely crowded hunt unless permission is for exclusive land; it does not spread hunters out. It can be and often is a very competitive hunt with multiple parties chasing and shooting at the same bucks on opening day.

Mule deer went to LEH because there was nothing but 2 pts left during post season counts (they tried antler restrictions). The reason mule deer are so suceptible to over-harvest is because of sightability (evolution). Again, even there in the LEH hunts, which are as short as a couple of 4 day 'weekends' for rifle you will run into other hunters and there are increasing complaints of hunter crowding due to high numbers of tags. There are also many GOSs for both mule deer bucks and some for does in Alberta - most of the GOS is in forested areas, similar to those found in most of BC.

WTs are general open season either sex, with high bag limits across the province, other than for does in the prairie MUs. There's LEH on wainright but that's a special case.

Sheep have some LEH and some GOS starting in August.

Elk are GOS and draw, again generally draw in the prairies. In some GOS they have 3 point to boot in relatively easily accessed areas. Antlerless harvest is high through LEH.

Moose are prinicipally LEH.

On top of all that you have to throw issues with landowners (farmers) into the mix as it's a driving force due to all of the private property (4 day seasons). It's a big industry and a big issue that doesn't affect us nearly as much in BC but it also drives regulations over there.

Your conclusions are a little ways off in regards to Alberta's LEH draw (alberta is 100% LEH on everything) and the reasons for it at least when you review the history, talk to the those who manage[d] the wildlife and those who manage[d] the draw. It's quite a story really.
\
Let me clarify. The region of Alberta that I'm in has everything on LEH. Moose, both Mule and White Tail Deer, Elk. Not only are they LEH for Bulls but also females. I have a co worker that drew 3 doe tags, 1bull moose and a cow elk. Another got bull moose, bull elk, mule buck and 2 white tail doe tags. Most hunters here are in that same boat. Plenty of opportunity but spread across the region by the draw system.

As for you reference to the level playing field and out of line allocation in region 6. Really how many sheep are you arguing about? Please use what the G/O's harvest for your reference rather than inflating the numbers from the quota. Which you agree is unused.

[willy442]

What does 'we' and 'you' have to do with this?

This isn't about one or two people or out-competing outfitters. Residents don't or can't compete with outfitters as a whole. That's simply a fact of life.

Why should residents even have to compete with outfitters? I thought the challenge of hunting was with mother nature. I was also under the impression that residents had priority to the wildlife over outfitters and that the resource was owned by the people of BC.

Residents are supposed to harvest a minimum of 60% of the sheep in Region 6.

How does that happen?

GG; First and foremost we should be talking about hunting and opportunity which you and others complain about constantly. Not kills.
Please tell me where hunters have more liberal access to multiple spiecies than right here in BC. Just because the John Doe resident hunter fails to harvest a Ram, is that rteally due to the fact we have G/O's hunting Sheep? I think not! The reality of the matter is if the whinning, crying resident hunter put forth the effort that the G/O does, he would harvest as many Sheep. It is a matter of the resident, not being able to annually cover the Provinces Sheep range to kill the amount you would like to see arriving at 60% of harvest. The resident has not been able to achieve this in the past nor will he in the future, unless he bucks up and hires help. The biggest problem is a couple hundred people like yourself that keep forgetting. The wildlife is owned by all in BC. Not just a few hunters who think they have some sort of inherent right over others including non hunting residents.
It's a drum I will not quit beating, when it comes to Sheep. Post what you want or hit me your usual synical questions but I've watched it for too long. To throw numbers around is only that it really has no bearing on reality until you have proper and better information.

[bridger]

simple question? if outfitters can't fill their quota's why do they need the tags they can't fill?

[willy442]

The issue in Region 6 has been going on forever. The original quotas were too high, it isn't anything new for all resident hunters nowadays wanting a handout (although it may appear that way), more that the data and facts are coming to light. Region 6 has always been a problem.

That is the way things used to be in 7B before there were quotas in the late 70s. Residents were harvesting very few sheep - ironically the same arguments came out of guide-outfitters back then. Things have since turned around, there are more resident hunters than the 70s and early-mid 80s and residents are taking 50% of the harvest now that the quotas are under control. The implementation of meaningful quota appears to have worked ensuring there are enough rams left for residents to harvest.

Normally you claim we have far less hunters. What happened your math change again?

In Region 6 quotas are too high, but there's no money and no willingness to get an idea of exactly how many sheep are out there and have meaningful quotas. A resident only season along with the 8 yr rule on quota keeps the harvest sustainable and will should allow residents the opportunity to harvest more of their share. If it doesn't there's no loss.

You haved no idea how many Sheep are out there! yet you can determine quota's are to high. Magician I guess.

"Getting out there and competing with outfitters" don't cut 'er. For residents who already hunt sheep in 7B they're already at an 'advantage' compared to residents who hunt 6 - the quotas are 'meaningful', there's more of a surplus. Residents have been "getting out there" for 30 years in Region 6 and nothing's really changed, including quotas. It's worked in 7B, why wouldn't it work in 6?

Access is the only reason it appears to have worked. I say appears because at the rate Sheep have been declining over the last 2 decades, we could learn at anytime that we've created a disaster like some of the other programs out there. You really don't know by your own submissions.

Need to start working through solutions that allow residents to achieve their share, that's the bottom line. Meaningful quotas are the first choice, but if that isn't going to happen a resident only season with sustainable harvest may be the way to go.

It's called go out and hunt and you shall succeed. Sustainable is again a mystery, no one can put a number on it. Watch, one day it will come to managing people.

[bighornbob]

simple question? if outfitters can't fill their quota's why do they need the tags they can't fill?

I would think it might have something to do with resale of the guiding rights. Think about it if one was looking at buying an outfit, would you want an area that has 5 sheep tags or 20 tags knowing full well you can get 35,000 for a sheep.

So a current outfitter gets 20 tags but only kills 5 sheep, his area's value is based on tag numbers not what he kills. So if an outfitter loses tags he is essentially losing value in his business. A prospective buyer might question why he only kills 5 rams and the outfitter could say a number of things: I only hunt part of my territory, only take out close friends, legs just aren't there any more, not in it for the money etc etc.

Lets face it, with most things once its gone it gone, so they want to keep their tags numbers up high in case they sale the outfit or sheep numbers increase or sheep expand their territory.

Thats my take on it.

BHB

[lange1212]

\
As for you reference to the level playing field and out of line allocation in region 6. Really how many sheep are you arguing about? Please use what the G/O's harvest for your reference rather than inflating the numbers from the quota. Which you agree is unused.

From Skeena Region MoE harvest statistics 1996-2006 (11 years)
Ø 11 year harvest Skeena Region
Residents = 350 sheep
Non-Residents = 774 sheep
774-350 = 424

So over this 11 year period non-resident harvests 424 more sheep in the Skeena Region than residents L

The answer to your question (424/11 = 38.5), non-residents on average over this period harvest 39 more sheep “per year” in the Skeena Region than residents. Nope not 1 or 2 like you allude to.

Ø 11 year harvest average (over the 11 years)
Non-resident = 70 sheep
Residents = 32 sheep

Ø 5 year harvest average (2006 back)
Non-residents = 74sheep
Residents = 33 sheep

Ø Current cumulative annual GO quota fort the Skeena Region = 148 sheep

Ø Now factor in that GO’s are awarded administrative guidelines by the MoE that allows them annual over harvest opportunities of up to 30% so that they can over book clients to better achieve their allowable harvest targets. What this means ultimantly is that GO’s are given a regulator advantage to harvest their allowable harvest in a fraction of the over all allocation period but are not allowed to exceed the period allocation. For example they would be able to harvest the majority of a 5year allocation in the first 3 years of the period. Please share with me where residents are awarded such a regulatory advantage.


Willy442 it appears you’ve no clue what you’re taking about nor do you base any of your comments on fact. Certainly if these harvest stats were reversed you would be humming a very different tune.

I don’t here any complaints from you regarding advantages offered GO’s, just your desire to keep the chains and shackles on residents and hinder justified regulatory reform that would aid resident opportunity. I've come to realize there’s your opinion and then there's reality.

[GoatGuy]

Goatguy I have only hunted Area 6 once for sheep and was told by a local outfitter where to go. Although it was in his area he did not hunt there. If it wasn't for my own mistakes I would have had a beauty of a ram , exceeding 40 inches. North of Dease Lake there is tons of opportunity for harvesting rams on both side of the highway, no need for fly in camps just some strong legs and a strong mind. Park your truck and go, it may take a few days of hiking and glassing but there are good rams within reach for a dedicated hunteer.

You still think it's a 'personal' thing, it's not about 'me' going out. I've got horses, buddies with planes, strong legs and I know where to go in Region 6. I've flown most of that country and worked for outfitters up there. It isn't a 'me' issue.

This issue is with the harvest and the quotas not your perception of the opportunity or me parking my truck and walking for a few days.

Residents get a minimum of 60%, it's that simple. That has never happened in Region 6. It didn't happen in 7B either, but it is being straightened out. The quotas need to be straightened out and/or the regulations fixed so that happens. There's no need to move into the anecdotal encouragement about walking farther from the highway. The argument's ridiculous.

It isn't a personal issue; it's an issue of policy and procedure. Once you get over that hurdle this policy will be much easier to deal with.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

Nothing personal at all Goatguy, this was a general statement for resident hunters. The fact remains that residents have the opportunity to harvest their 60% but there are not enough sheep hunters to do this. As success rates are low and the interest is not there from the general hunting public.

[GoatGuy]

GG; First and foremost we should be talking about hunting and opportunity which you and others complain about constantly. Not kills.

I suppose the discussion is about opportunity to obtain the allocated share. The two are fairly intertwined. To harvest more animals you usually have to change regulations to accommodate that or create more hunters - increased or more focused opportunity I suppose.



Please tell me where hunters have more liberal access to multiple spiecies than right here in BC. Just because the John Doe resident hunter fails to harvest a Ram, is that rteally due to the fact we have G/O's hunting Sheep? I think not! The reality of the matter is if the whinning, crying resident hunter put forth the effort that the G/O does, he would harvest as many Sheep. It is a matter of the resident, not being able to annually cover the Provinces Sheep range to kill the amount you would like to see arriving at 60% of harvest. The resident has not been able to achieve this in the past nor will he in the future, unless he bucks up and hires help. The biggest problem is a couple hundred people like yourself that keep forgetting. The wildlife is owned by all in BC. Not just a few hunters who think they have some sort of inherent right over others including non hunting residents.
It's a drum I will not quit beating, when it comes to Sheep. Post what you want or hit me your usual synical questions but I've watched it for too long. To throw numbers around is only that it really has no bearing on reality until you have proper and better information.

Simple answer: residents acheived 60% of the harvest in 7B just two years ago. To say that the resident has not been able to "achieve this in the past nor will he in the future" is incorrect. Sorry.

Resident hunters do have an inherent right to access and use wildlife over non-resident hunters, that's a fact and part of life. As you infer wildlife is owned by all in BC and the Province of BC (the people) has decided resident hunters are entitled to a minimum of 60% of the AAH and that the hunting regulations need to make that happen. That's what the people have said.

You seem to take this personally, it isn't personal at all. Policy is policy.

Besides all this if having a resident only season doesn't result in increased harvest there's no blood loss.

I don't see what the big issue is here.

[GoatGuy]

I spend alot of time in Alberta. It is 100% LEH or Draw on everything and most people I see are quite happy with the system. It is used here to disperse hunters and accomplishes just that. It was intrduced here while game populations were still decent, which in turn left fairly large numbers of tags available. If used in BC it could accomplish the same. Your claim to the fact that it reduces hunter numbers is only valid in areas that have very limited draws available. It is a tool for the MOE to disperse hunters as I said.


\
Let me clarify. The region of Alberta that I'm in has everything on LEH. Moose, both Mule and White Tail Deer, Elk. Not only are they LEH for Bulls but also females. I have a co worker that drew 3 doe tags, 1bull moose and a cow elk. Another got bull moose, bull elk, mule buck and 2 white tail doe tags. Most hunters here are in that same boat. Plenty of opportunity but spread across the region by the draw system.

It's nice that you clarified that. It struck me as a fairly wild one, even for you. I doubt you're talking about a region unless it's in the prairies, you're probably talking about a couple of MUs.

I'm not aware of any wt buck areas that are on LEH besides Waynewright unless your co-workers work for the army I think you're a ways out there.

There is a lot of success in the draw. A big part of all those does draws is the fact that they actually harvest antlerless wildlife in Alberta, something that has been gradually phased out in most of BC over the last 25 years.



As for you reference to the level playing field and out of line allocation in region 6. Really how many sheep are you arguing about? Please use what the G/O's harvest for your reference rather than inflating the numbers from the quota. Which you agree is unused.

The number of sheep is about 60% of the AAH. To get to the minimum you'd end up doubling the resident harvest. You're talking about another 30-40 harvested sheep every year by residents. If the success rate stays constant that means we could potentially double the number of resident hunter numbers pursuing sheep in Region 6. Under a resident only season you will see more participation in Region 6 due to more opportunity.

[lange1212]

The fact remains that residents have the opportunity to harvest their 60% but there are not enough sheep hunters to do this. As success rates are low and the interest is not there from the general hunting public.

The facts don't support your argument at all, resident interest is there, just not the regulations to support it. Residents would be able to achieve 60% of the harvest as set out by policy if the MoE managed the regulatory frame work to allow this to occur.

Resident only pre-season sheep hunt, resident only pre-season sheep hunt, resident only season pre-season sheep hunt.

GO's have Admin guidelines for sheep and residents should have a resident the only season. Its justified, with merit, supported by policy, reflects resident priority and is sustainable.

[GoatGuy]

Nothing personal at all Goatguy, this was a general statement for resident hunters. The fact remains that residents have the opportunity to harvest their 60% but there are not enough sheep hunters to do this. As success rates are low and the interest is not there from the general hunting public.

I believe what you're saying is there is no problem with the quotas and outfitters will shoot sheep regardless of the resident harvest. If that's true then that's great.

Then what is the real harm in having a resident only season?

You'll end up with more resident sheep hunters and if the quotas are truly over-inflated more sheep being harvested. It tests the theory. If the resident harvest increases the opportunity can be considered a success and we all move on. Everybody's happy, right? :wink:

No dancing.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

I suppose the resident early season is not a bad idea but if the harvest does not reach the 60% by doing this would the resident hunters give back to the outfitters? Probably not. The fact is the number of residents hunting sheep would not increase by alot. If they want to hunt sheep the opportunity is there for them now.

If the outfitters do not fill their quota with at least that number of hunts maybe not so much kills, after a couple of years they should lose some sheep tags.

[hunter#1_300]

I support the resident advantage, hell why not. Would it make sheep hunting easyer not rilly sheephunting isnt a easy hunt.you have to give it a 110%to be succesfull n still u might come out with out a sheep but its not all about the kill its about the experience of the hunt.The 2 week season befor the GO's get to bring in the non resisdents could possibly make it less crouded on the mountains. But then mayby it wouldnt because u would have every one hittin the hills on those 2 weeks.. so would it up your chances of gettin a ram probably not. You would have just as much pressure on those so called easy rams declinin your chances as much as if the guide is in there if not more. mayby some of these hunters should give it a extra 20 percent n push a bit farther back into the mountains and find a ram. It is nice to have a valley to ureself but its nice to talk to people in the mountains i have ran into some fellow residents hunters n guides n had no probablom with them. I think the only way for us resident hunters to up are harvest percentage would to do your homework befor you go out and for more resident hunters out sheep hunting and to give it your all. Why lesson the GO's quota thats there job and there doing a good job. mayby the resisdents should be given it a bit more effort not sayin they dont mayby its just a lack of info. i havnt hunted in region 6 and dont no much about the harvest precentagebut i have in region 7b n seen no lack of rams but i wasnt hunting right off the road i got back in the mountains thanks to the GO's horse trails and a fellow hunter

just a peace of my mind dont no if this will rilly change the harvest precentage but u never no unless we try it

[boxhitch]

LEH as a hunter dispersal tool ??
Well thats one way of looking at it......I guess

So there are 100 potential hunters to hunt species z, and they could all have a chance under GOS to pick a time and place. They may ultimately run into each other in the known spots.

Then the same hunt goes LEH. Now 20 or 30 or even maybe 50 hunters are told when they can go and given boundaries to the zone they can hunt. Numbers of hunters is lower, because we all know in BC , there are never enough permits for those interested, thus the odds.

Yeah, you could say they are dispersed. But what about the unsuccessful LEH applicants ? If the animals are there, then there is no reason they should have to sit at home.

And what are the chances of attaining allocation ? LOFA, because the number of permits let will never be enough to allow it, due to variable participation, and MOE fear of overachievement.

Disperssal tool ? No Opportunity killer ? YES.

[GoatGuy]

I suppose the resident early season is not a bad idea but if the harvest does not reach the 60% by doing this would the resident hunters give back to the outfitters? Probably not. The fact is the number of residents hunting sheep would not increase by alot. If they want to hunt sheep the opportunity is there for them now.

If the outfitters do not fill their quota with at least that number of hunts maybe not so much kills, after a couple of years they should lose some sheep tags.

Trying to follow the logic.

If the season starts a couple of weeks early or there's lots of sheep, as you believe, nothing is being taken away from outfitters, so why would there be any giving "back to the outfitters"? By stating the 'giving back' concept, you've actually implied that a resident only season would actually take something away from outfitters, yet you believe there will be no increase in resident hunters or harvest. So what have residents taken and what is there to give back?

It doesn't make much sense, or does it?

We'll keep going.

Following your argument a little bit further down the line actually means no increase in harvest, no change in resident hunter numbers and when the season for non-resident hunters opens up there will probably be fewer residents in the bush creating a better experience for non-residents because residents will be out for the opening 2 weeks. Sounds like a winning deal for outfitters, no? That's how one of your arguments plays out.

You see, you're arguing with yourself, and your losing.

Your premise is that there are lots of sheep out there and lots of opportunity, more opportunity won't change anything, but it will 'take away' from outfitters. It's not making sense.

The problem is residents aren't achieving their share.

Your assumption that the number of resident sheep hunters and days in Region 6 wouldn't increase is a fallacy - you have no evidence to substantiate that. Your argument isn't based in fact; how you come upon that conclusion intuitively or otherwise is beyond me. I can show you where increased resident opportunity for all species, including SHEEP increases participation and harvest. Can you demonstrate otherwise?


I believe you don't like the concept, but I don't believe that your rational is the reason you don't like the concept. You've defeated your own argument here.

[PGK]

How many keyboards you wear out this week GG?

[Devilbear]

How many "Pampers" did Mummy change on you this week, PGK?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

.

If the outfitters do not fill their quota with at least that number of hunts maybe not so much kills, after a couple of years they should lose some sheep tags.

That's not the way it works in Reg 6 . As long as "X" % of their rams are over 8 yrs old, their quota automatically increases by a set amount. If the percentage of rams is lower to a certain point it stays Status quo...if the percentage of 8 yr old rams goes below a certain percentage then their quota is cut.
It's been this way for many yrs. Most quotas are so high they are completely meaningless. As GG mentioned they have quoata for rams that don't exist.
This is why many GO's in Reg 6 are so protective of "their" rams. Every ram that a resident does not harvest is money in the bank for them.

SSS

[chilcotin hillbilly]

Goatguy
The fact is the residents have plenty of opportunity. If the outfitters have such huge quotas and you know this for a fact give me some names and quota numbers.[at least let me know where to find your facts] The only outfitter I personally knew in area 6 had a solid sheep population and a tiny quota which was easily filled each year. After paying for sheep counts, lots of flying and video taping sheep numbers his little quota was not increased. As far as I know he was never allowed more then 3 sheep a year. Area 7 I believe is a different story, the guides seem to lose abit of quota regularly which is fine as it just drives the price up for no resident aliens.

[GoatGuy]

Goatguy
The fact is the residents have plenty of opportunity. If the outfitters have such huge quotas and you know this for a fact give me some names and quota numbers.[at least let me know where to find your facts] The only outfitter I personally knew in area 6 had a solid sheep population and a tiny quota which was easily filled each year. After paying for sheep counts, lots of flying and video taping sheep numbers his little quota was not increased. As far as I know he was never allowed more then 3 sheep a year. Area 7 I believe is a different story, the guides seem to lose abit of quota regularly which is fine as it just drives the price up for no resident aliens.

The quota in Region 6 is around 165; if it's allocated 60 non-res/40 res that brings the AAH to 275 sheep every year. Of those sheep only about 100 are harvested/year.

The quota in 7B is around 100 and the AAH in all of Region 7B is around 180. They're all harvested.

[boxhitch]

The zone 6 outfitter quotas are general the same(any where from 3-6). This is once again a general #. Heidi G,Creyke, Ostreich,Black/connors, Geraci, Collingwood, Lancaster, and Cummins, have more. Some of these quotas are larger, I would think, b/c they encompass some of zone 7. .....Would someone have the fortitude to post the actual quota numbers ? Guessing does no good.
No one can argue about how the quotas are adjusted in reg 6, using the formula in place says the good guys will keep getting more permits. If someone is stuck at 3-4 sheep, they haven't done well in the past.

[bridger]

Would someone have the fortitude to post the actual quota numbers ? Guessing does no good.
No one can argue about how the quotas are adjusted in reg 6, using the formula in place says the good guys will keep getting more permits. If someone is stuck at 3-4 sheep, they haven't done well in the past.


see what i can do in the next day or so

[lange1212]

I still think a large portion of the sheep they are killing are rams the res. would not get.

Why is it so important we try to get this kill ratio where it is stated it should be? Might we lose some of our rights if we don't?

So you would agree that a resident only sheep season last 2 weeks of July in the Skeena Region would not really impact the GO's?

It is important to achieve harvest ratios as provided for a number or reasons.
1. Harvest rations are established as a small % of the population that is replenished by natural reproduction.
2. If harvest ratios are not achieved (either sector) then one must ask why, are quotas to high, LEH permits too low, should GOS be applied... In short harvest needs to be monitored and regulations managed to allow allocations to be met not hindered as is the case today in the Skeena Region.
3. Properly managing sustainable wildlife harvests and regulations maintained allowing them to be achieved is a win win. It provideds maximum opportunitues and fosters the many revered values such as providing food, social values, recreational values, supports the economy and most important supports our wildlife.
4. I also realize that their is different idealogy out their and is primarily divided between resident and non-resident uses. For the most part GO's specifically target trophy class rams as this is what their clients are paying to harvest. There is little non-resident interest to pay big dollars and harvest younger legal rams. On the other side residents also would like to harvest mature rams but in most cases are more than happy to simply come home with a legal one. In short non-residents and GO's for the most part measure their success and prioratize by trophy quality whereas residents for the most part measure success in having the opportunity to harvest a legal ram. In any event looking at the species as long as the full curl ram restriction applies biologist agree that there is little risk to populations as only a very small proportion of the ram only population is exposed to harvest.
5. GO's being unable to achieve sheep quota while considering the value and demand raises red flags and is a strong indication that the legal rams don't exist to meet their quota. At least in the Skeena Region.
6. Review if Administrtive guidelines, should they apply on commercial sheep hunts? Do they present a conservation concern and or is there application hindering resident harest opportunity.

Solutions:
Review GO quota and make the neccessary changes. If there's a long history of commercial under utilization this suggests that the territory simply does not have the legal rams to support quota. I dont buy the argument that not selling ones product is a good business decision. If you wnated to buy a dozen 2x4's at the hardware store would they only sell you six? If they did it would likely be because they only has 6 left in stock and didn't have the product to supply you with.

Review, monitor and manage regulations to allow harvest goals to be achieved. Hindering barriers need to be identified and removed.

Implement a resident only pre-season sheep hunt, for sure in the Skeena Region. This will aid in addressing resident under utilization while reducing the resident - non-resident competition beyond Aug 1st.

Proper sheep inventory assesment is desperatly needed and must be completed in the Skeena Region. Although some work has been progressing there is a need to complete this work in an expediant manner.

Work together to promote habitat enhancement such as burn and predator control programs. Getting lamb recruitment up should be a goal that will benefit us all in the years to come.

[GoatGuy]

The zone 6 outfitter quotas are general the same(any where from 3-6). This is once again a general #. Heidi G,Creyke, Ostreich,Black/connors, Geraci, Collingwood, Lancaster, and Cummins, have more. Some of these quotas are larger, I would think, b/c they encompass some of zone 7. I still think a large portion of the sheep they are killing are rams the res. would not get. Once again, generally, most hunters want to go to zone 7 becouse there is more sheep, easier access, and the sheep are bigger in 7. Remember, I'm talking in general terms. A couple day head start in these areas might help us grab a few handy ones off of lakes or trails, but I'm not sure it would make much difference. I know Stan L. tried managing is sheep by taking less hunters than his quota was and he got penalized for it with a cut. Why is it so important we try to get this kill ratio where it is stated it should be? Might we lose some of our rights if we don't?

Not too interested in the personal stuff or singling individual outfitters out and their quota. This is a policy issue, not something where we need to have people bashing individual outfitters for the quota the ministry gives them.

With the allocation policy if residents don't harvest the sheep they go to non-residents, which means the resident share goes down. Regulations are supposed to allow residents to achieve their share which is a minimum of 60% for sheep. Currently residents in Region 6 shoot about 30%, that needs to double, at the minimum, by 2012. We need regulations that make that happen. A resident only season is one of them and as you say access will also help in some areas.

The problem here is that if residents continually under-achieve due to over-inflated quotas, like in the EK where they're smacking every 6 year old that walks by. If residents start harvesting sheep or there's a die-off residents could be placed under more restrictive regulations to keep the harvest down.

What this could mean, especially in a place like the EK is LEH for sheep, eventhough it's unlikey in a place like Region 6.

In addition, and perhaps more importantly, LEH or complete removal of quota has already been requested and is being lobbied by the guide-outfitters association. If we don't get our harvest up now during the transition period we could end up under more restrictive regulations in 2012.

Even though I don't shoot sheep I like hunting them.

[GoatGuy]

Would someone have the fortitude to post the actual quota numbers ? Guessing does no good.
No one can argue about how the quotas are adjusted in reg 6, using the formula in place says the good guys will keep getting more permits. If someone is stuck at 3-4 sheep, they haven't done well in the past.

I don't think it's appropriate.

[BCrams]

If we don't get our harvest up now during the transition period we could end up under more restrictive regulations in 2012.




How long has the Provincial Gov't (MOE) known about the policy?

What have they done in the last few years to help residents achieve those results by 2012?

What have the GOABC done in the last 3 years? They certainly havn't worked with residents have they according to the policy agreement. (not regarding just sheep but also province wide)

Its already the 2010 season.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Not too interested in the personal stuff or singling individual outfitters out and their quota. This is a policy issue, not something where we need to have people bashing individual outfitters for the quota the ministry gives them.

With the allocation policy if residents don't harvest the sheep they go to non-residents, which means the resident share goes down. Regulations are supposed to allow residents to achieve their share which is a minimum of 60% for sheep. Currently residents in Region 6 shoot about 30%, that needs to double, at the minimum, by 2012. We need regulations that make that happen. A resident only season is one of them and as you say access will also help in some areas.

The problem here is that if residents continually under-achieve due to over-inflated quotas, like in the EK where they're smacking every 6 year old that walks by. If residents start harvesting sheep or there's a die-off residents could be placed under more restrictive regulations to keep the harvest down.

What this could mean, especially in a place like the EK is LEH for sheep, eventhough it's unlikey in a place like Region 6.

In addition, and perhaps more importantly, LEH or complete removal of quota has already been requested and is being lobbied by the guide-outfitters association. If we don't get our harvest up now during the transition period we could end up under more restrictive regulations in 2012.

Even though I don't shoot sheep I like hunting them.

Thought we should all read what the policy really says(nutshell version).
Pay particular attn to the "Policy Statement".

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/harvest_alloc/docs/Under-HarvestofAllocatedSharePolicy.pdf

Better yet...read everything on this page
http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/harvest_alloc/

SSS

[6616]

If we need to get resident harvest up, I look at the Spatsizi. I've never hunted there. The ministry keeps thinking if you give out more tags the harvest will go up. I'm not sure this is so. For some reason, people put in for draws with no interest in going. Why not open up the Spatsizi to a general. That way serious sheep hunters could go and hunt sheep. We could probably add a good # of sheep to our(res) harvest if a serious sheep hunter could make a late plan to hunt it. From what I hear Collingwood is a huge anti-res. outfit but why does the Spatz. need to be on Ltd entry?

Because BC Parks says so. I'm sure F&W would take LEH off if they could.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

If we need to get resident harvest up, I look at the Spatsizi. I've never hunted there. The ministry keeps thinking if you give out more tags the harvest will go up. I'm not sure this is so. For some reason, people put in for draws with no interest in going. Why not open up the Spatsizi to a general. That way serious sheep hunters could go and hunt sheep. We could probably add a good # of sheep to our(res) harvest if a serious sheep hunter could make a late plan to hunt it. From what I hear Collingwood is a huge anti-res. outfit but why does the Spatz. need to be on Ltd entry?

Since the Spatz switched to the earlier draws resident harvest has increased. Probably not as much as we would have liked but it has increased.

SSS

[bayou]

[quote=GoatGuy;604211]Not too interested in the personal stuff or singling individual outfitters out and their quota. This is a policy issue, not something where we need to have people bashing individual outfitters for the quota the ministry gives them.

With the allocation policy if residents don't harvest the sheep they go to non-residents, which means the resident share goes down. Regulations are supposed to allow residents to achieve their share which is a minimum of 60% for sheep. Currently residents in Region 6 shoot about 30%, that needs to double, at the minimum, by 2012. We need regulations that make that happen. A resident only season is one of them and as you say access will also help in some areas.

The problem here is that if residents continually under-achieve due to over-inflated quotas, like in the EK where they're smacking every 6 year old that walks by. If residents start harvesting sheep or there's a die-off residents could be placed under more restrictive regulations to keep the harvest down.
Sorry but since your talking about the EK again and Im not sure what your saying here thought I would ask. Sounds like your saying the residents are not meeting there harvest target number of animals because the original number of animals is wrong, and your concerned about the age of rams people are shooting and also saying if to many sheep are taking it may cause more restrictions even LEH.
Maybe Im just reading it wrong but seems to contridict what you have said in many other threads.
What this could mean, especially in a place like the EK is LEH for sheep, eventhough it's unlikey in a place like Region 6.

In addition, and perhaps more importantly, LEH or complete removal of quota has already been requested and is being lobbied by the guide-outfitters association. If we don't get our harvest up now during the transition period we could end up under more restrictive regulations in 2012.

Even though I don't shoot sheep I like hunting them.

[6616]

Yes, I thought ltd entry in Spats might be b/c of the park. I wonder if there is some kind of special leg. for the managing of BC parks hunting seasons, quotas, and such?

It's just that BC Parks has never been very supportive of hunting in parks, they prefer ultra conservative harvest levels and also prefer to have as much on LEH as they can. When we finally got the LEH numbers increased for Assiniboine, after several years of trying, F&W had to get approval from BC Parks. They will only issue a limited number of horse camping permits per year based on potential degradation of the landscape.

BC Parks involve the guide-outfitters in their management planning process and tend to look after their guides if they have high stewardship standards. Resident hunters rarely get involved except in a case like the MK where it's LRMP driven to begin with, so in the end BC Parks appears on the surface anyway to show some preferential treatment to outfitters.

The ratio of non-resident quota to resident LEH, and also the kill data, quite often is not in compliance with the allocation policy, and BC Parks says it's not their policy and they don't feel they need to follow it. It's not as big of an issue as it was a few years ago, but managing hunting in BC Parks still has lots of problem areas.

[GoatGuy]

Yes, I thought ltd entry in Spats might be b/c of the park. I wonder if there is some kind of special leg. for the managing of BC parks hunting seasons, quotas, and such?

All it says is that the harvest, not hunting opportunity, should be more conservative in Parks. Parks interprets this as using LEH and limiting the number of hunters.

Right now believe the quota's 9, resident allocation is 11. Up to 2007 it was 8 and 8.

Outfitters harvest their quota and go 100% success rate without a hitch.

Residents harvest 2-3 sheep/year on 50 LEH.

They're proposing 80 LEH this year; residents might harvest half of their allocation.

[lange1212]

The "wilderness experience" excuse is often used by Parks and antis as a justification to hinder resident hunting opportunity. We see ultra conservative allocations, LEH applied and no consrvation concern present, seasons and a plethora of other hindering barriers.

Parks have been ask what restrictions are in place on other users to ensure that the wildernes experience of hunters is not negatively impacted. They were unable to provide an answer or any examples.

Regulations need to be in place that allow hunters to achieve their allocated harvests. In Parks this is ultra conservative and is no reason for under utilization to occur.

After many years of struggle with MoE we've finally see the sheep permits in Spatsizi increase from 50 to 80. This is much appreciated but a far cry from the 110 permits the region reccomended. The resident allocation is 11 and 50 permits generate an average harvest of 3. Doing the math 100 permits should get us 6, a far cry from 11.

Another alternative was presented to the Skeena Region and was to implement 90 LEH pemits for full curl ram and 5 permits for any ram. The intent to see if there was any interest in the ram opportunity, what age class would be targeted and to aid as a management tool. Biologist indicated that harvesting from variable age ram classes was beneficial to the population as long as it was tightly controled.