moe denies early resident only sheep season in region 6

[bridger]

As has been discussed at length on the site the BCWF has been asking for a two week early resident sheep season in region 6 in an effort to allow residents an opportunity to acheive our share of the allocated harvest. The MOE has now officially turned down that request.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Did MOE offer up any other alternative solutions to attempt to get the harvest split somewhere closer to "reasonable"?? Further slashing GO quotas where it's warrented??

SSS

[boxhitch]

Not surprised this was met by opposition
Both sides claim to have barriers and want them removed, yet cry foul if an idea is not fair to both equally.

Resident effort has to increase, and that will only happen with dispersal of information.
How to - ,
Where to -,
Which creek -,

[bridger]

resident effort is difficult to increase with leh in most the area and there are real access issues in the skeena that cannot be overcome with more effort.

[bridger]

Did MOE offer up any other alternative solutions to attempt to get the harvest split somewhere closer to "reasonable"?? Further slashing GO quotas where it's warrented??

SSS

I will post the whole letter when i get it. as far as slashing quota's there is a real possibility of moe taking the guides completely off quota in 2012.

[BCrams]

I will post the whole letter when i get it. as far as slashing quota's there is a real possibility of moe taking the guides completely off quota in 2012.


Bridger.....

What is the MOE going to do to help residents to acheive harvest?

Taking the GO's off quota? Some will benefit and others won't as they're not acheiving their quota as it is. Good years they'll take advantage of it when they know the rams are there to be harvested .... further eroding chances residents have to acheive harvest.

[bridger]

Bridger.....

What is the MOE going to do to help residents to acheive harvest?

Taking the GO's off quota? Some will benefit and others won't as they're not acheiving their quota as it is. Good years they'll take advantage of it when they know the rams are there to be harvested .... further eroding chances residents have to acheive harvest.


it appears the only changes the moe is willing to make is to increase the leh authorizations in region 6

[Gunner]

it appears the only changes the moe is willing to make is to increase the leh authorizations in region 6I for one would like an explanation from MOE regarding this decision.Its one thing for them to make the decision lets hear why. Gunner

[bridger]

the explantion will come in a day or so after the spin doctors get throught with it.

[BromBones]

it appears the only changes the moe is willing to make is to increase the leh authorizations in region 6

Hopefully residents can put a few more on the ground this year.

One thing to add, LEH zone 6-19 is being recommended for GOS/full curl for the coming season.

[willy442]

As has been discussed at length on the site the BCWF has been asking for a two week early resident sheep season in region 6 in an effort to allow residents an opportunity to acheive our share of the allocated harvest. The MOE has now officially turned down that request.

Glad to see that MOE is maintaining the length of time Sheep can be chased around in the mountains at the predent level. Nothing against more LEH tags. Dead against resident favortism at the expense of our sheep.:-D

[bridger]

resident early season will not increase the overall harvest in the skeena just balance the allocation scales.

[6616]

Glad to see that MOE is maintaining the length of time Sheep can be chased around in the mountains at the predent level. Nothing against more LEH tags. Dead against resident favortism at the expense of our sheep.:-D

What's wrong with resident favouritism (resident priority), isn't that the way it's supposed to be?

It certainly doesn't need to be at the expense of the sheep, the non-resident harvest just has to be lower to compensate...!

I believe regulations that ensure 60 to 70% of the harvest goes to non-residents is favouritism, but not to residents...... thats for sure...!

[yukon john]

sheep = money did you really think it was going to happen? honestly?

[Gunner]

sheep = money did you really think it was going to happen? honestly?No I didn't think it would happen for a minute.I would like an explanation,but as Bridger says,after the MOE spin doctors get through,we'll think they're doing us a favor.Business as usual. Gunner

[bruin]

Dead against resident favortism at the expense of our sheep.:-D


x2.
I don't think I would call it favoritism. I would call it Resident opportunity at the expense of our sheep.

[Caribou_lou]

x2.
I don't think I would call it favoritism. I would call it Resident opportunity at the expense of our sheep.


So your saying your against resident opportunity eventhough we aren't reaching our AAH because we haven't been given enough LEH permits?

[BCrams]

So your saying your against resident opportunity eventhough we aren't reaching our AAH because we haven't been given enough LEH permits?

Bruin has a biased opinion because he is a sheep guide.

He says its at the expense of the sheep ... but really, all it would do is even up the AAH with an early season and even then it still does not represent resident priority with the allocation splits.

Guys like Bruin then would 1- either have to work a lot harder to find their clients rams and 2- perhaps take a booked client or two on a walk about because the ram they normally would shoot has been taken by a resident for a change.

Here's the idea behind it: an outfitter has a quota of say 15 rams but only takes 5 or 6 every year.......doesn't meet his quota. Why???? Because there probably aren't more 'legal' rams to take. So most years the outfitter takes his 5 or 6 rams and residents take another 1 or 2 and often none. The early season is hoped residents will take 2-4 rams and when the GO's can start hunting them, he may only end up taking 2-4 rams himself which gets things on track for resident priority as far as splits go.

[bruin]

So your saying your against resident opportunity eventhough we aren't reaching our AAH because we haven't been given enough LEH permits?

Sorry, that should be hunter opportunity. I wouldn't consider myself biased, I may guide for another year or two but then I'll be in the same boat as every other resident hunter. Couldn't the same be said about you BCrams because you're a resident you're biased in your opinion. I can't find the thread on average sheep age but if I remember correctly it was shown to be going down which is an indication of an overhunted/or unhealthy population? No? From all the rumors I've heard, and they are only rumors I realize, Stone sheep hunting in the north is going in the crapper. All I'm saying is that I think that should be the highest priority, regardless of who's expense it is at.

[bruin]

Guys like Bruin then would 1- either have to work a lot harder to find their clients rams and 2- perhaps take a booked client or two on a walk about because the ram they normally would shoot has been taken by a resident for a change.


Yeah, cause us guide, we just hate hikiing!

[ryanb]

Well Bruin, if you think sheep hunting is going down the crapper, and it is the GO's shooting all the rams in region 6, you are then advocating for a complete ban on non-resident sheep hunting based on your argument, correct?

I agree.

On another note, someone needs to start asking some very serious questions about the MOE's motivation in some of their policies. There is a clear mandate on resident priority, so why does the MOE continue to ignore the mandate? Who is responsible for this? What are their motivations? Could the GO industry be involved in any "improper" ways?

[Devilbear]

NOOOO???? Foreigners having unusual and questionable influence in government policies concerning resource allocation/harvesting here in BC, never, couldn't be, our governments wouldn't screw we citizens, would they?????

This is the history of Canada and especially BC, the foreign grab of our rare and irreplacable resources and the current MOE policies simply continue that travesty.

The way to deal with the Stone's Sheep and other populations that are/may be in difficulty is to ban all non-resident hunting in BC, permanently. The GOs are the problem and need to be put out of business for good.

[bridger]

x2.
I don't think I would call it favoritism. I would call it Resident opportunity at the expense of our sheep.

please explain that to me.

[bigwhiteys]

resident effort is difficult to increase with leh in most the area and there are real access issues in the skeena that cannot be overcome with more effort.
If Access is the real issue how does a 2 week early season help out...? I still don't get it nor do I really support the initiative.

"Head Start" doesn't seem to equate to Better Access for me? If we have access issues, the head start doesn't solve them. More available transport, and pilots flying to your chosen lakes might help?

Carl

[Caribou_lou]

x2.
I don't think I would call it favoritism. I would call it Resident opportunity at the expense of our sheep.

I'm not so concerned at this statement being bias. I'm more concerned when you say " at the expense of our sheep ". I will assume you know of the areas on LEH in region 6. In these LEH zones, resident hunters have not been able to reach our AAH, do to lack of permits given out. In fact we have not even come close to reaching it! So it would be incorrect to say it would be at the expense of our sheep since residents aren't killing as many as we should be.

[bridger]

If Access is the real issue how does a 2 week early season help out...? I still don't get it nor do I really support the initiative.

"Head Start" doesn't seem to equate to Better Access for me? If we have access issues, the head start doesn't solve them. More available transport, and pilots flying to your chosen lakes might help?

Carl

quite simple actually Carl. just like in region 7b outfitters in region 6 pre scout sheep and hit the accessbile areas first out competeing the average resident then hunt the less accessbile parts of their areas. opponents of this plan say it won't work. that may be but why don't we try it and find out for sure.

[bigwhiteys]

resident hunters have not been able to reach our AAH, do to lack of permits given out.
And now they are willing to give out more permits... Problem Solved? More Permits, Earlier Season... This does NOTHING to improve access which is what Bridger says is the real problem.

Hunters have to get to the sheep... That is not happening.

Carl

[bigwhiteys]

quite simple actually Carl. just like in region 7b outfitters in region 6 pre scout sheep and hit the accessbile areas first out competeing the average resident then hunt the less accessbile parts of their areas. opponents of this plan say it won't work. that may be but why don't we try it and find out for sure.

So will this early season really help out the "average" resident or the hard-core guys who know where to go and what to do? (they know how to utilize that 2 week season)

"Average" resident sheep hunters seem to do more damage than good with our sheep populations? short sheep, underage etc...

Carl

[6616]

And now they are willing to give out more permits... Problem Solved? More Permits, Earlier Season... This does NOTHING to improve access which is what Bridger says is the real problem.

Hunters have to get to the sheep... That is not happening.

Carl

The problem is not restricted to the LEH areas. Non-residents harvest up to 70% of the sheep in the GOS areas as well.

Last fall the outfitters did not book the usual number of sheep hunts, or shoot their usual number of sheep, supposedly due to the economic crisis, and low and behold - the resident harvest increased dramatically, doesn't that possibly indicate what's wrong.

[bigwhiteys]

Last fall the outfitters did not book the usual number of sheep hunts, or shoot their usual number of sheep, supposedly due to the economic crisis, and low and behold - the resident harvest increased dramatically, doesn't that possibly indicate what's wrong.

You cannot use one single season as an accurate measuring stick. Show me that trend continuing and not just a special year and then you might have something!

Carl

[BCrams]

You cannot use one single season as an accurate measuring stick. Show me that trend continuing and not just a special year and then you might have something!

Carl

Which is why I believe they should have a trial period of 3 or 5 years (preferably 5) of an early season to see the results.

If it doesn't work, at least we know and we know it won't hurt the sheep regardless of the outcome.

[Hotshoe]

quite simple actually Carl. just like in region 7b outfitters in region 6 pre scout sheep and hit the accessbile areas first out competeing the average resident then hunt the less accessbile parts of their areas. opponents of this plan say it won't work. that may be but why don't we try it and find out for sure.
All the years I guided in region 6 we never went in any earlier than July 31st. The few residents that we would see in the area were always way back in the middle of the boonies, never on the 'easy' sheep close to easy access. More of a knowledge competition problem to me. Sheep hunting isn't suppose to be easy, the more you do it the better your chances are. Obviously an outfitter will have more knowledge of his area than most of the residents, that shouldn't discourage anyone though, it's hunting, don't be afraid to compete and aquire the knowledge it takes to "figure out" an areas sheep.

[bigwhiteys]

All the years I guided in region 6 we never went in any earlier than July 31st. The few residents that we would see in the area were always way back in the middle of the boonies, never on the 'easy' sheep close to easy access. More of a knowledge competition problem to me. Sheep hunting isn't suppose to be easy, the more you do it the better your chances are. Obviously an outfitter will have more knowledge of his area than most of the residents, that shouldn't discourage anyone though, it's hunting, don't be afraid to compete and aquire the knowledge it takes to "figure out" an areas sheep.
I spent many seasons at my Grandpas outfit in 7B. Always there for the first and second hunts of the season. I NEVER saw the packstring or plane take hunters to "the easily accessible stuff".

Carl

[bridger]

I spent many seasons at my Grandpas outfit in 7B. Always there for the first and second hunts of the season. I NEVER saw the packstring or plane take hunters to "the easily accessible stuff".

Carl


not much easy access in your grampa's old area

[CanuckShooter]

The problem is not restricted to the LEH areas. Non-residents harvest up to 70% of the sheep in the GOS areas as well.

Last fall the outfitters did not book the usual number of sheep hunts, or shoot their usual number of sheep, supposedly due to the economic crisis, and low and behold - the resident harvest increased dramatically, doesn't that possibly indicate what's wrong.

And like Carl said one year isn't enough, they should keep this going for several years and see if it proves the trend, maybe not give the go's so many tags for ten years or so?? What a good idea.

[6616]

The problem is not restricted to the LEH areas. Non-residents harvest up to 70% of the sheep in the GOS areas as well.

Last fall the outfitters did not book the usual number of sheep hunts, or shoot their usual number of sheep, supposedly due to the economic crisis, and low and behold - the resident harvest increased dramatically, doesn't that possibly indicate what's wrong.

And like Carl said one year isn't enough, they should keep this going for several years and see if it proves the trend, maybe not give the go's so many tags for ten years or so?? What a good idea.


Well that certainly raises a good point. As unbelieveable as it sounds, the current combined quota for all outfitters in Region 6 actually is greater than the overall regional sheep AAH for residents and non-residents combined.
That equates to a completelly unrestricted harvest potential for non-residents and could indicate that non-residents may be shooting a bunch of sheep that are actually allocated to residents.

[CanuckShooter]

Well that certainly raises a good point. As unbelieveable as it sounds, the current combined quota for all outfitters in Region 6 actually is greater than the overall regional sheep AAH for residents and non-residents combined.
That equates to a completelly unrestricted harvest potential for non-residents and could indicate that non-residents may be shooting a bunch of sheep that are actually allocated to residents.[/quote]

How could this be allowed to happen?? I never had a problem with GOs getting a quota when we were first put under LEH [all species] but after going many years getting NIL back on my applications I now believe that GOs shouldn't get any allocations until the need to lift the LEH requirment is met. What your telling me here is that somehow in Region 6 the GOs have been successful in scamming the tags away from resident and non-resident Canadian hunters......whoever is responsible for this should be taken to task...

[bigwhiteys]

not much easy access in your grampa's old area
Not a problem if you got horses or a supercub. You've been in there!

The 2 week "head-start" should be for the guys WITHOUT the rigging then. If you've got two feet a heartbeat and a heavy ass backpack then sure you deserve a head start.

If you've got the same rigging as the guides (horses, river boats, planes) then you probably should be competing with the guides. I fail to see the advantage for the "average" sheep hunters with the early season unless a restriction on horse/plane/quad and riverboat travel was put in place. By Foot ONLY! :)

Carl

[bridger]

Well that certainly raises a good point. As unbelieveable as it sounds, the current combined quota for all outfitters in Region 6 actually is greater than the overall regional sheep AAH for residents and non-residents combined.
That equates to a completelly unrestricted harvest potential for non-residents and could indicate that non-residents may be shooting a bunch of sheep that are actually allocated to residents.

How could this be allowed to happen?? I never had a problem with GOs getting a quota when we were first put under LEH [all species] but after going many years getting NIL back on my applications I now believe that GOs shouldn't get any allocations until the need to lift the LEH requirment is met. What your telling me here is that somehow in Region 6 the GOs have been successful in scamming the tags away from resident and non-resident Canadian hunters......whoever is responsible for this should be taken to task...[/quote]


it happened because the regional bio in smithers automatically increased the quota by 20% every three years if g/o's harvest a certain percentage of plus 8 yr rams . the fact that the quota alone exceeds the annual allowable harvest was of no concern to him. As a result we are now in the mess we are in with the harvest split reversed and no end in sight.

[Devilbear]

"Bullshit walks, but, money talks" and THAT, my friend, is EXACTLY what has and is driving government policy concerning ALL our resources and always has. Look at the "Tree Farm" policy developed under "Wacky" Bennett, for one egregious example.

[lange1212]

The problem is not restricted to the LEH areas. Non-residents harvest up to 70% of the sheep in the GOS areas as well.

Last fall the outfitters did not book the usual number of sheep hunts, or shoot their usual number of sheep, supposedly due to the economic crisis, and low and behold - the resident harvest increased dramatically, doesn't that possibly indicate what's wrong.

And like Carl said one year isn't enough, they should keep this going for several years and see if it proves the trend, maybe not give the go's so many tags for ten years or so?? What a good idea.

The trend does exists and its decades old. 2007 back the harvest averages are about 30% residents and 70% non-residents. You can calculate this over 5, 10 or 25 years and it math always turns out the same pointing to resident under utilization with no effective regulator change by MoE to improve sheep harvest potential for residents.

The world economic crisis is undeniable and started in 2008. In 2008 non-resident harvest started downward as a result of lowered non-resident participation while at the same time resident harvest trended upwards.

So lets look at the Skeena data from 2005. In 2005, 113 sheep were harvested 66% by NR and 34% by R. In 2006, 100 sheep were harvested 72% by NR and 28% by R. In 2007, 119 sheep were harvested 66% by NR and 34% by R. In 2008, 106 sheep were harvested 61% NR and 39% by R. In 2009, 102 sheep were harvested 56% by NR and 44% by R. Note that the economic crises peaked in 2009 and as a result the $30,000-$40,000 disposable cash was simply not there for many that could afford it prior to the crash causing non-resident participation to spiral downwards.

Now considering the sheep harvested 113, 100, 119, 106, 102 totalling 540. The mean average is 108. That's 8 above the low and 11 below the high. So one could argue that quota is way too high on this basis aswel. There was a shift in harvest in 2008 and 2009 but not any dramatic shift in harvest.

MoE needs to and should implement the resident only pre-season in the Skeena Region. It will not cause a conservation concern, but it will provide a much needed regulatory change to aid resident harvest. Implement it and let the facts speak for themself rather than the current misinformation, preception and propoganda.

The resident only season is not and has not been all about guides and impacting them. Its about respecting resident priority and providing regulations that allow resident to achieve and maintain a minimum sheep harvest of 60%. It was never proposed to eliminate guides from the resident only season only non-residents. If a resident wants to hire a guide to hunt sheep go for it. Don't believe all the GO hype about the us against them crap. The primary opposition comes from the few GO's that have a strong and wealthy non-resident clientele and lets face it the average BC'er is not going to spend $40,000 to harvest a sheep. This being the case the greedy simply don't want residents out their and prefer to keep the chains and shackles on resident under utilization for their own personal gain. On the other hand there's a less vocal group of GO's that would tailor their business so that both residents and GO's benefit from a resident only season. Time for you boys to stand up and have your voice heard.

[bridger]

excellent and insightful post.

[yukon john]

Is it just me or could this whole thing be solved by A resident hunters losing a few pounds and getting of their quads or B we could start a stone sheep farm here in the valley and leave a gift wrapped ram on the door step of all the guys who want a easy sheep every august first. Get real there is no easy sheep it takes a lot of money and hard work to bring home a ram, just cause some of you couldnt hack it on the mountain doesnt mean the mountain or the province or GOABC owes you anything. Go run along and shoot moose calves and 3 point elk. (as I have said before there is some hard core sheep hunters on here who have my respect )

[GoatGuy]

Is it just me or could this whole thing be solved by A resident hunters losing a few pounds and getting of their quads or B we could start a stone sheep farm here in the valley and leave a gift wrapped ram on the door step of all the guys who want a easy sheep every august first. Get real there is no easy sheep it takes a lot of money and hard work to bring home a ram, just cause some of you couldnt hack it on the mountain doesnt mean the mountain or the province or GOABC owes you anything. Go run along and shoot moose calves and 3 point elk. (as I have said before there is some hard core sheep hunters on here who have my respect )

It's just you - that's part of the special tax.

[Caribou_lou]

Great post Lange1212.

[GoatGuy]

Easiest thing is to deal with the numbers.

The AAH is Region 6, if they ever established one instead of using arbitrarily assigned numbers, is going to be close to twice as high as it is in 7B.

Are there twice the sheep in 6 compared to 7B?

No.

Not even close, there are fewer sheep in 6 than there are in 7B so if we use a bit of LOGIC or uncommon sense that would mean that the AAH should actually be lower in 6 than it is in 7b.

We could look at the fact that outfitters across Region 6 usually shoot only half of their quota or that a bunch of the honest outfitters will tell you they don't have the sheep in their area that they have for quota but we don't need to.

No need to complicate things.

[Gunner]

It doesn't make much difference whether it's Region 6 sheep or Region 8 moose.MOE has a very good idea of how many LEH authorizations are needed to achieve the AAH in either case.The fact that they will not issue the number of LEHs neccesary shows that they will not manage for risk(as has been mentioned before).The idea that all of a sudden LEH holders becoming 100% successful meaning a possible overharvest scares the wits out of them.We all know that will never happen,but until they boost LEHs we will never harvest our share of the AAH,and that means there is quota room to go elsewhere. Gunner

[Devilbear]

Is it just me or could this whole thing be solved by A resident hunters losing a few pounds and getting of their quads or B we could start a stone sheep farm here in the valley and leave a gift wrapped ram on the door step of all the guys who want a easy sheep every august first. Get real there is no easy sheep it takes a lot of money and hard work to bring home a ram, just cause some of you couldnt hack it on the mountain doesnt mean the mountain or the province or GOABC owes you anything. Go run along and shoot moose calves and 3 point elk. (as I have said before there is some hard core sheep hunters on here who have my respect )

This attitude is exactly why I have very little respect left for most GOs and guides I encounter on both 'net forums and in person. I don't know who you think you are, but, there are many guys here who were hacking it on the mountain when you were still pissing in your Pampers.

The FACT is that the Stone's Sheep BELONG to us and NOT to ****ing GOs from Texas, so, I guess that WE have the right to decide what will be done with them.

I wonder if the GOABC would hire you as a "PR" person, you seem to have a real knack for making friends here.

[yukon john]

This attitude is exactly why I have very little respect left for most GOs and guides I encounter on both 'net forums and in person. I don't know who you think you are, but, there are many guys here who were hacking it on the mountain when you were still pissing in your Pampers.

The FACT is that the Stone's Sheep BELONG to us and NOT to ****ing GOs from Texas, so, I guess that WE have the right to decide what will be done with them.

I wonder if the GOABC would hire you as a "PR" person, you seem to have a real knack for making friends here.


lol the truth hurts DB, My outfitters are from bc, yukon and alberta and if they are your sheep then how come my american friends will be shooting them on aug 1 while your pissing in pampers in the care home?

[Devilbear]

Sonny, if, with a mouth like yours, you even reach my age and can still backpack as much as I do, admittedly not nearly as fast, far or for my living as I did for years before you were a spark in your pappy's eye....poor guy, seeing what he got out of it....THEN, you can sound off.

As it is, you may be young, full of yourself and looking to start shit here, but, the end result will simply be to further antagonize most BC residents against guides and GOs and foreigners....not a very wise move in your position, now is it.

Your ...american friends... will, no doubt, be gratified to pay the huge cost of a Stone's Sheep hunt here in BC with a "guide" who demonstrates the level of infantile behaviour that you have on these posts. Grow up.

[lange1212]

Devilbear, don't let the young fella get the better of you. He's a guide and only trying to ambush an insightful and eductional thread that he fears is educating resident hunters to a reality of injustices imposed on resident that benefit GO's and non-residents. This will change, residents do have priority, and there are activists fighting hard in the name of residents and gaining ground. This is his real fear. His words and actions speak for themself and not worthy of further response.

Back to fact and biology:

The Skeena sheep population provided by the MoE (Dall's and Stone's) is approximatly 4725-7250 animals.
Now considering a biologically defensible harvest rate is between 2%-3%, allowing for population growth to continue I provide the following calculations based on a 3% harvest rate and mid range of the population estimate of 5500 sheep.

3% of 5500 = 165 that can be harvested

Even if we consider the upper range of the population and a 3% harvest rate:

3% of 7250 = 217 that can be harvested, I live in Region 6 and been trough most of it and question the upper population limit. None the less will provide the calculation.

Now consider that commulative Guide outfitter quota in the Skeena Region is 148. That equates to MoE giving guide outfitters given 89% of the allowable harvest and at the higher range of the population estimate 68% of the attainable harvest. Any way you slice it MoE has mismanaged sheep in the Skeena Region, neglected residents, failed to manage by proper science and biology and people question why Skeena Region resident has a history of harvest under utilization. It time for the MoE to be call on their inappropriate management of Skeena sheep populations and failure to exercise due dilagence.

[Steeleco]

Debate all you like, but the insults are not needed. And won't be tolerated.

[willy442]

What's wrong with resident favouritism (resident priority), isn't that the way it's supposed to be?

It certainly doesn't need to be at the expense of the sheep, the non-resident harvest just has to be lower to compensate...!

I believe regulations that ensure 60 to 70% of the harvest goes to non-residents is favouritism, but not to residents...... thats for sure...!

The guy who works the hardest, reaps the benefits. If you have the means to get back and compete with the guides great and good luck. To impose an earlier season for residents will accomplish nothing for the average sheep hunter. As you well know about these spots that are continually under harvested by residents. Cost and accessability are the problem. How do you expect an early season to help anyone?
Just more resident unorganized whinning in my opinion. If you can't get the job done within the present seasons, stay home or hunt Moose and Deer.

[6616]

The guy who works the hardest, reaps the benefits. If you have the means to get back and compete with the guides great and good luck. To impose an earlier season for residents will accomplish nothing for the average sheep hunter. As you well know about these spots that are continually under harvested by residents. Cost and accessability are the problem. How do you expect an early season to help anyone?
Just more resident unorganized whinning in my opinion. If you can't get the job done within the present seasons, stay home or hunt Moose and Deer.

So basically what you're saying means throw the allocation policy out, throw away non-resident quota, throw everything wide open and let residents compete with guide-outfitters for whatever they can get out of it and let the chips fall where they may....? In other words just like the good old days before there was guide-outfitter quotas and non-residents shot 70% of the sheep in 7B as well. Yup, I can see where thousands of resident hunters are going to jump on your bandwagon Willie...!!!

[willy442]

Bruin has a biased opinion because he is a sheep guide.

He says its at the expense of the sheep ... but really, all it would do is even up the AAH with an early season and even then it still does not represent resident priority with the allocation splits.

Guys like Bruin then would 1- either have to work a lot harder to find their clients rams and 2- perhaps take a booked client or two on a walk about because the ram they normally would shoot has been taken by a resident for a change.

Here's the idea behind it: an outfitter has a quota of say 15 rams but only takes 5 or 6 every year.......doesn't meet his quota. Why???? Because there probably aren't more 'legal' rams to take. So most years the outfitter takes his 5 or 6 rams and residents take another 1 or 2 and often none. The early season is hoped residents will take 2-4 rams and when the GO's can start hunting them, he may only end up taking 2-4 rams himself which gets things on track for resident priority as far as splits go.

Biased opinion has nothing to do with it. By all sheep counts and studies recently seen, sheep numbers are declining. How in the hell do you think what we have left can survive and replenish with a bunch of idiots running around through thier habitat for the major part of July? This is the best month they have at replenishing thier systems after winter and prior to a rut that can take a toll on Rams of all ages.
When or at what point are people going to put thier greed aside and start looking at the Sheep? I can't believe the narrow minded thinking on this subject, with the few armchair experts on this site. If the resident wants more opportunity give them more LEH tags. This will eventually be the way it goes anyway as it is the only way sustainable numbers can be maintained, from what I've seen over the years.

[6616]

Biased opinion has nothing to do with it. By all sheep counts and studies recently seen, sheep numbers are declining. How in the hell do you think what we have left can survive and replenish with a bunch of idiots running around through thier habitat for the major part of July? This is the best month they have at replenishing thier systems after winter and prior to a rut that can take a toll on Rams of all ages.
When or at what point are people going to put thier greed aside and start looking at the Sheep? I can't believe the narrow minded thinking on this subject, with the few armchair experts on this site. If the resident wants more opportunity give them more LEH tags. This will eventually be the way it goes anyway as it is the only way sustainable numbers can be maintained, from what I've seen over the years.

I have an even better idea, how about giving the outfitters less quota....!!!!

You know the resident only season does not have to be in July, it could be from Aug 1st to 14th just as easily.

[willy442]

So basically what you're saying means throw the allocation policy out, throw away non-resident quota, throw everything wide open and let residents compete with guide-outfitters for whatever they can get out of it and let the chips fall where they may....? In other words just like the good old days before there was guide-outfitter quotas and non-residents shot 70% of the sheep in 7B as well. Yup, I can see where thousands of resident hunters are going to jump on your bandwagon Willie...!!!

There is no basically to what I'm saying. THE GUIDES SHOULD STAY ON QUOTA. The residents need to grow a penis and start hunting Sheep. If they can't do that then maybe the post saying we should gift wrap Rams and leave them on doorsteps for the whinners has some merrit. It also pisses me off when some residents on here have in excess of a dozen rams and they cry about the guides killing them all. Who needs to kill that many Stone Rams outside of being a guide?

[willy442]

I have an even better idea, how about giving the outfitters less quota....!!!!

You know the resident only season does not have to be in July, it could be from Aug 1st to 14th just as easily.

I would be much more willing to support that. However if you really thought about it, under the present system, guides are usually finished sheep hunting by mid September. This leaves the resident 1 full month of non-competative hunting at a time when sheep are easier to hunt and very often a time when the bigger timber rams show themselves. I refuse to by into the arguement that all the seasons legal rams are shot by that time. Over the years I probably took 3 big rams in October to every one I took in August. Yep it can be cold, yet people hunt Buffalo in December.

[lange1212]

I have an even better idea, how about giving the outfitters less quota....!!!!

You know the resident only season does not have to be in July, it could be from Aug 1st to 14th just as easily.

You are correct 6616 the resident only season could occur in the first 2 weeks of August. However we listened and try to work with GO's on this issue.

The initial proposal was for the 1st 2 week of august but GO's felt this may impact their business. As a result a win win proposal was suggested establishing a resident only season for the last two weeks of July benefiting both residentcy groups. Remember the resident only season was never meant to be anti guide but to aid resident under utilization and be a reflection of resident priority over non-residents.

It was never proposed that guides could not operate in the resident only season, just that they could only cater to residents of BC in that time frame.

Some GO representatives, primarily those with premier sheep areas and a waiting list of rich non-resident clients spun the propoganda as an anti guide proposal instead of a working with residents and sharing this opportuinty proposal.

If the first 2 weeks of August works implement it. Its clear that trying to find a workable solution with this commercail sector and its current leadership is a bust and now the fire is going to be lit under the MoE to represent the public interest rather than that of a handful of GO's that have now bitten the hand that feed them. Its sad a couple of sour apples in the basket makes the entire basket smell bad.

[GoatGuy]

Willy, the outfitter quota in 6 is higher than it is in 7B.

The total AAH in Region 6 will be around 320+.

The AAH is only around 190 in 7b.

Do you think that's right?

[ryanb]

Why do we waste time arguing with the GO proponents on this website? They obviously will not listen to reason. Lets spend our time discussing what we can practically do to try and turn things around.

[bridger]

lol the truth hurts DB, My outfitters are from bc, yukon and alberta and if they are your sheep then how come my american friends will be shooting them on aug 1 while your pissing in pampers in the care home?


YukonJohn your post is a great disapointment. Although you are an assistant guide your posts have usually been pretty positive. along with my hunting partner I have been on about 43 stone sheep hunts give or take a couple. in our earlier years we were tough and indomitable and accessed areas many residents only dreamed about but at no time were were outside the influence of guides and their non residents cients. no matter how many days we travelled by horseback to get into a remote area we were always competing head to head with guides and their non resident clients. Often we were able to sit down and discuss a hunting strategy that would benefit both parties. But alas many times we have been told that we had no business being in the area and that we should be somewheres else. Jon and I are not average resident sheep hunters we have made stone sheep hunting a focal point of our lives. I can tell you from first hand how frustrating it is to compete with super cubs, ground to air communications, and constant competition from guides that have a thorough knowledge of the area and little regard for resident hunting sucess. We as resident hunters are pissing in our pampers as you say because we don't own supercubs or have access to air to ground communications to tell us where the sheep are. We are frustrated by a government that caters to non resident huntiing opportunites to the deteriment to the very people who elected them. When we are fortunate enough to harvest a ram we earn it the old fashion way, with hard work and blisters. Your attitude is typical of assistant guides and outfitters and quite frankly is bullshit. There is room is bc for guides and non residents but you sure as hell shouldn't be driving the bus. you should be thankful that you have the opportunity to hunt in bc. In no other jurisdiction in north america do non residents have more hunting oipportunities than bc. Why can't you guys be satisfied with the great deal you have. Why do you have to keep pushing resident hunters out of the picture? In my humble opinion you can take the chip on your shoulder and shove it up your ass. If you can't I will glady do it for you!!!!!!!!!

[Stone Sheep Steve]

YukonJohn your post is a great disapointment. Although you are an assistant guide your posts have usually been pretty positive. along with my hunting partner I have been on about 43 stone sheep hunts give or take a couple. in our earlier years we were tough and indomitable and accessed areas many residents only dreamed about but at no time were were outside the influence of guides and their non residents cients. no matter how many days we travelled by horseback to get into a remote area we were always competing head to head with guides and their non resident clients. Often we were able to sit down and discuss a hunting strategy that would benefit both parties. But alas many times we have been told that we had no business being in the area and that we should be somewheres else. Jon and I are not average resident sheep hunters we have made stone sheep hunting a focal point of our lives. I can tell you from first hand how frustrating it is to compete with super cubs, ground to air communications, and constant competition from guides that have a thorough knowledge of the area and little regard for resident hunting sucess. We as resident hunters are pissing in our pampers as you say because we don't own supercubs or have access to air to ground communications to tell us where the sheep are. We are frustrated by a government that caters to non resident huntiing opportunites to the deteriment to the very people who eleceted them. When we are fortunate enough to harvest a ram we earn it the old fashion way, with hard work and blisters. Your attitude is typical of assistant guides and outfitters and quite frankly is bullshit. There is room is bc for guides and non residents but you sure as hell shouldn't be driving the bus. you should be thankful that you have the opportunity to hunt in bc. In no other jurisdiction in north america do non residents have more hunting oipportunities that bc. Why can't up guys be satisfied with the great deal you have. Why do you have to keep pushing resident hunters out of the picture? In my humble opinion you can take the chip on your shoulder and shove it up your ass. If you can't I will glady to it for you!!!!!!!!!

On that note...I'm going to bed with a smile on my face.

Well said Bridger!

SSS

[BCrams]

YukonJohn your post is a great disapointment. Although you are an assistant guide your posts have usually been pretty positive. along with my hunting partner I have been on about 43 stone sheep hunts give or take a couple. in our earlier years we were tough and indomitable and accessed areas many residents only dreamed about but at no time were were outside the influence of guides and their non residents cients. no matter how many days we travelled by horseback to get into a remote area we were always competing head to head with guides and their non resident clients. Often we were able to sit down and discuss a hunting strategy that would benefit both parties. But alas many times we have been told that we had no business being in the area and that we should be somewheres else. Jon and I are not average resident sheep hunters we have made stone sheep hunting a focal point of our lives. I can tell you from first hand how frustrating it is to compete with super cubs, ground to air communications, and constant competition from guides that have a thorough knowledge of the area and little regard for resident hunting sucess. We as resident hunters are pissing in our pampers as you say because we don't own supercubs or have access to air to ground communications to tell us where the sheep are. We are frustrated by a government that caters to non resident huntiing opportunites to the deteriment to the very people who elected them. When we are fortunate enough to harvest a ram we earn it the old fashion way, with hard work and blisters. Your attitude is typical of assistant guides and outfitters and quite frankly is bullshit. There is room is bc for guides and non residents but you sure as hell shouldn't be driving the bus. you should be thankful that you have the opportunity to hunt in bc. In no other jurisdiction in north america do non residents have more hunting oipportunities than bc. Why can't up guys be satisfied with the great deal you have. Why do you have to keep pushing resident hunters out of the picture? In my humble opinion you can take the chip on your shoulder and shove it up your ass. If you can't I will glady do it for you!!!!!!!!!

Hittin the sack with a big grin here too!

Great post that tells it like it is.

[6616]

YukonJohn your post is a great disapointment. Although you are an assistant guide your posts have usually been pretty positive. along with my hunting partner I have been on about 43 stone sheep hunts give or take a couple. in our earlier years we were tough and indomitable and accessed areas many residents only dreamed about but at no time were were outside the influence of guides and their non residents cients. no matter how many days we travelled by horseback to get into a remote area we were always competing head to head with guides and their non resident clients. Often we were able to sit down and discuss a hunting strategy that would benefit both parties. But alas many times we have been told that we had no business being in the area and that we should be somewheres else. Jon and I are not average resident sheep hunters we have made stone sheep hunting a focal point of our lives. I can tell you from first hand how frustrating it is to compete with super cubs, ground to air communications, and constant competition from guides that have a thorough knowledge of the area and little regard for resident hunting sucess. We as resident hunters are pissing in our pampers as you say because we don't own supercubs or have access to air to ground communications to tell us where the sheep are. We are frustrated by a government that caters to non resident huntiing opportunites to the deteriment to the very people who elected them. When we are fortunate enough to harvest a ram we earn it the old fashion way, with hard work and blisters. Your attitude is typical of assistant guides and outfitters and quite frankly is bullshit. There is room is bc for guides and non residents but you sure as hell shouldn't be driving the bus. you should be thankful that you have the opportunity to hunt in bc. In no other jurisdiction in north america do non residents have more hunting oipportunities than bc. Why can't up guys be satisfied with the great deal you have. Why do you have to keep pushing resident hunters out of the picture? In my humble opinion you can take the chip on your shoulder and shove it up your ass. If you can't I will glady do it for you!!!!!!!!!

Hip Hip Hooray, yah Bridger....!

[frodo]

Bridger I have been watching this thread with interest but as of now I am going to start to work on:
1. getting GO quota's reduced to the origional 90/10 policy.
2. a residents only season for a month which excludes Non-residents.
3. no GO quota in some zones to increase resident success.
4. ensuring GO's and Ass't guides are BC residents.
5. permits to accompany for other Canadians.

That young Ass't Guides attitude has galvanized me into action so it can't be said he does no good.

[325 wsm]

4. ensuring GO's and Ass't guides are BC residents.




Frodo your way out to lunch on this point. People in Canada need to travel to other places to work in Canada.
Maybe you should try making it so that non-residents are put on LEH (still have to hire a GO in drawn area) and Residents on quotas and manage areas individually according to sheep populations. LEH for residents will only ensure that hunters keep getting drawn in areas they aren't familiar with, therefor limiting chance of success. Have already seen a few posts on this site saying " got drawn for my second choice does anyone know anything about this area? "
Just because your pissed of at a guide who has made some good points (even if not worded in a polite manner) you should still sit and think a bit more about it before trying to take action.
By the way your point #4 pissed me off but only enough to try and discuss REASONABLE solutions

[Devilbear]

I would have to agree with Willy442 on one and only one aspect of his posts, while ignoring his never-ending sexual references to resident hunters, their peni and all of the other such crap he posts...I am not a psychologist and will leave interpretation of such behaviour to those who specialize in such mental health issues.

I am not too keen on sheep being hunted in July and feel very strongly that an August opening date is early enough. I am not as familiar with the northern regions of BC as some here, but, have lived alone in the mountains there for long enough to have some grasp of "greenup" dates and so forth. I do know that much of the Kootenays summer range for various ungulates is not really available to them until late July, in many years and the animals need this time to feed, undisturbed by humans.

I think that an exclusive season for BC citizens and I mean CANADIAN citizens, not the way it is now, would be the very minimum that is acceptable, this in late August-mid. September. A month without ANY GO-foreign hunter activity would be a good start and NO GO-foreign access to the resource where LEH is in effect. I would prefer to ban all American and other foreign hunting here, permanently, but, the above is a first step toward recovering our right to our game.

GOs and guides that make questionable personal remarks here simply show an attitude that will make non-hunting BC people less willing to accept their presence in our province, IMHO.

[Devilbear]

I agree with Frodo and would lobby for ALL GOS and ALL of their employees to be CANADIAN citizens AND BC residents, ONLY, NO exceptions. While, I agree with Canadians working in Canada wherever they wish to, this is a special situation and requires a different approach than most others.

BTW, when I applied for a job in forestry in the Yukon, I was told, "we would love to have you, with your experience and references", but, we MUST hire Yukoners".....my direct ancestors participated in the "Klondike" from the early days, but, I am not "welcome" to work there, it seems.

[325 wsm]

Preference is given to Yukoner's who are qualified And if none are qualified they will then look at someone who is not a Yukon resident. While your quote of reply to your application is probably correct word for word I think you neglected to add the word "first" at the end of your quote.

BTW, when I applied for a job in forestry in the Yukon, I was told, "we would love to have you, with your experience and references", but, we MUST hire Yukoners".....my direct ancestors participated in the "Klondike" from the early days, but, I am not "welcome" to work there, it seems.[/QUOTE]

[bushguy]

YukonJohn your post is a great disapointment. Although you are an assistant guide your posts have usually been pretty positive. along with my hunting partner I have been on about 43 stone sheep hunts give or take a couple. in our earlier years we were tough and indomitable and accessed areas many residents only dreamed about but at no time were were outside the influence of guides and their non residents cients. no matter how many days we travelled by horseback to get into a remote area we were always competing head to head with guides and their non resident clients. Often we were able to sit down and discuss a hunting strategy that would benefit both parties. But alas many times we have been told that we had no business being in the area and that we should be somewheres else. Jon and I are not average resident sheep hunters we have made stone sheep hunting a focal point of our lives. I can tell you from first hand how frustrating it is to compete with super cubs, ground to air communications, and constant competition from guides that have a thorough knowledge of the area and little regard for resident hunting sucess. We as resident hunters are pissing in our pampers as you say because we don't own supercubs or have access to air to ground communications to tell us where the sheep are. We are frustrated by a government that caters to non resident huntiing opportunites to the deteriment to the very people who elected them. When we are fortunate enough to harvest a ram we earn it the old fashion way, with hard work and blisters. Your attitude is typical of assistant guides and outfitters and quite frankly is bullshit. There is room is bc for guides and non residents but you sure as hell shouldn't be driving the bus. you should be thankful that you have the opportunity to hunt in bc. In no other jurisdiction in north america do non residents have more hunting oipportunities than bc. Why can't you guys be satisfied with the great deal you have. Why do you have to keep pushing resident hunters out of the picture? In my humble opinion you can take the chip on your shoulder and shove it up your ass. If you can't I will glady do it for you!!!!!!!!!

Well said Bridger,keep up the great work,,,dont usually have too much to say ,,,,but this deserves a high five.




Bump to the top :mrgreen::mrgreen:,,,what an extremely piss poor attitude yukon john,,there are a lot of "resident" hunters on here that have "been there done that",,,like you are doing now,the guiding thing,,,you remind me of a punk teenager,,,who thinks he's all that,,,,,,,,,,,but needs a good spanking.Big yukon hunting guide,,,*****,,,funny stuff.You da man!

[BromBones]

Some pretty heated discussion as usual when sheep hunting is on the menu!:-D

Can't stand attitudes from guides like yukonjohn. It's that same greed that will screw up our hunting opportunities in the future. MOE needs to get their shit together and clean up the quota mess in reg 6 - it's a bloody shambles & makes absolutely no sense.

Good post by Bridger. There's a guy who's welcome at my fire.

[325 wsm]

Many years ago (30 +) the government bought out an outfitter in zone 7 of the Yukon that has some of the best genetics and populations for Dall sheep anywhere. It is now mostly LEH and is open only to Yukon residents. Maybe the BCWF could accomplish something like this in BC.

[325 wsm]

[QUOTE=bushguy;637185]Well said Bridger,keep up the great work,,,dont usually have too much to say ,,,,but this deserves a high five.




Bridger is obviously a well educated sheep hunter and always has good posts.

[bruin]

Well we've never been known for being highly educated! It would be nice if we weren't all painted with the same brush.




Many years ago (30 +) the government bought out an outfitter in zone 7 of the Yukon that has some of the best genetics and populations for Dall sheep anywhere. It is now mostly LEH and is open only to Yukon residents. Maybe the BCWF could accomplish something like this in BC.

I know some residents in the Yukon and they have been very happy with this area and its produced some incredible animals that don't get much attention because in many cases that's the northern way. Then again, some of them say this area is now underutalized. (I don't have any statistics for that). Then again, if its a somewhat remote area would it be a bad thing if it was underutalized? I think this could be a good idea for the BCWF. It could take some pressure off of both parties.

[Devilbear]

Preference is given to Yukoner's who are qualified And if none are qualified they will then look at someone who is not a Yukon resident. While your quote of reply to your application is probably correct word for word I think you neglected to add the word "first" at the end of your quote.

BTW, when I applied for a job in forestry in the Yukon, I was told, "we would love to have you, with your experience and references", but, we MUST hire Yukoners".....my direct ancestors participated in the "Klondike" from the early days, but, I am not "welcome" to work there, it seems.[/quote]

I am well aware of that and I agree with this type of regulation, in general, my wife was an "outpost" RN in the Yukon and NWT. The situation I encountered simply was that there WAS NO consideration of "qualifications" and, according to YOUR posted opinion here, I should have at least been considered. You can't have it both ways, IMHO.

As it happens, I later applied to Alberta and although they have a similar regulation, the Forest Officer in charge made a phone call to Edmonton and Victoria, the last to check me out and I was offered a job within three hours, based on my experience. Should he have hired me over an Alberta citizen with appropriate qualifications, but, less actual field experience than I happen to have....NO, IMO, residents first.

I still, after almost nine years of retirement, receive frequent job offers, including in the "Territories", so, my attitude is not based on a personal grievance, it is what I consider "right".

[frodo]

Thanks for the thoughtful comments 325 WSM-could you live with GO's must be BC Residents and Ass't Guides from BC get first crack then other Canadians?

[d6dan]

Many years ago (30 +) the government bought out an outfitter in zone 7 of the Yukon that has some of the best genetics and populations for Dall sheep anywhere. It is now mostly LEH and is open only to Yukon residents. Maybe the BCWF could accomplish something like this in BC.

325wsm I have nothing against your employment:), but I have a hard time accepting the fact that the Yukon Govt actually paid (bought) a guide outfiitters area? so the residents could hunt. I always thought the yukon belonged to the people first and not a guide/outfitters?.

Yes, It would be nice to have an area in BC where a BC Resident could hunt sheep, etc without having a guide/outfitter around. I certainly hope that this Govt of (BC) doesn't follow in those footsteps and starts paying an Outfitter for something he doesn't own.

[6616]

It also pisses me off when some residents on here have in excess of a dozen rams and they cry about the guides killing them all. Who needs to kill that many Stone Rams outside of being a guide?

You are entitled to place sheep on a pedestel and see them as something special over and above other game animals and set yourself a personal quota of only killing one or two rams in a lifetime if that's your choice, no one is attempting to force you to kill more rams,,,, but it's just plain wrong for you to expect all other sheep hunters to adopt your personal criteria on sheep hunting and to verbally attack those that don't...!

Killing a dozen rams in an entire lifetime of sheep hunting is perfectly legal and ethical even if it does not meet your personal criteria and still represents many trips with no rams harvested. This merely demonstates that other people besides yourself place a high value on the sheep hunting experience.

When you were outfitting did you turn down repeat clients because, by your personal criteria, they had already killed their lifetime quota of rams? It's interesting to hear someone who was responsible for the harvest of 100 or more rams complain about an individual that has harvested a dozen or so, or is it OK in you oponion because dollars were involved?

The persons you refer to who may have killed a dozen rams might just be worried about the future of sheep hunting for all BC residents, not their own personal goals, have you considered that?

[325 wsm]

Thanks for the thoughtful comments 325 WSM-could you live with GO's must be BC Residents and Ass't Guides from BC get first crack then other Canadians?

I think that GO's should only have to be Canadian and then should be able to employ who they see fit to do the best job. I think you'll find a lot of BC outfitters hire locally whenever possible. Here in the Yukon a lot of outfitters hire residents from other provinces and I see no problem with that. Also I can think of 4 of the 20 areas in the Yukon that are owned and operated by BC residents.

[Deaddog]

Kind of nice to have outfitters in sheep country..makes it a whole lot easier to get to the sheep when I can hike/ride up their trails:mrgreen: DD

[bruin]

paying an Outfitter for something he doesn't own.

He bought the right to outfit in the first place. I'd say he owns it. A dairy farmer buys quota to produce milk. I'd say he owns it.

[bridger]

There is no basically to what I'm saying. THE GUIDES SHOULD STAY ON QUOTA. The residents need to grow a penis and start hunting Sheep. If they can't do that then maybe the post saying we should gift wrap Rams and leave them on doorsteps for the whinners has some merrit. It also pisses me off when some residents on here have in excess of a dozen rams and they cry about the guides killing them all. Who needs to kill that many Stone Rams outside of being a guide?

how about the non resident trophy hunter butch kuflach that has 11 grandslams. I doubt any outfitter would turn him down if he started on the 12th. of all the resident sheep hunters I know only two have take more than a dozen rams and that was over a period of years so i would be interested to know how many guys on here have taken over a dozen stone rams.

[Devilbear]

I think that GO's should only have to be Canadian and then should be able to employ who they see fit to do the best job. I think you'll find a lot of BC outfitters hire locally whenever possible. Here in the Yukon a lot of outfitters hire residents from other provinces and I see no problem with that. Also I can think of 4 of the 20 areas in the Yukon that are owned and operated by BC residents.

So, under your "policy", a "Canadian" GO backed and controlled by big Yankee money, as is the case now here in BC's best hunting areas, check for yourself if you don't believe me, should be able to hire whom he chooses? This would mean that Americans could come here and "guide" and so could other foreigners.

BC outfitters hire guides from Alberta and Saskachewan and Manitoba because they do not want BC residents learning their "honeyholes" and then bringing their buddies hunting there after leaving the GO's employment. Some are local, but, lots are not.

The Yukon and BC have a very different employment situation and many people will not work in the "Territories" plus many Canadians have built businesses there and ALL Canadians subsidize the "Territories" through out taxes. Consequently, it is not really the same situation AND we in BC have a FAR more generous "permit to accompany" system than the Yukon does, so, maybe we should copy theirs?

No, BC citizens in any and all aspects of guiding only is the bare minimum that is acceptable and a total ban on foreign hunting and the concomitant effect upon the GOs would be best.

[Gunner]

He doesn't own the land or the animals,he owns a quota at the behest of the Government(the people of BC).If what he bought won't support him he should be in another business. Gunner

[bridger]

Kind of nice to have outfitters in sheep country..makes it a whole lot easier to get to the sheep when I can hike/ride up their trails:mrgreen: DD


I agree! But that doesn't mean residents should keep getting the short end of the stick.

[Devilbear]

He bought the right to outfit in the first place. I'd say he owns it. A dairy farmer buys quota to produce milk. I'd say he owns it.

Again, it is not the same situation, at least here in BC. If, you read the pertinent legislation, you will see that there is NO "guarantee" of a quota or even access to game given with the GO's licence, nor, should there be.

ANY business has risks and can lose it's market share and go out of business or adapt to changing circumstances, why should GO's be different?

They have screwed the resident hunter for far too long and it is time we took back what is ours, no matter what it takes to do so.

[bruin]

In what other business can a license be given, owners making large investments to "improve" and run their operation, and have it stripped becuase another user group wants it all to themselves. That would be like hunters being stripped of their hunting licenses because bear watchers want to watch more bears.
Bankrupcy because of competition/poor management/changing markets is one thing, bankrupting someone because of opinion is another.

I like the way ownership and guides rules are now. It would be nice if foreign ownership wasn't so prominent but it still allows many BC'ers to do what they love.

[GoatGuy]

In what other business can a license be given, owners making large investments to "improve" and run their operation, and have it stripped becuase another user group wants it all to themselves. That would be like hunters being stripped of their hunting licenses because bear watchers want to watch more bears.

Too late, that already happened. Guide-outfitters are only given a license to guide non-residents aliens, nothing more. There is no guarantee of quota or allocation attached to a guides license.

Some outfitters in BC are more than happy to simply sell-out to anti-hunters which is exactly what you're talking about. It's a business, it's not about hunting.


Bankrupcy because of competition/poor management/changing markets is one thing, bankrupting someone because of opinion is another.

I like the way ownership and guides rules are now. It would be nice if foreign ownership wasn't so prominent but it still allows many BC'ers to do what they love.

Guide-outfitting in BC has one of the lowest bankruptcy rates in NA. It is not a competitive industry, nor is the environment in which guide-outfitters operate.

By having exclusive rights guide-outfitting it is actually an anti-competition industry in BC.

The US has a competitive guide-outfitting industry. People put in for tags, get the draw and then find an outfitter in most cases. That is competition. Going to the outfitters for the tags in an area which they have exclusive rights (monopoly) is anti-competition.

In BC when times get tough (that's a relative word) outfitters ask for more tags or regulations which increase 'trophy potential' and reduce resident participation and harvest. In the past that has worked. That what LEH has been transformed into over the last 25 years.

[willy442]

Willy, the outfitter quota in 6 is higher than it is in 7B.

The total AAH in Region 6 will be around 320+.

The AAH is only around 190 in 7b.

Do you think that's right?

The quota means nothing when the G/O's there are not harvesting even close to the numbers. I have no arguement about the fact they should be cut back to realistic numbers. I also agree with resident priority, what I disagree with is the fact that the resident is owed anything as far as actual kill numbers. If they want to harvest thier allocation, get educated and get out there and hunt. Cut the feel sorry for me bullshit that runs prominent amongst some on here. Some that actually consider themselves sheep hunters.
I agree the average G/O will be more successful then the resident in kills. There are many reasons for this, experience, investment in equipment, knowledge of the area and we could go on for many more. If you look at Bridgers post, He has been on over 40 sheep hunts and has been able to compete with the guides due to his investment. That same avenue to successful sheep hunts is available to each and every resident hunter if they so desire. Being limited by finances is something many of us face and are somewhat restricted by the fact. Many nonresidents save for years for a chance at a Stone Ram. Maybe those hard done by residents that can't find sheep should save up and get some rigging to access the hotspots. I would like to know how many Stone Rams Bridger and his group have harvested over the years. Seems like the province has pretty much provided him with more than his share of rams.

[willy442]

You are entitled to place sheep on a pedestel and see them as something special over and above other game animals and set yourself a personal quota of only killing one or two rams in a lifetime if that's your choice, no one is attempting to force you to kill more rams,,,, but it's just plain wrong for you to expect all other sheep hunters to adopt your personal criteria on sheep hunting and to verbally attack those that don't...!

Killing a dozen rams in an entire lifetime of sheep hunting is perfectly legal and ethical even if it does not meet your personal criteria and still represents many trips with no rams harvested. This merely demonstates that other people besides yourself place a high value on the sheep hunting experience.

When you were outfitting did you turn down repeat clients because, by your personal criteria, they had already killed their lifetime quota of rams? It's interesting to hear someone who was responsible for the harvest of 100 or more rams complain about an individual that has harvested a dozen or so, or is it OK in you oponion because dollars were involved?

The persons you refer to who may have killed a dozen rams might just be worried about the future of sheep hunting for all BC residents, not their own personal goals, have you considered that?

Actually I would think those that Sheep hunt do so because of the serine country and experience enjoyed while hunting them. The need for many kills is not a high priority in my opinion as an accomplished sheep hunter. Killing is actually anti climatic in the big picture, unless you think like Charles Manson. I have nothing against those that continue sheep hunting setting thier standards continually higher after each successful hunt, to kill a ram just because you can is wasting a very valuable and limited resource, others may enjoy. I remind you that I've guided for over 100 rams and have only shot 1 Stone and 1 Dall for myself.

[GoatGuy]

The quota means nothing when the G/O's there are not harvesting even close to the numbers. I have no arguement about the fact they should be cut back to realistic numbers. I also agree with resident priority, what I disagree with is the fact that the resident is owed anything as far as actual kill numbers. If they want to harvest thier allocation, get educated and get out there and hunt. Cut the feel sorry for me bullshit that runs prominent amongst some on here. Some that actually consider themselves sheep hunters.
I agree the average G/O will be more successful then the resident in kills. There are many reasons for this, experience, investment in equipment, knowledge of the area and we could go on for many more. If you look at Bridgers post, He has been on over 40 sheep hunts and has been able to compete with the guides due to his investment. That same avenue to successful sheep hunts is available to each and every resident hunter if they so desire. Being limited by finances is something many of us face and are somewhat restricted by the fact. Many nonresidents save for years for a chance at a Stone Ram. Maybe those hard done by residents that can't find sheep should save up and get some rigging to access the hotspots. I would like to know how many Stone Rams Bridger and his group have harvested over the years. Seems like the province has pretty much provided him with more than his share of rams.

I suppose that's the point Willy, after the quota is used up there's nothing left. I've worked in that country and the sheep simply don't exist- they aren't there. The outfitters in 6 don't even book their quota because they plain and simply don't have the sheep. Luckily the quota is tied to age and most of the outfitters there are pretty ethical folks otherwise the sheep would be in trouble as well.

I think the concept was to have a pre-season to show that after residents shot some sheep non-resident days per kill would go up and success rates would go down. That would show how out to lunch the quotas and AAH are over there.

So far as the rest of it goes, it's not my part. You know the limitations that most resident hunters have and it's really not worth arguing. I've got horses and all the rest of the stuff a person needs, couple months a year to hunt, but that isn't to say that the average resident hunter has access to those tools or the learning. Think about the first time you went sheep hunting versus the last time you guided a successful hunter. You have 30 years of experiencing with 3-4 months in the bush every year. Residents get 7-10 days in the bush a couple times a lifetime for most - they will never acheive the level of experience a guide has. It's pretty rediculous to think this is even close to a level playing field particularly given the high fidelity of a species like sheep.

Anyways, really, this shouldn't be a guide-outfitter vs resident issue. It's a resident thing. There really should be no 'competition'. It's about hunting. Resident only seasons and areas are common across most of North America. If there's a surplus then someone should harvest it but the first crack should go to resident hunters like it does pretty much everywhere else.

The point of this is was to flush out a rat and to see if the AAH is actually accurate or even close in Region 6. I think we can agree it isn't.

[Devilbear]

To even suggest that a lifelong, native-born BC citizen should have to purchase a lot of very costly gear to compete with a GO and his foreign client is just bizarre, what total bullshit.

The never-ending derogatory comments about resident hunters are also total bullshit and I think that such posts are highly offensive to those here who "walk their talk", not hide behind "injuries" and other pussy excuses.

[willy442]

I suppose that's the point Willy, after the quota is used up there's nothing left. I've worked in that country and the sheep simply don't exist- they aren't there. The outfitters in 6 don't even book their quota because they plain and simply don't have the sheep. Luckily the quota is tied to age and most of the outfitters there are pretty ethical folks otherwise the sheep would be in trouble as well.

I'm in full agreement with the fact the Sheep are not there in numbers to match the tags issued

I think the concept was to have a pre-season to show that after residents shot some sheep non-resident days per kill would go up and success rates would go down. That would show how out to lunch the quotas and AAH are over there.

I have a real problem with this statement. It appears that this was to take place and prove a point at the expense of the Sheep. How many more times are we going to deal with the results of this kind of regulation, just to prove a point. We all know the Sheep are not there so lets cut back quota's and AAH until we can better determine how we want to manage the issue. This keeps sheep on the mountain and when we can make an educated effort at having a sustainable harvest, open it up.

So far as the rest of it goes, it's not my part. You know the limitations that most resident hunters have and it's really not worth arguing. I've got horses and all the rest of the stuff a person needs, couple months a year to hunt, but that isn't to say that the average resident hunter has access to those tools or the learning. Think about the first time you went sheep hunting versus the last time you guided a successful hunter. You have 30 years of experiencing with 3-4 months in the bush every year. Residents get 7-10 days in the bush a couple times a lifetime for most - they will never acheive the level of experience a guide has. It's pretty rediculous to think this is even close to a level playing field particularly given the high fidelity of a species like sheep.

One group is a business, the other is recreational. How can you ever expect the numbers to line up? What makes you think the business man has to back off to give the recreational user a better chance? Is it not about the opportunity to get out there and look for both?

Anyways, really, this shouldn't be a guide-outfitter vs resident issue. It's a resident thing. There really should be no 'competition'. It's about hunting. Resident only seasons and areas are common across most of North America. If there's a surplus then someone should harvest it but the first crack should go to resident hunters like it does pretty much everywhere else.

My point is it's about opportunity not harvest. If you want to harvest get out there and hunt.

The point of this is was to flush out a rat and to see if the AAH is actually accurate or even close in Region 6. I think we can agree it isn't.

Why do we have to make this a scientific study at the expense of sheep to prove a point.

[GoatGuy]

Why do we have to make this a scientific study at the expense of sheep to prove a point.

The beauty of the quota is the harvest would still be sustainable (ie, 8+).

The reason you need a scientific study, this would be an experiment, is because F all else will happen if you don't. This has been going on since the 70s.

Unless of course you want to see this spill over into the political arena. Not my place but my guess is where this will all end up.


It's unfortunate.

[willy442]

To even suggest that a lifelong, native-born BC citizen should have to purchase a lot of very costly gear to compete with a GO and his foreign client is just bizarre, what total bullshit.

The never-ending derogatory comments about resident hunters are also total bullshit and I think that such posts are highly offensive to those here who "walk their talk", not hide behind "injuries" and other pussy excuses.

Devilbear; My point was, if you want to get out to the virgin sheep hunting areas that some G/O's enjoy. Aquire the the gear to get there. How would you make your way there with out it.
None of my comments were derogatory towards the resident other than for the fact: Sheep hunting is a tough sport for tough people, so why all the whinning. I think Yukon John had the right idea for some by gift wrapping horns for thier doorsteps. My ram is 43.5 inches and book quality, maybe I should start selling replicas to those that think they are owed a ram on the streets of Vancouver or Kelowna.

[willy442]

The beauty of the quota is the harvest would still be sustainable (ie, 8+).

The reason you need a scientific study, this would be an experiment, is because F all else will happen if you don't. This has been going on since the 70s.

Unless of course you want to see this spill over into the political arena. Not my place but my guess is where this will all end up.


It's unfortunate.

I agree. Don't forget the fact it is "we hunters that can't get our shit together to keep it out"

[Kody94]

Devilbear; My point was, if you want to get out to the virgin sheep hunting areas that some G/O's enjoy. Aquire the the gear to get there. How would you make your way there with out it.
None of my comments were derogatory towards the resident other than for the fact: Sheep hunting is a tough sport for tough people, so why all the whinning. I think Yukon John had the right idea for some by gift wrapping horns for thier doorsteps. My ram is 43.5 inches and book quality, maybe I should start selling replicas to those that think they are owed a ram on the streets of Vancouver or Kelowna.


That's just not realistic for your average guy. Most guys just don't have the time or resources to "compete" with guides. Owning and maintaining horses and learning how to use them well enough that its realistic to make a multi-day pack trip back into sheep country is simply out of the question for most people.

Spending the kind of money it takes to fly in is also beyond the means of many. Especially the number of times it would take to get to know an area as well as the outfitters.

Many folks don't even have enough vacation days to spend the kind of time in there that it would take to learn an area and the trails etc well enough to have a chance to be on a level playing field with the g/os.

The best and most dedicated residents can barely match the success rates of outfitters. Your average guy will never be able to come close. The way the season is set up, its a race to the legal rams and the residents will never ever win. The region 6 "pre-season" scenario was created to give the residents a first crack at the rams...that's it. The outfitters wouldn't have to have their quota reduced in order to try and better balance the harvest. They'd still have all the opportunity to sell hunts and if they can find the 8+ yo rams they are targetting, their clients have the opportunity too. Its still a helluva tough hunt for the residents, no different than it currently is in fact...the "gift wrapping" comment is friggen rediculous.

ps: my best stone is longer than yours....what the hell does your 43.5" ram have to do with anything?

[bridger]

willy--who decides what anyone's share of stone sheep is? By your own admission you have been responsible for the killing of over 100 rams. those rams would not be dead if you hadn't used your considerable skill to bring about their demise. \But according to your rules that is ok because you are a guide and really didn't kill the rams. someone else did. I always find it interesting when an outfitter thinks he is losing a discussion about stone sheep he reverts back to the old how many rams does a resident hunter need argument. Be honest if I were a rich texan and wanted to pay you the outfitter $35,000 you would take me hunting as long as I kept paying right no matter how many rams I killed right? And if you wouldn't through some rare pang of conscious another outfitter would. so I guess your rules are if you pay money you can kill as many sheep as you want. Or if you gget paid to hunt sheep you can be responsible for killing as many rams as you want. However, if you are a resident hunting on your own you should be limited in the number of rams you take. What about whitetails or moose or elk etc. Should residents have a life time quota on them as well.?Not that it is any of your business but I have 9 rams. 6 stones on self guided hunts and 3 dall sheep on fully guided hunts. Had I wanted to I could have easily killed a sheep almost every year. So if 6 stone rams in 43 years makes me something other than a good sheep hunter in your eyes I am not going to lose any sleep over it. As far as the bunch i hunt with as you describe them the overall average of sucess is about one ram every five or six years. As a group of resident hunters that hunt together at times and alone at others we have killed far less rams than you and your hunters have. you live in a glass house so don't throw any more rocks at me. Let's keep to the topic of resident priority as that is what this thread is about. If you don't think residents shouldn't have priority fine with me keep the personal bullshit out of it.

[Devilbear]

Devilbear; My point was, if you want to get out to the virgin sheep hunting areas that some G/O's enjoy. Aquire the the gear to get there. How would you make your way there with out it.
None of my comments were derogatory towards the resident other than for the fact: Sheep hunting is a tough sport for tough people, so why all the whinning. I think Yukon John had the right idea for some by gift wrapping horns for thier doorsteps. My ram is 43.5 inches and book quality, maybe I should start selling replicas to those that think they are owed a ram on the streets of Vancouver or Kelowna.

Willy, there are lots of people here who have spent as much or even more time in the BC wilderness as you have and they do not make snide comments about other hunters in EVERY freakin' post they put here, but, YOU do.

As to ...tough people..., well, those that hike and climb are my idea of what this term means.

[GoatGuy]

One group is a business, the other is recreational. How can you ever expect the numbers to line up? What makes you think the business man has to back off to give the recreational user a better chance? Is it not about the opportunity to get out there and look for both?

It isn't about the 'business man' about backing off. The allocation for residents is a minimum of 60%. What that means is if residents are not harvesting their allocation there should be a pile of sheep sitting on the hillside every year and there should be some old age and whopper rams in Region 6. There aren't. You know it's funny we talk about wildlife management by science and when one group doesn't like it it's rejected or we morph the argument into something about money, 'my business', anything other than wildlife. Not surprising I suppose.

Personally I don't see this as a 'negotiation', or giving recreational users a 'better chance'. I don't see guide-outfitters and residents in the same bag. No different than lawyers don't do brain surgery, residents and outfitters are not in the same market nor should they be 'competing'. Residents of BC own the resource, guide-outfitters pay residents to use it - really it's a form of lease. Residents are the ones who set who, when and where guide-outfitters use it and that's actually laid out in the Wildlife Allocation Policy. It's fairly explicit and at this point not really worth arguing about. If outfitters can't sell a hunt that's unfortunate but not significant enough reason to reduce or eliminate resident hunters.

This concept that residents should have to compete with outfitters for their resource is pretty wild really.

As you know guide-outfitter harvest was originally set up at least in concept because there was a surplus to be harvested after residents were done. Over time that's deviated from the original intent and it may be time to bring things back for a few reasons. The most important one is that I think this will help get people on track to making more wildlife instead of trying to steal each other's share.

Funny, this discussion is really about the allocation policy which was signed, sealed and agreed to 4 years ago and f all has happened. There's no sense in pointing fingers, a deal's a deal.

It's unfortunate and as I said before another problem that will end up in the political arena.

[Kody94]

Residents of BC own the resource, guide-outfitters pay residents to use it - really it's a form of lease. Residents are the ones who set who, when and where guide-outfitters use it and that's actually laid out in the Wildlife Allocation Policy. It's fairly explicit and at this point not really worth arguing about. If outfitters can't sell a hunt that's unfortunate but not significant enough reason to reduce or eliminate resident hunters.

This concept that residents should have to compete with outfitters for their resource is pretty wild really.


AMEN to that. I am not anti-outfitter by any stretch of the imagination...but every discussion on this topic should only occur with both sides understanding and acknowledging the context laid out by GoatGuy in the quote above.

[willy442]

willy--who decides what anyone's share of stone sheep is? By your own admission you have been responsible for the killing of over 100 rams. those rams would not be dead if you hadn't used your considerable skill to bring about their demise. \But according to your rules that is ok because you are a guide and really didn't kill the rams. someone else did. I always find it interesting when an outfitter thinks he is losing a discussion about stone sheep he reverts back to the old how many rams does a resident hunter need argument. Be honest if I were a rich texan and wanted to pay you the outfitter $35,000 you would take me hunting as long as I kept paying right no matter how many rams I killed right? And if you wouldn't through some rare pang of conscious another outfitter would. so I guess your rules are if you pay money you can kill as many sheep as you want. Or if you gget paid to hunt sheep you can be responsible for killing as many rams as you want. However, if you are a resident hunting on your own you should be limited in the number of rams you take. What about whitetails or moose or elk etc. Should residents have a life time quota on them as well.?Not that it is any of your business but I have 9 rams. 6 stones on self guided hunts and 3 dall sheep on fully guided hunts. Had I wanted to I could have easily killed a sheep almost every year. So if 6 stone rams in 43 years makes me something other than a good sheep hunter in your eyes I am not going to lose any sleep over it. As far as the bunch i hunt with as you describe them the overall average of sucess is about one ram every five or six years. As a group of resident hunters that hunt together at times and alone at others we have killed far less rams than you and your hunters have. you live in a glass house so don't throw any more rocks at me. Let's keep to the topic of resident priority as that is what this thread is about. If you don't think residents shouldn't have priority fine with me keep the personal bullshit out of it.

Did you not read the part of my post that said I had nothing against a sheep hunter that tries to better his trophy as he continues hunting. I was more questioning your success in relation to the point that if anyone so desired to aquire the equipment such as yourself, it could mean better success in more remote country. Why do we continually harp about the unfairness of the system when many people won't put out the effort to be successful. All of these things point toward supporting the use of easily accessed areas for residents only as I suggested a long time ago. Reducing quota's, early seasons and more LEH tags will do nothing for the novice sheep hunter. Special areas on the other hand would.

[Gateholio]

Did you not read the part of my post that said I had nothing against a sheep hunter that tries to better his trophy as he continues hunting. .

Was every ram you guided to better than the last? Was number 11 better than #1? Was #63 better than #22?

Did every repeat hunter better his last one?
:wink:

[willy442]

That's just not realistic for your average guy. Most guys just don't have the time or resources to "compete" with guides. Owning and maintaining horses and learning how to use them well enough that its realistic to make a multi-day pack trip back into sheep country is simply out of the question for most people.

Spending the kind of money it takes to fly in is also beyond the means of many. Especially the number of times it would take to get to know an area as well as the outfitters.

Many folks don't even have enough vacation days to spend the kind of time in there that it would take to learn an area and the trails etc well enough to have a chance to be on a level playing field with the g/os.

The best and most dedicated residents can barely match the success rates of outfitters. Your average guy will never be able to come close. The way the season is set up, its a race to the legal rams and the residents will never ever win. The region 6 "pre-season" scenario was created to give the residents a first crack at the rams...that's it. The outfitters wouldn't have to have their quota reduced in order to try and better balance the harvest. They'd still have all the opportunity to sell hunts and if they can find the 8+ yo rams they are targetting, their clients have the opportunity too. Its still a helluva tough hunt for the residents, no different than it currently is in fact...the "gift wrapping" comment is friggen rediculous.

ps: my best stone is longer than yours....what the hell does your 43.5" ram have to do with anything?

Glad to hear you have a bigger Stone than mine. Maybe those whinning on here about unfair treatment would rather have a replica of your than mine.
Lack of vacation days, lack of experience, lack of equipment or what ever lack of you come up with is irrelevant. If you want to be a successful deep sea fisherman, you put in the time. Sheep hunting is no different. The resident already has the whole month at the end of the season to hunt sheep without competition. Sheep are more accessable, usually better quality rams are around and capes are better. Why do residents opt not to hunt then? I guess cold feet is to big of price to pay for a decent quality set of sheep horns. The sheep are out there, it's up to the hunter to go get them.

[willy442]

Was every ram you guided to better than the last? Was number 11 better than #1? Was #63 better than #22?

Did every repeat hunter better his last one?
:wink:

Your questions are rediculous. For the most part every hunter was a new hunt, no different than a resident going out for the first time. So if the ram was 8 or indicated maturity through brooming, we allowed the client to shoot.
Repeat hunters almost always look for a better ram, usually they book as repeats because of the fact they want better. Not too many people want to dish out the cash just to shoot another.
I also could have taken a ram every year I guided, some damn big ones. I never did this though and only took 1 ram after I quit guiding. That ended my Stone Sheep hunting out of respect for very magnificent animal. Since I have taken a Dall and may one day complete my Grand Slam.

[Kody94]

Glad to hear you have a bigger Stone than mine. Maybe those whinning on here about unfair treatment would rather have a replica of your than mine.
Lack of vacation days, lack of experience, lack of equipment or what ever lack of you come up with is irrelevant. If you want to be a successful deep sea fisherman, you put in the time. Sheep hunting is no different. The resident already has the whole month at the end of the season to hunt sheep without competition. Sheep are more accessable, usually better quality rams are around and capes are better. Why do residents opt not to hunt then? I guess cold feet is to big of price to pay for a decent quality set of sheep horns. The sheep are out there, it's up to the hunter to go get them.


You are missing the point. Non-residents are harvesting more than their fair share of the resource. To a large degree, the reason residents aren't harvesting more is because the non-residents are beating the residents to the rams, and there aren't enough left over for residents to utilize their share. Its a simple fact that most residents can't and will NEVER be able to out compete outfitters for the rams that are there. "Growing a penis" and "manning up" and getting out there will not solve the problem....your "solution" is not going to work, so do you have any other bright ideas?

Keep in mind who's resource it is.

The only alternative is to reduce the outfitter's quota. I would think that would be a more undesirable outcome for outfitters.

[325 wsm]

[QUOTE=willy442;637502]Devilbear; My point was, if you want to get out to the virgin sheep hunting areas that some G/O's enjoy. Aquire the the gear to get there. How would you make your way there with out it.


Willy I'm sure that with Devilbear's a person who would never buy a product unless it was designed and built in BC using BC materials and only by lifetime BC residents. I'm sure his vehicles are made in BC, his boots are made in BC, his guns and the computer he uses to access this site are all 100% pure BC designed and built. Hell I bet you he doesn't even use the Alaska highway knowing it was built by fat, lazy, rich Americans whom I'm sure he refuses to support.
Could I be wrong, do you think he might use all those American (and other countries) products and technologies only to be so greedy as to not want to share anything in return?

[willy442]

You are missing the point. Non-residents are harvesting more than their fair share of the resource. To a large degree, the reason residents aren't harvesting more is because the non-residents are beating the residents to the rams, and there aren't enough left over for residents to utilize their share. Its a simple fact that most residents can't and will NEVER be able to out compete outfitters for the rams that are there. "Growing a penis" and "manning up" and getting out there will not solve the problem....your "solution" is not going to work, so do you have any other bright ideas?

Keep in mind who's resource it is.

The only alternative is to reduce the outfitter's quota. I would think that would be a more undesirable outcome for outfitters.

Tell me why over the years we keep reducing quota's and numbers work out a little better. Then numbers fall out of line again and we cry for another reducion in quota's the trend continues. By the admission of many on here the nonresidents are declining anyway due to the economy
Do you not think it's time we do something for the sheep and face the real issue, instead of who's shooting what. The other thing is how many of the so called sheep hunters on here are really concerned with John Doe hunter getting a ram? For the most part sheep knowledge is very secretive. Can you say PERSONNAL GAIN?

[Gateholio]

Your questions are rediculous. For the most part every hunter was a new hunt, no different than a resident going out for the first time. So if the ram was 8 or indicated maturity through brooming, we allowed the client to shoot.
Repeat hunters almost always look for a better ram, usually they book as repeats because of the fact they want better. Not too many people want to dish out the cash just to shoot another.
I also could have taken a ram every year I guided, some damn big ones. I never did this though and only took 1 ram after I quit guiding. That ended my Stone Sheep hunting out of respect for very magnificent animal. Since I have taken a Dall and may one day complete my Grand Slam.

It's not a ridiculous question Willy...It's irony.

It's okay for you to guide someone to a smaller ram than the one you guided another hunter to the year before, but it's not okay for a hunter to shoot rams except under your criteria.

It's okay for you to guide hunters to 100 rams, but not okay for a resident to kill more than you agree with.

You criticize hunters for not "bettering" their rams but at the same time you criticize hunters that post pics of rams that dont' meet your standards - shouldn't they be allowed a starting point?

You talk about how hunting sheep should be about the outdoor experience, but then when it comes down to a hunter enjoying the outdoor experience, having a good hunt, and finishing off thier personal outdoor experience by taking a ram that is either not to your standards or isn't bigger than the one they got 5 years ago, you are critical.

You were personally responsible for the death of over 100 rams (not all giant rams, either) but somehow you believe that only killing one yourself is showing "respect to a very magnificent animal"

That's irony...

Or hypocrisy. Take your pick.:wink:

[willy442]

It isn't about the 'business man' about backing off. The allocation for residents is a minimum of 60%. What that means is if residents are not harvesting their allocation there should be a pile of sheep sitting on the hillside every year and there should be some old age and whopper rams in Region 6. There aren't. You know it's funny we talk about wildlife management by science and when one group doesn't like it it's rejected or we morph the argument into something about money, 'my business', anything other than wildlife. Not surprising I suppose.

Personally I don't see this as a 'negotiation', or giving recreational users a 'better chance'. I don't see guide-outfitters and residents in the same bag. No different than lawyers don't do brain surgery, residents and outfitters are not in the same market nor should they be 'competing'. Residents of BC own the resource, guide-outfitters pay residents to use it - really it's a form of lease. Residents are the ones who set who, when and where guide-outfitters use it and that's actually laid out in the Wildlife Allocation Policy. It's fairly explicit and at this point not really worth arguing about. If outfitters can't sell a hunt that's unfortunate but not significant enough reason to reduce or eliminate resident hunters.

This concept that residents should have to compete with outfitters for their resource is pretty wild really.

As you know guide-outfitter harvest was originally set up at least in concept because there was a surplus to be harvested after residents were done. Over time that's deviated from the original intent and it may be time to bring things back for a few reasons. The most important one is that I think this will help get people on track to making more wildlife instead of trying to steal each other's share.

Funny, this discussion is really about the allocation policy which was signed, sealed and agreed to 4 years ago and f all has happened. There's no sense in pointing fingers, a deal's a deal.

It's unfortunate and as I said before another problem that will end up in the political arena.

Actually truth is the guides opened up the country so the resident had access to start sheep hunting. This was before your time though.
Tell what is the magic number you think is surplus and allowable for nonresidents?

[325 wsm]

The only alternative is to reduce the outfitter's quota. I would think that would be a more undesirable outcome for outfitters.


sounds like the best alternative as it would just drive up the price of a hunt and outfitters could work less and make just as much money.

[willy442]

It's not a ridiculous question Willy...It's irony.

It's okay for you to guide someone to a smaller ram than the one you guided another hunter to the year before, but it's not okay for a hunter to shoot rams except under your criteria.

It's okay for you to guide hunters to 100 rams, but not okay for a resident to kill more than you agree with.

You criticize hunters for not "bettering" their rams but at the same time you criticize hunters that post pics of rams that dont' meet your standards - shouldn't they be allowed a starting point?

You talk about how hunting sheep should be about the outdoor experience, but then when it comes down to a hunter enjoying the outdoor experience, having a good hunt, and finishing off thier personal outdoor experience by taking a ram that is either not to your standards or isn't bigger than the one they got 5 years ago, you are critical.

You were personally responsible for the death of over 100 rams (not all giant rams, either) but somehow you believe that only killing one yourself is showing "respect to a very magnificent animal"

That's irony...

Or hypocrisy. Take your pick.:wink:

I guess it's impossible for you to comprehend that I was guiding, not hunting for myself. Like I said every client was a new hunter, just like every new resident that goes out. The only difference is the fellow with me hired experience to help achive his goals.
On the other issue CONSERVATION is my concern not the few that are killing little sheep. Don't worry I had lots of respect for them through out my guiding career.

[Kody94]

Do you not think it's time we do something for the sheep and face the real issue, instead of who's shooting what. The other thing is how many of the so called sheep hunters on here are really concerned with John Doe hunter getting a ram? For the most part sheep knowledge is very secretive. Can you say PERSONNAL GAIN?

I'm concerned for my friends and colleagues that make the trip north a half dozen times or more and still come back empty handed every time. They put in the time and the effort and hunt damn hard. They have other commitments in life and its only because of understanding wives and kids that they have been able to do it as many times as they have. It takes time to get to know an area. It bothers me that they work damn hard and wear out pair after pair of boots and gear, and each time it seems they show up at right spot too late, after some guy on the second day of his first attempt for a stone got his with the outfitter that had been in their scouting for a couple weeks already. My friend's and colleagues will probably eventually get the time and location right so that they get there before the outfitter....but it bothers me that the reason they have to work so much harder is because there really aren't enough legal rams to go around for everyone and the outfitters get more than their fair share because they have way more time and way more resources than the residents can ever realistically have. The "pecking order" in terms of public resource utilization is the wrong way around.

Give the residents a first crack at it. If the rams are there afterward like the numbers say they should be, the g/o's will still find them.

You keep referring to doing the right thing for the sheep. What exactly do you have in mind and how would it address the current imbalance in utilization? You seem to be arguing against lowering outifitter quotas, and doing the right thing for the sheep seems to imply shooting less sheep, so I am lost....do you want the residents to shoot even less?

[Gateholio]

I guess it's impossible for you to comprehend that I was guiding, not hunting for myself. Like I said every client was a new hunter, just like every new resident that goes out.

I understand that completely. You still were responsible for the death of 100 rams...And that is okay for you, but a resident hunter taking a number of rams brings out "how many rams does a guy need?"

There is no chance that any resident hunter could even come close to matching half your kill number.


The only difference is the fellow with me hired experience to help achive his goals.

So they didn't have to "man up' and 'grow a penis?' they just had to pay you? Doesn't that make your advice to toughen up a little hypocritical?:wink:


On the other issue CONSERVATION is my concern not the few that are killing little sheep. Don't worry I had lots of respect for them through out my guiding career.

Conservation through the death of 100 rams...Uh Huh...:-D

I guess you respected them to death, which was okay, since you got paid.

I dont' have an issue with a guide being successful, but lets not forget that you had more impact on the deaths of more sheep than any hunter that you criticize here.

[GoatGuy]

Actually truth is the guides opened up the country so the resident had access to start sheep hunting. This was before your time though.
Tell what is the magic number you think is surplus and allowable for nonresidents?

Hahaha, funny comment. Who do you think paid for the highways and roads?

It's not a matter of 'who opened the country up' the fact remains that guide-outfitters are paying to use the resources of British Columbians. Who did or does what really doesn't matter.

So long as there's a surplus after resident demand is met there should be plenty of opportunity for non-residents.

[willy442]

I'm concerned for my friends and colleagues that make the trip north a half dozen times or more and still come back empty handed every time. They put in the time and the effort and hunt damn hard. They have other commitments in life and its only because of understanding wives and kids that they have been able to do it as many times as they have. It takes time to get to know an area. It bothers me that they work damn hard and wear out pair after pair of boots and gear, and each time it seems they show up at right spot too late, after some guy on the second day of his first attempt for a stone got his with the outfitter that had been in their scouting for a couple weeks already. My friend's and colleagues will probably eventually get the time and location right so that they get there before the outfitter....but it bothers me that the reason they have to work so much harder is because there really aren't enough legal rams to go around for everyone and the outfitters get more than their fair share because they have way more time and way more resources than the residents can ever realistically have. The "pecking order" in terms of public resource utilization is the wrong way around.

Give the residents a first crack at it. If the rams are there afterward like the numbers say they should be, the g/o's will still find them.

You keep referring to doing the right thing for the sheep. What exactly do you have in mind and how would it address the current imbalance in utilization? You seem to be arguing against lowering outifitter quotas, and doing the right thing for the sheep seems to imply shooting less sheep, so I am lost....do you want the residents to shoot even less?

Are you suggesting that all the good rams are shot every year? Have you ever hunted Stone Sheep into late season? I have and can tell you, that we would find rams in October that we had not seen ever, let alone just that season. I have flown winter range and seen rams that were not killed during a season.
I have no idea what the quota's should be today and really don't care, where they are as long as we still have good old rams alive to lead the young. The problem I've seen is we always cry the guides are klling all the sheep. This was not true in the past and might not be now other then when looked at by harvest numbers. Do you or anyone else have results of counts taken over winter range on mature rams. Or are we not finding them during the hunting season? I've seen quite a few 10yr old plus rams on various sites, which indicates numbers are escaping the perils of being hunted each year.
When we were harvesting our area to capacity years ago it was not uncommon to taken 16-18 trophy rams. Sometimes adjustments had to be made due to winters and wolves, but we had lots of sheep. I know numbers have decreased but that same area today I believe has a quota of 6 and maintains a very good age average. Thats 1/3rd of what it was sustaining. This area is almost impossible to access for the backpacker and no other river or lake options are available. This kind of info tells me the guides are still maintaining quotas in some areas but moving back to do it. I agree with this, hence I support special areas. Give the resident some access to sheep along corridors and leave a long season for them to enjoy. I believe G/O quotas in much of 7 are low enough to sustain in the backcountry only available to them and few residents due to thier equipment. This all points to good utilization of the opportunity and limits competition between G/O's and residents.
Guess as long as greed and politics make the rules we will all continue to loose.

[lange1212]

? For the most part sheep knowledge is very secretive. Can you say PERSONNAL GAIN?

For my resident sheep hunter brothers and sisters I wish to share my so called secrets with you. It's not at all PERSONAL GAIN as Willi442 indicates for residents in fact this is more true for GO's. If this helps 1 resident hunter harvest a ram its enough PERSONAL GAIN for me.

Sheep Areas in the Skeena Region that I will share.
1) Klastline Plateau
2) Victoria Lake
3) East of Kiniskan Lake and Todagain Mnt.
4) Stellar population in Spatsizi, smaller population in Edziza
5) South east of Tatsamenie Lake
6) Blue and Little Blue sheep Lakes just outside region 6 into Region 7
7) Ewe Lake
8) The range between Beale Lake and McDame
9) A pocket population directly east of Tucho Lake
10) Fannins off of Moon, Skelly and Racine (more dall genetics)
11) Fannins off of Taku Arm, Golden and Engineer Mnt. (more dall genetics)
12) West and South of Tootsee Lakes

Here's a few key areas to look into.

I challenge any of the Assit. guides or GO's to add to the list or start on for Region 7.

In fact I will Start the list for Region 7 now.

Ketchika Trench
1) Colt Lake
2) East of Dall Lake
3) South east of Denetiah Lake
4) Moodie Lakes, Inspector Peak

Afraid to share this information, well the cats out of the bag. When I have a bit more time I may even add a few of those remote isolate spots and provide GPS co-ordinates to some of those un-named lakes you often hear guides refer to.

For anyone who puts this information to good use and harvests a ram all I ask is you PM me a picture and pay the information forward.

Good luck and happy trails.

[bigwhiteys]

For my resident sheep hunter brothers and sisters I wish to share my so called secrets with you. It's not at all PERSONAL GAIN as Willi442 indicates for residents in fact this is more true for GO's. If this helps 1 resident hunter harvest a ram its enough PERSONAL GAIN for me.

A quick flip through the record book will find all of those locations you've put down and I think Jelly has even pasted a similar list... Willy will actually put the little red X's on the maps instead, just ask BCRams :mrgreen:

Hey may not be so popular on here because of his views but if you approach him in the right fashion, the guy has and will bend over backwards for resident sheep hunters who ASK. But he has to like you first and that screws over 99% of the people on here.:twisted:

Carl

[Devilbear]

Carl, it is not Willy's views and nobody here questions his expertise in respect of Stone's Sheep hunting. However, he constantly attempts to belittle resident hunters and other posters for no sound reason and, frankly, he loses his credibility with many of us by doing so.

Given your filial relationship, I quite understand that you would have a somewhat different approach and opinion on the matter and I have no desire to offend you as you are a nice guy. So, I will not belabour the point, however, if Willy chose to treat others here with appropriate respect, I think that he would be making a far greater contribution to the knowledge base than he now does.

Anyway, without any rancour at all, that is how I see it.

[bigwhiteys]

Carl, it is not Willy's views and nobody here questions his expertise in respect of Stone's Sheep hunting. However, he constantly attempts to belittle resident hunters and other posters for no sound reason and, frankly, he loses his credibility with many of us by doing so.

Given your filial relationship, I quite understand that you would have a somewhat different approach and opinion on the matter and I have no desire to offend you as you are a nice guy. So, I will not belabour the point, however, if Willy chose to treat others here with appropriate respect, I think that he would be making a far greater contribution to the knowledge base than he now does.

Anyway, without any rancour at all, that is how I see it.
Hey... I've known the guy for 29 years. He's a pretty different character outside the forum, like many of us probably are. Sheep is a subject he is passionate about just like most of us participating in these threads.

Throw a bunch of guys who are passionate about something (like sheep) onto an Internet forum and the shit is bound to hit the fan.

If you go through some of the old sheep threads, he's actually given out a pile of great advice on hunting sheep, as have you on hunting gear and backpacking and to my knowledge Willy has yet to be banned... :mrgreen: Just buggin!

Carl

[bridger]

the bcwf asked for an early resident sheep season to help level the playing field for resident sheep hunters. I have been on sucessful sheep hunts on my own and on guided hunts. I have seen the issue from both sides. I can tell you from personal experience a guided sheep hunt is so much easier there is really no comparison. Hiring a guide makes sheep hunting a piece of cake compared to hunting on your own. This is a compliment to the guiding industry. Outfitters have a full compliment of equipment that gives them an advantage that most resident hunters cannot compete with. The big thing tho is that they have hunted their areas for years and know every nook and cranny rams use. If you don't find a ram on mtn x just move to mtn b. don't shoot that ram because we have seen a bigger one in this bunch he's around here somewhere we just have to just to keep looking etc. If you can't find a ramn in this camp the supercub comes in and moves you to another camp where you will. Compare that to a resident sheep hunter that has 10 days to hunt and consideraby fewer resources and you can see the difference. Outfitters either don't understand the difficulties that face resident sheep hunters or just don't give a damn. Either way they have a tremendous advantage and the goabc and moe fail to recognize that fact and until they do and really want to bargain in good faith this issue will remain unresolved.

[CanuckShooter]

the bcwf asked for an early resident sheep season to help level the playing field for resident sheep hunters. I have been on sucessful sheep hunts on my own and on guided hunts. I have seen the issue from both sides. I can tell you from personal experience a guided sheep hunt is so much easier there is really no comparison. Hiring a guide makes sheep hunting a piece of cake compared to hunting on your own. This is a compliment to the guiding industry. Outfitters have a full compliment of equipment that gives them an advantage that most resident hunters cannot compete with. The big thing tho is that they have hunted their areas for years and know every nook and cranny rams use. If you don't find a ram on mtn x just move to mtn b. don't shoot that ram because we have seen a bigger one in this bunch he's around here somewhere we just have to just to keep looking etc. If you can't find a ramn in this camp the supercub comes in and moves you to another camp where you will. Compare that to a resident sheep hunter that has 10 days to hunt and consideraby fewer resources and you can see the difference. Outfitters either don't understand the difficulties that face resident sheep hunters or just don't give a damn. Either way they have a tremendous advantage and the goabc and moe fail to recognize that fact and until they do and really want to bargain in good faith this issue will remain unresolved.

:You've hit the nail on the head......good post!!

[bigwhiteys]

the bcwf asked for an early resident sheep season to help level the playing field for resident sheep hunters. I have been on sucessful sheep hunts on my own and on guided hunts. I have seen the issue from both sides. I can tell you from personal experience a guided sheep hunt is so much easier there is really no comparison. Hiring a guide makes sheep hunting a piece of cake compared to hunting on your own. This is a compliment to the guiding industry. Outfitters have a full compliment of equipment that gives them an advantage that most resident hunters cannot compete with. The big thing tho is that they have hunted their areas for years and know every nook and cranny rams use. If you don't find a ram on mtn x just move to mtn b. don't shoot that ram because we have seen a bigger one in this bunch he's around here somewhere we just have to just to keep looking etc. If you can't find a ramn in this camp the supercub comes in and moves you to another camp where you will. Compare that to a resident sheep hunter that has 10 days to hunt and consideraby fewer resources and you can see the difference. Outfitters either don't understand the difficulties that face resident sheep hunters or just don't give a damn. Either way they have a tremendous advantage and the goabc and moe fail to recognize that fact and until they do and really want to bargain in good faith this issue will remain unresolved.

You've said yourself the barriers are equipment and knowledge of the area.... I still don't see how two extra weeks removes those two barriers. Other than gives you two weeks without outfitters around.

Does their presence for that 2 weeks really limit the resident harvest as much as some say/think?

Is this move designed to attract new resident sheep hunters?

Will we really kill that many more sheep? (to even out the harvest #'s)

I still think resident only areas would be a viable solution... Then the guys with the rigging can get back where they want to, and the GUIDES would be limited to that inaccessible back country where they belong. Leaving the accesible country open for the "average" resident sheep hunter. (which Rich you and your partners are FAAAR from. You have all the rigging except a super-cub)

OR it sounds to me like EDUCATION for resident sheep hunters on where to go, how to indentify etc... Might be another alternative idea. (I realize we have some basic stuff out there but I am talking much more comprehensive)

Carl

[bridger]

resident only areas are a viable option that is for sure and is probably something we can look at again. in the past when we have suggested that it was not acceptable. when lynn ross lost his guiding area those long years ago. the bcwf presented a plan to the moe that would have left the majority of the area to resident hunters. the plan was for the moe to attach the back of the area (rob lake head of the sikanni) to the neighboring outfitters along with the sheep quota. the rest of the area was to be left as a resident only area for moose elk etc with some access restrictions. unfortunately the regional manager sold the entire area after initialling agreeing to it. Educating hunters is also a good idea, but in reality the real factor has always been competition for the resource between non resident and resident hunters. I have travelled four days horseback many many times to get into a remote area wfhere there were no other resident hunters, but there are always guides and their clients.

[willy442]

the bcwf asked for an early resident sheep season to help level the playing field for resident sheep hunters. I have been on sucessful sheep hunts on my own and on guided hunts. I have seen the issue from both sides. I can tell you from personal experience a guided sheep hunt is so much easier there is really no comparison. Hiring a guide makes sheep hunting a piece of cake compared to hunting on your own. This is a compliment to the guiding industry. Outfitters have a full compliment of equipment that gives them an advantage that most resident hunters cannot compete with. The big thing tho is that they have hunted their areas for years and know every nook and cranny rams use. If you don't find a ram on mtn x just move to mtn b. don't shoot that ram because we have seen a bigger one in this bunch he's around here somewhere we just have to just to keep looking etc. If you can't find a ramn in this camp the supercub comes in and moves you to another camp where you will. Compare that to a resident sheep hunter that has 10 days to hunt and consideraby fewer resources and you can see the difference. Outfitters either don't understand the difficulties that face resident sheep hunters or just don't give a damn. Either way they have a tremendous advantage and the goabc and moe fail to recognize that fact and until they do and really want to bargain in good faith this issue will remain unresolved.

Thats the problem with the good old boys club in the BCWF. They keep crying foul and want special seasons etc. No one there has thought about what an early season can do to the sheep as they really don't care as long as they can get on a ram. Like I've posted before, the resident already in effect has a non competitive season on sheep with all the reduced quota's. Hunt the late season it's better anyway and the guides are busy hunting Moose.
Is it the MOE's or the Guides fault that the average resident fails to have the equipment or the means to get into whats classified as inaccessable country? Give me a break it's called hunting and until the resident quits whinning and all hunters join forces to achieve a common goal, little will change as you've seen over the span in your life from becoming a Canadian citizen to present day.
Special seasons are the last thing we should be looking at unless you want to take time off the back end. The Sheep we have are chased enough at present in my view and I really don't care which hunting group it is doiung the chasing.

[efnhunter]

Bridger.....

What is the MOE going to do to help residents to acheive harvest?

Taking the GO's off quota? Some will benefit and others won't as they're not acheiving their quota as it is. Good years they'll take advantage of it when they know the rams are there to be harvested .... further eroding chances residents have to acheive harvest.



what duz moe mean or what is it lol

[325 wsm]

what duz moe mean or what is it lol

ministry of environment

[burger]

You've said yourself the barriers are equipment and knowledge of the area.... I still don't see how two extra weeks removes those two barriers. Other than gives you two weeks without outfitters around.Less Pressure from others around always equates into less spooky animals. No?

Does their presence for that 2 weeks really limit the resident harvest as much as some say/think? I would think that if there were no GO around then the resident hunters odds of sucess would go up as there would be only residents around and there would be more animals potentially.

Is this move designed to attract new resident sheep hunters? No I think by reading this topic it would be to increase the residents harvest numbers to the percentage agreed upon by the BCWF/GOABC in the allocation policy.(correct me if i'm wrong).

Will we really kill that many more sheep? (to even out the harvest #'s)Who knows but wouldn't it be prudent to give it a shot. After all the representitives from most of the parties involved did enter an agreement.

I still think resident only areas would be a viable solution... Then the guys with the rigging can get back where they want to, and the GUIDES would be limited to that inaccessible back country where they belong. Leaving the accesible country open for the "average" resident sheep hunter. (which Rich you and your partners are FAAAR from. You have all the rigging except a super-cub)Who then gets what areas. The party that bitches or pads the coffers gets more leverage?

OR it sounds to me like EDUCATION for resident sheep hunters on where to go, how to indentify etc... Might be another alternative idea. (I realize we have some basic stuff out there but I am talking much more comprehensive) I personally think that the best education is real world stuff. Do your research at home yes but nothing beats hands on. If resident hunters knew that they had a better chance at harvesting a ram as there was less pressure on the whole I would suspect that we may see an increase in participation from resident hunters.

Carl

As for the timiming of the resident only opening. It could be the first two weeks of Aug. It seems the residents on here would be up for that but the GO are against it. Why? IF as you stated Willy that better tree rams come out later in the year would that not be good for business. I know moose is usually started in that time, but work is work is it not? Hunt sheep a little later and then moose a little later. I know you would probably be after the rut and your success would probably go down but with all the expertise shouldn't that be minimal? Residents should get the priority, shouldn't they ??

[willy442]

As for the timiming of the resident only opening. It could be the first two weeks of Aug. It seems the residents on here would be up for that but the GO are against it. Why? IF as you stated Willy that better tree rams come out later in the year would that not be good for business. I know moose is usually started in that time, but work is work is it not? Hunt sheep a little later and then moose a little later. I know you would probably be after the rut and your success would probably go down but with all the expertise shouldn't that be minimal? Residents should get the priority, shouldn't they ??

I have no arguement about resident priority on opportunity. I'm dead against special provisions through seasons to assist any hunter out side of the disabled. Special resident area's, I would support. I would also support total LEH on sheep.

[efnhunter]

what is MOE and what duz it do

[lange1212]

[quote=willy442;637988]"No one there has thought about what an early season can do to the sheep as they really don't care as long as they can get on a ram".

If you only knew the thousands of hours spent researching, going over data, corresponding between regions, meeting with MoE and stakeholders, attaining biologists opinion, researching sustainable wildlife practices, policy, procedure... and all as a volunteers free of charge.

Peers and I lobbied the MoE to conduct a sheep inventory in the Skeena similar to R7 and establish a science based AAH that is sustainable by applying a 2%- 3% harvest rate that will allow for population growth. This is positive for sheep and sheep management yet the GOABC and GO are against this?

The allocation policy will applies and divides the pie according to policy and procedure therin, no more behind closed door dealing that some guides have been known for.

GO's proposing to remove sheep from quota and the species from class A status. What's that about, this is negative to sheep not positive or consitent with good management practices. Have you thought this out?

Yes we considered the impacts to sheep, the sheep population, recruitment... and have proposed management initatives for the betterment of the species first and foremost and hunters second. Have you?

Through the piles of data it became apparent that GO quotas were set way to high paticularly in the Skeena. However you are misinformed if you think Skeena quotas were lowered as you indicate. For many of the GO's the Regional MoE inflated Skeena quota first and then reduced them. With creative math there was a reduction but in reality there was not it should have been. Quota should be 126 but is 148.

There's a requirment by MoE to provide regulations that allow residents to achieve their share of the harvest. The resident only sheep season was proposed as it is sustainable, within policy and reflects the priority of resident over non residents and will aid residents getting closer to their minimum share of 60%. Further it was never intented to to omit GO's but include them a point that seems to have been missed. If a resident wants to hire a guide fair game, the only restriction to guides is that they can only cater to residents during this season. Is this not a win win?

You are way off base if you think that a resident only season was not carefully thought out, not even in the park if you think residents or the BCWF would support a regulatory change that was not sustainable. I have binders of reasearch data to support and justify this proposal because residents care about their wildlife and would not support any regulatory change that was detrimental to the species and future generation enjoyment and opportunity.

So with all that being said, Willy442 exactly what research, data, ethical wildlife management practice and science do you have to justify and support your arguement that a resident only season will negatively impact sheep. I ask exactly how will this impact sheep and request any data or information that has merit and substance to support you stance? If you can provide an arguement and data with merit I will certainly consider it and if convincing will even support it. If you can't then your just taking the walk not walking the walk.

[lange1212]

I have no arguement about resident priority on opportunity. I'm dead against special provisions through seasons to assist any hunter out side of the disabled. Special resident area's, I would support. I would also support total LEH on sheep.

LEH on non-resident sheep hunters, we finally agree on something. Your right Willy let the non-residents research and choose the areas they want to hunt, apply for them through LEH and when they beat the odds after years of trying they can book the GO who holds the Territory they wish to hunt in. I love it, your a genius! I'll draft up the proposal and get it to the MoE, don't worry I let the MoE and other GO's at the table know that this one was your brain child.

[Toad Hunter]

Hahaha, funny comment. Who do you think paid for the highways and roads?

It's not a matter of 'who opened the country up' the fact remains that guide-outfitters are paying to use the resources of British Columbians. Who did or does what really doesn't matter..

Who do you think paid for the roads? It is certainly not G & O. That is for sure!

[GoatGuy]

Who do you think paid for the roads? It is certainly not G & O. That is for sure!

That was my point.

[Devilbear]

While I often do not agree with Willy and we have had our differences, I feel it is only fair to say that he does know a lot about Stone's Sheep and, as I have suggested here before, I wish he would post greater detail on his reasons for his opinions and less commentary as to the abilities of resident hunters as he sees us.

I realize that he does not wish to do this to benefit me and that is fine as I am far more interested in Kootenay hunting for the probable few seasons I have left. However, his knowledge would genuinely help others and, IMO, the more we all know about these wonderful animals, the greater the possibility that more hunters will cooperate among ourselves to conserve and perpetuate them.

I am finding this among the best threads that I have ever seen here in learning more about the situation involving the sheep, the MoE, the GOs and the "whole enchilada". HBC is a very useful tool for anyone interested in wildlife, guns and the various outdoor activities we all enjoy and I am damm glad it is here for us.

[willy442]

LEH on non-resident sheep hunters, we finally agree on something. Your right Willy let the non-residents research and choose the areas they want to hunt, apply for them through LEH and when they beat the odds after years of trying they can book the GO who holds the Territory they wish to hunt in. I love it, your a genius! I'll draft up the proposal and get it to the MoE, don't worry I let the MoE and other GO's at the table know that this one was your brain child.

Don't pick bits and pieces out of my post to suit your believes as you see fit. What I said was "I support 100% LEH on Sheep for everyone". We are not that many years away from it happening is my believe and I hope it's implimented while numbers are still high enough to have a reasonable` amount of permits. Knowing the resident train of thought it will likely drag on until nothing is left and LEH tags are at very low numbers.

[willy442]

[quote=willy442;637988]"No one there has thought about what an early season can do to the sheep as they really don't care as long as they can get on a ram".

If you only knew the thousands of hours spent researching, going over data, corresponding between regions, meeting with MoE and stakeholders, attaining biologists opinion, researching sustainable wildlife practices, policy, procedure... and all as a volunteers free of charge.

You are not the only one that has many many days and seasons studing sheep. I was doing this (although non scientific in times before you were born). We used to record and take very stringent counts and information on the sheep behavior in our guide area and the surrounding winter ranges over the thirty years we were in business. Countless hours were flown in our own aircraft observing sheep, preforming predator control and sometimes doing the same while trapping and using our own snow machines. I usually spent from June to late October out in the area cutting trails, building camps and when time permitted, studying Sheep and thier behavior. Let me remind you this was all done at our personnal expense.
In years past the G/O's and some Bio's worked very close on game counts and issues with various animals. This came to an end and the Ministry lost the valuable ability to use the guides and thier specialized equipment to assist them on gathering info. WHY? Because the resident hunter started crying that the Ministry was showing favortism to the G/O, due to the politics they could no longer use any info we gathered or assisted with. This same claim remains to this day. If you fail to believe me, ask a couple of the oldtimers in your region.

Peers and I lobbied the MoE to conduct a sheep inventory in the Skeena similar to R7 and establish a science based AAH that is sustainable by applying a 2%- 3% harvest rate that will allow for population growth. This is positive for sheep and sheep management yet the GOABC and GO are against this?

I do not have your details on this. I do agree with your thinking of doing game counts though and get away from setting harvest on past kill records.

The allocation policy will applies and divides the pie according to policy and procedure therin, no more behind closed door dealing that some guides have been known for.

The allocation policy was put into place to try and divide the pie. It has never really worked and has been the cause of major in fighting between residents and non. Hence, one of the main reasons I support total LEH. This will set the opportunity, disperse people from hunting over top of each other and reduce competition. Yes it may take some time to be drawn, but there is also ways to address this issue with points or other measures. The big thing again is impliment it while we can still have a few hundred tags to draw from through out the habitat of Stone Sheep.

GO's proposing to remove sheep from quota and the species from class A status. What's that about, this is negative to sheep not positive or consitent with good management practices. Have you thought this out?

It's my believe the guides are also starting to see the value of LEH and the above would speed up the proccess. Although I have not been involved in thier discussions since 1992.

Yes we considered the impacts to sheep, the sheep population, recruitment... and have proposed management initatives for the betterment of the species first and foremost and hunters second. Have you?

If you considered the impacts on Sheep how do you explain the desire to have the resident start hunting sheep in mid July? This is absolute stupidity in my mind after watching the behavior of sheep moving from winter range to mountain tops. Feed is just greening up in the mountains and they require the months of June and July to get thier supply of fat built up prior to the feed becoming dry and parched in August. (again my own non scientific observations done at my personnel expense)

Through the piles of data it became apparent that GO quotas were set way to high paticularly in the Skeena. However you are misinformed if you think Skeena quotas were lowered as you indicate. For many of the GO's the Regional MoE inflated Skeena quota first and then reduced them. With creative math there was a reduction but in reality there was not it should have been. Quota should be 126 but is 148.

The quota in region 6 is really not an issue. Yes it's to high, I agree. However the guides are not harvesting it at this time and never will. I'm sure over time this will be adjusted as better information becomes available.

There's a requirment by MoE to provide regulations that allow residents to achieve their share of the harvest. The resident only sheep season was proposed as it is sustainable, within policy and reflects the priority of resident over non residents and will aid residents getting closer to their minimum share of 60%. Further it was never intented to to omit GO's but include them a point that seems to have been missed. If a resident wants to hire a guide fair game, the only restriction to guides is that they can only cater to residents during this season. Is this not a win win?

I believe the resident already has this. Yes I agree in some locations the balance has to be brought into line a little better. My thinking is a resident only season is only going to help those experienced resident sheep hunters get into the back country and and do nothing to assist the average hunter or recrutment.

You are way off base if you think that a resident only season was not carefully thought out, not even in the park if you think residents or the BCWF would support a regulatory change that was not sustainable. I have binders of reasearch data to support and justify this proposal because residents care about their wildlife and would not support any regulatory change that was detrimental to the species and future generation enjoyment and opportunity.

Only a few posts ago in this thread it was mentioned that the resident only season should be tried to see if it would bring the allocation numbers into line. No where in that post was there any indication of considewration for the sheep. Time and time again we only see the crying about allocation. I have seen the results of some of these initiatives that failed in the past.

So with all that being said, Willy442 exactly what research, data, ethical wildlife management practice and science do you have to justify and support your arguement that a resident only season will negatively impact sheep. I ask exactly how will this impact sheep and request any data or information that has merit and substance to support you stance? If you can provide an arguement and data with merit I will certainly consider it and if convincing will even support it. If you can't then your just taking the walk not walking the walk.

I do not nor will I ever have the scientific data you request. What I do have is personnel knowledge from living with the sheep in thier country over many years and seasons. I tend to put much more merrit on things that I've watched and learned than incomplete studies and sometimes science.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Knowing the resident train of thought it will likely drag on until nothing is left and LEH tags are at very low numbers.

Since we're talking about Reg 6 on this thread....it sure won't be the residents' fault if there is nothing left.

Who's killing rams in region 6??

Willy, you really need to open your eyes on this one. Numbers don't lie...just people.

OKay....so now you'll ignore the mani point, go on about my sheep hunting ability(or lack there of), my job and who knows what else you'll stoop to:?.

SSS

[lange1212]

Don't pick bits and pieces out of my post to suit your believes as you see fit. What I said was "I support 100% LEH on Sheep for everyone". We are not that many years away from it happening is my believe and I hope it's implimented while numbers are still high enough to have a reasonable` amount of permits. Knowing the resident train of thought it will likely drag on until nothing is left and LEH tags are at very low numbers.

Bill,
Let me ask you this; In the Skeena Region the total resident and non-resident harvest added together does not and has never equated to 60% of what is allocated to GO's alone in quota. Is this considered appropriate wildlife management or reflective of resident prioity over non-residents? Fact

Now consider that the resident success rate on sheep is about 15%, whereas non-resident success rate is 69%. And yes there are far more resident hunters than non-resident hunters? Fact

Now consider that the vast majority, 70%+ sheep are harvested in the first 3 weeks of August by both residentcy groups and is a historical trend. Fact

Now consider that historical sheep harvest trends in the Skeena shows 70/30 favoring non-residents. Fact

Commercial hunting interets are now lobbying gov't to remove quota harvest limitations on GO while at the same time demanding that residents be put on LEH. Fact

Commercial hunting interets are lobbying the MoE to remove sheep from class A species status which will cause allocation decisions being seperated from the Provincial Harvest Allocation Policy and return them to behind closed door dealings between GO's and Regional MoE staff. Who do you think is going to benefit from this? Certainly not our revered sheep populations or residents.

Removal of sheep quota and as a class A species lessens protection on sheep populations and will create a conservation concern. Basically repeat what happened in Region 7 decades ago. A senario residents are not willing to repeat. Keep in mind that it is biologically important to maintain a mature component in the population post hunt with sheep populations being management as such.

Summing up this information do you think there's a MoE management problem in the Skeena?

Do you think your GO's representative organizations are lobbying governemnt in the best interets of sheep populations first with profit and business potential second?

Residents are and contiune to be on the losening end yet said to have priority. The MoE has failed on the very basic principle to protect its citizens and the public interest first and foremost and is becoming increasingly apparent not only with resident hunting interests.

Residents of BC have had it and are starting to take a stand to reclaim what's theirs. We are a generous lot and have and will contiue to share our cherished wildlife resource with other users, but will not allow our generosity to be exploited and used against us. We are the citizens that call BC home, the majority share holders, and financial supporterd of wildlife management with fish and wildlife held in public trust.

Hunting is a our heritage, tradition and culture. The value residents gain from it; getting in tune with nature, provding food for our families, physical and mental wellness, promoting cherished memories and fostering life long bonds with our families and friends.

There's so much more value in the aspects of resident hunting than that of killing for profit and maximizing business potential that the commercial hunting sector promotes and places on a pedestal.

[lange1212]

Don't pick bits and pieces out of my post to suit your believes as you see fit. What I said was "I support 100% LEH on Sheep for everyone". We are not that many years away from it happening is my believe and I hope it's implimented while numbers are still high enough to have a reasonable` amount of permits. Knowing the resident train of thought it will likely drag on until nothing is left and LEH tags are at very low numbers.

Willy442,
I want to make sure I'm understanding your position here. If an LEH was to be implemented on "everyone" for sheep your saying both user groups, residents and non-residents or just residents on LEH?

Will the GOABC support the application of LEH on non-residents as well, I'm assuming your a memeber?

An interetsing thought, remove quota and instate a non-resident LEH program. Thank you Bill I will be doing some research on this one as it may have some merit.

[6616]

Willy442,
I want to make sure I'm understanding your position here. If an LEH was to be implemented on "everyone" for sheep your saying both user groups, residents and non-residents or just residents on LEH?

Will the GOABC support the application of LEH on non-residents as well, I'm assuming your a memeber?

An interetsing thought, remove quota and instate a non-resident LEH program. Thank you Bill I will be doing some research on this one as it may have some merit.


As those of us that have hunted in the States and other Canadian Provinces are well aware of, there is considerable merit in the concept of administrating non-resident hunting by LEH.

BC is pretty much the only northwestern jurisdiction south of the northern territories that does not use LEH to allocate non-resident harvest so it obviously works just fine.

Moreover something that should be of interest to British Columbians is the fact that non-resident allocation is limited to 5 or 6 % in Alberta depending on species, 0% in Saskatchewan for all LEH species, and 10% in all of the pacific northwestern American States for all big game species.

[willy442]

As those of us that have hunted in the States and other Canadian Provinces are well aware of, there is considerable merit in the concept of administrating non-resident hunting by LEH.

BC is pretty much the only northwestern jurisdiction south of the northern territories that does not use LEH to allocate non-resident harvest so it obviously works just fine.

Moreover something that should be of interest to British Columbians is the fact that non-resident allocation is limited to 5 or 6 % in Alberta depending on species, 0% in Saskatchewan for all LEH species, and 10% in all of the pacific northwestern American States for all big game species.

I only support LEH if both nonresidents and residents are on it. LEH for all.

[willy442]

Willy442,
I want to make sure I'm understanding your position here. If an LEH was to be implemented on "everyone" for sheep your saying both user groups, residents and non-residents or just residents on LEH?

Will the GOABC support the application of LEH on non-residents as well, I'm assuming your a memeber?

An interetsing thought, remove quota and instate a non-resident LEH program. Thank you Bill I will be doing some research on this one as it may have some merit.

Both user groups. The trick like I said is bring it in before we further reduce our sheep herds and have little to draw in numbers of tags.

[willy442]

Bill,
Let me ask you this; In the Skeena Region the total resident and non-resident harvest added together does not and has never equated to 60% of what is allocated to GO's alone in quota. Is this considered appropriate wildlife management or reflective of resident prioity over non-residents? Fact

Now consider that the resident success rate on sheep is about 15%, whereas non-resident success rate is 69%. And yes there are far more resident hunters than non-resident hunters? Fact

Now consider that the vast majority, 70%+ sheep are harvested in the first 3 weeks of August by both residentcy groups and is a historical trend. Fact

Now consider that historical sheep harvest trends in the Skeena shows 70/30 favoring non-residents. Fact

Commercial hunting interets are now lobbying gov't to remove quota harvest limitations on GO while at the same time demanding that residents be put on LEH. Fact

Commercial hunting interets are lobbying the MoE to remove sheep from class A species status which will cause allocation decisions being seperated from the Provincial Harvest Allocation Policy and return them to behind closed door dealings between GO's and Regional MoE staff. Who do you think is going to benefit from this? Certainly not our revered sheep populations or residents.

Removal of sheep quota and as a class A species lessens protection on sheep populations and will create a conservation concern. Basically repeat what happened in Region 7 decades ago. A senario residents are not willing to repeat. Keep in mind that it is biologically important to maintain a mature component in the population post hunt with sheep populations being management as such.

Summing up this information do you think there's a MoE management problem in the Skeena?

Do you think your GO's representative organizations are lobbying governemnt in the best interets of sheep populations first with profit and business potential second?

Residents are and contiune to be on the losening end yet said to have priority. The MoE has failed on the very basic principle to protect its citizens and the public interest first and foremost and is becoming increasingly apparent not only with resident hunting interests.

Residents of BC have had it and are starting to take a stand to reclaim what's theirs. We are a generous lot and have and will contiue to share our cherished wildlife resource with other users, but will not allow our generosity to be exploited and used against us. We are the citizens that call BC home, the majority share holders, and financial supporterd of wildlife management with fish and wildlife held in public trust.

Hunting is a our heritage, tradition and culture. The value residents gain from it; getting in tune with nature, provding food for our families, physical and mental wellness, promoting cherished memories and fostering life long bonds with our families and friends.

There's so much more value in the aspects of resident hunting than that of killing for profit and maximizing business potential that the commercial hunting sector promotes and places on a pedestal.

The answer to every question you have above is LEH for both residents and non. Stop the bullshit of bickering over allocation. You have policy in place that is not working. Under LEH it will, the resident will have his allocation to draw from and so will the guides. The days of sheep hunting at will are coming to an end for everyone. Why must the resident keep fighting for special seasons and treatment to achive harvest levels. Go to a system that will allow common ground for all hunters to band together and work towards a common goal of maintaining sheep on the mountain.

SSS. I do not have time to reply to your posts. You have cried wolf too many times and will always remain with your partner on my do not help list.:)

[bchunter4life]

and i thought the waterskeeter threads were bad.. these are even worse soap operas

grow up boys

[bighornbob]

The answer to every question you have above is LEH for both residents and non. Stop the bullshit of bickering over allocation. You have policy in place that is not working. Under LEH it will, the resident will have his allocation to draw from and so will the guides. The days of sheep hunting at will are coming to an end for everyone. Why must the resident keep fighting for special seasons and treatment to achive harvest levels. Go to a system that will allow common ground for all hunters to band together and work towards a common goal of maintaining sheep on the mountain.


Willy how do you see this working???

Lets say the allowable harvest is 100 rams out of Region 7. To me (lets say 100 LEH tags available) I see residents getting 70 tags (how the ministry works) and 30 tags going to non-residents.

As we know residents don’t have the kill success of NR so after say five years the resident average is 30 rams (very unlikely that close to 50% of guys going out would kill a ram.)

You and I both know that the GO's will ask for extra tags (Does this sound familia) as the residents are not killing them and that is a wasted resource in their minds as 100 rams can legally be killed each year and still be quite sustainable.

So how do you propose the LEH to work:
Ministry has to hand out enough tags for residents to be able to kill their share? (So based on a resident success rate of about 5%. Lets assume the ministry needs a safety net of another 10% so over harvest does not occur. This means the ministry gives out about 466 (if my math is correct) tags to get the resident harvest?

Does the government say screw the kill our share and residents only get 70 tags and NR only get 30 tags. No more no less for anyone?

Do NR apply and once chosen they can hire a guide of their choice or does the outfitter get the tags to sell.

Are the 100 tags for the whole region of are they specific to certain MU’s.

Is this how you see it or am I way off.

BHB

[Devilbear]

It seems that Willy supports a system where all sheep hunters are equal in respect of opportunity to hunt the rare Stone's Sheep here in BC. His rational for holding such an opinion seems to be that all hunters should band together to save the sheep from looming extirpation.

The problem with this approach is that it essentially gives part of my birthright to American sheep hunters and THAT is NEVER going to be acceptable to me, period. The sheep BELONG to BC citizens and ONLY to BC citizens and NO foreign involvement is necessary or acceptable.

If, the sheep ARE declining in population densities and herd numbers, then a smaller annual harvest is called for and even some closures of areas where they are having problems. Such closures should eliminate the foreign hunters and GOs FIRST and only then impinge on the rights of resident BC hunters.

Our problem is that we have been TOO DAMN NICE and allowed the MoE boffins to give to the GOs and their foreign clients, that which is ours and ONLY ours. The long term solution is to simply eliminate the foreign hunting and adjust harvest levels by res. hunters through a different approach than has heretofore been used.

[willy442]

Willy how do you see this working???

Lets say the allowable harvest is 100 rams out of Region 7. To me (lets say 100 LEH tags available) I see residents getting 70 tags (how the ministry works) and 30 tags going to non-residents.

I would think the numbers could be higher at present. If the allowable harvest is 100 the allocation is already set. Why complicate things like if the resident fails to harvest, we should not be looking at kills but opportunity instead. Who cares about kills at this point the G/O is stuck to the allocation split. If the resident fails to harvest and we are at "lets say a 80/20 split" the amount of guide harvest is low, which would likely leave more mature rams on the mountain, better resident success and possibly allowing for LEH increases under the allocation. So for every additional 8 resident rams the G/O's would recieve 2 through out the entire region. Who or how these would be distributed to the guide could be based on kill performance. IE age and size of rams harvested the best managed area would be first to aquire increases if supply allowed. The allocation would be strictly adhered to under this type of program. Yes outfitters would face reduction in the interm but at least we would harvesting our sheep on the side of caution. The main thing is adopt the system while we still have reasonable numbers so the LEH opportunity is high for those entering the draw.
As we know residents don’t have the kill success of NR so after say five years the resident average is 30 rams (very unlikely that close to 50% of guys going out would kill a ram.)

Under the above system, I believe percentages would fall in line and the kill ratio would be alot closer to reaching an acceptable balance. Those drawing tags would most likely put out a better effort at becoming successfull. While the G/O is strictly regulated.

You and I both know that the GO's will ask for extra tags (Does this sound familia) as the residents are not killing them and that is a wasted resource in their minds as 100 rams can legally be killed each year and still be quite sustainable.

What is the matter with wanting more tags? Under the above the resident would recieve 8 for every 2 the guides got. I would think if increases were valid, this would not be that bad.

So how do you propose the LEH to work:
Ministry has to hand out enough tags for residents to be able to kill their share? (So based on a resident success rate of about 5%. Lets assume the ministry needs a safety net of another 10% so over harvest does not occur. This means the ministry gives out about 466 (if my math is correct) tags to get the resident harvest?

That's exactly my point about implimenting the LEH before we face further reduction in numbers. At present we could probably start with 400 plus LEH tags for residents. Go's would have 80. This would only be a starting point and over the early years of implimentation would have to be looked at annually through harvest data to make sure we did not overly increase the kill from present day numbers.

Does the government say screw the kill our share and residents only get 70 tags and NR only get 30 tags. No more no less for anyone?

Yes I believe getting away from who kills what and more to the opportunity side of things would benefit everyone. The guides would have a strictly set LEH and although they harvest all thier rams the actual overall number would be low under my above example.

Do NR apply and once chosen they can hire a guide of their choice or does the outfitter get the tags to sell.

This is a tough one under the way we manage in units and sub units. The guides are alotted areas and in order to balance the harvest of the G/O's. I would suggest a realignment of boundaries with management units. This way the allocation for the units could go to the guide or guides. This would also maximize the return on the tags. I know it's a sore spot that the G/O is given the tag to sell however he wants, but at present I see no real alternative.

Are the 100 tags for the whole region of are they specific to certain MU’s.

I would suggest that the amount of LEH tags fall in line with the amount of tags presently issued to the resident and the G/Os recieve a portion under the present allocation policy.

Is this how you see it or am I way off.

[FONT='Verdana','sans-serif']BHB[/font

Hope this clears it up for you.

[willy442]

It seems that Willy supports a system where all sheep hunters are equal in respect of opportunity to hunt the rare Stone's Sheep here in BC. His rational for holding such an opinion seems to be that all hunters should band together to save the sheep from looming extirpation.

The problem with this approach is that it essentially gives part of my birthright to American sheep hunters and THAT is NEVER going to be acceptable to me, period. The sheep BELONG to BC citizens and ONLY to BC citizens and NO foreign involvement is necessary or acceptable.

If, the sheep ARE declining in population densities and herd numbers, then a smaller annual harvest is called for and even some closures of areas where they are having problems. Such closures should eliminate the foreign hunters and GOs FIRST and only then impinge on the rights of resident BC hunters.

Our problem is that we have been TOO DAMN NICE and allowed the MoE boffins to give to the GOs and their foreign clients, that which is ours and ONLY ours. The long term solution is to simply eliminate the foreign hunting and adjust harvest levels by res. hunters through a different approach than has heretofore been used.

Devilbear; We have all seen your posts and know your dislike for the American hunters. However we are in a world now where many things have become under Global scrutinity. Hunting is one. Many people hunt world wide and I for one have enjoyed some of this through hunting in the Southern states on occassion. I believe there are others here in B.C. and Canada that have also enjoyed hunting other countries and would like to continue doing so. Yes I believe we should severily restrict the accessability we give to nonresidents for the purpose of harvesting our wildlife. I do not want to prevent them from having some opportunity. It would not be good if all of a sudden we lost our world wide hunting opportunities because we refused to share. My concerns at all times are first for the animal and not the hunter.

[Devilbear]

Well, we obviously differ on this as I sympathze with other Canadians who are not well off financially and would like to hunt here in BC,with minimal difficulty. My problem is more with the GOs and how they have attempted to evade honouring the allocation agreement that they signed than with American or other foreign hunters, per se.

We do not ...share..., when we allow foreigners, mostly Americans, to kill a larger number of Stone's Sheep rams per annum than we residents do and this goes on for years; that is not sharing, it is exploitation.

I very seriously doubt that the major African hunting nations will deny BC citizens the opportunity to hunt simply because we finally stop the mass exploitation of our resources by Yankees and, frankly, I do not care about "hunting" in the southern US or any other region thereof.

What exactly IS ...Global scrutinity..., this is a new one to me?

My concern is for the animals first and BC hunters next and NOT for the tiny minority of "hunters" who ...hunt world wide... as they are usually well off financially and can look after their own interests. If, the sheep are in decline, then, ONLY BC citizens should be allowed to hunt them.

[Deaddog]

for those that are interested in what is actually happening to our sheep numbers, stop by the wild sheep society's convention and hear the figures from the biologists that actually study the sheep, lots of anedotacal thoughts on this thread, however the scientific study's , particularly in region 7 are not in keeping with what has been stated on this thread. DD

[HD95]

for those that are interested in what is actually happening to our sheep numbers, stop by the wild sheep society's convention and hear the figures from the biologists that actually study the sheep, lots of anedotacal thoughts on this thread, however the scientific study's , particularly in region 7 are not in keeping with what has been stated on this thread. DD
I have to agree with this.I have been reading this thread with great interest.I hunt the west side of the trench,and I'm not seeing the doom and gloom numbers.In fact the opportunities are fantastic for those prepared to work hard.
I can't imagine waiting for an leh authorization to hunt sheep.I think I've been applying for 25 yrs. and still have been unable to obtain an elk tag on the Island.Theres only so many years available to us ever-aging sheep hunters.

[SHAKER]

I wasn't going to comment on this thread but, I'm really tired of hearing about LEH. It's an over used tool by MOE to manage people not wildlife! Some area's need it where their is a conservation concern but most of them should be scraped and go to a GOS so anyone who wants to, can have the opertunity. I heard about the proposal for the early season but I could have told you it wouldn't fly, we already suguested that for Cougar here in reg. 8 and can not be done. Unfortunatly I don't hunt the west side so I don't know exactly whats going to comment, but keep up the good fight whoevers fighting for us poor tax paying residents.

[6616]

Are we killing too many sheep in BC? Is there a conservation concern being caused by resident hunting? If not, why would we consider LEH for residents?

Regarding non-resident harvest, the tools are in place already to control the harvest level, they just need to be used as designed. Accurate and sustainable AAHs need to be determined and allocations set by the current allocation calculator (which was agreed on by all parties) and non-resident quotas issued in accordance with the calculated percentages.

No more funny games, no more fooling around with or manipulation of quotas, MOE just needs to follow their own policy. The policy clearly states regulations must be in place to allow both residency groups sufficient opportunity to harvest their share. If that means special season dates or special areas for resident hunters so be it..!

If overall harvest numbers were based on 2 to 3 percent of accurate and reliable population estimates there would never be a conservation concern for any species of sheep.

[willy442]

Are we killing too many sheep in BC? Is there a conservation concern being caused by resident hunting? If not, why would we consider LEH for residents?

Regarding non-resident harvest, the tools are in place already to control the harvest level, they just need to be used as designed. Accurate and sustainable AAHs need to be determined and allocations set by the current allocation calculator (which was agreed on by all parties) and non-resident quotas issued in accordance with the calculated percentages.

No more funny games, no more fooling around with or manipulation of quotas, MOE just needs to follow their own policy. The policy clearly states regulations must be in place to allow both residency groups sufficient opportunity to harvest their share. If that means special season dates or special areas for resident hunters so be it..!

If overall harvest numbers were based on 2 to 3 percent of accurate and reliable population estimates there would never be a conservation concern for any species of sheep.

Like I said the good old boys club will fight it to the grave. Then claim foul and being blindsided by it's arrival and low LEH numbers. I'm just as tired of hearing about an allocation program full of holes and causing major dissention amongst hunters.

[willy442]

for those that are interested in what is actually happening to our sheep numbers, stop by the wild sheep society's convention and hear the figures from the biologists that actually study the sheep, lots of anedotacal thoughts on this thread, however the scientific study's , particularly in region 7 are not in keeping with what has been stated on this thread. DD

Deaddog: Perhaps if you believe sheep are fine you can tell me why area's such as the Nevis Creek, Besa River, Prophet River, Sikanni River and Halfway River water sheds almost have no sheep. Numbers in these areas are at all time lows. I can also lis other areas of which I've spent major time in that numbers are down. To believe things like sheep were at a high artifical number after the wolf kill progam in the 80's etc,. is pure garbage.

[bruin]

I can't imagine waiting for an leh authorization to hunt sheep.I think I've been applying for 25 yrs[for island elk]

I don't think its acurrate to compare this situation to what a sheep LEH would be in the north. The ratio of interested hunters to available tags would be much, much higher.

[bruin]

Deaddog: Perhaps if you believe sheep are fine you can tell me why area's such as the Nevis Creek, Besa River, Prophet River, Sikanni River and Halfway River water sheds almost have no sheep.
Doesn't this have alot to do with inflated elk herds using sheep winter range, brought on by artificial burns?
Not saying that a lower harvest could not be part of a solution to this problem.

[willy442]

Doesn't this have alot to do with inflated elk herds using sheep winter range, brought on by artificial burns?
Not saying that a lower harvest could not be part of a solution to this problem.

Yes there is the Elk and the Buffalo, but the country I list is a huge piece of real estate that my father and some friends guided in years ago. These areas at one time had as many sheep as the Muskwa, Tetsa, Frog Turnigan and others. Now there are but few sheep in these hills. Some of this country is also very remote.

[bigwhiteys]

for those that are interested in what is actually happening to our sheep numbers, stop by the wild sheep society's convention and hear the figures from the biologists that actually study the sheep, lots of anedotacal thoughts on this thread, however the scientific study's , particularly in region 7 are not in keeping with what has been stated on this thread. DD

Please post the data they have on Stones Sheep populations in Region 7 prior to the completion of the Alaska Highway. I find the statement that our stone sheep populations are stable and growing to be misleading. They have actually been steadily declining but you keep trying to "spin" it into something rosey.

My Grandpa was hunting sheep in region 7 from 1958-59 on up... He knew all the old timers in his era and was one of those responsible for the burning and predator control. I'll take his word over yours and your "scientist" most any day of the week as to what the sheep population USED to be like prior to the wolf control and burning programs you speak of.

Carl

[Deadshot]

for those that are interested in what is actually happening to our sheep numbers, stop by the wild sheep society's convention and hear the figures from the biologists that actually study the sheep, lots of anedotacal thoughts on this thread, however the scientific study's , particularly in region 7 are not in keeping with what has been stated on this thread. DD

Any word back from the government boys from Region 6 & whether or not they are going to field some questions?

[bridger]

I have to agree with this.I have been reading this thread with great interest.I hunt the west side of the trench,and I'm not seeing the doom and gloom numbers.In fact the opportunities are fantastic for those prepared to work hard.
I can't imagine waiting for an leh authorization to hunt sheep.I think I've been applying for 25 yrs. and still have been unable to obtain an elk tag on the Island.Theres only so many years available to us ever-aging sheep hunters.


your observations that things are well in the trench are correct as that is the area that holds the biggest portion of the remaining stone sheep population in 7b. unfortunately that is not the case on the east slope where numbers are down significantly. areas along the besa river and richards creek etc where we used to see lots of rams and big ewe and lamb groups are way down in numbers

[Deaddog]

No representation will be at the sheep convention from region six, hoping to have an "update" to give out in a statement form.

[Deaddog]

Deaddog: Perhaps if you believe sheep are fine you can tell me why area's such as the Nevis Creek, Besa River, Prophet River, Sikanni River and Halfway River water sheds almost have no sheep. Numbers in these areas are at all time lows. I can also lis other areas of which I've spent major time in that numbers are down. To believe things like sheep were at a high artifical number after the wolf kill progam in the 80's etc,. is pure garbage.


No one has ever said that every area is in decent shape, certainly there are areas that are of concern, just that overall pops are stable (according to the regional bios that are paid to supply the numbers), again, I would encourage you to call the regional bio's for their thoughts as they are the ones that are collecting the data on our sheep pops...So perhaps you can tell me how you know that populations of sheep in all areas are crashing??

[bridger]

some of the historic data the bios in region 7 are using is suspect as they were estimates not actual popuation counts. i have hunted stone sheep on the east slope before,during, and after the wolf kill and it is obvious that sheep are not at a historic level. the total harvest between residents and not residents has been over 300 rams annually now the aah is 180. there are pockets of sheep for sure, but as far as the east slope goes numbers are down in general. I believe the outfitter on the sikanni has only taken one ram in the last four years and the outfitter on the besa has a quota of only 5 and can't fill that. the first time i hunted the besa i saw 47 full curl rams on a 10 day hunt. can't do that now.

[bruin]

some of the historic data the bios in region 7 are using is suspect as they were estimates not actual popuation counts. i have hunted stone sheep on the east slope before,during, and after the wolf kill and it is obvious that sheep are not at a historic level. the total harvest between residents and not residents has been over 300 rams annually now the aah is 180. there are pockets of sheep for sure, but as far as the east slope goes numbers are down in general. I believe the outfitter on the sikanni has only taken one ram in the last four years and the outfitter on the besa has a quota of only 5 and can't fill that. the first time i hunted the besa i saw 47 full curl rams on a 10 day hunt. can't do that now.


Is there any steps being taken at the moment to change the situation?

[GoatGuy]

. To believe things like sheep were at a high artifical number after the wolf kill progam in the 80's etc,. is pure garbage.

So what you're telling me is predator control doesn't work? Why did the harvest go up and days per kill go down so dramatically?

Overall, the current harvest is not creating a conservation concern. The average age of harvest is fine - a big part of that is probably due to the full curl regulation. If the age falls too low the 1 in 3 can certainly be re-instituted before anything more dramatic happens. You could also apply an 8+ minimum to outfitter quota to help that IF it was a problem.

While you may be able to speak about 7B in the good old days, you didn't outfit in Region 6.

Thinking LEH will solve this problem is outlandish. The use and application of LEH policy right now is one of the most abused policies, far worse than the Allocation Policy. To be very honest putting non-residents on LEH really doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless they're going to be able to hunt un-guided. What are they going to do throw in an extra $5 to get a $35,000 with the outfitter that has exclusive access to the area? Several outfitters aren't booking enough clients to fill their quota right now due to the economy so the 'odds' would be less than 1:1. Pretty pointless. Secondly, you can hit your demand simply by adjusting the price of the hunt. Really, the concept makes no sense.

Anyways, this thread is about ensuring both groups achieving their allocated harvest in Region 6. I would suggest we deal with the sheep numbers, quota and harvest over there.

[GoatGuy]

Please post the data they have on Stones Sheep populations in Region 7 prior to the completion of the Alaska Highway. I find the statement that our stone sheep populations are stable and growing to be misleading. They have actually been steadily declining but you keep trying to "spin" it into something rosey.

My Grandpa was hunting sheep in region 7 from 1958-59 on up... He knew all the old timers in his era and was one of those responsible for the burning and predator control. I'll take his word over yours and your "scientist" most any day of the week as to what the sheep population USED to be like prior to the wolf control and burning programs you speak of.

Carl

When you look at population status and growth you compare it to the most recent data not 1958. So when we say a population is increasing it's usually a comparison with the past couple of years (<5 if we've got the money).

Nobody's surprised that there were more sheep when there was burning and intensive predator control (extermination) and no highways. That was before the 1080 days so basically anything with teeth or talons was dead. Also no bison and no elk hammering the shit out of the alpine.

Hunting's a very small part of a way bigger equation. If over-harvest was a problem you would see it in sex ratios and ram composition. While it's low in a couple of spots the alarm bells aren't going off.

You will probably find almost every single game population across the province was higher in the 1950s-60s as compared to now. With houses, highways, wineries, golf courses, no predator control and 40 years of fire suppression I don't think anybody should be surprised.

[6616]

Like I said the good old boys club will fight it to the grave. Then claim foul and being blindsided by it's arrival and low LEH numbers. I'm just as tired of hearing about an allocation program full of holes and causing major dissention amongst hunters.

Sorry, I almost forgot, anyone who doesn't agree with the Sheep Sherriff must be a dolt...should have known better then have the odacity to do that...!!!

[bridger]

Is there any steps being taken at the moment to change the situation?

sorry if my post mislead anyone. hunting is not the cause of the decline of the sheep population in 7b and no amount of leh etc will solve that. it is a more complex problem caused mostly by an increase in several predator species and in dramatic increase in the elk herds. The overall sheep population tho in 7b is not what it was. Thjere is no doubt that the aerial predator management program in the 80's resulted in a big increasse of sheep.

[willy442]

[quote=Deaddog;639100]No one has ever said that every area is in decent shape, certainly there are areas that are of concern, just that overall pops are stable (according to the regional bios that are paid to supply the numbers), again, I would encourage you to call the regional bio's for their thoughts as they are the ones that are collecting the data on our sheep pops...So perhaps you can tell me how you know that populations of sheep in all areas are crashing??[/quote

I don't recall saying all areas. As for the Bio's they are not eager to admit mistakes. You buy into thier numbers if you wish. I've seen them wrong too many times. Involving them and politics I'm sure makes the sheep feel real confident they are being taken care of!:)

[willy442]

sorry if my post mislead anyone. hunting is not the cause of the decline of the sheep population in 7b and no amount of leh etc will solve that. it is a more complex problem caused mostly by an increase in several predator species and in dramatic increase in the elk herds. The overall sheep population tho in 7b is not what it was. Thjere is no doubt that the aerial predator management program in the 80's resulted in a big increasse of sheep.

Rich; I disagree with you. We had away more sheep on the east slope prior to the wolf kill program. I don't disagree with the fact the kill helped in later years. Wolves, Bears, Eagles and man are all predators. If we do nothing to control the natural ones, we must control man at a better level to increase populations.

[willy442]

So what you're telling me is predator control doesn't work? Why did the harvest go up and days per kill go down so dramatically?

Overall, the current harvest is not creating a conservation concern. The average age of harvest is fine - a big part of that is probably due to the full curl regulation. If the age falls too low the 1 in 3 can certainly be re-instituted before anything more dramatic happens. You could also apply an 8+ minimum to outfitter quota to help that IF it was a problem.

While you may be able to speak about 7B in the good old days, you didn't outfit in Region 6.

Thinking LEH will solve this problem is outlandish. The use and application of LEH policy right now is one of the most abused policies, far worse than the Allocation Policy. To be very honest putting non-residents on LEH really doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless they're going to be able to hunt un-guided. What are they going to do throw in an extra $5 to get a $35,000 with the outfitter that has exclusive access to the area? Several outfitters aren't booking enough clients to fill their quota right now due to the economy so the 'odds' would be less than 1:1. Pretty pointless. Secondly, you can hit your demand simply by adjusting the price of the hunt. Really, the concept makes no sense.

Anyways, this thread is about ensuring both groups achieving their allocated harvest in Region 6. I would suggest we deal with the sheep numbers, quota and harvest over there.

You are still supporting setting harvest off of kills. Is this not a back asswards way of doing things. Reminds me of people that hear of a big ram being taken so thay all go hunt there the next year. Don't make sense the rams already dead.

[willy442]

Sorry, I almost forgot, anyone who doesn't agree with the Sheep Sherriff must be a dolt...should have known better then have the odacity to do that...!!!

Getting a little bitter are we?:)

[Devilbear]

NOw, THAT is sure, pot, kettle, black!

[6616]

Getting a little bitter are we?:)

Not really, just thankful that guys like Bridger and Goatguy are in a much stronger position to have any actual impact on future regulations.

[bayou]

Not really, just thankful that guys like Bridger and Goatguy are in a much stronger position to have any actual impact on future regulations.
Interesting so certain people can have an impact on future regulations depending on strength of there position.

[bigwhiteys]

Interesting so certain people can have an impact on future regulations depending on strength of there position.

Such as Bridger pushing hard for the resident only season and describing clearly in several posts how it would benefit him and his hunting party?

I would consider myself an "average" sheep hunter as far as my means of access are concerned (sweat & boot leather). Unfortunately I see no benefit to the sheep nor to myself for the early season.

The most competition "in the field" I've ever seen was actually among residents!

If we need the harvest numbers back in line, the easiest solution I see is to cut the G/O's back to realistic quotas and let them compensate for lost tags with hunt price (as has been the trend for decades). If a guy can drop $35,000 on a stone sheep hunt what is $50,000 or $60,000...?

Less work for the G/O providing he can still sell the hunts.

Carl

[GoatGuy]

You are still supporting setting harvest off of kills. Is this not a back asswards way of doing things. Reminds me of people that hear of a big ram being taken so thay all go hunt there the next year. Don't make sense the rams already dead.

The harvest targets are based off of population estimates and the age of the kills is what let's us monitor the trend and also points to any problems.

The way it's monitored would not be any different on GOS or LEH.

[MattB]

Such as Bridger pushing hard for the resident only season and describing clearly in several posts how it would benefit him and his hunting party?

I would consider myself an "average" sheep hunter as far as my means of access are concerned (sweat & boot leather). Unfortunately I see no benefit to the sheep nor to myself for the early season.

The most competition "in the field" I've ever seen was actually among residents!

If we need the harvest numbers back in line, the easiest solution I see is to cut the G/O's back to realistic quotas and let them compensate for lost tags with hunt price (as has been the trend for decades). If a guy can drop $35,000 on a stone sheep hunt what is $50,000 or $60,000...?

Less work for the G/O providing he can still sell the hunts.

Carl
Thats the best idea ive read in this whole thread. No matter what there would still be people with the $$$$ to spend on a hunt to try and get there Stone sheep!

[GoatGuy]

I would consider myself an "average" sheep hunter as far as my means of access are concerned (sweat & boot leather). Unfortunately I see no benefit to the sheep nor to myself for the early season.

The most competition "in the field" I've ever seen was actually among residents!

If we need the harvest numbers back in line, the easiest solution I see is to cut the G/O's back to realistic quotas and let them compensate for lost tags with hunt price (as has been the trend for decades). If a guy can drop $35,000 on a stone sheep hunt what is $50,000 or $60,000...?

Less work for the G/O providing he can still sell the hunts.

Carl

Whether you've experienced it or not competition in the field between residents and guide-outfitters does exist. The only place I've run into resident sheep hunters 'on the trail' is region 4 and I certainly wouldn't call them competition.

Particularly in 4 it is safe to say *if* a resident only season existed or *if* AAH was set up properly resident harvest would go up and guide-outfitter harvest would go down. It is also safe to say if quotas were increased resident harvest would go down. I think it is very fair to say the same thing would happen in many parts, certainly not all, of Regions 6 and 7B.

The resident harvest would go up with a resident only season for two reasons. It would stimulate interest and probably increase the number of resident sheep hunters and secondly the non-resident harvest wouldn't be there. There are several areas close to lakes and highways where residents and outfitters compete head to head every year during the first couple weeks of the opener and generally speaking outfitters are more successful - that is a fact. So, theoretically, if that outfitter harvest and pressure was not there resident harvest and success would go up in those areas. How much would be a guess at best. The concept of a resident only season does not need apply to July or what have you, the time frame is inconsequential.

As to your solution I think it's a good one. To be very honest the only way to make that happen is political - again not my cup of tea. You should probably be aware GOABC is pushing to remove quotas for sheep as well.

[6616]

Interesting so certain people can have an impact on future regulations depending on strength of there position.

Position as in role, job, elected or appointed "position" within an org, IE: committee chair, member, etc,,,, not position as opinion or stance on an issue.

[bigwhiteys]

Whether you've experienced it or not competition in the field between residents and guide-outfitters does exist.
I am not denying that for one second. But I have seen plenty of competition from residents for spots and sheep.

Follow any guide outfitter trail long enough and you're bound to run into the outfitter somewhere.


The resident harvest would go up with a resident only season for two reasons. It would stimulate interest and probably increase the number of resident sheep hunters and secondly the non-resident harvest wouldn't be there.

That's part of the problem... We remove the G/O from the equation and now there is just more resident hunters competing with each other in the easily accessible areas. What's the benefit there? Everybody gets to race to the same rams? It's like that already in some areas.

I don't see any reason for us to be killing more rams. The clear solution (if sheep are to benefit) is to cut the G/O's quotas back even further...

Price of sheep hunts goes up... No skin off our noses... We live here. Might be less work for the guides, but maybe the G/O would pay more.

Seems easier than all the fighting and science to increase "our" share.

Carl

[GoatGuy]

I am not denying that for one second. But I have seen plenty of competition from residents for spots and sheep.

Follow any guide outfitter trail long enough and you're bound to run into the outfitter somewhere.

Hahahaha, guess you're going to have to get back there and see it to believe it.



That's part of the problem... We remove the G/O from the equation and now there is just more resident hunters competing with each other in the easily accessible areas. What's the benefit there? Everybody gets to race to the same rams? It's like that already in some areas.

I don't see any reason for us to be killing more rams. The clear solution (if sheep are to benefit) is to cut the G/O's quotas back even further...

Price of sheep hunts goes up... No skin off our noses... We live here. Might be less work for the guides, but maybe the G/O would pay more.

Seems easier than all the fighting and science to increase "our" share.

Carl

There would actually be more rams available for the residents as well as you would probably find some people go farther into those hidey holes that are spotty or that usually only hold a band or two of rams. There are a lot of those kinds of spots in Region 6. The way it is now ain't really worth going into those spots when there's 3 guides a wrangler and a hunter. Or like in Region 4 a spotter up all 3 valleys with radios, a guide and a hunter rotating through them.

Because of the nature of the quota system in Region 6 I don't think you'd see the overall harvest go up and over there according to the MoE sheep are doing well although there's no actual report. ??

7B is right about where it should be right now in terms of splits and all the rest of it- it really isn't part of the discussion and that's what you seem to be focusing on.

Region 6 is the issue and yes you're still right lowering the quotas will help. Lower means cutting them by more than half.

[lange1212]

Quota provided in Region 6 is undefensible by the MoE. It does not follow basic management principles and certainly is not in the interests of sheep or hunters.

For Region 6 the total sheep harvest combined for Resident and Non-Resident:
2004 - 113
2005 - 113
2006 - 100
2007 - 119
2008 - 106
2009 - 102

This harvest trend is generally the same if even if you go back a decade or more. with non-resident on average harvesting 70% of the total.

Now consider that the GO quota alone is currently 148. Yep total MoE mismanagement when the combined harvest does not come close to what's allocated to GO's alone.

Now factor in that the vast majority of NR will not pay $35,000 to shoot a 34"-36" ram, they simply want trophy value for their buck and starts around the 38"-39" mark being 8-9 year old rams. GO's passing up smaller rams is less a function of conservation on their part and more clients demanding more. Although I suspect the commercial sector will spin the propoganda on this one.

Now consider that typically residents harvest of full curl 7 year rams is more prominent in the harvest data suggests 1) The vast majority of mature rams are harvested in early august in hunted areas with those smaller rams being passed up by paying clients. This most often leaves ram bands with out a mature ram forcing residents to harvest the remaining younger full curls. 2) lets be honest boys at $35,000 a sheep and the demand on this speies, if the mature rams existed GO's would be harvesting them. Arguing that they shift huntinting to other species later in the season that hold a fraction of the value is bogus. It simply does not support good business sense. Further GO's can have multiple clients hunting multiple species at the same time.

If you were a GO and had a quota of 10 sheep and repeatedly harvest only 5, 5 x $35,000=$175,000 earned, also means that there was a loss of $175,000 of potential earnings. Now working it out over 5 years the loss of potential earning would be $875,000.
If any of you were in business and had the product to sell would you turn your back on $875,000. Key words being if you had the product.

GO's do benefit from inflated quotas when they sell their territories. The # of sheep alloted to a territory adds huge $$$ to the territories resale valued. Although the quota can't be harvest the sale price reflects available quota not harvested quota. So for GO's with over inflated quotas they do everything to keep them, for MoE to allow GO's to have inflated quotas that are not defensible....you can come to your own conclusion on this one.

Yes quota is grossly inflated in the Skeena Region, is impacting the mature component of the huntable sheep populations and hindering resident harvest. Yep quota is out in space and needs to be brought down to earth.

A bit of a different perspective.

[bridger]

here are some sheep harvest stats from region 7b that sheep hunters may find interesting

the period from 1987 to 2009

total rams harvested ---- 5537
average per year 240
biggest one year harvest 375
lowest one year harvest 171

years residents took more than 50% of the harvest 7 out of 23

[willy442]

Position as in role, job, elected or appointed "position" within an org, IE: committee chair, member, etc,,,, not position as opinion or stance on an issue.

Like making sure the allocation proccess is followed?:) The truth of the matter is in reality very little has been accomplished other than a lot of wasted time and money. We are still hunting under very much the same system as when Allocation was first brought in. Less over all kill but other than that no difference. I wish the Bridgers and Goat Guy's would accomplish some good. Don't see it happening soon though.

[Deaddog]

I wish the Bridgers and Goat Guy's would accomplish some good. Don't see it happening soon though.


Well what Bridger and Goat Guy have accomplished is open for your interpertation.. the bottom line is that they are at the very least dedicating thousands of hours of their own time to at least try and invoke change, irregardless of whether some think it is the right direction or not, they are at least making the effort for the what they believe is the good of all hunters...now if we all were willing to sacrifice our own time to that extent, the issues we are dealing with in the wildlife arena would quickly be overcome..DD

[325 wsm]

I still don't understand why people are spending thousands of hours begging the MOE for rights and changes to sheep hunting. Dealing with the government is usually futile. Why not spend that time to develop an organization to raise money and purchase some areas. With these areas you could allocate the sheep quota's to residents through whatever means seems best. The rest of the species available in the area could also be allocated to residents or leased out to someone for guiding non-residents. The funds gained through this could then be used to purchase more areas. You will then "own" these areas. After all a GO quota is not a non-resident quota so don't give up the "we already own it attitude". If you buy them you will then own them and not have to beg the government for change and can take pride in saying "we bought it we own it and we manage the harvest in it". If you don't take control in some manner such as this you will forever be begging the government for permission. As they say "beggars can't be choosers" but I believe owners can.

[6616]

Well what Bridger and Goat Guy have accomplished is open for your interpertation.. the bottom line is that they are at the very least dedicating thousands of hours of their own time to at least try and invoke change, irregardless of whether some think it is the right direction or not, they are at least making the effort for the what they believe is the good of all hunters...now if we all were willing to sacrifice our own time to that extent, the issues we are dealing with in the wildlife arena would quickly be overcome..DD

Moreover, regardless of what some people think about the direction the BCWF takes, guys like GG and Bgr aren't just promoting their own positions, they're acting as directed by the grass roots membership of the BCWF.

[Gateholio]

I still don't understand why people are spending thousands of hours begging the MOE for rights and changes to sheep hunting. Dealing with the government is usually futile. Why not spend that time to develop an organization to raise money and purchase some areas. With these areas you could allocate the sheep quota's to residents through whatever means seems best. The rest of the species available in the area could also be allocated to residents or leased out to someone for guiding non-residents. The funds gained through this could then be used to purchase more areas. You will then "own" these areas. After all a GO quota is not a non-resident quota so don't give up the "we already own it attitude". If you buy them you will then own them and not have to beg the government for change and can take pride in saying "we bought it we own it and we manage the harvest in it". If you don't take control in some manner such as this you will forever be begging the government for permission. As they say "beggars can't be choosers" but I believe owners can.

I believe you have to use the outfit- or lose it. Maybe someone with more knowledge on this can comment.

[bruin]

The way the rules are now. If the outfit isn't shown to be used within a certain amount of years it is taken away.

[GoatGuy]

Like making sure the allocation proccess is followed?:) The truth of the matter is in reality very little has been accomplished other than a lot of wasted time and money. We are still hunting under very much the same system as when Allocation was first brought in. Less over all kill but other than that no difference.

Actually there have been changes in most hunts, some significant, some small and there will be more in 2012.

Back in your time the paper allocations were actually 50/50 which went to 75/25 on paper both of which were pointless. Being around at the time you know all it took was a call to the local regional manager and a couple short chats and you could get a pocket full of quota. Now the new policy which is being adopted, albeit slowly turns paper into opportunity.

For sheep in 7B it's a big change from the 70s when g/os were taking up to 85% of the harvest and had no quota, to 2006 where outfitters were allocated 77% of the harvest to today where quota is 40%. Resident harvest is at 60% up from 15% and then 23% and that will go up again in 2012. That is significant.

Overall certainly still one of the worst allocation policy's in NA but better than it was. Gets rid of all the backdoor regional deals that were so prevalent in the past.

Resident hunter numbers are also up and seeing increases annually as well as core graduates are at record highs since the early 80s. This has all happened in the last 3 or so years which is a positive.

So there's a long way to go but most days we're headed in the right direction. Once we get this policy under wraps we can get onto a few other things that have been sitting on the books.

I agree a waste of time and money but the last time everybody finished up the policy the backdoor deals started the very next day and resident allocation was handed over pretty much all over the province. This is unfortunately part of the program when dealing with somebody who doesn't keep their word.

I also agree there's really no sense in whining about what GOABC or MoE does. Resident hunters need to stop relying on others to drive or support change or act in good faith - gonna have to take it upon themselves if they're to drive change.

That is one thing you've shared with all of us that I've learned from you and through a bit of experience and I appreciate it. :wink: Thanks Willy!

[GoatGuy]

The way the rules are now. If the outfit isn't shown to be used within a certain amount of years it is taken away.

1 year although you can get a permit not to operate depending on the reasons.

[willy442]

Well what Bridger and Goat Guy have accomplished is open for your interpertation.. the bottom line is that they are at the very least dedicating thousands of hours of their own time to at least try and invoke change, irregardless of whether some think it is the right direction or not, they are at least making the effort for the what they believe is the good of all hunters...now if we all were willing to sacrifice our own time to that extent, the issues we are dealing with in the wildlife arena would quickly be overcome..DD

I don't have a problem working towards what I believe is in the best interest of our wildlife. I do have a problem with supporting any hunting at the expense of depleteing our game herds or seasons that would be detrimental to thier annual feeding cycles. Blind trust in Biologists is also something I fail to support anymore.

[willy442]

Moreover, regardless of what some people think about the direction the BCWF takes, guys like GG and Bgr aren't just promoting their own positions, they're acting as directed by the grass roots membership of the BCWF.

People are alot like sheep. There is leaders and followers. The good old boy's club within the BCWF has been followed for years. Your choice follow if you wish. I think theres a better way.:)

[willy442]

I believe you have to use the outfit- or lose it. Maybe someone with more knowledge on this can comment.

Yes you are right Gates

[bridger]

well willy I am disappointed that you taken this thread to a personal level by attacking the "good old boys in the fed" as you call them. I can tell you from personal experience that they have spent more of their own time and money trying make thiings better for both the resource and resident hunters than the majority of people in the province. to my knowledge they have never broken their word at the negotiation tables. Something that neither the goabc or moe can say.

they have done a lot of good things for sheep around the province. Can you say that? what have you ever done personally to improve the status of stone sheep. I know one thing for certain i have personally raised more money for sheep conservation than you have. I also know that resident stone sheep hunters in 7b are not on limited entry due to the direct efforts of the "good old boys" you keep slamming. Your posts always indicate it is the resident hunter that is at fault for all the problems sheep have had and are now facing and if left to the control of the "good old boys in the goabc" things would be fine. The truth is resident hunters now more than ever have to stand up for themselves. If there is a better way as you say why don't you run for office in the fed or goabc and become a leader instead of a rock thrower? Who knows you might even do some good!!

[Devilbear]

Excellent post, Rich, as a former member of the Lower Mainland BCWF Executive, I totally concur. The BCWF, has done more for all wildlife and our resident hunting rights and traditions then all of the GOs, "greenies" and other interested parties together.

Willy is right on one issue, hunting of the sheep must always come second to conservation concerns for them. He is wrong in placing the foreign hunters and GOs privileges to continue the commercial slaughter of these animals on an equal basis with our resident rights as he always does.

This thread, has made me see even more clearly, how it is necessary to ban all non-Canadian hunting here in BC and, hopefully, throughout Canada, ASAP. The GOs have been exploiting our resource for far too long and it is time to eliminate this permanently.

[bruin]

This thread, has made me see even more clearly, how it is necessary to ban all non-Canadian hunting here in BC and, hopefully, throughout Canada, ASAP. The GOs have been exploiting our resource for far too long and it is time to eliminate this permanently.


You know what would be even better? We should stop selling any and all of our natural resources! Then we could stop importing as well!
Come on DB, what is wrong with getting some revenue out of our wildlife as long as there is not a conservation concern and residents get their share? You sound like an extremist environmentalist (with a different viewpoint).

[Devilbear]

I agree, we SHOULD stop selling our irreplaceable raw resources, especially to the nation that poses as our "friend" and "ally" and then "weasels" on the softwood treaty decisions. We SHOULD process these here at home and import far less from China and so forth; we USED to make things here and we still could.

There IS both a conservation concern AND residents are NOT getting ...their share..., while other Canadians cannot afford to hunt here in B.C. I would have thought this was apparent in the many comments on this thread.

I AM an environmentalist, a VERY hardcore, lifelong one and I must ask, are you a "guide", or a GO and, were you born in BC, or, are you among the Yankees who have residence here to exploit our game?

Are you connected with Bryan Martin or ANY GO now or have you been? You sound like an extremist GO.

[bruin]

I agree, we SHOULD stop selling our irreplaceable raw resources, especially to the nation that poses as our "friend" and "ally" and then "weasels" on the softwood treaty decisions. We SHOULD process these here at home and import far less from China and so forth; we USED to make things here and we still could.

There IS both a conservation concern AND residents are NOT getting ...their share..., while other Canadians cannot afford to hunt here in B.C. I would have thought this was apparent in the many comments on this thread.

I AM an environmentalist, a VERY hardcore, lifelong one and I must ask, are you a "guide", or a GO and, were you born in BC, or, are you among the Yankees who have residence here to exploit our game?

Are you connected with Bryan Martin or ANY GO now or have you been? You sound like an extremist GO.

PM on the way.

[325 wsm]

I believe you have to use the outfit- or lose it. Maybe someone with more knowledge on this can comment.

Yes GH I understand that and that is why I suggested leasing out the sheep areas to someone who would be interested in running it to hunt the other species available in the purchased areas. As long as you sell a few hunts each year for moose, black bear, goats etc. you would still be "effectively" running the areas. For the sheep you could run a lottery amongst supporters of the organization and the winners would then be able to purchase a sheep hunt for a minimal fee. I'm sure there are no regulations stating that an outfitter must sell a certain amount of hunts for a certain price. Even the other species could work through the lottery system available only to residents of BC. This would also be a winning situation for local guides as they would need to be hired to guide the residents to ensure game laws were strictly adhered to. As a suggestion a ticket for the lottery could be somewhere around $50 and winners would then pay $500 for the hunt. That should easily cover the cost of the guide and as has been stated before on these threads guided hunts are generally more successful. This overall would allow more resident hunters to attain success at sheep hunting . Those who have no interest in supporting this type of operation (and even those who did) would still have the options available to them that are currently offered for hunting in BC. The final result would be a larger percentage of harvested rams going to residents instead of non-residents and local GO areas still being run to help support the economy. Of course some technical glitches and policies would have to be ironed out but in my opinion that beats the hell out of begging to the government year after year.

[bruin]

This has been a very educational thread. Other than some personal jabs I have really enjoyed it.

[sako_300]

I agree, we SHOULD stop selling our irreplaceable raw resources, especially to the nation that poses as our "friend" and "ally" and then "weasels" on the softwood treaty decisions. We SHOULD process these here at home and import far less from China and so forth; we USED to make things here and we still could.

There IS both a conservation concern AND residents are NOT getting ...their share..., while other Canadians cannot afford to hunt here in B.C. I would have thought this was apparent in the many comments on this thread.

I AM an environmentalist, a VERY hardcore, lifelong one and I must ask, are you a "guide", or a GO and, were you born in BC, or, are you among the Yankees who have residence here to exploit our game?

Are you connected with Bryan Martin or ANY GO now or have you been? You sound like an extremist GO.


That is beyond words... maybe we should all start wearing tie dyed t-shirts and fabricating bongs to support the local economy; I hear there is good money in that these days.

I don't agree with the softwood agreement but think about it - If someone was asking $1000 for an item you desired and you knew they would take $200 would you really pay them $1000?? I don't think so. Canada vs. the USA; the only thing we can win at is hockey...

Common, there is rational and extreme.

[bridger]

personally I think it would be a sad day if we banned non resident hunting in our province and a sadder day if the guiding industry no longer functioned. the point of the whole excercise is merely to give residents of bc the same priority in hunting and fishing opportunites that residents of other provinces and states enjoy. Is that asking too much? Giving residents priority in the harvest will not deplete the sheep or any other specie. If the moe would follow the new allocation policy most of this lobbying would go away. that is the issue. we as resident hunters have to band together and make our voices and economic power heard. Simple as that!!

[Devilbear]

That is beyond words... maybe we should all start wearing tie dyed t-shirts and fabricating bongs to support the local economy; I hear there is good money in that these days.

I don't agree with the softwood agreement but think about it - If someone was asking $1000 for an item you desired and you knew they would take $200 would you really pay them $1000?? I don't think so. Canada vs. the USA; the only thing we can win at is hockey...

Common, there is rational and extreme.

I do not "get" your first sentence although the questionable allusion is obvious; just to make it clear, I was working in the Forest Service, the forest and mining industries and paying my own way in Selkirk College during the ... tie dyed t-shirts... era. The reference to ...bongs... escapes me, is this concerning those little drums?

The issue with softwood is both very complex and rather simple; the Yankees made a TREATY with us and then they BROKE THEIR WORD when the situation worked in our favour. I do not accept this and think it appropriate to deal with them as they do with us and, with our energy resources, we have a VERY strong bargaining position, which we should use.

Are you saying that I am not rational, or, is that merely another offensive aside made by an person of rather dubious literacy...as in, ...Common..., when you meant, "Come on".......

You may be willing to sell out Canada to the Yankees for very little, however, many Canadians are not and sound alternatives DO exist; it is simply a matter of courage such as we demonstrated every time they invaded us...and we kicked their azzes.

[Devilbear]

personally I think it would be a sad day if we banned non resident hunting in our province and a sadder day if the guiding industry no longer functioned. the point of the whole excercise is merely to give residents of bc the same priority in hunting and fishing opportunites that residents of other provinces and states enjoy. Is that asking too much? Giving residents priority in the harvest will not deplete the sheep or any other specie. If the moe would follow the new allocation policy most of this lobbying would go away. that is the issue. we as resident hunters have to band together and make our voices and economic power heard. Simple as that!!

I have great respect for you, your activities and your opinions, however, I think that the very best thing that could happen to BC hunting and angling would be an immediate and total ban on all foreigners pursuing these activities. I see no good reason to allow ANY "consumptive" tourism here in BC-Canada and hope to see it end soon.

The GO industry is NOT going to cooperate, will NOT cease from demanding more and more and is the worst enemy, except lunatics like PETA, that we BC hunters/anglers have. They are becoming evermore aggressive in their demands to profit from our resources and we need to eliminate them and their malignant influence on government.

Sorry, but, that is how I see it.

[bridger]

can't really argue that

[SHAKER]

here are some sheep harvest stats from region 7b that sheep hunters may find interesting

the period from 1987 to 2009

total rams harvested ---- 5537
average per year 240
biggest one year harvest 375
lowest one year harvest 171

years residents took more than 50% of the harvest 7 out of 23


Interesting #'s.... curious when those 7 years were or were they spread out? One other thought to this that I don't think is mentioned in the 20+ pages... Sheep hunters arent like deer hunters. I think for the most part once you've taken a Ram and "IF" your going to take another one it would have to be larger or something extra special compared to the one you aready have. I believe Goats, Cats, Grizz bear ect fall into this same bucket with this? I know, I always get "the crazy goat guy that shoots one every year" thing but those I think are a minority.

[bridger]

Interesting #'s.... curious when those 7 years were or were they spread out? One other thought to this that I don't think is mentioned in the 20+ pages... Sheep hunters arent like deer hunters. I think for the most part once you've taken a Ram and "IF" your going to take another one it would have to be larger or something extra special compared to the one you aready have. I believe Goats, Cats, Grizz bear ect fall into this same bucket with this? I know, I always get "the crazy goat guy that shoots one every year" thing but those I think are a minority.

the years were spread out. I don't know any sheep hunter that kills a ram every year very few harvest 2 in three years.

[SHAKER]

Kind of an interesting thought with some of the low harvest though. I think I can safely say that people who hunt "specialty critters" do tend to harvest less and are more selective in the animals they do harvest. That being said I'll still shoot a small white tail buck if the opertunity persents itself. But for me to shoot another Cali it would definatly have to be larger then the one I have on my wall. Same goes for my Cougar, bobcat or lynx. But then again I havn't killed a Stone and a 7yr old lamb tipped ram that makes full curl....... KA-BOOM! Got lots of years to look for a bigger one after.

Just so theirs' no confusion..... Go resident hunters!

[willy442]

well willy I am disappointed that you taken this thread to a personal level by attacking the "good old boys in the fed" as you call them. I can tell you from personal experience that they have spent more of their own time and money trying make thiings better for both the resource and resident hunters than the majority of people in the province. to my knowledge they have never broken their word at the negotiation tables. Something that neither the goabc or moe can say.

they have done a lot of good things for sheep around the province. Can you say that? what have you ever done personally to improve the status of stone sheep. I know one thing for certain i have personally raised more money for sheep conservation than you have. I also know that resident stone sheep hunters in 7b are not on limited entry due to the direct efforts of the "good old boys" you keep slamming. Your posts always indicate it is the resident hunter that is at fault for all the problems sheep have had and are now facing and if left to the control of the "good old boys in the goabc" things would be fine. The truth is resident hunters now more than ever have to stand up for themselves. If there is a better way as you say why don't you run for office in the fed or goabc and become a leader instead of a rock thrower? Who knows you might even do some good!!

Rich: Why is it always a who done more or who did best with you and others whom follow your thinking. It has never been an issue with me on if the resident caused this or that. The problem I have is the resident cannot get in line and follow any one idea or issue whole heartedly, that is put forth by the BCWF. In most circles if the leaders of a group cannot organize its members and bring them inline with a common focus. Elections are held and new ideas and blood are layed on the table. The problem is the good old boys feel they have put so much in that they don't want new blood manage and they step aside. Your statement of the resident isn't on LEH because of you is partially correct. I would like to know why you feel this is the right path for our sheep (not resident hunters). I'm just as entitled to have my own ideas and am just as proud of what myself and my family have done on behalf of both sheep and guides as you are of your accomplishments. Never have I stated or indicated that the resident should not have priority. My concern is how priority is going to come about and how it is going to affect our depleteing sheep herds. Sorry if you don't like it you're entitled to that just like I am to my opinion.

[bridger]

prioirity is not going to deplete the sheep herds that is the point. the only difference is that resident hunters are going to be taking more than non residents. the aah will remain the same. quota's will go down to the guaranteed minimum of 20% of the aah. if the aah is exceeded then we put the brakes on the resident side of the harvest. pretty simple really. at no time would the bcwf condone an overharvest of the sheep by either residency group.

[willy442]

personally I think it would be a sad day if we banned non resident hunting in our province and a sadder day if the guiding industry no longer functioned. the point of the whole excercise is merely to give residents of bc the same priority in hunting and fishing opportunites that residents of other provinces and states enjoy. Is that asking too much? Giving residents priority in the harvest will not deplete the sheep or any other specie. If the moe would follow the new allocation policy most of this lobbying would go away. that is the issue. we as resident hunters have to band together and make our voices and economic power heard. Simple as that!!

Bridger: The issue is the allocation policy has never worked and I believe never will. MOE don't want it and won't implement it as has been shown over many years. It's time to quit beating a dead horse and develop a system that everyone can support and buy into. Hunting is something that is on the verge of extinction if you look down the road another fifty years. Hunters cannot afford to be infighting as we are now over allocation and meat verses trophy. They must all band together and follow a common path to keep our opportunities at as high as possible levels. You seen obsessed with bringing the old allocation policy into play. Why?

[GoatGuy]

Bridger: The issue is the allocation policy has never worked and I believe never will. MOE don't want it and won't implement it as has been shown over many years. It's time to quit beating a dead horse and develop a system that everyone can support and buy into. Hunting is something that is on the verge of extinction if you look down the road another fifty years. Hunters cannot afford to be infighting as we are now over allocation and meat verses trophy. They must all band together and follow a common path to keep our opportunities at as high as possible levels. You seen obsessed with bringing the old allocation policy into play. Why?

Willy, the allocation policy was developed by everyone and everyone supported it and bought into it. Since then it has gone to shit. Of course, that was before Dale left so if you think the 'old boys club' is the problem on the resident side and that things have changed on goabc's side you best look around.

Without any allocation resident hunters can't hunt - that's pretty simple. Without being able to hunt there won't be any resident hunters - that's pretty simple as well. That is why allocation is important! If you don't get that, you won't understand the problem from top to the bottom.

The part you seem to be missing is this is not a non-resident versus resident issue, never was. GOABC does not represent non-resident hunters and I can guarantee you must non-resident hunters that come to BC would gag if they got only 60% or 30% of the aah in their respective jurisdiction. I can also guarantee to you that most non-resident hunters across North America would and do support residents in BC.

Most of the issues here are GOABC trying to take away resident hunters ability to hunt - that is it. None of the justifications for cutting resident hunter opportunity has anything to do with 'science' it all has to do with politics. It really has nothing to do with hunting, it's about money. Times have changed since you were outfitting. Most of the outfitters now aren't in it for hunting, they're in it for money. The old boys, who hunt when they aren't guiding are a dying breed - there's very, very, very few of them.

It is not hunters who are fighting, it is hunters who are fighting business - there's a big difference.

[6616]

Bridger: The issue is the allocation policy has never worked and I believe never will. MOE don't want it and won't implement it as has been shown over many years. It's time to quit beating a dead horse and develop a system that everyone can support and buy into. Hunting is something that is on the verge of extinction if you look down the road another fifty years. Hunters cannot afford to be infighting as we are now over allocation and meat verses trophy. They must all band together and follow a common path to keep our opportunities at as high as possible levels. You seen obsessed with bringing the old allocation policy into play. Why?

The old allocation policy (1984) was not the best in the world, that's for sure. The allocation policy review was demanded by GOABC and to emphasis that point they pulled away from the allocation meetings in all regions and refused to participate in the old allocation process thus effectivelly killing it.

Following that the allocation review began and it was driven and guided by the MOE. It's their (MOE's) policy, they developed it, BCWF and GOABC both agreed to it, so I don't see why MOE wouldn't want it or would refuse to follow it or implement it. There have definitely been some growing pains during the implementation period which have caused a lot of strife, but MOE assures us they intend to fully implement the new allocation policy in 2012, and hopefully the strife will be over.

So in 2012 the allocation policy will work if MOE wants it to work and sticks to their word, any failure of the policy at that time will only be caused by MOE not following it. If they follow it everything should work out.

Having said that, in my opinion I agree that it's a crappy policy and much too convoluted and complicated, and if I had my way I'd throw it out and not even have an allocation policy at all. Instead I would prefer to have a section written into the Wildlife Act (enacted in law) that clearly sets out a maximum percentage of AAH allowed for non-residents to harvest, much like the 10% rule used in most other juristdictions.

My own personal opinion is that I would be very generous in regards to the non-resident percentage in consideration of the importance of the outfitting industry in BC and furthermore I would allow higher percentages for those species residents do not seem to be as interested in. For example 10% to 15% max for non-resident harvest for deer, elk, moose, etc, but perhaps 20% to 25% max for sheep, goats, and grizzly bears. I am not firm on these numbers and believe there is room for negotiation.

[SHAKER]

My own personal opinion is that I would be very generous in regards to the non-resident percentage in consideration of the importance of the outfitting industry in BC and furthermore I would allow higher percentages for those species residents do not seem to be as interested in. For example 10% to 15% max for non-resident harvest for deer, elk, moose, etc, but perhaps 20% to 25% max for sheep, goats, and grizzly bears. I am not firm on these numbers and believe there is room for negotiation.[/quote]


Kind of like the track your on but if it's on LEH and some people still have to stare threw the peep hole cause they can't particapate? I think thats still got some demand doesn't it?

[6616]

My own personal opinion is that I would be very generous in regards to the non-resident percentage in consideration of the importance of the outfitting industry in BC and furthermore I would allow higher percentages for those species residents do not seem to be as interested in. For example 10% to 15% max for non-resident harvest for deer, elk, moose, etc, but perhaps 20% to 25% max for sheep, goats, and grizzly bears. I am not firm on these numbers and believe there is room for negotiation.


Kind of like the track your on but if it's on LEH and some people still have to stare threw the peep hole cause they can't particapate? I think thats still got some demand doesn't it?[/quote]

I agree. I would even go as far as saying that certain hunts that have high resident demand and very small allowable harvests (perhaps elk on VI for example) should not have any allowable non-resident harvest.

[SHAKER]

Kind of like the track your on but if it's on LEH and some people still have to stare threw the peep hole cause they can't particapate? I think thats still got some demand doesn't it?

I agree. I would even go as far as saying that certain hunts that have high resident demand and very small allowable harvests (perhaps elk on VI for example) should not have any allowable non-resident harvest.[/quote]


Whooo Hoooo! Someone except me had the balls to say it. Allot of places have it where if there is a LEH season for residents their is NO non resident hunting! If resident harvest are under what MOE wants then remove barriers for use to accieve our AHH. I think it says that in the reg policy doesnt' it?

[6616]

If resident harvest are under what MOE wants then remove barriers for use to accieve our AHH. I think it says that in the reg policy doesnt' it?

Yes it does.

[willy442]

Willy, the allocation policy was developed by everyone and everyone supported it and bought into it. Since then it has gone to shit. Of course, that was before Dale left so if you think the 'old boys club' is the problem on the resident side and that things have changed on goabc's side you best look around.

Without any allocation resident hunters can't hunt - that's pretty simple. Without being able to hunt there won't be any resident hunters - that's pretty simple as well. That is why allocation is important! If you don't get that, you won't understand the problem from top to the bottom.

The part you seem to be missing is this is not a non-resident versus resident issue, never was. GOABC does not represent non-resident hunters and I can guarantee you must non-resident hunters that come to BC would gag if they got only 60% or 30% of the aah in their respective jurisdiction. I can also guarantee to you that most non-resident hunters across North America would and do support residents in BC.

Most of the issues here are GOABC trying to take away resident hunters ability to hunt - that is it. None of the justifications for cutting resident hunter opportunity has anything to do with 'science' it all has to do with politics. It really has nothing to do with hunting, it's about money. Times have changed since you were outfitting. Most of the outfitters now aren't in it for hunting, they're in it for money. The old boys, who hunt when they aren't guiding are a dying breed - there's very, very, very few of them.

It is not hunters who are fighting, it is hunters who are fighting business - there's a big difference.

Twist it any way you want. It boils down to the resident verses nonresident, thats why we keep seeing the kill refered to and the fact that the G/O's are more successful. This pisses the resident off and fuels all the arguements and issue's. I agree for the 100th time residents come first. It's time to find a new approach, this one hasn't worked in the last 25 years. Blame the failure on whoever you want it still don't change the fact that it won't work.

[willy442]

The old allocation policy (1984) was not the best in the world, that's for sure. The allocation policy review was demanded by GOABC and to emphasis that point they pulled away from the allocation meetings in all regions and refused to participate in the old allocation process thus effectivelly killing it.

Following that the allocation review began and it was driven and guided by the MOE. It's their (MOE's) policy, they developed it, BCWF and GOABC both agreed to it, so I don't see why MOE wouldn't want it or would refuse to follow it or implement it. There have definitely been some growing pains during the implementation period which have caused a lot of strife, but MOE assures us they intend to fully implement the new allocation policy in 2012, and hopefully the strife will be over.

So in 2012 the allocation policy will work if MOE wants it to work and sticks to their word, any failure of the policy at that time will only be caused by MOE not following it. If they follow it everything should work out.

Having said that, in my opinion I agree that it's a crappy policy and much too convoluted and complicated, and if I had my way I'd throw it out and not even have an allocation policy at all. Instead I would prefer to have a section written into the Wildlife Act (enacted in law) that clearly sets out a maximum percentage of AAH allowed for non-residents to harvest, much like the 10% rule used in most other juristdictions.

My own personal opinion is that I would be very generous in regards to the non-resident percentage in consideration of the importance of the outfitting industry in BC and furthermore I would allow higher percentages for those species residents do not seem to be as interested in. For example 10% to 15% max for non-resident harvest for deer, elk, moose, etc, but perhaps 20% to 25% max for sheep, goats, and grizzly bears. I am not firm on these numbers and believe there is room for negotiation.

Finally we agree on something.:-D

[bridger]

I agree the harvest percentages should be law not policy. I hve said that from day one. policy can be manipulated law cannot. When willie says that the allocaiton process doesn't work i agree. however, it is important to keep in mind why it doesn't work.

[bayou]

Whether you've experienced it or not competition in the field between residents and guide-outfitters does exist. The only place I've run into resident sheep hunters 'on the trail' is region 4 and I certainly wouldn't call them competition.

Particularly in 4 it is safe to say *if* a resident only season existed or *if* AAH was set up properly resident harvest would go up and guide-outfitter harvest would go down. It is also safe to say if quotas were increased resident harvest would go down. I think it is very fair to say the same thing would happen in many parts, certainly not all, of Regions 6 and 7B.

The resident harvest would go up with a resident only season for two reasons. It would stimulate interest and probably increase the number of resident sheep hunters and secondly the non-resident harvest wouldn't be there.
That may not really be so if you read BHB post on the other thread he says he nows lots of people that only hunt sheep if drawn for an LEH even though there is GOS in the same areas so maybe LEH stimulates more interest.
There are several areas close to lakes and highways where residents and outfitters compete head to head every year during the first couple weeks of the opener and generally speaking outfitters are more successful - that is a fact. So, theoretically, if that outfitter harvest and pressure was not there resident harvest and success would go up in those areas. How much would be a guess at best. The concept of a resident only season does not need apply to July or what have you, the time frame is inconsequential.

As to your solution I think it's a good one. To be very honest the only way to make that happen is political - again not my cup of tea. You should probably be aware GOABC is pushing to remove quotas for sheep as well.
Since you have brought up region 4 I beleive people should listen to willy and do something before its to late for the sheep.
You have said the sheep are down, 6616 says residents cant reach there target harvest for theres not enough sheep to allow it, I have heard from otheres there is a concern about the dropping age of harvested rams. Seems there may be abit of a concern that just cutting and burning some trees will not fix.

[bayou]

Position as in role, job, elected or appointed "position" within an org, IE: committee chair, member, etc,,,, not position as opinion or stance on an issue.
I know what you meant how people in certain postions have certain pull, how they can sway things one way or another,how they have access to certain information, how they can be part of closed door meetings how they use there positon for personal agendas,gain and advancment.
I get ya on that.

[bridger]

the moe will follow the allocation policy if resident hunters focus on it. if we don't we will end up on leh for every hunt in the province with half the hunters we had 10 years ago. i don't think residents wantto go there.

[6616]

I know what you meant how people in certain postions have certain pull, how they can sway things one way or another,how they have access to certain information, how they can be part of closed door meetings how they use there positon for personal agendas,gain and advancment.
I get ya on that.

I did not say anything about personal agendas, gain, and advancement, those are your words and your interpretation, not mine...do not attempt to attribute that accusation to me,,, I have not witnessed that occurring in this case..!

[Deadshot]

I guess we wait til 2012 & then demand the allocation percentages are met.
Is that about right?

[6616]

Since you have brought up region 4 I beleive people should listen to willy and do something before its to late for the sheep.
You have said the sheep are down, 6616 says residents cant reach there target harvest for theres not enough sheep to allow it, I have heard from otheres there is a concern about the dropping age of harvested rams. Seems there may be abit of a concern that just cutting and burning some trees will not fix.

If harvest levels are a concern, the situation in Region 4 will correct itself with full implementation of the allocation policy in 2012,,, if implementation is carried out as promised by MOE. However, with a full curl horn regulation and an annual harvest of 40 rams or less out of a population of 2250 I don't really see harvest levels as being a significant conservation concern.

After the 2007 to 2011 allocation period is over the statment in the allocation policy "non-resident quota will not exceed non-resident allocation" will apply and that will change things considerably, but don't be surprized if SGO and MOE attempt to find a way to void this clause.

Regarding conservation and the long-term future of sheep in Region 4, it's 100% directly related to habitat, and eco-system restoration in the corridor between Premier Ridge and Bull River is currently the most critical aspect.

[bridger]

I guess we wait til 2012 & then demand the allocation percentages are met.
Is that about right?


in my opinion we need to keep reminding the moe and politicians constantly that they are obligated to implement the maximum percentages for residents and minimum percentages for non residents in 2012 as imo the goabc will be lobbying hard to keep that from happening.

[GoatGuy]

That may not really be so if you read BHB post on the other thread he says he nows lots of people that only hunt sheep if drawn for an LEH even though there is GOS in the same areas so maybe LEH stimulates more interest..

The draws that are high odds are by and large any ram hunts. If you had a GOS that was any ram you would stimulate more interest.

I don't expect you to understand that.



Since you have brought up region 4 I beleive people should listen to willy and do something before its to late for the sheep. You have said the sheep are down, 6616 says residents cant reach there target harvest for theres not enough sheep to allow it, I have heard from otheres there is a concern about the dropping age of harvested rams. Seems there may be abit of a concern that just cutting and burning some trees will not fix.

The sheep are down in the long-run because of habitat and predation. Everytime you have a die-off the population increases and stabilizes at lower levels due to forest ingrowth. If there was a problem with ram harvest we would see high mortality rates in Class IIV rams which we don't appear to be. The problem is there aren't the same number of sheep as there used to be. A full curl on rockies is a fail-safe regulation. The sheep numbers will keep going down until the whole place burns. The way this spring is going that may just happen this year.

I don't expect you to understand it either. Have no idea why you'd care if the age of harvest was going down. Remember, you're the one who doesn't believe in managing by numbers or science.

[Devilbear]

:) :) :) touche!

[bayou]

[quote=GoatGuy;640594][/color]

The draws that are high odds are by and large any ram hunts. If you had a GOS that was any ram you would stimulate more interest.
And you would no this how.
I don't expect you to understand that.




The sheep are down in the long-run because of habitat and predation.
I hope your including humans under predation since in some MUs more rams are killed after the season by human then during, and more sheep in general then by coyote or cat.

Everytime you have a die-off the population increases and stabilizes at lower levels due to forest ingrowth. If there was a problem with ram harvest we would see high mortality rates in Class IIV rams which we don't appear to be.
Why all the complaining about the resident harvest then if theres no problem.
The problem is there aren't the same number of sheep as there used to be. A full curl on rockies is a fail-safe regulation. The sheep numbers will keep going down until the whole place burns. The way this spring is going that may just happen this year.
Some of the MUs have been cleaned and the sheep still dont use them like in the past even less since the cutting. But then you wernt around then.
I don't expect you to understand it either. Have no idea why you'd care if the age of harvest was going down.
For itmay be a cause for concern which may result in different regs implamented like you suggested in post #168

Remember, you're the one who doesn't believe in managing by numbers or science.
I dont remember saying that exactly can you show me where, if not Im sure one of your understudys will get right on it.

[willy442]

in my opinion we need to keep reminding the moe and politicians constantly that they are obligated to implement the maximum percentages for residents and minimum percentages for non residents in 2012 as imo the goabc will be lobbying hard to keep that from happening.

Same old, same old. Good luck.

[6616]

I hope your including humans under predation since in some MUs more rams are killed after the season by human then during,
Where do you get this from Dale, needs stats, data....sounds like BS to me..!

and more sheep in general then by coyote or cat.
Predator kills are closely related to habitat ingrowth.

Some of the MUs have been cleaned and the sheep still dont use them like in the past even less since the cutting.
Now this statment doesn't just sound like BS, it is pure unadulterated BS....!

[bayou]

I hope your including humans under predation since in some MUs more rams are killed after the season by human then during,
Where do you get this from Dale, needs stats, data....sounds like BS to me..!

and more sheep in general then by coyote or cat.
Predator kills are closely related to habitat ingrowth.

Some of the MUs have been cleaned and the sheep still dont use them like in the past even less since the cutting.
Now this statment doesn't just sound like BS, it is pure unadulterated BS....!
A fellow like you should have the stats, some of it may not be writen in stuff you get, and maybe some they dont think its worth letting you know.Like I have said before you have to be out there to see whats going on, maybe get out from behind the computer someday and have a look. There is people out there that have observed and watched things for years just because the dont have a piece of paper or degree doesnt mean they dont no things. It boils down on who you want to beleive.
I really dont care if you think its BS or not like I said to DB your only as good as your word and you no what I think of yours.

[6616]

some of it may not be writen in stuff you get, and maybe some they dont think its worth letting you know.

or maybe it doesn't exist............hahaha...!

[bridger]

Same old, same old. Good luck.


got a better idea or more rocks?

[GoatGuy]

And you would no this how.

It's what I do.



I hope your including humans under predation since in some MUs more rams are killed after the season by human then during, and more sheep in general then by coyote or cat.

So are we talking about rams or are we talking about sheep? Which one is it?

Are you saying we have a sperm supply problem? Are there many second estrus lambs being dropped? What is the lamb:ewe ratio and what does that indicate in terms of population status? What should it be?

Are you saying the population is declining due to highway mortality? What are the numbers? Do you have the numbers from highway collisions across WMR 4?

What kind of predator avoidance strategies do bighorn sheep use? What kind of habitat did they evolve in? Have you read any of the papers from collared sheep in Region 4?


Why all the complaining about the resident harvest then if theres no problem.

It's a matter of the split. It isn't about 'conservation'. If there were serious problems we'd be talking about reducing the total harvest, not the allocation and quota.

There are a myriad of other problems that would be cropping up including high participation in the rut and mortality of class IIV rams, second estrus lambs, low birth rates and extremely low recruitment rates. Are you seeing any of that?


Some of the MUs have been cleaned and the sheep still dont use them like in the past even less since the cutting. But then you wernt around then.

Less since being thinned really? So what you're saying is burning and thinning is a waste of money?

We should just let the trench grow in and the populations will increase?

That is rather interesting. I think you should call up a couple of the biologists and tell them thinning and burning is a waste of time - it doesn't work and that the sheep populations will increase dramatically by moving to LEH. I'm sure it will go over well.


For itmay be a cause for concern which may result in different regs implamented like you suggested in post #168

If it was a concern we'd be talking about it. The sheep in Region 4 are probably the most intensively censused population in the Province. If there was a conservation concern there would be some serious discussion about it. The fact that the class IV rams are down does not create conservation concern. While we're on that what % are class IV rams in an un-hunted population?

We've actually got populations getting right up near carrying capacity in terms of their ingrown habitat and the worry is we're going to get disease and a die-off. That was why the ewe LEH was proposed in the bull but nobody had enough smarts to support it so instead we'll just let them die-off in the future like we've already done a couple of times in the past..... and then it will be the ministry's fault. :roll:

Right now we're talking about the split in the harvest and the quotas, not about the sheep.

It's highly unlikely that harvesting 60 rams out of a population of 2200 is causing widespread decline and in fact most populations are increasing however will never get back to what they were 40-50 years ago. And no I wasn't around back then but I've seen all the pictures of the trench and the mountains that used to hold hundreds of sheep that are now completely and totally overgrown with timber.

My guess is you don't know the numbers, birth rates, recruitment rates, highway mortality, predation rates on collared sheep, or anything else about the sheep in Region 4.

You know what you think and that's fair enough but I really don't understand how you believe you know what the problems are if you aren't keeping tabs on all the variables that can affect a sheep population. A person would have to have one hell of a personal diary kept up to date to even see part of the picture. To me it just doesn't make any sense that a person can come up with something so wild as habitat enhancement doesn't work.

It's really just out of my league.

[Devilbear]

Well, I WAS ...around 40 to 50 years ago, a very active outdoorsman, conservationist and then a resource agency worker and student of biology.

I have SEEN what has taken place with post-WWII wildlife and fisheries situations here in BC, especially the Kootenays and I have studied literally hundreds of old photos of "the good old days" belonging to family and friends plus spent hours with genuine oldtime bushmen.

So, with this, while MY word also means nothing to this poster, with his trenchant and "expert" opinions, so well expressed in flawless Engish, I must support "6616" and "Goatguy", who, IMHO, actually know WTF they are talking about.

GG, that is an outstanding post, but, given the "expertise" you are facing, it will not be anymore effective than any other factual presentation of reality...........

[bayou]

[quote=GoatGuy;640986]It's what I do.



So are we talking about rams or are we talking about sheep? Which one is it?
Both more so about rams
Are you saying we have a sperm supply problem? Are there many second estrus lambs being dropped? What is the lamb:ewe ratio and what does that indicate in terms of population status? What should it be?
no,dont no, dont no and compared to what.
Are you saying the population is declining due to highway mortality?
No but the ram numbers could be affected and since the sytem seems to be based on the # of dead rams it could have an effect on later years. I think I also said human killed not just highway mortality, some of them were also shot, now I have been told someone is suspossed to keep a record of that but I dont no if there is or if your sent that.
What are the numbers? Do you have the numbers from highway collisions across WMR 4?No , do you and if so are they just of what they pick up.

What kind of predator avoidance strategies do bighorn sheep use? What kind of habitat did they evolve in? Have you read any of the papers from collared sheep in Region 4?
Didnt know collared sheep wrote papers thought it was the Bios that did the writing. Have discussed things about collared sheep in region 4 in person with some bios.

It's a matter of the split. It isn't about 'conservation'. If there were serious problems we'd be talking about reducing the total harvest, not the allocation and quota.

There are a myriad of other problems that would be cropping up including high participation in the rut and mortality of class IIV rams, second estrus lambs, low birth rates and extremely low recruitment rates. Are you seeing any of that?



Less since being thinned really? So what you're saying is burning and thinning is a waste of money?
No never said that at all but you can twist it to what ever benefits your agenda.
That is rather interesting. I think you should call up a couple of the biologists and tell them thinning and burning is a waste of time - it doesn't work and that the sheep populations will increase dramatically by moving to LEH. I'm sure it will go over well.
Again never said that at all , just you twisting things around for your benifit, your free to call anyone you want. I have talked to some in person about it about why the sheep dont use areas like they did in the past, the didnt seem to have a problem with the discussion.


If it was a concern we'd be talking about it.
Who is we , some people are talking about it sorry if the didnt come to you first for your permission.
The sheep in Region 4 are probably the most intensively censused population in the Province. If there was a conservation concern there would be some serious discussion about it. The fact that the class IV rams are down does not create conservation concern. While we're on that what % are class IV rams in an un-hunted population?Not really sure what the purpose of this question is are we not talking about a hunted population.

We've actually got populations getting right up near carrying capacity in terms of their ingrown habitat and the worry is we're going to get disease and a die-off. That was why the ewe LEH was proposed in the bull but nobody had enough smarts to support it so instead we'll just let them die-off in the future like we've already done a couple of times in the past..... and then it will be the ministry's fault. :roll:
Who says it will be the ministrys fault, no different then you blaming it on everyone else and saying nobody had enough smarts.
Yes major die offs would be bad, is this how the ewe LEH was presented at the proposal. Was/is not some of the past dieoffs linked to domestic sheep/livestock.
Right now we're talking about the split in the harvest and the quotas, not about the sheep.
Sure thats what your talking about but how did it all first come about how were the quotas first established through science, studys,game counts etc. Are the GO actually doing anything wrong other then shooting the rams they were told they are allowed. Some say because it was an inflated # that the whole system was based on to start with. why would that happen.
It's highly unlikely that harvesting 60 rams out of a population of 2200 is causing widespread decline and in fact most populations are increasing however will never get back to what they were 40-50 years ago. And no I wasn't around back then but I've seen all the pictures of the trench and the mountains that used to hold hundreds of sheep that are now completely and totally overgrown with timber.
First you say sheep #s are down now you say in fact most populations are increasing which is it.
My guess is you don't know the numbers, birth rates, recruitment rates, highway mortality, predation rates on collared sheep, or anything else about the sheep in Region 4.
This your opinion my guess is that you dont either other then from what other people tell you.
You know what you think and that's fair enough but I really don't understand how you believe you know what the problems are if you aren't keeping tabs on all the variables that can affect a sheep population. A person would have to have one hell of a personal diary kept up to date to even see part of the picture. To me it just doesn't make any sense that a person can come up with something so wild as habitat enhancement doesn't work.
Again I never said I know what the proplems are and I never said enhancement doesnt work.
It's really just out of my league.

[boxhitch]

GG, hope you save yourself some aggrevation and end this
You can't convince this one.

[Gateholio]

Its utterly pointless to continue a debate where one person uses facts, and the other uses opinion.:-D

[horshur]

Its utterly pointless to continue a debate where one person uses facts, and the other uses opinion.:-D

poor guys are trying to herd a cat!!!

[bridger]

that is a possibility, but if the moe and goabc follow the allocation policy the negotiations are over

[GoatGuy]

I have a sneaking suspicion this idea of outfitters having no quota is a negotiation ploy on there part becouse of resident push for quotas being lowered. Ask for the sky and settle for the middle ground. This is also the rumour around here in Cranbrook with the outfitters. From the outfitters I talk to they really don't want to abolish there quota but don't want to cut to bare bones either. They to are afraid of the odd greedy outfitter over harvesting.

Ok, I'm gonna be nice this time. After your thoughts on Region 6 quota I'm pretty sure whoever's giving you information is loading you up with BS.

First of all residents are not pushing to lower quotas. The guides agreed to the allocation policy and it says quotas go down. Second the quotas are over-inflated.

With the success rates, admin guidelines and all the rest of the stuff that was handed out in the past did you know the quota is 48 per year for the first two years?

The AAH for the whole region is only 55 and that number counts every single sheep that lives on a mine or in a park for its entire life.

Most of the outfitters down there are already shooting anything and everything that breaks.

Betcha the average age out of 4-01 and 4-02 for outfitters is a hair over 7 and it's only that high because the CI inspectors don't know WTF they're doing and the outfitters seem to be able to convince them that a lamb-tipped 6 year old is in fact 8.

At this point all that removing quotas would do down there is lower the resident harvest even more.

[bayou]

[quote=GoatGuy;643470]Ok, I'm gonna be nice this time. After your thoughts on Region 6 quota I'm pretty sure whoever's giving you information is loading you up with BS.

First of all residents are not pushing to lower quotas. The guides agreed to the allocation policy and it says quotas go down. Second the quotas are over-inflated.

With the success rates, admin guidelines and all the rest of the stuff that was handed out in the past did you know the quota is 48 per year for the first two years?

The AAH for the whole region is only 55 and that number counts every single sheep that lives on a mine or in a park for its entire life.

Most of the outfitters down there are already shooting anything and everything that breaks.

Betcha the average age out of 4-01 and 4-02 for outfitters is a hair over 7 and it's only that high because the CI inspectors don't know WTF they're doing and the outfitters seem to be able to convince them that a lamb-tipped 6 year old is in fact 8.
Curious as to what this has to do with anything and why you would bring it up for I thought you said age was of no concern. If its lamb tipped and legal what does it matter. Who do you feel is capable of doing the inspections. If your allegations are true and the CI inspectors dont know what they are doing and age was of a concern it could mean that some of your science, facts, reports could be wrong. Any other department out there that may be putting out wrong numbers or being convinced to change things that we should watch out for.
At this point all that removing quotas would do down there is lower the resident harvest even more.

[GoatGuy]

Curious as to what this has to do with anything and why you would bring it up for I thought you said age was of no concern. If its lamb tipped and legal what does it matter. Who do you feel is capable of doing the inspections. If your allegations are true and the CI inspectors dont know what they are doing and age was of a concern it could mean that some of your science, facts, reports could be wrong. Any other department out there that may be putting out wrong numbers or being convinced to change things that we should watch out for.


What I'm trying to illustrate is that the quotas are probably high in some areas and are certainly out of line when we add success rates and admin guidelines - that is why the outfitter age of harvest is low. Using your reading skills you may have noticed there was no mention of conservation.

There are always things that 'could' be wrong or that have error built into them, but you have to be able to understand how they work first to know what the shortcomings are and how they 'could' be wrong or what the errors are. It would be like me asking you what the problems are with DNA mark-recapture sampling for grizzly bears. First you have to understand how it works to understand what the problems are. Don't think we'll get into that one today. :wink:

Having some guy off the street aging horns is no different than getting you to use the quote function properly. Without a bunch of training you'll never get it right.

There are other departments people should watch out for, but don't worry you're protected by a foil hat.