why would we give sask anything for starters... When I can hunt there muledeer I will agree on that... Also why should a wild animal be not aloud in the book due to it being on the prarie?
I'll take a stab at it WB. I think the price should be that costs are paid for to catch them and enough extra to actually do something to help the population we do have in place already!! That exact price I do not know but I will tell you it would be expensive. It they won't pay it then we keep them and repopulate the areas that need to be using the $$ that the auction brings in every year. Where is that money going??? I can't get on AO and check out the thread on sheep and the changes but I am interested to know the backroom talk of it all if you care to share? I think the mains issues with the population if there is one is that some areas get hit by the native hunters and the predators are also hurting the populations. Most areas I assume are up to par or better than they have been in the past. My 2 cents worth
So why is it stupid that we put in the river breaks like Montana??? There has to be a few things before it could be done. But I like the idea. I think Alberta would forsure keep the monsters we are known for already.
Who did the power point you have Buff?SG
There are other ways to help sheep than to simply further restrict hunting; Habitat enhancement, predator and non native competition (wild horses) control, access control (motorized access restrictions).
If you change "non native competition" to "native hunting", you'd be onto something. And motorized access is an overblown factor that is driven by other agendas, IMO.Anyway, WB, you certainly do good work. Thx.