RAMP - What does everyone think?

Maybe we should ask the taxpaying public if they mind paying for access for hunters that are uneducated on the process of soliciting access, or those too lazy to follow due diligence in securing access?
Click to expand...
How the govt is paying for the program is probably the only chance we have of defeating it. Not any taxpayer myself included wants to pay for RAMP.
The insidious brilliance of the fact finding process is shocking. The lower this years number are the easier it is for RAMP to be a success as each year as the project becomes more widely known in all of the province the greater the attendance numbers will be.
 
Last edited:
Omega said:
How the govt is paying for the program is probably the only chance we have of defeating it. Any taxpayer myself included wants to pay for RAMP.
The insidious brilliance of the fact finding process is shocking. The lower this years number are the easier it is for RAMP to be a success as each year as the project becomes more widely known in all of the province the greater the attendance numbers will be.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. They will have good numbers of users as much of the area(s) in question are those that Pheasants are released. Given a rough winter coupled with a late wet spring - there are not the numbers of birds that there has been other years. Also who pays and organizes the Pheasant release? Can we suggest the releases take place on non RAMP land?
 
With my little experience with the program:

Likes:
Hunting land that I didn't know how to access previously (especially in new areas)
Maps that actually show where property lines are (and where you can hunt that you didn't previously know you could hunt)
No trying to track down land owners who are away/on vacation/sleeping

Dislikes:
Paid for out of tax dollars
Filling in cards every morning for every locale
Filling in cards, period (I am having stickers made up for next year if this program stays)
Seems ALOT busier this year in 108.... still filling my tags though
Poor information distribution (I had no idea about the program until a landowner informed us, we bought our tags before bow season this summer and no one said boo about it).

More to come as I think about it some more...
 
norskie said:
Not necessarily. They will have good numbers of users as much of the area(s) in question are those that Pheasants are released. Given a rough winter coupled with a late wet spring - there are not the numbers of birds that there has been other years. Also who pays and organizes the Pheasant release? Can we suggest the releases take place on non RAMP land?
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but i'm sure next years numbers will be a shocking increase from this year as the word spreads.
 
gorky said:
With my little experience with the program:

Likes:
Hunting land that I didn't know how to access previously (especially in new areas)
Maps that actually show where property lines are (and where you can hunt that you didn't previously know you could hunt)
No trying to track down land owners who are away/on vacation/sleeping

Dislikes:
Paid for out of tax dollars
Filling in cards every morning for every locale
Filling in cards, period (I am having stickers made up for next year if this program stays)
Seems ALOT busier this year in 108.... still filling my tags though
Poor information distribution (I had no idea about the program until a landowner informed us, we bought our tags before bow season this summer and no one said boo about it).

More to come as I think about it some more...
Click to expand...

I guess I am just to old school - how could you not know how to access land? How could you not know the boundaries?
In order to ask permission, you need to know who owns the land, so a MD map would be in order. On the MD map it illustrates who has the land, so you know where the boundaries are.

I guess if you only hunted public land, but often you are required to chat with the leaseholder too.

When we look at a new area we try to make contact with the landowner several months before the trip. This shows that you are serious in preparing yourself that far in advance, and gives you a chance to establish a relationship with him. I have even done this in locales that are distant - the first time I actually met them face to face was the hunting trip.
As a backup, I always have a landmap, local phonebook and a cell phone for any additional needs - assuming you can get cell service...

Your comment about filling in the cards is disconcerting to me - if people think it is a pain to fill in a card I can just imagine what they must think of getting a land map and actually doing the legwork to gain access..

Thanks for the comments Gorky.
 
Omega said:
Perhaps, but i'm sure next years numbers will be a shocking increase from this year as the word spreads.
Click to expand...

You may be right, but I think that the "experience" is definitely enhanced for a lot of hunters when they harvest or at least see game.

If the roosters that are released (which seems to be the bulk of them this year) are let go on non- RAMP land, the hunters will follow.
 
Omega said:
How the govt is paying for the program is probably the only chance we have of defeating it.
Click to expand...


Finding money for this is not an issue to focus on.

If and when taxpayers find out they are footing the bill, they suddenly become part of the conversation. And there's more of them than hunters in AB. Albertans have shown time and time again they support user funded or private systems over taxpayer funded public ones.

Ted wants this to be about money.
 
Lazy Ike said:
Finding money for this is not an issue to focus on.

If and when taxpayers find out they are footing the bill, they suddenly become part of the conversation. And there's more of them than hunters in AB. Albertans have shown time and time again they support user funded or private systems over taxpayer funded public ones.

Ted wants this to be about money.
Click to expand...


You may very well be correct Ike.
 
Lazy Ike said:
It would certainly make it easier to take it province wide if it were user funded.
Click to expand...

No doubt about that and I've heard him say that he hoped it will be self-funded but do you think the average Alberta hunter will pony up $300-$400 per year for this program? Ted has been all about increasing hunter numbers in the province and I see user funding being the single biggest cause of hunter decline we could face. I may be wrong but I still see him trying to sneak the money out of somewhere else like he did for the pilot. The Land Use Framework seems the most obvious to me but time will tell.
 
sheephunter said:
No doubt about that but do you think the average Alberta hunter will pony up $300-$400 per year for this program? Ted has been all about increasing hunter numbers in the province and I see user funding being the single biggest cause of hunter decline we could face. I may be wrong but I still see him trying to sneak the money out of somewhere else like he did for the pilot. The Land Use Framework seems the most obvious to me but time will tell.
Click to expand...

Ted is not about increasing hunter numbers - if you believe that you are far more naive than I imagined.

Despite the honeyed lies from his and Gate's mouths I think they are far more interested in setting up additional economies in rural Alberta.

We mentioned to him face to face that the quickest way to lower new hunter recruitment was to saddle them with additional fees - to which he replied "but you wont have to pay". When asked who would pay - "our biggest concern is finding the money for this thing if it is successful". He would not say absolutely that user fees were not on the horizon.
We tried to offer creative solutions to hunter recruitment with the focus on increased education and increasing Habitat - this fell on deaf ears.

This is definitely all about the money. And Ike's reasoning actually makes way too much sense......He sold this whole pilot as a rural hardship issue to the cabinet policy committee...

Truth be known, to Ted Morton the average hunter is about as important to his policy as a speck of fly #### on a Bulls ass.....
 
We mentioned to him face to face that the quickest way to lower new hunter recruitment was to saddle them with additional fees - to which he replied "but you wont have to pay". When asked who would pay - "our biggest concern is finding the money for this thing if it is successful". He would not say absolutely that user fees were not on the horizon.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I've personally heard him say that he hopes RAMP becomes self funding. I guess that's why it's important to know where the money will come from. At least it will give us some idea what we are fighting. We need to force him into a corner. Once we know who will pay and how they will pay, at least it gives us a basis to mount an attack on that principal.
 
sheephunter said:
No doubt about that and I've heard him say that he hoped it will be self-funded but do you think the average Alberta hunter will pony up $300-$400 per year for this program? Ted has been all about increasing hunter numbers in the province and I see user funding being the single biggest cause of hunter decline we could face. I may be wrong but I still see him trying to sneak the money out of somewhere else like he did for the pilot. The Land Use Framework seems the most obvious to me but time will tell.
Click to expand...


Ted's proposals contradict the notion that he is concerned about average hunters. Ted thinks landowners should be able to sell their wildlife and make a profit. This will not benefit the average hunter.
 
Lazy Ike said:
Ted's proposals contradict the notion that he is concerned about average hunters. Ted thinks landowners should be able to sell their wildlife and make a profit. This will not benefit the average hunter.
Click to expand...

And we're back to the real genesis of HFH/OS/RAMP.
 
Lazy Ike said:
Ted's proposals contradict the notion that he is concerned about average hunters. Ted thinks landowners should be able to sell their wildlife and make a profit. This will not benefit the average hunter.
Click to expand...

Again I totally agree Ike but at some point someone is going to have to pay the Piper for RAMP and it's either going to be taxpayers or hunters and from what Morton has said it keeps leading back to hunters but I'd just like to know how he proposes to pay for RAMP so I know if I can be an outraged taxpayer or hunter. Once I know where the money is coming from, it's a lot easier to voice an educated opposition and point out the folly of his plan. Right not we can yell and scream about concepts and I'm sure Morton planned it that way but I'd rather be able to yell and scream about process before we are saddled with a province-wide RAMP or whatever else he has up his sleeve to pay for it.

I think we all agree that's it's a forecone conclusion that the three-year pilot known as RAMP will be evaluated as a success. Wouldn't it make sense for us to at least know how he plans to pay for it before it's province wide? The current version of RAMP was brought in under a shroud of secrecy....I'd hate to see the same thing happen with a province-wide RAMP.

I agree with you that there are many reasons not to like RAMP and many levels on which to oppose it but without knowing the source of funding......who knows if that's one of them. It could be nothing but it could be the key too. I just want to know. If it is truly going to be user funded....how will that process work and how willit affect hunter recruitment in the province? So many questions with no answers. It would be nice to get a few.
 
Silverado said:
And we're back to the real genesis of HFH/OS/RAMP.
Click to expand...

Even HFH did little to address how RAMP would be paid for though. No question that HFH was self funding but where the RAMP money is coming from has never been addressed. WMUs108 and 300 were the perfect locations to launch HFH because of the large land holdings but it's application in the central and northern parts of the province was far more limited. RAMP is pretty well universal in design.

There is a lot of suspicion by some that HFH will rear its ugly head again because it is self funding....so why not keep asking TED how he will pay for RAMP. If HFH is part of his solution.....well we have an answer and some facts to attack. Right now we have nothing reagarding funding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom