Paid Hunting in Alberta?
 

I just got out of a local Fish & Game meeting, and it appears that this is indeed something that we need to be highly aware of.

One of the fellows from the zone came to the meeting and said that there have been back room talks with stake holders outlining very fuzzy directions about access and landowner initiatives. Apparently several stakeholders were asked to vote on the principles. They pretty much received the support from all parties involved

He also mentioned that there were meetings held that outlined a possible "test run" of two new plans.

The first one centers around how landowners would be eligible for "compensation" if they allow hunting, something like if you allowed a person on you would fill out a form (chit)with particulars & submit them to the govt for compensation. There would be a cap on each quarter for compensation.

The second is even scarier, they are talking about compensation to landowners who typically have not allowed hunting. The catch is they would allow a certain # of the tags for given species directly to the landowner. These would then be able to be sold. The example used was if there were 100 tags for antlered mule deer allotted in a WMU & 25 % of the land in that WMU were held by a landowner who previously did not allow hunting to the public, that landowner would be eligible for 25 tags to be distributed as they wished. They would have to in turn allow hunting to the general public on this land.


They are talking this will be a pilot project run in wmu 108 and wmu 300 in the 2008 season. The current Stelmach government under Morton's direction is looking at order in council to enact this. SRD released this information at a meeting apparently.

I do not know much about the details yet, as none of the information surrounding this is public knowledge. It sounds as though the government is going to try to enact legislation for the 2008 hunting season. I will advise if I hear any other details.

I can't tell you how ****ed I am. This govt needs to have their arses booted so far out of power......

If anyone has any means of getting more information on this, time is of the essence. This is the first step towards paid hunting......

Hmmm, illegal paid hunting has been going on for some time in this province, would really suck to see it legalized....

keep a strain on er.

.

hmmmmmmmmmm....................I wonder which non government agency would stand to gain the most out of this.

I hope there isn't any truth to this, but if there is, this is one issue that we as hunters and outdoorsmen will have to stand united against.

I get a sick feeling in my stomach just thinking about it.

Waxy

double

deleted

Paid hunting access has always been on the table of a number of organizations. In whatever form it gets instituted (and history has shown that the hunting population is not considered when it comes to decisions that affect them) it will not be good for the general hunting populace.

I agree with you, Waxy and I happen to be a land owner. It seems to me that, once you start paying land owners to allow hunting, even on a trial basis, it's a slippery slope down to a situation where only the wealthy few will be able to afford to enjoy the sport. Once you get to that point, its not hard to imagine a government caving in to the antis ( who could well be more numerous than the hunters at that point) and eliminating hunting altogether.

If this is true, then it is very frightening and seems to go against the desire or rationale for increased hunting opportunities.

I see what some of you are inferring; if the government proceeds with this type of program, no doubt the rich will be buying up all the best hunting opportunities, and by “rich” I am confident you are implying APOS.

A former member of APOS once told me that the simple solution to maintain or increase hunting opportunities in Alberta for Albertans and Canadian residents would be to relegate APOS activities to Crown land only. Any thoughts? Regards, Mike

I will never pay to hunt period. Theres alot of crown land out there. I hope we never see this in Alberta. You see on those US hunting forums where they have hunting clubs and they pay each year to hunt. Or basically you do not hunt. I also see in BC they are making it hard on land owners claiming crop damage for insurance upon deer eating there crops and not allowing hunters on their land. We seen how crown lease land was abused and still is this is a whole new ball of wax.

I hope this never happens.There is one large landowner south of Lethbridge who would take advantage of this, he would use all the tags himself and his friends they wouldn't have to wait for priority draws.What's to stop a large landowning anti hunter from taking a full allocation of tags and sitting on them it wouldn't leave very many draw tags available in that zone.

http://poli.ucalgary.ca/wildlifestew...PFactSheet.pdf

This is alll hearsay at this point........In fact there was a thread about this subj not so long ago but it didn't have any spin on hunters actually paying for hunting.....

The link provides "documented" information..and the one statement "Programs under this initiative will not consider direct compensation from hunters/anglers to landowners." is contrary to what is suggested here.

Don't you think its a little premature for statements like this?

The fact sheet clearly states no direct compensation from anglers/hunters to landowners...ie no paid hunting!

Rather than rumour milling............these are the "hunter friendly" organizations that represent us and are represented at these meetings. Contact them for facts, whatever they may be:

ACA
AFGA
APOS
Hunting for Tomorrow Foundation.

That is certainly how I understood it too. I'm just hoping that nothing has changed. Lots of speculation, but I do wonder if the Province was considering issuing tags directly to landowners if that might circumvent the notion of "direct compensation" (indirect compensation) as a legal technicality?

It would be helpful to get the Province's actual position on this situation. Until then, I can only hope that we are over-reacting to speculation. Regards, Mike

deleted

APOS is not a "hunter friendly" organization.

I agree with the principles put forward in the link. I think landowners should be compensated to some extent.

The problem is how to implement the compensation in a manner that isn't rife with the potential for abuse and doesn't lead to USA or European style hunting access.

That's a tall order, but I won't pretend to have the answers, but it's critical that we as a hunting community have our voice heard so that we get this thing right the first time, because there's nothing as permanent as something temporary.

Waxy

.

.

Paid hunting access
 

Can't be all bad. The upside is it would keep the "Gucci" hunters in a safe place. :lol: Just make sure it gets adequately regulated.

Full Disclosure: I am a landowner

I don’t think I am an anomaly, but I do not support any sort of compensation as it relates to hunting and hunting opportunities. I do support some sort of financial recognition (likely through a tax incentive) for landowners that maintain or sustain critical wildlife habitat (outside of a registered conservation easement) to the benefit of all Albertans. I think for the most part, some sort of direct compensation availability is not going to coerce all landowners to allow or disallow hunting.

I also fear that those landowners that are motivated by money will be the most unprincipled and this cannot be good for lawful hunting and lawful hunters. My thoughts anyway. Regards, Mike

What is a "Gucci" hunter???

Jamie

landowner tags
 

I am heard the same thing that Lurch is talking about in reagrds to landowners getting the tags and putting them out to bid. This will not benefit the average hunter at all. The only thing I know about location is that they want to try it as a trial down south first.

We already lose enough tags to outfitters, now we may lose more to landowners. BRUTAL

Jamie...
 

A "Gucci" hunter can be instantly recognized by the rhinestones in his hunting vest, the Peter Hofer Jagdwaffen over his shoulder, answers to the name, Dick, and can be heard saying, "Sorry, Harry...you looked like a ringtail in that hat!"...

deleted

simple comparison
 

Right now with the price of allocations in this Province we have already lost hundreds of thousands of acres to paid hunting- private land and lease land tied up by outfitters. No doubt this would just compound an already tough situation for the non-connected resident hunter.

By non-connected this is what I mean;
If you know someone- a friend, relative, friend of a friend, etc.. it is still not bad to get permission on deeded land. If there is an outfitter on said piece of land, well forget about it, you are not hunting there. On the bigger farms/ranches in the prime NE Lloydminster area it is tough to get permission if you just decide to hunt there with no connections. You better have your ducks in a row before you arrive.

I go to Saskatchewan every year for the one week NR Canadian whitetail hunt, and 98% of the time we get access to great deeded land to hunt!(cold calling)
You don't have to be an Economics major to figure out why- NO non-resident guiding allowed on deeded land!

And they say there is no paid hunting in Alberta :huh: :confused: :huh: