Tork, Are you purposefully trying to mislead? If not, How could you Not know the facts?
APOS, sure as Lloyd being a Poacher, IS FULLY and Completely responsible for governing sanctions against APOS membership outfitters that break the law!
This commentary below is
COMPLETE GARBAGE!, likely as an attempt to fool those that read it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Torkdiesel
And here lies the issue with APOS ! They aren’t really a governing body although they are treated as such in some cases.
What they actually are is an administrator of the allocations required to outfit non residents in Alberta and an association for its members. Which unlike other jurisdictions are required to be members whether they want the “benefits” or not.
If a law is broken by a member they are charged by F&W at the direction of or on behalf of the crown. They go to court just like anybody else and there’s an outcome good or bad. Now if convicted you are contacted by APOS and a review takes place of your actions, and you’re accessed an additional fine or disciplinary action by the association.
This is where things get “grey” because people assume APOS should step in and take all the allocations from the offender like an angry master and the outfitter then goes bankrupt and hides his head in shame.
In reality it’s very hard for an association to do this, and other members likely don’t want to see huge expenditures going towards civil court cases. There’s also the issue with who decides exactly how steep the internal penalty is ? Does a technicality warrant loss of use ? Is there a 3 strike rule ? Does APOS support the crown even if the evidence is questionable regardless of the situation? Very slippery slope that one !!
What we’ve seen lately from the crown/judges are huge fines and suspensions. A $80,000 fine and 22 year ban on anything to do with hunting/outfittting hurts even the biggest outfitters out there, I promise you that.
In my opinion we should be depending on the judicial system to take care of these issues, not tasking APOS with it.
Next door we have GOABC who is a very powerful advocate for us, but they have nothing to do with administrating how the government handles the outfitting industry. And in my opinion that’s exactly how it should be !
If quotas need to be changed, they’re changed by the government. If you have an issue with it then you ask your association for help. If you’re convicted of an offence the government takes care of who can continue to operate or not, there’s no middle man. It’s way more cut and dry !
|
APOS is THE delegated authority, in charge of developing and enforcing rules that Outfitters and guides must follow to be a member in good standing, as both a business or Director!
Yes, the Government could intervene and make APOS change their bylaws.
OR, APOS could manage themselves as promised by signing to be the delegated authority, and making and Enforcing new bylaws that truly punishes the stink out of their ranks.
From the Wildlife Act Regulations.
(Section 10(2) of this Regulation)
The Alberta Professional Outfitters Society
Interpretation of Schedule
1(1) In this Schedule,
(a) “by‑laws” means the by‑laws made by the Society under section 10;
(b) “fiscal year” means the fiscal year of the Society, as specified in the by‑laws;
(c) “Society” means the Alberta Professional Outfitters Society referred to in section 2(1).
Continuation of delegated authority, and delegated functions
2(1) The Alberta Professional Outfitters Society is continued as a delegated authority referred to in section 104(1)(b) of the Act.
(2) The Society is delegated the following powers, duties and functions, to be carried out in accordance with the Act, this Regulation and the objects and by‑laws of the Society:
(a) the issue of outfitter‑guide permits and guides’ designations;
(b) the distribution, including transfers, of allocations;
(c) the issue of non‑resident alien licences authorizing the hunting of big game animals;
(d) the collection of fees for licences, permits and guides’ designations;
(e) the designation of, and the setting of the qualifications for, guides;
(f) the cancellation and suspension of licences, permits and guides’ designations, issued by the Society;
(g) establishment of the kinds of protection of deposits required by section 57(2) of this Regulation.