Do you have to be an Alberta resident to own a registered trap line in Alberta?

Peace Country · #1 11-01-2011, 08:13 AM

Do you have to be an Alberta resident to own a registered trap line in Alberta? And how do you find out who owns a certian trap line I have the registered trap line number?

RockyMountainMusic · #2 11-01-2011, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peace Country

Do you have to be an Alberta resident to own a registered trap line in Alberta? And how do you find out who owns a certian trap line I have the registered trap line number?

I would assume you would have to hold a valid alberta trappers licence but i am sure someone here will let you know. As for finding out who owns the line the SRD in the area the trapline is in will know who owns it.

Trapperdan · #3 11-01-2011, 09:29 AM

Yes, you have to be an Alberta resident. SDR will know who is the holder of the trapline but under the privacy act are not allowed to release the name. They may forward your name to the other party if you request that.

Peace Country · #4 11-01-2011, 09:29 PM

Thanks for the reply guys, the trap line that I am looking at SRD say's the owner does not live in Alberta but he does hold a registared trapping license and area? Yes that is what SRD said that they cant tell me who owns the trap line but they can contact them for me, thats when he said that he does not live in Alberta and had never lived in Alberta?

Brian Bildson · #5 11-02-2011, 04:07 PM

I call BS on non-resident legally owning a RFMA. If so, it's a resident who pulled out of Alberta and is not being honest about where they live. If a SRD officer is telling you this I'd ask why they're not enforcing the regulations.

Okotokian · #6 11-02-2011, 04:17 PM

I sure hope it's restricted to Albertans.

KI-UTE · #7 11-05-2011, 12:17 AM

The answer to this debate could lie outside of the wildlife act possibly.

In all likelyhood, a registered trapline could be potentially viewed as "real property" and then ownership could be subjecdt to a whole different set of rules/laws about private ownership of that (supposed) "property".

We need lawyer for an answer on this one. Hopefully all the hicks don't jump on my head in ignorance over this post.

And if this were deemed so, then registered traplines would become a very hot commodity south of the border!

braggadoe · #8 11-05-2011, 05:45 AM

the answer is on page 6 of the regulations. if you have questions or comments about regulations, a good start would be to read them. no lawyer required.

KI-UTE · #9 11-13-2011, 09:40 AM

Ya, regulations are neat.

But when certain acts such as the wildlife act conflict with other laws that not only govern the province but the country, then you have a problem. The trapping regulations do not deal with chattel rights, nor ownership of "property" (and to spell it out, I am not suggesting land) then a lawyer is a much better avenue for a real answer than some little pamphlet thrown together as a very brief summary of (some) laws pertaining to trapping.

But it is much cheaper to sit on a trapping forum and listen to others speculate on what they think. If you want to up the anti, you could even drag a fish and wildlife officer into it to see what he thinks, but he often thinks as an individual rendering an opinion, and these individuals in particular are often not necessarily correct, and then the govt needs their lawyer to try to back up what he thinks.

duffy4 · #10 11-14-2011, 11:07 AM

It is my understanding that one must renew a registered trap line yearly.

So if you come in to the office and you are not a resident of Alberta your line would not be renewed. "Real property" ownership has the requirement to abide by the regulations I would think.

KegRiver · #11 11-14-2011, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KI-UTE

Ya, regulations are neat.

But when certain acts such as the wildlife act conflict with other laws that not only govern the province but the country, then you have a problem. The trapping regulations do not deal with chattel rights, nor ownership of "property" (and to spell it out, I am not suggesting land) then a lawyer is a much better avenue for a real answer than some little pamphlet thrown together as a very brief summary of (some) laws pertaining to trapping.

But it is much cheaper to sit on a trapping forum and listen to others speculate on what they think. If you want to up the anti, you could even drag a fish and wildlife officer into it to see what he thinks, but he often thinks as an individual rendering an opinion, and these individuals in particular are often not necessarily correct, and then the govt needs their lawyer to try to back up what he thinks.

That's because one does not own a registered trap line. One owns the rights to trap a registered trap line for a specified length of time, presently five years.

That is why one can not sell a registered trap line. One can only sell any improvements one has made.

KI-UTE · #12 11-14-2011, 09:42 PM

Yes, yes SRD is trying to convince everybody of all such things, seems they have you convinced. However, all's not going to be so cut and dry for a couple of lawyers and a judge. Deliberations would take quite some time to ascertain what does owning a registered trapline actually entail, which acts besides the wildlife act are involved in the govenrning process of he ownership of this "thing" (is that a better term for you to process?)

If only the trappers had more money to deliberate such a complex issue to completion. Perhaps with enough money, the right lawyers and team of brilliant minds, the trappers could even start getting paid out for such activities as logging and drilling on their traplines to be paid on such a grand scale as those who simply have the privelege to graze cattle on public land.

We have thrown in the towel far too easily! But whatever. It's just money, so who cares?

KegRiver · #13 11-14-2011, 10:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KI-UTE

If only the trappers had more money to deliberate such a complex issue to completion. Perhaps with enough money, the right lawyers and team of brilliant minds, the trappers could even start getting paid out for such activities as logging and drilling on their traplines to be paid on such a grand scale as those who simply have the privelege to graze cattle on public land.

We have thrown in the towel far too easily! But whatever. It's just money, so who cares?

Spoken like a true Lawyer, and an uninformed one at that.
We do get compensated for such activities as logging and drilling, If they negatively impact our trapping. This has been so for decades.

As to this being a complex issue, no more so then a hunting license.
They are the same thing, one allows the harvest of a game animal for food, the other allows the harvest of a fur bearing animal for income.

KI-UTE · #14 11-15-2011, 10:54 PM

Ha! That's quite comical. Do you not realize the levels being paid to trappers are basicallya token amount? essentially pocket change, but it does seem to pacify the trappers without having to fork aout any real money.

The guys who have the privelege of grazing stock on public land get at minimum $5000 each time a rig punches a hole in the ground plus annually $2000 for surface rent of a 2 acre block.

Then the trapper gets, what $1300 when the logging company comes in and clear cuts his trapline, oh yes and a few thousand more for the cabin they flatened.

So really, the trapper is basically NOT getting paid! But we can all pretend all is well!

sourdough doug · #15 11-16-2011, 12:12 AM

Couldn't agree with you more Ki-ute. I have yet to receive a nickel from any of the oil or forest people for what they have done on my line.. I guess I'm not of the right persuasion or whatever the politcally correct name is.

northerntrapper · #16 11-16-2011, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sourdough doug

Couldn't agree with you more Ki-ute. I have yet to receive a nickel from any of the oil or forest people for what they have done on my line.. I guess I'm not of the right persuasion or whatever the politcally correct name is.

I have never been compensated for oil leases, access roads or borrow pits, or for forest company clear cuts. I wonder where I went wrong?
I must admit that Pembina Pipelines came forward and compensated me for running a pipeline across my line last winter. The only one in 40 years. Truly, a company that acknowledges that there are others out there that are affected by their actions.
And yes Sourdough, it does matter where your line is located, on whether there is consideration for compensation. Sad, but true.

DoUCWhatIC · #17 11-16-2011, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KI-UTE

The answer to this debate could lie outside of the wildlife act possibly.

In all likelyhood, a registered trapline could be potentially viewed as "real property" and then ownership could be subjecdt to a whole different set of rules/laws about private ownership of that (supposed) "property".

We need lawyer for an answer on this one. Hopefully all the hicks don't jump on my head in ignorance over this post.

And if this were deemed so, then registered traplines would become a very hot commodity south of the border!

You are right about one thing. Only a lawyer would "potentially view" land under an RFMA as "real property"....How ridiculous!