Canada’s Outdoor Outfitters Wholesale Sports

Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 09-12-2019, 07:00 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default Canadian Land Access Systems (CLAS)

Yes I know there is a thread from 2016 by the same name and it goes on to discuss it and ends up in the gutter as usual. They will claim it is paid hunting (facepalm)

I think it is a great tool for hunters. My opinion.

At first blush I didn't like it. Paying to be a member hmmmm. Then I thought the fee for being a member is a drop in the bucket for a hunter. It's no different than the NCC booking site...…….except that the NCC doesn't charge for booking their properties.

So an entrepreneur comes up with the software and goes on a crusade to get landowners to jump aboard. He/she did it, as it looks widely accepted...….just have a look at all the properties identified...…..granted some are not affiliated with CLAS and don't require any booking...….these properties are mainly tied into the ACA. Having these properties lumped together is a bonus.

So of course it's going to have a cost. Maintaining the software and relations with landowners takes sweat equity and that is what you are paying for...…..a third party. How many calls does a landowner take where hunters are asking for permission? Repeatedly telling hunters the same rules, taking names, taking dates, etc. Why not avoid all of that?

I just paid up for six months tonight and booked a hunt on Sat.

No link required......google it
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 09-12-2019, 08:50 PM
R3illy R3illy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 910
Default

curious why you wanted to sign up. Was it just to have more areas to hunt? Was there a specific piece of land you wanted? I can see the site being useful for lazy hunters who dont know how to gain permission.

I'm sort of in the middle of if this is a good idea or not. Allowing this site means any landowner should be able to charge for access to hunt which we know is not allowed.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 09-12-2019, 09:37 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R3illy View Post
curious why you wanted to sign up. Was it just to have more areas to hunt? Was there a specific piece of land you wanted? I can see the site being useful for lazy hunters who dont know how to gain permission.

I'm sort of in the middle of if this is a good idea or not. Allowing this site means any landowner should be able to charge for access to hunt which we know is not allowed.
I don't like your insinuation and it couldn't be farther from the truth. I was scouting and I called the landowner for access. The land manager said the property was administered by clas for hunting. So I had no alternative but to sign up with clas to hunt the property. Satisfied with that?

I started a new post on this subject to avoid all the pay for access junk. It's not what this is about. The link to it isn't rational.
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 09-12-2019, 11:13 PM
R3illy R3illy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 910
Default

sorry I didnt mean to offend. I should have said generally speaking, theres lots of reasons one could use their services for example lazy hunters who want an easy option to hunt. I was more so curious how/why you decided to sign up. Ultimately the land owner referred you to pay a website before he granted you access to hunt.

Isnt what you described illegal? You bartered cash for access for the purpose to hunt. The landowner told you how to pay to hunt his land. Cash exchanged hands between parties for access?

This is not a shot at you more so trying to understand why fish and wild life let's this happen in Alberta.

Personally I see the value in the service but not a fan of how its ignored/allowed to operate.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 09-13-2019, 12:07 AM
SnipeHunter SnipeHunter is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Calgary
Posts: 87
Default

Interesting concept. I took a peak. I couldn't find any private access. If they didn't post the existing du and other existing sites they'd have nothing. The fees they want vs what they offer is scammer level. Beware.

Brokering access for a fee is maybe illegal...not sure. Landowners not paid...but in a way they want to provide a service a licenced goose guide would ordinarilly provide.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 09-13-2019, 09:35 AM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SnipeHunter View Post
Interesting concept. I took a peak. I couldn't find any private access. If they didn't post the existing du and other existing sites they'd have nothing. The fees they want vs what they offer is scammer level. Beware.

Brokering access for a fee is maybe illegal...not sure. Landowners not paid...but in a way they want to provide a service a licenced goose guide would ordinarilly provide.
I don't know what you looked at but there a many, many large ranches in the South that use this service. And that is what it is, a service for both landowners and hunters. A 6 month membership costs 54.00. Pretty much the same price as an elk tag. I burn more than that in gas in a day to get to some places. Your" scammer level" comment doesn't have any traction.

It's all in front of you but I can't make you understand...…..they are not brokering for a fee. It's not illegal. They are a third party that created a system whereby landowners can use them to take all of the hassle out of administrating hunter permission and all that goes along with that. Since someone created this system and maintains it regularly, that same someone should expect compensation for past and continuing work. But if you believe that something illegal is happening you should compel yourself to call RAP. Tell us how you make out with that.

Personally, I would like to see more landowners take advantage of this system. It's probably more advantageous to a larger ranch than isolated 1/4s, but I do see the advantage in smaller properties as well.
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 09-13-2019, 09:40 AM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNP View Post
I don't like your insinuation and it couldn't be farther from the truth. I was scouting and I called the landowner for access. The land manager said the property was administered by clas for hunting. So I had no alternative but to sign up with clas to hunt the property. Satisfied with that?

I started a new post on this subject to avoid all the pay for access junk. It's not what this is about. The link to it isn't rational.
You had no alternative but to pay for access.

__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-13-2019, 09:53 AM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
You had no alternative but to pay for access.

We make choices everyday. I choose to hunt. I chose to go scouting. I chose to pay $100 for diesel that day. I chose to phone the landowner. She chose to enlist CLAS in order to field all the calls like mine. I chose to be a member of CLAS in order to benefit from that service. I didn't have to make any of those decisions. I had choices, I had alternatives. So your "no alternative" comment doesn't work on me. It's not "pay for access" It's pay for using a service. Again, understanding what is being paid for is what makes this legal and in my opinion an alternative for both landowners and hunters. I respect that anyone that doesn't like it probably won't use it. They have alternatives. I'll use it.
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-13-2019, 11:34 AM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNP View Post
We make choices everyday. I choose to hunt. I chose to go scouting. I chose to pay $100 for diesel that day. I chose to phone the landowner. She chose to enlist CLAS in order to field all the calls like mine. I chose to be a member of CLAS in order to benefit from that service. I didn't have to make any of those decisions. I had choices, I had alternatives. So your "no alternative" comment doesn't work on me. It's not "pay for access" It's pay for using a service. Again, understanding what is being paid for is what makes this legal and in my opinion an alternative for both landowners and hunters. I respect that anyone that doesn't like it probably won't use it. They have alternatives. I'll use it.
That reminds me of the leaseholder that told me I had to hire the Outfitter if I wanted to access the grazing lease to hunt elk....

I guess they were only selling a service, not making me pay for access.


CLAS's recreational access model has not been determined to be legal.

When asked by CLAS, the government gave no opinion as to whether the recreational access part of their business was legal or illegal. The gov did decided to not charge them and test the case in court, at the time.

This could very well change. I've discussed this with the gov, CLAS and lawyers. Other legal opinions suggest that the model is illegal.

The law states that NO ONE may be compensated for providing recreational access. CLAS is acting as an agent for the land/leaseowner, receiving a valuable service from CALS. CLAS receives financial compensation from the recreational access user. In other words and IMO, both CLAS and the land/leaseowner are recieving compensation for providing recreational access, which is illegal.


I've stated here before that the owners of CLAS have class and have developed a model that could be a great benefit to Landowners, recreational users and the government. I am not against the concept in general, just against the current financial scheme.

What happens if/when fees increase to join CLAS or another similar company? Or when the fee is charged per access request?
This property is $1000 to access, that one is $50.
With groups like ACA using CLAS, what if in the future ALL lands require paying for this "service"?
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 09-13-2019, 01:57 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
That reminds me of the leaseholder that told me I had to hire the Outfitter if I wanted to access the grazing lease to hunt elk....

I guess they were only selling a service, not making me pay for access.


CLAS's recreational access model has not been determined to be legal.

When asked by CLAS, the government gave no opinion as to whether the recreational access part of their business was legal or illegal. The gov did decided to not charge them and test the case in court, at the time.

This could very well change. I've discussed this with the gov, CLAS and lawyers. Other legal opinions suggest that the model is illegal.

The law states that NO ONE may be compensated for providing recreational access. CLAS is acting as an agent for the land/leaseowner, receiving a valuable service from CALS. CLAS receives financial compensation from the recreational access user. In other words and IMO, both CLAS and the land/leaseowner are recieving compensation for providing recreational access, which is illegal.


I've stated here before that the owners of CLAS have class and have developed a model that could be a great benefit to Landowners, recreational users and the government. I am not against the concept in general, just against the current financial scheme.

What happens if/when fees increase to join CLAS or another similar company? Or when the fee is charged per access request?
This property is $1000 to access, that one is $50.
With groups like ACA using CLAS, what if in the future ALL lands require paying for this "service"?
What if? There is never an end to what if's...I don't see the what if's you are concerned about being a possibility. Either they would be illegal or they would price themselves out of business.

Not being against the concept, how you be against the "financial scheme"? There is never a charge to access property, there is a charge to be a member of the system that administrates a website that manages who, what, when where and why. Surely there has to be a charge for the administration of this process. Who is going to do this for free? You're going to have to wean yourself off of the "scheme" that spirals a fee for access. There is no fee for access because that would not be legal. That's how I view it. If it is not legal, then I would support shutting it down.
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 09-13-2019, 03:09 PM
R3illy R3illy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 910
Default

What you fail to realize cnp is that anyone can make a website to manage access and can charge whatever the hell they want. I'd set the rates to my land based on what type of animals there were.

I could create my own website and update it with recent photos of animals. If I had a herd of elk maybe I'll charge $400 per hunter. After all my websites just managing access for hunters.

Theres a massive revenue model every land owner could copy under the guise we are managing access. In your case their not managing access. The land owner explicitly told you to pay up for permission to hunt. After you paid that land owner granted you access.

I dont blame you for utilizing a tool before you nor do i think you did anything wrong as this website is well known and is allowed to operate.

But what you've described is pay for access regardless how you spin it. It should be investigated for what it is.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 09-13-2019, 08:33 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,201
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R3illy View Post
What you fail to realize cnp is that anyone can make a website to manage access and can charge whatever the hell they want. I'd set the rates to my land based on what type of animals there were.

I could create my own website and update it with recent photos of animals. If I had a herd of elk maybe I'll charge $400 per hunter. After all my websites just managing access for hunters.

Theres a massive revenue model every land owner could copy under the guise we are managing access. In your case their not managing access. The land owner explicitly told you to pay up for permission to hunt. After you paid that land owner granted you access.

I dont blame you for utilizing a tool before you nor do i think you did anything wrong as this website is well known and is allowed to operate.

But what you've described is pay for access regardless how you spin it. It should be investigated for what it is.
Exactly. I was saving this scenario for future discussion, but you nailed it.

When I asked the gov about this scenario they wouldn't give me an answer.
Typically this means that they are on the wrong side of the law or policy.

Which is scary. Why is the gov allowing this to continue?
Kind of reminds me of the beginning of the game farming industry in Alberta....
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 09-13-2019, 08:47 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 9,201
Default

My head hurts trying to comprehend CNP's rambling....

I'll present this to all.

"Not being against the concept, how you be against the "financial scheme"? "

CLAS has developed a computer program that can function as a great medium to manage recreational access to lands.

I suggest that the government licence use of the program from CLAS.
Apply the program to ALL lands where public access is limited by regulations.

I think this could be a great way to deal with the problems currently facing access to crown grazing leases, and allowing private properties to use the system at no cost would be a positive way to increase managed recreational access to these lands.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 09-13-2019, 09:15 PM
R3illy R3illy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 910
Default

Yeah the law needs to decide what it wants. ANYONE can create a website and charge any rate they want as a membership that provides exclusive access to a property. We can all become an outfitter over night.

If all we need as a landowner is to have a third party(friend, business partner, co worker) managing a website for our land that's easy to sort out.

I've asked a friend to create a crude website for our land so i can sell "memberships/services". Why pay an outfitter when you can pay for a membership at 1/10th the cost.

If clas is allowed and the precedent is there others need to follow suit.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 09-13-2019, 09:26 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
My head hurts trying to comprehend CNP's rambling....

I'll present this to all.

"Not being against the concept, how you be against the "financial scheme"? "

CLAS has developed a computer program that can function as a great medium to manage recreational access to lands.

I suggest that the government licence use of the program from CLAS.
Apply the program to ALL lands where public access is limited by regulations.

I think this could be a great way to deal with the problems currently facing access to crown grazing leases, and allowing private properties to use the system at no cost would be a positive way to increase managed recreational access to these lands.
I loathe government taking over private enterprise. I do however like the idea of extending public land held under a grazing lease to a booking standard through a similar government model (of CLAS). The government has no business in operating or providing a private land booking system. The government, contracting a provider to do this for grazing leases could make sense.
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 09-13-2019, 09:33 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R3illy View Post
What you fail to realize cnp is that anyone can make a website to manage access and can charge whatever the hell they want. I'd set the rates to my land based on what type of animals there were.

I could create my own website and update it with recent photos of animals. If I had a herd of elk maybe I'll charge $400 per hunter. After all my websites just managing access for hunters.

Theres a massive revenue model every land owner could copy under the guise we are managing access. In your case their not managing access. The land owner explicitly told you to pay up for permission to hunt. After you paid that land owner granted you access.

I dont blame you for utilizing a tool before you nor do i think you did anything wrong as this website is well known and is allowed to operate.

But what you've described is pay for access regardless how you spin it. It should be investigated for what it is.
Your scenario ^^^^ would not be legal. You're describing a landowner charging access for his land for hunting. The reason CLAS is allowed to operate, in my opinion, is that it is not compensating landowners. A scheme that compensates landowners cannot be allowed under existing law.
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 09-13-2019, 10:53 PM
R3illy R3illy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNP View Post
Your scenario ^^^^ would not be legal. You're describing a landowner charging access for his land for hunting. The reason CLAS is allowed to operate, in my opinion, is that it is not compensating landowners. A scheme that compensates landowners cannot be allowed under existing law.
it's funny you see how this is paid access but your still in denial in what you described in your second post which is text book 100% paid hunting.

You explicitly stated you had no other option to hunt the land owners land then to sign up and pay for access. This was on the land owners recommendation that forced you to pay so you could hunt.

If f&w deem this acceptable then there are so many ways to take the CLAS model and use it for personal gain on your own land.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 09-14-2019, 01:27 AM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R3illy View Post
it's funny you see how this is paid access but your still in denial in what you described in your second post which is text book 100% paid hunting.

You explicitly stated you had no other option to hunt the land owners land then to sign up and pay for access. This was on the land owners recommendation that forced you to pay so you could hunt.

If f&w deem this acceptable then there are so many ways to take the CLAS model and use it for personal gain on your own land.
No land owner is selling access, that would not be legal. A land owner would be violating the Wildlife Act if they adopted the CLAS model to sell access on their land. I can't even believe a landowner would try such a thing, a stubby pencil and paper is no different than software insofar as a violation is concerned. A landowner could use a simple calendar app to record who is hunting, when, where etc......…………..but he/she cannot sell access.

You know CLAS is not something being dreamed up now. It's been happening now for what.....four years? And your course of action is to do what?

Time for you to step up. As I see it, you have two options:

Report the crimes that you allege CLAS has committed and continues to commit; or

Do nothing.

What are you going to do?

While you're at it you might as well recommend charges against me. You believe CLAS is selling access; in doing so you must believe I am wrongfully buying access because today I am hunting on private land, arranged through CLAS. I have also colluded with CLAS by becoming a member. All members should be charged. Is this all correct?

Here is an excerpt from the Province of Alberta Wildlife Act from which you can form your case against them:

49(1) No person shall directly or indirectly buy or sell, trade or barter or offer to buy or sell access to any land for the purpose of hunting any big game or any fur-bearing animals on any land.
(2) No person shall directly or indirectly buy or sell, trade or barter or offer to buy or sell access to any land for the purpose of hunting any game bird except as provided in Subsection (3).
(3) No person shall directly or indirectly buy or sell, trade or barter or offer to buy or sell access to any land for the purpose of hunting upland game birds.
(a) on privately owned land unless the person holds a licence issued to the person for that purpose pursuant to this act and except in accordance with the regulations, or
(b) on public land that is not privately owned land. 1984 cW-9.1
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 09-14-2019, 06:17 AM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

…………………..and don't forget to recommend charges against the ACA. They are a co-conspirator

Quote:
CLAS is Partnered with Alberta Conservation Association
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 09-14-2019, 07:11 AM
Albertadiver's Avatar
Albertadiver Albertadiver is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 9,283
Default

Thanks Walking Buffalo. I can't say anything better than what you've already posted.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 09-14-2019, 07:43 AM
R3illy R3illy is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 910
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNP View Post
I was scouting and I called the landowner for access. The land manager said the property was administered by clas for hunting. So I had no alternative but to sign up with clas to hunt the property. Satisfied with that?
Might want to take a look at what you posted. You explicitly said you had no alternative to sign up and pay a website before you were granted permission to hunt. You then went on that hunt.

Your still struggling with how easy it is for ANYONE to create a website to create a new revenue stream for their property. All a landowner needs to do is have a friend or family member benefit from the "membership service" while the friend manages it.

Or I could manage my neighbors land and he manages mine we have now created it so the landowner isnt directly benefiting but we both cash in.

ITS EASY FOR ANYONE TO COPY CLAS AND RAISE THE FEES SIGNIFICANTLY. I think it's clear your not getting that tho.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-14-2019, 10:48 AM
urban rednek's Avatar
urban rednek urban rednek is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,078
Exclamation consider the logistics

While I do not have a horse in this race, I will say this:
If I was a landowner/leaseholder that was given the opportunity to sign up to a software app that would take care of all the hunting inquiries from "Joe Public", handle all the scheduling logistics for the season, while providing me with the means to view daily access details online... I would definitely consider this as payment enough.

There are operations in prime hunting territory and/or close to major urban centers that field hundreds of calls and visits from Joe Public every year. Surely some of them must be getting tired of it by now.
__________________
UADOESNTHUNT seems more appropriate.

“We seem to be getting closer and closer to a situation where nobody is responsible for what they did but we are all responsible for what somebody else did.”- Thomas Sowell
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-15-2019, 05:02 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by R3illy View Post
Might want to take a look at what you posted. You explicitly said you had no alternative to sign up and pay a website before you were granted permission to hunt. You then went on that hunt.

Your still struggling with how easy it is for ANYONE to create a website to create a new revenue stream for their property. All a landowner needs to do is have a friend or family member benefit from the "membership service" while the friend manages it.

Or I could manage my neighbors land and he manages mine we have now created it so the landowner isnt directly benefiting but we both cash in.

ITS EASY FOR ANYONE TO COPY CLAS AND RAISE THE FEES SIGNIFICANTLY. I think it's clear your not getting that tho.
What are you going to do about it? Nothing?
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:32 AM
Ronaround Ronaround is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by urban rednek View Post
While I do not have a horse in this race, I will say this:
If I was a landowner/leaseholder that was given the opportunity to sign up to a software app that would take care of all the hunting inquiries from "Joe Public", handle all the scheduling logistics for the season, while providing me with the means to view daily access details online... I would definitely consider this as payment enough.

There are operations in prime hunting territory and/or close to major urban centers that field hundreds of calls and visits from Joe Public every year. Surely some of them must be getting tired of it by now.
Just Curious> Does the landowner by Canadian law have to let anyone on it if they choose? Do they get any help from the Providence by letting hunters hunt there land at all? tax incentives ?
I cant imagine that after massive door knocking and trespassers it does get over-whelming. Follow the money,follow the money,it will always pan out.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:44 AM
Green1 Green1 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Calgary
Posts: 15
Default

This type of service is exactly what the government should be doing about the lease access issues already. No more calling for access. A user has to sign up for a date, provide contact info, read and agree to all the leaseholder conditions. No one gets denied for BS reasons and the leaseholders have a record of who was on the property without dealing with a million phone calls. I say implement this everywhere, and I would gladly pay a little more on my wildlife certificate to cover a program that actually allows albertans an easy way to access their public land.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-16-2019, 10:49 AM
Green1 Green1 is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Calgary
Posts: 15
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
My head hurts trying to comprehend CNP's rambling....

I'll present this to all.

"Not being against the concept, how you be against the "financial scheme"? "

CLAS has developed a computer program that can function as a great medium to manage recreational access to lands.

I suggest that the government licence use of the program from CLAS.
Apply the program to ALL lands where public access is limited by regulations.

I think this could be a great way to deal with the problems currently facing access to crown grazing leases, and allowing private properties to use the system at no cost would be a positive way to increase managed recreational access to these lands.
Apparently I don't read too good and missed this. Good suggestion WB!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-16-2019, 01:05 PM
CNP's Avatar
CNP CNP is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CNP
Posts: 6,698
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Green1 View Post
This type of service is exactly what the government should be doing about the lease access issues already. No more calling for access. A user has to sign up for a date, provide contact info, read and agree to all the leaseholder conditions. No one gets denied for BS reasons and the leaseholders have a record of who was on the property without dealing with a million phone calls. I say implement this everywhere, and I would gladly pay a little more on my wildlife certificate to cover a program that actually allows albertans an easy way to access their public land.
It has limited possibilities. You still have to contact the lease holder through the online app. That is how CLAS works with private land. The lease holder could ignore the request just like ignoring a phone call. He can still say access is denied for legitimate reasons or even non-legitimate reasons. This is not a fix, it just avoids personal contact through a telephone. Nothing to get excited about here...
__________________
[[[[[All news is fake news]]]]]
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-16-2019, 02:33 PM
urban rednek's Avatar
urban rednek urban rednek is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 1,078
Smile applies to private individuals, Guides & Outfitters

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronaround View Post
Just Curious> Does the landowner by Canadian law have to let anyone on it if they choose? Do they get any help from the Providence by letting hunters hunt there land at all? tax incentives ?
I cant imagine that after massive door knocking and trespassers it does get over-whelming. Follow the money,follow the money,it will always pan out.
In regards to hunting private land in Alberta- a private landowner has control over who may access their land for hunting purposes. There is no government incentive for the landowner to do so. It is illegal for a landowner to charge for hunting access; it is also illegal to offer any compensation (money, booze, food, labour, first born, etc.) for hunting access. I would insert the wink, wink, nudge, nudge emoticon here...but that doesn't happen in Alberta.
Anyone accessing private land without permission can face various charges depending on the severity of the trespass and whether they harvested any game. (poaching)

In regards to lease land (typically government assigned agricultural/grazing leases) in Alberta- short story- the leaseholder must allow public access for hunting purposes. However, each lease has a contract that stipulates leaseholder conditions and public access conditions; the specific access terms can vary from lease to lease. Some leaseholders claim public access conditions (crops or cattle still on the land, weather conditions, the price of tea in China, etc.) have not been met in order to prevent public access during hunting season.
The long story is a novel that always degrades into a mud-slinging donnybrook. Not worth getting banned over.

I was dead serious about some landowners/leaseholders fielding hundreds of calls/visits to their front door from hunters seeking access to their land every year. It must get tiring.

BTW- while it is a common lead in to honest questions, "Just Curious" is the online name used by an irritating eco-activist socialist troll in the comment section of many Canadian news, science and weather blogs. So, if you ever get a really negative response to a question, it might be someone who feels that Just Curious would make good chum.
__________________
UADOESNTHUNT seems more appropriate.

“We seem to be getting closer and closer to a situation where nobody is responsible for what they did but we are all responsible for what somebody else did.”- Thomas Sowell
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-17-2019, 05:03 AM
Ronaround Ronaround is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 171
Default

Urban> the "Just curious" was because i have no real stake in the game, I dont want to anger any residents here,and i really have a great interest in Alberta hunting and how its run. I have been up there 3 times in the last 4 years.
In the US all the hunting as land dwindles for hunting and populations boom, they are leasing land privately with anything farm farm help to lots of cash if your in whitetail wonderland.just to give you all an idea 45-60 acre lot with woods and maybe agriculture for 1000.00 to 2500.00. some charge 100.00 day per person.
I always thought for some insane reason that upper Alberta and the Providences around you had vast wilderness areas where you see no one.
thank you all for letting me expound.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:43 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.