Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old 10-01-2017, 09:31 PM
boah boah is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 863
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 270WIN View Post
Access for resident hunters to privately owned land gets increasingly more difficult each year. Anyone who believes that it's likely to improve if the antlered mule deer landowner licence were to be eliminated is dreaming. Everyone needs to think very carefully about this when answeringrr question 1.
I find there is lots of private land to hunt. If landowners a going to deny access because they no longer recieve a tag, that is their choice. In a zone that I apply in, the landowner tags almost equal the number of draw tags. This same zone is a 9 year wait. 9 lo tags to my 1 draw tag. I see a problem with that. Give the landowners 2 antlerless tags. Twice the meat, twice the fun.
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-08-2017, 01:44 AM
3blade's Avatar
3blade 3blade is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,176
Default

Done and done. This should stay at the top.

My answer to several of the issues is that we need a better definition of a resident (physically present in AB for the previous 365 days) and outfitter allocations should be capped at 10% or whatever that are now, whichever is lower.

Monetizing more wildlife runs contrary to the North American model of wildlife conservation, and is a real slippery slope. Pretty soon those guys at 10% "can't make a living" and need 15, then 20 etc. I don't want to see outfitters go out of business, but we sure don't need any more of them nor do they need a bigger piece of the pie. Any new/additional opportunities should go to residents.
__________________
“Nothing is more persistent than a liberal with a dumb idea” - Ebrand
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-08-2017, 07:32 AM
Tabers Best Tabers Best is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 270WIN View Post
Access for resident hunters to privately owned land gets increasingly more difficult each year. Anyone who believes that it's likely to improve if the antlered mule deer landowner licence were to be eliminated is dreaming. Everyone needs to think very carefully about this when answering question 1.
I am not sure what it is currently but if the land owner wants an antlered mule land owner tag then they should have to commit somehow that they will allow aceess to their land from the start to the end of the hunting season.

If they just wanted meat or to protect their crops then they should be ok with this only being an antlerless tag. To often its" you can come back after we have shot the grand daddy buck."

Thats not increased access. Sometimes they can chase the selected buck all season.
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-08-2017, 09:01 AM
Birchcraft's Avatar
Birchcraft Birchcraft is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 157
Default

Deleted, missed a couple words during first read.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 10-08-2017, 10:49 AM
3blade's Avatar
3blade 3blade is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 5,176
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tabers Best View Post
I am not sure what it is currently but if the land owner wants an antlered mule land owner tag then they should have to commit somehow that they will allow aceess to their land from the start to the end of the hunting season.

If they just wanted meat or to protect their crops then they should be ok with this only being an antlerless tag. To often its" you can come back after we have shot the grand daddy buck."

Thats not increased access. Sometimes they can chase the selected buck all season.
Disagree. No government should/will ever force a landowner to allow access, the deal would not be logistically enforceable anyway, and making deals for access is the start of a very slippery slope to paid access. Gotta look down the road on this one.

Landowner tags (any) are a dangerous idea anyway for the same reason. I don't blame a guy for wanting to protect his crops, but landowners do not own wildlife and that has to be the final say in things or we will all lose.
__________________
“Nothing is more persistent than a liberal with a dumb idea” - Ebrand
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-08-2017, 10:16 PM
bobalong bobalong is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,130
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3blade View Post
Disagree. No government should/will ever force a landowner to allow access, the deal would not be logistically enforceable anyway, and making deals for access is the start of a very slippery slope to paid access. Gotta look down the road on this one.

Landowner tags (any) are a dangerous idea anyway for the same reason. I don't blame a guy for wanting to protect his crops, but landowners do not own wildlife and that has to be the final say in things or we will all lose.
I know very few land owners that don't allow hunting on their deeded land. However they do choose to allow access to people who they know and trust.

There all millions of acres of crown land that you can choose to hunt on, no permission required.
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 -6. The time now is 12:55 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.