Alberta residents using Outfitters

[CanuckShooter]

Originally Posted by albertadave

If a resident has to wait 13 years for a tag (any tag) then the number of outfitter allocations (no matter who uses it) and nonresident licenses for that animal in that wmu should be reduced to a number just slightly above zero.

My thoughts exactly, there is no way a non resident should be sold the opportunity before a resident. In the very least they should make the 'clients' apply for the tags alongside the Alberta resident hunters.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

If it’s just purchasing a tag I get it but if it is hiring the guide well getting the tag it should not matter because it is still investing into the economy.

So you would rather an Alberta resident take their money to the US than hiring an outfitter in Alberta?

In the situation of my brother and I it’s 6k from him as a BC resident and another 6k from me not including tax. If it was not for present rules we would be taking our money to Wyoming or Montana. If it was not possible for both of us to hunt in Alberta neither of us would be booking the hunt

We could have paid less in the US but preferred to support a Canadian outfitter when the species is available here

We encourage everyone to buy local and invest in Alberta businesses any other time

What other provinces ban residents from hunting with an outfitter under their allocation?

The point is that if allowed to, some Alberta residents will use the opportunity to skip the draw system by purchasing a tag, without hiring an outfitter. In this case, the only person making a profit is the outfitter.
Or a wealthy Alberta resident can become an outfitter on paper, just to buy an allocation for his own use, year after year, and the result is actually less money going into our economy.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by 35 whelen

I'm not 100% sure but I don't think the rule was changed for Alberta residents to buy just a tag they have to use the Outfitters services with the tag

I am not sure either just had to hear the rant about residents trying to buy allocation only from the one outfitter so it burnt into my brain lol

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The point is that if allowed to, some Alberta residents will use the opportunity to skip the draw system by purchasing a tag, without hiring an outfitter. In this case, the only person making a profit is the outfitter.
Or a wealthy Alberta resident can become an outfitter on paper, just to buy an allocation for his own use, year after year, and the result is actually less money going into our economy.

So ban the ability of residents being able to hire an outfitter under their allocation because of possible abuse rather than targeting the abuse?

Might as well scrap the host program too because some abuse that illegally guiding.

Kinda the same way liberals are banning firearms to stop criminals isn’t it

If they are required to hire the outfitter it should not be an issue

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

So ban the ability of residents being able to hire an outfitter under their allocation because of possible abuse rather than targeting the abuse?

Might as well scrap the host program too because some abuse that illegally guiding.

Kinda the same way liberals are banning firearms to stop criminals isn’t it

If they are required to hire the outfitter it should not be an issue

If the registered outfitter and family can't use the tags, and the buyer has to hire the outfitter, I don't have an issue with this.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If the registered outfitter and family can't use the tags, and the buyer has to hire the outfitter, I don't have an issue with this.

I would say that is a very fair stance and how it should be

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If the registered outfitter and family can't use the tags, and the buyer has to hire the outfitter, I don't have an issue with this.

Lets say resident purchase of outfitter allocations becomes popular....

Do you think interested residents, APOS and the government won't be pushing for a higher allocation to satisfy the demand?


I suspect the courts would deem it illegal for these allocations to be restricted from purchase by family members. That's discriminatory.

The outfitter decides to sell the allocation and services at a discount, a steep discount. How would this be prevented?

Proxy ownership of allocations would easily provide a loophole to circumvent any of these proposed controls....


Remember, these allocations were argued for by the Outfitters and created by the government, on the basis that the product would bring in New (out of province and international) income.
Is this founding reason for the whole business model to be thrown out as irrelevant now?
If so, why have even outfitters allocations anymore?
Get rid of the allocations and let outfitters exist on their services, not the exclusivity of tags.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Lets say resident purchase of outfitter allocations becomes popular....

Do you think interested residents, APOS and the government won't be pushing for a higher allocation to satisfy the demand?


I suspect the courts would deem it illegal for these allocations to be restricted from purchase by family members. That's discriminatory.

The outfitter decides to sell the allocation and services at a discount, a steep discount. How would this be prevented?

Proxy ownership of allocations would easily provide a loophole to circumvent any of these proposed controls....


Remember, these allocations were argued for by the Outfitters and created by the government, on the basis that the product would bring in New (out of province and international) income.
Is this founding reason for the whole business model to be thrown out as irrelevant now?
If so, why have even outfitters allocations anymore?
Get rid of the allocations and let outfitters exist on their services, not the exclusivity of tags.

I can't disagree with any of your points, APOS is only interested in making money for themselves, so they will do whatever they can to make that happen.

[Smoky buck]

So should we ban residents using waterfowl and fishing guides as well? Not much of a difference here

Not a smart plan for outfitters to sell their allocation at discount rates with limited availability. Much more profitable to sell the hunt with services when you are limited on the number of tags

All this talk about just selling the allocated tags as being the real concern but is that even an option now?

Like I mentioned both outfitters I spoke to were strongly opposed to this legal or not

Any other provinces banning residents from hunting under an outfitters allocation well being guided?

As for adding to the economy again our money was either going to be spent here in Alberta or in the US. Under the old rules it would have been a lose of 6k from a resident going elsewhere along with 6k that would have never come from out of province if we are talking economics. 6k gained from out of province and 6k that stayed in the province instead with the present rules

Either way present laws allow it

Sounds like fear mongering on what ifs is the real issue

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

So should we ban residents using waterfowl and fishing guides as well? Not much of a difference here

Not a smart plan for outfitters to sell their allocation at discount rates with limited availability. Much more profitable to sell the hunt with services when you are limited on the number of tags

All this talk about just selling the allocated tags as being the real concern but is that even an option now?

Like I mentioned both outfitters I spoke to were strongly opposed to this legal or not

Any other provinces banning residents from hunting under an outfitters allocation well being guided?

As for adding to the economy again our money was either going to be spent here in Alberta or in the US. Under the old rules it would have been a lose of 6k from a resident going elsewhere along with 6k that would have never come from out of province if we are talking economics. 6k gained from out of province and 6k that stayed in the province instead with the present rules

Either way present laws allow it

Sounds like fear mongering on what ifs is the real issue

Waterfowl and fishing guides have nothing to do with this, they don't supply allocations for either fish or waterfowl, so people are not hiring them to bypass years of waiting to draw to hunt.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Waterfowl and fishing guides have nothing to do with this, they don't supply allocations for either fish or waterfowl, so people are not hiring them to bypass years of waiting to draw to hunt.

And the truth of why you and others who are opposed to this is found in the last line

This is nothing more than you don’t want anyone to have the ability to hunt without waiting in the draw just like you have. It’s the existents of the allocation and people being able to hunt species that are under draw

In a perfect world there would be no allocation for species residents must be drawn to hunt but that is not the case in Alberta

Odds are if this was about hunting a non draw species there would be no issue

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

And the truth of why you and others who are opposed to this is found in the last line

This is nothing more than you don’t want anyone to have the ability to hunt without waiting in the draw just like you have. It’s the existents of the allocation and people being able to hunt species that are under draw

In a perfect world there would be no allocation for species residents must be drawn to hunt but that is not the case in Alberta

Odds are if this was about hunting a non draw species there would be no issue

Exactly, it's a two tier system, the wealthy can buy their way out of the wait to draw. Wildlife management should not be based on how much money you have. Everyone should wait their turn.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

Exactly, it's a two tier system, the wealthy can buy their way out of the wait to draw. Wildlife management should not be based on how much money you have. Everyone should wait their turn.

So it has nothing to do with resident or non resident use of allocated tags it’s the fact allocated tags exist. All the rest is just BS trying to pick away at any part of a system you don’t agree with

A lot easier to respect someone’s stance if they are straight forward and spit it out

We were going pronghorn hunting either way I am just happy the money will stay in Canada vs the US because of present rules will allow it. But as a resident I would rather not see allocation for draw species and an end to non residents in Alberta’s draw system as well so I can respect that

This was more about finding a hunt we could share together do to different physical abilities and desires than hunting pronghorn in Alberta without a draw.

Getting him to apply in Alberta now and build priority till we are seniors was not a realistic option

We are within the rules either way

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

So it has nothing to do with resident or non resident use of allocated tags it’s the fact allocated tags exist. All the rest is just BS trying to pick away at any part of a system you don’t agree with

A lot easier to respect someone’s stance if they are straight forward and spit it out

We were going pronghorn hunting either way I am just happy the money will stay in Canada vs the US because of present rules will allow it. But as a resident I would rather not see allocation for draw species and an end to non residents in Alberta’s draw system as well so I can respect that

This was more about finding a hunt we could share together do to different physical abilities and desires than hunting pronghorn in Alberta without a draw.

Getting him to apply in Alberta now and build priority till we are seniors was not a realistic option

We are within the rules either way

The main argument to allow outfitter allocations, was to bring money into the province, selling hunts to residents doesn't do that, and does away with the main argument for allowing outfitter allocations. But some people obviously can't see that.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

The main argument to allow outfitter allocations, was to bring money into the province, selling hunts to residents doesn't do that, and does away with the main argument for allowing outfitter allocations. But some people obviously can't see that.

And I would say even with the present situation where residents can hunt under outfitter allocations majority of the clients will be non residents

The industry is still generating money for the province. Giving a resident an opportunity to spend the money within the province vs taking it out of the country is still contributing to the province as well

This is not something that has never been done before successfully without the great doom and gloom predictions given here

I am not involved in any of the issues here in Alberta so I will take your word that the main argument is to bring money from out of province but regardless the industry will always be attracting money from outside the province as the highest demand will be from non residents

Again presently completely legal regardless of your stance

[fishnguy]

I personally do not see any difference if the tags are used by residents or foreigners (regardless where they come from). If there is abuse of the system or something is done illegally, that should be addressed instead. Whether these tags should exist in the first place is another question entirely. The whole “bringing money out of province” and “spent on conservation” is a pile though and, at the very least, overblown. Hence, the reasoning behind the existence of these tags is questionable at best.

Good luck and have fun hunting, Smoky, whenever that happens. And my condolences with regards to your mother’s passing.

[ram crazy]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

And I would say even with the present situation where residents can hunt under outfitter allocations majority of the clients will be non residents

The industry is still generating money for the province. Giving a resident an opportunity to spend the money within the province vs taking it out of the country is still contributing to the province as well

This is not something that has never been done before successfully without the great doom and gloom predictions given here

I am not involved in any of the issues here in Alberta so I will take your word that the main argument is to bring money from out of province but regardless the industry will always be attracting money from outside the province as the highest demand will be from non residents

Again presently completely legal regardless of your stance

So maybe the government should make it that you can purchase one outfitter tag once in your lifetime, but you lose all draw priorities and can’t apply for draws 10 yrs. following the purchase of the outfitter tag.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

So maybe the government should make it that you can purchase one outfitter tag once in your lifetime, but you lose all draw priorities and can’t apply for draws 10 yrs. following the purchase of the outfitter tag.

In my situation I wouldn’t really care because of why I am doing this hunt and who I am doing it with is more important. For a personal hunt for myself alone I would have just waited for my archery or rifle draw and went DIY. If I was doing a guided hunt for myself for personal reasons I wouldn’t stay in North America even

Might as well just make trophy pronghorn a once in a lifetime draw for all regardless of how you get a tag and just be done with it. Really level the playing field if that is the concern

Or we could make it 6k for all residents to hunt pronghorn too just to make it fair and add some money to the economy or maybe straight to wildlife. Of course this suggestion is in the spirit of fairness and not that I would ever want to see costs that high for people to hunt in their home province

Like I keep saying my choice to do our hunt here in Alberta once what we were going to hunt was decided was to keep the money in Canada instead of spending it in the US. We could have easily gone south as there is a ton of pronghorn opportunity elsewhere. It’s not that hunting pronghorn in Alberta is giving superior trophy size or numbers or cheaper cost that cannot be found south of the border

Don’t worry this is likely to be the only time I use an outfitter in Alberta because this is a unique situation why I am doing this hunt

Really all the not fair stuff is found throughout our daily lives

[ram crazy]

As far as I’m concerned there shouldn’t be an outfitter tags for Bighorn, Mule Deer, Elk, or Mule Deer. Those should be residents only.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by ram crazy

As far as I’m concerned there shouldn’t be an outfitter tags for Bighorn, Mule Deer, Elk, or Mule Deer. Those should be residents only.

As I mentioned in an earlier post I would be in support of no allocation for species that residents are on draw and no non residents competing in resident draw pool

But that is not our present rules and there is opposition to both

We all have changes we would like to see and there is always those in opposition of these changes

[Sako123]

Alberta continues to be an outlier in Canada when dealing with non-resident hunters. It is the only jurisdiction that allows non-residents to hunt draw species. Alberta hunters that pay the taxes to manage these species are being bent over hard.

Alberta hunters and hunting organizations need to distance themselves from APOS. they has become entrenched in the special interest groups and work towards a very different goal than Alberta hunters. APOS is not a friend of resident hunters, they are a commercial operation focused on excluding Alberta resident hunter opportunities.

Albertans need to demand change. Just because it’s in policy now does not make it right. We need to demand transparency in the allocation data and talk plainly regarding the ridiculousness of the present outfitter debacle in Alberta.

And Smoky, all good in your choice. It’s your choice and it is currently supported in policy.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Sako123

Alberta continues to be an outlier in Canada when dealing with non-resident hunters. It is the only jurisdiction that allows non-residents to hunt draw species. Alberta hunters that pay the taxes to manage these species are being bent over hard.

Alberta hunters and hunting organizations need to distance themselves from APOS. they has become entrenched in the special interest groups and work towards a very different goal than Alberta hunters. APOS is not a friend of resident hunters, they are a commercial operation focused on excluding Alberta resident hunter opportunities.

Albertans need to demand change. Just because it’s in policy now does not make it right. We need to demand transparency in the allocation data and talk plainly regarding the ridiculousness of the present outfitter debacle in Alberta.

And Smoky, all good in your choice. It’s your choice and it is currently supported in policy.

Add B.C., Newfoundland, and Ontario to provinces that give outfitter allocations so non residents to hunt species residents are under draw for. I am pretty sure if I keep looking it is actually more common than not in Canada

Saskatchewan is the only province that I personally know on the top of my head that doesn’t

I agree there needs to be a change but Alberta is definitely not an outlier on the issue

The rest I don’t have enough knowledge to have a stance on

[Sako123]

Not to the extent that Alberta has allowed in policy. smoky you can defend your decision all you want, no one is judging.

Alberta is an outlier in how it sells its wildlife allocations and does not recognize resident priorities. This there is no doubt. Yes you can say that the invasive species of moose in Newfoundland is allowed to be sold to non-residents who have to draw. There are a few examples, mainly moose.

the outfitting industry in Alberta is fundamentally broken and as a lobbyist group with political support they are lobbying hard for more erosion in resident opportunity and involvement in the trophy management of the species. These are scary times indeed. APOS has successfully infiltrated many outdoor associations with nefarious intent to push their agenda. When we have resident hunters defending APOS, they have done their job well….

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by Sako123

Not to the extent that Alberta has allowed in policy. smoky you can defend your decision all you want, no one is judging.

Alberta is an outlier in how it sells its wildlife allocations and does not recognize resident priorities. This there is no doubt. Yes you can say that the invasive species of moose in Newfoundland is allowed to be sold to non-residents who have to draw. There are a few examples, mainly moose.

the outfitting industry in Alberta is fundamentally broken and as a lobbyist group with political support they are lobbying hard for more erosion in resident opportunity and involvement in the trophy management of the species. These are scary times indeed. APOS has successfully infiltrated many outdoor associations with nefarious intent to push their agenda. When we have resident hunters defending APOS, they have done their job well….

The statement regarding allocation has nothing to do with my choice in doing this pronghorn hunt. I am only stating facts Newfoundland add native caribou to those moose and they don’t have the same number of species for starters

B.C. makes Alberta look good when it comes to allocations between the fact they have many species without limitations on harvest numbers and allocation for everything residents are on draw for too. Only exception is areas that are not within an outfitters territory. Do some research on BCs allocation system you will see they have a similar situation except the allocation comes with a territory where they have exclusive guiding rights. I am an ex B.C. resident that knows this system very well

You hear a very similar stance from B.C. resident hunters as you posted and non stop conflict over allocations goes on there too

I am not saying this should be except able but only there is similar situation in other provinces

This has nothing to do with my choice to book a hunt in Alberta either and I don’t need people to except my choice because It doesn’t matter as I hunt for my own personal reasons.

[antler1]

A number of AO members are discussing buying antelope tags from an APOS outfitter to avoid the lengthy wait times in Alberta. If you do some looking on both sides of the border you will see a multitude of antelope hunts offered in Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, South Dakota even Idaho for substantially less than what the APOS sells hunts for up here. An way more antelope down there as well. A couple years of buying priority down there and you can be off to the races, or some areas require no priority.

[Smokinyotes]

I’m not sure if it has changed or not but you used to be able to get a license from the band office on some of the rez in Montana. It allowed you to shoot only on Rez land and no guide required.

[Salavee]

Have you ever wondered how many American hunters actualy own those allocations? Try APOS for the anwser. Its a real Cluster ----. A lot of money slipping out of Alberta along with free hunts.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Have you ever wondered how many American hunters actualy own those allocations? Try APOS for the anwser. Its a real Cluster ----. A lot of money slipping out of Alberta along with free hunts.

And again, one of the main arguments for allowing outfitters to sell hunts to non residents, is to bring cash into the Alberta economy.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Have you ever wondered how many American hunters actualy own those allocations? Try APOS for the anwser. Its a real Cluster ----. A lot of money slipping out of Alberta along with free hunts.

Not just money, but legal and full Ownership of our Wildlife.
These allocations, despite assurances from the government that they never will be, are becoming Real Property due to court decisions.
First was an Estate dispute that made a decision these Allocations are Real Property,
and then the international financing fiasco by Chad Lenz (former APOS President) with the Sheep allocations.
Chad really screwed over all Albertans with his financing moves, with damage that has yet to be fully realized.

As time goes by these allocations are slipping out of government control and the Wildlife is becoming the property of Individuals, Albertans and any one else in the world with the money to buy them.

Allowing Residents to hunt on the Allocations will hasten the slide into full private ownership of what was a resource held in trust by the government for ALL People.

It's sad when people don't look into the future, to see what their own personal short term pleasure will cost everyone else, all the while claiming to be innocent of the damage they cause.

[walking buffalo]

Here's another angle some Outfitters are frequently playing these days.

Instead of selling their hunt, they are trading them for hunts with other outfitters in other provinces and countries.

Again, Chad Lenz has been very active in doing this.
He was even advertising on an American Hunt Trade forum.
He even offered what was described as a "Landowner Tag" hunt to trade.
F&W shut that down, I have the evidence.


Trading Outfitter Allocations does not bring in ANY money to the economy, other than a few dollars for the tag.
Pure greed and abuse of what these allocations were meant to be.