Prime hunting being tied up down south

[bruceba]

I have seen a couple really good area's for hunting that are privately owned and did have access to hunt that are now shut down because being leased to _ _ _ _ _ _ family farms. Would you believe me if I told you that the family farms that is leasing all this prime land is owned by a guide would you begin to see a pattern developing.

[harv3589]

Wouldn't surprise me...

[700TI]

No surprise. It's been happening for years now. What can be done?

[Donny Bear]

I'm down in the south west corner of our province one outfitter has a wack of land tied up only will allow late season cow elk hunters all bulls reserved for clients. :mad2:

[Wulfespirit]

I don't know if its just outfitters or POed farmers but I've noticed ALOT more no hunting/trespassing posted farmland this year east of Edmonton all the way through to Manville.

Been hunting anywhere near Edson lately? With all of the oil and gas activity there's more metal than wood in those zones now.

Getting tough to find a spot without tacking on a 3-5 hour drive. :mad:

[700TI]

I know down here, when the landowner will give you permission if you have a doe tag but not with a buck tag, somethings up.

[Prdtrgttr]

Bruce, that's very discouraging. I know of at least one large ranch in the south here, that doesn't allow residents on their land, but allows an outfitter to hunt deer there with his client. This is not what hunting in Canada is supposed to be like. Do you feel there are any solutions to this type of activity?

[russ]

I know down here, when the landowner will give you permission if you have a doe tag but not with a buck tag, somethings up.

700 I know a guy that won't let the guides on because they only harvest bucks. He wants the pop down on his land, so he has a strong preference for meat hunting.

[panwojciech]

If a farmer doesn’t allow local hunter hunting , he shouldn’t be eligible for crop damage compensation.

[fat cat]

Up here in the north it is opposite, most land owners won't allow outfitters because of the past beef bans. Talk to the land owners and explain to them that you buy their product. If they don't agree then they are probably being paid off. If that is the case, then we should look at the same. Obviuosly F&W ain't doing nothing about it!!

[700TI]

700 I know a guy that won't let the guides on because they only harvest bucks. He wants the pop down on his land, so he has a strong preference for meat hunting.

I am sure this wasn't the case with my experience.

[pika]

Resident hunters have allowed non-residents to recieve up to 23% of the antlered deer tags in some WMU's in Southern Alberta. Now if resident hunters would make some noise by writing their MLA and Ted Morton things would change. It will also take some phone calls and that means repeated phone calls until you get the answer you are looking for otherwise the issue will fall silent, if you are a resident hunter it is definitely worth a little of your time to do so. You can start by asking your local SRD office for information on ie; antlered mule deer tags for WMU's you hunt resident draw quota vs non-resident allocations. If non-resident allocations exceed 10 percent of the tags you best be raising hell, just keep on this for a few months, then again for a follow up, it would take very little effort. It only makes sense to concure less land would be tied up by the outfitting industry if they don't have the tags. In Montana it is state law to limit non-resident tags to 10 percent (ie 10 percent of the antlered mule deer tags per zone) to protect resident hunting opportunities.

[Chung66]

Or just stoop the guiding industries' level and tresspass.
Had to say it.

[mulecrazy]

I believe the outfitters are by far the worst for breaking tresspassing laws. A friends ranch has repeatedly told one outfitter to stay out and he still sneaks in. He took a huge 200+ mulie last year. This same outfitter took a client in there this fall and wounded a 160+ whitey with a bow. The nerve of this guy is amazing. It isn't just outfitters though. A resident ignored the signs last year and shot a small mulie. F and W were involved. The penalty was pretty low and the hunter kept the deer. My friend does not guide on his land though. He is just trying to build up the deer population as the previous landowners allowed a free for all on the land. I don't mind blocking hunters for this reason, but too only allow non-residents makes me angry:mad3: . The tag numbers for them should be cut and tougher restrictions to curb this behaviour is a must.

[101sonny]

I have seen a couple really good area's for hunting that are privately owned and did have access to hunt that are now shut down because being leased to _ _ _ _ _ _ family farms. Would you believe me if I told you that the family farms that is leasing all this prime land is owned by a guide would you begin to see a pattern developing.Hummm
seems to me its legal so what is the problem .I dont think it would be any different if you or i leased it.Hunting would be shut down to the rest of the puplic "Wouldnt It"and dont say no you would be lieing right ????


Time to move on hope you find another pcs of land to hunt.:wave: My 2 cent

[Frans]

Hummm
seems to me its legal so what is the problem .I dont think it would be any different if you or i leased it.Hunting would be shut down to the rest of the puplic "Wouldnt It"and dont say no you would be lieing right ????


Time to move on hope you find another pcs of land to hunt.:wave: My 2 cent


It's illegal in Alberta to ask money for hunting access aka leasing.

Frans

[russ]

Resident hunters have allowed non-residents to recieve up to 23% of the antlered deer tags in some WMU's in Southern Alberta. Now if resident hunters would make some noise by writing their MLA and Ted Morton things would change. It will also take some phone calls and that means repeated phone calls until you get the answer you are looking for otherwise the issue will fall silent, if you are a resident hunter it is definitely worth a little of your time to do so. You can start by asking your local SRD office for information on ie; antlered mule deer tags for WMU's you hunt resident draw quota vs non-resident allocations. If non-resident allocations exceed 10 percent of the tags you best be raising hell, just keep on this for a few months, then again for a follow up, it would take very little effort. It only makes sense to concure less land would be tied up by the outfitting industry if they don't have the tags. In Montana it is state law to limit non-resident tags to 10 percent (ie 10 percent of the antlered mule deer tags per zone) to protect resident hunting opportunities.

I don't EVER recall encouraging SRD to allocate 23% of the tags to non-resident hunters. The guideline is SUPPOSED to be 10%. So you are right, we should be asking how the allocation went up to 23%.

[Nationwide]

if I told you that the family farms that is leasing all this prime land is owned by a guide would you begin to see a pattern developing.Sound's like a smart business man

It's illegal in Alberta to ask money for hunting access aka leasing.

Frans:huh: But if one" lease's a pcs of land" cant he or she do what they want with the land while holding the lease ,dont they have the right to .

[russ]

Depends, if it's crown grazing lease. There's an issue, otherwise not much we can do about it. Of course if there are crops being planted for the express purpose of attracting game to be hunted - well that's a different story.

[Rackmastr]

It's illegal in Alberta to ask money for hunting access aka leasing.

Frans

If the person who is leasing the land wants to restrict access, he is perfectly legal to do so. The lease was not made for the sole purpose of hunting, and leasing land does not mean you are paying for access to hunt. If its private ground, then the landowner or person who is leasing can do what they please in regards to allowing anyone else on....

[Iron Brew]

I don't know if its just outfitters or POed farmers but I've noticed ALOT more no hunting/trespassing posted farmland this year east of Edmonton all the way through to Manville.

Been hunting anywhere near Edson lately? With all of the oil and gas activity there's more metal than wood in those zones now.

Getting tough to find a spot without tacking on a 3-5 hour drive. :mad:

Combine this with no Sunday hunting, it gets a little discouraging to buy your tags for a saturday afternoon hunt. Why would you go out and set up a camp on Fri nite/saturday morning to pack up saturday evening? I used to teach, so getting time off was... not possible. Lots of others in that situation. I'm very anti the no Sunday hunting. Nobody has been able to explain to me why it is needed. If it is church, just ban hunting 1 mile from the churches on sundays.

[bowchaser]

Rack, if the lease is a grazing lease, they cannot restrict access, only if there are cattle on the lease. They are only leasing the right to graze the grass. If he is leasing it from a farmer, different story.

[chuck]

I used to teach, so getting time off was... not possible.

That's your choice, and problem. Not anyone elses.

[Chevy 454]

That's your choice, and problem. Not anyone elses.

The man is making a point about no sunday hunting,something that effects most guys with 9-5 jobs, not only teachers. I don't have either of those jobs,but I can see his point,for sure.

[SakoAlberta]

That's your choice, and problem. Not anyone elses.

Many people have only the weekend to hunt. I thought he made a good point.

[Duk Dog]

Actual lease land they have to allow "reasonable access" which often translates to foot access. If it is leased "private" land they can do as they wish.

[50BMG]

The man is making a point about no sunday hunting,something that effects most guys with 9-5 jobs, not only teachers. I don't have either of those jobs,but I can see his point,for sure.

My wife is a teacher....they can get time off in hunting season :D

[Okotokian]

Wouldn't bother me a bit if farmers did that with outfitters... as long as the government wasn't handing over my hard-earned tax dollars to those *&^%#^#**#^*@'s in the form of subsidies, farm fuel rebates, insurance this, income stabilization that.... burns my ass. When is my government cheque coming?

Forgive me for being an ass and politically incorrect... just hit a nerve here.

[bruceba]

101sonny it really doesn't effect my hunting at all but it will effect a lot of other people who do not have the flexability to hunt as great a range as I do. I have access on many farms and ranches from the BC boarder to the Sask boarder and from the 49th to as far north as I care to drive. What I lack is the time to enjoy all the area's and the time to visit with all the people I've met over the last 25 - 30 yrs.
I have said it before and I'll say it again, It's my oppinion that the guiding industry is pouring their agend in the back door while your watching the front door that's being rattled by Government smoke shows.

[Rackmastr]

Rack, if the lease is a grazing lease, they cannot restrict access, only if there are cattle on the lease. They are only leasing the right to graze the grass. If he is leasing it from a farmer, different story.

Yep...thats obvious. Re-read my post and you'll see that I stated if its private ground that its the choice of the landowner or leaseholder. I'm talking about PRIVATE GROUND....and not public land leases.....just wanted to clarify...

[Bobby B.]

Let's not be naive. The bottom line is that outfitters are paying landowners for exclusive rights to hunt their lands. So, if you can't offer up the $$$, then tough sh_t. Go hunt somewhere else. And, when more and more of this happens, well tough sh_t somemore. I can't speak for anyone else but this is not what I want to see happening here in Alberta.

Bobby B.

[bruceba]

Bobby B. that about sums it up and from what I hear the lease grab is on and some of the older guides are just doing it to build up a sizeable area and then they'll transpher or sell the lease's to other guide outfits for a tidy proffit and get out of Dodge before the crap hits the fan.

[tdwarburton]

Yes I agree that I don't want to see this happen. Turning hunting into a wealthy mans game. The worst part is we have helped things along as hunters. I was down at the local cofee shop in Schuler yesterday morning and was mortified in the way a number of the local farmers looked at hunters. A few of the guys have posted their land because of tresspassers driving all over things, leaving gates open etc. Now as a land owner if you could limit the access to one guy at least when there is truck tracks everywhere you know who's door to go and knock on. Tack on some financial gain and looks like a pretty good deal for a land owner. How many of us have helped with fencing, or picked rock or moved cows for land owners in hopes of maintaining permission on some hunting ground? Not many. Little things like that and actually asking for permission would sure help our image.

[TreeGuy]

It's illegal in Alberta to ask money for hunting access aka leasing.

Frans

So therefore, not only is the F&W Act being violated, I am sure that there is 'tax evasion' as the payments are probably in cash. Double whammy.

Landowners have a right to profit from the land they have worked hard to own. However, instead of breaking the law for profit, I'd like to see an incentive program put into place for the landowners who allow hunters on. It's maybe come to a point where an end of season thank you 'bottle' just doesn't cut it anymore when you have big name outfitters (Sho$ke#'s, etc) offering some pretty big cash 'thank yous'.

One thing to look into guys (I've only just heard about this), is that with membership in the NFA, for just an additional $7.95/year, you'll get $2 million in liability insurance for the year. Nice selling point.

I'm not really sure about the lease stuff, but for sure the bowzone around Calgary here has been overrun by lots of $85/barrel millionairs who could give a sh*t about letting hunters on. There is still availiable land of course, but it's gotten to the point where you have to make reservations. Do what ya gotta do I guess.

Tree

[Drewski Canuck]

What really is at the heart of this whole affair is the demand for opportunity where there is limited public lands. For a long time now, I have advocated that where there are fines levied for environmental damage, that the money be directed to acquiring lands in the south part of the province for recreational land banking. It would take a fraction of a percent of the oil royalties from heavy polluters such as tar sands producers to acquire substantial blocks of public lands. The land could be on a lease system similar to grazing leases, which would make the upkeep and tax payments self sustaining, if not building towards the acquisition of further public lands. Farmers will love it as their capital is freed up for other uses.

What would result is that prime range land on the front ranges could be assembled to stop the urbanization of the foothills region.

What also would result is the creation of wildlife corridors to ensure that localized populations do not become genetically concentrated.

Oh well, I make this point every fall.

IS ANYONE LISTENING????

Drewski

[j m]

Or just stoop the guiding industries' level and tresspass.
Had to say it.

I don't agree with tresspassing in any form, but I think this raises an interesting question. How discouraged is a guide with a 10k client going to be by a $200 tresspass fine? :huh:. Or the average guy on last day of season with his tag burning a hole in his pocket? The only thing tresspassing does is shut down land to hunting.

Since the 911 and the BSE border closing, beef producers have been up against a wall. Some have taken the cash from guides to keep things in the black. Others haven't and are becoming a dying breed. $$$$$ is ruining hunting here, slowly but surely:mad: