Paid access a go ahead in WMU108

[Steamer08]

Originally Posted by clarki

can anyone tell me why i cant hunt on sundays in 108???

M

The reason is because on the bald azz prairie without any trees to hide in, the animals need a day of rest.

[clarki]

does anyone have the real reason i cant hunt on sundays in 108??

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by rae61

I agree that paid access by outfitters happens and it is a BIG problem for resident hunters and we need to stop this. I don't see how legal paid access for resident hunters will make this better.

What landowner would give up his right to control access for $20 a head. I understand why landowners want to manage the number of hunters on their land. So don’t fool yourself
into thinking with this program you will have access anytime you want to any of the participating ranches.

Why is it that there is no hunting allowed on the McIntyre and Knight ranches now?? I don't think these large operations need the money, do you think that a mere 5 -10 K a year will make them open their gates to hunters. If they do there will have to be more in it for them than $20 a head.

I don't think I have a right to access any private land for any reason with out permission but the wildlife is owned by all the people of Alberta and owning the land does not change that and never should.

X2.

I don't understand the economics behind RAMP, it doesn't add up for the rancher, hunter, or taxpayer on any level, and there are a lot of them. If anyone here cares to take a shot at explaining it, I'm all ears.

It's why I remain so convinced that no matter how it's being soft sold this time around, RAMP is merely the pointed end of the wedge toward the direct sale of tags by landowners - it's the ONLY way this makes economic sense as a landowner as far as I'm concerned. It would be a cold day in hell that I'd give up my right to control access to my land for $10,000, let alone $2000.

While I understand the desire to hunt on a couple of these large ranches that don't currently grant access, I don't understand the willingness to give up on the current system and wildlife philosophy in AB in exchange for that access - for the few.

Waxy

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by clarki

does anyone have the real reason i cant hunt on sundays in 108??

Swap the word "animals" for "ranchers" in the response, and I think you'll be a lot closer.

That said, I have no problem with individual landowners determining what days they're going to allow access. IMHO, Sunday hunting should be legalized province wide, and left to the landowner's discretion.

Waxy

[rae61]

Originally Posted by Steamer08

Hey Brett,

I'm not saying that any of these ranches will get on board, but with a good program in place there is always that potential. Without some incentive to these ranches, no Albertan will ever get the possible chance to hunt on these properties. I know that everyone believes that if we start by doing this it will lead to disaster in the end. It may and it may not.

There always has been private land that hunters can't access and there always will be no matter what programs or moneys that are offered.

I ask you is the chance you might get to hunt these ranches worth the risk of what might be created in this process? I sure think not!

Paid hunting is paid hunting no matter if it's an outfitter or individuals or the goverment paying for us... in the end it's who can offer the most will be the one's to get access.

[lynx]

I can't get over how this forum beats everything to death. The more you read its the same old... same old.

Fighting back and forth isn't going to change things. I think people just like to blow off steam. Get with it... it was coming ,,, it is here,,,and its not going to change.

I am sure the ones implementing this get a big kick out of how you all get side tracked and fight among yourselves and they just continue on what they are doing. As you fight and bitch they are planning the next step and winning.

[Rackmastr]

Originally Posted by lynx

Fighting back and forth isn't going to change things. I think people just like to blow off steam. Get with it... it was coming ,,, it is here,,,and its not going to change.

Guess you just sat by and watched the Gun Registry without voicing your concerns and you sat by and watched the IMHA and just 'got with it' since it was already here and 'not going to change'

C'mon man.....you're saying just lay down and dont have an opinion if you dont like something at all that you're seeing. Have fun with that.....

[TreeGuy]

Originally Posted by Waxy

It would be a cold day in hell that I'd give up my right to control access to my land for $10,000, let alone $2000.

Waxy, no one is going to lose control of how they let their land be acessed at all. Just file your paperwork at the end of the season and get a cheque for $20/day/hunter. Seems simple enough.

This will do nothing to open up the big ranches for resident hunters, but that is not its intention.

The way I look at it is like this.....

I have a couple of permissions where for years, the landowners bent over backwards to accomidate us. Technically, it's illegal for us to thank them with anything. Yet year after year, they let people on.

I view this as a reward for all of the great landowners out there. I put in 20 days on one property this year. It could have been worth $400 bucks to them. What's so bad about that? Seeing a few extra bucks in their pockets for doing what they would have done anyway is no biggie in my books. I'd love to see them rewarded for being great stewards of the land and awesome human beings.

Yes, there is tremendous potential for abuse/fraud, but isn't that why 'trials' are run in the first place? To iron the bugs out?

As for landowners being able to sell tags...........I TOTALLY disagree!

Tree

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

I view this as a reward for all of the great landowners out there. I put in 20 days on one property this year. It could have been worth $400 bucks to them. What's so bad about that? Seeing a few extra bucks in their pockets for doing what they would have done anyway is no biggie in my books. I'd love to see them rewarded for being great stewards of the land and awesome human beings.

That is a cool way to look at it tree. l can't speak for all land owners out there but I just wanted to say the biggest reward I have every gotten, is long time friendships. And it all comes around. My daughter was really sick and needed to be in the city and as soon as one to the hunters that my dad first met, I know well also, got wind of what happened, he opened his house up to us for a week. We also get post cards when people travel.

The warm feeling people can give you out weighs all the negative stuff out there......sorry for the ramble, just brought back memories.

[gunslinger]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Waxy, no one is going to lose control of how they let their land be acessed at all. Just file your paperwork at the end of the season and get a cheque for $20/day/hunter. Seems simple enough.

This will do nothing to open up the big ranches for resident hunters, but that is not its intention.

The way I look at it is like this.....

I have a couple of permissions where for years, the landowners bent over backwards to accomidate us. Technically, it's illegal for us to thank them with anything. Yet year after year, they let people on.

I view this as a reward for all of the great landowners out there. I put in 20 days on one property this year. It could have been worth $400 bucks to them. What's so bad about that? Seeing a few extra bucks in their pockets for doing what they would have done anyway is no biggie in my books. I'd love to see them rewarded for being great stewards of the land and awesome human beings.

Yes, there is tremendous potential for abuse/fraud, but isn't that why 'trials' are run in the first place? To iron the bugs out?

As for landowners being able to sell tags...........I TOTALLY disagree!

Tree

sean that would be great and played by the rules but im afraid to tell you by experience this isnt how its gonna work. the stakes are going to be raised in every aspect of this.
ive done it , ive hunted em, ive succeeded and it was worth it, it just gets a little bit bigger and bigger till its above the locals heads.
if it somehow could just stay at 20$ a day and be totally governed like that that woudl be fine, but im afraid it doesnt, and guaranteed it will be a grand a week soon.

[TreeGuy]

'Slinger, it's not an 'out of pocket' expense for the hunters. Landowners get cut a government cheque at the end of the season for the amount of 'man days' they've allowed their land to be hunted that season. Unless I'm missing something, it's as simple as that.

If the landowners were allowed to dictate what the value of a 'man day' was, then that would be an entirely different story and one I would no support.

Personally, I think this is a great idea so long as they can put mechanisms in place to control abuse/fraud.

Tree

[gunslinger]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

'Slinger, it's not an 'out of pocket' expense for the hunters. Landowners get cut a government cheque at the end of the season for the amount of 'man days' they've allowed their land to be hunted that season. Unless I'm missing something, it's as simple as that.

If the landowners were allowed to dictate what the value of a 'man day' was, then that would be an entirely different story and one I would no support.

Personally, I think this is a great idea so long as they can put mechanisms in place to control abuse/fraud.

Tree

Yes i know that but if joe outfitter has 4 guides and each has one hunter for a week at a time, they pay there 140 each a week 560$ a month. Then the resident is cut out again.

Ok lets put it this way for everyone that hasnt hunted on paid land, there is a set amount put in place that the outfitter pays the landowner based on how many hunters he is bringing up, and then that amount is divided by the number of hunters and we pay it if we wanna hunt on this certain land.

Remember this was totally illegal before to accept money but now that there getting payed for there land u will see it locked up by outfitters soon down south. its just the way it works, and it has alot of people peeved in wyoming where i was and its gonna come here i can see it already.
Where i was the one outfitter payed 30000$ and the other guy that i hunted with payed 60000$, huge outfits with huge land, huge ranches with tons of game on em.

The ranchers love it, and the local hunters hate it cause they arnt allowed on there anymore , and are forced to hunt the crown land.

Its so very hard to have mechanisms in place for the abuse because when it happens there is alot of cash tradeing hands, the outfitter dont care it aint him paying, the rancher loves it, hes getting payed, the hunter likes it cause he gets to hunt good ranches.

I am just as much at fault because i hunt on payed hunting grounds in the usa ,because of the chance at a great hunt and animal, but yet i dont want it in our province, because i have seen and talked to the outfitters about it and they will even tell you its bad for the local hunters.

This whole post is nothing new to anyone i just thought i would enlighten anyone that doesnt fully understand what is hopefully not to come.

[rae61]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

'Slinger, it's not an 'out of pocket' expense for the hunters. Landowners get cut a government cheque at the end of the season for the amount of 'man days' they've allowed their land to be hunted that season. Unless I'm missing something, it's as simple as that.

If the landowners were allowed to dictate what the value of a 'man day' was, then that would be an entirely different story and one I would no support.

Personally, I think this is a great idea so long as they can put mechanisms in place to control abuse/fraud.

Tree

Tree, yes it’s not technically an out of pocket expense but tax dollars come from all of us, so we are paying for it. I can’t see the general public accepting these moneys being paid out of general revenue. So will it come at the cost of increased licenses or will other areas in the fish and wildlife budget lose out? Either way it’s not a free ride!

I agree as hunters we all should in or own way do something to thank the landowners that grant us access and allow us to pursue or passion. I like others on here have made life long friends through these interactions and that can’t be bought through $20 a day access fees!

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Waxy, no one is going to lose control of how they let their land be acessed at all. Just file your paperwork at the end of the season and get a cheque for $20/day/hunter. Seems simple enough.

This will do nothing to open up the big ranches for resident hunters, but that is not its intention.

TreeGuy,

I respectfully disagree. Increasing access to private land is one of the cornerstones this program has supposedly been based on since day one. In fact, it's being sold to the sportsmen of AB almost purely on the basis of increasing access.

How exactly do you envision there being an increase in access as a result of RAMP?

Do you feel the $20/day/hunter is going to be enough to convince those who do not currently allow access to begin allowing access?

If a landowner enrolls in the program, what are the requirements of him in terms of allowing access? If nothing changes regarding access, then this is nothing more than gov't subsidy for ranchers.

There are so many other issues that come into play when money gets involved that it's mind boggling - tax implications, liability implications, who and how is the potentially HUGE gov't bill for this program going to be paid, etc...

Again, it's all in the details, details the AFGA and sportsmen of AB have had very little input into as far as I know, and have been kept in the dark on.

The way I look at it is like this.....

I have a couple of permissions where for years, the landowners bent over backwards to accomidate us. Technically, it's illegal for us to thank them with anything. Yet year after year, they let people on.

I view this as a reward for all of the great landowners out there. I put in 20 days on one property this year. It could have been worth $400 bucks to them. What's so bad about that? Seeing a few extra bucks in their pockets for doing what they would have done anyway is no biggie in my books. I'd love to see them rewarded for being great stewards of the land and awesome human beings.

You know what, I tend to agree with you somewhat in principle.

However, I disagree on the method by which the compensation should be calculated and paid. IMHO, any tie to access equates to paid hunting and is fraught with the potential (IMHO the certainty) for abuse. Tie it directly to habitat, which really is the ultimate in stewardship, and you have a program worth supporting, and not just by hunters and fisherman, but by all Albertans.

Paid access is a slippery slope, and it's not just outfitters (who seem to be taking a real beating here) that are going to be to blame.

Yes, there is tremendous potential for abuse/fraud, but isn't that why 'trials' are run in the first place? To iron the bugs out?

I'm not sure the bugs can ever be ironed out. Look at the abuse of the system that goes on now, and it's currently completely illegal.

Waxy

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by lynx

I can't get over how this forum beats everything to death. The more you read its the same old... same old.

Fighting back and forth isn't going to change things. I think people just like to blow off steam. Get with it... it was coming ,,, it is here,,,and its not going to change.

I am sure the ones implementing this get a big kick out of how you all get side tracked and fight among yourselves and they just continue on what they are doing. As you fight and bitch they are planning the next step and winning.

I can guarantee you this lynx, they like the ones standing quietly on the sidelines doing nothing a whole lot more.

Hopefully you don't fall into that category...

Waxy

[bowchaser]

the places most of us hunt would never qualify for this program based on the minimum land requirement. So you have to ask yourself, why would a landowner with millions worth of land want a bunch of yahoos all over his huge tract and lose control for $20 a head. I guarantee it is about eventually getting the tags they can sell to the highest bidder, that's where this is going. Once the foot is in the door...and guess where Ted Morton personally hunts? Could it be in 108? Write him and ask him, I will again.

[TreeGuy]

Hey Waxy. No worries. I'm just trying to get my head wrapped around this thing.

Here is how it could benefit me personally.....

My primary permission is 15 minutes from my front door in NW Calgary. It is only a quarter section, but is very productive. It is an occupied home quarter. The landowners let 5 different people on. Using the $20/d/h model, and assuming that we all hunt an average of 20 days/season, the landowners will be cut a cheque for $2000.

However, on 3 sides, the property is bordered by 3 beautiful quarters that do not allow hunting. They are unoccupied, and the owner is elderly and has no real desire to make the effort.

Yet, with the chance that they could pocket a few bucks from something like this, I know for very nearly a fact that they would let us on.

I believe that this program is ment to reward the smaller landowners, and potentially encourage the fence-sitters to maybe participate as well. The larger ranches are going to do what they do regardless.

No one is going to get rich here. At the end of the day, Calgary transit probably spends more for a month of fuel then the province will expend on this program. It is a drop in the bucket IMHO.

I could be wrong, but I'll continue to look on the bright side of things I guess. As for this being the 'thin edge of the wedge', well, I personally feel that there are some bigger and more important wedges happening in Alberta right now that pose a far, far greater risk to our pastime than landowners getting a pittance for letting guys on their land.

Tree

[Payne 17]

My concern is if some land owners abuse this and let more people in than they should ,so they can maximize the money they will get, it could affect the populations of animals in certain areas.If you say you let in 10 pepole a year and now were going to get paid wouldnt you let in more.This will determine if landowners really care about the habbitat or just lineing there pockets.I have no concern if the landowners are responsible.I have seen good deer country depleted in less than 4 years due to bad guideing operations where the landowner lets to many tropy deer be taken year after year.

[richardslc]

What burns me about everything (besides this leading to paid hunting) is that even with this being a pilot project, why is it so hard to find out any information on how they plan on working and policing this? All the questions being asked on this thread are details that should be in place and readily available for viewing and questioning by everyone impacted by the decision. Prior to it even being mentioned as an in place pilot project. This tells me that it's something sneaky the government wants to put through and there's more to it then meets the eye. It's reasons like that, that leaves people with so little faith in the people who are running things. But governments aren't sneaky at all right? Regardless of what this is or isn't for, everything in this world is run by, controlled by, or boils down to money. Who has the most to hand over to get what you want.

[Bulletproof]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Hey Waxy. No worries. I'm just trying to get my head wrapped around this thing.

Here is how it could benefit me personally.....

My primary permission is 15 minutes from my front door in NW Calgary. It is only a quarter section, but is very productive. It is an occupied home quarter. The landowners let 5 different people on. Using the $20/d/h model, and assuming that we all hunt an average of 20 days/season, the landowners will be cut a cheque for $2000.

However, on 3 sides, the property is bordered by 3 beautiful quarters that do not allow hunting. They are unoccupied, and the owner is elderly and has no real desire to make the effort.

Yet, with the chance that they could pocket a few bucks from something like this, I know for very nearly a fact that they would let us on.

I believe that this program is ment to reward the smaller landowners, and potentially encourage the fence-sitters to maybe participate as well. The larger ranches are going to do what they do regardless.

No one is going to get rich here. At the end of the day, Calgary transit probably spends more for a month of fuel then the province will expend on this program. It is a drop in the bucket IMHO.

I could be wrong, but I'll continue to look on the bright side of things I guess. As for this being the 'thin edge of the wedge', well, I personally feel that there are some bigger and more important wedges happening in Alberta right now that pose a far, far greater risk to our pastime than landowners getting a pittance for letting guys on their land.

Tree

Tree,

I think that something like that could work in an area around Calgary or other areas with alot of small parcels of land. But...

We are not talking about the area around Calgary. The pilot project seems to be trying to target these big ranches (or at least initially it was when couples with OSA). In the wide open country of the pilot zone getting small land owners who have only a few quarters doesn't really help much in the big picture of things, at least not for big game. Where I hunt in the praries I've seen Deer move up and down creeks and rivers a couple miles per day.

Brett

[LongDraw]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Hey Waxy. No worries. I'm just trying to get my head wrapped around this thing.

Here is how it could benefit me personally.....

My primary permission is 15 minutes from my front door in NW Calgary. It is only a quarter section, but is very productive. It is an occupied home quarter. The landowners let 5 different people on. Using the $20/d/h model, and assuming that we all hunt an average of 20 days/season, the landowners will be cut a cheque for $2000.

However, on 3 sides, the property is bordered by 3 beautiful quarters that do not allow hunting. They are unoccupied, and the owner is elderly and has no real desire to make the effort.

Yet, with the chance that they could pocket a few bucks from something like this, I know for very nearly a fact that they would let us on.

I believe that this program is ment to reward the smaller landowners, and potentially encourage the fence-sitters to maybe participate as well. The larger ranches are going to do what they do regardless.

No one is going to get rich here. At the end of the day, Calgary transit probably spends more for a month of fuel then the province will expend on this program. It is a drop in the bucket IMHO.

I could be wrong, but I'll continue to look on the bright side of things I guess. As for this being the 'thin edge of the wedge', well, I personally feel that there are some bigger and more important wedges happening in Alberta right now that pose a far, far greater risk to our pastime than landowners getting a pittance for letting guys on their land.

Tree

Lets take this a step further.

Now the landowners get 4 Mule deer buck permits (one for each quarter) that they can do with as they want. An outfitter approaches and says I will work out a deal for all those permits, just keep the RAMP hunters to the minimum and to the area that I specify. I will give you $2500 for each permit.

How do you think you will fare now as a resident hunter on that property?

[Waxy]

Originally Posted by TreeGuy

Hey Waxy. No worries. I'm just trying to get my head wrapped around this thing.

Here is how it could benefit me personally.....

My primary permission is 15 minutes from my front door in NW Calgary. It is only a quarter section, but is very productive. It is an occupied home quarter. The landowners let 5 different people on. Using the $20/d/h model, and assuming that we all hunt an average of 20 days/season, the landowners will be cut a cheque for $2000.

However, on 3 sides, the property is bordered by 3 beautiful quarters that do not allow hunting. They are unoccupied, and the owner is elderly and has no real desire to make the effort.

Yet, with the chance that they could pocket a few bucks from something like this, I know for very nearly a fact that they would let us on.

I believe that this program is ment to reward the smaller landowners, and potentially encourage the fence-sitters to maybe participate as well. The larger ranches are going to do what they do regardless.

No one is going to get rich here. At the end of the day, Calgary transit probably spends more for a month of fuel then the province will expend on this program. It is a drop in the bucket IMHO.

I could be wrong, but I'll continue to look on the bright side of things I guess. As for this being the 'thin edge of the wedge', well, I personally feel that there are some bigger and more important wedges happening in Alberta right now that pose a far, far greater risk to our pastime than landowners getting a pittance for letting guys on their land.

Tree

Here's my admittedly cynical take on your situation -

"The owner is elderly and has no real desire to make the effort."

Why then would this person go to the trouble of signing up for a program like this? Not only would they have to go through all the paperwork and red tape, they'd have to allow access to their land and somehow oversee what's going on - something they currently can't be bothered with.

IMHO, there is no way that $2000/yr is enough incentive for anything to change in your situation. You're talking about a person that owns 3/4 of land 15 mins from NW Calgary!

The same goes for the landowner that gives you permission. Do you think $2000/yr is big deal to him? If he works in downtown Calgary, he likely clears more than that every two weeks. On top of that, do you think his reason for allowing you access is in any way currently tied to a desire to profit from it?

I also disagree on dismissing the potential costs as a drop in the bucket. IF it's expanded province wide (and I don't see how they can avoid that, what's good for the goose is good for the gander), the price tag will reach the millions. Where will that come from given the current chronic lack of funding for F&W in AB? The agriculture sector? How will the average tax payer, who sees no benefit, respond to that increase?

Waxy

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by bubbasno1

I am not minimizing his accomplishments. I am just realistic about them. I keep hearing people say "he has done more for Alberta hunters than anyone else" well I just don't see it. You prove to me one thing he has done that sets him above all other previous Ministers and I would be happy to give him credit. So far you have given me none.

The Hunting/Fishing/Trapping Heritage Act was a program he approved but that is the extent of his involvement.

I have no clue how much the sheep tag brought in. What were the bids at before he showed up? What were they after? Hopefully it was a big enough increase to justify his trip.

I can see the value in all of this but not enough value to justify the "best SRD Minister ever" and until he gives up on paid hunting in my books he is the worst.

Bubba

Ok Bubba.. WHo was better and what did they do?


You are so blinded by this percived injustice, that hasnt happened yet, that you know nothing about, that you say you will support under your conditions (that look like they will be met) that you can no longer see the good this guy has done for us a group.
You seem like a relativly inteligent man.. Open your mind a bit more.

Jamie

[Jamie]

Bubba, here is a little note about the year Ted did the sheep tag

"The sheep permit sold on Friday, January 19th and after an outstanding presentation by SRD Minister Ted Morton, supported by a 3 minute video
of some of the most impressive bighorn sheep in Alberta (live footage filmed this past fall), the permit sold for $155,000.00 USD. By comparison,
this is nearly double from 2006. Interestingly enough, the permit sold to an Alberta resident. Our Sheep tag netted the highest Bighorn sheep
revenue in the entire auction.
The elk permit sold on Saturday, January 20th and was again complemented by a presentation from Minister Morton and a Power point presentation.
The permit sold for $18,000.00 USD to a hunter from Minnesota. Again by comparison, this is more than double from last year.
There were a number of delegates from Alberta in attendance at FNAWS and with the outstanding cooperation and assistance from various organizations,
we are proud to say that we put forward an impressive marketing campaign. The attendance of Minister Ted Morton and staff from Alberta
SRD clearly demonstrated the value that this department has placed on these special permits. Our thanks and appreciation goes out to everyone
that assisted with this project. It was a proud demonstration of our willingness to work together!

I hope that answer your question about the $2,000 or so it cost to get him down there.

Jamie

[Cowboy Al]

I'm tired of fighting this monster. But I'm by no means giving up!
The more I think about this the more questions I have. The one thing that I keep coming back to is why would a rancher with thousands of acres of huntable land (lands that's worth big $$$) open his doors to hunters for the mere sum of a max of $10,000?? What I think will happen is the ranchers involved will still not be satisfied with the structure that SRD eventually lays out for payment. In their minds the compensation will will not be enough they will cry foul and want to shut out hunters again......unless they eventually get what they want which is tags! Tags that they control who gets em and for how much $ that is their ultimate goal to control the harvest of public wildlife.

I'm also curious to know if the ranchers involved will allow F&G members access? As many of them stated that when OS was voted down at the 08 conference no F&G members would be allowed to hunt on their property.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by LongDraw

Lets take this a step further.

Now the landowners get 4 Mule deer buck permits (one for each quarter) that they can do with as they want. An outfitter approaches and says I will work out a deal for all those permits, just keep the RAMP hunters to the minimum and to the area that I specify. I will give you $2500 for each permit.

How do you think you will fare now as a resident hunter on that property?

LD.. Very irresponsible of you to make up these types of scenarios. Tags for sale are not on the table.. Dont be fear monger.

Jamie

[rhino]

I don't know if anyone has looked recently at a map of the M.D. of P. Creek but if you ask me if you want access to hunt there become a card packing member of the Natures Conservency and the world is your oyster.
I am a land owner and hunter and do not ever want to recieve money for something that should be everyones right to do. My father and many like him were members of the Fish and Game Society 50 years ago and I remember them saying then that paid hunting would ruin the rights of those who couldn't afford it.

[Albertadiver]

Originally Posted by duffy4

Often when I see a "hot topic" that is gaining a lot of posts I'll click on the number of posts and it gives a break down of who is posting and how many times.

This is a really hot topic of concern to many. Well not really so "many".

Of the 99 posts there are three members who have posted 11 times each that is 33 of the 99.

The first 7 posters are responcible for 55 of the 99 posts.

So again there is a very vocal minority who are making it appear as if this is a really hot topic.

I know that they are all really motivated to save us all from the end of the world as we know it. (weather we want to be saved or not)

Hey Duffy,

I've been reading this thread pretty actively. Haven't posted because I don't think I know enough about either side of the issue to really add anything productive.

I will say though, it is refreshing to see people agree to disagree and engage in a debate where they haven't reduced themselves to insults and name calling.

I see a pretty educated discussion here, and personally I don't know If I like the idea or not.

Lots to be lost potentially, and maybe some gain. But as a relatively 'new' hunter, I don't know what the 'good ole days' were like, and all I know is I hunt primarily in 308. Some crown and some private land. We cold called on the farms we hunted on, and were turned down on 2 of the 6 places we asked permission for. In each case, we left on a positive note whether we had permission or not. Where we had permission, we were invited back next year. The guys I hunt with have been going for several years and have never had a bad experiance with outfitters etc. Maybe we're just not seeing the big picture, but that's my experiance.

[elkhunter11]

LD.. Very irresponsible of you to make up these types of scenarios. Tags for sale are not on the table.. Dont be fear monger

These scenarios are very common in the U.S.A. where paid hunting is allowed.

[blackpheasant]

Originally Posted by Albertadiver

Hey Duffy,

I've been reading this thread pretty actively. Haven't posted because I don't think I know enough about either side of the issue to really add anything productive.

I will say though, it is refreshing to see people agree to disagree and engage in a debate where they haven't reduced themselves to insults and name calling.

I see a pretty educated discussion here, and personally I don't know If I like the idea or not.

Lots to be lost potentially, and maybe some gain. But as a relatively 'new' hunter, I don't know what the 'good ole days' were like, and all I know is I hunt primarily in 308. Some crown and some private land. We cold called on the farms we hunted on, and were turned down on 2 of the 6 places we asked permission for. In each case, we left on a positive note whether we had permission or not. Where we had permission, we were invited back next year. The guys I hunt with have been going for several years and have never had a bad experiance with outfitters etc. Maybe we're just not seeing the big picture, but that's my experiance.

X2, trying to understand what the government's motive's are with some of these policie's, is the Minister being genuine with hunter's and trying to make thing's work better for resident's or is he going down some other path where we are going to be forced aside, man I hope not, we should all try to stay informed, I think there is a bunch of us here waiting for more detail's before we act, in the mean time I will here the Minister out...