Consort Area Guides/Outfitters?

[JRsMav]

Originally Posted by Wild side targets

Just found out it is them. Sure funny how word travels sounds like there is more then a small bunch of people fed up with ther crap!! that they have been getting away with. Well if all true in the court maybe just maybe he or they will get a kick in the shorts not just a hand slap MAKE THEM PAY. MAKE IT HURT!!

Who was it?

[jafo]

The one in court in Hanna was Cody Cassidy, yes he belongs to APOS. He got reported for trespassing and shooting out the truck window before legal light this morning and who knows where this will go? Americana has some tags in the Coronation area, not sure if they go as far east as Consort but have run into these guys in the fall hunting birds east of Galahad and they figure they own every piece of land around. Ongaro outdoors figures he owns everything in the Forestburg/Galahad area as well. Tough to get a shoot anymore when you have to work 5 days a week and these guys have fields all tied up.

[Whitetail2013]

Originally Posted by jafo

The one in court in Hanna was Cody Cassidy, yes he belongs to APOS. He got reported for trespassing and shooting out the truck window before legal light this morning and who knows where this will go? Americana has some tags in the Coronation area, not sure if they go as far east as Consort but have run into these guys in the fall hunting birds east of Galahad and they figure they own every piece of land around. Ongaro outdoors figures he owns everything in the Forestburg/Galahad area as well. Tough to get a shoot anymore when you have to work 5 days a week and these guys have fields all tied up.

How do you know it was him this morning?Lisence plate number? Did you confront him? Or is this just the beginning of bash the outfitter thread?

[jafo]

My neighbor reported him as he was waiting for legal light to go after the deer himself.

[Whitetail2013]

Did he get the deer?

[hal53]

Originally Posted by Whitetail2013

Did he get the deer?

does that make a difference?

[jafo]

Yes he did get the deer. I am not bashing outfitters, I am telling the truth. I am sure there are good outfitters in the business but in my opinion he is not one of them. He gets his clients some big deer and moose but how many are legally taken? Confront a few of the local land owners in the area about his antics and you will find out how good a guy Cody is. This is all I have to say about this Whitetail2013.

[MDowdall]

I know a guy lives in sedalia and farms from there and cereal and he says its constant repairing fences and gates because people just rip across his land chasing deer. My brother in law and his wife used to live on one of the farms and said always some truck or another out in the field so out they go tell them to vamous no hunting without premission from the owner and we have a list of whos allowed . blah blah blah this is so and so's place . nope thats five miles over there. this seems to be so normal its just disturbing.

[Baskey1414]

I wonder if bowhunter magazine tv will be booking hunts with him anymore lol read a article about a hunt with him talked him up like the best hunter in alberta..

[Redfrog]

Trespassing fines,need to be raised a lot. It needs to be made too expensive to trespass. A $200 fine for an outfitter who just got a gagger for his client is chump change. Just the cost of doing business.

But it's not just the outfitters. Locals who drive around every little slough on land with no permission should get hammered with a fine.

[elkhunter11]

Trespassing fines,need to be raised a lot. It needs to be made too expensive to trespass. A $200 fine for an outfitter who just got a gagger for his client is chump change. Just the cost of doing business.

With the changes that came into effect in 2011, the animal can be seized, and the hunter can face charges under the Wildlife Act.

[elkhunter11]

If it falls under occupied land, if not it still just a trespassing fine. Though the occupied land covers a lot of land.

I haven't found it in the Wildlife Act, yet, but I have the 2011 Hunting guide where it states "on lands where no access permission has been granted". It doesn't specify occupied land.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by bignixs

The Wildlife Act and the Petty trespass Act are separate acts. Hunting on occupied land without permission is a violation of the Wildlife Act, rather than just a violation of the Petty Trespass act

i.e. the wildlife act says a hunter can not hunt any wildlife or discharge any firearm on or over occupied land or enter on to such land for the purpose of doing so without the consent of the owner or occupant of the land.
NOTE: There is an additional requirement affecting access for guided hunts

The way I understand it is If the land is not "occupied land", but it is fenced, posted, or under cultivation, and you don't have permission, you could be charged with Petty Trespass, whether you are carrying a weapon or not. If the land is "occupied land" or if you discharge weapons too close to occupied buildings without permission, as specified in the Wildlife Act, you would be charged under the Wildlife Act. If your not hunting and you enter `occupied land` you could still be charged with petty trespass.

I am well aware that they are separate acts, but in the 2011 Hunting Guide, under the Important Changes, it states that "an amendment has improved the court's ability to deal with situations where wildlife was taken on lands,where no access permission had been granted, or in a location,where the person was prohibited from discharging a weapon." Speaking with a F&W officer, that year, he told me that it only applies if an animal was actually harvested, but the animal could now be seized, and a suspension of hunting priviledges could result against the perpetrator, rather than just a fine for trespassing.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by bezner

You must be talking about the great Cassidy's.... I was running a ranch just north of halkirk and had no uh ting signs every hundred feet of so...their was a bunch of nice mule deer that never left the property as we had a 4 section block...next thing you know a red Chevy comes peeling out of the lease road with a hunter and a freshly killed deer in the back...I reported it but nothing happened, few months later on his website is this deer that was always on the ranch property...people around their are starting to get fed up and are shutting land down because of their crap

Once all the land is shut down, you will just find more of the same. From outfitters and residents. That's one of the issues of shutting down land, the more owners post, the more some people will try the back roads and such.

Jamie

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by bignixs

All this is right for occupied land, if its not occupied land then its no applicable and the only recourse is petty trespass.

So yes in 2011 they made important changes to deal with situation were animals are taken on occupied land with out permission.

direct from regs:

Hunting on occupied land
38(1) In this section, “occupied land” means
(a) privately owned land under cultivation or enclosed by a
fence of any kind and not exceeding one section in area on
which the owner or occupant actually resides, and
(b) any other privately owned land that is within one mile of
the section referred to in clause (a) and that is owned or
leased by the same owner or occupant.
(2) No person shall hunt any wildlife or discharge any firearm on
or over occupied land or enter on occupied land for the purpose of
doing so, without the consent of the owner or occupant of it.

As I said it covers a lot of land but does not cover all of it. If it does not fit within the occupied land definition it falls under petty trespass.

I read the section from the Wildlife Act that you posted, but it mentions nothing about having to have actually killed an animal on occupied land. As well, the wording in that section of the Wildlife Act is no different than it was previous to 2011, in fact, the wording that is quoted from the Wildlife Act in the 2001 Hunting Guide is the same. The 2011 Hunting Guide mentions an amendment, but as of yet I have not been able to find an actual amendment in the Wildlife Act.

[elkhunter11]

I am not sure about the having to have actually killed an animal or not, its a good question, what is the definition of Hunting as it relates to this area of the law.

That is just the wording that was in the 2011 Guide, I don't see why it should matter if an animal was killed, or not, other than unless an animal was killed, there would be no animal to confiscate.

So the question I guess becomes if the amendment in 2011 changed the definition of occupied land.

I see no changes made to the definition of occupied land in 2011. I am just curious, because an amendment is mentioned, yet I can't find this amendment in the actual Wildlife Act.

[slough shark]

Originally Posted by Redfrog

Trespassing fines,need to be raised a lot. It needs to be made too expensive to trespass. A $200 fine for an outfitter who just got a gagger for his client is chump change. Just the cost of doing business.

But it's not just the outfitters. Locals who drive around every little slough on land with no permission should get hammered with a fine.

x2 I get fed up with the number of people that just willfully break the rules, IMHO you get caught you lose your hunting privilages for a couple years and a stiff fine if you are a resident. If you are a guide a stiff fine and your allocations suspended for a couple years on first offense, 2nd offence outright removed.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Once all the land is shut down, you will just find more of the same. From outfitters and residents. That's one of the issues of shutting down land, the more owners post, the more some people will try the back roads and such.

Jamie

Just curious is there anything negative that happens in "your" little hunting world that is not the landowners fault.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Just curious is there anything negative that happens in "your" little hunting world that is not the landowners fault.

How do you connect Jamie's comment to him blaming landowners for trespassers?

I think you are a "little" off in your judgement.

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

How do you connect Jamie's comment to him blaming landowners for trespassers?

I think you are a "little" off in your judgement.

Landowners posting more land will result in "forcing" more hunters to trespass and poach, I am sure you made the connection as well, you have just chosen to ignore it. Just look back through almost any of his posts on landowner/lease issues (check the landowner tag thread), his comments are always the same. My judgement is just fine, and it is mine.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Landowners posting more land will result in "forcing" more hunters to trespass and poach, I am sure you made the connection as well, you have just chosen to ignore it. Just look back through almost any of his posts on landowner/lease issues (check the landowner tag thread), his comments are always the same. My judgement is just fine, and it is mine.

I don't see Jamie using the word "forcing" in the quoted post....


The way I read his post I find it valid without being judgemental to landowners.


In the end, imo what we need to reverse the trend in poaching and trespassing (which will hopefully keep private land open for access) is harsher penalties for offenses and much more enforcement.

Regarding Outfitters, some may see the fines imposed IF they are caught as simply a cost of doing business. Make the chances for getting caught more likely, and make the penalties for Outfitters/guides severe and I think the offenders within this Profession will dwindle.

[Big Daddy Badger]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Just curious is there anything negative that happens in "your" little hunting world that is not the landowners fault.

He isn't blaming landowners and what he said makes sense... as access becomes harder to get more guys will be driven towards trying to sneak on without permission....on ever increasing amounts of land that is denied to hunters.
As more do it and get away with it... others will be tempted to try it themselves.

Just do the math...
If for instance next year every landowner in Alberta denied access... the incidents of trespassing would naturally skyrocket.


Landowners can do what they like but at some point their solution does sort of feed the problem.

That isn't saying that its their fault...its just an observation about human behavior and the nature of the crime of trespass.

It also rienforces the point that the best deterent to trespass is having reliable, dilligent and co-opertive hunters present to observe and report.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Landowners posting more land will result in "forcing" more hunters to trespass and poach, I am sure you made the connection as well, you have just chosen to ignore it. Just look back through almost any of his posts on landowner/lease issues (check the landowner tag thread), his comments are always the same. My judgement is just fine, and it is mine.

Easy now Bob.. My views on ownership vrs RENTERS is completely different.
And I never once used the word "FORCING" you made your own connection.
It's a simple consequence , you never want a trespasser on your property, open it up to everyone. You want trespassers, close it down.

Jamie

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

I don't see Jamie using the word "forcing" in the quoted post....


The way I read his post I find it valid without being judgemental to landowners.
In the end, imo what we need to reverse the trend in poaching and trespassing (which will hopefully keep private land open for access) is harsher penalties for offenses and much more enforcement.

Regarding Outfitters, some may see the fines imposed IF they are caught as simply a cost of doing business. Make the chances for getting caught more likely, and make the penalties for Outfitters/guides severe and I think the offenders within this Profession will dwindle.

Originally Posted by Big Daddy Badger

He isn't blaming landowners and what he said makes sense... as access becomes harder to get more guys will be driven towards trying to sneak on without permission....on ever increasing amounts of land that is denied to hunters.
As more do it and get away with it... others will be tempted to try it themselves.

Just do the math...
If for instance next year every landowner in Alberta denied access... the incidents of trespassing would naturally skyrocket.
Landowners can do what they like but at some point their solution does sort of feed the problem.

That isn't saying that its their fault...its just an observation about human behavior and the nature of the crime of trespass.

It also rienforces the point that the best deterent to trespass is having reliable, dilligent and co-opertive hunters present to observe and report.

Did either of you reference the Landowner Tag thread..........didn't think so. He also stated there that Landowners should be forced to allow other hunters on their land if they wanted a landowner tag, and should also have to post their coordinates so hunters could find their land. There is no interpretation required with a statement like that, and it is attitudes like that, that are the biggest cause of the declining landowner/hunter relationship.

What is probably more disturbing, is the ever increasing support for almost anyone on here that trashes landowners.......like I have said before it has become an epidemic.

[gman1978]

Why do most of the outfitters that operate in the prairie/parkland region seem to be so shady? I know trespassing is an issue but some of the other stuff you hear about is just bad, Using planes to push animals, rifle hunting moose and elk in bow season, night hunting , baiting, shooting animals in the winter and selling the racks, rodeo'n deer with trucks. The list goes on, heck even if 1/8th of the storys are true thats too many. I guess what ever it takes to get a cheque is ok in their books. What I can't understand is how do these guys get clients? Why would you want to pay 4000$ to 6000$ plus to road ninja whitetail or mule deer? Why not book a good outfitter and do it right.

[Cowtown guy]

Here's something to consider too. I have family that once limited the hunting on their land to a few friends and family. They had issues with trying to control who was in and when. They said no more hunting for anyone.

Lo and behold, they starting having gates left open, fences downed and fields chewed up.

After a couple of years they said to hell with it and put up signs saying that anyone can hunt and if anything suspicious is seen or if a fence is down to please call the house. Posted the number up right on the corner posts.

Whadda ya know they have next to no issues with any of the previous headaches. A fence gets a tree blown across it and they get a phone call telling them. A guy was ripping after a deer and someone called and the guy was charged.

Food for thought. Shutting access down for everyone may not be the best idea. It only keeps the honest folks out. McMahon already disregards signs. This will only serve to be his own private petting zoo.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by bobalong

Did either of you reference the Landowner Tag thread..........didn't think so. He also stated there that Landowners should be forced to allow other hunters on their land if they wanted a landowner tag, and should also have to post their coordinates so hunters could find their land. There is no interpretation required with a statement like that, and it is attitudes like that, that are the biggest cause of the declining landowner/hunter relationship.

What is probably more disturbing, is the ever increasing support for almost anyone on here that trashes landowners.......like I have said before it has become an epidemic.

Bob, I don't recall that conversation. Before commenting, I would like to re read it.
Got a link?

Jamie

[ULTRAlite]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

Here's something to consider too. I have family that once limited the hunting on their land to a few friends and family. They had issues with trying to control who was in and when. They said no more hunting for anyone.

Lo and behold, they starting having gates left open, fences downed and fields chewed up.

After a couple of years they said to hell with it and put up signs saying that anyone can hunt and if anything suspicious is seen or if a fence is down to please call the house. Posted the number up right on the corner posts.

Whadda ya know they have next to no issues with any of the previous headaches. A fence gets a tree blown across it and they get a phone call telling them. A guy was ripping after a deer and someone called and the guy was charged.

Food for thought. Shutting access down for everyone may not be the best idea. It only keeps the honest folks out. McMahon already disregards signs. This will only serve to be his own private petting zoo.

Similar story with 2 landowners in our area. Said they were much happier with the results... Neither of them are hunters though.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by Cowtown guy

Here's something to consider too. I have family that once limited the hunting on their land to a few friends and family. They had issues with trying to control who was in and when. They said no more hunting for anyone.

Lo and behold, they starting having gates left open, fences downed and fields chewed up.

After a couple of years they said to hell with it and put up signs saying that anyone can hunt and if anything suspicious is seen or if a fence is down to please call the house. Posted the number up right on the corner posts.

Whadda ya know they have next to no issues with any of the previous headaches. A fence gets a tree blown across it and they get a phone call telling them. A guy was ripping after a deer and someone called and the guy was charged.

Food for thought. Shutting access down for everyone may not be the best idea. It only keeps the honest folks out. McMahon already disregards signs. This will only serve to be his own private petting zoo.

Bingo!!
Sometimes thinking outside of the box will give you surprising results

Jamie

[bobalong]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Bob, I don't recall that conversation. Before commenting, I would like to re read it.
Got a link?

Jamie

You can search your comments as easy as I can,.........wouldn't worry about it , just carry on. I can see from a lot of the other comments, I am pretty much wasting my time anyway.