GRL Access with Cattle Present

[Bushrat]

All fine and dandy, I applaud your intentionsbut it doesn't help the leaseholder any more than the the farmer or rancher that outright owns their property who experience the same bad apples. Bad apples don't care if it is crown land, leased land or owned and deeded land, they will still do what they want. Nothng changes for them.

All these hoops to jump through to access land only hamstrings and punishes the ethical hunter. It does nothing to stop the bad apples, in fact it only moves the ethical hunters out of the way of those who are a problem. You will still have to deal with them and their 'egregious acts' regardless of whatever access processes and plans that are set up.

Only thing going to stop them is jail time and that will only stop them for the time they are actually in jail... of course jail is not going to happen. In effect we will be hashing and rehashing this foreaver and nothings going to change. Eventually the only people who will be able to hunt leased or owned deeded land are trespassers.

[Outcasts]

I would kindly disagree, only because the specific app for leaseholder and law enforcement, with direct and heavy input from both, and including the proposed changes to legislation we provided and lobbied for would do exactly that. As far as hoops, the draw system already has you jumping through hoops and although we would add a layer I believe the ability to guarantee access and hunt quality, as best as possible, is in all our interests. Personally I love the planning and work involved to plan my hunts…I just hate when they are upended with no ability for remunerations.

It is true that it’s directed toward public lands specifically but we could always offer the same app that allows landowners and law enforcement to identify and charge these bad actors without the same legal requirements that the landowners or lease disposition holders are currently held to that create their justifications for the “1 cow policy”. They are happy to share access in my experiences but not happy to bear the brunt of the damages and responsibility to charge criminals that takes away from their already burdened operations and schedules.

Again if given the opportunity I would argue that this is the best solution and the AGLA directors and Chairmen supported it and the benefits it provided although they’re hands are tied by that same legislation and lack of ability to police the problems in any timely manner. This results in self policing and high risk of injury or even death, Kyle Forbes had one of the scariest stories I had heard and he should be able to go home to his wife and 3 kids without worrying about those 3 months where people he doesn’t know are running around with firearms on his properties.

We can all rest on our laurels but I promise you smarter people than you or me, including COs, leaseholder groups and Hunter have tried to poke holes in the product and it does everything that can be achieved through technology and within the limits of reality.

I cannot stop bad actors from accessing and driving through your fences but I can help identify them and press charges without physical altercations, tying up valuable policing resources and offering equal access and better quality/safer hunting opportunities to all recreational users with the ability to help leaseholders cover costs associated with the negative effects of these same bad actors.

I hope I get the opportunity to show this and for you to poke further holes in the product and proposed system. Even if it’s 90% there I have done the work to lobby and had the ear of the government, this is no small feat imho and again they may make arbitrary decisions that effect you and all our families soon…

[Outcasts]

To be clearer about the “hoops” which you may be relating to current access and the work required, this would be highly streamlined and save everyone the time and funds to drive out or call/harass leaseholders while offering both the leaseholder/landowner and the hunters the ability to remove bad actors and confirm good actors are adhering to guidelines and management strategies without invasive and constant personal outreach that affects both operations on ranches/properties and our valuable time with families whether that be for hunting or otherwise. Hope this helps clear that up and again I will be sharing our 3000 ft view proposal that was submitted after request by the government and would be more than happy to present our plan and answer all questions. I will start another thread once the new name is approved by the moderators. All the best and thank you again for your response and further interest!

[thumper]

Looking forward to it! Thanks

[walking buffalo]

You have my attention, but just to let you know....
Despite all the writing you have done, I have no clue as to what you are actually proposing.

KISS.

[burbotman]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

You have my attention, but just to let you know....
Despite all the writing you have done, I have no clue as to what you are actually proposing.

KISS.

Thank you, I thought it was just me.

[Outcasts]

I understand your frustrations on the lack of specific info haha and even appreciate the sarcasm 😘 but this is a serious issue and I take it very seriously obviously haha even if others don’t or possibly question my motives. I will let the other contributors, my land owners and AGLA directors etc speak on my behalf as we are all bias in our own ways and always happy to provide references.

I had a few CLASS folks sneak into my presentations to the AGLA and although I’m not averse to sharing my ideas now, it’s still always better to do these things in person and no NDAs this time.

Again I’m happy to book the Community Association in McKenzie Lake SE that I volunteer at and go over the details with some of my contributors in tow, but tbh it’s a lot to go over and this is not the place to hash out these ideas or to quickly identify the holes that you all will hopefully identify and help fill. I have no monetary interest anymore, I just want solutions. I would love all your opinions and the opportunity to earn your support but this isn’t for me, it’s for us and our kids. We can all see where it’s heading and we all know the past. I hope some of you will consider it. There is nothing to lose.

If the moderators don’t get back to me I will post the RFI submission tomorrow for review but again it’s a 3000 ft view that protects some of my IP, with that said I am happy to share all of the wireframes and plans for integrating with Aspiras app and beautifully built draw system and has two separate apps for Recreational users and Landowners/Law enforcement to improve their timelines and hire additional Cos to reduce the gotaways and perception that hunting and land is neither protected or sacred.

Appreciate you all, even the naysayers or detractors, I am blessed to have had a dad who taught me to hunt and landowners that allow me to experience areas that I can only hope will still be accessible and protected when my kids come of age in the coming years.

All the best gents. I have a date booked for Oct 28th by chance just to start the ball rolling but as the Acting Director of Infrastructure I get few perks lol, otherwise it’s all work and no pay 😅.

[Outcasts]

I should apologize again for the way I write, which is how I talk as well unfortunately for my wife, and I am sorry to hijack this conversation and possibly the Bear attack due to my close relation to the matter. But after my reach out to Mike resulted in him saying changes were coming to both access and legislation (last time was paid access to campsites), I felt my cards were being forced and I would argue all our cards are being forced. Let’s try to exert some form of influence and put our best foot forward as hunters and lease/landowners so we don’t have to live with the choices of people who do not walk in our shoes.

[Lunkerhunter]

I appreciate the time you put into this Dustin. If I interpret this correctly will your app provide a draw or lottery for access to competitive grazing leases that have too much hunter desire to access land which requires limiting? It sounds like the app will also streamline and take some of the responsibilities off of the leaseholder in collecting personal information of hunters accessing their property?

I agree too many hunters on a parcel is dangerous and detracts from the hunter experience. Some leaseholders I have contacted made it evident that they get a ton of calls, they have a system in place to schedule a certain number of hunters per calendar date and you need to book it in advance. As you say this is a huge drain on their personal resources.

I like the idea of a draw system as I feel it would add a layer of transparency. I’ve been turned away by a leaseholder to hunt on a few occasions and I am always left wondering who is granted permission? Is it the same people year after year? Are they family? Is there “gifts” involved? It just as likely could just be the first ten callers are granted and I wasn’t one of them but with no transparency there are always lingering thoughts.

I understand the work the leaseholders put into the properties but it also should not dictate lifetime access only for their friends and families to these large and productive parcels of land during the rut which is what it sometimes feels like with certain leaseholders. Obviously this is only applicable to the bad actor leaseholders, hiding behind the vague legal definitions outlined in the acts to prevent access any way possible to others outside their social circle. There are just as many or more honest and kind leaseholders who help make access possible for people looking to hunt and I love the idea of this app making it easier for these leaseholders to automate some of their processes or documentation and record collection for who is accessing the leased properties and free up some of their time for their other passions and responsibilities.

I’m excited to read more about this app and hope you can present some of our viewpoints expressed here in your meetings to demonstrate support from some like minded hunters.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Outcasts]

Beautifully written. Your speaking my language exactly and explaining that part of the program possibly better than I have. I couldn’t agree more on the family or friends being prioritized (I have been this person, it is unfair and failed to sit well with me in later years after seeing others turned away) or simply choosing the devils/angels you know to avoid the pitfalls of bringing in new comers and the education of the property and risks they can pose (errant shots, lost hunters/non hunting areas accessed, hunter conflicts, gates left open etc etc).

I’m glad your interest is peeked along with a few others who have personally DM me and I will look at getting my document loaded today.

Yes on the lottery and in line with the current draw system and priority system taking into consideration the pressure and interest in certain properties (the best and closest elk properties to metro areas may be harder or take longer to access than one north of peace country). I think we should not only know what animal in what wmu and species we are hunting for but we should have the ability to further target and secure properties after learning that information, with equal opportunity and some foresight, especially in cases where the priority is high and we are heading into worse times in that regard thanks to recent changes to issued tags. No guarantees of course but if you are able to know both your priority points align with a species/wmu draw AND land draw summaries you can plan those big hunts and sleep well at night not worrying about access and unknown hunter pressure. (Again can’t stop idiots from showing up illegally but guaranteed you will report him and the process of deterring him, and others, in the future starts).

The app for the landholder and law enforcement is definitely the ticket and helps give them the ability to know who should be where and when, ahead of time or on the day, and allows for a quick check on properties that should free up CO time and efficiencies as they have already identified your permission and possibly your legal Ability to hunt (can you access the system without proper licensing?).

Reporting is amazingly streamlined and goes out to all the stakeholders (Landowner-Law Enforcement) and we lobbied hard for the removal of the onus being on a landowner or hunter to charge the criminal and rather put the onus to be applied to the trespasser to prove in court they had the right to be there. Fines may need to be lowered but even at half of the cost today (275 vs 150 as proposed) the monetary penalty acts as a deterrent and the identification and removal of the individual from the system (varies depending on severity) will help but again you can’t stop stupid, you just prepare for and deter it haha. Once the location and approved hunters are set, there is no reason for the other individual to be there and if you have an instance where you can’t safely hunt your drawn or booked lease/land there would be contingent land set aside which isn’t ideal but at least you didn’t drive 3.5hrs for nothing (been there too many times myself).

Other benefits include the ability to access other areas/ leases for retrievals or to contact other hunters through the landowner or CO (who have this information) without phoning/physical contact to avoid spoiling hunts or creating safety issues. We’ve been in way too many situations where we’re on one side of the buck brush and another group is on the other and neither knows it. Can’t solve them all but we can mitigate as much as possible and create better relationships in the field and with our gracious hosts.

Looking forward to it as well and I hope to garner further interest from the rest of the group. Always looking for more contributors and experiences that we may have overlooked to supplement what I believe is a steel-clad product working to be ironclad.