Not quite true,if Fish&Wildlife comes to my home to check my freezer, as long as I held a valid license, and the number of birds does not exceed my possession limit, I won't be forced to prove that I took each and every bird in a legal manner. How could a person provide actual proof that each bird was killed during an open season, in a legal location, on exactly which day, with a shotgun that was plugged, and who actually fired the shot that killed the bird? It's a lot more complicated when an outfitter has over a hundred clients over the course of a season, each client hunts for several days, and kills 50-100 birds or more, and some clients do not take all of their birds home with them. If the record keeping isn't done properly, the outfitter may have a tough time explaining every bird found in his freezers.
Outfitters fined $20,000 for over possession in Saskatchewan
- Thread starter chadmichener
- Start date
Not quite true,if Fish&Wildlife comes to my home to check my freezer, as long as I held a valid license, and the number of birds does not exceed my possession limit, I won't be forced to prove that I took each and every bird in a legal manner. How could a person provide actual proof that each bird was killed during an open season, in a legal location, on exactly which day, with a shotgun that was plugged, and who actually fired the shot that killed the bird? It's a lot more complicated when an outfitter has over a hundred clients over the course of a season, each client hunts for several days, and kills 50-100 birds or more, and some clients do not take all of their birds home with them. If the record keeping isn't done properly, the outfitter may have a tough time explaining every bird found in his freezers.
$20K is a large fine for a simple book keeping error/omission. It would then seem logical there were much more serious allegations/charges on the table/pending and that SWO plead guilty to the lesser charges to make the rest go away. It was only a couple years ago when Jeff Foiles faced a couple hundred charges related to waterfowl poaching etc when he pleaded out to a small handful of charges to make the rest go away.
A quick Google search shows that GOABC contributed 56,000 to the libs between 2005 and 2013. So break that down to approx. 250 outfitters in the province it works out to 25 bucks a year. Hardly proof that they are awash in cash.
Seems a bit light. If they seized my truck and other hunting stuff it would value more than 20k. But there are many other hunting/outfitter related atrocities that happen here in sask. that are deemed perfectly legal.
Problem with waterfowl is many more are shot than consumed by the hunters. I wonder how many just get fed to the dogs at these operations.
Problem with waterfowl is many more are shot than consumed by the hunters. I wonder how many just get fed to the dogs at these operations.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Probably none. Feeding your dog the birds they're supposed to retrieve unharmed is a bad idea for training. Most dogs don't seem to like waterfowl meat anyhow. The very few I've seen that eat birds seem to like grouse.
And that right there is the rub ain't it?
I see guys in this thread kinda defending the outfitter and I just shake my head.
I have much more to lose if a CO audits/inspects my tags/freezer/vehicle if I am in violation of :
A: failing to have the appropriate paperwork (tags lisence) and or record my kill when required AKA record keeping
B: exceeding my allowable species quota ... By accident or not
I would face fines, potential forfeture of vehicle gear and firearms, have lisence suspended or revoked altogether.
But if I was an outfitter, I guess my lawyers would be able to plea it down to a itty bitty fine and it's business as usual.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I thought you were treaty indian? None of that applies to you then. No license, no bag limit, no season. Want to start a conversation about that?
So if none of that even applies to him, what possible purpose could he have for posting that they did apply to him?
Last edited:
ol' beerkilr is just trying to help his fellow guides/outfitters out by deflecting the conversation from shining a light on the outlaw activities of yet another outfitter/guide, in a pathetic attempt to derail this thread into a different subject matter which will likely result in the thread being locked...
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Hunters like you or myself will get forfeiture of weapons or lose hunting license for x number of years and all they get is $20,000 fine.... WTH? How about cutting there tags in half for the next 5 years with severe restrictions and probation. Screw it, just ban them from having tags. I am so sick of outfitters that think they are above the law and the system that doesn't punish them
Geese or ducks are not tagged, so there are no tags to cut. As for fines or penalties, the penalties are generally very minimal for everyone, in Saskatchewan and Alberta. It's very rare to have a firearm confiscated, and I have never heard of a hunter losing a vehicle for taking an extra deer, or a few extra birds. For many offenses, the hunter does not even receive a suspension of hunting privileges. If you report people trespassing on your land to hunt, the officer taking the call will often ask if the people appear to be native, and if you tell him that they look native, it's likely that nobody will even show up. As for outfitters, Alberta is even easier on violators than Saskatchewan. An Alberta outfitter that was convicted of criminal offenses, as well as multiple violations of the Wildlife Act, over a period of years, is still allowed to outfit in Alberta. He didn't even lose any allocations. Yes the penalties need to be harsher, but they need to be harsher for everyone, not just outfitters.
chadmichener
Member
- Location
- Saskatoon, Sk
The original post only really highlights the bad book keeping, but the fine print reads over possession!
The Wildlife Act is pretty clear on this one and it dose not matter if its deer, bear, grouse or goose, over possession is over possession.
The Wildlife Act is pretty clear on this one and it dose not matter if its deer, bear, grouse or goose, over possession is over possession.
If you report people trespassing on your land to hunt, the officer taking the call will often ask if the people appear to be native, and if you tell him that they look native, it's likely that nobody will even show up./QUOTE]
THIS IS TOTALLY FALSE. All trespassing calls that are reported must be pursued. Ive been there and done that, took the charge as well. So i hate to say it, YOUR WRONG. I can't speak for Alberta but thats the way she goes here in Saskatchewan.
The funny thing is we can all cry to each other about how much we dislike outfitters, but unless we stand up and speak nothing will get done.
We all have to remember, We are resident voters and the people coming in and making a dollar off our areas are not.
Its only going to get worse as time goes on and there won't be a thing you'll be able to do if some one docent speak up.
GROUP BUY ON BUMPER STICKER THAT SAY "JUST SAY NO TO OUTFITTERS" ANYONE????
The original post only really highlights the bad book keeping, but the fine print reads over possession!
The Wildlife Act is pretty clear on this one and it dose not matter if its deer, bear, grouse or goose, over possession is over possession.
If you report people trespassing on your land to hunt, the officer taking the call will often ask if the people appear to be native, and if you tell him that they look native, it's likely that nobody will even show up./QUOTE]
THIS IS TOTALLY FALSE. All trespassing calls that are reported must be pursued. Ive been there and done that, took the charge as well. So i hate to say it, YOUR WRONG. I can't speak for Alberta but thats the way she goes here in Saskatchewan.
The funny thing is we can all cry to each other about how much we dislike outfitters, but unless we stand up and speak nothing will get done.
We all have to remember, We are resident voters and the people coming in and making a dollar off our areas are not.
Its only going to get worse as time goes on and there won't be a thing you'll be able to do if some one docent speak up.
I would be shocked if anybody showed up to investigate any trespassing call. Its a small fine in sask and unless its at night it isn't criminal. So why would they bother?
Of course it is possible that the bad record keeping may have made it appear that the possession limit was exceeded?
As for asking the hunters how many birds that they shot, it's very common to find less birds on the ground than the total of what the hunters claim that they shot. I have seen this happen many times.
I am referring to incidents that occurred in Saskatchewan several years ago. An officer responded to the very first report, but as soon as the landowner told the officer that it was the same vehicle as before, he came up with excuses why he couldn't respond. The same individuals kept trespassing, after that, because that they knew that nobody was going to do anything about it.
Last edited:
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
So let me get this straight; you start a thread and go on a rant against outfitters and illegal activities and now admit to being a violator yourself? Priceless!
So let me get this straight; you start a thread and go on a rant against outfitters and illegal activities and now admit to being a violator yourself? Priceless!
It is kind of ironic isn't it. Perhaps he would be satisfied if all people that have violated the wildlife regulations, or that have trespassed had their hunting privileges revoked for life.
I am a status Indian from bc. I live in sask, here I have to fallow the same rules as everyone else. In bc I had to fallow the same rules as well I just didn't have to pay for a tag. unless I was entering a LEH then I used my status card number to enter and payed the fee. the exception to this rule is hunting traditional Territory in witch case the band establishes the bag limits and other hunt regs.
