another one Outfitter fined for unauthorized hunting
- Thread starter medvedqc
- Start date
These outfitter threads always go the same route as the "crooked cop" threads.
Keep painting with that big brush boys. The ignorance is amusing.
I hear ya , I've been very strong worded in past threads on these types of topics and have since chosen to keep my comments short and to the point (see my earlier post in this thread)
I have several friends and aquaintances with guides/outfitters in their family or they them themselves are in the business in one way or another.
my take on all this and other cases is that until resident hunters see the "good guys" in the guide outfitting business turning their backs on and ostricizing the bad guide outfitters instead of keeping up with a status quo...... the rest of us will keep piling the firewood around an issue that IS turning the resident hunters of BC dead against the guide outfitters of BC.
and I'll be the first to admit that there are some very exceptional and respectable people out there in the profession who are losing the respect of regular hunters due to the actions of the idiots in their profession.
Good painters always strain the scum from their product so everything goes smoothly. Maybe the outfitting business should take a lesson.These outfitter threads always go the same route as the "crooked cop" threads.
Keep painting with that big brush boys. The ignorance is amusing.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
There's nothing in place for an outfitter's association to deny someone the privilege to outfit. It comes solely from the provincial government and courts, so while your argument may seem logical, it's not doable.
I
I pretty much feel the opposite.
Resident opportunity has been in decline for some time while outfitters are awarded more tags. 20-40% of LEH tags shouldn't go to non residents. If BC residents are on LEH, it indicates resident demand exceeds supply.
There are many small outfits in BC that were never intended to be full time jobs. As well, people bought territories at the height of the market. The outfitters cry hardship were really it is lack of business savvy and refusal to adapt their business model to the changing face of hunting.
And we are supposed to believe that the changes are "only 60 animals". How 60 animals will save the BC outfitting business is unclear....
The LEH system is managed to achieve harvest goals using several different factors. Remoteness and popularity included. Quick example would be they want 2 animals harvested. So they release 10 tags, as they know 6 will buy a tag, 4 will actually hunt and 2 will harvest. And frankly there is nothing wrong with leaving an extra animal alive anyway. we don't have to kill everything.
BC hunters contribute far more dollars to the economy and far more volunteer hours to conservation than foreign hunters do. We pay taxes here, live here and there is no reason foreigners shoukd be allocated such large percentages of wildlife when resident demand is not met.
BC had an allocation agreement in 2007. GOABC and BCWF agreed to it, then GOABC Immediately turned around and lobbied the government for more. This is not about conservation, it's about outfitters wanting more. For all the financial hardship GOABC claims, they sure were able to find thousands of dollars to donate to politicians.
I pretty much feel the opposite.
Resident opportunity has been in decline for some time while outfitters are awarded more tags. 20-40% of LEH tags shouldn't go to non residents. If BC residents are on LEH, it indicates resident demand exceeds supply.
There are many small outfits in BC that were never intended to be full time jobs. As well, people bought territories at the height of the market. The outfitters cry hardship were really it is lack of business savvy and refusal to adapt their business model to the changing face of hunting.
And we are supposed to believe that the changes are "only 60 animals". How 60 animals will save the BC outfitting business is unclear....
The LEH system is managed to achieve harvest goals using several different factors. Remoteness and popularity included. Quick example would be they want 2 animals harvested. So they release 10 tags, as they know 6 will buy a tag, 4 will actually hunt and 2 will harvest. And frankly there is nothing wrong with leaving an extra animal alive anyway. we don't have to kill everything.
BC hunters contribute far more dollars to the economy and far more volunteer hours to conservation than foreign hunters do. We pay taxes here, live here and there is no reason foreigners shoukd be allocated such large percentages of wildlife when resident demand is not met.
BC had an allocation agreement in 2007. GOABC and BCWF agreed to it, then GOABC Immediately turned around and lobbied the government for more. This is not about conservation, it's about outfitters wanting more. For all the financial hardship GOABC claims, they sure were able to find thousands of dollars to donate to politicians.
Last edited:
Maybe not in B.C. But I'm pretty sure APOS in Alberta has the ability. But they haven't done anything yet.
So because the outfitter association doesn't have direct control, the government is at fault?
If the outfitter associations don't wish to help self police, then I see no problem with their industry taking some heat for the indiscretions of their lowest denominator.
Considering this group is supposed to be professional, they sure seem to attract and retain a disproportionately large bunch of poachers. Wouldn't it be in the Outfitter Associations best interest to try to help clean up their business?
It sure would be, but most often the messenger gets his arse shot, in more ways than one.
This LEH system has me up in arms also.
Never seem to manage a doe draw in all my years of applying. There are many.
I believe they should restrict not increase the GO's limits and hold them accountable.
If the clients are that fortunate to have such a big fat bank account, they could very well be
able to pay for the pleasure of our fine animals.
I also suggest that those participating in the LEH system should hold a valid hunting licence
and also a species tag of which they are LEH'ing.
I've heard it often enough of folk yapping about not getting a successful draw and not going
after such critters.
This thought should git sum britches uptight..........?
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
What would the government be at fault for? There are regulations and laws in place for outfitters, just like any other resource based business in Canada. Those who break those are dealt with by the government and judicial system, it's how it should and does work for all businesses. What are your thoughts on oil & gas, minerals and lumber? Should those industries be self regulating without government and judicial interference? Would you also agree that the RCMP should make up their own regulations in regard to gun control, essentially overriding court and government decisions?
Can you provide some numbers on your opinion in regard to a "disproportionately large bunch of poachers", or are you just basing your assumption on the fact that pretty much every case is publicized due to the fact most Canadian hunters and the media despise the stereotypical fat,rich Americans coming to shoot "your" animals and a business making money off "your" resources.
Anyhow, I know there's no point in arguing as many residents have severe tunnel vision when it comes to this issue. I think it boils down to Canada's predominant socialist thinking and an inferiority complex in regard to the USA. It's like debating hunting with animal rights activists.
They would likely forfeit their sheep and lose hunting license for a few years. I doubt you'll see this outfitter lose his license and he still made money off these hunts.
on the case reported this is only speculation about where the hunters came as we do not know and will never.
but yes when locals are caught the sheep is seized, there is a fine and they can not hunt for five years ....
Any industry or business with any ethics would be looking for another employee, if their current employee has been convicted of a crime while going about their companies business.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Why would you think outfitters to be employees of their association?
They can lose their membership, that's all.
You had a decent post until your last sentence.
The government isn't at fault, nor did I suggest that. I suggest that the outfitters should take more responsibility for the actions of their collective group if they wish to avoid the negative comments and optics as a result of incidents like this.
And there is a distinction between self regulation and pro-active self policing. And other resource based business that provide goods (oil) that all benefit from are apples and oranges to this issue.
And sorry that we have "tunnel" vision on this issue - but the reality is this is a public resource, and while that exists I think anyone wishing to make a business off of it needs to play by the rules that public sets out.
And give me a break with the last comment - these publicized convictions of foreign trophy hunters add more credence to animal rights activists than any resident hunters concern about the resource ever could.
It doesn't boil down to socialist thinking, but rather critical thinking. I would love to hunt white sheep in the Yukon some day, but sure as heck don't blame Yukon residents for being upset with the continual lack of regard and respect towards their public resource by foreign hunters and guides. I just hope that lack of respect isn't systemic, and that those opportunities don't disappear due to the actions of the greedy and uninformed.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
There are and always will be illegal activities in all forms of business. There are also measures in place to deal with these people.
In this day and age with the Internet, those outfitters who don't play by the rules will lose out, even if the justice system misses its mark.
Just remember that not all outfits are foreign owned and not all outfitters are crooks.
In this day and age with the Internet, those outfitters who don't play by the rules will lose out, even if the justice system misses its mark.
Just remember that not all outfits are foreign owned and not all outfitters are crooks.
Why would you think outfitters to be employees of their association?
They can lose their membership, that's all.
You are correct, I should not have used the term "employee".
they should lose their membership. This is not something that is very common, even though "some" outfitters have been convicted on more than one occasion.
Saying this, guides ARE employees. But, they too, seem to be bullet proof.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
Losing your membership in an outfitters association doesn't mean you lose your license to outfit.
Guides are employees of the outfitter, not the government. They are licensed by the government, just like outfitters, and can lose their license, just like outfitters. Again, this would be decided by the courts and subsequently the provinces wildlife branch administration.
I'm not sure what you mean by "bullet proof"? Do you really think that they turn a blind eye to outfitters or guides involved in illegal activity? I can assure you the opposite is true.
