another one Outfitter fined for unauthorized hunting

[Tempest]

Considering the population wasn't threatened in any way, I find this absurd and ridiculous. Consider the typical client isn't the super wealthy fat cat most picture, but actually the guy who's saved for years, ticked off his wife, and finally booked the hunt and has to trust his guide knows all the ins and outs. You really feel it's appropriate to confiscate their sheep they paid fifty grand to hunt through an error that was no fault of their own? Glad you're not in government! Sheep was in season, the animals were legal shooters, but on the wrong side of a division the guide made no attempt to hide- it's very likely he screwed up and he's paid the piper. So, does anyone know how the fine applies in the Yukon? Did the guide take the hit, or the outfitter? Here in BC it would likely be the guide, as he was the one who physically went into the wrong area, the outiftter very likely wasn't even aware. In that case a good guide earns $300 a day plus tips, and this fine would have hurt something serious. I'm not sure if this was discussed earlier and I've forgotten, this thread has wound a bit.

Ardent I can't understand this line of reasoning it sounds like you're saying if the price you pay for your guide is high enough special considerations should be given if your guide messes up. Plus how does any of this matter if the population is not threatened. If crap like this becomes common then there will be population concerns. Poaching has consequences.

Where did we find out his own paper work got him caught. The news paper article even says he confused the two zones so that says to me that he put the zone he had the right to be in on the documents. Along with that I wonder what zone he put on the third ram that was in camp. If that one was correct then him saying he was confused is BS.

 

[Tempest]

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at the situation and an understandable knee-jerk reaction, but you have to keep the tourism industry as a whole in mind. Confiscating the trophies won't bring them back to life, but would reflect rather poorly on the Yukon as a hunting destination. From what we know, the outfitter is at fault here, and he's the one that needs to bear the burden 100%.
That said, I realize there are many who would like nothing more than never seeing another non resident hunter, so they care little what happens to the hunters.[/QUOTE

Here's another one I can't understand poaching is never good for any reason, making excuses for breaking the law will only encourage more poaching. You want people to be tourists you need an honest industry and that doesn't happen by rewarding the people prepared to break the laws. The hunters should lose the sheep and then deal with the guide. If you have money for the hunt you should be able to come up with money to deal with a croocked guide.

The names of the hunters are in the court documents. It pisses me off that there were 4 charges and it was pled so he only was charged with 2.

 

[bearkilr]

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at the situation and an understandable knee-jerk reaction, but you have to keep the tourism industry as a whole in mind. Confiscating the trophies won't bring them back to life, but would reflect rather poorly on the Yukon as a hunting destination. From what we know, the outfitter is at fault here, and he's the one that needs to bear the burden 100%.
That said, I realize there are many who would like nothing more than never seeing another non resident hunter, so they care little what happens to the hunters.[/QUOTE

Here's another one I can't understand poaching is never good for any reason, making excuses for breaking the law will only encourage more poaching. You want people to be tourists you need an honest industry and that doesn't happen by rewarding the people prepared to break the laws. The hunters should lose the sheep and then deal with the guide. If you have money for the hunt you should be able to come up with money to deal with a croocked guide.

So by that same token everyone riding in a vehicle should get the speeding ticket along with the driver?

 

[Tempest]

So by that same token everyone riding in a vehicle should get the speeding ticket along with the driver?

Seriously!

 

[stew]

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at the situation and an understandable knee-jerk reaction, but you have to keep the tourism industry as a whole in mind. Confiscating the trophies won't bring them back to life, but would reflect rather poorly on the Yukon as a hunting destination. From what we know, the outfitter is at fault here, and he's the one that needs to bear the burden 100%.
That said, I realize there are many who would like nothing more than never seeing another non resident hunter, so they care little what happens to the hunters.[/QUOTE

Here's another one I can't understand poaching is never good for any reason, making excuses for breaking the law will only encourage more poaching. You want people to be tourists you need an honest industry and that doesn't happen by rewarding the people prepared to break the laws. The hunters should lose the sheep and then deal with the guide. If you have money for the hunt you should be able to come up with money to deal with a croocked guide.

The names of the hunters are in the court documents. It pisses me off that there were 4 charges and it was pled so he only was charged with 2.

If the names of the hunters are in the court documents do you no who they are and are you allowed to post them and what were the other 2 charges.
Thanks for your time.

 

[medvedqc]

Stew certainly the ones as for the GO so:
The offenses were hunting when not permitted 2xtimes for each hunter. but there is certainly a deal or bargain with the plea guilty to avoid any more bad publicity.

 

[medvedqc]

That's an overly simplistic way of looking at the situation and an understandable knee-jerk reaction, but you have to keep the tourism industry as a whole in mind. Confiscating the trophies won't bring them back to life, but would reflect rather poorly on the Yukon as a hunting destination. From what we know, the outfitter is at fault here, and he's the one that needs to bear the burden 100%.
That said, I realize there are many who would like nothing more than never seeing another non resident hunter, so they care little what happens to the hunters.[/QUOTE

Here's another one I can't understand poaching is never good for any reason, making excuses for breaking the law will only encourage more poaching. You want people to be tourists you need an honest industry and that doesn't happen by rewarding the people prepared to break the laws. The hunters should lose the sheep and then deal with the guide. If you have money for the hunt you should be able to come up with money to deal with a croocked guide.

The names of the hunters are in the court documents. It pisses me off that there were 4 charges and it was pled so he only was charged with 2.

you have some inside intel ... was wondering about that 3rd sheep ....

 

[medvedqc]

in 2013 42 sheep has been taken by residents and 4 by non residents cant wait to see the next harvest ...

Phil

 

[Gatehouse]

If the sheep were illegAl, the hunters shouldn't get to keep them.

Hopefully it will encourage clients to use good outfitters and put the bad ones out of business.

 

[Ardent]

So by that same token everyone riding in a vehicle should get the speeding ticket along with the driver?

For all the anger this subject brings out I probably should withhold opinion here out, but this is extremely well put and you've outlined the problem. If you unwittingly were riding in a vehicle with someone who had broken the law in some way all of you should suffer the punishment and then expect to be paid back by the driver? Seems many here would argue yes. In this case actually it's being argued the unwitting passengers take the biggest hit by far. The damage actions like this could do to tourism were clearly considered, and the opinion of the Yukon government clearly decided the clients were innocent and not deserving of having their dreams confiscated. I have a slightly different insight I would argue, having hunted in numerous countries abroad often with a guide as required by law. You are forced to put faith in your guide and I could not tell you how brutal it would be to have the experience you saved for, finally got the time off to do, and ticked off your wife to chase destroyed over something completely out of your control. For resident hunters it doesn't seem so bad, to anyone who's been a client in far flung places and all the confusion and leap of faith that comes with the suggestion of confiscation reads like a nightmare.

 

[Gatehouse]

The passenger in the car trivializes the argument. The hunters were active, willing participants and are in possession of illegally killed game. Confiscation of the Rams sends a clear message to future hunters to use a reputable guide and make it clear to the guide that you refuse to bend or break rules.

The only hunting tourists that this would effect is those willing to book with a bad outfit, although hunting tourism dollars is a minuscule contribution to the economy anyway.

If these Rams were underage and not legal, shoukd the hunters still keep them? How about if your guide tells you to shoot an elk in 6pt season and it turns out to be a 5pt? Or shoot s grizz that turns out to be a sow with Cubs?

All illegal (in BC) and all have been confiscated, leaving very unhappy clients and a guide with fines.

 

[Ardent]

Small economic impact? In BC hunting generates $350 million a year in economic activity- this reported by the Vancover Sun by no means a pro-hunting publication. The vast majority of that goes right into the local economies, aviation charter companies, hotels, fuel, food, and on and on. The Yukon I know no numbers, but I do know it's an extremely significant component of the economy as the Yukon ecomony is smaller and less diverse than BC's by good margin. It's also one of the greenest businesses going and in the age of pipelines and converting lakes for tailings ponds I hope it remains supported and thrives. The client doesn't have the luxury of knowing if he has a good outiftter or bad one, and I will agree seizure is warranted in certain situations. This one however I agree with the Yukon, based on the very little information we have. The car argument is spot on, the clients are passengers and trust the driver, it's all they can do. The guide here was on the wrong side of a line and admitted his fault, and was fined five figures. Maybe one day we'll get to learn more.

 

[guido]

So by that same token everyone riding in a vehicle should get the speeding ticket along with the driver?

No, but everyone without a seat belt should get a ticket.
The speeding comparison would be the same as the outfitter guiding in the wrong area and getting caught, without anything being harvested.
The sheep was illegally harvested. Pretty simple.
To make it a little more clear, the party was not in a legal area to hunt. Everyone, not just the guide.

 

[medvedqc]

Small economic impact? In BC hunting generates $350 million a year in economic activity- this reported by the Vancover Sun by no means a pro-hunting publication. The vast majority of that goes right into the local economies, aviation charter companies, hotels, fuel, food, and on and on. The Yukon I know no numbers, but I do know it's an extremely significant component of the economy as the Yukon ecomony is smaller and less diverse than BC's by good margin. It's also one of the greenest businesses going and in the age of pipelines and converting lakes for tailings ponds I hope it remains supported and thrives. The client doesn't have the luxury of knowing if he has a good outiftter or bad one, and I will agree seizure is warranted in certain situations. This one however I agree with the Yukon, based on the very little information we have. The car argument is spot on, the clients are passengers and trust the driver, it's all they can do. The guide here was on the wrong side of a line and admitted his fault, and was fined five figures. Maybe one day we'll get to learn more.

Angus,

tourism is by far not a very important key of our economy ... mining is or was.

on 20000 employees or workers more than 6000 are working for different form of Governments ... +2600 in education and Health (even doctors are paid by the gvt ...).

a note on the outfitting business around half of the concessions are run by locals the other half is Alberta or BC residents if not foreigners so tell me how it can afftect the local economy.

on a stone sheep of 40 000 usd what do you think is really injected in the local economy. when we were the only one distributing mountain house food in big quantities only three outfitters were buying locally on 20 ones ...

i have a good tip for future hunters coming here do not rely on hunting show to find a good place and more certainly do your homework and check references and not only a few.

Phil

 

[medvedqc]

back to the numbers:

exploration for mining 300 millions to 45 millions not exploitation
tourism 200 millions in decrease for the last three years.
where outfitting bring 8.1 millions (do not know how much the local hunters are bring in)

retail sales 650 millions.

to sum up Yukon Government budget is 1.3 billions.

here is some local numbers.

 

[Gatehouse]

]

Small economic impact? In BC hunting generates $350 million a year in economic activity- this reported by the Vancover Sun by no means a pro-hunting publication. The vast majority of that goes right into the local economies, aviation charter companies, hotels, fuel, food, and on and on. The Yukon I know no numbers, but I do know it's an extremely significant component of the economy as the Yukon ecomony is smaller and less diverse than BC's by good margin. It's also one of the greenest businesses going and in the age of pipelines and converting lakes for tailings ponds I hope it remains supported and thrives.

The 350 million generated by hunting breaks down to about $120 million from non resident "tourist" hunters (according to GOABC) . 120 million really is is a drop in the bucket in the BC tourism sector, which is a 14 billion dollar a year business. If outfitting disappeared completely in BC it would have little economic impact on BC.

The client doesn't have the luxury of knowing if he has a good outiftter or bad one, and I will agree seizure is warranted in certain situations. This one however I agree with the Yukon, based on the very little information we have.

In this day and age, the client that chooses to spend $45 000 on a sheep hunt has no excuse to NOT know if is outfitter is good or bad. Someone investing the price of a new pickup on a 14 day life experience has no excuse to not do background research. Wildlife infractions are public record for the most part, and we have the internet and telephones to do research with other clients, resident hunters from the area and local CO's. We have more information at our fingertips than ever before. One post on a forum like this prior to the hunt can bring someone like medved with background knowledge. One call to local CO's can bring you lots of information. If an outfitter is on the CO radar, it's not a good thing.

The car argument is spot on, the clients are passengers and trust the driver, it's all they can do. The guide here was on the wrong side of a line and admitted his fault, and was fined five figures. Maybe one day we'll get to learn more.

The guide wants us to believe this was an honest mistake, the clients want us to believe that they were just following the guide.

I find it hard to believe that a guide that can take his clients to 2 trophy rams has no prior knowledge of the area they were in and is unable to read a map, compass or GPS.

The clients were screwed before they left home, the only question is whether they were an active, willing participant or if they really spent $45 000 each and did zero research. If I was that average Joe that had been saving my pennies to go on a dream hunt, you better believe I would be making inquiries prior to sending my hard earned cash.

The animals were illegally killed. Letting clients keep them is setting a very dangerous precedent.

 

[medvedqc]

Clark,

that story is very simple sheep killed in a non hunting period time and area = poaching. the seizes of the sheep will have impacted more the outfitter than just the fines and i agree the clients are as responsible as the guide and the outfitter that were both guiding.

as a local i will pay a fine, losse my sheep and maybe some gears and will not be able to hunt fo the next five years what they got is nothing ... but the more we talk the more his business will be impacted ...

 

[Zanelike]

So by that same token everyone riding in a vehicle should get the speeding ticket along with the driver?

A driver getting a speeding ticket would be more similar to someone having a loaded firearm in a vehicle. That fine would be for the individual committing the act. Poaching a sheep out of season is more similar to buying stolen property. Whether you knew it or not you still have to turn it over and if you knew it was wrong all along then maybe there would more consequences.
Sure it sucks for the hunters who paid a large sum to go on this hunt but it does not change the fact that the sheep were poached.

 

[patty59]

For all the anger this subject brings out I probably should withhold opinion here out, but this is extremely well put and you've outlined the problem. If you unwittingly were riding in a vehicle with someone who had broken the law in some way all of you should suffer the punishment and then expect to be paid back by the driver? Seems many here would argue yes. In this case actually it's being argued the unwitting passengers take the biggest hit by far. The damage actions like this could do to tourism were clearly considered, and the opinion of the Yukon government clearly decided the clients were innocent and not deserving of having their dreams confiscated. I have a slightly different insight I would argue, having hunted in numerous countries abroad often with a guide as required by law. You are forced to put faith in your guide and I could not tell you how brutal it would be to have the experience you saved for, finally got the time off to do, and ticked off your wife to chase destroyed over something completely out of your control. For resident hunters it doesn't seem so bad, to anyone who's been a client in far flung places and all the confusion and leap of faith that comes with the suggestion of confiscation reads like a nightmare.

The speeding car comparison doesn't hold any water and if it did in this case the hunters were driving the car.(killing the sheep)

It's really apples and oranges.

If a resident hunter shoots a ram in an area that he can't hunt in they lose the ram, whether they hired a guide or not. Shouldn't be any different in this case. It sucks, but IMO, that's how this should have played out.

Didn't the guy that shot the g-bear off the Dempster Hiway with his guide have to forfeit the bear? Why is this different?

 

[medvedqc]

The speeding car comparison doesn't hold any water and if it did in this case the hunters were driving the car.(killing the sheep)

It's really apples and oranges.

If a resident hunter shoots a ram in an area that he can't hunt in they lose the ram, whether they hired a guide or not. Shouldn't be any different in this case. It sucks, but IMO, that's how this should have played out.

Didn't the guy that shot the g-bear off the Dempster Hiway with his guide have to forfeit the bear? Why is this different?

we got no answer on that one?
but international sheep brotherhood is another planet ....