Can a non hunter accompanying a hunter in the field?

[warbird2006]

I had my wife accompanying me for few years. But she was annoying, asking weird questions all the time, so I paid her for a hunting course and PAL. many problems solved.

[rbest]

I had my wife accompanying me for few years. But she was annoying, asking weird questions all the time, so I paid her for a hunting course and PAL. many problems solved.

hahaha! Nice one

[sumonda]

This is good to know.. I had wondered this a couple weeks ago. My wife came grouse hunting with me as an observer, She has a firearms license so I thought it would be ok for her to carry my 30-06 just in case I spotted a deer and I could hand off my 410 and not loose the opportunity... any way turns out we had no luck with either that day, but I started thinking maybe she shouldn't have been holding my deer rifle - now we know and she will have to take the CORE and get her hunting license.

[Yuritau]

Valid firearms licence is all you need to pack a firearm whether walking in bush or not. Until something is dead you are just walking around with your Legal firearm

but if you are with someone that is hunting then you are considered hunting .

More than a year late, but I think it's important to correct these mistakes. It's been posted in this discussion already, but it's good to keep in mind; the legal definition of "hunt" from the Wildlife Act:

"hunt" includes shooting at, attracting, searching for, chasing, pursuing, following after or on the trail of, stalking or lying in wait for wildlife, or attempting to do any of those things, whether or not the wildlife is then or subsequently wounded, killed or captured,

a) with intention to capture the wildlife, ***or***
b) while in possession of a firearm or other weapon;

Look at the OR that I have highlighted. It does not matter if you INTEND to harvest an animal, nor does it matter who you are with. If you are walking around in the bush while in possession of a firearm or other weapon (what counts as an "other weapon" is not defined, so don't push it), it's not only possible for a CO to assume that you are hunting, it is REASONABLE for a CO to assume you are hunting.

Also very important, look at the portion of the definition that I have underlined. It does not matter if you ever even try to wound, kill, or capture an animal. If you are engaging in any of the nine activities listed and you satisfy either a) or b) in the eyes of the CO, you are hunting.

You might be able to convince the CO or a judge that your firearm was strictly for defense against dangerous animals, but I would never want to rely on that.

[Quiet Hunter]

Very good info. Thanks guys

[guntech]

If I was not hunting and with someone who was hunting I would simply have a camera with me at all times and no firearm.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Way too many Rules and Regulations for hunting and fishing ! JMO RJ

[MRP]

Stop over thinking things. Seams crazy this made it as a sticky. Unstick it move on.

[HappyJack]

A word of caution. Emailing a CO will give you one persons opinion. Not much different than on here. Until the moment you and your buddy encounter a CO and that CO makes a determination, you won't know where you stand. Not until you are in a court of law and testing it against the legislation. Ask me how I know.

If that opinion is from a Peace Officer and in writing...it's legal to follow that advice even if it's wrong.

[HappyJack]

Way too many Rules and Regulations for hunting and fishing ! JMO RJ

Agreed, they should pare them down a bit it's no wonder that more than half the guys can't get things right. Some of the rules are just plain unreasonable nonsense, like this discussion.

Just because you're packing the tools [firearm] doesn't mean you are 'hunting' until you actually take the step into poaching, so technically you would be poaching and where is the definition of that?