Bringing an adult non hunter observer on a hunt?

[snowplayaa]

Can someone clarify the law around bringing a non licenced observer on a trip into the woods? In my case, my father has expressed interest in joining this weekend as I try fill my deer tag (as unlikely as that is going to be given the weather). He is an acomplished outdoorsman but never a hunter. As I understand it, he can come with me as long as he doesn't actively participate in the kill, he cannot carry a firearm (he's not liceneced for that either) but he can help me transport and field dress etc...

Is that correct? Any advice in case we run into a CO?


thanks

[Philcott]

As long as he's not hunting you are good to go. This has been asked before and I believe the general consensus was he can drive the truck, glass the slash, even help you carry your game out but he cannot do the deed. If you hang a camera around his neck and he says he's taking pictures to document the hunt you'll be just fine.

This is as I see it, not legalese.

[hare_assassin]

Look up the definition of "hunting" in the regs.

If he is going to refrain from any of the activities listed, then he will not be "hunting" and therefore cannot be charged.

[hare_assassin]

As long as he's not hunting you are good to go. This has been asked before and I believe the general consensus was he can drive the truck, glass the slash, even help you carry your game out but he cannot do the deed. If you hang a camera around his neck and he says he's taking pictures to document the hunt you'll be just fine.

This is as I see it, not legalese.

As per the definition of hunting in the regs "glassing the slash" is considered hunting. Not so sure how sticky the COs are on this though.

[bighornbob]

As per the definition of hunting in the regs "glassing the slash" is considered hunting. Not so sure how sticky the COs are on this though. This is only true if he was carrying a weapon. If there is only one gun in the truck then you guys will be fine.

BHB

[snowplayaa]

Thanks guys...and\or gals.

[GoatGuy]

You will be fine.

[E.V.B.H.]

As per the definition of hunting in the regs "glassing the slash" is considered hunting. Not so sure how sticky the COs are on this though.

You have to be doing it with the intent to capture or kill. If you aren't pulling the trigger you can look at all the animals you want

[brian]

As per the definition of hunting in the regs "glassing the slash" is considered hunting. Not so sure how sticky the COs are on this though.
They would have a difficult time making those charges stick, especially if he had no hunting weapons on him. A dude out for a hike is allowed to direct his binos where he wants, unless he happens to be hiking by a sorority house during their lingerie, pillow, tickle fight night.

[snowplayaa]

Crap, that was totally our plan.


They would have a difficult time making those charges stick, especially if he had no hunting weapons on him. A dude out for a hike is allowed to direct his binos where he wants, unless he happens to be hiking by a sorority house during their lingerie, pillow, tickle fight night.

[TPK]

The regs are VERY clear on this point. NO he can not "help" during the hunt, that includes glassing the cut blocks and helping identify animals. Makes NO difference if he has a firearm or not, if he's "helping" and does not have a license he's breaking the law. Once the hunt is ended, animal on the ground, yes he can help with game retrieval and processing/gutting.

[TPK]

They would have a difficult time making those charges stick, especially if he had no hunting weapons on him. A dude out for a hike is allowed to direct his binos where he wants, unless he happens to be hiking by a sorority house during their lingerie, pillow, tickle fight night.
The "Dude" is not on a hike, he's accompanying hunters on a hunt.

[E.V.B.H.]

The regs are VERY clear on this point. NO he can not "help" during the hunt, that includes glassing the cut blocks and helping identify animals. Makes NO difference if he has a firearm or not, if he's "helping" and does not have a license he's breaking the law. Once the hunt is ended, animal on the ground, yes he can help with game retrieval and processing/gutting.

Your are wrong on this point. If he does not have the intention to capture or kill himself he can do everything but pull the trigger. I've talked to a co about this because I had a friend who wanted to come as well. No problem, he said your friend could even carry a shotgun for bear defence, but if he was carrying a scoped rifle it would look suspicious. Lot of people carry open sight or shotguns for bears with no hunting licence, as long as you have your pal if not supervised than this is totally legal.

[hare_assassin]

The "Dude" is not on a hike, he's accompanying hunters on a hunt.

This is true, according to the law.

The same is true about kids accompanying on hunts, without a licence. People break these laws all the time. The kid is involved in the hunt, even if it is just "hey kiddo, keep your eyes open for ______".

Do this with a kid under the age of 10, and you are committing an offense, according to the regs.

Like I said earlier, it is up to the CO whether he/she wants to enforce it.

I know all kinds of people who take their youngsters hunting without a licence and I don't judge them for it. But I have told them what the law says.

Me, I waited till my girls were 10 years old and then bought them the $7 licence. Really not that difficult to comply with the law, IMO.

[Sofa King]

Your are wrong on this point. If he does not have the intention to capture or kill himself he can do everything but pull the trigger. I've talked to a co about this because I had a friend who wanted to come as well. No problem, he said your friend could even carry a shotgun for bear defence, but if he was carrying a scoped rifle it would look suspicious. Lot of people carry open sight or shotguns for bears with no hunting licence, as long as you have your pal if not supervised than this is totally legal.

don't believe what a co tells you.
like cops, they all have their own interpretation of the laws and their own view on what they'll allow/ignore.
one may say it's fine, the next may nail you to the wall.

[E.V.B.H.]

The point is, the regs say you are only hunting if you have the intent to capture or kill. If you don't you are not hunting. Plain and simple. You can look and point out stuff to the person who has that intent all day long.

[Cookie1965]

The way I interpret the rules, is that in order to be hunting one needs to either intend to kill or capture the wildlife or be in possession of a firearm. If I bring an unlicensed companion with me he is neither intending to shoot or in possession of a firearm. I have been pulled over by COs while with unlicensed people and the question hasn't even come up. I was in possession (cased on the back seat of my truck) of more firearms than I hold licenses too.

[Sofa King]

personally, I'd have no problem with it.
thinking back, I've done this.
I took a friend along on a hunt.
he had never experienced hunting, he's an outdoor nut, insane with fishing.
so he came along, excited as all hell.
as I was driving in to the cut where I planned to hike, I spotted a deer just as we were getting to the end of the road.
it was way, way off to our left, just hugging the edges of the trees.
I parked and we got out.
I glassed him and confirmed he was a 4 point.
he was small though, and it was very early in the season, so on most circumstances, I would have let him walk.
but he was mega-excited and really, that's why I brought him, so he could experience a hunt.
so I made the decision to take the deer, I grabbed my rifle and took a seat in the cut behind a big stump.
it was a 400 yard shot and I was going to need a solid rest and some time to get settled.
while I was preparing for the shot, he watched through the binos, to see it all up-close.
the shot rang out and the deer collapsed in it's tracks.
and it all unfolded right before his eyes, zoomed in with the binos.
he said it was the coolest thing he had ever seen.
but I guess technically, some would say that was breaking the law.

[E.V.B.H.]

As a side, you can be carrying a gun for defence without a licence. Lot of people around here do that, in fact this summer a guy had to shoot a grizz at about ten feet with a 45-70 lever. It was reported by him, he doesn't have a licence but does have his pal, no action was taken against him because he didn't break any laws.

[coach]

The regs are VERY clear on this point. NO he can not "help" during the hunt, that includes glassing the cut blocks and helping identify animals. Makes NO difference if he has a firearm or not, if he's "helping" and does not have a license he's breaking the law. Once the hunt is ended, animal on the ground, yes he can help with game retrieval and processing/gutting.

Can you quote where that is in the regs? Seems completely ridiculous IMO - particularly when there is every effort being made to increase hunter recruitment - including a proposed new category of license for people wanting to try hunting.

[Cookie1965]

There's no way bringing an unlicensed companion on a hunt can be a problem, unless you buy him dinner on the way home and he's now an unlicensed guide :mrgreen:

[E.V.B.H.]

personally, I'd have no problem with it.
thinking back, I've done this.
I took a friend along on a hunt.
he had never experienced hunting, he's an outdoor nut, insane with fishing.
so he came along, excited as all hell.
as I was driving in to the cut where I planned to hike, I spotted a deer just as we were getting to the end of the road.
it was way, way off to our left, just hugging the edges of the trees.
I parked and we got out.
I glassed him and confirmed he was a 4 point.
he was small though, and it was very early in the season, so on most circumstances, I would have let him walk.
but he was mega-excited and really, that's why I brought him, so he could experience a hunt.
so I made the decision to take the deer, I grabbed my rifle and took a seat in the cut behind a big stump.
it was a 400 yard shot and I was going to need a solid rest and some time to get settled.
while I was preparing for the shot, he watched through the binos, to see it all up-close.
the shot rang out and the deer collapsed in it's tracks.
and it all unfolded right before his eyes, zoomed in with the binos.
he said it was the coolest thing he had ever seen.
but I guess technically, some would say that was breaking the law.

Awsome. Some would say lawbreaker but their wrong! This is a great thing to do as it encourages people to start hunting. Co's want to increase hunter numbers as well and this is a great way to do it, the ones I've talked to are very supportive of exposing people to hunting this way.

[hare_assassin]

... particularly when there is every effort being made to increase hunter recruitment - including a proposed new category of license for people wanting to try hunting.

And why would a new category of licence even be considered necessary, if it was perfectly legal for people to assist on a hunt with no licence?

[300H&H]

The regs are VERY clear on this point. NO he can not "help" during the hunt, that includes glassing the cut blocks and helping identify animals. Makes NO difference if he has a firearm or not, if he's "helping" and does not have a license he's breaking the law. Once the hunt is ended, animal on the ground, yes he can help with game retrieval and processing/gutting.

I could not find where this is in the hunting regs.
Would you please post it here for me. Thanks.

Then I will self-report myself to the RAPP Line as I have had non hunters accompany me on hunts.
All this time I thought I was being nice and exposing non hunters to a activity I enjoy and allowing them to be "in the bush" instead of sitting in front of the TV. Bad me...bad, bad, bad.

This post is just me being facetious.

fa·ce·tious
fəˈsēSHəs/
adjective
adjective: facetious
1.
treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor; flippant.


synonyms:
flippant (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+flippant&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CCsQ_SowAA), flip (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+flip&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CCwQ_SowAA), glib (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+glib&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CC0Q_SowAA), frivolous (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+frivolous&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CC4Q_SowAA), tongue-in-cheek (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+tongue-in-cheek&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CC8Q_SowAA), ironic (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+ironic&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDAQ_SowAA), sardonic (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+sardonic&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDEQ_SowAA), joking, jokey (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+jokey&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDIQ_SowAA), jocular (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+jocular&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDMQ_SowAA), playful (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+playful&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDQQ_SowAA), sportive (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+sportive&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDUQ_SowAA), teasing, mischievous (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+mischievous&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDYQ_SowAA); Morewitty (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+witty&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDgQ_SowAA), amusing (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+amusing&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDkQ_SowAA), funny (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+funny&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDoQ_SowAA), droll (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+droll&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDsQ_SowAA), comic (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+comic&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CDwQ_SowAA), comical (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+comical&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CD0Q_SowAA), lighthearted (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+lighthearted&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CD4Q_SowAA), jocose (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+jocose&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CD8Q_SowAA)
"unfortunately, they took my facetious remarks seriously"








antonyms:
serious (https://www.google.ca/search?biw=1333&bih=663&q=define+serious&sa=X&ei=KMSgUsGIGqKRiAKWsIDICQ&ved=0CEAQ_SowAA)

[happyhunter]

Seems like you would be fine. I have been out hunting with people before I had my core. One time we were stopped by a CO and we had two guns, one long range rifle and one shotgun and he said we were ok I just couldn't be using either of them. Just to muddy the waters a bit here... But what about schedule C critters which you do not need a licence to hunt?

[300H&H]

Seems like you would be fine. I have been out hunting with people before I had my core. One time we were stopped by a CO and we had two guns, one long range rifle and one shotgun and he said we were ok I just couldn't be using either of them. Just to muddy the waters a bit here... But what about schedule C critters which you do not need a licence to hunt?

Good point. You should still need a PAL.

[ru rancher]

Can you quote where that is in the regs? Seems completely ridiculous IMO - particularly when there is every effort being made to increase hunter recruitment - including a proposed new category of license for people wanting to try hunting.
what?? why would they bother making a new class of licence the CORE is such an easy test and you can easily pass with challenging it i have a couple friends with very minimal outdoor expiriance and they never read the book and they passed and they really arent the brightest either haha and it only take like a week to come in i dont see the point in a special trial licence

[hare_assassin]

For those of you who think this no big deal, let's look at it from another angle.

Let's say a licenced hunter brings 12 unlicensed friends out to the bush to "share" the experience. They divide up into groups and use radios to keep in contact. The groups of unlicenced people go in search of game, reporting what they see to the guy with the tag(s). The end result is a dead animal.

Does this activity increase the licenced hunter's chances of success in harvesting an animal? Does this seem "right"?

What intentions do these unlicenced people have? Certainly not to shoot the animal themselves, but certainly they intend for their actions to result in a dead game animal. No?

While they are "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:" ... what is their intention? To just look at the animal? No. Their intention is to report this information to the licensed individual so he can attempt to kill the animal. Indirectly, they intend for that animal to be captured or killed, despite not having the means to do so. That's why it is stated in the regs as:

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

Granted, this is an extreme example. However, the same conclusions should be reached if it is just a licenced guy and his best bud out for a drive or hike. The same intentions are there.

[coach]

what?? why would they bother making a new class of licence the CORE is such an easy test and you can easily pass with challenging it i have a couple friends with very minimal outdoor expiriance and they never read the book and they passed and they really arent the brightest either haha and it only take like a week to come in i dont see the point in a special trial licence

Join a fish and game club, become a member of the BCWF, educate yourself on the process of how these proposals come to fruition. You can contribute a lot more through the proper channels. By doing this you can have a voice in the regulations process. You're a smart guy and you're passionate. Whether I agree or disagree with your position, we need young guys like you stepping up..:-D

[ru rancher]

For those of you who think this no big deal, let's look at it from another angle.

Let's say a licenced hunter brings 12 unlicensed friends out to the bush to "share" the experience. They divide up into groups and use radios to keep in contact. The groups of unlicenced people go in search of game, reporting what they see to the guy with the tag(s). The end result is a dead animal.

Does this activity increase the licenced hunter's chances of success in harvesting an animal? Does this seem "right"?

What intentions do these unlicenced people have? Certainly not to shoot the animal themselves, but certainly they intend for their actions to result in a dead game animal. No?

While they are "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:" ... what is their intention? To just look at the animal? No. Their intention is to report this information to the licensed individual so he can attempt to kill the animal. Indirectly, they intend for that animal to be captured or killed, despite not having the means to do so. That's why it is stated in the regs as:

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

Granted, this is an extreme example. However, the same conclusions should be reached if it is just a licenced guy and his best bud out for a drive or hike. The same intentions are there.
i would go with no they are not in intent to capture or kill if you used your example you could charge people that go out and take pictures of wild animals and show the picture to any hunter not to tell them where the animals are but just to show off there photo graphs so your saying this person is also breaking the law because they indirectly helped the licenced tag hold to where potential game is?

[hare_assassin]

By the way, in no way am I saying this is a great law. Just providing a different perspective.

[coach]

For those of you who think this no big deal, let's look at it from another angle.

Let's say a licenced hunter brings 12 unlicensed friends out to the bush to "share" the experience. They divide up into groups and use radios to keep in contact. The groups of unlicenced people go in search of game, reporting what they see to the guy with the tag(s). The end result is a dead animal.

Does this activity increase the licenced hunter's chances of success in harvesting an animal? Does this seem "right"?

What intentions do these unlicenced people have? Certainly not to shoot the animal themselves, but certainly they intend for their actions to result in a dead game animal. No?

While they are "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:" ... what is their intention? To just look at the animal? No. Their intention is to report this information to the licensed individual so he can attempt to kill the animal. Indirectly, they intend for that animal to be captured or killed, despite not having the means to do so. That's why it is stated in the regs as:

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

Granted, this is an extreme example. However, the same conclusions should be reached if it is just a licenced guy and his best bud out for a drive or hike. The same intentions are there.

Take the tin foil hat off and you'll have a better chance of getting a whitetail. :-D

[hare_assassin]

Take the tin foil hat off and you'll have a better chance of getting a whitetail. :-D

No tinfoil here. Just reading the law as it is written. I suspect that if I brought 12 people into the bush to search for animals, a few COs would have an issue with that.

Why any different if I only bring 1 or 2?

[ru rancher]

this is just getting rediculouse this guy wants to go out and hang out with his father for a day out in the bush why are people telling him not to do this its a great idea bring him along for the hunt

[ru rancher]

Join a fish and game club, become a member of the BCWF, educate yourself on the process of how these proposals come to fruition. You can contribute a lot more through the proper channels. By doing this you can have a voice in the regulations process. You're a smart guy and you're passionate. Whether I agree or disagree with your position, we need young guys like you stepping up..:-D
sounds good ill keep that in mind

[coach]

sounds good ill keep that in mind

Cool. While you're at it, ponder this: "the world is run by those who show up".

[snowplayaa]

Thanks for everyone's perspective....yes I just want ot be sure I don't get my pop in trouble but I don't care if the discussion goes in another direction. Have at it!

[hare_assassin]

this is just getting rediculouse this guy wants to go out and hang out with his father for a day out in the bush why are people telling him not to do this its a great idea bring him along for the hunt

I totally agree. We should be able to bring people out there and enjoy the outdoors.

Here's hoping the COs all read the law the way we'd like them to. Is that enough? Maybe.

But there's always that new temporary licence for those who have their doubts....

[coach]

Thanks for everyone's perspective....yes I just want ot be sure I don't get my pop in trouble but I don't care if the discussion goes in another direction. Have at it!

Ha ha! Enjoy the day out with your dad. I hope he spots a gagger for you and you're able to out it down and post your story and pictures. :-D

[TPK]

this is just getting rediculouse this guy wants to go out and hang out with his father for a day out in the bush why are people telling him not to do this its a great idea bring him along for the hunt
No one is saying don't bring him along, by all means do, it's not aproblem at all. He'll likely have an awesome time, he just can not help with the hunt in anyway as he's not licensed.

[Gateholio]

I've don it on many occasions. Nothing illegal about it.

[guntech]

I don't see how anything is wrong or how he could ever be convicted of any infraction if he is simply along for company (no license, no gun, not beating the bush chasing game to you) ... or if he has a camera he can even be an official photographer...

[Mephizto]

How about getting your father that new license that introduces people into hunting? i think its $15 and he is allowed to hunt with you to a maximum of 12 times i think but don't quote me on that. He will be allowed to take game as long as he has a registered hunter with him. He can use a gun with you as a supervisor or a bow. Go to anyplace that sells your tags and they should know about it.

here is a link

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/resident/#initiation

Initiation LicenceEffective April 1, 2013, the new Initiation Hunting Licence for first time hunters aged 18 or older will be in effect. The requirements to complete CORE and to hold a Hunter Number Card are waived for this one-time-only licence.
It is anticipated the new licence will be available at Service BC locations and local vendors no later than March 20, 2013.
The initiation hunting licence is a new type of mentoring licence that allows a person 18 years or older who has never previously held a hunting licence in B.C. to try hunting for a one-year period. It is a one-time-only licence.
Government is introducing the new licence at $19.00 ($15.00 licence fee plus $4.00 Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation surcharge).
To be eligible for the initiation hunting licence, a person:


must be a B.C. resident,
must be 18 years or older,
must not have held a B.C. hunting licence in the past, with the exception of a youth (junior) hunting licence, and
must be under the close personal supervision of a licensed adult who satisfies the qualifications to be a supervising hunter.

Supervising Hunter for an Initiation Hunter
A person who holds an initiation hunting licence commits an offence if the person hunts unless the person is accompanied by and under the close personal supervision of a supervising hunter who is 18 years of age or older and meets the prescribed qualifications.
The prescribed qualifications to be a supervising hunter are


the person must be a “resident” of B.C. and hold a resident hunting licence other than an initiation hunting licence (or be exempted from holding a licence),
the person must have held a hunting licence in B.C. (other than an initiation hunting licence) or a licence to hunt elsewhere in not fewer than 3 of any of the licence years preceding the current licence year (or be exempted from holding a licence),
if the person is an Indian residing in B.C., paragraphs (a) and (b) do not apply and the person must have received training in hunting and previously hunted lawfully without supervision, and
the person must not be prohibited from carrying a firearm.


The supervising hunter may accompany no more than two initiation hunters at one time (or no more than two youth hunting licence holders, or one youth and one initiation licence holder).
If the holder of an initiation hunting licence is hunting with a licensed guide, the prescribed qualification in item (b) does not apply to the supervising hunter.

[Dannybuoy]

Thanks for everyone's perspective....yes I just want ot be sure I don't get my pop in trouble but I don't care if the discussion goes in another direction. Have at it!

Yes , you got your answer on page 1 .... No worries , you and your dad are good to go ! I really cant believe this one has been dragged out .!

[Clint_S]

don't believe what a co tells you.
like cops, they all have their own interpretation of the laws and their own view on what they'll allow/ignore.
one may say it's fine, the next may nail you to the wall.

Very true.

I asked one CO about needing a tag to chase cougars since I had no intention at the time of taking one.
He said it was fine to not have a tag.

Next time I was stopped a couple years later a different CO had a totally different take on the situation.

The interesting thing was he said they had hashed this all out amongst themselves at some point and there were differences in opinion.

[J_T]

haha, last year I was out for a walk in camo clothes (outdoor gear). No weapon, but I was confronted and put under investigation for hunting without a permit to do so.

Sometimes, CO's are just like people, they wake up, and they just can't find their happy groove.

[brian]

The "Dude" is not on a hike, he's accompanying hunters on a hunt.
Naturally you missed the intent of my post. I was saying that it would be difficult to have the charges stick even if it were illegal. The CO would have to prove intent.

The regs are VERY clear on this point. NO he can not "help" during the hunt, that includes glassing the cut blocks and helping identify animals. Makes NO difference if he has a firearm or not, if he's "helping" and does not have a license he's breaking the law. Once the hunt is ended, animal on the ground, yes he can help with game retrieval and processing/gutting.
I cannot find where the regs are very clear on this. If you are referring to the definition of hunting then it states...

Hunt & Hunting -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.


Considering that the person accompanying you has no intention to A. capture the wildlife or B. is not in possession of a weapon... they are not hunting. I cannot find where the regs make any mention of people helping out who are not engaged in the actual act of hunting (other than the guiding section which does not apply here). The regulation does not make clear whether possession of a weapon applies to individuals or whether it applies to a group (which I would find improbable). You may be able to make a some kind of case on the latter point, but I would suspect lawyers would need to get involved to clear that mess up.

[TPK]

Yes, that's the section I was referring to. It's pretty clear to me to me that if he's helping glass, or helping in any way, he's breaking the law if he doesn't have a license. To just go along and not help in any way until the animal is down and the tag is cut is fine. If the CO observes him standing beside or other wise in contact with the hunter while he's glassing, it's not a stretch of the imagination for the CO to assume he's helping in the hunt. If the hunter is not close by and he's not in contact with him (radio for instance), he can glass to his hearts content. This can be debated to nth degree and indeed has been. As pointed out it may be hard for charges to stick but really it comes down once again to ethics ... ask yourself the question ... is what you are doing helping the hunt in any way, if the answer is yes, it's illegal, if no, good to go. He will know, as will the hunter if what he is doing is helping the hunt. Pretty clear really.

[guntech]

Yes , you got your answer on page 1 .... No worries , you and your dad are good to go ! I really cant believe this one has been dragged out .!

Me too... dragged way out...

[TPK]

Me too... dragged way out...
It has dragged out because people are saying he can glass with his son which is not the case. The OP even stated that was the plan and that would have been illegal. The OP's subject of the post was a simple question can a non licensed person OBSERVE on a hunt, the answer to which is YES. The problem is if he is glassing the slash with his son in order to help locate animals (and again the OP said this was the case), then the answer is NO, that's illegal. If we can all agree on this then this thread is done .... finally.

[snowplayaa]

Thanks again everyone....here's an easy way to finish things up: My dad is out--too cold for him. I'm runny solo for a last ditch effort around Renfrew (assuming its not too cold for me too). Have a great weekend y'all and good luck.

[TPK]

After all of this .. sorry to hear he isn't going out with you. Good luck!!

[Gateholio]

He can glass , point out bucks and help pack the deer out. He isn't in possession of a weapon nor does he intend to kill it.

Imagine a kid getting a ticket because he says. Look Daddy, a buck!! Ain't gonna happen.

[TPK]

lol- Well I'll agree to disagree and bow out on this one. As mentioned, different CO's give different answers. I do like your analogy though as it brings up a very likely scenario and points out how silly the law can be ... if you (as I do) believe helping glass would end up with you getting a fine.

[Gateholio]

To be hunting he must meet the criteria as defined. He himself personally. Not the guy beside him. If he is unarmed and has no intent to personally kill, he isn't hunting, as per the definition in the regulations.

[J_T]

To be hunting he must meet the criteria as defined. He himself personally. Not the guy beside him. If he is unarmed and has no intent to personally kill, he isn't hunting, as per the definition in the regulations.
Not entirely. In spending some time negotiating with the CO service last year, it was explained to me, if, the 'other' person accompanying, enhances the hunters hunt, (spotting, counting points) a CO may evaluate the information at the time and assess accordingly. Seems subjective and flexible to me. For me, anytime i have a bud along on a hunt, hunter or non hunter, the hunt is enhanced.

[brian]

Not entirely. In spending some time negotiating with the CO service last year, it was explained to me, if, the 'other' person accompanying, enhances the hunters hunt, (spotting, counting points) a CO may evaluate the information at the time and assess accordingly. Seems subjective and flexible to me. For me, anytime i have a bud along on a hunt, hunter or non hunter, the hunt is enhanced.

I hate to drag this thread out even more but, I really want to know where in the regs it says you are not allowed to have other people enhance a hunt? What law are you breaking?

[Gateholio]

Not entirely. In spending some time negotiating with the CO service last year, it was explained to me, if, the 'other' person accompanying, enhances the hunters hunt, (spotting, counting points) a CO may evaluate the information at the time and assess accordingly. Seems subjective and flexible to me. For me, anytime i have a bud along on a hunt, hunter or non hunter, the hunt is enhanced.

I have never seen the word "enhanced" used in the regs in this way. I have a difficult time believing that a CO would pursue charges for this , as the observer clearly isn't hunting as defined in the regs.

[Gateholio]

The more I think abotu this "enhanced" thing, the more ramifications I dream up.

Examples:

I am tagged out on mule deer but I go with my buddy who still has a tag. I decide I will hunt with him and if an opportunity to shoot a wolf/yote/black bear comes up, I will take it, and if he gets a deer, I will assist him packing it out. I spot a 4 pt but must remain silent as to not enhance his hunt (I cannot hunt for mule deer with no tag of course) I sit silent for 10 minutes. Luckily, he spots the deer just before it slips away and shoots it. The deer runs off and dies. I cannot help track the deer because that would enhance his hunt.

The same buddy draws a grizzly LEH. I go with him with a black bear tag. We spot a grizzly so I get out my spotting scope and confirm it's a male and no cubs. Busted!

And of course the one I already mentioned. Kittle kid sees a buck "Daddy, a 4 pt!" Write that kid a ticket, pronto!

:)

[835]

Thats my take....
otherwise ..... how many of you have broke this law how many times....... really.
The "Spotter" has no intention of killing... you do... This "Helping" thing...

CO: "Did you have intention of killing that thing?"
Guy: "No how could i? he got the gun and liscense"

Everything is not this complicated.

[Dannybuoy]

Everything is not this complicated.

On HBC sometimes it is :-D
I cant believe some are still questioning this ... whats next ? the friend that reloads for the shooter has "helped" with the hunt ?

[Josethesiningfish]

I completely agree with you.

[TPK]

Here's what I got from our CO in Quesnel.

Question:Is it legal for a person that does not have a hunting license to help someone that does, glass cut blocks and help spot animals?

Answer: Sorry, it is not as cut and dry as would make it simple.

The definition of hunt is : “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”

Under the strict definition of hunt a person who is accompanying a hunter to help them spot animals could be considered to be hunting. . In my opinion this is a bit of a grey area in the regulations and officer discretion would have to be applied based on the exact circumstances. Your scenario could be expanded to include someone who has a moose LEH and is accompanied by someone who has a license, but no LEH, and is out to tag a deer. It could be argued that the second person is hunting without an LEH (helping spot a moose), but is that reasonable? I have conducted many checks where there were multiple people in a vehicle and only one licensed hunter, I have never taken issue with this because the circumstances never made me feel it was in the interest of the public for me to do so. All that being said, if the group are in any way attempting to make unfair advantage for themselves or are negatively impacting a resource an investigation could occur.

[835]

TPK,
That is how I saw it. Letter of the law maybe illegal.... 12 guys chasing deer to a liscensed killer bad...... a guy out for a drive with 3 of his buddies maybe doing some fishing and a guy brings his gun... thats ok....

All the circumstances that get brought up here over the "Grey" of the law... These are all the things the CO will deal with case to case.. That is what people never seem to get, the law in many cases is specifically grey and not black and white all the time...

[Gateholio]

I have never taken issue with this because the circumstances never made me feel it was in the interest of the public for me to do so. All that being said, if the group are in any way attempting to make unfair advantage for themselves or are negatively impacting a resource an investigation could occur.

That answer is about what I would expect- Unless someone was doing something unscrupulous, there is no need to be concerned about a non hunting tag along.

[TPK]

That answer is about what I would expect- Unless someone was doing something unscrupulous, there is no need to be concerned about a non hunting tag along.
So indeed I was wrong, I was thinking it was very clear and not allowed .. Seems not so clear and for the most part OK.

[J_T]

The more I think abotu this "enhanced" thing, the more ramifications I dream up.

Examples:

I am tagged out on mule deer but I go with my buddy who still has a tag. I decide I will hunt with him and if an opportunity to shoot a wolf/yote/black bear comes up, I will take it, and if he gets a deer, I will assist him packing it out. I spot a 4 pt but must remain silent as to not enhance his hunt (I cannot hunt for mule deer with no tag of course) I sit silent for 10 minutes. Luckily, he spots the deer just before it slips away and shoots it. The deer runs off and dies. I cannot help track the deer because that would enhance his hunt.

The same buddy draws a grizzly LEH. I go with him with a black bear tag. We spot a grizzly so I get out my spotting scope and confirm it's a male and no cubs. Busted!

And of course the one I already mentioned. Kittle kid sees a buck "Daddy, a 4 pt!" Write that kid a ticket, pronto!

:)
Then fill your boots and carry on as you always have. Your scenario of being with your buddy is exactly what put me into my "negotiation" with the CO service which helped understand a lot more about how they interpret the law. And I wasnt carrying a weapon or binoculars Only a camera. What i said above was not conjecture It happened

[Gateholio]

Then fill your boots and carry on as you always have. Your scenario of being with your buddy is exactly what put me into my "negotiation" with the CO service which helped understand a lot more about how they interpret the law. And I wasnt carrying a weapon or binoculars Only a camera. What i said above was not conjecture It happened

I definitely will carry on as I always have, especially after what TPK posted. If your experience had resulted in a ticket and a court date due to "enhancing" it would have been interesting though.

I guess someone that was really interested could email Stephen McIvor. He's the guy that seems to put all the speculation to rest with these legal questions.

[J_T]

I know Steve quite well. Regs are one thing, but dealing in the moment with a CO is just somewhere we dont want to be. For me, a negative altercation isnt always about being heard in court. There's a lot of negative BS that enters into your live that takes time to resolve before you can finally get closure and put it behind you.

[Gateholio]

If you know him, it would be nice to get his written interpretation. My guess it would be similar to what TPK got. It would be very valuable in a situation like what you had.

None of us want a ticket or go to court, but I won't stop taking adults and youth interested in hunting out because some CO has a funny idea. :)

[guntech]

To be hunting he must meet the criteria as defined. He himself personally. Not the guy beside him. If he is unarmed and has no intent to personally kill, he isn't hunting, as per the definition in the regulations.

Exactly... no license, no firearm and he is not personally going to capture any game...

[J_T]

Gatehouse. Your statement about taking people out, promoting recruitment is exactly correct. Ive never said otherwise. We arent lawyers and most of us arent COs. My point simply is, we make decisions all the time and everytime we live with the decision. What we cant always predict is that one time when someone in a position of authority judges our actions differently than we do.