Can an outfitter hunt in his territory even if he is from out of province?

[44inchStone]

I'm unsure of these rules and regulations but I'm sure there are guys out there who are up on these rules. I have heard of many guys from other provinces, purchasing guide outfits in other provinces and then hunting them during the GOS.
There are a few territories in BC, Yukon, NWT and many others owned by, well whoever. Some are Canadian residents but NOT residents of the province in which they own the territory.
My question is, can they and their friends or family hunt this territory even if they are not residents? I'm sure all the owner/outfitter has to do is hire guides FROM that province and guide them and their friends/family members to these trophy animals.
I'm sure a Grizz,moose,caribou in NWT, yukon or BC would cost a fortune as a non resident but how do so many that don't reside in that province get to hunt there? Do they only have to pay a trophy fee or a kill fee to that province? and then just be guided by a qualified guide from that province?
if this was the case then I guess all it would take would to have a few guys pool their money, buy a territory and use it for their personal hunting area for family and friends.
It more than likely wouldn't happen unless the outfitter had a large quota that he probably would have a hard time filling anyways.
Just curious on how this is happening. I'm sure it's logit with a technicality in there somewhere.
I'm sure there are a few guys out there that have the answers.
Thanks

[Gateholio]

All he would have to is buy appropriate non resident license and tags. Obviously someone with a guide license must also be there.

[Whonnock Boy]

This relates to dan brooks comment. Yes, someone can purchase a guide territory, issue his "clients" or friends if you will assistant guide licenses, and there they have their own private hunting territory for a lifetime with zero, or little economic benefit to the province of British Columbia.

[44inchStone]

WOW, maybe that's why I see more of that business going on all the time. I guess you still to come up with the possible million bucks it would cost to buy say a big territory in the Yukon. I guess that's why you could pool your money with other hunters. Just seems crooked and crazy at the same time.
The rich end up with a pile of critters in the record book, yearly. And all their family and friends, with just the use of a assistant guide who lives in that province or territory?

[Walking Buffalo]

The concerns being highlighted here run much deeper than is commonly being recognized.

There are few natural resources left that are not in the control of major corporations. Wildlife in Canada has generally been spared from corporate ownership. This is starting to change.

As noted in other threads recently, outfitter allocations are more commonly being purchased for speculative iinvestment. As governments trend to manage wildlife resources with a stronger emphasis on financial gains along with corresponding privatization allowances, big business and very wealthy individuals are taking note and are starting to buy in.

The example in the OP relates to allocation purchases for recreation use. Of even greater concern is the potential for governments to continue on the path of privatizing wildlife with international conglomerates becoming the owners. Expect to see pharmaceutical/agricultural companies buying control of the last public food source.

Yet another reason why the new outfitter allocation agreement must be revisited. Wildlife must remain in the public's ownership under government trust.

[boxhitch]

If they are hunting within the quotas given to the particular G/O , who cares what the name is on the license or what the association with the g/o area is ? You think they are the only ones taking advantage of a law or rule ?
If you want to start scrutinizing the morals and ethics of businesses operating in BC , there is a far larger net to throw .

[boxhitch]

WOW, maybe that's why I see more of that business going on all the time.You must have an insider view , as I doubt many folk know the background of any hunter client that comes here.

[yama49]

If they are hunting within the quotas given to the particular G/O , who cares what the name is on the license or what the association with the g/o area is ? You think they are the only ones taking advantage of a law or rule ?
If you want to start scrutinizing the morals and ethics of businesses operating in BC , there is a far larger net to throw .

i agree somewhat, except that they push harder agiasnt residents rights, then say it being locally owned??

[1899]

If they are hunting within the quotas given to the particular G/O , who cares what the name is on the license or what the association with the g/o area is ? You think they are the only ones taking advantage of a law or rule ?
If you want to start scrutinizing the morals and ethics of businesses operating in BC , there is a far larger net to throw .

Two wrongs don't make a right, so we don't really need to talk about the red herring. If you want to discuss how other businesses are run then have at 'er...in a different thread.

What we can and should talk about is how the ownership and running of the GO territory does affect one of the key arguments the GOABC is using to advance their demands for more game: It is good for everyone because of the money it brings to the economy.

We also need to discuss it from the perspective of our hunting heritage and how the GO business as set up now could even more severely curtail resident hunting opportunities in the future. Is this how we want to manage hunting opportunities?

[Everett]

What I have heard is an owner of territory from out of province paying a local to hold the outfitter certificate then getting himself registered as assistant guide so he can hunt with his buddies from out of province as there guide.
Thinking further I guess the buddy could be registered as an assistant guide as well so the owner could hunt as the client than.

[303savage]

If you owned a GO area, does that give the owner exclusive right to hunt that area, meaning nobody else can hunt the area?

[Island Redneck]

If you owned a GO area, does that give the owner exclusive right to hunt that area, meaning nobody else can hunt the area?

No; It gives the GO. the exclusive right to charge to guide hunters in that area

[tangozulu]

The area i hunt in NW BC has an outfitters big ranch in anothers GO Area. Now the other GO ranch is in his area. It burns my but when ihave to hunt beside this ranch with the outfitter guilding in the others territory. I suppose they have mutual aggreements. Also his Alberta guide shot 2 wolves I was watching and i dont know if this could be legal.

[Everett]

In B.C., the guide must be a Canadian resident but doesn't need to live in B.C. If a couple of Newfies bought an outfit in B.C., they could "Guide" each other! If a foreigner was to buy an outfit through a Canadian, he would have to hire a guide to hunt here!

Lots of foreign guides in BC these days that are not resident

[tangozulu]

If there was another guide near, then he was technically "guided"!


If another guide was around he was 2 miles away in the lodge, does that count.

[280 77]

The concerns being highlighted here run much deeper than is commonly being recognized.

There are few natural resources left that are not in the control of major corporations. Wildlife in Canada has generally been spared from corporate ownership. This is starting to change.

As noted in other threads recently, outfitter allocations are more commonly being purchased for speculative iinvestment. As governments trend to manage wildlife resources with a stronger emphasis on financial gains along with corresponding privatization allowances, big business and very wealthy individuals are taking note and are starting to buy in.

The example in the OP relates to allocation purchases for recreation use. Of even greater concern is the potential for governments to continue on the path of privatizing wildlife with international conglomerates becoming the owners. Expect to see pharmaceutical/agricultural companies buying control of the last public food source.

Yet another reason why the new outfitter allocation agreement must be revisited. Wildlife must remain in the public's ownership under government trust.
Very well said

[boxhitch]

If there was another guide near, then he was technically "guided"!Maybe ........IF the rules were followed . Wolves are big game , not small game like coyotes , so he would have to have a n/r license and species tag , bag limit of one , and fill out harvest report and pay royalties . G/O would have to fill out guide dec too .

[44inchStone]

Well it seems that this happens not Only in BC but in many of our neighbouring provinces. Residents of BC buying a Guide territory in SASK. Hires the local boys as guides, then flys from BC to SK to hunt whitetails. Always different rules for the various groups of people. I thought there were rule changes for Non-residents hunting whitetails in Alberta? But I guess if you are the owner of the territory and that deer comes out of your quota, then these new regulation changes do not apply to you and the rest of your family and friends who you allow to hunt your OWNED territory within that province.
Seems very confusing and so much politics involved with the many types of rules.
I have myself flown into a lake in BC where the owner was a Alberta resident. We were basically just waiting out bad weather at his camp for a few hours before flying into our camp.
Saw some hunters just getting ready to head out on horseback. There were friends of the owner of that territory with resident guides. I guess in this case it's like a sponsored hunt.