changes to wildlife act

[bridger]

the new wildlife act has removed the previous residency and citizenship requirements for assistant guides and guide outfitters. anyone can now get a guides license or outfitters license. previoulsy you had to be a canadian citizen to hold either. this will lead to more international hunting companies and fewer canadian outfitters.

[BCRiverBoater]

Great...just what we need. Farm out more of our provincial resources. Lets make it easy for others to buy companies and take our work when the job losses are at at 20 year high.

Wow...does not surprise me though. But how disgusting.

[riflebuilder]

This at a time when Canadians are out of work. The guiding industry is going to be lost to our control alot faster than it was happening already. Not a great move.

[bruin]

Can you post a link to where you found this information, I would like to forward it. Thanks.

[Fido]

Way to go Gordo thanks alot.

[bridger]

Can you post a link to where you found this information, I would like to forward it. Thanks.
sorry i don't know of a link where you can find it. i am on a bcwf committee and got the info through it. it is true though. will see if i can hook you up with a link.

[Chuck]

Well, I for one don't immediately grasp the intelligent reason behind this super move!!!

[bridger]

Well, I for one don't immediately grasp the intelligent reason behind this super move!!!

I think it is a direct result of a lobbying effort by the guides association to increase the value of the sale of their areas.

[proguide66]

the new wildlife act has removed the previous residency and citizenship requirements for assistant guides and guide outfitters. anyone can now get a guides license or outfitters license. previoulsy you had to be a canadian citizen to hold either. this will lead to more international hunting companies and fewer canadian outfitters.

UN FRIKKIN BELIEVABLE...:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::m ad::mad::mad::mad::mad:...............might as well let anyone get a canadian passport as well.:roll:

[heybert]

The foreigner can own it, but they can't work it. They still have to hire Canadian guides, unless they can show the the feds that they can't find a Canadian to work for them.

[Skeena Hunter 1]

Boy, some fear mongering going on here as well as misinformation. You have to be a canadian citizen to hold an outfitters certificate and license. The change as far as the outfitters license is concerned is in regards to what makes you qualified, used to be at least two years guiding as well as an exam, now it will be differnt, what I am not sure.
Assistant guides will be changed as far as residency requirements.
So as usual, some bits of fact in the original post, but definitely misleading.

These changes were made to the act almost a year ago, posted on this forum....Sounds like the BCWF is a day late and a dollar short.

[Mr. Dean]

:confused:



.

[bridger]

The foreigner can own it, but they can't work it. They still have to hire Canadian guides, unless they can show the the feds that they can't find a Canadian to work for them.
not anymore under the new wildlife act anyone can get a guides license. i know of one outfitter that is hiring mexican sheep guides for this fall. had one up last year just hanging around camp and checking things out.

[bridger]

Boy, some fear mongering going on here as well as misinformation. You have to be a canadian citizen to hold an outfitters certificate and license. The change as far as the outfitters license is concerned is in regards to what makes you qualified, used to be at least two years guiding as well as an exam, now it will be differnt, what I am not sure.
Assistant guides will be changed as far as residency requirements.
So as usual, some bits of fact in the original post, but definitely misleading.

These changes were made to the act almost a year ago, posted on this forum....Sounds like the BCWF is a day late and a dollar short.
if i am wrong i apologise but the information is i believe correct this didn't happen a year ago. will re check and re post.

[Skeena Hunter 1]

You are correct as far as assistant guide licenses, incorrect as far as outfitters licenses.
I beleive the act was changed last april, but in fairness to the BCWF, the new regulations under the act changes are just being developed.

[Lil Buck]

Skeena is right ...But the act states that an individual can own the territory hold the certificate and the acting outfitter is just that .Also you can own multiple territories.I have read it many times and still a little confused .

[frenchbar]

I think it is a direct result of a lobbying effort by the guides association to increase the value of the sale of their areas.

Your probably right on the mark with that! Its all about the CASH!!

[ianwuzhere]

maybe some companies can bring in some mexican/foreign women to work for them. oh no, wait, yup, i think some already do;)

[elkdom]

Mexican, German or whatever Country the guide is from needs a valid Canadian issued Work Permit if they are working in Canada.

ha ha!That is very funny! There actually are people that believe because there are
work Visa/Permit requirements , then there is "COMPLIANCE"!, sorry in the real world (B.C.) there is a lot of organized corruption, BC F+W rules being ignored and bent for the Love of $$$ MONEY, unlicensed Non-Resident Asst Guides, Asst Guides accompanying sometimes as many as 4 non-resident hunters, dropping off non-resident hunters in remote or private land to hunt big game "unaccompanied", baiting Bears , failing to recover killed game, exceeding bag limits, fire arm offenses, that's just a few offenses that I have personally observed over the last several years, to the extent that I personally choose not to be any longer associated with the G.O. Industry, the more encouragement for Non-Resident (non-Canadian Citizen) ownership of Guiding Territories, the more it Becomes only about the $$ Money!!!, the "Reputable Resident Licensed GO's" are becoming a very small group indeed,,,

[Skeena Hunter 1]

ha ha!That is very funny! There actually are people that believe because there are
work Visa/Permit requirements , then there is "COMPLIANCE"!, sorry in the real world (B.C.) there is a lot of organized corruption, BC F+W rules being ignored and bent for the Love of $$$ MONEY, unlicensed Non-Resident Asst Guides, Asst Guides accompanying sometimes as many as 4 non-resident hunters, dropping off non-resident hunters in remote or private land to hunt big game "unaccompanied", baiting Bears , failing to recover killed game, exceeding bag limits, fire arm offenses, that's just a few offenses that I have personally observed over the last several years, to the extent that I personally choose not to be any longer associated with the G.O. Industry, the more encouragement for Non-Resident (non-Canadian Citizen) ownership of Guiding Territories, the more it Becomes only about the $$ Money!!!, the "Reputable Resident Licensed GO's" are becoming a very small group indeed,,,

Why don't you tell us how you really feel, you know get it all off your chest.
Hope you reported all those infractions.

[bigwhiteys]

I guess we didn't have it so bad when some of the old timer resident outfitters were doing their thing.

Carl

[proguide66]

Well , while I am still working as an assistant guide and come across a Mex er German er european guide ( or any non Canadian)working in B.C. while fellow Canadians are being laid off by the hundreds..I WILL be openly and loudly starting a BIG SHITSTORM obout that one :evil:.....as well I dont think it would be hard to aquire common attitudes to accompany for THAT ride....we can only take it from behind IF we bend over !:x

[elkdom]

Why don't you tell us how you really feel, you know get it all off your chest.
Hope you reported all those infractions.

over 20 years as a licensed BC Asst Guide,I have seen a lota-$hit happening in the outdoors, over 40 years a BC resident hunter I have witnessed even more $hit going on, as for your comment "quote" Hope you reported all those infractions ??? matter of fact! I am pretty tight with the MOE on Wildlife Enforcement! the MOE is under funded, under staffed and many directives come from HEAD Office, (Victoria BC) many of those directives and policy changes are POLITICALLY driven and reflect on wildlife protection or management short comings, and to finish,why dont YOU get IT off your chest?? what YOU dont KNOW and UNDERSTAND!:eek:

[Skeena Hunter 1]

over 20 years as a licensed BC Asst Guide,I have seen a lota-$hit happening in the outdoors, over 40 years a BC resident hunter I have witnessed even more $hit going on, as for your comment "quote" Hope you reported all those infractions ??? matter of fact! I am pretty tight with the MOE on Wildlife Enforcement! the MOE is under funded, under staffed and many directives come from HEAD Office, (Victoria BC) many of those directives and policy changes are POLITICALLY driven and reflect on wildlife protection or management short comings, and to finish,why dont YOU get IT off your chest?? what YOU dont KNOW and UNDERSTAND!:eek:

That's better, feel better now. Now you still haven't answered the question regarding reporting those infractions, other than to say you are "pretty tight with the MOE", so have you?

And also are you saying Victoria is directing their staff to look the other way when GOs break the law? That would be surprising, especially to MOE staff in Victoria.;-)

Isn't this fun, we haven't had a good guide bashing thread in a while, they are always productive.:rolleyes:

[BCRiverBoater]

Mexican sheep guides up here? I know they are very skilled at packing and can find and spot sheep like any experienced sheep guide. I also know it gets very cool at night in the Mexican mountains but I can not wait to see them up here when it gets to 15 below and there is 3 feet of snow on the ground.

I do not doubt their ability but they will be in for a real shock with the weather. Unless of course they have been over chaising Argali's etc.

[boxhitch]

On one hand, I have seen some real good guys come into BC, work for an G/O filling a space that had been open to any resident that wanted it. A couple of these have been exceptional hunters and workers, and would make great guides.

On the other hand, this change could pave the way to foreign-owned private hunt clubs here in BC.
A foreign owner brings in his personal staff, to cater to his hunter-friends and family. Probably easier to do than to buy into a European concession, and for sure easier than buying a large tract of land in the U.S.

Mexicans ?? Well the FN boys aren't guiding anymore, maybe settling on an easier life-style ?? That leaves the work for local boys, at the same payrate as flipping burgers. Wonder how tough it really is to find good resident staff ??

[d6dan]

Well that sucks Bridger! If thats whats possibly going to happen in this Great Province, time to oust the gov't.

[willy442]

On one hand, I have seen some real good guys come into BC, work for an G/O filling a space that had been open to any resident that wanted it. A couple of these have been exceptional hunters and workers, and would make great guides.

On the other hand, this change could pave the way to foreign-owned private hunt clubs here in BC.
A foreign owner brings in his personal staff, to cater to his hunter-friends and family. Probably easier to do than to buy into a European concession, and for sure easier than buying a large tract of land in the U.S.

Mexicans ?? Well the FN boys aren't guiding anymore, maybe settling on an easier life-style ?? That leaves the work for local boys, at the same payrate as flipping burgers. Wonder how tough it really is to find good resident staff ??

Boxhitch; Where have you been the last few years? Most of the larger area's in the North are actually hunt clubs at present, owned by members and operated by licence holders. Wake up and get with the times. Also for many years now guides have been able to come from outside of BC. The G/O is the one who makes application for the assistant licence at his discretion if he deems the individual qualified.

[bruin]

Most of the larger area's in the North are actually hunt clubs at present, owned by members and operated by licence holders.

Not trying to be a dick or contradictive, but who are you talking about?

[GoatGuy]

Boxhitch; Where have you been the last few years? Most of the larger area's in the North are actually hunt clubs at present, owned by members and operated by licence holders. Wake up and get with the times. Also for many years now guides have been able to come from outside of BC. The G/O is the one who makes application for the assistant licence at his discretion if he deems the individual qualified.

Yeah Boxhitch where have you been for the last 10+ years from mid July-Oct. :roll:

geez......

[elkdom]

Boxhitch; Where have you been the last few years? Most of the larger area's in the North are actually hunt clubs at present, owned by members and operated by licence holders. Wake up and get with the times. Also for many years now guides have been able to come from outside of BC. The G/O is the one who makes application for the assistant licence at his discretion if he deems the individual qualified.

X2 on the FACTS! trouble is so many people are either ignorant of the ways things are headed or want to believe it's all OK! whatever!:rolleyes:

[Kody94]

Boxhitch; Where have you been the last few years? Most of the larger area's in the North are actually hunt clubs at present, owned by members and operated by licence holders. Wake up and get with the times. Also for many years now guides have been able to come from outside of BC. The G/O is the one who makes application for the assistant licence at his discretion if he deems the individual qualified.

They're not just in the north.

I am not anti-GO by any stretch of the imagination...but the "hunt clubs" sure piss me off. Its taking a legitimate business opportunity away from British Columbians.

[boxhitch]

Boxhitch; Where have you been the last few years? Most of the larger area's in the North are actually hunt clubs at present, owned by members and operated by licence holders. Wake up and get with the times. Also for many years now guides have been able to come from outside of BC. The G/O is the one who makes application for the assistant licence at his discretion if he deems the individual qualified.You have a strange definition of a hunt club. IMO a hunt club is open to members and invited guests, closed to Joe Public. Most of the outfits in BC if not all are open to anyone who wishes to make a booking. Show me one that is not, with proof. .
Maybe you have to wake up and get out of your bubble.
Of course guides from other parts of Canada can get employment at any job in BC or any other province. The discussion is about non- Canadian aliens. It would be a rare case indeed if a non-resident received pay and paid income taxes. Working illegally ? Well that would have to be proven too.

[boxhitch]

....... Its taking a legitimate business opportunity away from British Columbians.Like any business in Canada, a foreign interest can make an offer to buy, just as a resident interest can. It happens all the time. How he is legislated to operate is what keeps him in line with the public thinking, or allows him to function as he wishes.
Business ownership is a competitive open market, so win some loose.

[boxhitch]

X2 on the FACTS! trouble is so many people are either ignorant of the ways things are headed or want to believe it's all OK! whatever!:rolleyes:Facts can be proven. Your opinion is not a fact.

I never implied I agree with what is happening in the way of change, I am only offering what I know about what I have seen in the business, and can prove every bit of it.

[Kody94]

IMO a hunt club is open to members and invited guests, closed to Joe Public. Most of the outfits in BC if not all are open to anyone who wishes to make a booking. Show me one that is not, with proof. .


Curious....how do you expect someone to prove it? I know of one in the Koots. Was even told so by the original Canadian operator (before the owner got a Canuck address). How would I prove it without access to their financials? And just because they may take one or two legit clients doesn't mean it ain't a hunting club for all intents and purposes.

[boxhitch]

why dont YOU get IT off your chest?? what YOU dont KNOW and UNDERSTAND!:eek:Calling someone out only shows your own lack of credability. IMO

[boxhitch]

Curious....how do you expect someone to prove it? I know of one in the Koots. Was even told so by the original Canadian operator (before the owner got a Canuck address). How would I prove it without access to their financials? And just because they may take one or two legit clients doesn't mean it ain't a hunting club for all intents and purposes.So what would make it legit ?
Open bookings ? Zero repeat customers ? More than X % legit customers ? whatever they are.
If it is open to anyone that tries to book , is that a closed door ?
Not saying it doesn't happen, but is it really different than any other business ? Any proprietor has favorite ways of doing business.

[Kody94]

Like any business in Canada, a foreign interest can make an offer to buy, just as a resident interest can. It happens all the time. How he is legislated to operate is what keeps him in line with the public thinking, or allows him to function as he wishes.
Business ownership is a competitive open market, so win some loose.

When territories are bought up and run as a hunt club, its not being run as a business. Its different then foreign ownership of a Canadian business, IMHO, as the objective is different. Businesses are run for profit...they employ locals, income taxes get paid, etc etc.

[Kody94]

So what would make it legit ?
Open bookings ? Zero repeat customers ? More than X % legit customers ? whatever they are.
If it is open to anyone that tries to book , is that a closed door ?
Not saying it doesn't happen, but is it really different than any other business ? Any proprietor has favorite ways of doing business.

You are confusing me. :) Are you defending hunt clubs?

What I am talking about is not "business", although it may be made to look that way.

[GoatGuy]

Curious....how do you expect someone to prove it? I know of one in the Koots. Was even told so by the original Canadian operator (before the owner got a Canuck address). How would I prove it without access to their financials? And just because they may take one or two legit clients doesn't mean it ain't a hunting club for all intents and purposes.

It's a business. Owners can do whatever they want. There are and have been silent partners in the industry for ages.

Most outfitters were sponsored by somebody at sometime. Whether you're paying interest through hunts or what have you. Usually the backers are clients.

I know of a few 'hunt type club' outfits where their buddies come and hunt. They do book the occasional client but the majority are their buddies. They still need assistant guides, have to buy supplies and pay royalties which really isn't much different than other 'made in BC' outfitters.

Some/ a lot of the 'profit' doesn't stay in BC anymore, that's the way it goes. It certainly isn't restricted to hunt club type operations - that's industry wide. Not really much different than what happens in other industries. A lot of the outfitters/silent partners I know live in Alberta/Yukon or the US. Some are from Europe.

Look around at privately held and publicly traded companies. Owners all over the world. That's the way she goes.:wink:

[willy442]

You have a strange definition of a hunt club. IMO a hunt club is open to members and invited guests, closed to Joe Public. Most of the outfits in BC if not all are open to anyone who wishes to make a booking. Show me one that is not, with proof. .
Maybe you have to wake up and get out of your bubble.
Of course guides from other parts of Canada can get employment at any job in BC or any other province. The discussion is about non- Canadian aliens. It would be a rare case indeed if a non-resident received pay and paid income taxes. Working illegally ? Well that would have to be proven too.

Let me give you an example on how some of these hunt clubs are doing business.
Lets say 10 people come up with the funds to buy an area. They purchase one that has a sheep quota of 5 rams. With additional spiecies allowable harvest of 20 moose, 2 bear and 10 caribou.
The 10 members are then allowed through thier own agreement to have a personnel harvest of 1 Ram every 2 years, 2 Moose per year, 1 Bear every 5 years and a Caribou every year. Now this harvest can either be hunted within the Provincal bag limits with the excess being sold off to the public or the member can sell all his alotment annually, what ever he wishes. Part of the proceeds go to operating capital and part is returned to him for return on his investment into the area. So in this way, yes hunts are for sale.
This type of hunting club or one of similar structure is involved in more than afew area's at present. None of which I will name at this time as doing so would only give the armchair patriots and biologists on this site fuel to feed on.
Have you found a Ram in the timber yet?

[GoatGuy]

Let me give you an example on how some of these hunt clubs are doing business.
Lets say 10 people come up with the funds to buy an area. They purchase one that has a sheep quota of 5 rams. With additional spiecies allowable harvest of 20 moose, 2 bear and 10 caribou.
The 10 members are then allowed through thier own agreement to have a personnel harvest of 1 Ram every 2 years, 2 Moose per year, 1 Bear every 5 years and a Caribou every year. Now this harvest can either be hunted within the Provincal bag limits with the excess being sold off to the public or the member can sell all his alotment annually, what ever he wishes. Part of the proceeds go to operating capital and part is returned to him for return on his investment into the area. So in this way, yes hunts are for sale.
This type of hunting club or one of similar structure is involved in more than afew area's at present. None of which I will name at this time as doing so would only give the armchair patriots and biologists on this site fuel to feed on.

Have you found a Ram in the timber yet?

That's been going on since Christ was a Cowboy.

Current outfitter sets up a finance deal or the purchaser has support from somebody else.

In the past lenders would not look at guide-outfitting for small business loans because of the ownership or lack thereof. It was the only way to raise capital.

Nothing wrong with that.

[Kody94]

It's a business. Owners can do whatever they want. There are and have been silent partners in the industry for ages.

Most outfitters were sponsored by somebody at sometime. Whether you're paying interest through hunts or what have you. Usually the backers are clients.

I know of a few 'hunt type club' outfits where their buddies come and hunt. They do book the occasional client but the majority are their buddies. They still need assistant guides, have to buy supplies and pay royalties which really isn't much different than other 'made in BC' outfitters.

Some/ a lot of the 'profit' doesn't stay in BC anymore, that's the way it goes. It certainly isn't restricted to hunt club type operations - that's industry wide. Not really much different than what happens in other industries. A lot of the outfitters/silent partners I know live in Alberta/Yukon or the US. Some are from Europe.

Look around at privately held and publicly traded companies. Owners all over the world. That's the way she goes.:wink:

There are MANY shades of grey in the spectrum. That doesn't excuse the far end of the spectrum in MHO.

My example is not silent partners, or buddies coming to hunt. Its more like a territory (won't call it a business) with 7 or 10 shareholders that hunt there. And no, I don't have any facts and won't point fingers. I am just making the point that it happens and will likely happen more...and I don't particularly like it much. Nuttin more or less.

[boxhitch]

The 10 members are then allowed
members, partners, investors, whats the difference ?
I buy into a carwash and get free washes for life and gift cert. for the family at Christmas. Different ?



Have you found a Ram in the timber yet?
Actually, a fine Bighorn. But never a thinhorn, right ?

[willy442]

That's been going on since Christ was a Cowboy.

Current outfitter sets up a finance deal or the purchaser has support from somebody else.

In the past lenders would not look at guide-outfitting for small business loans because of the ownership or lack thereof. It was the only way to raise capital.

Nothing wrong with that.

Please: Lets not get into what has happened in the past. You have choosen to elaborate on your knowledge of times prior to your birth before.
I think most of us are agreement that the used truck thread, where you expanding upon your knowledge of used cars is far more suited to your life style. Let the people that were alive and involved in the past talk about those times. Clean your ears and listen to them, for something other than numbers and stats. Then when you are able to talk about the past with some personnal knowledge, maybe you will carry a little bit of credibility. In the mean time have a nice day.

[GoatGuy]

Please: Lets not get into what has happened in the past. You have choosen to elaborate on your knowledge of times prior to your birth before.
I think most of us are agreement that the used truck thread, where you expanding upon your knowledge of used cars is far more suited to your life style. Let the people that were alive and involved in the past talk about those times. Clean your ears and listen to them, for something other than numbers and stats. Then when you are able to talk about the past with some personnal knowledge, maybe you will carry a little bit of credibility. In the mean time have a nice day.

Just talking about what a couple of my buddies told me. Granted most of them retired after selling their outfits. However, one's family currently happens to own 4 outfits and owned others in the past. I used to work for them. You may have herd of them?
:lol:

Most residents like them.

[GoatGuy]

There are MANY shades of grey in the spectrum. That doesn't excuse the far end of the spectrum in MHO.

My example is not silent partners, or buddies coming to hunt. Its more like a territory (won't call it a business) with 7 or 10 shareholders that hunt there. And no, I don't have any facts and won't point fingers. I am just making the point that it happens and will likely happen more...and I don't particularly like it much. Nuttin more or less.

They still employ assistant-guides and buy their food here right?

There's more than one in your neck of the woods.

[Kody94]

members, partners, investors, whats the difference ?
I buy into a carwash and get free washes for life and gift cert. for the family at Christmas. Different ?


Well, if the carwash was only open to members, partners, investors, shareholders, or made available to others only if one of the members, partners, investors, shareholders, etc decided to sell their wash tokens because they couldn't use it that year...then I'd call it a private carwash club. :) More of an asset then a business...especially if the carwash didn't even advertise a name, and the only way to get in for a wash was to know the phone number of the guy whose name is on the business permit. :D

Cheers!

[Kody94]

They still employ assistant-guides and buy their food here right?

There's more than one in your neck of the woods.

Yes and no. I expect in at least one case, most of the supplies don't even come from this side of the border...including fuel. Why would it when it costs so much more? And you don't need many assistant guides if you only have a few shareholders hunting every year.

And, yah, I know.

The only part that bugs me is that I'd rather see a guy making a living from an outfitting territory, than having a bunch of guys not operating it for a profit or to feed a family...

[GoatGuy]

Yes and no. I expect in at least one case, most of the supplies don't even come from this side of the border...including fuel. Why would it when it costs so much more? And you don't need many assistant guides if you only have a few shareholders hunting every year.

And, yah, I know.

The only part that bugs me is that I'd rather see a guy making a living from an outfitting territory, than having a bunch of guys not operating it for a profit or to feed a family...

Gotcha.....

[Skeena Hunter 1]

Is this a rampant problem?Please someone name one that is a "hunting club"? Shouldn't be hard,judging by the rant on this thread there should be dozens of them. Please name one or two?

While we debate whether americans are buying up the province, bigger issues are transpiring as we speak. namely antis buying them(guiding territories) and the goverment being complicate. Sounds like the Charlottes are a done deal, enjoy the erosion of your hunting opportunities by the "true" enemies.

[boxhitch]

There are MANY shades of grey in the spectrum. That doesn't excuse the far end of the spectrum in MHO.

My example is not silent partners, or buddies coming to hunt. Its more like a territory (won't call it a business) with 7 or 10 shareholders that hunt there. And no, I don't have any facts and won't point fingers. I am just making the point that it happens and will likely happen more...and I don't particularly like it much. Nuttin more or less.That sort of brings up the question about what does actually prove a legitimate G/O business ? What do they have to do to fulfil their obligation to operate a territory ?
I understand they have to offer up hunting opportunities for a species, maybe not to the full extent of their permits or license.
The green group that bought the coastal outfit is an example. They have no intent of hunting bears, but in order to hold the G/O license they have to offer hunting. Do they have to have income ? Do they have to kill anything ? Do they have to spend any money on operations?
Hhhmmm????

[willy442]

That sort of brings up the question about what does actually prove a legitimate G/O business ? What do they have to do to fulfil their obligation to operate a territory ?
I understand they have to offer up hunting opportunities for a species, maybe not to the full extent of their permits or license.
The green group that bought the coastal outfit is an example. They have no intent of hunting bears, but in order to hold the G/O license they have to offer hunting. Do they have to have income ? Do they have to kill anything ? Do they have to spend any money on operations?
Hhhmmm????

It was required that a Guide area must be operated or after a period of time it would revert back to the Crown. The exception to this was if application is made to the Director a permit could be aquired for the period of 1 year to not operate. Again after 1 year of not operating, it should go back to the crown. I believe they had to actually do more than offer hunts.

[willy442]

Just talking about what a couple of my buddies told me. Granted most of them retired after selling their outfits. However, one's family currently happens to own 4 outfits and owned others in the past. I used to work for them. You may have herd of them?
:lol:

Most residents like them.

Why have they owned so many area's. Maybe it's a case of over harvest and move on to another. A properly farmed area should last for ever, unless factors out of ones control are involved. What stats do you have on thier harvests, percentage of success for clients, cow to calf ratio's etc? :)

[J_T]

Is there a possibility with the shift in legislation that foreign (or not) non hunting interest groups could start to purchase more GO territories and quietly remove the non resident allocated hunt?

GG, just a soft point, if you were selling car washes, the number of car washes is virtually unlimited. Having a trophy ram opportunity is a bit different than selling hot water and a buff. But I understood your example.

[GoatGuy]

Is there a possibility with the shift in legislation that foreign (or not) non hunting interest groups could start to purchase more GO territories and quietly remove the non resident allocated hunt?

GG, just a soft point, if you were selling car washes, the number of car washes is virtually unlimited. Having a trophy ram opportunity is a bit different than selling hot water and a buff. But I understood your example.

wasn't my example.

[GoatGuy]

Yes and no. I expect in at least one case, most of the supplies don't even come from this side of the border...including fuel. Why would it when it costs so much more? And you don't need many assistant guides if you only have a few shareholders hunting every year.

And, yah, I know.

The only part that bugs me is that I'd rather see a guy making a living from an outfitting territory, than having a bunch of guys not operating it for a profit or to feed a family...

There's a bit of give and take on this one as well. The guy who's booking 30 clients and shootings 5-6 bulls certainly makes up for that fellow who isn't. Also makes for some pretty uncomfortable resident/non-resident situations when you have a dozen hunters and guides clambering around one small outfit in the EK.

I'm sure the boys from Kimberly know what I'm talking about.:mrgreen:

[GoatGuy]

Why have they owned so many area's. Maybe it's a case of over harvest and move on to another. A properly farmed area should last for ever, unless factors out of ones control are involved. What stats do you have on thier harvests, percentage of success for clients, cow to calf ratio's etc? :)

Just moving on to bigger and better things, that's all.

[J_T]

wasn't my example.My apologies. It just seemed .... so .... you... :wink:

[Everett]

There's a bit of give and take on this one as well. The guy who's booking 30 clients and shootings 5-6 bulls certainly makes up for that fellow who isn't. Also makes for some pretty uncomfortable resident/non-resident situations when you have a dozen hunters and guides clambering around one small outfit in the EK.

I'm sure the boys from Kimberly know what I'm talking about.:mrgreen:

Yea we know who you are talking about had a foot race with one of his guides and a american client a couple of years ago. They lost.:biggrin:
Mind you the outfitter is a nice guy in person talked to him a couple of times and to be honest 30 hunters in that territory is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of resident hunters.
I personally don't have a problem with the hunt club model for guide territories mainly because It does'nt effect residents. BC residents don't pay to go on guided hunts.
As for foreign assitant guides if they have the permit to work in BC let them.
My big bitch with GO industry has always been foreigners getting to hunt Animals that I can't for example EK moose.

[bigwhiteys]

However, one's family currently happens to own 4 outfits and owned others in the past. I used to work for them. You may have herd of them? :lol: Most residents like them.


Is this the same family that has had their hunting ethics questioned more then once and a series of wildlife infractions in more then one province while movin onto bigger and better things...? I think you know the point I am trying to make :)

Carl

[Kody94]

I personally don't have a problem with the hunt club model for guide territories mainly because It does'nt effect residents. BC residents don't pay to go on guided hunts.


It may not affect you as a resident hunter, but it does affect "BC Residents". It takes away a legitimate business opportunity for someone that would run it that way. And to me it even undermines the system (to a degree anyway)...specific exclusive tenure rights for a public resource were awarded on the assumption of a commercial enterprise that would provide benefits back to the Province. I don't think selling a "private non-resident hunting preserve" is in keeping with the spirit and intent.

[Kody94]

That sort of brings up the question about what does actually prove a legitimate G/O business ? What do they have to do to fulfil their obligation to operate a territory ?
I understand they have to offer up hunting opportunities for a species, maybe not to the full extent of their permits or license.
The green group that bought the coastal outfit is an example. They have no intent of hunting bears, but in order to hold the G/O license they have to offer hunting. Do they have to have income ? Do they have to kill anything ? Do they have to spend any money on operations?
Hhhmmm????


I wish I had some answers for ya. Haven't given this enough time/energy/thought/research to have any solutions. Its obviously a complex problem with many shades of grey, and I don't like broad brush solutions that will negatively impact the large number of companies that are not the issue....

[boxhitch]

wasn't my example.Glad you take things so good.

[boxhitch]

....specific exclusive tenure rights for a public resource were awarded on the assumption of a commercial enterprise that would provide benefits back to the Province. .I bet this is the intent with the authorization of any business license in the province, but I doubt it is in writing. In a perfect world all the money would stay here and circulate a few times.
Would have been fun to be at the table the first time the maps had the lines drawn on for G/O's. Quite a show I bet.

[boxhitch]

I believe they had to actually do more than offer hunts.The term 'token gesture' comes to mind.

[boxhitch]

Is this the same family that has had their hunting ethics questioned more then once and a series of wildlife infractions........
That doesn't narrow down the choices very much , does it ?

[6616]

That sort of brings up the question about what does actually prove a legitimate G/O business ? What do they have to do to fulfil their obligation to operate a territory ?
I understand they have to offer up hunting opportunities for a species, maybe not to the full extent of their permits or license.
The green group that bought the coastal outfit is an example. They have no intent of hunting bears, but in order to hold the G/O license they have to offer hunting. Do they have to have income ? Do they have to kill anything ? Do they have to spend any money on operations?
Hhhmmm????

Sooner or later a non-hunting outfit or an outfit that isn't using all their quota is going to lose it's allocation and quota under MOE policy.
When that happens it would be re-assigned to the resident allocation and the territory would probably lose significant market value.

[Bowtime]

Sooner or later a non-hunting outfit or an outfit that isn't using all their quota is going to lose it's allocation and quota under MOE policy.
When that happens it would be re-assigned to the resident allocation and the territory would probably lose significant market value.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've heard that this has already happened to an area around Bella Coola and the grizzly tags have yet to be re-assigned to the resident allocation.

[Bowtime]

You are correct as far as assistant guide licenses, incorrect as far as outfitters licenses.
I beleive the act was changed last april, but in fairness to the BCWF, the new regulations under the act changes are just being developed.


As far as I know, and I do have a great source from which I obtain my info from. They are now able to purchase an outfitters license. And in all fairness to the hunters of British Columbia, the BCWF needs to start standing up more for resident hunters and protecting our rights.

[BCRiverBoater]

And in all fairness to the hunters of British Columbia, the BCWF needs to start standing up more for resident hunters and protecting our rights.

The BCWF is made up of paying members from around the province. The members of this province are resident hunters. The voice of the BCWF can be all resident hunters if people would just sign up and show support. If people who had concerns actually joined and got active at their local level through Rod and Gun clubs and joined the BCWF and campaigned other family and friends to do the same then our voice would get heard. If even half of the resident hunters in BC actually signed up and became active then they would control the BCWF.

I believe the BCWF has done many great things and is the reason many quotas are even at where they are. But like any group it can always become larger and louder. We really need to get people off their butts and become active rather than sitting around a campfire complaining to each other on how much better it should be.

[6616]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I've heard that this has already happened to an area around Bella Coola and the grizzly tags have yet to be re-assigned to the resident allocation.

The policy states that the quota has to be under utilized for three consecutive years and then a review is done to determine why.

Un-used quota will then impact the outfitter's "degree of utilization" factor when new allocations are calculated for the next allocation period. What all this means is that the allocation at Bella Coola will not be transfered until 2012 since 2011 is the end of the current allocation period.

Clear as mud, I know???

[6616]

the BCWF needs to start standing up more for resident hunters and protecting our rights.

Are you as member Bowtime, do you pay dues to the BCWF, if so make your complaint official and move it on up the line.

If not, tell me why would you expect the BCWF to spend time and effort representing you or responding to your complait when you don't even pay dues...are you looking for a freebee..???? Hunters are very quick to criticise the BCWF but only 1/3 of them belong, the rest looking for a free ride maybe....????....but of course don't hesitate to criticise the 1/3 that are trying to make things better....

[Ron.C]

[quote=6616;413825]Hunters are very quick to criticise the BCWF but only 1/3 of them belong, quote]


6616,

I Agree 100%

[6616]

[quote=6616;413825]Hunters are very quick to criticise the BCWF but only 1/3 of them belong, quote]


6616,

I Agree 100%

Thank you! I know I shouldn't rail about it,,,, but it's frustrating to spend 20 or 25 hours a week volunteer time and then get told by people who's best effort is posting on the internet that "you're not doing enough"....!!!
Sorry Bowtime, I shoudn't single one person out when there are 56,000 of you.

[Skeena Hunter 1]

The policy states that the quota has to be under utilized for three consecutive years and then a review is done to determine why.

Un-used quota will then impact the outfitter's "degree of utilization" factor when new allocations are calculated for the next allocation period. What all this means is that the allocation at Bella Coola will not be transfered until 2012 since 2011 is the end of the current allocation period.

Clear as mud, I know???

This is incorrect, utilization applies to the region as a whole not to the individual outfitter. So that particular example may not occur depending on what happens with everyone/everything else. Probably a subject for a different thread.

[willy442]

I bet this is the intent with the authorization of any business license in the province, but I doubt it is in writing. In a perfect world all the money would stay here and circulate a few times.
Would have been fun to be at the table the first time the maps had the lines drawn on for G/O's. Quite a show I bet.

Actually the designating of boundaries for guide areas in what is now region 7 was not a show at all. The people that qualified for a licence at the time pretty much made thier own agreements following ridges and water sheds. The ministry helped put them on a map and made them official. Remember back then a guide area was much like a family farm. Not like some of the greedy money grabbing operations seen today.

As far as the intent of the licence. What is difference where the money comes from to operate, all these outfits buy locally, hire people that spend money, clients buy plane tickets,outfits buy gas, horses, boats or whatever. Then they pay royalties to the crown for the animals they harvest. The Province see's alot of value in this or the resident hunter would have recieved the sole right to BC wildlife long ago.

[GoatGuy]

And in all fairness to the hunters of British Columbia, the BCWF needs to start standing up more for resident hunters and protecting our rights.

The BCWF spent a pile of time and had several meetings with the ministry on this stuff. They also prepared a 10 or so page brief if I recall correctly. Meetings with the minister etc.

At the end of the day the MLAs said no because they didn't hear from the hunters in their constituencies. The "Province to train 10 year old killers" headline in the paper didn't help that situation.

There were also several threads posted on here, several emails, alerts, newsletters that toured the Province regarding feedback on the Wildlife Act for hunters to post on the government website.

Per the usual most hunters chose to complain and didn't put any feedback on the government website regarding the various issues. I would say half or more of the feedback was from anti-hunters!!!!!!!!!

Here's a typical example of what was posted:
"I am quite happy to see hunting discouraged by official government policies."

"For the record, I am AGAINST this INSANE proposal to increase the # of hunters... In this age of global warming and loss of habitat etc, we should be protecting our wildlife and promoting eco-tourism."

There were only a handful of dedicated hunters/conservationists who did. Some of the feedback wasn't even big picture stuff, it was "me,me,me" per the usual.

There were 10 responses to the proposed amendments to guide-outfitter requirements and now we have 8 or 9 pages?

Gimme a break.

Time for hunters to step up to the plate.

[willy442]

This is incorrect, utilization applies to the region as a whole not to the individual outfitter. So that particular example may not occur depending on what happens with everyone/everything else. Probably a subject for a different thread.

The incorrect part of these discussions run wild on this sight. Very often even those involved in the BCWF are uninformed. This is really too bad for the resident hunter. If many of the couch potatoes on here were to get involved this site would probably develop into a wealth of information, instead of all the uninformed garbage seen at times on some subjects.

[GoatGuy]

Here's a link to bill 29. Has all the amendments that made it.

http://www.leg.bc.ca/38th4th/1st_read/gov29-1.htm

[GoatGuy]

Yea we know who you are talking about had a foot race with one of his guides and a american client a couple of years ago. They lost.:biggrin:
Mind you the outfitter is a nice guy in person talked to him a couple of times and to be honest 30 hunters in that territory is a drop in the bucket compared to the amount of resident hunters.

Hahahahaha, there's lots of background there.

How many goats? hahaha.

[GoatGuy]

Glad you take things so good.

Guess we're like-minded?

[jml11]

The policy states that the quota has to be under utilized for three consecutive years and then a review is done to determine why.

Un-used quota will then impact the outfitter's "degree of utilization" factor when new allocations are calculated for the next allocation period. What all this means is that the allocation at Bella Coola will not be transfered until 2012 since 2011 is the end of the current allocation period.

Clear as mud, I know???


Would this change with the new amendments?

SECTION 19: [Wildlife Act, sections 59 and 59.1]

removes the requirement that the holder of a guiding territory certificate be a person licensed as a guide outfitter;
provides for the issue of a guiding territory certificate to one or more persons;
grants the holder of the guiding territory certificate exclusive control over guiding privileges in an area described in the certificate for a period not exceeding 10 years;
provides for temporary or partial discontinuance of the privileges granted by a guiding territory certificate;
authorizes the regional manager to review the operation of a holder of a guiding territory certificate and suspend, cancel or refuse to renew the guiding territory certificate if there is no guiding in a year in a guiding territory.I'm assuming this outfitter group is not guiding at all or are they just not hunting bears?

[jml11]

SECTION 15: [Wildlife Act, section 51]

removes the requirement for a guide outfitter licence that a person have held assistant guide licences for 24 months and actively guided during that time;SECTION 19: [Wildlife Act, sections 59 and 59.1]

removes the requirement that the holder of a guiding territory certificate be a person licensed as a guide outfitter;Do these amendments now mean that any joe blow can buy and operate an outfit without seeking out license holders or being an assistant guide before hand?

[Skeena Hunter 1]

Would this change with the new amendments?

SECTION 19: [Wildlife Act, sections 59 and 59.1]

removes the requirement that the holder of a guiding territory certificate be a person licensed as a guide outfitter;
provides for the issue of a guiding territory certificate to one or more persons;
grants the holder of the guiding territory certificate exclusive control over guiding privileges in an area described in the certificate for a period not exceeding 10 years;
provides for temporary or partial discontinuance of the privileges granted by a guiding territory certificate;
authorizes the regional manager to review the operation of a holder of a guiding territory certificate and suspend, cancel or refuse to renew the guiding territory certificate if there is no guiding in a year in a guiding territory.I'm assuming this outfitter group is not guiding at all or are they just not hunting bears?

All they have to do is take one hunter on paper, fill out a guide declaration, submit and that will constitute use. They don't even have to kill one animal. This is all acedemic anyway, as the Bella Coola example is driven in part by native interests, you just have to look at non use on traplines, regional managers very rarely take them back for non use.

[BCrams]

SECTION 14: [Wildlife Act, section 48] requires a guide outfitter to be present in the guide outfitter's guiding area during a majority of the time rather than substantially all of the time when the guide outfitter's assistant guides are guiding for game.


Whats the difference between majority of the time and substantially all the time?

Reading through the rest.......

[Skeena Hunter 1]

SECTION 15: [Wildlife Act, section 51]

removes the requirement for a guide outfitter licence that a person have held assistant guide licences for 24 months and actively guided during that time;SECTION 19: [Wildlife Act, sections 59 and 59.1]

removes the requirement that the holder of a guiding territory certificate be a person licensed as a guide outfitter;Do these amendments now mean that any joe blow can buy and operate an outfit without seeking out license holders or being an assistant guide before hand?

No,you can now own an area without being a licensed outfitter. Outfitters have basically two documents, a certificate which outlines their area and tenure. They then have to have their license attached to that, they renew this every year. certificates are every ten years. You are kind of correct, for example joe blow canadian can have his name on the certificete and not have qualifications to be licensed, while someone else can hold the license, this person will have to be qualified(this will be done through regulation. It will also allow for more than one "owner" to be listed on the certificate. Another example would be if a father owned the area, but his qualified son held the license. There are various reasons this was done which I will not get into right now, but it makes sense, seeing how they had problems with the sytem in the past.
The 24 month qualification thing was taken out of the act and put into regulation, still to be seen how this will shake out, it was done more for people from out of province(still canadian) to qualify.

Hopefully I made some sense.:-D

[Skeena Hunter 1]

Whats the difference between majority of the time and substantially all the time?

Reading through the rest.......

This was changed becuase an outfitter may now be licensed in two different areas(can also own more than one area). Pretty hard to be in two places at once. Substantially is now going to be defined in regulation, but will probably mean 51% of the time. It needs to be defined because some regional managers made up their own defintions, and those were grossly inconsitent.

[jml11]

No,you can now own an area without being a licensed outfitter. Outfitters have basically two documents, a certificate which outlines their area and tenure. They then have to have their license attached to that, they renew this every year. certificates are every ten years. You are kind of correct, for example joe blow canadian can have his name on the certificete and not have qualifications to be licensed, while someone else can hold the license, this person will have to be qualified(this will be done through regulation. It will also allow for more than one "owner" to be listed on the certificate. Another example would be if a father owned the area, but his qualified son held the license. There are various reasons this was done which I will not get into right now, but it makes sense, seeing how they had problems with the sytem in the past.
The 24 month qualification thing was taken out of the act and put into regulation, still to be seen how this will shake out, it was done more for people from out of province(still canadian) to qualify.

Hopefully I made some sense.:-D

Ok, I think I understand most of what you said. What qualifies someone to have a guide outfitter license? Is the owner(s) the certificate holder?

[Skeena Hunter 1]

Ok, I think I understand most of what you said. What qualifies someone to have a guide outfitter license? Is the owner(s) the certificate holder?

This is being developed in regulation as we speak, maybe already has been(qualifications for licensee,) The certificate holder will be the owner and have control. This was always a problem with the old system, the license holder was always the certificate holder but not necesarily the "owner". Hopefully this will alleviate this problem.

[jml11]

This is being developed in regulation as we speak, maybe already has been(qualifications for licensee,) The certificate holder will be the owner and have control. This was always a problem with the old system, the license holder was always the certificate holder but not necesarily the "owner". Hopefully this will alleviate this problem.

Ok, so based on the amendments, the owner has to be a Canadian citizen or resident correct, even though they can now hire "alien" guides or is there another section which says otherwise?

Guiding territory certificate

59 (1) A regional manager may issue a guiding territory certificate to a person who, or to a group of persons each of whom,
(a) is a citizen of Canada or a permanent resident of Canada,
(b) is 19 years of age or older, and
(c) has other qualifications prescribed by regulation.

[Skeena Hunter 1]

The certificate holder(s) and guide/ outfitter must be CANADIAN citizen or permanent resident of canada.

[jml11]

The certificate holder(s) and guide/ outfitter must be CANADIAN.


Sounds good. So it seems that only assistant guides can now be americans, mexicans what have you (assuming they are granted work Visa's :-?...whole different thread). It doesn't appear to me that we are giving away our resources to foreigners, in fact taking it away. We are potentially giving away a few jobs (which isn't new here in canada...yeah for NAFTA). So this whole thread has been blown a little out of proportion has it not?

[Skeena Hunter 1]

An american can still be the licenses holder as long as he is a resident. The definition of resident is definitely worthy of it's own thread. some think you have to be 10th generation canadian, the provincial government a whole lot less.

[Bowtime]

Are you as member Bowtime, do you pay dues to the BCWF, if so make your complaint official and move it on up the line.

If not, tell me why would you expect the BCWF to spend time and effort representing you or responding to your complait when you don't even pay dues...are you looking for a freebee..???? Hunters are very quick to criticise the BCWF but only 1/3 of them belong, the rest looking for a free ride maybe....????....but of course don't hesitate to criticise the 1/3 that are trying to make things better....

Yes I am a member. And I do stand up for our rights. I do feel that the voices at the top of the ladder who have more power than me are not speaking loud enough for us who are members.

[6616]

This is incorrect, utilization applies to the region as a whole not to the individual outfitter. So that particular example may not occur depending on what happens with everyone/everything else. Probably a subject for a different thread.

You are correct. So if that's the case, under utilization by a single outfit has the potential to impact the regional allocation percentages, and thus all the outfitter quotas in the entire region, hardly seems fair...??? But that's looks like how it would pan out.

[boxhitch]

Sooner or later a non-hunting outfit or an outfit that isn't using all their quota is going to lose it's allocation and quota under MOE policy.
When that happens it would be re-assigned to the resident allocation and the territory would probably lose significant market value.In the case of the Green outfit, I doubt they care about the market value, or retaining any quotas. They will do what they have to to maintain the G/O certificate and save a few bears.

[Ambush]

In the case of the Green outfit, I doubt they care about the market value, or retaining any quotas. They will do what they have to to maintain the G/O certificate and save a few bears.


Should book a "hunt" with them, telling them that your interested in getting some bears on film.

Then shoot a bear and plaster it all over the place!! See what their supporters think about that.

[Bowtime]

[/quote] I believe the BCWF has done many great things and is the reason many quotas are even at where they are. But like any group it can always become larger and louder. We really need to get people off their butts and become active rather than sitting around a campfire complaining to each other on how much better it should be.[/quote]

Speaking of quotas that the BCWF have done great things to. I do beleive that region 5 was put on LEH for moose. Suppose to be for only 3 years as promised by the BCWF to boost moose numbers. I think it was a good idea. But that was 5 years ago now I do believe, correct me if Im wrong. And there is no problem with the numbers. Does that sound like one of the great things the BCWF has done??

[Bowtime]

Hunters are very quick to criticise the BCWF but only 1/3 of them belong, the rest looking for a free ride maybe....????....but of course don't hesitate to criticise the 1/3 that are trying to make things better....


I will not hesitate to criticise the people who let our queen charlotte bear hunt go. I think they need to start informing us more about what goes on. Sure seems like they try to keep alot of issues quiet and low key. I think they need to be more vocal about it and maybe more hunters will become involved.

[Bowtime]

An american can still be the licenses holder as long as he is a resident. The definition of resident is definitely worthy of it's own thread. some think you have to be 10th generation canadian, the provincial government a whole lot less.

Can you please explain to me why this is better than what they had prior to the change?

[Gateholio]

Bowtime, I am wondering what you have done to get your issues heard? As a BCWF member, what have you done to influence the BCWF directors?

If they are not speaking loud enough, have you, or will you attempt to become a director?

I'm not asking these questions to be confrontational, I am asking that a member be heard.

[BCRiverBoater]

Speaking of quotas that the BCWF have done great things to. I do beleive that region 5 was put on LEH for moose. Suppose to be for only 3 years as promised by the BCWF to boost moose numbers. I think it was a good idea. But that was 5 years ago now I do believe, correct me if Im wrong. And there is no problem with the numbers. Does that sound like one of the great things the BCWF has done??

They only do what they do because not enough BC resident hunters join and make their voice heard. Strength is in numbers and if we all get more people to join and actually be active then we have the power to change it. Sitting back and whining about it is not productive.

Do not forget about the things they have done in our favor. But look only at the bad if you wish. You name one area that was hurt or was not followed through to the end and that is not right but do not forget about other areas that have had change in our favor. No one is perfect but give some credit where credit is due.

I am not defending the BCWF 100% by any means but I will call out those who sit on their butts and expect things to change by themselves.

Tell me what one can do by themselves? Not much but you get 50,000 people speaking out to the leadership and guess what? Things will change. Elect the right people and put the right people in power and your voice can be heard on the BCWF. No organization is perfect and no organization can please every individual.

Tell me what people whining on this site does that actually helps us? These same people should be going to meetings, writing letters to papers, editors, politicians and ride the BCWF and point them in the right direction.

[GoatGuy]

Speaking of quotas that the BCWF have done great things to. I do beleive that region 5 was put on LEH for moose. Suppose to be for only 3 years as promised by the BCWF to boost moose numbers. I think it was a good idea. But that was 5 years ago now I do believe, correct me if Im wrong. And there is no problem with the numbers. Does that sound like one of the great things the BCWF has done??

Did you see any of the roadblocks that were set up by FN in Region 5 when the immature bull moose season was opened?

In case you haven't noticed resident hunters take the back seat and that has nothing to do with the MoE or BCWF. That goes straight to the Premier's office.

[Bowtime]

Bowtime, I am wondering what you have done to get your issues heard? As a BCWF member, what have you done to influence the BCWF directors?

If they are not speaking loud enough, have you, or will you attempt to become a director?

I'm not asking these questions to be confrontational, I am asking that a member be heard.


If I had time I would. I am searching for a new job at the moment so I can put more time and effort forward. I am unable to do so at this time. But I am still a member and support our local rod and gun.

[Bowtime]

Did you see any of the roadblocks that were set up by FN in Region 5 when the immature bull moose season was opened?

In case you haven't noticed resident hunters take the back seat and that has nothing to do with the MoE or BCWF. That goes straight to the Premier's office.

I think it has everything to do with the MOE and BCWF. How many grizzly tags did we lose this year because of the FN?

[bridger]

I will not hesitate to criticise the people who let our queen charlotte bear hunt go. I think they need to start informing us more about what goes on. Sure seems like they try to keep alot of issues quiet and low key. I think they need to be more vocal about it and maybe more hunters will become involved.

i would like to comment again on the effectiveness of the bcwf. honeslty we try as hard as we can but most of us are volunteers and donate our time and in a lot of cases our money trying to make a difference. It is frustrating that the majority of hunters won't make the effort to join. in the case of the queen charlotte bear hunt that is a land claim issue and the governmet will not give us access to the discussions. couldwe have made a better public awareness maybe, but it all takes time and money. one reason the goabc is effective as a lobby group is that they have sent up a non resident hunting preservation fund. they charge every non resident hunter that comes into the province $125. five thousand non resident hunters come to bc each year. do the math. the issue of non residnt sheep quota reductions being postpone for five years was a direct result of that lobby pressure even after the goabc had agreed to the reductions. they went back on their word and went straight to the minister. If every resident hunter donated onlly $100 a year you would see a lot more results from the bcwf. If you are not prepared to do that. Quit bitching.

[GoatGuy]

I think it has everything to do with the MOE and BCWF. How many grizzly tags did we lose this year because of the FN?

Right, same with the QCI I suppose?

FYI the MoE wasn't even consulted on it.

[Bowtime]

[quote=bridger;414232] in the case of the queen charlotte bear hunt that is a land claim issue and the governmet will not give us access to the discussions. quote]

From what I have heard the BCWF was notified of what was happening on the QCI bears and were told to keep it quiet. This should have been an issue that was brought forward.

[bridger]

i am not going to get into a p----------- contest on this but either put up or shut up

[6616]

[quote=bridger;414232] in the case of the queen charlotte bear hunt that is a land claim issue and the governmet will not give us access to the discussions. quote]

From what I have heard the BCWF was notified of what was happening on the QCI bears and were told to keep it quiet. This should have been an issue that was brought forward.

Hilarious, does sending a call out to all clubs and members to write letters on the QCI bear issue fall under the catagory of keeping quiet...? What about all the letters and meetings the exec and wildlife committee wrote to, and met with, governemnt on this issue, is that keeping quiet? Several News Releases were sent to the media regarding the QCI bear hunting issue by the BCWF as well, is that "keeping quiet"?.

The fact is that media does not care about QCI bear hunting issues, nor do the majority of British Columbians for that matter. Yep,,,all the BCWF's fault...?????? Gimme a break...!

[Bowtime]

The fact is that media does not care about QCI bear hunting issues, nor do the majority of British Columbians for that matter. Yep,,,all the BCWF's fault...?????? Gimme a break...!

Well, someones at fault. I find it hard to believe that majority of British Columbian "Hunters" don't care that we just lost QCI bears. If I would have know about this sooner I would have tried to become more involved. I would stand for their bear hunt and look for them to back me if I ever need a voice.

[GoatGuy]

Well, someones at fault. I find it hard to believe that majority of British Columbian "Hunters" don't care that we just lost QCI bears. If I would have know about this sooner I would have tried to become more involved. I would stand for their bear hunt and look for them to back me if I ever need a voice.

The first letter "Urgent and Important Notice to All BC Wildlife Federation Members" went out Nov 7. There were emails, posts, threads and it went out to the clubs as well.

If you want to be added to the BCWF alerts send an email here:

jbholdstock@shawcable.com

[bridger]

Well, someones at fault. I find it hard to believe that majority of British Columbian "Hunters" don't care that we just lost QCI bears. If I would have know about this sooner I would have tried to become more involved. I would stand for their bear hunt and look for them to back me if I ever need a voice.

turn off your computer and go look in the mirror!

[6616]

Well, someones at fault. I find it hard to believe that majority of British Columbian "Hunters" don't care that we just lost QCI bears. If I would have know about this sooner I would have tried to become more involved. I would stand for their bear hunt and look for them to back me if I ever need a voice.

Note I said British Columbians, not British Columbia hunters. The BCWF does not have the influence it once had, that has declined proportionally to the number of hunters in BC, hence the importance of recrutiment/retention. The Haida Qwii were supported by the Wildlerness Tourism Assn, CPAWS, RCCS, etc, in their bid to stop the bear hunting on QCI. A formidable alliance consdering the high profile FN issues receive these days. The BCWF was not going to be able to reverse this decision on it's own, it needed public support and letters from outraged hunters. I wrote mine, where was yours?
Are you still looking in the mirror, who do you see....?????

[Bowtime]

Note I said British Columbians, not British Columbia hunters. The BCWF does not have the influence it once had, that has declined proportionally to the number of hunters in BC, hence the importance of recrutiment/retention. The Haida Qwii were supported by the Wildlerness Tourism Assn, CPAWS, RCCS, etc, in their bid to stop the bear hunting on QCI. A formidable alliance consdering the high profile FN issues receive these days. The BCWF was not going to be able to reverse this decision on it's own, it needed public support and letters from outraged hunters. I wrote mine, where was yours?
Are you still looking in the mirror, who do you see....?????

Like I said, If I would have know about it sooner or I would have become more involved with the issue. Now that I think about it I do remember something being said that the Haida Qwii was supported by the wilderness tourism assn.
Please tell me if we are in threat of losing any other hunts because of FN in partners with these groups anywhere else around B.C.?

I was looking in the mirror the other day, and saw one angry hunter!!

[GoatGuy]

Like I said, If I would have know about it sooner or I would have become more involved with the issue. Now that I think about it I do remember something being said that the Haida Qwii was supported by the wilderness tourism assn.
Please tell me if we are in threat of losing any other hunts because of FN in partners with these groups anywhere else around B.C.?

I was looking in the mirror the other day, and saw one angry hunter!!

Off the BCWF Website

http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/documents/s=211/bcw1227309581366/

[Gateholio]

I was looking in the mirror the other day, and saw one angry hunter!!

Anger is an energy- You just need to channel it the right direction...

[6616]

Like I said, If I would have know about it sooner or I would have become more involved with the issue. Now that I think about it I do remember something being said that the Haida Qwii was supported by the wilderness tourism assn.
Please tell me if we are in threat of losing any other hunts because of FN in partners with these groups anywhere else around B.C.?

I was looking in the mirror the other day, and saw one angry hunter!!


"I was looking in the mirror the other day, and saw one angry hunter"

Good response, I think we all feel the same re the Haida Qwii amendments. Time to take a personal interest and do something about it (as individuals).

Of course there are other threats, there always are, it's endless. Talk to your regional BCWF reps and they will tell you about the Atlin LUP negotiations, The North Coast and Central coast LRMP amendments, and the new Conservancies, etc, as well as the G to G negotiations that led to these. Right now there are more land use issues in the Skeena then in any other area of BC. As citizens, you guys need to be ontop of these situations and doing something about them.

[Bowtime]

Anger is an energy- You just need to channel it the right direction...

I plan on doing just that.

[Bowtime]

Off the BCWF Website

http://www.bcwf.bc.ca/documents/s=211/bcw1227309581366/

Does it actually state in that article that the Executive Commitee knew about the proposal but was requested by the Ministry of Enviroment to maintain confidentciality of the proposal?I'm sorry but this just doesn't seem right to me. This is what I mean when people feel like they are being kept in the dark. I pay my dues and feel I should recieve info like this sooner. Maybe if we were informed ASAP, we could have had more of an impact on the sittuation?

[Gateholio]

Does it actually state in that article that the Executive Commitee knew about the proposal but was requested by the Ministry of Enviroment to maintain confidentciality of the proposal?I'm sorry but this just doesn't seem right to me. This is what I mean when people feel like they are being kept in the dark. I pay my dues and feel I should recieve info like this sooner. Maybe if we were informed ASAP, we could have had more of an impact on the sittuation?

If you are asked to keep something confidential, and you don't -then you won't be given confidential information in the future....And having that information can be very useful.

[Gateholio]

I plan on doing just that.

Hopfully you do. SO far all we've seen is you pointing a finger at the BCWF.....:shock:

[Bowtime]

If you are asked to keep something confidential, and you don't -then you won't be given confidential information in the future....And having that information can be very useful.


Then whats the point on recieving confidential info? One needs to wonder how many other "confidential" proposals are out there? We will be informed about those proposals once it's too late.

[Bowtime]

Hopfully you do. SO far all we've seen is you pointing a finger at the BCWF.....:shock:


Thats good for a laugh. I have my reasons.

[Gateholio]

Then whats the point on recieving confidential info? One needs to wonder how many other "confidential" proposals are out there? We will be informed about those proposals once it's too late.

You can have it 2 ways-

#1 The people with the confidential info trust you, so they share it with you. You have prior knowledge about a soon to be public issue, so you have time to build a strategy for when the info becomes public, and you are poised and ready to take action.

#2 The people with confidential info don't trust you, so they don't share info with you, so when the info becomes public, you are caught unprepared. And then people whine on the intraweb that you aren't doing a good job. ;)

[6616]

Then whats the point on recieving confidential info? One needs to wonder how many other "confidential" proposals are out there? We will be informed about those proposals once it's too late.


Sometimes a BCWF committee will receive a draft document from the government during the development stage of that document to dertermine if the BCWF has any preliminary input. Often in such cases the committee is asked to keep it confidential merely because it's only a draft and still subject to significant changes. This has at times saved months and months of work for both parties.

This doesn't happen often, but it did happen during the allocation review for example when numerous drafts were being passed back and forth between the BCWF committee and MOE on a weekly basis for months on end. Each draft was remarkably different as our concerns were addressed one after the other by MOE. One of these drafts leaked and caused a huge uproar even though it was not even a concern because it was several drafts outdated by the time it leaked and the later versions had already addressed the contentious issues.

So you can see there is sometimes a good reason for the request for confidentiality. Eventually when any document or proposal gets past the draft stage it is released to the BCWF clubs and members they then have a chance to provide input, and following that the BCWF will provide an official position or statement on it based on the club and member input. It's just the way things work. No one is trying to hide anything. It's just an attempt by government to make proposals more workable before they're actually released for public input.

In the case of the Haida Qwii agreement they didn't ask the Fed for input, they just warned the Fed that it was going to happen and that it had already been agreed to in G to G negotiations. Why they did that I don't know,,, they surely weren't naive enough to think that the Fed was not going to oppose it. Maybe it was like Gates said, that some one in government wanted the BCWF to be prepared and not caught by surprize.

[Bowtime]

You can have it 2 ways-

#1 The people with the confidential info trust you, so they share it with you. You have prior knowledge about a soon to be public issue, so you have time to build a strategy for when the info becomes public, and you are poised and ready to take action.

#2 The people with confidential info don't trust you, so they don't share info with you, so when the info becomes public, you are caught unprepared. And then people whine on the intraweb that you aren't doing a good job. ;)

Well put and makes sense. But I think the part about "whining on the interweb that you aren't doing a good job." should at the end of #1.
Just a joke. I think I'm finished with the subject. We obviously have a different view on things.

[Gateholio]

People will whine regardless of what the BCWF does....:shock:

[BCRiverBoater]

People will whine regardless of what the BCWF does....:shock:

Also will only mention the things they failed on or could not come through on. Funny how people do not come on here and talk about all the good things they have done. Would be nice to see some positive threads on Conservation that works for us.

[Gunner]

Over the years I've found that concerning hunting,fishing,or any other outdoor sport,the people who whine the most,are the people who DO the least. Gunner