Paying to hunt

[warren0427]

Has anyone heard anything on landowners being able to legally charge hunters to hunt on their land next year?
If so, any details?

[bigwhiteys]

This has been going on for a while... I know of properties in the FSJ area where farmers want you to pay for access...

Anywhere from $150 to $300 a day is not uncommon.

Happy Hunting!
Carl

[Farmer]

I hope that these are not the same farmers and ranchers who are complaining about the deer, elk, and moose eating their winter feed.

[browningboy]

If thats the case, I found my new career! I'm packing up and buying as much land as possible, but seriously, its been happening for awhile, if you go on a buffalo hunt at pink mnt etc, you will pay!8)

[troutseeker]

Same thing between Dawson Creek and Chetwynd. Farmers will allow you to hunt the Elk opening on their land as long as you "buy" a very expensive bale of hay...

Troutseeker

[browningboy]

Same thing between Dawson Creek and Chetwynd. Farmers will allow you to hunt the Elk opening on their land as long as you "buy" a very expensive bale of hay...

Troutseeker

Just make sure you don't touch the "other" hay they're growing!:lol:

[mark]

If thats the case, I found my new career! I'm packing up and buying as much land as possible, but seriously, its been happening for awhile, if you go on a buffalo hunt at pink mnt etc, you will pay!8)

You will pay??? Why? Are you to lazy to take the trail that goes around the ranch property?

Only time id pay to hunt on someones land would be if I KNEW there was trophy class animals there, even then it would bug me!

[browningboy]

You will pay??? Why? Are you to lazy to take the trail that goes around the ranch property?

Only time id pay to hunt on someones land would be if I KNEW there was trophy class animals there, even then it would bug me!

no, not too lazy well sometimes but in all seriousness when we were there the property seemed pretty penned up and signs were friggin everywhere so in frustration we asked to go hunt there and it was 300 per day for the two of us and we said f**k that (we were only moose hunting but scouting for buffalo), but at that time we didn't know the land that well but seen the sign and animals on their property.8)

[mark]

Ya, but right at the gate to the 300. a day ranch, theres a trail to the right that goes around that property and your in the back of it. thats how it was 10 years ago when i slammed my buff!

[Will]

Wanna play in someone's backyard.......you Pay ;)

Still plenty of Crown land for me.........for now:|

[browningboy]

Ya, but right at the gate to the 300. a day ranch, theres a trail to the right that goes around that property and your in the back of it. thats how it was 10 years ago when i slammed my buff!

Never seen the trail to the right but the property was so expansive, it was nuts and we didn't waste too much time there, but beautifull in some areas, the only area I thought would go there is when you reach the gate "muskwa / kechicka park" but without knowing forture, didn't want to chance or waste time.8)

[hunter1947]

This has been going on for a while... I know of properties in the FSJ area where farmers want you to pay for access...

Anywhere from $150 to $300 a day is not uncommon.

Happy Hunting!
Carl I wounder if they pay Tax on the money they get from the hunters ???? :lol: hunter 1947

[tuchodi]

Mark you are right about the trail past the gate. It was that way 2 years ago also and I dont think it can change because of the Park, I believe Mike has 2 quarters deeded land. You can go to the lands office and there you can buy a map showing his property so you can make sure you dont trespass. I payed his $300 a day about 5 years ago and for that you got a room and all your meals.

[Walksalot]

Hey guys, these farmers/ranchers are froze to the land by the ALR. The government lets cheap imports undermine the industry and the Mad Cow disease has decimated the cattle industry. These land owners are trying to make a dollar any way they can. Should they be forced to farm the land, have the governments ungulates destroy their feed storages and on top of it all let hunters on THEIR LAND for free. Maybe a tub of KY Jelly should be placed by each land owners gate so they can be screwed in fine style. People with their montly incomes, pention plans and benefit packages should take a hard look within themselves.

[boatdoc]

Walksalot makes a good point ,the land owner pays the the property taxes,therefore can decide who , when and how much.I don't want to pay a fee for access,but respect a farmers right to ask.

[BCLongshot]

I don't think I'd pay we have way to much public land here.

I couldn't pay anyways after maxing out all my credit borrowing money from every family member, friends, dogs, girlfriend to buy that Barbie quad. I'm in a serious hole now. Maybe I can take my Marlin back to Reliable for a partial refund.

[Gateholio]

it's thier land, they can ask anyone they like to pay to acess it. You can do the same even if you live in an urban area- if you can convince someone it's worth $100 a day to wander around your backyard...:lol:

[bigwhiteys]

If I had spotted a buck on private land and it was something I wanted to shoot I would definitely pay the farmer for access if thats what he wanted.

Fortunately there are still plenty of farmers who don't charge for access so I'll concentrate on hunting their land first.

Happy Hunting!
Carl

[Rainwater]

Region 8 biologist is proposing a private land hunt from Aug. 1 to Aug. 31 and you can bet your ass those farmers bitching about too many animals will have their hand out. Oh yah, he also wants to increase the bag limit, he thought this one up all on his own too. Seen it happen here before when the ministry jacklighted a huge amount of mulies on a farmers field, offered so many tags for that field and when the guys showed up to hunt the farmer wanted $20.

[Gateholio]

Region 8 biologist is proposing a private land hunt from Aug. 1 to Aug. 31 and you can bet your ass those farmers bitching about too many animals will have their hand out. Oh yah, he also wants to increase the bag limit, he thought this one up all on his own too. Seen it happen here before when the ministry jacklighted a huge amount of mulies on a farmers field, offered so many tags for that field and when the guys showed up to hunt the farmer wanted $20.

If a farmer is applying for government crop predation grants, it is shameful to ask for hunters cash.

I think that there should be more enforcemnet of this- If you get a grant, you agree to let hunters acess your land - unless you can demonstrate, on a case by case basis, why a particular hunter(s) shoudl not be allowed on your land.

[bigwhiteys]

If a farmer is applying for government crop predation grants, it is shameful to ask for hunters cash.


If hunters are going to be driving through the farmers fields/crops etc... I don't think it's all that unreasonable to ask for a small amount of cash. Even if the farmer applied for a grant... Charging $100-$300 a day would be ridiculous but $20.00?

Happy Hunting!
Carl

[Gateholio]

I can see that sort of argument- If the hunter is truly going ot be doing some damage. But I woudl htink that the benefit the hunter brings by reducing the herd that is damaging the crops would outweigh any damage his truck may do...:confused:

[bigwhiteys]

But I woudl htink that the benefit the hunter brings by reducing the herd that is damaging the crops would outweigh any damage his truck may do...:confused:

A pickup truck with a driver who doesn't know any better or may not care and drives through 1/2 mile of windrows costs the farmer $$$$.

But that depends on the season, the crops, etc...

Most farmers are pretty honest, hard working guys, they aren't trying to cheat us and if you are fair with them they are usually fair with you.

Maybe a deposit would be better... Leave $100 with the farmer when you go on the land... Good incentive to behave and respect the land (although most would anyways) and you get your money back when you leave.

Carl

[Walksalot]

[quote=Gatehouse]If a farmer is applying for government crop predation grants, it is shameful to ask for hunters cash.


Not by a long shot. The amount the farmers will get is peanuts compared to what they are loosing and alot of the grant money will go to buy feed to replace what was lost Besides, along with covering their losses they might, just might want to put a dollar in the bank.

Look around and see how people are ****ing the system to a finish and a farmer gets a few bucks to replace feed and that's all he/she deserves. I think it is disgusting.

[Gateholio]

[quote=Gatehouse]If a farmer is applying for government crop predation grants, it is shameful to ask for hunters cash.


Not by a long shot. The amount the farmers will get is peanuts compared to what they are loosing and alot of the grant money will go to buy feed to replace what was lost Besides, along with covering their losses they might, just might want to put a dollar in the bank.

Look around and see how people are ****ing the system to a finish and a farmer gets a few bucks to replace feed and that's all he/she deserves. I think it is disgusting.

I wasn't aware that it was such a small amount. Good points..

[Rainwater]

I heard wah wah here for so many years from fruit farmers, and for them fencing has solved the problem. I realize that fencing on huge cattle ranches is impracticle but not fencing your haystack is like leaving your wallet on the street hoping it will be there tomorrow. Cattle farmers place cattle on crown land every year at a fee that is so cheap it would amaze, their truck insurance is way cheaper than yours or mine and tax is not paid by them on many things you and I pay tax on. Further to this they are often subsidized in ways that other small business people just plain and simple are not. They do NOT own the wildlife. This slippery road will lead to one thing, the RICH hunt and we stay home. Don't cry to me if you want to be a farmer, by the way I have land run as an organic carrot farm and those damn whities just figured out how dig, now let me see how many tags I can get!!!

[Walksalot]

Compared to the rest of the world farmers in Canada is one of the least subsidized. Until one has walked a mile in their shoes they have no idea what it is like. I applaude their charging people to hunt on their land and the more they can get the better. Bucks for bucks and bigger bucks for bigger bucks.

[Rainwater]

Welcome to Texas Walksalot.

[browningboy]

I know that our business deals with farmers in the lower mainland, and I haven't seen a poor farmer yet! In fact most of them laugh at me when I mention about subsides etc.. I was told by one of the largest blueberry / cranberry farmers that they get so many subsidies from the government and government guarunteed loans from banks that they have all new equipment, houses, trucks, cheap farm fuel, the list goes on and on.
:confused: Seems opposite of what I always heard, but if you drive around the farmers fields, they sure do have large new houses etc..:roll:
HMM gumboots...velcro gloves...sheep!:lol:

[Walksalot]

The fruit industry and the cattle industry is in financial ruin. Good on them for charging people to hunt on their property.

[Rainwater]

I have lots of friends in the fruit industry (most are organic) and know a lot of cattle ranchers in our Valley, all are doing well, plus enjoying their lifestyle. Quite a few of our Ranchers are gonna be hurt when the Fed Gov't shoves a National Park down our throats as well as some fruit farmers who have not fenced (they will simply have to). So trust your comments about the poor farmers are factual, I was one at one time and we were always whining. One of my anti-bowhunting buddies was spouting off about all our special seasons, I looked over at his truck and said A plate and of course could not resist the rebuttle. I sure as hell don't get a deal to drive to my job, do you?

[todbartell]

So trust your comments about the poor farmers are factual, I was one at one time and we were always whining.

Some things never change, eh? :lol: :lol:

[Rainwater]

I know what you mean TB and every year they keep whining but they love it and keep doin it.

[300WM]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Gateholio]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Jetboat]

their truck insurance is way cheaper than yours or mine and tax is not paid by them on many things you and I pay tax on


I call bullshit on that statement. I happen to farm north of Fort St. John and supposedly I'll recieve a partial GST rebate (waiting 10 months so far) I have two farm trucks and save about $200 between the pair of them compared to what I was paying before for the same coverage. Ya, big tax breaks and huge insurance savings :roll: We choose to live and farm for the lifestyle, not the so-called benefits.

[Rainwater]

Depends on the truck, usually on a new truck at least a $300 saving on each unit. And if you look at my last post is says exactly that, lifestyle.

[wetcoaster]

The argument need go no further as it is their property. It is different if there are land use agreements etc on crown land but if they have the deed to the property they can do what they want. If someone is willing to pay they will be hunting. Do I like it of course not but it is becoming fairly common and I respect their right to do what they want with their property. This sort of thing is rampant aong the fraser delta for waterfowl and will only get worse. This is why we need to keep as much land as we can as crown land that is shared land use. Or else we edge ever closer to a European model and hunting becomes an elitest rich mans past time.

[hunter1947]

Never have ,never will pay to hunt ,i just do it fine myself ,hunter 1947.:lol:

[boxhitch]

Some things never change, eh? :lol: :lol:
:lol: :lol:

[Seeadler]

If a farmer is applying for government crop predation grants, it is shameful to ask for hunters cash.

I think that there should be more enforcemnet of this- If you get a grant, you agree to let hunters acess your land - unless you can demonstrate, on a case by case basis, why a particular hunter(s) shoudl not be allowed on your land.

Who owns the animals? If the neighbours cattle tramples someones fences and eats their hay, they have legal recourse for damages. Wildlife belonging to the crown can damage private property and yet there is no recourse.

People think that payment for damages should entail allowing hunters onto private property. This is wrong. As I have said, the Crown's property is damaging private property, and the Crown should therefore be legally responsible for compensation.

I own farmland and have been offered compensation with the caveat that I allow access. I will not participate in any scheme like this. I don't want the peanuts that they offer (and it is peanuts when you consider how much 50 elk can eat, or 50+ deer that are there night after night, and I can't draw an antlerless elk LEH to save my life). So I give up my right to determine who can and can't access my property for a few dollars, they can forget it.

[boxhitch]

People think that payment for damages should entail allowing hunters onto private property. This is wrong.
So,why not charge a tresspass fee at your gate, to help you take care of your problem ?

As I have said, the Crown's property is damaging private property, and the Crown should therefore be legally responsible for compensation.

'The crowns property'????? So what do you call coyotes or neighbors dogs that harrass/eat your livestock ? or the freak storm that floods a field ? or the hail storm that wrecks a crop ? You the property owner, should be able to look after your problems, however. If that means fencing, ditching, pesticides, stock-protection dogs or donkeys, whatever.

[Fisher-Dude]

So,why not charge a tresspass fee at your gate, to help you take care of your problem ?

'The crowns property'????? So what do you call coyotes or neighbors dogs that harrass/eat your livestock ? or the freak storm that floods a field ? or the hail storm that wrecks a crop ? You the property owner, should be able to look after your problems, however. If that means fencing, ditching, pesticides, stock-protection dogs or donkeys, whatever.

X2...

The Crown is NOT responsible for the actions of game animals, or any animals for that matter. If you are out hiking and a grizzly bear chews your leg off, do you think the Crown should compensate you? If you are driving your car and hit a moose, should the Crown pay for repairs? If a mouse shits in your cupboards, should the Crown pay to clean it up?

There is a degree of risk that one assumes by being a landowner. There are costs associated with running any business. Don't expect the Crown to assume those risks and pay those costs on your behalf.

[Hank Hunter]

The whole issue on paying to hunt, other than normal license, tags etc. is sad. Slippery slope to everything fenced in for the almighty buck

[browningboy]

The whole issue on paying to hunt, other than normal license, tags etc. is sad. Slippery slope to everything fenced in for the almighty buck
Sure is but a fact of life:sad:

[Seeadler]

So,why not charge a tresspass fee at your gate, to help you take care of your problem ?

'The crowns property'????? So what do you call coyotes or neighbors dogs that harrass/eat your livestock ? or the freak storm that floods a field ? or the hail storm that wrecks a crop ? You the property owner, should be able to look after your problems, however. If that means fencing, ditching, pesticides, stock-protection dogs or donkeys, whatever.

Wild animals ARE the property of the Crown, why do you think we have to buy licences and tags?

If the neighbour's dog damages my property, I could sue him (or in reality, shoot his dog). Same goes if his cattle trample my garden (the sueing part, a few carrots aren't worth shooting someones cows). In my experience, coyotes are only a problem if you have chickens running around, they are actually a benefit because they seem to prefer mice. BTW, in many areas, below 1100m in elevation (ie agricultural areas), there is no closed season on wolves. Bears are not an issue either as it is bear season almost the entire time they are out of their dens.

I won't high fence my property, only stategic parts of it, ie stackyard for hay. I don't want to exclude wildlife from my property, or prevent them from grazing in the spring.

I don't want any money for floods, hail, or whatever else you can think of. I don't even want money for damages caused by deer and elk. If the gov't would give me one antlerless elk tag and 3 antlerless deer tags, valid for the entire year, to be used only on my property, they would never hear anything from me on the issue again. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that the deer and elk eat my grass and trees, I should be able to eat them.

Other than high fences, there are no non-lethal ways to keep the deer away. Dogs don't work, you can't let them chase the deer and if they are tied up the deer soon learn to ignore them. Chemical deterents are very limited in their effect. So are motion activated lights and sprinklers, the deer figure out pretty quick that they are harmless. About the only thing that I haven't tried is shooting them with rubber buckshot.

Elk are very agressive and will chase horses and cattle away from their feed. And if startled or chased will wreak fences.

Anyways, these are just my ramblings on the subject. I enjoy seeing animals around and don't want them gone. I just resent the suggestion that compensation for damage is conditional on granting access. (And it is that very reason why I refuse to participate in those programs).

[Rainwater]

I do agree with you on not wanting to see animals gone but if you are grazing crown land which could be considered winter range and growing fodder on what originally was winter range then we are gonna have some problems.

[GoatGuy]

Wild animals are property of the Crown - this doesn't entitle anyone to 'get' tags for any reason, particularly if they own the land that these wild animals may use. Charging fees is a slippery slope that eventually opens up the free market where the folks with the most $$ get access and the rest are shutout. On top of that it seldomn encourages conservation, but infact supports trophy hunting and in several areas in the states farmers have become game farmers.

As far as the farmer goes, if you don't like the damage animals are creating, high fence it. It's an extremely easy solution - heck, if you complain enough the government (actually taxpayers) will pay for it just to keep farmers happy.

There are other more challenging solutions but it requires time, effort and cooperation. If you want a solution you have to look for it. IMO landowner tags, charging access fees or insurance claims aren't the answer.

Besides, farming is already amongst one of Canada's most heavily subsidized industries which, since several technological innovations, creates fewer jobs. Canadians think it's part of our tradition so we should support them at taxpayers expense- it's kind of a feel good thing. Not that I don't like to feel good about farming and our history, but there's a lonnnnnnnggggggg drawn out economic argument against farming in Canada. Subsidizing farmers isn't anything restricted to Canada; there are several countries which subsidize their farmers - in the States they pay farmers to grow grain, tarp it and let it rot.

To say farmers should get landowners tags is outrageous considering animals belong to the Crown especially when farmers are already given government funded handouts in several areas.

[Hank Hunter]

ditto on that, farming and wildlife are different topics

[tmarschall]

This might seem a bit far fetched, but things could be headed for even worse situation in the future.....
Landowners could consider their land a private guide area and want allocations for harvesting, then they would consider themselves "guides" and have foreigners from wherever come and pay out the ying-yang to come and harvest their animals. Animals on private property would be financially out of reach for most residents. Thats how most of Texas is set up now... sigh... don't let 'em do it!!!!!

[Tank]

As far as the farmer goes, if you don't like the damage animals are creating, high fence it. It's an extremely easy solution

I priced out putting chain link fence around my yard the other day....I wouldn't even want to guess what a "high fence" around 1/4 section would cost!

[J_T]

But if you lived in the East Kootenay, the Government would pay to fence your property. Full section or bigger. Nice high fence.

[Walksalot]

To you guys who advcate fencing to cure the problem, do you have any idea how much habitat will be lost to the wildlife. Animal numbers can be drastically changed by the farmer/rancher changing crops but to eliminate that much habitat from the equation could cause a drastic fluctuation in animal numbers.
Fencing is just the start. Do you guys have any idea how much work it entails in maintaining a four foot fence? Well just double that for an eight foot fence. The land owner would have to under take a tree removal program to eliminate any potential snag from falling across the fence.
The bears will tunnel under the fence and then the deer will use these to access the property. It is not as simple as it sounds.

[Mr. Dean]

This might seem a bit far fetched, but things could be headed for even worse situation in the future.....
Landowners could consider their land a private guide area and want allocations for harvesting, then they would consider themselves "guides" and have foreigners from wherever come and pay out the ying-yang to come and harvest their animals. Animals on private property would be financially out of reach for most residents. Thats how most of Texas is set up now... sigh... don't let 'em do it!!!!!


Yup. About 20 years in the future.....:cry:

[Seeadler]

High fencing really is a terrible solution, it cuts the animals off from high quality feeding areas, especially at spring green-up, as well, if farm after farm is highfenced, it also cuts off movement.

As to cost, I believe that high fencing runs around $7000/km and it is 3.2 km around a 160 acre piece or land. The gov't will chip in (AFAIK they will not pay the whole shot) to entirely fence off a property, but will not provide incentive to fence off things like stackyards for hay storage. Which to my mind is completely backwards.

I derive a great deal of pleasure from seeing big game animals around my place, but when I am feeding 100+ animals (deer and elk combined, i have counted up to 84 elk at one time), deer are eating anything that I plant in my yard (and even looking in my windows at times, that is how close they come, they even smashed and ate my jack-o-lantern at halloween), and elk are knocking down my fences, it gets to be quite frustrating.

As to the point of this thread, paying to hunt, Unless it was a great deal of money, I wouldn't allow someone to pay me to hunt on my land. I bought it and pay taxes on it and private hunting grounds is one of the few perks that come from that investment. Also, since I have Crown land on two sides, anyone that would pay me to hunt obviously hasn't figured out that they can sit a couple hundred yards from my hayfield on Crown land with no problems.

If someone came to my door and said they had a doe tag, I would have no problem allowing them to take one just to be rid of one of the more brazen deer.

[Tank]

As to the point of this thread, paying to hunt, Unless it was a great deal of money, I wouldn't allow someone to pay me to hunt on my land. I bought it and pay taxes on it and private hunting grounds is one of the few perks that come from that investment. Also, since I have Crown land on two sides, anyone that would pay me to hunt obviously hasn't figured out that they can sit a couple hundred yards from my hayfield on Crown land with no problems.

If someone came to my door and said they had a doe tag, I would have no problem allowing them to take one just to be rid of one of the more brazen deer.

get ready for a truck-load of PM's:lol:

[Mr. Dean]

High fencing really is a terrible solution, it cuts the animals off from high quality feeding areas, especially at spring green-up, as well, if farm after farm is highfenced, it also cuts off movement.

Agreed.



...since I have Crown land on two sides, anyone that would pay me to hunt obviously hasn't figured out that they can sit a couple hundred yards from my hayfield on Crown land with no problems.

How about filling me in on where ya live. I could be into an Elk hunt next season. :wink: :cool:

Just PM me the coordinates, I'll take it from there.

[Gateholio]

We are all happy to help wiht your deer/elk problem...

Don't worry..

We are from the Internet.:lol: :lol:

[Walksalot]

Making a bit of a clarification. In my last post I referred to private land as habitat and that is incorrect, it is a food source. Also, any live animal belongs to the crown but if you find a dead one and tell the government to get their animal off your land they will tell you it belongs to you. Been there.

[Gunner]

I must say that I like the way it works in Saskatchewan.My wifes relatives all farm,and they are elgible for compensation if ducks or geese damage their crops(Swathed grain etc,).However to receive compensation(crop insurance),they must allow hunters on their property.I realize this is not practical or acceptable to some BC farmers(I grew up on a farm myself),but it sure makes for some great shooting oppurtunities back there.I have never been turned down when asking fot permission to hunt waterfowl,or upland birds for that matter.None of the grain fields are fenced,and it can be difficult to find the owners sometimes,but if I don't have permission,I don't hunt.It is illegal in Saskatchewan for the farmer to charge for access,although many do,particularly to guides and yanks.Gunner

[Rainwater]

Really hard to compare a green head to a 170 class typical whitetail. People are not paying tens of thousands of dollars to shoot widgeons, lets not go Texan hey!

[Seeadler]

How about filling me in on where ya live. I could be into an Elk hunt next season. :wink: :cool:

Just PM me the coordinates, I'll take it from there.

Just look in the LEH for any area that has antlerless draws, then request a land ownership map from whichever Regional District it is in and you are good to go, maybe even google earth the area and pick out the green fields. I don't think there are any secret (accessable) areas, as one fellow I know has put it, the elk hunters "circle around here like a bunch of Indians circling a cowboy".

Almost forgot to add; if the Crown land you want to hunt on is under a Grazing Tenure, you will need the permission of the tenure holder to hunt on it IF the land is occupied by cattle (which I believe it can be until November). Not sure where this information would come from, probably the Ministry of Forests is my guess.

[Mr. Dean]

Just look in the LEH for any area that has antlerless draws, then request a land ownership map from whichever Regional District it is in and you are good to go, maybe even google earth the area and pick out the green fields. I don't think there are any secret (accessable) areas, as one fellow I know has put it, the elk hunters "circle around here like a bunch of Indians circling a cowboy".


But I was hoping to help out with your plight...
If your area is only open to LEH, it does make things difficult, to say the least.



Almost forgot to add; if the Crown land you want to hunt on is under a Grazing Tenure, you will need the permission of the tenure holder to hunt on it IF the land is occupied by cattle (which I believe it can be until November). Not sure where this information would come from, probably the Ministry of Forests is my guess.

This a well known AND is a whole new can of worms.
Many hunters invest a great deal of time and $$ into a hunt that can take them hundreds of miles from their home turf - Only to find cattle on the mountain they wish to hunt.

Many of these guys travel in on a Friday night (weekend) then are forced to wait it out for the ministry office to open and then try to locate WHO'S field moose are WHO'S and then track down the owners and get the permission. Could take two or three more days to get things ironed out.

Half a week is lost on a one week hunt.
Shoulda stayed home and watched pay-per-views.

It would've been more productive. :wink:

[bcfarmer]

[
Almost forgot to add; if the Crown land you want to hunt on is under a Grazing Tenure, you will need the permission of the tenure holder to hunt on it IF the land is occupied by cattle (which I believe it can be until November). Not sure where this information would come from, probably the Ministry of Forests is my guess.[/quote]

I beleive your mistaken.....If the Crown land you want to hunt is under a grazing lease, and there are cattle on it then you have to ask the rancher permision.

There is a difference between the two. Only a few actual leases in the province currently but many grazing tenures. This is according to a local rancher.

[Jagermeister]

.....Almost forgot to add; if the Crown land you want to hunt on is under a Grazing Tenure, you will need the permission of the tenure holder to hunt on it IF the land is occupied by cattle (which I believe it can be until November). Not sure where this information would come from, probably the Ministry of Forests is my guess.I would like you or anybody else to direct me to any government site that supports this statement of claim. I have searched BC government sites, Ministry of Forests and others and have been unable to substantiate this claim. This applies in Alberta, but I am un-aware that it exists in BC.

[Seeadler]

I beleive your mistaken.....If the Crown land you want to hunt is under a grazing lease, and there are cattle on it then you have to ask the rancher permision.

There is a difference between the two. Only a few actual leases in the province currently but many grazing tenures. This is according to a local rancher.

It is possible that I am mistaken. Someone that knows more than me will have to pipe in on the difference between lease and tenure (I use the terms, perhaps wrongly, interchangably).

[BCrams]

Jager - page 12 of the hunting regulations.



3.

Wildlife Act

(Section 39) - A person is not
p e rmitted to hunt on cultivated land or on
Crown land which is subject to a grazing lease
while the land is occupied by livestock, without
the consent of the owner, lessee or occupant
of the land.

[Seeadler]

I would like you or anybody else to direct me to any government site that supports this statement of claim. I have searched BC government sites, Ministry of Forests and others and have been unable to substantiate this claim. This applies in Alberta, but I am un-aware that it exists in BC.

Look on page 12 of the hunting regulations. The #3 point refers to Section 39 of the Wildlife Act.

Section 39 (b) to be exact:
http://www.qp.gov.bc.ca/statreg/stat/W/96488_01.htm#section39

"(b) hunts over Crown land that is subject to a grazing lease while the land is occupied by livestock"

[Gateholio]

Sooooooo...How many grazing LEASES are there, as opposed to TENURES, as suggested in a previous post?

[Mr. Dean]

Here's the DUMB question of the day.

What is a tenure?

[Mauser98]

Sooooooo...How many grazing LEASES are there, as opposed to TENURES, as suggested in a previous post?

I think I'll muddy the water some more.

Grazing lease: a lease of Crown land issued for grazing purposes under the Land Act.

I don't know how many Grazing leases there are in BC but I have found out the Ministry of Land and Water isn't issuing new ones. They are renewing existing Leases.

http://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hra/grazing/

The Minisrty of Forests issues Grazing Licences(10 yr term), Grazing Permits(up to 5 yrs), Hay Cutting Licences(10 yr term) and Hay Cutting Permits(1 yr). These Licences and Permits give the agreement holders the right to the forage growing on the Crown Land. They don't give the holders any right to the land as is the case with a Grazing Lease.