I don't agree with banning Americans from hunting. Hunting should be shared as widely as possible before the antis do us all out of it. Otherwise we make the same mistakes as some yanks make with their stupid slamming of every ideology not their own. As a nation we have always managed to stay above that kind of hate. One thing about the yanks we are wise to recognize is their strong hunting and shooting communities. We should use their expertise and lobbying power to help us stop the official Ottawa Liberals and NDP from stripping us of guns and hunting rights.

Dewey has a good point. Guide outfitters usually refuse to accept BC hunters as clients, and will often refuse other Canadian clients. Given the remoteness of the hunting areas, this means that in reality only wealthy foreigners have access to some of the best game herds. Changes to the regulations would help the problem, but BC's government is largely big-business and centered in the south. They are mostly non shooters, don't hunt and don't care enough to change anything. This conflict is inevitable as long as the status quo effectively shuts BC and Canadian residents out of large areas of prime hunting. It could close out foreign hunting.

We need to get provincial politicians on our side to enforce more inclusive hunting. One of their issues is money - a foreigner can be forced to pay royalties per game animal that citizens don't pay. One answer would be persuading politicians to require more Canadian hunts. That means allowing more hunts so that government can get its revenues, and punishing GO's who refuse to fill local orders. Some will call this interference with private enterprise, but it shouldn't be a problem (beyond the ideological whiners) if done right. Since the GO does not share the royalty, his profit should be the same for any hunt.

Which takes me back to the first paragraph. We need to politic to get Canadians back into the remote hunting scene.

Dewey, jb is successfully trolling to yank your crank and sidetrack your thread. Just put him on ignore.

quote:

Originally posted by BBBruce:

Dewey, jb is successfully trolling to yank your crank and sidetrack your thread. Just put him on ignore.

I've been learning from the master of thread hijacking,bbbruce.

I have to give you credit ,though bruce,I think Iv'e made about 400 posts this year trading barbs with you.
You must of at least made 10,000 in the same amount of time.

But if it isnt me dewfus has to listen to,it'll be some one else.
On the other hand,if he didnt spout hate about americans,I wouldnt bother him,As I couldnt give a shit less about BC hunting,but he is too delusional to even think for a minute that that is possible.

BBB, very simply, the foreign hunters, especially the Yankees, provide the cash flow that enables the GOs to continue to exploit our wildlife and to lobby to impose even greater restrictions on we resident hunters.

Soooo, we ban foreign hunting here, the "hunting industry" is eliminated and WE have OUR wildlife back under OUR control. This is the most effective method of preserving what hunting will be left to us, subsequent to the "land claims" settlements.

Also, it is simpler than enacting blockades of Yankees, but, I will be heading north on Sat., the 13th instant and then to the Kootenays on the 21st.

If, I encounter any Yankees hunting here, I WILL advise them to go home, PDQ and I seriously doubt that any of them will be foolhardy enough to become aggressive toward me.....but, who knows, we will be only too happy to react in kind, rather forcefully, as Yankees do not belong here!

That's right....blame it on Americans you dumb bastard......not your own politicians for allowing foreign GOs to run the show. You are an impotent, little badger doody.

We have to play by the rules that YOU set up you dumb fuck.......man, are you tiresome.

My, my, you DO get a bit hostile, eh, you "big hat-no cows" blowhard.

So, stay home and be happy before you suffer an infarction!

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:

If, I encounter any Yankees hunting here, I WILL advise them to go home, PDQ and I seriously doubt that any of them will be foolhardy enough to become aggressive toward me.....but, who knows, we will be only too happy to react in kind, rather forcefully, as Yankees do not belong here!

So you will be committing a crime, obstruction with a lawful hunt.....Par for the course, given your history of bragging about trespassing and such.

we follow the laws that you dumb bastards dream up, and somehow it's our fault??? maybe you could afford to hunt in your own country if you were a little more capitalistic and a little less socialistic.

Sorry, old top, I have a six-figure income, retired at 55 and do whatever I please.

This is not about our laws or your following them, we just do not want your asshole kind here, get it?

and that is exactly the reason i quit hunting in Canada 10 years- discovered Africa is a MUCH better bang for the buck and with any luck at all, i will never spend another dime north of the border. i likewise have a 6 figure income and choose to spend it where i feel welcome.

Dewey's six figure income: $8,999.99

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
and that is exactly the reason i quit hunting in Canada 10 years- discovered Africa is a MUCH better bang for the buck and with any luck at all, i will never spend another dime north of the border. i likewise have a 6 figure income and choose to spend it where i feel welcome.

Well, we agree on something, African "hunting" is much less costly than B.C., Yukon and N.W.T. trips are and this is one of the reasons why guys like me want to change our entire system...naughty socialists that we are......

As to being welcome, that is a result of how you behave in other people's countrys and we Canadians seem welcome wherever we go. I do think, tho', that your's is the most realistic approach to being able to hunt anywhere.

Do you hunt in Alaska, I hear it is becoming VERY crowded and "out of state" nimrods are not always welcomed by those who live there...is this true, in your experience? It kinda reminds me of "The Dirty Thirties" and the starving, native-born "Okies" and how Kalifornians treated those fellow Americans....chickens, home, roost,eh?

God, now you sound like Rev. Jeremiah Wright!!! and no, i don't hunt Alaska anymore, even though it is cheaper than Canada.

quote:

Originally posted by Norton:
Dewey's six figure income: $8,999.99

6 figure income,2" dick,0 brains.

quote:

Dewey, jb is successfully trolling to yank your crank and sidetrack your thread. Just put him on ignore.

Done and a good idea, BBB, the creature "jb" is simply a waste of protoplasm.

The following users are currently not accepting your private topics:

Dewey

now if he would just go away!

quote:

Originally posted by jb:
The following users are currently not accepting your private topics:

Dewey

now if he would just go away!

how come YOU havent put me on ignore,bbb ?

As a fellow canadian I have to apologize for the behavior of that pole smoking, butt monkey Dewey who must be an anti. All that anger he shows must means he needs to get laid. For the record close to 50 % of the clients I guide are from Canada and most of those from BC.

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:
My, my, you DO get a bit hostile, eh, you "big hat-no cows" blowhard.

So, stay home and be happy before you suffer an infarction!

May you go the way of Murf yourself...

quote:

Originally posted by BBBruce:
I don't agree with banning Americans from hunting. Hunting should be shared as widely as possible before the antis do us all out of it. Otherwise we make the same mistakes as some yanks make with their stupid slamming of every ideology not their own. As a nation we have always managed to stay above that kind of hate. One thing about the yanks we are wise to recognize is their strong hunting and shooting communities. We should use their expertise and lobbying power to help us stop the official Ottawa Liberals and NDP from stripping us of guns and hunting rights.

Dewey has a good point. Guide outfitters usually refuse to accept BC hunters as clients, and will often refuse other Canadian clients. Given the remoteness of the hunting areas, this means that in reality only wealthy foreigners have access to some of the best game herds. Changes to the regulations would help the problem, but BC's government is largely big-business and centered in the south. They are mostly non shooters, don't hunt and don't care enough to change anything. This conflict is inevitable as long as the status quo effectively shuts BC and Canadian residents out of large areas of prime hunting. It could close out foreign hunting.

We need to get provincial politicians on our side to enforce more inclusive hunting. One of their issues is money - a foreigner can be forced to pay royalties per game animal that citizens don't pay. One answer would be persuading politicians to require more Canadian hunts. That means allowing more hunts so that government can get its revenues, and punishing GO's who refuse to fill local orders. Some will call this interference with private enterprise, but it shouldn't be a problem (beyond the ideological whiners) if done right. Since the GO does not share the royalty, his profit should be the same for any hunt.

Which takes me back to the first paragraph. We need to politic to get Canadians back into the remote hunting scene.

Dewey, jb is successfully trolling to yank your crank and sidetrack your thread. Just put him on ignore.

BBB,et al., you make some very sound points here and an alternative to the current system must be found and implemented in order to retain sufficient numbers of res. hunters for us to have ANY political clout....we have DAMM little now, as the whole "allocation" situation has sadly demonstrated.

When I was in high school, during the JFK era, hunting was seen as a normal and totally acceptable activity. In my hometown, 10,000 pop., there were two gunstores and 4-5 other firearms outlets and they ALL displayed firearms in their front windows routinely during the late summer and well into autumn. I first saw my favourite rifle, a P-64 Mod. 70 Alaskan, .338WM, in such a display when on my way to Sea Cadets, one Monday evening and nobody thought anything of guns hanging in pickup windows.

The outfitters we had then were ALL Canadians and locals who guided because they loved it and did not attempt to block resident hunters from access to our wildlife, as so many do now. So, the current problems have largely arisen since the 1980s and we are certainly being given the shitty end of the stick with respect to the "new" allocation policy and L.E.H., as well as certain access issues.

An alternative, might well be to study the various American states and the systems that they use to control access to game by non-residents and foreigners. A "draw" system, based on a specific percentage of available tags would give us back the control over and access to our hunting and game, while possibly providing some availablity for foreign hunters who are willing to wait and try to "draw" a specific tag, i.e., Stone's Sheep or RMGoat.

Given our demographic changes and the contemporary attitude of the vast majority of media commentators on hunting and especially trophy collecting by non-res. persons, such a system might well be the only option we have left.

I agree on the "politicing" needed and have been involved in it for decades, yet, we seem to be losing the fight and if we do not manage to change things VERY soon, I think that hunting of all types here in B.C. WILL be so circumscribed that we will not find it very appealing.

A case in point, a week ago, today, I was sighting-in a few of my rifles at Poco Range and a pleasant chap at the next bench commented to me about all the "black guns" evident on the range and, he THEN said, "don't see any good reason to own one, there is no reason to own a gun, except for hunting, really"....and he was in total earnest...........

Makes a guy think, eh?

Be careful Dewey, one of us foreigners might take a face to face the wrong way and pull his belt off, yank down your britches (thus exposing your cross dressing issue) and spank you.

regards,

Rich
DRSS

Nah, I am sure that you are cute, but, I am not gay or into S&M, sorry. You might go back to San Franfagcity and find a solution to your fantasies there.

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:
I was sighting-in a few of my rifles at Poco Range and a pleasant chap at the next bench commented to me about all the "black guns" evident on the range and, he THEN said, "don't see any good reason to own one, there is no reason to own a gun, except for hunting, really"....and he was in total earnest....

For the most part I agree with the guy you talked to at the range. If "we" buy military firearms and overtly threaten government the way the yanks do, government will simply buy more guns for themselves and enact tougher laws. Tit for tat. And we lose public support. The US has a serious gun problem and many of these guys here cause it. We don't want it or need it.

I don't need military weapons at home. If I ever have to defend my family my shotgun will do just as good a job. Its not as though a home scenario will result in a protracted gunfight. Your garden variety burglars will be beatin' feet at the first shot. Some guys here talk of keeping a handgun and a shotgun at their bedsides? I don't know how much of a gunfight they expect to have at home, but one must suspect them of overkill and playing Walter Mitty.

I saw a quote from an Alberta Provincial Court Judge recently about the right to gun ownership in Canada. He said that it is unsafe to think Canadian society can afford to disarm, and to do so is wrong and an unnecessary sacrifice to political correctness (not a quote). My hope is that the leftist gun registry was too much too soon. It alarmed Canadians and has created a pro-gun environment that did not exist before. What we have to do is nurture that new respect, not spoil it with US-type extremism.

Threads like this are pure gold for anti's

You guys always seem to have all your fun when I go away for a few days.

I have one request....Please keep it civil, or this thread will get punted to the Crater where it really belongs.

Also, as long as the debate/discussion is civil and remains in this forum, please consider it the "Official" thread for discussion "non-resident hunting in Canada". I don't want to see a rash of these threads "polluting" (for lack of a better term at the moment) the Canadian Hunting forum. The primary purpose of this forum is to share information and experiences about hunting in Canada...not to discuss the politics of it (there is a forum for that). I think most can see that this kind of thread can discourage the kind of discourse that the forum is intended for (in case folks can't, its because folks will decline to share their experience or ask questions if they feel they'll get jumped on for being a non-resident, etc). To that end, I may lock other threads on this topic and refer the participants back to this thread.

Given that its an important topic that potentially effects the future of hunting here, however, I have no issues with letting it continue here, within the limits I have expressed above.

Thanks for your cooperation,
Canuck

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Latham:
Threads like this are pure gold for anti's

Actually, I think that threads of this type are, or can be, VERY valuable in preserving hunting and gaining understanding of how others feel about some rather controversial and crucial issues. The "antis" will be the same whether we thrash things out here, or not.

The few "trailer trash" posters, such as those who use terms such as ...buttmonkey..., will never rise above their guttersnipe attitudes, so, my opinion is that this is a valid and potentially enlightening thread.

quote:

Originally posted by BBBruce:
What we have to do is nurture that new respect, not spoil it with US-type extremism.

Historically:

ONE
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

TWO
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

THREE
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

FOUR
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

etc etc

You greatly misinterpret " extremism" as to firearms possession by Americans--

The founders saw the possession of arms by individual citizens as a DIRECT counterbalance to governmental abuse, as were not billeting troops, freedom to gather,speak,worship,etc,etc
--if you will "extremism" of the government itself in oppressing the citizenry.

As to one Arm (firearm) type being non-useful as a tool for hunting as to protection from one's government or other threats--
there was no distinction.

As to how all this pertains to Canadian Hunting and/or gun rights-- I have read of only construed /indirect rights-- related to the Magna Carta, then the 1869 English Bill of Rights etc---

(Your knowledge of Canadian law should vastly outstrip mine.)
It would appear NO DIRECT RIGHT WAS STATED.

If no direct right was stated ,it would follow you may have no actual rights to keep and bear arms --whether you " overtly threaten " by purchase of a specific type of firearm or not.

As to Hunting in Canada by non-Canadians--American or other nationality--
Obviously, Canada's government can legislate in its best interest ---BUT, surely, the consideration of financial interest from hunting tourism MUST be a consideration of some significant magnitude.

Additionally , such an extreme move as to BAN a close trade partner country's citzens from a long established economic activity , would certainly be met with similar modalities in kind.

AS HUNTERS, any such consideration should disturb ALL of us-- as it signals a further erosion of our heritage ,passion and by many perceived right (in our own land)in this day of ONE WORLD style lawmaking and growing animal "rights" extremist positions.

Protecting the game animals by draw ,lottery, points ,etc --have been used in many locales ,as has simply escalating costs or requiring guides; all have varying degrees of success.

Alot for ALL to think of if we wish hunting to continue into the future in some recognizable, affordable manner.

Dewey,

As a Canadian with a three digit IQ I can proudly say, you are definitely NOT " One of us". Your views are an embarrasment to "all of us". Take up golf you whiney ...

i hate to see this border warfare . i have only hunted in Alberta for moose and love the place and its people. have made many good friends. i have seen both sides of some of these issues. as a non resident i can hunt moose ever year but the locals have to draw and maybe get a tag every other year. an advantage based only on money and supporting the industry. i watch cable channel hunts and it is starting to sicken me with my own countrymans attitude. got er done now lets get on to the next hunt. only a matter of money. and i think that this is really at the root of this problem. i am rambling but hate to agree with Dewey but i do see a grain of truth in his attitude. Not the way he displays it however. i m pretty sure this is the same way the English felt about us in 1943 and 1944. we were overpaid, oversexed and over there. i dont take my priviledge lightly by being allowed to hunt in Canada, i hope to again some day.

quote:

Originally posted by DuggaBoye:

quote:

Originally posted by BBBruce:
What we have to do is nurture that new respect, not spoil it with US-type extremism.

Historically:

ONE
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

TWO
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

THREE
No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

FOUR
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

etc etc

You greatly misinterpret " extremism" as to firearms possession by Americans--

I don't think I do at all. The wording of a constitution counts less than the culture that enforces it. The constitution of the old USSR was more generous than those of Canada or the US but that did not create civil rights in Russia.

quote:

The founders saw the possession of arms by individual citizens as a DIRECT counterbalance to governmental abuse, as were not billeting troops, freedom to gather,speak,worship,etc,etc
--if you will "extremism" of the government itself in oppressing the citizenry.

As to one Arm (firearm) type being non-useful as a tool for hunting as to protection from one's government or other threats--
there was no distinction.

As to how all this pertains to Canadian Hunting and/or gun rights-- I have read of only construed /indirect rights-- related to the Magna Carta, then the 1869 English Bill of Rights etc---

(Your knowledge of Canadian law should vastly outstrip mine.)
It would appear NO DIRECT RIGHT WAS STATED.

If no direct right was stated ,it would follow you may have no actual rights to keep and bear arms --whether you " overtly threaten " by purchase of a specific type of firearm or not.

In my opinion and the opinion of most of the civilized world, America has a gun problem. We know what your constitution says and why it says it. You still have a gun problem, perhaps because you have a culture and history of violence and guns top it off?

Joseph Wambaugh is an American police writer, and not a man one would consider anti-gun. In his 1989 book The Blooding, a true story about the search for an English serial murderer, he described the arrest of the killer. He wrote at page 325 (Bantam Books edition):

A surveillance and arrest of a major felony suspect is done differently in Britain than in the United States. In Britain a suspect under observation is often allowed to enter his house so that he can't get away. In a gun-crazy country like the U.S. the last thing the police want to do is let any suspect enter his house, where he might have enough firepower to take the Persian Gulf.

This is not meant as a slam of the US. Canadians seem to have a different relationship with their government than Americans. Our culture is less violent. I understand what DuggaBoye is saying about the legal basis to US gun rights. I disagree that they have created a healthy environment, if that is what Dugga is arguing. I also do not agree that Canadians should permit ourselves to be disarmed. I think there is a healthy compromise somewhere between what Canada had before the gun registry, and what Americans here at AR support which I think is extremist.

Canada is a common-law jurisdiction, which means that most of its constitutional rights have developed incrementally in the case law. The issue will ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court of Canada if it has to be. That court about ten years ago mentioned in another case that it thought the issue was important.

quote:

As to Hunting in Canada by non-Canadians--American or other nationality--
Obviously, Canada's government can legislate in its best interest ---BUT, surely, the consideration of financial interest from hunting tourism MUST be a consideration of some significant magnitude.

It is. Very much so. If you read the above arguments, it is being considered too much of a cash cow by the bean counters and not enough as a Canadian right. An unintended consequence of the present scheme is that Canadians are effectively banned from their own game herds in remote areas. If hunting is to survive, it must do so as a Canadian right, not just as a source of revenue for desperate politicians.

quote:

Additionally , such an extreme move as to BAN a close trade partner country's citzens from a long established economic activity , would certainly be met with similar modalities in kind.

From what Dewey said it already has been. Many states ban Canadians hunters.

America has no room to complain about border fiddling with business. George Bush broke every agreement Canada relied on every time we didn't go along with him - which was much of the time - and often just to create a cash cow for US lobbies.

quote:

AS HUNTERS, any such consideration should disturb ALL of us-- as it signals a further erosion of our heritage ,passion and by many perceived right (in our own land)in this day of ONE WORLD style lawmaking and growing animal "rights" extremist positions.

Protecting the game animals by draw ,lottery, points ,etc --have been used in many locales ,as has simply escalating costs or requiring guides; all have varying degrees of success.

Alot for ALL to think of if we wish hunting to continue into the future in some recognizable, affordable manner.

I agree.

Gentlemen,

I have a question.

If an outfitter/guide charges X amount of dollars for a specific hunt, why would he refuse a BC citizen????

I do not understand that. ???

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Gentlemen,

I have a question.

If an outfitter/guide charges X amount of dollars for a specific hunt, why would he refuse a BC citizen????

I do not understand that. ???

They think that if you show one resident how its done, he'll show up on his own (ie. not using the guide's services) with three friends the next year. And then they'll tell two friends, and so on....

Its happened.

[QUOTEAs to Hunting in Canada by non-Canadians--American or other nationality--
Obviously, Canada's government can legislate in its best interest ---BUT, surely, the consideration of financial interest from hunting tourism MUST be a consideration of some significant magnitude.

Additionally , such an extreme move as to BAN a close trade partner country's citzens from a long established economic activity , would certainly be met with similar modalities in kind.[/QUOTE]



I am primarily concerned with B.C. as wildlife management in Canada is a provincial matter and the Dominion Government has little to do with it. So, I will speak to B.C. issues here as they directly affect me and I am most familiar with them.

The REAL economic benefit to BC's people from foreign hunting here is miniscule and the effects of said hunting substantially impact upon our access to and harvest of our game. So, why allow hunters from foreign nations here, at all?

The reprisals mentioned which the USA could enact are LESS harmful to BC's economy than the actions of "Dubya" and his gang, who repeatedly BROKE TREATY AGREEMENTS with us and, quite frankly, that is something many here will NEVER forget or forgive. So, WHAT can the USA DO to us...refuse to pay for hundreds of millions of dollars worth of undervalued BC hydroelectric power....Oh, we just GAVE that to California, when those "free capitalists" could not/would not pay the money they OWED us.......

So, I do not give a damm WHAT the mighty USA is going to TRY to do to us as WE will do just fine without any dependence on "Uncle" and should have pursued a totally independent foreign policy from WWII onward.

Frankly, I have no particular animus toward Americans and like many of them; this is about what is BEST for BC and that is my only concern.

I would really like to see a "referendum" here in BC on ALL foreign hunting and fishing and I am willing to bet that most citizens would vote in favour of banning such exploitation of our resources.

To me, this INCLUDES allowing foreign (and this also means British) "environmentalists" to come here and arrogantly tell us where/when/how we can log, mine, hunt, fish or anything else.

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:

quote:

Originally posted by N E 450 No2:
Gentlemen,

I have a question.

If an outfitter/guide charges X amount of dollars for a specific hunt, why would he refuse a BC citizen????

I do not understand that. ???

They think that if you show one resident how its done, he'll show up on his own (ie. not using the guide's services) with three friends the next year. And then they'll tell two friends, and so on....

Its happened.

Very true. But game is a public resource, hunting is carried out on public land and the GO's are given licenses, not ownership. If someone wants to go to all that work to circumvent a GO it might be that the GO's prices are too high. In any event they should not have the right to monopolize the resource to non-residents. I scarcely think that enough residents are going to show up to be anything other than an inconvenience. Every other business sector has to compete in their neighbourhood.

quote:

Originally posted by Dewey:
I would really like to see a "referendum" here in BC on ALL foreign hunting and fishing and I am willing to bet that most citizens would vote in favour of banning such exploitation of our resources.

I am willing to bet the NDP would turn it into an anti-hunting referendum and the tree huggers would pack the polls.

quote:

Originally posted by chilcotin hillbilly:
As a fellow canadian I have to apologize for the behavior of that pole smoking, butt monkey Dewey who must be an anti. All that anger he shows must means he needs to get laid. For the record close to 50 % of the clients I guide are from Canada and most of those from BC.

So rather than attacking him, why not recognize the truths in what he says? Your territory is not as remote as the Alaska Highway territories so there is no way you can keep BC hunters out. The remote guys have the rep of screwing residents; can you think of ways to make it more fair?

why not recognize the truths



Im having a hard time believing anything some people say anymore.

So, although it's been shown to be true numerous times that hunting drives more wildlife conservation efforts than all the antis in the world ever did, you jokers want to ban hunting?
You dont want to pay the guides prices, and at the same time want to ban the people that do?
There are plenty of places in africa where hunting and the money it brings are banned, look into what it has done for wildlife in those countries.
Two ways to go here boys, continue to whine about the big bad foreigners and get you ban on hunting enacted, or, start acting like sportsmen.

quote:

Originally posted by DIYASUB:
So, although it's been shown to be true numerous times that hunting drives more wildlife conservation efforts than all the antis in the world ever did, you jokers want to ban hunting?
You dont want to pay the guides prices, and at the same time want to ban the people that do?
There are plenty of places in africa where hunting and the money it brings are banned, look into what it has done for wildlife in those countries.

You err on a number of points. Canuck has asked quite nicely that we keep this an issue-focused Canadian Hunting debate, not a crater-type pissing contest. Your post seems more like the latter. If I am incorrect I apologize. We are discussing solutions.

Second, everybody is not anti-anything. Dewey is concerned because the current way that GO's operate does not work well for Canadian and especially BC hunters. He is right. If you couldn't get hunting as, where and when you wanted at home because of Canadians, you too might search for solutions. Dewey has said that in some states Canadians can't hunt big game at all. Dewey has responded to one of my posts saying that what I have written makes sense, and my first sentence in the thread says, I don't agree with banning Americans from hunting. Why don't you join us in talking about sharing the hunting?

Third, while governments make money off foreign hunters, it is a drop in the bucket of overall revenues. It's not unimportant, but it's not a big deal either. Dubya chopped all Canadian beef and softwood lumber exports to the US and didn't budge us one inch to joining the Iraq war effort. Foreign hunters are unimportant enough that BC's left wing NDP (a political party) would shut down hunting in a heartbeat. As I said above, we could use the expertise of the US hunting fraternity in helping us keep hunting alive. You might have missed that part.

The thrust of the discussion is keeping the hunt for everybody because we are hunters. Not just Americans but all foreigners. Not because we want your money, but because we want to share the hunt. If push came to shove and Canada banned all foreign hunting our economy wouldn't even hiccup. We would rather share, but as Dewey points out, sharing should not mean that regulations are used by GO's in a left-handed way to keep us out of prime territory.

So Diyasub, would you care to join buffalobreath in saying, 'yeah, let's talk?'

No thanks. My mistake, I thought the thread was about something else but it's obvious from the posts that it's about banning hunting by foreigners to prove Canada's economic independence from the U.S.
I have no interest in such topics. The economics of hunting and how those economics affect wildlife conservation are more important.