/

I don't like it but they pulled out their money to do it. What's the difference between that and a syndicate of European hunters buying it and using it as their own private hunting preserve? Maybe I should go and buy out an outfitter. Then when the antis come to me I could make a pot full of money selling to them.

the chef

C

What is the public response to this? Do BC hunters, Fish and Game associations, guide/outfitters, etc. have an opinion on this, and do they carry any political weight?

Have provincial government officials commented on the wisdom of this move?

The relationship between resident hunters, outfitters, first nations and environmental groups seems very complex in BC. Please educate non-BCers on the implications of this development.

An interesting cocept. An anti-hunting group has created a Resident only Hunting area. Doesn't sound too bad to me. Perhaps B.C, residents should be sending them money, so they can buy up some more. If 40% of the kills are by Residents, as they claim, as a B.C. resident, I'd be pissed that Non-residents are killing the bulk. My only question is, what is the Native's role in this? If their action to ban all Sport hunting there is successful, some Outfitter got 1.3 million bucks for essentially nothing.
Grizz

/

The text that I read stated the intent of the native groups were to ban resident hunting after 2006, so I don't see this as an opportunity for resident hunters.

One of the outfitters who has apparently sold his outfit to this group is Leonard Ellis. He traded as Bella Coola Outfitting Company.
http://www.bcoutfitting.com/hunting.htm
I think he has a booth at the SCI Reno Convention. Look him up and ask him about it.

From what I understand, the GOABC is not amused about this.

Trouble
Big trouble

Ellis claims that he consulted the GOABC before the sale and that they approved it . . . Somethin' don't smell right.

quote:

Originally posted by John G:
Ellis claims that he consulted the GOABC before the sale and that they approved it . . . Somethin' don't smell right.

This is not what I heard from GOABC. I will forward your post to them and see what they say.

Guiding/Outfitting rights should be like trapping rights....in short, if you don't use the territory, it reverts back to the crown for re-disposition.

Canuck

Actually, I was speaking a little tongue in cheek. We've got an unholy alliance here and I suspect a hidden agenda, at least on the Natives part. The tree huggers may simply be naive, but my thoughts lean to the possibility that hunting may be available there again in the future, If you hunt with your friendly neighborhood Native outfitter. Hunt for need only? I roll my eyes everytime I hear that argument.
Maybe the outfitters saw the handwriting on the wall and figured if they were going to lose in the end anyway, this might be better than arguing for compensationwith the Feds, down the road.
Grizz

I was speaking tongue in cheek too. I really wanted to see what my comments would do to piss people off. There are a LOT of foreigners buying guiding outfits for their own private use. They do it through a front man who is Canadian. If the Province truly sees hunting as a means to manage wildlife for profit and sustainability they will not allow this to proceed.

As hunters we should also put out money where our mouth is and make it MANDATORY to pay a fee on every tag purchased. This fee should be earmarked to pay for hunters rights and freedoms. Sadly too many people are opposed to to the idea of contributing to save our rights. Hunters groups should manage the tag system in conjunction with the natural resources cops-and we should have the ability to levy fees to cover our expenses incurred in protecting our resources. If we don't we'll be forced out it's palin and simple-the antis have millions and millions of dollars behind them.

What do we have? We really need to get together.

the chef

quote:

Originally posted by Canuck:
Guiding/Outfitting rights should be like trapping rights....in short, if you don't use the territory, it reverts back to the crown for re-disposition.

Canuck

That is my understanding now. The holder has certain responsibilities in regards to management and revenues. The rights are not issued in perpetuity but for a fixed period that can be reviewed. Use it or Lose it.

That may all change with the politics in play and the residents need to watch there backs here for sure.

Reading this post and the subsequent responses, I am compelled to offer my very-humble opinion; there is no way that any purchase of land/concessions of otherwise, by an ANTI-HUNTING group could or should be construed or interpreted as good for anyone that hunts; being from the SF Bay Area of California, the belly of the beast when it comes to the Anti's agenda, these types of things go on all the time, with the end result being the effective end to hunting, period... Please don't take this as any disrespect to your collective rights, as native Canadians, to want to curtail Non-Resident hunting within your country, that is certainly your right and you obviously don't need someone from CA to tell you that; but guys, an organization that's inherent purpose is to make sport hunting unlawful, now controls this huge block of land, and mark my words, there will come a time when ho hunting will be allowed for sport purposes, period... This is good for no one in the long term...

Just my opinion as a bystander and an avid hunter who has had the real pleasure of hunting in BC in the early 90's...

Regards,
Craig Nolan

Hunters from outside of BC already pay HUGE tag fees and royalties. They also pay an additionl 125 dollars for a hunting preservation fund in BC. The ministry recently passed a law stating that ALL fees from lics and tags now goes back into wildlife and NOT into general revenue. There are many organization outside BC who contribute to wildlife conservation in this province including wildlife counts. At a minimum, 80 million dollars a year of new money is pumped into the BC economy from non-resident hunters. These people who come from abroad are very greatful for the abundant wildlife in BC and dont mind paying extra for it. Before everyone condims the non-resident hunter, maybe they should hear how they feel.
I think its high time ALL hunters who have an intrest in BC's wildlife ban together and stop bickering. As it is it with all that is going on around the province the bickering only makes us even weaker. Lets face it WHERE do you think the anti's get there money from? Its certainaly not from here. AND its not all from the US either. Millions of dollars are pumped into the anti's NON-PROFIT bank accounts from all over the world. Lets us hunters just keep on fighting about who gets what. The end will be near for all of us. No more hunting. No more guns. Hell if they have there way there will be no more MEAT for the eating of any of us. Wake up guys and smell the roses. We need to ban together is correct CHEF but not against each other. We have millions of dollars out there to fight for our rights too but there is currently to much stubborness on the part of some hunter groups to see the end results.
The outfitter who sold out to the anti's had no choice. Between the anti's desire and funding to stop Grizzly bearhunting and the goverments playing their "voting" time politics, The outfitter lost most of the quota. He could not even afford the annual right of use fees that he had to pay the goverment just to operate every year. Had more hunter groups been interested in what is really going on maybe none of this would have happend in the first place. Be careful to blame him. He had bills to pay too. This was a long fight for him and everybody involved could do nothing but bicker about what they thought that needed to be done. My hats off to you Mr Ellis. Hopefully this will open some eyes to our very limited and short future.

No one hunts for need. They might hunt for the pleasure of eating meat, but they don't have to do that either.

Hunters who eat meat are not morally superior to those who trophy hunt. Humans don't have to do either.

Looks like Canuck has the right idea, but that would take some political organization. But, the fact of the matter is they "bucked up" with the dough.

Gotta hand it to the antis though, they pulled a fast one! Now we just wait and see of B.C. hunters/guids etc. decide to change it for the next go around.....

IV

quote:

Originally posted by Moosemountain:
I think its high time ALL hunters who have an intrest in BC's wildlife ban together and stop bickering.

I couldn't agree more. I don't know much about the group that purchased these rights, but I suspect that they are funded from world-wide sources, and have a world wide agenda behind them. I suspect they will work with native groups to get the entire area declared a wildlife sanctuary (except for native groups of course) and then will back out. I doubt if they will want to pay annual fees in perpetuity.

Hunting regulations are set by provincial governments, not by tree huggers. I think that BC resident hunters, GOABC and area Chambers of Commerce need to get together to ensure that their voices are heard in government circles. Whether this concession ever reverts back to a licensed guiding and outfitting operation depends on the outfitters themselves, but that is no reason why resident hunting should end.

It is my understanding that the BC gov't alows outfitters exclusive "rights" to take non resident hunters int areas to hunt. this group has bought those "rights' from an outfitter or outfitters and will not likely be guiding any non-residents to hunt in these areas. Residents will not be effected by this buy out of non-resident hunting opportunities.

I wonder if we could attract this group to come to Alberta and buy the non-resident sheep allocations from some of the outfitters here. Then there would be more sheep and more room for resident hunters to hunt sheep.

Robin

Duffy, I think you are whistling past the graveyard.

JBD
I have never heard that expression before. What does it mean and so what is your point?

Robin

I have posted here more than once in the past year that "non-resident alien" hunting in B.C. was on the way out. Posters from other countries, especially the U.S.A., have mocked and reviled me for this opinion; this apparently because they think that they have some "right" to hunt here.

I have expected this situation for several months and there are various other substantial forces at work that will result in an end to foreign hunting here within the next decade.

I am, generally speaking, strongly in favour of a ban on ALL foreign hunting in B.C., except for Australians, New Zealanders and the British, our brothers in the "old" Commonwealth.

I want to see the "Guide/Outfitter" industry completely owned and controlled by CANADIANS with NO foreign presence, investment or influence. I also want to see the G/O quotas eliminated wherever Limited Entry draws are in force as I am not going to compete with some guy from another country to shoot a Stone's Sheep. The game belongs to me and my fellow British Columbians.

This situation, if we B.C. hunters handle it properly, can be a very good thing for us. We need to seek an understanding with the environmentalists and the aboriginal peoples; I think that this is both doable and B.C.'ers will ALL benefit from doing so. It is time we stood tall for OUR heritage and stopped giving it away to those who exploit our generosity and good will.

quote:

Posted 14 December 2005 15:05
Saw this in the Vancouver Sun today !

A prominent anti hunting group has bought a large West Coast guide outfitters concession and will effectively put an end to visitor hunting in

Well we have STEVE IRWIN AKA CROCODILE MAN buying up large tracts of land down here for much the same...i reckon it all stinks of greeny shit...

kutenay
I don't want to see the elimination of all nonresident hunting from Alberta. Just a better balence of permits for residents. I do not have the feeling that we as residents "own all the wildlife" or that we should have exclusive "rights" to hunting in our province (Alberta). A hunter from another land i consider a hunting brother and I feel he is welcome to some degree to enjoy a hunting experience where I live.

Just my opinion.

Robin

kutenay,

You are very naive, the animal rights activists are trying to abolish all hunting.

No hunting, no fishing... They would force you into a vegan diet if they had the power.

quote:

First nations representatives, who are negotiating a land and resource management plan with Victoria, say they hope the deal will be expanded in early 2006 to include a ban on resident sport hunting as well.

It is all racial politics for these guys.

Sadly enough the Resident Hunters Groups don't have near enough money, Political Expertise or Political Will to save Hunting in BC. If this stands and Kutes is correct about Non Resident hunting being removed than there will be no hunting in BC, except by Natives, within 5 years of Non Resident Hunting ban.

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

quote:

I am, generally speaking, strongly in favour of a ban on ALL foreign hunting in B.C., except for Australians, New Zealanders and the British, our brothers in the "old" Commonwealth

Why would the Australians,New Zealanders and british deserve any more rights in Canada than any other foreigners?The only thing that have contributed to Canada is to be a model for our stupid gun laws.

/

Good point Alf, and don't forget retaliation from the rest of the Hunting World.

No Canadians allowed to hunt here.

Think of all the Canadians that would want US Passports so they could leave Canada, borrow a rifle and hunt.

quote:

Originally posted by kutenay:
...
This situation, if we B.C. hunters handle it properly, can be a very good thing for us. We need to seek an understanding with the environmentalists and the aboriginal peoples; I think that this is both doable and B.C.'ers will ALL benefit from doing so. It is time we stood tall for OUR heritage and stopped giving it away to those who exploit our generosity and good will.

You do love the soap box. Unfortunately you are trying to climb on one that is already filled.

Do you really think an animal rights group that has the political savy to pour millions into this wants an alliance with you because you are a Canandian? These people don't want you wearing leather!

There is no way they will form an alliance with hunters. So go ahead and stand tall. Until you put together the money to outbid them, they win. When they win, no one hunts.

quote:

Originally posted by Mickey1:
Sadly enough the Resident Hunters Groups don't have near enough money, Political Expertise or Political Will to save Hunting in BC. If this stands and Kutes is correct about Non Resident hunting being removed than there will be no hunting in BC, except by Natives, within 5 years of Non Resident Hunting ban.

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

True enough. When the natives control all the hunting, white residents will pay as dearly as non-residents do now. It's about politics, control and money and always will be.

Not to mention that you are welcome to hunt here in the US Kute, and for far less than it costs us to hunt in Canada with the exception of the big three in Alaska. Our public lands are open to you without having to employ any packers, outfitters or guides.

Your notions are misguided, friend. Alf said it all. You lose our help (and the NRA spends A LOT of money in Canada trying to aid gun owners/hunters up north) and your situation will get far worse far faster. You prolly don't want to hear that being a bigot and all but that's the facts.

Robin, I respect your opinion as an Albertan and I used to work in AB for the Forest Service so qualified as a resident under the act. I did not hunt there as I cannot use the meat since I had plenty from my B.C. hunting and do not kill unless I am going to eat the meat, predators excluded.

I ask you, though, if Albertans do not own the wildlife, who does? Do you think that we Canadians somehow owe foreigners a share in our resources because we have an abundance? Should we ship our oil south for free? Your comments seem to me to be based on idealism rather than the reality of contemporary hunting.

Here in B.C., many of the Outfitters are foreign owned and even live in the U.S.A. during the off-season. Far from being a positive force in the B.C. economy, these guys buy their supplies in the U.S.A. and Alberta because it's "cheaper" and they take their profits on OUR wildlife there as well.

The actual tax monies returned to the B.C. Government by the GOABC are about ten million dollars per annum; this pales beside the billions ripped off by the Yanks in their illegal duties on our softwood. The beneficial impact on the private sector of the B.C. economy is also miniscule compared to the devastation of our forest products based rural communities. Consequently, I favour not allowing Americans to dictate to us what they will and will not buy, hunt or do in OUR country.

Stubbie, I did not say that any foreigners have any right to hunt here as I do not believe that this is the case. I would extend the privilege of hunting here to the people I mentioned as I am a strong supporter of the British Commonwealth and feel a kinship with those people that I know you do not share.

I see no real benefit to allowing any other foreign hunting here in B.C. as our game should be available to our fellow Canucks at a reasonable cost, instead of to rich trophy collectors from foreign countries.How about a Stone's Sheep hunt where you pay a grand to B.C. for the tag and can hunt on your own or even with me, which you cannot do now, although you can pay an American who "owns" a G/O concession here over $30,000 CDN to do this.........

Regardless of the attitudes of some extremists in the aboriginal and environmentalist(many of whom are themselves foreigners) communities, we B.C. hunters MUST come to an understanding with them as several recent governments have stated concerning resource issues in general. In the 40+ years I have been involved in conservation issues here in B.C., I have found that most people involved in this situation can be dealt with with reason and courtesy and the opinions of foreigners on this issue simply are not relevant to OUR decisions concerning OUR resources.

It's kinda funny, an American speaks out in favour of pro-American activities and he is a "patriot", BUT, a Canadian dares to think that he has rights in his native land and he is a "bigot". How very typical as are the attitudes displayed concerning hunting on "public lands" in the U.S.A. Why would a B.C. resident WANT to leave here to hunt there, especially since most of what little hunting Americans have left is on PRIVATE lands restricted by the owners.....try to sell me another bridge........

quote:

Originally posted by kutenay:

It's kinda funny, an American speaks out in favour of pro-American activities and he is a "patriot", BUT, a Canadian dares to think that he has rights in his native land and he is a "bigot". How very typical as are the attitudes displayed concerning hunting on "public lands" in the U.S.A. Why would a B.C. resident WANT to leave here to hunt there, especially since most of what little hunting Americans have left is on PRIVATE lands restricted by the owners.....try to sell me another bridge........

Don't put words in my mouth, Kute. I feel exactly the same about my American pinhead counterparts to your attitiude.

And come here and hunt public lands before you disaprage them. Some fine hunting is to be had in virtually every state. But a selfish fool is a selfish fool the world over and ususally too closed-minded to think outside the box of self-pity they've constructed for themselves so I'll go away.

Yeah, we Canadians are always ...selfish...when we presume to contradict whatever an American states about our country and our resources. I have seen this on several U.S. based gun forums, so, your arrogance does not surprise me; it is characteristic and it is also what motivates the growing sentiment about Americans not being allowed to hunt here.

Every single slur against Canada and Canadian self-determination made by an American on this type of forum simply strengthens the position of the "antis" AND makes Canucks like me realize that our concern about U.S. domination of OUR resources is both well-founded and timely.

I will ignore the personal slurs as I find them actually kind of funny.

OK, I'm back. Once again you miss the whole point. I didn't slur Canadians. I slurred you as an individual. There are several of your fellow countrymen here who, whether they like me or Americans or not, agree with my side of this argument so are they "unpatriotic Canadians"?

I have no real desire to hunt Canada for reasons that have nothing to do with this post but I truly enjoy sharing hunting in Texas with folks from wherever. THAT is the brotherhood of hunting; the desire of sharing the fun with others, especially those for whom the experience is far from home and likely to be memorable. Sometimes its a simple dove hunt outside Houston and other times it might be a paid hunt on private land but in each case it is great fun, great comaraderie and one way to accentuate the similarities of us all instead of looking for perceived differences.

Being a bigot is not something one should find funny.

Well, this simply demonstrates my point since you do not address the issues concerning resource allocation, etc. that I mention, you simply slur me. Who cares, your opinion of me is not important, but, preserving my country from domination by foreign interests is. I think that you will find that most Canadians agree with my position on this and it is OUR country. Slur away.....

In a modern world resources are allocated by demand and demand is expressed by the valuation a product or commodity put on it within the pool of potential users.

What you want to do is limit the pool of users to an arbitrary limit based on your sense of nationalism. And if you can get enough of your fellow citizens to agree, more power to you. But the game will suffer from overpopulation faster than paranoid Canadians will experience any sense of throwing off the yoke of American domination.

That said, there aren't enough Canucks to burn the oil and gas you produce and if you leave it in the ground for "future generations", alternative fuels may make it useless before they ever get to use it or see a nickel form the sale of it. And by then, the rest of the world will eco-tariff your products because they'll be made with energy from old-world fossil fuels, not clean modern ones. Economies are real-time. "saving" resources like that only makes for a poor economy today and an unceratin future for tomorrow.

And I think your game departments can manage wildlife resources about as well as any, assuming that you and your fellow Canadians elect governments with the right priorities.


Let's see... your mad because all that valuable wood resource is going to rich Americans when it should be saved for native Canadians (and other Commonwealthers, I assume) but your also mad at Americans for a tariff that makes it harder to sell that wood here? Where is the logic in that? I would think you'd be grateful, even more so if the tarif gets high enough to stop all Canadian lumber sales here.
The complexities of the softwood wars are beyond my personal experience but its simple enough to know that stopping all softwood exports to the US would devastate the Canadian lumber industry. There isn't enough market elsewhere to make up that volume without price-dumping to take away someone elses' existing marketshare. And then, presto, you're in a new pissing contest, different partner.

Top that off with the fact that to keep the loggers in business, your government will probably price-fix domestic lumber to a high enough price that the indusrty can survive on 1/4 the production. Result? You pay 6 times the current price per board-foot and get fined if you try to smuggle "cheap" American lumber into Cananda. Just look at the cigarette debacle of the last decade for your model.