Please Do Not Hunt BC, Canada

[huntnphool]

Good Luck BC Hunter! As a few have mentioned... its very unfortunate but hunting is heading that way ALL OVER... Montana, Colorado, Utah... wherever... money is the driver... an elk...hell, not even a big trophy bull, just some elk... is worth a fortune nowadays...

$$$$ =  Root of All Evil....

Didn't Montana get away from dedicated outfitter tags just a few years ago?

 They did away with outfitter guaranteed tags.

[JimmyHoffa]

Good Luck BC Hunter! As a few have mentioned... its very unfortunate but hunting is heading that way ALL OVER... Montana, Colorado, Utah... wherever... money is the driver... an elk...hell, not even a big trophy bull, just some elk... is worth a fortune nowadays...

$$$$ =  Root of All Evil....

Didn't Montana get away from dedicated outfitter tags just a few years ago?

I think they still have them.  I saw something about guaranteed outfitter tags for non-res deer/elk combo tags.   

[huntnphool]

Good Luck BC Hunter! As a few have mentioned... its very unfortunate but hunting is heading that way ALL OVER... Montana, Colorado, Utah... wherever... money is the driver... an elk...hell, not even a big trophy bull, just some elk... is worth a fortune nowadays...

$$$$ =  Root of All Evil....

Didn't Montana get away from dedicated outfitter tags just a few years ago?

I think they still have them.  I saw something about guaranteed outfitter tags for non-res deer/elk combo tags.   

 I-161 eliminated them.

[JimmyHoffa]

Good Luck BC Hunter! As a few have mentioned... its very unfortunate but hunting is heading that way ALL OVER... Montana, Colorado, Utah... wherever... money is the driver... an elk...hell, not even a big trophy bull, just some elk... is worth a fortune nowadays...

$$$$ =  Root of All Evil....

Didn't Montana get away from dedicated outfitter tags just a few years ago?

I think they still have them.  I saw something about guaranteed outfitter tags for non-res deer/elk combo tags.   

 I-161 eliminated them.

Alright thanks.  The outfitter site I saw is probably outdated.

[Bean Counter]

How would you feel if this was happening in your state? What if our province is setting a precedent? 

I hunted in the state of Wyoming last year for the first time. In that state, the outfitters got together and successfully pushed the state to ban non resident hunters from accessing wilderness areas without paying a guide. While I don't live in that state, I do pay federal income taxes (yes, I actually have a federal tax liability each year) which pays for the national forests where the wildernesses are found. So I will never hunt with a guide in Wyoming. Even if they aren't a wilderness outfitter. As far as I'm concerned, they're all worthy of a boycott until that law is repealed. 

[JJB11B]

I would like to see Bearpaws views... its always nice when having a discussion like this to see both sides. unless its wolves, then I dont want to hear the hippies

[daddysprad]

I hunted moose in Alberta 2 years ago.  In talking to the guide/owner he said that for that area there were 15 tags for outfitters and 5 for locals.  Made some of the locals not-so-friendly and who can blame them. 

[mkcj]

I've read post's on other boards about this and one of the biggest complaints is that a lot if not most of the guides are not even residents of BC.

[Sitka_Blacktail]

Residents should always have first priority. They are the ones with skin in the game when it comes to decisions regarding management. They pay the local taxes. They built the roads. They settled the area. They have the tradition of hunting locally. They suffer when local areas are closed where a well heeled non resident can just move on to another area. They put up with animals in their gardens and crops. Their cars are the ones damaged by collisions with animals. They are they are the ones who sacrifice so the animals can be there in the first place. They should always be the first in line to have access for hunting. Non residents should only be allowed when it doesn't interfere with a resident's opportunity to hunt.

If you agree with the argument that non resident money is a valuable asset used for management and states/provinces should make all the money they can off of game animals, take that argument to it's logical conclusion.  You will end up with states/provinces deciding that all tags and licenses should be sold to non residents and be guided because the State makes the most money that way. Game animals are to be managed for the good of the residents, not to make money for the government. And they definitely shouldn't be managed just to support a big bureaucracy.

[Special T]

 

[huntnphool]

I've read post's on other boards about this and one of the biggest complaints is that a lot if not most of the guides are not even residents of BC.

 Which was one of the main factors in Montana's decision as well.

[Ridgeratt]

Good luck with your campaign.  I can imagine the uproar here if even 10% of the OIL tags were allocated to outfitters only.  Unfortunately, as we are all well aware, being in the right doesn't mean much when the other side has a lot of money to push their agenda.

I think we are the only state that doesn't do a Out of State quota on tags. Doesn't Idaho alot 10% to non-residents.

I know that in 2011 a person from North Carolina drew a OIL Moose tag and some folks were upset that he drew even though it cost him 10x the money.

[BOWHUNTER45]

It definitely is not a good trend.  Even the Skagit elk, everyone that can upriver is trying to get depredation tags and sell them.  They can get $500 easy for a cow tag.  You have enough guys that want to shoot them that are will to pay for it.  Here in the not to distant future you won't see elk south of HWY 20 at the rate they are going.

Not to up end this thread or change the subject but at this time there are more elk than they can deal with on both sides of the river ..Just talked with some people the other day about this subject ..The problem they have now is that most of the Nutsack tags are not getting filled on the nutsack side of the road but are mostly being filled on the valley floor    I know of 3 tag holders this year who went home with nothing ..not as easy as everyone thinks ..plus it is hard for the out of towners to even get permission to hunt private land ..they have a lot of figuring to do  21 branched antler bulls in one field and it is now January ...all on private property ...no elk around here 

[pd]

Residents should always have first priority. They are the ones with skin in the game when it comes to decisions regarding management. They pay the local taxes. They built the roads. They settled the area. They have the tradition of hunting locally. They suffer when local areas are closed where a well heeled non resident can just move on to another area. They put up with animals in their gardens and crops. Their cars are the ones damaged by collisions with animals. They are they are the ones who sacrifice so the animals can be there in the first place. They should always be the first in line to have access for hunting. Non residents should only be allowed when it doesn't interfere with a resident's opportunity to hunt.

If you agree with the argument that non resident money is a valuable asset used for management and states/provinces should make all the money they can off of game animals, take that argument to it's logical conclusion.  You will end up with states/provinces deciding that all tags and licenses should be sold to non residents and be guided because the State makes the most money that way. Game animals are to be managed for the good of the residents, not to make money for the government. And they definitely shouldn't be managed just to support a big bureaucracy.

In general, I agree with you, Sitka.  In a "hunting neutral" state like Washington or Oregon, that would be a valid argument.  However, based upon my limited understanding (from my hunting friends in Vancouver, BC), the province of British Columbia has gone from "hunting neutral" to "anti-hunting."  I think the point of this post is bigger than just OIL tags for outfitters--BC hunting opportunities for residents seem to be getting worse.  Don't even start talking about firearms restrictions.

[BULLBLASTER]

Good luck with your campaign.  I can imagine the uproar here if even 10% of the OIL tags were allocated to outfitters only.  Unfortunately, as we are all well aware, being in the right doesn't mean much when the other side has a lot of money to push their agenda.

I think we are the only state that doesn't do a Out of State quota on tags. Doesn't Idaho alot 10% to non-residents.

I know that in 2011 a person from North Carolina drew a OIL Moose tag and some folks were upset that he drew even though it cost him 10x the money.

idaho allows up to 10% of tags to go to nonresidents. They dont specifically set 10% aside, but limit nonres to 10%. Different...