Why is the Canadian model far less friendly to Non-Resident hunters compared to the US?

Joined
May 15, 2024
Messages
74
I've noticed that it's not uncommon for American hunters to apply for and build points across multiple states for DIY hunts, something that is near impossible to do north of the border without a Guide/Outfitter. This makes it easy to build a "hunting plan" which can drastically increase your odds of drawing a tag each year.

There are a few rare examples where a Canadian can hunt certain game out of Province DIY but for the most part we are required to pay the big bucks for an outfitted hunt for elk, goat, sheep etc. This leads to the vast majority of Canadian hunters never hunting outside of their home province and having much lower odds of drawing a tag each year.
 

ozyclint

WKR
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
1,883
Location
Queensland, Downunder
I hunted Alberta for black bear as a non resident alien under their hunter host system. It was great. Just 2 mates DIY hunting, one of them being an Albertan.
 
OP
N
Joined
May 15, 2024
Messages
74
I hunted Alberta for black bear as a non resident alien under their hunter host system. It was great. Just 2 mates DIY hunting, one of them being an Albertan.
Yeah that seems to be one of the exceptions that some of the Provinces offer, hunting with a local "host" hunter for certain game. It doesn't appear to apply to goat, sheep, brown bear etc.
 

ozyclint

WKR
Joined
Apr 27, 2012
Messages
1,883
Location
Queensland, Downunder
Yeah that seems to be one of the exceptions that some of the Provinces offer, hunting with a local "host" hunter for certain game. It doesn't appear to apply to goat, sheep, brown bear etc.
Correct. Only certain species were available when I did it. Things like sheep, goats, brown bear like you mentioned were not available.
The fishing was great too. I caught walleye, pike and cutthroat trout. Mix of lures and fly. The walleye and pike are such cool species.
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2015
Messages
86
I've noticed that it's not uncommon for American hunters to apply for and build points across multiple states for DIY hunts, something that is near impossible to do north of the border without a Guide/Outfitter. This makes it easy to build a "hunting plan" which can drastically increase your odds of drawing a tag each year.

There are a few rare examples where a Canadian can hunt certain game out of Province DIY but for the most part we are required to pay the big bucks for an outfitted hunt for elk, goat, sheep etc. This leads to the vast majority of Canadian hunters never hunting outside of their home province and having much lower odds of drawing a tag each year.
My guess is that the outfitters lobbied early on for it so they could attract the high paying American hunter.
 
OP
N
Joined
May 15, 2024
Messages
74
My guess is that the outfitters lobbied early on for it so they could attract the high paying American hunter.
The high paying American client would be coming anyway. I get why an international non-resident hunter would be required to pay for an outfitter, just as I would if I hunted in a different country.

The point I'm trying to make is that as a Canadian, I should be able to apply for any game in any Province or Territory by just buying the requisite tags/licences. Not being treated the same as an international hunter.

We deserve more of a home team advantage like the US and many European nations have.
 

tater

WKR
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
453
Location
BC
Each Province and Territory has autonomy to manage its natural resources.
They manage them for resident priority, finding a balance with First Nations interests (which are becoming more and more the focus.). Guide outfitter demands vary region to region and often play a role in management decisions based on economic benefits to certain communities.

Resources are limited (especially for species like sheep and goats) and a lot of rules now are in place because of historical mismanagement and previous bad acts by non residents (1950'5/60's).

To the OP, you do not "deserve" anything outside of your Province or Territory as you are not a resident.
Your paying federal taxes do not mean anything when it comes to Provincial/Territorial resource management nor should they.

As far as reciprocity with other countries like the U.S., i firmly believe that a lot of States are too liberal in their non-resident/alien allocations. Resident priority matters.
 

KurtR

WKR
Joined
Sep 11, 2015
Messages
3,815
Location
South Dakota
I know the out fitters are the ones who are getting freelance waterfowl hunting cut to pretty much nothing with the regulations that they are passing
 
Joined
Feb 24, 2016
Messages
2,475
I know the out fitters are the ones who are getting freelance waterfowl hunting cut to pretty much nothing with the regulations that they are passing
The outfitters are extremely disgruntled at American waterfowl hunters…..I heard this in person from an Albertan…. He was quite animated about it.…… Lol


Really it doesn’t make much sense to me because there are so many ducks and geese up there that it’s ridiculous. It’s just proof that people are greedy and want all of the world's animals to themselves no matter what country you’re in.
 
Last edited:

Fatcamp

WKR
Joined
May 31, 2017
Messages
5,780
Location
Sodak
Each Province and Territory has autonomy to manage its natural resources.
They manage them for resident priority, finding a balance with First Nations interests (which are becoming more and more the focus.). Guide outfitter demands vary region to region and often play a role in management decisions based on economic benefits to certain communities.

Resources are limited (especially for species like sheep and goats) and a lot of rules now are in place because of historical mismanagement and previous bad acts by non residents (1950'5/60's).

To the OP, you do not "deserve" anything outside of your Province or Territory as you are not a resident.
Your paying federal taxes do not mean anything when it comes to Provincial/Territorial resource management nor should they.

As far as reciprocity with other countries like the U.S., i firmly believe that a lot of States are too liberal in their non-resident/alien allocations. Resident priority matters.

Well, there you go, OP.

Your fellow hunters believe that being from a different province/territory is no different than being from a foreign country. Pretty simple really. Throw in profits to guide services and you have your answer.
 

TSAMP

WKR
Joined
Jul 16, 2019
Messages
1,605
Well, there you go, OP.

Your fellow hunters believe that being from a different province/territory is no different than being from a foreign country. Pretty simple really. Throw in profits to guide services and you have your answer.
I mean, it isn't called the United Provinces of Canada...
 
OP
N
Joined
May 15, 2024
Messages
74
It sounds like many States are becoming more restrictive and moving closer to the "Canadian Model" but in general, the availability of affordable cross-State hunting is still far more prevalent than interprovincial.
 

tater

WKR
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
453
Location
BC
My initial response was late at night and a half baked cookie, so i will break this down from a B.C. perspective as it sits currently (and this is very surface and i can't stress how the subject is WAY MORE complex and political than this simple summary).

Non-hunting residents in B.C. (the majority of voters) DO NOT support the allocation of hunting opportunities to ANY non residents of B.C.. This became clear during the "information seeking" that saw the closure of the grizzly bear hunt. B.C. Non-hunters support local hunting for food. They are clear in that, (over 70% support) but see any non resident activity as removing resources from rural communities and "trophy hunting".
Having said that, there is no political incentive to give more NR's of any flavour more opportunity and no governing party will hang themselves over it.

We are still at risk of losing sheep and mountain goat seasons and will continue to be so until we can show that hunting those species are not a "vanity trophy hunt' (an exact quote from my Member of the Legislative Assembly that i met with when the Province was exploring closure three years ago).

As populations of certain species have declined, there are areas that have requested that B.C. residents from other zones not be allowed to hunt/harvest what they see as their critical local food source. Moose in particular has become a heated topic, and there have been large cuts to OTC opportunities for locals in Region 7 and a move to LEH.

Non hunting urbanites also support the Provincial move to the principles of UNDRIP that see the return of control of the land and resources to First Nations. This has begun to close large areas to non-Indigenous hunters (and this will continue to grow), especially in Regions 5 and 6, but also 7A and B.

So for clarity, if B.C. residents are continuing to see a reduction in access and opportunity and a declining support for any non-resident participation from the larger voting population why would anyone with any degree of perspective think that NR opportunity will or should increase?

Its not as simple as "i don't want non-residents hunting my space". We are heading towards large changes, and i predict that in the next ten years no one will be hunting in B.C. unless they are Indigenous or B.C. residents.
Guide outfitters will see their tenures stripped (as they have done to Doug McMann at Skinner Creek) or bought out (as they have done with multiple tenures in the Great Bear area).
There may be a First Nation that decides to provide guided hunts in their area in the future, but i doubt that their residents will support it.
 
Joined
Aug 11, 2017
Messages
2,613
Location
Florida
My initial response was late at night and a half baked cookie, so i will break this down from a B.C. perspective as it sits currently (and this is very surface and i can't stress how the subject is WAY MORE complex and political than this simple summary).

Non-hunting residents in B.C. (the majority of voters) DO NOT support the allocation of hunting opportunities to ANY non residents of B.C.. This became clear during the "information seeking" that saw the closure of the grizzly bear hunt. B.C. Non-hunters support local hunting for food. They are clear in that, (over 70% support) but see any non resident activity as removing resources from rural communities and "trophy hunting".
Having said that, there is no political incentive to give more NR's of any flavour more opportunity and no governing party will hang themselves over it.

We are still at risk of losing sheep and mountain goat seasons and will continue to be so until we can show that hunting those species are not a "vanity trophy hunt' (an exact quote from my Member of the Legislative Assembly that i met with when the Province was exploring closure three years ago).

As populations of certain species have declined, there are areas that have requested that B.C. residents from other zones not be allowed to hunt/harvest what they see as their critical local food source. Moose in particular has become a heated topic, and there have been large cuts to OTC opportunities for locals in Region 7 and a move to LEH.

Non hunting urbanites also support the Provincial move to the principles of UNDRIP that see the return of control of the land and resources to First Nations. This has begun to close large areas to non-Indigenous hunters (and this will continue to grow), especially in Regions 5 and 6, but also 7A and B.

So for clarity, if B.C. residents are continuing to see a reduction in access and opportunity and a declining support for any non-resident participation from the larger voting population why would anyone with any degree of perspective think that NR opportunity will or should increase?

Its not as simple as "i don't want non-residents hunting my space". We are heading towards large changes, and i predict that in the next ten years no one will be hunting in B.C. unless they are Indigenous or B.C. residents.
Guide outfitters will see their tenures stripped (as they have done to Doug McMann at Skinner Creek) or bought out (as they have done with multiple tenures in the Great Bear area).
There may be a First Nation that decides to provide guided hunts in their area in the future, but i doubt that their residents will support it.
That same perspective could be used on the other side as well. More stake holders, more money coming in, external pressure and more coverage of these issues to a much larger audience who will actually care since they now have a dog in the fight. It’s true that it won’t add BC votes, but external pressure and money matters, resident or not.
I’m not saying this is my view on it, haven’t thought about it enough, just another way of looking at it.
 
Top