Saskatchewan Follows Manitoba

There is a new group on Facebook that is trying to help with the freelance situation in Sask. It is called Canada Freelance Waterfowlers Association. The group is small [55 members] but is growing and seems to have some good ideas. Anyone interested can join or find out more about it on Facebook. FYI
 
Community @ duckboats.net,
Please find attached a letter in response to my correspondence, from the Honourable Darlene Rowden, Minister of Environment.
RM

Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com acrobat.adobe.com
 
Last edited:
RM Anderson said:
Community @ duckboats.net,
Please find attached a letter in response to my correspondence, from the Honourable Darlene Rowden, Minister of Environment.
RM


Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com acrobat.adobe.com
Click to expand...
Lots of places have licensed outfitters and manage to regulate and enforce licensing requirements and other rules without discriminating against non-residents. Maine has run undercover sting operations on illegal guiding.
 
RM Anderson said:
Community @ duckboats.net,
Please find attached a letter in response to my correspondence, from the Honourable Darlene Rowden, Minister of Environment.
RM

Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com acrobat.adobe.com
Click to expand...

I'm glad to say that my hunting partner and I did Not fall into the 85% of non resident hunters category. The beauty and allure of staying many weeks and enjoying ourselves with no rush or pressure was fantastic. As I wrote prior the war on snow geese changed that. In fact we began to not hunt snow geese due to that and all the BS that goes with it. When ya stay a long time ya better be able to eat what you kill and stay within possession limits at all times.

What they can do to get folks back is offer a longer hunt stay license at a higher price. Freelance hunters already have made major investments in their time, dogs and equipment. I'm pretty damn sure a higher price license will not put them off. That said with the license will come checks from SASK fish and wildlife officers as in the past for long duration hunters to make certain they are in compliance with all laws. Folks there know who is playing by the rules and who is not. Some will say why should we have to pay more and yada yada yada. If a balance can be struck in another way so be it.

my 2 cents
 
It is unfortunate that the long-stay freelance types will get the shaft with these new regulations. There is a fellow around here that comes from the US and has bought a little house and stays here for at least a few weeks per year. Without staking out his home during hunting season, it's impossible to tell what exactly he is up to, but he does have several 'friends' come up throughout the season. The problem is, there is almost no enforcement effort to see what this guy is actually up to, how many hunters come up to 'visit' him, and whether any money changes hands. This kind of thing happens all over. There are not enough human resources to chase these cases down and separate friendly hunters from illegally outfitted ones. I suspect that these limits are a way to address that without the need for extra manpower in the field. My guess that when the new outfitter model comes out, outfitted hunters and freelancers will have different licenses as well, but that is only a guess on my part, so we shall see. They are looking at the model for big game hunters regarding the allocation model for guidance, but Saskatchewan doesn't allow freelance non-resident big game hunting, so it's not an easy comparison.

I'm sure it will be the case with the outfitter allocation model as well, when it comes, that some outfitters will feel like they are getting the shaft. The bottom line, in my opinion, is that something needs to be done to address the issues at hand: illegal outfitting by residents and non-residents, competition for the land, and outfitter growth. I can't speak for the average freelancer, but in the case of outfitters there are probably some who had growth plans that would be halted by the new allocation model, and they would feel like they have been wronged. To those outfitters I would say that if they had been paying attention at all for the past 5 years they would have seen this coming and should have planned accordingly.
 
Adam Dyck said:
It is unfortunate that the long-stay freelance types will get the shaft with these new regulations. There is a fellow around here that comes from the US and has bought a little house and stays here for at least a few weeks per year. Without staking out his home during hunting season, it's impossible to tell what exactly he is up to, but he does have several 'friends' come up throughout the season. The problem is, there is almost no enforcement effort to see what this guy is actually up to, how many hunters come up to 'visit' him, and whether any money changes hands. This kind of thing happens all over. There are not enough human resources to chase these cases down and separate friendly hunters from illegally outfitted ones. I suspect that these limits are a way to address that without the need for extra manpower in the field. My guess that when the new outfitter model comes out, outfitted hunters and freelancers will have different licenses as well, but that is only a guess on my part, so we shall see. They are looking at the model for big game hunters regarding the allocation model for guidance, but Saskatchewan doesn't allow freelance non-resident big game hunting, so it's not an easy comparison.

I'm sure it will be the case with the outfitter allocation model as well, when it comes, that some outfitters will feel like they are getting the shaft. The bottom line, in my opinion, is that something needs to be done to address the issues at hand: illegal outfitting by residents and non-residents, competition for the land, and outfitter growth. I can't speak for the average freelancer, but in the case of outfitters there are probably some who had growth plans that would be halted by the new allocation model, and they would feel like they have been wronged. To those outfitters I would say that if they had been paying attention at all for the past 5 years they would have seen this coming and should have planned accordingly.
Click to expand...
Adam,
Vince Pagliaroli kind of hit the nail on the head. I remember pictures of pickup boxes filled with white geese sent to me by an acquaintance. Nobody can eat that many goose sticks. Scaling back the limits very well may provide the same result as the impending rule changes. We eat what we shoot and our dog happily eats innards and legs, cooked of course. Wanton waste is the real problem, not freelance hunting. RM
 
RM Anderson said:
Community @ duckboats.net,
Please find attached a letter in response to my correspondence, from the Honourable Darlene Rowden, Minister of Environment.
RM

Adobe Acrobat

acrobat.adobe.com acrobat.adobe.com
Click to expand...
RM

Thank you for following up with that letter. Her words lead me to believe this was mostly driven by a law enforcement issue. SK passed laws concerning guiding that they could not enforce so their solution to the issue is to block out everyone falling into a particular group (non-residents) whether they were breaking the law or not.

Passing unenforceable laws is an attribute of poor government leadership. There is nothing like an unenforceable law to undermine the rule of law and create opportunities for selective and discriminatory enforcement thus reducing public respect for policy makers and authorities. In this example outfitters wormed their way in to make sure the changes benefit them first and foremost.

I can guarantee you the crux of the problem is an underfunded wildlife management system that can't deal with the combined needs of habitat and hunter management. As a freelance hunter who treads lightly on the resource I am fatigued by the constant reduction in hunting opportunity for the average participant while outfitters and others who financially benefit from our public resource (waterfowl) take more and more. Their greed is hideous.

I have been a very active duck hunter for over 40 years and have given countless hours of my time and talents to the duck hunting community over much of this and have been boots on the ground for waterfowl habitat. As I ruminate over the situation of the average hunter and what is being taken from them I am convinced those that profit from this pubic resource need to, at the very least, pay more for waterfowl management. License fees and duck stamps aren't cutting it. Pittman Robertson (PR) needs to be expanded. Right now PR is funded by excise taxes on firearms, archery equipment, and ammunition. That's it! Those companies are largely footing the bill for most conservation projects. Waterfowl hunting's economic impact far exceeds what it was in 1937 when PR started. It needs to be expanded and taxes levied on outfitters and the rest of the waterfowl hunting industry. They are getting a free ride on the backs of the average hunters who is getting squeezed off the land.

I don't know how much more of this trend I can take. I'm getting to the point I don't need the bureaucracy, crowding, and aggravation. I find a lot of enjoyment in other activities. I used to think I'd be a lifer. Now I'm thinking any season might be my last.
 
OK I gotta chime in again cuz I can't help it. At one time SASK was very good at enforcing the laws that were on the books. In many cases a Mountie would accompany SASK Wildlife officers during game checks. My hunting partner and I went through that more than once. When that did happen you know they are serious about enforcing the laws. We were always in compliance, and they treated us very well.

Once after being in SASK for over 2 weeks a Wildlife Officer came to the place we were staying (now out of business) to check on hunters. The freezers were checked for birds and tags. The officer asked me why there was only 1 duck (a beautiful plumage GW drake) in the freezer with my tag on it after hunting for over 2 weeks. "Where are the other birds?" I replied I carve decoys and that bird I'll keep as a study bird, the rest I cook and we eat them. He gave me a strange disbelief look, and asked to see my decoys. I asked him if he would care to share a meal with us. He said he would think about it and thanked me.

Each week the small town we stayed in had a Hunters Dinner at the local hockey rink with food, raffles, drinks & Fun. The community very much liked non resident hunters being there and we liked being welcomed and appreciated. The place was packed each week. Many times the SASK wildlife officers would get up and tell stories about the encounters they had with hunters that week. Some stories were funny, others were not. There was very much a sense of community and respect between all there. One week we did not attend the dinner cuz I cooked Canvasbacks on Toast in the shared kitchen for other hunters and us. Well let me tell ya when the owners of the old motel got back from the weekly hunter dinner they gave me Hell for not attending and cooking for the hunters cuz on that day It's Our Job they said. I never made that mistake again. Thanksgiving was always a good time there as well. The one day we did Not eat waterfowl but delicious Turkey with all the trimmings and I did not cook.

I could go on and on with stories about our time spent in SASK. That all changed after the war on Snow Geese really kicked in. Things got ugly and now we have gotten to This Point. Did it cull the geese and Save The Tundra? Hell NO but it sure made a mess out of things that will not recover anytime soon. Talk about Backfire...

I very much miss those old times and the many friends we made there. I'm Blessed to have experienced it and Live my Dreams. For me SASK was The Last Best Place.
 
RM Anderson said:
Adam,
Vince Pagliaroli kind of hit the nail on the head. I remember pictures of pickup boxes filled with white geese sent to me by an acquaintance. Nobody can eat that many goose sticks. Scaling back the limits very well may provide the same result as the impending rule changes. We eat what we shoot and our dog happily eats innards and legs, cooked of course. Wanton waste is the real problem, not freelance hunting. RM
Click to expand...
The waste thing made the news a couple of times here last year. I do wonder what some freelancers are doing with their snow goose limits. Of course outfitters can be guilty of this as well. We give our breasts to an organization called Nature's Food Bank, a local organization that distributes game meat to families in need. We also eat some ourselves (crane mostly) and give some away to locals.

naturesfoodbank.com

Home - Nature's Food Bank

Welcome to the Nature’s Food Bank
naturesfoodbank.com naturesfoodbank.com
 
Adam,

That is all well and good. Waste Not Want Not. We have a program like that here for venison.

My question IS when you donate the meat/breasts Is One Wing Attached to the Breast as the law states? This was a major issue when we wanted to have birds processed and have them smoked while there by a professional processor and smoker. He was told No Wing Attached you cannot accept or process the birds. Has that changed or just disregarded? If so the laws need updated in Canada, the USA and Mexico.

Again we get back to the laws, and if and when they are enforced or not.
 
Adam,

That is all well and good. Waste Not Want Not. We have a program like that here for venison.

My question IS when you donate the meat/breasts Is One Wing Attached to the Breast as the law states? This was a major issue when we wanted to have birds processed and have them smoked while there by a professional processor and smoker. He was told No Wing Attached you cannot accept or process the birds. Has that changed or just disregarded? If so the laws need updated in Canada, the USA and Mexico.

Again we get back to the laws, and if and when they are enforced or not.
 
Fascinating to read this from Northern California. We have fundamentally the same issues at play. Guide services have aggressively leased fields in the Central Valley, which has served to increase pressure (marketing) and decrease access for traditional users. This is happening while land management has shifted away from wildlife-friendly practice to a much more aggressive, strip-everything style of management of farmland. We predictably have lost 97% of the pheasant population and are pushing ducks out of traditional areas.


In my experience, we are underestimating the impact of social media and the willingness of people to travel. The same dynamic played out in the ski industry with the advent of social media. In the old days, a trip to Utah to ski was special. I skied outside of Lake Tahoe exactly once before I went to college. Now, everyone is can get a report that the snow is great at XXX location and they go there. Even worse, they see that others had great skiing! I hunted once outside of California during the same time period (Klamath Falls).

Stacks of ducks and sick ski lines are exactly the same phenomenon. I see that someone else got it, so I want it. This is good for the operation that can cram people in, but bad for the resource and really bad for those who remember the good old days, whenever they were.

This dynamic pushes people into harder-to-reach places, either physical or financial. I spend a lot more time skiing in hard to reach locations than I did 20 years ago. I really push into hard to reach locations for hunting. Fortunately, in the Bay Area, there is a huge amount of tidal marsh that is difficult to access and potentially dangerous. Sacramento Bro does not want to come to the Bay to shoot bufflehead when he could be stacking greenheads at Gray Lodge.

Addressing the wanton waste, I've developed a hardcore view of "don't do it" and "make it illegal". From my house, I can see the party boats fishing for halibut. The limit is two per day. I would make that two per season. Our current 7 bird limit on ducks is VERY generous. If I shoot 7 ducks in a day, that keeps me in ducks for weeks. A focus on the enjoyment is more important. Research shows that, for most people, the number of ducks they need to shoot to be sus
 
Vince Pagliaroli said:
Adam,

That is all well and good. Waste Not Want Not. We have a program like that here for venison.

My question IS when you donate the meat/breasts Is One Wing Attached to the Breast as the law states? This was a major issue when we wanted to have birds processed and have them smoked while there by a professional processor and smoker. He was told No Wing Attached you cannot accept or process the birds. Has that changed or just disregarded? If so the laws need updated in Canada, the USA and Mexico.

Again we get back to the laws, and if and when they are enforced or
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top