Private company buys 67,000 acres and puts 70 hunt camps on notice

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Species8472

Camp, cottage, trailer etc whatever you call it is irrelevant. What matters is whether the definition of "residence" as defined in the Residential Tenancy Act applies. A camp, cottage, trailer etc used in multiple seasons by the same family for multiple recreational purposes qualifies.

A makeshift shack used for hunting only by 12 different guys for 2 weeks in November - not so much and in the area in question that is the norm.

So those camps used year round for multiple purposes by one family probably have a chance anything else not so much. It will also depend on who is listed on the lease agreement. Less and from one family is better.

And for the record I only mentioned cottages because that is what the northerners called them in the legal decisions that you linked.

Also in my mind having lived in Peawanuck for several years anybody from South of Pickle Lake lives in Southern Ontario.

---

No harm, no foul meant. But being a northerner, it gives me glee to jab the southern folks at every opportunity that rolls along. :D
Regardless of the term used, it will probably come down to the wording of the lease. That's "if" the lessee's group together and challenge it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmoose

No harm, no foul meant. But being a northerner, it gives me glee to jab the southern folks at every opportunity that rolls along. :D
Regardless of the term used, it will probably come down to the wording of the lease. That's "if" the lessee's group together and challenge it.

---

None taken. I know you love to jab southerners. But in riposte the Sault is southern Ontario as far as i'm concerned:moose::moose:. Spent more time in traffic jams on 17 along the north shore than i ever have on the back roads around here and for the record i actually spend more time at my place outside North Bay than any where else - but it too is Southern Ontario as far as I'm concerned. Unless ice out is after May 31 it is Southern Ontario:D.

As for how it plays out neither of us actually has a clue as to whether they have any legal legs to stand on. But my guess is if they are 2 week camps they are screwed as the RTA specifically says those type of seasonal stays are not protected. Actually have given testimony at RTA hearings as a professional witness on behalf of some big bad landlords regarding infrastructure provided to renters.

If you are ever out around Markdale/Flesherton shoot me a pm and we can throw back a few wobbly pops around the fire at my deer camp (owned not leased).

This covers blocks of wooded land mostly in Hastings county. Lease costs traditionally were around $4.50 per acre. So a 500 acre lease was appox. $2250/yr. Now it could be as much as $5000/person/yr. These camps had rules, respected the land and kept poachers off. Approximately 1000 hunters effected. I guess the underlying concern here is that the Feds gave this private citizen an extremely large grant to proceed. Effectively ending hundreds of hunters ability to hunt.

Sent from my LM-G900 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ted

This covers blocks of wooded land mostly in Hastings county. Lease costs traditionally were around $4.50 per acre. So a 500 acre lease was appox. $2250/yr. Now it could be as much as $5000/person/yr. These camps had rules, respected the land and kept poachers off. Approximately 1000 hunters effected. I guess the underlying concern here is that the Feds gave this private citizen an extremely large grant to proceed. Effectively ending hundreds of hunters ability to hunt.

Sent from my LM-G900 using Tapatalk

---

The feds gave a private citizen a grant to buy the property? I smell a politician or a relative with the fingers in the cookie jar. A 67K acre windmill farm,maybe,or to offset The Algonguin Land Claim? As soon as the word "grant" or "politician" gets involved,I smell a stinkin' outhouse.

i was talking to a few different people that know a few members that hunt there.
One said they have to be out of there by September 1 other one said they will be allowed to hunt there this fall but that's the end.
There are some very nice camps in there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bushmoose

No harm, no foul meant. But being a northerner, it gives me glee to jab the southern folks at every opportunity that rolls along. :D
Regardless of the term used, it will probably come down to the wording of the lease. That's "if" the lessee's group together and challenge it.

---

I grew up in the south, not my fault, and we always went to camp, friends would call it the cottage but they would be wrong, ha ha ha.

Sorry, but not sorry - you are correct Private Property rights are paramount and take precedence over the camps. Crummy situation, but I agree with new land owner. MY FIL and his 30 yr deer group just got told by the owner no more deer hunting on the property. They have done years of improvements and work on the property and the husband was part of the group, he passed last spring. The widow just decided it would be too painful to have the boys back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Species8472

If it's private property and has been since before the camps were set up where's the problem. Just a land owner exercising his/her legal rights. Sure it sucks for those that are going to lose their leases but that is always a risk with leasing - nothing new. Pros and cons to leasing vs owning - this is one of the cons where leasing is concerned.

---

Update: I've done a little more research. This new owner seems to have an understanding of the concerns and history of these camps. He has shown a willingness to work with camps at least in the short term. Leases can be extended at least through this years hunting seasons. Renegotiating will continue next year. [emoji1696] Being a conservationist his main concern is the few camps that have shown disrespect for the land they have been charged with ( old vehicles, garbage and the like) again proving that the few can ruin it for everyone... Hoping for the best

Sent from my LM-G900 using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ted

Update: I've done a little more research. This new owner seems to have an understanding of the concerns and history of these camps. He has shown a willingness to work with camps at least in the short term. Leases can be extended at least through this years hunting seasons. Renegotiating will continue next year. [emoji1696] Being a conservationist his main concern is the few camps that have shown disrespect for the land they have been charged with ( old vehicles, garbage and the like) again proving that the few can ruin it for everyone... Hoping for the best

Sent from my LM-G900 using Tapatalk

---

Talked with my local sources only yesterday before reading this post as I am just back from up north. So all the Domtar lands south and east of me are gone to this guy. I knew something was wrong as he has set up a gate post's on a Township Road and has posted Private property on both sides of the "road allowance", so the Township has done "nothing" about that aspect.
The other info is that the land base extends right across to Limerick and the money came from the Federal Government and the owner will be declaring this land a nature Preserve, no hunting. I cannot verify if this is accurate or not or just local talk.
So between this and the Algonquin land claims in the same area hunting opportunities just got a little tighter.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trimmer21

The feds gave a private citizen a grant to buy the property? I smell a politician or a relative with the fingers in the cookie jar. A 67K acre windmill farm,maybe,or to offset The Algonguin Land Claim? As soon as the word "grant" or "politician" gets involved,I smell a stinkin' outhouse.

---

Oh my, you may not want to Google Bark Lake/Century Lane