Woods and Water hunting club

[trimmer21]

These people are building a business by filling a niche catering to hunters who haven't the time or inclination to find their own property to hunt on. It's business entrepeneurship at it's finest based on an American model. It's quite clear,though,that it's wrankling the feathers of hunting "purists" who take great pride in interacting with farmers and landowners as part of the hunting tradition to establish their own areas to hunt. "Paying to hunt" is open to debate. Clearly,establishing the concept is detrimental to those without deep pockets,but,with Ontario being the vast province it is with 10X the public (Crown) land than private,accessible areas to hunt may mean a little more travelling time,but,as a trade off in the long run? Six of one-half a dozen of the other.

[Bluebulldog]

These people are building a business by filling a niche catering to hunters who haven't the time or inclination to find their own property to hunt on. It's business entrepeneurship at it's finest based on an American model. It's quite clear,though,that it's wrankling the feathers of hunting "purists" who take great pride in interacting with farmers and landowners as part of the hunting tradition to establish their own areas to hunt. "Paying to hunt" is open to debate. Clearly,establishing the concept is detrimental to those without deep pockets,but,with Ontario being the vast province it is with 10X the public (Crown) land than private,accessible areas to hunt may mean a little more travelling time,but,as a trade off in the long run? Six of one-half a dozen of the other.

I know we've waded into this subject previously maybe a year or two ago.

The pay-to-play model is big in the US, because they have very little public land. Of course this comes from having a population 10X what Canada is, on a smaller piece of geography. When you look at maps of the US, the large tracts of open space are most often Federal Preserves, National Parks, or other noted managed areas. They don't have anything resembling the massive amounts of Crown land that we do. Yes, it's a bit of a drive to some, but I'd still rather burn some gas than pay to play like that.

[TPM]

Seems like a useful model to me. If it's run legit without over crowding it would help people get started out. Land access is the toughest part of hunting in Southern Ontario.

And it will only get tougher if these types of "business ventures" start tieing up more and more properties.

[terrym]

Yes but let's not kid ourselves. Not every new hunter has the luxury of being born into existing hunting clans. Also many hunting permissions/properties are from some personal connection. So for those without these chances this model seems useful. I know nothing about this outfit being considered but I see value in the model especially for Southern hunters who aren't surrounded by Crown land. You pay to ski, golf, skate, play soccer etc. I also see it as an "option". Hunters can still jump in thier cars and drive North to Crown land but at $100 for a tank of gas that really isn't free either.

[trimmer21]

And it will only get tougher if these types of "business ventures" start tieing up more and more properties.

Because most landowners won't allow access even if they have an offer to be paid,I can't see it making a whole lot of difference. Besides,who can fault them if they want to hunt their own property,exclusively?

Yes but let's not kid ourselves. Not every new hunter has the luxury of being born into existing hunting clans. Also many hunting permissions/properties are from some personal connection. So for those without these chances this model seems useful. I know nothing about this outfit being considered but I see value in the model especially for Southern hunters who aren't surrounded by Crown land. You pay to ski, golf, skate, play soccer etc. I also see it as an "option". Hunters can still jump in thier cars and drive North to Crown land but at $100 for a tank of gas that really isn't free either.

Even at $100 to fill up,there's nothing like unloading gear and setting up for a day (or two) in an area where you can hunt anywhere you please and nobody can say you can't. Time well spent outdoors hunting and fishing is worth every nickle.

[TPM]

Yes but let's not kid ourselves. Not every new hunter has the luxury of being born into existing hunting clans. Also many hunting permissions/properties are from some personal connection. So for those without these chances this model seems useful. I know nothing about this outfit being considered but I see value in the model especially for Southern hunters who aren't surrounded by Crown land. You pay to ski, golf, skate, play soccer etc. I also see it as an "option". Hunters can still jump in thier cars and drive North to Crown land but at $100 for a tank of gas that really isn't free either.

I understand what you're saying but my concern is for existing hunters getting displaced if someone starts offering the land owner money for exclusive rights.

[krakadawn]

I understand what you're saying but my concern is for existing hunters getting displaced if someone starts offering the land owner money for exclusive rights.

TPM, couldn't agree more. When $$$ get offered then issues start. It becomes a slippery slope for sure.

I understand some folks need to seek out a guide/outfitter/whatever to hunt but I would challenge them to do some background work prior to your selection. I would hold them to a standard I am ok with. Pretty simple.....if you've been convicted of violations to the fish and game act or been charged criminally then common sense says to stay away from them as a service provider. Shooting a neighbours dog saying it was a coyote would also make this a no fly zone for me...........

[GuideRob]

TPM, couldn't agree more. When $$$ get offered then issues start. It becomes a slippery slope for sure.

I understand some folks need to seek out a guide/outfitter/whatever to hunt but I would challenge them to do some background work prior to your selection. I would hold them to a standard I am ok with. Pretty simple.....if you've been convicted of violations to the fish and game act or been charged criminally then common sense says to stay away from them as a service provider. Shooting a neighbours dog saying it was a coyote would also make this a no fly zone for me...........

I would like to let you guys know that things aren't always as they appear. This dog in particular that was shot was 100 pounds plus. It had this farmer's family scared to go out on there own land. It was vicious having cornered the guys wife in the barn ready to attack. He had to fight him off with a large stick. His son was also cornered in a fence row teeth coming at him. This dog had also killed some livestock recently on his farm. There are over a dozen stories like this from neighbours. This dog coming on their land attacking their dogs and cattle. The municipal dog catchers were not doing their jobs and the township was not keeping track of the adding complaints.

Either way I ended up wearing the dirty end of the stick. That's all I am going to say about this long standing subject.

It is sad when animals have more rights than people. Looking back last month people in Toronto made a memorial for a dead raccoon. Framed his picture, candles the whole deal on the side of the road. Sad!!! But did any of you hear anything about the homeless man that died in a bus shelter last winter. Nope. They just tagged him John Doe and buried him.

Oh, and another thing I would like to point out while I am here now. There are guys and their buddies on this forum that are my competition and take pride in telling lies, 1/2 truths and anything they can to put others down for their own gain. I am not going to mention names because that is not the way I am!!! Now having said my piece someone is probably going to complain and have this removed. Let's try to keep this Forum truthful and positive!

[redd foxx]

Quite often conversation can bring out the truth. Lack of it allows suspicions and conjecture and assumptions. Perhaps if there was more frank conversation...there would be less confrontation. Like has been said here before there are 3 sides to every story. Often the third is exactly like one of the other two.

[trimmer21]

I would like to let you guys know that things aren't always as they appear. This dog in particular that was shot was 100 pounds plus. It had this farmer's family scared to go out on there own land. It was vicious having cornered the guys wife in the barn ready to attack. He had to fight him off with a large stick. His son was also cornered in a fence row teeth coming at him. This dog had also killed some livestock recently on his farm. There are over a dozen stories like this from neighbours. This dog coming on their land attacking their dogs and cattle. The municipal dog catchers were not doing their jobs and the township was not keeping track of the adding complaints.

Either way I ended up wearing the dirty end of the stick. That's all I am going to say about this long standing subject.

So,I guess we can assume that it was YOU that shot the dog? Obviously,you failed to convince the Judge which is too bad. Didn't the witnesses testify on your behalf? It would seem you did everyone a big favor taking care of the problem,but,I would simply ask why they left it up to you instead of taking care of the problem themselves when you had no authority? They would have been within their absolute right as landowners to shoot the damn thing. Why didn't they? You made a mistake and got called on it. Now,you'll wear it forever. Live and learn,that's life.
I see this is your first post,so,welcome to the forum. It's important for everyone to see both sides of the coin. Stick around.