I appreciate your kind offer Germ on the bear hunt. I wish to take you up on it in the near future.

Lmao! It's state land.

Well, then i can go slurp down my pint of Fosters knowing that i did at least one productive thng today[8D]

Calm down HCH. I am not familiar with the laws of Canada.. so I'm not just gonna quote what someone says on the HNI forums. No need to get all rustled up..

I'm just wondering why its okay to use an outfitter by you but not okay to lease. Its the samething. Isn't it?

Have one for me!!

I've hunted around Orr and Cook. Two different outfitters and very low success rates in both of the camps.

Wanna be guides! There's a pile of them around where I hunt on state land. Very few by me are decent guides, they just screw the woods up for us guys that like to do it on our own!

I used an Outfitter in MN for bears as baits have to be established and gas and time for me to drive 8 hrs one way every weekend is not feasible. The baits wereon state land.Canada makes it a requirement, it pads the Canadians pockets. Bears are overun in Canada as like Germ said, no spring bear hunts in ON, which holds 75% of Canadas black bear population(last I knew on that figure) and locals don't hunt bears.Canadian localslook at you like you are stupid when you tell a local you hunt bears.
Now, leasing and outfitting are two seperate issues and sometimes they are tied together though with an outfitter leasing ground. I don't understand though how leasing would be mandatory or law as in your original question. How do you make leasing a law??

I'm not trying to make leasing a law. Maybe I'm just not being clear.

You stated that you hunt outfitters in Canada because it is law. I am just asking that if leasing was a law.. than would you be subjective to it. That's all.. no harm.. no foul.

But I will say.. paying an Outfitter (no matter in what country) is the same as leasing land. Your giving a sum to recieve a product (so to speak). Whether its to a farmer.. a wealthy landowner.. a business.. whatever.. there is no difference.

So by you paying an outfitter.. you are no better than I.. who leases ground to hunt. The only real difference is that I don't go through a "middle man".

Now.. can we end this debate. And talk bowhunting again..

So which one is it? are they separate or tied together?

The truth is they go hand in hand, bothcost apretty significant amount of money to hunt, both are limited to the number of hunters who can participate and both take up large tracts of land that would otherwise be available to the public either through publicor private acreage. By you paying for a hunt in Canada and somehow try to excuse it because of it's location or mandatory regulations does not change the fact that by putting money into an outfitters hand you are in essence adding to the very problem you denounce.

Outfitter hunting in Canada effects the outfitter/lease hunting here in the USA even if only by cost analysis, marketing strategies or comparative extrapolation (I propose it's more though). If it's working well in Canada (or anyplace else for that matter) then more will be inclined to try their hand at it here in the states, thus ADDING to the problem.