Where can I go to legally practice all aspects of Bushcraft without permission?
- Thread starter Billy1
- Start date
Plus, as a non-resident, you can expect to pay 10X our price for licences. Then you need to pay the royalty to whoever is the legal owner of the trap line for every fur-bearer (squirrels included) that
you harvest for whatever reason. Where I come from, there is a total open fire ban = lots of cold raw meat for meals. No fire light after dark.
Probably no percentage of trying your skills here.
you harvest for whatever reason. Where I come from, there is a total open fire ban = lots of cold raw meat for meals. No fire light after dark.
Probably no percentage of trying your skills here.
Because while we are all responsible and sensible adults that are able to make a fire safely, the remaining 99.999999% of the population can't be trusted to do so. Thus in areas with significant wildfire risk, pretty much everything that might start a fire is banned. Quite sensibly.
If you ever want to dramatically improve your fire skills, go camping with an Aussie. You'll have the least sparking, most efficient little fire imaginable.
J
BC, Alberta, Saskatchewan are in a very dry condition right now. Literally hundreds of forest fire being fought by the local provincial firefighters as well as firefighters from other provinces, the US, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia.
Some are started by lightning strikes, others by humans and if it isn't enough others are arson.
Some villages, areas that are down wind or in the path of the fires have been evacuated or under evacuation notice, 10 minutes to get ready and gone.
Another aspect of the reality of bushcraft.
Our Crown land is for everyone's use, not abuse
Then there is the of searches for "experience hiker/campers" that get in over their realistic skill levels.
A program called Alone is a useful guideline, it is not as romantic as most perceive.
Along with the obvious skills, loneliness, isolation, physical discomfort, also have a part in bushcraft. Not to put anyone off but be realistic with yourselves.
Some are started by lightning strikes, others by humans and if it isn't enough others are arson.
Some villages, areas that are down wind or in the path of the fires have been evacuated or under evacuation notice, 10 minutes to get ready and gone.
Another aspect of the reality of bushcraft.
Our Crown land is for everyone's use, not abuse
Then there is the of searches for "experience hiker/campers" that get in over their realistic skill levels.
A program called Alone is a useful guideline, it is not as romantic as most perceive.
Along with the obvious skills, loneliness, isolation, physical discomfort, also have a part in bushcraft. Not to put anyone off but be realistic with yourselves.
If I remember correctly Canada also requires non-residents who wish to hunt to do so with a registered guide, thus adding another expense. My memory of this is over 30 years old and may be suspect. Add to that the fact that I was in Alberta and am unsure if this was a national or provincial requirement.
Exactly, as with the USA, there are federal laws and each state has its own laws so do federal and provinces in Kanata
+1 to what the other guys have said about chopping trees down.
When I looked at this thread earlier there were 202 members and 585 visitors looking at it .
I also noticed that there are 28,377 members. Also by the figures above thousands of people
watching .
If all of these people went out and chopped down a living tree that had taken 10 or 20 years to grow it is going to have quite an impact for no good reason. As someone said, take a tarp.
When I looked at this thread earlier there were 202 members and 585 visitors looking at it .
I also noticed that there are 28,377 members. Also by the figures above thousands of people
watching .
If all of these people went out and chopped down a living tree that had taken 10 or 20 years to grow it is going to have quite an impact for no good reason. As someone said, take a tarp.
British Columbia is experiencing an unusual summer drought with record-breaking temperatures in the high 30's and low 40's. Some wild fires are now in the thousands of km^2 area.
In the central interior, city of Prince George where I'm visiting, today is expected to be thunder storms with lots of lightning from noon onwards. My home is east in McBride. That is the ICH zone with moisture dependent natural forests of western red cedar and hemlock, much like the west coast (lots of precip.) In the past 6 weeks, we have had rain showers on 2 days for a sum total in my rain gauge of approx 3/8". Otherwise, not a useful cloud in the sky.
+1 santaman, you memory does not fail you. Foreign hunters _MUST_ use a guide. As an amateur, I can do as I please BUT, I cannot guide a foreign hunter.
In the central interior, city of Prince George where I'm visiting, today is expected to be thunder storms with lots of lightning from noon onwards. My home is east in McBride. That is the ICH zone with moisture dependent natural forests of western red cedar and hemlock, much like the west coast (lots of precip.) In the past 6 weeks, we have had rain showers on 2 days for a sum total in my rain gauge of approx 3/8". Otherwise, not a useful cloud in the sky.
+1 santaman, you memory does not fail you. Foreign hunters _MUST_ use a guide. As an amateur, I can do as I please BUT, I cannot guide a foreign hunter.
Gonna play devils advocate here.
Yes, and no. Depends on what you consider to be a tree, as well as the species of tree, and the stage in it's life cycle. If all 28,377 members chopped down one trunk in a specific area, we wouldn't actually even be chopping down a whole Tree.
Some species of tree live longer in response to being cut down occasionally, be it by coppicing or pollarding. Others that cut will be terminal. Some times chopping the right tree down will have a general overall benefit to the forest, and in others, they will only grow upon the corpse of a fallen tree.
Many of us can be a touch sentimental and have an aversion to cutting anything off any living tree. We think of trees as the mighty standards of Oak and Ash and Beech, that tower majestically in the forest, sentinel to the passage of time. Thing is, the reality is that if every member were to go out into the Canadian wilderness, spread ourselves equally, and chop down one tree that is no more than the diameter of our forearm, then we the forest wouldn't even notice we'd done it.
If we did the same thing in a predominantly broadleaved area, and everyone took down one tree that they could only just hug. The impact would on the face of it be pretty devastating. But, if we left the land after doing so, within 100 to 200 years, you wouldn't notice it'd happened.
I'm not trying to advocate large scale deforestation, especially in areas such as the tropical rain forests, where chopping down primary rain forest will result in secondary rainforest that will take centuries, or possibly millennia to regain it's original climax vegetation, if it ever does.
But in much of the northern hemisphere. Humans have been chopping down the odd tree here and there for millennia, and it isn't making a major impact on the world.
That said, any large scale deforestation without appropriate replanting is Really Bad.
J
Gonna play devils advocate here.
(Many of us can be a touch sentimental and have an aversion to cutting anything off any living tree.)
Yes I hug trees, talk to them, listen to them, take care of them and thank them for when I have NEED to use them
(We think of trees as the mighty standards of Oak and Ash and Beech, that tower majestically in the forest, sentinel to the passage of time.)
So large trees are majestic but a poplar sapling isn't because it is "common". The life of all size living organism irrespectively, is sacred to it. (mosquitoes or eagles to them life is all they have)
(Thing is, the reality is that if every member were to go out into the Canadian wilderness, spread ourselves equally, and chop down one tree that is no more than the diameter of our forearm, then we the forest wouldn't even notice we'd done it.)
In reality how many would travel a hundred miles or more, alone just to practice "bushcraft", we would be as close as we can be, there goes at very least the scenery.
(If we did the same thing in a predominantly broadleaved area, and everyone took down one tree that they could only just hug. The impact would on the face of it be pretty devastating. But, if we left the land after doing so, within 100 to 200 years, you wouldn't notice it'd happened.)
100-200 years is a long time for our children to wait
(But in much of the northern hemisphere. Humans have been chopping down the odd tree here and there for millennia, and it isn't making a major impact on the world.)
They had to, it was reality not "practice"
I see, feel things much differently, thats me
Creator's advocate
Last edited:
Logging/harvesting here in BC has a legal requirement for replanting.
Even excess height stumps will cost you, big time.
Excessive soil compaction will cost you, big time.
If you don't contract a tree planting crew, you can and will be left with the clothing that you are standing in.
You home, your car/truck, everything can and will be seized to pay for replanting.
We know for a fact that by 1996, the bottom line cost to put a tree in the ground was about $4.50 each.
By that time also, some 4,000,000,000 trees had been planted on harvested sites.
It's a fiber crop no different that wheat, just a 70 year turn around, not 100 days.
I cannot cut _any_ merchantable tree for any reason as I have no licence(s) to do so,
not even dead stuff (aka "salvage logging".)
The rules and requirements are laid out very clearly. Care to even try to bluff the "twig pigs" (aka Forestry Police?)
As a land owner, however, you can harvest what you please. But if you have no buyers for your logs, what's the point?
Even excess height stumps will cost you, big time.
Excessive soil compaction will cost you, big time.
If you don't contract a tree planting crew, you can and will be left with the clothing that you are standing in.
You home, your car/truck, everything can and will be seized to pay for replanting.
We know for a fact that by 1996, the bottom line cost to put a tree in the ground was about $4.50 each.
By that time also, some 4,000,000,000 trees had been planted on harvested sites.
It's a fiber crop no different that wheat, just a 70 year turn around, not 100 days.
I cannot cut _any_ merchantable tree for any reason as I have no licence(s) to do so,
not even dead stuff (aka "salvage logging".)
The rules and requirements are laid out very clearly. Care to even try to bluff the "twig pigs" (aka Forestry Police?)
As a land owner, however, you can harvest what you please. But if you have no buyers for your logs, what's the point?
So just for a giggle, let's suppose that you plan to hunt in Canada, in southern BC in particular.
First thing to do is contact the Association of BC Guides & Outfitters to find out who has open time, and tags
for whatever you're after.
I have no commercial interest in these guys but they are efficient and full-service, summer and winter.
www.Kettleriverguides.com
1. Click on the BC Cougar hunts to see the size of the cats you can find in the winter.
2. Look at the doofus in the ghillie coat with the 25lb Merriam's wild turkey on the home page.
That's me. Their first and rapidly successful turkey hunter.
First thing to do is contact the Association of BC Guides & Outfitters to find out who has open time, and tags
for whatever you're after.
I have no commercial interest in these guys but they are efficient and full-service, summer and winter.
www.Kettleriverguides.com
1. Click on the BC Cougar hunts to see the size of the cats you can find in the winter.
2. Look at the doofus in the ghillie coat with the 25lb Merriam's wild turkey on the home page.
That's me. Their first and rapidly successful turkey hunter.
Me too. But then I am training to make a living out trees.
It's an interesting one. In my local permission, per acre there are 12 standards, the rest is coppice. It's chestnut. As long as I do it properly, I can chop down various bits of the chestnut without damaging the tree, and without effecting the woodland in an adverse way. Quite the contrary. Coppice a few dozen stools, and the following summer you'll have foxgloves growing, along with other wild flowers in the herbaceous and field layer. The tree isn't harmed, it'll grow back. And yet we've given life to all these other species.
As for the poplar sappling. There will be thousands upon thousands of tiny sapplings for every standard. Not all of those can live to full maturity, there just isn't the space, those that started to grow in shade will likely die and never reach maturity. There is little harm on the forest as a whole in weeding some of those out.
That wasn't the point I was trying to make. Spread the cutting down over a wide enough area, and our impact will be less than the impact of the native wildlife we go there to enjoy. Noone complains at the beavers felling trees.
There is also an argument when dealing with wildernerss to set aside some areas as no go, whilst using other areas as a sacrificial anode. We protect plot A, by being more liberal with what people do in plot B.
My comment was a thought experiment, there to illustrate the scale of the world we have.
In the time scales of trees, it's the blink of an eye. Pando, the tree I linked to previously is estimated to be at least 80000 years old. There is a tree in Sweden that is 9500 years old, and the Bristle cone pines live to around 5000 years old (at least). I am not advocating that we fell all the standards, I'm merely pointing out that in the grand scheme of things, our time scales are next to nothing.
They had to, it was reality not "practice"
I see, feel things much differently.
Devils advocate
You see, I think this might be a linguistic esoteric-ism. I practice bushcraft, the same way a doctor practices medicine. In that use of the word, I think it changes the impact of the activity, beyond "skill training" or simple "skill repetition".
J
Ok Quixoticgeek, How did you manage all those different quotes from the original post? I am trying to learn but I find it difficult.
I see things as I said differently than most, some people march to a different drum....I march to a different band
And I corrected Devils advocate, to Creator's advocate, my mistake
I see things as I said differently than most, some people march to a different drum....I march to a different band
And I corrected Devils advocate, to Creator's advocate, my mistake
Ok Quixoticgeek, How did you manage all those different quotes from the original post? I am trying to learn but I find it difficult.
I see things as I said differently than most, some people march to a different drum....I march to a different band
And I corrected Devils advocate, to Creator's advocate, my mistake
Encapsulate the paragraphs you want within [quote] blocks like so:
[quote]
this is the bit that the person you are replying to originally said.
[/quote]
This is your reply.
[quote]
They said this too.
[/quote]
and this is your reply to that bit too...
Make sure to close each quote block with [/quote].
J
As an ex-Aussie, who spent not inconsiderable time each summer fighting fires, I'd beg you to please not ever try your skills at firelighting in countries like Australia.
The forests are full of tinder, at times of high summer even the air above the trees is flammable (eucalyptus oil).
The forests are full of tinder, at times of high summer even the air above the trees is flammable (eucalyptus oil).
