I believe BC has that right/agreement not sure the "Third" party(Hunter) does though...

I have racked my brain trying to figure out the answer to this. I keep coming back to the fact that as long as hunters are lining up to get in on these leases, there's no need for customer service for the Hunter. I realize that lots of not most are happy with their arrangement. I just feel like the amount of money they're asking for these leases, they could be a little more professional and protect both sides. I'm scared to death of dropping $2000 and seeing signs that somebody else is enjoying my lease more than me

Take 2. I wrote out a whole reply here last night only to hit the wrong key and bye-bye, it was gone...didn't have the strength to do it again.

The hunter landowner relationship is the key to the leasing process. Are all hunters forthright and trust worthy, uh no. Are all landowners? No. What is provided by most brokers is a strong document that represents/protects both sides.

Copied from the link above'
Licensor hereby agrees:
1. To provide the Licensee with hunting rights on the Premises during the term of this Agreement, subject to the
conditions and restrictions provided herein.
2. To not license to or give any other individual(s) permission to access for recreation, occupy for recreation, or
use for recreation purposes, or hunt on the Premises during the term of this Agreement. This does not restrict
the licensor or the licensor’s agent from farming, harvesting timber or firewood, conducting mineral
exploration, or general maintenance of the Premises.
That is pretty clear to me. If a LO then breaches the agreement the hunter has every right to pursue satisfaction.
In the real world here is the problem with expecting the broker to step in...
Hunter A has a tough hunting season and hasn't seen much activity on his lease. Farmer/LO cuts down 2 trees for firewood. (or allows a nephew to ride an ATV one time) you get the picture. HUnter A then blames his LO for his lack of success and demands a refund. What side would the broker take? Its a no win situation. It is best for the two parties to attempt a settlement, then like any other dispute, if you can't settle or agree you go to small claims court. The hunter has the lease agreement in hand, if he can prove the contract was breached it should be pretty simple.
This is not the norm. I have had 4 leases. 2 had great success, 2 I did not. In each case, the LO was receptive to my ideas and needs and was very accomodating. Remember, the LO ideally wants a good relationship with the hunter so they will renew and pay again the following year.
I realize all cases are not the same and I appreciate that some of you have had bad experiences.
There is always the option of leasing on your own. A well placed classified ad or knocking on a door armed with the proper paperwork and an appropriate amount of cash may be all you need.
I have thought about the possibility of offering an arbitration process through our association. But, I am certain the losing party would always feel cheated and unfairly treated. Regardless.

Sean, thanks for the info.

If I can ask...what was the difference between the 2 leases which you found successful vs. those 2 you did not?

Oh, my bad...all I have to do is go to court and PROVE THE LANDOWNER "GAVE THE PEOPLE PERMISSION"...then I can get my money back?
I feel a lot better now.
That should be easy.
Everybody has an opinion...mine is that for the kind of money the LO's are getting, they should HAVE TO PROSECUTE or allow the Hunter to prosecute anyone they find out there.
If the LO just wants compensated for allowing hunters in there it should be a simple tresspass fee. But I understand this is business. I also understand there is a LOT of demand by hunters to get into these leases.

It would be a lot easier to call a LEO to enforce the trespassing laws if you had the authority...IMO