PDA

View Full Version : News Release:A Failure to Consult, Manage and Conserve: Moose in the Cariboo



BCWF
02-15-2016, 12:41 PM
News Release:

A Failure to Consult, Manage and Conserve: Moose in the Cariboo





Quesnel, B.C. The annual resident hunter allocation for bull moose in Management Units 5-03, 5-04 a/b, 5-5, 5-12a, 5-13a, and 5-14 was 250 from 2010 through 2014. The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations is proposing to reduce resident hunter allocation for bull moose to 170 for the 2016 hunting season, more than a 30% decline.
The reduction is part of a reconciliation agreement between the TSilhqot’in First Nations and the B.C. government. According to government, the TSilhqot’in have agreed to shift their harvest from cows and calves to bull moose with the difference made up by reducing the number that resident hunters may utilize. While shifting the harvest is a part of moose recovery, government has failed to consult the public orprovide long-term funding and measurable objectives for moose recovery.


The Cariboo region has a long history of similar changes without a strategic approach to wildlife and habitat conservation. “Mule deer, sheep, caribou and moose populations have declined significantly in the Cariboo over the last 30 years. This downward spiral mirrors the trend in government funding, capacity, and its interest in biodiversity conservation. Resident hunters used to sustainably harvest over 2,000 moose per year in the entire Cariboo – we expect the resident hunter allocation in the entire region to be less than 800 for 2016,” said Jesse Zeman, Resident Priority Program Manager.
B.C. is one of the most biologically diverse jurisdictions in North America and at the same time one of the most under-funded. Instead of investing to bringing our natural capital back, government has chosen to monitor a declining population, and attempt to create division between those who care about the resource.
Government is acting as an autonomous agent, disregarding the public’s interest in fish, wildlife and habitat. “Cutting the public out of the process is becoming the norm. We have seen this in the Peace with Site C, and with the Peace-Liard moose management plan where government has not consulted or engaged the public,” said Gerry Paille Wildlife Committee Chair.
The BCWF Wildlife Committee calls for immediate creation of a moose recovery plan for the Cariboo region. The BCWF sees a moose recovery program containing the following essential components: funding, science, objectives and collaboration. The plan needs to set legislated objectives for moose populations and look at cumulative effects of resource extraction, access, and predation on moose productivity and survival. The approach needs to include First Nations and non-First Nations interests.

The BC Wildlife Federation has a history of working in collaboration with First Nations to sustainably conserve and enhance biodiversity. The BC Wildlife Federation will continue to partner with First Nations to drive positive change for biodiversity conservation in British Columbia.

For more information contact:

Jesse Zeman, BCWF Resident Priority Program Manager Phone: 250-878-3799 Email: jessezeman@gmail.com
Gerry Paille BCWF Wildlife Committee Chair, Phone: 250-262-1612 Email: gpaille@me.com

Attend the Quesnel Information Session February 17 from 7-9 pm at the Royal Canadian Legion, 262 Kinchant Street

Background:

The BCWF calls for a moose recovery program containing the following essential components:

Funding:

British Columbia is one of North America’s most biodiverse jurisdictions and is at an all-time low in terms of funding and capacity related to natural resource management and enforcement in B.C. Most fish and wildlife departments across North America (in jurisdictions which are smaller and less biodiverse than BC) operate on budgets in the hundreds of millions. In contrast B.C. operates on a budget closer to $25 million. While most jurisdictions in North America have dedicated funding models for wildlife management, B.C. does not.
Instead of funding fish and wildlife management, and setting landscape level objectives for species such as moose, caribou, mule deer, and sheep, government has chosen to reduce public access and allocation.

Inventory and Objectives:

Comprehensive inventory work needs to be done in the area so that moose management and the corresponding regulations are based on science. A target number for moose in the management area needs to be established.
Simply monitoring dwindling wildlife populations and biodiversity is not an acceptable approach. Without goals and objectives, monitoring becomes a convenient process which lacks accountability and inevitably results in a gradual, but long-term decline. Many caribou, moose, steelhead, salmon, and sheep populations are at historical lows yet only a few caribou populations have tangible, results based recovery plans. Objectives at the landscape level, including species specific targets, should be identified and legislated to ensure decision makers are accountable to biodiversity and the public.
Cumulative effects from fire suppression, high road density, and resource extraction such as salvage logging are all having an impact. Habitat, predation, and access all needs to be looked at, and management actions must be based on science. Continuing to allow the resource to dwindle is not in the public interest.


Collaboration:

First Nations and key stakeholders should be a part of a moose recovery plan through a roundtable process. The BC Wildlife Federation has a history of working in collaboration with First Nations to sustainably conserve and enhance biodiversity.

The BCWF finds it objectionable that the proposal was derived through government to government consultations while shutting out other major stakeholders. This approach creates conflict between people who live in British Columbia, and fails to adequately protect and enhance wildlife.

Ambush
02-15-2016, 02:09 PM
Timely.
I just received a response from my MLA regarding these very issues, including the Peace moose reallocation from non-status residents to status only moose harvest.

Though I have not been able to discover if non-resident guided hunts will still take place.

chris
02-15-2016, 02:42 PM
This really sounds like business as usual for region 5 but how can we improve the situation? Everyone will tell you that wolves beetles and unregulated hunting have destroyed the moose population but no one seems to know how to restore it. I don't think anyone even knows how many moose are left in the region.

rgn5hunt
02-15-2016, 03:14 PM
It looks like a solid plan in the article. Funding, Inventory and Objectives, and Collaboration. IMHO

ICEWOODY
02-15-2016, 05:24 PM
Stupid way to manage by turning two party's against each other.

horshur
02-15-2016, 05:45 PM
nothing a calf season wouldn't fix!!!

houndogger
02-15-2016, 06:36 PM
Who gets the bigger share of wolf scat?

Rob Chipman
02-15-2016, 07:09 PM
"The reduction is part of a reconciliation agreement between the TSilhqot’in First Nations and the B.C. government. According to government, the TSilhqot’in have agreed to shift their harvest from cows and calves to bull moose with the difference made up by reducing the number that resident hunters may utilize."


I've never seen that sort of admission in anything close to official black and writing before. Maybe I missed it. I would love to see it in government correspondence or on Tsilhqot'in letterhead.

huntcoop
02-15-2016, 07:42 PM
Let's all remember that they are the big voice, let's all support the BCWF.

40incher
02-16-2016, 12:48 AM
The annual resident hunter allocation for bull moose in Management Units 5-03, 5-04 a/b, 5-5, 5-12a, 5-13a, and 5-14 was 250 from 2010 through 2014. The Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations is proposing to reduce resident hunter allocation for bull moose to 170 for the 2016 hunting season, more than a 30% decline.


So ... I would hope the guide allocation would be 40 or less, given the obvious strong resident demand!

What say ya' guides. C'mon now, it's a conservation issue ... right!!

But ... then again ... the Indians own GO territories in the Chilco don't they?!

huntcoop
02-16-2016, 11:58 AM
We all have opinions, let's support our voice, the BCWF as a whole.

Gateholio
02-16-2016, 12:35 PM
Several of you have had posts deleted on this thread because you are trying to hijack it for your own agenda. (Several people quote them and were deleted too)

Further posts of this nature will result in an HBC vacation. I hope that is clear.

The Hermit
02-16-2016, 06:27 PM
Go get them Jesse! Good work.

Once again anyone wanting information about allocation spits should be encouraged to contact the Ministry directly and let them know of any concerns you may have. It is your right to have direct contact with your MLAs and to contact the Ministry representatives directly and to make FOI requests if you are not satisfied with their answers.

Please remember that the Ministry staff are sometimes constrained by politicians about the level of detail they can disclose, and by many competing interests, so please be respectful as I think you will find them to be honest BC residents themselves - people working their asses off to accomplish the most they can with the resources available to them.

Ambush
02-16-2016, 07:37 PM
What a joke
What's the point of having a discussion with just one side of the story.

Souwester, I can never figure out where the heck you are coming from!! Or what you are trying to convey.

You just throw out half questions inferring that the answer is obvious, when really it is not.

Are you a guide? A disgruntled resident hunter? Are you mad at the government for taking something from you?

Are you mad at the BCWF for not doing something for you, or for doing something to you?

Exactly who the hell are you mad at and what for!?!?

Gateholio
02-16-2016, 07:56 PM
What a joke
What's the point of having a discussion with just one side of the story.

Discuss the topic at hand all you want. Stay on the topic. Easy.

Drillbit
02-16-2016, 11:06 PM
I spent all day in 5-13a today after fresh snow last night.

Put on lots of miles chasing tracks.

Only saw one moose track. Total.
No deer tracks.

Saw 2 separate packs of wolf tracks, 6 in one, 8 in the other. Saw one out of the 8 and shot it.

Pretty bleak out there. Hopefully something will be done to help the moose out.

Down South
02-17-2016, 08:51 AM
I spent all day in 5-13a today after fresh snow last night.

Put on lots of miles chasing tracks.

Only saw one moose track. Total.
No deer tracks.

Saw 2 separate packs of wolf tracks, 6 in one, 8 in the other. Saw one out of the 8 and shot it.

Pretty bleak out there. Hopefully something will be done to help the moose out.

Now that is what I call valuable information, I hope someone is paying attention

horshur
02-17-2016, 05:43 PM
stockpiling wolves!

houndogger
02-17-2016, 08:13 PM
stockpiling wolves!
Lmao good one.

Apolonius
02-17-2016, 08:22 PM
The numbers have being going down for a while.There is more to this than the wolves.But always a good starting point.
Management of the other "wolves" has to play a role too(hmmm right).But after we limit the resident hunter,everyone else will be happy.
Have the resident kill the wolves,take away a good chunk of the RH harvest....now that IS management.
Use some federal money (our money) to buy GO areas....give them to natives....
Does it sound like ,the buying of commercial fishing licences.....yep.
Long lives "reconciliation"!!!!...or guilt trip!!!
Bend over....

b72471
02-18-2016, 01:09 AM
Well Apolonius you have pretty well summed it up. First Thompson gives the guides what they want and be sure that will remain untouched , now First Nations are being addressed; after this, the LEH will be quickly reduced to almost ZIP.
Some Areas have had the LEH reduced to one or two moose already but the guide still has his allotment and almost an exclusive area for hunting. Conservation, BS not when only one group takes the brunt of reduction.
I live in 5-13.

Ry151
02-18-2016, 11:04 AM
After attending the meeting last night in Quesnel to hear Jesse zeman speak I was quite surprised by the fickle towards guide outiffers. I got the impression from the speakers that resident hunters should now work with the outfitters to bring moose numbers up which I agree with to some extent but has the BCWF forgot about the knife in our backs? Are we no longer fighting the allocation? I left feeling some what confused on that one.
Jesse put on a good presentation, vary informative

bearvalley
02-18-2016, 11:16 AM
After attending the meeting last night in Quesnel to hear Jesse zeman speak I was quite surprised by the fickle towards guide outiffers. I got the impression from the speakers that resident hunters should now work with the outfitters to bring moose numbers up which I agree with to some extent but has the BCWF forgot about the knife in our backs? Are we no longer fighting the allocation? I left feeling some what confused on that one.
Jesse put on a good presentation, vary informative

Im not out to start a shit storm on here but here's something to think about....Jesse told it the way it is last night, with no BS.
If someone has not heard it that way before.....maybe there is cause for confusion.

Ry151
02-18-2016, 03:50 PM
Im not out to start a shit storm on here but here's something to think about....Jesse told it the way it is last night, with no BS.
If someone has not heard it that way before.....maybe there is cause for confusion.
i may be alone on this but im not ready to work with outfitters at this point. There will be a point when we need to work together but not until the allocation is adjusted in residents favor

Fisher-Dude
02-18-2016, 04:20 PM
After attending the meeting last night in Quesnel to hear Jesse zeman speak I was quite surprised by the fickle towards guide outiffers. I got the impression from the speakers that resident hunters should now work with the outfitters to bring moose numbers up which I agree with to some extent but has the BCWF forgot about the knife in our backs? Are we no longer fighting the allocation? I left feeling some what confused on that one.
Jesse put on a good presentation, vary informative

I think common interests like making more animals is shared by residents, GOs, and FNs. Yet government doesn't care about that, and wants to keep slicing a smaller pie thinner and thinner among us.

I think a united front to demand change from government is a good idea. Government is scared shitless about that, as they would rather keep us fighting among ourselves - we're easier to control that way, and it keeps us from making them do anything about it.

Have people given up the allocation fight? Not at all.

But they are two very separate issues, and I think it's important to make that distinction.

Gateholio
02-18-2016, 04:42 PM
What FD said is bang on. Two seperate issues.

Currently predator control in BC is highly controversial. Probably the only group that the antis won't stand up to is FNs.

FN support will crush any opposition. They want to hunt moose too.

Apolonius
02-18-2016, 06:44 PM
Negative thoughts here.
Common interest for GO ,FN,RH...to "make" more game.
Does it seem to you that the common interest stops...just there????
The only ones the get cut on their ...Allocation is Resident hunters.
OOPS they gave us a more liberal limit .....on wolves!!!
Are you people thinking more game,means more for the RH?????
Give your head a shake!!!
Anything supported/promoted by GO?FN?GOV is good for them!!!
You as a resident,being used by them for their own good.Road closures...reconciliation/studies,all to limit the RH harvest.
That is the reason i don't understand BCWF.
We don't need Goabc,they need us.They will through you under the bus in a milliesecond....they did it before.
What happened to "Hill to die for???"..goatguy???
Now you are preaching/hinting,to work together with Goabc????
Quiet a 180 there.
Residents are being sold out left and right.
I already wonder if we are being sold,by our own.
Maybe it is time to start new.With a new direction.
Very soon the only thing we will be hunting(aloud) ,will be wolves(for their,go/fn own good) and squirrels.SHAME

bearvalley
02-18-2016, 06:50 PM
What FD said is bang on. Two seperate issues.

Currently predator control in BC is highly controversial. Probably the only group that the antis won't stand up to is FNs.

FN support will crush any opposition. They want to hunt moose too.

You've got it Gatehouse. If the three groups that FD mentioned can pull together, government will have very little choice but to listen.
FN's are the only ones that will back down the antis.
There will always be differences amongst the three groups but overall there is more common ground.

Ambush
02-18-2016, 07:08 PM
I drove down to the information session in Quesnel. It was worth the drive.

Jesse was well spoken and articulated a workable strategy in regards to the betterment of wildlife. Without a goal and a plan, you're just flailing about. Lots of action and noise, but no real results. Keep in mind that there is a multi faceted approach being taken. There is not much point in fighting about a share of something that doesn't even exist. If, at the same time, we can get government's attention, grow more animals and have the strength to negotiate a fair portion of them , then we are moving forward.

Too many people want everything perfect before they will join up. There is no perfect ride or perfect road. Hunters just have to realize there will be some bumps and times when you want the windows rolled down when most want them rolled up. You can't bail every time it's not "just right" if you want to get to the end.

b72471
02-18-2016, 07:30 PM
RESIDENT HUNTERS SHOULD TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT WHAT THE BCWF HAS ACHIEVED FOR THEM OVER THE YEARS, NOT MUCH. I believe RH should start over with a new organization that does not get so caught up in POLITICAL CORRECTNESS . This year will be the first year I ask the Quesnel club not to send any of my dues to BCFW rather donate that portion to a local charity, more will be accomplished.
Thanks.

Apolonius
02-18-2016, 08:26 PM
RESIDENT HUNTERS SHOULD TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT WHAT THE BCWF HAS ACHIEVED FOR THEM OVER THE YEARS, NOT MUCH. I believe RH should start over with a new organization that does not get so caught up in POLITICAL CORRECTNESS . This year will be the first year I ask the Quesnel club not to send any of my dues to BCFW rather donate that portion to a local charity, more will be accomplished.
Thanks.
We still have to remember BCWF is not a political voice.Political correctness has a role in that but i believe ,there is the direction BCWF is taking,or seems to be taking....is a bit questionable.
The friendships/associations you are building,might give you a black eye,or already done.
BCWF only has to remember,if you bill yourself as the voice of the RH....stand up and be counted.
And if i did something and guides and goabc....claps their hands.....i would question it.
Not the clapping/playing...but whatever i am doing!!!!
But after all, i still believe in the principals of conservation that BCWF represents.
And year after year i pay my dues.

houndogger
02-18-2016, 08:49 PM
I drove down to the information session in Quesnel. It was worth the drive.

Jesse was well spoken and articulated a workable strategy in regards to the betterment of wildlife. Without a goal and a plan, you're just flailing about. Lots of action and noise, but no real results. Keep in mind that there is a multi faceted approach being taken. There is not much point in fighting about a share of something that doesn't even exist. If, at the same time, we can get government's attention, grow more animals and have the strength to negotiate a fair portion of them , then we are moving forward.

Too many people want everything perfect before they will join up. There is no perfect ride or perfect road. Hunters just have to realize there will be some bumps and times when you want the windows rolled down when most want them rolled up. You can't bail every time it's not "just right" if you want to get to the end.
Great that you guys finally started listening.

Whats the plan?

Ambush
02-18-2016, 09:03 PM
Great that you guys finally started listening,

Who's "you guys" and whom should they have been listening to?

HarryToolips
02-18-2016, 09:14 PM
What FD said is bang on. Two seperate issues.

Currently predator control in BC is highly controversial. Probably the only group that the antis won't stand up to is FNs.

FN support will crush any opposition. They want to hunt moose too.
I agree with FD as well on this...therefore I would think one of the best things we could do right now is promote pred control to the public, explain why it is so crucial...so how would we make this happen??? Can BCWF publish an article in the 'The Province' newspapers, or local newspapers around BC?? I just don't see 'letters to the editor' making the desired impact...

houndogger
02-18-2016, 09:17 PM
Who's "you guys" and whom should they have been listening to?
All you bcwf drum beaters. Been saying it for a bunch of years there was a wolf problem. So are you guys gonna talk about it for 10 years or come up with a plan.

HarryToolips
02-18-2016, 09:18 PM
The numbers have being going down for a while.There is more to this than the wolves.But always a good starting point.
Management of the other "wolves" has to play a role too(hmmm right).But after we limit the resident hunter,everyone else will be happy.
Have the resident kill the wolves,take away a good chunk of the RH harvest....now that IS management.
Use some federal money (our money) to buy GO areas....give them to natives....
Does it sound like ,the buying of commercial fishing licences.....yep.
Long lives "reconciliation"!!!!...or guilt trip!!!
Bend over....
The best way, to my limited knowledge, of limiting harvest of the 'other wolves' is road de-activation, and should be considered important tools in 'managing and conserving', how much of this has been done in region 5, and how do we as resident hunters promote it?? Would be nice to see more of it in region 8 too btw..

Fred1
02-18-2016, 09:23 PM
The best way, to my limited knowledge, of limiting harvest of the 'other wolves' is road de-activation, and should be considered important tools in 'managing and conserving', how much of this has been done in region 5, and how do we as resident hunters promote it?? Would be nice to see more of it in region 8 too btw..

Agreed and in addition the snowmobile access (ie sled tracks up old or new roads are a big help to predators). AND the clear cutting and what we call WTP's or wildlife tree patches (hahahahahah) do nothing whatsoever for wildlife no matter how we as foresters rationalize it.....

Gateholio
02-18-2016, 09:26 PM
Looks like there is some resistance from some outfitters to working together. :)

Ambush
02-18-2016, 09:43 PM
All you bcwf drum beaters. Been saying it for a bunch of years there was a wolf problem. So are you guys gonna talk about it for 10 years or come up with a plan.

Nobody but you and ole sour-wester has ever even thought about predators. Too bad we didn't know about that before just right now.:roll:

The plan? Attend the next session and listen.

Gateholio
02-18-2016, 09:46 PM
Cant speak for any outfitters but if I paid a yearly due to an organization that just went 180 degrees and a person had a six figure salary to promote it Id ask a bunch of questions.

The number one question I have right now is "has souwester ever contributed anything constructive?"

Ambush
02-18-2016, 09:51 PM
Cant speak for any outfitters but if I paid a yearly due to an organization that just went 180 degrees and a person had a six figure salary to promote it Id ask a bunch of questions.

180 degrees and six figure salary. You better go wash your hands, 'cause you just pulled that out'a your ass.

You belly ache for years that the BCWF is going the wrong direction. Now you claim they've turned 180 and now that is the wrong direction.

You shouldn't let your mind wander anymore. It's too small to be out by itself.

yama49
02-18-2016, 09:51 PM
The number one question I have right now is "has souwester ever contributed anything constructive?"

I agree, sure gets old listening him whine like a b***ch

guest
02-18-2016, 10:31 PM
Just ban me Gate house I don't give a shit

apparentley you do give a s--- ....... you keep coming back under a new name. Must be sad going through life so, so so ......... Well I'm speechless .

Gateholio
02-18-2016, 11:02 PM
Just ban me Gate house I don't give a shit

Naw, you amuse me.

Besides, you are useful. You don't realize it, but you serve a purpose. :)

huntcoop
02-18-2016, 11:11 PM
What were his alias?

Whonnock Boy
02-18-2016, 11:31 PM
I would like to know more about the 6 figure salary for RPP.

Ferenc
02-18-2016, 11:50 PM
I would like to know more about the 6 figure salary for RPP.
Sounds like a golden handshake .. If it's true !!

Gateholio
02-19-2016, 12:27 AM
I don't know anything about who makes what salary, but I do know one thing.

Many organizations hamstring themselves by not employing the right people and instead rely only on volunteers to get results. It doesn't matter what type of organization it is, either.

For some reason Canadians get squeamish about paying people to get results. Americans don't, and their organizations are often much more effective. Look at the NRA head office-they have lots of paid staff whose sole mission is American gun rights. It's not something they do in their spare time while holding down a full time job too, which is why the NRA is so effective.

Organizations can spend a lot of time and money with volunteers and get far less results than by hiring some key people and getting them on it full time.

This isn't to diminish what volunteers can do at all. Volunteers have made incredible accomplishments, done astonishing things, and sometimes the best way (or only way) requires volunteers to make it happen. It's just that sometimes hiring someone is a better way to get from A to B.

Whonnock Boy
02-19-2016, 12:38 AM
It's not.........


If it's true !!

rgn5hunt
02-19-2016, 12:43 AM
I don't know anything about who makes what salary, but I do know one thing.

Many organizations hamstring themselves by not employing the right people and instead rely only on volunteers to get results. It doesn't matter what type of organization it is, either.

For some reason Canadians get squeamish about paying people to get results. Americans don't, and their organizations are often much more effective. Look at the NRA head office-they have lots of paid staff whose sole mission is American gun rights. It's not something they do in their spare time while holding down a full time job too, which is why the NRA is so effective.

Organizations can spend a lot of time and money with volunteers and get far less results than by hiring some key people and getting them on it full time.

This isn't to diminish what volunteers can do at all. Volunteers have made incredible accomplishments, done astonishing things, and sometimes the best way (or only way) requires volunteers to make it happen. It's just that sometimes hiring someone is a better way to get from A to B.
If we had Resident Priority and a well paid manager for the last 10 years our situation may be better than it was in early 2015.

Apolonius
02-19-2016, 07:00 AM
If we had Resident Priority and a well paid manager for the last 10 years our situation may be better than it was in early 2015.
I always said "Pay some one to win,or have to live with your losses".
Maybe some people would say "nobody wants to pay".
I would pay/donate if i knew there is someone fighting.
Now right or wrong,is perceived we did not fight,and we are making strange bedfellows.
Yesterdays enemy,is not todays friend.....only if he needs you.

bearvalley
02-19-2016, 10:56 AM
I always said "Pay some one to win,or have to live with your losses".
Maybe some people would say "nobody wants to pay".
I would pay/donate if i knew there is someone fighting.
Now right or wrong,is perceived we did not fight,and we are making strange bedfellows.
Yesterdays enemy,is not todays friend.....only if he needs you.

If we all had your mentallity we wouldn't get very far, would we?
Study the past.

Gateholio
02-19-2016, 01:27 PM
If we had Resident Priority and a well paid manager for the last 10 years our situation may be better than it was in early 2015.

Absolutely. If we had had Someone that could have been working with FN and other stakeholders to force government to do the right thing, we might not just be looking st wolf tracks. :)

Husky7mm
02-19-2016, 02:41 PM
I think common interests like making more animals is shared by residents, GOs, and FNs. Yet government doesn't care about that, and wants to keep slicing a smaller pie thinner and thinner among us.

I think a united front to demand change from government is a good idea. Government is scared shitless about that, as they would rather keep us fighting among ourselves - we're easier to control that way, and it keeps us from making them do anything about it.

Have people given up the allocation fight? Not at all.

But they are two very separate issues, and I think it's important to make that distinction.

^This^ people shouldnt cut off their nose to spite their face.

Husky7mm
02-19-2016, 02:44 PM
I don't know anything about who makes what salary, but I do know one thing.

Many organizations hamstring themselves by not employing the right people and instead rely only on volunteers to get results. It doesn't matter what type of organization it is, either.

For some reason Canadians get squeamish about paying people to get results. Americans don't, and their organizations are often much more effective. Look at the NRA head office-they have lots of paid staff whose sole mission is American gun rights. It's not something they do in their spare time while holding down a full time job too, which is why the NRA is so effective.

Organizations can spend a lot of time and money with volunteers and get far less results than by hiring some key people and getting them on it full time.

This isn't to diminish what volunteers can do at all. Volunteers have made incredible accomplishments, done astonishing things, and sometimes the best way (or only way) requires volunteers to make it happen. It's just that sometimes hiring someone is a better way to get from A to B.

Good wisdom here!

Whonnock Boy
02-19-2016, 03:08 PM
Contrary to popular belief, there are some good guide owners out there. Some..... Regardless, if we want to see more wildlife on the landscape, we need to work together to get that done. This does not mean that the federation has forgotten the allocation issue, it just means that there are more pressing matters than squabbling over wildlife that is not there, imo.......... I carry the same sentiments as previously stated by FD, and carried by many other members of the federation.




Now right or wrong,is perceived we did not fight,and we are making strange bedfellows.
Yesterdays enemy,is not todays friend.....only if he needs you.

houndogger
02-19-2016, 03:12 PM
Contrary to popular belief, there are some good guide owners out there. Some..... Regardless, if we want to see more wildlife on the landscape, we need to work together to get that done. This does not mean that the federation has forgotten the allocation issue, it just means that there are more pressing matters than squabbling over wildlife that is not there, imo.......... I carry the same sentiments as previously stated by FD, and carried by many other members of the federation.
Great news to bad the fed couldn't have figured that out many years ago.

Apolonius
02-19-2016, 05:24 PM
Now that there is no animals to hunt,supposedly.
As a management tool,we restrict the RH harvest....and tell them kill more wolves.
Moose harvest for the RH in region 5 going down....anyone else had their "harvest" limited.....to grow wildlife?
Dall Sheep going down...for the RH.
Elk on the Island now it is ....once in two lifetimes!!!!
Did our "partners of today" loose any animals????
How can you ask more from the RH ,when just a while ago ,you took from them to give to the guides???
Did the guides do well in the Allocation????....with money and good PR,or BS????
It is not a pressing issue to stop loosing???
I think BCWF is doing what they think is good for conservation.
They should never be representing the RH.
Even if it seems we are the same,WE as hunters are not.Hunters are conservationists,conservationists not always...Hunters.
Maybe a separate Federation should be doing that,if it does not exist...
BCWF can not pretend to represent over 100,000 hunters,with less than half only members.
It is my opinion,if you want to make things working,only when all partners sacrifice,you will see results.
Asking only the RH to sacrifice,it is a failure.Just look at the people that are pushing it,the ones that failed or screwed the RH!!!!!
Now you can rain on me!!!

bearvalley
02-19-2016, 06:53 PM
Now that there is no animals to hunt,supposedly.
As a management tool,we restrict the RH harvest....and tell them kill more wolves.
Moose harvest for the RH in region 5 going down....anyone else had their "harvest" limited.....to grow wildlife?
Dall Sheep going down...for the RH.
Elk on the Island now it is ....once in two lifetimes!!!!
Did our "partners of today" loose any animals????
How can you ask more from the RH ,when just a while ago ,you took from them to give to the guides???
Did the guides do well in the Allocation????....with money and good PR,or BS????
It is not a pressing issue to stop loosing???
I think BCWF is doing what they think is good for conservation.
They should never be representing the RH.
Even if it seems we are the same,WE as hunters are not.Hunters are conservationists,conservationists not always...Hunters.
Maybe a separate Federation should be doing that,if it does not exist...
BCWF can not pretend to represent over 100,000 hunters,with less than half only members.
It is my opinion,if you want to make things working,only when all partners sacrifice,you will see results.
Asking only the RH to sacrifice,it is a failure.Just look at the people that are pushing it,the ones that failed or screwed the RH!!!!!
Now you can rain on me!!!

I'm not going to rain on you but your post has some flaws;
- All licensed hunters took a reduction in the Region 5 tradeoff.
The licensed BC resident hunters took a cut and the guided ones did as well.

Right now you've got some RH representing you at the Fed. Why don't you give them a chance to maybe work with the other stakeholders so we can dig out of this rut.
They're not going to erase the "Duck Dynasty" screw ups overnight.

palmer
02-19-2016, 07:15 PM
Bringing back moose in great habitat like the caribou is an easy solution
1. Zero killing of Antlerless moose by ANYBODY
2. Make sure Bull numbers are high enough for breeding and allow hunting of numbers above this mark
3. Have funded predator control
If these 3 things were put in place we would have moose numbers building in no time...But that's the big question getting ALL parties to agree...It will never happen..so we keep splitting up a smaller pie until all the pie is gone.

bearvalley
02-19-2016, 07:36 PM
Bringing back moose in great habitat like the caribou is an easy solution
1. Zero killing of Antlerless moose by ANYBODY
2. Make sure Bull numbers are high enough for breeding and allow hunting of numbers above this mark
3. Have funded predator control
If these 3 things were put in place we would have moose numbers building in no time...But that's the big question getting ALL parties to agree...It will never happen..so we keep splitting up a smaller pie until all the pie is gone.
The parties are pretty much in agreement on these points.
The major holdback is the implementation of your 3rd point. A major predator reduction is nessasary.
Road access needs cut back as well.
And government needs to step up to the plate and get started on the recovery part of the plan.

Cordillera
02-19-2016, 08:01 PM
And we all know that 100,000 hunters are just a small slice in a province of 4 million. The 3.9 million don't want predator management. So just beating on the government is not going to change them facts. The government already takes bullets every day for the predator management it has implemented in the past few years.

kebes
02-19-2016, 08:07 PM
And we all know that 100,000 hunters are just a small slice in a province of 4 million. The 3.9 million don't want predator management. So just beating on the government is not going to change them facts. The government already takes bullets every day for the predator management it has implemented in the past few years.

I think that's where teaming up with FN would be a big bonus. If FN publicly support predator control it will go a lot further than G.O's or resident hunters pushing for it.

bearvalley
02-19-2016, 08:36 PM
And we all know that 100,000 hunters are just a small slice in a province of 4 million. The 3.9 million don't want predator management. So just beating on the government is not going to change them facts. The government already takes bullets every day for the predator management it has implemented in the past few years.
I would say 10-20% of the population are dead against.
Roughly the same number are in support of predator control.
The important ones are the middle group and FN's message will be what gains their support.
After that government will become accountable to implement a plan.

Rob Chipman
02-20-2016, 01:23 PM
BV:

"I would say 10-20% of the population are dead against.
Roughly the same number are in support of predator control.
The important ones are the middle group and FN's message will be what gains their support.
After that government will become accountable to implement a plan."

I agree with the theory, in that there is a hardcore opposition on one end of the spectrum, a bunch of undecided in the middle, and some pro-predator control on the other end of the spectrum. I think that holds true for hunting in general.

I'm not sure I buy your numbers, but they'd be tough to prove either way - anti-predator control people and groups are very good at fund-raising and awareness raising (awareness is always a big line item on their financials) so it could be that it just looks like more of them because they get their message out.

FN support may help a bit, but I saw FN support for wolf culls to save caribou and the wolf cull was still very unpopular.

Still, I think you're pointing in the right direction. We need to learn from our opponents, though, in terms of telling our story, raising funds, and making alliances.

bearvalley
02-20-2016, 04:10 PM
BV:
We need to learn from our opponents, though, in terms of telling our story, raising funds, and making alliances.
Rob, what your saying here is true. We need guys like you to get out and promote what needs to be done and the resoning behind it.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm a little rough around the edges to be the PR man in some circles where the message needs to grow.

Apolonius
02-20-2016, 05:06 PM
Rob, what your saying here is true. We need guys like you to get out and promote what needs to be done and the resoning behind it.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm a little rough around the edges to be the PR man in some circles where the message needs to grow.
BV you sound like me now...not a bad thing.I like the rough around the edge thing.
I always said,and will repeat it again.
We need pros,we need a plan and another plan how to implement it.
We need a spokesperson,preferably a woman that her mouth drips honey and at the same time,able to change to the attack mode,in a millisecond .
Nobody would offend a lady in a suit.
It is easier to attack and discredit a guy,much easier in a camo outfit.
This is one of the obstacles we have to overcome.There are lots more....
Without common ground for all involved,we are doomed.And it looks to me we are on our way.

bearvalley
02-20-2016, 05:18 PM
BV you sound like me now...not a bad thing.I like the rough around the edge thing.
I always said,and will repeat it again.
We need pros,we need a plan and another plan how to implement it.
We need a spokesperson,preferably a woman that her mouth drips honey and at the same time,able to change to the attack mode,in a millisecond .
Nobody would offend a lady in a suit.
It is easier to attack and discredit a guy,much easier in a camo outfit.
This is one of the obstacles we have to overcome.There are lots more....
Without common ground for all involved,we are doomed.And it looks to me we are on our way.

Hey, you can't be all bad!
I have a feeling that this message is going to grow.
Some key players, in the right organizations can see that working together is what it's going to take to get results.
There will always be some resistance, be it from mistrust, misinformation or personal agendas. So be it, it's time to move on.
You might be on to something with your idea of a woman for a spokesperson, it shouldn't be hard to find one that outclasses the "PETA Queens" that spoke out in our opposition. JMO

Apolonius
02-20-2016, 06:27 PM
BV our worst enemy is just us.
The thing we got to change is "Perception".
How we are perceived by the general public is most important of all things.
Antis portray themselves as saviours,they are not.
But the general public believes them.
PETA is the most moronic organization out there,but look at their targets.
Young women and celebrities all over.We need to change that.
We need to front our women too.Miss Shockey would do very well,she got the smarts.
There are others too,i don't want to mention.
The next big thing is to get everyone on the table,not with the mentality "what did i get for my members"from the table.
You got to go to that,with the intent to "put things on" the table for the common good.
This is how you build trust and build a future for wildlife.
But like everyone else we also have to fight the "perception",that we are the only ones (BCWF) that give up things.Real or not it is the perception i got too sometimes....ok most of the time.Rough around the edges....lol
Communication and media releases should be the order of the day.
Then i believe money will start rolling,by members.Some people have to be told more than once, and lay it out in the open for them to see and believe.

Whonnock Boy
02-20-2016, 06:46 PM
Have you ever had the opportunity to listen to Jesse Zeman speak?


BV you sound like me now...not a bad thing.I like the rough around the edge thing.
I always said,and will repeat it again.
We need pros,we need a plan and another plan how to implement it.
We need a spokesperson,preferably a woman that her mouth drips honey and at the same time,able to change to the attack mode,in a millisecond .
Nobody would offend a lady in a suit.
It is easier to attack and discredit a guy,much easier in a camo outfit.
This is one of the obstacles we have to overcome.There are lots more....
Without common ground for all involved,we are doomed.And it looks to me we are on our way.

bearvalley
02-20-2016, 06:56 PM
Have you ever had the opportunity to listen to Jesse Zeman speak?

True, I beleive Jesse's on track.
The same with most of the BCWF executive.
They've figured out that working together we'll get somewhere.
In the past, we've been our own worst enemies.....other than the antis.

Ambush
02-20-2016, 06:57 PM
Have you ever had the opportunity to listen to Jesse Zeman speak?

I was impressed with his presenting skills plus he's professional and personable. He will be worth his salt.

I personally think we have nothing to worry about with PETA. 97% of the population knows they are crazed dingbats.


It's the Raincoast's and Pacific Wild's that we have to counter and attack aggressively.

Ambush
02-20-2016, 07:00 PM
I'll be the first to admit that I'm a little rough around the edges.....

Haha, no offense, but you're rough right to the middle to. :mrgreen: :razz:

Cordillera
02-20-2016, 07:11 PM
I think that's where teaming up with FN would be a big bonus. If FN publicly support predator control it will go a lot further than G.O's or resident hunters pushing for it.

Bingo. And guides can bring funding to the table if we can focus on the bigger picture. Predator management ain't cheap if you want to cover any significant areas.

bearvalley
02-20-2016, 07:25 PM
Haha, no offense, but you're rough right to the middle to. :mrgreen: :razz:

Thanks a bunch, Rod.
LOL

mpotzold
02-20-2016, 11:53 PM
Bringing back moose in great habitat like the caribou is an easy solution
1. Zero killing of Antlerless moose by ANYBODY
2. Make sure Bull numbers are high enough for breeding and allow hunting of numbers above this mark
3. Have funded predator control
If these 3 things were put in place we would have moose numbers building in no time...But that's the big question getting ALL parties to agree...It will never happen..so we keep splitting up a smaller pie until all the pie is gone.


Some other solutions to dwindling moose numbers in Management Units 5-03, 5-04 a/b, 5-5,5-12a, 5-13a, and 5-14!

1) temporary NCS,NBL on black bears until moose numbers rebound. Some studies indicate that that bears kill at least 50% of the newborn.

And get rid ofthe 1994 reg (requirement of removal of edible portions of black bear)
In Alberta-It is unlawful to abandon,destroy or allow the edible meat of any game bird or big game animal (except cougar or bear), to become unfit for human consumption.

Been hunting 5-03 for almost 50 years & have witnessed the drastic increase in the black bear numbers especially in the last 10 years. Just 2 years ago I saw over a dozen black bears in just a few days & no moose or fresh moose signs within the Big Creek, Farwell, Gang triangle.(5-03)

Alaskans kill bears to save moose
“Research indicates that predation by bears is playing a significant role in preventing the moose population from increasing. A wolf control program has been in effect in the unit since 2004 but reducing wolf numbers has not had a noticeable effect on the moose population”
http://www.georgesmithmaine.com/arti...ars-save-moose (http://www.georgesmithmaine.com/articles/georges-outdoor-news/october/2014/alaskans-kill-bears-save-moose)
45 of the 54 newborn calves studied died, mostly killed by bears and only 1 by a wolf or coyote. 7 of the calves were abandoned when calf were collared(therisk of collaring a newborn)
http://www.thesewardphoenixlog.com/s...ation/798.html (http://www.thesewardphoenixlog.com/story/2012/11/01/local/bears-take-biggest-bite-of-young-moose-population/798.html)

2) Close moose hunting to all & that includes FN in the name of CONSERVATION until the numbers rebound. Give them a chance to breed and multiply. If it takes more than 1 year so be it.

3) Close cow/calf moose season in the adjacent regions.

4) Management is useless without knowing the number of moose killed by FN.
In the name of conservation total # harvested must be reported including sex, age, when & where.
Night hunting must be stopped & the indiscriminate slaughter must be controlled.

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 07:59 AM
I agree on the bear issue 100%. Both blacks & grizzlies take a toll on moose calves as well as caribou, elk and deer.
Grizzlies can be tough on goats as well.

In the northwest bears were identified as a problem as well as wolves.
What was said there is we need to reduce wolves to slow up the decline in moose & caribou.
At the same time bears need managed to help with the recovery.

The "Raincoast/bear hugger" segment started dishing out the same old crap....."bears have more value for visual purposes than they do as a hunt species".

Government started to side with them saying that they have to do what the majority of voters tell them to do when it comes to bear management.

That's when the head of the FN Central Council stood up and said;
"When you are done F****** around, if wildlife is in decline and grizzly bears are part of the problem, we will exercise our Constitutional Rights and kill them for food, social or ceremonial purposes, whether you like it or not".

You could have heard a pin drop in the room.

More of both the public and government employees need to hear that message.

325 wsm
02-21-2016, 09:12 AM
Black bear meat is not required tp be taken in the Yukon either, its considered a fur bearing animal.
Ambush…your little poke at BV being rough right to the middle….thats some funny shit.

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 09:16 AM
Black bear meat is not required tp be taken in the Yukon either, its considered a fur bearing animal.
Ambush…your little poke at BV being rough right to the middle….thats some funny shit.

Haha
Hey, I try my hardest at times to stay civilized.

Apolonius
02-21-2016, 09:22 AM
Have you ever had the opportunity to listen to Jesse Zeman speak?
No i can't say i have.And if i did i did not know who it is.
I was not trying to take away his job and give it to my girlfriend.lol
I was just pointing,at what others have done and it worked very nicely.
Look at Trudeau,hired Obama's ex campaign manager and he did ok.
Mr Zeman can be a great Orator,no doubt.
And that is his job.
Is he,or do we have someone the will analyze the situation and find strategies to win?
Some one that won before and knows the tactics of the antis,the demographics of our opponents?
And at some degree ruthless ?
This is not a one soldier job.If we want to win.But at first chance i will try and find some time to go and hear him speak.

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 09:42 AM
You're right Apolonius, it is not a "one soldier job".
Jesse's a good messager and knows his stats.
Moving on to make the forward momentum nessasary we will need more.
It will take a collaborated effort from all stakeholders working together to make the "decision makers" become accountable.
We have had scientific studies and procrastination dumped on us for years.
Neither of those two options is a correction.

i like your idea of someone a whole bunch prettier than Jesse taking a front role in the PR campaign that needs to be launched by all the stakeholders in this game.
No offense to you, Jesse.

horshur
02-21-2016, 09:44 AM
No i can't say i have.And if i did i did not know who it is.
I was not trying to take away his job and give it to my girlfriend.lol
I was just pointing,at what others have done and it worked very nicely.
Look at Trudeau,hired Obama's ex campaign manager and he did ok.
Mr Zeman can be a great Orator,no doubt.
And that is his job.
Is he,or do we have someone the will analyze the situation and find strategies to win?
Some one that won before and knows the tactics of the antis,the demographics of our opponents?
And at some degree ruthless ?
This is not a one soldier job.If we want to win.But at first chance i will try and find some time to go and hear him speak.

sir the goal cannot be to "Win" when stakeholders sit at the table the only goal should be how can all benefit. If you leave the table having won others left having lost and they will resolve to not be screwed again next round. Making opponents is not constructive !

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 09:51 AM
sir the goal cannot be to "Win" when stakeholders sit at the table the only goal should be how can all benefit. If you leave the table having won others left having lost and they will resolve to not be screwed again next round. Making opponents is not constructive !

This statement is very true.
There will always be differences at the table. What needs to be is stakeholder groups working towards a common goal.
The rest can be sorted out in time, preferably in a straight up, amicable manner.

Ambush
02-21-2016, 10:10 AM
Is he,or do we have someone the will analyze the situation and find strategies to win?
Some one that won before and knows the tactics of the antis,the demographics of our opponents?
And at some degree ruthless ?
This is not a one soldier job.

I think you just described Jesse. I believe the right soldier is leading the charge.

Ambush
02-21-2016, 10:16 AM
sir the goal cannot be to "Win" when stakeholders sit at the table the only goal should be how can all benefit. If you leave the table having won others left having lost and they will resolve to not be screwed again next round. Making opponents is not constructive !

As srupp would say "hhuumm". :confused:

That sounds a lot like what happened recently with the "revised" allocation policy. :?

So you are saying that that was counter productive, damaging to partnerships and to the detriment of wildlife?

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 10:23 AM
As srupp would say "hhuumm". :confused:

That sounds a lot like what happened recently with the "revised" allocation policy. :?

So you are saying that that was counter productive, damaging to partnerships and to the detriment of wildlife?

My answer to that is that the entire allocation fiasco was counter productive, damaging to partnerships and did wildlife no favors.
Not just the revised part but right from the beginning.

Gateholio
02-21-2016, 11:28 AM
I think the minute FN publicly states that they support a wolf cull because the wolves are killing all their protein source......there will be a wolf cull and the PETA types won't have much to say, and wot be listened to anyway.

boxhitch
02-21-2016, 11:46 AM
I think the minute FN publicly states that they support a wolf cull because the wolves are killing all their protein source......there will be a wolf cull Probably right there, once the two governments decide to address the issue.
That could work for saving the bighorns from domestics too.

horshur
02-21-2016, 12:19 PM
As srupp would say "hhuumm". :confused:

That sounds a lot like what happened recently with the "revised" allocation policy. :?

So you are saying that that was counter productive, damaging to partnerships and to the detriment of wildlife?

who made who an enemy??There have been many chapters of this drama.

Ambush
02-21-2016, 02:33 PM
who made who an enemy??

Well maybe start a poll on HBC to gauge the perception of the answer to your question.

I used to be one that always defended the outfitting business and always promoted them as an ally and partner. You can go back to posts I've made, pre-allocation "imbalance", and verify that.

You also may not have noticed that since then, I purposely differentiate between "outfitters" and the GOABC as an representative association. I can easily work with many outfitters, but I would/will not even try to work with the GOABC, or more properly with the present leadership.

Because, yes, what they did and even more the tactics involved, were despicable, and though not outright illegal, certainly grossly unethical. That GOABC leadership shot us in the back and even made us pay for the bullets. The gifting and reciprocal regifting of taxpayers money, I consider a blatant fraudulent abuse on both parties behalf.

But hopefully all this will come out to the public in the proper and necessary time frame.

And as for the guilty. I hope that they start shaking like escaped convicts, when they hear the distant baying of The Dawg on their greasy trails. We will have to satisfy ourselves with having their fear, since it seems we can't get their respect.

Buck
02-21-2016, 04:24 PM
Every time an guide outfitter opens his yap on here it is to either to take away access or allocation don't be fooled into believing we have a common goal.They have no honor and should be treated as such.

souwester
02-21-2016, 05:30 PM
Buck .. as much as I appreciate people who aren't afraid to say what they think,it looks like you and about 40 000 other BCWF members need to get on the new train.

Destination FANTASY land

Ambush
02-21-2016, 05:38 PM
Destination FANTASY land

Ahh, the sunbeam appears, to enlighten, encourage, warm and inform. :grin:

Thanks. How do you maintain your cheer?

souwester
02-21-2016, 05:57 PM
Actually Mr Ambush im extremely happy that there seems to be some change of direction going on.

I have extensive experience with a bunch of first nation folks from Howe sound to Prince Rupert on the coast due to my work and I can say from my experience that creating an environment where resident hunters and the First Nations came together on the same page is going to be next to impossible.


Sure Hunting BC has a couple members that are outfitters that are open minded and progressive in thinking but I think there is a big challenge with that group as well .


I am glad that u feel there is a new leader to get things going in what appears to be a new direction.

lets get your group through your AGM and see what effective change can ACTUALLY be accomplished during the year or two after.

If some change is ACTUALLY made and its not just a bunch of continual POLITICKING then you will have my upmost respect.

I actually have a crazy idea too ......how about the BCWF has its own forum on its website so that this one isn't continually used to voice a handful of peoples ideas.

cheers

guest
02-21-2016, 06:12 PM
Buck .. as much as I appreciate people who aren't afraid to say what they think,it looks like you and about 40 000 other BCWF members need to get on the new train.

Destination FANTASY land


Hes back ........ Let the entertainment begin!

Avalanche123
02-21-2016, 06:42 PM
sir the goal cannot be to "Win" when stakeholders sit at the table the only goal should be how can all benefit. If you leave the table having won others left having lost and they will resolve to not be screwed again next round. Making opponents is not constructive !

Very well said.....

Avalanche123
02-21-2016, 06:53 PM
Well maybe start a poll on HBC to gauge the perception of the answer to your question.

I used to be one that always defended the outfitting business and always promoted them as an ally and partner. You can go back to posts I've made, pre-allocation "imbalance", and verify that.

You also may not have noticed that since then, I purposely differentiate between "outfitters" and the GOABC as an representative association. I can easily work with many outfitters, but I would/will not even try to work with the GOABC, or more properly with the present leadership.


Because, yes, what they did and even more the tactics involved, were despicable, and though not outright illegal, certainly grossly unethical. That GOABC leadership shot us in the back and even made us pay for the bullets. The gifting and reciprocal regifting of taxpayers money, I consider a blatant fraudulent abuse on both parties behalf.

But hopefully all this will come out to the public in the proper and necessary time frame.

And as for the guilty. I hope that they start shaking like escaped convicts, when they hear the distant baying of The Dawg on their greasy trails. We will have to satisfy ourselves with having their fear, since it seems we can't get their respect.

Hey Ambush. I respect you, Good points but don't poll HBC as it doesn't represent most of BC residents. Only the "regulars will pipe up. I have followed this post and think you and others are onto a good thing. I am still trying to understand what separates our differences, sure I guide but sure I love to also hunt. I think guys that Horsur and BearValley bring key points. My impression they are looking at the glass half full as opposed to half empty. It is going to take some "thinking outside the box" to benefit wildlife. I hold out hope we can get there. Yep I agree GOABC didn't do themselves any favours in the past year. Steve.

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 07:16 PM
Every time an guide outfitter opens his yap on here it is to either to take away access or allocation don't be fooled into believing we have a common goal.They have no honor and should be treated as such.

Hey Bucky, have you ever had a productive thought?
i think you have a goal, but it's not for the good of most of the hunters on here.
Carry on flapping your gums.
LMAO

Ambush
02-21-2016, 07:30 PM
I can say from my experience that creating an environment where resident hunters and the First Nations came together on the same page is going to be next to impossible.

From your perspective why do you believe that is so? Do they just not feel a need to collaborate, or is there an active opposition to aligning themselves with non-status hunters? Or is it only resident hunters that they have an aversion to?

Ambush
02-21-2016, 07:38 PM
123, like I said, there are many outfitters I could work with.

Part of a relationship rebuilding has to involve some restorative justice. And i honestly don't see that happening with the status quo leadership at GOABC.

Perhaps it's time for the responsible outfitters to take the lead and clean house in a gesture of good faith.

souwester
02-21-2016, 07:45 PM
Mr Ambush Im not gonna put myself too far out on limb on this question.

Some advice before I even take a stab at your question would be for this forum to delete all historical Anti First Nation rhetoric.Pretty tough eh?
I believe the way to accomplish what you want will be through the younger generation of first nation people just be careful not to underestimate them as political opponents.
its an extremely tough issue

Jagermeister
02-21-2016, 08:00 PM
RESIDENT HUNTERS SHOULD TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT WHAT THE BCWF HAS ACHIEVED FOR THEM OVER THE YEARS, NOT MUCH. I believe RH should start over with a new organization that does not get so caught up in POLITICAL CORRECTNESS . This year will be the first year I ask the Quesnel club not to send any of my dues to BCFW rather donate that portion to a local charity, more will be accomplished.
Thanks.
You would be better served to direct the club donate the dues to the Nicola Valley Fish & Game Legal Fund.

On the topic. "FAILURE TO CONSULT, .... Do you really get the picture, do you? I don't think so.

The provincial government is slowly cutting you, the resident hunters and fishermen out of the picture. The resident hunter allocation is just a part of the process. Rancher grazing leases, GOABC harvest, privatizing of Crown lakes, you name it, it is happening.

Crown land is quietly being transferred over to the management of the private sector, which in turn gives them exclusive use. Can you say private reserves? You know, like the ones in the UK, where only those with very deep pockets will be able to hunt or fish, hike, ski, boat etc.

Your right b72471, the BCWF is failing us. But it's our fault and it's time for a change at the top. But the question is who do we replace them with?
The BCWF is an "advocacy group" which is us. it should be lobbying the government on our behalf but that is not happening. Why you ask? Because someone has a notion that the BCWF is a registered charity and registered charities are not supposed to lobby. Making it virtually ineffective. If it is a registered charity, then it is like a limp dick on a hot date, useless. Guess what? Did a search to see if the BCWF is registered and it is NOT!
Who do we replace them with?
I attended the BCWF Shuswap Region AGM. What I saw was a bunch of tired old men and women such as myself that have been toiling on our behalf for many many years. When they were in their What I did not see were those that should be there. You know, the replacements, those in their 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's.

If you fall in this demographic, 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's, you need to get your ass involved, highly involved. You're the replacements and you better get on board real soon. The gate was open and the only ones still standing at the gate are the resident hunter and fishermen.

Us old guys and gals cannot carry the torch much longer and the government needs to know that you care about your right to do outdoor activities beyond the urban parks and golf courses. The government needs to know you actually exist.

You need to join your local fish and game club. You need to be involved in said club, not just a member, but a doer. A leader, facilitator, recruiter, educator. You all have a steep learning curve

What is happening between the Nicola Valley F&G and Douglas Lake/Corbett Lake doesn't just affect them, it affects all of us. I hear that the principals in the DLCC have purchased interests in some Chilcotin/Cariboo based ranches. I wonder if that has some influence on the "Failure to Consult":mad:

Avalanche123
02-21-2016, 08:09 PM
123, like I said, there are many outfitters I could work with.

Part of a relationship rebuilding has to involve some restorative justice. And i honestly don't see that happening with the status quo leadership at GOABC.

Perhaps it's time for the responsible outfitters to take the lead and clean house in a gesture of good faith.

You might have hit the nail on the head there. I am too removed to really know for sure.

guest
02-21-2016, 08:15 PM
How about starting with accountability by all FN on wildlife harvested. At least many of us have CI on several animals, it's not enough. GO's have to report harvested wildlife, why not ALL of us, including FN

how can we come remotely close to know wildlife inventory when the keepers of the land do not have to be ACCOUNTABLE and many refuse to cooperate with officials.

I think Mandatory reporting of ALL game harvested by every one is a good start. We are not any where near that . It would at the very least help as part of the management.

This Gov is completely out of touch with sound management and beckons to its big money supporters that support it in return. Mean while ......... We will continue down the spiral drain till it's all gone unless they wake up and manage this the way it should be.

souwester
02-21-2016, 08:33 PM
you have some good points Curly Top
there is extreme deep seated resentment on both sides.... that's why I suggested it be called fantasy land
If someone wants to take me to school in a FACTUAL way ... let er rip

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 09:01 PM
How about starting with accountability by all FN on wildlife harvested. At least many of us have CI on several animals, it's not enough. GO's have to report harvested wildlife, why not ALL of us, including FN

how can we come remotely close to know wildlife inventory when the keepers of the land do not have to be ACCOUNTABLE and many refuse to cooperate with officials.

I think Mandatory reporting of ALL game harvested by every one is a good start. We are not any where near that . It would at the very least help as part of the management.

This Gov is completely out of touch with sound management and beckons to its big money supporters that support it in return. Mean while ......... We will continue down the spiral drain till it's all gone unless they wake up and manage this the way it should be.

curly top, I agree with what your saying. I've said the same myself, many times on here.

GO's report all of their clients harvest, some licensed resident harvest is reported and some FN bands are starting to document what they are using.

We need accountability from all the harvesters of wildlife. Numbers so we accurately know what is being used.

We need game counts. Numbers so we know what is out there to be used.

We need a predator reduction program in a large portion of this province.
Enough studies have been done, now the procrastination needs to come to an end and a program implemented.

We néed stakeholders to recognize that the common end goal is the same for all.

We can scrap over the other issues after we've made something to scrap over.

Ambush
02-21-2016, 09:18 PM
....there is extreme deep seated resentment on both sides.... that's why I suggested it be called fantasy land

You are right on the first statement and sadly, maybe right on the second half to.

souwester
02-21-2016, 09:28 PM
Ambush I hate to break it to you but Hunting BC comes across as pretty Anti First Nations most of the time in my opinion.
Probably be one of the first things I changed to be honest,If the plan is to truly work together.

Internet mud slinging aside people would be extremely foolish to underestimate both intelligence and political sword this group wields.

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 09:50 PM
souwester, there's already a solid group of concerned individuals working together on issues.
The group is made up of hunters and non hunters, FN's and non FN's, that all share 1 common concern...the state of our wildlife and the state of the habitat that wildlife needs to thrive.
This group is expanding.

As far as most of the dribble on here, if you go to where wildlife issues are really being discussed and what needs to be done to make it better, I would say the HBC dribble doesn't leave a mark very high on a tree.
JMO

souwester
02-21-2016, 10:01 PM
I hear u Bear Valley and Im gonna get there
there was a thread at Christmas time where a guy who was one of the "new generation" of hipsters for lack of a better word voiced some opinions of his ...I thought it was great ,I didn't totally agree but thought it was great he had the courage to say how he felt about some issues.
Maybe I need to get a bit more respectful but I have a feeling this forum is read by a lot of young folks and if they learn to question how decisions are made that are going to affect their future ,and aren't afraid to look at all sides and form an opinion on their own ,I would feel a lot better
cheers

Jagermeister
02-21-2016, 11:25 PM
souwester, there's already a solid group of concerned individuals working together on issues.
The group is made up of hunters and non hunters, FN's and non FN's, that all share 1 common concern...the state of our wildlife and the state of the habitat that wildlife needs to thrive.
This group is expanding.

As far as most of the dribble on here, if you go to where wildlife issues are really being discussed and what needs to be done to make it better, I would say the HBC dribble doesn't leave a mark very high on a tree.
JMOCare to elaborate who this group might be or is it still in the clandestine stage?

bearvalley
02-21-2016, 11:33 PM
Care to elaborate who this group might be or is it still in the clandestine stage?

Come to the BCWF convention, I heard the head of the group has been invited as a guest speaker.

Mulehahn
02-22-2016, 01:23 AM
You would be better served to direct the club donate the dues to the Nicola Valley Fish & Game Legal Fund.

On the topic. "FAILURE TO CONSULT, .... Do you really get the picture, do you? I don't think so.

The provincial government is slowly cutting you, the resident hunters and fishermen out of the picture. The resident hunter allocation is just a part of the process. Rancher grazing leases, GOABC harvest, privatizing of Crown lakes, you name it, it is happening.

Crown land is quietly being transferred over to the management of the private sector, which in turn gives them exclusive use. Can you say private reserves? You know, like the ones in the UK, where only those with very deep pockets will be able to hunt or fish, hike, ski, boat etc.

Your right b72471, the BCWF is failing us. But it's our fault and it's time for a change at the top. But the question is who do we replace them with?
The BCWF is an "advocacy group" which is us. it should be lobbying the government on our behalf but that is not happening. Why you ask? Because someone has a notion that the BCWF is a registered charity and registered charities are not supposed to lobby. Making it virtually ineffective. If it is a registered charity, then it is like a limp dick on a hot date, useless. Guess what? Did a search to see if the BCWF is registered and it is NOT!
Who do we replace them with?
I attended the BCWF Shuswap Region AGM. What I saw was a bunch of tired old men and women such as myself that have been toiling on our behalf for many many years. When they were in their What I did not see were those that should be there. You know, the replacements, those in their 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's.

If you fall in this demographic, 20's, 30's, 40's and 50's, you need to get your ass involved, highly involved. You're the replacements and you better get on board real soon. The gate was open and the only ones still standing at the gate are the resident hunter and fishermen.

Us old guys and gals cannot carry the torch much longer and the government needs to know that you care about your right to do outdoor activities beyond the urban parks and golf courses. The government needs to know you actually exist.

You need to join your local fish and game club. You need to be involved in said club, not just a member, but a doer. A leader, facilitator, recruiter, educator. You all have a steep learning curve

What is happening between the Nicola Valley F&G and Douglas Lake/Corbett Lake doesn't just affect them, it affects all of us. I hear that the principals in the DLCC have purchased interests in some Chilcotin/Cariboo based ranches. I wonder if that has some influence on the "Failure to Consult":mad:

This is truly perhaps one of the best posts I have read on any forum EVER. I hope people appreciate it for what it is. In fact it is so good I feel bad about what I am about to say for fear it might diminish it.

Read about this new group that is apparently rising (under a shroud of secrecy apparently, but I digress). To quote Bear Valley, "The group is made up of hunters and non hunters, FN's and non FN's, that all share 1 common concern...the state of our wildlife and the state of the habitat that wildlife needs to thrive. This group is expanding." Now, how I read this is, and feel free to correct me BV, is Guides, Ranchers, and First Nations are realizing that there is huge money to be made from the land and animals. There is no mention of Resident Hunters, and I strongly suspect there will be no room for them.

The American style of private hunting concessions is impossible in BC under the current system as almost all land is Crown. Further, It is difficult, and financially foolish to buy large enough tracts anymore to make a real difference. It is even against the law for G/Os to keep resident hunters out of there areas. What happens, however, when that land is given to the FNs. It basically becomes private (such as is the concern with the Half-way River Valley). No one has to pay for the land as it is given to them, and I am sure G/Os and FNs could come to an arrangement, something similar to a head tax per animal or something. Adding $5000 to an $30,000 hunt is not that far of a stretch. With Guides being entitled to 40% of the animals and FNs, if they have there way, controlling 110% of the province, they would be foolish to not do everything they can to enhance habitat and increase numbers. The same also applies to the Ranchers, a term I am using very loosely. You cannot get grazing leases any more, only grazing rights. That is from the government, a Band would be free to do as they please. I am sure that any prime fishing lakes that are on these leases would be included. It is a gamble, but one they are willing to take. They know what way the wind is blowing, and are in it for the long haul. The only thing standing in there was is the Resident hunter and fishers, the ones on the front lines.

This is not an attack on any group. It is human nature. Look after yourself first. They are only doing what is best for them, the same as any group (resident hunters included). It just unfortunate that 3% of the population is going to dictate what happens to the other 97%, and that the vast majority will be thanking the semi that is about to hit them.

Apolonius
02-22-2016, 07:32 AM
sir the goal cannot be to "Win" when stakeholders sit at the table the only goal should be how can all benefit. If you leave the table having won others left having lost and they will resolve to not be screwed again next round. Making opponents is not constructive !
Busy day yesterday.
If you go to a table to create a partnership you put things on the table.
Like this "NEW" partnership you and BV talking here."OF concerned Outdoorsmen"
If you go to a table like the allocation,you go like i said on my post.
You need people to fight ,for the rights of the RH.
Do you think we as RH put a good fight on that?
Did we loose anything?
Are the same people the in my opinion "Lost" so much for us, on this "table of concerned 0utdoorsmen"????
Not long ago this new "partners" bend us over....
Now with the tail between our legs,going back as partners????
I would be willing to give it a chance....but different people to represent us the RH.
They are at best incapable to do any good for the RH.
This table you are talking about it is an Equal "table" or another table so the RH would surrender more...in the name of wildlife!!!
After reading Jagermeisters post ,i can see some hope,i can see there are some people with open eyes and minds.
The rest we are like horses....and some people that betrayed all of the hunting community,are trying to lead us like horses.
The less is visible for the "horse" ....the easier it is to lead it where you want.
You talk of a partnership...Natives...Guides...BCWF....RH.
Do you want me to believe,or do you actually believe a native will give anything up????
They talk about "THEIR CONSTITUTIONAL" right to do anything they want.
And the government WILL give them anything they want....and they want it all!!!!
Look at the Dam in the Peace....no hunting for RH so the Indians can have it all.
The Chilcotins????....the Yale natives backing of their SIGNED agreement....Kamloops indians will put things on your precious "TABLE"????
Keep dreaming.
Time for the RH to start becoming members at their local clubs and take control of their clubs.
BCWF,looks at things in a different perspective.
And they might start preaching....."Hunt With aCamera".......for wildlife!!!!!
So young Hunters....there is you chance to blaze your trails.
Start new ,start Fresh!!!!!!!....And your new ....Association.

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 08:06 AM
This is truly perhaps one of the best posts I have read on any forum EVER. I hope people appreciate it for what it is. In fact it is so good I feel bad about what I am about to say for fear it might diminish it.

Read about this new group that is apparently rising (under a shroud of secrecy apparently, but I digress). To quote Bear Valley, "The group is made up of hunters and non hunters, FN's and non FN's, that all share 1 common concern...the state of our wildlife and the state of the habitat that wildlife needs to thrive. This group is expanding." Now, how I read this is, and feel free to correct me BV, is Guides, Ranchers, and First Nations are realizing that there is huge money to be made from the land and animals. There is no mention of Resident Hunters, and I strongly suspect there will be no room for them.

The American style of private hunting concessions is impossible in BC under the current system as almost all land is Crown. Further, It is difficult, and financially foolish to buy large enough tracts anymore to make a real difference. It is even against the law for G/Os to keep resident hunters out of there areas. What happens, however, when that land is given to the FNs. It basically becomes private (such as is the concern with the Half-way River Valley). No one has to pay for the land as it is given to them, and I am sure G/Os and FNs could come to an arrangement, something similar to a head tax per animal or something. Adding $5000 to an $30,000 hunt is not that far of a stretch. With Guides being entitled to 40% of the animals and FNs, if they have there way, controlling 110% of the province, they would be foolish to not do everything they can to enhance habitat and increase numbers. The same also applies to the Ranchers, a term I am using very loosely. You cannot get grazing leases any more, only grazing rights. That is from the government, a Band would be free to do as they please. I am sure that any prime fishing lakes that are on these leases would be included. It is a gamble, but one they are willing to take. They know what way the wind is blowing, and are in it for the long haul. The only thing standing in there was is the Resident hunter and fishers, the ones on the front lines.

This is not an attack on any group. It is human nature. Look after yourself first. They are only doing what is best for them, the same as any group (resident hunters included). It just unfortunate that 3% of the population is going to dictate what happens to the other 97%, and that the vast majority will be thanking the semi that is about to hit them.

There are a lot of assumptions in this post and some reality.
Not all members of the group are FN's, Guides and Ranchers...there is RH representation, but from people that actually give a damn about the state that wildlife is in....not just that they want to kill something because they have the right.
Input is also provided from the local RH segment, these are the people that understand the issues in their backyard. No offense meant, but how the hell does someone gain much knowledge or respect of an area when they spend a weekend or a week there, then go home, 500 to a thousand miles away for the rest of the year.
Has the past worked for anyone or for wildlife?

2chodi
02-22-2016, 08:16 AM
The BCWF is an "advocacy group" which is us. it should be lobbying the government on our behalf but that is not happening. Why you ask? Because someone has a notion that the BCWF is a registered charity and registered charities are not supposed to lobby. Making it virtually ineffective. If it is a registered charity, then it is like a limp dick on a hot date, useless. Guess what? Did a search to see if the BCWF is registered and it is NOT!


Check again http://tinyurl.com/zc2bgxq

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 08:22 AM
Check again http://tinyurl.com/zc2bgxq

So does that make it like a limp dick on a hot date?

boxhitch
02-22-2016, 09:02 AM
Like this "NEW" partnership you and BV talking here."OF concerned OutdoorsmenIf this is the one , its not really secret
Wildlife Stewardship Council .com


The Wildlife Stewardship Council (WSC) is a provincial organization whose membership includes First Nations, guide outfitters and associate members, all of whom share a common concern for the health of British Columbia’s wildlife and habitat. The WSC has developed many partnerships with First Nations in BC. Our mission statement is as follows: “To be a voice and advocate for wildlife and the ecosystems that sustain all life.”
The WSC wishes to comment on the recent Nenqay Deni Accord announcement..........ctnd

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 09:05 AM
If this is the one , its not really secret
Wildlife Stewardship Council .com
That's the group.

boxhitch
02-22-2016, 09:49 AM
Okay , then not to be confused with ...

The Wildlife Stewardship Partner Program (WSPP) is designed to enhance partnerships between hunters, First Nations and others who care about wildlife. WSPP funds can be used as seed dollars to leverage larger projects, professional fees to design projects for submission to Habitat Conservation Trust Foundation and other funding organizations, and education programs on the sustainable use of wildlife.........

the GOABC announces a 5-year, $250,000 commitment to a new provincial Wildlife Stewardship Partner Program, demonstrating the role of the hunter conservationist in wildlife management. The Wildlife Stewardship Partner Program will provide annual funding of $50,000 per year for community-based wildlife stewardship initiatives.

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 10:12 AM
Okay , then not to be confused with ...

That is a complete different organization.
Absolutely NO affiliation.

boxhitch
02-22-2016, 10:24 AM
Which lead to a search of the BC Gov't site for info on the Partner Program. It seems it doesn't exist ?

Here is a link to all the good info on what the BC Gov't has planned for wildlife and habitat etc
www.env.gov.bc.ca/esd (http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/esd)
They already have the knowledge and organization in place to know the right thing and to get it done if they live up to their word.
Thats why effort is needed to build the political will to get things done. To get that done, BC people have to engage their local officials.
Old song , but timeless

From the Wildlife Program Plan

Develop and implement co-ordinated approach for high priority
inventory.
• Develop a monitoring action plan to track priority wildlife species
and population trends, and effectiveness of conservation actions.
• Develop population and habitat supply modelling capability

This has all been spelled out before , we know how to get it done.
Whats missing is the funding and that takes political will.

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 10:33 AM
Which lead to a search of the BC Gov't site for info on the Partner Program. It seems it doesn't exist ?


This has all been spelled out before , we know how to get it done.
Whats missing is the funding and that takes political will.

Interesting on the non existence of the Partner Program.

We can dump all kinds of money in a pile....the first thing that needs corrected is the political will.

Jagermeister
02-22-2016, 12:09 PM
Check again http://tinyurl.com/zc2bgxq
Thanks for chasing that down. Don't understand why my search of the same site didn't bring that up. Nevertheless, I knew that the BCWF is a charitable organization and essentially that proverbial "limp dick".
Before I get to far into this, I want you all to know that I support the BCWF. At the moment it is the only representation that we, the resident outdoors men and women have. It is not ideal and we need to change that and soon. Otherwise we will be left at the gate, the locked gate.
BCWF as a charitable organization cannot lobby otherwise it will lose it's tax deducible status. Unlike the GOABC which is not a registered charity and although it receives sizable donations from it's clients, does not issue tax deduction receipts.
The way the BCWF is today, it merely gets lip service from the powers to be, sometimes. Case in point, "Failure to Consult". "Oh gee, we forgot to call you. Oh well, next time........maybe." The BCWF has no clout That has to change. It has a large membership base and it should be far more effective than it is. There may have been no need in the past for lobbying, but there is definitely a need now. And if the leadership of the BCWF cannot accept that, then they should be punted.
What's more important, a tax receipt or gaining some of our lost ground back. Remember a year ago, a whole bunch of us turned up on the Legislature lawn. A large gathering, all for naught.
Mulehahn's post is bang on, there are no assumption. It is prophetic, the real light. To believe that this is a backyard situation is to believe this innuendo riddled post,

There are a lot of assumptions in this post and some reality.
Not all members of the group are FN's, Guides and Ranchers...there is RH representation, but from people that actually give a damn about the state that wildlife is in....not just that they want to kill something because they have the right.
Input is also provided from the local RH segment, these are the people that understand the issues in their backyard. No offense meant, but how the hell does someone gain much knowledge or respect of an area when they spend a weekend or a week there, then go home, 500 to a thousand miles away for the rest of the year.
Has the past worked for anyone or for wildlife?

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 12:42 PM
Where's the line between "innuendo" and "fact", Jagermeister?
Or in the case of my so called "riddled post", could the judgement all lie in the intrepretation of the reader?

Jagermeister
02-22-2016, 04:09 PM
There are a lot of assumptions in this post and some reality.
Not all members of the group are FN's, Guides and Ranchers...there is RH representation, but from people that actually give a damn about the state that wildlife is in....not just that they want to kill something because they have the right.

So you're insinuating that the only people that "give a damn about the state that wildlife is in"are those in your tight ass group? How fickle that statement.

Input is also provided from the local RH segment, these are the people that understand the issues in their backyard.

Now let me get this right. You take your guide hat off and put on your resident hunter cap. Then you qualify and quantify as the local RH segment "that understand the issues in their backyard". Say, do FN's qualify as RH in your group too? Or just the ranchers and guides?

No offense meant, but how the hell does someone gain much knowledge or respect of an area when they spend a weekend or a week there, then go home, 500 to a thousand miles away for the rest of the year.

I guess you're a resident in the area of your concession?

Has the past worked for anyone or for wildlife?

You would ask that question? LEH Has that worked for anyone other than the guide instigators. Come on, give me a break. How about allocation? Guide instigators again. The past sure has been working for some would you not say. It always brings this to mind.
​http://www.vancouverobserver.com/sites/vancouverobserver.com/files/imagecache/vo_scale_w850/images/article/body/christy-clark-award_0.jpg

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 06:27 PM
Jagermeister, I don't think the past has worked for anyone.
If it has explain why we are seeing the downward spiral we are seeing right now.
Remember there's about 25% less guided clients than not to many years ago.
As for the three in the picture, give it a rest, who cares.
Throwing that picture up on here as guide representation is no different than if I was to post a picture of one of the clubs, consisting of mostly oldtimers, say 75 and up and state they represent the majority of resident hunters.
Not likely.

Apolonius
02-22-2016, 06:42 PM
A picture is worth a thousand words.
Will it be, a really wild guess ,that one of our old enemies will be speaking at the BCWF convention?
Strange bedfellows for sure.
But this "stewards of wildlife" do not represent the RH!!!Time for BCWF to start doing it.
Strange world we live in.

souwester
02-22-2016, 07:04 PM
Who is the woman in the middle of that picture?

Id put a saddle on and let her" ride" me around the house. What a "PILF"!

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 07:29 PM
Will it be, a really wild guess ,that one of our old enemies will be speaking at the BCWF convention?

You're right, it was a really wild guess.
And your answers wrong.

tuner
02-22-2016, 07:30 PM
If you ever look up the word "betrayal" in the dictionary, this is the picture that will accompany the definition. http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/webkit-fake-url://513ea9d3-ced4-442c-a19c-d8dcdc9b11ae/imagejpeg

Ferenc
02-22-2016, 07:57 PM
Who is the woman in the middle of that picture?

Id put a saddle on and let her" ride" me around the house. What a "PILF"!

Your going to need a big tube of Polygrip sir !!

Apolonius
02-22-2016, 08:01 PM
Anything promoted here it seems to me as ...a redistribution of wildlife.
All on the back of the resident hunter....the usual victim.
All the solutions mentioned are being touted before.
Biologist with no money.
CO service money dried out.
No policing of the resource,a free for ...not all but some.
Every one is looking for a bigger piece of the pie,selfish and greedy.
And all of us bitching for nothing .....thats what is left at the end.
Politicians want your vote,thats all....and money talks.
No political will,just games.
I hope BCWF stands up.I hope the did what is good for the people the supposedly represent.
Guides,FN,Ranchers do not represent us RH.
Only their interests.

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 08:15 PM
Guides,FN,Ranchers do not represent us RH.
Only their interests.

You've got a great attitude.
So your going to tell me to be and represent RH you have to be a schoolteacher, truck driver or plumber?
Good one, Apoionius.

Jagermeister
02-22-2016, 09:26 PM
You've got a great attitude.
So your going to tell me to be and represent RH you have to be a schoolteacher, truck driver or plumber?
Good one, Apoionius.
There you go with the innuendo again Mike. Apoionius said nothing of the sort. He said, and I quote, "Guides,FN,Ranchers do not represent us RH. " It's akin to letting the wolves guard your cows, surely you can understand that example.

bearvalley
02-22-2016, 09:42 PM
There you go with the innuendo again Mike. Apoionius said nothing of the sort. He said, and I quote, "Guides,FN,Ranchers do not represent us RH. " It's akin to letting the wolves guard your cows, surely you can understand that example.

Dennis, tell me, what are the qualifications to be a resident hunter rep?

Jagermeister
02-22-2016, 10:02 PM
Jagermeister, I don't think the past has worked for anyone.
If it has explain why we are seeing the downward spiral we are seeing right now.
Remember there's about 25% less guided clients than not to many years ago.
As for the three in the picture, give it a rest, who cares.
Throwing that picture up on here as guide representation is no different than if I was to post a picture of one of the clubs, consisting of mostly oldtimers, say 75 and up and state they represent the majority of resident hunters.
Not likely.I will grant you this. The apathy in the demographic group of 20 to 50 is beyond all reasoning. Who else but us old dudes to pack the torch until we fall down which will be soon. Then when they lose their rights they will quickly blame the preceding generations for letting them down. In the meantime the other stakeholders, guides, ranchers and FN's are making good time snatching more from our hand.
You may not know this Mike, but my first campaign as a Quesnel Rod and Gun Club member was getting Weldwood to cease driving logs down the Quesnel and Cariboo Rivers. It was not done alone, we were aided by the Women's Institute, the BCWF along with all the associated clubs and the Canadian Wildlife Federation. You don't see any logs floating past your door today unless they have root mass, now do you? I can tell you my employer was not very happy with me and one of my associates. Incidentally, our employer was none other than Weldwood.
It was 40 years ago and it's time the younger folks step to the plate to try and save what is rapidly disappearing before their eyes.

Apolonius
02-22-2016, 11:00 PM
You've got a great attitude.
So your going to tell me to be and represent RH you have to be a schoolteacher, truck driver or plumber?
Good one, Apoionius.
My question for you is.
What do Ranchers have to do with wildlife management?
What is the common interest for Guides/FN/Ranchers?
What brings them together?
Let me guess....MONEY.
Always follow the money.
An indian will not give anything if he does not get something back.Dont blame them for that.What can a FN bring to your table??
Land!!!!What do the rancher needs???Land!!!
What is it that the Rancher wants to RANCH??Cows?He could do that already.
Could they "ranch",wildlife????Not really .....
But if it is in FN land....."constitutional" land ,all politicians will cower, and it gets done!!!
Legal or not!!!!
Not where do the guides fit???
TIN HAT???......

Jagermeister
02-23-2016, 12:33 AM
Dennis, tell me, what are the qualifications to be a resident hunter rep?
It not so much the qualifications, it is the qualifications that a resident hunter rep would not have, like a vested interest in a guiding operation. So, would you qualify as a resident hunter representative on my behalf. The short answer, NO!

Apolonius
02-23-2016, 07:18 AM
It not so much the qualifications, it is the qualifications that a resident hunter rep would not have, like a vested interest in a guiding operation. So, would you qualify as a resident hunter representative on my behalf. The short answer, NO!
A resident Rep is first and foremost a RH.
Wears only one hat.
Does not see wildlife as a commodity to sell,
Sees it as reward of the land to its people.
This stewards are there to sell our wildlife for profit.The only ones that could call themselves Stewards of Wildlife is BCWF.
Even if i don't support them in certain things,they are the most dedicated group,we got today.
My opinion is BCWF should take the Torch of Stewards and reps of the Resident Hunter.
Start doing things our way,this partners ,might not be what is best for wildlife and RH.
Start informing your members,have a clear direction.
Do a membership drive,by young people for young people.50,000 members in waiting!!!!!
They know better then us old farts,and they have the social media skills!!!
Going to a meeting and telling the older members this and that brings no new members.
Get young members that would make it "Cool' to be a member.
And we as BCWF should distance ourselves from Wildlife Peddlers.
This is what a rep of the RH looks like.
And no guide members,you can wear only one hat.

bearvalley
02-23-2016, 11:34 AM
My question for you is.
What do Ranchers have to do with wildlife management?
What is the common interest for Guides/FN/Ranchers?
What brings them together?
Let me guess....MONEY.
Always follow the money.
An indian will not give anything if he does not get something back.Dont blame them for that.What can a FN bring to your table??
Land!!!!What do the rancher needs???Land!!!
What is it that the Rancher wants to RANCH??Cows?He could do that already.
Could they "ranch",wildlife????Not really .....
But if it is in FN land....."constitutional" land ,all politicians will cower, and it gets done!!!
Legal or not!!!!
Not where do the guides fit???
TIN HAT???......

I would suggest you get to know a few ranchers before you whitewash them all.
The same applies for FN's and guides.
It seems to me that all three of those groups are taking a lot of badmouthing from a few individuals based on past actions by some ranchers, some FN's and some guides.
Not every rancher is DLCC, not every FN's hunter shoots 6 cow moose and not every GO is out to screw the RH.
Anyone that believes that lives a pretty damn shallow existence.
Anyone that thinks ranchers do not contribute to growing wildlife is dumber than shit.
Most ranchers appreciate wildlife on their ranch land, a lot of them let RH's hunt their land and expect NO compensation.
If you doubt my word, maybe you should contact the Region 5 BCWF rep and see if my story holds true.


It not so much the qualifications, it is the qualifications that a resident hunter rep would not have, like a vested interest in a guiding operation. So, would you qualify as a resident hunter representative on my behalf. The short answer, NO!

Very narrow minded thinking, Dennis.
There are a lot of guides that are RH's.
Most were RH's before they were guides and intend to remain so while they are guides and after if they are no longer in the GO business.
Guides have hands on knowledge of wildlife issues within their hunting areas and the province and they want wildlife to be abundant, for the benefit of all.
So, would you rather see a RH rep that is firmly entrenched in the "useage management" techniques of the past instead of someone that can see the broader picture.....that wildlife is in trouble.
It looks to me that's what you want.
Dennis, the guides were not the only ones grabbing for a bigger slab of the pie, and not all outfitters are of the mentality of the one or two you might have known in the past.


A resident Rep is first and foremost a RH.
Wears only one hat.
Does not see wildlife as a commodity to sell,
Sees it as reward of the land to its people.
This stewards are there to sell our wildlife for profit.The only ones that could call themselves Stewards of Wildlife is BCWF.
Even if i don't support them in certain things,they are the most dedicated group,we got today.
My opinion is BCWF should take the Torch of Stewards and reps of the Resident Hunter.
Start doing things our way,this partners ,might not be what is best for wildlife and RH.
Start informing your members,have a clear direction.
Do a membership drive,by young people for young people.50,000 members in waiting!!!!!
They know better then us old farts,and they have the social media skills!!!
Going to a meeting and telling the older members this and that brings no new members.
Get young members that would make it "Cool' to be a member.
And we as BCWF should distance ourselves from Wildlife Peddlers.
This is what a rep of the RH looks like.
And no guide members,you can wear only one hat.

Well, it's obvious in your world that having the ability to wear more than one hat is wrong.
Not in mine, in fact it might even be a touch boring.

On the topic of "Wildlife Peddlers", that's a very catchy phrase.
I asked the question, to an executive member of the BCWF, as to if the BCWF had ever put money towards wildlife management projects (such as game inventory, etc ) in a large portion of Northwestern BC.
The answer was Zero funding from the BCWF, possibly funding, but doubtful, from the local club level due to the small size of clubs.
So to be fair, does it not seem that RH's are in some aspect "Wildlife Takers".
I include myself in this resident hunter group even if you Saint's don't think I rate to belong.
Not to single you out Apolonius but what has been your personal contribution to making more wildlife?

i beleive there is a change going on with the BCWF, and it looks like for the better of all.
The message just needs to filter down thru the ranks.

kebes
02-23-2016, 11:42 AM
Sorry BV, there's no way on God's green earth I want an Outfitter representing resident hunters in any way shape or form. Absolute conflict of interest.

Jagermeister
02-23-2016, 11:59 AM
Let's see. What would the G&O's want now? They want the ability to exclude the Resident Hunter from entering into their concessions. Let's see if Schneider or Ellis say that this is not on the agenda. Any bets boys.

BgBlkDg
02-23-2016, 12:09 PM
I wouldn't put that past Ellis or that immigrant Schneider, but, I have never seen Mike suggest any policy such as that, to be fair.

Frankly, I would denaturalize and deport ANY immigrant who ever presumed to say that a native Canadian of the founding stock like me should be kept out of ANY part of OUR Canada.

This sort of attitude has also been seen in certain American immigrants from the late '60s who operate(d) various backcountry snowsports venues, on CROWN LAND. I would send them all home, PDQ, as Canada, belongs to we who were born here, first and foremost!!!

bearvalley
02-23-2016, 12:24 PM
Well kebes, I pack the same BCWF membership as you, and l feel that the well being of wildlife and the sustainability of our RH opportunities is not being maintained by the current mandate.
If you want to throw out members on conflict of interest issues, you could see a lot of shrinkage within the organization of the BCWF.
Lets start with;
-all guides ...out
-all farmers & ranchers ...out
-all FN's ...out
-all trappers ...out
-all FLNRO employees ...out
-definitely no members of the COS
-throw out the BCWF anti hunting segment and the wolf huggers with a membership as well

What at do you do? Maybe you're in conflict?
Not that I want to piss on your parade...I have no desire to be solely the rep of the "Wildlife Takers"(BCWF), instead I'd rather contribute my small part to the bigger picture.
Whats been your contribution?

bearvalley
02-23-2016, 12:27 PM
Let's see. What would the G&O's want now? They want the ability to exclude the Resident Hunter from entering into their concessions. Let's see if Schneider or Ellis say that this is not on the agenda. Any bets boys.
I won't speak for Schneider or Ellis, but for myself....I call Bullshit.

kebes
02-23-2016, 12:29 PM
You can pack a bcwf membership all you want that doesn't erase the fact that there is a conflict of interest repesenting resident hunters on a panel. I have no problem that you're on the panel, in fact I think your passion for wildlife and desire to see predator management implemented is great and needed on all fronts by all user groups. That doesn't change the fact that representing both G.O's and RH is questionable at best.

kebes
02-23-2016, 12:30 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/bc-wildlife-federation-takes-aim-at-objectionable-moose-hunting-quota/article28846395/

dont know if this has been posted yet

bearvalley
02-23-2016, 12:30 PM
I wouldn't put that past Ellis or that immigrant Schneider, but, I have never seen Mike suggest any policy such as that, to be fair.

Dewey, thanks.

GoatGuy
02-23-2016, 01:10 PM
There are guide-outfitters who support resident hunting, and want to work on wildlife populations.

There are a number of FN bands who want to work on wildlife populations and don't mind sharing fish and wildlife.

The same goes with ranchers, foresters etc.

If we can all pull in the same direction we can change the outcome.

The allocations issue is not finished. The current model is not workable.

The people who have been taking shots from the bleachers, free-riding, and unwilling to chip in can continue on. The list in that bunch is a long one - plenty of people who in the past didn't want to chip in for inventory, burns, wildlife populations, yet had a hand stretched out as far as they possibly could. I'm sure they will attempt to come back peddling rainbows and roses, but that horse has left the barn.

Work with the ones who want the same, ditch the ones who don't. The formula is pretty simple.



Souwester, not the type of person to run to lawyers and threaten lawsuits. You are out of touch with reality. Not sure if you are actively concocting libelous statements, or someone has been peddling incorrect information to have a laugh at your expense. Either way, free time for that kind of BS is all used up. The nice thing about hbc is there's an ignore function. Don't worry you are in good company.

souwester
02-23-2016, 04:32 PM
I will make sure my nametag is easy to read in Nanaimo Mr Goatguy, hopefully we will have a chance to talk if you are there.
cheers

btridge
02-23-2016, 04:35 PM
[QUOTE=GoatGuy;1754618]There are guide-outfitters who support resident hunting, and want to work on wildlife populations.

There are a number of FN bands who want to work on wildlife populations and don't mind sharing fish and wildlife.

The same goes with ranchers, foresters etc.

If we can all pull in the same direction we can change the outcome.

The allocations issue is not finished. The current model is not workable.


Work with the ones who want the same, ditch the ones who don't. The formula is pretty simple.



QUOTE]
I agree with the above, when it comes to wildlife and working to grow more and remove predators. When it comes to the allocation issue, I won't support any outfitter representing resident hunters.

bearvalley
02-23-2016, 04:57 PM
I agree with the above, when it comes to wildlife and working to grow more and remove predators. When it comes to the allocation issue, I won't support any outfitter representing resident hunters.




I agree that the allocation issue between licensed hunters would be a conflict of interest for a RH that is also a GO.

As for situations such as what this thread started out to discuss, the Tsilhqot'in moose recovery, we are better off pulling together.

If we don't, the allocation splits won't mean squat.

kebes
02-23-2016, 05:59 PM
[QUOTE=btridge;1754670]

As for situations such as what this thread started out to discuss, the Tsilhqot'in moose recovery, we are better off pulling together.

If we don't, the allocation splits won't mean squat.

There's something we can certainly agree on!

Apolonius
02-23-2016, 10:13 PM
I would suggest you get to know a few ranchers before you whitewash them all.
The same applies for FN's and guides.
It seems to me that all three of those groups are taking a lot of badmouthing from a few individuals based on past actions by some ranchers, some FN's and some guides.
Not every rancher is DLCC, not every FN's hunter shoots 6 cow moose and not every GO is out to screw the RH.
Anyone that believes that lives a pretty damn shallow existence.
Anyone that thinks ranchers do not contribute to growing wildlife is dumber than shit.
Most ranchers appreciate wildlife on their ranch land, a lot of them let RH's hunt their land and expect NO compensation.
If you doubt my word, maybe you should contact the Region 5 BCWF rep and see if my story holds true.



Very narrow minded thinking, Dennis.
There are a lot of guides that are RH's.
Most were RH's before they were guides and intend to remain so while they are guides and after if they are no longer in the GO business.
Guides have hands on knowledge of wildlife issues within their hunting areas and the province and they want wildlife to be abundant, for the benefit of all.
So, would you rather see a RH rep that is firmly entrenched in the "useage management" techniques of the past instead of someone that can see the broader picture.....that wildlife is in trouble.
It looks to me that's what you want.
Dennis, the guides were not the only ones grabbing for a bigger slab of the pie, and not all outfitters are of the mentality of the one or two you might have known in the past.



Well, it's obvious in your world that having the ability to wear more than one hat is wrong.
Not in mine, in fact it might even be a touch boring.

On the topic of "Wildlife Peddlers", that's a very catchy phrase.
I asked the question, to an executive member of the BCWF, as to if the BCWF had ever put money towards wildlife management projects (such as game inventory, etc ) in a large portion of Northwestern BC.
The answer was Zero funding from the BCWF, possibly funding, but doubtful, from the local club level due to the small size of clubs.
So to be fair, does it not seem that RH's are in some aspect "Wildlife Takers".
I include myself in this resident hunter group even if you Saint's don't think I rate to belong.
Not to single you out Apolonius but what has been your personal contribution to making more wildlife?

i beleive there is a change going on with the BCWF, and it looks like for the better of all.
The message just needs to filter down thru the ranks.
BV i will just try to list my contribution.
I work hard, pay my taxes.
Never being on UI,welfare,government assistance.
I don't kill cow moose,don't apply for draws like that.I am a believer ,you don't kill what replenishes your herd.
I don't go for Calf seasons and it is only personal,i don't have a problem with others doing it if it is legal.
Try to stay on the straight and narrow.
Did not get any game the last two seasons,still had a very good time hunting.
I buy some wildlife lottery tickets,donated before the allocation.
Tried to get other people to join BCWF,buy an extra membership.
Could i do more?Financially yes.Volunteering no.Work 6-7 days a week.
One thing BV,and is not meant as a compliment....i think you are a good guy.
Probably a guide with the RH on his heart.
Quiet an anomaly.But appreciated,even if we disagree at certain things.

325 wsm
02-24-2016, 10:17 PM
A resident Rep is first and foremost a RH.
Wears only one hat.
Does not see wildlife as a commodity to sell,
Sees it as reward of the land to its people.
This stewards are there to sell our wildlife for profit.The only ones that could call themselves Stewards of Wildlife is BCWF.
Even if i don't support them in certain things,they are the most dedicated group,we got today.
My opinion is BCWF should take the Torch of Stewards and reps of the Resident Hunter.
Start doing things our way,this partners ,might not be what is best for wildlife and RH.
Start informing your members,have a clear direction.
Do a membership drive,by young people for young people.50,000 members in waiting!!!!!
They know better then us old farts,and they have the social media skills!!!
Going to a meeting and telling the older members this and that brings no new members.
Get young members that would make it "Cool' to be a member.
And we as BCWF should distance ourselves from Wildlife Peddlers.
This is what a rep of the RH looks like.
And no guide members,you can wear only one hat.

you sound like a dick tator

Apolonius
02-25-2016, 06:59 AM
^^^^One of those guides????......that know what is good for the RH!!!!!

Jagermeister
02-25-2016, 11:43 AM
I agree that the allocation issue between licensed hunters would be a conflict of interest fora RH that is also a GO.

As for situations such as what this thread started out to discuss, the Tsilhqot'in moose recovery, we are better off pulling together.

If we don't, the allocation splits won't mean squat.Damn Mike, the opening statement restores my faith in you
and I concur with the second statement as well but I can also see the Chilcotins selling off their allotment to the guides. We will see if that happens......maybe.

40incher
02-25-2016, 08:07 PM
[QUOTE=bearvalley;1754673] I agree that the allocation issue between licensed hunters would be a conflict of interest for a RH that is also a GO.

As for situations such as what this thread started out to discuss, the Tsilhqot'in moose recovery, we are better off pulling together.

If we don't, the allocation splits won't mean squat. [QUOTE]



Excuse me, but the allocation splits do mean squat ... typical guide manoeuver BTW!

After FN Section 35 has been decided the BC resident priority still kicks in, even though the GO'S think they are going to get preference! After the FN's get what they need it's licensed residents first and the guides following the gut wagon.

If the boys think they are going to scoop up some of the FN allocation, think again ... not on my watch bud!!

wideopenthrottle
02-26-2016, 07:47 AM
I wonder what the going rate will be for a GO to buy a native bull?....any guesses?

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 09:41 AM
I wonder what the going rate will be for a GO to buy a native bull?....any guesses?
It's illegal

wideopenthrottle
02-26-2016, 10:06 AM
It's illegal

o ya ...so that means ????..sorry, I was thinking how it would work in reality instead of on paper

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 10:10 AM
o ya ...so that means ????..sorry, I was thinking how it would work in reality instead of on paper
It's called sheltering.

COS busts non-FN for it all the time.

wideopenthrottle
02-26-2016, 10:12 AM
It's called sheltering.

COS busts non-FN for it all the time.

so it happens all the time?

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 10:16 AM
so it happens all the time?

Not with outfittters, but with FN and non-FN hunting together.

The COS have definitely busted a few people recently.

Some of the local bands have also had the COS bust FN from other areas for hunting in their territory.

Jagermeister
02-26-2016, 10:17 AM
http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by wideopenthrottle http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=1755488#post1755488)
I wonder what the going rate will be for a GO to buy a native bull?....any guesses?


Goat Guy post
"It's illega"l

Do you really think Crown Counsel would proceed with that if a CO were to lay a charge? I don't think it would happen. The Supreme Court ceded the land to the Chilcotins and that is all there is to it.

wideopenthrottle
02-26-2016, 10:22 AM
Not with outfittters, but with FN and non-FN hunting together.

The COS have definitely busted a few people recently.

Some of the local bands have also had the COS bust FN from other areas for hunting in their territory.

so you think that GO's are saints and would never partake in anything illegal like that...hmmmmmm

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 10:25 AM
Do you really think Crown Counsel would proceed with that if a CO were to lay a charge? I don't think it would happen. The Supreme Court ceded the land to the Chilcotins and that is all there is to it.

Yes, and they have.

FN sec 35 are for food, social and ceremonial only.

Crown retains the right to manage wildlife, and allocate it after FN needs have been met.

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 10:26 AM
so you think that GO's are saints and would never partake in anything illegal like that...hmmmmmm
Could happen for sure, but it would be illegal and they would be busted for it.

wideopenthrottle
02-26-2016, 10:28 AM
Yes, and they have.

FN sec 35 are for food, social and ceremonial only.

Crown retains the right to manage wildlife, and allocate it after FN needs have been met.

"ceremonial salmon for sale up ahead" funny.... the signs on the road don't say this

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 10:37 AM
"ceremonial salmon for sale up ahead" funny.... the signs on the road don't say this

Sounds like DFO and picking and chosing.

COS will pursue charges and many of the local bands are supportive.

wideopenthrottle
02-26-2016, 10:42 AM
Sounds like DFO and picking and chosing.

COS will pursue charges and many of the local bands are supportive.

ok you win...I just need to have more trust I guess...

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 10:55 AM
ok you win...I just need to have more trust I guess...
long ways to go --- but there is hope...... I people speak up

GoatGuy
02-26-2016, 07:29 PM
When and where?

3 ppl, okanagan last hunting season

HarryToolips
02-26-2016, 07:37 PM
^^^^^good to hear...

GoatGuy
03-02-2016, 03:14 PM
http://www.alaskahighwaynews.ca/regional-news/ram-s-head-goes-missing-after-moberly-lake-man-convicted-of-illegal-hunt-1.2188643

A Moberly Lake man has been ordered to pay $4,500 in fines after illegally killing a stone sheep near Smithers—the head of which has allegedly been stolen.
Last week, a judge in Dawson Creek Provincial Court convicted Jordan Patrick Garbitt of hunting without a valid limited entry hunting authorization in Spatsizi Provincial Park in 2012.
He was also ordered to turn over a wall mount made of the animal's horns and skull—worth nearly $20,000. However, he now claims the ram's head been stolen.
The conviction concludes a two-year investigation into Garbitt, who the Conservation Officer Service learned of though its public complaints line.
http://images.glaciermedia.ca/polopoly_fs/1.2188654!/fileImage/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/original_size/ram2.jpgPhoto Courtesy BC Conservation Officer Service
Garbitt claimed he took the animal on Treaty 8 territory, where member First Nations people are allowed to hunt with few restrictions.
However, Conservation Officers (COs) found the animal was taken in Spatsizi Provincial Park based on a pin embedded by a wildlife biologist during a compulsory inspection of the animal's body. The park is the traditional territory of the Tahltan First Nations, and is not Treaty 8 territory.
"Sheep are one of those species in the province that biologists are very closely managing the harvest," said Conservation Officer Kevin Nixon. "All sheep in North America are permanenty marked with this pin, just to keep an eye on sale and trafficiking after they're harvested."
Nixon said officers are skeptical of Garbitt's explanation of the missing sheep's head. COs have since reported it to the RCMP as stolen, meaning Garbitt could be charged with theft if it's spotted again on his wall.
Nixon said the head is worth tens of thousands of dollars.
"Sheep are very hard to come by, a big, big ram like this," he said. "To a guide outfitter, it's a $20,000 to $30,000 hunt they could sell."
Garbitt was allegedly hunting in the Coldfish Lake area of the park with two companions in September 2012.
He has been barred from hunting anywhere outside Treaty 8 territory for one year, and was ordered to pay $3,500 to the Habitat Conservation Trust Fund, and another $1,000 in fines.
reporter@dcdn.ca
- See more at: http://www.alaskahighwaynews.ca/regional-news/ram-s-head-goes-missing-after-moberly-lake-man-convicted-of-illegal-hunt-1.2188643#sthash.7bdEJAFn.dpuf

yama49
03-02-2016, 03:51 PM
Nice to see the charges.. nice looking ram