Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t eat
Is this the, 'thin red line'?
As educated human beings, isn't leaving mother nature, to her boom and bust cycles unethical in itself?
Let these animal populations rise beyond carrying capacity, only to die of starvation and disease?
Isn't controlling the population, an intelligent ethical response to the way's of mother nature?
If not, why not?
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...ticle37701186/
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
Just read who the opinion piece is by and that says enough.
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
Well, I guess it is a point of view.
And that's the direction where we are headed, so heads up everyone.
Once Preds are off the "hunting list", it's on to goats and sheep I suppose.
It won't end until "hunting is deemed illegal" by some.
The internet, "Pandora's box".
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
where is BCWF in all this? they should be much more vocal and in the public eye. They need to fight this rhetoric head on via social media and other mainstream venues, instead they update their website bi annually and drive around the province doing slideshows.
there are many false statements in this article that the globe and mail should be fact checking. at least we should have someone that can counter this and set the record straight.
I definitely am starting to see issues with the stakeholder roundtable all user pay system here. the writer hints to it that if non hunters want input they may have to financially contribute and buy guiding territories (something they have already done)
getting pretty worried the organization that is supposed to represent us is selling us down the river.
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
cougar is god damn tasty. end of story
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
Where I hunt, I have never seen any eco-tourists. So that statement only holds water in certain areas.
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
Quote:
Originally Posted by
warnniklz
cougar is god damn tasty. end of story
Beaver is good along with cougar
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
Well paid Raincoast Foundation staff have a right for an opinion too, absolutely, but sorry it won't hold much water to me.
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
you know the sad this is that they are gona win this.
they are organized for years and well trained.
us (the hunter) well all we can do is wait for opening day.
getting caribou area closed to snowmobiling for a couple of caribou
there slowly closing off every thing in the wild to us.
think about the roads you found totally impassible this year while out hunting?
one byte at a time they have slowly consumed us.
Re: Hunters: To protect our social licence, we have to stop killing animals we don’t
brownmancheng:
The BCWF is a great organization, but it has it's limits and it's about time we recognized them.
They are uncompetitive on social media. Maybe they shouldn't be, but they are. A solid social media presence requires several people working in shifts to get out a consistent message. BCWF (as far as I can see) has neither the resources nor the talent for that. I'm not criticizing them. I'm just pointing out that they are not equipped to respond well on social media. Someone else is going to have to do that.
The media isn't going to fact check jack shit. Perhaps they should, but look out your window. They don't. There's a good reason for it. They're losing money and their old business model doesn't pay. Add into this the fact (yes, the irony of this statement isn't lost on me) that we live in a post-fact world. Opinions are much more valuable and pay much better than facts. As soon as you start looking (and Chris Darimont's article offers proof) you'll see it.
Additionally, because old fashioned media can't make money they're happy to take opinion pieces written by people who are being paid by someone else. It's free content. If we want to counter that we need someone (or a bunch of someones) who can write usable content.
You are right to see some issues with involving other people as stakeholders. It is a fact that hunting conservationists are missing a hell of a good game, and that many anti-hunters are paying close attention. Notice the headline: Raincoast is casting itself as a hunting entity that wants to preserve social license for hunters.
Also, lets recognize that in terms of money, many NGOs are much better funded than BCWF or any other conservationist hunter group.
Is there a bright side? Absolutely. We have a better story to tell. The problem is that we need more people to tell it, and we need to get it to the right people (both the general public and decision makers/thought influencers).
You've heard the phrase "managing to zero", right? Awesome phrase, awesome concept. You know who hasn't heard it but who understands it immediately every time I bring it up? Every MLA I talk to. They don't know about it until I bring it up.
Now, I've said BCWF is limited and can't fix everything. You know what they can and have done, and done very well? Connected diverse people from across the province who are working on the bigger picture. That will continue. There's probably somewhere around 100,000 licensed hunters in BC. We outnumber a lot of NGOs already. All we need to do is get into the game.