Wildlife Management in BC - an Organized Mess

Rob

Not to get into an argument about Wildlife Bio's, but in my 30 years working with, around and in the vicinity of said bio's, I have seen a lot change.

the old days of doing wildlife management really changed when the Liberals came into power in the early 2000's and that change is still here today. The old days, management of wildlife was done by regions with deportment heads and a regional manager. They managed the bio's, the budget and what to focus on, and they listened and worked with local R&G clubs, land use plans, local stakeholders and others to develop plans for the region. Now days, everything is run out of Victoria, with the local bios and section heads providing information when requested and following orders. And whats in Victoria? Politicians and all the lobby groups who think they know what is best for the province, along others who don't understand how to manage wildlife and especially don't know the region and the land that the wildlife live on. It's the same way with forestry, mining, agriculture and even oil and gas.

The other big difference is that the most of the new Professionals who are in charge of our resources are changing; the new breed is much more comfortable doing statistics, computer models and following books than heading out in -25 for a day of telemetry. It the new way of doing resource management in BC. No different in Forestry and other resource industries in BC.

I am not saying that all professionals are like this and a lot of the old breed along with some of the new are doing a great job with one hand tied behind their back. But Victoria interference is strong and until those ties are snipped, we will see the same old processes repeated.

Victoria controls the purse strings, the direction that resources are managed and who has a say in what is going on.

Cheers

SS

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sitkaspruce

Rob

Not to get into an argument about Wildlife Bio's, but in my 30 years working with, around and in the vicinity of said bio's, I have seen a lot change.

---

Actually, the statutory decision makers are still in region — about the only thing that was shifted to Victoria was responsibility for allocation, with regional advice.

Many in the higher natural resource positions in region are foresters, so when budgets are minuscule, wildlife takes the hit. We have little support for core work like inventory in the NE. Little support for prescribed fire. The NE has many staff vacancies in the wildlife section, even at senior levels. One of our bios, assigned mostly to caribou recovery has been out capturing and collaring caribou, wolves and big horn sheep over the last few weeks.

The big issue is the shift to regulating from on-the-ground actions that really make a difference. Talk to your MLAs.

Hey Rob, who writes your paycheques?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piperdown

Hi GC, i do hope this winter is not hard on your cattle, hopefully the wolf management program brought in last year has helped your situation out somewhat. It must be so frustrating dealing with the same thing year after year. How is your hip doing, you running laps around the ranch yet :)

---

It has been mostly mild but for this last week although long. A foot of snow on Oct. 20 followed by 3 inches of rain flooded our winter range and a couple weeks later 16 inches of heavy, wet snow fell. We are now at nearly four feet accumulated, not very easy on moose and caribou.
The counting crews were here a couple weeks ago and counted same areas the do annually, hearing they saw way more moose than they have been. Not sure where they came from because we haven’t grown that many in the last year.
Wolf cull 2020 did have a positive outcome for moose and caribou calf survival. This needs doing province wide and someone needs to thin the bear population drastically yet.
Our losses to predators including mitigation costs topped a million dollars this year since we started keeping track in 2003. I would hazard to guess if the decision makers involve in wildlife mismanagement sustained these types of losses personally there might be a completely different mindset from Victoria.

Hip is good, I am pretty much back to full work days.

Was voted in as President of Cariboo Cattlemens Asso. yesterday so will be busy with that as well. You may be sure that predators were high on my mandate.

Gcreek asked: "Hey Rob, who writes your paycheques?"

I do. I've been writing my own and several other peoples' paycheques since the 80s.

What's the point of your question? I'm not sure I can see where you're going with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob Chipman

Gcreek asked: "Hey Rob, who writes your paycheques?"

I do. I've been writing my own and several other peoples' paycheques since the 80s.

What's the point of your question? I'm not sure I can see where you're going with it.

---

No need to go further, thanks for honest answer.

There's a need to go further. Why would you ask question like that? Who did you think wrote my paycheques?

Rob,

I guess it wasnt my best post and think my message got lost.
Truth is, i dont give a shit about Bio's anymore and "what they have to say"
The fellow you mentioned in the OP, well ironically another member (not so frequent on here) also sent me a link on him "joining their ranks".
In his case, it sounds like he likes the guy.

And this sums up why i am slowly spending less time on HBC.
Again, we have someone with opinions, and others that disagree with it.
Thats fine, nothing new on HBC, thats for sure.
But there is a common theme going on:
Hunters arguing with other hunters!!
No wonder it is going to shit in BC.
Arguing this Reg or that one or this should be banned...blah blah blah.

I have said this before, if hunting Regs and Restrictions, imposed on us generally thru the recommendations of Bios would be of benefit, we should
have some of the best hunting in NA!
In the early 60's it was a page with hours of when to hunt and what was open and when it closed, and thats it.....period!
Now its a bible and online changes on the fly, and we are more F****d now than back then!

Why!!!????
Because Hunting isnt the main contributor to the decline in populations.
Never has been and never will be!!
So go on everyone, Micro manage the shit out of it, while the wheels sink deeper into the mud.
Argue amongst yourself, that this should be leh or that should be closed or that shouldnt be allowed.
In the end, things are getting more restricted, limited or closed.
And each time that happens, hunters are forced to congregate in smaller and smaller and tighter groups, until that area becomes over run and closed.
(best example was R5 closed for 10 days now to see R3 being hammered and the effects are starting to show in some MU's)

Yes, we have some good Bios and yes, we have some that i think are Anti's in the group.
I have also seen some dumb shot like the no scope xbow suggestion.
(they couldn't even be truthful as to why they wanted it and said it was for moose management, utter bs if one was at the table as it was a CO's
recommendation because of so many xbow infractions up there and yes, they needed to address the declines in Moose in the area, but again,
wasnt due to hunting if you ask me anyways)

There is so much BS as of late, and there is tons of studies already done, just gaining dust.
Fine, the recent MD study is great, because we have altered the habitat thru logging so much in 20 years that it would be stupid to go off of any
old studies where an area has been so turned upside down. and not manage it differently now.

But, what is going to get done...sweet F*** ALL!

There is no money for CO's.
And there is no money to improve habitat, or not much.
So, what's left, to mange thru restrictions and closures.
So who cares what they say anymore, they are only given one option to manage.
We should only be concerned with if we have any Bios' amongst the ranks that are ANTI's.
As i can see they would love to manage thru restriction and even more closures.
Those are the ones we need to bring to the spotlight and get out.

They cant manage the resource sectors or whatever else is destroying habitat, and they can influence political hot potatoes like a wolf cull.
Why, because that part all comes from the Political spectrum of input.

Look at the salmon.
Too afraid to make FN use Traditioanl means instead of nets.
Also, many Bios' are against hatcheries due to losing genetic diversity, which fine, i wont argue that, but what is the solution.
Quite simple actually, "clip all hatchery salmon in BC...100%"
And why isnt it happening?
Because the Feds (the political side) wont cough up 4 to 6 million to purchase 4 to 6 mobile clipping units (yes, they are a million a piece i am told).

The solutions are already on paper, we dont need the Bios other then to oversee implementation and monitoring at this point if you ask me, so F' em.
We are missing people in Politics (preferably with law degrees...sadly but we have FN issues as well) "who are passionate" about hunting and wildlife
and most importantly CONSERVATION!
How many are out there in BC that fit that bill.
How many of them actually sit on a portfolio high up in the ranks of these Parties or could???
And ones in the past had "special interests", quite often with the GO's and benefitting on a private manner.

My point is this, imagine what the USA would be like today, had they not had Roosevelt, a very strong presence of an individual that made sure he
got things done no matter what, and yes, was a passionate hunter and conservationist.

That other member that doesn't frequent much on hbc, well he is busy trying to start up a chapter for hunters, another hunting group.
I wish him luck.
But, the fact is, its just one group that will end up disagreeing with another group on some sort of hunting issue related to regs.
Hunters fighting hunters, on issues that wont make a difference because the root issue isnt inside or due to hunting.
So good luck whether your in the group or alliance or another group like BCWF.

Unless you get folks in POLITICS that are passionate about hunting, wildlife and conservation, its a downward spiral.
We need money pumped in, and we need other factors, outside of hunting to be addressed and regulated, not hunting.
So ya, i could care less about this Bio or that one these days nor get into more this side of the fence or that one on HBC Threads

Get yourself or your kids into politics if hunting is your or their passion if you still want it in the future.

Bugle:

Don't worry about it pal!

There are two types of disagreement on this forum/subject.

One is over interpretations or solutions or facts. You and I have those and we do it on a semi-regular basis. It's actually a good exercise and I don't take any offence and hope you don't either. I think it moves us closer to a synthesis of ideas and values that we can work with.

The other type of disagreement is a little different. That's the one where someone questions your motives and implies that you're somehow not honest or above board or uninformed. It's disrespectful and drives the tone of the conversation south.

You don't do that.

I think, actually, with the social license to hunt BS coming up that a lot of the posts are really good quality and in the first category. We seem to be trying to figure out the best response through consensus, and that's good. We aren't going to get there overnight, but we'll get there.


To a few of your other points:

"Look at the salmon.
Too afraid to make FN use Traditioanl means instead of nets."

"Our side of the ledger" (if I can use that term) need to do some work on ourselves when it comes to Indigenous Relations. In case that sounds unfair I'll point out that Chad Day has said exactly the same thing about FNs (see the Cutbanks Conversations podcast with him).

We can't "make" FN use traditional nets. It's got nothing to do with being "afraid", even if government people do send out a vibe that they're terrified. Indigenous rights are real, legal things. "We" can't pretend that simply electing a guy who's got the balls to make Indigenous people do something is a workable solution. "We" tried putting Indigenous people on reserves, putting them in residential schools to advance assimilation and "we" destroyed a lot of their culture, all by force.

What happened? "They" survived that ordeal, didn't go anywhere, maintained their identity, increased their populations and.....took "us" through "our" court system and won. (I'm putting "we" and "they" in quotes because we need to move past an us vs them dynamic).

Bottom line? We need to reconcile because of our centuries old legal system. It's not a case of uninformed socialist latte sippers in downtown Vancouver making popular demands like the social license to hunt issue. Indigenous people have Supreme Court of Canada tested rights. That said, traditional, sustainable ways to fish are becoming more visible as a solution.

"we dont need the Bios other then to oversee implementation and monitoring at this point if you ask me, so F' em."

We already did F'em. They are so underfunded they can't count anything. There is no monitoring to really speak of, and implementation? Same story. You need money to buy whisky and cigarettes, and we aren't giving them any. Funding, all on its own, is a huge problem. Call your MLA and tell them they need to pay. Refer to Jesse's numbers. If you don't have them, contact me.



Hatcheries are a challenge right now. Watch the film "Artifishal" for an anti-hatchery viewpoint. Then talk to the guys in your club who have been doing volunteer hatchery work.....forever. In other words I don't know the solution either, but we'll get there.

"My point is this, imagine what the USA would be like today, had they not had Roosevelt..." I tell politicians his story *every* *single* *time*. You and I are on the same page there.

"he is busy trying to start up a chapter for hunters, another hunting group.
I wish him luck."

Me too. He should start a hunter's rights group. There is an argument going back to Magna Carta to prove we have those rights. BCWF is not a hunter's rights group. It's a conservation organization that has a big membership that overwhelmingly consists of hunters. That's an important distinction.

Hunters inform what BCWF does, but that's informing BCWF on conservation issues. Hunter rights? That really should be a different, but complementary group that concentrates on that. Example: who's better on guns? BCWF or CCFR? Who's better on hunter informed conservation? BCWF or CCFR? Two different jobs, two different groups doing them. Add a third group for hunters rights and I'll say "Hey, send me the application so I can join". We need it.


Anyhow, I enjoy your input. Take 'er easy.

Yup,

I feel sorry for the pro-hunting Bio's for sure.
There is no funding, either to monitor properly, or to make the changes needed (generally habitat and habitat use related).
If there are any Anti Bio's in the works, those are the ones that are more than happy to throw on more restrictions etc to stop hunting.
(those Bio's should be pointed out on this site for sure so we all know)
There are lots of good ones, but, they have nothing to work with other than Regs, and thats the sad part and why we are getting grouped tighter and
tighter out in the field.
It's the debating whether it should be 4pt or if this should be leh or off the table battles that irk me the most and generally are between hunters.
We just arent organized and many fail to see the pressure from the outside, and that th Antis all have "1 GOAL", to ban hunting.
Thats an easy agenda to stay focused on whereas us hunters look at so many different issues inside the hunting/wildlife spectrum.
And its that spectrum, basically like a collidescope, dispersing us to go off in so many different directions amongst ourselves.
No focus and we fail to see what is really happening.

When it comes to an example like the salmon, it shows how frustrating and simple a solution could be.
Get clipping machines here in BC and the sport could have a specific target catch season.
And most in the industry would be happy.
But again, that anti's just go on lately how bad hatcheries are and want them gone.
And some Bios buy into that in the DFO arena.
Which makes me bang my head against the wall because if they are clipped, then we know they are hatchery fish and we can harvest them, and
definitively know the ones that arent are wild.
But nope, no money from the Feds in an industry that makes tons of money for many folks trying to make a living.
Instead, closed or restricted size, and again, the same scenario as our wildlife in BC.

As for the FN, using say nets and showing that the use of them means they target all species in the river, not a specific catch.
Well, that's a matter of continuously spotlighting it in the media and public, like sturgeon being killed and dumped.
Only when its in front of everyone's faces will the majority call for change.
Right now, everyone, or most are to scared to say something.
Look at the mayor in Pouce, twittering about some not wanting a pipeline in the backyard due to environmental damage and yet their front yards
are a dump.
You end up being called a racist, but if it was you or I, being white, then your fair game!
Totally F'd ourselves in that arena now.

But, it all stems from the government and lack of action or funding.
Thats why i say we need those, that have that ability and love hunting to make a go for it in politics if you ever want to see it get bettr.
Right now, Antis are doing just that, so expect it to get worse, not better!
Thus the reason for a modern hells angel analogy.

Back in the day, when they rode their steel machines and wore their leathers and patches, they were easily identifiable as bad or the enemy.
Sort of like us when you have a rally and there are just a bunch of guys standing around wearing camo shirts and browning hats.
We are an easy target to look like the big bad killers.
I we want to make a change, a suite and tie and running in politics and getting somewhere from the "inside" is what will make the difference.
Expecting a politician who is an Anti and expecting them to listen to our concerns is extremely foolish.
We have to trade in the Camo, just like the Angels did, and "blend in" and get into where the real action happens.

I dot hate Bio's, not by a long shot, its just that they have no tools in regards to funding to make a difference.
And if your audience to make the change is a bunch of Anti politicians, then it wont happen.
Just more closures.