URGENT!! NON LEAD BULLET SURVEY Get on this now! Deadline Jan 30!!!!!!!!

[Bonz]

the information asked has anti hunt ammo written all over it. what a stupid survey, even if legit

why not do one that deffends us,oh, say like who suports grizzly hunting. to dissprove the bought survey the anti have from insight west, seems thats their biggest info to use on us the past few years. but well do one on led that may make us all be thrown under a bus...again.
i keep looking for reasons to suport with memberships..but...lol

[Lionhill]

Hey BCWF

I think the question quoted here is a legitimate one. I have been waiting for a couple of days for a response.

If BCWF is supporting any restrictions on lead use, you will never see another cent of my money again.

LH

Hey BCWF what can you tell us about the doctor and her business?
Is the collection of hunting data cloak and dagger stuff or transparent and on the public record?
did anyone at BCWF verify the legitimacy of these environments?

Also if this data is important to collect, why didn't BCWF post it on Hunting BC? Afraid of the response or
asleep at the switch?

I'm for conservation, fishing and hunting in BC, is BCWF? What exactly are BCWF's motives?
I showed up last year re the reallocation debacle and I pay my dues. Is BCWF on my side or or have they been compromised by antis?

Now that we can see BCWF is reading this,
Some answers and clarification would go a long way, thanks

[GoatGuy]

Your choices are this.

1) Do not participate, have environment Canada make something up (WAG= wild ass guess), then try to defend against what the agency proposes.
2) Take the high ground, participate, inform the results, and advocate afterwards.

Approaches in life:

Science based decision making
Decision based science making

[Lionhill]

Environment Canada will make the decision that is politically expedient, and rarely based on "fact and science".

Shooting club's Boards are being approached with the same bullshit survey, to which are also being ignored.

So I ask again, where is the BCWF representation of protecting resident hunters (first)? Why is the BCWF promoting such a flawed and fractured survey that will have a damaging result for the community?

Your choices are this.

1) Do not participate, have environment Canada make something up (WAG= wild ass guess), then try to defend against what the agency proposes.
2) Take the high ground, participate, inform the results, and advocate afterwards.

Approaches in life:

Science based decision making
Decision based science making

[GoatGuy]

Environment Canada will make the decision that is politically expedient, and rarely based on "fact and science".

Shooting club's Boards are being approached with the same bullshit survey, to which are also being ignored.

So I ask again, where is the BCWF representation of protecting resident hunters (first)? Why is the BCWF promoting such a flawed and fractured survey that will have a damaging result for the community?

My guess would be to inform science-based decision making.

Naturally, the choice is up to the individual. The option to participate or not participate is always there.

The individual should consider the ramifications of both strategies.

[vortex hunter]

DONE ......did my stupid survey for then tree huggers

[jassmine]

Your choices are this.

1) Do not participate, have environment Canada make something up (WAG= wild ass guess), then try to defend against what the agency proposes.
2) Take the high ground, participate, inform the results, and advocate afterwards.

So is this firm conducting the study(Toxecology) actually hired by the Federal Government to collect information, or was that a lie in the introduction of the survey?
Is this actually a BCWF survey?
Having someone answer the questions posted about the credentials and motive of the people hired (as well as the source of funding) would go a far way in showing transparency with the survey. These things are almost always clearly stated when questioned in legitimate surveys.

[Rob Chipman]

I believe that it is a genuine federal government project, but that it doesn't have a ton of resources, hence the use of survey monkey (don't quote me - this is hearsay based on info from a member of the BCWF shooters committee. I imagine he was talking about the same survey but I could be wrong).

[180grainer]

So is this firm conducting the study(Toxecology) actually hired by the Federal Government to collect information, or was that a lie in the introduction of the survey?
Is this actually a BCWF survey?
Having someone answer the questions posted about the credentials and motive of the people hired (as well as the source of funding) would go a far way in showing transparency with the survey. These things are almost always clearly stated when questioned in legitimate surveys.

Good for you. Who's doing it and who's paying them...........follow the money........

[tigrr]

done just now.