Re: BCWF- Changes at the BCWF
BCWF is an old organization that was created and designed for a different age.
There was a time when hunting and fish and game clubs were (for lack of better terms) much more normal and mainstream. Times have changed. Some F&G clubs, in some areas, are doing good work and are involved in...fish and game. Others are facing the twin challenges of an aging membership and members who join to have access to a shooting range. The general public (which votes, influences policy and is often poorly informed) largely does not see F&G clubs as cutting edge positive forces for the public good.
As I understand it, BCWF is supposed to represent the interests of all these F&G clubs, which is why F&G clubs pay funds and send reps to BCWF.
The problem is: what are the interests of F&G clubs? Is it gun rights? Hunting rights? Conservation?
Go ahead and pick one or all of those, but realize that they can then be broken down further. For gun rights, do we mean the ability to own firearms that allow us to hunt for meat during hunting season, or do we mean the right to own scary black rifles dressed up with tac gear that we can use at a range even if we never go hunting? Do hunting rights include maintaining a trophy hunting industry for private businesses, or does it just mean the right to hunt a deer? Does conservation mean fighting pipelines and fish farms, or does it mean managing wildlife populations for maximum game hunting opportunities?
Anyone can see that we can cut each of those issues up more and more finely, and as we do the adherents of each particular sub-issue will hive off and support it's favorite.
And when they do they will express admiration for their own concerns and disdain for other people's concerns. We see it here all the time. One guy says governance is critical, another guy says predator reduction is where we really need to go, another says we have to ally ourselves with commercial interests, another says we have do distance ourselves from commercial interests, another guy says we need to tell the majority of the population that they're wrong and we're right. On and on it goes.
And when BCWF doesn't satisfy one of those sub-groups, BCWF gets shit on.
Despite that, I think it's very fair to say that BCWF has made some substantial progress in an environment where it is tough to make progress. Look at this sub-forum. It's become more active recently. BCWF also sponsored the recent Mule Deer presentation in Kelowna. I'm sure others can add to the list.
I had a chat with BCWF president Harvey Andrusak and came away convinced that he understands the problems and will work hard to resolve them, but I also realized that he has a thankless job.
Meanwhile, on the other side of the field we face a well equipped, skilled and capable opponent. Raincoast is an example. As discussed elsewhere on this forum is in the middle of a campaign to raise $500,000. They have actual scientists on staff who promote their moral agenda. They absolutely decimate us in the press and in social media, and they are putting points on the board.
Our response? We bitch at each other and speculate about how much we could do if only we actually got our acts together and did something.
We all know from life experience that bitching and dreaming doesn't accomplish jack shit.
What does accomplish something? Taking action, especially when that action is modeled on the successful activities of others.
Chris Seervheen, who ran (I think) the US Inter-agency Grizzly program in the US, recommends parking a lot of differences at the door, because to win a war you need allies. How do you decide what differences you're going to allow to be parked? It goes back to what we want to accomplish.
And that will take a lot of work and compromise. Only when that is done will we be able to start moving forward.
So, the obvious question is: is BCWF the vehicle to undertake the whole job, or is it a group that has to park some of it's own issues at the door, and do other groups have to allow it to park the issues there? I don't know the answer.
What I do know is that the more people abandon and criticize the BCWF without creating another organization to complement it, the worse it will be for all of us.
Personally, what I want to accomplish is the preservation and enhancement of a wild landscape that is home to the most naturally diverse population of plants and animals possible, maintained in a balanced, natural and sustainable manner, with as much access for humans to pursue traditional recreational and food harvesting activities as possible.
I think BCWF is working in the same direction enough that I will stand with them and support them.
FWIW, if you share my goals and want to be part of a group that compliments BCWF's efforts but is perhaps a little more agile, I accept cash, cheques, Interac transfers and Bitcoin.
Rob Chipman
"The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders" - Ed Abbey
"Grown men do not need leaders" - also Ed Abbey
Originally Posted by bearvalley
Born 2 Make U Think
Freedom Fighter
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
