BCWF- Regulations input wanted

[Steeleco]

Are there to be town hall meetings like the recent road show? Would be nice to voice concerns in person and not from behind a keyboard

[J_T]

Are there to be town hall meetings like the recent road show? Would be nice to voice concerns in person and not from behind a keyboard

I doubt it. These recommendations that are now open for comment are the culmination of 2 years of discussion and presentation. You should have been informed along the way by your organization representatives. For the most part, the point hunters/conservationists are trying to make right now, is changes to the regulation are socially driven, and by and large we are not supportive of many proposed changes. The regulatory amendment process is currently a 2 year process. A lot of garbage proposals come in and get discussed. To be clear, it is entirely Government who are the decision makers on what stays, what moves on, what gets dropped from the table discussion. In the end, it is Government again that are the decision makers about which proposals go forward. The online consultation process simply allows decision makers the ability to say x% of respondents support this. If in fact the numbers do support a proposal. If the respondents don't support a proposal, Government is still going to go ahead with the change and in their statement, they'll just leave out the part about support.

[Bugle M In]

So JT, are you saying...."it doesn't matter if we go to this site, and place our opinions"???
Is it just a waste of time???
I have always wondered about that?

[J_T]

^^ No, I'm not entirely saying that. Perhaps I'm saying I'm sorry I spoke up. I've spent an enjoyable month away from here...

I think it's important to respond and I take the time and would encourage everyone to. However I think hunters need to understand the intention. The online component of consultation is really a final confirmation of what Government intends to do.

Perhaps with recent events I'm more skeptical about what Government's intentions really are. It's a socially driven decision process now. And there is a lot of uncertainty.

I do know that most hunters have a high level of apathy and if there are 100,000 hunters in BC, there is probably less than 2000 that will provide comment. Whereas the environmental community and anti hunting movement will provide exponentially more comments if it suits their agenda. Hunters should not be thinking "one voice" and "one organization" will speak for them. That's a cop out. Step up and be heard.

Take a look at how the anti hunting movement has been successful. I've said this before. Many groups, small in number, are heard more loudly, than one group speaking for many.

[finaddict]

Just went in and made a couple comments. I see that you need a BCied, but do not need a hunter registration number. Does this not allow anti-hunting groups to go in and flood the remarks with anything they want to support all restrictions? Should people who are not hunters be allowed to comment on changes that only affect hunters? Interesting the way this could be construed as a form of social manipulation of hunting regulations.

[J_T]

Just went in and made a couple comments. I see that you need a BCied, but do not need a hunter registration number. Does this not allow anti-hunting groups to go in and flood the remarks with anything they want to support all restrictions? Should people who are not hunters be allowed to comment on changes that only affect hunters? Interesting the way this could be construed as a form of social manipulation of hunting regulations.

Totally. Thats what "Public" consultation in a socially driven decision making process is. Everyone gets an equal voice.

[Bugle M In]

^^ No, I'm not entirely saying that. Perhaps I'm saying I'm sorry I spoke up. I've spent an enjoyable month away from here...

I think it's important to respond and I take the time and would encourage everyone to. However I think hunters need to understand the intention. The online component of consultation is really a final confirmation of what Government intends to do.

Perhaps with recent events I'm more skeptical about what Government's intentions really are. It's a socially driven decision process now. And there is a lot of uncertainty.

I do know that most hunters have a high level of apathy and if there are 100,000 hunters in BC, there is probably less than 2000 that will provide comment. Whereas the environmental community and anti hunting movement will provide exponentially more comments if it suits their agenda. Hunters should not be thinking "one voice" and "one organization" will speak for them. That's a cop out. Step up and be heard.

Take a look at how the anti hunting movement has been successful. I've said this before. Many groups, small in number, are heard more loudly, than one group speaking for many.

Okay, got it.
I will take the time to respond.
Only problem is, I don't hunt all these specific Regions, or MU's, or for all these specific Species.
So, someone like me "doesn't really know" what is reasonable or stupid, when it pertains to some of these changes.
That's where I feel a little inadequate in providing support for other hunters that do know certain items on there.
Unlike one person, I never claim to know an entire region, every thing that going good or bad.
Would like to see some others chime in on some of the specifics, to get some insight.
Some I can definitely answer however.

[horshur]

Okay, got it.
I will take the time to respond.
Only problem is, I don't hunt all these specific Regions, or MU's, or for all these specific Species.
So, someone like me "doesn't really know" what is reasonable or stupid, when it pertains to some of these changes.
That's where I feel a little inadequate in providing support for other hunters that do know certain items on there.
Unlike one person, I never claim to know an entire region, every thing that going good or bad.
Would like to see some others chime in on some of the specifics, to get some insight.
Some I can definitely answer however.

Just comment on what you know and what will effect you...

[Piperdown]

You post his just now when it has been out for quite some time, get it together

[Bugle M In]

Just went in and made a couple comments. I see that you need a BCied, but do not need a hunter registration number. Does this not allow anti-hunting groups to go in and flood the remarks with anything they want to support all restrictions? Should people who are not hunters be allowed to comment on changes that only affect hunters? Interesting the way this could be construed as a form of social manipulation of hunting regulations.

Interesting!, never realized that, and that's a scary fact!
Good point, should only be used to enter this "if you have a valid Hunters Number"!.
Didn't even consider that Anti's can get into this with opinions on hunting regs and having input.
Something else that needs to be on the "List of to do Changes" when we get some political party that will listen to the
rationale of this BCied versus hunter # registration to partake....IMO.