In my mind it cant happen soon enough. So easy to bitch, so hard to find solutions. This would be a concrete, solid win for every BC resident, but hunters in particular.
Yes
No
In my mind it cant happen soon enough. So easy to bitch, so hard to find solutions. This would be a concrete, solid win for every BC resident, but hunters in particular.
To those who say they already pay from buying tags, licenses and LEH you do realize these are cheap in BC
maybe a start is these funds going towards wildlife and increasing the fees to match closer to other parts of North America?
Bet that would’ve met by the same resistance though
Nailed it to the point.
Cheers
* When the People fear the Government there is Tyranny, when the Government fears the people there is liberty.
* Studies have shown, Vegetarians are poor providers !
* We are told this is the Information age. Seems to me more like the missinfomation age !
* Most always the soft spoken ones are the most deceiving and Dangerous !
* The Law is no substitute for Morality !
Be safe and happy Trails !
* When the People fear the Government there is Tyranny, when the Government fears the people there is liberty.
* Studies have shown, Vegetarians are poor providers !
* We are told this is the Information age. Seems to me more like the missinfomation age !
* Most always the soft spoken ones are the most deceiving and Dangerous !
* The Law is no substitute for Morality !
Be safe and happy Trails !
How many people actually read the initial post? The question was not just would you support the tax, it was would you support the tax IF it were dedicate for spending on provincial fish and wildlife management. It sounds like the vast majority are supportive of such a tax, just many are skeptical that it would work.
Since the majority of posters agree that we would pay for the tax if it could be dedicated, why don't we suggest some ways that we might be able to make it dedicated instead of just complaining that the government is too inefficient and will waste it.
For example, after reading the post about the Pittman Robertson Act, I find it interesting that it is Federal and that it takes cooperation between two levels of government to get money for projects. In other words, state projects need to be approved federally and if the feds tried to raid the fund, the states would be outraged and apply pressure on the feds to abide by the rules. This acts as a form of mutual accountability.
I think such a program would be a start in Canada, but it will take more than just that because there are 50 states that can apply that pressure vs. only 13 provinces and territories. It would be a lot harder for the feds to get consensus or a significant majority out of 50 states than 13 provinces/territories so we'd need some more accountability I think and I'm not sure what that would look like.
Can’t believe those who are asking to pay more tax.....you might rethink that soon after Trudeau and the GreenDPs start hiking the Fed/Prov taxes in near future to pay for all spending. Should come from the taxes we already pay. Easy enough....AB doesnt pay any Prov tax. If enviromemt and wildlife is so important to the Greens and the NDP it is time for them to “walk the talk” and reallocate a portion of the PST collected on sale of recreational items to wildlife management and habitat enhancement. Am all for it....but there’s no f’ing way I want to pay more taxes than I already do.
And the point I was trying to make is that the from taxes that are collected more should be allocated to wildlife . Doubling the cost of tags would not be out of line either,they are cheep but would the money go where it's needed or where the govt of the day wants to spend it. No one on this site is against more money for wildlife spending only where the money comes from and at the end of the day it is still our money.
I wonder if you could put a kill switch in a tax bill, like the moment the tax that is collected is rerouted then the bill is dead?
NO!! Not unless anything other than science is considered in managing wildlife populations. If governments are going to be swayed by social media campaigns and politics, then no I would not support any additional tax on my rights being restricted. Why would any hunter agree to such a proposition? How about an extra tax on ALL outdoor sports gear and activities (skiing, sledding access, kayaking, etc.), because these activities constitute encroachment on habitat and sometimes destroy habitat? Let's be fair about it and point out to city-ots how their activities also constitute habitat loss and encroachment, instead of blaming the hunter for all the woes in wildlife management!
Last edited by Ltbullken; 01-09-2018 at 04:44 PM.
Regards,
Ltbullken
Freelance Wildlife Population Manager
Animals - If you can't eat 'em, wear 'em!