Is anyone else sick of getting sidelined at our own game?

[Leaseman]

My solution?

Hammer home the idea of Science. Count the wildlife. Report wildlife "harvested". Allocate future harvest accordingly. For everyone.

It HAS been done. See this report on Federal Fisheries refusing to increase the Native alotment of sockeye due to low runs and the Feds WINNING in court:
http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn...or-more-salmon

Was quite the surprise to see that win!!!

[Mike_R]

My solution?

Hammer home the idea of Science. Count the wildlife. Report wildlife "harvested". Allocate future harvest accordingly. For everyone.

It HAS been done. See this report on Federal Fisheries refusing to increase the Native alotment of sockeye due to low runs and the Feds WINNING in court:
http://nationalpost.com/pmn/news-pmn...or-more-salmon

Not a good comparison IMO. Restricting access due to conservation reasons is a different "kettle of fish"

[Hublocker]

you lost me at third sentence. You have a RIGHT to fill your freezer with moose meat? Sorry. I can't take your letter seriously enough to finish reading anymore.

Yes, I think you're right.

Just because you live near an area that has an open moose season doesn't mean that the moose there are your own private herd of meat on the hoof for the taking every year. That is starting to sound like the FN argument.

For the rest of us mere mortals moose hunting is a luck of the draw event that if we are extremely lucky comes around every five or six years. And even then it is no guarantee.

David nailed it:

Hammer home the idea of Science. Count the wildlife. Report wildlife "harvested". Allocate future harvest accordingly. For everyone.

[canishunter22-250]

I dont mean that I personally have a right to shoot a moose every year. I mean that collectively the citizens of this province have a right to the moose as a resource. Obviously there are more hunters than available moose to harvest each fall and because of that we have to divvy them up fairly between us (whether through leh or restricting seasons so that only x amount if moose get taken). It's been happening for 100 years and it's nothing new. It's a good system.

My point is that they are now starting to restrict seasons not for this reason, but because it is being questioned whether us citizens of bc have a right to the resource at all. This is what we need to fight for. The simple fact that we collectively do have a stake in the wildlife of this province. The trend is moving towards a system that we do not.

We all collectively own the wildlife according to the basis of the North American model for wildlife management,so why would we not have a right to it?

[Hublocker]

You're right.

I dont mean that I personally have a right to shoot a moose every year. I mean that collectively the citizens of this province have a right to the moose as a resource. Obviously there are more hunters than available moose to harvest each fall and because of that we have to divvy them up fairly between us (whether through leh or restricting seasons so that only x amount if moose get taken). It's been happening for 100 years and it's nothing new. It's a good system.

My point is that they are now starting to restrict seasons not for this reason, but because it is being questioned whether us citizens of bc collectively have a right to the resource at all. This is what we need to fight for. The simple fact that we collectively do have a stake in the wildlife of this province. The trend is moving towards a system that we do not.

We all collectively own the wildlife according to the basis of the North American model for wildlife management,so why would we not have a right to it?

[markomoose]

I dont mean that I personally have a right to shoot a moose every year. I mean that collectively the citizens of this province have a right to the moose as a resource. Obviously there are more hunters than available moose to harvest each fall and because of that we have to divvy them up fairly between us (whether through leh or restricting seasons so that only x amount if moose get taken). It's been happening for 100 years and it's nothing new. It's a good system.

My point is that they are now starting to restrict seasons not for this reason, but because it is being questioned whether us citizens of bc have a right to the resource at all. This is what we need to fight for. The simple fact that we collectively do have a stake in the wildlife of this province. The trend is moving towards a system that we do not.

We all collectively own the wildlife according to the basis of the North American model for wildlife management,so why would we not have a right to it?

Good call buddy!I like your way of thinking!

[HappyJack]

I dont mean that I personally have a right to shoot a moose every year. I mean that collectively the citizens of this province have a right to the moose as a resource. Obviously there are more hunters than available moose to harvest each fall and because of that we have to divvy them up fairly between us (whether through leh or restricting seasons so that only x amount if moose get taken). It's been happening for 100 years and it's nothing new. It's a good system.

My point is that they are now starting to restrict seasons not for this reason, but because it is being questioned whether us citizens of bc have a right to the resource at all. This is what we need to fight for. The simple fact that we collectively do have a stake in the wildlife of this province. The trend is moving towards a system that we do not.

We all collectively own the wildlife according to the basis of the North American model for wildlife management,so why would we not have a right to it?

We don't have any rights to wildlife, we have privileges that we have to pay for, and take courses for.

[Jimbob]

By a supreme court decision:

1. First and foremost, species have a right to survive. This means that if the species is threatened the government can shut down or restrict harvest. Like the Sockeye example.
2. Next, FN has the right to harvest above others.
3. General public does what government says.

This is a supreme court decision and has set a precedent for all of Canada. It doesn't matter what laws the government makes the FN's have a right that goes above the general public. The only way to put restrictions on FN is to show that a species is threatened. This is why the BC government cannot shut down the grizzly hunt even if they wanted to to. They have to prove the grizzlies are at major risk to restrict FN.

That means if a population starts to decline then the general public is restricted and the FN can continue to do what they do. Until it becomes so bad that the government, in the name of saving the species, can restrict the FN and have a legal right to do so.

THE GOVERNMENT CANNOT DO ANYTHING UNTIL THE SPECIES IS SEVERELY AT RISK.

You can complain about this all you want but it is the Supreme Court of Canada that has decided this not provincial government.

[HarryToolips]

If there are plenty of moose around there is no legitimate reason to shorten the seasons for resident hunters. IF there are still guided hunts being sold in this region, then they should be the first to go if the moose population is in trouble.

And this is it....as long as our bull:cow ratio is fine, that is..

[one-shot-wonder]

Winter '17/18 known as 'the season of the cuts'......will go down in history.