FN issues Repost

[338win mag]

I'd be happy as hell if I could get a moose LEH in the areas the FNs have in that map, have gotten lucky twice since 1982. From my standpoint I'd support getting rid of all leh moose tags, then all licensed resident hunters would be on the same level and we wouldn't run into camps of LML hunters where everyone in camp has a draw. PS...and cut back the 25% allocations that are gifted to the outfitters, it's obscene.

WTF??? ......over.

[Pemby_mess]

Others are asking if and how they can grow a ground swell of support against indigenous groups taking control of BC and its economy
Going beyond the hunters in the province, take a look at who else is in the fray

Big business should be concerned, but much of that is foreign owned and fluid in where it does business
Eventually , maybe, these players wil be able to work with the new governing body, time will see how that plays out

Business interests will always find a way to work within a firm regulatory environment. The nature of the legal framework is somewhat less important, if one is looking at things without an entrenched ideology. If there are a bunch of changes afoot, it will be hard to convince smart money to make long term investments, because they can't predict what the rules will be when that investment starts yielding.

Most businesses aren't going to care whether they're writing cheques to the Crown, or to a FN government. It's the relationship of numerical values making up those cheques that matter.

What will kill business investment is an environment of long term uncertainty and anxiety. There are many in government, and those that represent them, that thrive off this set-up. It's in the direct long-term interest of politicians, lawyers and some old-stock crony businesses to drag out this process inevitably. Businesses in general want to see a resolution - period. Large and small alike.

[Island Roo]

Business interests will always find a way to work within a firm regulatory environment. The nature of the legal framework is somewhat less important, if one is looking at things without an entrenched ideology. If there are a bunch of changes afoot, it will be hard to convince smart money to make long term investments, because they can't predict what the rules will be when that investment starts yielding.

Most businesses aren't going to care whether they're writing cheques to the Crown, or to a FN government. It's the relationship of numerical values making up those cheques that matter.

What will kill business investment is an environment of long term uncertainty and anxiety. There are many in government, and those that represent them, that thrive off this set-up. It's in the direct long-term interest of politicians, lawyers and some old-stock crony businesses to drag out this process inevitably. Businesses in general want to see a resolution - period. Large and small alike.

Business will also walk away when they have too many governments claiming jurisdiction.
How many governments will we have in B.C. when the dust settles. There will be more inviting places to invest elsewhere.

[Pemby_mess]

Business will also walk away when they have too many governments claiming jurisdiction.
How many governments will we have in B.C. when the dust settles. There will be more inviting places to invest elsewhere.

I agree with you in a sense, but I interpret "settled dust" as being an agreed upon framework for legislation and court decisions to be predicted and therefore negotiated. The number of governments a business would have to deal with isn't going to necessarily change radically under a two row wampum regime. We usually think of the government hierarchy as Federal>Provincial>Local.

Under territorial FN governments, there isn't necessarily an other layer being added. Some of the responsibilities of all three tiers will be shifted to the local level. In some respects dealing with FN governments after "the dust has settled" will likely be much more "inviting" than the current status quo. Yes, for large, transnational projects there will be larger, more complex negotiations depending on the details of the final framework, but that is no different from jurisdictions elsewhere in the world with a large percentage of private land ownership.

[Jimbob]

Here is my take

1. Hunters need to do a better job of representing themselves. This comes in the form of ACTUAL conservation. Are we showing that we are leading the cause for conservation? How many hours a year are you volunteering for conservation? How much money are you donating? Are you attending meetings and having civil discussions with people with different views? I am not doing this stuff but I see that it is very important if we want hunting to have a future. I need to start. I just listened to a Journal of Mountain Hunting podcast that discussed this. Check this link for an organization that is trying to get hunters and business' to do more

https://fishandwildlife.org/


2. We need to educate ourselves about FN issues and understand the rights they have. If you go in fighting against a brick wall it is just stupid and a waste of time and money. If we can respect and understand that FN's have certain rights then we know when those rights are abused. if we say EVERYTHING they do is wrong then we lose all credibility. If we affirm their rights but raise awareness of abuse I think that gives more credibility. Yelling. screaming, and being racist will make us look bad as a group and give zero credibility to what we say.

If we, as hunters, are leaders in conservation (giving time and money) and we respect and affirm FN rights then I think we can be a strong group.

[boxhitch]

Yes, for large, transnational projects there will be larger, more complex negotiations depending on the details of the final framework, but that is no different from jurisdictions elsewhere in the world with a large percentage of private land ownership.

I can see where the transitional period will be protracted by the side that has the control but the inability to cope with the extra work. It shows already in how consultation and negotiations are poorly represented or the reps have to take issues back to their members for discussion. Growing pains that will clear in time no doubt, but how long. We are just scratching the surface now, wait until 'control of all natural resources' kicks in.

[BromBones]

It would appear that way but the issue has been brewing for decades, previous governments just skated by. Then the recent Supreme Court decisions on rights and land claims is what really brought things to where we are today.
Politicians can actually just shrug and carry out the orders, no will has to go into the

So one can argue all day as to whether the Courts get directives from some political party, or left- or right- wing nut bars
or suggest the courts are infiltrated or stacked with apologists from on wing or the other
the fact remains they hold the trump cards and it didn't happen because of the last election

You are 100% correct. These issues are purely the fault of past and current governments. The approach for the last 100 years has been to ignore the problem and hope it goes away. If you go back and look at things like the Tahltan Declaration from 1910, they were pushing hard for negotiations with the Crown and basically stated it would be in everyone's best interests and they didn't want to have conflict with 'The Whites', as it was put. They offered to give up a large chunk of their claimed territory for compensation. That offer would never happen today.

As aggravating as it is, a lot of the bands have a legitimate claim, being that the Governments refused to negotiate, and the longer these issues are stalled the more we will lose.

The only solution is for all groups affected to put immense pressure on the Provincial and Federal Governments and hold them accountable to get negotiations done. Butting heads with the natives wont accomplish anything good.

Only 3 bands have signed final agreements, plus the Nisgaa who went outside the process. The Tahltan are also going outside the BC Treaty process. There are 60 or so other bands part way into negotiations or just starting the process. At this rate it most of us will be long gone before deals are signed.

Government needs to be strong-armed into making this issue a priority.

[brn2ryd]

I was born in a public hospital on unceded First Nation Territory. Wondering where I can apply for a passport? I have discovered I am not actually Canadian, or a British Columbian as 150%(?????) of BC is FN Territory.
/S

In all seriousness, it breaks my heart knowing all the shit that First Nation people have been through. The cultural genocide left scars and gaping wounds that have not been healed. But I believe that they can be healed - The holocaust is a good example. What can we learn from that, that will help us move forward. Justin can apologize, I can apologize, we can all apologize. But the apology, for the most part, cannot breach a sympathetic level. You don't seek retribution from the person who says they are sorry that your dog died (unless they killed your dog). Punishing the perpetrator, their Children, and their children's children is some old testament shit (or maybe north Korean dictator shit).

Hunting is only one of the issues driving a wedge between First nations and British Columbia. Even though it does not have the same historical/cultural significance, can you not draw parallels with other issues? For example, Is the oil not on their land? Are the trees not on their land? Is my house not on their land?

I understand hunting is not my right, but it's also something my ancestors did. I hunt for sustenance. I hunt to provide for my family. I hunt because I love it.
I am proud to be Canadian, and always will be. It's my home on Native Land.

[northernbc]

Hunting is your right paid for in blood overseas.

[Wild one]

You are 100% correct. These issues are purely the fault of past and current governments. The approach for the last 100 years has been to ignore the problem and hope it goes away. If you go back and look at things like the Tahltan Declaration from 1910, they were pushing hard for negotiations with the Crown and basically stated it would be in everyone's best interests and they didn't want to have conflict with 'The Whites', as it was put. They offered to give up a large chunk of their claimed territory for compensation. That offer would never happen today.

As aggravating as it is, a lot of the bands have a legitimate claim, being that the Governments refused to negotiate, and the longer these issues are stalled the more we will lose.

The only solution is for all groups affected to put immense pressure on the Provincial and Federal Governments and hold them accountable to get negotiations done. Butting heads with the natives wont accomplish anything good.

Only 3 bands have signed final agreements, plus the Nisgaa who went outside the process. The Tahltan are also going outside the BC Treaty process. There are 60 or so other bands part way into negotiations or just starting the process. At this rate it most of us will be long gone before deals are signed.

Government needs to be strong-armed into making this issue a priority.

This is correct on all levels

These issues cannot be solved permanently with direct public conflict with FN but pressuring govt to address in a fair and timely manner could archive results

The issues we face truly are the result of govt brushing FN issues under the rug for generations