Leh

[Walking Buffalo]

For those who haven't watched the video take a gander from 3:56 onwards for comments on R4 LEH for bighorns.


If anyone wants to argue that this development is the fault of Jesse and the BCWF holding hands with Festa-Bianchet I think they have to reconcile the following:

"We hosted a webinar a couple of months ago on the province's proposal and then on his [Festa-Bianchet's] perspective of what's going on up there. Again, one of the best experts in North America in terms of sheep ecology, certainly his findings were not consistent with the proposal that's been put forward. The province decided to move forward to go to LEH in the Kootenay region..."



"his findings were not consistent with the proposal" vs "this outcome was being sought by the likes of Festa-Bianchet".

Fishy, indeed.

On the one hand you have people speaking in public and on the record, and on the other hand you have.....

I'm sure Jesse is pissed that sheep are now on LEH.
He really did care that We could hunt them. That's what mattered.
Didn't care at all that bad science was being used to kill our hunting opportunity.
This was very naïve.

Have you looked into which researchers are promoting the continued reduction of sheep hunting?
Who is their mentor, often their partner on the papers used to lobby governments to close hunting opportunity?
By your response on this topic, I'm sure you have yet to develop an understanding of what these people including Bianchet did to eliminate Sheep hunting.
Very tricky, very secretive and manipulative.

Bianchet deserves ZERO trust.
The WSF knows this, the WSFAb knows this.
The BCWF champions him....

Is the BCWF now being naive?
Could the BCWF not attract or be bothered with one of the many competent researchers that opposed Bianchet and gangs previous efforts?
Fishy.

[Rob Chipman]

I'm sure Jesse is pissed that sheep are now on LEH.
He really did care that We could hunt them. That's what mattered.
Didn't care at all that bad science was being used to kill our hunting opportunity.
This was very naïve.

Have you looked into which researchers are promoting the continued reduction of sheep hunting?
Who is their mentor, often their partner on the papers used to lobby governments to close hunting opportunity?
By your response on this topic, I'm sure you have yet to develop an understanding of what these people including Bianchet did to eliminate Sheep hunting.
Very tricky, very secretive and manipulative.

Bianchet deserves ZERO trust.
The WSF knows this, the WSFAb knows this.
The BCWF champions him....

Is the BCWF now being naive?
Could the BCWF not attract or be bothered with one of the many competent researchers that opposed Bianchet and gangs previous efforts?
Fishy.

You're not reconciling what Jesse appears to be saying (Festa-Bianchet's findings are not consistent with the actions proposed by the government) with what you appear to be saying ("Festa-Bianchet is getting exactly what he wants"); you're just doubling down on your accusations.

Make your case and show some receipts.

Otherwise you seem to be implying that more than twelve years of BCWF presidents and BoD members were mislead, tricked or complicit in doing something that none of them actually did, and you seem to be implying that Jesse was either complicit or tricked. More, you're implying that BCWF, including the current crop of directors, were mislead, tricked or complicit in doing something that none of us actually did.

You're doing the same thing you did last time when I asked for evidence: you're suggesting that I don't understand and that I should go look into things. Don't refer vaguely to Festa-Bianchet and his gang getting rid of hunting opportunity 12 years ago. Just provide some evidence for your accusation about the current move to LEH, or explain why I'm misunderstanding you.

[Walking Buffalo]

You're not reconciling what Jesse appears to be saying (Festa-Bianchet's findings are not consistent with the actions proposed by the government) with what you appear to be saying ("Festa-Bianchet is getting exactly what he wants"); you're just doubling down on your accusations.

Make your case and show some receipts.

Otherwise you seem to be implying that more than twelve years of BCWF presidents and BoD members were mislead, tricked or complicit in doing something that none of them actually did, and you seem to be implying that Jesse was either complicit or tricked. More, you're implying that BCWF, including the current crop of directors, were mislead, tricked or complicit in doing something that none of us actually did.

You're doing the same thing you did last time when I asked for evidence: you're suggesting that I don't understand and that I should go look into things. Don't refer vaguely to Festa-Bianchet and his gang getting rid of hunting opportunity 12 years ago. Just provide some evidence for your accusation about the current move to LEH, or explain why I'm misunderstanding you.

I've made a direct offer to help inform you and the BCWF about Bianchet and the Genetic Harm gang,
and you got defensive, wouldn't respond in any other way than to scramble to post here that you are right.

Others here that have followed the Bianchet Genetic Harm gang's work for the last 20 years have messaged me that they couldn't understand why you responded to me as you did.
I don't get it either except, couldn't help them with an answer other than an understanding of Ego.

Nah, I don't need to do the work or "make my case" to convince you. It's the BCWF's job to know this stuff.

I have twenty years into this issue already, helped elucidate and motivate several Hunting organizations and Researchers in Canada and the US to see the grave potential harm these people are causing. The troops rallied, piles of hours and $ were spent. Years later Bianchet has technically recanted on some of his claims die to our work. And now the BCWF thinks that Bianceht is their ally.

If you and the BCWF can't and continue to be unwilling to figure out who Bianchet is, who his disciples are, and what they have done already, what their intentions are.....
Naïve, lazy, unmotivated, egotistical, complicit come to mind...... I don't know, probably only one of these, but many sure tired of the attitude.

I'm sorry for the Hunters of BC, they are the one being harmed by the unwillingness of the BCWF to figure this out.

[Rackmastr]

From what I saw, BCWF attempted to use Marcos information to try and combat the LEH proposal in the Kootenays. Problem now is he also pointed towards stone sheep in his presentation that the Fed hosted and suggested that there are concerns there.

My guess is you see the govt use Marcos opinion on stone sheep as evidence as to why stone sheep should be put on LEH.

Seems like we lost on the Kootenay conversation (which sure looks like they already had their minds made up and weren't willing to look at alternatives) and likely a good chance we will lose again when the conversation shifts to Northern stone sheep.

I am not as well versed as WB is on Marco, but I know enough about him that I didn't like the idea of where things were going when he started being the voice used to discuss sheep mgmt in BC. Have seen enough from Alberta to draw my conclusions on his end goals.

[Rob Chipman]

I think you misunderstand, and I think the fact that you say it's not your job to convince me about Festa-Bianchet demonstrates your confusion.


I'm not disputing your opinion of Festa-Bianchet, or of BCWF, or of Jesse, or of the dynamic that you claim to see at work when you reference "this outcome was being sought by the likes of Festa-Bianchet and others through agenda based and biased "science".

How can anyone dispute something so vague?

You might be right. There might, indeed, be something fishy going on. That's what I'd like you to be more precise about.

I'm asking you to be more precise with your accusation that the LEH change in R4 is a somehow a result of BCWF holding hands with Festa-Bianchet, and indeed acting as his champion, in a manner that is fishy.

It's a pretty serious charge if it's got any validity, but, again, it's a very vague charge and Rackmastr contributes to making my point when he say, about you: "My guess is you [Walking Buffalo] see the government using Marcos opinion on stone sheep...."

Resident hunters and anglers have a pretty big challenge in front of us in terms of pursuing conservation/restoration and maintaining access to fish and wildlife. Government isn't looking out for us. Industry isn't looking out for us. First Nations aren't looking out for us. We're on our own.

BCWF is the biggest grassroots organization trying to address that dual challenge, but we need to get bigger, stronger and more effective. A drive by smear hurts our chances of growth, but a valid criticism that can be corrected helps.

I get that you don't like Festa-Bianchet, and that's fine. What I don't get is why you'd take your dislike of Festa-Bianchet and turn it into a drive by smear of the BCWF and then not clarify your position.

How is your accusation vague? Let me count the ways:

1) What do you mean by "BCWF"? Where on the spectrum between 43 some odd thousand members, on one extreme, and a single individual, Jesse, on the other, does your definition of BCWF lie? Is it just Jesse? Is it Jesse and the Board of Directors? Is it everyone in BCWF?
2) What do you mean by "holding hands"? Are you imagining that Festa-Bianchet is in some sort of advisory position to the Board? That BCWF has adopted his agenda?
3) What do you mean by "fishy"? Are you saying that Festa-Bianchet wants less hunting opportunity or wants to see sheep on LEH and that his views are being championed and advanced by BCWF?

The only thing you've precisely defined ins Festa-Bianchet.

I get that he is a controversial figure for a lot of sheep hunters. OK, fine.

However, he is merely one of many, many scientists that BCWF provides an audience to. Bruce McLellan, Chloe Wright, Lori Daniels, Robert Gray, Kyle Wilson, Carl Walters, Siobhan Darlington, Kate Nelson, Adam Ford, Scott Hinch, Kelly Proffitt, Chris Proctor, Sam Foster, Sophie Gilbert, Evelyn Merrill....the list goes on and on.

How you conclude that there is some sort of fishy relationship between BCWF and just one of the scientists we engage with is beyond me. Nobody at BCWF, to the best of my knowledge, advocated putting those sheep on LEH. I'd like you to explain yourself, because nothing I've witnessed supports your accusation and in fact everything I've witnessed is in conflict with your accusation. If your accusation is groundless I'd like to demonstrate that, or at least demonstrate that you won't back it up with any facts.

Again, *nothing* I've witnessed at BCWF aligns with your accusation. Maybe you're familiar with some sort of information on how BCWF operates that I'm unaware of.


Getting you to explain yourself in terms of your vague accusation is a win-win, right? I mean, whether you're saying that every member in BCWF, or just the BoD, or even one single individual are/is up to something fishy with Festa-Bianchet the fact remains: if you're correct and there is something fishy going on then that something fishy can be addressed. If you make yourself clear on what you're saying I'll give you credit, and if you have a valid point I'll apologize for busting your chops. If you identify an actual problem I'll acknowledge that and see if we can solve it.

If you're not right, and you're just throwing out terms like "complicit" along with "fishy"? Again, demonstrating that is a win for anyone concerned with conservation/restoration of the resource and access to it.

So, when you say BCWF is holding hands with Festa-Bianchet and are up to something fishy, who, exactly, are you accusing and what are you accusing them of? That's not a big ask.

[bruteforce17]

https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/sp..._2022-2023.pdf

[jshansen]

Looks like I got to update my credentials I guess. It says to click on "Apply for new credentials" tab under profile options but when I do it only gives me options to upload proof of indian status for license exemption.. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

[IronNoggin]

Looks like I got to update my credentials I guess. It says to click on "Apply for new credentials" tab under profile options but when I do it only gives me options to upload proof of indian status for license exemption.. Can anyone point me in the right direction?

Go into your Fish & Wildlife Profile.

On the left side there will be a listing "Profile Options".

Under that is a link to: "Update Residency".

Click on that and follow the instructions.

Cheers,
Nog

[jshansen]

Thanks Nog

[Foxton Gundogs]

Anyone thinking about the new 2 tag any sex Elk ARCHERY draw in R1-5, it is pretty much all private land and it is almost impossible to ge permission. Be ashame tk get a draw and not be able to get permission permission.