Indian band declares Ashnola valley protected

[Livewire322]

We disagree on the nature of rights.

You apparently believe that rights come from the government. I believe that the government merely recognizes or refuses to recognize rights.

The Royal Proclamation isn't the creation of a right. It's a recognition of title to land subject to the Crown, and it is a legal precedent that has been interpreted by the courts to have application in BC.

Refer to one of the most brilliant pieces of political writing in the English language: We holds these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness --That tp secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.

Some people don't believe that bit prose, but I do. There's no need to justify it, which is the beauty of saying "I hold this to be self-evident". You believe it our you don't.

What's clear is that rights pre-exist government, and that the rights come not from other men, but from whoever it was who created us (which is why it says "Creator" and not "God").


But if you own your firearms because Justin Trudeau and his band of cronies allows you the privilege and you're ok with that, more power to you.

What a crock.

Try driving a car without a license and getting pulled over.
Try deer hunting without a license and go through a game check.
Try being in possession of a firearm without a valid PAL and going through a game check.

All three of these things will affirm that driving, hunting, and firearms ownership are examples of revocable privileges, not inalienable rights bestowed upon you by some mythical deity.

The fact that you (presumably) have a firearms license is evidence that you yourself do not believe that you have a divine right to own firearms, but a government allowed privilege - otherwise, why both to jump through the hoops?
You have the ability to drive a car, own a gun, and hunt, all without a license.
You have the right to life - that’s about the only thing the government can’t take from you in Canada.

[ElectricDyck]

Four obvious questions:


1) How would you describe my strategy, including the goal and the tactics?

From what Ive heard you say so far I'd assume the strategy is cozy up to those in power, project your self as a respectful conservationist that doesn't argue with the transition thats taking place right now. Start by announcing that you are on stolen land, then get a seat at the decision table, try not to offend anyone, develop relationships with those in power, get into those back door deals, don't call anyone out on their lies if it hurts the cause, keep the hunting community from having any flag waving protests or "throwing rocks in your road" or calling the government or FN out on their lies, take donations, show hunters as good stewards, work towards something better than nothing.

2) How long has it been in execution and who's executing it?

Unless the BCWF is totally un unified and every person speaks for themselves or the strategy changes every year I would think this strategy has been in effect for a while...or is it brand new?

3) What have the results been and why do you call them dismal?

I've only hunted since 2007 so I don't have perspective before that but in the last few years moose hunting opportunity in the north has been drastically reduced in the form of reduced seasons and rut closures, not because of a conservation concern but because of FNs demands. Now we have an epic decision we await for in 7b and 6 and all signs point towards caribou being closed and moose going leh..."Great bear" rain forest closed. Grizzly closed, not because of numbers but because of Canadians who never leave the city except to go to a National Park, Green Conservation entity's with big bank accounts and moron celebrities that team up with them and in the case of the great bear rain forest also FN. Anybody hunt west of Taseko lake lately? Would you not call that dismal? It sure happened fast..

4) What's the alternative and what does that alternative strategy look like?

As I've stated earlier I think we have already lost...but I would rather wave flags then sit at a table with some of those people and acknowledge Im on stolen land like I or my ancestors had any part of what went on, its like still calling germans nazis today....but like I said I believe the war was lost before we started fighting. I believe in equal rights. One lawi s the only way it works long term. People are people. Before the Haida had control of the logging they said whitey was over logging..now they have control and log more than before ahahahahahahhaaa! Its hilarious, really funny to me actually!

As you and I have agreed, honest questions lead to good places. It can, of course, be tough to get answers.

Its strange to me the questions you ask, I keep repeating myself, I believe I was clear, maybe not....

I read your replies and understand where you are coming from even though you talk politically and it sometimes feels like you are strongly on both sides of the issue at once lol.

In the end I don't agree with your strategy and don't have another. I wish you the best of luck with yours!

I gotta say Im surprised the moose closures happened before sheep goats and black bears...I would have put money on that moose would be last...hmmm

[Rob Chipman]

Nog:

I understand the frustration with moving forward on most of the action items as noted.

I know very well that you understand that and empathize with the victims. Who wouldn't? The context I was referring to is that First Nations don't feel any better served by our government than many of the rest of us, and they have a lot of historic grievances that have been recognized but not substantially addressed. They've been waiting a long time. Have some of them exploited the media story and fanned the flames? Absolutely.

You understand their frustration but think some First Nations went too far. It's good that you understand their frustration and you make a fair point that fanning the flames doesn't really help people of good faith get to a reasonable solution.

But....are we seeing different movies here? I see a distinct shortage of people of good faith on each side. We have a putative leader who made a big deal of declaring a National Indigenous People's Day and then lied about working and spent the weekend running away from media like a little bitch. At the end of it he went to Kamloops and got dressed down in public. He is one example on the side of non-Indigenous people of a non-good faith actor, and a bloody embarrassing one at that. I know that you don't like him any more than I do, but in the movie I'm watching I see a lot of people who are not friends with each other fighting over the same pie.


One side has a fairly substantial beef about being put into residential schools and having their kids taken from them and the ones who dies being treated very, very improperly. The government talks a good fight but has to be dragged kicking and screaming through court before they'll do the right thing, at which time it costs the taxpayers even more money than it would have if the government had just done the right thing in the beginning.

And then there is another group that didn't put anyone in residential schools, didn't improperly handle the bodies of dead kids, didn't steal anyone's land, and didn't enforce racist laws but somehow wants to deny that those things happened. I don't get it. I don't feel guilty about stuff I didn't do, and I don't get threatened when someone complains about stuff that someone else did to them.

BTW? I'm pretty sure you didn't steal anyone's kids or land either.

I can not & will not condone the overt claims that all these graves contain innocent children.
They don't.

You didn't really write that, did you? "all these graves" and "innocent" children? That's like the guy on here with the signature line that says he doesn't shoot innocent animals, only guilty ones


We don't know how many graves there are. The graveyards clearly existed and they clearly fell into disrepair. We don't know who's in them, but they;'re not "so called" graveyards.

Unless you're throwing us a brand new curve ball none of the dead kids were guilty of anything. The beef is how the kids were taken, how the dead ones died, how their bodies and records of death were handled, and if, *if* the guys running the show got up some additional ****ery.

Based on what we already know, from church records, government records, court records, testimony from all parties and historical documents? There was very likely a degree of ****ery that has to be recognized.

Recognizing that very reasonable probability does not require excavation of graves. You yourself have gone so far as to say that, given that all the parties involved agree that ****ery there were likely kids buried in unmarked graves. You're only arguing about the number.



Demanding excavation before recognizing that very obvious probability (which you've already admitted is likely, right?) on the other hand, is a bit strange. Why would anyone argue against the mountains of evidence that some bad shit occurred and that some bad people got away with some very bad behaviour for a very long time? (I think that's a really important question to ask because it helps us all get clear on what's going on).

I cannot condone the burning down and vandalizing of churches...

Fair comment. I'm not sure anyone is asking you to condone it. Burning down churches doesn't help anyone as far as I can see, and I am as far from a Bible thumper as you can find.

....including the potential that the Litton disaster was spurred by that.

Wait. Are we, on the one hand, denying all kinds of actual evidence in regard to unmarked graves while on the other taking a position on speculation that the Lytton fire was started by First Nations as some sort of political act?

Pump the brakes.

You are openly supporting the media & FN narrative in this case. You openly accept the touted numbers as "real" and do not question them.

That's a misunderstanding on your part. The media does what the media does. I don't support the media narrative and often, in public, question it. I've done so in this thread. I don't think you can find a single instance of me accepting any "touted" number or saying they're real. I'm not even aware of any hard number right now. The closest thing I could come to a number is "It looks like it's more than the original number published in the report from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission".

Personally, I don't think the number matters that much. Whether it's 3,200 dead First Nations kids or 32,000 doesn't change my perspective. What happened was wrong. I didn't kill or bury any of them. I don't feel collective guilt. But I understand that First Nations in BC do indeed care about it and that arguing with them about it pisses them off. Pissing First Nations off is bad for restoring fish, wildlife and habitat and maintaining access to it.

You openly suggest that somehow disinterring these radar found anomalies would be an affront rather than a truth finding mechanism.

I know. Going out on a limb there, aren't I? Suggesting that First Nations find it an affront when they say "We find this an affront".


On reflection it's not really that much of a limb.

Personally I consider that to be the actions of an apologist. My Opinion.

Again, not apologizing. Just sharing data.


As for a plan, you don't need to have one, but if you don't, and you want to restore fish, wildlife and habitat and maintain access to it, why would you make achievement of that harder? As you know or should know, there is no one plan that was dreamed up by one guy. It's a bunch us trying to figure out the best way to to restore fish, wildlife and habitat and maintain access to it. Any insights you have to making that happen more effectively are welcome. It's not like I'm hard to find or unwilling to engage.

I will say this - I spent the vast majority of my working career fully engaged with an extremely functional Co-Management (Cooperative Management) regime that performed wonders for the habitat and the resources thereon. It was at times difficult work, but all sides engaged for the explicit purpose of making proper focused management meet the demands of doing so. Differences, although often discussed, were set aside to ensure the best outcome for the resources in question. A true and functional collaborative effort.

Would be fantastic if we could do that today here in BC.

I've heard you say that before and I think you have a contribution to make on that score. There's no sense re-inventing the wheel if we can innovate a solution that has worked elsewhere, right?

What is required is for both (all) sides of the equation to focus on the task at hand, bury historic wrongs to do so, and to engage on an equal standing basis. Or it simply will not fly.
I do not see that occurring here. I see one side's desires to dictate the entire program, and to generally over-ride other's concerns when doing so. That is a recipe for failure in my mind.

I think you're correct, but you're missing something and I think you're seeing something a little bit incorrectly.

I think you're seeing two sides but I'm not clear who those sides are. Horgan and Trudeau, for example, are not on my side. Neither is Raincoast. This isn't a racial divide as far as I'm concerned. The fact that Horgan and Trudeau are white doesn't get them my support or loyalty.

You also need First Nations to *want* to work with whatever side you eventually define. Tough to do that and bury the hatchet when you diminish the amount of pain they express.

That my friend, is the uphill battle I was referring to.
And while I do indeed wish you luck and success, I won't be holding my breath for that outcome any time soon.

I think you're right. It's a very tough row to hoe. So far I think the only thing resident hunters and anglers offer First Nations is capacity and support in achieving some of their goals. Some First Nations may need or want that, but others do not. Some First Nations will cooperate with non-Indigenous people just because it's the right thing to do, but that's more hope than strategy.

Still, you cannot win if you do not play.

[Rob Chipman]

Its strange to me the questions you ask, I keep repeating myself, I believe I was clear, maybe not....

I read your replies and understand where you are coming from even though you talk politically and it sometimes feels like you are strongly on both sides of the issue at once lol.

In the end I don't agree with your strategy and don't have another. I wish you the best of luck with yours!

I gotta say Im surprised the moose closures happened before sheep goats and black bears...I would have put money on that moose would be last...hmmm

You're confusing the tactic of not pissing off someone who has the power to stop your project with the strategy. I figured you were, and that's why I asked the question.

Let's keep this particular part simple: would you agree it's not smart to piss off people who you need to say "yes"?

I'm not speaking for the BCWF when I say "Stop pissing off the people who have to power to shut down a lot of what we do", but I think most BCWF members see the sense in not picking useless battles that we can't win.

As for you judging the results from my strategy as dismal, its a moot point, as you understand. Your understanding of the strategy is incorrect. All I'm doing in this thread is saying "If you dispute residential school graves it pisses off people who we need to not be pissed off if we are going to restore fish, wildlife and habitat and maintain access to it". That's just a tactic, and I think it's a pretty wise one. Now, if you've got another goal then my tactic may not be appropriate, but I'm not sure what that goal is and you haven't said you have one.

If your goal is the same as mine (and you haven't said that it is, as far as I recall, which is weird) you have been clear that you think the game is already lost and you would rather escalate than play a longer game and win. Fair enough. It's a free country.

But if you share the goal, and think we've lost, and don't have another strategy, and wish me well with "my" strategy (and it's not mine -its shared by a lot of people) maybe try helping us and encourage other people who are in this same boat to stop chopping holes in the boat.

It's great that you believe in equal rights. I believe in them too. Sadly, we don't live in a country that provides them, and we never have. A lot of people have trouble accepting that, but it's a demonstrable fact. We both know it.

As for the strategy? You've got some interesting quotes in your signature. Are you familiar with Andrew Breitbart? If not, download his audiobook. It's the closest you'll come to a biography or autobiography because he had a jammer very young. We live in the ripples of the splash he made.

He said politics is downstream from culture. Want to change the politics? Change the culture to what you want to see. He told that to the Tea Party. It was good advice. There's something to learn there. In fact, there's a strategy there. First Nations are not your enemy.

[Rob Chipman]

What a crock.

Try driving a car without a license and getting pulled over.
Try deer hunting without a license and go through a game check.
Try being in possession of a firearm without a valid PAL and going through a game check.

All three of these things will affirm that driving, hunting, and firearms ownership are examples of revocable privileges, not inalienable rights bestowed upon you by some mythical deity.

The fact that you (presumably) have a firearms license is evidence that you yourself do not believe that you have a divine right to own firearms, but a government allowed privilege - otherwise, why both to jump through the hoops?
You have the ability to drive a car, own a gun, and hunt, all without a license.
You have the right to life - that’s about the only thing the government can’t take from you in Canada.

If that's a crock to you, fine and good. It's my belief about rights.

I jump through the hoops because the juice of not jumping through them isn't worth the squeeze.

The reason they said "Creator" is because "Creator" allows for more than mythical deity. Even an atheist knows that man wasn't created by the government and that natural rights can logically exist. You don't need to believe it, but there's nothing irrational about the belief.

Where do you think rights come from?

[ElectricDyck]

Ok so lay out the strategy and objectives that you and others share so it's clear.

[wildcatter]

We're all here and we aren't going anywhere. Giving all the land, resources and wildlife to one group is not sustainable. I think we both agree on that.

You say "they" want it all. I know Indigenous people who do not say that and who recognize that we are all there and we are all staying here and that we need to figure out a way to make that happen that is sustainable. Clearly you and I disagree on who the "they" are and what it is that the "they" want. If you're correct and there is one monolithic "they" and they do indeed want everything then refer back to my first answer. That arrangement isn't sustainable.

I don't know who the talking heads are and I don't know who is going to form government going forward. We just saw Donald Trump walk into a sclerotic political establishment in the US, kick it in the nads and take control of the presidency. He accomplished a lot and he failed in many ways but he was no fan of the UN, NATO in its current form or foreign wars waged for the benefit of globalists.

Today we have Lyndsey Graham saying there is no way Putin can remain in power, that he must be removed and that there is no off ramp. The US has sent huge amounts of money and weapons to Ukraine and is helping them fight Russia. US government officials are on the records as saying that they are in it to win it and that the goal his to destroy Russia's military, and apparently now Finland has formally asked to join NATO, much to Russia's dismay.

We may very well be at the same stage we were at in July 1914, marching towards disaster.

Forgive me if I doubt your accuracy when you predict the future.

Rob, I am not predicting the future, this is only my private opinion.
By "they" I mean the chiefs, elected leaders, down to the last indian.
Now, I know there are some with well established life outside the FN community who don't care much.
But I ask you if it's offered up on a "silver platter" will they say no, I don't want any of that?
Of course you know who the talking heads are, why pretend? (try decision makers and negotiators on both sides)

But you know, we hunters are small potato, logging, mining/exploration, infrastructure building, gas and hydro generating are the big prizes.
Owning the land got everything to do with all that!

I'm not sure why you drag US politics into this, but since you did let me just say, Trump won the election, istead of "taking control of the presidency".
Lyndsey Graham is an idiot who doesn't understand how much weight his words, or other elected members' carry.
Anyway, the way I see it, you would fit right in with the radical democrats.

"We may very well be at the same stage we were at in July 1914, marching towards disaster."
I honestly hope you are wrong with this, however the possibily is real.

[ElectricDyck]

Ok so lay out the strategy and objectives that you and others share so it's clear.

And answer how you think its been going so far...

Ive been honest and forthright in my opinions and takes on things, it would be interesting to me and others to hear answers to these questions in a concise manor without speaking out of both sides of your mouth, no spin, just truth.

People are looking for leadership to get behind. someone to donate to. As seen in the truckers protest there is no shortage of dollar bills when people are inspired.

[Rob Chipman]

Rob, I am not predicting the future, this is only my private opinion.
By "they" I mean the chiefs, elected leaders, down to the last indian.
Now, I know there are some with well established life outside the FN community who don't care much.
But I ask you if it's offered up on a "silver platter" will they say no, I don't want any of that?
Of course you know who the talking heads are, why pretend? (try decision makers and negotiators on both sides)

But you know, we hunters are small potato, logging, mining/exploration, infrastructure building, gas and hydro generating are the big prizes.
Owning the land got everything to do with all that!

I'm not sure why you drag US politics into this, but since you did let me just say, Trump won the election, istead of "taking control of the presidency".
Lyndsey Graham is an idiot who doesn't understand how much weight his words, or other elected members' carry.
Anyway, the way I see it, you would fit right in with the radical democrats.

"We may very well be at the same stage we were at in July 1914, marching towards disaster."
I honestly hope you are wrong with this, however the possibily is real.

No disagreement on many things. Trump did win the presidency. He walked in and said "You guys are really underachieving and out of touch with the regular people and I'm going to prove it to you" and he did. No question.

I don't drag US politics into this - I cite US politics because we've seen an outsider walk in and take over, so that shows you that its possible to change the trajectory. We all saw it happen. MSM would have you think he's the worst thing since....whatever, but the fact is that a lot of Americans still support him and a lot of his perspectives.

I cite Lyndsey Graham (who is an idiot, but sneaky enough to survive and thrive under Trump while actually not supporting him) because he's calling for regime change in Russia, right now (and he's not alone) which makes all of our futures very uncertain.

I don't know which talking heads you're talking about. I can't read your mind and I'm not about to guess.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you can't complain that First Nations don't agree with each other and then say they all want the same thing.

Owning the land is central to everything. Always has been, all across the world. Always will be. It's also one of the main drivers in the history of contact, all the way back to the Dutch buying Manhattan.


Radical democrat? Nice. Tell livewire, because he thinks my belief that I have an unalienable right to own a firearm is a crock! I guess I'll be the first pro-2ndA radical Democrat.

I hope I'm not right about the 1914 thing either. It's ruin moose camp this year.

[wildcatter]

No disagreement on many things. Trump did win the presidency. He walked in and said "You guys are really underachieving and out of touch with the regular people and I'm going to prove it to you" and he did. No question.

I don't drag US politics into this - I cite US politics because we've seen an outsider walk in and take over, so that shows you that its possible to change the trajectory. We all saw it happen. MSM would have you think he's the worst thing since....whatever, but the fact is that a lot of Americans still support him and a lot of his perspectives.

An outsider walk in and take over what and where, what's that got to do with things here?

I cite Lyndsey Graham (who is an idiot, but sneaky enough to survive and thrive under Trump while actually not supporting him) because he's calling for regime change in Russia, right now (and he's not alone) which makes all of our futures very uncertain.

Again, these idiots are playing with fire!

I don't know which talking heads you're talking about. I can't read your mind and I'm not about to guess.

Of course you know who the talking heads are, why pretend? (try decision makers and negotiators on both sides)???

I've said it before and I'll say it again: you can't complain that First Nations don't agree with each other and then say they all want the same thing.

Owning the land is central to everything. Always has been, all across the world. Always will be. It's also one of the main drivers in the history of contact, all the way back to the Dutch buying Manhattan.


Radical democrat? Nice. Tell livewire, because he thinks my belief that I have an unalienable right to own a firearm is a crock! I guess I'll be the first pro-2ndA radical Democrat.

I hope I'm not right about the 1914 thing either. It's ruin moose camp this year.

That for sure would ruin the hunt for all of us!