Indian band declares Ashnola valley protected

[Rob Chipman]

Just got off the phone with one of the guys I was with. I left in the afternoon but he stayed until after dark. If you know the Pemberton Valley and the Lillooet FSR, he ran into a grizzly at the 4k mark, so not far up past the bridge. Likely the sow with cubs that others have seen. She huffed and puffed but all ended well.

[Rob Chipman]

Matt/Iron Noggin:


I think we don't actually disagree on very much aside from what we might happen to be discussing at any given time, meaning I might say "That's not what we're talking about right now" and you saying "It's what I'm talking about". That's not really a significant disagreement and it's easily navigated.

A bunch of your comments should be underlined, I think.

-The cards are not looking great for resident hunters and anglers, no question. We may not be playing a 7-2 off suit, but we're pretty close. I also cling to the hopes that we can turn the current trajectory around, but it won't be easy.

- There are way more than 2 sides. I wasn't really clear about that and you're right to underline it and I'll underline it again. There are about 16 different sides to this.

-User groups do get used as cannon fodder, and a lot of times we all walk right into it willingly even when it's not to our benefit (much like real cannon fodder in real wars, right?) We cannot continue that without the risk of losing the whole game. You are bang on.

- Confrontation is problematic to the goal of restoring fish, wildlife and habitat and maintaining access to it. Again, I concur with you entirely.

- We will never know how many kids died due to evil actions. Too much time has passed in many instances, the records are incomplete, not all the facts were even recorded, records have been lost in fires and floods.....the list of facts about why we'll never know that is long and it is reasonable.

- It is reasonable to argue that governments at many levels (Indigenous and non-Indigenous) are not acting in good faith.



Truth and reconciliation and the whole question of how Indigenous rights and title will be resolved is a very provocative subject. It creates a lot of fear, both of the change that we know is coming and can't be avoided as well as the fact that many people don't have very much information on what is happening or why. You see it on this thread plenty, even if you restrict it to the fear of loss of access to the land base or loss of actual property rights. Fee simple title to land is no longer as solid a concept as we all grew up up understanding, and that should disturb people. We have seen access for hunting and fishing already restricted multiple times for multiple reasons.

If you and I were talking face to face we'd navigate it much faster and with more agreement, but writing on an online forum? There's way more room for misunderstanding and unclear communication. It's just the nature of the beast.

All that said, my concern is not to get anyone to adopt my preferred approach to reconciliation - that's a personal journey that individuals have to make on their own. It can't be stuffed down anyone's throat. A wise man at a BCWF AGM a few years ago remarked on this very subject after an academic presented on residential schools: "we don't need indoctrination; we need education".

I think he was right.

The old order we grew up with and were used to, in *every* walk of life, is changing. A lot of people feel that they are under attack, and with reason. We see it all the time (again, in *every* walk of life). It's a challenge to respond. One thing that helps is agreeing on what we're talking about. For me the subject is restoration of fish, wildlife, habitat and maintaining access to it for every BCer.

For those who are pissed at Trudeau, or mad about the UN, or UNDRIP and DRIPA, or the WEF, or the way Covid or the truckers' convoy was handled, or global elites pursuing an agenda that will continue to screw everyday people? I have no desire to move them off their opposition to those things. A lot of what is said is very reasonable and accurate.

But in terms of restoration of fish, wildlife, habitat and maintaining access to it for every BCer?

- We all understand that First Nations exert a ton of control over that.
- We all understand what sorts of things we can say that are objectionable to First Nations and that piss them off and hurt our chances of maintaining access to restored populations of f&w.
- We all understand that this is a pretty public forum and that controversial things said here turn up elsewhere and are often regarded as being representative of what resident hunters and anglers think.
- A lot of us still go out of our way, in public, to say those things.

You have to wonder why a resident hunter/angler who wants to restore fish, wildlife and habitat and wants to maintain access to those three things would go out of their way to to say, in public, things that most of us know will piss off First Nations.

[IronNoggin]

Matt/Iron Noggin:

I think we don't actually disagree on very much aside from what we might happen to be discussing at any given time, meaning I might say "That's not what we're talking about right now" and you saying "It's what I'm talking about". That's not really a significant disagreement and it's easily navigated.

Agreed.

If you and I were talking face to face we'd navigate it much faster and with more agreement, but writing on an online forum? There's way more room for misunderstanding and unclear communication. It's just the nature of the beast.

Also agreed.

For me the subject is restoration of fish, wildlife, habitat and maintaining access to it for every BCer.

I believe we can focus on that.

in terms of restoration of fish, wildlife, habitat and maintaining access to it for every BCer?

- We all understand that First Nations exert a ton of control over that.
- We all understand what sorts of things we can say that are objectionable to First Nations and that piss them off and hurt our chances of maintaining access to restored populations of f&w.
- We all understand that this is a pretty public forum and that controversial things said here turn up elsewhere and are often regarded as being representative of what resident hunters and anglers think.
- A lot of us still go out of our way, in public, to say those things.

You have to wonder why a resident hunter/angler who wants to restore fish, wildlife and habitat and wants to maintain access to those three things would go out of their way to to say, in public, things that most of us know will piss off First Nations.

I believe what you are seeing is the pushback for continuing declines to access, and continuing demands for even more of that. I understand that the FN's are pissed. Do they understand just how much their demands piss off those they are targeted on? I'd hazard a guess the thought doesn't even cross their minds. It has to be a two way street. The anger must be set aside in order to do that. Both sides will have to make concessions for that to happen. At this juncture, I do not believe that is readily achievable. Unless both sides back off to some extent, progress will always be minimal.

I wish you luck in this pursuit. The offer of help stands when the point is reached that good faith negotiations can be counted on from all quarters.
Nog

[bearvalley]

Because when you describe me as a First Nations liaison that's a term you've brought to the table that doesn't actually describe what I do for BCWF and not a label I've ever used to describe myself? Does that explain it for you?

My mistake Rob, you’re the “Indigenous Relations Chair” …..really what’s the difference?

[ACE]

. . . when you describe me as a First Nations liaison that's a term you've brought to the table that doesn't actually describe what I do for BCWF and not a label I've ever used to describe myself?

How would you describe yourself, and what is it that you do for the BCWF? Thanks.

[Rob Chipman]

How would you describe yourself, and what is it that you do for the BCWF? Thanks.

I'm a director of BCWF and I chair the Indigenous Relations Committee. If you're a BCWF member you can send me an email at irr@bcwf.bc.ca along with your name and I'll explain in depth what the IR Committee does, but it's predominantly concerned with gathering information and advising the BoD on all types of Indigenous issues in order to more effectively achieve the organization's goals. Lots of material there to cover.

[bearvalley]

I'm a director of BCWF and I chair the Indigenous Relations Committee. If you're a BCWF member you can send me an email at irr@bcwf.bc.ca along with your name and I'll explain in depth what the IR Committee does, but it's predominantly concerned with gathering information and advising the BoD on all types of Indigenous issues in order to more effectively achieve the organization's goals. Lots of material there to cover.

That go for me as well Rob?
Last I knew I was a lifer!

[Rob Chipman]

My mistake Rob, you’re the “Indigenous Relations Chair” …..really what’s the difference?

What's the difference? Subtle, I guess, but the dictionary definition of liaison is "a person who acts as a link to assist communication or cooperation between groups of people".

I don't act as a link, as you incorrectly assumed I do.

Yes, I ran a real estate blog for many years, many years ago that had a few thousand followers at the time. Yes, I have mentioned Chad Day in the past.

Does that clear up your confusion?

[Rob Chipman]

That go for me as well Rob?
Last I knew I was a lifer!

Absolutely. Include your name if you could be so kind. I think I know you, but there are an awful lot off anonymous people on the web.

[bearvalley]

Absolutely. Include your name if you could be so kind. I think I know you, but there are an awful lot off anonymous people on the web.

Oh….I’ll be so kind!