Together for Wildlife Strategies

[Bugle M In]

Just posting up a link for those interested “Together for Wildlife Projects”:

https://experience.arcgis.com/experi...92fdf3c2bb913a

[Imdone]

Did the TOGETHER FOR WILDLIFE group even consider anything from resident groups in their decisions on the Moose and Caribou regulations changes for Region 7 this past spring .......
NOT !

[J_T]

Did the TOGETHER FOR WILDLIFE group even consider anything from resident groups in their decisions on the Moose and Caribou regulations changes for Region 7 this past spring .......
NOT !

Together for Wildlife is a group of stakeholders (many are hunters) who have found common ground in working together, without personal agenda. The T4W focus is wildlife and habitat. Not hunting regulations. The critical focus is wildlife populations. However, to your point, are residents included in the discussions/decisions. Residents 'generate' the overarching discussions. Government renders the decision. A person can not link the activities of 'supporting wildlife' and hunting regulation with external Government decisions impacting many users of the land. Sorry, maybe a bit convoluted. But the decisions made on the land which are alienating residents is coming from another Government effort. In my opinion.

[high horse Hal]

"But the decisions made on the land which are alienating residents is coming from another Government effort."
the federal response to UNDRIP will always be the trump card

[huntingfamily]

"But the decisions made on the land which are alienating residents is coming from another Government effort."
the federal response to UNDRIP will always be the trump card

In this case the BC NDP government's commitment to UNDRIP.

[huntingfamily]

Here is the Minister's Wildlife Advisory Council
https://www.ministerswildlifeadvisor...et-the-council

[J_T]

Here is the Minister's Wildlife Advisory Council
https://www.ministerswildlifeadvisor...et-the-council

And directly from MWAC and under the T4W, Regional Wildlife Advisory Tables (RWAC) are being set up. The focus on land stewardship, fish/wildlife and their habitats. Wildlife inventory, access management, burn management, harvest plans (FLPs), eco-tourism, highway mortality.
And the continuation of any current regional hunting trapping advisory tables. And the establishment of additional regional tables where currently they may not be active. And ensuring all regions follow a common/modified framework.

There are a number of groups in active discussion feeding ideas toward this.
The Indigenous Forum https://www.firstnationsbcwildlifeforum.ca/
The Provincial Hunting Trapping Advisory Team https://www.bchuntingtrappingadvisory.ca/

And the BC Fish Wildlife and Habitat Coalition https://fwhbc.ca/

Not to mention BCWF, WSSC, BC BHA, Hunters for BC, UBBC, and the list goes on. Each of these organizations is represented in most of these groups above. Hunters do have a voice. If people want to get involved there is room. It takes time to find ones footing in the big picture but all contribution is valued. If people want to engage in discussion on here, in meaningful dialogue, myself and others on here are all listening. Scope management would be a key and difficult component of the discussion I'm sure.

Awareness is what its all about. There are lots of discussions that are not public and actions and decisions take time to clarify. With a public release such as this T4W release, it opens opportunity to dig a little deeper into discussions and ideas.

The objective of T4W is to make more wildlife and establish better practices on the land.

[Harvest the Land]

And directly from MWAC and under the T4W, Regional Wildlife Advisory Tables (RWAC) are being set up. The focus on land stewardship, fish/wildlife and their habitats. Wildlife inventory, access management, burn management, harvest plans (FLPs), eco-tourism, highway mortality.
And the continuation of any current regional hunting trapping advisory tables. And the establishment of additional regional tables where currently they may not be active. And ensuring all regions follow a common/modified framework.

There are a number of groups in active discussion feeding ideas toward this.
The Indigenous Forum https://www.firstnationsbcwildlifeforum.ca/
The Provincial Hunting Trapping Advisory Team https://www.bchuntingtrappingadvisory.ca/

And the BC Fish Wildlife and Habitat Coalition https://fwhbc.ca/

Not to mention BCWF, WSSC, BC BHA, Hunters for BC, UBBC, and the list goes on. Each of these organizations is represented in most of these groups above. Hunters do have a voice. If people want to get involved there is room. It takes time to find ones footing in the big picture but all contribution is valued. If people want to engage in discussion on here, in meaningful dialogue, myself and others on here are all listening. Scope management would be a key and difficult component of the discussion I'm sure.

Awareness is what its all about. There are lots of discussions that are not public and actions and decisions take time to clarify. With a public release such as this T4W release, it opens opportunity to dig a little deeper into discussions and ideas.

The objective of T4W is to make more wildlife and establish better practices on the land.

Just took a few minutes to read through the The Indigenous Forum https://www.firstnationsbcwildlifeforum.ca/.

Maybe you can shed some light on this - when they say that so far they have "Proposed Wildlife Act amendments to support reconciliation", how exactly does supporting reconciliation translate into making more wildlife on the land? When you say "without personal agenda" in post #3, what exactly were you referring too? Is reconciliation not a personal agenda of many indigenous folks all across this province? Or when they say "Advancing Goal 5 – Collaborative wildlife stewardship advances reconciliation with Indigenous governments", how exactly is advancing reconciliation with indigenous governments going to create more wildlife on the landscape? How is that not considered a "personal agenda" in your mind?

[J_T]

Just took a few minutes to read through the The Indigenous Forum https://www.firstnationsbcwildlifeforum.ca/.

Maybe you can shed some light on this - when they say that so far they have "Proposed Wildlife Act amendments to support reconciliation", how exactly does supporting reconciliation translate into making more wildlife on the land?

Reconciliation is not what everyone might agree on. What it means to you, might be different to someone else. For me and listening to Indigenous people at sessions; at the forefront of reconciliation is acceptance (of what happened) and respect going forward. Reconciliation doesn't start with giving someone land. But reconciliation might be a component of shifting stewardship to someone other than the Provincial Government. Because frankly one thing we do agree on, is that for multiple parties, over time, BC Government have not dedicated the budgets and resources to effectively manage wildlife. Indigenous people agree with us on that. Can we do a better job together?

In back room agreements, which I am completely opposed to, there are agreements being made. Whatever stewardship 'deals' cabinet is making with Indigenous people, should not be coming at the expense of you and I having access to the land. So people like myself are at the forefront of challenging that. Making positional statements that access and the ability to enjoy the land matters to us. In some cases, "co-management" works, but not at the expense of people's opportunity to be on the land and enjoy the land.

Regarding your question, I'm not sure how changes to the wildlife act will ultimately 'support' reconciliation. What I do know is that if we aren't in the conversation, we're likely worse off.

When you say "without personal agenda" in post #3, what exactly were you referring too? Is reconciliation not a personal agenda of many indigenous folks all across this province? Or when they say "Advancing Goal 5 – Collaborative wildlife stewardship advances reconciliation with Indigenous governments", how exactly is advancing reconciliation with indigenous governments going to create more wildlife on the landscape? How is that not considered a "personal agenda" in your mind?

The comment, "without personal agenda" is from my earlier post and it was intended to be a comment only with respect to the resident hunting, guiding and trapping groups that have agreed, we need to work together. Without personal agenda.
I don't see reconciliation as a personal agenda. I see it as a starting point. Common ground on the history of what has occurred. Acceptance. We need to treat people better, be more respectful.
Goal 5 - as we move toward co-management and shared decision making, again, we all have the same objective. We need/demand more wildlife. Creating a document under T4W, setting objectives, goals, budgets, casts in stone, the agreed to activities which must be carried out on the land. I would hope, through this process and with the number of people involved, we can stop the back room dealing that is going on. We set viable targets and together we ensure these are followed through. And together, we find solutions to increasing wildlife populations in a sustainable balanced approach.

I know, I'm an optimist. Thanks for keeping this important thread alive. Please, if you have more questions, i'll do what I can to answer them to the best of my ability.

[Night Hawk 3]

Dragging this back up to the top as it hit page 2 too quickly and disappeared.

There is some important information in this thread.

NH3