Quote Originally Posted by Harvest the Land View Post
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.


Quote Originally Posted by Harvest the Land View Post
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.