Oak Bay MLA response to new allocation policy

[hunter fisher]

tid bit of information i came across

EDIT after reading some links posted below, this person does not have my support as he has denounced the grizzly hunt. in fact he's a total joke

how do i delete this thread? mod please



http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/12/15/guide-outfitter-industry-prioritized-bc-hunters/


Media Statement: December 15, 2014
Guide outfitter industry prioritized over the needs of BC hunters
For immediate release
Victoria, B.C. –The Government of British Columbia’s recent decision to prioritize the guide outfitting industry over the interests of resident British Columbia hunters is directly contrary to the public interest says Andrew Weaver, MLA for Oak Bay-Gordon Head and Deputy Leader of the BC Green Party.
On December 10th, 2014 the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations released his decision concerning how hunting licenses would be allocated between industry and British Columbians.
Contrary to the established Wildlife Allocation Policy, and the consultation process that developed it, this new decision allocated a massive increase in the proportion of licenses available to industry. This means that BC hunters, many of whom hunt for sustenance, may go without licenses this year.
“What we are seeing is the needs of industry being placed ahead of the needs of British Columbia residents,” said Andrew Weaver. “Last spring we had legislation passed that allowed guide outfitting operations to be owned by a foreign corporations, and now the government is supporting this industry on the backs of British Columbians.”
In February 2013, the government introduced the Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations Statutes Amendment Act, 2014, which overhauled guide outfitting in BC. Importantly, it removed the requirement that a guide outfit can only be owned by a citizen of British Columbia, opening up the possibly that guide outfitters are owned and operated by corporations from other countries.
Since the legislation passed, government has maintained a focus on advancing the interests of this industry without mention of how it will affect BC hunters. In his June 2014 mandate letter, the Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations was directed to “continue to work with BC Guides and Outfitters and other back country operators to ensure continued access and business certainty to Crown land and provide economic and tourism opportunities in rural British Columbia.”
“There are over 100,000 British Columbia residents who hunt each year, a number that has been growing over time,” said Andrew Weaver. “This government needs to halt their current approach to wildlife management and ensure that it is British Columbian’s who benefit from their policies.”
“I fail to see why they are advancing the interests of this industry ahead of the interests of British Columbians,” said Andrew Weaver.
-30-
Media Contact
Mat Wright – Press Secretary, Andrew Weaver MLA
Mat.Wright@leg.bc.ca
Cell: 1 250 216 3382

[Darksith]

coming from a MLA that is not a part of the liberal party...bravo sir.

[adriaticum]

Andrew Weaver is the worst anti hunter in the legislature.

[bigwhiteys]

Careful who you guys get into bed with....

https://twitter.com/AJWVictoriaBC/status/488160217079611392

http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/02/20/grizzlies-in-gbr/

http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/01/09/grizzly-bear-trophy-hunting/

[Fisher-Dude]

Seems like both he and GOABC want to take our grizzly bears away. Hmmm........

At least the guy has the balls to express his views on the Thomson Allocation Policy, and is in favour of resident meat hunters having their respective share of harvest. I'll give him a brownie point or two for that. I don't have to agree with everything he stands for to accept and appreciate his support on the concept of resident priority.

I have a feeling that the grizzly bear meat retention rule is being written right now. Either that, or grizzly bear hunting will become the sacrificial lamb as government attempts to placate a non-hunting public that is in an uproar over privatizing and selling our wildlife resources to foreigners. One or the other is waiting for the ink to dry in Victoria right now, I'm betting.

Nothing good for wildlife or hunting is coming of GOABC's backroom shenanigans. That's a given.

[Salty]

At least the guy has the balls to express his views on the Thomson Allocation Policy, and is in favour of resident meat hunters having their respective share of harvest. I'll give him a brownie point or two for that. I don't have to agree with everything he stands for to accept and appreciate his support on the concept of resident priority.


Well said Fisher-Dude. I agree with him and welcome his support on the allocation issue. And I'll be strongly opposed to his and the Green party's stance on other hunting and non hunting issues.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Seems like both he and GOABC want to take our grizzly bears away. Hmmm........

At least the guy has the balls to express his views on the Thomson Allocation Policy, and is in favour of resident meat hunters having their respective share of harvest. I'll give him a brownie point or two for that. I don't have to agree with everything he stands for to accept and appreciate his support on the concept of resident priority.

I have a feeling that the grizzly bear meat retention rule is being written right now. Either that, or grizzly bear hunting will become the sacrificial lamb as government attempts to placate a non-hunting public that is in an uproar over privatizing and selling our wildlife resources to foreigners. One or the other is waiting for the ink to dry in Victoria right now, I'm betting.

Nothing good for wildlife or hunting is coming of GOABC's backroom shenanigans. That's a given.

Here's one for you GOABC that Jesse won't have to help you with.....what is 40% of zero???
Don't think any of us want to go there.

SSS

[bigwhiteys]

I'll be strongly opposed to his and the Green party's stance on other hunting and non hunting issues.

lol.... Yeah that will do you a whole lot of good. From one fire into another.

[Salty]

^^ I'm glad that you can pick a party/leader that you agree with you on 100% of the issues bw it must be nice. Personally I'll use their support here and there as required where there is agreement. And not trust them beyond that. I voted Liberal btw they're still running the best where I agree with them maybe 70% of the time. But really it'd be more productive to talk about the issues here than politics.

[bigwhiteys]

Good luck!

[Rob Chipman]

I just traded emails with Mr. Weaver. Nice enough guy. I'm in agreement with Fisher-Dude more than with Adriaticum. Here's why:

We've got about 100,000 hunters in BC, if I remember correctly. Most aren't going to active in any political work. We've got too much going on otherwise and many of us lost faith in it long ago. That means we're a small constituency whose job description at present is pretty much restricted to doing what we're told, taking what we're given, and paying the bill.

BCWF is a great organization, but they're not exactly hard nosed dirty trick policy changers like, for example, Greenpeace. That means that BCWF will do some things very well, but they aren't going to solve things that seem to piss most of us off on their own.

BCGOA seems like a pretty small organization that punches way over it's weight.

We could use some allies, especially ones that can get press releases that are read by people that aren't usually on our side.

Sustenance hunting is an increasingly popular urban pursuit. You've seen evidence of that on the forum.

Rather than blowing a guy off because he opposes trophy hunting it might be wiser to build on the common ground of supporting hunting for the freezer. From there it might be a little more possible to educate people about predator management and get them off the anthropomorphic fuzzy huggy approach to wildlife management.

Just my opinion. I could be totally wrong.

[bigwhiteys]

Rather than blowing a guy off because he opposes trophy hunting it might be wiser to build on the common ground of supporting hunting for the freezer. From there it might be a little more possible to educate people about predator management and get them off the anthropomorphic fuzzy huggy approach to wildlife management.


Just my opinion. I could be totally wrong.


Go and read all his past posts and news releases on the immediate moratorium of the Gbear hunt. Sorry, he is not your friend. He is a slimy politician who needs something to write about and gain some publicity. Oh look, I just got an email from him regarding site c and asking me for $5 bucks. He is a politician.

[Sasqman]

I just traded emails with Mr. Weaver. Nice enough guy. I'm in agreement with Fisher-Dude more than with Adriaticum. Here's why:

We've got about 100,000 hunters in BC, if I remember correctly. Most aren't going to active in any political work. We've got too much going on otherwise and many of us lost faith in it long ago. That means we're a small constituency whose job description at present is pretty much restricted to doing what we're told, taking what we're given, and paying the bill.

BCWF is a great organization, but they're not exactly hard nosed dirty trick policy changers like, for example, Greenpeace. That means that BCWF will do some things very well, but they aren't going to solve things that seem to piss most of us off on their own.

BCGOA seems like a pretty small organization that punches way over it's weight.

We could use some allies, especially ones that can get press releases that are read by people that aren't usually on our side.

Sustenance hunting is an increasingly popular urban pursuit. You've seen evidence of that on the forum.

Rather than blowing a guy off because he opposes trophy hunting it might be wiser to build on the common ground of supporting hunting for the freezer. From there it might be a little more possible to educate people about predator management and get them off the anthropomorphic fuzzy huggy approach to wildlife management.

Just my opinion. I could be totally wrong.

Well said!

[adriaticum]

I've followed Andrew Weaver's ascent to power. He is an anti hunter no doubt.
Today he is anti grizzly, tomorrow who knows.
His views are dictated by his party, not by him.
Both NDP and Greens are known for sacking their candidates if they don't follow the part line. And so are other parties to some degree.
But Greens are the worst.

I am not saying you shouldn't contact him, or that I wouldn't, and try to use him to get attention in the legislature.
All I am trying to do is make you aware of who he is so you know who you are dancing with.

My situation is that both MLA and MP are NDP, so that will be interesting.

[AJWeaver]

If interested, I put up a followup post today.

http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/12/20/bc-hunters-short-stick/

I recognize that there is a general mistrust out there of politicians, but I got into this business as I wanted to see more evidence-based decision-making and less decision-based evidence-making. It's pretty clear to me that these hunt allocation numbers have no basis in any evidence. They came out of left field dispite extensive consultation.

Finally, I have never been against hunting. I am against the grizzly bear trophy hunting as are most British Columbians and hunters I have spoken with. The Great Bear Rainforest is particularly sensitive right now in light this:

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/nineteen-year-battle-great-bear-rainforest-brink-peace-momentous-deadline-approaches

More details are in the new article I put up. Best wishes and have a great Christmas break.

Andrew

[The Hermit]

Andrew - I really appreciate your taking the time to register and post here on HBC. I am very hopeful that "we" can have a thoughtful and respectful dialouge here. You are correct about there being a general mistrust of politicians and might even allow that this mistrust has been well earned over the decades. Hopefully by your directly and openly engaging with us will help to overcome that mistrust. I think you are the first politician to ever post here! So great start!

My first question for you is: If the Regulation was changed to require hunters to remove all edible portions of grizzly bears, and provided there is no conservation issue in a given area would you support cointinuing the hunt?

[The Hermit]

I am subscribing to this thread...

[gerrygoat]

If interested, I put up a followup post today.

http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/12/20/bc-hunters-short-stick/

I recognize that there is a general mistrust out there of politicians, but I got into this business as I wanted to see more evidence-based decision-making and less decision-based evidence-making. It's pretty clear to me that these hunt allocation numbers have no basis in any evidence. They came out of left field dispite extensive consultation.

Finally, I have never been against hunting. I am against the grizzly bear trophy hunting as are most British Columbians and hunters I have spoken with. The Great Bear Rainforest is particularly sensitive right now in light this:

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/nineteen-year-battle-great-bear-rainforest-brink-peace-momentous-deadline-approaches

More details are in the new article I put up. Best wishes and have a great Christmas break.

Andrew

I really doubt there is as much opposition to grizzly hunting as you think, a lot of people would be neutral. Grizzly hunting is important to keep them under control, less grizzly hunting means more problem bears it is that simple. Come to the Kitimat river in August where there are a lot of grizzlies and you will see what the effects of having lots of bears around is like. There is a large grizzly closed area east of town that is filled up with them so the younger bears and sows with cubs come very close to town. Grizzly populations are increasing in B.C. so there isn't a conservation issue at all these days.

While I disagree with your stand on grizzlies I appreciate the the help in holding the government accountable on this unjust decision.

[bigwhiteys]

If interested, I put up a followup post today.


http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/1...s-short-stick/


I recognize that there is a general mistrust out there of politicians, but I got into this business as I wanted to see more evidence-based decision-making and less decision-based evidence-making. It's pretty clear to me that these hunt allocation numbers have no basis in any evidence. They came out of left field dispite extensive consultation.


Finally, I have never been against hunting. I am against the grizzly bear trophy hunting as are most British Columbians and hunters I have spoken with. The Great Bear Rainforest is particularly sensitive right now in light this:


http://www.vancouverobserver.com/new...ine-approaches


More details are in the new article I put up. Best wishes and have a great Christmas break.


Andrew


It's very impressive you took the time to register here and post. That says a lot. If we could just get you to re-evaluate your position on the Grizzly issues (not a complete moratorium for example) I would be more of a supporter for sure. The Grizzly bear hunt is sustainable and serves it's purpose in sound wildlife management. Fear of people is a common perc I see mentioned but I think that is absolutely minor when compared to other conservation benefits (for other species too) when we keep our Grizzly population in-check. We DO have a very healthy population of Grizzly bears in this province.

[Rob Chipman]

"Trophy" hunting can mean a lot of things.

I'm required to keep 4 pt mule deer antlers to prove that the deer I shot in 4 pt season is legal. If I put them up on my wall some people will call me a trophy hunter.

I need to keep evidence of sex in buck season. If I put the antlers on the wall some people will call me a trophy hunter.

When I shoot a bear I boil it's skull and keep it. That's a trophy.

I keep the hides of most animals I shoot. Deer and moose hides go to a woman who teaches traditional Metis crafts and needs the resources. Bears, which are tanned hair on and cost more than the processing of any meat I've ever had done, go various places.

Do I support killing an animal just to put a trophy up? No.

Do I support predator control if it's science based? Yes.

Is it wrong to kill a predator in the legitimate pursuit of management and then put it's head on the wall? Obviously not. Anyone who argues that it is does so on the basis of personal taste, and God save me from people using the government to legislate their tastes - we get enough of that in a free country already.

Most non-hunters I talk to in the city think grizzlies (and for that matter, most wildlife) is in danger. Yet, whenever I hunt I run across grizzly and wolf sign, and it's becoming more common all the time. I know that's anecdotal information, but its better than the info most anti-hunters have (which is usually none).

I think the important thing to think about is the total number of grizzlies. From that we can determine sustainability. How long have we heard that there are no solid numbers on grizzlies in BC? How can that be?

I traded emails with Andrew. He used a phrase that's worthwhile keeping in mind: evidence based decisions vs decision based evidence. The Liberals are accused of using decision based evidence - that is, deciding the hunt is a good thing, and then finding or creating evidence to support that decision. However, the anti-grizzly hunting side of the equation appears to me to be equally guilty.

How is it that Sue Aitken on Nat Geo's Life Below Zero can repeatedly say "there's 85 tagged grizzlies within 10 miles of my camp" but we in BC can't establish the baseline number that this argument needs? I know there are guys on the forum who know a lot about this stuff. Is there a way we can somehow collect the info in a easily accessed repository around here, similar to the sticky petition thread?

[coach]

If interested, I put up a followup post today.

http://www.andrewweavermla.ca/2014/12/20/bc-hunters-short-stick/

I recognize that there is a general mistrust out there of politicians, but I got into this business as I wanted to see more evidence-based decision-making and less decision-based evidence-making. It's pretty clear to me that these hunt allocation numbers have no basis in any evidence. They came out of left field dispite extensive consultation.

Finally, I have never been against hunting. I am against the grizzly bear trophy hunting as are most British Columbians and hunters I have spoken with. The Great Bear Rainforest is particularly sensitive right now in light this:

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/nineteen-year-battle-great-bear-rainforest-brink-peace-momentous-deadline-approaches

More details are in the new article I put up. Best wishes and have a great Christmas break.

Andrew

Welcome to HuntingBC, Mr Weaver and thanks for having our backs in this allocation debacle! Huge kudos to you for signing up on HBC. Hopefully you will stick around.

Thanks, again, for using my sheep photo for your website and latest article. I believe it's a much better image to use than the family of grizzly bears in your first press release. :-)

[Whonnock Boy]

First, welcome to the site. Joining here is a great start for you to see what the majority of resident hunters are all about.

Second, I could not agree with coach any more. Honestly, I felt the posting of that picture with your press release was in poor form. Using this opportunity to support your own agenda was a typical, politically motivated response. We don't hunt grizzly in family units, nor condone it. Science based wildlife management includes grizzly bear harvest, and it is small role we play in a much larger picture.

I am not trying to be rude here, just stating the obvious. Regards...


I am against the grizzly bear trophy hunting as are most British Columbians and hunters I have spoken with.



I believe it's a much better image to use than the family of grizzly bears in your first press release. :-)

[two-feet]

Hello Mr Weaver

Welcome. And an unconditional thank you for supporting the rights of resident hunters. This is very much needed and appreciated. It is great to see this issue gaining recognition with the press and members of government.

On the grizzly hunt- I have never hunted them but feel all management decisions should be based on science. People have a strong emotional reaction to bears but I feel they should receive the same treatment as ALL animals, sustainably harvested in an ethical manner. There is certainly no shortage of grizzly bears, even in areas that would surprise some people. They are growing in number and expanding their range in most parts of BC from my own observations.

I come from a pioneer family and hunting is in my dna. Humans have been hunting the game of this continent for over 15,000 years and there is still plenty of animals. We would not have the brain power to have this conversation if humans did not become meat eaters. No other endeavor brings you closer to nature, as a hunter you actually become part of the ecosystem.

Please help us continue this important heritage lifestyle.

[AJWeaver]

Thanks for all the feedback. I signed up as I felt it was important to get input from those who actually hunt regularly. I have met with a bunch of individuals and constituents on this topic and have read the myriad emails I received. Rob invited me to consider joining this thread to learn.

Re: Bill's question: my objection to the Grizzly Bear Trophy Hunt is the waste. I have never had a problem with hunting. I've enjoyed fresh Moose steaks in my time as well. So yes, I think that having requirements the same between Black and Grizzly bears re: edible meat would alleviate a lot of the problem. I will certainly be pressuring the minister on this. The Grizzly Hunt in the Great Bear is a little sensitive right now in light of the agreement that looks like it might be signed shortly (see my last post).

I think the images of wasted Grizzly carcasses in the media have done a great disservice to BC hunters. Many people dont realize that this is not all that common. But it only takes one or two stories like what hit the news re: Clayton Stoner to make the public (including me) wonder what is going on (while totally coincidental, his last name didn't help matters).

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/nhl-player-in-grizzly-bear-hunting-dispute-with-b-c-first-nations-1.1339132

What is important to me is that hunting be coupled with conservation. I think the BCWF gets that right (just like Ducks Unlimited) which is why I felt very comfortable supporting their position in this.

Anyway, I reiterate that I have never been against hunting and I firmly believe that it is an important part of British Columbia's heritage. I remain very troubled about the trend towards turning hunting over to a select few in an industry which now can be foreign owned.

Andrew

PS re: the image on my first post: I recognize now that it was a bad choice (noone hunts a sow with cubs). Apologies for that. I didnt have another picture. When Sean sent me a better one I immediately changed it on my website. I couldnt change it on Facebook.

PPS While not a hunter myself I am a regulat at TNT paintball (woodsball) in Sooke (with my son).

[bigwhiteys]

my objection to the Grizzly Bear Trophy Hunt is the waste.

Waste? You are misinformed sir. Who do you think eats another Grizzly Bear after it's died? Every single omnivore/carnivore within about 5+ miles of the carcass is going to have a few bites. Considering Grizzly bears are large omnivores themselves one could contend they would obviously eat dead bears too and that is exactly what happens. If removing the hide and skull from the carcass is the prize for the hunter then leaving the carcass in the ecosystem from which it came should be the prize for the ecosystem because it's eventually going to get the bear anyway.


So yes, I think that having requirements the same between Black and Grizzly bears re: edible meat would alleviate a lot of the problem. I will certainly be pressuring the minister on this.

Please don't pressure the minister about this. If you support hunting based on sound science then leave it at that and let the scientists decide.


The Grizzly Hunt in the Great Bear is a little sensitive right now in light of the agreement that looks like it might be signed shortly (see my last post).

It's only sensitive because Raincoast and some other radical groups say so. They make more salary harping misinformation about the state of the Grizzly Bear (in their mystical forest) then many politicians. Last time I checked they had a few directors receiving $80,000 a year in salary. Pretty sweet gig.

[Rob Chipman]

Bigwhiteys:

Point taken about the carcass not going to waste, but realistically, it seems to me to be a good strategic move to require that the edible portions be removed.

Here's why:

There's no sound science supporting taking or leaving the edible portions. Leave them and another bear may well consume the protein, but that may not happen as well. If it doesn't you can certainly argue that the carcass goes back into the system and feeds bugs, plants, etc. If you take the edible portions you can be more certain that the protein is being consumed. Scientifically its a wash.

On the other hand, if someone argues that trophy hunting is wrong they will almost always say that "nobody is upset about people who hunt for meat". Taking that argument away from them is just a smart counter move.

What's the downside of taking the edible portions?

You may not like "radical" groups like Raincoast (radical? really? they setting off bombs now?) but the fact is that whether you consider their arguments valid or scientific or not doesn't matter. Preaching to the choir is pointless. You need to either convert the opposition or outflank them.

[The Hermit]

Carl - The 70% +- of the public that don't hunt but are not fervent anti-hunters would clearly define leaving the meat in the bush as waste even though nothing is really wasted. That 70% gives us the social license to hunt. Without public support it the Greens and NDP will kill the hunt altogether. The GOABC, WWSBC, UBBC, and Trappers are all supportive of bringing out the edible portions of grizzly meat. Its a no-brainer and it is beyond me as to why the BCWF disagrees... it is like they are cutting off their noses to spite their faces!

[yamadirt 426]

Welcome to the site Mr Weaver. Thank you for your time. I do not hunt grizz and have no plans to but i do wish to uphold the rights of those that want t do so under strict science based decisions. Also im not opposed to a take the meat regulation change.

I do not support the current slanted allocation policy leaning toward guide outfitters over resident hunters.

Mike