Most recent allocation propaganda

[kebes]

Anyone else get the letter from Tom Ethier this morning? Seems like they're still trying to convince us the new allocation is a good thing......


Your correspondence to the Honourable Christy Clark, Premier of British Columbia and Honourable Steve Thomson, Minister of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations, regarding British Columbia wildlife allocation, has been forwarded to me for a response.

When considering allocation, it is important to note that resident hunters harvest about 92 percent of the approximately 48,000 big game animals taken annually by hunters in British Columbia. Of these 48,000 big game animals, about 7,500 are animals managed by allocation. The minister’s allocation decision is estimated to move 60 of the allocated big game animals to guide-outfitter hunts.

Allocation is only required for species in areas that cannot be managed solely by general open season, and only in the parts of British Columbia covered by guiding territories. Many popular big game species are completely untouched, province wide, by allocation policies, including mule deer, white-tailed deer, wolf, most Rocky Mountain elk populations and black bear. In the parts of British Columbia not covered by guiding territories, approximately 20 percent of the province and mostly in the southern half and north east, resident hunters and those that accompany them have access to 100 percent of the harvest.

Resident hunters are recognized as having a harvesting priority over non-resident hunters. Hunting and fishing is a key part of many British Columbian families’ lives and the ministry is committed to keeping it this way. In fact, the increase in resident hunters from 82,000 ten years ago to over 102,000 today is in part because of resident hunter recruitment and retention strategies introduced and implemented over the last 10 years.

The decision on wildlife-harvest allocation also reflects the government’s commitment to resident hunters. Under the decision, resident hunters continue to be recognized as having priority over non-resident hunters and will continue to harvest approximately 92 percent annually. Resident hunters make an important contribution toward the economy in this province and make large and ongoing contributions to wildlife stewardship.

The guide outfitter industry also plays a valuable role, encouraging tourism and providing income for British Columbia residents and families. Out-of-province guide-outfitter clients are some of the highest spending tourists per capita in British Columbia. These clients also pay fees and surcharges that benefit the province and Habitat Conservation Trust Fund, and royalties to the province. The ministry remains committed to maintaining the viability of the guide outfitter industry while ensuring resident priority.

Between 2013 and late fall 2014, representatives from the BCWF and GOABC met with ministry staff to review allocation policy and make recommendations on how to improve wildlife allocation. Recommendations forwarded to the Minister by GOABC and BCWF included replacing policies and procedures developed in 2007 with set allocation splits. The minister endorsed the recommendation to have set splits in order to achieve certainty and stability in wildlife allocation. These set splits reflect a balanced approach to allocation, with neither the BCWF nor GOABC receiving the splits they requested.

Government’s intent is for a consistent and transparent policy that is fair to all wildlife user groups, where conservation comes first, First Nations’ harvesting interests are met, and resident hunters receive priority allocation. The harvest allocation decision meets this intent, and will ensure that the $350 million that hunting brings to the British Columbia economy (from both guides and residents) continues to be viable for years to come. Now that a decision is made, the ministry is hopeful that resident hunters and the guide outfitter community can work together with government to focus on the mutual goals of all hunters: wildlife and habitat conservation, and ensuring sustainable and improved hunting opportunities.

Thank you for your interest in the management of wildlife in British Columbia. For more information on wildlife harvest allocation, I ask you to please visit, and encourage other concerned residents to visit, the Wildlife Harvest Allocation Decision 2015 Frequently Asked Questions document, available online at:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/harvest_alloc/docs/Wildlife-Allocation-Decision-2015-FAQ.pdf .

Sincerely,

Tom Ethier
Assistant Deputy Minister
Resource Stewardship Division

[kebes]

My response:

Tom,

Please understand that resident hunters aren't so daft as to be unable to see through the problems with your response.


1.) Comparing allocated species to unnallocated species is comparing apples to oranges. This issue is not about species that are unnalocated it is about species that are allocated! Guide outfitters have the same opportunities as residents when it comes to species that are not allocated. You are saying, "Go shoot a deer and be happy, the sheep and moose are for foreigners who can pay!"


2.) Residents will tell you what resident priority is! Please remember that your government represents us; this is not a monarchy! Residents are not satisfied with allocations the way that they are. We want a fair split that is in line with the majority of other jurisdictions in North America: 90% for residents and 10% for non residents on all species!


3.) It is well known that the recommendations made to minister Thomson were not followed in the new allocation policy.




Tom, what your party is doing is costing you votes. The chances of my vote going to your party in the next election are now almost non existent. Stop feeding resident hunters this tripe and change the allocation policy.

[dryflyguy57]

Damn , you got one too ? I thought I was special . Hey as far as spins go that is a good one that should make us common folk feel real good .

[The Dawg]

Yup, seems like he's the go-to now for it.

Ive received that from 5 people so far this morning

[BgBlkDg]

I no longer will support a 90-10 split, I am finally totally opposed to foreign hunting here in BC, with the possible exception of Aussies and Kiwis, but not Americans. etc.

I do support an 85ish-15 split so other CANADIANS can hunt here without a guide, but, this needs some careful work and strict enforcement.

We do NOT now have enough game for OUR wants and I see NO real benefit to allowing foreigners to kill our game under any circumstances.

LEH must go and all "guiding" be done by Canadians only, no exceptions.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Heard it all before. Even though Tom is not an elected official, it's clear who his bosses are.

[Ambush]

Yeah, got that too.
My reply:

Thank you for the generic response with the expected miss-information.

Your numbers are wrong because they have been provided to you by the GOABC. They don't want you to know the true numbers. And it seems you don't want to know them.


I worked hard and secured a good number of votes for my Liberal candidate, MLA Mike Morris.


In 2017, I will double my efforts to garner votes AGAINST Mr. Morris.


Your government has not heard or heeded the voices of many thousands of BC voters.


Your government has grossly underestimated the bitterness this situation has caused. And the bitter taste will still be there come ballot time. A careful scrutinizing of the vote margins from the past election clearly shows BC outdoors people have the numbers to change results.


The past few months have convinced me that we will not receive the respect we expected from our elected officials. But we will have the satisfaction of meting out the punishment the liberal government deserves. Bureaucrats will not escape a government change either.


You will be hearing from BC hunters again in 2017.


Til then, thanks for the slap in the face. It woke us up to the theft and sale of one of our most precious resources!!

[tuner]

every response from the government is exactly the same. They don't even bother with a new script, just rehash the same dribble,not one single original response.

[The Hermit]

Tom Either is the Assistant Deputy Minister, Resource Stewardship Division of FLNRO. His job depends on doing the Ministers bidding. As an ADM, in the Game of Thrones he would be:

Lord Varys (Conleth Hill)

A clever and enigmatic eunuch with a mysterious past, Lord Varys, is also known as "the Spider."

Varys serves on King Robert Baratheon's Small Council as his spymaster and is considered the "Master of Whisperers." He has a network of spies throughout KIng's Landing known as "little birds."

Although he outwardly appears scraping and obsequious he is also working an ulterior motive or angle to get information out of people. He is liked by few and trusted by fewer.

While he is scheming, Varys ultimately has his own code of honor.

He enjoys sparring with Lord Petyr "Littlefinger" Baelish and Tyrion Lannister.

[kebes]

Great response Ambush.

[Fisher-Dude]

Everybody, and I mean everybody, that gets this email from Ethier needs to respond to it.

I believe it's simply a fishing expedition by Steve and Christy to see where public sentiment is.

If there are no responses, they'll assume it has died down.

Respond now. Tell them you're just getting started on this fight and that the Thomson Gift is not acceptable to you nor your friends and family.

[2chodi]

Interesting that it is a letter from a bureaucrat that renews the discussion of this topic. Tom Ethier was the principal bureaucrat from Victoria that was involved in the discussions that led to the 2007 allocation policy. There were many broken promises over the next five years and he is all too familiar with what a fiasco this has turned into.

Here is just one example:

Tom when we last met in Vancouver in January the message that we felt we could not trust ministry staff was loud and clear. Your decison on stone sheep in region 7b is a perfect example why those of us who have been around for awhile have no faith in the integrity of ministry staff. resident hunters have been screwed on stone sheep allocaton for 15 years in 7b. the federation has brought it to your personal attention and to the personal attention of Al Martin several times over the last 2 1/2 years as we renegotiated the allocation policy. You refused to believe us, so I am assuming you either have no respect for us or you guys just give a damn about resident hunters. Personally I am begiining to believe its some of both. In talking with local outfitters the last couple of days it is clear that you and Andy had already made the decision and told the outfitters their new quota's before we had the meeting in Vancouver.

One of the first things that Al Martin said when we started negotiations was that the new policy was going to be transparent and fair. Unfortunately we forgot bull shit is not transparent. rich petersen

And the reply:

Hi Rich,


The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. The collective guide quota is being reduced and after this 5 year transition period the new allocation split will be fully applied. A tentative quota was provided to the guides the week of January 20th. At the January 12th meeting I assumed status quo for this hunt was correct.


The direction in this allocation decision is in favour of the residents. We made a decision that for these next 5 years the changes would not cause undue economic hardship. After the 5 years we move to full implementation.


I will counter your assertion that there is a lack of transparency. By being transparent we are dealing with these big issues and making the appropriate changes. There will likely be other difficulties but we will follow the policy and apply it fairly and openly.


I look forward to being able to speak to you directly about this.

[The Dawg]

This looks like Thomson is saying "I dont have time to deal with the Resident Hunter anymore, here, Tom, you do it"

Is that how we want to be treated?

Fire up those letters and say so!

[Whonnock Boy]

Thomson thinks so highly of resident hunters that he thought best to pawn us off on Tom Ethier. Same drum, different player. As FD says, everyone needs to respond asap.


https://scontent-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/s720x720/10928170_10155309682825383_7592874474227737747_n.j pg?oh=6c7cd2a5f71de3553be2005240f27d48&oe=55A7ED67

[GoatGuy]

Keep sending letters to the MLAs.

They are using the bureaucrats as human shields on this one. The ADM is being told what to say by the premier and it's a load of bs.

Tell your MLA: "You are my elected representative - you are supposed to represent me. Quit hiding behind bureaucrats and do your job."

[bigdogeh]

Got my letter also today and made a reply. basically said sorry, not good enough, tired of the canned responses, the 60 animals is political crap and spin. and I will do my best to see your party defeated in 2017... and also seems to be that you guys are trying for the same. doing your best to be defeated.

[The Dawg]

Interesting that it is a letter from a bureaucrat that renews the discussion of this topic. Tom Ethier was the principal bureaucrat from Victoria that was involved in the discussions that led to the 2007 allocation policy. There were many broken promises over the next five years and he is all too familiar with what a fiasco this has turned into.

Here is just one example:

Tom when we last met in Vancouver in January the message that we felt we could not trust ministry staff was loud and clear. Your decison on stone sheep in region 7b is a perfect example why those of us who have been around for awhile have no faith in the integrity of ministry staff. resident hunters have been screwed on stone sheep allocaton for 15 years in 7b. the federation has brought it to your personal attention and to the personal attention of Al Martin several times over the last 2 1/2 years as we renegotiated the allocation policy. You refused to believe us, so I am assuming you either have no respect for us or you guys just give a damn about resident hunters. Personally I am begiining to believe its some of both. In talking with local outfitters the last couple of days it is clear that you and Andy had already made the decision and told the outfitters their new quota's before we had the meeting in Vancouver.

One of the first things that Al Martin said when we started negotiations was that the new policy was going to be transparent and fair. Unfortunately we forgot bull shit is not transparent. rich petersen

And the reply:

Hi Rich,


The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. The collective guide quota is being reduced and after this 5 year transition period the new allocation split will be fully applied. A tentative quota was provided to the guides the week of January 20th. At the January 12th meeting I assumed status quo for this hunt was correct.


The direction in this allocation decision is in favour of the residents. We made a decision that for these next 5 years the changes would not cause undue economic hardship. After the 5 years we move to full implementation.


I will counter your assertion that there is a lack of transparency. By being transparent we are dealing with these big issues and making the appropriate changes. There will likely be other difficulties but we will follow the policy and apply it fairly and openly.


I look forward to being able to speak to you directly about this.




"The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. "


Well if 14 sheep is undue hardship, sign me up for some!


This is an outfitter in 7b


http://i1307.photobucket.com/albums/s592/Noahdawg247/10835234_10155367898705401_687427152929914389_o_zp sq2a2dnbo.jpg (http://s1307.photobucket.com/user/Noahdawg247/media/10835234_10155367898705401_687427152929914389_o_zp sq2a2dnbo.jpg.html)

[Whonnock Boy]

I count 16 sheep. How old is that pic dawg?


"The change in stone sheep allocation in 7b is within the undue hardship rule. "


Well if 14 sheep is undue hardship, sign me up for some!


This is an outfitter in 7b


http://i1307.photobucket.com/albums/s592/Noahdawg247/10835234_10155367898705401_687427152929914389_o_zp sq2a2dnbo.jpg (http://s1307.photobucket.com/user/Noahdawg247/media/10835234_10155367898705401_687427152929914389_o_zp sq2a2dnbo.jpg.html)

[The Dawg]

I count 16 sheep. How old is that pic dawg?

Yes, 16 sheep.

14 moose.

I got distracted by feeling bad for them going broke .



Its 2-3 years old....so well within the 'allocation hardship' talked about

[Fisher-Dude]

Yes, 16 sheep.

14 moose.

I got distracted by feeling bad for them going broke .



Its 2-3 years old....so well within the 'allocation hardship' talked about

Some quick math:

Sheep success in 7B for foreigners is about 68% last few years. 16 sheep kills/.68 success = 24 hunters @ $40,000 = $960,000
Moose success in 7B for foreigners is about 58% last few years. 14 moose kills/.58 success = 24 hunters @ $11,000 = $264,000

Then add in the elk and 'bou and g-bears and everything else.

Going broke running that kind of cash through a business in a couple of months? Hard to fathom.

[kilometers]

Email reply sent. Let the guides go hunt Wolves !!!!

[J_T]

This looks like Thomson is saying "I dont have time to deal with the Resident Hunter anymore, here, Tom, you do it"

Is that how we want to be treated?

Fire up those letters and say so! hmmm, no, I have to disagree. This looks like the accountability has come home to roost. I would suggest this entire allocation fiasco has occurred at the recommendation of Ethier. I first met Ethier in 1996 and have maintained necessary communication with him for some time. The "Thompson Allocation Policy" has always smelled like Ethier.

[GoatGuy]

hmmm, no, I have to disagree. This looks like the accountability has come home to roost. I would suggest this entire allocation fiasco has occurred at the recommendation of Ethier. I first met Ethier in 1996 and have maintained necessary communication with him for some time. The "Thompson Allocation Policy" has always smelled like Ethier.

The decision came right out of the Premier's office.

Either is being told to write the reply to do the blocking for the MLAs.

This decision is 100% a "liberal party" decision, despite the fact most of the MLAs (including liberals) do not support it.

Even the people inside the party think there's a body buried somewhere. At some point it might get dug up........

[Ambush]

Even the people inside the party think there's a body buried somewhere. At some point it might get dug up........

Perhaps some clever guide got a little video of CC hanging, back stage, with the "Jackson Five" at that particular GOABC annual conference. She just wanted to see if there was any truth to the rumour about.......................... well, you know. ;-)

[The Hermit]

GoatGuy is correct in as much as the final decision was at the cabinet and premier level but the recommendations did come from staff and as the top staffer Ethier certainly had a hand in it. And yes he is no doubt towing his bosses load now.

[GoatGuy]

GoatGuy is correct in as much as the final decision was at the cabinet and premier level but the recommendations did come from staff and as the top staffer Ethier certainly had a hand in it. And yes he is no doubt towing his bosses load now.

The decision is not part of the 'public eye' as it is wrapped up in a cabinet confidentiality agreement. Can guarantee what went on in that room and who was picking what. Certainly one of the most arbitrary decisions of our time.

How's that for transparency?

[GoatGuy]

Should also mention that the recommendations which came from staff........ over the years..... due to political pressure....... were NOT SUPPORTED BY CABINET.

[Spy]

Perhaps some clever guide got a little video of CC hanging, back stage, with the "Jackson Five" at that particular GOABC annual conference. She just wanted to see if there was any truth to the rumour about.......................... well, you know. ;-)I have been thinking the same thing something must have happened, It will come out one day! ;-)

[ruger#1]

Lets hope it comes out soon.

[Spy]

Lets hope it comes out soon.Nobody would be committing political suicide like she is, if they had nothing to hide!

[The Dawg]

The decision came right out of the Premier's office.

Either is being told to write the reply to do the blocking for the MLAs.

This decision is 100% a "liberal party" decision, despite the fact most of the MLAs (including liberals) do not support it.

Even the people inside the party think there's a body buried somewhere. At some point it might get dug up........



http://c85c7a.medialib.glogster.com/media/e6/e67b035a30fc7d99dc8e1e4a878a8353adab58983bbdb2be3b 9a70b073a81f92/dog-digging-jpg.jpg

[Bugle M In]

Love your response....!!!
Do you mid if I can use "this" generic response to send back to him???
If so...what is the email address??


Yeah, got that too.
My reply:

Thank you for the generic response with the expected miss-information.

Your numbers are wrong because they have been provided to you by the GOABC. They don't want you to know the true numbers. And it seems you don't want to know them.


I worked hard and secured a good number of votes for my Liberal candidate, MLA Mike Morris.


In 2017, I will double my efforts to garner votes AGAINST Mr. Morris.


Your government has not heard or heeded the voices of many thousands of BC voters.


Your government has grossly underestimated the bitterness this situation has caused. And the bitter taste will still be there come ballot time. A careful scrutinizing of the vote margins from the past election clearly shows BC outdoors people have the numbers to change results.


The past few months have convinced me that we will not receive the respect we expected from our elected officials. But we will have the satisfaction of meting out the punishment the liberal government deserves. Bureaucrats will not escape a government change either.


You will be hearing from BC hunters again in 2017.


Til then, thanks for the slap in the face. It woke us up to the theft and sale of one of our most precious resources!!

[kawdy]

I feel so very special, a form letter response to my heart felt letter :) and exactly zero questions answered.

They obvioulsy don't even know the true numbers involved here, " estimated to move 60 of the allocated big game animals " wow, ESTIMATED !

The letter also mentioned " now that a decision is made". One infers this is meant to add some finality to the issue.
Well let's remind them that we all have made our own VOTING decsions as well, as a result of THEIR descion being made.

[Apolonius]

The way it looks to me,Cristie is on a demolition course.Not a day goes by that her government hasn't done something to screw up the BC resident.Never liked her,"Miss Piggy" style(even with tits) is not my thing,now i hate her.And i hope no one ever rests till the Liberals go on unemployed.VOTE CRISTY AND THE LIBERALS OUT!!!!!And vote anything you like.

[goinghunting]

My response:

Tom,

Please understand that resident hunters aren't so daft as to be unable to see through the problems with your response.


1.) Comparing allocated species to unnallocated species is comparing apples to oranges. This issue is not about species that are unnalocated it is about species that are allocated! Guide outfitters have the same opportunities as residents when it comes to species that are not allocated. You are saying, "Go shoot a deer and be happy, the sheep and moose are for foreigners who can pay!"


2.) Residents will tell you what resident priority is! Please remember that your government represents us; this is not a monarchy! Residents are not satisfied with allocations the way that they are. We want a fair split that is in line with the majority of other jurisdictions in North America: 90% for residents and 10% for non residents on all species!


3.) It is well known that the recommendations made to minister Thomson were not followed in the new allocation policy.




Tom, what your party is doing is costing you votes. The chances of my vote going to your party in the next election are now almost non existent. Stop feeding resident hunters this tripe and change the allocation policy.



Great response

[Ambush]

Well my MLA, Mike Morris, is prompt if nothing else.

I sent him another e-mail this morning and he was quick to respond. In a nut shell: He is fully supporting the announced policy and I can like it or lump it, he doesn't care either way. I think he believes himself untouchable.

Or maybe he just really doesn't care. About his constituents or getting re-elected.

[The Dawg]

Well my MLA, Mike Morris, is prompt if nothing else.

I sent him another e-mail this morning and he was quick to respond. In a nut shell: He is fully supporting the announced policy and I can like it or lump it, he doesn't care either way. I think he believes himself untouchable.

Or maybe he just really doesn't care. About his constituents or getting re-elected.



He thinks hes untouchable.....we will see about that :)

[Whonnock Boy]

None of them care. http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?116343-quot-let-s-fire-a-liberal-quot


He is fully supporting the announced policy and I can like it or lump it, he doesn't care either way.

[Fisher-Dude]

Well my MLA, Mike Morris, is prompt if nothing else.

I sent him another e-mail this morning and he was quick to respond. In a nut shell: He is fully supporting the announced policy and I can like it or lump it, he doesn't care either way. I think he believes himself untouchable.

Or maybe he just really doesn't care. About his constituents or getting re-elected.

He has GOABC executives on his campaign team. Maybe he should do the math between 210 and 102,000.

[one-shot-wonder]

Love your response....!!!
Do you mid if I can use "this" generic response to send back to him???
If so...what is the email address??



If you never received this letter from Tom, I encourage you to not respond directly to Ethier, but rather paraphrase Ambush's response in a unique letter to your MLA and copy the Minister and Premier in which the decision came from.

[rgn5hunt]

Mike is an outdoorsman and a trapper. He probably is a hunter and with the tactics of the GOABC he probably is a Special guest on some of these hunting territories. They have a special "bond". As far as the Premier she would look pretty silly with a gun and big knife on her hip. However she likes to sport a Black Cowboy hat on occasions, she seems to have a special bond as well. She certainly does not respect the constituents and resident hunter or the North American Wildlife Conservation Model.
He has GOABC executives on his campaign team. Maybe he should do the math between 210 and 102,000.

[Ambush]

Anybody can copy and paste my response.

[Ambush]

He has GOABC executives on his campaign team.

Mr Morris had no trouble telling me that he and Mr. Schneider have been close friends for many years. I guess friends look out for friends.

[HarryToolips]

Great letters everybody...hope everyone is ready to vote this corrupt government out 2017...or just keep buying more lube and shut ur mouth..

[rgn5hunt]

Great letters everybody...hope everyone is ready to vote this corrupt government out 2017...or just keep buying more lube and shut ur mouth..
Most of us cant wait to resolve this issue until 2017. We all have to react to Tom Ethier's letter with aggression. What ever it is that the Premier is hiding has to come out as soon as possible. The Clark government is weak from many other recent issues. Now is the time to turn up the heat on this issue!

[GoatGuy]

FYI the $120M for the contribution of guide-outfitting, only about $47M of that is for hunting related services, $18M is for non-hunting services.

The rest is for induced/indirect benefits (hotels/flights etc) of which a pile probably do not apply to BC.

So when government says hunting generates $350 M (230 M for resident/120 for g/o) they are back to the lying part.......



Remember, you should all be thankful wolves are still on GOS.......

[Blowback]

Here is what I had for Mr. Ethier and his masters.

Mr. Ethier.
Thank you for your response, although not timely, it is appreciated. The importance, nor the strong sentiment of resident hunters views on this issue will not diminish over time.

I would appreciate if you are referencing numbers of animals that more clarity is provided as to how these numbers are tabulated with specifics to species and region and what time period these allocation shifts are being compared to.

I do not believe that resident hunters should be marginalized to hunt common species of animals while being restricted access to harvest higher value animals such as Sheep, Goat and Grizzly. I ask why animals on allocation, which indicates a population that must be closely managed, would be offered for sale to foreign hunters, while local or resident hunters are on a lottery for opportunity? Does that reflect resident priority in your opinion? Why would increasing the allocation to guide outfitters at the expense of resident hunter opportunity be seen as acceptable to your ministry and political heads? Why would it seem just, that for-profit harvest of animals would be given greater opportunity at the expense of residents? Why are resident barriers not being removed as agreed upon in the 2007 allocation policy to assist residents to achieve their allocation allotments?

The number of resident hunters is rising in the province, foreign hunter numbers are declining, yet resident hunting opportunities are being reduced in favour of foreign hunters. Why?
Resident hunters have clearly shown that they offer more annually to the local economy than foreign guided hunters, yet the Liberal government remains committed to subsidizing the guided hunting business sector with increased allocation of saleable animals, at the expense of resident hunters, and local businesses. You claim “Resident hunters make an important contribution toward the economy in this province and make large and ongoing contributions to wildlife stewardship” yet reward that with reduced hunting opportunities. It would seem favouritism for the guiding industry is at play as payback for political party contributions and campaign efforts.

Everyone knows that the guiding industry provides only seasonal employment to a small number of workers. Now with the change in policy the government allows foreign ownership of guiding territories, leading to revenue and employment opportunities to leave the province or the country.

It is interesting that you reference the 2007 wildlife Allocation policy, yet your ministry never fully implemented it, instead choose to be influenced by the guide industry to largely implement aspects which benefitted the guiding industry.
Allocation splits I would support at 90/10 for resident hunters all species, no exceptions. This is being generous to the guided foreign hunters considering the allocations of other provinces or comparable states. British Columbia is out of step with the rest of the continent in this regard and the political interference on this point is blatant and recognized. Shameful.
It is unacceptable that a government would guarantee viability to an industry at the expense of it’s resident voters.

Don’t even speak of“Government’s intent is for a consistent and transparent policy” when your ministry has continually been inconsistent in application of policy and anything but transparent. It is well known the access the guiding industry has had to your ministry on allocation policy. In fact the entire basis of the 2007 allocation policy was built on consistency and transparency, yet your ministry never implemented it. What message does that send? To me, one of just the opposite of consistency and transparency.
Your ministry can hope all it wants that “resident hunters and the guide outfitter community can work together”, but sadly that relationship and trust of your ministry has been broken. This has happened under your guidance and watch.

Resident hunters hold trust and peoples word in a high regard. These are not values that your ministry appears to embrace.
Resident hunters have long memories, are patient, and are passionate about their wildlife pursuits. I suggest you convey these traits to your political masters.

Sincerely

[Whonnock Boy]

Very nice work Blowback. Kudos to you for taking the time to put your thoughts to paper.

[Fisher-Dude]

10/10 Blowback! Excellent letter!

[killman]

Yes I got the letter too. My response was ....Nice letter to bad it's a load of crap! Hopefully the new govt will listen . Yours truly.

[Salty]

If you never received this letter from Tom, I encourage you to not respond directly to Ethier, but rather paraphrase Ambush's response in a unique letter to your MLA and copy the Minister and Premier in which the decision came from.

Prezactly! The politicians would like nothing better for us to respond back to staff and leave them alone. Don't do that. Write THEM back, no staff person can change this decision only the politicians can its their mess don't let them off the hook. See my handy MLA finder below and do it again.

[rgn5hunt]

The Premier is the second most unpopular Premier in the whole Country I believe. Many of the MLA S can see the Premier is leading the Liberal Party to a brutal defeat. I hope some of the MLA s can see this and convince the caucus the Premier is a liability to the Liberal Party. Politically she is on a mission of self destruction, selling out over 100000 constituents for a few friends. It is entertaining that she has Steve Thomson and now Tom Ethier shielding her. ( with help from registered lobbyists)

[40incher]

The thing to do when a bureaucrat lays his head out to defend a B.S. position is fairly obvious ...

Let him hang on his own hook. As a "public servant" he needs to be unbiased and serve the public "trust"!!

I think Tommy Boy needs to be held to task ... he needs to explain his numbers very clearly or just slither away.

[rgn5hunt]

Honest Tom , the Premier, Director of GOABC, and past Present of GOABC used Steve Thomson as a human shield. It is Tom Ethier s turn to take the wrath of angry constituents. Pound him with letters ! He should have recognized the 2007 WAP that he approved, no he betrayed and cheated all British Columbians .

[Salty]

You guys don't get it. Ethier is senior staff. His job is to implement the policies of the political leaders whoever they may be that is how our system works. Entering into a debate with him is playing in to Thompson and Clark's hand and a waste of your time, hit your MLA the minister or the premier.

[rgn5hunt]

Your right Salty I'm working on a letter for the Premier but I will also take it to my MLA.

[Ambush]

Lies from them or apathetic laziness on our part???

My MLA claims that he has had only one other letter/e-mail on the new policy in recent weeks. :sad: :?:

[40incher]

You guys don't get it. Ethier is senior staff. His job is to implement the policies of the political leaders whoever they may be that is how our system works. Entering into a debate with him is playing in to Thompson and Clark's hand and a waste of your time, hit your MLA the minister or the premier.


Have to disagree with you on this one as far as who invented the policy, but agree that Crispy and crew need to get the letter. Our provincial bureaucrats are just talking heads ... they have become a burden to themselves, and their employers, it is clear.

The whole allocation policy rewrite was a bureaucratic invention from a bunch of senior citizens who wanted their legacy to be more than what their limited existence allowed. The original policy, which was well worded and gave the guides no minimums, was something to destroy because it made too much sense you see, bureaucrats don't like taking direction from anybody ... let alone those that came before them.

The guides used the process to their advantage and once it was signed off they moved to buy off the politicians to make sure their maximums became their minimums. The bureaucrats are still the target as far as where Thompson et al are getting their advice on the "60 animal" bullshit. I plan on exposing that in short order myself. Once the politicians realize this ill-advised cover-up we will see some early retirements ... which likely serves them just fine. Then we will inherit the next culls from the ranks of the "public service".

Gotta love it!!

[Apolonius]

Right on 40incher.Many here don't realize the power some bureaucrats have in all forms of government.Thompson got caught (no excuse) in the lies and being a stubborn politician got screwed up.... and with help from Bennet.

[BgBlkDg]

I do understand this only too well from my years with the BCFS, AFS and other gov't. resource agencies. I have encountered this attitude that "WE" civil servants OWN the resource many times, even among novice COs, FS staffers and others.

It is very annoying and we need to teach these minions that WE own BC and that they work for US!

[GoatGuy]

Right on 40incher.Many here don't realize the power some bureaucrats have in all forms of government.Thompson got caught (no excuse) in the lies and being a stubborn politician got screwed up.... and with help from Bennet.

Not sure how many times this has to be said but the entire allocation decision comes straight out of the Premier's office.

Thomson knows the policy inside-out, probably better than most of the bureaucrats, and certainly better than most of the outfitters in the province.

The 'final decision' happened in a confidential cabinet meeting where the Premier and a couple Ministers got to pick percentages.

[Apolonius]

Is there a record of this meeting?Is there anything written,on record?Why it is not out in the open?I do realize this are very careful politicians ,but i am also of the belief "nothing hidden under the sun".All we heard is ,after consideration for all parties ,the Wildlife "ministry" decided this would be "fair" policy/allocation.I have not seeing anyone come out and say,WE did nothing?To me it reads like a bad movie script,where there is no flow.And i don't mean to say that Cristy and some MLAs were not involved.Always of the belief that nothing happens if it does not go through the premiers office.Just like her bud Harper.

[GoatGuy]

Is there a record of this meeting?Is there anything written,on record?Why it is not out in the open?I do realize this are very careful politicians ,but i am also of the belief "nothing hidden under the sun".All we heard is ,after consideration for all parties ,the Wildlife "ministry" decided this would be "fair" policy/allocation.I have not seeing anyone come out and say,WE did nothing?To me it reads like a bad movie script,where there is no flow.And i don't mean to say that Cristy and some MLAs were not involved.Always of the belief that nothing happens if it does not go through the premiers office.Just like her bud Harper.

1) The final decision is covered by a "cabinet confidentiality agreement" - that is as much of the record as you can get.
2) That is the way this government operates, there is no transparency and no accountability.
3) There was no 'consideration', this was a unilateral decision. The top politicians sat in a room and picked who they wanted to give to.
4) The BC liberals have been taking grief from everyone, including liberal party members, mayors across BC and Federal politicians, not to mention the BC conservatives, NDP, and green party MLAs.

If you want to track some history do some digging on who helped the Premier way back when she was running for the liberal leadership, then follow it through.

[2chodi]

I know that Federal Cabinet Confidentiality proceedings have a 20 year limit and that the contents are rarely revealed even after the 20 years. I suspect there is a similar limit in BC - some of us might live to know what really happened.

[Bugle M In]

I have to be honest here,..I never really go to the polls.
Reason being, I have little faith in our politicians, and the political system.
I always felt that when you go to the polls, you were just choosing a different poison.
If there was a box for none of the above...I would have taken the time
It's sad, I have met, on several occasions, several politicians from BC at home parties of friends over the years...
I cant believe the how little intelligence many of them actually have...it's scary to think that these are the people making decisions for us.
Anyways, that being said, I will be at the polls, and I won't be voting liberal for sure...!!
Now, if we could only get rid of the goof here running Vancouver into a bicycle course, I would really be happy.
[.QUOTE=GoatGuy;1633040]1) The final decision is covered by a "cabinet confidentiality agreement" - that is as much of the record as you can get.
2) That is the way this government operates, there is no transparency and no accountability.
3) There was no 'consideration', this was a unilateral decision. The top politicians sat in a room and picked who they wanted to give to.
4) The BC liberals have been taking grief from everyone, including liberal party members, mayors across BC and Federal politicians, not to mention the BC conservatives, NDP, and green party MLAs.

If you want to track some history do some digging on who helped the Premier way back when she was running for the liberal leadership, then follow it through.[/QUOTE]

[Apolonius]

GG i dont disagree with you at all.It just makes no sense to me that it could happen this way.....like picking lottery numbers for 6/49.I want to believe there was a plan,to screw us and reward their friends.The whole thing seems to me that there was plan A and plan B.A and B did not include us RH.But i also believe there were "wish" lists and help or "guidance" from some people "not in the open".People that don't go on any record.Do not for a moment think I don't know how they operate.And I dislike them more than anyone else here.I have seeing things in real life, how they "reward" their friends.And by now members here should know where i stand politically.But more important, ideologically i am 100% opposed to back door deals and favouritism.I just hope the day will come for them to pay for what they have done.And hope that no RH forgets come election day.If i have to,i will crawl to the voting station.

[Whonnock Boy]

This is what I love to read. :)



If i have to,i will crawl to the voting station.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I see mr Thomson is speaking in fernie. Either he has a big set of balls for speaking or cc has an even bigger set for making him go.
Should be interesting.

[Whonnock Boy]

I highly doubt there is going to be much he is going to say that people are going to be happy with. Maybe some promises that we HOPE he and the Liberals will keep. Regardless, not much he can say as my vote is going elsewhere.


I see mr Thomson is speaking in fernie. Either he has a big set of balls for speaking or cc has an even bigger set for making him go.
Should be interesting.

[Fisher-Dude]

I highly doubt there is going to be much he is going to say that people are going to be happy with.

I expect he'll say it's only 60 animals.

I expect he's full of bullshit.

[Whonnock Boy]

Care to make a wager as to how many times he will be told to phook off? :)


I expect he'll say it's only 60 animals.

I expect he's full of bullshit.

[rgn5hunt]

If Minister Thomson starts going about 60 animals, residents get 93% of big game. Residents can drive 19 hour to open season. The audience should all let loose on duck calls!

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Time to make some signs. "60 animals my ass"

[Wild one]

I expect he'll say it's only 60 animals.

I expect he's full of bullshit.

Until RH start focusing on the number of lost opportunities instead of the meat hunting vs trophy hunting debate this will keep coming up.

Take the focus away from the kill and put it where it needs to be. All resident hunters are loosing opportunities to go out and enjoy the hunt no matter their end goal. The hunt it self brings a lot more to BC hunters than just the kill, it is about passing on tradition of the hunt through families/friends, The experiences we have during our pursuit of each species and in each location these animals live.

These things cannot be substituted for anything outside of going out and hunting.

Keep focusing on the meat/kill and you will keep being told "most animals taken by RH are GOS". The next response to come from the libs is well you spend x amount of $ to go hunting you can just buy organically raised meat with that $ instead.

Just look into success rates and it is plain to see the kill is a small portion of the hunt to many if they will openly omit it or not. Lets be honest here and stop toeing the PC line about what hunting really is. It has been brought up many times on this forum for most hunters if you factor in the cost of the hunt to price per pound of meat it is higher than buying meat.

It is posted on here all the time when someone has an unsuccessful hunt "your time in the bush is what is most important" so why the hell are we focusing on the kill in this fight?

Yes Thompson will keep throwing out 60 animals because he is going unchallenged. Nice trick he is using factoring success rates and focusing on animals taken to minimize the impact on RH hunter opportunity.

In all honesty I am starting to become really pissed about this whole allocation issue and rightly so as I am personally loosing opportunity from this along with my family/friends.


Everyone hates Thompson 60 animal stance well it is going unchallenged and it will keep standing till RH's lose of opportunity is shown.

[BgBlkDg]

Well said, our family, three seniors, 68+, 67+ and 77+, really cannot use much red meat and I prefer fowl and fish to anything but the best venison mince, anyway.

So, if I try to tell someone that my customized new Taco 4x4, Leica and Zeiss optics, custom knives, many highend packs, tents, s-bags and custom rifles are all about **feeding my family**, they are going to think that I am finally senile.......

I have little interest in actually killing game, now, I will ONLY kill what little we CAN eat, but, I go hunting because I love it, for the cultural and traditional aspects and to enhance and maintain my failing bush skills and exercise my weary old bod.

I think that most do much the same and most reasonable members of the BC public get this and support our heritage.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Until RH start focusing on the number of lost opportunities instead of the meat hunting vs trophy hunting debate this will keep coming up.

Take the focus away from the kill and put it where it needs to be. All resident hunters are loosing opportunities to go out and enjoy the hunt no matter their end goal. The hunt it self brings a lot more to BC hunters than just the kill, it is about passing on tradition of the hunt through families/friends, The experiences we have during our pursuit of each species and in each location these animals live.

These things cannot be substituted for anything outside of going out and hunting.

Keep focusing on the meat/kill and you will keep being told "most animals taken by RH are GOS". The next response to come from the libs is well you spend x amount of $ to go hunting you can just buy organically raised meat with that $ instead.

Just look into success rates and it is plain to see the kill is a small portion of the hunt to many if they will openly omit it or not. Lets be honest here and stop toeing the PC line about what hunting really is. It has been brought up many times on this forum for most hunters if you factor in the cost of the hunt to price per pound of meat it is higher than buying meat.

It is posted on here all the time when someone has an unsuccessful hunt "your time in the bush is what is most important" so why the hell are we focusing on the kill in this fight?

Yes Thompson will keep throwing out 60 animals because he is going unchallenged. Nice trick he is using factoring success rates and focusing on animals taken to minimize the impact on RH hunter opportunity.

In all honesty I am starting to become really pissed about this whole allocation issue and rightly so as I am personally loosing opportunity from this along with my family/friends.


Everyone hates Thompson 60 animal stance well it is going unchallenged and it will keep standing till RH's lose of opportunity is shown.

Reduced opportunity for resident hunters is exactly what the GOABC wants. Means less of us out there ruining their 'quality experience'.


http://www.bcandbeyond.com/moose-hunting-in-bc/

"Moose Meat is a staple in thousands of British Columbian households every year and because of this high demand they are under limited entry only for much of the province. This is a good thing for out-of-province hunters looking to book a hunt with a professional guide outfitter. We are allocated a certain number of tags for our area every year regardless of the limited entry or not. This usually leads to a hunt with very little outside hunting pressure and a high success rate."

[rgn5hunt]

The Allocation issue is just a fraction of our concerns. How many of you think that it's out of the question that the Clark Government would allow GOABC to oversee and manage fish and wildlife ? You know contract fish and wildlife management out. Has it been suggested before?

[BgBlkDg]

I fully expect that this is what is going to happen and the Dippers, etc. may very well just leave it in place.

In the 1970s, there was a lot of BS from various feminists, foreigners and novices to the effect that certain bush jobs, most rather difficult and even dangerous, MUST be staffed by these people, regardless of ability and qualifications. These characters, also DEMANDED that the monthly salarys be doubled and when the vile Socred administration of Miniwac took power in 1975, they simply eliminated all of these positions.

They were corporatists of the worst type and so are CCs gang and they see wildlife, trees, fish and other aspects of nature as only $$$$$.

The relevance of the anecdote, simply that the NDP NEVER really restored the various useful and not costly services that Bennett, etc, had wrecked and we have paid the price in burned and wasted timber ever since.

So, yeah, I do think that this will happen and no other party IF in power will change it........