Apparently CO'S shouldn't hunt as that affects their work ethic

[Clint_S]

Remember Bryse Casavant?
I thought he was a stand up guy now I'd like to change my opinion.


Casavant argues that the high number of hunters in the service are evidence of a bias that fuels a kill-rather-than-conserve mentality, especially when dealing with black bears that come into contact with people. Conservation officers killed 475 black bears B.C.-wide from April to December in 2017.
He believes that department policies along with the large numbers of conservation officers who hunt result in the government not being “truly interested” in solving wildlife conservation issues: “Their recruitment is targeting those that want to hunt and kill for work.”

At least Athena and Jordan are doing well. (roll eyes)
Full article here.
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-releases-documents-revealing-hunting-culture-among-conservation-officers

[tuner]

What the hell made you think he was a stand up guy to begin with?

[Fisher-Dude]

Casavant now has his own party in government, the NDP.

That's why he got access to private documents on individual COs.

Certainly, this is a breach of privacy laws and the NDP and Casavant should be investigated and prosecuted, don't ya think?

From the article:
Casavant filed his own FOI request, and he, too, was initially rejected, but pursued the issue until he got the results based on his inside knowledge of government databases and the department.

Corruption within the NDP is sickening, and an attack on our rights as hunters.


https://i2.wp.com/media.globalnews.ca/videostatic/186/783/2017-01-11T20-05-14.833Z--1280x720.jpg?w=670&quality=70&strip=all

[rocksteady]

From what I have been told there is more than one reason that he was let go from the co service... it was not just cause he refused to kill 2 cubs..

[Stone Sheep Steve]

From what I have been told there is more than one reason that he was let go from the co service... it was not just cause he refused to kill 2 cubs..

Somehow that's not hard to believe. The dept probably lacked a 'safe space'.

[DeepJeep]

I was just about to post this as well.

Why is something that's legal NEWS nowadays? :roll:

Just goes to show how far off people are from reality nowadays...

Here's the article pasted from the Vancouver Sun:

The person who successfully navigated the bureaucracy where others couldn’t and who refused to take no for an answer is Bryce Casavant, the former conservation officer who gained international attention and support when he refused a superior’s order to kill two young bear cubs on Vancouver Island in 2015.


The FOI documents reveal that 75 of 106 mainly uniform and patrol officers — 70 per cent — have hunting records and that 48 specifically purchased hunting licences last year. Four officers unsuccessfully applied for limited-entry grizzly bear hunts, which have since been banned by the NDP government except for First Nations for food, social and ceremonial purposes. Names of the officers aren’t included in the documents.


Casavant argues that the high number of hunters in the service are evidence of a bias that fuels a kill-rather-than-conserve mentality, especially when dealing with black bears that come into contact with people. Conservation officers killed 475 black bears B.C.-wide from April to December in 2017.


He believes that department policies along with the large numbers of conservation officers who hunt result in the government not being “truly interested” in solving wildlife conservation issues: “Their recruitment is targeting those that want to hunt and kill for work.”

In response, communications officer David Karn released a written statement on behalf of the Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, saying that “part of the evaluation process for prospective employees includes ensuring values align with the role of a conservation officer. A desire to protect B.C.’s environment, and fish and wildlife resources, is essential.”


The ministry statement added that the government works with FOI applicants to ensure they get the available information they’re looking for in a timely fashion and that responses include all documents available at the time of the request. The ministry declined to discuss specific cases.


Casavant lives in Port McNeill, but ran for the NDP in the last provincial election in the riding of Oak Bay-Gordon Head, losing to Green party Leader Andrew Weaver.


He said he pursued the FOI request as part of his research in association with Royal Roads University, not as a B.C. civil servant. He expressed dismay at the “government’s behaviour in this matter and I feel for those members of the public who came forward to me. This is not the public service that I know.”


Three individuals approached him after they were stymied in their attempts to find out how many conservation officers were hunters, he said, adding they received letters saying no records could be located.


Casavant filed his own FOI request, and he, too, was initially rejected, but pursued the issue until he got the results based on his inside knowledge of government databases and the department.


“It really ticks me off when bureaucrats just block the public from exercising their information rights,” he said.

The response of the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner for B.C. to FOI requests is only as good as the information provided by the ministry, Casavant said.


“They don’t know what records the government has. It’s all based on the honour system,” he said.


Casavant also said he believes the Conservation Officer Service is too closely tied to pro-hunting organizations such as the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C. and B.C. Wildlife Federation, all of which sit on a wildlife regulation advisory committee that helps to establish hunting regulations.


In July 2015 an adult female bear was shot after breaking into a freezer and grabbing garbage from inside a home near Port Hardy. Casavant was ordered to shoot the female’s two, eight-week-old cubs on the assumption they were conditioned to human garbage and not candidates for rehabilitation.


Casavant refused, believing there was no evidence to support their death sentence, and took them to the non-profit North Island Wildlife Recovery Centre for rehab. He was suspended from his job and, following a public outcry, transferred from the Ministry of Environment to the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations to serve as a natural resource officer.


The cubs — Athena and Jordan — were released into the wild in June 2016, and were thought to have successfully hibernated on their own.


Currently, there are 148 conservation officers employed in 45 offices in eight regions spread across the province.

[Hunterguy]

Province paper today has an article regarding CO’s applying for hunting licenses which Bryce Casavant says is a conflict of interesting!

[Bchunt]

It's like saying traffic cops can't have a drivers licence because that is a conflict. NEw Green Party can pound sand

[dmaxtech]

Saw that last night, it's like saying cops who hand out speeding tickets shouldn't be allowed to drive cars. Absolutely ridiculous.

[Jagermeister]

got a link?

[dmaxtech]

Looks like the Province pulled the link. Found it in the the Vancouver Sun here http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-releases-documents-revealing-hunting-culture-among-conservation-officers

[DeepJeep]

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?142738-Apparently-CO-S-shouldn-t-hunt-as-that-affects-their-work-ethic

this is being discussed here as well.

[Brez]

My e-mail to lpynn@postmedia.com and ​vantips@postmedia.com
"I have to ask how anyone can write and/or publish such garbage??!!
I suppose that police officers should not be allowed to drive vehicles as they may be tempted to speed or run a light or drive distracted.
I suppose that border guards should not leave the country.
Please reply!"

[lovemywinchester]

So the gist is they won't hire C/Os that hunt in the future? This is cray. As usual, people don't don't understand that hunters have the most interest in healthy game and populations as well as conservation.
This reminds me of when I went to college at Sir Sandford Fleming in Lindsay Ont. It offered many natural resource based courses like forestry, aquaculture, geology and drilling. The young hippy kids would come to school to take forestry but they would be horrified after a week when they realized that the course was about cutting down the trees instead of preserving them. How can a CO do their job if they have no stomach for killing? Weird times these days.

[IronNoggin]

From what I have been told there is more than one reason that he was let go from the co service... it was not just cause he refused to kill 2 cubs..

Same info I have received.
Braced him on the matter at the grizzly rally that Foxey & I attended.
He was rather shocked I knew as much as I did, went red-faced, and tried several approaches at denial.
None were believable.
This one is simply a snake.
And the article is complete drivel.
But once again, the chosen audience will suck it up with relish... :-x

We are well overdue to getting our shit together and countering these fools folks!

Cheers,
Nog

[S.W.A.T.]

Isn't that like accusing the police of being drug dealers and fire fighters are arsonists

[finaddict]

THIS LATE BREAKING NEWS STORY..........

"The Province rag has used Freedom of Information Act to discover that most Firefighters have fireplaces and enjoy using them. They have even been known to have bonfires while camping! The NDP has commissioned a Royal Inquiry into the matter. John Horgan was noted as saying; We cant have firefighters who actually enjoy fires. We are currently reviewing a poll that tells us that 71% of all snowflakes are afraid of fire, while the other 29% had no comment since they had already melted."

Front page headlines to further reinforce their anti-hunting agenda. Nothing but drivel. I love the end where they talk about how these bear cubs were given names and then released into the wild. The Province is a rag and its best use in in the bottom of a bid cage.

[Wild one]

Just hope the more BS like this that comes out the more people realize the NDP needs to go

It’s clear as day they are no friend to hunters

[bang flop]

That ex CO is a tard. Can't believe he still making head lines.

[dougan]

Just what we need some asshat who doesn’t like hunting enforcing laws for hunting . Why would that ever be a bad idea? . At least a hunter can relate to another hunter when asking questions and getting information.

[Bugle M In]

Whats scares me is, is there a shift going on to as "whom" will be apart of what in the future.
Meaning, are there some people (Anti's) trying to focus on just shifting who is in what job for the future.
Like this article, to one day have CO's who are non hunters, or even anti hunting.
To fill the Ministry full of Bios who again, are non hunters or even Anti hunting.
That's my concern for the future, just like politics.
How many actual resident hunters do we have running as mla's anymore??
If hunting is going to survive, I sure hope we have them in those positions.
And like all hunters, we want to see us having success, so, just cause a bio, or co, is a hunter, it doesn't mean
it is a bad thing for wildlife, if anything, more awareness present to make sure wildlife flourishes.
But, you can't tell the Anti's that, no matter how you say it.

[Taylor329]

I guess people who pursue a career out of passion rather than a paycheck are lunatics? If I were someone that wanted to steer my career in the direction of law enforcement, adding to the fact that I already love the outdoors, why the hell wouldn't I want to be a C.O?? It's the best of both worlds!
It's a damn shame that the public has no idea that a C.O has many more duties than just running around dealing with problem animals.

I wonder how many people know that there is even laws surrounding wildlife that need to be upheld? Most of the non-hunting public that I have ever had a conversation with, were already surprised at the fact that there were printed regulations that we abide by when hunting. They thought we just grabbed a gun, went out in the woods, and just shot whatever we wanted to...

And my day started out so good too....

[Fisher-Dude]

The NDP is mounting this attack on hunting from all sides.

It's getting more difficult to determine where they will strike next.

Don't ever forget, Casavant is an NDP candidate. If Horgan disagreed with Casavant, don't you think he'd be distancing himself from these comments? His silence equals endorsement, as it always does in politics.

[elknut]

This Casavant is a piece of work...I wonder if the CO's are going to counter this..They sure as hell better ...They need to put this asshat to shame and assert their credibility to their position as CO's..All Biologists and CO's and Resource workers that hunt need to counter his negative views..We as hunters and fisherman have to support these people and stand against this Slander from Casavant..There must be people on this forum that represent these positions and I hope will rebute Casavants views..WE need front page as is Casavant today in the SUN or Province forgot which rag it was...Dennis

[saskbooknut]

Slander by innuendo - what a low life he is.

[scttcanuck]

So can anyone FOI to see who bought licenses, tags, and entered into the LEH?
Sounds like a massive breach of their privacy.

[guest]

In my opinion, He's a fool. And really should be ashamed of his failure as a quantified CO.

I'm glad we have CO's that ARE HUNTERS.... feeling passionate about their occupation, knowing some of the insides of hunters, what it takes to be successful and what it takes those that don't abide by the laws we follow.

Shame on you Casavant.! Thank goodness your NOT a CO any longer, the fish and wildlife are better off without you.

[MichelD]

Most of the comments to this article are supporting CO hunters and calling bullshit to Pynnhead's story.

[Jack Russell]

I can't believe the comments from some people.
It is a new social media trend to be anti hunting and anti fishing and to be vociferous (and not necessarily even slightly factual). Fight back. We don't need to show on social media the kill shots, guts and blood etc., even though that is an inevitable reality, but we need to show hunters are the TRUE people of the earth.
The toll on wildlife through habitat loss due to industry and people's needs for creature comforts is staggering.
There are some seriously distant human beings walking among us.

[Jack Russell]

Whats scares me is, is there a shift going on to as "whom" will be apart of what in the future.
Meaning, are there some people (Anti's) trying to focus on just shifting who is in what job for the future.
Like this article, to one day have CO's who are non hunters, or even anti hunting.
To fill the Ministry full of Bios who again, are non hunters or even Anti hunting.


This is already naturally happening, and affecting hunting and fishing.

[Brez]

Whats scares me is, is there a shift going on to as "whom" will be apart of what in the future.
Meaning, are there some people (Anti's) trying to focus on just shifting who is in what job for the future.
Like this article, to one day have CO's who are non hunters, or even anti hunting.
To fill the Ministry full of Bios who again, are non hunters or even Anti hunting.
That's my concern for the future, just like politics..

That would be the more revealing investigation...how many bios are anti-hunting.

[Ltbullken]

https://i2.wp.com/media.globalnews.ca/videostatic/186/783/2017-01-11T20-05-14.833Z--1280x720.jpg?w=670&quality=70&strip=all

This picture pretty much sums up what we need to expect from this government as it relates to hunters... let that image burn for a while...

[180grainer]

Horgan's got a big smile on his face while Casavant looks like he's been put through a workout. Wonder what's going on there?

[walks with deer]

horgan looks like a ****** and he is backing up the wussy winer...

[Walking Buffalo]

Just a reminder,

Offering scholarships is a wonderful way to help select the next generation for specific education and career paths.

[Salty]

This clown was a CO on the north island when I lived there and was the worse one they've ever had by a long ways. Invited himself to all the council meetings grand standing like a full ****** it was clear to see this was just a stepping stone in his mission of its all about me. I don't know if getting himself fired was a purpose thing but its the only reason he's got any kind of platform. Of course the platform was just the environmental extremist organisations . And the NDP, but he didn't get half the votes of the winner in his riding and anyone's listening to him why?

[scoutlt1]

Casavant is yet another symptom of what is happening to our hunting rights.

"Anti's" are infiltrating every part of our society in order to further their agenda. They are becoming our political "leaders"....Horgan, Trudeau, Robertson (and the pretend ones like Weaver). They are deep in our bureaucracy (Casavant). The media (where do I even start). They are influential and powerful in our post-secondary institutions (Darimont).

And don't think for a second that they aren't feeding the bs to our young people as well....
https://vancouverisland.ctvnews.ca/student-activists-call-for-grizzly-bear-trophy-hunt-ban-in-b-c-1.3344533
Very telling is a quote from this article... "Having this creature gone solely for someone’s ego and to have their head on a wall is absolutely horrendous,” said grade eight student Marisa Smith."

Call it what you want, it makes no difference. A war, a cancer.... either way, we need to fight this crap in every way possible.

The rights of legal firearm ownership is on the exact same path.

Those that are against us will stop at nothing until their objectives are met.

These are not "the best of times"....

[Steve W]

I was directly involved in recruiting for the COS for a few years and being a hunter/non-hunter was never a criteria or a consideration. You had to have a valid PAL and that was it for anything related to hunting. It would be easily proved with the record from the hiring process that are on file for several years. He's looking to build himself a niche in academia. He's entitle to his opinion, but it's not factually valid.

[horshur]

Beta male...cuddle fish

[SpottedPony]

He's looking to build himself a niche in academia. He's entitle to his opinion, but it's not factually valid.
Becoming a legend seems to be a common trait in some circles!
The man has a personal grudge and this is his way to even the score.
I have the utmost respect for the majority that wear the COS uniform, they do the best job that they can with the resources available to them.
The snitch, in this case deserves no respect.

[fuzzybiscuit]

https://i2.wp.com/media.globalnews.ca/videostatic/186/783/2017-01-11T20-05-14.833Z--1280x720.jpg?w=670&quality=70&strip=all


Well, he's a pretty talented I’ll give him that. Spewing that drivel while jacking your buddy off at the same time, all while on camera, is pretty impressive...

[Riverbc]

http://theprovince.com/news/local-news/b-c-releases-documents-revealing-hunting-culture-among-conservation-officers/wcm/1f6f6de4-87f2-4be0-8314-8462fb125e4c

[Riverbc]

I was directly involved in recruiting for the COS for a few years and being a hunter/non-hunter was never a criteria or a consideration. You had to have a valid PAL and that was it for anything related to hunting. It would be easily proved with the record from the hiring process that are on file for several years. He's looking to build himself a niche in academia. He's entitle to his opinion, but it's not factually valid.


Found this https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/natural-resource-law-enforcement/conservation-officer-service/careers

Proof of the following special requirements will be requested during the competition process:


Applicants must be at least 19 years of age
Possess a valid driver’s license (Class 5 or higher)
Completion of the Canadian Firearms Safety Course
Completion of CORE Hunter Safety or provincial equivalent
Completed Occupational First Aid Level 1 or equivalent training.
Obtain Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) Certification
Successful completion of the PARE physical abilities test to the recruit standard of 4:45 minutes

[fuzzybiscuit]

Second thread about the same thing.

But you did beat out the other one...

[NChunter]

According to the article "Three individuals approached him after they were stymied in their attempts to find out how many conservation officers were hunters,"

Who where these people asking him to looking to the matter? Doubt it was just random people on the street. Isn't he connected to the organization Bears Matter? Coincidence?

[crazy ducker]

Who would be more invested in conservation than a hunter

[Frosty]

If all could send this to their NDP and/or Green MLA it would be appreciated.....Copy and paste and go.

Don't forget to include a link to the story!
http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/b-c-releases-documents-revealing-hunting-culture-among-conservation-officers

When I was a young boy my father was a shop teacher he fixed his own mechanical equipment, My grandfather was a mechanic who worked on farm tractors and my passion through those influences led me to become a mechanic.

When My wife was young she spent a lot of time with her grandmother who was a nurse. Her grandmother told her exciting stories about the profession. Now my wife is a nurse.

My best friends father was a fishing guide and eventually my best friend became a guide but he also works at the local fish hatchery. His passion is fish! He knows more about fish than anyone I have ever met, his passion helps keep his interest and care in what he does at the hatchery. By doing this he is doing his part of keeping a healthy salmon population around for other anglers.

I started to think about the rest of my friends and family and soon realized I could tell stories like this about most of them. Makes me think what type of person would want to become a conservation officer! I wonder how many of them grew up spending lots of time in the outdoors hunting with their family and friends. The trend seems that people generally source work in what interests them. I wonder could they be like all the young professionals starting out with a dream to help make a difference and take care of their passion. Like I said earlier My father was a shop teacher and now my older sister is a teacher as well. If you ask her why she does it her answer is the same. It is not because our father was but because she wants to make a difference in young students lives!

Next time you see a conservation officer maybe you need to ask the question, did you become an officer to help protect something you were passionate about? I bet the answer will be yes. My fear would be if we had a group of people in the conservation profession who were not from a background of hunters and outdoor enthusiasts. They might not have the same care as someone that held those passions!

Seems pretty sensible that Hunters have chosen to become conservation officers and I couldn't think of a better person to do it than one who supports the interest they are tying to protect!

Thank you

[Steve W]

Found this https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/natural-resource-law-enforcement/conservation-officer-service/careers

Proof of the following special requirements will be requested during the competition process:


Applicants must be at least 19 years of age
Possess a valid driver’s license (Class 5 or higher)
Completion of the Canadian Firearms Safety Course
Completion of CORE Hunter Safety or provincial equivalent
Completed Occupational First Aid Level 1 or equivalent training.
Obtain Workplace Hazardous Materials Information System (WHMIS) Certification
Successful completion of the PARE physical abilities test to the recruit standard of 4:45 minutes




Thanks for the correction. My experience was different. Glad they have included the CORE now.

[Fisher-Dude]

Andrew Weaver of the Greens, Alex Dutton of the BC Liberals, and, err...some no name from the NDP square off in a debate...

https://www.saanichnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/91922saanichUVSSAllCandidate1.jpg


Talk about a lack of class. Can't even get a name plate for himself, let along tape it on straight. Typical NDP though - "It's not my job" mentality infects that party from top to bottom.

And show up in something other than a plaid shirt and jeans for a televised debate, okay?

We can't get these pricks out of office soon enough, people.

[Ltbullken]

Beta male...cuddle fish

'Yippie' beta male...

[Ltbullken]

Don't expect Minister Heyman to come out to the CO's defense either as he is an anti.

[Gateholio]

The big picture angle on this is an attempt to convince the masses that hunting is incompatible with conservation. With an added spin that this was some well guarded secret so there was something sinister about it.

[rimfire]

Andrew Weaver of the Greens, Alex Dutton of the BC Liberals, and, err...some no name from the NDP square off in a debate...

https://www.saanichnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/91922saanichUVSSAllCandidate1.jpg


Talk about a lack of class. Can't even get a name plate for himself, let along tape it on straight. Typical NDP though - "It's not my job" mentality infects that party from top to bottom.

And show up in something other than a plaid shirt and jeans for a televised debate, okay?

We can't get these pricks out of office soon enough, people.

Why spend money on a seat that they know they are going to lose? That is likely their thought process. Doesn't make it right, though.

[wideopenthrottle]

The big picture angle on this is an attempt to convince the masses that hunting is incompatible with conservation. With an added spin that this was some well guarded secret so there was something sinister about it.

its this exactly....they are trying to separate what we know to be inseparable....being a hunter means being a conservationist...if you are not a conservationist you are no true hunter more likely what we call a poacher or criminal...I was actually a bit surprised to see that CO's were not 90+ percent hunters.....On the other hand though, how many of us actually have a job that we also do as a hobbie....maybe most CO's were hunters but no longer spend their free time hunting (like the auto mechanic that drives a beater car or the contractor whos house is in desperate need of repairs)

[Foxton Gundogs]

Province paper today has an article regarding CO’s applying for hunting licenses which Bryce Casavant says is a conflict of interesting!

Conflict of interest????? What about the fact that the MOE fired his ass, now he writes criticism and gets it's published. Now that IS a conflict of interest.

[IronNoggin]

....maybe most CO's were hunters but no longer spend their free time hunting (like the auto mechanic that drives a beater car or the contractor whos house is in desperate need of repairs)

When I went to collect my secondary edumucation, I had yet to make up my mind - CO or Wildlife Biologist.
So, took all the relevant courses to promote each.
Couple years in, my main Fish Prof came to me, and handed me a 30 person list.
All graduates, All CO's or Wildlife. With phone numbers.
He did so with the suggestion I call each, and collect their thoughts on which way to go...
I did.

Of the lot, 28 were hunters previously.
Of the CO's, all but two suggested they had "No Time" to do that any more, as that was their busiest time of the year.
The Wildlife Biologists were pretty much the same ratio.
Of the 28, four figured they still were happy with the time they got to hunt. :shock:

I changed my Major to Fisheries Biology & Management the very next day.
Minors in Wildlife Biology & management, and 4 years of Law simply to understand that better.
No looking back, and damn happy I decided the direction I did.
For you see... I HUNT! :grin:

Nothing but Respect for those that carry the Badge and The Job.
As for me, although I did the job for a short spell, I was (and am) FAR to greedy of my hunting time to ever have considered that as a full time occupation.


Conflict of interest????? What about the fact that the MOE fired his ass, now he writes criticism and gets it's published. Now that IS a conflict of interest.

BINGO!
FAILS at the job. FAILS at politics.
Now aspires to be a journalist?
Now THAT right there is a joke, I don't care who you are! ;)

Cheers,
Nog

[Foxton Gundogs]

Those who can DO, those who can't Write about it and criticize those who can and DO and do a pi$$ poor job of that as well.

[Taylor329]

I wrote a little about my feelings on this, and will be posting it to my instagram/facebook, etc.. I took a few inspirations from the posts on this thread, so thank you to those with intelligent things to say, you should recognize where I used it. I'll leave this up for a day before I post, so if anyone sees anything they think should change, or maybe I'm wrong on, please tell me. Criticism is very welcomed, as I'm not good at lengthy write-ups generally and don't do this often.



I don’t usually rant about things, but stuff like this really gets me fired up. This will be a long read, and I’m not even sure where to start with this front page story by The Province...
As the time goes by, I see that more news headlines are being populated by something related to hunting. Even though our news outlets are supposed to be unbiased and neutral, I have not read an article or story recently that isn’t tainted with an anti-hunting agenda. I worry for the future state of our wildlife, and of our hunting heritage if this continues. I worry what kind of natural world is being left for my daughter, and all of her young cousins. The general non-hunting public are constantly being fed false information through social media and news outlets about wildlife management, and are being led by their emotions rather than sensibility and scientific data. We have already seen our new provincial government (The NDP), use wildlife as an emotional and political tool to further themselves in the public eye with the recent ban on Grizzly Bear hunting, all the while completely disregarding any hard facts or science. And now the very Conservation Officers that uphold the laws that protect, and responsibly manage our wild lands and animals, are being thrown under the bus. The reason?... Some of them are hunters. Go figure that someone who loves being outdoors would want to follow a career path that ties them to the outdoors, right? The same way that someone who loves cars would be be a mechanic, or anything else in the auto industry.

A freedom of information request was performed to find out how many Conservation Officers in B.C. are also hunters. Bryce Casavant, the ex-Conservation Officer involved in obtaining these documents stated on his twitter, “This is about the govts duty to assist FOI applicants & the responsibility to conduct an adequate search. This is not an anti-hunting agenda.” These documents show that 75 out of 106 uniformed officers have hunting records (70%), 48 of them purchased a hunting license last year. Oh, and they of course have to throw in that 4 of them applied for a limited entry grizzly bear tag, but were unsuccessful, like that stat even matters to this story at all? Again, grabbing an animal that provokes strong emotional responses, and dangling it out there for people when it has no real reason to be put forth. “Casavant argues that the high number of hunters in the [Conservation Officer] service, are evidence of a bias that fuels a kill-rather-than-conserve mentality… He believes department policies along with the large numbers of CO’s who hunt result in the government not being “truly interested” in solving wildlife conservation issues: “Their recruitment is targeting those that want to hunt and kill for work.”.

So let me get this straight… The CO’s that are also coincidentally hunters, aren’t in this field so they can work in the outdoors they are passionate about, uphold the law, and in turn protect the wild lands and animals of this province, they just want to get paid to kill? This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. It’s like saying a Firefighter chose his career because they enjoy campfires, or the fireplace in their own home, and they just want to get paid to play with fire. Casavant is an ex-CO, so he should know more than anyone that dealing with problem wildlife is only a small portion of what the job entails. From Wikipedia: “British Columbia Conservation Officer Service is responsible for protecting the environment and natural resources in British Columbia. Conservation Officers are peace officers, armed, and enforce 6 federal statutes and 25 provincial statutes, including the Species at Risk Act, Liquor Control and Licensing Act, Wildlife Act and Environmental Management Act.”. Sounds like there’s more to being an officer of the law than killing, eh?

In response to these comments by Casavant, communications officer David Karn released a written statement on behalf of the Ministry of Environmental and Climate Change Strategy, saying “part of the evaluation process for prospective employees includes ensuring values align with the role of a CO. A desire to protect B.C.’s environment, and fish and wildlife resources, is essential.”. With all the effort that was taken to find out how hunters work as a CO, and the time it took Larry Pynn to write this article, you think they would do a quick search on the gov’t website and find out that it’s actually a REQUIREMENT to have your provincial hunter safety certification to be hired as a CO. Knowing that it’s a requirement, would this article even matter? Does it really warrant a front page story? Frankly I’m surprised that there aren’t more CO’s with hunting licenses! I can only assume that the above requirement is fairly new, and some senior officers may have been grandfathered into this program, which would explain the 30% of officers without licenses.

This article is written under the guise of being a story about citizens struggling against the government to obtain documents that they feel should be available under the Freedom of Information Act, when it’s really an attempt to convince the masses that hunting is incompatible with conservation. Despite what Bryce Casavant says, this is blatantly anti-hunting. These officers work in direct correlation with hunters and anglers every day, so wouldn’t it make sense for them to know the process inside and out to do their job more effectively? I for one feel much better that there are hunters and anglers employed to enforce the regulations of hunting and angling, it just makes sense. If I were to have someone teach me how to play a musical instrument, I would much rather take the person who enjoys to play that instrument in their off-time, and not someone who is doing it to pay the bills.

“Casavant also said he believes the Conservation Officer Service is too closely tied to pro-hunting organizations such as the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C. and B.C. Wildlife Federation, all of which sit on a wildlife regulation advisory committee that helps to establish hunting regulations.” This really takes the cake as far as stupidity. Wouldn’t we want the CO’s to have close ties to the very organizations that are establishing the rules and regulations surrounding hunting? Their job is literally to enforce those very regulations!! Conservation Officers are out in the field, boots on the ground every day, and I think it makes perfect sense that they would be closely communicating with regulation makers on what is going on in the wild. It’s like a police department having someone on the inside of a major criminal gang, they know what’s current, what’s happening, and what effect their actions are having. I can’t stay silent while stuff like this is published, claiming a “conflict of interest” to something that is literally required for the job.

Hopefully the public has the common sense to see that this article is bogus, and that the good name of the Conservation Officer Service doesn’t get unnecessarily sullied any further. I could go on for a while still, but I feel I’ve gotten my point across. Thanks for taking the time to read.

[mod7rem]

I wrote a little about my feelings on this, and will be posting it to my instagram/facebook, etc.. I took a few inspirations from the posts on this thread, so thank you to those with intelligent things to say, you should recognize where I used it. I'll leave this up for a day before I post, so if anyone sees anything they think should change, or maybe I'm wrong on, please tell me. Criticism is very welcomed, as I'm not good at lengthy write-ups generally and don't do this often.



I don’t usually rant about things, but stuff like this really gets me fired up. This will be a long read, and I’m not even sure where to start with this front page story by The Province...
As the time goes by, I see that more news headlines are being populated by something related to hunting. Even though our news outlets are supposed to be unbiased and neutral, I have not read an article or story recently that isn’t tainted with an anti-hunting agenda. I worry for the future state of our wildlife, and of our hunting heritage if this continues. I worry what kind of natural world is being left for my daughter, and all of her young cousins. The general non-hunting public are constantly being fed false information through social media and news outlets about wildlife management, and are being led by their emotions rather than sensibility and scientific data. We have already seen our new provincial government (The NDP), use wildlife as an emotional and political tool to further themselves in the public eye with the recent ban on Grizzly Bear hunting, all the while completely disregarding any hard facts or science. And now the very Conservation Officers that uphold the laws that protect, and responsibly manage our wild lands and animals, are being thrown under the bus. The reason?... Some of them are hunters. Go figure that someone who loves being outdoors would want to follow a career path that ties them to the outdoors, right? The same way that someone who loves cars would be be a mechanic, or anything else in the auto industry.

A freedom of information request was performed to find out how many Conservation Officers in B.C. are also hunters. Bryce Casavant, the ex-Conservation Officer involved in obtaining these documents stated on his twitter, “This is about the govts duty to assist FOI applicants & the responsibility to conduct an adequate search. This is not an anti-hunting agenda.” These documents show that 75 out of 106 uniformed officers have hunting records (70%), 48 of them purchased a hunting license last year. Oh, and they of course have to throw in that 4 of them applied for a limited entry grizzly bear tag, but were unsuccessful, like that stat even matters to this story at all? Again, grabbing an animal that provokes strong emotional responses, and dangling it out there for people when it has no real reason to be put forth. “Casavant argues that the high number of hunters in the [Conservation Officer] service, are evidence of a bias that fuels a kill-rather-than-conserve mentality… He believes department policies along with the large numbers of CO’s who hunt result in the government not being “truly interested” in solving wildlife conservation issues: “Their recruitment is targeting those that want to hunt and kill for work.”.

So let me get this straight… The CO’s that are also coincidentally hunters, aren’t in this field so they can work in the outdoors they are passionate about, uphold the law, and in turn protect the wild lands and animals of this province, they just want to get paid to kill? This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. It’s like saying a Firefighter chose his career because they enjoy campfires, or the fireplace in their own home, and they just want to get paid to play with fire. Casavant is an ex-CO, so he should know more than anyone that dealing with problem wildlife is only a small portion of what the job entails. From Wikipedia: “British Columbia Conservation Officer Service is responsible for protecting the environment and natural resources in British Columbia. Conservation Officers are peace officers, armed, and enforce 6 federal statutes and 25 provincial statutes, including the Species at Risk Act, Liquor Control and Licensing Act, Wildlife Act and Environmental Management Act.”. Sounds like there’s more to being an officer of the law than killing, eh?

In response to these comments by Casavant, communications officer David Karn released a written statement on behalf of the Ministry of Environmental and Climate Change Strategy, saying “part of the evaluation process for prospective employees includes ensuring values align with the role of a CO. A desire to protect B.C.’s environment, and fish and wildlife resources, is essential.”. With all the effort that was taken to find out how hunters work as a CO, and the time it took Larry Pynn to write this article, you think they would do a quick search on the gov’t website and find out that it’s actually a REQUIREMENT to have your provincial hunter safety certification to be hired as a CO. Knowing that it’s a requirement, would this article even matter? Does it really warrant a front page story? Frankly I’m surprised that there aren’t more CO’s with hunting licenses! I can only assume that the above requirement is fairly new, and some senior officers may have been grandfathered into this program, which would explain the 30% of officers without licenses.

This article is written under the guise of being a story about citizens struggling against the government to obtain documents that they feel should be available under the Freedom of Information Act, when it’s really an attempt to convince the masses that hunting is incompatible with conservation. Despite what Bryce Casavant says, this is blatantly anti-hunting. These officers work in direct correlation with hunters and anglers every day, so wouldn’t it make sense for them to know the process inside and out to do their job more effectively? I for one feel much better that there are hunters and anglers employed to enforce the regulations of hunting and angling, it just makes sense. If I were to have someone teach me how to play a musical instrument, I would much rather take the person who enjoys to play that instrument in their off-time, and not someone who is doing it to pay the bills.

“Casavant also said he believes the Conservation Officer Service is too closely tied to pro-hunting organizations such as the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C. and B.C. Wildlife Federation, all of which sit on a wildlife regulation advisory committee that helps to establish hunting regulations.” This really takes the cake as far as stupidity. Wouldn’t we want the CO’s to have close ties to the very organizations that are establishing the rules and regulations surrounding hunting? Their job is literally to enforce those very regulations!! Conservation Officers are out in the field, boots on the ground every day, and I think it makes perfect sense that they would be closely communicating with regulation makers on what is going on in the wild. It’s like a police department having someone on the inside of a major criminal gang, they know what’s current, what’s happening, and what effect their actions are having. I can’t stay silent while stuff like this is published, claiming a “conflict of interest” to something that is literally required for the job.

Hopefully the public has the common sense to see that this article is bogus, and that the good name of the Conservation Officer Service doesn’t get unnecessarily sullied any further. I could go on for a while still, but I feel I’ve gotten my point across. Thanks for taking the time to read.

I think this is a very good write up, thanks for putting it together, but the comparison to a "police department with someone on the inside of a major criminal gang" just doesnt sound right to me. Maybe I'm reading or interpreting it wrong, but for me it doesn't work. It reads like you're comparing the regulation makers to a major criminal gang.

[whitlers]

I wrote a little about my feelings on this, and will be posting it to my instagram/facebook, etc.. I took a few inspirations from the posts on this thread, so thank you to those with intelligent things to say, you should recognize where I used it. I'll leave this up for a day before I post, so if anyone sees anything they think should change, or maybe I'm wrong on, please tell me. Criticism is very welcomed, as I'm not good at lengthy write-ups generally and don't do this often.



I don’t usually rant about things, but stuff like this really gets me fired up. This will be a long read, and I’m not even sure where to start with this front page story by The Province...
As the time goes by, I see that more news headlines are being populated by something related to hunting. Even though our news outlets are supposed to be unbiased and neutral, I have not read an article or story recently that isn’t tainted with an anti-hunting agenda. I worry for the future state of our wildlife, and of our hunting heritage if this continues. I worry what kind of natural world is being left for my daughter, and all of her young cousins. The general non-hunting public are constantly being fed false information through social media and news outlets about wildlife management, and are being led by their emotions rather than sensibility and scientific data. We have already seen our new provincial government (The NDP), use wildlife as an emotional and political tool to further themselves in the public eye with the recent ban on Grizzly Bear hunting, all the while completely disregarding any hard facts or science. And now the very Conservation Officers that uphold the laws that protect, and responsibly manage our wild lands and animals, are being thrown under the bus. The reason?... Some of them are hunters. Go figure that someone who loves being outdoors would want to follow a career path that ties them to the outdoors, right? The same way that someone who loves cars would be be a mechanic, or anything else in the auto industry.

A freedom of information request was performed to find out how many Conservation Officers in B.C. are also hunters. Bryce Casavant, the ex-Conservation Officer involved in obtaining these documents stated on his twitter, “This is about the govts duty to assist FOI applicants & the responsibility to conduct an adequate search. This is not an anti-hunting agenda.” These documents show that 75 out of 106 uniformed officers have hunting records (70%), 48 of them purchased a hunting license last year. Oh, and they of course have to throw in that 4 of them applied for a limited entry grizzly bear tag, but were unsuccessful, like that stat even matters to this story at all? Again, grabbing an animal that provokes strong emotional responses, and dangling it out there for people when it has no real reason to be put forth. “Casavant argues that the high number of hunters in the [Conservation Officer] service, are evidence of a bias that fuels a kill-rather-than-conserve mentality… He believes department policies along with the large numbers of CO’s who hunt result in the government not being “truly interested” in solving wildlife conservation issues: “Their recruitment is targeting those that want to hunt and kill for work.”.

So let me get this straight… The CO’s that are also coincidentally hunters, aren’t in this field so they can work in the outdoors they are passionate about, uphold the law, and in turn protect the wild lands and animals of this province, they just want to get paid to kill? This is the most ridiculous thing I have ever read. It’s like saying a Firefighter chose his career because they enjoy campfires, or the fireplace in their own home, and they just want to get paid to play with fire. Casavant is an ex-CO, so he should know more than anyone that dealing with problem wildlife is only a small portion of what the job entails. From Wikipedia: “British Columbia Conservation Officer Service is responsible for protecting the environment and natural resources in British Columbia. Conservation Officers are peace officers, armed, and enforce 6 federal statutes and 25 provincial statutes, including the Species at Risk Act, Liquor Control and Licensing Act, Wildlife Act and Environmental Management Act.”. Sounds like there’s more to being an officer of the law than killing, eh?

In response to these comments by Casavant, communications officer David Karn released a written statement on behalf of the Ministry of Environmental and Climate Change Strategy, saying “part of the evaluation process for prospective employees includes ensuring values align with the role of a CO. A desire to protect B.C.’s environment, and fish and wildlife resources, is essential.”. With all the effort that was taken to find out how hunters work as a CO, and the time it took Larry Pynn to write this article, you think they would do a quick search on the gov’t website and find out that it’s actually a REQUIREMENT to have your provincial hunter safety certification to be hired as a CO. Knowing that it’s a requirement, would this article even matter? Does it really warrant a front page story? Frankly I’m surprised that there aren’t more CO’s with hunting licenses! I can only assume that the above requirement is fairly new, and some senior officers may have been grandfathered into this program, which would explain the 30% of officers without licenses.

This article is written under the guise of being a story about citizens struggling against the government to obtain documents that they feel should be available under the Freedom of Information Act, when it’s really an attempt to convince the masses that hunting is incompatible with conservation. Despite what Bryce Casavant says, this is blatantly anti-hunting. These officers work in direct correlation with hunters and anglers every day, so wouldn’t it make sense for them to know the process inside and out to do their job more effectively? I for one feel much better that there are hunters and anglers employed to enforce the regulations of hunting and angling, it just makes sense. If I were to have someone teach me how to play a musical instrument, I would much rather take the person who enjoys to play that instrument in their off-time, and not someone who is doing it to pay the bills.

“Casavant also said he believes the Conservation Officer Service is too closely tied to pro-hunting organizations such as the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C. and B.C. Wildlife Federation, all of which sit on a wildlife regulation advisory committee that helps to establish hunting regulations.” This really takes the cake as far as stupidity. Wouldn’t we want the CO’s to have close ties to the very organizations that are establishing the rules and regulations surrounding hunting? Their job is literally to enforce those very regulations!! Conservation Officers are out in the field, boots on the ground every day, and I think it makes perfect sense that they would be closely communicating with regulation makers on what is going on in the wild. It’s like a police department having someone on the inside of a major criminal gang, they know what’s current, what’s happening, and what effect their actions are having. I can’t stay silent while stuff like this is published, claiming a “conflict of interest” to something that is literally required for the job.

Hopefully the public has the common sense to see that this article is bogus, and that the good name of the Conservation Officer Service doesn’t get unnecessarily sullied any further. I could go on for a while still, but I feel I’ve gotten my point across. Thanks for taking the time to read.

Well said! Couldn't agree more. This should be posted and shared on social medja for sure.

[DeepJeep]

Very well written. Thank you for putting so much effort in.

I would also explain the police thing a bit more as the way I see it.... gangs are being compared to guide outfitters and BCWF.

just a suggestion?

It’s like having the Police departments working with all agencies that are involved in law enforcement, so they know what’s current, what’s happening, and how to enforce the regulations as a team.

[wideopenthrottle]

well it seems this group of _________ is staying true to themselves....they seem to embrace candidates with no political experience so why wouldn't they expect everyone else to do jobs they have no practical experience with.....

[Seeker]

I think this is a very good write up, thanks for putting it together, but the comparison to a "police department with someone on the inside of a major criminal gang" just doesnt sound right to me. Maybe I'm reading or interpreting it wrong, but for me it doesn't work. It reads like you're comparing the regulation makers to a major criminal gang.

I would agree, To me it would be like the police department sitting on a committee to create laws that they need to enforce. Their input, from an enforcement perspective is critical, and would be irresponsible to not be involved.

Great write up. And kudos to you for contributing. Well done.

I think it may be time for all hunters to sign onto the likes of facebook, instagram, etc and and start a campaign to begin rating these news organizations that print this drivel. It appears they are about the ratings. Maybe we should make them pay attention by rating as they deserve.

[Taylor329]

Very well written. Thank you for putting so much effort in.

I would also explain the police thing a bit more as the way I see it.... gangs are being compared to guide outfitters and BCWF.

just a suggestion?

It’s like having the Police departments working with all agencies that are involved in law enforcement, so they know what’s current, what’s happening, and how to enforce the regulations as a team.




Great suggestion there, I'll use what you've written as a replacement, thank you!
And thanks to all the others for pointing out the same.

[DeepJeep]

Everyone go to his facebook page and comment there:

https://www.facebook.com/BryceforBC/?hc_ref=ARR5zRJ27f5avs_IjW-bKERhES1geOJdpi1tB8kKj7tBDOn5iw9Gz4LV9riPdB7mDy8&fref=nf

[IronNoggin]

The FAILURE's latest drivel: http://www.brycecasavant.ca/2018/01/30/breaking-casavant-responds-public-outrage-vancouver-sun-article/

Horgan must be teaching him Bafflegab! LOL!

Cheers,
Nog

[Wild one]

The FAILURE's latest drivel: http://www.brycecasavant.ca/2018/01/30/breaking-casavant-responds-public-outrage-vancouver-sun-article/

Horgan must be teaching him Bafflegab! LOL!

Cheers,
Nog

They were testing the waters to see the public’s response to his first article. If it went in there favour no doubt they would steam forward to make changes

Without overwhelming support we are now getting the political save face restriction

[Wild one]

Hunters really got to watch for the NDP testing the waters in the media to gauge public support

This tactic will be used often as they attempted to make anti hunting changes but try to keep in the public’s favour in hopes to stay in power

[Seeker]

The Sun and Province are owned by the same company....shouldn't be a surprise. The papers are pushing their own agenda....

[Taylor329]

“Favoring hunters in recruitment processes strictly because they have knowledge of killing wildlife, to a point where 70 per cent of uniformed staff are hunters, creates a situation where the policing service in question lacks balance and internal workplace diversity.”
Casavant points to his recent papers "To Conserve and Protect" and "Law Gone Wild" as examples of why law enforcement services should be staffed in a manner that is representative of the diversity of the public they serve.

So he thinks we only know how to kill? Apparently we have no other skills or knowledge of anything that could be useful in this type of job... I could give two shits how "diverse" a workplace or a police force is. The main thing should always be: Can they do their job correctly, professionally, and with proper common sense.

[weatherby_man]

[i]“creates a situation where the policing service in question lacks balance and internal workplace diversity.”
[/b]

Diversity is just a code word now for hiring unqualified people.

[Jelvis]

I thought if you were paid to do a job, you carried it out, the CO that dint kill the cubs, should have been FIRED
You don't listen to your superior, you should be fired.
Jel -- Donald wood ah fired the doood

[Danny_29]

Diversity is just a code word now for hiring unqualified people.

Just completed a course at work on diversity. The benefits are crazy, this attitude is archaic.

[horshur]

Just completed a course at work on diversity. The benefits are crazy, this attitude is archaic.
Look up meritocracy...the benefits are fascinating.

[Danny_29]

When all things are equal you stand to benefit from diversity

[Wild one]

Just completed a course at work on diversity. The benefits are crazy, this attitude is archaic.

Personally found when I had employees going with those who had the best qualifications for the job worked out to be the most productive.

So what part of the lower mainland are you from?

Public service job?

[horshur]

When all things are equal you stand to benefit from diversity
But all things are never equal..cept maybe in math

[Danny_29]

Personally found when I had employees going with those who had the best qualifications for the job worked out to be the most productive.

So what part of the lower mainland are you from?

Public service job?

Not in the lower mainland, one of the most successful companies in BC.

But all things are never equal..cept maybe in math - this is true and part of the problem with meritocracy as well.

Which is why we took inclusivity training to prevent and recognize potential bias.

[Jelvis]

It's perception folks, one person sees the glass half empty, one says, half ful and another shouts out, the middle.
The glass is still what ever it iz. It's peoples imaginations that give them problems.
Stick to being professional leave the emotional girl stuff for when yah get home. At work stick to your job requirements
Jel -- In other words The Rock says, " Know your role do your job and shut the pie hole."

[BimmerBob]

“Favoring hunters in recruitment processes strictly because they have knowledge of killing wildlife, to a point where 70 per cent of uniformed staff are hunters, creates a situation where the policing service in question lacks balance and internal workplace diversity.”
Casavant points to his recent papers "To Conserve and Protect" and "Law Gone Wild" as examples of why law enforcement services should be staffed in a manner that is representative of the diversity of the public they serve.

So he thinks we only know how to kill? Apparently we have no other skills or knowledge of anything that could be useful in this type of job... I could give two shits how "diverse" a workplace or a police force is. The main thing should always be: Can they do their job correctly, professionally, and with proper common sense.

Yuppers, he is an ass. All I can say is the CO Service got at least one thing very right, they FIRED his ass out the door, good on them!

[Wild one]

Nothing wrong with diversity but qualifications and skills are what matters in who Is best suited for a job

The suggestion that COs being hunters interferes with their job is being bias. It’s actually discrimination and an attack on the character of hunters and COs.

This is not a diversity issue

[walks with deer]

wild one could not agree more...taylor329 good job

[horshur]

Not in the lower mainland, one of the most successful companies in BC.

But all things are never equal..cept maybe in math - this is true and part of the problem with meritocracy as well.

Which is why we took inclusivity training to prevent and recognize potential bias.
a bias to doing your job...really

[HappyJack]

Personally it's kind of nice that most of our COs can tell the difference between a mule deer and a whitetail deer. Do you know that some people think the large white arse patch on a mule deer is a sign of a whitetail? And those COs that cannot determine by looking which way a bullet entered and left a carcass....we are better off with people in enforcement that KNOW what it's about, rather than some leaflicker.

[Sitkaspruce]

The FAILURE's latest drivel: http://www.brycecasavant.ca/2018/01/30/breaking-casavant-responds-public-outrage-vancouver-sun-article/

Horgan must be teaching him Bafflegab! LOL!

Cheers,
Nog

His ramblings have no end, as long as the uninformed slurp it up.....

By his way of thinking, we will end up with a bunch of want-to-be cops who have no idea about fish and wildlife and fish and wildlife management, never mind the mind of hunters and fishers and how they operate. The "never judge someone until you walk in their shoes" will mean nothing as they will have no idea the reasons why we hunt. But they will be good at catching people not wearing seat belts, consuming a beer out side your tent or running a stop sign on an FSR.......

It still boggles my mind how he became a CO?? He must be one of the examples he wants the "new" CO service to hire....and look where that got him......

Cheers

SS

[Danny_29]

a bias to doing your job...really

Yupp it's a real thing, and being aware of it is huge. Everyone has bias for whatever reason, but not everyone recognizes it. Knowing she'd so many of my personal interaction in a completely new light.

[Jelvis]

Think of it this way, time changes everything and everyone, I'm a low income senior city son, grew up thru the 60's and up.
Back then a game warden was a guy who had the job, someone everyone knew, Hey Chuck sort of thing. Now
Saying the game warden was a guy now states and makes people;s imagination flower out in the 2000's
equal rights, equal gender, gay, straight, etc, and now different qualifications,
It's gone from one extreme to another like the peoples minds have gone as well causing many problems beyond belief of the human brain.
Moderation is no longer possible these daze haha
Now for a CO you can be man or woman, or both a he-she if yah want, muslim jewish, iust can't touch the pork butt hey, a hunter or non hunter etc etc etc on and on and on and on until you puke
Jel -- half a dozen of the one and six of the same. Your mind is playing major games and I would relax and look up at the ceiling ---- tick tock tick tock

[Danny_29]

Nothing wrong with diversity but qualifications and skills are what matters in who Is best suited for a job

The suggestion that COs being hunters interferes with their job is being bias. It’s actually discrimination and an attack on the character of hunters and COs.

This is not a diversity issue

I'm sure they could hire equally skilled people that don't hunt to quash this. I agree that not hiring someone based on them being a hunter is discrimination but hiring a majority of hunters is clearly a bias. Just for the record I completely disagree with how they portrayed the hunting community within their ranks.

I have hunted with people I couldn't stand and hang out with people that don't hunt that I like very much so personally for me it's a crap shoot.

[Sitkaspruce]

I'm sure they could hire equally skilled people that don't hunt to quash this. I agree that not hiring someone based on them being a hunter is discrimination but hiring a majority of hunters is clearly a bias.

The did and his name was Bryce Casavant.......and see where that got them.

Cheers

SS

[walks with deer]

the point is they where not hired because they where hunters...they where hired because they persude the job because they are passionit about it.....and not just hunting but all aspects of conservation.


typically ethical hard working people.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Conflict of interest????? What about the fact that the MOE fired his ass, now he writes criticism and gets it's published. Now that IS a conflict of interest.

As i said before Hes a typical SKUMBAG doing ALL for himself :( Just another PERFECT person like Justin TRUDEAU is ! :( jmo RJ

[HappyJack]

The did and his name was Bryce Casavant.......and see where that got them.

Cheers

SS

Was this Casavant guy ever in FS John?? I had a run in with the dumbest, bone headed goof that thought he was a CO up there.

[albravo2]

I can't believe this thread has made 3 pages. Open and shut case-- Casavant is an idiot and was a lousy CO.

It is preposterous to suggest that if tall Chinese lesbians with pierced nipples make up .01% of the BC population we should have a similar ratio of tall Chinese lesbian COs.

Hunters tend to apply for the job of CO just like car enthusiasts tend to apply for mechanic's jobs.

And that's OK.

[scoutlt1]

I can't believe this thread has made 3 pages. Open and shut case-- Casavant is an idiot and was a lousy CO.

It is preposterous to suggest that if tall Chinese lesbians with pierced nipples make up .01% of the BC population we should have a similar ratio of tall Chinese lesbian COs.

Hunters tend to apply for the job of CO just like car enthusiasts tend to apply for mechanic's jobs.

And that's OK.

Couldn't have said it better myself!

[Wild one]

I'm sure they could hire equally skilled people that don't hunt to quash this. I agree that not hiring someone based on them being a hunter is discrimination but hiring a majority of hunters is clearly a bias. Just for the record I completely disagree with how they portrayed the hunting community within their ranks.

I have hunted with people I couldn't stand and hang out with people that don't hunt that I like very much so personally for me it's a crap shoot.


CO is a career many who where raised in a hunting family consider as a career at a young age. I actually have never met a non hunter who has ever thought of being a CO. Of course majority of applicants are going to be hunters because this is where their passion for wildlife and the outdoors comes from.

Also wonder how many COs started as non hunters and got into hunting because of working with hunters

Myself I don’t care if a gay transsexual Muslim non hunter becomes a CO as long as they are qualified and do a good job

But I also would not hire someone less qualified for the sake of diversity

[scoutlt1]

What truly sucks about this whole "diversity" thing, is that now, when I eat my Smarties, I can't eat my red ones last. :-(

[Wild one]

What truly sucks about this whole "diversity" thing, is that now, when I eat my Smarties, I can't eat my red ones last. :-(

Selecting by colour is racist you should be ashamed

[Danny_29]

CO is a career many who where raised in a hunting family consider as a career at a young age. I actually have never met a non hunter who has ever thought of being a CO. Of course majority of applicants are going to be hunters because this is where their passion for wildlife and the outdoors comes from.

Also wonder how many COs started as non hunters and got into hunting because of working with hunters

Myself I don’t care if a gay transsexual Muslim non hunter becomes a CO as long as they are qualified and do a good job

But I also would not hire someone less qualified for the sake of diversity

I agree with this. The large majority of applicants would be hunters I imagine, would be cool to know the numbers? My issue would be if they were hiring a higher percentage than applied. If the percentage was crazy high I'd support putting an emphasis on hiring people without hunting backgrounds to offer perspective and possibly a different view point.

[Danny_29]

The one thing buddy scrutinized was the CO's relationship with hunting organizations, these are organizations in contact with the people you police. Kind of an important relationship.

[Wild one]

The truth is all this BS about COs being a hunter or not is really not relevant and a real waste

The true issue we have in B.C. is a lack of COs and weak punishments for poaching. It’s not a lack of quality in the COs we have

[Fisher-Dude]

I agree with this. The large majority of applicants would be hunters I imagine, would be cool to know the numbers? My issue would be if they were hiring a higher percentage than applied. If the percentage was crazy high I'd support putting an emphasis on hiring people without hunting backgrounds to offer perspective and possibly a different view point.

You have no experience running a large corporation, do you?

[Danny_29]

You have no experience running a large corporation, do you?

About as much as most haha

[scoutlt1]

I guess the next heavy equipment operator I hire will have to be against the use of fossil fuels.....

[NChunter]

The truth is all this BS about COs being a hunter or not is really not relevant and a real waste

The true issue we have in B.C. is a lack of COs and weak punishments for poaching. It’s not a lack of quality in the COs we have

Very good point. This is a much bigger issue then how many COs may or may not be hunters and how it may or MAY NOT affect how they do there job. Hasn't the number of COs in the field being cut buy almost half? If Casavant really cares so much about wild life why isn't he pushing for a bigger budget and more COs? He claims the article was about the way freedom of information request are handled by the government, then why drag all this stuff about COs being hunters into? Why even bother looking for the information in the first place its not going to help wildlife.

[walks with deer]

hmm can the tall chinese lesbians with nipple rings at least be hot...
danny29 a board of directors is always good.. but they have to be highly qualified...that said workers have a task to do and we only need some much diversity..and we definatley need experiance...
eg we need co's that are good at hounds...
good at fish
good at polution issues...

[Spy]

I can't believe this thread has made 3 pages. Open and shut case-- Casavant is an idiot and was a lousy CO.

It is preposterous to suggest that if tall Chinese lesbians with pierced nipples make up .01% of the BC population we should have a similar ratio of tall Chinese lesbian COs.

Hunters tend to apply for the job of CO just like car enthusiasts tend to apply for mechanic's jobs.

And that's OK.
Lol so true I can't believe people are actually taking Casavant and all his snowflake followers seriously..

[Fisher-Dude]

About as much as most haha

It shows. Your "diversity" bullshit wouldn't last 5 minutes in real life.

Best person for the job, no exceptions.

One need only look at the shit show Trudeau has on his hands with his gender balanced, diverse bunch of jackasses that are doing the worst job in 150 years.

[Danny_29]

It shows. Your "diversity" bullshit wouldn't last 5 minutes in real life.

Best person for the job, no exceptions.

One need only look at the shit show Trudeau has on his hands with his gender balanced, diverse bunch of jackasses that are doing the worst job in 150 years.

I have experience in a "diverse" organization that embraces this bullshit and know it to be very successful.

[Gateholio]

The one thing buddy scrutinized was the CO's relationship with hunting organizations, these are organizations in contact with the people you police. Kind of an important relationship.

It sounds as if you are not in favour with CO's working closely with hunting organizations?

[scoutlt1]

I have experience in a "diverse" organization that embraces this bullshit and know it to be very successful.

Surely you jest.

[Danny_29]

It sounds as if you are not in favour with CO's working closely with hunting organizations?

Opposite opinion, could have been clearer.

[Fisher-Dude]

I have experience in a "diverse" organization that embraces this bullshit and know it to be very successful.

Like I said, you have no experiencing running a large corporation. It's quite obvious to those who do.

[Gateholio]

Opposite opinion, could have been clearer.

Good.

Only a fool would think that CO's building relationships with BCWF/GOABC is a negative thing.

[LBM]

The truth is all this BS about COs being a hunter or not is really not relevant and a real waste

The true issue we have in B.C. is a lack of COs and weak punishments for poaching. It’s not a lack of quality in the COs we have

Good post and mostly true.
One other thing is many times the COs hands are tied and its the crown that does not pursue the case/charge.
Many times the crown prosecutor is not that knowledgeable in hunting or the regs.

[Wild one]

Good post and mostly true.
One other thing is many times the COs hands are tied and its the crown that does not pursue the case/charge.
Many times the crown prosecutor is not that knowledgeable in hunting or the regs.

Agree 100% here

[Rob Chipman]

Danny_29

"I agree that not hiring someone based on them being a hunter is discrimination but hiring a majority of hunters is clearly a bias."

I think you need to unpack that and re-think it. There's no proof or indication that being a hunter gave anyone preference in hiring, to begin with. You should also probably recognize that diversity is not a neutral word any longer. It's actually pretty politically charged and has been (for lack of a better word) "weaponized" in the same way many other terms these days are. (You need an example of the weaponization of the term? Casavant uses it as a weapon to attack the CO service, without providing any actual evidence. When merely using a term gains you an advantage you've weaponized the term).

Diversity and merit aren't in conflict. I work in a very competitive, very diverse industry where rewards are all merit based. Diversity in the traditional sense of the word does pay benefits. There is absolutely no question about that. Diversity for political purposes (which is what Casavant wants) is a completely differnt thing.

[Sitkaspruce]

Was this Casavant guy ever in FS John?? I had a run in with the dumbest, bone headed goof that thought he was a CO up there.

Nope, North VI only. Still up there as an NRO that last time I asked. Will follow up next week and see if he still has a job with the Gov.

Cheers

SS

[Danny_29]

Danny_29

"I agree that not hiring someone based on them being a hunter is discrimination but hiring a majority of hunters is clearly a bias."

I think you need to unpack that and re-think it. There's no proof or indication that being a hunter gave anyone preference in hiring, to begin with. You should also probably recognize that diversity is not a neutral word any longer. It's actually pretty politically charged and has been (for lack of a better word) "weaponized" in the same way many other terms these days are. (You need an example of the weaponization of the term? Casavant uses it as a weapon to attack the CO service, without providing any actual evidence. When merely using a term gains you an advantage you've weaponized the term).

Diversity and merit aren't in conflict. I work in a very competitive, very diverse industry where rewards are all merit based. Diversity in the traditional sense of the word does pay benefits. There is absolutely no question about that. Diversity for political purposes (which is what Casavant wants) is a completely differnt thing.

I actually said I don't know the numbers, I was merely stating that if there was a preference (which there may or may not be) that would be an issue. I would have an issue with this in any medium.

[HappyJack]

I actually said I don't know the numbers, I was merely stating that if there was a preference (which there may or may not be) that would be an issue. I would have an issue with this in any medium.

You know, when they are looking for millwright apprentices, they want people with mechanical aptitude. Would that be an issue? Or how about someone that is afraid of heights applying for a window washing job? Should they hire someone as a CO that is scared of guns and terrified of bears? I honestly believe that some people are just a better fit for the job, and a CO should be a hunter/fisherman/trapper so they have a good handle on the rules and don't shitte themselves everytime they see a gun.

[chele]

Nope, North VI only. Still up there as an NRO that last time I asked. Will follow up next week and see if he still has a job with the Gov.

Cheers

SS

http://dir.gov.bc.ca/gtds.cgi?esearch=&updateRequest=&view=detailed&sortBy=name&for=people&attribute=display+name&matchMethod=is&searchString=Bryce+Casavant&objectId=147390

I wonder if anyone can submit a FOI request in order to find out the real motivation of the people who approach Casavant about obtaining the CO formation on their behalf. After all, he is a government employee.

[Taylor329]

This thread seems to have run it's course, but I feel like it's important that I give an update on what posting my little write up has done.

Instagram would not let me post it, as it was too long, so I focused on Facebook alone. Both comments I received were from people around the same age as me, (26-28 yo).
First comment I received was from someone I once went to school with. She is a highly educated person, (still in school some 10 years after graduating high school), she also happened to be vegan, and was not anti-hunting but not in support of it fully. She said that she my post was thought-provoking, and understood how the article was pandering subconsciously to an anti-hunting agenda. The first time she read the article she found nothing of the sort. She asked me if there was somewhere she could do some reading on how "hunting is conservation", so I gave her a few links and organizations to check out. She sent me a private message later saying thanks for sending her all the info, and that she has a different outlook on hunting, and hunters themselves. "I always had a thought that of all the people that choose to consume animal products, hunters might be the ones doing it the most humanely, but I just couldn't understand how the taking of a life could benefit anyone and always thought of it as a very selfish act." She remains vegan, but said that she fully supports local hunting practices now.

Second comment I received was from a sort of friend-of-a-friend, just a regular non-hunter citizen if you will. Also a smart guy, well traveled/cultured person. He actually ran as a candidate for the Green Party in his local riding last election, (downtown Vancouver area). Didn't win, first time he ran, always been interested in the political world. I feel I should copy-paste our conversation, tough to sum it up.

HIM - I don't think things are going to get better for you on this front as times go on, in terms of the public perception and support for hunting...
I think more and more people are just profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of killing things as a recreational activity, and they have trouble empathizing with someone who's hobby is to go out with the express purpose of killing something for enjoyment.
People are generally comfortable with killing for the purpose of food, and with killing for the purpose of conservation. But in both those cases I think the people who are consuming the animal products assume that the people doing the killing of the animals aren't particularly enjoying it. If I found out that someone working in a slaughterhouse was there because they really love slaughtering I think that'd make me really uncomfortable too.
So the idea that Conservation Officers are going into the job because they love the killing part of it bothers people, yeah. The assumption of the non-hunting general public is that the killing part is a necessity of the job sometimes, but that the COs hate having to do it, and do so reluctantly because it's necessary. So the fact that so many COs have hunting licenses implies that they really enjoy that part of the job. As you said, it doesn't mean that's WHY they took the job, but it's likely a part that they like.
The implication that that means they're not actually concerned with conservation is silly, I agree. But I think people are expected COs to be people who's primary reason for wanting to do conservation work was because they want to see animals thrive and succeed because of a recognition of the value of non-human life, and not because they want there to be ample stock of those animals for hunting.
And I think that's going to continue being the direction that the public perception goes.

ME - I agree that things will likely not get better in public support or perception, and there are inevitably some hunters who find a thrill in killing, or who hunt for sport. I feel that this is an unfortunate case of seeing a few bad apples on a tree, and proclaiming that it's the tree that is bad, and not the few apples themselves. The majority of us hunt for various different reasons, and with different motives, but those hunting stories will never make headlines.
I know that many people have a problem with the killing aspect of hunting, or any sort of killing in general, and I don't fault them for it. We have created cities and societies where killing is no longer a direct necessity for survival, and we are sort of shielded in a way from the natural world that we came from, and are still are a part of.
There's a quote from someone named M.R. James that has come to my attention recently, and while I can't speak for all the hunters out there, I can say that it speaks to me greatly on this very topic.
“Despite our ever-changing, ever-indignant world with its growing ignorance of and indifference to the ways of the wild, I remain a predator, pitying those who revel in artificiality and synthetic success while regarding me and my kind as relics of a time and place no longer valued or understood. I stalk a real world of dark wood and tall grass stirred by a restless wind blowing across sunlit water and beneath star-strewn sky. And on those occasions when I choose to kill, to claim some small part of nature’s bounty for my own, I do so by choice, quickly with the learned efficiency of a skilled hunter. Further, in my heart and mind, I know the truth and make no apologies for my actions or my place in time. Others around me may opt to eat only plants, nuts and fruits. Still others may employ faceless strangers to procure their meats, their leather, their feathers, and all those niceties and necessities of life. Such is their right, of course, and I wish them well. All I ask in return is no one begrudge me – and all of us who may answer the primordial stirrings within our hunter’s souls – my right to do some of these things myself.” – M.R. James

HIM -That's a really good quote, I especially like the part about faceless stranger, because it's absolutely right. Folks who don't have any connection to how their animal products are procured have a really sheltered view of how it is actually done.
You're absolutely right that hunting is still in our blood as well. A huge amount of our entertainment is still around simulated expressions of violence. We enjoy violent video games and TV shows because our instincts tell us that violence is fun, which makes sense because those humans who excelled at it were better at survival. The same goes for hunting, it makes total sense from an evolutionary standpoint that people would enjoy it.
But there's a big public perception difference between subsistence and trophy hunting, and people are always going to focus on the worst example of something. So when people hear "Hunter" they automatically assume that means someone who's flying to Africa to shoot endangered lions for the joy of it, not someone who hunts deer and then packs away all the meat for delicious jerky and steaks. The worst example of something always gets the most attention.
I appreciate your viewpoints, keeps me from getting stuck in an echo chamber on things like this!



I left it at that with him. A bit of a tougher nut to crack, but I feel the conversation went in a good direction. With someone like this I thought it better to show that I understood that we're not all perfect, and I'm not here to shout "look at me I'm a hero of conservation!".

If we could all have conversations like this with the non-hunting public, I feel we could really get somewhere with there being less vitriol towards our community. We can't ask people to understand us, all we really need is for them to understand what hunting means to us, what it does for us, and what it does for the natural world. If we can break down these barriers through education, and simply having a civil conversation, I really think we can make some ground here.

My post got shared around FB a couple of times, so a few hundred people have seen it, (can't guarantee they've all read it). And even Steve Rinella of the show MeatEater commented on my original post, told me to send this to the paper as an op-ed. Not going to lie I got a bit giddy when I realized he read what I wrote!

Another long-winded post, so thanks for reading. Understanding through education, strive for it ladies and gentleman, it works.

[Buck]

Good on you for taking the time to provide a thought provoking perspective on hunting in a modern world. Facebook is a great way to share our perspective with a lot of people much better than all the one on one discussions i have had.

[Jelvis]

I'll back any BC CO if he or she needed help anywhere anytime, 100%.
Jel -- our CO's folks

[HappyJack]

Killing:

I imagine most people kill things, or have in their lifetimes. Unless vegans never kill spiders or mosquito's? I wonder if they take any personal satisfaction or pleasure in stomping on a big fat spider, or ruthlessly crushing the skeeter that is looking for a feed?

Culture:

Whether people like it or not, hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering is an integral part of Canadian Culture, and has been for thousands of years. Hunters or fishermen are merely practicing Canadian Culture. I'd suggest if people living here don't like our culture, then they should seriously consider leaving this country as they are being anti Canadian. There is only one reason that we should be made to stop practicing our culture of hunting and that is for conservation purposes, never because some anti Canadian people think we should.

[wideopenthrottle]

Killing:

I imagine most people kill things, or have in their lifetimes. Unless vegans never kill spiders or mosquito's? I wonder if they take any personal satisfaction or pleasure in stomping on a big fat spider, or ruthlessly crushing the skeeter that is looking for a feed?

Culture:

Whether people like it or not, hunting, fishing, trapping and gathering is an integral part of Canadian Culture, and has been for thousands of years. Hunters or fishermen are merely practicing Canadian Culture. I'd suggest if people living here don't like our culture, then they should seriously consider leaving this country as they are being anti Canadian. There is only one reason that we should be made to stop practicing our culture of hunting and that is for conservation purposes, never because some anti Canadian people think we should.

vegans often conveniently forget that farmland causes habitat loss/big reduction in wildlife.....so unless the vegan is gathering their food from the forest sustainably then they are causing animals to die...they hold no moral high ground over hunters

[Greenthumbed]

This thread seems to have run it's course, but I feel like it's important that I give an update on what posting my little write up has done.

Instagram would not let me post it, as it was too long, so I focused on Facebook alone. Both comments I received were from people around the same age as me, (26-28 yo).
First comment I received was from someone I once went to school with. She is a highly educated person, (still in school some 10 years after graduating high school), she also happened to be vegan, and was not anti-hunting but not in support of it fully. She said that she my post was thought-provoking, and understood how the article was pandering subconsciously to an anti-hunting agenda. The first time she read the article she found nothing of the sort. She asked me if there was somewhere she could do some reading on how "hunting is conservation", so I gave her a few links and organizations to check out. She sent me a private message later saying thanks for sending her all the info, and that she has a different outlook on hunting, and hunters themselves. "I always had a thought that of all the people that choose to consume animal products, hunters might be the ones doing it the most humanely, but I just couldn't understand how the taking of a life could benefit anyone and always thought of it as a very selfish act." She remains vegan, but said that she fully supports local hunting practices now.

Second comment I received was from a sort of friend-of-a-friend, just a regular non-hunter citizen if you will. Also a smart guy, well traveled/cultured person. He actually ran as a candidate for the Green Party in his local riding last election, (downtown Vancouver area). Didn't win, first time he ran, always been interested in the political world. I feel I should copy-paste our conversation, tough to sum it up.

HIM - I don't think things are going to get better for you on this front as times go on, in terms of the public perception and support for hunting...
I think more and more people are just profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of killing things as a recreational activity, and they have trouble empathizing with someone who's hobby is to go out with the express purpose of killing something for enjoyment.
People are generally comfortable with killing for the purpose of food, and with killing for the purpose of conservation. But in both those cases I think the people who are consuming the animal products assume that the people doing the killing of the animals aren't particularly enjoying it. If I found out that someone working in a slaughterhouse was there because they really love slaughtering I think that'd make me really uncomfortable too.
So the idea that Conservation Officers are going into the job because they love the killing part of it bothers people, yeah. The assumption of the non-hunting general public is that the killing part is a necessity of the job sometimes, but that the COs hate having to do it, and do so reluctantly because it's necessary. So the fact that so many COs have hunting licenses implies that they really enjoy that part of the job. As you said, it doesn't mean that's WHY they took the job, but it's likely a part that they like.
The implication that that means they're not actually concerned with conservation is silly, I agree. But I think people are expected COs to be people who's primary reason for wanting to do conservation work was because they want to see animals thrive and succeed because of a recognition of the value of non-human life, and not because they want there to be ample stock of those animals for hunting.
And I think that's going to continue being the direction that the public perception goes.

ME - I agree that things will likely not get better in public support or perception, and there are inevitably some hunters who find a thrill in killing, or who hunt for sport. I feel that this is an unfortunate case of seeing a few bad apples on a tree, and proclaiming that it's the tree that is bad, and not the few apples themselves. The majority of us hunt for various different reasons, and with different motives, but those hunting stories will never make headlines.
I know that many people have a problem with the killing aspect of hunting, or any sort of killing in general, and I don't fault them for it. We have created cities and societies where killing is no longer a direct necessity for survival, and we are sort of shielded in a way from the natural world that we came from, and are still are a part of.
There's a quote from someone named M.R. James that has come to my attention recently, and while I can't speak for all the hunters out there, I can say that it speaks to me greatly on this very topic.
“Despite our ever-changing, ever-indignant world with its growing ignorance of and indifference to the ways of the wild, I remain a predator, pitying those who revel in artificiality and synthetic success while regarding me and my kind as relics of a time and place no longer valued or understood. I stalk a real world of dark wood and tall grass stirred by a restless wind blowing across sunlit water and beneath star-strewn sky. And on those occasions when I choose to kill, to claim some small part of nature’s bounty for my own, I do so by choice, quickly with the learned efficiency of a skilled hunter. Further, in my heart and mind, I know the truth and make no apologies for my actions or my place in time. Others around me may opt to eat only plants, nuts and fruits. Still others may employ faceless strangers to procure their meats, their leather, their feathers, and all those niceties and necessities of life. Such is their right, of course, and I wish them well. All I ask in return is no one begrudge me – and all of us who may answer the primordial stirrings within our hunter’s souls – my right to do some of these things myself.” – M.R. James

HIM -That's a really good quote, I especially like the part about faceless stranger, because it's absolutely right. Folks who don't have any connection to how their animal products are procured have a really sheltered view of how it is actually done.
You're absolutely right that hunting is still in our blood as well. A huge amount of our entertainment is still around simulated expressions of violence. We enjoy violent video games and TV shows because our instincts tell us that violence is fun, which makes sense because those humans who excelled at it were better at survival. The same goes for hunting, it makes total sense from an evolutionary standpoint that people would enjoy it.
But there's a big public perception difference between subsistence and trophy hunting, and people are always going to focus on the worst example of something. So when people hear "Hunter" they automatically assume that means someone who's flying to Africa to shoot endangered lions for the joy of it, not someone who hunts deer and then packs away all the meat for delicious jerky and steaks. The worst example of something always gets the most attention.
I appreciate your viewpoints, keeps me from getting stuck in an echo chamber on things like this!



I left it at that with him. A bit of a tougher nut to crack, but I feel the conversation went in a good direction. With someone like this I thought it better to show that I understood that we're not all perfect, and I'm not here to shout "look at me I'm a hero of conservation!".

If we could all have conversations like this with the non-hunting public, I feel we could really get somewhere with there being less vitriol towards our community. We can't ask people to understand us, all we really need is for them to understand what hunting means to us, what it does for us, and what it does for the natural world. If we can break down these barriers through education, and simply having a civil conversation, I really think we can make some ground here.

My post got shared around FB a couple of times, so a few hundred people have seen it, (can't guarantee they've all read it). And even Steve Rinella of the show MeatEater commented on my original post, told me to send this to the paper as an op-ed. Not going to lie I got a bit giddy when I realized he read what I wrote!

Another long-winded post, so thanks for reading. Understanding through education, strive for it ladies and gentleman, it works.

Nice one, Taylor! I think you are a conservation hero! Rubbing shoulders with Rinella,eh?!

Enlightening one person at a time. Talking to people in a civil manner gets one's point across far better than using course words. That's the way to do it. I talk to everyone I can about hunting and conservation. I feel like I might be making some positive head way too.

Chad

[Riverbc]

A reply in today's Province opinion section


Here’s a reply in today’s Province.


http://theprovince.com/opinion/op-ed/jesse-zeman-why-hunters-and-anglers-work-to-protect-our-natural-capital




In a Jan. 29 article, “Hunting culture rife within ministry”, it was inferred that the B.C. Conservation Officer Service is over-represented by hunters and that conservation officers choose their career for reasons inconsistent with protecting and conserving B.C.’s natural capital. The focus on personal, instead of policy-based issues, also attacked not only the interests and motivations of conservation officers, but those of hunters and anglers. The following response addresses what hunters and anglers do, and why.
British Columbians purchase approximately 280,000 freshwater angling licences, 110,000 hunting licences, and 280,000 saltwater angling licences annually. If you haven’t tried hunting or fishing, chances are you know someone who does. In B.C., hunting and angling bring in nearly $1 billion annually to our economy. A prerequisite to being a hunter or angler is having sustainable populations of fish and wildlife.
Despite being one of the most bio-diverse jurisdictions in North America, B.C. is also one of the most under-funded when it comes to conserving, monitoring and protecting our natural capital. To help counterbalance this deficiency, hunters and anglers have pushed for surcharges and taxes on their own licences to create mandatory funding for conservation. Organizations such as the Habitat Trust Conservation Foundation and the Pacific Salmon Foundation have put hundreds of millions of dollars into thousands of conservation projects across the province. Hunters and anglers recognize this is not enough.
In addition to licence fees, hunters and anglers spend their disposable income and volunteer hours to purchase and restore critical habitat for fish and wildlife, to assist research, and to monitor trends in abundance. This money and time is spent to protect, conserve and restore wildlife, because hunters and anglers are concerned B.C. is losing what makes it special.
Conservation organizations, and other natural resource-related agencies across the province, have worked hand-in-hand with the Conservation Officer Service since its inception. Hunters and anglers love to see conservation and fisheries officers out in the field because it gives them a sense that our laws are being enforced. Hunters and anglers have also created citizen-based enforcement programs such as Wilderness Watch and the B.C. Wildlife Federation Conservation App to help assist our enforcement agencies.



Programs such as Wild Safe B.C. were designed in concert with the B.C. Conservation Officer Service to prevent habituation of wildlife and reduce human-wildlife conflict. The Conservation Officer Services also spends its time in schools, in indigenous communities, at outdoors shows, and meeting with the public to educate the public; prevention is the best medicine. While these contributions were not mentioned in the article, they nevertheless exist because hunters and anglers care.
The reality is hunters, and anglers are over-represented across all fields related to natural resource conservation. You will find hunters and anglers are over-represented as Fisheries Officers, Conservation Officers, Natural Resource Officers, provincial and federal biologists and researchers, First Nations Guardians, environmental non-governmental organizations, and academic institutions. Given the educational requirements, nearly all of these jobs are under-paid compared to fields with similar post-secondary education requirements. The motivation is simple: because hunters and anglers care about the sustainability of our natural resources.
This trend is not specific to the Conservation Officer Service, or British Columbia. It is a global phenomenon. B.C., Canada, and North America’s most celebrated conservation pioneers were hunters and anglers. People who grow up hunting and fishing pick jobs that protect and conserve wild places and fish and wildlife all over the world. They are taught at a very young age that if you don’t take care of fish and wildlife, your ability to see, enjoy and use natural resources will disappear. It does not come as a surprise to anyone with an interest in natural resource conservation that hunters and anglers are in those jobs.
B.C. is losing what makes it special. The Fraser River is failing, and our mountain caribou are disappearing. The number of species and populations at risk increases annually. British Columbians need to come together to change this trajectory by focusing on the public interest, not personal vendettas.
Jesse Zeman is the director of the B.C. Wildlife Federation’s fish and wildlife restoration program.

[albravo2]

Very well written. Good job Jesse.

[albravo2]

I just read Taylor's FB post. Also well articulated, although I think I would have stressed more that many (most?) hunters don't enjoy the kill but it is an integral part of the whole experience. I've read many people on here expressing sadness after taking a life and lots of people have rituals that thank the animal for giving its life.

I doubt your slaughterhouse employees feel the same sadness.

Hunting is primordial, an intrinsic urge to survive. Sex is similarly a primal urge. I prefer to sub-contract neither activity but I also like to chop my own firewood and fix or build my own stuff. To each his own.

[mpotzold]

With the socialists/tree huggers in power it’s only a matter of time!

"A growing chorus of animal-welfare activists say they’re worried a trigger-happy, pro-hunting culture has infiltrated the ranks of provincial conservation agencies. They cite various incidents from the past year as evidence: uniformed officers posing for pictures next to animals they’ve shot as if they’re trophies; a controversial recruitment ad in B.C. highlighting as a perk the opportunity to tranquilize grizzly bears; and an announcement in Saskatchewan that its conservation officers will soon be equipped with AR-style rifles.
“There is an urgent need to completely overhaul how each of the provinces and territories manages wildlife,”

https://www.intelligencer.ca/news/canada/animal-welfare-activists-worry-pro-hunting-culture-is-militarizing-provincial-conservation-agencies/wcm/20fe8d6a-cb7e-45bc-9dbe-77da02383306

[wideopenthrottle]

THIS LATE BREAKING NEWS STORY..........

"The Province rag has used Freedom of Information Act to discover that most Firefighters have fireplaces and enjoy using them. They have even been known to have bonfires while camping! The NDP has commissioned a Royal Inquiry into the matter. John Horgan was noted as saying; We cant have firefighters who actually enjoy fires. We are currently reviewing a poll that tells us that 71% of all snowflakes are afraid of fire, while the other 29% had no comment since they had already melted."

Front page headlines to further reinforce their anti-hunting agenda. Nothing but drivel. I love the end where they talk about how these bear cubs were given names and then released into the wild. The Province is a rag and its best use in in the bottom of a bid cage.

one of the best posts ever.

[Bugle M In]

so true^^^^ good one Finn!

[Arctic Lake]

Taylor 329 Post #121 Great !
Arctic Lake

[limit time]

Some on this site probably agre ?

[Jack Russell]

This thread seems to have run it's course, but I feel like it's important that I give an update on what posting my little write up has done.

Instagram would not let me post it, as it was too long, so I focused on Facebook alone. Both comments I received were from people around the same age as me, (26-28 yo).
First comment I received was from someone I once went to school with. She is a highly educated person, (still in school some 10 years after graduating high school), she also happened to be vegan, and was not anti-hunting but not in support of it fully. She said that she my post was thought-provoking, and understood how the article was pandering subconsciously to an anti-hunting agenda. The first time she read the article she found nothing of the sort. She asked me if there was somewhere she could do some reading on how "hunting is conservation", so I gave her a few links and organizations to check out. She sent me a private message later saying thanks for sending her all the info, and that she has a different outlook on hunting, and hunters themselves. "I always had a thought that of all the people that choose to consume animal products, hunters might be the ones doing it the most humanely, but I just couldn't understand how the taking of a life could benefit anyone and always thought of it as a very selfish act." She remains vegan, but said that she fully supports local hunting practices now.

Second comment I received was from a sort of friend-of-a-friend, just a regular non-hunter citizen if you will. Also a smart guy, well traveled/cultured person. He actually ran as a candidate for the Green Party in his local riding last election, (downtown Vancouver area). Didn't win, first time he ran, always been interested in the political world. I feel I should copy-paste our conversation, tough to sum it up.

HIM - I don't think things are going to get better for you on this front as times go on, in terms of the public perception and support for hunting...
I think more and more people are just profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of killing things as a recreational activity, and they have trouble empathizing with someone who's hobby is to go out with the express purpose of killing something for enjoyment.
People are generally comfortable with killing for the purpose of food, and with killing for the purpose of conservation. But in both those cases I think the people who are consuming the animal products assume that the people doing the killing of the animals aren't particularly enjoying it. If I found out that someone working in a slaughterhouse was there because they really love slaughtering I think that'd make me really uncomfortable too.
So the idea that Conservation Officers are going into the job because they love the killing part of it bothers people, yeah. The assumption of the non-hunting general public is that the killing part is a necessity of the job sometimes, but that the COs hate having to do it, and do so reluctantly because it's necessary. So the fact that so many COs have hunting licenses implies that they really enjoy that part of the job. As you said, it doesn't mean that's WHY they took the job, but it's likely a part that they like.
The implication that that means they're not actually concerned with conservation is silly, I agree. But I think people are expected COs to be people who's primary reason for wanting to do conservation work was because they want to see animals thrive and succeed because of a recognition of the value of non-human life, and not because they want there to be ample stock of those animals for hunting.
And I think that's going to continue being the direction that the public perception goes.

ME - I agree that things will likely not get better in public support or perception, and there are inevitably some hunters who find a thrill in killing, or who hunt for sport. I feel that this is an unfortunate case of seeing a few bad apples on a tree, and proclaiming that it's the tree that is bad, and not the few apples themselves. The majority of us hunt for various different reasons, and with different motives, but those hunting stories will never make headlines.
I know that many people have a problem with the killing aspect of hunting, or any sort of killing in general, and I don't fault them for it. We have created cities and societies where killing is no longer a direct necessity for survival, and we are sort of shielded in a way from the natural world that we came from, and are still are a part of.
There's a quote from someone named M.R. James that has come to my attention recently, and while I can't speak for all the hunters out there, I can say that it speaks to me greatly on this very topic.
“Despite our ever-changing, ever-indignant world with its growing ignorance of and indifference to the ways of the wild, I remain a predator, pitying those who revel in artificiality and synthetic success while regarding me and my kind as relics of a time and place no longer valued or understood. I stalk a real world of dark wood and tall grass stirred by a restless wind blowing across sunlit water and beneath star-strewn sky. And on those occasions when I choose to kill, to claim some small part of nature’s bounty for my own, I do so by choice, quickly with the learned efficiency of a skilled hunter. Further, in my heart and mind, I know the truth and make no apologies for my actions or my place in time. Others around me may opt to eat only plants, nuts and fruits. Still others may employ faceless strangers to procure their meats, their leather, their feathers, and all those niceties and necessities of life. Such is their right, of course, and I wish them well. All I ask in return is no one begrudge me – and all of us who may answer the primordial stirrings within our hunter’s souls – my right to do some of these things myself.” – M.R. James

HIM -That's a really good quote, I especially like the part about faceless stranger, because it's absolutely right. Folks who don't have any connection to how their animal products are procured have a really sheltered view of how it is actually done.
You're absolutely right that hunting is still in our blood as well. A huge amount of our entertainment is still around simulated expressions of violence. We enjoy violent video games and TV shows because our instincts tell us that violence is fun, which makes sense because those humans who excelled at it were better at survival. The same goes for hunting, it makes total sense from an evolutionary standpoint that people would enjoy it.
But there's a big public perception difference between subsistence and trophy hunting, and people are always going to focus on the worst example of something. So when people hear "Hunter" they automatically assume that means someone who's flying to Africa to shoot endangered lions for the joy of it, not someone who hunts deer and then packs away all the meat for delicious jerky and steaks. The worst example of something always gets the most attention.
I appreciate your viewpoints, keeps me from getting stuck in an echo chamber on things like this!



I left it at that with him. A bit of a tougher nut to crack, but I feel the conversation went in a good direction. With someone like this I thought it better to show that I understood that we're not all perfect, and I'm not here to shout "look at me I'm a hero of conservation!".

If we could all have conversations like this with the non-hunting public, I feel we could really get somewhere with there being less vitriol towards our community. We can't ask people to understand us, all we really need is for them to understand what hunting means to us, what it does for us, and what it does for the natural world. If we can break down these barriers through education, and simply having a civil conversation, I really think we can make some ground here.

My post got shared around FB a couple of times, so a few hundred people have seen it, (can't guarantee they've all read it). And even Steve Rinella of the show MeatEater commented on my original post, told me to send this to the paper as an op-ed. Not going to lie I got a bit giddy when I realized he read what I wrote!

Another long-winded post, so thanks for reading. Understanding through education, strive for it ladies and gentleman, it works.

I wonder if these same people against hunting/killing their own food, are against FN for doing the same? Would that mean FN and the "rest of us" are different in some way?

[limit time]

I wonder if these same people against hunting/killing their own food, are against FN for doing the same? Would that mean FN and the "rest of us" are different in some way?
Identity politics is the name of the liberal game .

[Jack Russell]

^^^^^^^^ that is a very general statement. It doesnt really answer the question, the deeper question. Are FN different?

[limit time]

^^^^^^^^ that is a very general statement. It doesnt really answer the question, the deeper question. Are FN different?
i answered you.

[russm]

^^^^^^^^ that is a very general statement. It doesnt really answer the question, the deeper question. Are FN different?

Yes, they are more important than you or me, get used to it.

[Pemby_mess]

I wonder if these same people against hunting/killing their own food, are against FN for doing the same? Would that mean FN and the "rest of us" are different in some way?

Yeah, we're different in a lot of ways, but that is by our own design ( "our" is me speaking as a member of the dominant culture).

Legally and culturally, we were arbitrarily separated. Their economies have depended on hunter/gatherer subsistence for much longer. Culturally, they never really developed the desire for hunting trophies in exotic places, so that it is probably the primary difference as it relates to Taylor's exceptional conversation. The FN motivation to continue hunting and fishing has remained mostly centered around providing food for their local communities where there is little other choice.

For quite a while, FN were even legally barred from practicing agriculture, and their communities were pushed out of the the choice lowland valleys (best agricultural land), into swamps, wind hammered islands, and rocky bluffs. So expecting those whom view hunting under a critical moral hue, to apply the same line of reasoning to both parties under different circumstances is unreasonable.

As was mentioned in Taylor's conversation; hunting for food is generally seen as more acceptable to even those critical of hunting. True of all races/cultures. So that doesn't seem racially inconsistent at all. I think the image of FN hunting is still one of pragmatic necessity vs as a way to obtain entertainment. That blanket perception seems not entirely invalid, despite having some specific inaccuracy.

Non-indigenous hunters can certainly cultivate a more accurate image for themselves - but that's tough to do when you're oblivious to what the perceptions even are. Taylor's post was extraordinarily educational in that regard, for me personally.

[Pemby_mess]

This thread seems to have run it's course, but I feel like it's important that I give an update on what posting my little write up has done.

Instagram would not let me post it, as it was too long, so I focused on Facebook alone. Both comments I received were from people around the same age as me, (26-28 yo).
First comment I received was from someone I once went to school with. She is a highly educated person, (still in school some 10 years after graduating high school), she also happened to be vegan, and was not anti-hunting but not in support of it fully. She said that she my post was thought-provoking, and understood how the article was pandering subconsciously to an anti-hunting agenda. The first time she read the article she found nothing of the sort. She asked me if there was somewhere she could do some reading on how "hunting is conservation", so I gave her a few links and organizations to check out. She sent me a private message later saying thanks for sending her all the info, and that she has a different outlook on hunting, and hunters themselves. "I always had a thought that of all the people that choose to consume animal products, hunters might be the ones doing it the most humanely, but I just couldn't understand how the taking of a life could benefit anyone and always thought of it as a very selfish act." She remains vegan, but said that she fully supports local hunting practices now.

Second comment I received was from a sort of friend-of-a-friend, just a regular non-hunter citizen if you will. Also a smart guy, well traveled/cultured person. He actually ran as a candidate for the Green Party in his local riding last election, (downtown Vancouver area). Didn't win, first time he ran, always been interested in the political world. I feel I should copy-paste our conversation, tough to sum it up.

HIM - I don't think things are going to get better for you on this front as times go on, in terms of the public perception and support for hunting...
I think more and more people are just profoundly uncomfortable with the idea of killing things as a recreational activity, and they have trouble empathizing with someone who's hobby is to go out with the express purpose of killing something for enjoyment.
People are generally comfortable with killing for the purpose of food, and with killing for the purpose of conservation. But in both those cases I think the people who are consuming the animal products assume that the people doing the killing of the animals aren't particularly enjoying it. If I found out that someone working in a slaughterhouse was there because they really love slaughtering I think that'd make me really uncomfortable too.
So the idea that Conservation Officers are going into the job because they love the killing part of it bothers people, yeah. The assumption of the non-hunting general public is that the killing part is a necessity of the job sometimes, but that the COs hate having to do it, and do so reluctantly because it's necessary. So the fact that so many COs have hunting licenses implies that they really enjoy that part of the job. As you said, it doesn't mean that's WHY they took the job, but it's likely a part that they like.
The implication that that means they're not actually concerned with conservation is silly, I agree. But I think people are expected COs to be people who's primary reason for wanting to do conservation work was because they want to see animals thrive and succeed because of a recognition of the value of non-human life, and not because they want there to be ample stock of those animals for hunting.
And I think that's going to continue being the direction that the public perception goes.

ME - I agree that things will likely not get better in public support or perception, and there are inevitably some hunters who find a thrill in killing, or who hunt for sport. I feel that this is an unfortunate case of seeing a few bad apples on a tree, and proclaiming that it's the tree that is bad, and not the few apples themselves. The majority of us hunt for various different reasons, and with different motives, but those hunting stories will never make headlines.
I know that many people have a problem with the killing aspect of hunting, or any sort of killing in general, and I don't fault them for it. We have created cities and societies where killing is no longer a direct necessity for survival, and we are sort of shielded in a way from the natural world that we came from, and are still are a part of.
There's a quote from someone named M.R. James that has come to my attention recently, and while I can't speak for all the hunters out there, I can say that it speaks to me greatly on this very topic.
“Despite our ever-changing, ever-indignant world with its growing ignorance of and indifference to the ways of the wild, I remain a predator, pitying those who revel in artificiality and synthetic success while regarding me and my kind as relics of a time and place no longer valued or understood. I stalk a real world of dark wood and tall grass stirred by a restless wind blowing across sunlit water and beneath star-strewn sky. And on those occasions when I choose to kill, to claim some small part of nature’s bounty for my own, I do so by choice, quickly with the learned efficiency of a skilled hunter. Further, in my heart and mind, I know the truth and make no apologies for my actions or my place in time. Others around me may opt to eat only plants, nuts and fruits. Still others may employ faceless strangers to procure their meats, their leather, their feathers, and all those niceties and necessities of life. Such is their right, of course, and I wish them well. All I ask in return is no one begrudge me – and all of us who may answer the primordial stirrings within our hunter’s souls – my right to do some of these things myself.” – M.R. James

HIM -That's a really good quote, I especially like the part about faceless stranger, because it's absolutely right. Folks who don't have any connection to how their animal products are procured have a really sheltered view of how it is actually done.
You're absolutely right that hunting is still in our blood as well. A huge amount of our entertainment is still around simulated expressions of violence. We enjoy violent video games and TV shows because our instincts tell us that violence is fun, which makes sense because those humans who excelled at it were better at survival. The same goes for hunting, it makes total sense from an evolutionary standpoint that people would enjoy it.
But there's a big public perception difference between subsistence and trophy hunting, and people are always going to focus on the worst example of something. So when people hear "Hunter" they automatically assume that means someone who's flying to Africa to shoot endangered lions for the joy of it, not someone who hunts deer and then packs away all the meat for delicious jerky and steaks. The worst example of something always gets the most attention.
I appreciate your viewpoints, keeps me from getting stuck in an echo chamber on things like this!



I left it at that with him. A bit of a tougher nut to crack, but I feel the conversation went in a good direction. With someone like this I thought it better to show that I understood that we're not all perfect, and I'm not here to shout "look at me I'm a hero of conservation!".

If we could all have conversations like this with the non-hunting public, I feel we could really get somewhere with there being less vitriol towards our community. We can't ask people to understand us, all we really need is for them to understand what hunting means to us, what it does for us, and what it does for the natural world. If we can break down these barriers through education, and simply having a civil conversation, I really think we can make some ground here.

My post got shared around FB a couple of times, so a few hundred people have seen it, (can't guarantee they've all read it). And even Steve Rinella of the show MeatEater commented on my original post, told me to send this to the paper as an op-ed. Not going to lie I got a bit giddy when I realized he read what I wrote!

Another long-winded post, so thanks for reading. Understanding through education, strive for it ladies and gentleman, it works.

Did you ever take Rinella's advice and submit this? This is a fantastic juxtaposition of perspective that I think could help the average person see the real deal.

[Islandeer]

The image I’d like the general public to see is of FN shooting animals at night from their trucks.
Such ethical and respectful means to kill game.
My hunting culture goes back as far as so called First Nations.
We have always hunted,and are no less connected to the land and animals as any other human on this planet.

[limit time]

The image I’d like the general public to see is of FN shooting animals at night from their trucks.
Such ethical and respectful means to kill game.
My hunting culture goes back as far as so called First Nations.
We have always hunted,and are no less connected to the land and animals as any other human on this planet.
yes but not in the constitution