Comment!!!!now

[Scotty76]

https://engage.gov.bc.ca/wildlifeandhabitat/

Im posting this again.
The number of comments from hunters and outdoorsman is pretty minimal. More and more anti comments are popping up. Do you really want them to outnumber our comments? I have been replying to their uninformed logic as much as I can. I hope to see more comments from this group. It doesn’t take long. Cmon !?!

[Sirloin]

They were all posted at the same time and repeat the exact same points in the same wording under different names. Under each challenge category. Line, doris, chantal in one all have the exact same points posted at the same time.

I think this is likely one person repeat posting to game the system.

[325]

I commented

[Jelvis]

I read some of it, some sounds decent anyways, some will take time and effort first before anything much will change.
Hunters will need to be asked questions also so we can defend our rights first of all.--
-- We are hunters first and hunters are first in conservation and management of wild life.
Jelvis -- Mule deer are my main interest in the Reg 3 area around Kamloops B.C. -- this area is high quality mule deer habitat and needs to stay that way.

[m5wilson]

Commented.

[j270wsm]

I got a reply today about a comment I submitted. I'll try and attach it.

Hello

Thank you for your interest in the Wildlife and Habitat engagement.

We are writing regarding your comment to the engagement.

There have been many comments regarding Indigenous harvesting rights. First Nations have a protected right to hunt and fish for food, social and ceremonial purposes under section 35 of the Canadian Constitution. Comments about changing the constitution are outside the scope of this engagement. Comments on this discussion forum are expected to follow the conventions of polite discourse and should be carried on in a constructive and good-natured manner, comments that may be interpreted as racist or that focus on ancestry will not be approved or posted.

This discussion forum welcomes candid dialogue and diverse views, however, all comments must adhere to the Moderation Policy (https://engage.gov.bc.ca/wildlifeandhabitat/moderation-policy/). The Moderation Policy is intended to ensure that all British Columbians feel welcome to participate in a respectful exchange of information and ideas in a polite way and do not feel excluded or discriminated against by other’s comments.

[HarryToolips]

There just left a bunch of comments, didn't see too many anti hunter comments fortunately..

[ROY-alty33]

Unless I read it wrong Section 35 protects treaty rights, not a carte blanche to hunt fish etc unless defined under each treaty....

ETA:
I was wrong....Supreme court of Canada upheld that native rights to hunt/fish protected under sec 35

[AlexPdHJ]

Everyone should take a few moments to comment.

[rocksteady]

I got a reply today about a comment I submitted. I'll try and attach it.

Hello

Thank you for your interest in the Wildlife and Habitat engagement.

We are writing regarding your comment to the engagement.

There have been many comments regarding Indigenous harvesting rights. First Nations have a protected right to hunt and fish for food, social and ceremonial purposes under section 35 of the Canadian Constitution. Comments about changing the constitution are outside the scope of this engagement. Comments on this discussion forum are expected to follow the conventions of polite discourse and should be carried on in a constructive and good-natured manner, comments that may be interpreted as racist or that focus on ancestry will not be approved or posted.

.

So they ask for feedback, yet when you provide true opinion they moderate it.

Seems to me that the FN do harvest a considerable amount of game which needs to be factored into the inventory, in order to come up with good numbers for management purposes.. what a sham..

[guest]

Comments left....... Most deleted...... Called it for what it is.

First Nations harvest must be recorded and counted. Deleted

Mandatory reporting for all including FN to get accurate harvest data. Deleted

recommended equal rights for all, same penalties for all that commit offences . Deleted.

another waste of time with a government that already has its mind made up.

[AlexPdHJ]

Just completed my responses. We'll see when they get posted.

[CAC]

I have had the same result. Any comments that critique the FN role or political the role were deleted. SJWs hard at work censoring and shutting down conversation.

[wideopenthrottle]

[-] 1 min ago Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Too many in government are under the mistaken idea that FN communities are in any way qualified for the responsibilities of managing modern ecosystems. If there is to be a transition towards FN leadership in managing fish and wildlife it will take time to build a proper knowledge base……knowing how to run bison off a cliff does not constitute adequate wildlife management

I called into question government and FN in my comments...guaranteed it wont pass "moderation"

I was going to put something like "just because I come from Scottish heritage doesn't mean I am qualified to play bagpipes"..

[Bugle M In]

Sounds like "freedom of speech" I being breached by the government....lawsuit anybody??

[45freezer]

Left my $0.02, we'll see if it makes the cut or not...on a positive note I didn't see much from the antis, maybe I missed the bulk of it but seemed to be more resident hunters chiming in.

[boxhitch]

results here

https://engage.gov.bc.ca/wildlifeandhabitat/

[Darksith]

I think the summary looks pretty good. I believe we need to put conservation first, and bring first nations into that discussion. While they have a right to hunt in the constitution, the first nation communities can do better in ensuring overharvesting of females, or certain species does not happen. They could have their own tag system, which would probably mimic what they did traditionally as I believe they had "hunters" that answered to the chiefs. This would allow their rights are respected and also allow for proper management and conservation to happen.

I also do not believe that any group or organization that doesn't have an active stake in wildlife (so these anti groups) should have input. If you aren't in the tourism industry, a hunter, guide, or trapper, or resource extractor, you shouldn't have a say. Your input is completely biased and there is only one solution for you, the complete shutdown of everything. This is not productive and these groups should not have a voice at the table

[Bugle M In]

I think the summary looks pretty good. I believe we need to put conservation first, and bring first nations into that discussion. While they have a right to hunt in the constitution, the first nation communities can do better in ensuring overharvesting of females, or certain species does not happen. They could have their own tag system, which would probably mimic what they did traditionally as I believe they had "hunters" that answered to the chiefs. This would allow their rights are respected and also allow for proper management and conservation to happen.

I also do not believe that any group or organization that doesn't have an active stake in wildlife (so these anti groups) should have input. If you aren't in the tourism industry, a hunter, guide, or trapper, or resource extractor, you shouldn't have a say. Your input is completely biased and there is only one solution for you, the complete shutdown of everything. This is not productive and these groups should not have a voice at the table

What he said^^^^

[boxhitch]

But did you have input when the process was open

[Jordan f.]

I think the summary looks pretty good. I believe we need to put conservation first, and bring first nations into that discussion. While they have a right to hunt in the constitution, the first nation communities can do better in ensuring overharvesting of females, or certain species does not happen. They could have their own tag system, which would probably mimic what they did traditionally as I believe they had "hunters" that answered to the chiefs. This would allow their rights are respected and also allow for proper management and conservation to happen.

I also do not believe that any group or organization that doesn't have an active stake in wildlife (so these anti groups) should have input. If you aren't in the tourism industry, a hunter, guide, or trapper, or resource extractor, you shouldn't have a say. Your input is completely biased and there is only one solution for you, the complete shutdown of everything. This is not productive and these groups should not have a voice at the table

My dad doesn't hunt or make money off of industries like Oil/Gas or forestry. He lives in BC, he pays taxes in BC, he hikes/camps/kayaks and enjoys the outdoors in BC..

You don't think he should get a say because he isn't shooting something or making money?

[Jordan f.]

Also the use of "biased" is odd... since you think large companies who make millions of dollars off the land should have a say...

[Bugle M In]

But did you have input when the process was open

Who are you asking?
I know I did.

[Kb3]

I commented as well and got the same response at j270wsn. Seems like the government in BC wants to censor honest statements. I just pointed out that natives are allowed to sell fish and meat that they catch or kill for money online and this may impact animal numbers and I got the same message. Its ridiculous when honest, common sense statements are controlled and censored by our government. By hey, we live in a "free" country right?

[Bugle M In]

I recall making a statement about "knowing/reporting what the FN harvest",
not saying I wanted them to have "more input".
So yes, I felt it was "censored" as well.

It's not in their mandate to correct the FN situation, at least not from most RH perspectives.
Reminds me a little bit about the MD survey.
Yes, they got the bag limit reduced (which was a none issue for me but others it was understably),
and we could all see where that survey was headed right from the get go, meaning more restrictions.
Odd thing is, many from what I gathered also wanted to see a "harmonization" of the seasons.
But for some reason, R5 was never looked at to re-align with R3.
And ever since, R3 takes quite a pounding for those 10 days by hunters, cause we all have to go somewhere.
Again, just another way to get what they want but make it look like we had an opinion that was listened to,
but I never feel like that from the results.

Interesting to see if they enact a "wolf cull" as was recommended???hmmmm (as Srupp would say)