Losing the Biggest Opportunity Ever for the Future of Wildlife in BC

[Bugle M In]

Firstly, i am not opposed to the BCWF like some folks are on here.
When it comes to actual Hunters, I know the BCWF comprises mostly of hunters, but is no position to "truly represent Hunters".
In that case, i do believe BC needs a true Hunters Org, for hunters and representing "just hunters" in BC.
However, i feel there still is a big place for BCWF when it comes to our wildlife here in BC, which brings up the big issue for me.

We all know that to do anything right, habitat protection or restoration etc, that its going to require "cash".
Even if our hunting fees went 100% towards conservation (long over due and still nothing has happened), it would be nowhere near enough to get the job done right.

Over the years, right here on HBC, many including myself have said that what is needed is some sort of "eco fee" that comes from all
sorts of outdoor equipment/gear, and would generate a ton of cash flow imo.
HOWEVER, recently we have seen that BC Parks has put out a "survey" asking anyone interested if there is "support" for such a fee to
"help in maintaining and making trails " here in BC Parks.

Great!, just what we need, is more trails potentially and making it "easier" for folks to access the back country.
(the beauty about hunters of sheep or goat is, that 99% of the time, they make their own trail up and down, and no one is the wiser)


Anyways, "have we just lost the opportunity for funding for wildlife here in BC??????
I already know that the survey that is out is "irrelevant".
It's a "done deal"!, imo.
Just a "technicality" the government has to jump thru to make it happen.
Is that what "we want" to see happen with that money????
This could have been the "golden egg" to help wildlife, and instead is going to help a bunch of latte sipping city folks in the end.
Neither hunters nor wildlife will benefit from it, imo.

So, since this is a BCWF forum, i am asking (if anyone from the higher ups in the BCWF still come on here??):

"Is the BCWF trying to fight this eco fee being implemented for Parks and trails, and trying to get the government to listen to an
attempt in using the fees for Wildlife Conservation???
This is the time to stand up to that fee if implemented.
Now is the time to get the fee put towards wildlife projects in BC!

Would like know where the BCWF is on this.???

[adriaticum]

Habitat protection doesn't require cash. Habitat restoration yes.

No we don't need any additional fees.
There is plenty of money already flowing into government coffers and most of it is wasted and flows to 1 percent of people who own the politicians.

Saying yes to some additional fee doesn't do jack.
It just swells government bank accounts so they can do whatever they want.

[tigrr]

They have to open up the trails so natives can drive in and hunt(poach). What wild life, there won't be any left soon.

[blackbart]

Do some research on the Habitat Conservation surcharge already in place....

[Bugle M In]

Do some research on the Habitat Conservation surcharge already in place....

Yes, but it doesn't seem to be enough "does it"?
As I said, the "government" is looking to "implement some sort of Eco fee" now for Park Trails thru at the time someone purchases
particular gear for themselves.
Granted, some hikers would not want to support projects that benefit hunters, and would like trials to be upgraded.
But then again, there are hunters that wouldn't like to pay a charge on a pair of hiking boots that improves opportunities for hikers
either!

Anyways, this Trustee gets some money from fees like licenses, but some also comes from contributions from the private sector.

I am talking about the "government looking to implement a fee" and seems to be a waste to have it go to Parks when we need a whole lot more $$ to do the work that is needed.

[Bugle M In]

Habitat protection doesn't require cash. Habitat restoration yes.

No we don't need any additional fees.
There is plenty of money already flowing into government coffers and most of it is wasted and flows to 1 percent of people who own the politicians.

Saying yes to some additional fee doesn't do jack.
It just swells government bank accounts so they can do whatever they want.

Well, I disagree about the habitat protection.
Lots of lost winter range thru development over the years.
Would be nice to "buy some of it back if possible, when possible and keep it "natural".

As for money being wasted, I agree, but that's a whole different issue.
This isn't about whether "we want to pay a fee", as I know most would say what you just stated, that much is wasted already.
But considering the current situation, we need more money into wildlife, and in that case, "a fee that everyone, not just hunters,
but all outdoor users pay" is fine and fair by me. (something MORE needs to happen then the few bucks HCTF is doing or
accomplishing at the moment, and sometimes that Fund does not pay 100% of projects, fyi)

I am not asking "if we should have a new fee" debate.
What I am saying is "the government is CURRENTLY looking and asking about a Fee to be implanted" soon.
As far as I am concerned, it has a 80% chance in happening.

My concern is "shouldn't it rather be a fee for funding that goes into the HCTF"?
Because we are going to get a fee I suspect, but it will go to park trails, and I think that is stupid.
Isnt "now" be the time to go after that Fee the government is thinking about implementing, not whether you want to pay a fee.