Crown Land Given To Now Be FN Land

[ElectricDyck]

Maybe this should be in politics but it sure seems hunting related....will hunting be done in 10 years? Is there a reason why the hunting regs started talking about traditional treaty lands in more detail and telling people to ask for permission?

FN settlment lawyer say BC is in for a shock...

https://www.abbynews.com/news/british-columbians-in-for-a-big-adjustment-with-aboriginal-title-settlement-lawyer-says/

[BimmerBob]

It seems strange to me that the people that are taxed get less government representation than the people that aren't taxed, I mean shelters and housing for the homeless, more land for indians, housing and health care for the non-citizen border jumpers, something seems to be wrong with this picture. When is this going to change, we Canadian taxpayers may need our own Boston Tea Party to set the record straight.

[REMINGTON JIM]

I've said it for the last couple of years - the INDIAN's are getting all the Land and will RULE the F&W dept of BC too ! :mad: we are phucked here and Horgan (NDP) :evil: is in on it ALL too ! RJ

[adriaticum]

It should be in politics even if it's hunting related.

[browningboy]

The indians will get the land and all of us will be like WTF now? and we'll keep apologizing for it, absolutely disgusting!

[Surrey Boy]

Legal hunting is about to be severely restricted.

European-Canadians had better band together if we don't want to suffer like South Africa.

[adriaticum]

It will be interesting to see what develops from this.
Could be good, could be a disaster.

[ElectricDyck]

We don't have to guess how it will work out..how'd it work out in the Chilko Taseko lake area..anybody been out there hunting in the last few years?

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/chilko-lake-tourism-operators-appeal-for-help-against-nightmare

"With the 2018-2019 hunting season underway, the Xeni Gwet’in would like to remind all visitors that hunting is not permitted within the Declared Title Lands, nor will access be permitted through the Title Lands for hunting purposes."

https://www.tsilhqotin.ca/declared-title-area/

[Grizzlydick]

It should be in politics even if it's hunting related.

that's the problem right there.

[Arctic Lake]

Well I wonder if we need to give serious thought to where we apply for an LEH Moose Draw or for any LEH Draw
Imagine you get a draw and have not had one in years ,then you get it , Sorry FN’s won’t let you hunt it .
Aggahhhh ! Man we as hunters of all species had better get it together ! It’s coming at us from all sides Firearm restrictions, The Antis, FN , oh brother ! What do we do ? I’m all ears !
Arctic Lake

[DarekG]

There will be a lot of non-compliance, and likely much worse too.

[Rob Chipman]

Jack Woodward is a very experienced lawyer when it comes to working on Indigenous issues. His viewpoint can't be ignored. At the same time, some of his views in that piece are pure opinion and may not come to pass.

One thing that hunters need to come to terms with is that most of BC is unceded land. That's not an opinion or a statement of personal political values - it's a simple fact. We can rail at John Horgan and the NDP, but the politics and politicians aren't the real cause of this and they can't do a ton top fix it.


When the British government took control of what would become Canada the king made a pretty strong statement indicating that Indigenous title was a real thing and only the crown could alienate it from the First Nations.

When the Crown got to BC there were a few treaties entered into (generally called "historical" treaties) but most of the province was never alienated from First Nations through treaty. The governments of the day just started claiming the land and moving First Nations here and there. (Again, this isn't a political opinion or worldview - it's just the facts).

The First Nations took exception to it then, and kept doing it. There are several declarations through 1910-11 that show this.

That developed into the court battles we've seen in our lifetimes, and it's clear that Indigenous people have a very strong legal case *according to Canadian statue law going back to King George*.

That is why it's accurate to call much of BC "unceded land"; there was never any real transfer of ownership *according to Canadian (and before that British) law* .

It's possible that Jack Woodward's predictions are incorrect, but it's more likely that they are fairly accurate.

The Province is trying to fight this, but they're in a political bind - they're arguing that if a First Nation "abandons" part of it's territory they abandon their claims to it (First Nations and others make a counter argument that's pretty good) *but* the Province has also adopted UNDRIP (DRIPA). Kind of tough to suck and blow at the same time. Someone is going to get the hind tit and it's not going to be the guys at the table (Fns and govt) but rather this not at the table.

What will that look like? As ElectricDyck points out, look at Region 5. Anyone wanting to hunt in Tsilhqot’in Nation Declared Title Lands has to get permission from the Tsilhqot’in National Government and comply with TNG law. That is the current state of affairs, and it is legal and it's not going to change. It's not clear if you need a BC hunting license and tags as well, but it is clear that within TNDTL the Tsilhqot'in control who hunts and fishes.

If you want to hunt parts of R5 that a are only accessed through TNDTL you may (depending on what the TNG decides) be blocked from transiting through their territory. The legality of this has not been tested and the provincial government says they're negotiating how this can be resolved, but do not expect a fast solution. If you doubt what I'm saying check your LEH notices from the province which will confirm my statements.


It's important to recognize how important the Tsilhqot'in are in this. They declined to go along with the BC Treaty process, chose to go through court, and they did much better than what's the treaty process had promised. Their success is a model for other nations.


What do non-Indigenous hunters and anglers do?

As Adriaticum says: "Could be good, could be a disaster."

The law is not on the side of non-Indigenous hunters and anglers. Be clear on that. Do not expect the province to go to court on your behalf and win. It will not happen.

First Nations will get an increasing amount of control over the land base.

If you can't win in court because you don't have a good case, what do you do? My answer would be: negotiate the best outcomes that you can so that other people don't negotiate them for you.

The province is not likely to expend much time or energy looking out for non-Indigenous hunters and anglers. I don't know how it will be done, but any non-Indigenous hunter or angler who wants to keep doing what we do over most of BC is going to have to figure out how to come to terms with and influence the new reality.

Much as I like Surrey Boy's observations, we are not going to see and sort of SA European coalition banding together in Canada (not that it worked in SA anyway).

[dakoda62]

It will be interesting to see what develops from this.
Could be good, could be a disaster.
Nothing good will come of it.

[adriaticum]

Nothing good will come of it.

I am not necessarily convinced.
First nations and hunters/outdoorsmen are natural allies. I have always believed this.
Our interests are very much the same.
We have to figure out how to work together.
If we do, we will all benefit.
If we don't, there could be trouble.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Nothing good will come of it.

ONLY for the INDIAN's - the rest of us Indigenous Tax Payers of BC will be phucked over as usual ! :mad: RJ

[REMINGTON JIM]

I am not necessarily convinced.
First nations and hunters/outdoorsmen are natural allies. I have always believed this.
Our interests are very much the same.
We have to figure out how to work together.
If we do, we will all benefit.
If we don't, there could be trouble.

Yea - WELL good LUCK with that Belief ! - your Being very Naive ! jmo :tongue: RJ

[RugDoctor]

There will be violence. It’s unavoidable.

[Surrey Boy]

There will be violence. It’s unavoidable.

First, a culture of non-native identity needs to form. The IRA succeeded, the Status Indians succeed because they've established among their own people an Us vs Them context that defines their identity.

Mein Kampf lays out how to establish a culture that will sustain such a conflict. They're using that same method against us, we need to understand the paradigm.

[Rob Chipman]

^^^K, first, the IRA was spawned by a united ethnic culture/identity that had existed in opposition to the English for.....forever.

Indigenous people in Canada have had hundreds of fully formed cultures and identities for....forever. Status Indians didn't establish any Us vs Them context to define their identity. The very term arises from Canadian legislation that...defines Indigenous identity. You cannot pretend otherwise no matter how much you might like it.

But it's the last part that really exemplifies why I enjoy your input (and I'm not kidding about that): do you really think we're going to have a successful movement to establish non-Indigenous rights to hunt and fish by recommending to people the we follow Adolf Hitler's playbook? I actually snorted my coffee over the screen when I saw that.

Not to mention, Hitler's playbook didn't exactly work out so well for him, did it? :-)

[303savage]

"we will keep apologizing for it." I won't be apologizing, The natives would still be throwing rocks at their meal if we weren't here.

[Surrey Boy]

Mein Kampf, along with Das Kapital, essentially defines identity politics. Very readable and educational, and I see its premises and paradigms practiced in modern collective identity movements.

Marx and Hitler were wrong about many things, but were also very perceptive in ways that modern westerners are ignorant.

I wouldn't consider myself a communist or fascist, but those ideologies appeal to many people for normal reasons, and I hope we might understand it before it's too late to effectively resist.

Edit: The Chinese Communist Party is essentially a Nazi Party that believes in Han supremacy. Islam amounts to Arabic supremacy.

"Historical Rights" are tenuous, as anyone familiar with medieval history will know.

[adriaticum]

Ceeded/ unceeded land question is stupid.
What does it mean ceeded unceeded?

This issue exists only in Canada it seems.

[adriaticum]

In fact this whole bill c-21 thing makes me think it's a prelude to what might be happening with this ceeded unceeded bullshit.

[Surrey Boy]

In fact this whole bill c-21 thing makes me think it's a prelude to what might be happening with this ceeded unceeded bullshit.

Dozens of Gerald Stanley incidents to follow?

[adriaticum]

Dozens of Gerald Stanley incidents to follow?

No, just one 1861 incident.

[KodiakHntr]

I am not necessarily convinced.
First nations and hunters/outdoorsmen are natural allies. I have always believed this.
Our interests are very much the same.
We have to figure out how to work together.
If we do, we will all benefit.
If we don't, there could be trouble.

I am genuinely curious about this. How are our interests the same?
I don't see the interests being aligned at all.


One historical aspect that very few people acknowledge or talk about is that indigenous groups pretty much across the landscape were nomadic. Not many people really sit down and think about that, or why that might be.
Predominantly it was a food source issue though. It was a lot of work to pick up and peoples entire life. Historically, EVERYTHING in a given area would be eaten. Once there was nothing left to eat, it was time to move to the next area. And once EVERYTHING there was eaten, it was time to move again.
That is why you see a more developed culture on coastal indigenous groups than you do with interior groups. More food resources and easier winters on the coast. They had an easier lifestyle and more time available.
That is a fundamental difference in beliefs between indigenous groups in the interior and outdoorsmen. Eat everything there is available, vs grow a segment of the resource locally.

[jkraus]

Not to be rude but I think you had better wake up. That is already happening and has been for awhile.

[jkraus]

Well I wonder if we need to give serious thought to where we apply for an LEH Moose Draw or for any LEH Draw
Imagine you get a draw and have not had one in years ,then you get it , Sorry FN’s won’t let you hunt it .
Aggahhhh ! Man we as hunters of all species had better get it together ! It’s coming at us from all sides Firearm restrictions, The Antis, FN , oh brother ! What do we do ? I’m all ears !
Arctic Lake

Not to be rude but I think you had better wake up. That is already happening and has been for awhile.

[Downtown]

We don't have to guess how it will work out..how'd it work out in the Chilko Taseko lake area..anybody been out there hunting in the last few years?

https://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/chilko-lake-tourism-operators-appeal-for-help-against-nightmare

"With the 2018-2019 hunting season underway, the Xeni Gwet’in would like to remind all visitors that hunting is not permitted within the Declared Title Lands, nor will access be permitted through the Title Lands for hunting purposes."

https://www.tsilhqotin.ca/declared-title-area/


Until a Tourism Business Operator pledges his full and public support to the BC Resident hunting Community and the BC Guide Outfitting Industry, I wont have any Sympathy for such Operators. Unfortunately, many of those so called "non consumptive" Tourist Business where and still are against hunting and Guide-Outfitting.

Cheers

[adriaticum]

I am genuinely curious about this. How are our interests the same?
I don't see the interests being aligned at all.


One historical aspect that very few people acknowledge or talk about is that indigenous groups pretty much across the landscape were nomadic. Not many people really sit down and think about that, or why that might be.
Predominantly it was a food source issue though. It was a lot of work to pick up and peoples entire life. Historically, EVERYTHING in a given area would be eaten. Once there was nothing left to eat, it was time to move to the next area. And once EVERYTHING there was eaten, it was time to move again.
That is why you see a more developed culture on coastal indigenous groups than you do with interior groups. More food resources and easier winters on the coast. They had an easier lifestyle and more time available.
That is a fundamental difference in beliefs between indigenous groups in the interior and outdoorsmen. Eat everything there is available, vs grow a segment of the resource locally.


I was going to write a new thread explaining this, but might as well do it here.


Outdoorsmen and First Nations align in several key areas.

1. We love outdoors, we love to hunt, we love to fish, we want to preserve as much of natural environment as possible so we have healthy populations of fish and wildlife.
We do not like urbanization, we do not like what the uncontrolled resource development has done to this province, we don't see any benefits from many resource developments done by foreign companies with foreign workers.
I don't think First Nations are looking for land to be nomadic.
There are no more nomadic people's other than in some very nomadic places like. Siberia, some parts of Amazon.
I think we can all pretty much say that population densities across most of the world demand that we produce most of our own food.
I think First Nations understand that well.
We should not be thinking about the Indians and their culture that Columbus first encountered.
North American aboriginal people have evolved as well. We live in a connected world and learn from many different sources.

2. We are all tired of government bullshit from all levels of government. Governments are not our friend, they are not a friend of the First Nations either. They are not a friend of the environment.
Current economic system we have is not working and we are getting scalped for nothing.
The idea that First Nations govern themselves is not necessarily a bad idea. Not necessarily good either. Remains to be seen.
But, who wouldn't want to government themselves in this country?
Is Maverick party not exact idea that we govern ourselves in the west?
That we are through with federal bullshit? Is it not?
I am sure First Nations will have much simpler governments. First Nations culture is much more egalitarian than western european.
Unless one thinks that everything is right with the politics in Canada, I am sure you are seeking simpler, fairer, government and an economic system where 1 percent do not own the 90 percent.
Most of us are pretty much serfs today.
Who is to say that FN would not come up with a system to govern their land and people that is better?


All of our major problems around the world come down to 2 issues:
1. Human Over population
2. Government overreach into our lives.
Almost every major socio economic problem you can name today, is caused by one these issues.
Including wildlife decline and overfishing.
Politicians just keep sweeping the truth under the rug.
They just care about votes and money right now because they know there is no afterlife.
All governments are doing is working to take our money and keep us off our property.


I was watching recently some shows in Africa.
They call it "Poaching" and "Habitat destruction".
Is it poaching when you kill an animal to feed your family because it's the only source of food you have?
Is it habitat destruction when people deforest an area to grow crops and raise cattle?
No, it's called survival. And there is no other way for them to do it.
So the reason we are losing species around the world is not climate change, it's human over population.

[quadrakid]

We as non native hunters are in an increaingly poorer position as more and more native bands win their cases for getting back control of their territoriies. We will have to deal with native people to access hunting and fishing. God forbid they ever visit HBC. If you think a provincial government or federal government is going to wave a magic wand and reverse this course you are dreaming. The new reality is already here .

[Ride Red]

I am not necessarily convinced.
First nations and hunters/outdoorsmen are natural allies. I have always believed this.
Our interests are very much the same.
We have to figure out how to work together.
If we do, we will all benefit.
If we don't, there could be trouble.

How so? They whine, we get phucked = no problem?

[adriaticum]

How so? They whine, we get phucked = no problem?


Well pal, government is a stick.
A stick that we used to smack indians over the head.
now Indians are using that stick to smack us over the head.
That's how that works.

The problem is that people without moral principle, or any grounding in ethics are allowed to roam the halls of this vast country.
Think of government as a criminal organization that will do anyone's bidding.

First Nations have learned to wield that stick.

White people say nothing when criminals steal, rob, kill. We are used to it, that's why we don't raise a stink about it.
We have normalized crime, poverty, homelessness.
It's all a gimmick that politicians use to win votes.

When Europeans first came to this continent most of the lived peacefully with the natives. In fact Cherokee indians have embraced Europeans and taught them everything to survive.
These Europeans lived with them like family.
Until some government cockrach decided that he wanted all the land.
This created the great Cherokee trail of tears.
Government IS the problem.

[AllDay]

I think that if we put an honest effort into building relationships with Indigenous Hunters and communities we can come to a place of greater understanding and greater cooperation. The problem is that this would require a huge investment regarding how to communicate with one another. I think most people in Canada want to see everyone do better and if we can work on commonalities and build from there, there could be a positive outcome . However, I do not know if people on both sides of this issue are ready to do the personal work it would require to open those types of conversations. It is challenging due to the extreme emotion both sides feel in regards to the management of wildlife and resources. All I know is polarization, stereotyping (on both sides), and dismissive attitudes do not work well to facilitate trust building.

[ElectricDyck]

I am not necessarily convinced.
First nations and hunters/outdoorsmen are natural allies. I have always believed this.
Our interests are very much the same.
We have to figure out how to work together.
If we do, we will all benefit.
If we don't, there could be trouble.

Why do FN need to work with us? They do what they want and every time they go to court they get more rights. Meanwhile tax payers paid for the lawyers educations and then the subsequent court costs lol

[Ride Red]

Thanks for the lesson pal. Now back to the question, how are we natural allies?

[IronNoggin]

For any wondering just why Scott Fraser ran so damn hard away from the last election, wonder no more.
He was one of the architects of this particular mess.
And yet the local riding went to his same party, as did the entire province... http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/images/smilies/confused0024.gif

Nog

[adriaticum]

Do you guys understand that the top issue for FNs right now is how to get water to all their communities.
And our top issue is to send a guy to jail for refering his daughter as her, because she got injected with testosterone?
Does anyone see anything wrong here?

[adriaticum]

Why do FN need to work with us? They do what they want and every time they go to court they get more rights. Meanwhile tax payers paid for the lawyers educations and then the subsequent court costs lol


They don't.
They don't have to work with us if we take the approach that they don't and that we don't have to talk to them.
That's where cooperation comes in handy.
We will have to change how we think about some things.

Just think about one thing.
Have First Nations ever asked for anything from the government that you wouldn't want to have?

[adriaticum]

Thanks for the lesson pal. Now back to the question, how are we natural allies?


Read one of my previous posts.

[adriaticum]

One problem that First Nations have is that they are now used to rely on the government for handouts.
They are not self sufficient as much as they used to be.

[Ride Red]

Read one of my previous posts.

Which one?

[ElectricDyck]

I don't know, more than ever now I don't see a path forward that changes any outcomes..relationship or not. If i had control over my private hunting grounds and my bills were paid by taxpayers like FN do selfish me would not let anyone else hunt it....and if I did I would sell hunts to foereigners who can afford a to pay 10k plus for hunts...

[adriaticum]

I don't know, more than ever now I don't see a path forward that changes any outcomes..relationship or not. If i had control over my private hunting grounds and my bills were paid by taxpayers like FN do selfish me would not let anyone else hunt it....and if I did I would sell hunts to foereigners who can afford a to pay 10k plus for hunts...


Well how can you expect to hunt first nations land then if you wouldn't allow anyone to hunt your private land?

[Surrey Boy]

Just think about one thing.
Have First Nations ever asked for anything from the government that you wouldn't want to have?

Equality under the law, individual freedoms? They're not asking for that. Taxpayers have become serfs.

[KodiakHntr]

I was going to write a new thread explaining this, but might as well do it here.


Outdoorsmen and First Nations align in several key areas.

1. We love outdoors, we love to hunt, we love to fish, we want to preserve as much of natural environment as possible so we have healthy populations of fish and wildlife.
We do not like urbanization, we do not like what the uncontrolled resource development has done to this province, we don't see any benefits from many resource developments done by foreign companies with foreign workers.
I don't think First Nations are looking for land to be nomadic.
There are no more nomadic people's other than in some very nomadic places like. Siberia, some parts of Amazon.
I think we can all pretty much say that population densities across most of the world demand that we produce most of our own food.
I think First Nations understand that well.
We should not be thinking about the Indians and their culture that Columbus first encountered.
North American aboriginal people have evolved as well. We live in a connected world and learn from many different sources.

2. We are all tired of government bullshit from all levels of government. Governments are not our friend, they are not a friend of the First Nations either. They are not a friend of the environment.
Current economic system we have is not working and we are getting scalped for nothing.
The idea that First Nations govern themselves is not necessarily a bad idea. Not necessarily good either. Remains to be seen.
But, who wouldn't want to government themselves in this country?
Is Maverick party not exact idea that we govern ourselves in the west?
That we are through with federal bullshit? Is it not?
I am sure First Nations will have much simpler governments. First Nations culture is much more egalitarian than western european.
Unless one thinks that everything is right with the politics in Canada, I am sure you are seeking simpler, fairer, government and an economic system where 1 percent do not own the 90 percent.
Most of us are pretty much serfs today.
Who is to say that FN would not come up with a system to govern their land and people that is better?








Ohhhh.... Ok.

Well, I can see that you have a very romanticized view of indigenous peoples in BC.
And having read some of your further posts on this thread regarding this, all I can do is shake my head.

[IronNoggin]

Ohhhh.... Ok.

Well, I can see that you have a very romanticized view of indigenous peoples in BC.
And having read some of your further posts on this thread regarding this, all I can do is shake my head.

Yep. Indeed.

Nog

[Surrey Boy]

Ohhhh.... Ok.

Well, I can see that you have a very romanticized view of indigenous peoples in BC.
And having read some of your further posts on this thread regarding this, all I can do is shake my head.

Ask him about Bosniaks.

[adriaticum]

Ohhhh.... Ok.

Well, I can see that you have a very romanticized view of indigenous peoples in BC.
And having read some of your further posts on this thread regarding this, all I can do is shake my head.

I have rarely been accused of being romantic. LOL

I want government gang out of my business.

[adriaticum]

Ask him about Bosniaks.

What about Bosniaks?
What do you know about it?

[Surrey Boy]

What about Bosniaks?
What do you know about it?

I know Slobodan Milosevic is a hero to a great many Canadians of Yugoslavian heritage.

[browningboy]

Indians are awesome, nothing like just hanging around, drinking, free treaty cheques, if you run out of beer block a road and get some more free cash, hand out constantly.... If they get the land they should pay for it's dealings such as forest fires, slides or WHY out of their money, oh wait time to block another road! LOL
When will the tit dry?

[adriaticum]

I know Slobodan Milosevic is a hero to a great many Canadians of Yugoslavian heritage.


Milosevic is a fool.
If you took 3 old women from the cultures that live at the highest peaks in the country and put them together they would have found a better solution than the clowns that were elected to run the country.
I have more faith in old women, than in politicians.

[adriaticum]

Indians are awesome, nothing like just hanging around, drinking, free treaty cheques, if you run out of beer block a road and get some more free cash, hand out constantly.... If they get the land they should pay for it's dealings such as forest fires, slides or WHY out of their money, oh wait time to block another road! LOL
When will the tit dry?


Tit will never dry up, because the head doesn't have a brain.

[Surrey Boy]

Integration is the only way to establish peace, and integration is the last thing they or the Crown will choose.

[mikeman20]

Integration is the only way to establish peace, and integration is the last thing they or the Crown will choose.

Yep. You cant run a country with two tiers of people and differing rules, they will inevitably clash.

[Surrey Boy]

Yep. You cant run a country with two tiers of people and differing rules, they will inevitably clash.

The remaining question is, when will the taxpayer class begin to solidify and defend itself?

I think it'll take a decade of agitation until we have the cohesion to sustain resistance.

[adriaticum]

The remaining question is, when will the taxpayer class begin to solidify and defend itself?

I think it'll take a decade of agitation until we have the cohesion to sustain resistance.

Never. Taxpayers are already in the minority

[Rob Chipman]

Mein Kampf, along with Das Kapital, essentially defines identity politics. Very readable and educational, and I see its premises and paradigms practiced in modern collective identity movements.

Marx and Hitler were wrong about many things, but were also very perceptive in ways that modern westerners are ignorant.

I wouldn't consider myself a communist or fascist, but those ideologies appeal to many people for normal reasons, and I hope we might understand it before it's too late to effectively resist.

Edit: The Chinese Communist Party is essentially a Nazi Party that believes in Han supremacy. Islam amounts to Arabic supremacy.

"Historical Rights" are tenuous, as anyone familiar with medieval history will know.

You're not wrong. Problem is, it's tough to recruit people to the cause once you mention Mein Kampf. Part of the reason I like your contribution is that you see things like the above. Average Joe? Not so much.

[Rob Chipman]

Ceeded/ unceeded land question is stupid.
What does it mean ceeded unceeded?

This issue exists only in Canada it seems.

"Cede" means to give up control or power.

In BC/Canadian/British law when you transfer ownership (control) of land you do specific acts to make the transfer of ownership legal.

If you own real estate in BC and you sell it you've essentially "ceded" it. If someone comes along and just claims your land the government won't recognize the claim of the new person, but will recognize your title.

In Canada the Crown recognized Indigenous title at least as far back as 1763. You can argue that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 *didn't* do that, but the Supreme Court of Canada disagrees. I could be wrong, but as far was I understand it all the land claims that are settled through the courts trace it all back to 1763.

[Rob Chipman]

Why do FN need to work with us? They do what they want and every time they go to court they get more rights. Meanwhile tax payers paid for the lawyers educations and then the subsequent court costs lol


A lot of Indigenous people will answer that by saying a) they don't have capacity to do everything themselves and b) they'll point out that government isn't exactly their friend. (Adriaticum isn't crazy with a lot of his explanations. In fact, if you test what he's saying you'll see lots of it is spot on).

[.330 Dakota]

The FN dont follow the laws, they do what they want where and when they want. When the laws become ridiculous, we wont follow them either. I wonder now why we buy hunting licenses, why we bother with firearms licenses,,its the majority of citizens being ruled by a stupid minority in Govt. Glad Im not a young guy,,dont wanna deal with this BS for another 40 years,,seems like the morons of this world are taking over, and Im not just referring to this issue

[BimmerBob]

Is there a list of ceded and unceded land in BC? Or, is it all considered unceded by the Indians and therefore the courts?

[Arctic Lake]

From a quick search apparently 95% of land in BC is unceeded . I also found this http://www.bctreaty.ca/map
Arctic Lake

Is there a list of ceded and unceded land in BC? Or, is it all considered unceded by the Indians and therefore the courts?

[BimmerBob]

From a quick search apparently 95% of land in BC is unceeded . I also found this http://www.bctreaty.ca/map
Arctic Lake

So... since the land we hunt on is unceded why would we need to have a BC Hunting license or species tags to hunt on it? Could we not just go at it like the indians do and hunt and then go to court and ask them to make up their minds? Are we going by BC Government law or indian law on unceded territory?

[Arctic Lake]

You know that’s a good question and I think this is what needs clarification and ultimately is going to be decided . I think It applies to resource extraction as well .
Arctic Lake
So... since the land we hunt on is unceded why would we need to have a BC Hunting license or species tags to hunt on it? Could we not just go at it like the indians do and hunt and then go to court and ask them to make up their minds? Are we going by BC Government law or indian law on unceded territory?

[Rob Chipman]

So... since the land we hunt on is unceded why would we need to have a BC Hunting license or species tags to hunt on it? Could we not just go at it like the indians do and hunt and then go to court and ask them to make up their minds? Are we going by BC Government law or indian law on unceded territory?

This is off the top of my head, so forgive any errors, but....

There are a lot of treaties on Vancouver Island. These are referred to as the Douglas Treaties or "historical" treaties. They aren't really solid as there is an argument that the FNs involved did not give full and informed consent. It's unclear whether those lands are actually ceded or not (and it's likely "not").

There is Treaty 8, in the northeast of the province (as well as Alberta, Saskatchewan and part of the Northwest Territories). It is said by many that Treaty 8 lands are ceded, but I don't know if that means any sort of full and final settlement.

The Nisga'a Final Agreement was the first modern treaty signed in BC. For what it's worth the Nisga'a contested the claim of Crown ownership as early as 1887. Do the math: they were fighting with Victoria over their lands for over 100 years.

The BC Treaty Commission has been trying to complete more modern treaties, but you know what "government is trying" means. In this case it means there are 7 modern treaties being implemented - the Tsawassen Nation treaty, the Tla'amin Nation and 5 May-Nulth Nations.

My understanding of things is that when the BC Treaty Commission stared the idea was that FNs might get 2%-5% of their traditional territories. The Tsilhqot'in said "Thanks, but no thanks" and decided to go to court, where they got 20% of their traditional territory. That kind of hurt the prospects for the BC Treaty Commission. FWIW, the Tsilhqot'in now control who hunts what in Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Lands, and they also prohibit access through that territory for anyone wanting to hunt. This access restriction is known, understood and accepted but the Province. The Province says they're trying to negotiate access through TNDTL, but they also say "Don't hold your breath".

The Tsilhqot'in, or at least some Tsilhqot'in say "We apply our law to all of our traditional territory because although we only have 20% of it back as of now, we're going to get the other 80%, so we may as well just apply the law everywhere".

So, to your question: why do you need a BC hunting license or tags to hunt on unceded land? Simple. Where the First Nation involved hasn't gained control of the land it's effectively Crown land because the Crown claims to own it and so the Crown imposes it's laws on us.

Do you need a BC hunting license to hunt Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Land? If the TNG gave you permission I think the answer is no, you don't need a BC hunting license or tag. You might be in trouble if you're in possession of wildlife without observing BC law once you're out of TNDTL, but it's probably a moot point - The Tsilhqot'in aren't letting many non-Indigenous hunters hunt their title lands as far as I know.

What will happen in the future? It seems clear to me that there will be a Canadian federal government involve in hunting and angling, a BC provincial government involved in hunting and angling, and multiple Indigenous governments involved in hunting and angling. Non-Indigenous hunters and anglers are going to need Indigenous government permissions to hunt or fish, and those permissions may or may not be available. If they are available they will likely all have differing requirements.

The future is coming. The province is supposed to represent non-Indigenous British Columbians in any negotiations with Indigenous groups. If you're confident that the province will do a good job of that, excellent. Rest easy.

If you're not? Start making concerted efforts to ensure that your elected reps do what you want them to. Right now those reps don't even know who most of you are, let alone what you want and why they should get it for you. Among other things I'm trying to get a network of people together who will regularly meet with MLAs and MPs and tell those guys the same message, repeatedly, and make sure that our elected reps understand that any reconciliation that does not take our concerns into account simply cannot last.

But....if people don't get that message to MLAs an MPS and there are only a few of us telling the story, guess what? The MLAs and MPS will blow off those of us trying to influence them.

[Ride Red]

Thanks Rob.

[BimmerBob]

Yes, thanks Rob for taking the time to share your thoughts and some of the history with us.

[RugDoctor]

There will be violence. Ceded.....unceded......no such thing as either because it won’t matter a shit if they cede the land or not when they come for it with force and are met with force. Government will loose their control over both sides and it will get ugly. Both sides fighting each other, and both sides fighting the government.

we need to stop seeing it as “the government” and see it for what it is....a group of politicians who should be held responsible for their folly. “The government” is a veil that politicians hide behind. They are men and women in the employ of the people and should be personally accountable for their misdeeds. Misdeeds....not mistakes. They make very few mistakes but are responsible for all of the problems we face....the men and women who call themselves government rather than admitting that they are individuals with jobs and responsibilities.

they alone are responsible for the Indian industry, and they alone profit from it. We pay....indians continue to suffer the indignities inflicted upon the so the politicians, lawyers, and judges can profit.

[REMINGTON JIM]

[QUOTE=IronNoggin;2242872]For any wondering just why Scott Fraser ran so damn hard away from the last election, wonder no more.
He was one of the architects of this particular mess.
And yet the local riding went to his same party, as did the entire province... http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/images/smilies/confused0024.gif

Scott F was just a another USELESS CSer of the NDP :evil: cesspole ! jmo RJ

[Surrey Boy]

There will be violence. Ceded.....unceded......no such thing as either because it won’t matter a shit if they cede the land or not when they come for it with force and are met with force. Government will loose their control over both sides and it will get ugly. Both sides fighting each other, and both sides fighting the government.

we need to stop seeing it as “the government” and see it for what it is....a group of politicians who should be held responsible for their folly. “The government” is a veil that politicians hide behind. They are men and women in the employ of the people and should be personally accountable for their misdeeds. Misdeeds....not mistakes. They make very few mistakes but are responsible for all of the problems we face....the men and women who call themselves government rather than admitting that they are individuals with jobs and responsibilities.

they alone are responsible for the Indian industry, and they alone profit from it. We pay....indians continue to suffer the indignities inflicted upon the so the politicians, lawyers, and judges can profit.

While I agree with you that we live under an illegitimate kleptocracy, which is perpetuated by the unaccountable and unjust judiciary, remember that the Chinese Communist Party and Muslim Brotherhood hold significant power within Canadian institutions and internationally.

Any unrest that interrupts international trade will be countered by the UN, which would be catastrophic.

[Jagermeister]

British Columbian taxpayer.

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSEAIG1rYrwHehYzAEdKTQJcAB8eZVj_ vBdOg&usqp=CAU

[boxhitch]

Found another interesting document showing indigens claimed territories, it list most communities in BC and they band name
cnc.bc.ca/docs Indigenous Territory Guide British Columbia for the pdf
8 pages or I would just copy to here

[boxhitch]

There will be violence. Ceded.....unceded......no such thing as either because it won’t matter a shit if they cede the land or not when they come for it with force and are met with force. Government will loose their control over both sides and it will get ugly. Both sides fighting each other, and both sides fighting the government.
I doubt it will come to that. Likely the bands don't really want to chase us off of what was once our land, but they will get control and be able to tax as they deem suitable. Indigins are already recognized as another government to deal with.
Taxpayers for the most part will continue along as usual, head in the sand, glad to have a home, happy ways happy ways
Turd got it right when he legalized weed, kumbaya

[adriaticum]

I doubt it will come to that. Likely the bands don't really want to chase us off of what was once our land, but they will get control and be able to tax as they deem suitable. Indigins are already recognized as another government to deal with.
Taxpayers for the most part will continue along as usual, head in the sand, glad to have a home, happy ways happy ways
Turd got it right when he legalized weed, kumbaya
I don't think taxpayers will will continue to pay as usual.
I think there will be a reckoning

[Ride Red]

I don't think taxpayers will will continue to pay as usual.
I think there will be a reckoning

We will until FN are made to stand on their own two feet. But, without the revenue from all these lands, we will get phucked harder to cover costs. The reckoning, maybe a war.

[ElectricDyck]

I think it will be the frog in pot slowly heated toboiling, death of a thousand cuts...most will remain asleep until its too.late..

Majority of hunters I talk to have no idea whats coming, fisherman seem to be realizing a bit...as far as general people and politics most dont understand the severity...they dont believe me when I tell them there is a doctor doing gender re assignments on kids at the abby hospital for example..

[Gun Dog]

From the article:

“When First Nations do assume ownership of their land, they, unlike federal and provincial governments, are not allowed to destroy the fundamental economic value and productivity of the land,” Woodward said, “so, they’re forced by our legal system to be good stewards.”

That's a giant assumption given that many First Nations individuals ignore the legal system now.

There's this big fallacy that "the government" (for example) is a single person that acts on our behalf. In reality the government is made up of thousands of departments and hundred of thousands (or millions) of people and they don't agree and act against each other all the time.

The "First Nations" don't act as a single person either. Some might act as good stewards and neighbours and some don't care at all. I don't live near a band but from what's I've seen and read most bands have a very loose "rule of law" and there's no consequence for ignoring the decisions of the group or elders or elected leaders and doing whatever they want. Some bands aren't "good stewards" of their own village. I don't see them managing an actual territory.

It doesn't matter -- once the Chinese have bought up all the resources they won't put up with "unceded" anything. Or maybe they'll deal directly with the new stewards for resources and some gallbladders.

[Moose63]

A lot of Indigenous people will answer that by saying a) they don't have capacity to do everything themselves and b) they'll point out that government isn't exactly their friend. (Adriaticum isn't crazy with a lot of his explanations. In fact, if you test what he's saying you'll see lots of it is spot on).

When I think about it, we Hunters would have a better chance of bringing back the Grizzly hunt with FN than with Government

[Kill-da-wabbit]

When I think about it, we Hunters would have a better chance of bringing back the Grizzly hunt with FN than with Government
Yeah, at $30,000 a tag...

[Flyingfisher]

Yeah, at $30,000 a tag...

I think that it will all come down to money, as it always does. I wonder how much the natives are going to be charging for a moose or an elk tag? My guess is $10,000.

[Jagermeister]

Found another interesting document showing indigens claimed territories, it list most communities in BC and they band name
cnc.bc.ca/docs Indigenous Territory Guide British Columbia for the pdf
8 pages or I would just copy to here
The page does not exist. anymore? No access 404 error. Top secret behind the closed doors of the College of New Caledonia. There's a colonial name if I ever saw one!

[RugDoctor]

When I think about it, we Hunters would have a better chance of bringing back the Grizzly hunt with FN than with Government
Thinking we can partner with FN is a mistake. There’s no partnership when one “partner” wants all the spoils plus what’s to come plus future earnings, plus, plus, plus.....they’ve been conditioned to believe they have a legitimate claim to the land.....they don’t. Only the corrupt peddle that shit for their own purposes....not to help the FN....who never owned any land to cede. It’s all a scam....The land belongs to those who developed it, those who made something from nothing. The settlers. Colonizer is not a dirty word, it’s something to be proud of.

[Surrey Boy]

Thinking we can partner with FN is a mistake. There’s no partnership when one “partner” wants all the spoils plus what’s to come plus future earnings, plus, plus, plus.....they’ve been conditioned to believe they have a legitimate claim to the land.....they don’t. Only the corrupt peddle that shit for their own purposes....not to help the FN....who never owned any land to cede. It’s all a scam....The land belongs to those who developed it, those who made something from nothing. The settlers. Colonizer is not a dirty word, it’s something to be proud of.

John Locke articulated it well, but you're on par!

If you're ever in Qualicum, stop in for a beverage.

[f350ps]

Thinking we can partner with FN is a mistake. There’s no partnership when one “partner” wants all the spoils plus what’s to come plus future earnings, plus, plus, plus.....they’ve been conditioned to believe they have a legitimate claim to the land.....they don’t. Only the corrupt peddle that shit for their own purposes....not to help the FN....who never owned any land to cede. It’s all a scam....The land belongs to those who developed it, those who made something from nothing. The settlers. Colonizer is not a dirty word, it’s something to be proud of.
This is a first for me, I totally agree with you! :) If it wasn’t for the Europeans the FN’s would probably still be living in teepees and killing each other and stealing the other tribes women!! K

[RugDoctor]

John Locke articulated it well, but you're on par!

If you're ever in Qualicum, stop in for a beverage.
I have family there and friends near there....as long as your offer is open, you can bet I’ll take you up on it.

[RugDoctor]

This is a first for me, I totally agree with you! :) If it wasn’t for the Europeans the FN’s would probably still be living in teepees and killing each other and stealing the other tribes women!! K
I’m willing to bet we agree on more than we disagree on. People tend to get passionate (and not so “passive” aggressive) when the disagree on political topics and especially on line.....driving wedges where there could otherwise be amicable disagreements or positive/productive debates.

[adriaticum]

"Cede" means to give up control or power.

In BC/Canadian/British law when you transfer ownership (control) of land you do specific acts to make the transfer of ownership legal.

If you own real estate in BC and you sell it you've essentially "ceded" it. If someone comes along and just claims your land the government won't recognize the claim of the new person, but will recognize your title.

In Canada the Crown recognized Indigenous title at least as far back as 1763. You can argue that the Royal Proclamation of 1763 *didn't* do that, but the Supreme Court of Canada disagrees. I could be wrong, but as far was I understand it all the land claims that are settled through the courts trace it all back to 1763.

That was more of a rhetorical question.
Ceeded, unceeded doesn't mean anything.
So what if the land is ceeded, or unceeded.
Does that give FN any moral highground, or does it give European settlers any moral high ground?
Land that was ceeded was ceeded under the pain of death.
And land that wasn't ceeded, nobody really cared to ceed it, because they assumed the rule of the whole territory.
The whole idea is stupid.

People need to wake up to the unscrupulous nature of government.

[wildcatter]

Thinking we can partner with FN is a mistake. There’s no partnership when one “partner” wants all the spoils plus what’s to come plus future earnings, plus, plus, plus.....they’ve been conditioned to believe they have a legitimate claim to the land.....they don’t. Only the corrupt peddle that shit for their own purposes....not to help the FN....who never owned any land to cede. It’s all a scam....The land belongs to those who developed it, those who made something from nothing. The settlers. Colonizer is not a dirty word, it’s something to be proud of.

You got that spot on!
I wish everybody would see this for what it is - EXTORTION! and nobody have the balls to say anything, that includes the impotent BC government.
Always reconciliation comes up in the discussion, well there will be no reconciliation, rather confrontation and it will be ugly.
So 3.5-4% of the total population wants the whole area of BC which is about the size of France, Germany and the Neterlands combined.
There are people who own large tracts of land, so are they going to be forced off of their land?
I only got a small property but I'll be damned if hand it over to them!

[saskbooknut]

So, if I understand correctly, you want recognition of your title to land, but screw the other guy whose title is recognized by the courts.
Good luck with that.

[RugDoctor]

So, if I understand correctly, you want recognition of your title to land, but screw the other guy whose title is recognized by the courts.
Good luck with that.
The courts are corrupt and need to be brought back to doing the right thing instead of the thing they find interesting or personally right. The courts do not work in the best interest of the citizenry. They manipulate the law for their own agenda, which is mostly about what interests them, and what keeps them employed, and what gives them the most authority and control. All components of our courts are the most arrogant and entitled “public servants” you’ll have the misfortune of handing pay checks over to.

[gcreek]

Money better spent representing the general public fighting for freedom of using public land vs. Indians than a couple of lakes surrounded by private property. I would even donate to a cause such as that.

[browningboy]

No one will stand up to this, everyone balks but they will get their land and we will just get hosed. Kind of sucks but really, for real who will do anything?
keep voting NDP!

[Ohwildwon]

So, what’s the deal with Indians

in Alberta, NW Territory, Yukon?

[saskbooknut]

The courts are corrupt and need to be brought back to doing the right thing instead of the thing they find interesting or personally right. The courts do not work in the best interest of the citizenry. They manipulate the law for their own agenda, which is mostly about what interests them, and what keeps them employed, and what gives them the most authority and control. All components of our courts are the most arrogant and entitled “public servants” you’ll have the misfortune of handing pay checks over to.
Canadian courts are among the least corrupt in the world.
They aren't perfect, but they aren't the US courts corrupted by political bias.
BC is simply reaping the results of more than 150 years of denial of Aboriginal interest by their government.
The legal precedent of Aboriginal title is clear and we'll established.
It would have been easier and cheaper to settle a long time ago, but fools procrastinated.

[Mulehahn]

Canadian courts are not corrupt. They are incompetent. Their sole purpose is to interpret the law. Nothing more. Look at the Carbon Tax ruling. The side that deemed it constitutional did so out of their pure feeling that climate change was a serious issue. There was no legal grounds, just pure grand standing on emotion. The dissenting side gave a lengthy, much lengthier than usual, argument citing all the legal reasons against it.

The same has been happening with First Nation issues for decades. Canadian laws are not being interpretated by the courts, their sole purpose. Instead they are being created by them based on emotions. You can't win against emotions.

[adriaticum]

Canadian courts work for the government to keep the people in their place.
Much like church worked to do the same through the centuries.
Now that the church is all but ignored, something is needed to replace it.
People take Court's word like gospel.
Like it's the right thing to do.
Like it's justice.
Same like preacher's once.

[Rob Chipman]

....People take Court's word like gospel.
Like it's the right thing to do.,.

Actually, people take the word of the Supreme Court because it sets out what will and will not be enforced by the government, and it sets out what the government can and cannot legally do. It ain't a religious thing.


Two examples: if the Supreme Court says that Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Land belongs to the Tsilhqot'in and that they can govern it, but I don't agree with the SCC and I don't like the rules the Tsilhqot'in impose, what can I do? I can't take them to court and win, as it's been decided. I can't take up arms against anyone, because the Feds, the Tsilhqot'in National Government and the Province will all agree that I'm committing a criminal act. There's nothing religious about that. It's just the way the forces of coercion are aligned.

Second example: the Tsilhqot'in prohibit hunting without TNG permission in TNDT lands. The government cannot over-rule them, because they'll lose in court. It's not religion. It's statute and common law.

You may not like it.

You may argue that government can throw out statute and common law and over-ride what Indigenous peoples have won through long and hard legal battles, and you are 100% correct, but....we are a long, long way from seeing that happen. There's very little benefit to existing governments to do that.

It's also about much more than "land claims" - if it was only that there would be much less worry about what the future holds. It's about sovereignty. This post's title includes the term "Crown land" - that concept is in dispute. It's extremely common for Indigenous people to argue that there is no such thing as Crown land, so there's no way "Crown land" can be given to anyone, anywhere, anytime.

[RugDoctor]

Courts and politicians in this country need a severe beat down. The overreach is disgusting. They snuck it in, and we allowed it to happen over many, many years. Now it’s so entrenched in our DNA to accept being walked on the only way we will regain control of our land and freedom is through the needed beat down. There are no consequences for politicians or the judiciary when they’re clearly not acting in accordance with the will of the MAJORITY.

[saskbooknut]

Courts don't act on "the will of the majority."
That's a seriously screwed up concept.
Courts act on legal precedent and interpretation of the intent of legislation.

[saskbooknut]

Courts don't act on "the will of the majority."
That's a seriously screwed up concept.
Courts act on legal precedent and interpretation of the intent of legislation.

[Rob Chipman]

Courts and politicians in this country need a severe beat down...the only way we will regain control of our land and freedom is through the needed beat down. There are no consequences for politicians or the judiciary when they’re clearly not acting in accordance with the will of the MAJORITY.


So...how do we deliver this beat down, exactly? :-)

[RugDoctor]

The point is that the courts act in their own interest.....not in the interest of the people....or the law. Worse yet, legislation is not enacted with the best interest of the average citizen but rather to allow the money and authority to flow and benefit the right people.

how we deliver this beat down.....no idea man. What I actually think will happen is all the wet noodles out there will continue to slowly acquiesce their (our) freedoms.

[adriaticum]

The beatdown can only be delivered by votes and taxes.

[charlie_horse]

So I dont have faith in the population to act before everything is too late so I'm of the frame of mind we will lose everything due to apathy. The amount of people that seem to be pro land back is mind boggling and it makes no sense to me.

However ive always been curious about laws regarding unceded land. If I am hunting on their land (as determined by the courts), what in theory should happen if I shoot a moose? Do I stand trial by their government? Does our provincial government now hold any power over that situation? I mean I know the answer to my question but could their be a case made that our provincial government doesn't have the authority to stop me anymore and I need to be dealt with by a band authority?

[BimmerBob]

So...how do we deliver this beat down, exactly? :-)

I think the clear point of all of this is that there can not be different classes of citizens in a country without it causing conflict. One class of citizen having rights and privileges that another class of citizens does not will only exacerbate slights either imagined or historical. The fact that two babies born in the same hospital on the same day to parents living in the same locale, where one has lifetime right to do things in the community and on the land that the others does not, is fundamentally wrong.

Traditional ways of doing things in a land of non-traditional customs is a pipe-dream, basically an impossibility as the pressure on the land would be insurmountable with added populations due to the increased lifespans of all people living on the land. If we agree that a senior level of our system of governance can set rules with regard to the land, laws and regulations if you will, then those laws MUST apply to all within the bounds of that land.

Differing rights for different classes of citizens within the same land based upon racial ethnicities has led to many conflicts throughout the world's history and someone must stand up to oppose the creation of yet another brick in the wall of ignorance and strife.

THIS IS NOT JUSTICE, it is judicial stupidity, it will lead to more and more conflict and there will be no winners. It is time to put emotions aside and use bold and brutal logic to end this BS once and for all. ONE LAND, ONE PEOPLE, ONE LAW FOR ALL!

[chilcotin hillbilly]

I have lost my business due to Titled land. Never fun loosing something you built from scratch. Government is a joke, bowing to UN at every tern. More businesses will be lost , and more families displaced due to titled land that is what is coming.

I used to love this country and province but libtards have ruined a once great nation. Not the Canada I grew up in that is for sure.

[Imdone]

I have lost my business due to Titled land. Never fun loosing something you built from scratch. Government is a joke, bowing to UN at every tern. More businesses will be lost , and more families displaced due to titled land that is what is coming.

I used to love this country and province but libtards have ruined a once great nation. Not the Canada I grew up in that is for sure.

Sorry to hear the reality of this for you and yours. Very troubling indeed. Considering you and your family are the type that GREW this Nation, made it what it was for a while.

The Liberal Feds and BC NDP Government have driven Racism Far far deeper than ever before in Canada. It will continue until, we are one nation, not this over zealous free ride handout.

1 Law. 1 Nation.

As many others have said, Canada is NOT what it was, and Racism is growing stronger than ever because of double and triple standards.
Sickening.

All the best to you CHB.

[browningboy]

I’ve said this time and time again, what will anyone do about it? Sweet FA, they will get their land and you will like it so to speak? It’s frustrating to say the least but in reality no one has the time to stand up for their rights.

[stosto]

Geeze, I came back to read up on spring bear hunting and instead ended up here reading this sh*t about mostly bigoted nonsense.

I hope that younger and smarter hunters understand that some concesions, both in species availability and land access, will need to be made. For the rest you, whatever..

[elker]

Geeze, I came back to read up on spring bear hunting and instead ended up here reading this sh*t about mostly bigoted nonsense.

I hope that younger and smarter hunters understand that some concesions, both in species availability and land access, will need to be made. For the rest you, whatever..


I disgree with you. Before you posted this (or before you sh*t), all other posts havd been spirited and helpful for readers to understand the views from two sides.

[Walking Buffalo]

So I dont have faith in the population to act before everything is too late so I'm of the frame of mind we will lose everything due to apathy. The amount of people that seem to be pro land back is mind boggling and it makes no sense to me.

However ive always been curious about laws regarding unceded land. If I am hunting on their land (as determined by the courts), what in theory should happen if I shoot a moose? Do I stand trial by their government? Does our provincial government now hold any power over that situation? I mean I know the answer to my question but could their be a case made that our provincial government doesn't have the authority to stop me anymore and I need to be dealt with by a band authority?

The legal answers already exist in federal and provincial law from the rest of the Country and could probably be applied in BC.

Currently, First Nations outside of BC can develop management plans to sell hunting licences to non Nation member people with the approval of the Federal government.
Or, First Nations can allow unlicenced hunting without a fee by non Nation member people to hunt on their land without Federal government approval.

The Federal governments have the legal authority to prosecute people that trespass on First Nations land.
The Federal and Provincial governments have the legal authority to prosecute people that illegally import and/or possess wildlife obtained from First Nations land Into another jurisdiction, such as the neighboring provincial lands (into BC).

If you shoot a moose on First Nations land without band authority, you are best off eating it where it lays.
If you are caught "exporting" it from First Nations land 'Into" BC, you will be as guilty of many infractions of Provincial and Federal law.

With time I expect that most First Nations will develop an independent court system to deal with trespassers and poachers.
They might impose greater penalties for Non Nation members than having to attend a sweat lodge ceremony....

[RugDoctor]

Geeze, I came back to read up on spring bear hunting and instead ended up here reading this sh*t about mostly bigoted nonsense.

I hope that younger and smarter hunters understand that some concesions, both in species availability and land access, will need to be made. For the rest you, whatever..
Go to the hunting threads then.....or contribute meaningfully rather than jumping on mid thread and calling people who have an interest in this topic bigots. In fact, I suppose if you feel this way, you probably don’t want to be on a forum with a bunch of bigots.....thanks for coming out. Bye now.

[Surrey Boy]

I think the clear point of all of this is that there can not be different classes of citizens in a country without it causing conflict. One class of citizen having rights and privileges that another class of citizens does not will only exacerbate slights either imagined or historical. The fact that two babies born in the same hospital on the same day to parents living in the same locale, where one has lifetime right to do things in the community and on the land that the others does not, is fundamentally wrong.

Traditional ways of doing things in a land of non-traditional customs is a pipe-dream, basically an impossibility as the pressure on the land would be insurmountable with added populations due to the increased lifespans of all people living on the land. If we agree that a senior level of our system of governance can set rules with regard to the land, laws and regulations if you will, then those laws MUST apply to all within the bounds of that land.

Differing rights for different classes of citizens within the same land based upon racial ethnicities has led to many conflicts throughout the world's history and someone must stand up to oppose the creation of yet another brick in the wall of ignorance and strife.

THIS IS NOT JUSTICE, it is judicial stupidity, it will lead to more and more conflict and there will be no winners. It is time to put emotions aside and use bold and brutal logic to end this BS once and for all. ONE LAND, ONE PEOPLE, ONE LAW FOR ALL!

Thanks, Bob.

The Indian Act is as valid as the Danelaw.

[adriaticum]

I think the clear point of all of this is that there can not be different classes of citizens in a country without it causing conflict. One class of citizen having rights and privileges that another class of citizens does not will only exacerbate slights either imagined or historical. The fact that two babies born in the same hospital on the same day to parents living in the same locale, where one has lifetime right to do things in the community and on the land that the others does not, is fundamentally wrong.

Traditional ways of doing things in a land of non-traditional customs is a pipe-dream, basically an impossibility as the pressure on the land would be insurmountable with added populations due to the increased lifespans of all people living on the land. If we agree that a senior level of our system of governance can set rules with regard to the land, laws and regulations if you will, then those laws MUST apply to all within the bounds of that land.

Differing rights for different classes of citizens within the same land based upon racial ethnicities has led to many conflicts throughout the world's history and someone must stand up to oppose the creation of yet another brick in the wall of ignorance and strife.

THIS IS NOT JUSTICE, it is judicial stupidity, it will lead to more and more conflict and there will be no winners. It is time to put emotions aside and use bold and brutal logic to end this BS once and for all. ONE LAND, ONE PEOPLE, ONE LAW FOR ALL!


We already have different classes of citizens in this country.
It's completely and fully accepted by the sheeple.
It's been a tradition for centuries.
The question is, will the sheeple wake up?

[elker]

I have to argue against my interest. the slogan " ONE LAND, ONE PEOPLE, ONE LAW FOR ALL!" is not fair to the FN people. Think of this way: with more and more people immigrating to this country (I am the one as well), the FN people's interests will be diluted to less and fewer.
With the legal trend to move in the FN's favour, I can only hope that one day we can try out luck in the FN-LEH draws (not $6 per try though, I believe) and pay a royal fee to FN for harvesting the BC Big Five ( Moose, Elk, Grizzly, Caribou, Bison) from FN territories.

[adriaticum]

I have to argue against my interest. the slogan " ONE LAND, ONE PEOPLE, ONE LAW FOR ALL!" is not fair to the FN people. Think of this way: with more and more people immigrating to this country (I am the one as well), the FN people's interests will be diluted to less and fewer.
With the legal trend to move in the FN's favour, I can only hope that one day we can try out luck in the FN-LEH draws (not $6 per try though, I believe) and pay a royal fee to FN for harvesting the BC Big Five ( Moose, Elk, Grizzly, Caribou, Bison) from FN territories.


That's the whole thing if BC is partitioned off, it won't be one land.
It will be multiple lands.
So the question is who will fight to maintain British Columbia borders as they currently are.

[BimmerBob]

I have to argue against my interest. the slogan " ONE LAND, ONE PEOPLE, ONE LAW FOR ALL!" is not fair to the FN people. Think of this way: with more and more people immigrating to this country (I am the one as well), the FN people's interests will be diluted to less and fewer.
With the legal trend to move in the FN's favour, I can only hope that one day we can try out luck in the FN-LEH draws (not $6 per try though, I believe) and pay a royal fee to FN for harvesting the BC Big Five ( Moose, Elk, Grizzly, Caribou, Bison) from FN territories.

If you get your wish then British Columbia will no longer exist, which it in effect does not at this time because the BC Government does not enforce BC laws in a fair and equitable manner. Every area in British Columbia should come under the governance of BC regulations and laws otherwise what is the point? British Columbia, as we know it now, was not built by the ones you wish to give all this power to, it was built by pioneers and builders, my ancestors, for numerous generations. I have seen my and my neighbours rights and access to BC eroded over the years why do you feel that Indians get to somehow escape that erosion?

[vladthepes]

I have lost my business due to Titled land. Never fun loosing something you built from scratch. Government is a joke, bowing to UN at every tern. More businesses will be lost , and more families displaced due to titled land that is what is coming.

I used to love this country and province but libtards have ruined a once great nation. Not the Canada I grew up in that is for sure.


+1 on that!

[vladthepes]

....not probably...certainly! They were living in the iron age! No wheels, no horses before Europeans arrived and despite a 10,000 years head start! They would never have developed!

[elker]

....not probably...certainly! They were living in the iron age! No wheels, no horses before Europeans arrived and despite a 10,000 years head start! They would never have developed!

true.
That is one point that the FN has to appreciate and that the Libertards always want to deny.

[adriaticum]

true.
That is one point that the FN has to appreciate and that the Libertards always want to deny.


So what?
So what if they lived in the iron age?

Based on your knowledge of history of North America and Europe leading up to 1492, how would you compare lives of ordinary people in Europe vs North America?

[adriaticum]

It's funny how many of us are fighting against government bullshit and socio economic status quo and then when an opportunity to change that comes around, we fail to recognize it.

[RugDoctor]

So what?
So what if they lived in the iron age?

Based on your knowledge of history of North America and Europe, how would you compare lives of ordinary people in Europe vs North America leading up to 1492?
I think the point is that colonizer came, and made something of this land. Something much better, that was not there before. Meanwhile, the occupants of the land when colonizer came, were taking slaves, eating dogs, and warring. They may have developed, but may not....not the point....point is, someone came, claimed the land that was occupied, not owned or improved, and made something of it...improved it. Improving land is a cornerstone of claiming it and ownership.....outside of a couple corn rows, I don’t think there was any bustling infrastructure on the immediate horizon until the Europeans showed up.....Colonizers are the real owners of this land, and colonizers allowed natives to remain in whatever form they allowed it which was acceptable for the times....Not so much anymore, but if it’s FN taking slaves, eating dogs, and warring is not to be admonished because it was how it was at that time and place....so it is with how colonizers treated FN at the time.....times have changed.....FN don’t do those things, and neither do colonizers. Let’s recognize who the real land owners are, and who should be thanking who for the ability to be here.

[adriaticum]

I think the point is that colonizer came, and made something of this land. Something much better, that was not there before. Meanwhile, the occupants of the land when colonizer came, were taking slaves, eating dogs, and warring. They may have developed, but may not....not the point....point is, someone came, claimed the land that was occupied, not owned or improved, and made something of it...improved it. Improving land is a cornerstone of claiming it and ownership.....outside of a couple corn rows, I don’t think there was any bustling infrastructure on the immediate horizon until the Europeans showed up.....Colonizers are the real owners of this land, and colonizers allowed natives to remain in whatever form they allowed it which was acceptable for the times....Not so much anymore, but if it’s FN taking slaves, eating dogs, and warring is not to be admonished because it was how it was at that time and place....so it is with how colonizers treated FN at the time.....times have changed.....FN don’t do those things, and neither do colonizers. Let’s recognize who the real land owners are, and who should be thanking who for the ability to be here.


That's a bullshit narrative we have been perpetuating for millenia.
It shows no historical basis.

This narrative was mainly perpetuated by the church.

[Harvest the Land]

I think the point is that colonizer came, and made something of this land. Something much better, that was not there before. Meanwhile, the occupants of the land when colonizer came, were taking slaves, eating dogs, and warring. They may have developed, but may not....not the point....point is, someone came, claimed the land that was occupied, not owned or improved, and made something of it...improved it. Improving land is a cornerstone of claiming it and ownership.....outside of a couple corn rows, I don’t think there was any bustling infrastructure on the immediate horizon until the Europeans showed up.....Colonizers are the real owners of this land, and colonizers allowed natives to remain in whatever form they allowed it which was acceptable for the times....Not so much anymore, but if it’s FN taking slaves, eating dogs, and warring is not to be admonished because it was how it was at that time and place....so it is with how colonizers treated FN at the time.....times have changed.....FN don’t do those things, and neither do colonizers. Let’s recognize who the real land owners are, and who should be thanking who for the ability to be here.

There's no question that colonizers did make a ton of things better, but to say that colonizers made everything "much better" is highly debatable.

For instance, we're inundated with plastic in our water/soil/food, and with birth control/drugs/pesticides/chemicals etc in our water supply. Can't breathe the air on some days in the big cities. We've cut down almost all the old growth. We paved over 1000's of streams/creeks/waterways. Where have all the elk and bison and salmon gone since the colonizers made things "much better"?

Depends on what you think "much better" means and it certainly does not apply to every aspect of life.

P.S. this thread should be moved to the open debates or politics section btw

[KodiakHntr]

....not probably...certainly! They were living in the iron age! No wheels, no horses before Europeans arrived and despite a 10,000 years head start! They would never have developed!


true.
That is one point that the FN has to appreciate and that the Libertards always want to deny.

While I understand the sentiment behind the concept, it's not really a valid argument. Unless of course you have a 4x4 in your driveway that you designed from the ground up and built from scratch? Make your own powder in your back yard that you discovered through trial and error? Smelt your own steel and make your own rifles? Melt sand and make your own optics?

Trade and commerce have played out around the world since the beginning of time. It is how humans have advanced to the point we are at now.

[adriaticum]

I'd really like Rush Limbaugh over there to provide some arguments for his grandiose statements.
I already kind of know what Vlad the impaler might have to say.

[RugDoctor]

That's a bullshit narrative we have been perpetuating for millenia.
It shows no historical basis.

This narrative was mainly perpetuated by the church.
Wooo. Struck a nerve....again. Talk about BS.....

[dany]

Is there any temporal outlook on when these land-ownership changes may become effective in a relevant manner? As there is a lot of money involved, I’d be surprised if we are speaking about a timeframe of less then 10 years? Doesn’t make it better but still, to understand the context better that would be interesting.

Also, wouldn’t it be feasible to negotiate a term that grants access for recreational use and non indigenous hunting and fishing rights? The FN are hunters and fishers themselves, they should have an understanding for us. In business, you never win by concentrating what doesn’t work. I’m sure there are possibilities to find win wins for both sides of the table, and non resident hunting fishing rights should be the bare acceptable minimum.


Actually, people take the word of the Supreme Court because it sets out what will and will not be enforced by the government, and it sets out what the government can and cannot legally do. It ain't a religious thing.


Two examples: if the Supreme Court says that Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Land belongs to the Tsilhqot'in and that they can govern it, but I don't agree with the SCC and I don't like the rules the Tsilhqot'in impose, what can I do? I can't take them to court and win, as it's been decided. I can't take up arms against anyone, because the Feds, the Tsilhqot'in National Government and the Province will all agree that I'm committing a criminal act. There's nothing religious about that. It's just the way the forces of coercion are aligned.

Second example: the Tsilhqot'in prohibit hunting without TNG permission in TNDT lands. The government cannot over-rule them, because they'll lose in court. It's not religion. It's statute and common law.

You may not like it.

You may argue that government can throw out statute and common law and over-ride what Indigenous peoples have won through long and hard legal battles, and you are 100% correct, but....we are a long, long way from seeing that happen. There's very little benefit to existing governments to do that.

It's also about much more than "land claims" - if it was only that there would be much less worry about what the future holds. It's about sovereignty. This post's title includes the term "Crown land" - that concept is in dispute. It's extremely common for Indigenous people to argue that there is no such thing as Crown land, so there's no way "Crown land" can be given to anyone, anywhere, anytime.

[Rob Chipman]

Depends.

A court ruling can occur anytime without regard for the financial interests of stakeholders or parties to the dispute. It takes longer if it has to go to the SCC, but with Tsilhqot'in once they won at SCC they'd won. There was an implementation timeframe, but ask people who'd invested time and money in that area - they have to live with the ruling, no ifs, ands or buts. Right now the province is going to court with the Nuchatlaht over a land claim. BC is arguing that the Nuchatlaht abandoned the land and so don't have a valid claim. Nuchatlaht disagrees. If Nuchatlaht wins at court it'll be hard to say "OK, can we negotiate and be reasonable now that the government lost?" So, court process vs negotiated process are very different.

Negotiating is different from a court case because, as you point out, you can maximize the win-win aspect of it.

If Indigenous governments do agree that non-Indigenous people should be able, whether by right or privilege, to hunt and fish lands that the Indigenous governments control, great. Everyone will be happy. It's important to remember that an over the counter tag for a mule deer probably doesn't generate enough revenue for FN government to be very concerned about. At the same time, not allowing non-Indigenous hunting of fishing on the territory that the FN government controls may not seem like a bad thing for the particular FN.

It's also worth remembering that not all FNs think the same way. There will be different aproaches to things.

[adriaticum]

If Indigenous governments do agree that non-Indigenous people should be able, whether by right or privilege, to hunt and fish lands that the Indigenous governments control, great. Everyone will be happy.

Everyone, except anti hunters, vegans, vegetarians, urban hippies, animal rights activists etc.
But all I care about is my people :-D

[ElectricDyck]

Page 14! Surprised no one moved it to politics and debates to die.... I really do think this should be in the most watched forum to gather the most attention...hunters need to see what's on the horizon, educate their friends, government seems ok with throwing hunters under the bus..

[REMINGTON JIM]

I have lost my business due to Titled land. Never fun loosing something you built from scratch. Government is a joke, bowing to UN at every tern. More businesses will be lost , and more families displaced due to titled land that is what is coming.

I used to love this country and province but libtards have ruined a once great nation. Not the Canada I grew up in that is for sure.

Very Unfortunate for you :icon_frow - I FEEL your Pain ! Country is Nearly Ruined now ! :cry: RJ

[browningboy]

The only thing that would wake people up is to give the FN Vancouver or in fact the lower mainland! Otherwise if it doesn't affect them they really don't care and just move to the next head line!

[jshansen]

That's it! I've had it! I'm going back to Norway

[jshansen]

What really bugs me is that in the eyes of society these days white outdoorsmen and white commercial fishermen are portrayed and viewed as evil, greedy, blood thirsty, and they think we only kill animals to take nice pictures with big antlers and leave the meat to rot. But the natives can do no wrong! They are viewed as stewards of the land, saviors of the wilderness. If I've read once, I've read a million times that natives have special hunting and fishing priviledges for "food, social and ceremonial purposes" What the heck are these social pr ceremonial purposes? If we shot something for anything other than food we'd have our heads on poles in downtown Vancouver. I've even read, and I don't know if this is true or will be, that the grizzly hunting ban and potential wolf hunting ban doesn't apply to them because of these ceremonial purposes and traditions. And the public gives them their blessing! Guess what, the natives of today aren't the natives of the 1700's or 1800's, their favourite method of harvest is pit lamping and they don't rely on wild meat like they used to or any more than we do. Sorry for the lack of organized direction here this is just a cluster of thoughts.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Very TRUE ��

[Surrey Boy]

What really bugs me is that in the eyes of society these days white outdoorsmen and white commercial fishermen are portrayed and viewed as evil, greedy, blood thirsty, and they think we only kill animals to take nice pictures with big antlers and leave the meat to rot. But the natives can do no wrong! They are viewed as stewards of the land, saviors of the wilderness. If I've read once, I've read a million times that natives have special hunting and fishing priviledges for "food, social and ceremonial purposes" What the heck are these social pr ceremonial purposes? If we shot something for anything other than food we'd have our heads on poles in downtown Vancouver. I've even read, and I don't know if this is true or will be, that the grizzly hunting ban and potential wolf hunting ban doesn't apply to them because of these ceremonial purposes and traditions. And the public gives them their blessing! Guess what, the natives of today aren't the natives of the 1700's or 1800's, their favourite method of harvest is pit lamping and they don't rely on wild meat like they used to or any more than we do. Sorry for the lack of organized direction here this is just a cluster of thoughts.

Old stock Canadians are going to have to stick up for themselves. I don't want to become like South Africa.

[saskbooknut]

Going back to Norway, eh.
Norway where the Sami have indigenous land rights recognized by the courts.

[Rob Chipman]

ElectricDyck:

I think you're right. We need to see what's not only on the horizon, but what is here already.

Here's my question: let's assume we agree on what's going on. What should our response be? I think that will require a fair amount of thought, debate and discussion before we get on the same page and come tip with an effective response. What are your thoughts?

[Surrey Boy]

A broad lobby for Whites is the answer. Just like the Status Card Holders have.

[willyqbc]

So something that has been bugging me about this for years, perhaps some of you seemingly well informed folks can explain it to me. The Canadian Govt has a set of laws me must all live by and live with.....however, if it is deemed "for the greater good" or some such language the laws can be ignored at the gov'ts discretion. As an example, if you are a landowner who happens to be on the slated route for a pipeline, and does not want that pipeline on your land.....because it is for the "greater good" of the country and its citizenry, the govt has the ability to disregard your private land ownership rights and push it through whether you want it or not. Or they want to expand a highway and forcibly appropriate land you own but do not wish to sell.

SO......WHY can that same standard not be applied in response to FN wanting to own all this land??? surely the argument can be made that transferring vast amounts of land and resources to 4% of the population is NOT in the publics best interest or for "the greater good", regardless of whether they "technically" have legal grounds or not.

[ElectricDyck]

ElectricDyck:

I think you're right. We need to see what's not only on the horizon, but what is here already.

Here's my question: let's assume we agree on what's going on. What should our response be? I think that will require a fair amount of thought, debate and discussion before we get on the same page and come tip with an effective response. What are your thoughts?

I think we are done no matter what we do. Negative I know but I just can't see a scenario where we get to keep hunting, at least anything like we are today. Canada will go like Australia. Opportunity will be extremely low and mostly for the rich. Most people were brought up in this school system where guns are bad and white people stole everything from the indians. Government is giving hunting control to the indians, outfitters already buy tags from the indians, I've been told that within 5 years hunting will be controlled by the indians. Special interest groups like the Tides Foundation with tons of money that are anti gun, anti hunting are infiltrating and donating to politicians, hunting groups, green terrorist groups, anything they can to have some say in these groups and accomplish their goals one step at a time. Working with anti groups on conservation projects will not slow this down, I think it will only speed it up.

The small percentage of residents that care about hunting and fishing themselves are divided on simple issues like predator hunting and trophy hunting. Hunting orgs like BCWF pic a fight with outfitters and the GOABC over quota issues that effected no one and help create the term "Trophy Hunter" paid for with hunter dollars. GOABC would have made great allies...BCWF core book taught us to hide hunting and called it ethics. Don't post pics because the antis will use it against us is just another way for hunters to be ashamed and apologize for hunting, people only hide things that they are ashamed of and the general public recognizes this. Hunters on here comment about how the killing is the worst part and they only kill what they eat. Well they need to go eat some mice and weeds next time they have a cob of corn. Something always dies for something to live.

In the end hunting doesn't even really matter, there are bigger issues. We live in a country where the federal party in power is putting forward a bill to censor the internet and no one is marching with pitch forks. Another federal party wants to dismantle Canada's military. A gay activist BC judge puts a guy in jail because he objects to a pre puberty sex change on his daughter. When a small group gathers to protest this the city of Vancouver tries to shut it down. A public health care system that was stressed beyond capacity pre covid and after a year of covid the only the answer people have is to blame each other for not locking down enough or enough government control. Government is centralizing more and more, controlling interest rates, housing, schooling, universities, healthcare, this simply doesn't work long term and it always ends in not enough food. Canadians are apathetic, misinformed and lazy. They will ask for more censorship and government control and the government will gladly give it to them lol.

My plan is to play violin as the ship goes down.

[Imdone]

I think we are done ......Canada will go like Australia

My plan is to play violin as the ship goes down.
I'm pretty sure this statement could rank as a classic on here.

Love it.

[adriaticum]

I don't agree with your pessimism ElectricDyck.

I think social media is a new phenomenon and we still don't know what to do with it.
We have not established rules of behaviour that are agreed upon by all.
I think we will do that in the future. All new technologies start out like that.

We can only lose hunting rights and heritage if we, of our own accord, drop our guns and stop getting out.
As long as we have new generations taking up hunting, it will continue.

Australian hunting is just fine.
They don't have the game that we do so they have not a ton to hunt.
Kangaroos, some non-native deer and buffalo, some non-native pigs.
Australian hunting is as strong as it is here, they just don't have the game animals we have.

The only danger I see is urban encroachment and changing of attitudes toward guns.
It's happening because we are importing people from India, China and countries that have no guns and no hunting due to over population and extermination of all animals.
That's why.
Perhaps we should be spending more time on introducing Indians and Chinese into the benefits of the outdoors, conservation of the environment.
India and China are the largest populations and bare largest responsibility for over population of this planet.
Unfortutely attitudes of modern societies today are to allow them to spread and increase their populations even more.
But those attitudes will evenually change.

I think we just need to stay involved.

[adriaticum]

I think the great reckoning will come sooner than us losing our hunting heritage.
The great reckoning will be a world wide unrest, or war, I don't know, between serfs-peasants and their overlords.
Unfortunately people don't understand that this is all caused by human over population and scarcity of resources.
You can see unrest everywhere around the world and it's always people against their governments.
It's no longer nation against nation, race against race.
It's people against their government.
But, I think I will live to see the reckoning.

[2tins]

Legal hunting is about to be severely restricted.

European-Canadians had better band together if we don't want to suffer like South Africa.

Bring it. I think comparing us to South Africa is a bit of a stretch but I do agree that we should band together and stand up for OUR rights.

[ElectricDyck]

My point with australia was mainly about the gun restrictions...no semi-autos, no pump action shotguns and limited handguns and a limit to the amount of ammunition you can buy in a period...rifle ownership only if you prove first you are hunting and have a membership at the local gun club.

[Surrey Boy]

Bring it. I think comparing us to South Africa is a bit of a stretch but I do agree that we should band together and stand up for OUR rights.

I think it's a non profit organization worth founding. Every other ethnicity and culture has such lobbies.

[willyqbc]

There's one huge hitch in that plan surrey boy.....if people of color do it, it's "affirmative action" "civil rights", etc, etc. If a bunch of white folks do it....its "racist" and "hate speech". Not only would shiny pony's govt shut it down, we'd prolly all be thrown in jail to boot.

I dont know what the ultimate answer is, but the first step has to be getting a more moderate govt elected to take some control of the narrative away from the left.

Jmo
Chris

[Neckshot]

Bingo.....sadly.


There's one huge hitch in that plan surrey boy.....if people of color do it, it's "affirmative action" "civil rights", etc, etc. If a bunch of white folks do it....its "racist" and "hate speech". Not only would shiny pony's govt shut it down, we'd prolly all be thrown in jail to boot.

I dont know what the ultimate answer is, but the first step has to be getting a more moderate govt elected to take some control of the narrative away from the left.

Jmo
Chris

[REMINGTON JIM]

There's one huge hitch in that plan surrey boy.....if people of color do it, it's "affirmative action" "civil rights", etc, etc. If a bunch of white folks do it....its "racist" and "hate speech". Not only would shiny pony's govt shut it down, we'd prolly all be thrown in jail to boot.

I dont know what the ultimate answer is, but the first step has to be getting a more moderate govt elected to take some control of the narrative away from the left.

Jmo
Chris

101 % Correct Chris its :cry: jmo RJ

[300H&H]

It seems strange to me that the people that are taxed get less government representation than the people that aren't taxed, I mean shelters and housing for the homeless, more land for indians, housing and health care for the non-citizen border jumpers, something seems to be wrong with this picture. When is this going to change, we Canadian taxpayers may need our own Boston Tea Party to set the record straight.

I wish there was a thumbs up button !

[adriaticum]

There's one huge hitch in that plan surrey boy.....if people of color do it, it's "affirmative action" "civil rights", etc, etc. If a bunch of white folks do it....its "racist" and "hate speech". Not only would shiny pony's govt shut it down, we'd prolly all be thrown in jail to boot.

I dont know what the ultimate answer is, but the first step has to be getting a more moderate govt elected to take some control of the narrative away from the left.

Jmo
Chris


That's why we have to do it.

[boxhitch]

I think it's a non profit organization worth founding. Every other ethnicity and culture has such lobbies.B.C. Oath Keepers? No Great White North Guilt? 97 Percenters? ZED anon?

[boxhitch]

There's one huge hitch in that plan surrey boy.....if people of color do it, it's "affirmative action" "civil rights", etc, etc. If a bunch of white folks do it....its "racist" and "hate speech". Not only would shiny pony's govt shut it down, we'd prolly all be thrown in jail to boot.

I dont know what the ultimate answer is, but the first step has to be getting a more moderate govt elected to take some control of the narrative away from the left.

Jmo
ChrisCanada was one of the last holdouts to sign onto UNDRIP, previous Govs knew what they would be faced with in our country
Other countries had hard lines in place, be it lands or assimilation it was done. Recognition was an easy step, catchy and touristy
Not so here, and the Courts are drawing the rules of engagement , with Media fueling the way. Hang on

[Surrey Boy]

We're already advancing by having the conversation.

[REMINGTON JIM]

It seems strange to me that the people that are taxed get less government representation than the people that aren't taxed, I mean shelters and housing for the homeless, more land for indians, housing and health care for the non-citizen border jumpers, something seems to be wrong with this picture. When is this going to change, we Canadian taxpayers may need our own Boston Tea Party to set the record straight.

And THAT is a FACT ! Very phucking sad for use white working guy taxpayers ! :icon_frow jmo RJ

[wildcatter]

There's one huge hitch in that plan surrey boy.....if people of color do it, it's "affirmative action" "civil rights", etc, etc. If a bunch of white folks do it....its "racist" and "hate speech". Not only would shiny pony's govt shut it down, we'd prolly all be thrown in jail to boot.

I dont know what the ultimate answer is, but the first step has to be getting a more moderate govt elected to take some control of the narrative away from the left.

Jmo
Chris

You bey it would be racist and hate speech.
Check out the thread "Only white people can be racist"

[boxhitch]

The page does not exist. anymore? No access 404 error. Top secret behind the closed doors of the College of New Caledonia. There's a colonial name if I ever saw one!Not a live link
go to the site and type indigenous territory guide into the Search to get the pdf

[wildcatter]

Today's Vancouver Sun article about land disputes.
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-however-inevitable-wealth-transfer-might-be-i-doubt-any-govt-would-find-it-easy-to-admit-that-to-public

Here is a quote:
"Activist judges have no place in a democracy. This is 100% wrong and a travesty of monumental proportions. BC belongs to all of us. I’d like to see the First Nations provide a deed to all this property. Oral history is bunk. You can say whatever you like. And how are you supposed to reconcile disagreements between different bands ? Whose oral history are you supposed to believe ? In total, First Nations are claiming 110% of BC. The land claims industry has been making a fortune for lawyers and administrators over the last four decades. Enough of this nonsense"

My question is, will people be compensated who will be forced to leave their properties?

[adriaticum]

Woodward is a ****ing lawyer paid for by FN interests.
He is basically a spokeperson.
It may just be his mouth is writing cheques his ass can't cash.
But we will see.

[Harvest the Land]

Today's Vancouver Sun article about land disputes.
https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-however-inevitable-wealth-transfer-might-be-i-doubt-any-govt-would-find-it-easy-to-admit-that-to-public

Here is a quote:
"Activist judges have no place in a democracy. This is 100% wrong and a travesty of monumental proportions. BC belongs to all of us. I’d like to see the First Nations provide a deed to all this property. Oral history is bunk. You can say whatever you like. And how are you supposed to reconcile disagreements between different bands ? Whose oral history are you supposed to believe ? In total, First Nations are claiming 110% of BC. The land claims industry has been making a fortune for lawyers and administrators over the last four decades. Enough of this nonsense"

My question is, will people be compensated who will be forced to leave their properties?


From what I can tell many of these deals include provisions that stipulate that FN's are supposed to compensate land owners for confiscating their land, by using some of the lump sum funds the govt is awarding to these FN's. Whether or not that will come to fruition remains to be seen.

Man I'd sure hate to be a land owner on Nootka right now

[wildcatter]

Woodward is a ****ing lawyer paid for by FN interests.
He is basically a spokeperson.
It may just be his mouth is writing cheques his ass can't cash.
But we will see.

You can bet he is getting paid very well.
The asswipe is a traitor to his people.

[wildcatter]

From what I can tell many of these deals include provisions that stipulate that FN's are supposed to compensate land owners for confiscating their land, by using some of the lump sum funds the govt is awarding to these FN's. Whether or not that will come to fruition remains to be seen.

Man I'd sure hate to be a land owner on Nootka right now


And who decides the amount of compensation?
I wouldn't want to be compensated by FN, rather by the government in a fair manner.

[Harvest the Land]

And who decides the amount of compensation?
I wouldn't want to be compensated by FN, rather by the government in a fair manner.

Good question - would they simply go by current market values and refer to E-Value BC? And technically speaking you indeed would be getting compensated by the government because the government is dedicating a portion of the financial awards to FN's to specifically compensate land owners who will have their land confiscated (its government money that will be paying land owners - not FN's money)

[Rob Chipman]

Woodward is a ****ing lawyer paid for by FN interests.
He is basically a spokeperson.
It may just be his mouth is writing cheques his ass can't cash.
But we will see.


Maybe Woodward isn't so much writing cheques as pointing out which cheques have already been cashed. He's using provocative language, but the Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Lands decision is a fact that exists and has big implications. It was on BC government websites at least 2 years ago, I'm sure (and I referenced it here) that fee simple ownership and Indigenous title would have to be figured out. When I first read that I could not believe my eyes - I'm a realtor with over 3 decades in the business, so the concept of fee simple being pretty much inviolable was ingrained.

Guess what? It's not. Survey the web pages of law firms that work in this are and you'll quickly see that Indigenous title is often thought to be incompatible with fee simple title granted by the crown, and that fee simple is inferior to Indigenous title.

That has not been ruled on conclusively by Canadian courts, but it is up for grabs.

And like his opinion or not, Woodward is very knowledgeable in this area.

It's important to recognize that what most of us have always assumed to be a fact that won't change, that is, the concept of "Crown land" is very much up for grabs. In some circles the use of the term "Crown land" is simply unacceptable.

Don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger.

[Rob Chipman]

And who decides the amount of compensation?
I wouldn't want to be compensated by FN, rather by the government in a fair manner.

There's a bit of info on that
here:

https://www.wltribune.com/news/lodge-owner-in-tsilhqotin-declared-title-area-wants-to-be-bought-out-for-fair-price/

[adriaticum]

Maybe Woodward isn't so much writing cheques as pointing out which cheques have already been cashed. He's using provocative language, but the Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Lands decision is a fact that exists and has big implications. It was on BC government websites at least 2 years ago, I'm sure (and I referenced it here) that fee simple ownership and Indigenous title would have to be figured out. When I first read that I could not believe my eyes - I'm a realtor with over 3 decades in the business, so the concept of fee simple being pretty much inviolable was ingrained.

Guess what? It's not. Survey the web pages of law firms that work in this are and you'll quickly see that Indigenous title is often thought to be incompatible with fee simple title granted by the crown, and that fee simple is inferior to Indigenous title.

That has not been ruled on conclusively by Canadian courts, but it is up for grabs.

And like his opinion or not, Woodward is very knowledgeable in this area.

It's important to recognize that what most of us have always assumed to be a fact that won't change, that is, the concept of "Crown land" is very much up for grabs. In some circles the use of the term "Crown land" is simply unacceptable.

Don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger.


Sorry, I don't understand the Indigenous Land Title.
What is that?
Who granted indigenous people a title?
Some king from some foreign land in a paper that's not worth ink it's written on.
British King.
Is this Britain?
Who the hell is he and what authority or relevance does he have in Canada?
Britain and British have nothing to do with Canada. They are tiny minority here.

People don't understand one basic thing.
It will be what you want it to be.
If you show up, it will be what you want.
If you don't show up, it will be what your enemies want.

The problem with European descendants is their lives are way too comfortable and they are lazy.
They don't want to put the work in.
But push them over the edge and sword is what you will get usually.

[Harvest the Land]

Maybe Woodward isn't so much writing cheques as pointing out which cheques have already been cashed. He's using provocative language, but the Tsilhqot'in Nation Declared Title Lands decision is a fact that exists and has big implications. It was on BC government websites at least 2 years ago, I'm sure (and I referenced it here) that fee simple ownership and Indigenous title would have to be figured out. When I first read that I could not believe my eyes - I'm a realtor with over 3 decades in the business, so the concept of fee simple being pretty much inviolable was ingrained.

Guess what? It's not. Survey the web pages of law firms that work in this are and you'll quickly see that Indigenous title is often thought to be incompatible with fee simple title granted by the crown, and that fee simple is inferior to Indigenous title.

That has not been ruled on conclusively by Canadian courts, but it is up for grabs.

And like his opinion or not, Woodward is very knowledgeable in this area.

It's important to recognize that what most of us have always assumed to be a fact that won't change, that is, the concept of "Crown land" is very much up for grabs. In some circles the use of the term "Crown land" is simply unacceptable.

Don't shoot me - I'm just the messenger.

Well said. Like it or not, this will be the new reality that will be really tough for some to fathom/accept/understand. Make no mistake there is a reckoning coming and its coming faster than anyone imagined even 5 years ago.

Sure Woodward is a lawyer who represents FN's and he absolutely has an agenda. But he's serious as F_ck and he's got the street cred with that monumental 2014 case to back up much of what he's saying. And its important to carefully listen to what he says because some of it will come to fruition and then you all won't be caught off guard after the courts have their say

[mooze]

@Surrey Boy: you are not seriously quoting Adolf Hitler as a reference for a politically reasonable political approach?

[Rob Chipman]

Sorry, I don't understand the Indigenous Land Title.
What is that?
Who granted indigenous people a title?
Some king from some foreign land in a paper that's not worth ink it's written on.
British King.
Is this Britain?
Who the hell is he and what authority or relevance does he have in Canada?
Britain and British have nothing to do with Canada. They are tiny minority here.

People don't understand one basic thing.
It will be what you want it to be.
If you show up, it will be what you want.
If you don't show up, it will be what your enemies want.

The problem with European descendants is their lives are way too comfortable and they are lazy.
They don't want to put the work in.
But push them over the edge and sword is what you will get usually.


:-)

You understand it perfectly! You just don't want to accept it, which is completely fair. The problem you face is that if you don't want to accept what the powerful are doing you have to oppose them, and you and I both know how hard that is, and how the prospect of success is fairly low (revolutions do succeed, but they are not common).

Britain and the British and the British King (from a few centuries ago) have plenty to do with Canada. The concept is "honour of the Crown", meaning if the Crown did something in 1763 that we find kind of stupid today we still have to abide by it because of...the honour of the Crown. Again, you understand that, but may not want to accept it (and there is a reasonable argument for rejecting it, but boy oh boy you'd be facing an uphill climb).

Then, of course, there's the whole common law president thing.

Bottom line: Indigenous title is a real thing that's been recognized by Canadian courts. We can keep pretending that the recoginition of Indigenous title isn't a real thing, but it's not a strategy that's going to work unless you've got people ready to take up arms and oppose the current government structure in this country. I can't see that happening.

Do you have another way to get around Indigenous title?

[northernguy]

They seem to use our "colonial" laws when it serves their purposes; such as claiming title. But tend to deride and even ignore the laws when they don't serve their purpose...and our politicians let them.

Their selective use and manipulation of legal principles does them no credit...but our politicians don't care.

And for some; they don't want "reconciliation" through title. They want vengeance. And that's what scares me.

[browningboy]

So will the indians be on their own now? Doubt it they will keep sucking that tit until they get all the land, funny how they account for 1% of the population but they are the tail thats wagging the dog! The government will have greatly reduced tax revenue so it will be a double whammy, you'll get taxed extra while the indians are dining on caviar!

[adriaticum]

:-)

You understand it perfectly! You just don't want to accept it, which is completely fair. The problem you face is that if you don't want to accept what the powerful are doing you have to oppose them, and you and I both know how hard that is, and how the prospect of success is fairly low (revolutions do succeed, but they are not common).

Britain and the British and the British King (from a few centuries ago) have plenty to do with Canada. The concept is "honour of the Crown", meaning if the Crown did something in 1763 that we find kind of stupid today we still have to abide by it because of...the honour of the Crown. Again, you understand that, but may not want to accept it (and there is a reasonable argument for rejecting it, but boy oh boy you'd be facing an uphill climb).

Then, of course, there's the whole common law president thing.

Bottom line: Indigenous title is a real thing that's been recognized by Canadian courts. We can keep pretending that the recoginition of Indigenous title isn't a real thing, but it's not a strategy that's going to work unless you've got people ready to take up arms and oppose the current government structure in this country. I can't see that happening.

Do you have another way to get around Indigenous title?


We understand each other.
Yes I have many ways to get around the title, but nobody is listening.
One way is to eliminate the monarchy.
Another way is to get out of this mess called Canada and finally form our own land for our own people.
And so forth.

I am not necessarily in oppositin of Indigenous title. I don't have any evidence that FNs would be worse government than we currently have.
But I am in opposition to removing any people residing on any title from their land and I am willing to fight that.

To me government is like toilet paper.
Only to be used once.

[IronNoggin]

'Large chunks' of B.C. Crown land could end up in hands of Indigenous Nations
Opinion: Aboriginal title over large tracts of 95 per cent of B.C. that's now referred to as Crown land would entail “huge transfer of wealth.”

Woodward, in one of his more provocative comments, suggests that where Aboriginal title is recognized, a Crown tenure is “a worthless piece of paper.” The province will probably have to provide some sort of compensation for tenure-holders. The end result, says Woodward, will be local control by First Nations, as opposed to forestry and other tenures being held by multinational corporations.

https://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-however-inevitable-wealth-transfer-might-be-i-doubt-any-govt-would-find-it-easy-to-admit-that-to-public

[wildcatter]

:-)

You understand it perfectly! You just don't want to accept it, which is completely fair. The problem you face is that if you don't want to accept what the powerful are doing you have to oppose them, and you and I both know how hard that is, and how the prospect of success is fairly low (revolutions do succeed, but they are not common).

Britain and the British and the British King (from a few centuries ago) have plenty to do with Canada. The concept is "honour of the Crown", meaning if the Crown did something in 1763 that we find kind of stupid today we still have to abide by it because of...the honour of the Crown. Again, you understand that, but may not want to accept it (and there is a reasonable argument for rejecting it, but boy oh boy you'd be facing an uphill climb).

Then, of course, there's the whole common law president thing.

Bottom line: Indigenous title is a real thing that's been recognized by Canadian courts. We can keep pretending that the recoginition of Indigenous title isn't a real thing, but it's not a strategy that's going to work unless you've got people ready to take up arms and oppose the current government structure in this country. I can't see that happening.

Do you have another way to get around Indigenous title?

"Bottom line: Indigenous title is a real thing that's been recognized by Canadian courts.
We can keep pretending that the recoginition of Indigenous title isn't a real thing"

Rob, is the Indigenous Title based on some oral records told by a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe?
This is as blunt as I can put it.
I have a some more thoughts, but I would be banned if I type it in here.

[wildcatter]

There's a bit of info on that
here:

https://www.wltribune.com/news/lodge-owner-in-tsilhqotin-declared-title-area-wants-to-be-bought-out-for-fair-price/

One quote from the article:
"Plank said the province remains a neutral party in any purchase negotiations between the tourism operators and the First Nation."

How nice, they wash their hands and say you are on your own.
And it's TFB if the indians offer you one tenth of your property's worth.
Are you OK with that?

[saskbooknut]

Indigenous title rests on the foundation of our legal system. You have as much chance of fighting that, as a snowballs chance in hell.
Whether you like it or not, our laws derrive from British law and common law.
The challenge will be to sort out this sorry mess, brought about by a century of denial and avoidance, with no small participation of a starkly racist population.
It is not right for fee simple titles to be in jeopardy of being undervalued or discounted.
Denying the reality of historical injustice won't get any happy endings.
Making new injustices seems almost inevitable.

[Surrey Boy]

I've never heard of a treaty lasting as long as these. Traditionally, they're unilaterally renegotiated every fifty years or so.

If you accept the validity of eminent domain, it's possible.

[Rob Chipman]

"Bottom line: Indigenous title is a real thing that's been recognized by Canadian courts.
We can keep pretending that the recoginition of Indigenous title isn't a real thing"

Rob, is the Indigenous Title based on some oral records told by a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe?
This is as blunt as I can put it.
I have a some more thoughts, but I would be banned if I type it in here.


Man, that made me laugh! Don't get offended, but I think you need some blunt talk as well.

Look, I understand you're frustrated, but I think you need to start thinking about this a bit before you share your thoughts.

First, Indigenous title is traced back to the King of England and the Royal Proclamation of 1793 (and no, it wasn't the king running the show just like today, it was a bunch of politicians). We all know (or should know by now) where Indigenous title comes from.

After being recognized for political purposes by the Crown Indigenous title has been repeatedly tested and recognized in Canadian courts of law.

It's got nothing to do with oral history and it's not something you can blame First Nations for. The British crown, acting through the British Parliament, are the ones to blame. If you want to throw barbs at someone, aim them waaaay further east, across the ocean.

Something else you may not have thought through: social media is public. When you say things like "some oral records told by a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe" you're giving anti-hunters ammunition to call all of us racists. You know exactly what a screen shot is. Now, we often say hunters should stick together and support each other because we're in the same boat.

Some of us are chopping holes in the boat. Those guys have to stop doing that.

Again, I get that you're frustrated, but how about you adopt my gun control policy? Hit the right ****ing target.



"How nice, they wash their hands and say you are on your own.
And it's TFB if the indians offer you one tenth of your property's worth.
Are you OK with that?


Again, I think you're getting confused. It doesn't matter what I'm ok with. Why would it? That's like asking if I'm "ok" with taxes, or rain, or forest fires. I never caused this problem and I can't cure it. I'm not celebrating it and, importantly, I'm not crying about it. I'm trying to figure out how to deal with it.


If you're not happy with it you should do something effective about it, or at least don't make things worse. Check your watch. Look at the date. The year is probably going to say something like "2021", not "1965". Like it or not we are where we are. When you say stuff in public like "indians" and "your property" you're in complete denial about how the game we're in is played. There is a legal argument to be made that "your property" is stolen property. Again I'm the messenger. Don't shoot me for telling you what the real world looks like today.

In the current game we're on our own. Indigenous people have Canadian law squarely on their side, and they've got G2G status in negotiations. Regular guys like you and I have to depend on the provincial and federal governments to look out for our interests. If you think they're going to do that then you've clearly been smoking crack. They are not looking out for us. That is the very nature of the problem. Woodward is right when he says most of BC is in for a shock.

You know what the shock will look like, right? I'll look an awful lot like what people in the Tsilhqot’in Nation Declared Title Lands have experienced.

You're like the guy not he team taking dumb penalties for no good reason. You are only hurting other hunters by pretending that the world isn't what it is and throwing around racist slurs (which really aren't a good look at the best of times).

Again, I get that you're frustrated. A lot of people are. Don't make things worse.

[Harvest the Land]

Man, that made me laugh! Don't get offended, but I think you need some blunt talk as well.

Look, I understand you're frustrated, but I think you need to start thinking about this a bit before you share your thoughts.

First, Indigenous title is traced back to the King of England and the Royal Proclamation of 1793 (and no, it wasn't the king running the show just like today, it was a bunch of politicians). We all know (or should know by now) where Indigenous title comes from.

After being recognized for political purposes by the Crown Indigenous title has been repeatedly tested and recognized in Canadian courts of law.

It's got nothing to do with oral history and it's not something you can blame First Nations for. The British crown, acting through the British Parliament, are the ones to blame. If you want to throw barbs at someone, aim them waaaay further east, across the ocean.

Something else you may not have thought through: social media is public. When you say things like "some oral records told by a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe" you're giving anti-hunters ammunition to call all of us racists. You know exactly what a screen shot is. Now, we often say hunters should stick together and support each other because we're in the same boat.

Some of us are chopping holes in the boat. Those guys have to stop doing that.

Again, I get that you're frustrated, but how about you adopt my gun control policy? Hit the right ****ing target.





Again, I think you're getting confused. It doesn't matter what I'm ok with. Why would it? That's like asking if I'm "ok" with taxes, or rain, or forest fires. I never caused this problem and I can't cure it. I'm not celebrating it and, importantly, I'm not crying about it. I'm trying to figure out how to deal with it.


If you're not happy with it you should do something effective about it, or at least don't make things worse. Check your watch. Look at the date. The year is probably going to say something like "2021", not "1965". Like it or not we are where we are. When you say stuff in public like "indians" and "your property" you're in complete denial about how the game we're in is played. There is a legal argument to be made that "your property" is stolen property. Again I'm the messenger. Don't shoot me for telling you what the real world looks like today.

In the current game we're on our own. Indigenous people have Canadian law squarely on their side, and they've got G2G status in negotiations. Regular guys like you and I have to depend on the provincial and federal governments to look out for our interests. If you think they're going to do that then you've clearly been smoking crack. They are not looking out for us. That is the very nature of the problem. Woodward is right when he says most of BC is in for a shock.

You know what the shock will look like, right? I'll look an awful lot like what people in the Tsilhqot’in Nation Declared Title Lands have experienced.

You're like the guy not he team taking dumb penalties for no good reason. You are only hurting other hunters by pretending that the world isn't what it is and throwing around racist slurs (which really aren't a good look at the best of times).

Again, I get that you're frustrated. A lot of people are. Don't make things worse.

Um is that what the kids these days refer to as a "Mic drop"?

You couldn't have laid it out any more clearly Rob. People need to realize that anti's do read these forums and look for any ammunition they can find to use against us. Being characterized as trophy hunting killers who only care about the "killing" part is one thing; but being characterized by the Anti's as racist trophy hunting killers is in another league altogether and we don't need any more players on the team taking dumb penalties - we're already playing shorthanded FFS

[wildcatter]

Man, that made me laugh! Don't get offended, but I think you need some blunt talk as well.

Look, I understand you're frustrated, but I think you need to start thinking about this a bit before you share your thoughts.

First, Indigenous title is traced back to the King of England and the Royal Proclamation of 1793 (and no, it wasn't the king running the show just like today, it was a bunch of politicians). We all know (or should know by now) where Indigenous title comes from.

After being recognized for political purposes by the Crown Indigenous title has been repeatedly tested and recognized in Canadian courts of law.

It's got nothing to do with oral history and it's not something you can blame First Nations for. The British crown, acting through the British Parliament, are the ones to blame. If you want to throw barbs at someone, aim them waaaay further east, across the ocean.

Something else you may not have thought through: social media is public. When you say things like "some oral records told by a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe" you're giving anti-hunters ammunition to call all of us racists. You know exactly what a screen shot is. Now, we often say hunters should stick together and support each other because we're in the same boat.

Some of us are chopping holes in the boat. Those guys have to stop doing that.

Again, I get that you're frustrated, but how about you adopt my gun control policy? Hit the right ****ing target.





Again, I think you're getting confused. It doesn't matter what I'm ok with. Why would it? That's like asking if I'm "ok" with taxes, or rain, or forest fires. I never caused this problem and I can't cure it. I'm not celebrating it and, importantly, I'm not crying about it. I'm trying to figure out how to deal with it.


If you're not happy with it you should do something effective about it, or at least don't make things worse. Check your watch. Look at the date. The year is probably going to say something like "2021", not "1965". Like it or not we are where we are. When you say stuff in public like "indians" and "your property" you're in complete denial about how the game we're in is played. There is a legal argument to be made that "your property" is stolen property. Again I'm the messenger. Don't shoot me for telling you what the real world looks like today.

In the current game we're on our own. Indigenous people have Canadian law squarely on their side, and they've got G2G status in negotiations. Regular guys like you and I have to depend on the provincial and federal governments to look out for our interests. If you think they're going to do that then you've clearly been smoking crack. They are not looking out for us. That is the very nature of the problem. Woodward is right when he says most of BC is in for a shock.

You know what the shock will look like, right? I'll look an awful lot like what people in the Tsilhqot’in Nation Declared Title Lands have experienced.

You're like the guy not he team taking dumb penalties for no good reason. You are only hurting other hunters by pretending that the world isn't what it is and throwing around racist slurs (which really aren't a good look at the best of times).

Again, I get that you're frustrated. A lot of people are. Don't make things worse.

Rob, the British Crown is as relevant as I am being the Pope, the whole system is crooked and badly needs an overhaul.
Is it racist to call an indian an indian?
I wish my property was stolen land, instead of me paying big bucks for it.
I also know that BC is in for a shock and I hope it's gonna be such a huge shock that it will eventually lead to big changes.
And being racist? - you got to be kidding.
One member here said this: "the school putting my 4 year old in a small storage room during Cree class because she's white"
Did you read the post "Only white people can be racist"?
Anything we say these days is racist, so I'm not gonna pretend and pussyfoot around these issues.
Eventually you have to pick a side!

[LBM]

Um is that what the kids these days refer to as a "Mic drop"?

You couldn't have laid it out any more clearly Rob. People need to realize that anti's do read these forums and look for any ammunition they can find to use against us. Being characterized as trophy hunting killers who only care about the "killing" part is one thing; but being characterized by the Anti's as racist trophy hunting killers is in another league altogether and we don't need any more players on the team taking dumb penalties - we're already playing shorthanded FFS

So hunters saying there not going to follow the travel ban would that be considered giving the antis ammo, like saying look hunters cant follow regulations they will do what ever they want to go kill something.
Would that be considered a dumb penalty.

[Harvest the Land]

Is it racist to call an indian an indian?


I don't think its racist to use the word Indian, BUT that's coming from a whitey who's half Dutch. It might be better to ask an Indigenous person if they think "its racist to call an Indian an Indian". I do think that most of them prefer to be referred to as First Nations or Indigenous people rather than Indians, but again this is coming from someone who not native.

But I think anybody, regardless of the colour of their skin would agree that saying shit like "a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe" might be construed by some as derogatory or racist.

You might have a different opinion and you're entitled to it

[Harvest the Land]

So hunters saying there not going to follow the travel ban would that be considered giving the antis ammo, like saying look hunters cant follow regulations they will do what ever they want to go kill something.
Would that be considered a dumb penalty.

I happen to have a company truck with signs on it. If I get stopped by a road block, I will be telling them that yes my travel is for work and it is essential (which won't be entirely untrue). I probably won't tell them (unless they ask) that I'm also travelling with my .308 and plan on making a detour up a logging road with the hopes of filling my freezer

[REMINGTON JIM]

http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by wildcatter http://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=2250401#post2250401)
Is it racist to call an indian an indian?

ABSOLUTELY NOT ! The Federal goverment has Referred to indians as indians for YEAR's The land plots GIVEN to them are still called INDIAN Reservations ! RJ

[wildcatter]

I don't think its racist to use the word Indian, BUT that's coming from a whitey who's half Dutch. It might be better to ask an Indigenous person if they think "its racist to call an Indian an Indian". I do think that most of them prefer to be referred to as First Nations or Indigenous people rather than Indians, but again this is coming from someone who not native.

But I think anybody, regardless of the colour of their skin would agree that saying shit like "a bunch of drunken indians at the campfire smoking a peace pipe" might be construed by some as derogatory or racist.

You might have a different opinion and you're entitled to it


Yeah I know, I did that on purpose, why not everybody can say what ever they want about us whites, so let's return the favor.
By the way, I refuse to call them First Nations, because they are not.

[Hadda]

If ya'll quit being such assholes you might find the FN support the outdoor lifestyle you value more than alot of the non indigenous people who are currently influencing Wildlife management.

[REMINGTON JIM]

If ya'll quit being such assholes you might find the FN support the outdoor lifestyle you value more than alot of the non indigenous people who are currently influencing Wildlife management.

Yea Right ! Keepers of the Land :roll: BUT you are right about there being LOT of asshole whities against Hunting ! RJ

[adriaticum]

If ya'll quit being such assholes you might find the FN support the outdoor lifestyle you value more than alot of the non indigenous people who are currently influencing Wildlife management.
I tend to agree , but it remains to be seen how things play out. both sides have a lot of work to do to fight old stereotypes.

[Rob Chipman]

Rob, the British Crown is as relevant as I am being the Pope, the whole system is crooked and badly needs an overhaul.
Is it racist to call an indian an indian?
I wish my property was stolen land, instead of me paying big bucks for it.
I also know that BC is in for a shock and I hope it's gonna be such a huge shock that it will eventually lead to big changes.
And being racist? - you got to be kidding.
One member here said this: "the school putting my 4 year old in a small storage room during Cree class because she's white"
Did you read the post "Only white people can be racist"?
Anything we say these days is racist, so I'm not gonna pretend and pussyfoot around these issues.
Eventually you have to pick a side!

Like I said before, I understand that the state of the world frustrates you. That's no reason to shoot yourself in the foot, and it's certainly no reason to shoot other hunters and anglers in our feet.

You can *pretend* that the Crown is irrelevant to you. Since it's tax time why not start with sending JT a letter saying "Hey, the Crown is irrelevant to me and needs a big overhaul so I'm not paying taxes anymore"; or tell the CO "That Crown stuff is bs. I don't buy it. So, no, I don't have a hunting license". All legal authority in this province, and Canada, ultimately resides in the Crown.

You can call it the "British" crown if you like, but understand: Queen Elizabeth II is the Queen of *Canada* and she is the head of state. You don't need to like it. Your opinion isn't required. If Bruce Jenner can win gold in the decathlon and then later become Caitlyn Jenner *and* run for governor of California there's no reason you can't believe the crown isn't relevant to you. Fill your boots.

However....if you want to know why Indigenous title is a real thing you need to understand that *the people who make the rules* believe that the Crown is very relevant. They use a concept called "the honour of the Crown", and that makes the British Crown of 1763 absolutely relevant to anyone who wants access to the land, animals or fish in BC. That's just a fact. Neither you nor I have to like it, but we'd have to be idiots to ignore it (and again, its a free world and if someone wants to be an idiot, more power to them).

It's not always racist to call an Indian an Indian. It's a legal term, and some people identify as Indians. Sometimes it is racist. We both know that. Let's stop trying to pretend that we still need to figure it out.

I'm not saying you are a racist. Maybe you are, maybe you aren't. I don't know, and besides, that's kind of a question that you should be answering yourself.

But, there's no question that linking the existence of a fact that you don't like and don't want to accept (Indigenous title) with the phrase "drunken Indians smoking a peace pipe around a fire" is not only a racist thing to say, it's also clearly illogical.

Let me walk you through it:

1) you're using negative language based on stereotypes and you're targeting a group of people based on their immutable characteristics, in this case, race. That's pretty much the definition of a racist comment. I'm not going out on a limb to observe the a lot of people would consider that racist. Maybe you think it's worth running the risk that someone calls *you* a racist, but you understand how the world works, and since you're running that risk on a hunting forum it's not a stretch to observe that there are people in the world who will paint all of us on this forum with the same brush;

2) it's an illogical statement. Canadian governments and the Canadian legal system, going back before the creation of Canada into the pre-cursor British system, recognized and defined Indigenous title. You can't blame First Nations for that. Doing that is illogical;

3) when you go out of your way to make an illogical statement that contains racist stereotypes....sometimes people will call you a racist.

Again, you can decide if you are one or not. I don't care. But stop saying racist things that give anti-hunters ammo. It' ain't helping.

It's also going to be offensive to many, many people who non-Indigenous hunters and anglers have much in common with, and who are doing many things that non-Indigenous hunters and anglers want done. Why would you go out of your way to offend them?

As for stolen land, again, there is a legal argument that your property *is* stolen land. You can pretend that argument doesn't exist, and you can pretend it isn't relevant to you. Still, all our lives we've watched First Nations fight, through the Canadian legal system, and they've been fighting largely over....land. First Nations aren't arguing that the land was purchased, fair and square. They're arguing that it was stolen. They've chalked up some impressive wins.

Did I read the post "Only white people can be racist"? Seriously? You're asking *me* that question? What in our history together leads you to believe that I don't know that whole paradigm, including the writings of the people who developed the paradigm, backwards and forwards? I could explain it to you until your eyes glazed over and you cried for mercy. I'm not ignorant of what's going on in today's world. I'm trying to get you to see it and, more importantly, accept it and react to it effectively. There is no questions that racists exist, but there's also no question that the term "racist" has been more effectively weaponized than "trophy hunter". Don't give your opponents ammunition.

I have picked a side. I'm on the side of the environment, the fish, the animals, and hunters and anglers. I want funding for conservation, and science applied to wildlife management, and I want access to the land and water base. I'm really f'ing clear on that and I'm telling you to stop making the accomplishment of those goals harder.

What side are you on and what are you trying to do?

Reverse more than century of Indigenous legal accomplishments *under Canadian law*?
Overhaul the country's political system?
Change the popular cultural values surrounding racism?

Fly at 'er. Good luck. I don't think you're going to be successful, but I admire the confidence. Once you've accomplished that come back and help us hunters and anglers come to grips with and react effectively to the challenges we face as hunters and anglers. We need all hands on deck.

[wildcatter]

I wasn't always racist, the system made me and the injustice that most people just accept doesn't help.
"Did I read the post "Only white people can be racist"? Seriously? You're asking *me* that question?"
Yes I am asking you the question. I guess you don't find anything wrong with reverse racism.
Just think about if somebody tried to publish something like that about black, or any other people.

However, we look at things differently, I tend to question things I don't like.
So you go ahead and belive there is nothing can be done about the land deals (not in our favor anyway)
I would like to think someday the wish of the majority will be heard and perhaps the laws will be applied equally for everybody.
Mind you probably not going to happen in my lifetime.
Let me be clear, I never had the intention to hurt anybody, but sure as hell I have every intention to defend myself and my property.

[Rob Chipman]

Wildcatter:

I think you're still a bit confused.

I'm not expressing any of my political or social views. I'm just telling you what the state of the world is. I understand that you are not happy with a lot of things in the word, and that you're frustrated by them.

We live in a hyper-partisan world. As you say "Anything we say these days is racist" - it certainly can seem that way. Going further, just about anything you say can be either offensive to someone or misrepresented by them. We all recognize that.

Here's where you're going wrong. When I explain to you where Indigenous rights and title come from, or that the honour of the Crown is an important concept, or that crown land and fee simple isn't as solid an idea as we used to think, you seem to assume that I like it.

You're making a simple, but significant mistake. You're confusing data with an opinion.

I'm not sure we look at anything significant differently. I understand the concepts that only white people can be racist, or that racism is about a power structure, or that there can't be reverse racism.


"Understand" doesn't mean "don't find anything wrong with".

You don't have to pussyfoot around. You're making provocative statements that are at times very racist, and now you're even admitting that you are a racist. The thing is, you're not attaching your name to those statements. You're staying anonymous. That's fine, and you're free to do it, but its about as stunning and brave as Meryl Streep when she criticizes Trump at the Oscars.

I use my real name and I'm connected to the BCWF. It can't be surprise to you that I self-censor as a result. I don't share many of my political or social beliefs in public, especially when they can be screenshot, misquoted and used as ammunition by people who want to demonize hunters and anglers.

Those people exist. You and I both know that.


The world is far from perfect. A lot of things that happen in it upset a lot of people. You aren't unique in being pissed at some things.

But I'm asking a very simple thing: regardless of how frustrated you are with the state of the world, be smart about it. Don't give anti-hunters ammunition to use against the rest of us because you're upset. Suck it up.

Being a racist is not a good look, regardless of who and what injustice got you there. You should probably think it through. Indigenous people didn't create the Canadian legal concept of Indigenous title or rights. Your elected officials and their predecessors did. Once you realize that you might be able to see that attacking Indigenous people for something that they didn't do is illogical and does not help anyone who wants to maintain our practice of hunting and fishing in BC.

Hunters and anglers have a lot in common with Indigenous people, and given that Indigenous people throw a lot of weight around we're going to have to collaborate with them. Want predator control? Make friends with an Indian.

I know you say you wish something will happen, and that you don't think it will happen in your lifetime. On that we do see the world differently. I don't have a lot of time left, but I'm not wishing for jackshit. I'm working to make something happen. If you can't help me, stop making my job tougher.

Fair deal?

[sakohunter]

Wildcatter:

I think you're still a bit confused.

I'm not expressing any of my political or social views. I'm just telling you what the state of the world is. I understand that you are not happy with a lot of things in the word, and that you're frustrated by them.

We live in a hyper-partisan world. As you say "Anything we say these days is racist" - it certainly can seem that way. Going further, just about anything you say can be either offensive to someone or misrepresented by them. We all recognize that.

Here's where you're going wrong. When I explain to you where Indigenous rights and title come from, or that the honour of the Crown is an important concept, or that crown land and fee simple isn't as solid an idea as we used to think, you seem to assume that I like it.

You're making a simple, but significant mistake. You're confusing data with an opinion.

I'm not sure we look at anything significant differently. I understand the concepts that only white people can be racist, or that racism is about a power structure, or that there can't be reverse racism.


"Understand" doesn't mean "don't find anything wrong with".

You don't have to pussyfoot around. You're making provocative statements that are at times very racist, and now you're even admitting that you are a racist. The thing is, you're not attaching your name to those statements. You're staying anonymous. That's fine, and you're free to do it, but its about as stunning and brave as Meryl Streep when she criticizes Trump at the Oscars.

I use my real name and I'm connected to the BCWF. It can't be surprise to you that I self-censor as a result. I don't share many of my political or social beliefs in public, especially when they can be screenshot, misquoted and used as ammunition by people who want to demonize hunters and anglers.

Those people exist. You and I both know that.


The world is far from perfect. A lot of things that happen in it upset a lot of people. You aren't unique in being pissed at some things.

But I'm asking a very simple thing: regardless of how frustrated you are with the state of the world, be smart about it. Don't give anti-hunters ammunition to use against the rest of us because you're upset. Suck it up.

Being a racist is not a good look, regardless of who and what injustice got you there. You should probably think it through. Indigenous people didn't create the Canadian legal concept of Indigenous title or rights. Your elected officials and their predecessors did. Once you realize that you might be able to see that attacking Indigenous people for something that they didn't do is illogical and does not help anyone who wants to maintain our practice of hunting and fishing in BC.

Hunters and anglers have a lot in common with Indigenous people, and given that Indigenous people throw a lot of weight around we're going to have to collaborate with them. Want predator control? Make friends with an Indian.

I know you say you wish something will happen, and that you don't think it will happen in your lifetime. On that we do see the world differently. I don't have a lot of time left, but I'm not wishing for jackshit. I'm working to make something happen. If you can't help me, stop making my job tougher.

Fair deal?




Very well said.

[wildcatter]

Understand what you are saying about anti hunters, you can suck it up, but I can't.
Do you find anything wrong with giving natives ALL of BC because of the mistreatments by the early settlers?
It is very unfortunate what happened, but unfortunately we can't change that.

There are countless other people around the world who have been conquered, mistreated or pushed
aside throughout history, yet don't see anything like this going on, at least not on this scale.

So to remedy the problem we will let them claim the land for themselves and when they have all of it you hope they
will be satisfied and relationship between us and them will be normalized.
I somehow can't see it that way, because that will give them even more ammo, so to speak, and they will be very hostile
at every opportunity they get and guess what? - the government will not be on our side.
I hope I am wrong on this, but I can see it becoming the norm.

You think hunting for us will be ok with the natives owning most of the land, they will probably let us hunt
whenever they feel like for a fee, but it can change anytime, anywhere.
Let's say a hunter plans his/her hunting trip, arrange for holidays, make preparations, as most people have to
and when get to the destination they say we are not allowing to you hunt here, go home.
Subject to change without notice applies.

Since you are in the real estate business let me ask you this:
Do you ever tell your clienst they are buying (your words) "stolen land"?
And if not, how can you make a sale in good conscience?

[Rob Chipman]

Wildcatter:


Remember when I wrote: "I don't share many of my political or social beliefs in public, especially when they can be screenshot, misquoted and used as ammunition by people who want to demonize hunters and anglers. "


That said, I'm going to give you a more accurate way to look at things:

Indigenous people aren't getting land settlements "because of the mistreatments by the early settlers".

They are winning their claims in Canadian courts, all the way up to the Supreme Court, or they're negotiating settlements with governments who want to avoid worse outcomes through the courts because Canadian law is largely on their side.

Their claims are holding up in Canadian courts because of things that have been said by the governments of Canada and Canada's predecessors. I get that you don't accept this fact, and that it frustrates you, but it is, nevertheless, a fact. It's not new. It's been established in Canadian law.

Whether you or I like this fact is irrelevant. It's been ruled on.

Countless other peoples were conquered through history. Correct. Also irrelevant. In the cases you refer to the conquerers said "You had it, we took it, too bad".

The British didn't do that in Canada. They said "You had it, we've ended up running it, but it's still yours until we legally alienate it from you, according to our laws" - you see the difference? We are still living the results of the Royal Proclamation off 1763. If that piece if *law* had never existed you and I wouldn't be having this talk. You really have to accept the particular fact on the ground that is the Royal Proclamation. (You don't have to like it. If it makes it easier, think of it like cancer. You don't like cancer, right? But you also don't pretend that it isn't real).


"...when they have all of it you hope they
will be satisfied..."




"...they will be very hostile
at every opportunity they get..."



I don't hope or wish anything.

I also don't predict the future in a way that justifies me doing nothing but complain.

I play out the possible outcomes and I try to figure out how I can influence them so that I don't suffer through inaction.



"You think hunting for us will be ok...."
Obviously I don't think that. If I thought that I wouldn't be doing any of the work I'm doing now. I'd sit back and let it unfold. I'm doing exactly the opposite. I'm engaging with people and groups that are influential and powerful and who share many of my conservation concerns.




"Let's say a hunter plans his/her hunting trip, arrange for holidays, make preparations, as most people have to
and when get to the destination they say we are not allowing to you hunt here, go home.
Subject to change without notice applies."

That's what happens now, right? With the BC government running the show the regulations change without notice despite whatever plans you may have. Were you unaware of that? Have you not been paying attention? Hunting went from "essential" to "Not essential if you have to travel" to "Nah, just not essential no matter what".



"the government will not be on our side."

Did you say "will not"? Like "In the *future* the government will not be on our side, unlike today, where, for example, they over-fund science in wildlife management, and gladly manage predator imbalances, and make sure that access isn't restricted, and don't cancel any hunts for anything and do exactly what we need them to do!"

Newsflash: the government is generally not on the side of hunter angler conservationists. They haven't been for a long, long time. Put not your faith in princes, and make sure you choose what team you're on before you grab a jersey.



"Since you are in the real estate business let me ask you this:
Do you ever tell your clienst they are buying (your words) "stolen land"?"

Wildcatter - pay attention. I'm the guy in this conversation using his real name in public. I have clients who read this. Nothing I'm saying is secret and nothing I say is attached to a pretend name. None of this is new. When I sell a condo in Richmond I generally don't bore people with a long description of the Royal Proclamation, the Tsilhqot'in decision or the resulting uncertainty about fee simple title vs Indigenous title and whether the two are compatible.

If we're buying property in the Interior? In any vaguely rural setting? You bet we have that discussion.

And in case you didn't know, any informed and professional realtor in BC has taken continuing legal education on the impact of Indigenous rights and title.

Your problem seems to be that you don't like the reality of the world, you want to deny it, and you want other people to deny reality as well. Thanks for the invite, but I ain't playing that game.


In this world, in BC, Indigenous rights and title are a real thing, and when they are fully recognized they are going to bring big changes.

Indigenous people have demonstrated, time and again, that they can influence the course of events significantly.

In light of those facts I'm trying to influence outcomes to benefit hunters, anglers and all sorts of outdoor recreationalists, as well as trying to advance conservation for the sake of the plants and animals.

What about that do you *not* like? What's your solution?

[wildcatter]

When you said suck it up, you basically resigned to, "it's out of our hand, nothing we can do, just take it up the you know where".
I get it about the Royal Proclamation and that the natives can and will take full advantage of it.
If I was a lawyer, I would seriously think about getting involved.

As for my name, why do you have a problem with me not using my real name? - most on here dont.
If you are worried something being used against you, well you can change that.

"Newsflash: the government is generally not on the side of hunter angler conservationists. They haven't been for a long, long time"
Perhaps not as much as we would like, but there are certain channels open to us dealing with huntinf/fishing related issues.
Whereas, I have a strong feeling we will not be able to deal with the natives the same way.
Ultimately when all this settled, opportunities and resources for us non natives will be drastically reduced.
And yes I don't like it, ask any hunter and probably get the same answer 99% of the time.
Hunting being not essential is for travel restrictions for the duration of Covid measures, till statistics improve.
The Ministry have been making changes to hunting regulations time to time, that is not unusual.
Hunting as a whole would not be cancelled by the goverment, but I can see that happening if natives own all the land.

[Bugle M In]

Spoke with somebody that dealt with FN Issues for many many years.
The BIG ISSUE was the "Lawyers".

Many many times, there were deals on the table, and all seemed well, AND THEN, on the 11th hour, the FN LAWYERS would
cancel the agreement/deal.

WHY??????

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Just keep billing more hours, it was a "cash cow" for the lawyers.
And, to be "a little fair" to government, these "broken deals" add up.
(Why do you think ICBC just made big changes.????? Simple, to reduce lawyer costs as that was the biggest issue and
ballooning costs)
So, i suppose they end up "not fighting" for us, and like some state, that it pretty much looks like the government is not here
to support the non FN into fair agreements.

The big problem is to figure out a way to "CAP" lawyers costs on issues (if that is even possible).
That for every deal on the table, there will only be so much money the government (US!) will pay for their lawyer costs.
The rest comes out of THEIR POCKETS.

Then, you spin it the other way and tie "them up in lawyers costs"!!
Until it gets to expensive for "them to cover their own lawyers cost"

Then we can have some proper resolutions again.
Right now, its the lawyers that are laughing their asses off to the bank.
And they dont care what they destroy in their path.

Ian Waddel was a lawyer, who was an NDP party member in the house that help start some of this BS in BC.
And you know what, he many times said at private parties that he ended up "losing out".
That in the end, his lawyers comrades that he knew walked away with tons of cash.
"His buddies" made all the money.
And we are all left with the damage now and in the future.

All because we never figured out a way to cap lawyers costs/billing on any of these issues along the way.
It wasn't the FN (i believe) that walked away at the 11th hour......it was the lawyers.

[wildcatter]

Spoke with somebody that dealt with FN Issues for many many years.
The BIG ISSUE was the "Lawyers".

Many many times, there were deals on the table, and all seemed well, AND THEN, on the 11th hour, the FN LAWYERS would
cancel the agreement/deal.

WHY??????

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

Just keep billing more hours, it was a "cash cow" for the lawyers.
And, to be "a little fair" to government, these "broken deals" add up.
(Why do you think ICBC just made big changes.????? Simple, to reduce lawyer costs as that was the biggest issue and
ballooning costs)
So, i suppose they end up "not fighting" for us, and like some state, that it pretty much looks like the government is not here
to support the non FN into fair agreements.

The big problem is to figure out a way to "CAP" lawyers costs on issues (if that is even possible).
That for every deal on the table, there will only be so much money the government (US!) will pay for their lawyer costs.
The rest comes out of THEIR POCKETS.

Then, you spin it the other way and tie "them up in lawyers costs"!!
Until it gets to expensive for "them to cover their own lawyers cost"

Then we can have some proper resolutions again.
Right now, its the lawyers that are laughing their asses off to the bank.
And they dont care what they destroy in their path.

Ian Waddel was a lawyer, who was an NDP party member in the house that help start some of this BS in BC.
And you know what, he many times said at private parties that he ended up "losing out".
That in the end, his lawyers comrades that he knew walked away with tons of cash.
"His buddies" made all the money.
And we are all left with the damage now and in the future.

All because we never figured out a way to cap lawyers costs/billing on any of these issues along the way.
It wasn't the FN (i believe) that walked away at the 11th hour......it was the lawyers.

You can bet the lawyers will milk it all its worth.
The FN is using money to pay the lawyers they get from the government and we are paying for it.
The whole thing is a crooked system.

[Rob Chipman]

When you said suck it up, you basically resigned to, "it's out of our hand, nothing we can do, just take it up the you know where".


Wrong. By "suck it up" I mean "When you get frustrated and want to say something racist in public that doesn't reflect well on hunters, can be screenshot and used as ammunition by anti-hunters *suck it up and bite your tongue*.





I get it about the Royal Proclamation and that the natives can and will take full advantage of it.



Good. So now you understand that Indigenous title isn't something made up by First Nations but a function of the Canadian legal system. You're starting to understand why it's not a clear cut "they're" taking advantage of "us" and more "we have rules we follow whether we like them or not".





As for my name, why do you have a problem with me not using my real name? - most on here dont.
If you are worried something being used against you, well you can change that.



I don't care what name you use, but since I use my real name and am connected to BCWF I'm not going to say stupid things and then say "Hey, I don't pussyfoot around - what's wrong with you? Why won't you say dumb and provocative things anonymously"



"Newsflash: the government is generally not on the side of hunter angler conservationists. They haven't been for a long, long time"
Perhaps not as much as we would like, but there are certain channels open to us dealing with huntinf/fishing related issues.



Do tell what those channels are. I spend plenty of time engaging with government, am not happy with the results and will happily make use of any pointers you want to share to make me more effective.




Whereas, I have a strong feeling we will not be able to deal with the natives the same way.



Thats's awesome. You have a feeling that dealing with more than 200 Indigenous groups (be they governments or other organizations) won't be the same as dealing with government? You might be right. You might be wrong. I said it before: I don't predict the future so that I can sit around in the present and complain. I try to indentify the problems and then influence the outcomes so that I have less to bitch about. I could use your help. DOn't make it harder by saying stuff with your outside voice that you should be saying with your inside voice.




And yes I don't like it, ask any hunter and probably get the same answer 99% of the time.
Hunting being not essential is for travel restrictions for the duration of Covid measures, till statistics improve.
The Ministry have been making changes to hunting regulations time to time, that is not unusual.
Hunting as a whole would not be cancelled by the goverment, but I can see that happening if natives own all the land.


Grizzly hunt cancelled on the basis of society's values, science sideline.

Government looking at changing trapping regs because of a social media dust up in Victoria, ignoring science.

Hunting deed essential, then bureaucrats deciding that travel to hunt means it's non-essential.

Talk of municipalities calling for a moratorium on wolf hunting and the government certainly paying attention to a campaign to stop "trophy hunting of predators"....and elk and sheep.


Meanwhile, multiple Indigenous groups are actually promoting and doing predator management and making lots of noises the actually support hunting.


You're free to speculate about what might happen in the future, and when your vision is grim enough you're free to comapina about the terrible future you've dreamed up. Fly at 'er.

But if you're going to express your frustration in public in a way that hurts other hunters who actually have to work with First Nations to try to maintain hunting and angling and access to the land in BC, do me a favour, will you? Suck it up and bite your tongue. It's not a big ask.

[eric]

Rob Chipman, I am sure that I am not the only individual who appreciates the fight you are enduring on behalf of all hunters.
It must be very frustrating dealing with Governments who only want the vote to keep them in power, and to hell with what science has to say.

I say well done, and keep up the fight.
The road ahead is going to be a rough ride..

[Rob Chipman]

Thanks, and to be clear - government is tough. Wildcatter isn't hard to endure and I'm not fighting him. He's frustrated with a lot of the same stuff as me and a bunch of us. What hunter or angler isn't? I think he just hasn't seen it clearly yet and he's getting frustrated. It's actually great that he enfaces because we all get to work this shit through and figure out the best way to raise to the challenge.

[Bugle M In]

Yes, we are frustrated.
And its good that someone like you Rob "do understand" the FN side of the argument and agreements that are coming from it.

No way to find proper solutions if one can "not confront" the "actual issues".

We all have to understand the "rules that are at play", whether we like them or not.
In the end, if the outcome does go downhill for us non FN, then at that time us that arent happy can think of alternative ways
to address issues that "arent working" for both groups.
That alternative isnt as pleasant for sure, but at some point, taking a page out of the FN rule book at one point in their crusade
may all be what is left for us to do in the end to be heard.

I agree with many here, that our government seems more inclined to listen to FN these days and think less of the rest of us.
Hopefully the solutions agreement work in the end for both groups.
If not, then we have to decide how we are going to play ball.

Example, if things like the pacific salmon issues arent addressed properly, and only the FN are given any benefit, then convoys
of protest and hay bales down rivers might in the end be the only game left in town.
I hope for everyone's sake the government "does consider what could happen" if they get this wrong and dont keep a fair balance
for all.
Who cares what the UN has to say, they dont live here, their families dont live here.

We, as outdoorsman know what is at stake.
Unfortunately most city folks that make up the provinces population have no clue whats going on or care to even want to
know.
Its only when a sign goes up or they are asked to open up their wallets that they will start to figure out how manipulated they
have become.

Right now we are the greatest minority in the province and of least concern.
Thats why it hurts more.

[wildcatter]

Regardless of the outcome of this, it's not going to be good for us non natives.
And the lawyers, who are to benefit enormously, will make it even worse.

[Rob Chipman]

You're correct about the lawyers. It's a very steady gravy train.

[Arctic Lake]

Any lawyers on here ? You can see how legal bills add up if you have needed a lawyer’s services . Everything is calculated
Photocopies , Telephone calls, Travel Time etc....
Arctic Lake