|
|
The BC Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund is a voluntary fund created to actively protect, promote and enhance the interests of British Columbia resident hunters and anglers.
The BC Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund was formed by a group of BC Wildlife Federation members who were frustrated by the lack of progress in restoring resident priority in the provincial allocation policy and the continuing loss of resident angling and hunting opportunity in the province.
Because of the limitations on political activity by the BC Wildlife Federation due to its charitable status, it was decided to manage the fund under the auspices of the BCWF Political Action Alliance which had initially been formed to politically fight against the federal firearms legislation.
The goal of the Fund is to actively and continually lobby the governments of BC and Canada at all levels to ensure that their policies, regulations, and acts recognize non-commercial resident priority and that their managers implement those procedures as written in every region of the province.
To accomplish this, the BC Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund needs the help of every active resident angler and hunter to lobby politicians and ministry officials to ensure that resident priority policies are followed in all Regions of the province.
The Fund also needs financial assistance in order to hire professional expertise in lobbying, purchase media advertising and counter campaigns by groups that will negatively or adversely impact resident hunting and angling opportunities.
If every hunter and angler in the province financially supports the fund our lobby would be immensely effective, and would enable us to restore and protect our opportunities for now and the future.
What is the BCWF Political Action Alliance (PAA) and is the PAA associated with the BC Wildlife Federation?
The BCWF Political Action Alliance (PAA) is a society registered under the Societies Act of BC and is not in any way directly associated with or part of the BC Wildlife Federation. It has its own constitution, its own directors and its own mandate as registered with the Registrar.
The BCWF Political Action Alliance currently has two funds in place.
One fund was created by Gary Mauser specifically to support the passing of Bill C-391 with a goal to promote the elimination of the long-gun registry.
The other, and more recent fund is the Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund (RAHPF).
What is the BCWF Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund?
The BC Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund is a voluntary fund created to actively protect, promote and enhance the interests of British Columbia resident hunters and anglers.
The BC Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund was formed by a group of BC Wildlife Federation members who were frustrated by the lack of progress in restoring resident priority in the provincial allocation policy and the continuing loss of resident angling and hunting opportunity in the province.
Is the Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund associated with the BCWF’s Legal Defence Fund?
The RAHPF was established with the intent of working for resident priority and is not associated with, nor does it have the same mandate as the BCWF’s Legal Defence Fund.
Does the British Columbia Wildlife Federation have any knowledge of the Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund (RAHPF)?
Yes, the RAHPF was discussed and endorsed by the BCWF members present at the 2009 AGM in Fernie. However, no endorsement by the BCWF was required to proceed with the creation of the fund. Individual members and club representatives made significant donations to the fund right on the floor of the convention.
Does the British Columbia Wildlife Federation have access to the funds in the Resident Angler and Hunter Preservation Fund?
No, the BCWF does not have access to the RAHPF monies. All of the funds used by the RAHPF are from donations made directly to the BCWF PAA for the purposes stated on its website (http://residentpriority.ca/) and none of the funds have come from the BC Wildlife Federation. Only the directors of the BCWF Political Action Alliance manage the fund.
Did the BC Wildlife Federation approve the advertisement that was placed by the BCWF Political Action Alliance?
The directors of the BCWF Political Action Alliance approved the advertisement placed in local papers around the province in late 2009. Neither the executive nor the board of directors of the BC Wildlife Federation had any knowledge or part in the approval of the ad prior to its publication.
How much money did the BC Wildlife Federation spend on this ad?
The BC Wildlife Federation spent no money on the ad that was run by the BCWF PAA.
Are the claims in the advertisement legitimate?
The Allocation Policy was agreed to in 2006 but since then the GOABC has requested the policy be delayed or re-opened. There was a transition period in the originally agreed to policy through 2012 that was to allow guide-outfitters to transition to the new policy. GOABC has requested that the Allocation Policy implementation be delayed until 2017 and has also requested the Allocation Policy be re-opened.
Since the new Allocation Policy took effect, in Region 7A guide-outfitters have lobbied to reduce or remove the calf general open season, reduce or eliminate cow harvest and eliminate or at the very least make the immature bull moose an allocated hunt all to increase quality of product. Prior to the Allocation Policy guide-outfitters in 7A harvested close to 1100 cow moose from 1980-2007, which is about 7% of the cow harvest. Through the new policy the guide-outfitter share was reduced to 2%. But probably because these hunts are becoming harder to sell, even with the reduced numbers available, there is now a push to reduce or completely eliminate the cow harvest which would greatly impact resident opportunity, but have little effect on the bottom line of commercial operators.
Also, by making immature bull moose an allocated hunt the total resident share of the bull harvest will be reduced from about 92% to 75% increasing guide-outfitter share from 8% to 25%. What this means to resident hunters is either the spike-fork season or the LEH hunt will be greatly reduced or eliminated.
GOABC has also requested all resident sheep hunting be placed on LEH or to have Guide-outfitters quota completely removed. This was the system in place until the 1970s and resulted in huge conservation concerns and in resident sheep hunters being placed on LEH in some areas despite only harvesting 15% of the sheep prior to that.
These are but a few of the issues that are being pushed behind closed doors without your knowledge.
The GOABC has also produced an economic viability paper that they have used to lobby government to make changes to hunting regulations that will support their industry at the expense of resident hunter opportunity. All the contents of the ad you have mentioned, directly reference statements contained in this viability paper.
In what we see as a positive move for resident anglers of British Columbia, The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, the Honourable Gail Shea, today issued the following statement:
“The Government of Canada is deferring the negotiation of fisheries components at treaty tables in British Columbia that involve salmon, pending the findings and recommendations of the Commission of Inquiry into the Decline of Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River. The deferral of fisheries related negotiations will allow for treaty negotiations to be staged so that fish chapters in treaties can be informed by the findings and recommendations of the Inquiry.”
Read the entire ministerial statement.
TSCRA News Update, Feb. 22, 2010
In a landmark RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act) lawsuit certain to have far-reaching implications for the animal rights movement, Feld Entertainment and the Ringling Brothers circus sued the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), its lawyers, and several other animal rights groups last week.
The nonprofit Center for Consumer Freedom (CCF) unearthed the lawsuit in federal court records Monday. CCF is making the lawsuit available online at the Web site, www.HumaneWatch.org.
“America’s farmers, ranchers, hunters, fishermen, research scientists, fashion designers, and restaurateurs have seen for decades how the animal rights movement can behave like a mobbed-up racket,” said CCF Director of Research David Martosko. “But it’s still shocking to see the evidence laid out on paper. In a treble-damage lawsuit like this, a jury could actually do the humane thing and finally put HSUS out of business completely.”
In a lawsuit filed Feb. 16, Feld leveled bribery, fraud, obstruction of justice, and money laundering charges against HSUS and two of its corporate attorneys; three other animal rights groups; the Washington, D.C. law firm of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal; and all three of that firm’s named partners.
On Dec.30, 2009, Federal Judge Emmitt Sullivan ruled that these defendants collaborated to pay more than $190,000 to Tom Rider, a former Feld employee who was an elephant “barn helper” for two years in the late 1990s, in exchange for his impeached testimony against Feld in an earlier lawsuit—testimony Judge Sullivan declared “not credible” and disregarded in its entirety. That lawsuit was dismissed.
Feld is also suing Rider and a nonprofit “Wildlife Advocacy Project” charity, claiming that Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal used it to funnel money from their plaintiff clients to Rider. These clients included the Fund for Animals, which merged with HSUS in 2004.
“The new HumaneWatch Web site is the only place the public will be able to read this lawsuit,” Martosko added. “We’re publishing a treasure trove of information about the Humane Society of the United States, including lots of surprising documents that HSUS would rather remain hidden from its contributors.”
Last week CCF launched www.HumaneWatch.org, an online watchdog project dedicated to analyzing HSUS’s activities and keeping the group honest. It includes a blog, an interactive document library, and a growing body of information about HSUS-related organizations and staff.
The Center for Consumer Freedom is a nonprofit watchdog organization that informs the public about the activities of tax-exempt activist groups. It is supported by American consumers, business organizations, and foundations.
For Immediate Release:
BC Wildlife Federation
February 24th, 2010
The 37,000 members of the BC Wildlife Federation (BCWF) do not share our politician’s enthusiasm with the recent signing of the Yale Final Agreement. “We have the same issues with the numbers of Fraser River sockeye allocated to the Yale as in the Tsawwassen Final Agreement.” states BCWF President Mel Arnold. Combining the food and commercial allocations the Yale First Nation are to receive over 2% of the annual Fraser River sockeye plus some allocations of other salmon species. “There are ninety six other First Nations on the Fraser River, most larger in band numbers, potentially demanding similar or likely larger percentages. It is to be noted that another small Band at Tsawwassen also received close to 2% of the Fraser Sockeye in their Treaty. Then we also have the Bands in the Strait of Georgia, Johnstone Strait, Juan de Fuca Strait and the West Coast of Vancouver Island who also have or are promised a share of the Fraser Sockeye. Historically the commercial and public fisheries have benefitted all Canadians but as these treaties roll out it is clear the only benefit will be to First Nations. And it is clear from the math that not all First Nations will in fact benefit but will lose their current share in the end.”
Over the years the BCWF has met with Government officials both in BC and Ottawa and on many occasions raised the question of the “arithmetic” regarding these numbers in final agreements with First Nations. “It is incredulous that our government leaders don’t get it. Maybe they just don’t care. At the time of the signing of the Tsawwassen Final Agreement only five provincial MLAs had requested briefing notes. We suspect the vast majority of current MLAs are equally ignorant of what is in the Yale Final Agreement.”
“How British Columbians can accept the blatant discrimination of voters in the Yale First Nation Government is equally baffling. Non-natives living on Yale settlement lands will be taxed but disallowed a vote in the local government. Eighty seven percent of voting British Columbians told Premier Campbell in the infamous 2002 ‘ binding’ referendum’ that aboriginal self-government should have the characteristics of local government, with powers delegated from Canada and British Columbia’. Once again we see Campbell and his government rejecting the wishes of the citizens of B.C. ”
The BCWF supports the principle of forming treaties with the First Nations of British Columbia. It does not support the denial of public consultation. “Each First Nation person of voting age gets his say on whether to accept or reject an agreement,” said BCWF President Mel Arnold, “when you consider how the cumulative impact of these will affect the future of all British Columbians why should we, as tax paying citizens accept less than our First Nations people expect?”
For further information please contact Patti MacAhonic, Executive Director of the BCWF at 604-291-9990 extension 230 or at patti@bcwf.bc.ca.
The BCWF is a province-wide voluntary conservation organization representing over 37,000 British Columbian members whose aims are to protect, enhance and promote the wise use of the environment for the benefit of present and future generations.
The B.C. Wildlife Federation was incorporated under the B.C. Societies Act in 1951 and it became a registered charity in 1969. The Federation is British Columbia’s largest and oldest conservation organization. |
The anticipated Olympic anti-hunting campaign by environmental groups and anti-hunting, anti-use groups has begun. Take a look at the list of supporters in the news release below. A lot of the usual suspects back again after the anti-hunting referendum in 1996. However this time they have returned with some big hitters with huge financial resources, namely the Humane Society of the United States. The difference this time is that they are trying to take a smaller bite and instead of going for a blanket ban on bear hunting are using First Nation representation to focus on closing bear hunting on the North & Central coast. Or the First Nations are using them: it’s a moot point.
This would be an opportune time to write to your local MP as well as the Premier’s office and tell them that it is time to stand up to these anti-hunting, anti-use activists and tell them that they cannot make the rules for resource use in British Columbia.
******************
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The “Sport” That Should Be Banned
Growing International Network Calls on B.C. Government to End the “Sport” That it Does Not Want people to Know About — The Trophy Hunt of Bears in the Great Bear Rainforest.
VANCOUVER, BC, February 16, 2010, –/WORLD-WIRE/–
In less than two months, the B.C. government plans to open the trophy hunt of bears in the internationally celebrated Great Bear Rainforest. Trophy hunters will be allowed to gun down vulnerable grizzlies and black bears as they emerge from hibernation.
A growing international network consisting of First Nations, conservation, animal protection and tourism groups — representing more than 15 million members and constituents from over 40 countries — is calling on the government to ban the trophy hunt for ethical, cultural, conservation and economic reasons.
“This is not a sport, it is a senseless slaughter,” said Art Sterritt, Executive Director of Coastal First Nations. “The trophy hunt goes against every moral teaching that we carry and is disrespectful to our culture and values.”
“When one looks at the diversity of groups calling for action, from First Nations and wildlife viewing businesses to some of the world’s leading conservation and animal welfare organisations, it is clear that the time has come to end this anachronistic blood sport.” said Ian McAllister, Executive Director of BC-based Pacific Wild. “With the 2010 Olympic games in town, the eyes of the world are on BC’s environmental practices, and this trophy hunt is tarnishing our reputation.”
“The international condemnation of this trophy hunt will continue to build until the bears in the Great Bear Rainforest are protected,” said Rebecca Aldworth, Executive Director of Humane Society International/Canada. “British Columbia residents and the world community stand united in their opposition to the cruel and needless trophy hunting of bears.”
“British Columbia should be celebrating our wildlife heritage, not killing it for sport or for a senseless trophy,” said Dean Wyatt, owner of Knight Inlet Lodge and a Director of the Commercial Bear Viewing Association. Our businesses depend on healthy bear populations and a positive international reputation.”
For More Information:
Rebecca Aldworth,
Executive Director,
Humane Society International
Canada phone: (514)575-6797
raldworth@humanesociety.org
Ian McAllister,
Executive Director,
Pacific Wild
phone:(250)957-2480
ian@pacificwild.org
Art Sterritt,
Executive Director of Coastal First Nations
phone: (604)868-9110
Dean Wyatt,
Coastal Bear Viewing Association,
phone (250)203-0353
Background:
- The Great Bear Rainforest, located on the BC central and north coast, contains the largest tracts of intact old growth temperate rainforest on earth.
- Each spring and fall season, the government of British Columbia allows trophy hunters, both local and foreign, to kill bears in the Great Bear Rainforest.
- A 2009 Ipsos Reid poll shows that 79 percent of British Columbians oppose the trophy hunting of bears.
- Of the 430 grizzlies killed in 2007 in BC, 87 percent were killed by trophy hunters. Approximately 300 BC grizzly bears are killed annually.
- Bear viewing is far more lucrative than bear hunting in BC. One bear viewing lodge in Knight inlet alone generates more revenue than the entire combined grizzly bear hunting industry.
Signatories of ad campaign: For ad download go to: www.pacificwild.org (Ad in Vancouver Sun today, Feb 16 pgA13)
Pacific Wild
Humane Society International/Canada
Humane Society of the United States
Humane Society
Wildlife Land Trust
Coastal First Nations
Greenpeace
Sierra Club BC
Western Canada Wilderness Committee
David Suzuki Foundation
The Spirit Bear Youth Coalition
Valhalla Wilderness Society
Bears Matter
Forest Ethics
Animal Rights Sweden
Freedom for Animals – Croatia
Brigitte Bardot Foundation – France
Franz Weber Foundation – Switzerland
Global Action in the Interest of Animals (GAIA) – Belgium
Fundacion para la Adopcion, Apadrinamiento y Defensa de los Animales (FAADA) – Spain
Four Paws (International)
Respect for Animals – UK
Commercial Bear Viewing Association of British Columbia
Robin Wood Canopy
*******************
BCWF ALERT
By: George T. Baker
The Daily News
Prince Rupert
February 18, 2010
A local notice in the newspaper placed by the BC Wildlife Federation may have broken what little potential there was for an agreement between B.C.’s Coastal First Nations and the BCWF.
The notice questions First Nations in Prince Rupert on whether they are aware of representation on their behalf by an ad hoc group named Coastal First Nations, a body that is advocating for the end of trophy hunting of bears on the coast.
Art Sterrit, head of Coastal First Nations, told the Daily News – after seeing the open letter for the first time – that this would be likely to severe any relationship developed between First Nations and the BCWF.
“We thought we were coming to an understanding and eventually an agreement over sustenance hunting with the BCWF. So, now I find out they have tried to undermine the political autonomy of First Nations along the coast. It won’t be tolerated – though I am not surprised,” said Sterrit.
In the BCWF notice, which is signed by BCWF president Mel Arnold, questions are raised over who appointed the group and what gave them the right to represent the communities. They also wanted to know if local First Nations have been properly consulted by the CFN, and whether CFN had the right to restrict future generations of First Nations from hunting.
“Ordinarily we would not get involved in the business of First Nations people or their relationships with the BC Government; however in this case an effort is being made by the consortium to virtually eliminate residents’ long and established cultural right to hunt.”
The intent of the letter, said BCWF Skeena regional representative Ken Franzen, is to fight fire with fire.
A massive ad was purchased in the Vancouver Sun signed by an international network consisting of First Nations, conservation, animal protection and tourism groups – representing more than 15 million members and constituents from over 40 countries – calling on the government to ban the trophy hunt for ethical, cultural, conservation and economic
reasons.
The campaign – which includes the Coastal Bear Viewing Association, Pacific Wild and the Humane Society of B.C. – is hoping that world attention on the Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver will result in eyes turned towards their cause.
“We have no choice but to respond,” commented Franzen. “We have hunted bears for a long time in this country and its not like we have a conservation concern. That would be different.”
Sterrit, however, is not amused.
“Our attempts at a relationship with the BCWF are finished,” proclaimed Sterrit.
“[First Nations] teach our children not to make fun of animals - we teach them that.”
|
Donate with Paypal
|
