View Full Version : Wild Elk Federation.ca
03-02-2007, 09:02 PM
Many of you may know that the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation no longer exists in Alberta. Another organization has taken up the tourch. The "Wild Elk Federation".
There is a bunch of elk in holding pens in Elk Island Nat. Park who were going to go on a one way trip to a south eastern State. Hpowever the Us D of Ag will now not allow them in. So some are going to the Blacfoot G.L. (for Big Bore to chase) and the rest are bound for the west country of the east slopes. The "Wild Elk Federation" along with Parks Canada are arranging transportation and they may be having trouble getting some good sized stock trailers with powerful 4X4s to pull them.
If you are a member of the Federation or your have thought about getting involved and have an "elk hauling unit" get in touch with them ASAP. They would like to tentatively move them next Wednesday. They have a website (www.wildelkfederation.ca) that is "under construction" but has a contact number.
Robin in Rocky
03-02-2007, 11:19 PM
Duff ,,,when did the Rocky Mountain Elk foundation leave A.B. and why,, I have never been a member but it was one of those things on the to do list. I used to subscribe to the magazine up until a couple years ago and I am sad to hear they left, from what I got they were a good organization...
With all the Metis hunting issues we've had for the last couple years I thought it was kind of useless to give money to raise animals to have a group go in and slaughter them,, so I sort of gave up on a lot of wildlife groups..But now that it looks like we have a handle on things I am interested in putting more back into our sport and to be honest I was thinking of the R.M.E.F. So were can I get more info on the Wild Elk Federation..
03-03-2007, 12:44 AM
"With all the Metis hunting issues we've had for the last couple years I thought it was kind of useless to give money to raise animals to have a group go in and slaughter them"
Now it makes sense why the elk I shot last fall didn't taste as good as it usually does. You quit putting money in, and now they taste funny. Walleyes, are you okay with giving money to raise animals so First Nations can hunt them? I can't believe that I wasted all that money on the RMEF, while they were up here in Canada. No one told me that was all they were doing, raising animals so groups could legally hunt them.
03-03-2007, 12:59 AM
The first nations people have been harvesting animals from ever since the first regulations came into effect and it could be figured into the harvest forecasts...The Metis issue added a whole new problem and we had no idea what effect it would have on our game...
03-03-2007, 01:44 AM
I must have missed the news reports and articles in the papers showing the facts that we had " slaughtered" all the elk in the province, especially the ones the RMEF had sunk all their money into.
And pardon me! I didn't realize that First Nations are reporting all thier kills as well. I gotta quit working in the bush so much, and take more time to catch up on all these current events.
03-03-2007, 07:21 AM
and good ridence. You want to support a bunch thats hauling wildlife from here to there, support game farming. Where's Daryl when you need him?
03-03-2007, 08:29 AM
Your search - www.wildelkfederation.ca - did not match any documents.
Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
Try different keywords.
Try more general keywords.
Duffy, I have an 07 F-350 diesel. No 5th wheel though. The hitch is factory. Don't know the rating (I'd have to look again).
Not much time to get set up for it....and no $ for the 5th wheel I want.
They pay anything ? Or all volunteer including fuel ?
03-03-2007, 11:04 AM
and good ridence. You want to support a bunch thats hauling wildlife from here to there, support game farming. Where's Daryl when you need him?
The RMEF never supported game farming...your sadly mistaken. As for moving animals, well thats personal opinion whether its a good thing or a bad thing, but it sure has helped in several states and provinces to re-introduce animals and get a healthy population rebuilt.
Not joining wildlife foundations when the IMHA began is like giving up your membership to the NFA when the gun registry started. Its at these sorts of time that its important to have groups fighting for the rights of hunters and conservationists, and you can bet the RMEF was/is opposed to the IMHA....just a thought.
03-03-2007, 11:32 AM
Not joining wildlife foundations when the IMHA began is like giving up your membership to the NFA when the gun registry started.
You are right on that one rack,, I never looked at it that way.. But I had a lot of mixed emotions as did a lot of poeple did I'm sure when the I.M.H.A came into affect I just coud'nt see the point in raising animals and or putting my money in for the slaughter, it just sort of seemed pointless...
I was not aware that the RMEF has left, good to know. Just a question regarding them though...asides from taking elk from Canada to relocate to the USA, what did they do in recent times for Canada? They have always been one of the organizations that are trying to get memberships here, but what was the Canadian membership money going towards? Just wondered if anyone out there had some involvement with them and if mabey they had some info for my curiousity, because hopefully I am wrong. If my suspicions are right, then lets hope the Wild Elk Federation will do better than the RMEF did for it's Canadian elk and outdoorsmen.
03-03-2007, 12:59 PM
" But I had a lot of mixed emotions as did a lot of poeple did I'm sure when the I.M.H.A came into affect I just coud'nt see the point in raising animals and or putting my money in for the slaughter, it just sort of seemed pointless... "
walleyes, I have a question for you, and an opinion I'd like to share.
1) where was/is this slaughter that happened to all the elk in Alberta.
2)IMHO your reasoning behind your statement comes off as kind of a lame excuse to justify to yourself the reason you chose not to get involved. Granted the RMEF did use most of the Canadian dollars generated from memberships up here, back down south, they did do a few things up here. I hadn't realized that thier total focus was to provide elk meat and targets for aboriginals. Give me a break. IMHO, if this was the only reason I stayed away from supporting these types of organizations, I would either get better informed, or keep my opinions to myself. We are all entitled to our own opinions, and decisions, but I personally think mine out a little harder.
Just for your information, in case you hadn't figured it out, I am Metis, not that it really matters as far as I am concerned. I'd like to hear some facts about this "slaughter" that happened. Then maybe it could be brought forward to the MNA. If the criminals involved, and I do say criminals, were doing something wrong, then they could be prosecuted. The ball is in your court.
03-03-2007, 01:02 PM
In the past I have posted pics of 6 elk that were shot by the same guy. He didnt do anything illegal, he was just following the rules. However it seems that is about to change
03-03-2007, 01:57 PM
I stated that when it came out had mixed emotions,, meaning who knew what would happen is that allright with you,, or I can't state how I felt..
And there have been quite a number of incedents witnessed and reported of abuse of rights.. Thats why the aggreemant is no more... And don't try and make this out to look like an attack on Metis people. I simply stated how I felt when the agreemant came out...
03-03-2007, 03:24 PM
fair enough................I was just trying to understand how you "felt" your potential funding of the RMEF was involved in adding to the "slaughter". And I wasn't trying to " make this out to look like an attack on Metis people". You did, unless I missunderstood the context in this statement.........."With all the Metis hunting issues we've had for the last couple years I thought it was kind of useless to give money to raise animals to have a group go in and slaughter them......." Which "group" are we talking about?
03-03-2007, 03:50 PM
A couple of years ago the time came for the RMEF to stand with the hunters they made it clear they were a conservation organization and not a hunters organization. Hunters formed it and hunters finance it and when we needed their voice they weren't a hunting group.
Ducks has pulled the BS.
I cancelled my membership the next day.
03-03-2007, 03:52 PM
Duffy4 - I appologize for hijacking your thread, I got wound up - 'nuff said here by me - I'm gonna check out the wild elk foundation site - thanks for the info
03-03-2007, 03:53 PM
RMEF was involved with OFAH (Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters) and they did a number of transfers of elk from Elk Island National Park east to Ontario to try and reintroduce elk herds there again. If I'm not mistaken there have also been other transfers from EINP to parts of Alberta as well.
03-04-2007, 01:23 PM
Hey guys if anyone has any questions about this organization or want to help please call Bob Grimsey with Wild Elk Federation the number is 780-980-1600(please leave a message) Also the Wild elk federation will be having their annual fundraising dinner and auction banquet On April 21st 2007. Anyone wishing to attend or provide a donation or financial support can contact Bob at the number provided above. Thanks
03-04-2007, 02:40 PM
Any idea where the banquet is going to be held?
03-04-2007, 02:44 PM
Yes the banquet will be held in Leduc at the Black gold centre, located block 4300 of black gold drive, just southeast of the Leduc city centre.
03-04-2007, 10:35 PM
Not sure what scouts comments have to do with the Wild Elk Federation?? :rolleyes After reading it I think a new thread would have been in order. But since it is here, I will say man am I confused is the IMHA still in full effect?? As for "scouts" comments on how the Alberta gov. did the right thing by engaging the MNA to strike an agreement, (one that went well beyond Powely). As an Albertan with a vested interest in OUR wildlife I still feel very upset with the exclusion of other stakeholders in a issue as wide ranging and possibly harmful to wildlife as the IMHA
03-04-2007, 10:36 PM
Hey fall......the way Minister Morton explained things is that two judges ruled the IMHA agreement invalid and that is not being appealed by the government. Kip won his case yes and likely should have but what this means is that the IMHA is no longer in force and the Metis must now follow the letter of Powley which is far more limiting than the IMHA. There is no more IMHA according to Morton and he sees no need for a new one. He felt Metis should follow Powley and nothing else. Since he is in charge of enforcement, I'd tend to believe him.
Was it a win for Kip...yes and really he just got caught in the middle. Was it a win for anglers and hunters...definitely. Was it a win for the Metis? For those that truly need to subsistence hunt and have the historical ties, yes they are protected by Powley but for all the "new" Metis is was definitely a loss and a rightful one at that.
Minister Morton also expressed his disgust at how stakeholders were excluded and how the caucus was even excluded. Behind closed doors was the words he used!
Wild Elk Fede
03-04-2007, 10:53 PM
Justice Verville, of the Alberta Queen’s Bench has released his decision in the Kipp Kelley appeal. Without question, it is a win for Mr. Kelley and a win for the Métis Nation of Alberta.
The win is simple and straightforward. Alberta Métis, who are eligible and are harvesting within the terms of the Interim Métis Harvesting Agreement can rely on it as a defence if the Crown lays charges against them (read the decision Part 1 Part 2 Part 3 ). The courts are willing to hold the Alberta Government to its commitments within the IMHA and they are willing to throw out charges if the Crown proceeds with charges against eligible Métis who are harvesting within the terms of the IMHA.
Since there have been some media reports that have mistakenly accepted the spin of the Alberta Fish and Game Association, I want to set out the facts of the case so everyone understands why this is a win.
At trial, Judge Norheim, of the Alberta Provincial Court, found Mr. Kelley guilty of trapping without a license even though Mr. Kelley was eligible and was harvesting within the terms of the IMHA. Judge Norheim found that Mr. Kelley had not established he had a Métis right to hunt and could not rely on the IMHA as a defence.
Yesterday, Justice Verville overturned Judge Norheim’s decision. The Alberta Court of Queen’s bench held that Mr. Kelley could rely on the IMHA as a defence to the charge against him. The court set aside Mr. Kelley’s conviction and Mr. Kelley as well as the IMHA were vindicated by the courts.
The appeal court was very clear: Métis harvesters in Alberta can rely on the IMHA as a defence if the Crown decides to lay unwarranted charges against them. Justice Verville said it would offend the conscience of the community and bring the administration of justice into disrepute if the courts allowed the Alberta Crown to proceed with charges against a Métis harvester who was harvesting within the terms of the IMHA. This is very strong language from the court and Métis can take comfort in the fact that the judiciary is willing to uphold the deal the Métis Nation made with the Alberta Government.
Now some people have seized on the part of the judgment where the court finds that the IMHA is not a “legally enforceable” part of Alberta regulatory regime. This is true. The Alberta Government has not done a technical legal step of making the IMHA a part of its regulatory regime.
However, the court also points out to the Alberta Government that this could be easily accomplished. All they have to do is deem the IMHA to be a regulation under the legislation. I will be writing to the Alberta Government to request that this be done in order to overcome this technical issue.
I am going to let Mr. Kelley’s legal counsel explain this issue in more detail, but I want to be clear this does not diminish the fact that the court, in fact, upheld the IMHA and recognized it as a reasonable accommodation of Métis harvesting in Alberta. Even if this technical legal issue is not resolved right away by the Alberta Government, the court has clearly said our members can rely on the IMHA for ensuring they will not be subject to prosecution.
If any of our Métis harvesters are issued a summons or charged, they should contact the MNA Head Office right away so we can engage the Alberta Government on these issues pursuant to the processes set out in the IMHA.
I also want to highlight a few other important points in the decision.
First, we are pleased that the court recognized that the Alberta Government and the MNA did the right thing following the Powley decision. The court found that following the release of the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Powley, the Alberta Government was under a “constitutional imperative” to consult, negotiate and accommodate Métis harvesting practices. Alberta fulfilled this constitutional imperative by negotiating the IMHA with the MNA.
At the time, entering into the IMHA was a bold step, but the court has now validated that it was the right step.
Second, Justice Verville, throughout his decision, emphasized that negotiations and accommodations, like the IMHA, are the preferred route to resolve rights issues. He noted that the IMHA not only benefits the Métis, but it benefits Alberta too since we are able to avoid the expenses related to time consuming and costly litigation.
Third, the court has now confirmed that the principles for consultation and accommodation set out by the Supreme Court of Canada in its decisions in Haifa Nation and Take River apply equally to the Métis people. This means that when Alberta consults with First Nations, it should also be consulting with Métis. We look forward to working with the Alberta Government to implement a Métis Consultation Policy in order to ensure Métis are being adequately consulted throughout the province.
Finally, I think an important point in the decision - for all Aboriginal peoples - is that the courts are willing to ensure the Crown upholds its commitments to Aboriginal peoples that are arrived at through negotiations and included within accommodation agreements.
For years, the Supreme Court has been urging the Crown and Aboriginal peoples to negotiate and reconcile their interests, rather than just resorting to litigation. However, for this reconciliation to be achieved, Aboriginal peoples need to be secure that the Crown will fulfill and implement its commitments that are arrived at through negotiations and agreements.
With this judgment, the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench has confirmed that the courts are willing to uphold these agreements and ensure they are honorably implemented. For Alberta Métis, this means they can rely on the IMHA to exercise their harvesting practices without fear or prosecution.
The MNA is now engaged in renewed negotiations with the Alberta Government on a Longer Term Métis Harvesting Agreement. We believe this decision will be helpful to inform these negotiations and demonstrates that the Alberta Government and the MNA are on the right track. The IMHA has now been in place for over two years and the MNA and the Alberta Government have a good working relationship. We believe this decision will only strengthen that relationship and we remain committed to working with Alberta to ensure Métis harvesting rights are respected.
Why post that, now i feel like vomiting . I'm sick of reading about this crap everywhere.
03-05-2007, 12:07 AM
Well Sheep, I sure hope you are right and for know I have no reason to belive you are wrong. I will feel much better when the gov comes out with some clarification. A press release would go along way. As for Kip Kelly being caught in the middle I would agree, but it would disgust me if a similar case came out where the accused was doing alot more then trapping squirels. Esp if the accused was aquitted on the bases that they thought they were following the law based on a IMHA that no longer existed.
I think the gov owes everyone (metis, sportsmen, fish and wildlife officers that have to enforce the rules...) some clarification.
I am sure it is coming, maybe time for me to drop a line in Mortons in-box?
Thank-you sheep for sharing what you know about this.
F A F
02-29-2008, 05:37 PM
I was a member of RMEF for a few years. They left the province because it was more economical to run the program from a more central point. It was too expensive to have offices all over. This WEF sounds great. I'm going to sign up. Awesome the federation is completely Canadian.
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.