Jasper National Park hunting agreement

[Smokinyotes]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

It's also extremely racist when the users are telling indigenous people to live like it's 1880 because it suits their vision of what their life should be like. We have 3 or 4 pages of posts like that so far.

No one is asking anyone to hunt like it’s the 1880’s. We just wish that everyone could respect that it’s a national park and the animals have interacted with humans since the day they were born. Basically like shooting my favourite pet cow.

[270person]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

It's also extremely racist when the users are telling indigenous people to live like it's 1880 because it suits their vision of what their life should be like. We have 3 or 4 pages of posts like that so far.

Stop calling it a traditional hunt if you don't like the 1880 comment then. Nothing traditional about it.

Long hike from Tete Jaune "BC" to hunt traditionally way back then too huh? I guess there was no game on the BC side of the border to hunt. Of course when you're from Kamloops and looking for virgin hunting ground to have all to yourself and know a limpwrist government won't do anything to prevent it, its worth the trip.

[Sundog57]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

It's also extremely racist when the users are telling indigenous people to live like it's 1880 because it suits their vision of what their life should be like. We have 3 or 4 pages of posts like that so far.

Please accept this as an attempt to promote a respectful discourse.

The entire hunt is based on race which is being asserted as the reason that certain persons should have rights that other persons do not.
There are a number of questions that arise including as to whether the "traditional avocations of hunting and fishing" should include modern methods.
If we were speaking of people living on a strictly subsistence basis then this might not feature in the discussion, but we are not.
Indigenous hunters, much like non-indigenous hunters may contribute to their annual food supply through hunting but do not need it to survive - we all do it for other reasons.
To declare that an indigenous person's spiritual relation to the hunt is different or perhaps more important than mine is to make a racist assumption.

When we speak of "traditional hunting areas" it is pretty difficult to ascertain what this means. The earliest whites arriving in the west did not differentiate clearly between various groups and used multiple conflicting names for them. The people living on the territories obviously knew who they were but unfortunately they did not foresee future claims on "their" land.

We do know from various writings of the early contact groups that indigenous communities protected their hunting territories quite vigorously and did not accept incursion by others.

When the Hudson's Bay Company began trading guns for furs with the Nehiyawak and Anishaabe peoples starting in about 1673, the traditional territories began to shift dramatically as those groups who had the means began to expand their hunting and trapping territories to advance their own positions through trade with the HBC .
These territories changed again with the arrival or horses via the Arapaho/Eastern Shoshone connection from the American south around 1730 - the time before that is referred to as "the pedestrian era" and it might be expected that movements of large groups of people over long distances was probably pretty limited.

Defining territory is further exacerbated by the near de-population of large tracts of "traditional territories" as a result of various epidemics.

To bring this back to the question of hunting in Jasper - if one accepts the race based hunting argument - it is enshrined in Canadian law rightly or wrongly - and accepts that is spite of the treaty wording allowing the land to be used " to time be required or taken up...for other purposes" it is possible to accept a rationale for allowing members of the original indigenous groups who would have hunted there prior to contact to conduct a limited hunt, but it seems illogical to me that this should be open to anyone else.

The question then arises as to how to establish who has a historical right and how to determine who those people are.
Do we have to establish particular genetic markers for each indigenous group and use a 'blood quantum" method as they do in the US?
Do we allow like we apparently do for gender now and accept that anyone who asserts that they indigenous, is?
Do we allow anyone with a status card to so assert - even though the question of status is hotly contested by many indigenous groups?

The question is fraught with complication...

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

It's also extremely racist when the users are telling indigenous people to live like it's 1880 because it suits their vision of what their life should be like. We have 3 or 4 pages of posts like that so far.

Ok can you explain why this hunt should take place and justification of how the past one was conducted

It has been made clear with many reasons why people are opposed but let’s hear why it should take place?

Yes I agree there is anger that has caused people to make posts that might be out of line. You need to understand this is agreement that didn’t consult the general public and this is just rammed down our throats. As non FN hunters we are also basically told our traditions and culture are of lesser value. FN are not the only people with traditions strongly tied to hunting.

There are many things that have created the anger you see no matter if it is valid or not. I am not saying it is correct but it should not be a surprise either

I for one don’t think FN should live like it’s 1880 but this also means we should be moving forward on what benefits all. None of us are the people from the past and we all have traditions/culture that should be respected. The future will not improve until we start moving forward as one and wildlife be managed for all

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Smoky buck

...we should be moving forward on what benefits all. None of us are the people from the past and we all have traditions/culture that should be respected. The future will not improve until we start moving forward as one and wildlife be managed for all

That is the truth.

There are those who profit from sowing division among us, and until there is a common will to end their influence and bring them to account, we will be circling on these issues ad nauseum.

[Grizzly Adams1]

Originally Posted by Stinky Buffalo

That is the truth.

There are those who profit from sowing division among us, and until there is a common will to end their influence and bring them to account, we will be circling on these issues ad nauseum.

There are segments of society, Natives aren't the only ones, stuck in a time Warp, nothing is going to change them. We have to learn to deal with them.

Grizz

[elkhunter11]

Nobody is saying that FN should not be allowed to hunt, what we are saying is that if National Parks are so sacred that most people can't possess firearms in a national park, and we can't even remove a shed antler from a national park, let alone hunt there, those restrictions should apply to everyone. To make exceptions based on race is racist, which is so ironic given all of the talk about trying to eliminate racism in Canada. The real problem is that certain people that constantly complain about racism, are okay with racism ,if it benefits them.

[ruffy71]

I think the crux of the issue is what is the real reason/purpose behind this is.

I've heard it phrased that is more a spiritual thing, but then we've talked about that angle and when the hunt actually happens, it doesn't really look any different than any other hunt, by indigenous people or otherwise.

Then the more likely scenario is that this is a treaty right and they are trying to exercise every treaty right they have. Fair enough, then let's talk about it under those terms.

I would still question if it is really necessary to hunt every square inch of territory they are entitled to. Indigenous people could say we reserve the right to hunt, but under today's circumstances, we will not hunt in national parks. That is my preference but it is for them to decide.

I would surely hope that they are not doing this just to "flex" their hunting privileges. That's not a good reason to do this.

[MooseRiverTrapper]

This isn’t about a big elk or ram. Just wait. That are after national park revenue.

[edmsmith]

Originally Posted by Sundog57

Please accept this as an attempt to promote a respectful discourse.

The entire hunt is based on race which is being asserted as the reason that certain persons should have rights that other persons do not.
There are a number of questions that arise including as to whether the "traditional avocations of hunting and fishing" should include modern methods.

There's lots to your post. Figured id respond as you've put a lot of thought. There's been 20+ posts mentioning indigenous hunters shouldn't use modern technology.

Why is that? Ask yourself why this specific detail comes up from those upset at indigenous hunting. It's full of racist undertones backed by a colonial mindset.

People don't like what they don't have therefor they think they should force others into conforming what suits their vision of things. Again what does this sound like?

For the record I said I don't like the jasper hunt.

Important to note for the other users who responded to my post calling out the racist replies from many users. I can be against the hunt but against the nonsense many are spewing.

One detail no one seems to care about and gloss over. If I recall correctly the last jasper hunt had a specific quota of 20 or so animals. Is it the same now? Is that what everyone's crying about?

I know anything indigenous related gets stomped on here so appreciate seeing someone with some legitimate thoughts and questions.

[ruffy71]

Can someone answer the question then.

Why hunt in a national park if you are a member of the stony nation?

You need the meat for sustenance?

It fulfills a spiritual need?

It supports a cultural/psychological need?

To assert your treaty rights, in essence use the right to help protect your right?

Then the question is, do you have to hunt inside the park boundaries to satisfy one of the conditions above? There is no other way to meet your needs?

[Bushrat]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

One detail no one seems to care about and gloss over. If I recall correctly the last jasper hunt had a specific quota of 20 or so animals. Is it the same now? Is that what everyone's crying about?

No, they are protesting the racial bias and the constant throwing of bones to one group at the expense of another. This should have been settled 100+ years ago. Actually it should have been dealt with as part of confederation of our country called Canada. Special rights are not conducive to a unified equal society which is what Canada is supposed to be. This is a festering sore spot that people want dealt with and finalized. Nobody wants to be dealing with this for the next 100 or 1000 years which it will unless it's dealt with, the sooner the better. If it ever happens there will be winners and losers but it needs doing.

Has nothing to do with the number of animals as long as the number doesn't become excessive endangering the viability and health of the herd.

[edmsmith]

So your festering sore spot is the reason you get to dictate what modern technology an indigenous person can use to hunt? And you call this a racial bias? Some of you guys should read what you've written as you pretend it's not racist.

I'm against the hunt. Pretty simple. Many are as well. Pretty simple. Notice how easy that is without dictating terms or bringing race or colonial statements into things?

[decker1]

Newfoundland is doing it right. Management of the wildlife population in national parks.

https://www.gov.nl.ca/hunting-trappi...ational-parks/

[Who Da Fisherman]

Originally Posted by ruffy71

Can someone answer the question then.

Why hunt in a national park if you are a member of the stony nation?

You need the meat for sustenance?

It fulfills a spiritual need?

It supports a cultural/psychological need?

To assert your treaty rights, in essence use the right to help protect your right?

Then the question is, do you have to hunt inside the park boundaries to satisfy one of the conditions above? There is no other way to meet your needs?

These are questions that cannot be answered by this crowd. You need to be asking the chiefs of these bands the questions if you want the real informed response.
WDF

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

So your festering sore spot is the reason you get to dictate what modern technology an indigenous person can use to hunt? And you call this a racial bias? Some of you guys should read what you've written as you pretend it's not racist.

I'm against the hunt. Pretty simple. Many are as well. Pretty simple. Notice how easy that is without dictating terms or bringing race or colonial statements into things?

Some of us are simply stating that firearms should not be used by anyone, in a national park, regardless of race. That is not at all racist.

[270person]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

There's lots to your post. Figured id respond as you've put a lot of thought. There's been 20+ posts mentioning indigenous hunters shouldn't use modern technology.

Why is that? Ask yourself why this specific detail comes up from those upset at indigenous hunting. It's full of racist undertones backed by a colonial mindset.

People don't like what they don't have therefor they think they should force others into conforming what suits their vision of things. Again what does this sound like?

For the record I said I don't like the jasper hunt.

Important to note for the other users who responded to my post calling out the racist replies from many users. I can be against the hunt but against the nonsense many are spewing.

One detail no one seems to care about and gloss over. If I recall correctly the last jasper hunt had a specific quota of 20 or so animals. Is it the same now? Is that what everyone's crying about?

I know anything indigenous related gets stomped on here so appreciate seeing someone with some legitimate thoughts and questions.

You don't seem to get that 1 or 20 animals isn't the point here at all. You also seem be incapable of looking down the road and spotting trends for the future.

Best to just close the door to national parks permanently now, or in 2017 like it should have been, before it becomes an expected perk. Lots of crown land to hunt.

[Ackleyman]

They are killing game [it can't be called hunting] in a National Park with high power rifles...a friggin sanctuary for ALL to enjoy. It's 100% wrong and not subject to argument , but so easy to play the racist card and stray from the very subject when others voice their concerns. I don't give a rats ass if they are using bow's or 30-06's NOBODY should be permitted to hunt in a National Park.

[outofbounds]

With other National Parks outside of the Province of Alberta openly having hunt allocations for population control measures, for what has been identified as health of the Eco system within said parks.

Is the same concern held by Alberta resident hunters and groups such as the sheep foundation for the use of firearms within National Parks and population control allocated hunts by licenced hunters in outside of Alberta National Parks?

Population control being the goal, considering predator such as wolves and target species moose is not the same for listed Park ungulate populations due to geographic locations.

Is it the same, no firearms, no hunting as it is Canadian National Parks under Parks Canada that are allocating licenses to hunt?

[alder]

Is there a possibility that we are arguing with an AI bot on this? Are these guys real voices? Doesn’t matter as I’m sure the opinions represented are an accurate representation of the delusional justifications that are espoused by those actually wanting that hunt to happen but I do wonder what with all the AI input already commonplace in so much.

[Smoky buck]

Originally Posted by alder

Is there a possibility that we are arguing with an AI bot on this? Are these guys real voices? Doesn’t matter as I’m sure the opinions represented are an accurate representation of the delusional justifications that are espoused by those actually wanting that hunt to happen but I do wonder what with all the AI input already commonplace in so much.

Post history will answer your?

I don’t think theses members are AI

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

So your festering sore spot is the reason you get to dictate what modern technology an indigenous person can use to hunt? And you call this a racial bias? Some of you guys should read what you've written as you pretend it's not racist.

I'm against the hunt. Pretty simple. Many are as well. Pretty simple. Notice how easy that is without dictating terms or bringing race or colonial statements into things?

Before you make even one more post can you please, please, please, educate yourself on the definitions of 'racist' and 'racism'?
Pretty please?
Because I can't take any more of your misuse of the word.
I think once you actually educate yourself on the definition, you'll realize why this hunt is in fact racist, and not the people posting here.

[edmsmith]

Originally Posted by CBintheNorth

I think once you actually educate yourself on the definition, you'll realize why this hunt is in fact racist, and not the people posting here.

A certain segment of users are demanding indigenous hunters NOT use modern day technology so they'd feel better about themselves. Then demanding indigenous hunters to use bow and arrows like they did back in the 1800s. Your right... it's the hunt that's racist not the users making these demands. LOL.

On a more serious note.. what are the odds we will see the animals harvested from this hunt. Maybe someone can reach out to the reserves doing the hunts so we can see their successes.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

A certain segment of users are demanding indigenous hunters NOT use modern day technology so they'd feel better about themselves. Then demanding indigenous hunters to use bow and arrows like they did back in the 1800s. Your right... it's the hunt that's racist not the users making these demands. LOL.

On a more serious note.. what are the odds we will see the animals harvested from this hunt. Maybe someone can reach out to the reserves doing the hunts so we can see their successes.

If you have to be FN to participate in the hunt, then the hunt is racist.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

A certain segment of users are demanding indigenous hunters NOT use modern day technology so they'd feel better about themselves. Then demanding indigenous hunters to use bow and arrows like they did back in the 1800s. Your right... it's the hunt that's racist not the users making these demands. LOL.

On a more serious note.. what are the odds we will see the animals harvested from this hunt. Maybe someone can reach out to the reserves doing the hunts so we can see their successes.

I must have forgot the "with a cherry on top" part.
My bad.
As you were.

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by elkhunter11

If you have to be FN to participate in the hunt, then the hunt is racist.

Thank you.
I thought it was pretty evident to everyone, but I guess not.
Racism can only be committed by a certain race, apparently...
Oh, the irony.

[Mountain Guy]

Originally Posted by outofbounds

With other National Parks outside of the Province of Alberta openly having hunt allocations for population control measures, for what has been identified as health of the Eco system within said parks.

Is the same concern held by Alberta resident hunters and groups such as the sheep foundation for the use of firearms within National Parks and population control allocated hunts by licenced hunters in outside of Alberta National Parks?

Population control being the goal, considering predator such as wolves and target species moose is not the same for listed Park ungulate populations due to geographic locations.

Is it the same, no firearms, no hunting as it is Canadian National Parks under Parks Canada that are allocating licenses to hunt?

Ungulate populations have been dropping in Jasper for many years.. Parks Canada aerial surveys have shown elk populations dropping significantly in last several surveys.. I don't have the numbers but elk numbers are down and dropping.
They don't have an explaination , but I do... Way too many predators hard at work here.
''game management'' should not even be mentioned as part of the justification for this hunt..

[Phil McCracken]

Originally Posted by CBintheNorth

Thank you.
I thought it was pretty evident to everyone, but I guess not.
Racism can only be committed by a certain race, apparently...
Oh, the irony.

That...

[huntinstuff]

Originally Posted by edmsmith

It's also extremely racist when the users are telling indigenous people to live like it's 1880 because it suits their vision of what their life should be like. We have 3 or 4 pages of posts like that so far.

Then, to you, my comments are racist.

I don't care.

I posted facts supported by previous FN claims. In particular, the over-use/abuse of the word "traditional".... You don't like that. Life is hard when someone actually challenges you on something. Buy a helmet.

[Stinky Buffalo]

You know, the participants and the regulators know that the general public really doesn't care all that much about this.

They care even less that the hunting fraternity is upset about this.