Subsistence hunting- OFFICIAL thread

[Winch101]

I deleted my comments just in case This Jordan is president
Of SCI .....Safaris . If these are actual hunt pics wonder how they came about .



The joys of social media ...

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by SmokinJoe

There isn't, and I'd love to know where guys get these numbers. This thread is going to be published as a fantasy novel.

Kurt, if any government official came to my office with any of the less than well thought ideas you pitching he would leave with an empty brief case and uncomfortable bottom.

Figure out what the problems actually are before trying to brew up solutions. This thread is about subsistence hunting, by definition it has nothing to do with First Nations people, and I'm tired of having to explain to you that our portion of the law is not broken. Stop thinking you can fix it.

My office has been watching this thread since the beginning, and it's not helping future considerations for non FN people.

Subsistance harvesting is most prevalent amongst treaty people as most non treaty people don't have the luxury as having that as an option.

If any government official came into your office with any idea other than to give you more rights I'm sure he'd walk out the same way because you can't look past yourself to see the big picture, you're hung up on 1870.

I always here "you want to change the treaties because it's not working in your favor now" but isn't that what you've been doing ever since the treaties were signed? In 1870 there were no trucks, no quads, no quality optics, head lights, none of the modern technology that makes it possible to harvest and process animals like today. There was no deep freeze in the basement, there was no 24hr corner store but you haven't had a problem changing you ways of hunting. Times have changed greatly, needs have changed greatly, just because things were done a certain way 150yrs ago it doesn't mean it has to be done that way today. Many cultures have moved on and still teach about history, most that have not, still live like they did 150yrs ago, like some tribes in
Africa and South America.

It IS a broken system here in Canada, perhaps instead of taking away status rights, like Big Thumper suggested we should give more rights to ALL Canadians so we all have an equal right to the animals on the land, how do you feel about that?

[Winch101]

You would think for as long as it has been that we strayed from a true conservative or liberal democracy we ( Canada ) would have our hand out
System down pat . We allowed the left to flourish and now we pay .
The Govt has allowed natives to say and claim an abundance of untruths
Without any censor . You know the old saying " a lie repeated becomes
A fact "
Any sensible educated person can see ......If the crown and govt had
Stuck to the original treaty agreements , there would be no natives
Canada would be known as a genocidal state .
Now with the help of a socialist attitude rarely seen outside of communist
Countries .....we have created a full nanny paternalistic environment
Around everything Aboriginal .
If we ever elected a federal govt who stuck to the facts and original
Agreements ,we might be able to fix this very broken system .
Unfortunately it looks like we are headed further left with another
Round of native appeasement Liberal style .

Regionally you may be able to bring some sound thinking to this
Problem .
Vive le Alberta Libre ......

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by Speckle55

Any Albertan can Subsistence hunt if you qualify
December 14, 2007
Changes made to Subsistence Hunting Licence
Edmonton... It is now easier for Albertans who rely on wild meat for sustenance to apply for a special hunting licence for moose, elk or deer. The Subsistence Hunting Licence is available to qualified applicants free of charge from any Fish and Wildlife District office.
Although this licence is not new, the provincial government has made the following changes to make it available to more Albertans.
• Licences may now be used anywhere in the province, not just north of Highway 16.
• Licences are now available all year.
• Licence holders may take moose, elk or deer based on local game populations.
In addition, the $5 fee for a Domestic Fishing Licence has been dropped. This licence can now be obtained free of charge by eligible applicants.
Ted Morton, Minister of Sustainable Resource Development, said that he hoped the changes would help Alberta families in need. He also noted that they address the difficult situation of some Métis who have not yet applied for or received confirmation of their harvesting rights, but need to hunt or fish to feed their families.
“There’s no need for anyone to break the law to get meat for their family,” Morton said. “Just come in to one of our local offices and apply for a licence.”
A person applying for either licence must show evidence that they, or their family, have no other source of meat or that they have a special health requirement for wild meat.
For more information on the Subsistence Hunting Licence and the Domestic Fishing Licence, including the location of the nearest fish and wildlife office, call Service Alberta at 310-0000.
Alberta’s Subsistence Hunting Licence is part of Premier Ed Stelmach’s plan to secure Alberta’s future by building communities, greening our growth and creating opportunity.
Media enquiries may be directed to:
Darcy Whiteside Public Affairs Officer Sustainable Resource Development 780 427-8636
To call




Subsistence hunting licence - eligibility
39(1) A person is eligible to obtain or hold a subsistence hunting
licence if and only if
Section 40 AR 143/97
WILDLIFE REGULATION
42
(a) he is a resident, and
(b) the Minister is satisfied that he is in dire need of
sustenance for any of his family members, including his
adult interdependent partner.
(2) Repealed AR 234/2007 s2.
AR 143/97 s39;109/2003;234/2007
Subsistence hunting licence - entitlements
40(1) A subsistence hunting licence authorizes its holder, if any of
his family members, including an adult interdependent partner, is in
dire need of sustenance, to hunt the kind or kinds of animal, from
among moose, elk and deer, and in the number, during the period
and in the area, specified in the licence.
(2) The period referred to in subsection (1) may, if the licence so
specifies, be outside or notwithstanding the lack of an open season.
AR 143/97 s40;109/2003;234/2007


This is what is happening in States as Elk have cause major Habitat changes and damage to ecosystem

http://www.denverpost.com/opinion/ci...is-working-out

Food for Thought

David

Was browsing through this thread and saw this post. If I am reading it correctly then anybody who may have fallen on hard times can go into a fish and game office and ask for one of these free sustenance liscences. It's not just for natives?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by waterninja

Was browsing through this thread and saw this post. If I am reading it correctly then anybody who may have fallen on hard times can go into a fish and game office and ask for one of these free sustenance liscences. It's not just for natives?

I would love to know if anyone here has been able to obtain one....outside of someone who is already entitled to it.

I think it is a "holographic carrot" you can see it, it's there, but you can never really touch it.

LC

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I would love to know if anyone here has been able to obtain one....outside of someone who is already entitled to it.

I think it is a "holographic carrot" you can see it, it's there, but you can never really touch it.

LC

Exactly, how is anyone going to prove they have no other means of getting meat? It's absurd!

[claystone]

EMS guy I know told me when he got his PAL it was a question asked on it if he hunted for subsistance , he said yes and has it printed on his pAL He also said said he never used it but wondered what would happen if he did, and he wasn't exactly a starving albertain at the time. So I guess if you really want to know , you gotta go find out for yourself. Maybe it's true maybe it's not, I never actually saw it.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by claystone

EMS guy I know told me when he got his PAL it was a question asked on it if he hunted for subsistance , he said yes and has it printed on his pAL He also said said he never used it but wondered what would happen if he did, and he wasn't exactly a starving albertain at the time. So I guess if you really want to know , you gotta go find out for yourself. Maybe it's true maybe it's not, I never actually saw it.

PAL has nothing to do with hunting or subsistence hunting...is your leg sore?

LC

[Full Curl Earl]

I am curious SmokinJoe, who or what this office of yours is? Is there a connection to this thread?


Originally Posted by SmokinJoe
There isn't, and I'd love to know where guys get these numbers. This thread is going to be published as a fantasy novel.

Kurt, if any government official came to my office with any of the less than well thought ideas you pitching he would leave with an empty brief case and uncomfortable bottom.

Figure out what the problems actually are before trying to brew up solutions. This thread is about subsistence hunting, by definition it has nothing to do with First Nations people, and I'm tired of having to explain to you that our portion of the law is not broken. Stop thinking you can fix it.

My office has been watching this thread since the beginning, and it's not helping future considerations for non FN people.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by SmokinJoe

My office has been watching this thread since the beginning, and it's not helping future considerations for non FN people.

I'm glad your office has been following this thread, there are some very valid points as to the needs of FN people today as compared to the needs in 1870. If your office cares about the wildlife, then they care about the conservation of it as well. I'm sure they care to enough about the wildlife to protest against potential environmental hazards that threaten ecosystems, I'm sure if they have access to a computer they also are making a decent income and have access to a grocery store. I'm sure they are educated enough to know that there are non treaty Canadians who need to access wild game more than they do. I'm sure they know it's not the color of your skin, or what your last name is, that determines what social or economical level one lives in. I'm sure they know we are ALL Canadians, living on the same land, and I'm sure they understand we are all responsible for wildlife conservation and sustainability.

I would be very interested in hearing their thoughts on the subject, what they think about subsistence harvesting, who they think deserves it, and where do we draw the line as to harvest limits. Surely it can't be a free for all, so lets hear their suggestions.

[drake]

After 17 pages in 3 days it is obvious that alberta outdoorsmen do not have a problem with "substinence hunting"......

The reaility of the siutaion is that no change will occur due to all the oil and gas opportunities on "traditional aboriginal lands". Premier Prentice aka Alberta Minister of Aboriginal Affairs WILL NOT threaten their "traiditonal way of life" because he wants to avoid red tape generated from more law suits, lesislated hearings, and grevinaces. Ironically, aboriginals dont vote (histroically).....but they sure litigate.

Im sorry to tell you......we can not/will not win this one!

[claystone]

Originally Posted by drake

After 17 pages in 3 days it is obvious that alberta outdoorsmen do not have a problem with "substinence hunting"......

The reaility of the siutaion is that no change will occur due to all the oil and gas opportunities on "traditional aboriginal lands". Premier Prentice aka Alberta Minister of Aboriginal Affairs WILL NOT threaten their "traiditonal way of life" because he wants to avoid red tape generated from more law suits, lesislated hearings, and grevinaces. Ironically, aboriginals dont vote (histroically).....but they sure litigate.

Im sorry to tell you......we can not/will not win this one!

As long as there are attitudes of "The Lazy Indian" and "Whiteman Speaks with Forked Tongue" and there is no in between we are all destined to spin our wheels and get nowhere. Our common ground is wildlife, we must leave all else at the door and then maybe some constructive ideas can be put forth and even implemented. This might be the 21st century but the attitudes have to change or it goes nowhere. IMO.

[2KW'S]

Just curious if anyone knows the difference between treaty 6 and treaty 7 . I hear only treaty 6 natives are allowed on suffeild to hunt. As far as i can remember treaty 7 was signed in alberta and 6 in sask. Means only native hunters from sask in there killin elk .

[Full Curl Earl]

I think it's important to remember history on this.
Natives were getting wiped out in North America in general, there was evil at work. Great men stepped up at the time, white men and Indians, and said enough, this has to stop and backed our native bretherin. Sure this was their land, but like all conquered nations from the beginning of man kind, no other nation showed remorse like the new Canadian. They put a stop to the killing and had the foresight to see a future where we could all exist. Maybe not as equals, as there was much improvement needed, but it was a beginning for peace. I like to think my ancestors were these white men, not the butchers of buffalo and the Indian people. Carrying chips on shoulders only results in remaining a victim of long ago atrocities that can never be corrected. I don't feel the German or Japanese people owe me anything for my lost family members during the war, that kind of anger will eat you up. If we can move forward we might be able to attain equality of some sort, and stop this snyde won ton elk killing just because you can. if mainstream Canada is ever going to consider the natives as the keepers of the land, it sure wont be through truck loads of unregulated trophy bulls or reefer trucks that resulted in ungulate void wastelands, or by only being used as pawns to rid private land of elk.

[claystone]

Originally Posted by Full Curl Earl

I think it's important to remember history on this.
Natives were getting wiped out in North America in general, there was evil at work. Great men stepped up at the time, white men and Indians, and said enough, this has to stop and backed our native bretherin. Sure this was their land, but like all conquered nations from the beginning of man kind, no other nation showed remorse like the new Canadian. They put a stop to the killing and had the foresight to see a future where we could all exist. Maybe not as equals, as there was much improvement needed, but it was a beginning for peace. I like to think my ancestors were these white men, not the butchers of buffalo and the Indian people. Carrying chips on shoulders only results in remaining a victim of long ago atrocities that can never be corrected. I don't feel the German or Japanese people owe me anything for my lost family members during the war, that kind of anger will eat you up. If we can move forward we might be able to attain equality of some sort, and stop this snyde won ton elk killing just because you can. if mainstream Canada is ever going to consider the natives as the keepers of the land, it sure wont be through truck loads of unregulated trophy bulls or reefer trucks that resulted in ungulate void wastelands, or by only being used as pawns to rid private land of elk.

In hindsight the natives should have told suffield it's your problem we want no part of it , but unfortunately it has become this and turned good people against their neighbors.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by claystone

As long as there are attitudes of "The Lazy Indian" and "Whiteman Speaks with Forked Tongue" and there is no in between we are all destined to spin our wheels and get nowhere. Our common ground is wildlife, we must leave all else at the door and then maybe some constructive ideas can be put forth and even implemented. This might be the 21st century but the attitudes have to change or it goes nowhere. IMO.

I couldn't agree more. From this thread it's evident which side seems more willing to step up to the table to come up with an action plan. People from both sides (it's sad I have to even use that term) are very well educated today as compared to 1870, and knowing what we know now, we can make a change that will benefit Canadians and get us one step closer in closing the division between people so we can move forward as one Canada. Fighting against each other only makes us weak as a nation.

[claystone]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I couldn't agree more. From this thread it's evident which side seems more willing to step up to the table to come up with an action plan. People from both sides (it's sad I have to even use that term) are very well educated today as compared to 1870, and knowing what we know now, we can make a change that will benefit Canadians and get us one step closer in closing the division between people so we can move forward as one Canada. Fighting against each other only makes us weak as a nation.

Agreed.

[drake]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I couldn't agree more. From this thread it's evident which side seems more willing to step up to the table to come up with an action plan. People from both sides (it's sad I have to even use that term) are very well educated today as compared to 1870, and knowing what we know now, we can make a change that will benefit Canadians and get us one step closer in closing the division between people so we can move forward as one Canada. Fighting against each other only makes us weak as a nation.

Thats a beautiful dream you have.....unfortunatly corporate greed and provincial fiscal realities trump non-aboriginal hunting rights. As long as oil and gas activity occurs on "traditional lands" we have NO leverage.

[elkdump]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I couldn't agree more. From this thread it's evident which side seems more willing to step up to the table to come up with an action plan. People from both sides (it's sad I have to even use that term) are very well educated today as compared to 1870, and knowing what we know now, we can make a change that will benefit Canadians and get us one step closer in closing the division between people so we can move forward as one Canada. Fighting against each other only makes us weak as a nation.

When you find just ONE person with benefits of Treaty willing to give up those benefits ? Then please publicize the name of that person immediately ,,,

OH, and I won't be holding my breath .

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I couldn't agree more. From this thread it's evident which side seems more willing to step up to the table to come up with an action plan. People from both sides (it's sad I have to even use that term) are very well educated today as compared to 1870, and knowing what we know now, we can make a change that will benefit Canadians and get us one step closer in closing the division between people so we can move forward as one Canada. Fighting against each other only makes us weak as a nation.

Unfortunately our government seems content to have Canadians fighting amongst themselves, or they wouldn't be passing racist laws to keep Canadians from being equal.

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

I would love to know if anyone here has been able to obtain one....outside of someone who is already entitled to it.

I think it is a "holographic carrot" you can see it, it's there, but you can never really touch it.

LC

"Holographic Carrot". I like that.
I would also like to know if anyone who is non-native has ever recieved one of these "carrots".
Quite honestly, I would think that if someone went to ESRD and told them they had lost their job, etc., and couldn't afford meat for their family, it would be difficult for a CO not to grant a lisence to harvest at least one animal. Wonder what "hoops" someone would have to jump through to prove they meet requirements to get that license?

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by waterninja

"Holographic Carrot". I like that.
I would also like to know if anyone who is non-native has ever recieved one of these "carrots".
Quite honestly, I would think that if someone went to ESRD and told them they had lost their job, etc., and couldn't afford meat for their family, it would be difficult for a CO not to grant a lisence to harvest at least one animal. Wonder what "hoops" someone would have to jump through to prove they meet requirements to get that license?

I used the "holographic carrot" analogy with my boss when talking bonus structure during my review...it was not a popular term with him but he got my point

LC

[Kurt505]

I realize it will fall upon FN to decide that there is a need for regulation to sustain Canada's fish and wildlife, and don't worry, I have no grand illusions. Writing it down for all to see feels therapeutic in a way though.

One positive note that has come from this thread so far is that I believe there are a couple with treaty rights who know the system is broken, and I'd be willing to bet that in the name of conservation they would be willing to change. Others would rather see all the wildlife decimated before ever letting a non treaty have equal harvest rights, or agree to a limited harvest.

I truly believe that in time, and through education a change will come.

[elkhunter11]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I realize it will fall upon FN to decide that there is a need for regulation to sustain Canada's fish and wildlife, and don't worry, I have no grand illusions. Writing it down for all to see feels therapeutic in a way though.

One positive note that has come from this thread so far is that I believe there are a couple with treaty rights who know the system is broken, and I'd be willing to bet that in the name of conservation they would be willing to change. Others would rather see all the wildlife decimated before ever letting a non treaty have equal harvest rights, or agree to a limited harvest.

I truly believe that in time, and through education a change will come.

I wish that I was as hopeful as you are, that education will result in change, but I believe that there are just too many people that will stand by and let the game populations be decimated, rather than agree to concessions that could sustain those populations.

[dshaw]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I realize it will fall upon FN to decide that there is a need for regulation to sustain Canada's fish and wildlife, and don't worry, I have no grand illusions. Writing it down for all to see feels therapeutic in a way though.

One positive note that has come from this thread so far is that I believe there are a couple with treaty rights who know the system is broken, and I'd be willing to bet that in the name of conservation they would be willing to change. Others would rather see all the wildlife decimated before ever letting a non treaty have equal harvest rights, or agree to a limited harvest.

I truly believe that in time, and through education a change will come.

Agreed, but how much "time" will be needed? thats the question. 50 years? 100 years? if so who knows what wildlife populations will be then. I'm afraid at the rate we are growing as a province "time" is not on our side for the wildlife and conservation.

[iceburg]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I realize it will fall upon FN to decide that there is a need for regulation to sustain Canada's fish and wildlife, and don't worry, I have no grand illusions. Writing it down for all to see feels therapeutic in a way though.

One positive note that has come from this thread so far is that I believe there are a couple with treaty rights who know the system is broken, and I'd be willing to bet that in the name of conservation they would be willing to change. Others would rather see all the wildlife decimated before ever letting a non treaty have equal harvest rights, or agree to a limited harvest.

I truly believe that in time, and through education a change will come.

I don't necessarily see a problem in the systems theory and with it being broken, it's more with people's fear, misconceptions and I don't know if jeolousy is the right word but it's something. I have not seen meat wasted, I have seen it used at the reserve level by people who cannot get out and hunt, or homes that don't have hunters. I know alot of people that if they could, they would welcome this ability(we witnessed this with Metis in Sask in about 1994)
The Indians get it this week with Suffield going on, they will get it also when Cadomin is going on. Other times of the year its outfitters, then Newfies, then northern Albertans vs southern Albertans.
As mentioned before, there are way too many other factors that will impact general populations than Subsistence hunting imo

[Kurt505]

Thinking out loud here, but why is it that only FN people are entitled to harvesting rights? I understand the land thing, but no man owns any of the wildlife on this earth any more than another. Why is it solely up to non treaty people to be responsible for the conservation of our wildlife? Doesn't every culture have hunting and fishing as a part of it? Shouldn't it be just as important for all cultures who live in Canada as Canadian citizens to be able to have their harvesting traditions honored?

I'm interested in hearing why it isn't.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by iceburg

I don't necessarily see a problem in the systems theory and with it being broken, it's more with people's fear, misconceptions and I don't know if jeolousy is the right word but it's something. I have not seen meat wasted, I have seen it used at the reserve level by people who cannot get out and hunt, or homes that don't have hunters. I know alot of people that if they could, they would welcome this ability(we witnessed this with Metis in Sask in about 1994)
The Indians get it this week with Suffield going on, they will get it also when Cadomin is going on. Other times of the year its outfitters, then Newfies, then northern Albertans vs southern Albertans.
As mentioned before, there are way too many other factors that will impact general populations than Subsistence hunting imo

Jealousy is certainly a factor, I'll admit I'm jealous, and why shouldn't I be? Who wouldn't want to be able to have a free pass to Canada's fish and wildlife? And I get why people fight tooth and nail to defend that privilege. But tell me why it's only FN who deserve to have this privilege? Why is one Canadian more entitled to fish and wildlife than another? They own the land and all that's in it, on it, and above it?

If it's right to claim ownership than shouldn't it also be right to take responsibility? I see many willing to lay claim to ownership, but very few if any who are willing to take responsibility.

The way in which I see our system broken is it allows people unlimited access to fish an wildlife who clearly don't need it, yet others who need it the most are denied such access.

[iceburg]

Are you aware many reserves have cultural awareness/mentor programs? (in regards to hunting/fishing)Non-aboriginals are not the only ones who acknowledge the need for preservation.
I'm not going to blanket all non-aboriginals as poachers when I see that published,it's not really fair to label these people, I think it's the misinformation that is put out there online or stories from a buddy who heard from a guy.

[iceburg]

'The way in which I see our system broken is it allows people unlimited access to fish an wildlife who clearly don't need it, yet others who need it the most are denied such access.'

This is a system that leaves that 'unlimited access' open to the individual to decide, if there is meat wasted/spoilage then there should be charges laid. These individuals need to answer to their conscience about what is needed or not(I'm sure we all know people who have a hard time with this one)

I thought we talked about the ability for people to apply for subsistence eligiblity? I really beleive that this should be used more btw, and would love to see someone apply for this.