metis info

[Jimm]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

So does everyone agree this latest ruling was a poor decision that was made without any consideration for current and future wildlife populations, a decision made for political gains at the expense of our wildlife and all regulated users?

Absolutely not. Has anyone considered that the new agreement will have president over the old agreement! If so about 95 % of the Métis that could hunt in the area around their identified settlement will no longer be able to hunt unless they prove linage before 1900. There is certainly potential of having over a 60 reduction in eligible Métis harvesters after sept than there are now.

[crazy_davey]

Originally Posted by Jimm

Absolutely not. Has anyone considered that the new agreement will have president over the old agreement! If so about 95 % of the Métis that could hunt in the area around their identified settlement will no longer be able to hunt unless they prove linage before 1900. There is certainly potential of having over a 60 reduction in eligible Métis harvesters after sept than there are now.

Hey Jimm, what was your previous username?

[iceburg]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Nothing of the sort. What I’m saying is that the honest ones are honest, like any other race. I’ll use myself for instance. I follow the regulations of Hunting, I only harvest what I’m allowed, sometime not even harvest anything even though it’s open for harvest. Now, take away the regulations and I can harvest what I want. I would 100% have a moose in the freezer at all times and a gun in my truck at all times for Incase I see that nice big muledeer or whitetail and want to put on the wall. I’d bet every hunter feels the same way and now there will be thousands, which will lead to tens of thousands of other hunters in Alberta who will do this very thing legally.

Think about that for a minute.

Would your line of thinking change if you knew the numbers were low?

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

Nothing of the sort. What I’m saying is that the honest ones are honest, like any other race. I’ll use myself for instance. I follow the regulations of Hunting, I only harvest what I’m allowed, sometime not even harvest anything even though it’s open for harvest. Now, take away the regulations and I can harvest what I want. I would 100% have a moose in the freezer at all times and a gun in my truck at all times for Incase I see that nice big muledeer or whitetail and want to put on the wall. I’d bet every hunter feels the same way and now there will be thousands, which will lead to tens of thousands of other hunters in Alberta who will do this very thing legally.

Think about that for a minute.

.I doubt that. Having enough (read adequate) meat in the freezer is pretty simple to do. I believe most Hunters are satisfied with that.
Taking more game that is necessary, especially for "trophy" purposes , even though it's legal, is a major part of the bigger issue ..depleting resources and longer draw waits. The simple fact is there is an increasing population of hunters(predators incl)and a dwindling supply of Ungulate resources and necessary habitat. Because it's legal,doesn't make it right.











an

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Jimm

Absolutely not. Has anyone considered that the new agreement will have president over the old agreement! If so about 95 % of the Métis that could hunt in the area around their identified settlement will no longer be able to hunt unless they prove linage before 1900. There is certainly potential of having over a 60 reduction in eligible Métis harvesters after sept than there are now.

You seem to be in the know. What wildlife studies were done to ensure the populations will be able to sustain the unregulated harvest before they came up with this decision? Where do you come up with the 95% of Metis now not being able to harvest now? Is it a fact or a number you came up with yourself?

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

.I doubt that. Having enough (read adequate) meat in the freezer is pretty simple to do. I believe most Hunters are satisfied with that.
Taking more game that is necessary, especially for "trophy" purposes , even though it's legal, is a major part of the bigger issue ..depleting resources and longer draw waits. The simple fact is there is an increasing population of hunters(predators incl)and a dwindling supply of Ungulate resources and necessary habitat. Because it's legal,doesn't make it right.

Just because meat is red, doesn’t mean I want it in my freezer, and trust me there are thousands who agree. Given the choice between whitetale steak or moose steak, how many people will pick whitetail???

Anything that is regulated is easy to control, easy to alter limits and sizes allowed for harvest. Unregulated is IMPOSSIBLE to control. Pretty simple concept.

There will always be people who aren’t honest, this isn’t what the discussion is about.

[Norwest Alta]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

I’m aware of the big picture but the forum rules say I can only base my rant on issues pertaining to the outdoors so I’m only discussing this portion here. I agree the changes have to come from deep within the political arena, that’s why I’ve stressed this isn’t just about wildlife to the politicians.

I know ranting about it on the forum won’t change things but it at least brings up awareness. It has to start somewhere and here is as good a place as any.

So this is your route to effect change. Very interesting.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Norwest Alta

So this is your route to effect change. Very interesting.

This is me voicing my opinion. It’s obviously gained attention of others to the subject, you included.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

You seem to be in the know. What wildlife studies were done to ensure the populations will be able to sustain the unregulated harvest before they came up with this decision? Where do you come up with the 95% of Metis now not being able to harvest now? Is it a fact or a number you came up with yourself?

Where did you come up with the 95% figure ? I try real hard not to mention non-facts . You ?

For your info, the long and limited draws times were in effect long before the Metis were recently considered to be included i.

I spent a good portion of my younger years as a District Forest Officer in the Grande Prairie Div, so I do know a little about what I'm saying. I knew the "hunters" that did most of the FN hunting for the Reserve people and how they did it. It really isn't, a wasn't, as you described or insinuated . A good rant is good,as long as you have the facts straight.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

Where did you come up with the 95% figure ? I try real hard not to mention non-facts . You ?

For your info, the long and limited draws times were in effect long before the Metis were recently considered to be included i.

I spent a good portion of my younger years as a District Forest Officer in the Grande Prairie Div, so I do know a little about what I'm saying. I knew the "hunters" that did most of the FN hunting for the Reserve people and how they did it. It really isn't, a wasn't, as you described or insinuated . A good rant is good,as long as you have the facts straight.

You are totally mistaken and off base, you clearly don’t understand what I’m talking about.

The 95% number isn’t even a number I came up with, it’s a number I was asking Jimm how he came up with it.

Furthermore, Hunting in general today is nothing like what it was in the 50’s or 60’s. Trophy hunting hasn’t been mainstream for very long and human populations have grown exponentially since then, while wildlife populations have ebbed.

The problem is, they are all approaching this with your was of thinking, basing it off of what they see when they look out the window and not considering where it will lead to in the future.

Unregulated is exactly what it sounds like, UNREGULATED.

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by Jimm

Absolutely not. Has anyone considered that the new agreement will have president over the old agreement! If so about 95 % of the Métis that could hunt in the area around their identified settlement will no longer be able to hunt unless they prove linage before 1900. There is certainly potential of having over a 60 reduction in eligible Métis harvesters after sept than there are now.

There’s no way that any fn or Métis group would make a deal to give the rights away for 95% of their population

Not in a million years

So your saying potentially 95% of the population, freely gave away their harvesting rights for the benefit of 5%?
How stupid do you think we are?

[walking buffalo]

Having NOT read the last 50 or so pages....



How long until the Alberta Metis are donating wild meat to the food bank as a promotional event?

How long until organizations such as the Caribou Marketing Board (this is a real entity) are set up in Alberta under the auspices of Aboriginal rights?


This stew has simmered long enough for all the juice to have steamed off....
What is left is a chunk of Tribalists fighting for control of a natural resource at the exclusion of others.

As a Chief recently told me, "We are still at war."

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by Kurt505

You are totally mistaken and off base, you clearly don’t understand what I’m talking about.

The 95% number isn’t even a number I came up with, it’s a number I was asking Jimm how he came up with it.

Furthermore, Hunting in general today is nothing like what it was in the 50’s or 60’s. Trophy hunting hasn’t been mainstream for very long and human populations have grown exponentially since then, while wildlife populations have ebbed.

I think I have the ability to read and understand. Having said that,
I totally agree with your last paragraph, in particular the last sentence.

Nothing remains static for long. Hunting will ever never be like it was in the 50`s and 60`s nor will it ever be like it was in 2000 or 2018. Change happens much faster now and as far as Hunting opportunity goes, I don`t think future changes will be for the betterment. No one is to blame,really. I think it`s called progress these days. Hindsight doesnt count.`Just look at Africa now. A total farce compared to what it was at one time.

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by Salavee

I think I have the ability to read and understand. Having said that,
I totally agree with your last paragraph, in particular the last sentence.

Nothing remains static for long. Hunting will ever never be like it was in the 50`s and 60`s nor will it ever be like it was in 2000 or 2018. Change happens much faster now and as far as Hunting opportunity goes, I don`t think future changes will be for the betterment. No one is to blame,really. I think it`s called progress these days. Hindsight doesnt count.

Why do future changes have to be detrimental?
There’s no reason why things can’t be changed for the better
But a critical factor in order for anything positive to happen is regulated harvesting
It’s time that the law abiding outdoorsmen have a voice that our elected officials listen to.
The squeaky wheel keeps getting the grease

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by Salavee

I think I have the ability to read and understand.

Then why are you asking me if I just made up the 95% number and suggested I stick to posting only facts? After all, it was I who originally asked if the 95% was fact or just a number Jimm came up with.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

Why do future changes have to be detrimental?
There’s no reason why things can’t be changed for the better
But a critical factor in order for anything positive to happen is regulated harvesting
It’s time that the law abiding outdoorsmen have a voice that our elected officials listen to.
The squeaky wheel keeps getting the grease

They don`t necessarily have to be detrimental and I agree 100% with what you say. As I see it, there is more than one squeaky wheel - they are just putting the grease on the wrong ones . It`s a matter of opinions.

My advice would be to join the AFGA. It`s the only established voice we have, but it definately needs a serious injection of younger blood before it is totally useless. Most of us old Buggers are getting tired.

.

[marky_mark]

Originally Posted by Salavee

They don`t necessarily have to be detrimental and I agree 100% with what you say. As I see it, there is more than one squeaky wheel - they are just putting the grease on the wrong ones as we see it. It`s a matter of opinions.

My advice would be to join the AFGA. It`s the only established voice we have, but it definately needs a serious injection of younger blood before it is totally useless. Most of us old Buggers are getting tired.

.

We lost our grizzly hunt based on “science”
Bc lost theirs due to public opinion
Now we are facing the challenge of even more unregulated hunting and their are under attack by the same group for cat hunting
I used to think that they would never be able to take hunting away
But it’s happening

[iceburg]

One of my complaints to government is to do a better job regarding animal #'s and to ensure accuracy. The way it is now gov'ts can shut down any and all hunting if low #'s dictate that is needed, just need it enforced.

[Salavee]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

We lost our grizzly hunt based on “science”
Bc lost theirs due to public opinion
Now we are facing the challenge of even more unregulated hunting and their are under attack by the same group for cat hunting
I used to think that they would never be able to take hunting away
But it’s happening

Yes they are. It is not anywhere near a priority with the greater (by far) Majority and Hunting is a PITA , and even evil, to some modern Governments. To us, it`s a view taken from very different perspective,albeit a small one.

In some current day African countries, they are just now realizing the importance of what they once had in Wildlife Resources and are now scrambling like hell to save the few wild remnants they have left. Hindsight.



I

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by marky_mark

We lost our grizzly hunt based on “science”
Bc lost theirs due to public opinion
Now we are facing the challenge of even more unregulated hunting and their are under attack by the same group for cat hunting
I used to think that they would never be able to take hunting away
But it’s happening

We lost the Gbear hunt due to a lack of science, not "based on science".
Lobbyists complained that the government couldn't Prove the hunt was sustainable due to a lack of verifiable population estimates.

Just saying so because it is So very important to know how we got here.


And in fifty years or less when the vast majority of Humans living in Alberta will not be allowed to hunt moose or elk based on racial discrimination, if we remember, we will know how we got there.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by iceburg

One of my complaints to government is to do a better job regarding animal #'s and to ensure accuracy. The way it is now gov'ts can shut down any and all hunting if low #'s dictate that is needed, just need it enforced.

The only hunting the government is willing to shut down is regulated hunting.

[59whiskers]

This might sound far fetched. In the not to near future the none hunting segments of the populations that used to hunt will no longer need firearms. This divide and conquer tactic means they will come after your firearms next. This race based politics around hunting is the start. Hope my kids will have a good life in the future.

[bobtodrick]

I have as much anticipation following this thread as waiting for the next new Big Bang Theory episode

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by iceburg

Would your line of thinking change if you knew the numbers were low?

Do you mean in regards to moose? I would like to think it would. Right now if I had a draw for a moose I would try my best to fill it, if I came across a 200” whitetail or muledeer and had a tag I’d shoot it too.

August, September, October, December, January, and even February will now be rifle season. Velvet bucks aren’t as cagey as hardhorns so I imagine that’ll be a good time to shoot a trophy buck, December and January after the bucks have rutted themselves silly will be another good time to score on a wore out buck.

The thing is, these are new rights, not something they were born into. The novelty is fresh and they will be used. Many of the new unregulated harvesters were regulated harvesters last year wishing they had harvest rights. It’ll be interesting to see how the first few years go.

[iceburg]

Originally Posted by 59whiskers

This might sound far fetched. In the not to near future the none hunting segments of the populations that used to hunt will no longer need firearms. This divide and conquer tactic means they will come after your firearms next. This race based politics around hunting is the start. Hope my kids will have a good life in the future.

Am I the only one scared about the not-too-distant future and the lay of the land? The way it is looking is that the next time there are changes, it will be done by a new special interest group that will be taking over governments and they will make changes to suit their needs. I fear subjects like Metis and 1st Nation hunting will not even be on the radar.

[Scouter]

Originally Posted by bobtodrick

I have as much anticipation following this thread as waiting for the next new Big Bang Theory episode

I know! We find it very entertaining.
Some peoples arguments are so funny. makes you wonder where people dig this stuff up.

seems like people actually hover over their keyboards waiting for a chance to fight and rant.

[R3illy]

Originally Posted by Salavee

I spent a good portion of my younger years as a District Forest Officer in the Grande Prairie Div, so I do know a little about what I'm saying. I knew the "hunters" that did most of the FN hunting for the Reserve people and how they did it. It really isn't, a wasn't, as you described or insinuated . A good rant is good,as long as you have the facts straight.

I like how kurt ignores your personal experience. It doesnt fit his narrative. It doesnt fit all that he's been crying about.

Kurt's not basing anything off facts.. his posts are emotional/hysterical.

[Scouter]

Originally Posted by R3illy

I like how kurt ignores your personal experience. It doesnt fit his narrative. It doesnt fit all that he's been crying about.

Kurt's not basing anything off facts.. his posts are emotional/hysterical.

its called a tantrum

[last minute]

.

[Kurt505]

Originally Posted by R3illy

I like how kurt ignores your personal experience. It doesnt fit his narrative. It doesnt fit all that he's been crying about.

Kurt's not basing anything off facts.. his posts are emotional/hysterical.

If you had any comprehension skills you would have been able to see where I addressed salavees personal expirience.

You’re greed runs so deep you’re unable to comprehend.

How about you post up some facts r3illy, maybe start with the system Manitoba has in place, since Alberta hasn’t had metis harvest right in place for any long terms. Or maybe let’s ignore Beeman3’s account of what happened in Saskatchewan?

Those are just make beleive stories right r3illy? Surely you have some facts to discredit them or you wouldn’t be flapping right?

Let’s here your facts, or maybe you’re just flapping???