BHA interview-cue the haters!

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

OK, we just launched our 5th episode of the Highlander Hunting Podcast.
The BHA interview.
Backcountry Hunters and Anglers-Alberta Chapter chairman.

I would encourage anyone who has an opinion on the Castle Wilderness issue to have a listen. I'm sure you will learn something, either confirming your current opinion, or maybe changing your mind, who knows. But we at Highlander Hunting don't have a dog in this race.

This interview was my idea.
Here's my reasoning:
Lots of Americans I have respect for support BHA in their states. Randy Newberg, Remi Warren, Steve Rinella, Aaron Snyder, the list goes on and on. Everything I've heard from them has been a net positive for hunting in the states. Access rights, and boots on the ground habitat work in the Kootenays. So in my mind, having another voice for Hunting and fishing here in Alberta is a good thing.
But, I don't own a OHV right now. I have in the past. I usually don't use one for hunting, but did a few weeks back (thanks Mike!).
So when I think of hunting access, I don't automatically think of OHV riders. But lots of other hunters do.
I just want people to understand the rationale for posting this interview.

Like it or hate it. I hope you're at least entertained.
And we're still waiting for our first hate mail
highlanderhuntingpodcast@gmail.com

Cheers,
John McCann

Free download at:

highlanderhunting.podbean.com
Highlander Hunting Podcast on Itunes and Google Play.



So with that in mind, I thought I would at least give the new Alberta chapter a chance to get their message out to our small group of listeners.

[Pathfinder76]

Wouldn't Randy Newberg be apposed to motorized access?

[pikergolf]

Whoa, you guys are going to blow your advertising budget in 2 weeks.

[Newview01]

Doesn't Alberta already have very effective hunting / conservation groups? What will another group achieve that AFGA and Alberta Conservation, among others, will not?

[Jjolg123]

I'd say there will never be enough groups in Alberta to properly voice hunters and anglers voices. Seems when it comes to conservation in Alberta there is as much fighting between fellow hunters as there is with the province

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by Jjolg123

I'd say there will never be enough groups in Alberta to properly voice hunters and anglers voices. Seems when it comes to conservation in Alberta there is as much fighting between fellow hunters as there is with the province

I sure seems that way.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by Newview01

Doesn't Alberta already have very effective hunting / conservation groups? What will another group achieve that AFGA and Alberta Conservation, among others, will not?

There's a lot of people, myself included, who feel that the AFGA has become a bloated old boys club that only pursues the agenda of a select few on their executive and doesn't rock the boat. They were at one point an effective voice, and have done some important habitat work.

At the same time, they have repeatedly tried to throw bowhunters under the bus (thanks largely to former AO member sheephumper and his vendetta), they did not lobby for the grizzly hunt or call out the garbage science conducted by golder and provincial bios despite knowing full well what was going on. They don't call out APOS on the multitude of issues in that group. They certainly do not oppose the endless treaty-rights based slaughter going on. Kananaskis. Rock lake. Landowner tags. Bison hunting going native only. Etc, etc, etc.

I can keep going all day, point is I don't trust the AFGA and when I see BHA, I see a group that has put foot to highly connected political arse and made a huge difference for regular hunters.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by 3blade

There's a lot of people, myself included, who feel that the AFGA has become a bloated old boys club that only pursues the agenda of a select few on their executive and doesn't rock the boat. They were at one point an effective voice, and have done some important habitat work.

At the same time, they have repeatedly tried to throw bowhunters under the bus (thanks largely to former AO member sheephumper and his vendetta), they did not lobby for the grizzly hunt or call out the garbage science conducted by golder and provincial bios despite knowing full well what was going on. They don't call out APOS on the multitude of issues in that group. They certainly do not oppose the endless treaty-rights based slaughter going on. Kananaskis. Rock lake. Landowner tags. Bison hunting going native only. Etc, etc, etc.

I can keep going all day, point is I don't trust the AFGA and when I see BHA, I see a group that has put foot to highly connected political arse and made a huge difference for regular hunters.

I know nothing about AFGA. Would be happy to interview them tho.

I have spoke to ACA people, they seem similar to BHA from what I could tell. But I could be wrong.

[Okotokian]

nevermind. edited.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by pikergolf

Whoa, you guys are going to blow your advertising budget in 2 weeks.

Lots of post, point taken.
We just thought this is a great way to connect with likeminded individuals. Or at least Alberta hunters anyway.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by chuck

Wouldn't Randy Newberg be apposed to motorized access?

Not sure, but he supports BHA.
Think he was using a side by side on one of his shows.

[waterninja]

The link provided did not work for me. Can someone else please post another? Would really like to know the details of what your all talking about. Thanks.

[alta270]

I hear a lot of concern and angst with the Y2Y initiative, but no one has outlined why. I looked at their hunting and fishing policy, and I see no issues with it.

https://y2y.net/about-us/policies/y2...chterm=HUNTING

Can someone advise why this is a problem?

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by alta270

I hear a lot of concern and angst with the Y2Y initiative, but no one has outlined why. I looked at their hunting and fishing policy, and I see no issues with it.

https://y2y.net/about-us/policies/y2...chterm=HUNTING

Can someone advise why this is a problem?

The main concern I have heard and read is that the policy recognizes indigenous hunting trapping and fishing rights only and does not mention non indigenous peoples' rights
Cat

[sjd]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

The main concern I have heard and read is that the policy recognizes indigenous hunting trapping and fishing rights only and does not mention non indigenous peoples' rights
Cat

I think you misread the 4 bullets here. The first bullet refers to aboriginal treaty rights the next 3 bullets clearly refer to non aboriginal hunting.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by sjd

I think you misread the 4 bullets here. The first bullet refers to aboriginal treaty rights the next 3 bullets clearly refer to non aboriginal hunting.

I think cat is dead on, and we all know which group gets to hunt in provincial and national parks that Y2Y is manipulating into existence

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by sjd

I think you misread the 4 bullets here. The first bullet refers to aboriginal treaty rights the next 3 bullets clearly refer to non aboriginal hunting.

You don't see those points for what they are. They do not at all imply that hunting is a right, but rather a tool that should only be used as needed.

Don't fall for their trap in the form of BHA.

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by sjd

I think you misread the 4 bullets here. The first bullet refers to aboriginal treaty rights the next 3 bullets clearly refer to non aboriginal hunting.

I am not sure what you are referring to that I read or who wrote what because I never linked anything
Cat

[alta270]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

The main concern I have heard and read is that the policy recognizes indigenous hunting trapping and fishing rights only and does not mention non indigenous peoples' rights
Cat

The trouble is, that indigenous peoples do have rights under the constitution, treaties and the Supreme Court decisions. Those of us who are non-native only have privileges to be consumptive users of wildlife and fish. As such, I'm not sure how their points could have been rewritten in any way.

Do you?

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by alta270

The trouble is, that indigenous peoples do have rights under the constitution, treaties and the Supreme Court decisions. Those of us who are non-native only have privileges to be consumptive users of wildlife and fish. As such, I'm not sure how their points could have been rewritten in any way.

Do you?

Their points are not the law, so the least they could have done was said "we support the right to hunt for all who wish to partake".

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by alta270

The trouble is, that indigenous peoples do have rights under the constitution, treaties and the Supreme Court decisions. Those of us who are non-native only have privileges to be consumptive users of wildlife and fish. As such, I'm not sure how their points could have been rewritten in any way.

Do you?

I used the wrong term,I SHOULD have said "non indigenous hunting , trapping and fishing privileges".
Cat

[3blade]

Originally Posted by alta270

I hear a lot of concern and angst with the Y2Y initiative, but no one has outlined why. I looked at their hunting and fishing policy, and I see no issues with it.

https://y2y.net/about-us/policies/y2...chterm=HUNTING

Can someone advise why this is a problem?

http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...=59209&page=3#

Post #63

http://hunting-washington.com/smf/in...?topic=93185.0

Above we can see where the lobo watch guy catches them and forces a rather quick change in policy wording vs the one you linked

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by alta270

I hear a lot of concern and angst with the Y2Y initiative, but no one has outlined why. I looked at their hunting and fishing policy, and I see no issues with it.

https://y2y.net/about-us/policies/y2...chterm=HUNTING

Can someone advise why this is a problem?

The problem is that in practice, Y2Y has always fought for preservation projects that decrease hunting, never the other way around.

They offer no active lobbying effort to maintain or expand hunting, but do attempt to have laws rewritten to eliminate hunting for everyone except aboriginal peoples.

Can you see the problem now?

------


Back to BHA, my opinion of the group is rather neutral except for the concern of the association with Y2Y.

As I noted, other BHA chapters have received significant funding from private interests for the purpose of supporting the Y2Y initiative....

I wonder if the Alberta BHA is even aware of this?



The new update from the beer night suggests that these guys are tackling concerns already being worked on by the AFGA.

Has the BHA approached AFGA to partner on these issues?




I am always happy to hear of people willing to physically get into the game of promoting wildlife and hunting.... while concerned that their efforts may actually be hindrance to the effectiveness of a united front.

If the BHA will not or cannot form alliances with the current Hunting stakeholder groups then their existence will most likely produce negative effect for hunting....

[alta270]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

The problem is that in practice, Y2Y has always fought for preservation projects that decrease hunting, never the other way around.

They offer no active lobbying effort to maintain or expand hunting, but do attempt to have laws rewritten to eliminate hunting for everyone except aboriginal peoples.

Can you see the problem now?

If that is in fact the case, yes, I would be concerned. Can you reference where this has happened?

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by alta270

If that is in fact the case, yes, I would be concerned. Can you reference where this has happened?

Stop gargling....

If you had done any research on Y2Y then I wouldn't have to reference the initiatives that led to elimination or reduction of hunting by non-aboriginal peoples.

In other words, do some research before spouting off in support of an anti-huntinging group when others are telling you to open your eyes.

Look up Y2Y led preservation efforts and evaluate how hunting was impacted.
The truth will be obvious.

[HIGHLANDER HUNTING]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

The problem is that in practice, Y2Y has always fought for preservation projects that decrease hunting, never the other way around.

They offer no active lobbying effort to maintain or expand hunting, but do attempt to have laws rewritten to eliminate hunting for everyone except aboriginal peoples.

Can you see the problem now?

------


Back to BHA, my opinion of the group is rather neutral except for the concern of the association with Y2Y.

As I noted, other BHA chapters have received significant funding from private interests for the purpose of supporting the Y2Y initiative....

I wonder if the Alberta BHA is even aware of this?



The new update from the beer night suggests that these guys are tackling concerns already being worked on by the AFGA.

Has the BHA approached AFGA to partner on these issues?




I am always happy to hear of people willing to physically get into the game of promoting wildlife and hunting.... while concerned that their efforts may actually be hindrance to the effectiveness of a united front.

If the BHA will not or cannot form alliances with the current Hunting stakeholder groups then their existence will most likely produce negative effect for hunting....

I believe what was said last night in regards to working with AFGA was that AB BHA is willing to work with AFGA where it makes sense to do so. Also, it was mentioned by one of the board members that they really don't want to be in conflict with AFGA and wanted people to not say disparraging things about AFGA on social media when speaking about BHA.

So from what i can tell, they really are willing to work with AFGA.

Just reporting what I heard last night.

Also, Y2Y was brought up but it was in the context of people misunderstanding the Y2Y stance on hunting issues. Personally I know pretty much nothing about Y2Y. Other than the main thing about a wildlife corridor from yellowstone to yukon.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by alta270

You made the assertion, and when asked for details, you tell me "google it". Do you have such details? I truly would be interested in knowing, but I am not about to spend 1/2 hour digging through links that may or may not reveal the details that you already are aware of.

So, please, advise of those situations at least.

In other words, you're a sheep.

If you won't take time to educate yourself, I consider it pointless to guide you any further.


Your tag line is a joke, right?

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by HIGHLANDER HUNTING

I believe what was said last night in regards to working with AFGA was that AB BHA is willing to work with AFGA where it makes sense to do so. Also, it was mentioned by one of the board members that they really don't want to be in conflict with AFGA and wanted people to not say disparraging things about AFGA on social media when speaking about BHA.

So from what i can tell, they really are willing to work with AFGA.

Just reporting what I heard last night.

Also, Y2Y was brought up but it was in the context of people misunderstanding the Y2Y stance on hunting issues. Personally I know pretty much nothing about Y2Y. Other than the main thing about a wildlife corridor from yellowstone to yukon.

This is really concerning, in a negative light for BHA.

BHA is committed to promoting the creation of a National and Provincial Park system where the elimination or reduction of non-aboriginal hunting is part of the plan.

And this supposed to be a PRO-hunting group?

It sounds like these members of BHA have decided to take the path that is already paved.

They probably won't understand what that means....

[matt1984]

Originally Posted by alta270

I hear a lot of concern and angst with the Y2Y initiative, but no one has outlined why. I looked at their hunting and fishing policy, and I see no issues with it.

https://y2y.net/about-us/policies/y2...chterm=HUNTING

Can someone advise why this is a problem?

Here's a quote from Stephen Legault, program director for Yellowstone to Yukon (Y2Y)

"The main thing that kills grizzly bears in Alberta is access, and anytime we’re reducing access to core grizzly bear habitat, we’re making progress.”

[oiler_nation]

Welcome to AOF, where wanting people to substantiate and defend a position makes you a "sheep".