FRPA Engagement Responses

 The deadline is July 15th, 2019 at 4pm, so there isn't much time left to respond.  Here are my responses to the questions.  These answers have been informed by the conservation organizations I am a member of, the podcasts I listen to and my firsthand experiences in the backcountry.

How should the Province identify opportunities and priorities for adapting forest management to a changing climate, such as mitigating the effects of beetle infestations, drought and fire?

 

The Province should seek input from provincial biologists on how to manage forests for climate change.  The primary goal should be to maintain native biodiversity in both plant and animal species in the many climates and ecosystems of BC.  Second to that, maintaining forests with natural biodiversity for usage by both recreational users and industry should be balanced with the long term effects of climate change to ensure sustainability of plant and animal populations.  

What factors should be considered in the planning of forest operations to reduce the risks of wildfire around your community?

 

The mono-culture of pine trees by the forestry sector by spraying glyphosate and excessively eliminating fire from the landscape has had a catastrophic impact on the risk of wildfires across BC.  The mono-culture of only planting one type of fast growing tree has increased the fire risk which is naturally mitigated by biodiversity and leads to a the compounding effect of pine beetle kill.  Ultimately, when forests are managed as a large farm for the forestry sector, blights and disasters such as fire will have an increased impacted on both communities and the forest itself.  The best thing to reduce the risk of wildfires is to manage forests for natural biodiversity.  Forests go through a natural cycle of recovery after fire or deforestation, where grasses first, deciduous second, and finally coniferous trees reclaim the landscape.  Failing to replant a natural collection of plants and trees in favour of pine cultivation is detrimental.

A vital step in landscape-level planning is understanding what is important to the public. Based on what is important to you or your community, what information on the condition of resource values such as species-at-risk habitat do you think is necessary to support the planning process?

 

 The most important thing for me, my family, and my community is maintaining healthy and thriving habitat for wildlife and fish populations for the purpose of hunting and fishing.  For me and my community, hunting and fishing plays a central role in our lives.  It allows us to put organic, natural, healthy and ethically sourced food on the table and allows us to enjoy BC's natural beauty.  It is distressing to see the gradual loss of hunting and fishing opportunities as forestry sector and other resource sector jobs damage the environment with no accountability or enforcement or requirement for meaningful restoration and habitat recovery.  Jobs in rural BC are obviously very important as well, and the solution is not to simply halt forestry or create protected areas which the public has limited access to.  It is critical to balance both the jobs of rural BC with how imperative it is to protect, maintain, and enhance habitat to recover and increase wildlife populations.  This can be done with careful planning and the inclusion of provincial biologists in protecting and ensuring recourse activities have a net positive impact on habitat and wildlife populations through using increased fees paid by the resource sector to be directed back into wildlife management.  It is critical that provincial biologists and conservation officers have the funding and enforcement powers needed to manage habitat and wildlife for long term sustainability and growth.  The resource sector and healthy wildlife populations are not inherently opposing priorities.  Many jurisdictions in the United States have thriving and growing populations of game species as a result of habitat restoration and protection paid for by fees from the resource sector and excise taxes on outdoor recreation equipment.  It is not impossible to have your cake and eat it too in the area of enhancing wildlife populations and allowing sustainable resource sector jobs.

How would you like to be involved in the planning process?

 

I would like to be involved by having a single location online where I can sign up for notifications and read about planned activities in BC forests.  Also, it should be incumbent on anyone wishing to be involved in the planning process to prove their legitimacy as a stakeholder.  It is my deep concern that foreign funded organizations play an illegitimate role in shaping policy in forest and wildlife management.  The UK cosmetics company LUSH spends huge amounts of money funding anti-hunting organizations masquerading as environmental groups and mobilizes well-meaning but uninformed urbanites who have never and will never venture into the woods to support their anti-meat agenda, while the American forestry company Weyerhaeuser pretends to be advocating for jobs when really they are looking at profits.  Neither group is a legitimate stakeholder in how BC forests and wildlife should be managed.  The people who live, spend time, and make a living in the regions where the planning is taking place are the only legitimate stakeholders.  Please consult First Nations, hunters and anglers, outdoor recreation groups, and local residents of the region where the planning is taking place.

Resource roads are a valuable asset in the province as they provide access for the forest industry, ranchers, other resource users, and the public for commercial and recreation purposes. Yet, these same road networks are costly to maintain and have potential negative impacts on wildlife, water quality and fish habitat. What values do you believe are important to consider when planning new roads, road use and maintenance, and deactivation in your area?

 

 Roads have a scientifically proven impact on habitat, fish, and wildlife.  Numerous scientific papers confirm this.  Deactivation by simply pulling culverts has a negligible impact on mitigating their impact on ecosystems.  Reforesting roads is required to restore and recover habitat.  Obviously, a balanced approach is required to allow access for both industry and the public without unnecessarily or irreversibly harming wildlife and fish populations.  This is where scientific monitoring by provincial biologists and conservation officers should inform decision making on road deactivation and reforestation.  Wildlife and fish populations are the canary in the coal mine to inform decision making about the level road deactivation and reforesting that is required.  If wildlife or fish populations are declining, then deactivation and reforesting is more urgent.  If populations are sustainable or growing, then road density can be maintained.  Ultimately, we need to manage our forests for the long term health of BC plant and animal species.

How can the Province improve transparency and timelines of information regarding proposed operational and landscape-level objectives, plans and results?

 

It is critical that the government publish, in an easy to read format, at a central location online, objectives, plans and results of landscape-level planning.  It is also critical that objectives be measurable and meaningful with sufficient resources to monitor and enforce.  For decades we have seen the slow decline in fish and wildlife populations which indicates that the process is clearly failing, yet there is no transparency and even less accountability.  It should be mandated that having a net-positive impact on habitat, fish and wildlife populations, and biodiversity be a condition of resource sector operations which is planned for and monitored by provincial biologists and enforced by conservation officers and police.  

 

What information will help inform your feedback on plans that may impact you, your community or your business (e.g., maps of cutblocks and roads planned in your area, hydrological assessments, wildlife habitat areas or recreation opportunities, etc)?

 

Detailed maps, reports from biologists on native biodiversity, fish, and wildlife populations, and the criticality of the habitat, as well as a detailed plan of how the habitat impacts will be reversed  or restored following the resource sector operations or how they will be offset or mitigated would greatly help inform feedback on the impacts of planned resource extraction.

What additional values should be considered in FRPA that will allow us to manage forest and range practices in a better way?

 

 The values of hunter and angler conservationists should be considered in the FRPA.  Hunter and angler conservationists want to ensure fish and wildlife populations thrive in BC.  It is easy to assume this is simply because we want to hunt or hook these animals and fish.  While we do enjoy hunting and fishing, and enjoy the food it puts on the table, the main reason every hunter and angler I have ever met wants to ensure healthy and abundant fish and wildlife populations in BC is because when you spend weeks or months in the woods, quietly learning about the habitat and animals of BC, you gain an unparalleled love for the beauty and preciousness of nature.  The nature of BC is one of a kind and once it is gone, it may never come back. Healthy and thriving fish and wildlife populations mean that there is a healthy ecosystem with native biodiversity.  We are the custodians of this great natural beauty which can sustain us through hunting and fishing, recreation, and also industrial activities if they are managed carefully for long term sustainability.  Hunter and angler conservationists don't see nature as something to be exploited for profit or tamed for agriculture, but rather appreciate the richness of it simply remaining wild.  There are many countries in the would which have lost their native species hundreds of years ago to the ignorance or greed of development and there are many poor countries today that are trading their natural heritage for socioeconomic development.  BC stands at a crossroads where we can either become like Europe, which has lost most of its biodiversity, or make a serious stand and invest in protecting and restoring forests, fish, and wildlife populations so that we can still call ourselves Beautiful British Columbia for generations to come.

 

In what ways should the province strengthen government oversight and industry accountability regarding forest and range activities to better address the challenges of climate change and the interests of all British Columbians?

 

The province should strengthen oversight and industry accountability by funding forest, wildlife and habitat management to levels comparable to jurisdictions which are succeeding in maintaining healthy fish and wildlife populations.  This means roughly a ten times increase in funding.  The increase in funding can come from fees levied on resource extraction and forestry, excise taxes on outdoor recreation equipment, fees for tourism sector groups such as ski hills and whale watching, increased fees on hunting and fishing licences. With adequate funding, provincial biologists would have the resources to monitor the health of forests, streams, and wildlife, participate in planning of resource sector activities, monitor impacts, and recovery efforts, and work with conservation officers to enforce and maintain accountability.  Right now, provincial biologists and conservation officers barely have the funding required to monitor the free-fall declines in certain fish and wildlife populations, but do not have the resources to prevent, or reverse the trend.  Fish and wildlife managers across north America have proven they know how to use science to restore and maintain healthy wildlife populations if they have the resources and enforcement powers to do so.  We must use the best science and adequate funding to manage the effects of climate change so that we can maintain healthy wilderness in BC.

Alert: Have your say on Forest Practices in BC in 3 easy steps!

Alert: Have your say on Forest Practices in BC in 3 easy steps!

The government wants to hear from British Columbians about how forests should be managed in BC.  Other environmental and industry groups will certainly be making their voices heard.  This is your opportunity to ensure that lots of hunters and anglers are part of the conversation.  Every comment counts! We need you! The deadline is July 15, 2019 at 4:00 p.m. so don't wait!

What to do:

1) Read the Discussion Paper to learn about the issues.

2) Click on the online feedback form to have your say!

3) Last, take 1 minute to send this form letter to the minister in charge, Doug Donaldson.  Enter your address, postal code, and country on the left and click GO.  Follow the instructions and customize the letter if you have more to add.  Then all you have to do is click SEND.  If you want to write your own letter then you can send it to engagefrpa@gov.bc.ca.

... and you're DONE! That was easy!!!!

If you want a little guidance on what the BCBHA thinks about these issues, here is a cheat sheet.

Region 2 BCBHA Cheat Sheet:

• "Landscape level management" could be a good thing.
• Set limits on the combined impact of forestry, mining, oil and gas, roads, etc. on habitat
• Include measurable objectives to restore habitat and wildlife populations.
• Enforce the limits and recovery objectives! There are lots of smart scientists and conservation officers who know how to restore habitat and increase wildlife populations.
• Leave it better than you found it! It shouldn't matter if you are a forestry company, snowmobiler, or hiker.  It should be the law that you leave the backcountry better than you found it.
• Let's work together on climate change. Everyone needs a voice at the table to make sure our precious backcountry is still around for the next generation.

If you are interested in the detailed and nuanced BCBHA official position, here is some additional reading which may help inform your response. 

The Official BCBHA Position

BCBHA supports changes to FRPA proposed in the provincial Discussion Paper that will improve conservation and environmental stewardship. In particular, BCBHA wants to see FRPA improvement include the following key points:

• Revise FRPA to provide clear, enforceable legislation that guides landscape level management for forests and grasslands. 
• Include measurable objectives for the management of cumulative effects from industry, forestry, recreation and development
• Landscape level management requires integration between FRPA and other legislation and ministries. Wildlife, habitat, and access management need to be incorporated into landscape level planning.
• Require resource and recreation users to have net-positive impact on biodiversity, water quality and critical wildlife habitat.
• Improve collaboration in planning by developing stakeholder groups that meet with government officials and industry.

Join BCBHA in commenting on the FPRA Improvement Initiative. Public feedback will be collected by the provincial government until July 15, 2019 at 4:00 p.m. Participate by completing the online feedback form.  BCBHA has detailed our thoughts on how FRPA should be improved in this comment guide to help you answer the questions. Or, if you are short on time, send this letter to Minister Donaldson letting him know you support the improvement of FRPA for the benefit of ecosystems and wildlife.

Yours in conservation,

British Columbia BHA
http://www.backcountryhunters.org/

BC Habitat and Wildlife Reports

I just found this useful link where many of the reports which have been prepared for the government over the last number of years can be found.

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/index.html#wildlife-allocations

Form Letter For Advocacy

I decided it might be a good idea to write a form letter for advocacy.  I sent this to the BC Chapter of the BHA in case it might serve as a good starting point to make a form letter for people to use as a starting point to contact their MLA.  Feel free to use any or all of it.  Again, I have paraphrased a lot of great sources in conservation including my favourite Theodore Roosevelt quote, so...

<Your Name Here>

<Your Email Address Here>

<Your Phone Number Here>

<Your Home Address Here>

<Today’s Date Here>

Dear <The Name of your MLA Here>,

RE: Please Make Protecting Habitat a Priority

I am writing this letter because, as a hunter and angler who lives in your constituency, protecting habitat is extremely important to me.  I am concerned about the loss of high quality habitat and the resulting declines in fish and wildlife populations which I have observed, and which have been confirmed in numerous studies and reports prepared for the government.  The actions taken by the current government are a good first step, but there is a lot more which needs to be done to protect habitat for future generations. 

[Optional] I would also like to request a meeting at your earliest convenience to discuss with you in person the important issues facing habitat, fish and wildlife in BC.    

Recently, it was extremely distressing to learn of the extinction of the Selkirk Mountain caribou herd due to habitat loss.  A failure to protect the old growth lichen bearing trees which the caribou rely on is a mistake we cannot afford to repeat.  High logging road density and loss of old growth forest habitat is detrimental to numerous other species as well, including grizzly bears, elk, and moose.  This type of habitat loss crisis is occurring across BC and it is deeply upsetting to witness first hand.  I ask that you work with the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development and the Ministry of the Environment & Climate Change Strategy to act on the following points to make protecting and restoring habitat in BC a priority. 

1)    Clear Management and Recovery Objectives

Habitat, fish and wildlife recovery plans need to include specific area or population numbers, rather than ratios or flexible goals.  Habitat continues to be lost while fish and wildlife population numbers are declining even when current ratios are being met.  

2)    Science Based Management 
Science should set policy and management objectives for habitat, fish, and wildlife rather than politics or public opinion.  Biologists and staff already employed by the province know how to collect the necessary data and recover habitat, fish and wildlife populations.  They need the funding, authority, and support to do so.

 3)    Increased Funding

BC has the least funding compared to all our neighbours while we have the most animal species and biodiversity which need protection (see info-graphic attached). 100% of license fees as well a higher portion of taxes and fees collected from the tourism and resource industries should go directly to habitat, fish, and wildlife management.

4)    Accountability

Habitat, fish, and wildlife managers as well as the resource industry need to be accountable for meeting population recovery and habitat restoration goals. Provincial agencies, biologists, and conservation officers need the legislation, regulation, and other tools to be able to set policies, ensure their involvement in resource industry extraction planning, increase monitoring, and have the necessary enforcement authority to hold industry accountable.

Spending time in nature and being able to source healthy and organic meat and fish is of the highest importance to me and my family.  I am worried that if action is not taken that we are destroying the natural heritage of future generations.  Please take action and make protecting habitat a priority.

Sincerely,

<Your Signature Here>

<Your Name Here>

 

Conservation Advocacy: MLA's office and BHA Pint Night

Yesterday, I managed to get out to my MLA's office for a meeting with one of her assistants.  I am still trying to arrange a second meeting with my MLA Judy Darcy, here in New Westminster, but with the legislature sitting right now, MLAs are away from their constituency.  I will continue to try to arrange a meeting for the next time the legislature breaks.

The meeting went well and I felt that I was able to convey my key points.  I'll discuss those in a moment.  

Later in the evening I went to my first BC Chapter of the Backcountry Hunters and Anglers Pint Night.  The Region 2 Rep, Mark Robichaud and the Communications Rep for Region 2, Jeff Chan, were there as well as some familiar faces such as Dylan Eyers of EatWild, Rob Chipman, Mitch who I head met at the BC Sportsman's Show when we were two of just a few people listening to Jesse Zeman's presentation about managing to zero, and Grady who I met at the Beers for Wild Things event in February.  I also met a lot of new people who were all very dialed in and passionate hunter conservationists.   It was an excellent event.

Mark had asked me to do a short presentation about my political activism, so I tried to summarize how I approach letter writing to politicians and my MLA, rather than just talking about how many letters I have written or what they said.

This is how I try to communicate the message that hunters care about habitat, wildlife, and the future of wilderness in BC.  

I want to first say that I have pulled a lot of catch phrases from a lot of places, podcasts, and presentations, so please accept my reuse as flattery.

Know Your Audience
It is important to remember who you are talking or writing to.  If it is a person, try to understand who they are or what they know.  If it is the public, assume they are hunting-curious and probably eat meat, but also that they likely don't know much about the issues.  They will all probably be shocked by both the sad state of affairs and how much you know and care.
 
Politicians:     
- They are just normal people.  Some are good, some are not so good, some care, some won't. When I met my MLA Judy Darcy, I felt like I was having a nice conversation with my mom.  It wasn't at all intimidating.
- They may not know much about the issues, so you may need to start at the beginning and summarize.
- The are probably curious and interested, like most of the public.

Hunters:
- This is our echo chamber.  Everything you say will be echoed back at you with cheers and agreement.  
- While it makes you feel good, it doesn't further the cause to spend too much time trying to convince people who already agree with you.
- I think it is worth trying to get hunters to talk to non-hunters

Anti-Hunting Activists:
- Tiny minority of people who you will never convince.
- Arguing with them is not worth your time and isn't productive.

The Non-Hunting Public:
- Most people eat meat 
- Caring where your food comes from is really popular these days
- Many will be curious about hunting and know very little other than what's on social media, TV or in movies
- Would probably love to try some game meat.  "Venison Diplomacy" wins hearts and minds via the stomach.

- They occupy the sane middle ground and we want to be there with them.  The protest at Antler, the restaurant in Toronto where the Chef, Michael Hunter, butchered a deer leg in the window out of exasperation for the weekly protests, gained huge public support and support from moderate vegans for the restaurant.  We have the best story and it is a sane, normal, everyday person story.  We just need to tell the complete story... More on that to come below. (There is a great Joe Rogan Podcast with Michael Hunter.  It is excellent.)

Have a Clear Message
It pays to be organized and concise.  I know that being concise is a weakness of mine, so I really try to organize my letters or talking points into 3 clear points per letter or meeting.  Any more than 3 points, in my opinion, will be hard to follow or seem like you are rambling.

Who you are:
- I like to start with who I am.  Where you live matters to your MLA.  They care a heck of a lot more if you live in their community.  I explain that I am a hunter who grew up in Vancouver and came to hunting as a adult.  Through hunting my eyes were opened to the habitat destruction and declining wildlife numbers and that is why I am reaching out.

What you want:
- If you want a meeting, then ask for a meeting at their earliest convenience
- If you want changes such as Clear Management and Recovery Objectives, Science Based Management, Increased Funding, Wildlife and Habitat to be a Priority, Changes to Policy and Legislation, Biologists to be Included in Resource Extraction Planning and Remediation, etc. state those objectives clearly.

Why you care:
- Explain why it matters to you (Food, Nature, Future Generations, Tradition, Family)
- Explain why the things you have learned are upsetting and worrisome.


Use Info-graphics and Visual Aids When Possible:
- A picture is worth a thousand words 

It's About the Habitat
I like to always keep it about the habitat.  It sets a good tone when you focus on habitat issues. All studies indicate that the habitat is the key to conservation and the recovery of wildlife populations.  It helps all hunters if we can be seen as a voice for habitat.  It shows us in a positive light.  If the discussion focuses too heavily on the animals as themselves, then the result will be a reduction in the hunting of those animals in order to preserve them.  It is far better for us to keep the discussion about enhancing habitat to increase or protect the total population.

Clear Management Objectives:
- One way to keep it about the habitat is to have objectives.  Protecting specific areas, road deactivation, biodiversity objectives, fish and wildlife population objectives, prescribed burn to restore habitat objectives, etc.
- The objectives have to include solid numbers, not ratios or soft goals, or else no one will be held accountable.
 
Science Base Management:
 - I like to discuss how provincial biologists should be included in forestry planning and replanting to ensure biodiversity and high quality habitat.
- I also like to discuss how it is about giving people who are already government staff the funding and authority to do what they already know needs to be done. 

Funding:
Inevitably it will come to how to pay for it all.  I would prefer that funding is widely distributed so that it is everyone paying a little for a larger total. This includes ideas about:

- 100% License fees allocation
- Modest increase to License fees
- Excise taxes similar to in the US
- Including other user groups paying their share (Skiing, Biking, Eco-Tourism, etc.)
- Show discrepancies with our neighbours and the scale of how little funding we are really asking for ($700 million roof on BC place, $820 million Port Mann Bridge)

We Show Up!
I am a real person, from BC, who cares so much that I wrote this letter or came to this meeting.  I care even when it is not in the spotlight and I still care even when things didn't go my way.  Our opposition, anti-hunting activists and organizations, way on the other side of this debate, aren't going to take the time to meet with their MLAs and continue to advocate for wildlife and habitat after it is out of the media or after they achieve an objective to end a hunt.  I still advocate for grizzly bear habitat, even though the hunt has been ended, because I genuinely care about the habitat and grizzly bear populations.  I hope that it does not go unnoticed that the opposition groups have stopped caring now that they have achieved their objective of ending the hunt.  I generally think that the grizzly bear topic is very sensitive and divisive and I only bring it up once I have established a rapport with someone.


We Are Here to be Productive!
- I try to do everything I can not to seen angry, but rather really worried, upset, and distressed
- I try to say thank you for any funding increases or positive actions, but make it clear that it is only a first step and that there is so much more to do.
- I am here to help and answer any questions, be a resource for my MLA, and friend in the community.

 
Change the Narrative
-I do everything I can to come across as just an average person who cares about BC's native plants and animals, their habitat and where my food comes from. I don't wear camo or hunting t-shits to meetings.
-I think it is important for us to all work to change perception so that when people think of hunters they think about us being the strongest and most passionate advocates for habitat and wildlife. 

Tell the Complete Story:
Part of changing the narrative is accepting we have an image problem.  It is easy for hunters to be vilified as blood thirsty killers who just want to trophy hunt to cover our walls with heads, hides, and antlers.  

We all know who nonsense that is.  So, why is it so easy for us to come across so terribly?  In my opinion, it is because we have done little to try to understand what non-hunters think about.

1) If you are going to post on the internet or social media, it cannot be just a "Grip and Grin" of a dead animal.  Post the whole story, the planning, the days without success, the story of the success, the animal, the processing, the meat, and food, the meals, the enjoyment, the recipes, the memories.  Steven Rinella and MeatEater do a great job of ensuring every episode is a complete story and ends with a meal.  We need to do the same.

2) When a non-hunter hears "Trophy Hunting", "Trophy Animal", etc. they think that is the only value that that animal has to us.  They think that we won't eat the meat or use the hide. They hear "Killing for the sake of killing". We've lost that battle.  It's over.  I prefer the term "Selective Hunting" so that it is harder for people to misuse.  "Selective Hunting" didn't get as warm of a reception when I mentioned it last night at the meeting, but I still like it.  Anyways, be careful with the words you choose and understand how they will be interpreted.

3) Many non-hunters probably don't really want to think too hard about where their food comes from.  In the media there are tons of documentaries which show the horrible conditions in factory farming and there are great cooking shows which champion knowing where the food comes from.  It is very popular and trendy to talk about food security and ethical sources of food.  I explain how that was a significant reason why I got into hunting in the first place.  If you gently force people to confront the issue of where there burger or chicken comes from and explain that their discomfort is why hunting is so important it can be a great way to bridge the gap and explain why you do what you do.

4) Venison Diplomacy is Steven Rinella's term for sharing a game meal with someone to help break the ice and normalize hunting.  No one will dislike hunters after eating an amazing meal.

5) Occupy the sane middle ground.  We have the best story.  Habitat protection and restoration, caring about the health of fish and wildlife populations, ethical, organic, and hormone free meat, are all issues everyone can get behind.  We need to build bridges starting with these points.  

Ambassadors of Conservation
We need to realize that everything we do, say, or post reflects on us as hunters.  We need to be careful so that we can build friendships, allies, and gain public support.  We need to be in it for the long game, not simply reacting to events.  We need to look towards where we want to get to in 5, 10, 25, 50 years and work diligently to protect and enhance what we care so much about.  If we fail, there will be no wild places for future generations to learn about and appreciate what we are fighting to protect.

"The “greatest good for the greatest number” applies to the number within the womb of time, compared to which those now alive form but an insignificant fraction. Our duty to the whole, including the unborn generations, bids us restrain an unprincipled present-day minority from wasting the heritage of these unborn generations. The movement for the conservation of wild life and the larger movement for the conservation of all our natural resources are essentially democratic in spirit, purpose, and method."

Theodore Roosevelt