Changes to hunting regulations

[seewood]

It is a human rights abuse to encroach on unceded First Nations land.

???? That's silly, I have hunted and logged all over this province without seeing/running into one first nations soul. Well, other than Haida Gwaii.
Opening a can of worms and huge push back with a statement like that young fella. I recognize it as crown land and reserve land as reserve land. Whitey's don't go on reserve land but crown is open to everyone.
Human rights abuse to hunt at Apex, yea right.

[captkirkcanada]

It is a human rights abuse to encroach on unceded First Nations land.

Call it what you want. You'll have to prove to a tribunal that my harvesting a deer to feed my family on Crown land is a human rights abuse for you.

The law is very specific about this. Wildlife is held in trust for all citizens of BC by the Crown, and regulations are governed by the Crown. This has nothing to do with "unceded" land.

Well you better take it up bc hydro cause they arranged this deal . First nations have the right to set who goes on their land . I told ppl this day was coming , should have taken heed. Im not signing that petition. Case closed

[captkirkcanada]

It is a human rights abuse to encroach on unceded First Nations land.

???? That's silly, I have hunted and logged all over this province without seeing/running into one first nations soul. Well, other than Haida Gwaii.
Opening a can of worms and huge push back with a statement like that young fella. I recognize it as crown land and reserve land as reserve land. Whitey's don't go on reserve land but crown is open to everyone.
Human rights abuse to hunt at Apex, yea right.

It is one area in bc . There is no right to hunt for whitey as you put it . Only first natons were guarenteed hunting rights . Unceded land isnt crown land until there is a deal reached .

[DoDo1975]

Incorrect.

ALL wildlife in BC is held in trust for ALL residents by the Crown. No FN have any legislative power to set any hunting regulations in BC.

It is a human rights abuse to encroach on unceded First Nations land.

But define First Nations Land. You define it as everything, the rest of us have a significantly smaller definition.

It is precisely this unwillingness to define which is at the root of all the issues.

But I will go out on a limb and tell you I don't think First Nations Land means all land you say today was yours 200 years ago. I also do not think that the intent of the UN is to allow FN to draw whatever borders they want and then take control of those lands from real governments.

I know that is what you want it to mean, but I think you are drastically wrong in your thinking.

The asserted traditional territories != FN land.

[Brass Monkey]

Call it what you want. You'll have to prove to a tribunal that my harvesting a deer to feed my family on Crown land is a human rights abuse for you.

You feed your family by going to a grocery store. You’d need to bag a dozen good sized mulies a year if your family was solely dependent on deer meat for protein. The government needs to prove to any tribunal whatsoever that they have a lawful claim to indigenous lands.

The law is very specific about this. Wildlife is held in trust for all citizens of BC by the Crown, and regulations are governed by the Crown. This has nothing to do with "unceded" land.

The law that is imposed on land not lawfully acquired by the crown or federal government. This is an especially sticky subject given the crown’s absolutely horrible job of moderating wildlife and marine harvesting that has decimated certain animal species.

[Brass Monkey]

But define First Nations Land.

Land that falls within a territory claimed by an indigenous group

You define it as everything.

Yes, I define all of BC as being a mosaic of territories belonging to several different indigenous groups. There’s only one faction in play that believes all these territories belong to one peoples.

the rest of us have a significantly smaller definition.

Yes, this is typically how colonizers think.

It is precisely this unwillingness to define which is at the root of all the issues.

The border definition is not what has Canadians up in arms - it’s the realization that there is no federal, royal or international law justifying Canadas occupation of land it has not lawfully acquired.

But I will go out on a limb and tell you I don't think First Nations Land means all land you say today was yours 200 years ago. I also do not think that the intent of the UN is to allow FN to draw whatever borders they want and then take control of those lands from real governments.

Neither myself or nation have ever tried to claim all of BC, only one nation has done this. There is no definition of real government - only the ones that colonially birthed nations choose to acknowledge when it is in their favour.

I know that is what you want it to mean, but I think you are drastically wrong in your thinking.

It is not just what I want it to mean but what the federal, royal and international law states.

The asserted traditional territories != FN land.

But somehow unlawfully occupied land = crown land? Huh

[DoDo1975]

But define First Nations Land.

Land that falls within a territory claimed by an indigenous group

You define it as everything.

Yes, I define all of BC as being a mosaic of territories belonging to several different indigenous groups. There’s only one faction in play that believes all these territories belong to one peoples.

the rest of us have a significantly smaller definition.

Yes, this is typically how colonizers think.

It is precisely this unwillingness to define which is at the root of all the issues.

The border definition is not what has Canadians up in arms - it’s the realization that there is no federal, royal or international law justifying Canadas occupation of land it has not lawfully acquired.

But I will go out on a limb and tell you I don't think First Nations Land means all land you say today was yours 200 years ago. I also do not think that the intent of the UN is to allow FN to draw whatever borders they want and then take control of those lands from real governments.

Neither myself or nation have ever tried to claim all of BC, only one nation has done this. There is no definition of real government - only the ones that colonially birthed nations choose to acknowledge when it is in their favour.

I know that is what you want it to mean, but I think you are drastically wrong in your thinking.

It is not just what I want it to mean but what the federal, royal and international law states.

The asserted traditional territories != FN land.

But somehow unlawfully occupied land = crown land? Huh

Your interpretation of the law is clouded by the narrative being pushed by a certain group and will not stand up. The land is Canada and almost assuredly will stay that way. Denying it only serves to increase and prolong divisiveness and harm FN people as a whole.

Best to recognize situations for what they are instead of what you wish or hope they could be or think they should be.

Canada will not cede British Columbia and it's 5+ million inhabitants to 150+ ragtag governments without any capabilities even close to sufficient to provide what is needed to govern a modern society. And if you don't think Canada would need to cede it, note that it has been unequivocally under its control for the last 150+ years regardless of your unschooled legal opinion.

There is no plausible scenario where the province could just cease being Canada or where the inhabitants would cease being Canadian.