Thank you for the…

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the BGMAC report.

I am a member of a family hunt club. Our family has been living off the land for more than six generations. Hunting brings our family together every Fall, teaching each new generation how to provide for themselves, the family history, knowledge of the land and animal behaviour.
I wish to express concern about the impact of some of the BGMAC recommendations on the future of this club, and on our large extended family. Each year, three generations of family participate in the hunt; men and women, grand-fathers and grand-daughters, mothers and sons. The older generation provide crucial knowledge of the past, sharing their experience and advice. The younger generation are mentored by the older generations, learning every hunt.

About half of our club live in proximity to our hunting area. The other half have nearby cottages, trailers, or stay at the hunt camp. Because of this, we have different numbers and combinations of hunters throughout the week. We may have more on the weekend, as high as 15-18 in the last few years, because younger generations especially may not have the seniority to apply for vacation time during moose season, so can only hunt on weekends. Older generations may miss a day or two to rest up or attend a medical appointment. On average, we have about 13 -15 hunters during the week, aged from 18-82.

There are a few recommendations in the BGMAC report relating to the preference point system for distributing tags. They could have serious consequences for our family hunt camp, and I am concerned they would lead to great divisiveness and the loss of valued family tradition and involvement in hunting.

• I am concerned that this process could be a disincentive to younger generations, just out of high school, or college/ university. They have little income and given they will have accumulated fewer ‘preference points’, unless the ‘modest application fee’ is truly modest, ie $20; they may not apply for a tag when they have no chance of getting a tag. Perhaps you might consider increasing the odds for those with more ‘preference points’, rather than allocate tags only to those with the most points. All applicants could have some chance of a tag, to increase the incentive for them to apply.
• Pricing tags separately from the draw could place a burden on our older hunters. I am assuming that to make up for the lower tag application price, the purchase of tags will be in excess of the current combined price to apply for a tag. If so, older hunters (who have more points based on the long time they have been hunting) who live on a fixed income may find it cost prohibitive to purchase their tag.
• Reducing the size of the hunting party to 10 would be devastating to our family hunt camp. How would we decide who gets to hunt? If we did our own draw, what if I get to hunt and not my husband? Each generation provides a necessary and valuable role in the hunt. I have discussed this with my family and we just couldn’t imagine excluding family, who are paid up members of the camp, from a hunt. I hope with all my heart that you will not adopt this recommendation.
• Further, if we had 15 hunters and 2 tags, when one tag is filled, will 5 members have to be excluded from hunting for the rest of the week? How could we possibly decide who has to stay home?

Thank you for considering these comments. I hope they can influence the decision and ensure that future generations will be a part of this family hunt camp, passing along knowledge of and love of the land, of self-sufficiency, and Canadian tradition.