100 Mile Free Press Thursday, March 26, 2015
www.100milefreepress.net
Opinion
A9
Reader dismisses minister Thomson's editorial To the editor: Re: (Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations) Minister Steve Thomson’s Guest Shot (page A8, March 12) about the fairness of his hunters harvest allocation. He quotes numbers of animals, which is contentious because there are several interpretations of the numbers in the policy. He attempts to rationalize it by reminding us we can hunt deer, elk (in some Management Unit
Regions) and black bears. A few years ago his Director of Wildlife included rabbits, grouse and other small game in his consolation list. There is no mention of moose because he gave 25 per cent of them away in this Region and ignored us when he made adjustments to his original plan during the public uproar. He is taking partial credit for the 20,000 new resident hunters in British Columbia, which is fair, and in his first paragraph he
expects the old policy will be put behind us and the new one will provide certainty. In that case, what will the registered lobbyists do to keep busy? There will likely be an endless number of other improvements they will want. Remember there will now be 102,000 hunters instead of 82,000 for them to worry about because some of the outfitters don’t like other hunters to be on their territories. They will likely want new
regulations to control all these residents and will lobby hard to get things like fewer draws, no spike fork seasons or any buck seasons and maintain existing road closures, etc. Minister Thomson outlines his appreciation for the resident hunters and his commitment to the viability of commercial hunting, and then goes on to emphasize his policy of resident priority (in words only). Genuine resident priority would look more like
how residents are treated in other neighbouring provinces and states. This policy change and the way it was done is one more example of the disrespect that the B.C. government has shown for its resident hunters over the last couple of decades. It is insulting to be taken for granted this way and it is not acceptable. Garth Lee 108 Mile Ranch
Retired engineer offers simple solutions To the editor: After reading and analyzing your three reports of the Cariboo Regional District’s (CRD) public meeting on Feb. 19, I have applied my 52 years of engineering, including: adjunct professor in the Faculty of Engineering, University of Alberta; and P.Eng. Manitoba, Alberta and British Columbia, to my analysis. I have been a property owner at the 108 Mile Ranch for 44 years. It is my professional opinion that capital expenditure of $2.8 million on Option A or $5.1 million on Option B are totally unnecessary. The test well into the north aquifer shows a manganese level double that of the existing well. The calculated water discharge of a well installation there, costing $115,000, would be far less than the existing pump’s capability of discharging a half million gallons per day. Director Al Richmond stated the CRD would be obliged to provide water to homes on a multi-home development on 108 Resort
T
property. An earlier, widely publicized proposal by the (then) Dubai owners of the 108 Resort of such a development never materialized – I very much doubt if it ever will. However, if it did, the solution would be to draw water from the emergency wells at 106 Mile and at Easzee Drive, and treat, as necessary, at the cost of the developer. Narrowing of service lines by a manganese
deposit is confined to homes within a small radius of the existing well. In these cases, a homeowner would install a bypass valve prior to a CRD operator vibrating the line with compressed air and manipulating the shutoff valve. The above simple solution; the north test well capped, and the health authorities satisfied with the current water quality, a
treatment plant is unnecessary. The existing well is capable of meeting the demands of future homes constructed within the boundaries of the CRD’s water supply area. Neil Duncan B.Sc., P.Eng. (ret’d.) 108 Mile Ranch
From one ‘soapboxer’ to another To the editor: Walter Box in his letter, headlined Reader defends Barnett on page A9 of the Feb. 25 Free Press, which criticizes my Feb. 4 letter to Donna Barnett regarding the re-allocation of animals between resident hunters and guide outfitters, has attempted to circumvent the issue.
While Donna’s assistant sent a response, Donna did not, nor has she to this day answered my question. Does she support the decision of the government regarding the re-allocation? The “lesson in math” was directed to Donna and the B.C. Liberal government that tried
to pass off the increase to guide outfitters as 10 per cent when in fact it was 50 per cent. The changes Mr. Box refers to as only involving 65 to 70 animals was a direct result of protests made to the government by people such as myself. Regarding the “get off your
soapbox” comment, the last time I checked speaking from a soapbox was a legitimate form of protest in Canada Mr. Box, which you clearly understand as shown by the contents of your letter.
Making real progress on poverty to cover their child care and transportation And then there was the recent decision costs for an approved training program of to end the claw-back of parental child up to one year. support payments from income assistance Medical and child care costs will then be payments. covered for up to a year after training, to The province has for many years run allow a transition to employment. a costly child maintenance enforcement Approved training means program to track down (mostly) training for jobs that are deadbeat dads and force them identified as in demand, to pay at least a token amount requiring high school and to support their children. Now occupation-specific training when they pay child support that can be completed in a to a single parent on income year or less. They include assistance, they will at least have retail sales, general office work the satisfaction of knowing the and assistance jobs in health children actually receive the services. extra benefit. Another overdue policy These harsh, historic policies Tom change is to double the were built around a philosophy Fletcher allowable earnings for all that welfare is a temporary income assistance recipients last resort to be withdrawn as from $200 to $400 a month. This gives soon as some other source of income is people a chance to improve identified. That is a valid, if unfashionable, their circumstances by taking whatever position to take on behalf of working part-time or casual work they can taxpayers who pay for all this, but it only manage, without having that little income makes sense if the income assistance cut from their already meagre welfare recipient has a realistic option. cheques. For those who are already in the entry-
BC VIEWS
he B.C. Liberal government has made its most significant moves in decades to address the needs of some of the province’s poorest people. The largest financial commitment is for a new program to help single parents escape from the welfare trap. There are 16,000 single parents in British Columbia receiving provincial income assistance or disability payments, most of them are women. Even if they could find an entry-level job, it wouldn’t pay enough to cover the child care they would need to go to work. Worst of all, the current system requires that if they enrol in training, they lose their income assistance, including dental and extended medical care for themselves and their children. That is the welfare trap, one of the most perverse government policies to have survived into our supposedly enlightened modern era. The new program takes effect in September. It will not only continue income assistance payments when single parents enrol in skills training, it promises
Wayne Fox Lac la Hache
level job market, the minimum wage goes up 20 cents an hour in September, from $10.25 to $10.45. This is the beginning of an annual review that will tie the wage to the consumer price index. A paltry sum, to be sure, but anyone who still thinks jacking the minimum wage up to $15 an hour is a magic solution that won’t cost some entry-level jobs is clinging to a socialist dream world. • I have been contacted by several low-income seniors who read my recent column on B.C.’s Seniors’ Advocate. They were asking where to find out if they are eligible for support programs such as the SAFER rent subsidy, assistance for Medical Services Plan premiums, property tax deferment and grants to help with home modifications for disabilities. I apologize for this oversight. One place to start is the Seniors’ Advocate tollfree information line, 1-877-952-3181, weekdays 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Tom Fletcher is legislature reporter and columnist for Black Press. Twitter: @ tomfletcherbc E-mail: tfletcher@blackpress. ca