|
June 7, 2002
Mandatory hunter training
faces strong opposition
Designing a land claim
compliant wildlife law
KIRSTEN
MURPHY
A suggestion to introduce
mandatory hunter education programs throughout Nunavut faced strong opposition
last week during a public meeting to discuss changes to the Wildlife Act.
On May 30 in Iqaluit, members
of the public had their say before a seven-person consultation panel made up
of representatives from the department of sustainable development, Nunavut Tunngavik
Inc. and the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board.
They were asked to review
14 recommendations drafted by panel members, who make up the Wildlife Legislation
Working Group.
The current act, created
in the early 1970s, was inherited from the Northwest Territories on April 1,
1999.
The Nunavut version of
the Wildlife Act must comply with the Nunavut land claims agreement, whose constitutionally
protected provisions guarantee Inuit harvesting rights and spell out the role
that Inuit must play in wildlife management.
"Many of these provisions
conflict with provisions of the current Wildlife Act, according to a GN discussion
paper on the development of a new act.
"The NLCA defines
the harvesting rights of Inuit and clarifies the extent to which the GN and
the NWMB can restrict or limit harvesting by Inuit. The act, therefore, requires
updating in order to comply with the NLCA."
Similar meetings are taking
place all over Nunavut. A draft act should be tabled in the legislative assembly
next year.
Part of the public consultation
process involves discussing the 14 separate issues point by point. The consultations
have run into the early morning hours in some communities.
Hunter training program?
The first of the working
groups recommendations, a mandatory hunter-education program in Nunavut,
started a fierce debate in Iqaluit.
Every Canadian territory
and province has a mandatory hunter-training program except Nunavut.
The consultation committee
did not say Nunavut must adopt a mandatory hunter-education program. It simply
points out that other jurisdictions have.
Iqaluits Madeleine
Redfern said the Nunavut land claims agreement says no obstacles should impede
a beneficiarys hunting rights.
"Hunter education
should not be mandatory. There should be no obstacles to those rights. Thats
completely unallowed," Redfern said.
"Hunter education
needs to be established for wildlife conservation, but those of us who live
on the land already know wildlife conservation," one man added.
Another contentious topic
was residency requirements for non-Inuit.
Current legislation says
non-Inuit residents must live in Nunavut for two years before they are allowed
to hunt big game. "That is the most restrictive requirement in Canada,"
the discussion paper says.
Most jurisdictions have
a three-month to 12-month waiting period.
Even after the two-year
waiting period, a new resident must hunt with an Inuit guide for another two
years.
The working group asked
people to consider a request for an exemption from the current two-year period
by RCMP members, members of the clergy and Nunavik Inuit.
Winston Fillatre said he
supports lowering the residency restriction if it increases employment opportunities
for Inuit guides. However, he emphatically denounced making residency exceptions
for RCMP officers, clergy and armed forces officers.
"They should not have
any special considerations," Fillatre said.
Mathew Alainga supported
Fillatre. "We have to abide by their [RCMP] rules, they should listen to
ours," he said.
Iqaluit resident Rebekah
Williams, who is also the MLA for Quttiktuq and the wife of Iqaluit city councillor
and outfitter Glen Williams, said most clergy are paid minimal salaries and
should be allowed to hunt.
Redfern returned to the
microphone several times. She said the land claims agreement supersedes any
government act, thus creating a two-tier system: one for Inuit and one for non-Inuit.
"Defining things like
residency requirements is up to the [regional wildlife organizations] and the
[hunters and trappers organizations] under the NLCA. I dont want to see
it defined in the Wildlife Act," she said.
The meeting finished at
11:30 p.m. with six issues still to be discussed. The next meeting has not yet
been scheduled.
Joe Tigullaraq, a panel
member representing the department of sustainable development, admitted that
consensus is not always possible.
Anyone unable to attend
the meetings may add their comments toll-free at
(866) 887-5927 or via e-mail
at wildlifeact@gov.nu.ca.
|