By careful research and analysis, it has been shown that with a family of four — husband, wife and two children — both parents must be working and earning at least 15 dollars an hour, just to be able to afford the most basic of necessities. Such wages for both parents do not allow for extras, like supper in a restaurant or money for children’s sports activities where dues are required to be paid. Music lessons and holidays are also out of the question for such a family.
“And Area” doesn’t want Wasa And Area OCP
The residents of Skookumchuk, Premier Lake, Sheep Creek and TaTa Creek — known as “And Area” in the Wasa and Area proposed OCP — do not want to be zoned in the Wasa Lake land use plan. We feel we have enough regulations!
The Crown land all around us has many regulations and rules to protect the land, forests, streams and wildlife. If these regulations and rules are good enough for the Provincial government’s Crown land then they should be good enough for private landowners.
Now, Wasa is going to be allowed secondary suites and another large campground, and there is another application for a gravel pit across the higway from the Wasa Sloughs and Cameron Pond. I feel and wonder if the onerous and costly ESAs and riparian laws in “And Area” are an attempt by the RDEK to mitigate the things being allowed in “Wasa” and to soothe their consciences. These ESAs and riparian laws will reduce the value of our properties by 60 per cent, and we were told that if we can’t sell our properties, we can give them to the RDEK or another government agency. Now I’m sure the RDEK directors would be happy to do the same with their properties; that they, like us, worked all their lives to purchase and perhaps to have something to leave their heirs, or sell to live out their “golden” years.
The other “wonderful” plan they have, before we sell at whatever we can get for our properties, is to put a restrictive covenant on the property, which also would have an adverse effect on any sale of said properties.
The Director of Area B, Stan Doehle, respected the wishes of his constituents. Hopefully the Director of Area E listens to the people of “And Area,” 94 of whom signed a petition to have this travesty stopped.
Re: Grizzly Hunt Ban Aims at Cities
In the attempt to drive a wedge between city dwellers and rural dwellers (all of whom are presumably hunters) Tom Fletcher overlooked something. An Insights West poll conducted this year found that 74 per cent of residents in five rural ridings opposed a grizzly trophy hunt.
The suggestion that the BC Liberals increased last year’s grizzly tags because bear numbers had increased also falls on its face.
In March the US trophy hunting group Safari Club International made a $60,000 donation to GOABC to help promote the grizzly trophy hunt; more tags means more money. The same group has recently written to Minister Donaldson and Deputy Tim Sheldon to express their outrage regarding a grizzly ban. The thrill of the kill is a very powerful emotion.
In bringing up the wolf kill, Mr. Fletcher is suggesting that urban dwellers only oppose it to “feel good.” He should do his own research. Data confirms that the mass killing of wolves by gunning them down from planes has resulted in no gains in caribou populations.
Quoting BC Liberal John Rustad regarding black rhinos in Africa as an example of scientific wildlife management is cringe-worthy considering the International Union for Conservation of Nature last year declared the West African Black Rhinoceros extinct.
BC wildlife belongs to all British Columbians, and we’re ready for a change from the kill first, ask questions later, fairy tale induced, wildlife policies of the past 16 years. This is a welcome step, and a good beginning.