So why are none of us Hunters talking about the 30 x 30 Intiative?

[Ardent]

Sure did, another case of those with a smattering of the information thinking they understand it. My territory, not my business, was sold to Raincoast as I was surrounded by the territories they already owned. Half my business disappeared with an email in 2017 when the grizzly hunt was closed, and the remaining half shrunk at pen strokes as my quotas for other species were cut. My home was mortgaged to own it, I was getting legislated out and at odds with the band locally, and the future wasn’t bright on the coast politically for commercial hunting. No hunting group or individual was willing to put up the money to keep non-resident hunting active in the area. Ever been in that position with your family’s home on the line?

As I’ve said before, the last offer came as I was at a cross roads, sinking most of a million on principle isn’t financially in my cards, it sure seems a popular concept on the internet for those with no stake however. The timing for my family was good, having seen the inside of the hunting industry for a half dozen years I wasn’t sad to go back to hunting with family and leaving the territory to just resident hunters and the band. The members here have little in common with much of the high rolling clientele in the hunting industry despite the prevalent assumption all hunters are the same, the more successful we became the more the clientele shifted to the lawyers and old money with jets seeking to kill something to increase social standing and gain life stories.

And again, yes the world is warming, the problem isn’t that it’s happening, it’s that it’s happening so fast, at a rate a human lifetime can note. That’s absurd. Far more concerning to me than climate change is the rate we’re destroying wilderness to “development”, we’re losing it at a pace worldwide that means we’ve got a mass extinction rolling that fits right in with the end of the dinosaurs. Trouble is, as humans we don’t live long enough to think much of it. It’s spooky when at 40, I’ve seen herds disappear and areas that were wild fully developed, in the Amazon, Africa, and at home. The “everything’s fine” crowd haven’t looked around much.

 

[MiG25]

I have a challenge for anyone, find an actual weather station that shows the period from 2000-2022 is warmer than 1900-1922. Or even better warmer than 1920-1942.

 

[blakeyboy]

It’s a lot to unpack. If you’re unable to unpack that much that’s a ‘you problem’. It doesn’t mean that much doesn’t need unpacking. We've been misled and lied to our whole lives. Proof is in the direction we’re headed. The wrong way. It’s never been easier to connect the dots and start unpacking all this. They count on it being too overwhelming and too much for our minds to accept and handle. Well too bad, so get your heads wrapped around the scale of this, yes it’s way bigger than most can comfortably unpack. As I said, if you can handle 3 months to 1 year of significant emotional and mental trauma as all this sinks in...you will be fine. 95% of us can get through it. 5% of you will be lost to the programming forever. Lessons learned from the Germans after ww2.

We’re off in the ditch looking at the weeds here discussing too many of the topics trying discredit whatever message makes you uncomfortable. Well one group was correct the past three years about every single step of what happened. Marinate on that. Don’t get lost in the ditch. Marinate on the 7 decades of climate hoaxes.

Some of you are doing your level best to get lost in the bullst1t when the answers are right in front of you. You’re running, cowards. What’s that diagnosis for those who defend their oppressors called? Something like that is happening here. Let go folks, the truth is now crashing down all around you, it’s massive in scale, it’s going to test your ability to cope, but you’re not alone, we will be alright, take this head on, it’s the only way to go now. Face your fears and rise or forget them an run. It’s time to pick a lane. And it’s 100% your journey. No one can take the walk for you. You cannot get someone out of a cult, you can only help them to the edge of the water, you get out of the cult by taking the swim yourself.

 

[hors555]

The “everything’s fine” crowd haven’t looked around much.

Exactly this...on that point, even if you find climate change to be of questionable concern, the benefits of protected areas extend far beyond the potential mitigation of climate change.

 

[hors555]

I have a challenge for anyone, find an actual weather station that shows the period from 2000-2022 is warmer than 1900-1922. Or even better warmer than 1920-1942.

There would be plenty of examples available showing both colder and warmer trends. Single weather stations really do not mean anything in the context of a changing global climate.

...on that note, I'm not sure what we should do about climate change or of it's "realistically" within our ability to control (we should for sure be preparing). But for damn sure it is real.

 

[MiG25]

There would be plenty of examples available showing both colder and warmer trends. Single weather stations really do not mean anything in the context of a changing global climate.

...on that note, I'm not sure what we should do about climate change or of it's "realistically" within our ability to control (we should for sure be preparing). But for damn sure it is real.

Should be easy then to find a Weather Station that shows 2000-2023 is warmer than 1900-1922 or 1920-1942.

Science ya know is measurable.

 

[hors555]

Should be easy then to find a Weather Station that shows 2000-2023 is warmer than 1900-1922 or 1920-1942.

Science ya know is measurable.

You're right, it would be easy. I dont see the point, but if you're that curious you really should have a look.

 

[blakeyboy]

Exactly this...on that point, even if you find climate change to be of questionable concern, the benefits of protected areas extend far beyond the potential mitigation of climate change.

First off the ‘everything is fine crowd’ was hilarious. What an epic gaslight. Um, it’s we who are telling you everything is the opposite of fine lol. Man, we have a loooong way to go here. Secondly, no one will argue against looking after the environment and wildlife. What is being educated here is not that, 30x30 is easily exposed agenda because it’s using at its core another climate hoax to drive it. It’s just a stepping stone for control and power, not for the animals and environment, that’s just how they sell it to us and our gullible azzes just keep gobbling it up.

We will all get behind real conservation efforts. Everything is not fine. Try to keep up.

 

[MiG25]

You're right, it would be easy. I dont see the point, but if you're that curious you really should have a look.

You don't see the point of measuring if it is actually warmer. Sounds "sciencey".

 

[hors555]

First off the ‘everything is fine crowd’ was hilarious. What an epic gaslight. Um, it’s we who are telling you everything is the opposite of fine lol. Man, we have a loooong way to go here. Secondly, no one will argue against looking after the environment and wildlife. What is being educated here is not that, 30x30 is easily exposed agenda because it’s using at its core another climate hoax to drive it. It’s just a stepping stone for control and power, not for the animals and environment, that’s just how they sell it to us and our gullible azzes just keep gobbling it up.

We will all get behind real conservation efforts. Everything is not fine. Try to keep up.

Of course, it is us unenlightened folks who are not keeping up. Helpful commentary.

I've yet to see any evidence of the nefarious nature of this 30x30 enacted in Canadian law. As I'm sure you are aware, whatever may happen on the international stage doesn't mean anything without Canadian laws to back it up. ANY existing long term protected areas are being used to calculate this 30% target, this is just building on whats already in place in Canada and around the world. At the end of the day it will simply be more protected areas like we already have. Open to any evidence you might have to suggest this isn't the case.

Do you not agree protected areas have value? If so, why does it matter what the government of the day says their reasons are for promoting new ones? The selection of high value areas is a whole other topic, but is always an issue when selecting areas.

 

[hors555]

You don't see the point of measuring if it is actually warmer. Sounds "sciencey".

Ha, let me be clear here - I don't see the point of finding examples to show you. There are plenty out there. Weather data over long time series exists from stations all over the world.

 

[MiG25]

Ha, let me be clear here - I don't see the point of finding examples to show you. There are plenty out there. Weather data over long time series exists from stations all over the world.

Show me one. Or am I just to believe? Show me real evidence that 2000-2023 is warmer than 1900-1922 or 1920-1942. You won't because you can't because it isn't.

 

[hors555]

Show me one. Or am I just to believe? Show me real evidence that 2000-2023 is warmer than 1900-1922 or 1920-1942. You won't because you can't because it isn't.

So others are supposed to do your research for you? I think maybe you need to look into it yourself, you may learn something.

I know the average air temperatures in most areas of where I live have increased over the last 100 years, because I have looked it up before.

More to my point though, single monitoring stations tell you nothing about the global climate.

If you want to debate about the reasons the earth is getting warmer, or how effectively it can be mitigated, sure. There really is no debate on IF it is getting warmer.

 

[MiG25]

So others are supposed to do your research for you? I think maybe you need to look into it yourself, you may learn something.

I know the average air temperatures in most areas of where I live have increased over the last 100 years, because I have looked it up before.

More to my point though, single monitoring stations tell you nothing about the global climate.

If you want to debate about the reasons the earth is getting warmer, or how effectively it can be mitigated, sure. There really is no debate on IF it is getting warmer.

You're the one making a claim that you have zero evidence for and presenting it as fact. If "Global Warming" is true, single weather stations will tell the Tale. Instead you say they tell you nothing.

 

[hors555]

You're the one making a claim that you have zero evidence for and presenting it as fact. If "Global Warming" is true, single weather stations will tell the Tale. Instead you say they tell you nothing.

So if I showed you a single weather station that had increasing temperatures over the last 100 years, you would then believe global warming is "true"?

You really don't see how flawed that is?

I dont consider myself a fanatic about any of this...and I don't think we should take drastic action on climate change if there is no benefit. Average temperatures are increasing though, that is one of the only things with very little nuance in this whole topic.

 

[MiG25]

So if I showed you a single weather station that had increasing temperatures over the last 100 years, you would then believe global warming is "true"?

You really don't see how flawed that is?

I dont consider myself a fanatic about any of this...and I don't think we should take drastic action on climate change if there is no benefit. Average temperatures are increasing though, that is one of the only things with very little nuance in this whole topic.

No, to show Global Warming you need to show evidence of Global Warming. Let's call it "proof", if average temperatures are increasing it should be a slam dunk to show it.

But I do challenger you (or any of the Faithful to show one weather station that shows 2000-2022 is warmer than 1900-1922 or 1920-1942. Bet ya can't.

 

[blakeyboy]

Of course, it is us unenlightened folks who are not keeping up. Helpful commentary.

I've yet to see any evidence of the nefarious nature of this 30x30 enacted in Canadian law. As I'm sure you are aware, whatever may happen on the international stage doesn't mean anything without Canadian laws to back it up. ANY existing long term protected areas are being used to calculate this 30% target, this is just building on whats already in place in Canada and around the world. At the end of the day it will simply be more protected areas like we already have. Open to any evidence you might have to suggest this isn't the case.

Do you not agree protected areas have value? If so, why does it matter what the government of the day says their reasons are for promoting new ones? The selection of high value areas is a whole other topic, but is always an issue when selecting areas.

You ever hunted any alberta 400 zones? Some of the hardest to hunt land in our province if not the hardest and why many won’t...wanna know why? It’s chalk full of protected zones, sanctuaries, parks, corridors, even some trails within huntable areas. It’s a minefield from the USA border to the willmore, and you best have your maps, regs, gps with purchased mapping specific to all these boundaries to make sure you keep it shiny side up and not end up with a court date. The list of all this protected country and the square km’s would shut this argument down in about 1 second.

You, or they, making it sound like it’s the only wildlife and environment protection initiative we’ve ever implemented is laughable. Perspective is totally lost here in how much country is out there and how much we’ve already protected. This 30x30 is only sold as more of the same, it isn’t coming from the right place, it’s about something else entirely and is pushed on us through deception and lies. It’s nefarious as I bolded in an earlier post of the direct mission statement for the initiative as based on a climate change hoax. That’s how you know. It’s the most basic dot you can connect in this world after 70 years of these same lies.

Don’t like my delivery?, well did you read the entire thread and digest for a minute before you jumped in on one leg?

 

[hors555]

You ever hunted any alberta 400 zones? Some of the hardest to hunt land in our province if not the hardest and why many won’t...wanna know why? It’s chalk full of protected zones, sanctuaries, parks, corridors, even some trails within huntable areas. It’s a minefield from the USA border to the willmore, and you best have your maps, regs, gps with purchased mapping specific to all these boundaries to make sure you keep it shiny side up and not end up with a court date. The list of all this protected country and the square km’s would shut this argument down in about 1 second.

You, or they, making it sound like it’s the only wildlife and environment protection initiative we’ve ever implemented is laughable. Perspective is totally lost here in how much country is out there and how much we’ve already protected. This 30x30 is only sold as more of the same, it isn’t coming from the right place, it’s about something else entirely and is pushed on us through deception and lies. It’s nefarious as I bolded in an earlier post of the direct mission statement for the initiative as based on a climate change hoax. That’s how you know. It’s the most basic dot you can connect in this world after 70 years of these same lies.

Don’t like my delivery?, well did you read the entire thread and digest for a minute before you jumped in on one leg?

I do believe that I made mention of this 30% building off of what's already there. You can be sure they are including existing protected areas in the calculations to meet 30%. It's a bit of a smoke and mirrors show by the gov in a way.

So, in no way did I say that its the only initiative ever implemented, quite the opposite actually.

I think there's lots to be upset about in this day and age...but would actually love to see more protected areas where I hunt. They are the only places we have mature timber left.

 

[blakeyboy]

I do believe that I made mention of this 30% building off of what's already there. You can be sure they are including existing protected areas in the calculations to meet 30%. It's a bit of a smoke and mirrors show by the gov in a way.

So, in no way did I say that its the only initiative ever implemented, quite the opposite actually.

I think there's lots to be upset about in this day and age...but would actually love to see more protected areas where I hunt. They are the only places we have mature timber left.

A lot of what you said I wouldn’t argue with, nobody loves the environment and wildlife more than hunters. Conservation is what we do and we put our money where our mouth is. Most of the people giving lip service on the subject couldn’t name half the animals in our beautiful province let alone know them intimately and spend the amount of time we do with them.

This particular topic/agenda though has fack all to do with true conservation. This is what is being discussed and exposed here.

“30 by 30 (or 30x30) is a worldwide initiative for governments to designate 30% of Earth's land and ocean area as protected areas by 2030.[1][2] The target was proposed by a 2019 article in Science Advances, "A Global Deal for Nature: Guiding principles, milestones, and targets", highlighting the need for expanded nature conservation efforts to mitigate climate change.[3][4]”

As soon as they use that as a sales pitch after 70 years of lies and financial and freedom thievery from us it’s a really easy dot to connect. The agenda is instantly exposed as soon as that is their selling point.

 

[hors555]

A lot of what you said I wouldn’t argue with, nobody loves the environment and wildlife more than hunters. Conservation is what we do and we put our money where our mouth is. Most of the people giving lip service on the subject couldn’t name half the animals in our beautiful province let alone know them intimately and spend the amount of time we do with them.

This particular topic/agenda though has fack all to do with true conservation. This is what is being discussed and exposed here.

“30 by 30 (or 30x30) is a worldwide initiative for governments to designate 30% of Earth's land and ocean area as protected areas by 2030.[1][2] The target was proposed by a 2019 article in Science Advances, "A Global Deal for Nature: Guiding principles, milestones, and targets", highlighting the need for expanded nature conservation efforts to mitigate climate change.[3][4]”

I hear ya, and am sure we probably agree on more things hunting related than disagree.

All im saying is often those international agreements mean next to nothing. In this case I think the gov was just trying to look good on the big stage (its all appearances after all) while simply taking credit for and building on what was already happening in canada... if I'm wrong about that I'm certainly open to changing my mind.