The Métis Interim Harvest Agreement:
A conservation catastrophe?

    In early fall of 2004, the Alberta Government implemented the Interim Métis Harvest Agreement (IMHA) effectively giving almost 70,000 Métis, once in possession of their Métis card, unaccountable year round Alberta hunting and fishing rights. To date almost 32,000 Métis secured their Métis Nation Card. Alberta is the only province to date to open the Métis hunting flood gates in response to the Powley case in Ontario. What a knee-jerk reaction! I think any Alberta resident, whether they are a non-hunter, resident hunter, outfitter or Métis can see that this has the potential of a conservation nightmare for Alberta and its wildlife. 

     It is important to know that there are two distinct Métis groups in Alberta. The Alberta Métis Federation consists of eight settlements with a total of 1.26 million acres and approximately 8,000 people. These folks have had exclusive year round harvesting privileges on their settlements for many years now. The IMHA has now extended these privileges to all lands outside of their settlements, which amounts to the same lands that Treaty Indians have access to. 

    The Métis Nation of Alberta (MNA), comprises the remainder who identify themselves as Métis and who may or may not live on one of the eight Métis settlements. They are doctors, lawyers, farmers, outfitters, Fish and Wildlife officers, politicians, teachers, etc. Up to this point, any of these people who hunted or fished were required to do so under the rules and regulations pertaining to all Albertans. Now, they too can harvest fish and wildlife year round with essentially the same limitations as Treaty Indians. 

    The Alberta Government’s response to the Powley decision has been very quick, and subsequently, there is some confusion with many of the particulars. However, there is no doubt that this agreement is a very clear step backwards in wildlife management. This not only hurts our outfitting industry, but more importantly, hunting in general and most definitely the fisheries and wildlife resource. In my mind, it is also another step backwards for aboriginal peoples. 

    How will this agreement impact wildlife management? Consider this. In the 1800’s, a mere 100 years ago, aboriginals, Métis, white settlers and everyone else had unlimited hunting rights, which ultimately wiped out (among other things) over 60 million buffalo. In 1905, when Alberta became a province, wildlife management regulations were put in place to prevent the harvesting practices which had seriously devastated wildlife populations. The human population of Alberta in 1905 was roughly equal to the current aboriginal and Métis population of present day Alberta – around 140,000. How is it that 140,000 Albertans 100 years ago figured out the need for well managed wildlife populations, but three million residents in 2005 can’t? 

    The IMHA will now give almost 70,000 Métis people the same harvest “privileges” as the 80,000 Treaty Indian people. No one knows how many of those Métis hunted and fished previously as licensed sportsmen. However, the six regional offices of the MNA have been flooded with applications for Métis status ever since the Supreme Court decision was announced. It is very likely that a significant number of licensed sports hunters and fishers will now drop out of that category and become part of the unknown number of hunters and fishers who harvest unknown quantities of fish and game. Unknown information in wildlife and fisheries management is bad! 

    Knowing how many hunters there are, how many days they spend hunting and for what species, success rates, etc. is key to good management. Nothing positive can come out of letting an unknown number of hunters take an unknown number of unknown species in Alberta’s backcountry. Resident hunters are licensed, surveyed, and proudly pay the price to make sure their wildlife is managed to be there for generations to come. They register their sheep, elk, grizzlies and lions to further aid the cause. As outfitters, we do that and more. We have to provide a daily activity report of all our 7,000 clients listing Wildlife Management Units hunted and game taken – every duck to every deer. The average allocation and licence cost for each of these 7,000 clients runs over $350 each and that money goes right back into the resource. I’d like to ask my Métis friends, you now have your right to hunt; will you treat that privilege with the responsibility it requires? 

    While the lack of accountability by Métis should be a huge concern to wildlife managers; their wisdom, concern, and knowledge has for the most part been silenced. You will likely hear nothing from them except the official government line. And to those who really care about fish and wildlife, this must be devastating. 

    As we all know, wildlife and fisheries management is hard enough when we know how many people are involved and what their harvests are. For years we have been struggling with the unknowns of the Treaty Indian harvest; we can now basically count on doubling that impact. How many animals or fish harvested? What sex? What area? This information, which is critical to proper wildlife management, is now significantly reduced. Licence revenue, which is already grossly inadequate for optimum wildlife management, is also reduced. The challenges to enforcement personnel as they attempt to deal with yet another group who don’t have to follow current wildlife management practices will be extremely frustrating. 

    As much as I believe this interim agreement will be bad for fish and wildlife, I also feel strongly that this cannot ultimately be in the best interests of the Métis peoples. Firstly, giving special privileges to one group or denying them to another does not foster tolerance. In fact, it creates the opposite. Encouraging Alberta Métis to walk away from participating in the current wildlife management strategies will not improve the public perception of the Métis nation, and, whether people are willing to admit this or not, this is indeed an issue. Secondly, to reinforce the concept that the Métis need special privileges in order to survive in society will only continue to prevent them from reaching their full potential. A child who is told that he does not have the ability to compete with his peers will usually prove that to be the case. People are more likely to be successful when they are challenged to do more, rather than encouraged to do less. 

   This whole issue is raising some serious points: The Alberta government has had to respond to the Powley decision. Is this the only alternative? Alberta has gone way beyond what any other province is doing. Why? 

   Will this indeed have a negative impact on fish and wildlife populations? Of course! 

    This has been promoted as a subsistence harvest. What exactly does that mean? Stories are already rolling in of questionable subsistence hunts. One confirmed story tells of an Edmonton oil field worker who headed to Grande Cache in early January, 2005, took not one but two 170 class rams and returned a day later. Is this subsistence hunting? 

    If Métis people get the right to hunt and fish like their Treaty Indian cousins, what about income tax exemption, free education, land claim settlements, health care benefits, etc. Are they next? 

    Although the agreement stresses that Métis harvests will employ the concept of conservation, (i.e. adhere to any government closures due to conservation) in essence, it means that only once a fishery or animal population is in a state of crisis will Métis people be prevented from hunting or fishing. Resident hunters and outfitters will lose our opportunity long before the Métis do in this agreement. Is this fair? 

    In 1989, the Métis Federation signed an Accord with the Alberta Government granting them title and jurisdiction over their land. It would be interesting to investigate what wildlife management strategies each settlement has implemented over the last 15 years and how effective they have been. 

    Every year, both spring and fall, I am humbled by a number of my clients who point out to me what a tremendous province we live in. They talk of wilderness, a plethora of landscapes, great species diversity, rivaling anything in North America. Clean air, clean water; I’m constantly reminded how lucky I am. I could not agree more. Isn’t it a pity in this day and age that all residents in Alberta (including Métis and Treaty Indian people) do not have the vision and appreciation for the resource that we have. Do we have to lose it before we appreciate what we had? Why on earth, in the 21st century, have we created an arrangement which encourages people to be less responsible to the resource, especially one they have historically been deeply dependent upon? 

    The Alberta Interim Métis Harvest Agreement reflects a society that is headed in the wrong direction. Let’s hope there is still time to turn it around. And there is a slim hope. The agreement is an interim agreement with the final document scheduled to be signed later this fall. Whether you’re a licensed hunter, a concerned Albertan or a Métis person, there is still time to build some serious responsibility into the agreement. Make your voice heard. MLAs need to hear it, the Fish and Wildlife Division needs to hear it and the board members of the Métis Nation really need to hear that with this right to hunt comes the responsibility to manage. We owe it to the future of Alberta’s wildlife!

Ryk Visscher is Past President of the Alberta 
Professional Outfitters Society.