Why no translocation?
We’re told that Kimberley City Council had a letter against translocation from the Toronto-based Animal Alliance of Canada (AAC) led by Liz White. In the past, the AAC was in favour of translocation and donated money to help. Readers weren’t told how many letters supported translocation and reduction of the deer population.
It’s worth noting that in the last federal election, the political arm of the AAC, the Animal Protection Party of Canada (also led by Liz White), received less votes than the satirical Rhinoceros Party. Both parties were under 0.40% in ridings where they had candidates. Although, neither has credibility, council cited a letter from the AAC in partial support of its decision not to translocate deer this year.
Our Urban Deer Advisory Committee (UDAC), after years of studying reports and consulting with a variety of experts, recently updated & revised the 2010 urban deer threshold down to 30. They didn’t pull that figure out of the air. But council voted against their advice.
The recent deer count said we have over 70 deer in town. And in the 11 Jan. article, Kimberley’s CAO said, “You can’t throw a snowball without hitting [a deer].” In the later article, he says 125 deer in town should be our maximum, despite the updated UDAC recommendation. Where would one see such a concentration of deer in the wild? Hunters say they don’t.
Our mayor also quotes the 2010 number of 125. He says he doesn’t want Kimberley to take on the province’s responsibility. He worries that, “It’s a slippery slope … taking responsibility [for those deer].” Yet property damage, the threats to people and the danger posed to pets by mule deer continue.
Two councillors, citing public safety. spoke in clearly in favour of translocation and noted that it’s been successful in the past. Then each voted against it. Why? By voting against translocation, these two councillors let the UDAC & the community down.
Why didn’t city council take responsibility to protect Kimberley’s citizens, their property and their pets? Tell the province you are assuming their responsibility, “without prejudice to further claim.”
It’s now left it up to your citizens to bear the costs and pick up the pieces.
Election financial disclosure
The financial disclosure statements regarding municipal campaigns are now online, albeit in error.
There was a “pesky” little part of the form which wasn’t clear and I was “bullied” by Elections BC.
“Reused Signs” became an issue and I was “directed” over the phone to have my reused signs assessed at Home Depot in Cranbrook because I had not reported them as a campaign expense.
I don’t take orders over the phone so I hung up.
My amended form now includes signs which I paid for and disclosed when I ran for DNV Council in 2005.
Other candidates in Kimberley put up their “reused signs” and they are not disclosed. I wonder how many across our province have inadvertently neglected to file the fact that they have “re-used” signs.
I find this to be incompetence by Elections BC.
City of Kimberley 2018