Thank you. There is another "class" of hunters and trappers who are excluded from the existing policy because of the restriction on alternate income included in the policy. Telephone submissions received from the Gwich'in Hunters' and Trappers' Association summarized this problem succinctly:
"I do not think anybody is going out in the bush to plan on having an accident. But, according to the criteria now, preceding the accident you have to have been trapping 12 months of year. In this day and age, there are a lot of people who work a little bit in town, get a little unemployment insurance, live off the land a little bit, really it kind of fouls them up. In a lot of cases you cannot just do one thing."
In the instance of someone who was primarily a trapper, but worked for his brother building a HAP house for a few weeks in the fall, for example, the policy would preclude workers' compensation coverage because he would not fit the definition of a person "principally engaged" in trapping. This, again, appears to be contrary to the understanding Mr. McLaughlin outlined to the House in 1987 and does not reflect the reality of contemporary life in communities of the Northwest Territories.
Motion To Accept Recommendation 21, Carried
Therefore, I move that this committee recommends, that for the purpose of subsection 10.(1) of the Workers' Compensation Act, the definition of aboriginal harvesters "who are principally engaged in hunting, trapping or fishing for a livelihood" should reflect the realities of working and living in northern communities.