Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as everybody knows, I seconded this motion when it first came forward to this bill. I would like to thank Mr. Dent for all the work that he has done in bringing this private Member's bill forward. He has done an awful lot of research and did a very good job in presenting it to us.

I was also on the committee that went around the North doing public consultation on this bill. I know that in Yellowknife, there was a large turnout here for comments on the bill. It certainly was not totally negative. There were a number of groups represented in support of this bill.

I have also been talking to a number of people in Hay River, where I come from. I must say that for the people who have come forward and talked to me on this bill, I would have to say that it was pretty well 50/50 as far as supporters of this bill and people against it.

However, some of the things I have heard on the negative side of this is they did not want it to happen because what it would do to them -- and I am talking here about resident hunters who have already been here for over two years -- their opposition to it was just the fact that if more hunters come along and the game population drops down, they would be affected by it, so a not-in-my-backyard type of thing, I guess.

I have other problems with the opposition to this bill for reasons of the number of hunters that it would create and the number of animals that would be taken from it. There are things happening in the Territories that when I look at it, especially when you go in the Norman Wells area and you see plane loads of hunters getting off all dressed in camouflage outfits, going in simply because they have a lot of money and are willing to pay, can go in the bush and kill game, pretty well guaranteed that they are going to get some of our best wildlife. I guess, to the same extent, resident hunters or non-resident hunters that want to pay large sums of money can go out, pay an outfitter, go out and hunt.

So to me, that does not tell me that it is a case of not having enough game or that more hunters are going to deplete our game populations. It simply tells me that if you have the money, you can do it, whereas a resident who has been here for whatever the required amount of time is, if he cannot afford to do it, then he is going to be left out. That creates a problem for me.

When we say that conservation is a big issue, I think conservation is something that we are responsible for. RWED or the aboriginal groups that are controlling game on their lands, if they have the proper quotas in place and the people to enforce the amount of hunting that is going on to supply the data, how much game is being taken and what is sustainable, then I think that is our area. I think the government should have good data as to what game we have and how much game is being harvested.

I have been in the Territories for 32 years and I have done some hunting in the Territories but I do not hunt anymore. I think what Mr. Dent has said about the number of resident hunters decreasing, I go along with that because I have seen it. I have also seen though that the game populations have been dropping, especially in our area. I can remember I rode on trains for just about 30 years between High Level and Hay River. We used to see an awful lot more game than what we do now, especially woodland caribou.

At the same time, I would not say that the reason that the game is no longer there or the game populations have dropped, I cannot rightfully say that those reasons are all because of resident hunters. As a matter of fact, I know that is not the reason, or not totally the reason.

We also heard from people that have presented to us that you cannot manage wildlife. Wildlife manages itself. All we can do is put regulations in place and make sure that the amount of harvesting that we are allowing, from whoever it is, whether it is a resident or a non-resident or aboriginal, if we are allowing over-hunting, then we will deplete the game that we have. As far as the management of it, they will manage themselves.

I know there is a concern about saying if we reduce the residency to six months or a year, that it is going to create a huge influx of people coming just to hunt. I just do not see that. Right across the country, if you go, you will see the number of hunters are dropping, especially in the younger generation. There is not the interest in hunting that there used to be. It is the same in Nova Scotia. There is still a lot of game down there but there just are not the hunters that there used to be.

As far as people coming into camps that are coming on eight-month jobs, I do not see where they would have any chance of being a resident anyway. There is still criteria they have to meet to become residents. I just do not see where that would be a big thing.

I know though that when we encourage people to come to the North and work here, we do not hesitate to encourage them to buy houses and pay taxes and contribute to the economy and the Territory, so I tend to think that if we penalize them for a year by making them wait to hunt for a year or so, that would be long enough. I think that as Canadians, we all have the right to move around and enjoy wherever we choose to settle down or live, whatever there is to offer there. I think we have a right to enjoy some of that.

Maybe six months is a little bit short. I would be quite willing to support a one-year residency clause. If that amendment comes through, I would be supporting that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.