Feedback re: NDP Grizz Hunt Changes - NOV. 2 Deadline! Read more: http://huntingandf

IronNoggin

IronNoggin

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Location
Port Alberni, Vancouver Island
Surprisingly enough, the BC Coalition Government is actually asking for input regarding it's suggested changes to the way the grizzly hunt is conducted here in BC.

Specifically, they are seeking input on two policy documents outlining the proposed regulation changes required to implement the ban.

As part of the consultation, input is being sought on:

Changes to manage the ban in hunting areas that overlap the Great Bear Rainforest;
Changes that will prohibit the possession of "trophy" grizzly bear parts;
Changes that will manage prohibited grizzly bear parts;
Changes to prohibit the trafficking of grizzly bear parts; and,
New reporting requirements for taxidermists.

The request can be found here: http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/

And comments can be submitted here: grizzly.bear@gov.bc.ca

The consultation period will conclude on November 2, 2017. TOMORROW!!

The anti's have flooded the system at this point so we best be getting our point of view in fast!!

Cheers,
Nog
 
My name is Matt Stabler, and I am a retired Marine Biologist who has lived and worked within BC for over two decades now.

I am writing to express my concern over the proposed closing of the grizzly bear hunts both within the so-called great bear rainforest and elsewhere within BC. The background papers you provided well indicate that these closures are not being imposed for conservation purposes, and that hunt as it is currently managed is indeed sustainable. That leaves the inescapable conclusion that our latest government has made the leap of abandoning science for the purposes of wildlife and wildland management in favor of emotion. This abandonment of the very principles of wildlife management is obviously being undertaken in order to cater to the ill-informed desires of the new government’s largely southern and urban voting base.

The abandonment of proven wildlife management principles is neither logical nor progressive, and in itself presents a threat to the continuing success of scientific based management within our home Province. For this, and many other reasons I am adamantly opposed to the closure of the hunts Province wide.

I also strongly disagree with the ill-conceived notion of forcing hunters to leave the head, hide and paws of grizzlies in the field. Such an act is extremely wasteful, abhorrent in fact to most who hunt and those in management. Introducing the requirement of meat retrieval already addresses the “trophy hunt” concern, and is something that hunters themselves initiated some time ago. The leaders of the new government stood by our side in the allocation dispute, and said they would work with us towards the meat retrieval rule and proper management of the grizzly bear species. Once elected however, they have twisted our words towards their own agenda, and come up with this nonsensical approach which clearly does not sit well with hunters, nor management teams across the Province.

The notion of having one set of hunters leave the head, hide and paws behind, while allowing another (First Nations) to retain the same opens up the door for a rather significant upswing in black market dealings of the same. By restricting their ownership, you set a “price” for these items to the black market that some will not be able to resist. This is an extremely foolish and irresponsible action.

Human / bear problems have hit a high in BC of late, notably so with the increasing number of grizzlies that had to be shot by Conservation Officers this past year. By removing the hunt, you remove the one instrument that creates a recognizable fear / respect for man in these animals. If this non-scientific approach is adhered to, one can expect the number, frequency and savagery of such occurrences to increase significantly. Does the Province intend to come up with a windfall budget to support the increased numbers of already over-burdened Conservation Officers such a development will require?

Harvesting a small portion of their population has proven of benefit for grizzly bears as it greatly reduces significant mortality from starvation and predation of cubs, as well as prey species such as ungulates. This helps keep animal populations closer to their “carrying capacity”, rather than suffering through the long boom and bust cycles (and risk of extinction) that simply leaving the populations un-managed incurs.

While grizzly bear populations do face limiting factors in some areas, hunting is not the cause of that. Even the Auditor General confirmed that fact when noting it is habitat loss that is the greatest threat to their populations. Scientific management would strongly suggest that efforts should be taken to address that very real threat, rather than dealing the necessity of science based policy, wildlife management and the hunters’ role in the balance and conservation of wildlife such a backhand blow.

As a hunter, biologist and strong believer in Conservation, I am in disbelief of the misconstrued "information" circulated for the agenda of a few. Never in the history of conservation has a policy been put in place by emotions or social acceptance. Never has Science based facts gathered from this Province’s leading wildlife biologists been so blatantly disregarded to further a politically driven agenda. Abandonment of the very principles of Conservation and Wildlife Management is an abhorrent option, and especially so when one considers it is being done so purely for political gain.

That being my position, I would like to offer an alternative. You can't go far wrong with science/fact based policy as long as it is factual, honest and properly communicated. The government has the voice, and the media will cover it. Honesty, and science based management will win respect and votes. It is well recognized the hunt is more than sustainable. The meat removal addresses the “trophy” aspect quite well. There is no reason other than political manipulation for the draconian closures being proposed at this point in time.

I, and a great many others, consider this issue to be a certain indicator of whether governance will be coherent and do the right thing, or stimulate the masses with PR to exploit emotion and do the wrong thing for the sake of popularity. If they choose the latter and continue with this nonsensical approach to wildlife management, I will do my utmost to ensure they are defeated in the next coming election. And I will not be alone in that pursuit.
 
Thanks, I politely voiced my disapproval. How do they know that they will be receiving a large volume of responses???
 
i predict there will be no hunting in bc in 10 years or if there is hunting it will be similar to the states. Saskatchewan is selling of crown lands..... BC already has forestry and gas exploration restricting access. Soon it will be province wide.
The world is full of stupid people with stupid ideas and we let them figure out a way to rise to the top and govern us all...... so we get what we get..... more stupid.
I am totally opposed to this political play by the NDP , it wasn't done for the bears, it was done for PR and more votes from the stupid.
When the big dominant bears start eating all the young ones and disease spreads thru the otherwise healthy populations..... the granola eating eco touristas from hollywood will just blame global warming. And then there's the morons who will flock to fill the business opportunities in harrassing wildlife .... ooops I mean wildlife viewing and some more bears will get put down for eating some snivelling out to lunch soccer mum who's ears where bleeding so bad from the miley cyrus that she didn't even hear it coming LOL

I'm not a bear hunter but I'm with all of ya that hunt these bears and believe you are a integral conservation tool to maintain the health of these bears populations in what little the governments and corporations have left for them. I am however, strongly against ANY and ALL foreign ownership or employment of foreign workers in the fishing/hunting/ wildlife viewing/guiding industry , Canada wide.
 
Six posts introducing one of the most important game management situations and the response seems to be, ho-hum.
Years ago, shortly after they discovered how to use DNA for identification, the BC Game Department set up food cache's with meat, in barb wired enclosures, so the bears would have to leave some hair on the barbwire, for DNA identification.
It was soon learned there were a way more bears, blacks and grizzlies, than they had thought. Even the doubter's had to admit there were a lot more bears than they had realized.
This management system seemed to have fallen by the wayside, but this looks like a revival of it and it should be treated as such.
 
To whom it may concern;

Having read the proposed changes, and your press release in full, I must confess to being deeply distressed and concerned by the direction this policy is proposing. Reading through every document provided for this public feedback, I have found nowhere therein any hint of a rationale for the changes. Your proposed policy begins by admitting that the hunt is being administrated in a wholly sustainable and scientific manner; any change, then, is shown clearly for the duplicitous and callow political posturing that it is, dangerous in its precedent that scientific management tools be obfuscated for the sake of cheap applause.

Many in our province believe, mistakenly, that the grizzly bear population is declining, and that the hunt is therefore an unsustainable threat to the species, and that action is therefore warranted. It is not. This has been verified by British Columbia’s own wildlife biologists, confirmed by a team of independent experts, and reiterated in your own policy announcement. It is a sorry government indeed, that invests in scientific research, and the employment and training of wildlife conservation professionals, only to disregard their data and advice, in favour of the whim of the most ignorant, and the demands of the most militant. This government could, and should, instead issue press releases explaining simply and factually that the grizzly bear hunt is sustainable, and the population numbers robust. It could even, for good measure, include more education about wildlife conservation management and principles in our schools and communities.

Arbitrarily sectioning off wide swaths of our province, and hiding that arbitrary nature behind the thinnest veil of politically motivated language (Eg. the hitherto unknown, so-called “Great Bear Rainforest”), is itself clumsy pandering. To end a hunt described in the very document that proposes its banning as “considered sustainable” is absolutely flabbergasting in its cynicism. I expect rational decisions and effective leadership from a government. This is so far from.

“Trophy Hunting”, so called, is the killing of a game species ONLY for the purpose of obtaining a “Trophy”. If your government chose to revise its policy, only requiring that edible portions of meat be removed from the carcass, I would consider this change to be a laudable one. I can see no reason to leave to rot any edible OR useful portion of any game species. This I consider to demonstrate respect for the animal.

And I consider straightforward leadership based on solid science to demonstrate respect for us, the citizen.
 
rockymountainrange said:
To whom it may concern;

Having read the proposed changes, and your press release in full, I must confess to being deeply distressed and concerned by the direction this policy is proposing. Reading through every document provided for this public feedback, I have found nowhere therein any hint of a rationale for the changes. Your proposed policy begins by admitting that the hunt is being administrated in a wholly sustainable and scientific manner; any change, then, is shown clearly for the duplicitous and callow political posturing that it is, dangerous in its precedent that scientific management tools be obfuscated for the sake of cheap applause.

Many in our province believe, mistakenly, that the grizzly bear population is declining, and that the hunt is therefore an unsustainable threat to the species, and that action is therefore warranted. It is not. This has been verified by British Columbia’s own wildlife biologists, confirmed by a team of independent experts, and reiterated in your own policy announcement. It is a sorry government indeed, that invests in scientific research, and the employment and training of wildlife conservation professionals, only to disregard their data and advice, in favour of the whim of the most ignorant, and the demands of the most militant. This government could, and should, instead issue press releases explaining simply and factually that the grizzly bear hunt is sustainable, and the population numbers robust. It could even, for good measure, include more education about wildlife conservation management and principles in our schools and communities.

Arbitrarily sectioning off wide swaths of our province, and hiding that arbitrary nature behind the thinnest veil of politically motivated language (Eg. the hitherto unknown, so-called “Great Bear Rainforest”), is itself clumsy pandering. To end a hunt described in the very document that proposes its banning as “considered sustainable” is absolutely flabbergasting in its cynicism. I expect rational decisions and effective leadership from a government. This is so far from.

“Trophy Hunting”, so called, is the killing of a game species ONLY for the purpose of obtaining a “Trophy”. If your government chose to revise its policy, only requiring that edible portions of meat be removed from the carcass, I would consider this change to be a laudable one. I can see no reason to leave to rot any edible OR useful portion of any game species. This I consider to demonstrate respect for the animal.

And I consider straightforward leadership based on solid science to demonstrate respect for us, the citizen.
Click to expand...

damn that's good writing right there.... Bravo.
 
Excellent Letter Rocky!
Pozitive.gif

Many Thanks!

Last Day Folks!!

Cheers,
Nog
 
Hrsplit said:
Don't chew me up here but what's the point of hunting grizzly or bear for that matter , can u even eat it ?
Click to expand...

You can certainly eat bear, both black and grizzly. Like everything else, diet will determine flavour, but everyone I know who hunts bear, eats bear. Give it a taste if you ever have a chance!
 
Hrsplit said:
It's the tree hugger in me haha
Click to expand...

No needs to esplain....
I have had Blk bear from the interior and from Northern and Southern Vancouver Island.
All three have had the same texture when eating and all had good flavour, the only discernible difference I ( my opinion here folks ) could determine was the amount of grease/fat in the meat.
I’ll eat a Black Bear and a Grizzly, well I would have to pretty sure it was an Alpine blue berry feasting bear before delving in.
Been to a few game banquets and yet to see Grizzly on the table and yes there are GB hunters in those banquets I have attended.
Bon Appetite!
Rob
 
Aside from the regulation changes to grizzly hunting which I obviously don't agree with, the part of this that really makes me mad is that by lobbying, advertising, and very skewed polling these antis are getting the government to strip a freedom from British Columbians for no other reason than finding it distasteful. WTF kind of democratic governance is that?
 
Letter sent. Not expecting it to do anything, because this was an election promise, and with another election being possible at any time the NDP are going to use this to say "see! We listened to you! Vote for us again!"


Actually, I did vote for them. Time to write my MLA and explain why he's not getting my vote next time if they don't smarten the f*** up...
 
rockymountainrange said:
To whom it may concern;

Having read the proposed changes, and your press release in full, I must confess to being deeply distressed and concerned by the direction this policy is proposing. Reading through every document provided for this public feedback, I have found nowhere therein any hint of a rationale for the changes. Your proposed policy begins by admitting that the hunt is being administrated in a wholly sustainable and scientific manner; any change, then, is shown clearly for the duplicitous and callow political posturing that it is, dangerous in its precedent that scientific management tools be obfuscated for the sake of cheap applause.

Many in our province believe, mistakenly, that the grizzly bear population is declining, and that the hunt is therefore an unsustainable threat to the species, and that action is therefore warranted. It is not. This has been verified by British Columbia’s own wildlife biologists, confirmed by a team of independent experts, and reiterated in your own policy announcement. It is a sorry government indeed, that invests in scientific research, and the employment and training of wildlife conservation professionals, only to disregard their data and advice, in favour of the whim of the most ignorant, and the demands of the most militant. This government could, and should, instead issue press releases explaining simply and factually that the grizzly bear hunt is sustainable, and the population numbers robust. It could even, for good measure, include more education about wildlife conservation management and principles in our schools and communities.

Arbitrarily sectioning off wide swaths of our province, and hiding that arbitrary nature behind the thinnest veil of politically motivated language (Eg. the hitherto unknown, so-called “Great Bear Rainforest”), is itself clumsy pandering. To end a hunt described in the very document that proposes its banning as “considered sustainable” is absolutely flabbergasting in its cynicism. I expect rational decisions and effective leadership from a government. This is so far from.

“Trophy Hunting”, so called, is the killing of a game species ONLY for the purpose of obtaining a “Trophy”. If your government chose to revise its policy, only requiring that edible portions of meat be removed from the carcass, I would consider this change to be a laudable one. I can see no reason to leave to rot any edible OR useful portion of any game species. This I consider to demonstrate respect for the animal.

And I consider straightforward leadership based on solid science to demonstrate respect for us, the citizen.
Click to expand...

Outstanding.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom