Grizzly Bear Webinar

IronNoggin

IronNoggin

CGN frequent flyer
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Location
Port Alberni, Vancouver Island
278963568_7346732992035500_7297777629107167438_n.jpg



Registration: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/6216505068523/WN_Y7DlptOoSs2-fX2p1xf3cQ
 
IronNoggin said:
What exactly are you trying to say??
Click to expand...

I'm thinking there was a typo error and medvedqc hit send before correcting/editing his comment.
Besides, why do we need to hear the excuses by a retired biologist when we all know it was for poltical gain by the current NDP and for gain by the first nations.
Science had little or nothing to do with the closure and now there is a former Provincial Biologist making excuses and getting paid for a speaking engagement, no ?
Prove me wrong.
Btw, I wasnt speaking for medvedqc...
 
Suther said:
Judging by the fact the bcwf is involved I'd assume pro hunting?
Click to expand...

VERY Much PRO Hunting.

FLHTCUI said:
Besides, why do we need to hear the excuses by a retired biologist when we all know it was for poltical gain by the current NDP and for gain by the first nations.
Science had little or nothing to do with the closure and now there is a former Provincial Biologist making excuses and getting paid for a speaking engagement, no ?
Click to expand...

So much conjecture... :rolleyes:

Yes, this was purely a political move by the NDP to garner citified votes.

The FN's were very much apposed (excluding the small group working with Rainforest) and they still are.
Many are already taking the matter into their own hands.
Even more are advocating directly and loudly for a return of the hunt.

The retired Biologist is on OUR side, always was, always will be.
He receives absolutely nothing in the way of compensation for his time addressing this matter (once again).

I'd suggest looking into the matter before putting your foot in your yap and thus indicating how foolish your perspective actually is.

Nog
 
nog,

let me clarify as it seems you re not happy about conjectures. this why we re having discussions and we may even disagree ... that is life ...

could you tell me why the grizzly hunt ended in BC? and the previous time as well that led to some issues with CITES.

it happened in the past and what was the position of that specialist in those days? as he has been in that position forever ,,,...

what was his position when he was in charge and what he publicly said about it not now that he is retired?

i do like the fact that i can still hunt grizzly here and we have a really anti hunt carnivor specialist here and it is a very interesting subject of discussion in the yukon and i m than willing to learn from mistakes made somewhere else.

cant wait to read your comments.
 
medvedqc said:
nog,

let me clarify as it seems you re not happy about conjectures. this why we re having discussions and we may even disagree ... that is life ...

could you tell me why the grizzly hunt ended in BC? and the previous time as well that led to some issues with CITES.

it happened in the past and what was the position of that specialist in those days? as he has been in that position forever ,,,...

what was his position when he was in charge and what he publicly said about it not now that he is retired?

i do like the fact that i can still hunt grizzly here and we have a really anti hunt carnivor specialist here and it is a very interesting subject of discussion in the yukon and i m than willing to learn from mistakes made somewhere else.

cant wait to read your comments.
Click to expand...

It didn't seem like the province gave much weight to biologist input when banning the hunt. From what I remember biologists were saying there is no threat to the species as a whole, numbers were stable or trending up, and the hunt was well managed in its current (now previous) form. I want to say about 400-450 bears a year were taken from an estimated 10-15k total population.

It should be noted that the NDP first banned Trophy Hunting of bears, so you couldn't keep certain parts of the bear but hunting for meat was still allowed, and they then followed suit with a full closure shortly after.
 
Suther said:
It didn't seem like the province gave much weight to biologist input when banning the hunt. From what I remember biologists were saying there is no threat to the species as a whole, numbers were stable or trending up, and the hunt was well managed in its current (now previous) form. I want to say about 400-450 bears a year were taken from an estimated 10-15k total population.

It should be noted that the NDP first banned Trophy Hunting of bears, so you couldn't keep certain parts of the bear but hunting for meat was still allowed, and they then followed suit with a full closure shortly after.
Click to expand...

the first closure that happened a while ago 90s i believe was given the reason of population endangered in some areas which led to ban of any cites import to EU.

now i d like to read the official position of those biologists ...
 
medvedqc said:
the first closure that happened a while ago 90s i believe was given the reason of population endangered in some areas which led to ban of any cites import to EU.

now i d like to read the official position of those biologists ...
Click to expand...

That one I can't comment on. I was but a wee lad then...
 
IronNoggin said:

VERY Much PRO Hunting.



So much conjecture... :rolleyes:

Yes, this was purely a political move by the NDP to garner citified votes.

The FN's were very much apposed (excluding the small group working with Rainforest) and they still are.
Many are already taking the matter into their own hands.
Even more are advocating directly and loudly for a return of the hunt.

The retired Biologist is on OUR side, always was, always will be.
He receives absolutely nothing in the way of compensation for his time addressing this matter (once again).

I'd suggest looking into the matter before putting your foot in your yap and thus indicating how foolish your perspective actually is.

Nog
Click to expand...

That the best you can do ?
Your lame attempt at embarrassing me is weak....
Your credibility has waned and Welcome to the list little boi.
Rob

I
 
medvedqc said:
i should have said by instead of why ...

so it is done by one of those that promoted the end of hunting?: should have been my phrase or sentence ...
Click to expand...

Again, the BCWF and the biologist involved were certainly NOT in any way associated with those who "promoted the end of hunting".
Very much the absolute opposite of that in fact.

medvedqc said:
let me clarify as it seems you re not happy about conjectures. this why we re having discussions and we may even disagree ... that is life ...
Click to expand...

It is the assignation of blame where it is not warranted that displeases me.
Much the same with any other kind of BS spew I run across.

could you tell me why the grizzly hunt ended in BC? and the previous time as well that led to some issues with CITES.
Click to expand...

The hunt was curtailed this last time as a vote pandering exercise by the NDP (of course in cahoots with the Green Party). They knew full well that the majority of their citified voting base would give that a nod of favor, so they set about with directed intent to make that so. Chief among their related actions was the deploy of an online questionnaire on the subject, to which anyone, anywhere in the world could vote multiple times. The Anti's jumped all over that and ramped up their rather well oiled machine to do just that 24 / 7. Those skewed results allowed Horgan to trot out the numbers and state that they were "proof positive" the vast majority of "BC'ers" wanted the hunt shut down. Nothing short of an organized scam. Period.

Horgan and Weaver both directly looked me in the eye and lied about their intent in this regard. I was far from alone in that. And we knew that was the likely case. But dammit someone had to try, and we did. Many many many times. They simply turned a blind eye to our concerns.

The previous closure was also inflicted by the NDP. That time they claimed that there were "engendered" and/or "threatened" populations within the hunt areas. There were not. There were a couple sub populations that were seeing issues, but none were in any hunting area whatsoever. The push and closure then resulted in CITIES (I was a Canadian Delegate prior to this mess) listing them and barring international trade.

In both cases the biologist in question was not in favor of blanket closures and publicly stated that.

what was his position when he was in charge and what he publicly said about it not now that he is retired?
Click to expand...

As noted he did indeed state that he was not in support. But as is the case for all government employees, the employer can simply choose to ignore that advise. Been on the receiving end of that many times myself in the role of a fisheries biologist (Arctic).

i do like the fact that i can still hunt grizzly here and we have a really anti hunt carnivor specialist here and it is a very interesting subject of discussion in the yukon and i m than willing to learn from mistakes made somewhere else.
Click to expand...

You live in a very beautiful part of this Country.
Spent a lot of years up there myself based out of Inuvik, while working both the Yukon North Slope & the NWT.

Thankfully the socialists haven't taken over up there yet as they are doing down here.
The very fact you still have a grizzly hunt is a great reflection of that.
Cross your fingers the BS never comes your way!!

I suspect you and I have a lot in common, and think along the same lines.
What happened in BC, and to some extent in Alberta was a tragedy.
I sure as hell hope you fine folks up North can learn by our mistakes, and prevent the "woke" from interfering with your way of life.

The webinar will answer most of the questions poised here much better than I can.
I suggest any who want to be truly informed on the matter (as opposed to buying into conjecture & rumor) take it in.

Even better, sign up and pose those questions yourself.

Registration: https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/6216505068523/WN_Y7DlptOoSs2-fX2p1xf3cQ

Cheers,
Nog
 
IronNoggin said:

VERY Much PRO Hunting.



So much conjecture... :rolleyes:

Yes, this was purely a political move by the NDP to garner citified votes.

The FN's were very much apposed (excluding the small group working with Rainforest) and they still are.
Many are already taking the matter into their own hands.
Even more are advocating directly and loudly for a return of the hunt.

The retired Biologist is on OUR side, always was, always will be.
He receives absolutely nothing in the way of compensation for his time addressing this matter (once again).

I'd suggest looking into the matter before putting your foot in your yap and thus indicating how foolish your perspective actually is.

Nog
Click to expand...

You might want to take your attitude down a notch.
 
to close the debate bcwf is against the closure (hopefully still) and biologists were not so adamant while employee by the government. they are more agaisnt that they were when in charge nothing new ...

his writings in the past were not as clear as it seems today. type his name into any publications he has done (please read the bear humane conflict ones) you may come up with a different opinion ... in those days he was not a pro-hunting for grizzly bear. in being nice i will say neutral and sometimes against ...
 
Last edited:
medvedqc said:
his writings in the past were not as clear as it seems today. type his name into any publications he has done (please read the bear humane conflict ones) you may come up with a different opinion ... in those days he was not a pro-hunting for grizzly bear. in being nice i will say neutral and sometimes against ...
Click to expand...

It is one thing to infer someone's stance from their writings.
It is quite another to do so from speaking with them in person.
I have known the biologist in question for quite some time, and engaged in the latter frequently.

Cheers,
Nog
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom