OK, CZ and other people from the Ducks, are there herds of 100 elk out there? The tracks I checked out in the Interlake showed a herd of 11. My buddy saw 16 on a field once, that was a large herd for the Interlake. The fellow in the video seemed to be saying they got them all except a bull, sounds to me like they dropped the whole herd...
Elk slaughter in Manitoba
- Thread starter 7mm-08
- Start date
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
I'm not 100% sure, but I would think that there are few if any places in North America where a single herd of elk number 100+, except for maybe during the winter feeding program in Yellowstone. I've also seen some large numbers in the Elkford area of BC on the coal mine property, but doubt it was over 100 in one bunch. There are no herds that number 100+ in MB. If 100 elk had been freqenting the farmer's "old" alfalfa bales, it would take them a only a few days to decimate them, they can be very destructive. I suspect that's what happened here; the natives were called in to get rid of the hay destroyers, it's a pretty common and appalling practice by lazy ass farmers.
There were programs in place years ago where Manitoba Conservation would pay to erect an elk proof fence to store the hay in. That program was of course abused where the farmers would pocket the money and not buy fencing, consequently DNR would only supply the fencing or pay for it after, which kind of ended that since the farmers got PO'd that their cash cow had dried up. I also believe there is currently compensation available for bales destroyed by wildlife, but obviously some effort has to be made to at least haul the bales near cattle where they will be fed, not leave them in the field as appears to be the case here.
Last edited:
Probaby. It's getting very hard to get permission from farmers to hunt there any more. They used to be friendly, neighborly and hospitable around there. Everyone helped everyone else out. At least it was that way when I was growing up on the farm. Few people cared if you drove or walked across their land as long as you were easy on their crops. Now they're up in arms if you do. Politeness is met with smart-ass responses.
For an ethical hunter that picks one animal, and only fires at that particular animal until it falls, yes that would be odd. On the other hand, some people have been known to fire at multiple animals without watching to see what they actually hit. Some people have even resorted to just firing into a herd.
Back in 1997 my dad and I were hunting south of RMNP and a herd of around 100 came over the hill mostly cows,calves and a couple small bulls.By the time legal shooting time arrived there were about 30 that hadn't made it off the field to the safety of the park....We were fortunate enough to harvest a cow elk.
The next time we were drawn we seen 1 large bull,but no luck.
The third time drawn we seen 2 herds a small herd of 4 and then another herd of about 12 again no luck.
The fourth time drawn we went out we couldn't find a elk
The fifth time drawn I went out in the interlake I didn't even find a track.I have seen the odd herd of elk 4-8 in the interlake they do seem few and far between and I travel the area quite often.With the elk drawn now a 10 tier system I find it not worth my time or money to enter maybe a landowner tag might be different.
That goes along what I heard from friends who hunted outside RMNP. There was a spot they'd see a large herd like you speak of, and by the late 90's when I accompanied them it was getting smaller. Everyone and there friend were after them. No one I know has seen a large herd there since. If these guys really saw 100 elk, then no problem. Didn't seem to be what they were saying on the video.
As for the comments about cattle farmers, they had really hard times for a while so take it easy on them. I agree 100% elk proof fencing is the only way to go, not shooting elk, but things really fell apart after BSE, and they lost their shirts.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
They've been doing that before, during and after BSE and like I said, there are aid programs for wildlife damage as well, so there's no excuse.
Special Sub-Topic: Riding Mountain National Park
Reports in 2003 called for culling of elk to keep the population at about 2500 animals until bovine tuberculosis was eradicated in the Riding Mountain area. Bovine tuberculosis is not naturally found in elk and deer and was likely introduced from contact with domestic livestock.
Reports in 2003 called for culling of elk to keep the population at about 2500 animals until bovine tuberculosis was eradicated in the Riding Mountain area. Bovine tuberculosis is not naturally found in elk and deer and was likely introduced from contact with domestic livestock.
Maybe people like this shouldnt be hunters to begin with....., so lets say this was the case, and the tag limit was 1 per person and they ended up killing more than 1 per person, a person like this would likely just leave the extra dead animals to rot, or poach them....what a waste!
Well I'm heading up there this weekend. Got drawn for late season which opens on Monday. The last time I was drawn there the CO's were flying around in helicopters culling the herds by air right during the middle of the hunt. Haven't been back since but we never even got a sniff of an animal then and if it's still bad this year it will be the last time I waste my money on a draw tag in Manitoba. Between the unregulated elk harvest in the northwest and all the moose being shot by Metis hunters in the Southwest part of the province, the special draw areas will be finished. Might as well save my money and hunt outside the province and put my hard earned dollars into someone else's economy where they still put a value on preserving their natural resources. At the rate we're going quality hunting in this province will be finished in the next 5-10 years.
Interesting.
I have conflicts balancing the need to honor my heritage.
While it would e nice to hunt and fish year round whenever I feel like it.... From a conservation perspective, I just don't agree with it.
I see guys here throwing around comments about if they were causasion they would be treated differently.
Canada has a dwindling caucasion population and yellow, brown, black and white non indian hunters break the rules too.
I live a couple miles from a reserve, I also live in a lottery only moose region. I know many of the first nations hunters around here. I also know of a few poachers around here. Those poachers are "caucasion" in my area. Shooting does, hunting any buck during 4 pt season, hunting deer during rut closures and hunting moose without LEH tags.
A talk with my local CO also confirmed this and said the largest issue in our area is non native poaching.
Bottom line, poachers exist from all walks of life.
It's lookin more and more like Mr Flett and company were simply hunting under the provisions of the laws as it pertains to their "status". His son's video and posting it on facecrack was just stupid on his part. Also , stating that the hunt was an excercise under "Idle No More" , I personally, as a Metis citizen, find that comment to be even more stupid.
I don't care who you are, if yer starving and need to kill an animal to feed your family then do it. But don't brag about it and make silly statements that only draw negative responses from everyone who sees/hears about your doings.
bearkilr
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- Nowhere, ......just past the middle
See, that's where our opinions on poachers differ. For a native/Metis to partake in these activities you don't consider it poaching as it's legal under our antiquated laws, yet for everyone else it is considered poaching. See what I'm getting at?
And you can leave the "caucasian" term out of the equation, as it's also illegal for Asians,Hispanics,etc. All I'd like to see is for everyone to fall under the same category and abide by the same laws. Is that racist? I think not.
And you can leave the "caucasian" term out of the equation, as it's also illegal for Asians,Hispanics,etc. All I'd like to see is for everyone to fall under the same category and abide by the same laws. Is that racist? I think not.
If you are excercising your right or legal permission to hunt under the provisions of the laws in your region, no matter who you are, and no matter how distasteful your actions may be to others.... You are not a poacher by definition, plain and simple.
Winnipeg Free Press - PRINT EDITION
Two laws, but one resource to hunt
By: Paul Turenne
1:00 AM
Although certain debates sometimes degrade into questions of race, rarely is the conversation forced into such a position by the law.
But such is the case with aboriginal harvest rights, where Canadian law has created two sets of rules, separating citizens into two camps based on blood.
It is an imperfect situation at best and a racial firestorm at worst, but it is the reality faced by all Manitoba hunters and anglers, including those whose rights are granted by provincial licence and those whose rights are granted by treaty.
Despite the corner into which these laws have backed all parties, it is not an insurmountable situation.
It is, however, one that requires quick and significant improvement before the lines drawn in the sand become too deep and fish and animal populations suffer as a result.
This concern is not unfounded. One of the province's best-known wildlife biologists warned, in a Free Press story last week, that unsustainable hunting practices could threaten wildlife populations as soon as a decade from now.
That story was about aboriginal hunters taking 12 elk in western Manitoba -- an act that was perceived as a routine, responsible harvest by some and a reckless, arrogant slaughter by others.
It brought to light two issues that are never far from the surface among Manitoba's hunting and fishing community -- aboriginal harvest rights and the way they are exercised.
As a representative of the province's outfitters and lodge owners, I frequently hear from people who fear irresponsible practices are threatening the long-term stability of the fish and wildlife resources that form the basis of their livelihood.
They have every right to be concerned and, to their credit, they most often cite incidents and practices rather than the skin colour of the perpetrators. In fact, several of our members are First Nations or Métis themselves, and many more hire aboriginal hunting and fishing guides.
The larger debate often sees Manitobans question why there are two sets of rules, why aboriginal people are not licensed like everyone else, or at least why rights-holders are not subject to similar limits, seasons and fines for violations.
It's not an unreasonable argument, but it is a legally and socially unrealistic one.
Aboriginal harvest rights are guaranteed in the Constitution and have already withstood challenges that rose to the Supreme Court.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper himself could not change that. Period.
The solution, then, lies not in questioning the rights themselves, but how they are exercised.
Many aboriginal people conduct their harvest safely, considerately and with a view toward conservation and sustainability. To suggest otherwise is blatantly racist.
On the flip side, I have personally witnessed resident poachers with skin as white as fresh snow shooting from roads, hunting private property without permission and performing other misdeeds.
It is not a question of whether your right to hunt was granted by treaty or licence. It's how you exercise that right that matters.
Whether or not you're bound by seasons and limits, it comes down to personal responsibility, consideration for your fellow hunters and anglers, and conservation of the resource.
I encourage aboriginal leaders and responsible aboriginal harvesters to relay this message to their fellow harvesters.
It should not politically, and cannot legally, come from government, so it must come from within.
This is why I consistently applaud the Manitoba Métis Federation, which has established, on its own, the Métis Laws of the Harvest and is currently working with the province on a regulation that would strip Métis harvesters of their rights should they violate that self-imposed code.
Some have criticized that code as being too liberal with its limits and restrictions, but the Constitution guarantees Métis harvest rights one way or another, and the alternative is no limits, seasons or ID cards at all.
The MMF deserves sincere commendation for its position, and I personally encourage all First Nations councils to consider their example and perhaps establish a similar system.
Ideally, before too long Métis, First Nation and licensed hunters and anglers can all sit down together and manage our shared resources jointly, with all sides contributing time, expertise, harvest data and money to the cause.
Because even though there are two sets of rules, there is only one natural resource that we all must share.
Paul Turenne is executive director of the Manitoba Lodges and Outfitters Association.
mloa@mloa.com
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition January 7, 2013 A11
Two laws, but one resource to hunt
By: Paul Turenne
1:00 AM
Although certain debates sometimes degrade into questions of race, rarely is the conversation forced into such a position by the law.
But such is the case with aboriginal harvest rights, where Canadian law has created two sets of rules, separating citizens into two camps based on blood.
It is an imperfect situation at best and a racial firestorm at worst, but it is the reality faced by all Manitoba hunters and anglers, including those whose rights are granted by provincial licence and those whose rights are granted by treaty.
Despite the corner into which these laws have backed all parties, it is not an insurmountable situation.
It is, however, one that requires quick and significant improvement before the lines drawn in the sand become too deep and fish and animal populations suffer as a result.
This concern is not unfounded. One of the province's best-known wildlife biologists warned, in a Free Press story last week, that unsustainable hunting practices could threaten wildlife populations as soon as a decade from now.
That story was about aboriginal hunters taking 12 elk in western Manitoba -- an act that was perceived as a routine, responsible harvest by some and a reckless, arrogant slaughter by others.
It brought to light two issues that are never far from the surface among Manitoba's hunting and fishing community -- aboriginal harvest rights and the way they are exercised.
As a representative of the province's outfitters and lodge owners, I frequently hear from people who fear irresponsible practices are threatening the long-term stability of the fish and wildlife resources that form the basis of their livelihood.
They have every right to be concerned and, to their credit, they most often cite incidents and practices rather than the skin colour of the perpetrators. In fact, several of our members are First Nations or Métis themselves, and many more hire aboriginal hunting and fishing guides.
The larger debate often sees Manitobans question why there are two sets of rules, why aboriginal people are not licensed like everyone else, or at least why rights-holders are not subject to similar limits, seasons and fines for violations.
It's not an unreasonable argument, but it is a legally and socially unrealistic one.
Aboriginal harvest rights are guaranteed in the Constitution and have already withstood challenges that rose to the Supreme Court.
Prime Minister Stephen Harper himself could not change that. Period.
The solution, then, lies not in questioning the rights themselves, but how they are exercised.
Many aboriginal people conduct their harvest safely, considerately and with a view toward conservation and sustainability. To suggest otherwise is blatantly racist.
On the flip side, I have personally witnessed resident poachers with skin as white as fresh snow shooting from roads, hunting private property without permission and performing other misdeeds.
It is not a question of whether your right to hunt was granted by treaty or licence. It's how you exercise that right that matters.
Whether or not you're bound by seasons and limits, it comes down to personal responsibility, consideration for your fellow hunters and anglers, and conservation of the resource.
I encourage aboriginal leaders and responsible aboriginal harvesters to relay this message to their fellow harvesters.
It should not politically, and cannot legally, come from government, so it must come from within.
This is why I consistently applaud the Manitoba Métis Federation, which has established, on its own, the Métis Laws of the Harvest and is currently working with the province on a regulation that would strip Métis harvesters of their rights should they violate that self-imposed code.
Some have criticized that code as being too liberal with its limits and restrictions, but the Constitution guarantees Métis harvest rights one way or another, and the alternative is no limits, seasons or ID cards at all.
The MMF deserves sincere commendation for its position, and I personally encourage all First Nations councils to consider their example and perhaps establish a similar system.
Ideally, before too long Métis, First Nation and licensed hunters and anglers can all sit down together and manage our shared resources jointly, with all sides contributing time, expertise, harvest data and money to the cause.
Because even though there are two sets of rules, there is only one natural resource that we all must share.
Paul Turenne is executive director of the Manitoba Lodges and Outfitters Association.
mloa@mloa.com
Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition January 7, 2013 A11
Yeah and ideally pigs will learn to fly so that they're more sporting to shoot at. Paul Turenne must be David Chartrand's cousin or something because he sure couldn't shove his head any further up the MMF's a**.
