Ban on grizzly hunt may be lifted

APOS lobbies SRD and and the Provincial Government the same way AFGA, FNAWS, ABA, etc, and others do. Some items that are brought forward to SRD are supported by all groups if palateable by all, and others are only supported and brought forward by each individual association.

I would think that APOS would be in support of a resident-only grizzly hunt as it may lead to a Non-resident opportunity one day.
 
Last edited:
icehunter121 said:
I never said I shot one or was a authority on the subject now did I ? Now who is the hypocrite here?? Feeling a little insecure are ya? Gotta start name calling.
Click to expand...

So are you lying here,

Or Here
I have hunted grizzlies right from the White Court area,Virginia hills to Grand Cache ...and spent a week in the Swan hills grizz area also....the population is not what it should be due to mans encroachment,roads,gas wells etc..etc....
Click to expand...

:wave:

If you were "hunting" then you must have had a tag. Since you were skunked, let's see the tag...or are you one of the "sustenance" hunters, and if so, why were you harassing Grizzlies?
 
There are many reports of bears being killed and covered up by the "scientists" (university student types with no real world experience). I heard someone was investigating it and putting together a report of all the bears killed, and all the money missing form this great "study" There is a real reason why everyone is questioning what happened and the concussions that were drawn, where there is smoke..... This is a case much deeper than the regular "recreational #####ing" that occurs when the government does a game count.




There are also indirect effects (mortalities) due to this "study" I know of 2 bears that were shot both collared and both causing trouble with humans. One bear was young and was wearing a NON-ROT-OFF collar. Hummm I wonder what could have happened there????? And how many other bears are walking around right now being strangled to death and acting out.

In the end the guy gets charged for shooting the bear. Ya, it's his fault:rolleyes:...defect the blame, and cover up before people start finding out what really has been happening, it stinks and people are starting to smell it.
 
Last edited:
You mean to tell me some snot nosed university students aren't the ideal source for qualified, competent anastisiologists. Where was the overseeing "professor", fondling a student in the tent?
 
2fat2fly said:
So are you lying here,

Or Here


:wave:

If you were "hunting" then you must have had a tag. Since you were skunked, let's see the tag...or are you one of the "sustenance" hunters, and if so, why were you harassing Grizzlies?
Click to expand...

And how pray tell was I harassing a grizzlie when there was none to be seen?Answer that and you win the prize!!! And for some one in here to ask to see the tag...do you think I keep old unused tags around just so that I can Prove to some one that I have hunted grizzlies?? I dont have to PROVE any thing to any one,I know what I have done and where I have been.

All I have from those days are still lots of pics and good ol memories of being out there.

Your last comment about uni students..I dealt with them for a week on 2 seperate ranges and ridges and can tell you how much they hate hunters...especially bear hunters and some of there favourite tips,tactics and other bs to screw up any one else on a hunt or even out quadding or enjoying the mountain scenery.

I have hunted the grizzly bears and from what I have seen the population is not where it should be,man has wrecked so much good habitat for them just so that man can build a friggen golf course for his leisure use,What is wrong with giving the great bears a break from man and try and let the numbers come back up to sustain a harvest with out the possibility of really endangering them?

Or would you rather me say that sure I agree open it up so we can shoot em all out of Alberta then we wont have to worry about seeing a grizzly around this province any more:rolleyes: Hell lets raffle off special licenses just for the national parks so that you can enjoy a stay at Jasper,do 18 holes before lunch then go out in the afternoon,and drop the hammer on a grizzly...:rolleyes:

If you really feel the need to shoot a big bear but cant in Alberta then get your butt on a plane and head up to the Kodiak Islands and spend 10 to 15 grand on a hunt up there. I would even be happy to send you the name of a outfitter that can set you up on a hunt.

Thats all i got to say about this....:wave::wave::wave::wave:
 
Is any of this (the study in question, old harvest numbers, number of tags let in the last year of a legal hunt, number of grizz killed by researchers) available online? I did a quick search but since I don't know the names of who was involved I found nothing. Also, any reason why the university did the population estimate instead of the provincial govt? Or did I just step in a big pile of dodo?
 
sheephunter said:
Quite possibly but as we were taking about G-bears here and there is no NR G-bear season.....it seems a moot point. I'm sure the black bear study was conducted with the intent of keeping opportunities for outfitters but I don't know that qualifies as "say". More just scientific input and it's still up to SRD whether they accept that input or not. I see it no different than the grizzly count the Willmore Wilderness Foundation undertook this year. It is good solid anecdotal evidence but SRD is under no obligation to use that data in their decision making. Hopefully they do but there is no requirement for them to just as with the U of A study.

APOS is far from the only group that has contributed money to aerial surveys.....ACA, AFGA, FNAWS, SCI to name a few.
Click to expand...

With no resident hunting there will never be a chance for outfitters to guide for a 'future' money making non resident hunt. I believe the APOS has a vested interest in Grizzly Bear hunts, if the number are truly high enough to hunt. With the money & employment they generate in the province, I doubt their suggestions get shrugged off as fluff. I do concede that the other organizations you have mentioned (one I had never heard of before) probably get some of SRD ear as well. Politics always plays a roll in conservation at any government level & although there may be no written obligation to use the the data given to them; I'm sure it does not fall on deaf ears at the SRD... This is purely my opinion & for the record, I do think that the department has done a fine job over the years that I was there. The province I'm in now could learn a lot from Alberta's Fish & Wildlife Division. (This has been one of the better threads as of late:D)
 
I have confidence in the SDR. Once the numbers come back up I'm sure they will open the season like it was before to a limited amount of hunters/tags. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but didn't they close the season for Pronghorns years back and then re-open it once the population got stronger?

BTW I have seen plenty of grizzlies in both the Livingston area and south of Grande Prairie.

Ivo
 
I was at priority 10. I just want to hunt a griz once. I dont even care if I get one. I just want to have a tag, set up a camp by myself and hunt griz for two weeks.

I have seen many griz in my hunting area over the years. Always sent a shiver up my spine. But its a "good" shiver......

Perhaps they will consider maybe 5 tags per year or something like that. Im not sure how it works really. I dont want to hunt griz if they are truly endangered, that's for sure.

But if they close the hunt forever, I guess I will just stick to hunting BigFoot.......
 
huntinstuff said:
I was at priority 10. I just want to hunt a griz once. I dont even care if I get one. I just want to have a tag, set up a camp by myself and hunt griz for two weeks.

I have seen many griz in my hunting area over the years. Always sent a shiver up my spine. But its a "good" shiver......

Perhaps they will consider maybe 5 tags per year or something like that. Im not sure how it works really. I dont want to hunt griz if they are truly endangered, that's for sure.

But if they close the hunt forever, I guess I will just stick to hunting BigFoot.......
Click to expand...

Im a priority 0 and have no intrest in hunting Grizz but I want the hunt reopened if there are enough animals left(however the f**k they can figure that out to make all parties happy considering the anti lobby involved in the proccess are never going to see a number that will change their minds)

Reduced Grizzly numbers due to hunting has always been a red herring. The majority of do-gooders who had a passing intrest in this issue have moved on, feeling good that they have stopped the threat to the bear but if the population was threatened, it still is.
 
Last edited:
jaydog said:
Is any of this (the study in question, old harvest numbers, number of tags let in the last year of a legal hunt, number of grizz killed by researchers) available online? I did a quick search but since I don't know the names of who was involved I found nothing. Also, any reason why the university did the population estimate instead of the provincial govt? Or did I just step in a big pile of dodo?
Click to expand...

I found this chart yesterday for discussion on another board: http://srd.alberta.ca/fishwildlife/wildlifeinalberta/grizzlybearmanagement/albertagrizzlybearmortalityrates.aspx

Interesting to note self defence kills, problem bears and road kills have all increased since the hunt was closed. And 7 reported research related deaths in 6 years.
 
Its interesting to see the highest number of illegal kills were during the open hunting seasons 2000-2005. I wonder if it was do to mistaken identification, wrong W.M.U.'s, more stringent monitoring of hunts, more reported self defense cases that weren't or just a case of more poaching?
 
I was at a meeting in Sundre tonight.

No chance of a season on grizz in the next decade (they didn't say that but they are certainly NOT recommending a reopening of the season anytime soon).

They figure 400 bears in AB max (I figure 600).

They have NO idea as to how many bears the area can support.

Access is directly related to bear mortality.

Forestry and oil and gas is GOOD for the bears. The roads allow too much access that is BAD.

Bears outside of the parks grow bigger and reproduce faster than bears in the parks (due to the low food resources and people induced stress of the old growth parks). Bears outside of the parks get more protein from meat and can reproduce at a younger age.

We'll be lucky to keep the back country access we have now.

Some loudmouth cowboy had to end the meeting with the stereotypical comment of "Well, the mortality (grizz) gonna be increasing around here."
 
Split the difference & say 500. To me that number does seems low... Maybe not so low to the guy with 499.9 bears feeding on & fornicating with his livestock??? Who hosted the meeting & conducted the research? What did you think of the meeting & the study?
 
Sundre FanG hosted the meeting. Research was solid IMO for the areas they studied but they didn't study a lot of AB where bears may not have a strong presence but still exist in small numbers. My estimate of 600 includes the bears they would have missed and the small numbers that are probably scattered throughout northern and eastern Alberta.

Gord Stenhouse conducted the research and Jamie Bruha talked about the access.

Basically they have mapped all of the roads from Hinton to Montana and over layed that with the areas that they have been able to capture and mark bears. The highest Griz pops are the farthest from the roads. Griz like roads though and travel out to them lots, where they get into conflict with people or are shot by poachers. So roads are bad for bears because they allow ignorant arseholes to get into bear habitat.

Their numbers are also only a snapshot of one area in one year. They have no idea of population trends at all. They would need to survey each area again for that. NOt likely they said in the current economic situation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom