BC consultation for Grizzly hunting future

Good illustration of populations in Grizz country neither the voters nor the hunters who would vote against the Grizzly hunt will ever see. This one camp, CGN member's hoytcanon's, had fifty-eight Grizzly sightings within a rifle shot in less than a week. Every single one of those tracks that isn't human is Grizzly track, and they get washed away constantly from the sand by rain and flood, those are all fresh. Only one black bear was spotted from two camps and no deer or moose were laid eyes on. These new rules have nothing to do with bear populations. This is the exact same situation we're discussing that gun owners have been struggling with for years, the old Remington and Winchester owner vs the guy with handguns. They're in the same boat just neither knows it, and dividing doesn't have the effect they think it will for either of them.

On8C5OX.jpg
 
Ardent said:
You missed Phil's point, and the hunters they polled would have been largely casual meat hunters aiming to bag a deer or moose a year without having to travel too far or charter bushplanes. They need to poll the folks hunting in proper Grizzly country, the folks who actually have a clue on Grizzly hunting and populations, and what Grizz can do to a valley. Phil's point to summarise was, do you think they're stopping at Grizzlies? Ungulates aren't in the public mind much... now. This isn't an attack on Grizzly hunting, it's an attack on hunting period, and is only one of more encroachments to come if we're not careful and don't resist together. An encroachment based on emotional reasons not scientific ones I should add again. "Most" Canadians are against us owning more than one or two guns per person too, doesn't mean they know what they're voting on.
Click to expand...

I understand your view, but no matter what we do, the trophy hunt will end. We can either fight the ban or try to limit what exactly is being banned. Cut off the hand to save the arm, so to speak.

Also, your guns are your personal property, whereas the bears belong to everyone (or no one). Not really the same thing.
 
medvedqc said:
forgot to add we already lost the special guiding for grizzly hunting few years ago ...outfitters pushed their agenda and won (or they think so ...)
Click to expand...

GOABC was involved in something similar last year and can tell you from inside they learned a serious lesson. Hunting is one community, and has to be, or we're all in trouble. The Grizzlies as you say are just the beginning.
 
Suther said:
I understand your view, but no matter what we do, the trophy hunt will end. We can either fight the ban or try to limit what exactly is being banned. Cut off the hand to save the arm, so to speak.

Also, your guns are your personal property, whereas the bears belong to everyone (or no one). Not really the same thing.
Click to expand...

Disagree as many Canadians feel your and my guns effect them too. Many would scale that effect higher than the extremely small number of Grizzlies harvested each year, especially in light of recent events stateside. They, and hunters also need to get past the term "trophy hunting", it's just extremely selective hunting and nobody is arguing against keeping the meat. We are all angry and arguing that the skin and skull should NOT be confiscated and destroyed. The only reason to allow the meat only and destroy the skin and skull hunt after Nov 30 was so they could posture as "not being against true hunters". We've got populists driving the ship and that never ends well. It is derision and devision and beautifully done.
 
I agree we need to be a united front. But we can't win if our goal is to stop the ban entirely. The current political climate means that it's impossible. If we do damage control, we might get somewhere. If we fight the ban outright we're going to get nowhere.
 
trying to stop one little thing like grizzly hunting because there is only a few hunters impacted is wrong ... ask them and yourself which specy next? why not wolf?

about firearms unless im wrong under the Canadian laws you do not really owns your firearms ... you possess them up to the time you do not have the right to ...
 
Actually, we can, and it's been done before and even with the NDP themselves. There are so many Grizzlies in B.C. it's not a matter of whether a sustainable hunt makes sense or not, and we faced the same public opinion issues from the uninformed last time the NDP closed the Grizzly hunt. In fact that debate may have even been more heated. Through coordinated action not acquiescence and devision we have every chance of turning it around again. If they have you convinced any position but accepting drastically curtailed Grizzly hunting is the only outcome they're doing their spin job alarmingly well.
 
the last ban in BC led EU to forbid the import of any grizzly parts within European Union under CITES arrangement.

if the populations is not at risk and the harvests are really conservative then we are delaing with something that is not based on facts but on emotion we all know how it goes.

in the population in general they are feared of bears but COs and local authorities are taking care of it for them ... people are scared of guns they are no more educated on it and rely on the news.

now if we can reverse the mind of the people on hunting and also on guns then we have a winning situation. not for now but aim with the actual kids that will be educated adults.

long time ago i was shooting in Europe for competitions and it was in schools even in Western Germany (i do not think we can dream about it ...anymore) ... young adults were also trained with military weapons ... so i do not think we were better just that we were aware and not scared ...
 
WE have a leftist Liberal provincial government here in Ontario,too. Every time OMNRF staffers come up with some hare-brained scheme that has the potential to affect hunting or fishing,they issue an Environmental Bill of Rights consultation process,so,they can say that public consultation is taking place. When the public opinion runs counter to "the party line".they simply ignore it and proceed,regardless. I suspect B.C. hunters will be dealing with the same result.
 
Ardent said:
Actually, we can, and it's been done before and even with the NDP themselves. There are so many Grizzlies in B.C. it's not a matter of whether a sustainable hunt makes sense or not, and we faced the same public opinion issues from the uninformed last time the NDP closed the Grizzly hunt. In fact that debate may have even been more heated. Through coordinated action not acquiescence and devision we have every chance of turning it around again. If they have you convinced any position but accepting drastically curtailed Grizzly hunting is the only outcome they're doing their spin job alarmingly well.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong, but last time NDP said they were going to end the grizz hunt they did, and it wasn't until libs retook power that it was reinstated?
 
Ardent said:
It doesn't matter if it's resident or guided non-resident we're talking Grizzly hunting and there's zero shortage of bears, and the fact folks are splintering in this very thread already and siding with the NDP narrative of "rich trophy hunters" is evidence to me the NDP is succeeding and smarter than we give them credit for.

The economic importance of the hunt is large on the non-resident side and an important bargaining tool, the natives who wish to continue to hunt Grizzly are a critical element due to the bands' traditional rights bargaining power, and the resident hunters including myself all have to stand together too. If we divide they've conquered. All of us are accepting of keeping the meat, that's just swell, but when they've already got the hunting fraternity sorting themselves into different corners in a province of growing Grizzly numbers and no concerns on the population, they've won a master stroke already.

These guys handed our small family business a loss that over the next ten years and considering territory value impacts is hundreds of thousands of dollars with one statement, because they felt like it. I've never even seen a resident hunter in six bear seasons where I guide and outfit and would shake his or her hand when I do. What I'm saying is we're not competing with each other and we're stronger together by far on Grizzly hunting.
Click to expand...

Amen!

Someone wants to pay a bunch of their hard cash for a grizzly hunt, good on 'em! The money keeps people working, pays bills and taxes too.


Cheers
Trev
 
Ardent, you mentioned First Nations hunting of grizzly. I'd like to hear more about this as the "usual narrative" is that BC First Nations are unanimous in their opposition to the grizzly hunt.
 
Suther said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but last time NDP said they were going to end the grizz hunt they did, and it wasn't until libs retook power that it was reinstated?
Click to expand...

The NDP was in power at the time, with an election looming. The grizzly moratorium was a last ditch attempt tp curry favour with urban voters. They still got decimated in the election.

This one is much worse, as the NDP/Greens might be in power next spring season too. Hopefully thier coalition will crumble over the winter.
 
Ardent said:
Not at all, it's a mix with some bands heavily opposed and some heavily for. Some even own the outfitting territories on the coast south of me. They've indicated they will not be stopping Grizzly outfitting, and will be a welcome thorn in the NDP's plan.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling they will also be supplying their hunters with the hide and skulls, one way or another.
 
Ardent said:
Not at all, it's a mix with some bands heavily opposed and some heavily for. Some even own the outfitting territories on the coast south of me. They've indicated they will not be stopping Grizzly outfitting, and will be a welcome thorn in the NDP's plan.
Click to expand...

Does that land fall in the mid coast timber supply area that they are planning to close?

Buckchaser, as Ardent points out its very band dependant. There are a few very vocal bands that are making big bucks on ecotourism, and they are the ones who are pro ban. Besides that, the ban basically doesn't effect a lot of bands (as long as the hunt is on traditional land, they can keep the skull and hide).

Ardent you are more on the inside than I, what do you think the chances are of the Liberals reversing this ban if reelected?
 
My letter:

My name is Jay and I live in Ontario. You may be aware that the spring bear hunt in Ontario was cancelled for 15 years and recently reopened. During this 15 year closure, damage to property and incidents with problem bears increased dramatically. It is important for you to realize that the closure was based on emotion and not science. In fact, it is common knowledge that the Ontario government did not listen to their own biologists who opposed the closure of the spring bear hunt. They chose to side with animal rights activists who claimed that the closure of the spring bear hunt would prevent hunters from harvesting sows and leaving orphan cubs behind to perish. Nothing could be further from the truth. Hunters do not target sows with cubs, and it is not legal to harvest a sow with cubs. Thankfully, common sense prevailed and the spring bear hunt was reinstated in Ontario.

When I look to your beautiful province of British Columbia, and I hear that you are considering restricting 'trophy hunting' for grizzly bears, I have to ask you several questions. Are you basing your decisions on sound wildlife management principles? You must know that the main reason for bear cub mortality is predation from mature male bears. Trophy hunting, which targets these mature male bears, is actually a benefit to the species! That may be hard to believe if you are not a hunter, but it's true.

The management of bear populations via the regulated hunting of bears, trophy hunting especially, should be allowed to continue in BC. There is no valid scientific reason to close it. If you chose to ignore the science and sound wildlife management principles, there will be an increase in bear cub mortality and financial hardship for all segments of the economy currently involved in the legal hunt.

In closing, let me say that I am not against the closure of hunting seasons to protect a given animal population. But these decisions need to be based on science, not emotion.
 
Well done and thanks Jay, they need to hear from folks outside too.

Suther said:
Does that land fall in the mid coast timber supply area that they are planning to close?

Buckchaser, as Ardent points out its very band dependant. There are a few very vocal bands that are making big bucks on ecotourism, and they are the ones who are pro ban. Besides that, the ban basically doesn't effect a lot of bands (as long as the hunt is on traditional land, they can keep the skull and hide).

Ardent you are more on the inside than I, what do you think the chances are of the Liberals reversing this ban if reelected?
Click to expand...

The mid coast timber supply area was erroneously linked on this site by another knowledgeable member accidentally as being the previous name for the great bear rainforest. It would be nice if that was the case but the eco folks had a much greater vision, the mid coast timber supply area is one small pocket (though geographically large) of a much, much broader area of the coast designated the great bear. The entire coast and up in behind the Alaska panhandle from halfway up Vancouver Island is the great bear now. Literally almost the entire coast of B.C., not just a mid coast pocket, I'm north of the mid coast timber supply area anyhow. Yes if the Liberals regain power, we can only hope, there is a very good chance of a reversal. The coast will be harder depending how much paperwork the NDP manages to throw on it as a "conservancy".

E87RAVm.jpg

gqWufg5.jpg
 
Suther said:
I agree we need to be a united front. But we can't win if our goal is to stop the ban entirely. The current political climate means that it's impossible. If we do damage control, we might get somewhere. If we fight the ban outright we're going to get nowhere.
Click to expand...

So your answer is to throw a certain demographic of hunters under the bus? Maybe 20 years down the road, all hunting will be considered a bloodsport and only target shooting will be allowed. What would you say to that? You certainly couldn't complain about the IPSC crowd not coming on side.
Face the facts, no one needs to hunt to survive in this day and age. Anything involving a firearm is a sport. There is no country in the world I know where firearms enthusiasts are so divided. It's really pathetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom