Ardent
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
There was an interesting article recently that showed Tourists who want to photograph Grizzly Bears bring much more revenue than people who shoot the bears.
It could be a simple matter of economics.
That was an extremely biased article, I read it too. It was heavily influenced by the native band as well.
First and foremost it completely ignores the fact we can, and already do, do both. Hunting Grizzlies doesn't mean less bears, quite the opposite, by removing the mature males that kill cubs (mature males kill cubs as a natural population control), and who consume the most food you maintain the health of the population and allow a sustainable, renewable harvest.
So, what do you think pays more, tourist viewing? Or hunting AND tourist viewing? Ask Dogleg, he hunted my area this year- there's no shortage of Grizzlies on the coast. If you're against bear hunting, this likely isn't the best forum for you.
you are but one apple in the barrel Angus
and while your opinion and posts are certainly respected here...... I wouldn't be in such a hurry to defend the GOABC if I was you.
the truth is out there and it's not good, denying it is pointless.
Except they advocate for the continuation of the Grizzly hunt more effectively than any other organisation, and they cover us with insurance I'm required to have far more affordably than any other option. Reality is there's good and bad in everything, the GOABC will prove instrumental in protecting the hunt. I lodged a complaint this year with the GOABC in the internal survey about the bungling of resident relations. They're sensitive to it and the questions asked to members made it clear to me the importance of improving resident relations is at the top of their concerns this year. And rightly so, there have been cataclysmic #### ups.
Last edited:




















































