MUST READ about Grizzly - Jim Shockey's post re death of mother and baby daughter

Agree or disagree with Jim Shockey's motives, I'm a northerner and I know he's right. A grizzly is as much of a threat to human life in some parts of BC and YT as your " gang bangers" in Toronto, Surrey and Montreal. Every hunter here understands this and acts accordingly, there isn't a year goes by without bear attacks, sometimes fatal. No, they are not evil, nor a monster, but they are masters in their own domain and when they believe they are invincible will be the apex predator. No sportsman including myself advocates eliminating these animals, but there are times and places ( and animals) where their numbers need to be controlled. Those who live in cities and can't understand or at least accept it should stand aside and let the people who are directly affected run the show. We northerners don't tell you how to solve your gang problems.
Jim Shockey is legitimately furious, knowing that this problem bear could have been dealt with in the past and he likely has some remorse that by breaking the law he may have been able to prevent this tragedy. Good on him for venting, screaming as loud as he can, he will get attention to this problem where all the whining on Gunnutz can't ever hope to reach.
 
sorry i really disagree with that opinion.

it is getting worse. some are using that tragic event to push their business agenda. i really like Jim Shockey but it went too far especially knowing that during the plan on grizzly management nor him nor his business partner came to talk. i hope he has documented his request for a bear to be killed because being too dangerous ...

to sum up dancing on the graves is not something people should do because they are campaigning or want more hunt on their area ...

Totally disagree with your point of view here...Shockey is correct when it comes to grizzlies, city idiots shouldnt be writing the play book!
 
There are dangerous animals in the bush.
A human being which is essentially much easier to catch and kill than a deer is in harms way when in the wilderness that contains hungry predators.
That's why when I'm in the bush I go armed and keep a constant watchful eyes on the unarmed members of my family when they are in there.
If you let unarmed people wander around in bear country eventually there is going to be a tragedy when the animal follows its instincts and preys on them.
People who live their lives in bear country need to possess tools of self defense and be trained and competent in their use.
This is all been well known fact for hundreds of years.
No miraculous revelation here.
Don't need Shockey or anyone else to tell me what I've known since I was a kid.
 
Very sad, but you go out in the bush trap and kill as many things as you can for money. Nature does it's own fighting back and kills you for survival.

So the fix here is to encroach on their territory even more, complain they are there and cull them? Humans think far to highly of themselves. Destroy all nature, go find more nature, get mad nature doesn't bow to your greatness destroy that nature...

Keep seeing ''problem bear", the bear is trying to live in the last place it has left. Humans come and kill everything they can for profit and the bear is the problem in this situation? Again, superiority complex...

I am far from anti-hunting but poop goes both ways and you can't play the game without losing sometimes...


Keep on fuddin'...
 
Last edited:
Very sad, but you go out in the bush trap and kill as many things as you can for money. Nature does it's own fighting back and kills you for survival.

So the fix here is to encroach on their territory even more, complain they are there and cull them? Humans think far to highly of themselves. Destroy all nature, go find more nature, get mad nature doesn't bow to your greatness destroy that nature...

Keep seeing ''problem bear", the bear is trying to live in the last place it has left. Humans come and kill everything they can for profit and the bear is the problem in this situation? Again, superiority complex...

I am far from anti-hunting but poop goes both ways and you can't play the game without losing sometimes...

:bangHead:

………………………………………………………...
 
Very sad, but you go out in the bush trap and kill as many things as you can for money. Nature does it's own fighting back and kills you for survival.

So the fix here is to encroach on their territory even more, complain they are there and cull them? Humans think far to highly of themselves. Destroy all nature, go find more nature, get mad nature doesn't bow to your greatness destroy that nature...

Keep seeing ''problem bear", the bear is trying to live in the last place it has left. Humans come and kill everything they can for profit and the bear is the problem in this situation? Again, superiority complex...

I am far from anti-hunting but poop goes both ways and you can't play the game without losing sometimes...

Me thinks you are not as far as you thinks you are.
 
What's the big deal and all the deep philosophic crap?
It's just basic common sense.
Grizzly bears were dangerous predators a week ago, last year, 100 years ago as they are today.
People have been killed by defensive and predatory animals before.
When you're in bear country you carry defensive tools that you know how to use competently.
If you want to be an idiot like Treadwell and think you're "one with the bear" and wander around without defensive tools that you know how to use then they're eventually going to find your tooth fillings in a pile of bear poop.
 
sorry i really disagree with that opinion.

it is getting worse. some are using that tragic event to push their business agenda. i really like Jim Shockey but it went too far especially knowing that during the plan on grizzly management nor him nor his business partner came to talk. i hope he has documented his request for a bear to be killed because being too dangerous ...

to sum up dancing on the graves is not something people should do because they are campaigning or want more hunt on their area ...

Exactly.

RIP girls.
 
What's the big deal and all the deep philosophic crap?
It's just basic common sense.
Grizzly bears were dangerous predators a week ago, last year, 100 years ago as they are today.
People have been killed by defensive and predatory animals before.
When you're in bear country you carry defensive tools that you know how to use competently.
If you want to be an idiot like Treadwell and think you're "one with the bear" and wander around without defensive tools that you know how to use then they're eventually going to find your tooth fillings in a pile of bear poop.

Exactly. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
 
What's the big deal and all the deep philosophic crap?
It's just basic common sense.
Grizzly bears were dangerous predators a week ago, last year, 100 years ago as they are today.
People have been killed by defensive and predatory animals before.
When you're in bear country you carry defensive tools that you know how to use competently.
If you want to be an idiot like Treadwell and think you're "one with the bear" and wander around without defensive tools that you know how to use then they're eventually going to find your tooth fillings in a pile of bear poop.

warning-frequency-of-human-bear-encounters-hikers-please-take-extra-precautions-19912105.png
 
Exactly. Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

yeppers and you will be winning more stupid prizes with reduced bear harvest.

Kinda wonder what the outcome would have been if she was allowed to carry a sidearm?
 
As an ATC holder in the past I was never under the illusion that my revolver was the invincible death machine that the government thinks but I figured that in the case of a bear attack it would be better than my knife, rock hammer or fingernails.
 
My thoughts and prayers to this family.
I am not a big fan of Mr. Shockey, but I do agree with a lot of what he is saying. Which is odd for me, because I hated his shows.
But, you got remember that your dealing with a car sized rodent that is very cunning, very adaptable, and very dangerous! You don't just grow to be 1000 lbs plus by being a just dumb weak animal.
When bears push other bears out of their area, they do come into settled areas, and learn fast about the new area. Like your livestock, yours dogs and how many, and you being a two footed slow moving lunch. They will claim it.

I will stop now, because my last bear rant got me a scat pile of infractions.
 
first bad timing, second the system that is working with him for quota on grizzly bear hunting. his quota: is 10 sow and 27 boars in total for his area ... not exactly what he is saying. third im sorry but few days ago we had a meeting on public management on grizzly hunting and did not hear anything from any outfitters including him.
fourth why i will rely on GO to tell us how many bears are roaming because he is the only hunting, no benefit for the local hunters and fifth where and whom did Jim contact about the dangerous bear ... and none sisxth the less why he didnt gave one of his guide a tag to kill that so dangerous bear.

again i call that dancing on graves and little low class but that is just me.

he is on a campaign good for him but locals may not agree and im a bear hunter.

Unfortunately Shockey's views would not be given mainstream media coverage if it were not for death of this woman and baby.

The GO has, probably, a better idea of how many bears are wandering around than the average hunter. Guaranteed he has a better idea than the antis in the city and those sitting in their cushy offices in Victoria. So yes, his views on population should carry some weight.


You say he is misleading about his quota. That may be true, I don't know. But even if it were untrue, the numerous facts he states, some of which I quoted, remain relevant and accurate.

https://www.canadiangunnutz.com/forum/showthread.php/1799056-future-of-Yukon-grizzly-hunting-is-on

havwe a read where outfitters didnt bother to be there ... im not anti nor agaisnt bear hunting but using some deaths to push their agenda well that is maybe just me but something is wrong ...


I too was invited to these kinds of discussions, in my capacity as a director of a Wildlife Association, and did not attend. I refused to attend and urged others to do so because it was a ruse to provide legitimacy to a "consultation" process that was BS from the get-go. Look at the Key references listed in the draft Conservation Plan you linked. You think this represents a scientific and legitimate approach?

Wind River Bear Institute - sounds like a place of higher learning, right? It is, in fact, their mission is the effective training and use of Karelian Bear Dogs, is to reduce human-caused bear mortality and conflicts worldwide to ensure the continued survival of all species of bears for future generations.

Southern Lakes Wildlife Co-ordinating Committee - The SLWCC is comprised of 6 First Nation Governments.

COSEWIC - an independent advisory panel to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada that meets twice a year to assess the status of wildlife species at risk of extinction. Members are wildlife biology experts from academia, government, non-governmental organizations and the private sector responsible for designating wildlife species in danger of disappearing from Canada.

Papers by Scott Slocombe, environmentalist, including - Respect for Grizzly Bears: An Aboriginal Approach for Co-existence and Resilience, which starts off with the following quote:
All I know is respect for bear. When I meet up a bear face to face in the bush, we talk to him and he look at us and pretty soon be turning away. We tell him we live on our own, this is my trail I travel on, for some day for myself. And you do the same out there where you make your living, you can just go ‘round there. Make your own living. Look at him for a little while he’ll go away. But if they charge us, then we will got no choice but shooting him... we don’t shoot him for fun or anything like that. Champagne and Aishihik First Nations Elder, 19 July 2004.

This does not sound like a fair and balanced approach. Why lend credibility when there is such bias evident?


Very sad, but you go out in the bush trap and kill as many things as you can for money. Nature does it's own fighting back and kills you for survival.

So the fix here is to encroach on their territory even more, complain they are there and cull them? Humans think far to highly of themselves. Destroy all nature, go find more nature, get mad nature doesn't bow to your greatness destroy that nature...

Keep seeing ''problem bear", the bear is trying to live in the last place it has left. Humans come and kill everything they can for profit and the bear is the problem in this situation? Again, superiority complex...

I am far from anti-hunting but poop goes both ways and you can't play the game without losing sometimes...

I suspect this person is trolling.
 
For me there's 2 kinds of bears.
The kind that is going about its business and isn't posing a threat and the kind that's acting aggressively or exhibiting predatory behavior to a degree that I consider a threat to my life or the lives of those around me.
Grizzlies/Browns have tried to run hunters off of their game kill. If that hunter is me it usually doesn't end well for the Grizzly/Brown.
My bear load that pushes a 405 grain Woodleigh Weldcore out the snout of my 1895GS ~ 1925fps takes care of the latter kind in short order.
If I'm hunting and carrying the 300 Win Mag I load the 200 grain Nosler PT bullet.
I consider it my responsibility to put down a bear that is behaving in a manner that would indicate it poses a danger to people.
I've been packing through the wilderness of most of Canada and the United States for over 50 years and know my sh!t when it comes to bears and other wilderness predators.
 
Unfortunately Shockey's views would not be given mainstream media coverage if it were not for death of this woman and baby.

The GO has, probably, a better idea of how many bears are wandering around than the average hunter. Guaranteed he has a better idea than the antis in the city and those sitting in their cushy offices in Victoria. So yes, his views on population should carry some weight.


You say he is misleading about his quota. That may be true, I don't know. But even if it were untrue, the numerous facts he states, some of which I quoted, remain relevant and accurate.




I too was invited to these kinds of discussions, in my capacity as a director of a Wildlife Association, and did not attend. I refused to attend and urged others to do so because it was a ruse to provide legitimacy to a "consultation" process that was BS from the get-go. Look at the Key references listed in the draft Conservation Plan you linked. You think this represents a scientific and legitimate approach?

Wind River Bear Institute - sounds like a place of higher learning, right? It is, in fact, their mission is the effective training and use of Karelian Bear Dogs, is to reduce human-caused bear mortality and conflicts worldwide to ensure the continued survival of all species of bears for future generations.

Southern Lakes Wildlife Co-ordinating Committee - The SLWCC is comprised of 6 First Nation Governments.

COSEWIC - an independent advisory panel to the Minister of Environment and Climate Change Canada that meets twice a year to assess the status of wildlife species at risk of extinction. Members are wildlife biology experts from academia, government, non-governmental organizations and the private sector responsible for designating wildlife species in danger of disappearing from Canada.

Papers by Scott Slocombe, environmentalist, including - Respect for Grizzly Bears: An Aboriginal Approach for Co-existence and Resilience, which starts off with the following quote:


This does not sound like a fair and balanced approach. Why lend credibility when there is such bias evident?




I suspect this person is trolling.

you are right and im wrong...
 
Back
Top Bottom