Polar Bears Are In Serious Danger, Thanks To The NRA

A quota is assigned to different areas and in some cases part of the quota is sold to sporthunters. If those hunts don't sell they shoot them themselves. The community may benefit more if a sporthunter takes the bear but individual locals would rather have a hide to sell themselves. The number taken doesn't change, it's just a matter of who clobbers it. The one thing that would change is that with legal importation to the states the price would sky rocket. Personally; and admittedly completely selfishly I'd rather things stay the same to keep the price within my reach.

For those talking about 100,000 bear hunts could they please send me a list of those willing to pay that? I cN get bear hunts all day long for 25,000 as can anyone that bothered to ask. With that list of high rollers I could resell them and never work another day of my life. When we were up in Uluhoktok the prce was a non negotiable 25 and that had sold a grand total of zero hunts. The locals had no problem with that state of affairs; though I'm sure the office would have appreciated the business. Not enough to drop their price a nickel though.
 
Dogleg said:
For those talking about 100,000 bear hunts could they please send me a list of those willing to pay that? I can get bear hunts all day long for 25,000 as can anyone that bothered to ask. With that list of high rollers I could resell them and never work another day...
Click to expand...

You missed my point...

The article expressed a fear that "demand" for polar bears would bring about their demise "if" the legislation passed allowing the trophy skulls/hides to be imported... my point was if this were true and demand sky rocketed, then the reciprocal supply would follow pace, vis-a-vis "value."

$100,000 was a facetious, arbitrary number indicating this fantasy "skyrocket" demand...

My point would be, the price for a bear hunt will reflect the demand for a bear hunt... so if USA legislation inflates demand... we inflate price... the guides and communities benefit, and we still issue the same number of tags.
 
hoytcanon said:
Or grand mustache as compensation... ;)
Click to expand...

Douglas being the ultimate hunter used that mustache not for compensation, but to aid in his attempt to mimic a tasty bearded seal! Once the trap was set, that bear was doomed. The Inuit and his .338 were just for show.

bearded-seal_1599259i_zpsrmiv0tua.jpg
 
They were listed as "threatened" only because of lies and fraudulent reports.

Do these eco-loons not know that we have this thing called a limit on the number of hunting licenses?
 
hoytcanon said:
You missed my point...

The article expressed a fear that "demand" for polar bears would bring about their demise "if" the legislation passed allowing the trophy skulls/hides to be imported... my point was if this were true and demand sky rocketed, then the reciprocal supply would follow pace, vis-a-vis "value."

$100,000 was a facetious, arbitrary number indicating this fantasy "skyrocket" demand...

My point would be, the price for a bear hunt will reflect the demand for a bear hunt... so if USA legislation inflates demand... we inflate price... the guides and communities benefit, and we still issue the same number of tags.
Click to expand...

We're probably not too far apart on this. Same amount of tags, higher prices. Some benefit from higher prices, some don't. Individual local hunters don't and from what I've seen they are fine with shooting their own bears and buying a new sled once in a while with the hide money. Some will make a few bucks guiding though, and the office would probably prefer to sell all of them. I don't and I'm fine with things staying the same as they are until I get my polar bear. Its not like I get to decide the issue anyway.
 
Maybe a tempest in a teapot ... read the amendment: .. as I read it ... legislation will not open up the importation of polar bear "parts" taken today .. or in the future. Any one read differently?? I havent read all the cross references though...

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/s405/text

(D)Polar bear parts
(i)In general
Notwithstanding subparagraphs (A) and (C)(ii), subsection (d)(3), and sections 101 and 102, the Secretary of the Interior shall, expeditiously after the date on which the expiration of the applicable 30-day period described in subsection (d)(2) expires, issue a permit for the importation of any polar bear part (other than an internal organ) from a polar bear taken in a sport hunt in Canada to any person—
(I)who submits, with the permit application, proof that the polar bear was legally harvested by the person before February 18, 1997; or
(II)who submitted, with a permit application submitted before May 15, 2008, proof that the polar bear was legally harvested from a polar bear population from which a sport-hunted trophy could be imported before May 15, 2008, in accordance with section 18.30(i) of title 50, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor regulation) by the person before May 15, 2008.
(ii)Applicability of prohibition on the importation of a depleted species
(I)Parts legally harvested before February 18, 1997
(aa)In general
Sections 101(a)(3)(B) and 102(b)(3) shall not apply to the importation of any polar bear part authorized by a permit issued under clause (i)(I).
(bb)Applicability
Item (aa) shall not apply to polar bear parts imported before June 12, 1997.
(II)Parts legally harvested before May 15, 2008
(aa)In general
Sections 101(a)(3)(B) and 102(b)(3) shall not apply to the importation of any polar bear part authorized by a permit issued under clause (i)(II).
(bb)Applicability
Item (aa) shall not apply to polar bear parts imported before the date of enactment of the Bipartisan Sportsmen's Act of 2015.
Click to expand...
 
"The bill would restrict the EPA from controlling lead ammunition," Merry said.

This alone would make the bill worth passing!
 
The ban on importation of polar bears to the U. S. had one major consequence. It lowered the value of polar bears to northern communities. They are still getting killed , but now fewer mature males that are shot. (meaning more cubs will be cannibalized) . The annual Fur Harvesters auction in North Bay , Ontario, now has Chinese buyers paying $12,000 for Polar bear hides, instead of an American paying more for a hunt.
I have always found the NRA a bit to radical for my taste , but I have to admit , I support them in this case!
 
Canada counts it's bears . Our hunting system is sustainable , whats your problem . Go ask people living in Thompson Manitoba what they think , not people sipping lattes at starbucks
 
I read the article on MSN.com the other day, and think it is just another example of anti-gun and anti hunting B.S. I'm a Yankee from Michigan and polar bears are very rare here. They're right up there with rhino's and elephants. I do know that they can be a pest certain times of the year in Hudson's Bay and other areas. I'm sure Canadian wildlife personnel can figure out where and when to have a hunt and calculate a bag limit.....all without the help of the Antis.

We've got a similar problem here at home with wolves. The Antis got wolves re-listed as endangered....which they are not as Michigan DNR will attest.. I don't think it will last. Wildlife management has to be in the hands of our paid professionals, not in the courts or houses of government., and free of interference by outside pressure groups.

Pete
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom