Raincoast

[Reel Time]

^ Can't I be a redneck who hunts but cant't stomach the Trophy hunt of our Apex Bear? I dont have issues with the fishery restrictions in SVI either. I think as we load the province with more people its inevitable that pressure on habitat will alone be reason for plummeting animal numbers. Unless your a skunk, racoon, Eagle, Coyote ext.....

 

[halimark]

I consider myself neither. I am a hunter and fisherman, I LOVE both. I do not cry or feel any weird sexual thing (as some stated) when I shoot a bear, I feel remorse and respect for EVERY animal I kill. Be it a bear or the accidental P-Cod floating behind my boat. All life is equal, but I am a hunter. I understand that hunters pay their way and will continue. Maybe the government will change the way conservation in BC is supported. A US model sounds good, tax and laws. I think utilization of every species that can support is best. Species that pay=stay. Undisputed truth. Some said, not very difficult for all user's to enjoy our G-bears with some minor reg/boundary changes. (this already exist in some areas)

I also listened to the news the day of closure announcement. The people who lobbied for the closure stated that it was a great decision, they were ecstatic, then went on to say how poaching would now be a bigger problem. (true) In the next statement he asked the government for more money to protect the (his) bears. In places (Africa) without government agencies hunting companies start and pay for anti poaching patrols, purchase drones, train people, protect the resource. Users of the resource should pay, this is not the case with the non hunting user communities worldwide. Private users are out to make a profit as its their livelihood. Time will tell how our G-Bears do. At least now the FN community have single control on G-Bear hunting in BC.

It is true what Kelly and others stated, hunters have been part of the problem with our public image, this continues today. If we want to gain larger public support we must clean up our act and image.

HM

 

[sly_karma]

I feel the same way Kelly. Everything is so polarised these days that it's hard to have a reasoned discussion despite holding differing views. Categorisation happens almost instantly, followed by dismissal. The irony is virtually none of us are 100% black and white in our views and personalities. Much in my background and circumstances would lead people to assume I'm a conservative: white male over 50, Anglo, live in the Okanagan, business owner and employer, contractor/developer. So easy to sum me up in one sentence, and either accept or dismiss my opinion based on that. But read my opinions on politics, wine, craft beer, social issues, immigration without knowing about my basic background and you could easily sum me up as another city-based liberal elitist. But what's that? You go fishing too? Does not compute!

It's human nature to be complex and nuanced, but it's also human nature to categorise and to push away that which is different.

 

[IronNoggin]

Quotes from alt-right redneck hunting journalist with absolutely no credibility are not science.

Typical. Jump immediately to shooting the messenger, and attempting to belittle the same without any background research whatsoever. Why don't you do a little digging on that, and get back too us with what you find. I already well understand the fellow is MUCH more qualified to speak to the matter than are you sir.

Neither that author, no I suggested the cats were sole reason for the declines in mule deer. But they are indeed a serious compounding factor when 68% (government figure) of the mortalities in the herd today are directly due to the cats.

By the way, why don't you now try and refute the information on bighorn populations crashes, and livestock depredation...

... As for the above post, I think you should do some research on Cristina. I’ve worked a lot with her and she has done an immense amount for our environment, even if you disagree with the grizzly stance...

Sorry you feel that way Kelly.
I did my research on your "friend". Most notably so in direct discussion with two of the world's leading Polar Bear Biologists. They had a fair bit to say about her, and the sensationalist nature of the video produced. I put a little more stock in these Professional's opinions than any others. Sorry, simply the way it is...

I have to agree however that this is a slippery slope. Fishing and hunting have a place in BC and it is certainly coming under threat. Everyone seems to be so far left and right these days that it’s painful to even try and get into a logical discussion. No matter what you say, you’re a liberal hippy or a conservative redneck...

This I VERY much agree with though...

The Slippery Slope has been well greased.
I do find it somewhat surprising that so many fail to see that through their rose colored blinders...

Nog

 

[wildmanyeah]

As my dad said this decision was

"concessions to the green party good thing salmon are federal"

"people that have never seen a grizzle bear in the wild are swaying governments"

"anyway it is what it is"

 

[OldBlackDog]

I have to agree however that this is a slippery slope. Fishing and hunting have a place in BC and it is certainly coming under threat. Everyone seems to be so far left and right these days that it’s painful to even try and get into a logical discussion. No matter what you say, you’re a liberal hippy or a conservative redneck...
This I VERY much agree with though...

The Slippery Slope has been well greased.
I do find it somewhat surprising that so many fail to see that through their rose colored blinders...

Nog


And that is a huge concern that will become obvious very soon.

How are the readers/ members of this site going to defend their right to fishing?
Especially knowing that the opposition will be using whales and seals against them?

There will be NO science it will be all politics.
It took less than 5000 emails to shut down bear hunting.

The Greens are already in the Ministers offices saying close down sports fishing.

 

[IronNoggin]

Grizzly Bear Hunt Statement - Wild Sheep Society of British Columbia
From Science to Politics; the British Columbia Government Ends the Grizzly Bear Hunt

On December 18, 2017, the provincial government announced an end to grizzly bear hunting in British Columbia. This decision completely undermines scientific management of wildlife and is a strong departure from the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation. Independent scientific studies and Auditor General Carol Bellringer’s report confirm the sustainability of the BC grizzly bear hunt.

By ending the grizzly bear hunt, British Columbia loses its main source of revenue used to conserve grizzly bears and their habitat. The government currently has no plans to replace this revenue and find an alternative solution to managing these populations. The WSSBC is alarmed and concerned that the provincial government has no plans to address the conservation challenges grizzly bears face, including habitat encroachment through land-use patterns and activities .The government has not given any consideration about the negative ecological impacts this decision will have on all wildlife species.

The WSSBC has been involved in the consultation process after the government’s announcement to ban the ‘trophy hunting of grizzly bears’. Throughout this consultative process the WSSBC and other stakeholders were engaged in discussions regarding ‘trophy parts’ and were assured by government that there were no plans to end the grizzly bear hunt. The sudden change in regulation, without consultation, shows the government cannot act in good-faith on behalf of its citizens. The provincial wide end of the grizzly bear hunt completely undermines the transparency of government decision making in British Columbia.

This decision was based solely on a political agenda and emotionally charged rhetoric funded by non government organizations. The WSSBC believes there is absolutely no place for politics in wildlife management.

In the coming months the WSSBC will continue to engage with government and support the scientific management of wildlife and transparent decision making processes in British Columbia.


Yours in conservation,

Rodney Zeeman,
President
Wild Sheep Society of BC

 

[GLG]

Lesson from the Arctic.

The truth about polar bears
Depending on whom you ask, the North’s sentinel species is either on the edge of extinction or an environmental success story. An in-depth look at the complicated, contradictory and controversial science behind the sound bites.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/article/truth-about-polar-bears

 

[SpringVelocity]

What a great post. This is the best out of this thread and is spot on.

I'm not a hunter, and I'm a bit of a greenie around the oil/gas debate and a lefty as far social programs are concerned, but I do have extensive scientific training and an unfortunate tendency to see both sides of an argument. It's easy to see that this decision is based on emotion and political positioning rather than science. The mostly metropolitan ridings where the government's power is centred have little knowledge of or connection to hunting and will either applaud the change or be apathetic to it. For the NDP, this is one of the easiest to fulfill of their many campaign promises, as the negative response to it will come from relatively few people, and those few are widely dispersed and largely living in ridings held by the opposition. For the government, it's easy gain for little pain. This is reality in the political arena, and decisions like this happen constantly over the years, and governments of all parties will do it when they see political gain to be made despite factual evidence to the contrary (long gun registry implementation and dismantling, cuts to parks and scientific research, mandatory minimum sentence legislation, and many more...)

The science doesn't matter as the waters have been amply muddied by years of emotive pleas for the banning of grizzly hunting. The message to the public has been consistent and repetitive: grizzlies are under grave threat, the hunting is unnecessary, trophy hunting is especially bad because the meat isn't used (I guess the animals and insects that make so many meals from a bear carcass don't count). A few environmental organisations have made a concerted effort in the past decade to push these messages and you have to say they've been effective, even though misguided. They've constantly used the label 'trophy hunting' to the point where the media uses it for all mentions of grizzly hunting. It's devastatingly simple - deeply judgmental without the casual user even realizing it. Most people have no idea that the grizzly population is stable and that hunting is carefully monitored by wildlife biologists as a tool to help maintain balance in the ecosystem, as well as providing constructive social and business opportunities.

Members here need to understand one key aspect that drives the thinking of those of the green persuasion: 'managing' the environment. For many who identify as eco-friendly, there is a core belief that the natural world must be preserved exactly as it is now. That means not killing anything, plant or animal, unless it's perceived to be an exotic or pest species. Furthermore, man is evil and we must somehow remove or reduce our influence from the Natural World. Never mind that ecosystems have always been dynamic and constantly changing and that we can prevent those changes about as easily as we can hold back the tide. The eco lobby is deeply suspicious of any type of environmental management, unless it is in the form of parks management (which consists of stoutly preventing all development and reducing human presence to only the fit and deserving). They generally perceive forest management, fishery management and wildlife management to be unnecessary, unnatural and corrupted by business interests. "Back in time, there was no such thing as wildlife management, and everything was fine. All we need to do now is stop killing the animals/trees/fish and everything will be fine again." They are suspicious of the management systems we do have in place, convinced that they are a cover operation for Big Business who rape the land and steal our grandchildren's inheritances. There's certainly some bad examples in the past of natural resource management - like all the introduced species that were supposed to solve a problem but ended up causing much larger ones - but the opposite approach of banning everything is equally misguided.

 

[OldBlackDog]

https://fabiusmaximus.com/2017/12/10/starving-polar-bears-face-of-climate-change/

Lesson from the Arctic.

The truth about polar bears
Depending on whom you ask, the North’s sentinel species is either on the edge of extinction or an environmental success story. An in-depth look at the complicated, contradictory and controversial science behind the sound bites.
https://www.canadiangeographic.ca/article/truth-about-polar-bears

 

[Charter Tofino]

To reiterate, the video was never posted saying this starving bear is directly caused by climate change. The video is to start the climate change conversation and science has told us that Polar Bears will be the canary in the cave as the world warms. Therefore they’re the perfect poster child for this discussion and this footage has brought the conversation into households around the world.

The headlines and opinions on this topic go back to my previous post of way too far left or right. Nobody seems to be able to read between the lines. The fact someone wrote such a meaningless article thinking they caught “fake news” is the perfect example. This bear is not scientific proof of global warming, it was never claimed to be. Science has shown us data that is proof. This bear is just a visual to make people start waking up to the scientific data that is out there.

 

[california]

Typical. Jump immediately to shooting the messenger, and attempting to belittle the same without any background research whatsoever. Why don't you do a little digging on that, and get back too us with what you find. I already well understand the fellow is MUCH more qualified to speak to the matter than are you sir.

Neither that author, no I suggested the cats were sole reason for the declines in mule deer. But they are indeed a serious compounding factor when 68% (government figure) of the mortalities in the herd today are directly due to the cats.

By the way, why don't you now try and refute the information on bighorn populations crashes, and livestock depredation...

Nog

I didn't mention the sheep because the premise on those by the "author" was even more idiotic than the premise on the deer. The sheep are endangered because of trophy hunters and some help from sheep ranchers spreading domestic sheep disease, nothing to do with big cats. The populations have rebounded somewhat since they were declared endangered in the 90s. So of course you believe the cougars need to pay for hunters almost wiping out the sheep so guys like you could hang the bighorns heads on the bloody wall? You are a typical white guy with a high powered gun who can fix all that is wrong by killing something else. You, I am happy to say, are a dinosaur who's time has come and gone. Blood hunts so guys can get off on killing cougars in CA (after it is chased by a pack of hounds up a tree and the "brave" hunter shoots it out of the branches) , or Grizzlies in BC are not coming back, but there are still plenty of areas you can blow away black bears.

 

[OldBlackDog]

And it continues. Was Grizzly Bears, now Cougars. Next ?

https://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/onlin...st-kills-cougar-in-northern-alberta-1.3730431

 

[IronNoggin]

LOL! You REALLY are on a roll now!

I didn't mention the sheep because the premise on those by the "author" was even more idiotic than the premise on the deer. The sheep are endangered because of trophy hunters and some help from sheep ranchers spreading domestic sheep disease, nothing to do with big cats.

Oddly enough you have managed to identify one compounding factor (domestic sheep) while tossing in a complete falsehood (hunters). Not overly surprising I guess... Might be somewhat interesting though for the rest of the audience to understand that it was those damned hunters that contributed the most coin, and the most physical effort to try and bring the sheep back... And still do today. Again quite oddly, those organizations opposed to hunting the cats were dismally absent in both the funding, and actual action departments. Hmmm...

In 1999 the California State Legislature itself recognized the serious problem of cougar depredation on the sheep (who then numbered around 100 in the Sierra's). As a consequence (based upon information provided by Science btw) they voted overwhelmingly to pursue the management of the cats through California's Fish & Wildlife Department. Although somewhat expensive (> 1/4 mill US) the project was reasonably successful, and the sheep population began to rebound.

A little background on that matter: http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/bighorn.pdf

Scientific references that directly dispute your erroneous claims:

http://www.hcn.org/issues/49.9/Wildlife-Services-mountain-lion-killing

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ra_Nevada_and_Granite_Mountains_of_California

https://books.google.ca/books?id=Th...predation on california bighorn sheep&f=false

There is of course more. MUCH more that is.
Usually is when facts are considered in the equation.
But that should suffice to get the gist of it.
In short, you are quite out to lunch in this regard.

You are a typical white guy with a high powered gun who can fix all that is wrong by killing something else. You, I am happy to say, are a dinosaur who's time has come and gone. Blood hunts so guys can get off on killing cougars in CA (after it is chased by a pack of hounds up a tree and the "brave" hunter shoots it out of the branches) , or Grizzlies in BC are not coming back, but there are still plenty of areas you can blow away black bears.

And you sir (using the term quite loosely) know nothing of what you speak.

I have killed but one grizzly - a Barren Ground Grizzly, at the direct request of both the local Inuit and the management authority. You see, he had taken a liking to creating serious problems when encountering humans, and indicated a decided preference for cubs (and occasionally their mothers) as food. It was in his own populations best interest he be removed. I found no joy in the task whatsoever, but did the job as requested.

I have never killed another, and have no desire to do so.
That said, I have seen literally hundreds, many rather close up in my career.
Have you ever laid eyes on even one outside of a zoo?

I also have no interest in wandering to California to take down any of their cougars.
The only time I ever take a cat was alongside my Grandfather (Government Trapper) in the mid-sixties.
A livestock killer that was marked for removal.

Black bears I have generally left alone.
Yes, I did take one down this year, after he destroyed hundreds of dollars of my gear, and terrorized the local ranching community. The response from the latter was great relief. The response from myself was to use every singly possible piece of that animal as I would with any other.

Trying to make this issue personal with me is a Fool's Errand.
I am not the issue under discussion.
The outright LYING by our government, and their dropping of science based management in favor of misplaced emotion is.
Try to focus if you can...

Interesting handle by the way. Rather fits IMHO.
You constantly seem to think the world revolves around you and your opinion, and no--one else's counts beyond a reference point for you to spout your own. Directly parallels with the state whose name you so gleefully share...

Care to get into the livestock issues after the cat hunts were banned in that state by any chance...

Waiting with bated breath...

Nog

 

[Admin]

Time to back away from the personal references in this thread.

 

[J-GLOBAL]

Neither that author, no I suggested the cats were sole reason for the declines in mule deer. But they are indeed a serious compounding factor when 68% (government figure) of the mortalities in the herd today are directly due to the cats.

By the way, why don't you now try and refute the information on bighorn populations crashes, and livestock depredation...

Nog

And this quote from your earlier post:
The State's population of bighorn sheep was so decimated they hit the Endangered Species List directly due to the increase in cat numbers. More taken out.
Mule deer populations plummeted, no surprise that 68% of their mortalities were brought about by the cats. More killed.

The above is simply UNTRUE. What is in italics is Completely untrue. So why would you post something so completely untrue?

These are bizarre quotes, and its seems you either didn't read the article or you are purposefully misrepresenting what the article you reference says.

Nowhere does it say, or does anyone say, 68% of deaths of mule deer are due to the cats, or to predators. What it says is 68% of Mule Deer killed by predators are killed by mountain lions.

Even a cursory review of articles reveals the main reasons for the bighorn decline as:

hunting
competition from livestock grazing
diseases introduced by domestic livestock
and presently Habitat loss


Since this thread was on Grizzly hunt, and your post introduced:
There is an exceeding close parallel between what just happened with BC Grizzlies, and historically with California Mountain Lions.

and then what you posted regarding the Mountain Lions was basically Untrue, I don't get why you would post it?

Further, if these posts reflect your years of interaction with hunters, management based on science, etc., essentially, either you have an extreme bias or you simply have no idea what you are writing about.

 

[J-GLOBAL]

LOL! You REALLY are on a roll now!
Scientific references that directly dispute your erroneous claims:

http://www.hcn.org/issues/49.9/Wildlife-Services-mountain-lion-killing

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ra_Nevada_and_Granite_Mountains_of_California

https://books.google.ca/books?id=ThUyAQAAMAAJ&pg=SA4-PA57&lpg=SA4-PA57&dq=effects+of+mountain+lion+predation+on+california+bighorn+sheep&source=bl&ots=EpWar4LhzI&sig=aNbO9vuabImyW0qYNttCi8ex5jw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9m82coprYAhVExGMKHRRlDJc4ChDoAQhJMAE#v=onepage&q=effects of mountain lion predation on california bighorn sheep&f=false

Once again, even the links you provide tell us that the massive decline in Bighorn were due to man.
Once they hit a low enough level, then predation becomes a factor - and in the article they are discussing a total population of 400 in 5 separate locations, in other words, on average less than 100 per location. Nowhere does it say that the Mountain Lions became a problem after the ban was put in place.
For those that don't want to do the reading:
A combination of hunting and livestock disease drove bighorns to near extinction.
Once they got so low they 'stocks' couldn't handle predation, MAN began hunting the predators so they wouldn't kill bighorns.

 

[california]

Since this thread was on Grizzly hunt, and your post introduced:
There is an exceeding close parallel between what just happened with BC Grizzlies, and historically with California Mountain Lions.

Perhaps I just don't understand the implications of the article published in the esteemed scientific publication "gohunt.com", Since as Iron Noggin says it is an "Exceeding close parrallel" (sic). As such I think I need to re-frame my perspective. These Trophy Grizzly hunters are not rich thrillseekers seeking to simply populate facebook pages with kill shots and cover trophy walls, they are the brave defenders of the line between the wild and civilization, the "thin orange line" if you will. If it were not for these brave grizzly killers, as in California where according to gohunt.com, runaway cougar populations are decimating ungulate populations, we can now expect the same devastation of deer and elk populations in BC. Furthermore the article outlines huge increases in cougar interactions with humans, as they are invading populated areas. Without the Trophy hunt, and keeping to the "exceeding close" theme we could now expect the exploding grizzly population to aggressively start expanding their range, its only a matter of time before Whistler, Squamish, even West and North Vancouver are over run by Grizzlies, devouring pets and mauling families out for evening strolls. We all need to heed the warnings outlined in "gohunt.com" . We should all be outraged that the Government of BC, as the State of CA before it, is not following the unbiased recommendations of this noted publication!

 

[california]

LOL! You REALLY are on a roll now!



Oddly enough you have managed to identify one compounding factor (domestic sheep) while tossing in a complete falsehood (hunters). Not overly surprising I guess... Might be somewhat interesting though for the rest of the audience to understand that it was those damned hunters that contributed the most coin, and the most physical effort to try and bring the sheep back... And still do today. Again quite oddly, those organizations opposed to hunting the cats were dismally absent in both the funding, and actual action departments. Hmmm...

In 1999 the California State Legislature itself recognized the serious problem of cougar depredation on the sheep (who then numbered around 100 in the Sierra's). As a consequence (based upon information provided by Science btw) they voted overwhelmingly to pursue the management of the cats through California's Fish & Wildlife Department. Although somewhat expensive (> 1/4 mill US) the project was reasonably successful, and the sheep population began to rebound.

A little background on that matter: http://sciencecases.lib.buffalo.edu/cs/files/bighorn.pdf

Scientific references that directly dispute your erroneous claims:

http://www.hcn.org/issues/49.9/Wildlife-Services-mountain-lion-killing

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ra_Nevada_and_Granite_Mountains_of_California

https://books.google.ca/books?id=ThUyAQAAMAAJ&pg=SA4-PA57&lpg=SA4-PA57&dq=effects+of+mountain+lion+predation+on+california+bighorn+sheep&source=bl&ots=EpWar4LhzI&sig=aNbO9vuabImyW0qYNttCi8ex5jw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9m82coprYAhVExGMKHRRlDJc4ChDoAQhJMAE#v=onepage&q=effects of mountain lion predation on california bighorn sheep&f=false

There is of course more. MUCH more that is.
Usually is when facts are considered in the equation.
But that should suffice to get the gist of it.
In short, you are quite out to lunch in this regard.



And you sir (using the term quite loosely) know nothing of what you speak.

I have killed but one grizzly - a Barren Ground Grizzly, at the direct request of both the local Inuit and the management authority. You see, he had taken a liking to creating serious problems when encountering humans, and indicated a decided preference for cubs (and occasionally their mothers) as food. It was in his own populations best interest he be removed. I found no joy in the task whatsoever, but did the job as requested.

I have never killed another, and have no desire to do so.
That said, I have seen literally hundreds, many rather close up in my career.
Have you ever laid eyes on even one outside of a zoo?

I also have no interest in wandering to California to take down any of their cougars.
The only time I ever take a cat was alongside my Grandfather (Government Trapper) in the mid-sixties.
A livestock killer that was marked for removal.

Black bears I have generally left alone.
Yes, I did take one down this year, after he destroyed hundreds of dollars of my gear, and terrorized the local ranching community. The response from the latter was great relief. The response from myself was to use every singly possible piece of that animal as I would with any other.

Trying to make this issue personal with me is a Fool's Errand.
I am not the issue under discussion.
The outright LYING by our government, and their dropping of science based management in favor of misplaced emotion is.
Try to focus if you can...

Interesting handle by the way. Rather fits IMHO.
You constantly seem to think the world revolves around you and your opinion, and no--one else's counts beyond a reference point for you to spout your own. Directly parallels with the state whose name you so gleefully share...

Care to get into the livestock issues after the cat hunts were banned in that state by any chance...

Waiting with bated breath...

Nog

Carry on...

California

 

[halimark]

I'm done with this thread, sorry Nog the anti's will NEVER see the truth. As normal they are google and living room experts, they no nothing of science and or CITES and what's going on with the worlds wildlife. Somehow they ignore the verified truth but believe the send us money to save groups. More importantly I am guessing that they did not donate 1/5 the funds I and other world hunters did o protect species both hunted and not. Scary is that some have no problem consuming, wasting and killing some species while stating how killing one other makes them cry, when all are legal activities. Most probably think the age old story of the bison driven to near extinction due to hunters shooting them. As a vet maybe some fishing from another thread. I also must plan my next trip.

HM