petition to keep the BC Grizzly hunt alive

[Sitkaspruce]

Its funny to me how I think every hunter in this thread said they wouldnt kill a grizzly, other then Sculpin who said he might.

Also wondering (might not want to get into this one lol) but I know how many fish poachers I and others have come across. How often do you guys run into it? I geuss its hard to tell if guys have tags or not. I was watching alaska state troopers yesterday and im sure they like to have good juicy stuff for there show but I was shocked how much wasteful poaching was happening. I know about the chinese using black bear gall ballder and bile thing. I know alot of 'hunters' arnt as respectful as Wolf,Sitka and Nog are. All who seem to be meat and not trophy. I admit trophy hunting mentality is something I will never understand. It seems cruel and unusual. and that is why I post in this thread. I love that its only fishing site. I dont go on other 'outdoor' forums I dont want to see the pictures or read the threads about it. omg its a emotion no one have a fit.

Fish Stalker

I work a lot on the mid coast, in some pretty remote areas and with lots of bears, mainly grizz as they keep the black bears in check. I see the odd hunter in the odd area, but with the area very remote and most of the bigger bears being reclusive, it is tough just to see one, never mind shoot one. Grizz hunting is not a drop in the bucket, it takes lots of time and a dedication to the whole trip because most of the areas with high numbers of draws is also in proportion to the access, high draw numbers along the coast are in very hard to access areas, so pressure is less.

Something to think about when you read, hear or see "Trophy Hunting" is that this type of hunter is also someone who is very selective, who might not kill an animal for years. I know of quite a few "Trophy Hunters" who have not shot a deer/elk or moose for over 5 years due to them being very selective in their choice of what they kill. It a choice that some make, because being outdoors and enjoying what it has to offer is what it is all about, killing an animal is just a bonus. Same as fishing, being on the water is what it is all about, catching a fish is a bonus.

What gets me when anti-hunters or anti-what ever uses the term "Trophy Hunter", it implies to most that the hunter or hunters is only hunting for the kill and to expand their ego. That could not be further from the truth. The ones I know (and I have been involved in the sport in one way or another for 31 years) compare it to a hobby, witting themselves against the animals they are hunting......and it 's not about the kill, it's about the challenge, the meat for the table and possibly the antlers/horns being a conversation piece.

For what it is worth, I have 8 heads mounted, a large black bear rug and wolf tanned, and other than the wolf, everything was eaten. Am I a "Trophy Hunter" in the eyes of the uninformed or anti-hunting group???

I also have to wonder if some of the people who are so against the grizz hunt think that it is different than the thousands of fisherman who head south every year to take part in the "Trophy" fishing for fish in the warmer waters to the south, most do not fish for the meat, it's for the biggest, toughest, rarest or on the lightest line possible fish. Yes some of the meat is eaten, but it is not caught to fill ones freezer....ego's, bragging rights and even the almight $$$$ plays a bigger part then the sport of it.

Cheers

SS

 

[lorneparker1]

I also have to wonder if some of the people who are so against the grizz hunt think that it is different than the thousands of fisherman who head south every year to take part in the "Trophy" fishing for fish in the warmer waters to the south, most do not fish for the meat, it's for the biggest, toughest, rarest or on the lightest line possible fish. Yes some of the meat is eaten, but it is not caught to fill ones freezer....ego's, bragging rights and even the almight $$$$ plays a bigger part then the sport of it.

Cheers

SS

Thats a great point Ken,

The Blue fin on the east coast is a great example of that. A species that, just like the grizzly is considered "a species at risk" yet draws huge amounts of "trophy" people out there and quite a bit of harvest for that designation definitely more then 2%. Yet there was even a thread on here about going to catch them and LOTs of people were all over that, and there were "zero" bleeding hearts if a remember.

I would love to go fish one of those!

Thats the funy thing about ethics and the subjectiveness of it.

Lorne

 

[fish stalker]

Sitka

If all hunters spoke or came across like you, Im sure peoples feelings might be different. You make all hunters sound like gentlemen lol.

Mabey ive over heard to many drunk boasting redneck conversations or plans or watched to many bits of those American hunting shows. From what ive seen or heard it is about the outdoors of course and comradely but it also is ego and killing, cant pretend its not for many. Mabey for the older wiser guys they are more selective and hobby like, these young guys, not always so much. Older guys to course, grumpy bitter ones taking there grumpyness out on poor Bambie. Mabey its people who arnt born into it, or just newer at it. im not sure.

Of course surprise surprise lol im not into the 'trophy' fishing either. What would the short answer be to what 'trophy hunter' is, if not for someone doing it for the kill? A kill of the biggest or baddest or rarest. Not sure what other word you would use to describe a trophy hunter. Is it not a thing to be proud anymore? Are only other hunters or trophy hunters aloud to use it as they only understand the 'true meaning'.



ahhhh lol sorry if it seems im busting your chops sitka. i might be lol.

 

[Sitkaspruce]

Sitka

If all hunters spoke or came across like you, Im sure peoples feelings might be different. You make all hunters sound like gentlemen lol.

Mabey ive over heard to many drunk boasting redneck conversations or plans or watched to many bits of those American hunting shows. From what ive seen or heard it is about the outdoors of course and comradely but it also is ego and killing, cant pretend its not for many. Mabey for the older wiser guys they are more selective and hobby like, these young guys, not always so much. Older guys to course, grumpy bitter ones taking there grumpyness out on poor Bambie. Mabey its people who arnt born into it, or just newer at it. im not sure.

Of course surprise surprise lol im not into the 'trophy' fishing either. What would the short answer be to what 'trophy hunter' is, if not for someone doing it for the kill? A kill of the biggest or baddest or rarest. Not sure what other word you would use to describe a trophy hunter. Is it not a thing to be proud anymore? Are only other hunters or trophy hunters aloud to use it as they only understand the 'true meaning'.



ahhhh lol sorry if it seems im busting your chops sitka. i might be lol.

First off, what are you doing up at the strange hour of 0130.....this topic keeping you awake....LOL!!!!

Second, if you paint all of us hunters with the same brush as what you see on TV, then maybe you need to come with a hunt with a few different hunters and see what it is really all about. Those TV "Hunts" are what is getting us into this mess.....yes there is a few better shows out there, but for the most part, they are designed for one thing.....selling products and making money. They are not true hunts and I believe they are doing us more bad than good.....but it is hunting and who am I say what people can do, as long as it is done legally, than I really don't have a say.

Thirdly, I was not singling you out as one of those "Trophy Hunting" fisherman. but I would bet my last nickle that some of those who are against the grizz hunt on here would not think twice (and probably have already done it) about heading south and killing a fish for the wall/picture/gragging/ego or $$$$.

We all need to stop stereo typing and pointing fingers as nobody wins.

And lastly, I wish some folks on here would take their concerned energy and turn it towards the real problems facing the grizz,; lose of habitat, people who attract the wildlife that get shot and the increase in roads/exploation/mines/pipelines etc. These are the REAL reasons bears and other wildlife have problems in some areas......not hunting, whether it is for the trophy or the meat.

Cheers

SS

 

[triplenickel]

Anyone that doesn't eat what they kill or catch is a trophy hunter, plain and simple. For a trophy hunter it is about the kill, if it wasn't and they cared about nature and were happy to just be out there as some claim they would take a camera. Getting in close enough to get a good pic garners way more respect than shooting something with the IQ of a 3 year old from 300 yards with modern gear. I watch hunting shows, and read the magazines and always chuckle to myself when the hunter says "what a gorgeous, big, beautiful, animal", then knocks it out of the gene pool. Or the ones that spend tens of thousand of dollars to kill a bunch of **** in Africa then justify it to themselves by saying they donated the meat to hungry villagers, imagine what the cash could have done. Kill whatever you want if you're gonna eat it is what I say.

As far as these culls and population control eventually we'll figure out much like fires that nature has it under much better control than we ever will.

 

[scott craven]

I know a cougar hunter (4 legged variety)that has retired his guns and shoots his trophies with a camera now.
He is a guide and has convinced his customers that this is a far more sustainable hunt.
In his opinion, the hunt is worth far more than the kill.

 

[Cuba Libre]

I know a cougar hunter (4 legged variety)that has retired his guns and shoots his trophies with a camera now.
He is a guide and has convinced his customers that this is a far more sustainable hunt.
In his opinion, the hunt is worth far more than the kill.

Fair enough -- i can accept and understand that. But it still ignores the valid points that others have posted to support the hunt. I have worked in the Bella Coola valley and in other areas in the Central Coast where bear encounters were frequent.... and can assure that the OTHER side of the argument about keeping the gizz population on thier toes by hunting and staying away from humans , does work. And its a whole lot safer for the residents to take down an aggressive bear before it eats something (like a cow or resident) that we need to preserve.

I dont trophy hunt-- in fact this year I have stopped hunting all together.... but a well regulated legal hunt may not sit well with the cellophane- wrapped steak crowd in the urban areas , but that is too bad.. These hunts need to be regulated by science-- not emotion.

 

[Sitkaspruce]

Anyone that doesn't eat what they kill or catch is a trophy hunter, plain and simple. For a trophy hunter it is about the kill, if it wasn't and they cared about nature and were happy to just be out there as some claim they would take a camera. Getting in close enough to get a good pic garners way more respect than shooting something with the IQ of a 3 year old from 300 yards with modern gear. I watch hunting shows, and read the magazines and always chuckle to myself when the hunter says "what a gorgeous, big, beautiful, animal", then knocks it out of the gene pool. Or the ones that spend tens of thousand of dollars to kill a bunch of **** in Africa then justify it to themselves by saying they donated the meat to hungry villagers, imagine what the cash could have done. Kill whatever you want if you're gonna eat it is what I say.

As far as these culls and population control eventually we'll figure out much like fires that nature has it under much better control than we ever will.

Typical answer from the uniformed.........I am a Trophy Hunter....and I eat everything I kill except wolves and yotes. It's not about the kill and if you think it is, then you have been watching too many US hunting shows and reading too much field and stream.....

For some species, it has to be a trophy to be killed; Mt Sheep, most elk, some moose and mule deer for most of the province. They all have restrictions in place that have hunters only taking mature animals. If what your saying is true, than most of the hunters here in BC are trophy hunters....yet they still enjoy a great winters supply of organinc meat. Grizz cannot be in a family unit or be less than 2 years old in order to be hunted.

With respect to the "Gene" pool, the ladies are the actual leaders in that game. The males might have big antlers, but they do not do all the breeding, young bulls and bucks will and do a lot of the breeding....and who knows what "genes" they bring to the game as they might not be in their prime yet....Again, another "Shot" (no pun intended) at something you know very little about.

You need to actually get out from behind your keyboard (or better yet TV) and go hunting with hunters too see what it is really all about.

I know a cougar hunter (4 legged variety)that has retired his guns and shoots his trophies with a camera now.
He is a guide and has convinced his customers that this is a far more sustainable hunt.
In his opinion, the hunt is worth far more than the kill.

RS

I would be curious to know who he is because there is laws in place that state that he has to hunt cougars (and kill them) in order to keep his licence....taking pictures does not need a licence.

And you have to ask him how is it more sustainable??? Is it in that as long as he gets his clients to take pictures of mature cats, it ok for the CO's to shoot the young ones that are being pushed into town?? 3 have been shot up here in the last little well, mainly due to the big number of cats around.

I grew up on the island and have lived 30 of my 47 years hunting, fishing, camping and hiking the island. Up until 2 years ago, I have never seen a live cat, been stalked/followed and watched by them, but never actualt seen one....call it bad luck or what ever. In the last two years I have seen 3 cats, now call it good luck or what ever, but up here on the North Island, there is lots of them. Taking a few will not hurt the population one bit. And it is damn good meat, in my top 5 for meat flavour.

Cheers

SS

 

[triplenickel]

Typical answer from the uniformed.........I am a Trophy Hunter....and I eat everything I kill except wolves and yotes.

Reread what I said and pay attention to the difference in our opinions on what the definition of a trophy hunter is. I'll say it again for clarification if you eat what you kill I don't think you're a trophy hunter, I don't care what you shoot if you eat it. So for someone who is out there for a trophy not the meat it's about the kill, the entire experience can be 100% the same up until the moment the shot is taken. The shot can be taken with a camera not a gun, the experience is the same except for the kill. I don't have any issue with people who eat what they kill, only those who don't, that's my opinion get it?

Help me understand, what do you get from killing the wolf that you couldn't get without killing it, a rug, a stuffed animal for your den? Are you convinced it's a noble effort to manage the population by manipulating the cycles that worked for millions of years until we screwed them up in the last 100?

The males might have big antlers, but they do not do all the breeding, young bulls and bucks will and do a lot of the breeding

Sure the young ones do some, but not the majority the biggest baddest alpha does the majority that's why they fight!

It's not about the kill and if you think it is, then you have been watching too many US hunting shows and reading too much field and stream.....

You're obviously taking my opinion on trophy hunters as some kind of attack against you and hunting in general (PS; I hunt) but this sentence quoted above kinda supports my point, it is what the majority of trophy hunters are about or the shows and mags wouldn't be set up as such!!

You need to actually get out from behind your keyboard (or better yet TV) and go hunting with hunters too see what it is really all about.

You have exactly zero idea who you're talking to, you're basing your opinion on one paragraph that you read and totally missed the point of. I have zero problem with you, so a conversation without the lame little shots would be neat.

 

[Sitkaspruce]

Reread what I said and pay attention to the difference in our opinions on what the definition of a trophy hunter is. I'll say it again for clarification if you eat what you kill I don't think you're a trophy hunter, I don't care what you shoot if you eat it. So for someone who is out there for a trophy not the meat it's about the kill, the entire experience can be 100% the same up until the moment the shot is taken. The shot can be taken with a camera not a gun, the experience is the same except for the kill. I don't have any issue with people who eat what they kill, only those who don't, that's my opinion get it?

Help me understand, what do you get from killing the wolf that you couldn't get without killing it, a rug, a stuffed animal for your den? Are you convinced it's a noble effort to manage the population by manipulating the cycles that worked for millions of years until we screwed them up in the last 100?



Sure the young ones do some, but not the majority the biggest baddest alpha does the majority that's why they fight!



You're obviously taking my opinion on trophy hunters as some kind of attack against you and hunting in general (PS; I hunt) but this sentence quoted above kinda supports my point, it is what the majority of trophy hunters are about or the shows and mags wouldn't be set up as such!!



You have exactly zero idea who you're talking to, you're basing your opinion on one paragraph that you read and totally missed the point of. I have zero problem with you, so a conversation without the lame little shots would be neat.

Yup. I did miss your point, guess the whole week of travel, house hunting and job interviews had me on tunnel vision.....not an excuse, but now that I did read it, I was off point on some stuff.

But.....as a hunter, do you not think we all need to stick together, whether we agree with a type of hunt or nor. Do you agree or disagree that the grizz hunt is but the tip of the iceburg on an attack on hunting in general.

As for wolves, I have no problem shooting them, we have screwed up the process, so we need to help out when ever possible. Besides we need to remove 80% of a pack or population before there will be any changes....and 3 three wolves/year in most areas will not have that effect, even if everyone shot their limit. As for the den and stuffing them, I leave them where they fall as they don't go to waste.

Thanks for pointing out my errors, for that I appoligize.

Merry Christmas

Cheers

SS

 

[tincan]

Really? These are two of your arguments? The 'tip of the iceberg' and the 'nothing goes to waste in nature' arguments? I'm pretty sure these have both been shredded already in previous posts on this thread no? Surely you can see the massive holes in both of these arguments. THEY are NOT out to end all hunting. It's not as simple as hunter vs anti-hunter as we've established there are many on this forum, myself included, who both hunt AND feel the need for science-based regulation. I don't even want to offer a response to your justification of leaving a dead wolf where it falls as 'nothing goes to waste'. Very noble of you

But.....as a hunter, do you not think we all need to stick together, whether we agree with a type of hunt or nor. Do you agree or disagree that the grizz hunt is but the tip of the iceburg on an attack on hunting in general.

As for wolves, I have no problem shooting them, we have screwed up the process, so we need to help out when ever possible. Besides we need to remove 80% of a pack or population before there will be any changes....and 3 three wolves/year in most areas will not have that effect, even if everyone shot their limit. As for the den and stuffing them, I leave them where they fall as they don't go to waste.

SS

 

[Bighorn]

Here is some info from Dr. Val Geist. Fairly well known in the World on Wildlife and Wildlife Management

http://bcaccess.ca/content/comments...ure-canada’s-grizzly-bears”-april-3-2010-suzu

 

[triplenickel]

Yup. I did miss your point, guess the whole week of travel, house hunting and job interviews had me on tunnel vision.....not an excuse, but now that I did read it, I was off point on some stuff.

But.....as a hunter, do you not think we all need to stick together, whether we agree with a type of hunt or nor. Do you agree or disagree that the grizz hunt is but the tip of the iceburg on an attack on hunting in general.

As for wolves, I have no problem shooting them, we have screwed up the process, so we need to help out when ever possible. Besides we need to remove 80% of a pack or population before there will be any changes....and 3 three wolves/year in most areas will not have that effect, even if everyone shot their limit. As for the den and stuffing them, I leave them where they fall as they don't go to waste.

Thanks for pointing out my errors, for that I appoligize.

Merry Christmas

Cheers

SS

Pffft no apology needed, just a conversation mate. No I don't think we all need to stick together at any cost, I think we need to have a logical reasonable argument to win. As for the wolf thing, you and I are miles apart obviously you're ok killing for the sake of killing, free country and all that but do you think that has any positive impact on the image of hunting?. You know how else they wouldn't go to waste? Let them live and die on their own. Why not just bonk a couple fish and toss em overboard, they won't go to waste.

 

[Gunsmith]

I put em in my crab traps.

 

[wolf]

Why not just bonk a couple fish and toss em overboard

we do already trying to find the "hatchery cohos" that are out there..... most alot of them perish becuase of this...
And your mistaken if you dont think cougars and wolves kill a shitload of deer and sometimes for fun I have personally seen it ,
so is it ok for wolves to wipe out an area move on and on till, well the population of deer is almost wiped out???Look at that cougar that was in central saanich they finally got after many sheep and pets killed they got it WHY cause it was easy food and there isnt a lot of deer in the "hills" anymore because there are so many predators you have bears,cougars,wolves all of them that feed on deer at certain times. there simply isnt enough to go around.

Whats next you ask WELL ill tell you then they will move into rural areas and start killing dogs,cats and livestock but i guess thats ok??? To knock them down a bit so ALL will be at sustanable levels is the right move, i sure dont want a cougar or wolf who is malnurished and sick come into rural area and take a kid who is playing in the backyard...

 

[Englishman]

And your mistaken if you dont think cougars and wolves kill a shitload of deer and sometimes for fun I have personally seen it ,

Wolf,

I posted earlier on this myth of predators killing for "fun" and I will do so again.

Life in the wild is very hard. The balance between energy expended catching prey and the energy gained is very fine, especially when raising young. There is no energy to waste and so predators never kill for “fun”. Nor do they have the slightest concept of “fun” in the human sense. In addition, they could not afford the risk involved in "frivolous" chases and kills. The slightest leg or shoulder injury caused by the chase or by larger prey such as moose and deer could mean curtains for them. A limping predator cannot hunt!!

If wolves or cougars do not consume all of their prey it is either too big, or they were disturbed, or (in the case of wolves) it might be a training exercise for the young. Even then, I believe they cannot afford to just leave the kill, given the energy expended to get it.

Finally all predators , especially bears and cougars will often leave or bury a carcass and then come back to it later. That is why, as you know, when you come across a carcass when hiking in the bush you are supposed to get the hell out of there, as the predator is often not far away, guarding their very hard earned carcass, which they cannot afford to lose!!

so is it ok for wolves to wipe out an area move on and on till, well the population of deer is almost wiped out???.

Well it would be OK if there was somewhere to move on to. Wolves live in very clearly defined territories and if one pack really did “eat themselves out of house and home” they would have nowhere to go. The neighbouring packs would make sure of that!!

In reality wolf territories are too large to “clean out” because if they did they would starve. The only entity that worries about the actual numbers of deer in any given area is people, because they wish to hunt them.

And the main reason we hunt wolves and other predators is simply because we see them as competitors for the same food sources as us. Which they are!

 

[lorneparker1]

Wolf,

I posted earlier on this myth of predators killing for "fun" and I will do so again.

Life in the wild is very hard. The balance between energy expended catching prey and the energy gained is very fine, especially when raising young. There is no energy to waste and so predators never kill for “fun”. Nor do they have the slightest concept of “fun” in the human sense. In addition, they could not afford the risk involved in "frivolous" chases and kills. The slightest leg or shoulder injury caused by the chase or by larger prey such as moose and deer could mean curtains for them. A limping predator cannot hunt!!

If wolves or cougars do not consume all of their prey it is either too big, or they were disturbed, or (in the case of wolves) it might be a training exercise for the young. Even then, I believe they cannot afford to just leave the kill, given the energy expended to get it.

Finally all predators , especially bears and cougars will often leave or bury a carcass and then come back to it later. That is why, as you know, when you come across a carcass when hiking in the bush you are supposed to get the hell out of there, as the predator is often not far away, guarding their very hard earned carcass, which they cannot afford to lose!!


Well it would be OK if there was somewhere to move on to. Wolves live in very clearly defined territories and if one pack really did “eat themselves out of house and home” they would have nowhere to go. The neighbouring packs would make sure of that!!

In reality wolf territories are too large to “clean out” because if they did they would starve. The only entity that worries about the actual numbers of deer in any given area is people, because they wish to hunt them.

And the main reason we hunt wolves and other predators is simply because we see them as competitors for the same food sources as us. Which they are!

You should really go outside and spend time in areas where wolves are present, in good numbers, instead believing everything you read on pro wolf websites.

Lorne

 

[hooktender68]

Cats are like seals.....when there is an abundance of food /salmon seals will only eat the soft bellyflesh out of a fish where all the higest nutrients are. Cougars the same, when deer are plentiful, they will kill and lap up ever drop of blood and eat the liver, heart lungs etc, high in vitamin D, leaving the meat behind only to return if more kills arnt made. Dont have scientific to back this, just conversation with fish biologists and old timers cougar guides.

 

[Englishman]

You should really go outside and spend time in areas where wolves are present, in good numbers, instead believing everything you read on pro wolf websites.

Lorne

Nope, you should do more reading, instead of affecting wolf behaviour by your presence and then misinterpreting what you see.

This guy in an Alaska newspaper is pretty clear on that:

http://community.adn.com/adn/node/151633

These guys also agree it is a myth perpetuated by misunderstanding a phenomenon called surplus killing. Wolves will kill and eat later, including carrion. Therefore when they come across lots of docile domestic animals they will kill more than they can eat as they "expect" to return and eat later. It is natural for them to take advantage of "surplus" food as that is a low risk behaviour. It is NOT killing for fun.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/explainer/2009/11/do_wolves_kill_for_sport.html
http://www.livingwithwolves.org/AW_question5.html

http://missoulian.com/news/opinion/...cle_3d52fff0-17e6-11df-91e1-001cc4c002e0.html

http://www.oregonwild.org/fish_wildlife/bringing_wolves_back/wolves-misunderstood#wolves-do-not-kill

 

[Gunsmith]

I have seen where coyotes will chase more than one deer into deep snow where they founder and the coyote will eat the liver while the deer is stiil living, I have found as much as three together with only the liver gone. Do I think they were killing for sport, no, but they were being selective, were they killing for pleasure, no, just predator instincts. Nothing is pretty in that world when it come to survival, only humans have emotions.
If I kill a predator I am just killing it, I have no glee, just remorse, do I want a trophy, no, I am just snuffing it.
Will I devote time to this, when necessary, yes.
I had a conversation with a rancher about coyotes once and she said to me if one of her cows lets a coyote get her calf she gets rid of the cow not the coyote. To her that type of cow requires too much work, practical way of thinking. The coyote if left alone gets rid of most of the varmints around and this provides her cattle with more feed and her with less work.
Again this doesn't work everytime but when it does it is a win win situation.