Rebeka Breder trying to ban Wolf an Bear hunting

I prefer the analogies to farming (in my best trump impression "and I love farmers"...heheheh)…1) not hunting animals is akin to saying "if only we just left all the wheat in the field instead of harvesting it we would end up with a lot more wheat".....ummmmmm how is it even possible to think like that!!!!. 2) hunters and farmers realize the need for sustainability -just like hunters, a farmer knows it is in his/her interest to ensure working the farm does not deplete the soils and leave nothing for the future... 3) farming has resulted in the loss of way more animals and the destruction of many more ecosystems than any hunting has ever done...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mod7rem

I think that’s the wrong approach. That approach would be asking a lot of anti-hunters to change their emotionally driven opinions by trying to trigger a different emotional opinion in convincing them that wolves and bears are somehow evil, vicious killers. I personally don’t understand why anyone, especially hunters, would use that argument to support predator hunting. It’s one emotional opinion vs another emotional opinion.
Predators kill to survive plain and simple and life/death is harsh.

IMO Wildlife are resources and need to be managed to suit everyone’s uses. The hard part is convincing people that everyone’s uses are important and sustainable.

---

We can dance until our balls fall off and play with science and emotions, marketing and politicking.
But when time comes on occasion, we have to show up and show teeth.

as I mentioned above, the trick is to use their own statements to debate them...it would be nice to see when their heads are exploding because we are using their own line of "logic" against them....in addition to the points I mention above, another one I use is the wild meat is organic free range sustainably harvested food so unless you are gathering your fruits ands veg from the forest you are contributing to global deforestation which affects "carbon capture" and "global climate change"....follow that with "why are ruining my/our planet?"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wideopenthrottle

in addition to the points I mention above, another one I use is the wild meat is organic free range sustainably harvested food

---

I use the same. It's a great way to bring out the hypocrite in anti hunting meat eaters.

I respect any person's right to chose the food they eat and where it comes from. And if that is abstaining from all meat products, so be it. But it's completely and 100% hypocritical for another meat eater to pass judgement on a hunter for choosing to feed themselves with wild game, in the case of this thread, call it black bear meat (which I love!)

It's all about personal choice. I can somewhat understand the non meat eaters position, but that is simple fact of choice based on their own personal preferences, ethics and values that they not eat meat, farmed or otherwise.

So how is exercising one of the most basic requirements of life (how we feed ourselves) not a choice by right? How is it different than having the legislated right to chose your religion? The federal governments recognised hunter heritage in 2014.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/...26/page-1.html

It's my choice to feed myself and my family with as much free range organic natural wild meat as I can (hopefully a very tasty lean spring bear). And I think it's long past time governments recognise this choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron.C

It's my choice to feed myself and my family with as much free range organic natural wild meat as I can (hopefully a very tasty lean spring bear).

---

Or cougar.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomcat

Or cougar.

---

absolutely!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron.C

I use the same. It's a great way to bring out the hypocrite in anti hunting meat eaters.

I respect any person's right to chose the food they eat and where it comes from. And if that is abstaining from all meat products, so be it. But it's completely and 100% hypocritical for another meat eater to pass judgement on a hunter for choosing to feed themselves with wild game, in the case of this thread, call it black bear meat (which I love!)

It's all about personal choice. I can somewhat understand the non meat eaters position, but that is simple fact of choice based on their own personal preferences, ethics and values that they not eat meat, farmed or otherwise.

So how is exercising one of the most basic requirements of life (how we feed ourselves) not a choice by right? How is it different than having the legislated right to chose your religion? The federal governments recognised hunter heritage in 2014.
https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/...26/page-1.html

It's my choice to feed myself and my family with as much free range organic natural wild meat as I can (hopefully a very tasty lean spring bear). And I think it's long past time governments recognise this choice.

---

I agree and I like it,,,,, I like it a lot!!!

Personally, a Huge Thank you for your part on the talk show to that Jesse fellow. Great job. You can sit at my campfire anytime.

He spoke very well and represents the opinions of thousands and thousands of BC hunters. Not all but most.

The Antis and wingnuts will never stop.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ron.C

(hopefully a very tasty lean spring bear).

---

K, a little off topic/sidebar. I've only gotten fall bears, and am always pumped about the fat in particular. Your post makes me curious: if you had to choose do you prefer spring or fall bears?

Here's what I have just written to my MLA. It's based on a similar letter which has been floating around for a few days. I've made a few slight changes. Feel free .... no, I urge/challenge others to copy this and email it to your MLA. There are way too many keyboard warriors on here who don't have legitimate excuse not to.
------------------
Dear ____________

I am writing to you as a concerned citizen, conservationist, resident hunter and a constituent.

Once again, there is a concerted attack underway, primarily via social media, against hunting, specifically the hunting of ‘large carnivores’ in British Columbia. The species that have been highlighted are black bears, cougars and wolves. Outside the ‘large carnivore’ designation, bighorn sheep and elk have also been included in recent articles. All the species mentioned in the articles and documents submitted to the B.C. government are suggested to be ‘trophy hunted.’ However, black bears, cougars, bighorn sheep and elk are highly sought-after sources of protein and are currently NOT in danger of population declines by regulated hunting.

Also mentioned in recent attack articles are provincial wolf management and caribou enhancement programs. Both programs are proven science-based approaches that have had positive impacts on caribou populations. The success of these programs is summarized in this short article: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/briti...cull-1.4915683

The use of misinformation and ‘social licence’ decision-making are the same tactics used in 2017 that lead to the grizzly bear hunt closure in B.C. The closure of the grizzly bear hunt was due to social pressure, instead of scientific reasons. Minister Doug Donaldson said on the topic, “It is no longer socially acceptable to the vast majority of British Columbians to hunt grizzly bears.” However, the opinion of the “vast majority of British Columbians” proved to be 78% of only 4200 poll respondents, or less than 3300 residents of a province with a population of 5-million (0.06%).

I am against wildlife being used as a political pawn and I am firmly in support of science and evidence-based management of wildlife and their habitats.

B.C. has approximately 105,000 resident hunters. Proudly, I am one of those who spends several weeks each year in pursuit of wildlife in the great wilderness this province offers.

Ungulate populations have dropped to abnormally low levels in some parts of the province. Meanwhile, predator populations have exploded across the province as a whole. As an example, I point to the ongoing news items about cougars in the lower mainland, coyotes in Stanley Park and the regular summer conflicts involving black bears on the north shore and elsewhere in this region.

There are between 120,000 and 160,000 black bears in B.C. with a harvest rate of approximately 3% (3,600 to 4,800). This is well within internationally-accepted wildlife harvesting guidelines. To offer some perspective, in 1980 it was estimated that there were 35,000 to 90,000 black bears in B.C. and a targeted harvest rate of about 4,000 animals.

The government has been proactive in efforts to prevent further loss to ungulate species by allowing regulated hunting of predators. This should be allowed to continue. Predator (or ‘large carnivore’) hunting has been relied upon for generations, not only as a means of responsible wildlife management but also to generate revenue for wildlife conservation. Once again emotionally-driven campaigns are attempting to interfere, risking the loss of our social license to continue to hunt in B.C. and threatening to put further pressure, by allowing predator numbers to rise, on ungulate populations that are already in difficulty.

Hunters are the original and most passionate conservationists. As such, I and many other resident hunters are prepared to support wildlife management decisions such as hunting closures which, based on science, are deemed necessary. It is unacceptable for the government to rely on uninformed public opinion polls and emotionally-driven campaigns when making wildlife management decisions.

I expect the government to use science and evidence-based approaches when making decisions impacting wildlife management in B.C.

I look forward to receiving your response and indication of support of my concerns.

Yours in Conservation,

________________