RAINCOAST wants BLACK BEAR HUNTING BAN

[GoatGuy]

Haha....here we go with your personal issues.
Goat Guys been logged in here since the NDP made the call....why doesn't he tell us why?
Or maybe you....since you seem to want to be second in command.
I've read the response and have a question....if and when a hunter kills a grizzly and packs out the head, hide and paws (as the BCWF statement says should be done).....does the hunter get to keep the head, hide and paws?
Or is the hunter packing out 150 lbs to be handed over for scientific evaluation, etc, etc....and forfeit the right to keep the head, hide and paws.

Busy working. Lots of folks/orgs working on this issue and a number of other issues across the province and in Victoria. A number of people coming to the forefront and getting engaged - all positive stuff.

Check in here on occasion, but seems like there are still folks intent on fighting with each other instead of trying to drive change. Feel free to post whatever you want from BCWF - you're more than capable of copying and pasting or pasting a link to radio/news etc. And feel free to criticize, it's your right.

Despite the fact it appears to be popular, never been much for sitting in the stands throwing beer at the ice. Learning not to waste time on that type.

Didn't expect you to revert back, but it seems like a trend .... oh well, continue on.

[Whonnock Boy]

Social media is not my job for the BCWF, nor do I wish to step on any toes in relation to that job, or any other. Oddly enough, it's not Goatguy's job either. He's the manager of the Resident Priority program and his plate is full. Social media is the office, and the office is headed by Brenton Froehlich, and the state of the office is a reflection of both him and your other friend that resigned not too long ago. You need to ask them what's going on or has gone on. Ultimately, Mr. Froehlich will have the answers for you.

Second in command? Don't think so.....

Ask the NDP as they are the only ones that have any inkling what the new legislation will entail.

Haha....here we go with your personal issues.
Goat Guys been logged in here since the NDP made the call....why doesn't he tell us why?
Or maybe you....since you seem to want to be second in command.
I've read the response and have a question....if and when a hunter kills a grizzly and packs out the head, hide and paws (as the BCWF statement says should be done).....does the hunter get to keep the head, hide and paws?
Or is the hunter packing out 150 lbs to be handed over for scientific evaluation, etc, etc....and forfeit the right to keep the head, hide and paws.

[jassmine]

A large part of the problem is that, because of systematic under funding, we don't have good science here, although I think "Scientific Review of Grizzly Bear Harvest Management System in British Columbia" was pretty good.

You highlight this as being pretty good despite it not being published in a journal (which I agree it is!) but let's look at the last few journals Mark Boyce has published in.
(Also not denigrating Mark as I know him from our Canadian Section of The Wildlife Society meetings at CSEE, just demonstrating a point)

Journal - Impact Factor

Ecology and Society - 2.77
Ursus - 0.971
Forest Ecology and Management - 2.826
Environmental reviews - 3.196
Plos One - 2.86 (highlight of my career so far but wasn't near the first author)
Ecosphere - 2.287

If anything I think in almost all of these circumstances I would prefer to have published in Biology letters (save for Plos One).

[Wild one]

I would say the BCWF response touched base on some good points and is a good start. I hope they continue to push back in favour of grizz hunting.

I do hope that a more in depth push towards why the hunter should be able to keep and utilize all of the bear personally. I just don't trust the govts response unless all loopholes are closed. NDP has shown they are trying to be sneaky about how they are willing to go about impacting grizz hunting.

We are not dealing with a party even remotely in our favour on this hunt so they should be approached like your dealing with the devil. Cover all bases and leave no holes that can be exploited

[bearvalley]

Didn't expect you to revert back, but it seems like a trend .... oh well, continue on.

It looks to me like reverting back is a problem in more camps than one.
Just for your information Jesse, my beliefs haven't changed.

[guest]

I am grateful to the BCWF, their stand on this particular issue and am thankful to be a supporter of theirs. There is no other organization this province that comes any where close to doing what the BCWF has done in the past for wildlife and conservation. That said, are the best organization for us resident hunters that are trying to keep our tradition and heritage alive. There is strength in numbers folks, be heard as our passion of hunting, providing, choosing healthy alternatives, thriving wildlife, is forever being threatened. And this past decision by the ND Greens, and special interests group are picking away, at our rights as conservationists and hunters. Taking away, little by little, they are trying to shut us down. Black Bear next, sheep, elk, goat, moose in the sights. Be heard, get involved, put up or shut up.
Thanks BCWF for your representation and stand on this issue.
CT

[TreeStandMan]

In what scenario is open access not a good?

When those journals are preditory. See Beall's list.

In the world of biology which I am in (conservation/ecology/evolution), Biology Letters is a very good journal.
By Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Report it is ranked 17 out of 84 in "Biology".
I'm not sure you are aware of the Impact Factors for journal ecologist or wildlife biologist typically publish in but a 3.33 (Biology Letters 5 year score) year average is pretty darn good.

I'm not in the biology field, and I haven't looked into how Thomson Reuters constructs their list, but I won't concede that an average of three citations per document over 2 years a good journal makes. Ultimately it's about reputation, so if people in your field have good feelings about it, fine, but the objective data based on citation data is unimpressive..

This is all a distraction, though: the point is that Raincoast rejects the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation, a system with a proven track record, and their publication history shows that for them science is secondary to anti-hunting PR. The article in Biology Letters, "Hunting for Status: Men trophy hunt as a signal they can absorb the costs," which Raincoast themselves characterize as "Scientific literature," is in my opinion garbage. I'd be interested to know what your assessment of this article is. I'd also be interested to know your feelings about the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation .

[Wild one]

I would hope a defence against this attack on black bear hunting is being put together

After how the QCI black bear hunt is now managed hunters cannot assume black bear hunting is safe

[bearvalley]

IronNoggin, thanks for posting the BCWF's response....I did notice it's not the same as the email sent to members.....even tho similar.
The question that still needs to be answered is.....IS THE BCWF IN SUPPORT OF THE HUNTER RETAINING POSSESION OF THE HEAD, HIDE AND PAWS OF A GRIZZLY.
Or is the BCWF supporting the meat only hunt and expecting the hunter to pack out the hide, head and paws and then FORFIET POSSESION OF THE HEAD, HIDE AND PAWS TO THE CROWN for the collection of scientific data.
Jesse for $500 a day you should be able to spare some of your precious time to provide your membership with some straight up answers.

[IronNoggin]

IronNoggin, thanks for posting the BCWF's response....I did notice it's not the same as the email sent to members.....even tho similar.

That version was collected from their Facebook response when it first came out. Since (I believe) they have made another, which albeit similar, is somewhat more defining...

From their own web page:

The BCWF Response to Provincial Government Announcement to End Grizzly Trophy Hunt

The provincial government has announced they will end grizzly bear trophy hunting throughout the province and stop all hunting of grizzlies in the Great Bear Rainforest after November 2017.

Hunting grizzlies for meat outside the Great Bear Rainforest is not included in the ban, but the government has said they will forbid a meat hunter from possessing the paws, head, and hide of a grizzly. This announcement is inconsistent with the North American Wildlife Conservation Model, which stipulates harvested wildlife should be used for legitimate purposes, including retrieving the fur and meat where usable. Requiring hunters or anglers to throw useable portions of their harvest away is wasteful and inconsistent with sustainable use.

Harvey Andrusak, President of the BCWF said, “The province must maintain a science-based hunt to determine if there is a sustainable harvest which includes the opportunity for hunters to utilize all portions of any animal or fish harvested. We cannot be managing fish and wildlife on a one-off basis. All wildlife management must be consistent with science-based recommendations.”

Biological data obtained from the hide and skull provides critical data to scientists. BCWF staff and executive met with government representatives yesterday to stress the importance of making sure experts maintain the opportunity to obtain valuable data from any animal harvested. The government has said they will meet with First Nations and all affected groups in the fall and the federation will be continuing to stand up strongly for science-based management of all wildlife species.

The BCWF supports a regional roundtable approach, with specific conservation measures and social considerations discussed with residents, First Nations, commercial and recreational sector representatives before wildlife management policy is changed or adopted.

We need your help! To be effective, members need to speak with their MLAs to educate them about this issue and stress the importance of maintaining hunting practices that do not waste any part of any animal taken. Find your MLA here.

BCWF Resident Priority Program manager Jesse Zeman participated in a panel discussion on CBC Almanac at noon on August 15, 2017, stressing these points and advocating for adequate funding for wildlife management in BC.

President of the BCWF- affiliated Spruce City Wildlife Association Steve Hamilton was featured in this story in the Vancouver Sun.

The BC Wildlife Federation will continue to support recovery efforts for grizzly bears in areas where populations are under threat and to advocate for increased funding and science for wildlife management in BC.

http://www.bcwf.net/
.........................................

While I would never pretend to answer for Jesse, I do believe you can find the answer to your question in this quote from the latter press release:

... the government has said they will forbid a meat hunter from possessing the paws, head, and hide of a grizzly. This announcement is inconsistent with the North American Wildlife Conservation Model, which stipulates harvested wildlife should be used for legitimate purposes, including retrieving the fur and meat where usable. Requiring hunters or anglers to throw useable portions of their harvest away is wasteful and inconsistent with sustainable use.

Harvey Andrusak, President of the BCWF said, “The province must maintain a science-based hunt to determine if there is a sustainable harvest which includes the opportunity for hunters to utilize all portions of any animal or fish harvested.

Cheers,
Nog