Hunting bears …. Why do we hunt them?

[RugDoctor]

Rug as usual. keep the insults flying lol

You’re right. My apologies for coming off like that….the spirit of my comment stands though. You seem to be happy to do what the (my opinion) perhaps wrong vocal but uneducated city folk want, while knowing it’s wrong….just to appease them

[bearvalley]

If i got the chance to hunt a grizzly i could compromise and eat it with no squables if that is what gives us social license to bring that hunt back.

Is there any one here that wouldn’t?

I for one would certainly be willing to bring all edible portions home if it meant getting the Griz hunt back

I’m sure we all would be more than willing to pack out the edible portions if that’s what it took to bring back the grizzly hunt.
As for eating it, that’s the hunters choice …. some grizzlies will be palatable and some will make you puke.
The reason I started this thread is to get hunters thinking that there are other reasons to have a licensed grizzly hunt.
In the last 3 or 4 decades provincial grizzly populations have tripled.
Our ungulates have crashed.
There should not be an Apex predator that is untouchable if wildlife management is taking place for other species.
The “I eat grizzly” line isn’t gonna cut it.
Politician’s aren’t gonna buy that BS.
We need to be looking at the grizzly hunt as a hunt that fits into the wildlife management big picture.
Eating them and saving the hide are an extra bonus.

[Greenthumbed]

I’m sure we all would be more than willing to pack out the edible portions if that’s what it took to bring back the grizzly hunt.
As for eating it, that’s the hunters choice …. some grizzlies will be palatable and some will make you puke.
The reason I started this thread is to get hunters thinking that there are other reasons to have a licensed grizzly hunt.
In the last 3 or 4 decades provincial grizzly populations have tripled.
Our ungulates have crashed.
There should not be an Apex predator that is untouchable if wildlife management is taking place for other species.
The “I eat grizzly” line isn’t gonna cut it.
Politician’s aren’t gonna buy that BS.
We need to be looking at the grizzly hunt as a hunt that fits into the wildlife management big picture.
Eating them and saving the hide are an extra bonus.

Your comment about an untouchable Apex predator rings true. This is a big mistake from a wildlife management perspective. I have already seen five grizzlies (two today) this year to only 3 Black bears. This seems wrong. I have seen 10 times as many grizzlies over the last couple of hunting seasons than 4-point mule deer. There is something wrong. I live in Golden which is right in the heart of grizzly county so seeing grizzlies is definitely a possibility, but the ratio is out of balance. I’m not saying that there is more grizzlies than black bears, but I think grizzlies are now habituating areas where they did not when there was a grizzly hunt. There are 5-6 year bears that have never had a reason to fear man. This is dangerous. Human-grizzly conflict will be unavoidable as grizzlies loose their fear of man. Politicians have taken away our ability to defend ourselves against an apex predator. The grizzly hunt was more than just a trophy hunt. It was a management tool. The people that made this an emotional/political issue did not think past their own uneducated, inexperienced perspective to see what the consequences would be.
We need to have the grizzly hunt brought back. If that is packing out the edibles then let’s get on with it.

[HappyJack]

They only have a commercial value for viewing and poachers, far as I am concerned they are no different than a worthless ground hog and make for good target practice. So they may as well open up a season for the tourist hunters and bring some money into the province, if they don't lots of grizz will just rot in the bush.

[HarryToolips]

I'd like to see the griz hunt return in BC, I enjoyed it once and would again... primarily though, I'd do it for the benefit of ungulates..

[Muledeercrazy2]

Its unfortunate that the majority of Canadian are more emotional than practical about wildlife. Unfortunately, we are forced to capitulate to them because they are the majority. Thinking there is a choice here is incorrect, there is no way our position is PC enough for the minority to overcome the emotional wildlife sentiment. So management of the “optics” of the situation is one of the best ways to help ourselves. Hunters shooting grizzlies to manage the population isn’t going to help our case with these people at all. The perception of trophy hunting is negative, and unfortunately we can’t change that easily. So no requirement to remove edible portions of the meat just hurts our cause.

Along the coastal regions grizzlies seem to be expanding their range. I have been told many indigenous communities are shooting twice as many “problem bears” as they were before the hunt was closed. Also that some northern bands would be bringing people in to hunt them if they could get export permits. So perhaps there is a better case or way forward there.

Unfortunately i think that the OP position is misguided and damaging. Not entirely wrong, but potentially damaging. It would be interesting to hear what other positions for a grizz hunt we could take.

[ratherbefishin]

Why hunt bears? Makes really good sausage and smoked hams.One thing I adamantly oppose is regulations based on emotion or political correctness to get votes

[rageous]

Bear hunting is a great way to provide organic meat protein.
There is the additional wildlife benefit factor aswell.
Often overlooked monetary stimulus benefits.
Bear hunting can be combined with countless other outdoor activities.

[silveragent]

Yes, unfortunately, we do live in a democracy and politicians are pandering to the 'Disneyland' view that has taken hold. Telling people I'm a hunter AT ALL comes has the potential of conflict. And hunting charismatic species such as bear - any bear - is a step further.

I would say the meat question is ONE way to address it but even if you make use of the hide it is an example of use. Unfortunately, there are still many who view meat as the only 'use' part of a hunt they support since, like many things, use of fur itself has been questioned even from the time I was a kid. And while I am open to making use of a hide for a rug, I'm afraid I would be in the extreme minority in the urban people I know.

Of course, I would eat bear and have had pretty good sausage from black bear. Convincing people that bear is good to eat is a matter of taste. Since lots of people are fine with not knowing 'how the sausage is made', food will always be one of the best ways to convince people. Most people are good with eating anything as long as they can be shown it is ethical and sustainable - even if they don't want to look too deeply into how it really was procured.

Telling people you shoot animals without making use of it equates to the majority as 'killing for fun'. So talking about using them as 'target practice' even as a joke you will not be gaining any supporters.

People are not good with indirection. By that I mean telling them that killing a bear will help the deer population - while it may be true - requires them to accept a two-step premise. It requires a greater effort in argument and in messaging. Think about that oft-repeated story about how the wolves help Yellowstone Park. That simple premise is actually a complex idea rendered down to one line. It has taken hold because the majority don't like killing charismatic species to begin with and so were able to put in the effort to understand the arguments about the ecology and the supposed affects allowing wolves to thrive in the park had on it.

Now try to do the same thing with bears in BC but at the disadvantage that people generally don't like the image of killing one of the symbol species of BC. I would argue, unless bears start directly impacting people in their Teslas in the cities and become huge pests (like Canada geese), or active threats, you won't see the majority changing their view of bears needing protection.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I’d love to see it return as well. It was one of my favourite hunts. And we packed the meat out from all but the very first one that I was involved with but only because we didn’t know the meat was edible at the time(before the www.).

One weak argument is that we want to manage the grizzly bear numbers to help with our struggling ungulate populations. Previously, the grizzly bear hunt was managed at levels where hunting had no effect on the grizzly bear populations. That’s why the hunt was defendable. If we are only killing enough grizzly bears in BC so that we don’t impact the bear population then we are certainly not going to be killing enough bears to have any measurable impact on ungulate numbers.

If you want to help the struggling ungulate populations then the hunt would have to be managed at levels to reduce the grizzly populations. And that means killing quite a few sows. Do you think that would fly at the moment since we haven’t even had any kind of hunt for several years?
I certainly don’t think so.

My two cents.

SSS