Media Request

[reporter]

*****Edited by Elkhound.*******

To set the record straight I have personally contacted the media company this reporter works for and confirmed this reporter is who they say they are. I also wanted to include a quote from an email between the reporter and myself. I personally think we should give the reporter a chance to write an article based on facts and not false truths and emotion. I know other members have sent the reporter PMs and introductions have been made. Put the tinfoil hats away this time people.

Quote from email exchange

I completely understand why hunters are hesitant to talk to the press about this, they are often taken out of context and unfairly demonized. That is the weakness in most other grizzly coverage that I am trying to overcome.


There have been a few comments about needing to do my research, etc. - which is fair as they don’t know anything about me or my work - but I thought you might like a little assurance. I have been working on this series for three months, I’ve spent a lot of time out in the field and interviewed dozens of Ministers, MLAs, guides, Chiefs, scientists, environmentalists, and a few former Premiers. The focus of my series is not on hunters, though I recognize they have a valuable voice in this debate.


The focus is on the government management and motivation behind sustaining the grizzly hunt. I recognize this issue has been covered a lot, but it is usually done very superficially. The kind of quick stories that lead to hunters being slotted in to the enemy role, which doesn’t add anything productive to the debate. After doing all this research I think that if people disapprove of the hunt they’re anger should be directed at the government and their questionable management of the commercial hunting industry, not local hunters. Hence why I started the thread in the hopes of humanizing hunter’s perspective on this... I come from a family of hunters and know at the heart of most hunters there is a deep love and respect for animals and their environment. Maybe if I highlight this for the public we can move beyond oversimplified blame in the grizzly debate.


Anyways, there have been a few really thoughtful responses which is great, Im happy to include them in my series.









Im working on a feature about grizzly bear hunting and, in the hope of creating a balanced and realistic piece, would love to include a section about all the amazing conservation work the hunting communities does.

I appreciate hunters often do not want to comment on the grizzly issue because they are (rightfully) worried about getting demonized, but your thoughts on the topic are just as important as those of the more outspoken groups. All of the hunters I know care very much about the health of the environment they love to hunt in.

I don't think the grizzly hunt debate needs to be polarized between hunters and antis, hopefully highlighting this common ground help bring a little perspective to the situation.

If you have any comments about the conservation efforts made by the hunting community (or the grizzly hunt in general) I'd happy to include them in my article.

[coach]

Can you elaborate a little more about who you are and who you are writing for? First time posters are kind of like strangers walking into a room. Usually best plan is to introduce yourself. I'm sure you will find people who are more than willing to help with the info you require.

[albravo2]

Agree with Coach. Nice to know who we are talking to.

I'm not a grizzly hunter myself so I can't speak from experience and I'm certainly don't consider myself a representative spokesman for all hunters but I'd be happy to share my personal philosphy on why the hunt is important.

I was going to suggest PM as the proper forum but it probably makes more sense to post it publicly so other hunters can agree or disagree with me.

At work now, watch this space for considered reply a bit later today.

[Gateholio]

Grizzly bear tastes much like black bear.

[gerrygoat]

I would like to comment but like the others said I would like to know who we are talking to. Thanks.

[reporter]

Understandable, though my editor would like to keep specific details under wraps until we are ready to publish so I will have to stick to the same level of anonymity that most other people use on the site, sorry. I can tell you that I am a BC reporter, and though I don't hunt much of my family does and I do fish a lot.

As I mention before, I'm trying to get a better picture of how hunters feel about the grizzly hunt in BC and highlight some of the conservation work they do to balance the debate a bit. If any one who has killed a grizzly would like to tell me about what the experience meant to them I would be keen to learn more, likewise for those taking on conservation projects.

If you don't feel comfortable commenting you are, of course, under no obligation to do so. I do hope some recognize this as an opportunity to get their point of view in the press and included in the debate that is often dominated by the most outspoken, like the antis or guide outfitters association, but that is your choice.

[FirePower]

Yes we are all to a certain degree anonymous here, but with that in mind, we do not share freely our secret spots, lures etc with just anyone who asks. I would be happy to share the knowledge I have stored away over the past 50 odd years of hunting ursus horribilis in a number of locations however like others I am reluctant to do so, especially in the current climate, and with a total stranger who's first post is requesting information and second is declairing his desire to remain anonymous. Sorry

[The Dawg]

If you wont even say what agency you are writing for, I think most are gonna be very reluctant to talk.

Including myself.

[Sasqman]

So when u finish writing the article, and your souces are "anonymous people" from a hunting forum in BC................ probably not going to do so well............

[Whonnock Boy]

I can't speak for anyone else, but I don't trust reporters further than I could throw them, and I bet I could throw a few of the slimy pieces of crap pretty far! You will pick, and highlight what best suits your agenda, completely erasing the intended meaning of a quote, for ratings, for shock factor, for sensationalism..... Asking us hunters for input on Grizzly hunting is an open invitation for disaster. Tell me your name, your publishers name, and maybe I would be inclined to express my thoughts, but I doubt it. Remember fellow members, this request is just about the right time for a "reporter" to start gathering facts in time for the spring grizzly hunt.

*By no means does this view paint all reporters with the same brush. My comment cannot be used in full, or in part without expressed written consent from yours truly. (spoken by fast speaking disclaimer guy from toy commercials :lol:)

[Elkhound]

I am hoping Big boar weighs in on this as I always like his approach to writing a balanced and well written response to topics such as this

[Whonnock Boy]

LOL!! I had to think about it for minute to figure out who Bog Bore was....

[MB_Boy]

Understandable, though my editor would like to keep specific details under wraps until we are ready to publish so I will have to stick to the same level of anonymity that most other people use on the site, sorry. I can tell you that I am a BC reporter, and though I don't hunt much of my family does and I do fish a lot.

As I mention before, I'm trying to get a better picture of how hunters feel about the grizzly hunt in BC and highlight some of the conservation work they do to balance the debate a bit. If any one who has killed a grizzly would like to tell me about what the experience meant to them I would be keen to learn more, likewise for those taking on conservation projects.

If you don't feel comfortable commenting you are, of course, under no obligation to do so. I do hope some recognize this as an opportunity to get their point of view in the press and included in the debate that is often dominated by the most outspoken, like the antis or guide outfitters association, but that is your choice.

I think if we take your words as the truth, most people wouldn't have an issue commenting. The "anonymity" is a big concern and that likely isn't just for the members of the site but also for the owner (this is a forum owned by one individual) and moderators. If attention is drawn to HuntingBC.ca this could become a nightmare with all sorts of anti-hunters joining up to cause disturbances; sadly in this day and age people DO have that kind of time to push agendas and stir things up. The moderators could be in for FAR more work than they choose in trying to moderate this site "if" something like that happened.

I would highly suggest contacting Gatehouse or Elkhound who are moderators and have posted in this thread or Marc (that is his name AND username) who is the owner of this site. Marc may want no reference to his site directly in any articles and as "guests" on his forum I don't think we are in the position to speak on his behalf. There ARE nut-bars out there who could probably with a bit of sleuthing find out who he is and perhaps even harass him.

For all we know this could be a 'disguised' post to publish propaganda to fuel the "shut down the Grizzly hunt" campaign by any group such as Rainforest, Suzuki etc.

When looking at opinions as Sasqman stated above, who do you intend to cite as your sources? If I offered an opinion/comment, would I be cited as MB_Boy on HuntingBC.ca or just a 'member' of a BC Hunting Forum called Huntingbc.ca??

Just thought I would point that out. He and the moderators may be fine with it, but it is an avenue I would visit if in your shoes. I hope you can understand the reluctance and I think in fairness as others have expressed knowing the publication would certainly help. I think no matter what is published on this topic there will ALWAYS be polarization; no way to avoid it.

[warnniklz]

I've seen grizzlies on hunting trips and non huntinh trips. Even seen them on fishing trips, trips to the gun range. Most of them are brown. Some have black on them. I also seen one in a river eating a fish.

[Rackmastr]

I am guessing that if you were interested in some information, that you'd provide your name and which publication you are writing for? Same would go for any reporter conducting an interview I'm assuming.

I believe there would be a strong voice of people willing to talk and be heard, especially once they knew this. Guessing BCWF and some of the conservation groups such as WSSOBC, etc would be glad to comment as well once they knew which publication it was for.

There was a petition started a few years back showing the support of the grizzly bear hunt, and several organizations, individuals, and leaders of groups got involved and shared comments, posted thoughts, etc. I do believe that a strong voice showing support of the grizzly bear hunt and the reasons that its still easily defend-able in relation to being a wildlife management tool is a good thing. There are also several misconceptions about grizzly hunting and other forms of hunting in general, so I do think it would be great to have that information properly publicized.

Again, you'll see a bit of hesitation without knowing who you are, but if you are interested in getting in touch with some of those people, send me a PM and I can try to assist, as I'm guessing sharing your contact info/publication wont be an issue to the individuals you are interviewing.

Trevor Carruthers (just so you know who I am)

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Here is a recent thread about the ethics of grizzly hunting
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?112854-Grizzly-Hunt-Ethical-Issues&highlight=Ethics+grizzly
http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?112854-Grizzly-Hunt-Ethical-Issues&highlight=Ethics+grizzly
the best thing we can do for grizzly bears is to make sure they have wild spaces and can move freely between populations.

Hunting grizzlies keeps them fearful of people which is good for both grizzlies and people. It is easy to see how animals react to hunting pressure by looking at National Parks vs areas that are open to people.

Interestingly, if you want to see a high mortality rate in grizzly bears, create a national park right in the middle of their habitat
SSS

[adriaticum]

I've seen grizzlies on hunting trips and non huntinh trips. Even seen them on fishing trips, trips to the gun range. Most of them are brown. Some have black on them. I also seen one in a river eating a fish.

I bet you've even seen grizzlies smoking pot.
I sure have.

[reporter]

Thanks so much for your response. Great points about the moderators, I hadn't considered that and will get in touch with them now.

While I appreciate the anonymity could be seen as suspicious, it's not specifically related to the topic in question. My editor just doesn't want to give too much information away on a public forum so other media sources don't pick up the story while we get ready to publish. A certain degree of confidentiality while you're working on a big piece is quite standard.

I'd be happy to clarify who I am and who Im writing for in a private message to the moderators. If they feel uncomfortable with the thread I'll respect their wishes and sign off.

As for my sources, I've been working on this feature for three months. I've done great interviews with all of the parties involved (guides, government, biologists, environmentalists, First Nations, etc.). Hunters as a general group are going to be underrepresented in the series, unfortunately, because I often get responses like the ones above when I approach them for a comment. I can assure you quotes will not be used selectively, for any of my sources. This series is not about me or my thoughts on the issue, it's about fairly presenting the reader with the audience with the thoughts of those involved.

An unwillingness to talk when antis are happy to comment every chance they get is only going to increase that polarization, something I'd like to reduce as I think it is damaging to all sides of the discussion - hence my original pitch to include a section about hunters and conservation. Lots of people care about the health of our environment in BC, hunters or not.

Beyond extending an honest offer for you to be involved in piece and held on an equal playing field with the comments given by the government and environmentalists there's not much I can do. Comment or not, no need to call me a slimy report, just trying to give you fair say here!

[Whonnock Boy]

And there you have it. The first misquote of the piece.... :|


no need to call me a slimy report

[reporter]

Thanks so much for the links!

Good point about habitat, that's an issue that has come up a lot in my interviews.

[Foxton Gundogs]

I would suggest that you search the site for G bear threads check them out, it wont take long to decide who has experience with bears. Then PM them that way you can disclose your identity off screen and with that taken care of you will surely get some good information.

[835]

I dont know enough on this topic but i think one of you guys who do should type up a good response.... if Reporter is not who he says he is what will it hurt? people already twist us ... some one may as well do their best... really what would it hurt..... cant hurt us anymore then some stranger logging on to the site....

[Fisher-Dude]

The hunt is sustainable. That's all that matters.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I' ve hunted grizzlies quite a number of times. Simply put, the places we go, you will never see any tourists out taking pictures. One of the arguments the antis like to use is that grizzly bears can generate more toursim dollars catering to bear viewing than through hunting.
We have over 15,000 grizzlies in BC and we kill ~300-350/yr. That leaves a whole lot of bears for bear tourists.....and all of those bears will be in easy access areas only.
The province is plenty big enough for both past times.

[reporter]

Thank you for all your comments. I have emailed the moderator with my personal contact information and more details about who I work for and what I am working on. If he feels comfortable with the discussion moving forward please continue to post, I'll read through everything you write. I think I will limit how much I comment from here on out, though, as this is not about me or what I think, it should be an outlet for you to freely share your opinions.

As for referencing, it would be referenced directly to huntingbc.ca and perhaps your username too. If you would prefer to be referred to as something else feel free to let me know, though ultimately it'll be up to my editor. I would choose relevant quotes as I do with all of my interviews, but I would ensure they respect and represent the full sentiment and may take screenshots of the entire comment for reference if people want to read more.

[reporter]

Also, if anyone would like to talk further or contact me directly feel free to send me a private message and we can switch to email or phone interviews if needed.

[caddisguy]

The hunt is sustainable. That's all that matters.

x2 and I am always happy to share my opinion in these threads, reporter or no reporter.

My opinion on the matter is that you have a species that has exceeded its carrying capacity of an ecosystem, harvesting a portion of the number which will starve will not have a long term negative impact on the population. In the short term it has a positive impact and in the long term it provides stability. Harvesting one large adult male bear can result in one or two more bears not starving to death and potentially prevents a few cubs from being killed by the male in attempt to make the sow go into heat again. Hunting keeps the population at its plateau rather a cycle of population booms and die-offs. The fact that it keeps bears scared of humans--which is both helpful to our safety and theirs own--is a bonus.

Those worried about possible declines in grizzly bear numbers--and we all should--ought to consider the factors which actually limit habitat and as a result, the ecosystems carrying capacity for bears. Hunting is sustainable when managed as it is. Factors such as dense urban development, expansion of agriculture, destruction and pollution of salmon spawning streams, etc. on the other hand will have an impact on the grizzly population.

[markomoose]

Been hunting over 25 years now and only seen 1 sow with 2 cubs this past summer and I was fishing in a boat.

[Ranger95]

So you want to write about a hunters perspective on Grizzly bear hunting? If your intentions are genuine then I see no reason not to help you.

so here - let me help you with Questions that I think you should be asking & Answers that I, and others should be giving you - that's if you really are interested !


1) What are the human-caused mortality rates for Grizzly Bears in British Columbia?

Currently, 50% of the of the province’s 135 Grizzly Bear hunts are set at 6% maximum allowable human- caused mortality, 24% are set at 5%, and 26% are set at 4%.


2) How are the hunter harvest rates determined for Grizzly Bears in BC?

Once the maximum human caused-mortality rate is established, a series of calculations known as “step- downs”, are used to determine the Annual Allowable Harvest (AAH) rate. These calculations include subtracting the First Nations harvest rate, and the estimated unreported mortality rate from the maximum human caused-mortality rate. The procedure also factors in the expected number of reported non-hunting mortalities that will occur in the future (typically conflict bears) based on the previous records of reported non-hunting mortalities in that GBPU. Only after all of these step-downs are made is the AAH rate determined. Although this rate is calculated on an annual basis, it is applied over a five year period to allow for annual variation and to reflect natural population processes.


3) How many bears are killed in the province each year through human activities? - Is it within sustainable limits?


The current maximum human-caused mortality for all hunted populations in BC combined is set at 682 bears per year. Of the 682 bears that can be sustainably removed from the hunted populations of the province, 120 are estimated as unreported mortality, leaving a sustainable mortality of 562 bears that could be removed through hunting, control kills, road-rail collisions, or other causes.


From 2004 to 2009, the average reported mortality of Grizzly Bears in the province has been 297 per year, approximately 53% of the maximum limit. However, while this provides a “big picture”, mortality distribution is a critical component to the responsible diligent management of Grizzly Bears.


4) What assurances are there that Grizzly Bears will not be over-harvested?


There are 3 primary mechanisms that the Ministry uses to ensure that Grizzly Bears will not be overharvested. These include: (1) LEH/Quota; (2) Protection of females with dependent young; and (3) a female harvest limit.


The LEH/Quota system is very effective at controlling the Grizzly Bear harvest, and ensuring that an overharvest does not occur. The number of permits issued is set to achieve the Annual Allowable Harvest for resident hunters, based on their average success rate. The average 2004 to 2008 success rate for resident hunters was approximately 10.5%, but varies by GBPU. A 10% success rate means that for every 10 resident hunters in possession of a LEH Grizzly Bear authorization, on average only 1 will actually harvest a bear. If the allowable harvest of Grizzly Bears in an area was 10 for resident hunters, and the hunter success rate for that area was 50%, then 20 LEH authorizations would be available. If there is an anomaly, and success rates in a given year are higher than the previous five year average, the number of authorizations available the following year is reduced to account for the change in success rates.


5) Is the Grizzly Bear harvest in the “Great bear Rainforest” sustainable?


Much attention has been placed on the Grizzly Bear hunt in the Great Bear Rainforest (GBR). The population estimate for the entire GBR is approximately 2,000 bears. From 2004 to 2009 there has been an average of 24 reported mortalities within the GBR annually, representing 1.2% of the GBR population, most of which occurred as non-hunting mortality in the Bella Coola Valley. Even after factoring in other human-related causes of mortality, actual mortality is well within the sustainable mortality limits for the coastal GBPU’s.


Approximately 53% of the GBR is open to hunting, leaving 47% that is closed. Included in the closed area are 470,000 hectares of Grizzly Bear No Hunting Areas (also referred to as Grizzly Bear Management Areas (GBMAs) in the Coastal Land and Resource Management Planning Process), which were previously open to Grizzly Bear hunting and prescribed closed through coastal Land and Resource Management Plans and subsequent Government to Government agreements with Coastal First Nations.


Of the portion of the GBR that is open, the current population estimate is 970 bears. The average reported human-caused mortality within this area, from 2004 to 2009, was 21, or approximately 2.1% of the population. Of the 21 reported mortalities of Grizzly Bears per year, an average of 8 were non-hunting mortalities, and 13 were harvested by hunters.


Harvest rates are well below sustainable limits for all coastal GBPUs with the exception of the Tweedsmuir GBPU which, because of its high occurrence of non-hunting mortality, is being managed under a slightly modified process.



6) What are Grizzly Bear Population Units (GBPUs)?


Grizzly Bears in BC are not part of one large interbreeding population, but rather are comprised of 57 discrete or nearly discrete population units (referred to as Grizzly Bear Population Units or GBPUs.


Grizzly Bears are managed by GPBU in order to ensure local conservation and management objectives are being met and to reflect known and suspected fractures in Grizzly Bear distribution. GBPU’s have been used for setting land use priorities for Grizzly Bear conservation during strategic land use planning and are currently being used to direct population recovery. GBPUs are the primary unit for establishing Annual Allowable Harvests (AAH) for viable populations that can sustain a harvest.


Grizzly Bears in the Northern Peace region live in habitats with different ecological characteristics than those in the Southern Kootenays. Hunting in the north has no impact on Grizzly Bear populations in the south. Similarly, the very intensive recovery effort for Grizzly Bears required in Southwest BC is very different from the management and conservation focus for bears in the Khutzeymateen area on the north coast. In addition to the 57 GBPUs, there is a large area of BC that has either never been occupied by Grizzly Bears or where adult female Grizzly Bears no longer inhabit.


7) How much of the province is open to a Grizzly Bear hunt?


Approximately 65% of the province (not including Vancouver Island or Haida Gwaii which are not within the historic range of Grizzly Bears), is currently open to Grizzly Bear hunting


8) How does the Ministry determine the level of hunting mortality that is sustainable?


The proportion of a Grizzly Bear population that can be harvested by humans without creating a population decline was discussed in detail by the original Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy Scientific Advisory Committee, and the subsequent Scientific Advisory Panel


If anyone else wants to chip in - feel free to do so!

If if you have any further questions Reporter - by all means go ahead and ask me.

[MB_Boy]

Or.....reporter could just pull your info from here?? :wink: :wink:


http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/management-issues/docs/grizzly_bear_faq.pdf

[Seeker]

I agree deaddog, this VERY suspicious, I agree with Fisher dude on this one, it is sustainable. Ranger95 has me thinking however, imagine the potential of other huntable populations if we managed them in a similar manner.

[Ferenc]

With all due respect Reporter please inform us on your findings.. And once your ready for another assignment... Have a look at what the wolves are doing... In my opinion this is on top of the list... I'm sure you would get all the feedback you want.

[Ranger95]

With all due respect Reporter please inform us on your findings.. And once your ready for another assignment... Have a look at what the wolves are doing... In my opinion this is on top of the list... I'm sure you would get all the feedback you want.

I agree, Grizzly bear hunting is "so yesterdays news" plus it's been done to death already!

Wolves is where the focus should be now - reporter should get out there and start reporting on the real threat's to BC wildlife!

[Husky7mm]

I think is an opportunity, as hunters do we want to be under represented? I hope some of the folk with the skills to do it justice chime in. Keep the comments friendly fellas, you catch more flys with honey than you do with dog sh!t.

[bc_buckshot]

Im gonna say it how it is, nothing good about media or any reporters what so ever. They will burn you and take what you say out of context just to have a story. And if you think im wrong then go ahead have you 2 mins of fame and see when talking to the media or anyone that wants to do a write up.

Mr Reporter, i suggest if you want real good info. Why dont you spend some time off your desk and put your time in Grizzly country to get your info. Hell, most of the guys/gals do it most days of the year. Do your own work and get your story

[835]

i am very sure if he did pm a mod then the mod could maybe post in here if the guy seems ok.......


Reporter,
if you are a reporter, remember... we hunters NEVER get good press... so keep that in mind when reading the posts here. We are the way we are because of how we get treated by un informed public who get glorifyed ill informed press

[835]

as well,, Reporter get the mod you pm'd to post in here..... that might help.

[fowl language]

if I was a reporter and did not know were to go I would look up the coast to cascade grizzly initiative put on by a bcwf club. they are doing a hell of a job trying to protect grizzlies....fowl

[Elkhound]

i am very sure if he did pm a mod then the mod could maybe post in here if the guy seems ok.......


Reporter,
if you are a reporter, remember... we hunters NEVER get good press... so keep that in mind when reading the posts here. We are the way we are because of how we get treated by un informed public who get glorifyed ill informed press


Did some checking and Reporter seems to be on the level. I see no reason why questions can't be asked. If you have nothing positive to add to the conversation.....stay out of it. If you are a member that would be willing to have the facts about Grizzly hunting come forward then please help Reporter out.

I think its time for our side to be in the open. The antis seem to get all the press to the public

Dave

[burger]

I think is an opportunity, as hunters do we want to be under represented? I hope some of the folk with the skills to do it justice chime in. Keep the comments friendly fellas, you catch more flys with honey than you do with dog sh!t.

Totally agree. The rest of you I shake my head at...

[835]

Did some checking and Reporter seems to be on the level. I see no reason why questions can't be asked. If you have nothing positive to add to the conversation.....stay out of it. If you are a member that would be willing to have the facts about Grizzly hunting come forward then please help Reporter out.

I think its time for our side to be in the open. The antis seem to get all the press to the public

Dave


There ya go,,,, i know zero about Grizzley hunting ,,, but i bet this is a good oppritunity for someone who is well worded and cool headed to do us some good. a voice out there is better then nothing... This guy is trying to give us an oppritunity.

[MichelD]

Fair enough.

[guest]

Some may not like what I say but hee goes.

i do put in LEH. Every year for a G Bear, have not drawn it yet. When I do and if I do I WILL TAKE ALL THE MEAT, just like every other animal I hunt, Sheep, Goat, B Bear, Moose Elk Deer. This should be mandatory in my opinion. Then MAYBE WE can get be rid of the NON RESIDENT coming here for strictly a dam hide.

There, that outa stir things up a bit.

CT

[BlackOwL]

Im working on a feature about grizzly bear hunting and, in the hope of creating a balanced and realistic piece, would love to include a section about all the amazing conservation work the hunting communities does.

I appreciate hunters often do not want to comment on the grizzly issue because they are (rightfully) worried about getting demonized, but your thoughts on the topic are just as important as those of the more outspoken groups. All of the hunters I know care very much about the health of the environment they love to hunt in.

I don't think the grizzly hunt debate needs to be polarized between hunters and antis, hopefully highlighting this common ground help bring a little perspective to the situation.

If you have any comments about the conservation efforts made by the hunting community (or the grizzly hunt in general) I'd happy to include them in my article.

You can refer to the BC Wildlife Federation, there You will have Our voice united. You are in the wrong place and I think of You one of two things:
1. You are not a reporter, You are a new hunter trying to get some honey holes to hunt G's.
2. You are not a genuine reporter, If You were You seriously are hurting Your ethics and professionalism hiding Your Editor's and Your Name.
3. (This is a bonus) You are Phishing.

[pete_k]

Ahhh. the internet. *sigh*

[BlackOwL]

I just want to add something about anti hunting groups:
Guys I don't hate You like You hate Me, in fact I understand Your hate, is all about penis envy. :lol:

[Elkhound]

I posted this on the first post but thought to update here as well.

*****Edited by Elkhound.*******

To set the record straight I have personally contacted the media company this reporter works for and confirmed this reporter is who they say they are. I also wanted to include a quote from an email between the reporter and myself. I personally think we should give the reporter a chance to write an article based on facts and not false truths and emotion. I know other members have sent the reporter PMs and introductions have been made. Put the tinfoil hats away this time people.

Quote from Reporter

"I completely understand why hunters are hesitant to talk to the press about this, they are often taken out of context and unfairly demonized. That is the weakness in most other grizzly coverage that I am trying to overcome.


There have been a few comments about needing to do my research, etc. - which is fair as they don’t know anything about me or my work - but I thought you might like a little assurance. I have been working on this series for three months, I’ve spent a lot of time out in the field and interviewed dozens of Ministers, MLAs, guides, Chiefs, scientists, environmentalists, and a few former Premiers. The focus of my series is not on hunters, though I recognize they have a valuable voice in this debate.


The focus is on the government management and motivation behind sustaining the grizzly hunt. I recognize this issue has been covered a lot, but it is usually done very superficially. The kind of quick stories that lead to hunters being slotted in to the enemy role, which doesn’t add anything productive to the debate. After doing all this research I think that if people disapprove of the hunt they’re anger should be directed at the government and their questionable management of the commercial hunting industry, not local hunters. Hence why I started the thread in the hopes of humanizing hunter’s perspective on this... I come from a family of hunters and know at the heart of most hunters there is a deep love and respect for animals and their environment. Maybe if I highlight this for the public we can move beyond oversimplified blame in the grizzly debate.


Anyways, there have been a few really thoughtful responses which is great, Im happy to include them in my series. "

[Elkhound]

Thanks Dave,

Your welcome. I dont think we as hunters can afford to lose an opportunity that was literally handed to us.

A chance for an updated and honest fact driven article on such a touchy horribly debated topic such as Grizzly hunting. While I have never hunted Grizz if the hunt is sustainable I never want to see our hunting privileges for any animal lost

[Ride Red]

Hopefully "Reporter" is legitimate as we could use all the positive media attention for our sport. My suggestion for Reporter, make yourself available for a sit down meeting and you'll have all the correct information that you need, otherwise you look like any other troll on this site.

[adriaticum]

The Reporter should come out today to the BCWF federation meeting and can find out all kinds of information he or she needs.

[Husky7mm]

There you go, the series is being written anyway, time to share the qualified view from the other side of the fence. Good time to not act like a stupid redneck also.

[Hanrahan]

I posted this on the first post but thought to update here as well.

*****Edited by Elkhound.*******

To set the record straight I have personally contacted the media company this reporter works for and confirmed this reporter is who they say they are. I also wanted to include a quote from an email between the reporter and myself. I personally think we should give the reporter a chance to write an article based on facts and not false truths and emotion. I know other members have sent the reporter PMs and introductions have been made. Put the tinfoil hats away this time people.

Quote from Reporter

"I completely understand why hunters are hesitant to talk to the press about this, they are often taken out of context and unfairly demonized. That is the weakness in most other grizzly coverage that I am trying to overcome.


There have been a few comments about needing to do my research, etc. - which is fair as they don’t know anything about me or my work - but I thought you might like a little assurance. I have been working on this series for three months, I’ve spent a lot of time out in the field and interviewed dozens of Ministers, MLAs, guides, Chiefs, scientists, environmentalists, and a few former Premiers. The focus of my series is not on hunters, though I recognize they have a valuable voice in this debate.


The focus is on the government management and motivation behind sustaining the grizzly hunt. I recognize this issue has been covered a lot, but it is usually done very superficially. The kind of quick stories that lead to hunters being slotted in to the enemy role, which doesn’t add anything productive to the debate. After doing all this research I think that if people disapprove of the hunt they’re anger should be directed at the government and their questionable management of the commercial hunting industry, not local hunters. Hence why I started the thread in the hopes of humanizing hunter’s perspective on this... I come from a family of hunters and know at the heart of most hunters there is a deep love and respect for animals and their environment. Maybe if I highlight this for the public we can move beyond oversimplified blame in the grizzly debate.


Anyways, there have been a few really thoughtful responses which is great, Im happy to include them in my series. "

Well, it sounds legit. Might be time for a few of the wordsmiths on here who Grizzly hunt to join in the conversation. I personally don't bear hunt, so you're not going to get much out of me.

[Wentrot]

Damn-we as hunters always bitch about not being heard and here we get a great opportunity and people act like a bunch of clowns. If I had a clue about the subject at hand id be all over it. Some of you need to give your heads a shake.

[835]

try stop by the BCWF meeting as suggested.

the big things i have picked up on, by reading stuff from guys in the know is.
Public forget about the population controle aspect. Grizz kill moose, alot of them. Sure you can say it is a cycle pred high one time prey high another but man has already screwed that one up with logging, mineing and just us living. Fact is man needs to help nature manage.

Secondly, the population can handle it, bears are not going extinct. The government asesses a popultaion and decides if it can be hunted. This does not effect the population, and in some cases it can help the population. look at the leh draw statistics and see how many tags actually come from one area http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/fw/wildlife/hunting/resident/leh.html#Synopsis .. look at page 14 each area is listed and the number of tags in that area... now, remember not all those tags will get filled..... so how many square miles is in a given area? how many filled tags? how many bears total? how is the access? alot of the big tag count areas are "Under prescribed" this means no one is putting in for them, the area is too tough to get into... so
Area 7-02 has 43 tags with odds of 0.8:1 that means .8 people put in for each tag...... that means if you put in for this draw it is a sure thing you will get a tag damned near.... why is that? because the area is impossible this equals safe bears... This is where i get lost, find the harvest statistics.. what they really are.. not what David Suzuki Tells you they are,, he does not use good data, he makes it up because he is adjenda driven...... Hunters are population driven.

But largely, people think if they hink it is not right then others can not do it. Heart and opinion are not shared by all. Fact is if the population can handle it, why cant I?... and in some cases like i said it needs to be done.

Society today does not think the same as it did, they want their meat in a package the dont want to do the work. I am not that way, i hope i can teach my Daughter Emma this way. I kill an animal, it never knows what is coming. It is not run through a slaughter house. It lives a life and i then take it. I keep my meat as clean as i can and i cut 90% of it my self. When i put a steak in front of you it has a story i know and can tell you, it is clean and lean... Bears are eaten, alot of people do eat Grizz.. but some dont. And the meat that does get left behind does not get wasted.... and a few hundred moose dont die that season.

Nature can no longer maintain itself, even if we all stepped out of it, and some times the ignorance ( i mean this honestly in the truth of the word ) we hunters have to deal with is tireing. Come out and see what i do, what happens out in the forest. And listen to why. After that you can make your decision...



lol guess i did have something to say!
Good day,


I pm'd her this.... maybe im wrong but i tried....
maybe someone smarter then me will help..

[Opinionated Ol Phart]

My suggestion would be to talk to the BC Wildlife Federation if you want to know what hunters contribute to conservation... more specifically, the excellent work the Courtenay and District Fish and Game Protective Association has done while working with the Provincial biologists on elk relocation on Vancouver Island and the Sunshine Coast. This year alone, the Courtenay Club has bought two GPS elk tracking collars for the Ministry to aid them in accessing the success or relocated elk to the west side of the Island. (Over $5K that the bios didnt have in their budget) We are a lot more than the " Hook and Bullet " guys moniker that we have been labeled with in the past.

[r106]

I personally have never hunted Grizzly and am limited to my knowledge on the topic, but I don't have an issue with the hunt. As long as the numbers can sustain the hunt then why not. Having a rule to take the meat will do nothing to stop the Anti Grizzly hunting community, It will only limit them attacking our motive and using the term "Trophy hunter" to sway public opinion. Just because there is no law to take the meat doesn't mean everyone doesn't.

Plus sides to hunting Griz, Population control, creating a fear of humans, and by targeting old males you can increase the survival rate of cubs.

[pete_k]

How do we know what magazine or paper to buy or website to visit to see the report?
I'd be interested in reading it.

[reporter]

I'll be sure to post a link back here when it is published. Should be out end of January.
Thanks for all the thoughtful comments!

[Husky7mm]

Many disconnected urbanites can not believe that here in the twentieth century we are still allowing grizzly's to be killed. In many parts BC there really is no shortage of grizzly's and their population ( studied many times) needs to be managed just as with the rest of wildgame. What puts the value of a grizzly's life on and above moose, deer ,caribou or black bear after all they are not endangered in BC. In the state of Alaska managers implemented intense predator management to curb the decline of Muskox and bolster weak numbers of moose and caribou, this included areail gunning of Grizzlies and shooting of family units. I don't think anyone want's to see that.
Nature is cruel even amongst itself, Grizzlies kill other grizzlies, Grizzlies kill wolves , wolves kill Grizzlies, wolves kill Cougars, wolves kill black bear and so on...... They have competing interests and that is natural.
As a life long hunter I beleive I am a part of nature and a part of the process. It's in my DNA, it's not a question of if I will hunt it's when, where and what I will hunt again.
Its as natural to some as breathing.
I hunt for clean organic meat and adventure, I want to be a part of the whole process. I hunt predators and large carnivores, including grizzly to ensure that there is always a presence of wildgame for the future. I have an unquenchable desire for adventures in the wild, but have to add that I don't hunt to kill rather I kill to have hunted. Hunters don't generally hate the game they are hunting and most wouldn't if it were not sustainable. An anti hunter would never understand that.

A true wild grizzly inhabits some of the most wild and beautiful country on the planet. What a treat to be in the rugged mountains in the early spring as everything is greening up and renewing itself. I observed avalanches coming down, seen countless wild newborn animals and crossed many blown out creeks and rivers. Often to be the soul witness, aside from the Bears. Many of my most enjoyable days in the field included or involved bear hunting in the spring. Both grizzly and black bear, and some of the ones that really renewed and recharged me had no harvest at all. When hunting grizzly one can truely experience the sense of fight or flight.
IMO you will never feel more alive and aware than when you see a big boar grizzly and commit to going for it.

[blindcast]

With all due respect, the reporter claims the need for anonymity in order to protect the the publication's "first-to-print" advantage. You've already let the cat out of the bag and if any other publication really wanted to steal that advantage, they could easily put a staffer or freelancer on the story and crank it through. Makes keeping the name of the publication confidential rather suspect.

[chilko]

Two observations. One, your editor will ultimately decide if a balanced perspective is presented ,not you. Second, in your e-mail correspondence with Elkhound, you say that if the public disagrees with the questionable management of the commercial hunt they should direct their anger at the gov't. Who said it's questionable? I see grizzlies virtually everytime I hunt,along with wolves I might add, a situation that didn't exist when I started hunting 25 years ago,so from a grizzly population stand point I see nothing questionable about it. And don't tell them how to best direct their anti-hunting protests to the gov't. That part of your presentation seems to be set even though you are in the info gathering stage.

[Bugle M In]

If you really want a story to do some good around here and for all residents of BC, you could write a story on the corrupt Liberal Government and selling off Wildlife to Privatization, Based on the Dec 10th Decisions of last week.
That's a story that would be much more useful, than some Grizzly hunt basses story that has been written and over talked about already hundreds of times in the past, and almost always misrepresented and skewed to fall one sided....Trash!

[Philcott]

Many disconnected urbanites can not believe that here in the twentieth century we are still allowing grizzly's to be killed. In many parts BC there really is no shortage of grizzly's and their population ( studied many times) needs to be managed just as with the rest of wildgame. What puts the value of a grizzly's life on and above moose, deer ,caribou or black bear after all they are not endangered in BC. In the state of Alaska managers implemented intense predator management to curb the decline of Muskox and bolster weak numbers of moose and caribou, this included areail gunning of Grizzlies and shooting of family units. I don't think anyone want's to see that.
Nature is cruel even amongst itself, Grizzlies kill other grizzlies, Grizzlies kill wolves , wolves kill Grizzlies, wolves kill Cougars, wolves kill black bear and so on...... They have competing interests and that is natural.
As a life long hunter I beleive I am a part of nature and a part of the process. It's in my DNA, it's not a question of if I will hunt it's when, where and what I will hunt again.
Its as natural to some as breathing.
I hunt for clean organic meat and adventure, I want to be a part of the whole process. I hunt predators and large carnivores, including grizzly to ensure that there is always a presence of wildgame for the future. I have an unquenchable desire for adventures in the wild, but have to add that I don't hunt to kill rather I kill to have hunted. Hunters don't generally hate the game they are hunting and most wouldn't if it were not sustainable. An anti hunter would never understand that.

A true wild grizzly inhabits some of the most wild and beautiful country on the planet. What a treat to be in the rugged mountains in the early spring as everything is greening up and renewing itself. I observed avalanches coming down, seen countless wild newborn animals and crossed many blown out creeks and rivers. Often to be the soul witness, aside from the Bears. Many of my most enjoyable days in the field included or involved bear hunting in the spring. Both grizzly and black bear, and some of the ones that really renewed and recharged me had no harvest at all. When hunting grizzly one can truely experience the sense of fight or flight.
IMO you will never feel more alive and aware than when you see a big boar grizzly and commit to going for it.

Man, I liked reading that! Especially the last line. I, myself, have never been in those shoes and possibly never will but I like that you describes what it is to you.

Thanks.

[Husky7mm]

Although the grizzly hunting story has been done many times it is still new to those that are reading it for the first time, young urbanites, immagrants, people that are getting there first tv or radio....lol

I contrubuited from a hunters perspective. As I said earlier IMO it's an opportunity, as the series is gonna happen regardless. I know what I don't want it to say... " when given an opportunity to comment the folks at HBC called me names, accused me of false motives and basically told me to go fack myself."
Ever heard of the benefit of the doubt, perhaps reporter just wants to write a better series than what has been already done in the past?

[r106]

Husky7mm - we need to get more guys like you to give our side. I just can't put it into words like you can.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Awesome job, Husky! You captured what grizzly hunting is all about (at least to me) in just one paragraph( ok...maybe two).
Well done!!

SSS

[Husky7mm]

Thanks folks, that took me an hour on the iPhone this morning riding shotgun to the work site, dam auto correct is maddening. Lol

[The Hermit]

Reporter - I hope in your list of people to interview you will seek out an interview with BC's Grizzly Bear Biologists and that they are free to do the interview. I've been privileged to attended a few sessions where they describe their research and findings... Those guys probably know more about these bears than all the rest of us combined! They are honest and tell it like it is!

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Reporter - I hope in your list of people to interview you will seek out an interview with BC's Grizzly Bear Biologists and that they are free to do the interview. I've been privileged to attended a few sessions where they describe their research and findings... Those guys probably know more about these bears than all the rest of us combined! They are honest and tell it like it is!

Yes. Thats good advice Bill! Sat in on a few sessions myself.

Reporter- just make sure you interview 'real' bear bios. Not the 'cause' scientists who will try to pound a square peg into a round hole every time

[Elkhound]

I contrubuited from a hunters perspective. As I said earlier IMO it's an opportunity, as the series is gonna happen regardless. I know what I don't want it to say... " when given an opportunity to comment the folks at HBC called me names, accused me of false motives and basically told me to go fack myself."
Ever heard of the benefit of the doubt, perhaps reporter just wants to write a better series than what has been already done in the past?

Exactly. Said it better than I did

[BugRock]

Reporter - you should talk to CO's across the Province. They are the ones who deal with grizzly bear/human conflicts. They are the ones who investigate grizzly bear attacks on livestock, grizzly bear attacks on humans and the habituation of grizzly bears to non-natural foods in communiites across the province.

[Bugle M In]

Reporter - you should talk to CO's across the Province. They are the ones who deal with grizzly bear/human conflicts. They are the ones who investigate grizzly bear attacks on livestock, grizzly bear attacks on humans and the habituation of grizzly bears to non-natural foods in communiites across the province.

Speak to CO Umsonst about Grizzly in the Kootenay / Invermere Reg in that Case.
Great Guy to talk with, really cares about all aspects of Hunting, although, he might not like me having put his name up here for you.
But, he really is a stand up officer!

[IronNoggin]

I don't think the grizzly hunt debate needs to be polarized between hunters and antis, hopefully highlighting this common ground help bring a little perspective to the situation.

A Lofty Ideal, unfortunately one that is about as likely to fly as the Proverbial Pig. http://bigshotsbc.ca/images/smilies/wink.gif

I have been directly involved in wildlife & fisheries management most of my life. From the experience thus gained, I can firmly state that such management MUST be driven by Strong Science if the targeted goals are to be obtained. Unfortunately in BC (as in much of Canada) there is but scant "Political Support" for this obvious requirement, and in fact, the vast majority of Management Agencies are being forced into operating with continuously dwindling budgets. NOT the way to go IMHO, and a development that will (most likely) have negative consequences for the resource down the road.

The "Anti's" as you call them are focused in an entirely different direction. They blatantly Ignore the findings of Science, and are quite willing in most circumstances to simply "make things up" to counter Science should it support their stance. A "Stance" based upon Imposing their sense of Ethics, Morals, Beliefs and Emotions upon the entire world that surrounds them. Most (the vast majority I would suggest) have lost ANY understanding of how the "Real World" works, and have become FAR removed from understanding the various delicate checks and balances required to keep our human-altered ecosystems running on something approaching an Even Keel.

I agree with 330 Dakota above. The "Anti's" are not simply interested in doing away with the Grizzly Hunt. Instead, they see that as a Soft Target - one that might offer them a foot in the door towards their Real Mission. That being the cessation of ALL hunting, Province, Country and World Wide. Something I am NOT prepared to sit idly by and watch occur...

In the case of BC Grizzlies, much of the Science has been well executed, documented and repeatedly backed up with study following study. The data is there, for any who Choose to Look. These are NOT an "endangered species" as some would have you believe. In fact, they have a strong base population which is growing in many areas. The allowable harvest (via hunting) is but a small percentage of the recognized Recruitment Rate, and hence provides extremely little in the way of threat to the population as a whole.

I have worked alongside Grizzly Bears for much of my working career. And I can tell you from Direct Observation that hunting very much serves several purposes.

First it keeps populations within the checks and balances dictated by the constraints of their environment (habitat, food, etc). Some will have you believe that left to their own devices, Grizzlies (and others) will find and settle into a "natural balance". Nice Dream. In today's world, there is not a single piece of remote real estate we have not altered in some fashion. Whether by Intent or Accident, the vast majority of ecosystems have been dramatically altered from their original state. That in turn has dramatic consequences regarding "Carrying Capacity" of almost every species of wildlife out there. Too late to close that particular barn door now. The Best we can now realize is Careful Controlled Management based solidly on Good Science.

Second it instills an instinctive wariness towards humans, resulting in reduced negative encounters. Populations that are hunted quickly develop a sense of Respect and view humans MUCH differently than those which are not.

Third it reduces the incidence of ranching stock mortalities.

An interesting parallel can be found in the case of Mountain Lion hunting in California.
The "Anti's" made that one of their main targets (much for the same reasons Grizzlies are the subject of their attention in BC these days). At the time, populations were very close to Carrying Capacity levels. The "Anti's" carried the day, and ALL forms of hunting the big cat were legislated into non-existence. Afforded such "protection", their populations began an immediate and uncontrolled expansion. The first to Pay The Piper were the ungulate herds. Some that were previously "in trouble" plummeted to the point they would not recover. Then the younger cats, displaced by mature animals that had saturated the available environs, began to move into towns and cities. Places where "prey" equated to peoples' pets, and on occasion their children and wives. The first to cry FOUL were the "Anti's" themselves. Not willing to put up with the Threat the cats had now become, they DEMANDED something be done. BUT, they still stuck by their guns that the answer had to be "less lethal". Complete Ignorance to the imbalance they themselves created, and a scenario quite close to the possibility we now face in BC IMHO.

In my hunting career, I have been a Meat Collector, a Trophy hunter, and a Selective hunter. These descriptive terms mean little to any but those who choose to label their own "Style" of hunting, or those who oppose them. As far as proper Management goes, they are all of but little consequence. When working to instill those fore-mentioned checks and balances required to maintain healthy wildlife populations, an "available surplus" is quite often identified and subsequently offered to FN's and hunters. A "Surplus" identified by careful and sound science taking into account population dynamics, habitat requirements / constraints, and MUCH More. The managers, nor the population in question, could not care less which "label" the hunters who engage in meeting that management objective may wear. They are simply a means to an end. Those that appear to "care" the most strongly appear to be found amongst those Diametrically Opposed to hunting in any form, and trotted out in a derogatory manner as required.

The Bottom Line as far as I (as one who has based a life around both working with Wild Resources and Hunting the same) am concerned is this:

Wildlife Management MUST be Solidly based in Good, Sound Science. In the case of Grizzly Bears in BC, that is in place. There is no need for change.
Considerations regarding "morals, ethics & emotions" from those with little or no understanding of just how the Real World works, and Management's role within that, have no place at the table when such decisions are being made.

Regards,
Matt

[303savage]

That leaves a whole lot of bears for bear tourists.....and all of those bears will be in easy access areas only.
The province is plenty big enough for both past times.
The trouble is the grizzly that tourist can see are the ones that get used to humans and become nuisance bears.

[Phreddy]

As resident hunters, we are out in the bush constantly during the season as well as in the off-season and most of us do a lot of work cleaning up messes left by campers, etc., during the off season. We are constantly aware of changes in the environment and report any problems we see to the proper authorities. As in any other wilderness users, there is the odd slob among our numbers, but the great majority of us care very much and do as much as we can about the quality of the wilderness and strive to preserve it for others to enjoy. As resident hunters we tend to shoot only what we intend to eat, or that which might intend to eat us. If we see an imbalance between animals and predators we sometimes do what we can to try to restore some kind of balance. That's about all one needs to know about hunters in general. As my father and grandfather told me in 1956 when I got my first firearm, "If you're looking down the barrel of your gun at a crow sitting on a fence post, before you pull the trigger, ask yourself one question. Am I going to eat this crown fried, roasted, stewed or boiled?, because if you kill it you will eat it.

[Bugle M In]

To be honest, I never knew that if anyone who shot a grizzly, did not have to pack out the edible portions of meat, like with all other big game.

Quite honestly, as a hunter, who is not against grizzly hunting at all, I find this point quite disturbing for me, and no, you won't change my opinion on that.

It makes it hard for me to defend Grizz hunting, other than for predator control reasons, against any Anti's that pose that point along to me.

I'm glad I found that out now, as I sure would have felt stupid in a discussion with anyone against Grizz hunting in the future.

[180grainer]

Understandable, though my editor would like to keep specific details under wraps until we are ready to publish so I will have to stick to the same level of anonymity that most other people use on the site, sorry. I can tell you that I am a BC reporter, and though I don't hunt much of my family does and I do fish a lot.

As I mention before, I'm trying to get a better picture of how hunters feel about the grizzly hunt in BC and highlight some of the conservation work they do to balance the debate a bit. If any one who has killed a grizzly would like to tell me about what the experience meant to them I would be keen to learn more, likewise for those taking on conservation projects.

If you don't feel comfortable commenting you are, of course, under no obligation to do so. I do hope some recognize this as an opportunity to get their point of view in the press and included in the debate that is often dominated by the most outspoken, like the antis or guide outfitters association, but that is your choice.

I am sure there are a number of moderators on this site who would meet with you personally or talk to you on the phone. Your request for anonymity is unusual for a legitimate reporter. This isn't "All the President's men" or the "Snowden Files". Perhaps share your identity with Gatehouse via PM as he is a moderator (I assume) or can put you in touch with one. Once proven legitimate by their say so, we'll comment. Your desire to remain hidden is suspicious which, to me anyways, means your motives are too. I would urge members of this site not to comment until this person identifies themselves and the paper or TV they work for. There is absolutely NO legitimate reason for them not doing so.

[180grainer]

Well after posting the last comment I realized we're at page 8. This person's request to remain hidden is stupid. Using our anonymity on this site, (as legitimate members) to their request for the same, as a "legitimate" reporters is asinine.

[The Dawg]

Oh man, she made us all look great!


http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/trophy-hunters-decimate-bears-bc-valley-under-abysmal-policy

[Rackmastr]

Oh man, she made us all look great!


http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/trophy-hunters-decimate-bears-bc-valley-under-abysmal-policy

Yep...pretty unprofessional and biased writing there!!!! Holy hell.

[MB_Boy]

Good lord. :roll:

Is that definitely the same writer who started this thread? If "yes", given her bio I am not surprised.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/contributors/claire-hume-0 (http://www.vancouverobserver.com/contributors/claire-hume-0)

[Wentrot]

Wow, may your reporting career burn in hell.

[IronNoggin]

We've been "Snookered" :mad:

Despite many assurances to the contrary, this HARDLY meets the test of "of creating a balanced and realistic piece"!!

Pissed at myself for answering in any fashion whatsoever! :evil:

Nog

[r106]

Not a fan of that article one bit. But they way I read it, it makes the outfitters look bad not resident hunters. Right now I could care less how the outfitters look in the public eye.

Is there any proof that this is the same person?

[IronNoggin]

... Is there any proof that this is the same person?

Identified January 3rd (on the "other" site) as the author of this article: http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/nineteen-year-battle-great-bear-rainforest-brink-peace-momentous-deadline-approaches

One and The Same http://bigshotsbc.ca/images/smilies/Doh%21.gif

Suckered...
Nog

[adriaticum]

The benefits of a healthy guiding industry, eh!?
Abe Dougan is the same guy who was tried for poaching stone sheep in BC.
http://www.castanet.net/news/Kamloops/121773/Hunting-guide-charged

If he still has a valid hunting license it's a massive failure of government (and all of us).

In fact this article is an excellent tool to be used to scale back the guiding industry in this province.

[The Dawg]

Not a fan of that article one bit. But they way I read it, it makes the outfitters look bad not resident hunters. Right now I could care less how the outfitters look in the public eye.

Is there any proof that this is the same person?



Yup- I told her to message me regarding a piece on wolves.

She sent me alllllllllll her details.

Thats how I know its her.

[The Dawg]

It paints ALL bear hunters in a negative light.



The Vancouver Observer (https://www.facebook.com/VancouverObserver?fref=nf)
3 hrs (https://www.facebook.com/VancouverObserver/posts/851135751591418) ·




BC's voters oppose the trophy bear hunt. The province allows it. In Pitt River Valley the result has been deadly.

[1899]

Didn't Reporter ask about Grizzly hunting? This is not a Grizzly hunting article. Maybe not the same person and not the relevant article.

[Grumpa Joe]

Wait for it. She states that she is writing a series of articles.

[Elkhound]

Didn't Reporter ask about Grizzly hunting? This is not a Grizzly hunting article. Maybe not the same person and not the relevant article.

This was my first thought as well......

[Whonnock Boy]

Well, well, well.... I wonder how she's going to trash talk us in her second, third, or fourth part of the series? It can't get any worse... or can it???

On the flip side, Abe Dougan is getting crucified. Any thoughts on him now Mr. 300rum700?


Joe, here IS the deal. Abe Dougan can direct you to and probably guide you to good sheep. He is Big Boar outfitting and is probably the best guide in BC. ^^^ good to see the saints are alive and well on hbc.

[The Dawg]

My issue is shes not distinguishing between meat hunters and trophy/guide hunting.

The Public sees us all under the same microscope, and she has done NOTHING to help our cause of being out from under that label.IMO

[.264winmag]

This Abe Dougan fellow seems to have good morals and judgment when it comes to hunting? I doubt he'd over hunt an area even if it was legal! Wow this guy has dug himself some kind of hole! I'm definitely not a fan of how the article was written either but it gives us some fuel towards the allocation policy:)

[Whonnock Boy]

What he said...


My issue is shes not distinguishing between meat hunters and trophy/guide hunting.

The Public sees us all under the same microscope, and she has done NOTHING to help our cause of being out from under that label.IMO

[MB_Boy]

My issue is shes not distinguishing between meat hunters and trophy/guide hunting.

The Public sees us all under the same microscope, and she has done NOTHING to help our cause of being out from under that label.IMO

Yes, and no mention that Black Bear hunters are not just taking the skull and hide; I think noting the meat requirement is key.

[Elkhound]

Her email to me awhile back............I bolded one sentence. Hmmmmmmmm nope.....dont think that was done



I completely understand why hunters are hesitant to talk to the press about this, they are often taken out of context and unfairly demonized. That is the weakness in most other grizzly coverage that I am trying to overcome. Unfortunately a lot of these comments are not doing their negative reputation any favours, though I appreciate this is the internet and it is easy for people to lose their cool.


There have been a few comments about needing to do my research, etc. - which is fair as they don’t know anything about me or my work - but I thought you might like a little assurance. I have been working on this series for three months, I’ve spent a lot of time out in the field and interviewed dozens of Ministers, MLAs, guides, Chiefs, scientists, environmentalists, and a few former Premiers. The focus of my series is not on hunters, though I recognize they have a valuable voice in this debate.


The focus is on the government management and motivation behind sustaining the grizzly hunt. I recognize this issue has been covered a lot, but it is usually done very superficially. The kind of quick stories that lead to hunters being slotted in to the enemy role, which doesn’t add anything productive to the debate. After doing all this research I think that if people disapprove of the hunt they’re anger should be directed at the government and their questionable management of the commercial hunting industry, not local hunters. Hence why I started the thread in the hopes of humanizing hunter’s perspective on this... I come from a family of hunters and know at the heart of most hunters there is a deep love and respect for animals and their environment. Maybe if I highlight this for the public we can move beyond oversimplified blame in the grizzly debate.


Anyways, there have been a few really thoughtful responses which is great, Im happy to include them in my series.


If you have any questions or comments feel free to give me a call.


All the best,


Claire Hume


The National Observer
604 789 1829

[1899]

Wait for it. She states that she is writing a series of articles.

Oh. This should be good then.

Interestingly she is, according to her bio, a fly fisherwoman. That is great and it is nice to see that she still has the fire of a hunter-gatherer in her belly. She does have a Masters and her area of study would indicate that she would have no problem in finding data relating to catch and release mortality. I assume a 100% mortality rate for the fish she takes home to eat. According to a 2010 study by the Freshwater Fish Society of BC rainbow trout have a mortality rate of 10 to 38% with an average of 19%. That average means that almost 1 in 5 fish caught and then released dies, And what does it die for? What did she accomplish by catching it and then letting it's life go to waste? And don't for one second think that this is a rant in any way against fishing or catch and release. I sure you all "get it".

[Rob Chipman]

From the article:

"Between 2003 and 2013, Dougan and his clients killed 348 black bears in B.C., a substantial number of them in the Upper Pitt Valley region, the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations says."

Is that true? Is that sustainable?

If true, and if not sustainable, we should all have a problem with it, and the writer of the article should be a smaller problem.

Am I missing something obvious? If so, sorry for being dense. 35 bears a year seems like a lot to take out for me. I could well be wrong. I have shot and eaten bear (ate some 2 nights ago). I'm not anti-bear hunting. I am for science based sustainable hunting. I would like to see the info she got from the guvmint.

[Husky7mm]

Well shit, that is her. What a liar! Her mind was made up before she wrote the article obviously. I certainly don't take any stands for a crooked outfitter, but this article manipulates uniformed readers into thinking that hunting in that area has wiped out the bears that are there. No mention that there is no grizzly hunt there, or that black bear meat must be removed, or that guides focus the harvest on large males, or that it is illegal to hunt females with cubs, or that black bears are stable to increasing all over the province and often underutilized. A ton of bias so far, I see the view of the lodge owner that wants to show guest bears and the Keanu Reeves look alike fishing guide were not "under represented". I wonder what kind of relationship they have? I wonder if any of them have been to the other 99% of the unit?

[Elkhound]

From the article:


Is that true? Is that sustainable?

If true, and if not sustainable, we should all have a problem with it, and the writer of the article should be a smaller problem.

Am I missing something obvious? If so, sorry for being dense. 35 bears a year seems like a lot to take out for me..

Good question.....does seem incredibly high for one guide

[Confused]

He seems to do it year after year, and lots of big boars by the looks of it......so I would say it is sustainable. Not to mention I imagine he hunts other places than just this sliver of land they talk about.

[Everett]

The article itself was horribly written can't believe she has a masters I have seen junior high students who write better than that but she bashed the crap out of slimy guide so I liked that part.

[srupp]

Hmm I have guided and hunted grizzly bears interior, coastal helped get 4 bears high in Boone Crockett, one of oldest grizzlies harvested in Canada, helped 13 hunters get grizzlies from this and other sites..
I will talk grizzlies with any reporter the where why when and how...
Personal email ssrupp@telus.net
Steven Rupp

[Whonnock Boy]

We don't need questions! We need a scapegoat!!!! Any ideas?


Good question.....does seem incredibly high for one guide

[The Dawg]

Hmm I have guided and hunted grizzly bears interior, coastal helped get 4 bears high in Boone Crockett, one of oldest grizzlies harvested in Canada, helped 13 hunters get grizzlies from this and other sites..
I will talk grizzlies with any reporter the where why when and how...
Personal email ssrupp@telus.net
Steven Rupp

Youre still willing to go there, even after she's shown she can't be trusted?

Retirement that slow?

[papaken]

To be honest, I never knew that if anyone who shot a grizzly, did not have to pack out the edible portions of meat, like with all other big game.

Quite honestly, as a hunter, who is not against grizzly hunting at all, I find this point quite disturbing for me, and no, you won't change my opinion on that.

It makes it hard for me to defend Grizz hunting, other than for predator control reasons, against any Anti's that pose that point along to me.
I'm glad I found that out now, as I sure would have felt stupid in a discussion with anyone against Grizz hunting in the future.


Nowhere that I know of does it state you are not allowed to take the meat from a grizzly. What you do have is the option not to take the meat as with many other predators ie: wolves, coyotes, bobcat, lynx, and cougar. Although I do not hunt grizzly if given the opportunity I would try the meat. I do eat the black bear I've harvested and have tried cougar. As long as the harvest of predators is considered viable and legal you should be able to hunt them whether you take the meat or as is legal choose not to. As for the antis, they don't want you to hunt no matter what.

[1899]

From the article:

"Between 2003 and 2013, Dougan and his clients killed 348 black bears in B.C., a substantial number of them in the Upper Pitt Valley region, the Ministry of Forests, Lands, and Natural Resource Operations says."

Is that true? Is that sustainable?

If true, and if not sustainable, we should all have a problem with it, and the writer of the article should be a smaller problem.

Am I missing something obvious? If so, sorry for being dense. 35 bears a year seems like a lot to take out for me. I could well be wrong. I have shot and eaten bear (ate some 2 nights ago). I'm not anti-bear hunting. I am for science based sustainable hunting. I would like to see the info she got from the guvmint.


Don't forget that the 348 number is a total, and not just from this area. From 2-08:

Ministry records indicate Dougan and his clients removed 50 black bears in a six-year period from MU 2-08, and Gerak believes they were all killed along a 20 kilometre stretch of river.

And Gerak, whom she referred to as resembling a rugged Keanu Reeves (of critical importance), believes they were killed in that 20km stretch based on what? A hunch? A gut feeling? Anecdotal evidence? Did he find the gut piles? Did he find remains of bears?

And look at the title of the article: "Trophy hunters decimate bears in B.C. valley under "abysmal" policy"

How do you know the bears have been decimated? What is a trophy hunter?

And I could go on and on.

[1899]

I have a question for the author. You seem to believe what Gerak tells you. He said in the video that he believes there used to be 100 bears in the valley. The evidence you gathered is that Dougan "removed" 50 bears in the last 6 years. That means just over 8 bears per year. So that would be 8% - 9% of the population per year. Assuming of course that all 50 bears came out of that valley where Rugged Keanu says there were 100 bears to start with. There are lots of studies on sustainable harvest rates. Please look into it and get back to us to inform us whether or not an 8% to 9% harvest rate is sustainable, or whether it will "decimate" the bear population within 6 years.

Thanks in advance.

[srupp]

Youre still willing to go there, even after she's shown she can't be trusted?

Retirement that slow?

Hmmm lol..just the facts..lol? Nope retirement is fine hope to get a chance at a wild pig tomorrow am..wood working, flytying, redesigning my fishing set up....alaways time to talk grizzly..
Steven

[scoutlt1]

My issue is shes not distinguishing between meat hunters and trophy/guide hunting.

The Public sees us all under the same microscope, and she has done NOTHING to help our cause of being out from under that label.IMO

You are bang on Dawg.


Some "Googling" about Claire Hume..

http://www.blurb.com/books/3101005-faltering-light-ii

She is clearly not a "fan" of hunters. Absolutely no understanding of hunting.

Go watch your peaceful grizzlies and put your reporter twist on things Ms. Hume....and really, I'm glad you think Danny looks like a "rugged Keanu Reeves"....but honestly, I couldn't care less what he looks like.

Go and spend some time with your friends and colleagues. Faisal Moola, Chris Darimont, and Paul Paquet....among others. I had a look at some of those names online. Interesting.

You have no friends here. We are men and women who spend time, lots of time, outdoors. We care about the wildlife that surrounds us. Way more than the "general" public. Much more than any of your friends, "experts" ever could or will.

I will be taking one of my sons predator hunting this weekend.
We will be trying to kill. Yes kill, as many coyotes/ wolves/ cougars, you name it....as possible. Both of us are pumped about spring bear season too.
And after reading your ridiculously biased article, I'm going to (with my son) do my best to head up the Pitt river valley for the upcoming spring bear hunt as well.

We can't wait to see one of those black bears hanging out beside the river....you know, the river that Danny likes to fish the living s*** out of....and shoot at least one of those bears. We're hoping to see more. If we do, legally, we'll kill as many as we can....and be damn happy about it.

I'll be thinking of you and Danny when I skin one of those bears out. You know, the ones I am required by law to take the hide and meat of. Black bear meat in the crock pot tastes great.
Oh sorry. Did you forget to mention that in your so called "article"???

All the best to you and Danny...


I used to think you were a pretty good reporter.

No more.

[Bugle M In]

Unless that person is willing to pass along all their credentials...and they need to stay anonymous...I think it is safe to avoid them, just like u would a tella marketer.

[1899]

LOL @ ScoutLT1.

May as well roll the credits. :)

[sobirch]

What a joke of a article, I especially like the playboy pose on the front of the boat LOL. Sounds like she needs a SLAPP from the guide she singled out, a lot of public speculation and no proven facts. It's like she is trying to get the resident hunter to agree with her but the bottom line that I see is that anti hunting is anti hunting. While we may have a current disagreement with the guiding industry over allocation I think we as hunters have to see through the smoke and mirrors and stick together to preserve our heritage for residents and the guiding industry. Just my opinion as a hunter and as a resident hunter. I would be willing to wager a case of beer that in her series of articles the resident hunter will be blamed for the loss wildlife viewing opportunities for the fishing guides or some other sector.

[Husky7mm]

After weeks of outfitter vs resident hunter threads maybe she thinks she nailed it, and did us a solid ! Lol

[scoutlt1]

This "article" throws all of us hunters into the same barrel as Abe Dougan. Like it or not.

That is how all the "antis" will read it. NONE of the "public" will see this and think....."damn that hunting guide, he is a poacher. Thankfully there are hunters out there that are looking after, and caring about our wildlife" We will be lumped into the same pile of dogs*** as Dougan.

Those that think their chicken and beef is born and raise in a styrofoam tray and covered in shrinkwrap will continue to do so...and that way of thinking will be re-enforced by so called "reporting" such as this.


I'm sick of this slanted media bullshit.

[BDN9]

Funny how a guide who lives there year round didn't see one bear. He needs to open his eyes. I went up there twice this Summer and saw 3 between first canyon and the hot springs. What a crock.

[Cookie1965]

Despite the many ridiculous claims and errors in this "article" I would still think a good reporter and her editor would know what the word "decimate" actually means. Maybe the Keanu Reeves look-alike distracted her.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Only way to reduce the bear populations are by hammering sows. Pretty sure Abe's outfit isn't called Big Sow Outfitters.

[Whonnock Boy]

That is what he does not realize. Animals adapt to the changes in their environment. Can anyone say whitetails? The bears are there, he just doesn't have the skills to find them, and that wouldn't suit their agenda.


Funny how a guide who lives there year round didn't see one bear. He needs to open his eyes. I went up there twice this Summer and saw 3 between first canyon and the hot springs. What a crock.

[BigfishCanada]

he doesnt make money from hunters, but eco adventures he could, bull shit, all lies and I will let every network i know to not NOT stay at his lodge, y

[Iltasyuko]

did us a solid ! Lol

haha - thanks for the chuckle, that was funny. :grin:

[Rob Chipman]

Good point about decimating by hammering sows instead of boars.

[Busterpayton54]

I wonder if she's been back to read the replies? I hope she does. I'd like her to know that she is indeed the typical journalist so many of us expected, just another one of the herd. She used lies and deceit to gain superficial knowledge with the intent manipulate facts to suit her agenda.

There is a difference between journalists and novelists you know. One is respected for telling it how it is, while fixing the strength to keep personal opinion out of the article, the other captivates the audience with their creativity. What you have here is some body that tries to combine the two to find because their skills are handicapped, thus they will forever be in the shadows of mediocrity, pleading for recognition.

[MB_Boy]

I am sure her message box is full.....and hopefully she is getting emails that she is being bombarded with messages. I would say call her out any way you can.

She he is trying to make a name for herself.....aligning with the likes of Paquet speaks volumes. I did know him many a year ago.

She is a crock....unless somehow her subsequent articles rebound like climbing Everest after dunking hunter's heads into the Dead Sea (lowest place on the planet)

[Busterpayton54]

I wonder if she's been back to read the replies? I hope she does. I'd like her to know that she is indeed the typical journalist so many of us expected, just another one of the herd. She used lies and deceit to gain superficial knowledge with the intent manipulate facts to suit her agenda.

There is a difference between journalists and novelists you know. One is respected for telling it how it is, while finding strength to keep personal opinion out of it, the other captivates the audience with their creativity. What you have here is somebody that tries to combine the two because they are ill equipped to do either with any level of excellence, thus they will forever be in the shadows of mediocrity, pleading for recognition.

[1899]

I wonder if she's been back to read the replies? I hope she does. I'd like her to know that she is indeed the typical journalist so many of us expected, just another one of the herd. She used lies and deceit to gain superficial knowledge with the intent manipulate facts to suit her agenda.

There is a difference between journalists and novelists you know. One is respected for telling it how it is, while finding strength to keep personal opinion out of it, the other captivates the audience with their creativity. What you have here is somebody that tries to combine the two because they are ill equipped to do either with any level of excellence, thus they will forever be in the shadows of mediocrity, pleading for recognition.

It helps when you target the right audience.

[bc_buckshot]

Im gonna say it how it is, nothing good about media or any reporters what so ever. They will burn you and take what you say out of context just to have a story. And if you think im wrong then go ahead have you 2 mins of fame and see when talking to the media or anyone that wants to do a write up.

Mr Reporter, i suggest if you want real good info. Why dont you spend some time off your desk and put your time in Grizzly country to get your info. Hell, most of the guys/gals do it most days of the year. Do your own work and get your story


Tod you guys back Dec 17 when i posted.... Nothing good with reporters and look what just happend. I agree with the jist of the story, ya Abe Dougan did shot of bears in that area. Yes i personally believe from facts and knowlege that he went over his limit and probley put damage in the bear numbers in that area. Yes I believe Abe should get his guiding licencse taken away because of this and being found guilty for other offenses And finally Yes I believe there is no good reason for a reporter on this site asking for infomation so she can write a story. A story is writen from first knowlege and what they saw and not second hand information from someone else. Should of listen to buckshot!

[Ambush]

Yes, she has been back just recently. Probably chuckling to herself how she out witted the dim-witted. Well, claire [small "c" on purpose] I'd rather be honest and dumb than "clever" and deceitful. And that's why you received the PM as follows:


Integrity in Journalism......


.....is obviously of no concern to you.

It must taste a little bit like vomit in your mouth when you speak of truth, integrity, fairness, balance or any other word that might represent good character.

[Bugle M In]

ok folk...back to the allocation policy, and fixing that!....lesson learned here for sure...and ya,she can kiss my a**, not on the right, not on the left, but right in the middle....
now that is journalism!!

[Phreddy]

With you 100% on that one adriatcum. Make the government and the guides look like the tools they are.
The benefits of a healthy guiding industry, eh!?
Abe Dougan is the same guy who was tried for poaching stone sheep in BC.
http://www.castanet.net/news/Kamloops/121773/Hunting-guide-charged

If he still has a valid hunting license it's a massive failure of government (and all of us).

In fact this article is an excellent tool to be used to scale back the guiding industry in this province.

[Husky7mm]

Maybe something fair on our behalf will be included in the next part of the series, but for now I wont be holding my breath.... Clearly the first part was written with an agenda.

[reporter]

Thank you to everyone who took the time to provide sincere answers to this thread.

Here is the story they were going to be used in:

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/hunters-say-they-love-what-they-kill

[Stone Sheep Steve]

That was a bit better than the last report.
Next time talk to Bruce McLennan for the perspective on the real issues that grizzly bears face and what controls their populations. Mr Paquet is not a respected 'biologist' at least in the real world of science. Mr McLennan is.

[The Dawg]

I don't think so SSS

lots of bs accusations, and nothing to defend us

"90% of bc opposes this hunt"?

[Whonnock Boy]

There was zero facts in either piece. Nothing but opinions, and emotion. Garbage.....

[adriaticum]

Ha,ha Ambush is a funny guy.
Putting integrity and journalism in the same sentence.

[Hanrahan]

Well, you have to consider the source. The Observer is read by a certain demographic in the city. It has a definite tendency to pander to it's base readership. As a news organization it's mediocre at best.

[The Dawg]

Well, you have to consider the source. The Observer is read by a certain demographic in the city. It has a definite tendency to pander to it's base readership. As a news organization it's mediocre at best.


And that's most likely the reason she refused to name herself or organization at the start

[r106]

As far as a Grizz right up, I didn't think it was to bad. I think it was more pro than con to the hunters but there was a lot better quotes on here to use than mine though.

[adriaticum]

And that's most likely the reason she refused to name herself or organization at the start

As a matter of fact we should have required her to disclose this information before we talked to her.

[r106]

As a matter of fact we should have required her to disclose this information before we talked to her.

we tried but she refused and instead contacted a Mod that verified she was a reporter. I don't see anything that she did wrong. I don't agree with it or her view on the subject but she was up front about what she wanted and what it was going to be used for.
I don't see the info that was supplied to her being used in a malicious way toward us. Don't like the info she used or I should say didn't use. or the tone of her previous articles on the subject

[Elkhound]

we tried but she refused and instead contacted a Mod that vouched for her. I don't see anything that she did wrong. I don't agree with it or her view on the subject but she was up front about what she wanted and what it was going to be used for.
I don't see the info that was supplied to her being used in a malicious way toward us. Don't like the info she used. or the tone of here previous articles on the subject


All I did was verify that she was who she claimed to be as members were not even convinced she was a real reporter. Nothing more

[r106]

All I did was verify that she was who she claimed to be as members were not even convinced she was a real reporter. Nothing more

Sorry vouched for her was the wrong word. I know you didn't do that

[Elkhound]

Sorry vouched for her was the wrong word. I know you didn't do that


No worries. I knew what you meant......

However.....I feel betrayed......I thought what we had was a reporter that grew up with hunting and fishing and was an outdoors woman herself .........I thought finally.....a chance to be heard.......I urged members to contact her and try and get our side out there.

I just googled poll on grizzly hunting in BC and the first 3 websites I was taken to had anywhere from 70 to 90 percent against grizz hunting. Yet the 90 percent cbc poll was used. Then go to
http://peachlandsportsmen.com/gbears.html

The level of support for grizzly bear hunting is 70% in the interior of the province where people live in close proximity with grizzly bears. Even in the heavily urbanized Lower Mainland, 50% of the people believe the hunting of grizzly bears should continue compared to just 44% who think it should not. This is the most populated region of the province with nearly 2 million people, most of who do not hunt, or have immediate contact with grizzly bears. Once respondents understood that population growth rates of grizzly bears can be 8% per year as a result of hunting, 60% of respondents told researchers that grizzly bear hunting should continue to be permitted in BC.
So yeah.....I feel another journalist decided to go with opinion instead of all facts like I was assured of. Disappointing to say the least. Then she makes a shot at how many members were willing to talk to her. Geeze I wonder why.

[Whonnock Boy]

Then she makes a shot at how many members were willing to talk to her. Geeze I wonder why.

Laughable really. Puts out that there are 15K members on the site, yet only a few wanted to speak up. How many of us are regular users? How many of us are regular posters? How many of those posters actually have personal experience with hunting grizzlies? How many of those actually trust what any "reporter" wants to report in regards to the grizzly hunt? A few less I would imagine now. Sensationalist, propaganda based journalism at its best.

[Hanrahan]

Well, it's clear that the tone of the article was decided on before the article was written. She just cherry picked the "facts" and quotes she wanted to in order to fit the predetermined outcome. As far as I know, that's not journalism, that's just writing an opinion piece. And am I the only one who noticed a condescending tone towards hunters in the article? Almost like saying, "Can you believe what these stupid hunters actually have the nerve to say?" Maybe it's just me. Either way, not an impressive example of journalism.

[MichelD]

Am I missing something? Is there another article besides the "Hunters decimating bears" one? I didn't see a reference to this site. In the news story of last week.

[Whonnock Boy]

Am I missing something? Is there another article besides the "Hunters decimating bears" one? I didn't see a reference to this site. In the news story of last week.

First post from today in the thread.

[papaken]

http://peachlandsportsmen.com/gbears.html
If reporter wants to really be honest she should put this info in her newspaper. In the interest of good journalism maybe every newspaper should put it out there. Personally I do not believe I will make any comments to reporters from now on as you cannot believe they and their editors, like anti hunters, will not twist what is said to fit their own agenda. If she came from a family of hunters and fishermen like mine we would be disappointed in her.

[Keta1969]

Personally I never talk to reporters. Learned a long time ago they will take things out of context, misqoute you, and do whatever it takes to get the "story" not the TRUTH.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I don't think so SSS

lots of bs accusations, and nothing to defend us

"90% of bc opposes this hunt"?
Didn't say it was good. Just better than the other one.

[Hanrahan]

Personally I never talk to reporters. Learned a long time ago they will take things out of context, misqoute you, and do whatever it takes to get the "story" not the TRUTH.

And then, as in this story, they say they tried to reach hunters for comment but they refused to talk. Funny how she wrote that "the Observer tried to reach hunters for comment" but doesn't say she refused to tell us who she was writing for. In reality, "the Observer" didn't try to reach us for comment at all, some random anonymous handle on an internet forum did.

[smeegle]

Her bio is as follows

" Claire Hume received her Master’s in Environmental Policy from the University of Cambridge, U.K. in the fall of 2014. Her work has been published alongside primatologist Jane Goodall in Faltering Light, a book on the grizzly bear hunt in B.C., and her Master’s dissertation on the liquefied natural gas industry was presented at the Oxbridge Conference for Canadian contributions to global research excellence. Prior to starting graduate school she completed her undergraduate degree in psychology at the University of British Columbia and wrote for a wildlife conservation organization while living in the Great Bear Rainforest. Claire is an avid fly fisher(wo)man, classically trained ballet dancer, and loves snowboarding, biking, and swimming."

Did she divulge this info at all or was it available on the website when she was writing the article?

[Eastbranch]

You guys are posting personal opinions on a public forum. The media can use what they want with or without your permission.

Hume, not bad. Looking here for intelligent opinions on hunting ethics was a poor choice. Talk to the new age people, Chad Brealy comes to mind (salt, fresh, field).

[Everett]

Wow I didn't think her second article could suck worse than the first but it did. Miss Hume I suggest you go back to school and learn how to write that was a pathetic piece of journalism and written at a grade four level. But in your defense that's probably the education level of the majority of your readers.

[Husky7mm]

Some say is better than no say.....

[caddisguy]

* Bear Hunting Journalism 101
- Set the tone with something that sounds creepy like "hunters love what they kill"
- Use the term "trophy hunting" as much as possible to give the illusion these words are mutually inclusive
- Add black bear and grizzly bear to the same pot and mix until information is blurry
- Avoid any science, particularly any in-depth analysis of sustainability
- Repeat "kill" and "trophy" to provoke uninformed emotion as needdd

I hope her flyfishing is better than her journalism.

[Coachman]

Journalism, reporters, and "the news" are not examples of a public service to bring information and facts to the general public.

They are simply a magazine, rag, suit and tie versions of the enquirer that revert to whatever tactics they can legally get away with to sell copies of their soiled toilet paper they call NEWS.....

There's my two cents. "reporters" can eat my shorts.

[Timbow]

Oh my! Miss Hume writes for a newspaper which I would imagine has a strong following from members of the Green Party. Things that make you go mmmmmmmm.......

[Husky7mm]

Explaining a hunters persective by a none hunter to a bunch of disconnected city folks is a lot like explaining color to a blind man, its not easy. I feel like everyone should be a bit more diplomatic before the next part of the series is about hunters acting like azzholes to those that don't agree them. What is it about the internet that everyone things they are so tough, smart and good looking .....

[r106]

Explaining a hunters persective by a none hunter to a bunch of disconnected city folks is a lot like explaining color to a blind man, its not easy. I feel like everyone should be a bit more diplomatic before the next part of the series is about hunters acting like azzholes to those that don't agree them. What is it about the internet that everyone things they are so tough, smart and good looking .....

I agree. Some of the comments on this thread as of late are a little ridiculous.

[The Hermit]

You know what would be GREAT? IMHO it would be great if one of the talented informed and successful TV production houses would put together a half hour piece that REALLY tells the true story about Grizzly hunting. The piece would lay out all the facts and in an entertaining way show the public that hunting is one of a number of tools in the scientific management of wildlife. Like W5 they could lay it all out there and ask some very pointed questions of the anti-hunting crowd about their misguided beliefs.

It would also be great if the BCWF would accept that BC's population give us the social license to hunt and that about 90% of them (including many hunters) DON'T approve of killing animals for pure sport. That is how the anti-hunting crowd has successfully characterized any hunt where the edible portions of the animal are not required to be removed from the bush for consumption! Obstinately holding to the accurate but facile fact that removal of bear meat is scientifically inconsequential, to my mind, is like cutting ones nose off to spite ones face! Likewise the old refrain that if you give an inch they will take a mile and that it is a slippery slope is horse feathers at this point.

If you agree, perhaps you could take a minute to apply your recently tuned up letter writing skills and send a note to GoatGuy and DeadDog. Everyone is going to loose this hunt unless the Government makes this change! BTW- The GOABC, BCTA, WSSBC, and UBBC are all in favor of an immediate regulation change requiring the meat of G-Bears and Cougars be removed for consumption!

[lange1212]

Everyone is going to loose this hunt unless the Government makes this change! BTW- The GOABC, BCTA, WSSBC, and UBBC are all in favor of an immediate regulation change requiring the meat of G-Bears and Cougars be removed for consumption!

Absolutely but with one caveat, that the meat must be taken to your place of residence whether your a resident or non-resident hunter.


This leaving meat behind with the GO's goes against the very principle of what such regulations stands for. If regulations require the "licensed hunter" to remove edible portions then they must be taken to your place of residence, otherwise such a regulation is just smoke and mirrors.

[The Hermit]

Not sure I'd agree with that... I'd be okay with the non-resident guided hunter donating all meat (Griz, Goat, Moose, Elk etc) through the GOABC to local food banks. I see that as a win win and a way for the guides to continue contributing to the well being of the people of BC in a direct and meaningful way... hell for all I care they could even charge clients a "donation fee" to cover their costs of inspections, butchering, transporting etc. To me it is more important that the all edible meat be used and we are seen as hunter-conservationists not as simply into hunting as sport.

[Hanrahan]

Not sure I'd agree with that... I'd be okay with the non-resident guided hunter donating all meat (Griz, Goat, Moose, Elk etc) through the GOABC to local food banks. I see that as a win win and a way for the guides to continue contributing to the well being of the people of BC in a direct and meaningful way... hell for all I care they could even charge clients a "donation fee" to cover their costs of inspections, butchering, transporting etc. To me it is more important that the all edible meat be used and we are seen as hunter-conservationists not as simply into hunting as sport.

That would probably work better. I used to fly a lot of American hunters in for moose and bear hunting in Ontario. A lot of them would take the meat home, but never use it. Especially the bear meat. It would mostly get thrown out when they got home, or the next year when they got their animal. I would guess that way more meat would be eaten by donating it here than taking it home.

[Bugle M In]

That would probably work better. I used to fly a lot of American hunters in for moose and bear hunting in Ontario. A lot of them would take the meat home, but never use it. Especially the bear meat. It would mostly get thrown out when they got home, or the next year when they got their animal. I would guess that way more meat would be eaten by donating it here than taking it home.

theres always the OWL society here in Ladner.
I once had to take a whitie that was badly freezer burned and kind of rank to begin with there....the eagles don't seem to mind, and they were more than happy to take it off my hands

[Husky7mm]

I had some mixed emotion going on my first grizzly hunt. I thought it would be the only grizzly hunt I would ever do... To get to kill a grizzly was really a small part of the adventure. Spring in the Mountains is just a wonderful time. The beauty coming alive is second to nothing. After we skinned the old boar we killed and left... he was nothing but bones the very next day. 3 golden eagles and 2 vulchers had consumed the entire carcass. Was it a waste? I don't think so at all. Ask the eagles.
The waste is at the garbage dumps where all the destined for the trash garbage we buy nowaday is. Off shore garbage filling the landfills everyday, by the billions!!!!

[fowl language]

hermit, could you get me copies of documents of those associations that would like to see all the g bear meat be removed. I will pass it on to the board at the board meeting of the bcwf....fowl

[Tuffcity]

Fowl,

BCWF was at the same meeting with the all the other org's when it was discussed.

RC

[argyle1]

Did some checking and Reporter seems to be on the level. I see no reason why questions can't be asked. If you have nothing positive to add to the conversation.....stay out of it. If you are a member that would be willing to have the facts about Grizzly hunting come forward then please help Reporter out.

I think its time for our side to be in the open. The antis seem to get all the press to the public

Dave
I think if hunters want to be heard it would be best to pick the author and the publication, rather than trust an anonymous reporter and publisher. I would never trust ANYONE who says "tell me your thoughts, and then I might tell you who I am"

[Philcott]

The latest article;


http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/grizzly-bear-population-risk-bc-liberal-government-aligns-trophy-hunters

[1899]

The latest article;


http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/grizzly-bear-population-risk-bc-liberal-government-aligns-trophy-hunters

I have to say that she is the only one in the media, that I have seen anyways, to really lays out the Liberal - GOABC relationship is like: the relentless lobbying, the commercialization of game, the money that flows from GOABC to the Liberal party, the "President's Award" to CC, the nature of the split compared to other jurisdictions, touching on the point about foreign ownership and so on.

I'm glad she pointed those things out and I wish other media outlets would jump all over that kind of information.

[835]

i did not like how she painted Grizzley hunting.... at all...

[pg83]

A much more balanced article than the previous one. I'm interested to see where it goes from here.

[Ranger95]

I have to say that she is the only one in the media, that I have seen anyways, to really lays out the Liberal - GOABC relationship is like: the relentless lobbying, the commercialization of game, the money that flows from GOABC to the Liberal party, the "President's Award" to CC, the nature of the split compared to other jurisdictions, touching on the point about foreign ownership and so on.

I'm glad she pointed those things out and I wish other media outlets would jump all over that kind of information.

I agree with you, however, I'm sure that her detractors will come out guns a-blazing (as usual)

[Phreddy]

She points out what the GOABC contributes to the government funds, but there's no mention about how much money the resident hunters contribute to the government funds. Maybe we'd find out if no one bought a license and tags one year, or did any conservation work and habitat restoration work. This gal has to be a blonde in disguise.

[Everett]

Even though it brings the slimy relationship between the GOABC and the Liberals into the light it is still a poorly written article. Wonder were she got the 6000 Grizzly number. Anyone who spends any time in the backcountry knows there is a hell of a lot more bears than that.