Proposed law aims to ‘kill’ trophy hunting in BC: Green Party MLA

[dbergen69]

The Green party is proposing a law so that all edible portions of a grizzly must be removed. They are pretty sure that most BC hunters and the GOABC support this. I have never hunted grizzly bears and I am not sure how much is edible.

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/proposed-law-aims-kill-trophy-hunting-bc-green-mla

[.300WSMImpact!]

just need to take the meat out of the bush, although I do not support this I dont think it will affect much, I would hope they go the other way and stop making us take the black bear meat out

[Salty]

I hope they will start supporting our cause, the immoral allocation policy instead of riding on our backs to make this about the grizzly hunt. The grizzly hunt has close to nothing to do with the allocation policy. Getting quite pissed about this actually a lot of the media has left us in the dust and jumped on this as the issue.

[Paulyman]

before anyone complains about having to pack out any type of bear meat just know that there is probably a line up of guys just like me that will gladly take 100 percent of any kind of bear you get. I couldn't imagine a better meat for my dog

[r106]

I could care less eitherway. But I don't think for a minute that it will make a significant difference in peoples opinion of the hunt.

[The Dawg]

Read between the lines people.....

[The Dawg]

And that article was swung hard to fit the VO standard of reporting we are all so very used to...

[.300WSMImpact!]

before anyone complains about having to pack out any type of bear meat just know that there is probably a line up of guys just like me that will gladly take 100 percent of any kind of bear you get. I couldn't imagine a better meat for my dog

You want to pick it up? I could kill a couple Bears to keep the population down

[Paulyman]

Read between the lines people.....

I know what you're saying. C'mon people, read between the lines.

[Paulyman]

You want to pick it up? I could kill a couple Bears to keep the population down
yes absolutely! I am going to go out for a bear this year, I'm sure I could use an extra. where are you located?

[BCbillies]

It's not a big deal for the GOABC according to Ellis: "So it’s an extra trip, multiple backpack trips, using a horse or two. It could be extra flights, in and out. It’s something we do with all the big game species, so we have the infrastructure to handle that,” he said.

This would definitely be tougher on the resident hunter who doesn't always have a horse or a plane nearby . . . that's why they endorse it. I'll do the extra pack trip this spring as it may be the last time!

[.300WSMImpact!]

yes absolutely! I am going to go out for a bear this year, I'm sure I could use an extra. where are you located?

I am in Okanagon, I don't mind the work just don't have enough dogs to feed

[Paulyman]

That's too bad, I'm in Vancouver. I'm sure you won't have any trouble finding a taker.

[Wrayzer]

I am in Okanagon, I don't mind the work just don't have enough dogs to feed
You could feed the chiauaua for life on one spring bear.

[The Hermit]

The GOABC recognizes that if we don't start bringing out the edible portions they stand to lose these profitable hunts entirely because we ALL get the social license to hunt from the general public, who are something like 95% opposed to trophy hunting grizzly bears!! Note that the FNs want the hunt stopped as well! Give yer heads a solid shake!!

[lange1212]

It's not a big deal for the GOABC according to Ellis: "So it’s an extra trip, multiple backpack trips, using a horse or two. It could be extra flights, in and out. It’s something we do with all the big game species, so we have the infrastructure to handle that,” he said.

This would definitely be tougher on the resident hunter who doesn't always have a horse or a plane nearby . . . that's why they endorse it. I'll do the extra pack trip this spring as it may be the last time!

That may be but the intent of the new legislation as I understand it goes beyond simply packing out bear meat for consumption, more importantly it removes meat laundering overall (the word used in legislature by the proponent). I understand many guided trophy hunters have used a loophole allowing them to gift game meat from their trophy animals harvested so they don't have to take it home. The wording as I understand it specifically states that the meat (with grizzlies only added to the already existing list of species) must be taken to the licensed hunters residence and therefore removes the "meat gifting" loophole.

I strongly support this as it meets the true intent of the law in regards to the removal of game meat, you kill it, you eat it, your dam well better be taking it home with you and not leaving on the door steep of a guide outfitter. I suspect the GOABC will not be so supportive of this aspect of the legislation, waiting to see how it will be spun.

[The Dawg]

That may be but the intent of the new legislation as I understand it goes beyond simply packing out bear meat for consumption, more importantly it removes meat laundering overall (the word used in legislature by the proponent). I understand many guided trophy hunters have used a loophole allowing them to gift game meat from their trophy animals harvested so they don't have to take it home. The wording as I understand it specifically states that the meat (with grizzlies only added to the already existing list of species) must be taken to the licensed hunters residence and therefore removes the "meat gifting" loophole.

I strongly support this as it meets the true intent of the law in regards to the removal of game meat, you kill it, you eat it, your dam well better be taking it home with you and not leaving on the door steep of a guide outfitter. I suspect the GOABC will not be so supportive of this aspect of the legislation, waiting to see how it will be spun.


Someone gets it....

[Everett]

That may be but the intent of the new legislation as I understand it goes beyond simply packing out bear meat for consumption, more importantly it removes meat laundering overall (the word used in legislature by the proponent). I understand many guided trophy hunters have used a loophole allowing them to gift game meat from their trophy animals harvested so they don't have to take it home. The wording as I understand it specifically states that the meat (with grizzlies only added to the already existing list of species) must be taken to the licensed hunters residence and therefore removes the "meat gifting" loophole.

I strongly support this as it meets the true intent of the law in regards to the removal of game meat, you kill it, you eat it, your dam well better be taking it home with you and not leaving on the door steep of a guide outfitter. I suspect the GOABC will not be so supportive of this aspect of the legislation, waiting to see how it will be spun.

That's the part that interested me and could really put a crimp in hunters from some countries who are not allowed to bring back meat with them. Imagine the cost of flying a moose to Europe.

[Salty]

So it may mean it more difficult for the GOs to sell grizzly hunts big deal it still does nothing to fight the allocation policy. Which the article tucks in a one liner at the end with no real explanations. Ask 100 people what the allocation policy is this week 90 of them won't have a clue. Ask them if there's anything in the news this week about grizzly hunting and most of them will have heard something about this. This proposed bill has done nothing for us.

[drakfero]

Guys , if we dont unite , we will go in deep shit!!! thats garanteed 100%. This will mean in the future all you shoot you have to bag it home , wolf , cougar , whatever. Those articles are paid articles from groups of people heading somewhere. Just think about that , all the time about wolf and grizzlies , never about killing fracking , gas pipes everywhere , cut blocks KMs long or trees planted so close that only little birds can get in. Back in europe we had same "green boys" , they protected cormorants so much that there is no fish anymore. Somebody got really mad and burn the house of those people.

Just think were this is going.

[chrismcd]

im going for my first black bear this spring but from what i understand its pretty good meat? have i been mislead?

[Fisher-Dude]

im going for my first black bear this spring but from what i understand its pretty good meat? have i been mislead?

You haven't been misled. It's excellent meat! Enjoy!

[DarekG]

im going for my first black bear this spring but from what i understand its pretty good meat? have i been mislead?

I've heard both. I've had bear smokies that were mixed with pork and they were delicious, I hear pepperoni is great too.

From what I understand it's nothing special on its own, and bears can carry trich and worms so you need to freeze the meat for 30 days before you can eat it, and also cook it all the way through.

I'm new so if I'm wrong someone please correct me! :razz:

[The Dawg]

I've heard both. I've had bear smokies that were mixed with pork and they were delicious, I hear pepperoni is great too.

From what I understand it's nothing special on its own, and bears can carry trich and worms so you need to freeze the meat for 30 days before you can eat it, and also cook it all the way through.

I'm new so if I'm wrong someone please correct me! :razz:


Wrong :)

Bear is great as smokies, pep on its own.


And freezing does not kill the trich found in bears, contrary to popular belief.

Cooking it does

[Salty]

Think pork and poultry you just need to cook it thoroughly..

[Wild one]

I've heard both. I've had bear smokies that were mixed with pork and they were delicious, I hear pepperoni is great too.

From what I understand it's nothing special on its own, and bears can carry trich and worms so you need to freeze the meat for 30 days before you can eat it, and also cook it all the way through.

I'm new so if I'm wrong someone please correct me! :razz:

BBQ bear burgers are great no need to mix in pork. No need to freeze for 30 days but cooking all the way through is a good practice.

Been eating bears for most of my life the important thing is hunt bears that are away from rotten salmon and garbage. Berry and veg feeding bears are great. I also de bone and remove the fat.

My son will take bear steak over moose and deer.

[Paulyman]

Wrong :)

Bear is great as smokies, pep on its own.


And freezing does not kill the trich found in bears, contrary to popular belief.

Cooking it does

To be more accurate, there are some types of trichinosis freezing does not kill.

[ruger#1]

Think pork and poultry you just need to cook it thoroughly..

There are meds that go into pig feed that you do not have to worry about It. Meds in chicken feed also, Still can get Salmonella. I get to breath those meds every night. I should be amune to to it.

[aggiehunter]

my drum is old...a hole in the middle..if you want to keep hunting bears you must take the meat out...bigger hole....

[180grainer]

It's a stupid and ill informed idea by a political party that's against hunting generally.

[Ride Red]

Bear sausage, pepperoni and hams are all good.

[tuner]

This proposal does nothing but detract from allocation policy.Its main purpose is to discourage grizzly bear hunting,the media loves grizzly bear story's but don't bat an eye as public resources are privatized.

[Rob Chipman]

I believe that in Alaska you have to remove the edible parts of a grizzly. An internet search on eating grizzlies seems to lead to people in Alaska saying they eat them. Some people don't like them (especially fishy ones) but others do.

I could be totally wrong, but from what I read in the press and social media anti-hunting people are often ascientific (I'm guessing that's a word that means they don't buy science or logic. Maybe I just made it up, but I like it).

The mainstream media often says that bears shouldn't be killed because they aren't eaten. The Georgia Straight has published articles stating that nobody eats black bear because its virtually inedible. The VO says it's unhealthy to eat grizzly because of trichinosis. We know that is bullshit.

Andrew Weaver thought bears were strictly hunted for trophies not long ago. He was unaware (I'm pretty sure he was, anyway) that black bear meat had to be removed, or that it was eaten widely.

Anti-grizzly hunters always point to meat left to waste in the bush, with just the hide and head taken. (I know, I know, nothing goes to waste in this world, and a grizzly carcass ends up feeding other animals, worms, soil, etc. Anti-hunters don't think that through. Like I said, they're ascientific).

Now Andrew Weaver is on this board and learning a bit about hunters. He knows that blackj bears are eaten widely and that the law requires the removal or the meat. He understands the the guy with the 4 pt muley rack is generally required to have it by law. He's also against the allocation policy and working for our side on that issue.

If he presents legislation that makes it a requirement to remove meat to the hunter's residence then two things are accomplished: one, an argument that bears are only hunted for heads and skins is gutted, and two, if the guided hunter has to take the meat to his residence it puts a crimp in the GOABC's business.

I'm good with both of those. I've got bear meat in the freezer, and I ate some today, so I'm fine with taking meat home. I can argue with an anti hunter that any bear I shoot is not wasted. I can tell an FN elder that he doesn't have to worry about bad luck because the bear I shoot gets eaten. I can also clear up the misconceptions about trophies.

It's be nice if the mainstream media gave a crap about hunters or allocation. Newsflash: they don't. Another newsflash: they ain't gonna change overnight.

So, if we can make a compromise on meat removal and in return gut the argument that grizzlies get hunted strictly for fur and heads and at the same time stick it to the GOABC a little, I'm good with it.

The alternative: keep trying to convince a granola eater that its good to kill a grizzly for a trophy because you think its a good idea, there are lots of them, its your heritage, etc. Let me know how you make out! :-)

Anyone who does shoot a bear and doesn't want the meat please contact me before the hunt and we'll arrange something that's legal and gets the meat used. No problem.

[Wild one]

I have no issue if the law passes that hunters need to take grizz meat home as I see bear meat as edible.

The truth of the matter is this will have no effect on trophy hunting GO's already have to deal with meat clients don't take home.

It is really just the green party trying to take a bite out of the grizz hunt any way they can

[HarryToolips]

I'm all for it bear is good to eat usually and most of us hunt em to eat anyway right???

[Paulyman]

This proposal does nothing but detract from allocation policy.Its main purpose is to discourage grizzly bear hunting,the media loves grizzly bear story's but don't bat an eye as public resources are privatized.
Bingo! which is exactly why we should ride this pony! media s getting the allocation story out because the public doesn't care, use the public to our advantage is the message here.

[Paulyman]

I have no issue if the law passes that hunters need to take grizz meat home as I see bear meat as edible.

The truth of the matter is this will have no effect on trophy hunting GO's already have to deal with meat clients don't take home.

It is really just the green party trying to take a bite out of the grizz hunt any way they can

the bill he is trying to pass would require that they bring it to their permanent residence. if they live in Texas that is where they will be required to bring it to.

[BiG Boar]

Let's not forget it is also their promise to kill the grizzly hunt if they ever get in. Think they would even consider a wolf cull?

[walks with deer]

Funny thing about this discussion. I am probably responsible for 40 dead black bears.
Zero hides mounted. I wonder why I shot them?
Only 1 ever I shot I did not like.

[KodiakHntr]

Wonder how many guys here are going to start eating a side of wolf or coyote chops along side their grizzly stew?

I understand that some people have a deep seated need to feel like an animal didn't die for "no good reason" after they shot it, so they have to eat it, so they can reconcile that in their minds.

However, lets not forget that EVERY animal out there is going to die. Just because YOU ended its life, that doesn't mean it was going to live until the end of time.
Not everyone's reasons to hunt are the same. Not everyone feels guilty over an animals death. Not everyone hunts for meat. And that doesn't make their reason to hunt less valid than someone who will only eat what they kill. Neither is wrong, just different.

[boxhitch]

Well said , KH
If it was all about the meat there wouldn't be a taxidermist in business in BC. All hunting , including so called trophy hunting , is regulated and done in a sustainable manner , and all hunters should be onside with this.
Even though hunters are a small % of the BC population , we all have to stand together in a unified voice .
No one listens to the orchestra warm up but they like the symphony .

[Wild one]

the bill he is trying to pass would require that they bring it to their permanent residence. if they live in Texas that is where they will be required to bring it to.

Do some research into it is common for meat to be gifted to GO's which intern it would not have to travle to Texas for but instead to the go's residents or donated to someone else example.

So you would need to change the law so hunters cannot give away meat either slippery slope if you start pushing that

Like I said personally I have no problem with taking the meat home but it will do nothing to change trophy hunting. The issue of dealing with meat that is required to be removed from the bush is all ready being dealt with other species and has no effect on non resident hunters who don't take meat home.

Law will change little when it comes to the big picture

Like I said this just the green party trying to attack the grizz hunt from a different angle

[bearvalley]

Wonder how many guys here are going to start eating a side of wolf or coyote chops along side their grizzly stew?

I understand that some people have a deep seated need to feel like an animal didn't die for "no good reason" after they shot it, so they have to eat it, so they can reconcile that in their minds.

However, lets not forget that EVERY animal out there is going to die. Just because YOU ended its life, that doesn't mean it was going to live until the end of time.
Not everyone's reasons to hunt are the same. Not everyone feels guilty over an animals death. Not everyone hunts for meat. And that doesn't make their reason to hunt less valid than someone who will only eat what they kill. Neither is wrong, just different.

Its good to see someone on here that gets it. Really it's no different than adriaticums bear mount that's getting criticized in another thread. We all have our own beliefs of what's right and wrong.

[snowplayaa]

Couldn't agree more! I am definitely in the "if you kill it, you eat it camp". I'm not into blood sports.

[Trigger Happy]

Yuck, please remind the party they eat rotten flesh including humans! You take the first bite :)

[boilerroom]

Well said , KH
If it was all about the meat there wouldn't be a taxidermist in business in BC. All hunting , including so called trophy hunting , is regulated and done in a sustainable manner , and all hunters should be onside with this.
Even though hunters are a small % of the BC population , we all have to stand together in a unified voice .
No one listens to the orchestra warm up but they like the symphony .

I respectfully disagree. There are many hunters, like myself that are against trophy hunting. I will go black bear hunting for the first time this year and have every intention of eating the meat. For the same reason, I won't go grizzly hunting - not because I am ethically against shooting them, but I understand that for me it wouldn't be possible to get the meat out.

As for your comment about taxidermists, I would like a nice bear rug for my office and to remind me of the great hunting experience long after the meat is eaten.

BR

[Stone Sheep Steve]

I respectfully disagree. There are many hunters, like myself that are against trophy hunting. I will go black bear hunting for the first time this year and have every intention of eating the meat. For the same reason, I won't go grizzly hunting - not because I am ethically against shooting them, but I understand that for me it wouldn't be possible to get the meat out.

As for your comment about taxidermists, I would like a nice bear rug for my office and to remind me of the great hunting experience long after the meat is eaten.

BR

Why wouldn't it be possible for you to get grizzly meat out but you can get black bear meat out??
All the spring grizzlies I've eaten have tasted every bit as good as the spring black bears I've eaten.

[boilerroom]

SSS, no quad, etc... my limited experience tells me that one usually has to hike much farther and into more remote areas to successfully grizz hunt than blackbears. To then have to backpack out the meat (probably on several trips) makes it unmanageable for me.

Maybe you can help me understand better - if grizz is as good tasting as black bears, why is there such a backlash against a proposal to make it necessary to take out grizz meat like there is with blackies?

[j270wsm]

I shot my grizz 269yds off the road.

Lots of grizz have been shot within a short distance from the road. Last year a guys dad and wife both shot bears( 7'6" & 7'11" ) less than 1.5km from the truck

[Stone Sheep Steve]

SSS, no quad, etc... my limited experience tells me that one usually has to hike much farther and into more remote areas to successfully grizz hunt than blackbears. To then have to backpack out the meat (probably on several trips) makes it unmanageable for me.

Maybe you can help me understand better - if grizz is as good tasting as black bears, why is there such a backlash against a proposal to make it necessary to take out grizz meat like there is with blackies?

Many g-bears are shot on roads, in clear cuts, accessible avalanche slides...etc. Last g-bear I was involved with we had a couple km pack. My partner had the hide/head and I had the hind quarters and backstraps in my Eberlestock J107. Fronts were shot up pretty good. It's not all that heavy. They are a heavy-boned animals so by leaving the bones in the bush, it will greatly reduce the load.

Some g-bears are indeed shot in more remote valleys so the logistics are tougher.

Coastal bears tend to be less palatable...at least that's the word on the street. Never ate a coastal bear myself.

SSS

[Fisher-Dude]

SSS, no quad, etc... my limited experience tells me that one usually has to hike much farther and into more remote areas to successfully grizz hunt than blackbears. To then have to backpack out the meat (probably on several trips) makes it unmanageable for me.

Maybe you can help me understand better - if grizz is as good tasting as black bears, why is there such a backlash against a proposal to make it necessary to take out grizz meat like there is with blackies?

Would that be different if it were a sheep or goat, which are generally found much further back than bears? Would you pack out, as required by law, all the sheep and goat meat?

[Fisher-Dude]

Fronts were shot up pretty good.


So was the skull, IIRC! :p

[Stone Sheep Steve]

So was the skull, IIRC! :p

Haha. No not that one. We had to fight a black bear for the meat that one the next morning.

[KodiakHntr]

Would that be different if it were a sheep or goat, which are generally found much further back than bears? Would you pack out, as required by law, all the sheep and goat meat?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

The difference being that a guy can kill a sheep or goat, spend the next day fleshing the hide, and pack all of his camp, all of the meat, the cape, and skull out in one 125+- pound trip.

I'd like to meet the man that can pack out 100lbs of grizzly hide and skull, along with 100 to 200 lbs of meat, and his gear, in one trip, for 5 to 20 km through knee deep rotting snow.....

[Spy]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

The difference being that a guy can kill a sheep or goat, spend the next day fleshing the hide, and pack all of his camp, all of the meat, the cape, and skull out in one 125+- pound trip.

I'd like to meet the man that can pack out 100lbs of grizzly hide and skull, along with 100 to 200 lbs of meat, and his gear, in one trip, for 5 to 20 km through knee deep rotting snow.....
Sounds like you will be making a trip or two! Just like you would with an Elk or Moose!

[j270wsm]

Leave early in the morning when the snow is harder and use snow shoes. If there is snow then you can't say the meat will go bad if you have to make more than one trip. Last fall I helped a friend pack an elk close to 2km and it was close to 20*c when we got to the truck. Meat was perfectly fine.

[KodiakHntr]

Completely baffled how some of you are so incredibly short sighted about this bill.

This is exactly the same mentality that ended up with handguns and scary looking black guns being restricted. Doesn't affect you, so it's ok, right?

Who are you going to whine to, when the only acceptable reason to hunt is when you have to prove to the gov't that your freezer is empty, and you live closer to a gov't farmed "human food animal" than you do to a Safeway.... Who are you going to whine to, when hunting for food is no longer acceptable because we have gov't sanctioned feed lots, that are MUCH more humane to the animal?

You guys need to look farther down the road, and THINK about what this bill actually means!
Just because YOUR reason to hunt is meat, doesn't mean MY reason to hunt is necessarily meat. And that doesn't make your reason ANY more valid than mine is.

[Spy]

[QUOTE=KodiakHntr;1617284]Completely baffled how some of you are so incredibly short sighted about this bill. This is exactly the same mentality that ended up with handguns and scary looking black guns being restricted. Doesn't affect you, so it's ok, right? Who are you going to whine to, when the only acceptable reason to hunt is when you have to prove to the gov't that your freezer is empty, and you live closer to a gov't farmed "human food animal" than you do to a Safeway.... Who are you going to whine to, when hunting for food is no longer acceptable because we have gov't sanctioned feed lots, that are MUCH more humane to the animal?You guys need to look farther down the road, and THINK about what this bill actually means! Just because YOUR reason to hunt is meat, doesn't mean MY reason to hunt is necessarily meat. And that doesn't make your reason ANY more valid than IF the animal is edible then the meat should be removed ! Why waste good meat. :-)

[Buck]

Grizzly meat removal was is inevitable.I can't find the link but if i recall the libs are under a lot of pressure by the natives to stop Grizz hunting period particularly on the coast.Bargaining chip for Pipelines? Meat removal is a compromise to maintain social license to non hunters ect.

[boilerroom]

Would that be different if it were a sheep or goat, which are generally found much further back than bears? Would you pack out, as required by law, all the sheep and goat meat?

FD, I would definitely pack out an animal that I shot...

I look at sheep and goats (and grizz) as a challenging hunt. Being a new hunter I am still absolutely excited to go deer and black bear hunting so I'll stick with those for now. If there comes a time when I feel like I want more of a challenge I'll try some other game.


SSS, I'm sure that some grizz are shot near the road but I wouldn't plan my hunt based on that. As I'm trying to absorb all of the knowledge from more experienced hunters I hear consistently to get off the roads and into the bush - if I was to hunt a grizzly I would use the same plan.

I think I should also make clear before Kodiak bursts a vessel (just kidding) that just because I don't agree with trophy hunting doesn't mean that I disagree with others right to do so. I also don't buy the slippery slope argument... I don't think that banning trophy hunting, or making hunters responsible for removing the meat is going to lead to a ban on all hunting. Privatization of hunting, now that's another story...

respectfully,
boilerroom

[ARC]

I have to agree with KodiakHntr on this one.

I had always wanted to bring a grizz tag on a fly-in sheep hunt. This bill would limit and/or put an end to that. There is a big difference between hauling out a whole sheep or goat taken a couple ridges off a lake as compared to a grizz.

There are some valleys well off of fly-in lakes I have been to that I know would hold a decent population of big bull moose during the rut. However, only the guide really has access to them, as residents can't get easily horses back there and I don't image too many guys would make several trips over several kilometres to get the meat out by pack. This bill would put grizz in the same boat...pretty much limit areas to guide harvest only.

We have to be careful on the whole 'ban trophy hunting angle'....what is trophy hunting? I go sheep hunting up north, and while I do take all the meat, it would be hard for me to say with a straight face that it is the only reason for going. Especially since I could likely just wait until October and shoot a mule deer within a couple kilometres of my house. I hunt different species for different reasons and it isn't all about the meat.

Is this bill really going to put an end to the anti-grizz hunting movement? Maybe it was inevitable, but I am not sure it will do much but further limit resident access.

[KodiakHntr]

Don't worry about my vessels. I'm not wound up. Sad maybe, but not mad.

It absolutely is a slippery slope though. We see it on this very thread with the division of hunters against hunters.

Everyone has different reasons and ethics for what they do, and yours are not necessarily in line with mine.

The difference being that some folks here are throwing around the term "trophy hunter" like its a slur, trying to marginalize how some one feels, trying to make people feel guilty about hunting a grizzly for his hide and skull.

You don't see those of us here who are grizzly hunters doing the same to those of you who are meat hunters. And I'll take that a step further, I would wager that the vast majority of us on this board who have hunted grizzlies did not do so with the specific intent of grizzly bear steaks.
Some of us may have chosen to utilize some or all of the meat (although I would be willing to bet that no one here has trimmed every scrap of flesh off of a grizz with the same attention to detail that they would with a bull elk), and if you are someone who chose to use some bear meat, good for you. But I'm not going to cast a shadow over your hunt or your bear for doing that.

The words of some of you here are quite shameful, what gives you the right to try and belittle MY accomplishment merely because I had a different reason to do it?

How many of you meat hunters will pass up a cranker stinky rutted up mule deer in favor of the whitetail doe standing just down the hill? After all the whitetail doe will be far superior table fare. Maybe you shouldn't be allowed to kill anything bigger than a spike or doe? After all they will eat better, and meat is the only good reason, right?

[j270wsm]

I agree on some of what you say arc. Last year my son and I both shot our first goats, part of the hunt was for a trophy, but also for meat. That being said I see no reason that grizz meat couldn't be removed. The law says all edible portions not damaged by method taking. Most guys take out both front shoulders, which would most likely leave only the back straps and hind quarters to pack out

[ruger#1]

I agree on some of what you say arc. Last year my son and I both shot our first goats, part of the hunt was for a trophy, but also for meat. That being said I see no reason that grizz meat couldn't be removed. The law says all edible portions not damaged by method taking. Most guys take out both front shoulders, which would most likely leave only the back straps and hind quarters to pack out Plus the head, Heart , Liver. What ever else is edible. That sure needs to be clarified right there.

[KodiakHntr]

Just because you poked a hole in both front quarters doesn't mean you can leave them lay there.... Trim the bloodshot and take the edible portions.

After better than 100 head of big game I have yet to see both front quarters ruined past the point of salvage.

[ruger#1]

I agree on some of what you say arc. Last year my son and I both shot our first goats, part of the hunt was for a trophy, but also for meat. That being said I see no reason that grizz meat couldn't be removed. The law says all edible portions not damaged by method taking. Most guys take out both front shoulders, which would most likely leave only the back straps and hind quarters to pack out

So if you shoot a boar. Make sure you pack it's balls out also.

[tuner]

What's next being forced to eat coyotes and wolves or lose the opportunity to hunt them?

[ruger#1]

What's next being forced to eat coyotes and wolves or lose the opportunity to hunt them?

I see it as another wedge to detour hunters, From hunting them. They will the anti's will keep whittling at hunting until there is no hunting. To the people that support this bill. Make sure you pack out all the edible parts, Not just the Edible parts you think are best.Who is going to police this bullshit bill. Maybe Davide Suzuki. When the anti's are finished with killing hunting, Then fishing will be next.

[j270wsm]

Plus the head, Heart , Liver. What ever else is edible. That sure needs to be clarified right there.


I don't recall organs being part of the edible portions.

[Fisher-Dude]

Are you being deliberately obtuse?

The difference being that a guy can kill a sheep or goat, spend the next day fleshing the hide, and pack all of his camp, all of the meat, the cape, and skull out in one 125+- pound trip.

I'd like to meet the man that can pack out 100lbs of grizzly hide and skull, along with 100 to 200 lbs of meat, and his gear, in one trip, for 5 to 20 km through knee deep rotting snow.....

If you can't pack it out, don't shoot it.

Hunting isn't about being convenient for you.

[bigwhiteys]

If you can't pack it out, don't shoot it.

That is exactly what will happen resident pressure on Grizzly bears especially in certain areas will decline. I don't believe a meat retention rule will save this hunt, period. Right now it's being imploded from the inside and attacked from the outside, it doesn't stand much of a chance.