WSSBC - Large Carnivore ban

[HankBC]

Received an email this morning from the sheep society. A friend Omer of precision optics heard of it and brought it to our awareness.

A group is attempting a ban on hunting of large carnivores, here’s the statement from the sheep society;

‘Thinly veiled under the guise of conservation, a concerted attack is now in place against ‘large carnivores’- specifically named are black bears, cougars, wolves and elk as they are mentioned as ‘trophy hunted only’.Noted in this same push by anti-hunting groups are bighorn sheep, part of our very life blood as an organization. We know firsthand that these sheep are so much more than the ‘trophy’ as claimed- that they are an icon of the hills that we care so passionately about. And that through our annual sheep counts as volunteers, know that there are no dangers of extirpation.’

Follow the link below to send an email and help out, sitting on our hands won’t assist us. It takes less than 3 minutes!


https://www.wildsheepsociety.com/actnow/

[dany]

Hi HankBC,

Thanks for sharing this! Sent! Is there any info on who owns this anti hunting campaign and how far the reach is?

We should however also aim for change in the own corner, as this entire movement is solely initiated by unnecessary social media provocation of a Vancouver island huntress.
It outrages me that the biggest threat for hunting comes from within, by unfortunate and unmindful Instagram posts. We all pay the price.

[LBM]

Elk are a carnivore?

[Bubbacanuck]

done! didn't take more than a minute to do

[Ltbullken]

Elk are a carnivore?

The Anti's threw a side swipe at elk and sheep hunting as a future anti campaign after predators.

[upnover]

Done! Thanks HankBC for the heads up. NEVER allow the anti's to take the moral high ground. NEVER hunt or fish unethically. NEVER forget that the animals come first, and if we take care of them they will take care of us. NEVER EVER give up your right/privelege to hunt.

[IronNoggin]

Done & Shared widely.

Nog

[RambleOn]

Done.

They can't make it any easier for people to get involved than that. Need to get this in front of people.

Took less than 2 minutes.

[sakohunter]

All done, thanks for the heads up.

[Ron.C]

done, thanks for sharing!!!!!!!

Also just joined and donated to the WSSBC. I'm not a sheep hunter but it's obvious this organisation is involved and trying to do something for BC hunters.

[Arctic Lake]

Thanks for the heads up on this ! When the hell will these people STOP !
Once this Pandemic is over Hunting organizations, game clubs , BCWF , need to make a collective approach to stop this .
Strength in numbers !
Arctic Lake

[HankBC]

Thanks for your help everyone! Share it around if you can, fighting this is unfortunately done with a keyboard or a phone call. Writing calling or just emailing more often does make a difference.

It's hard enough for the ungulates out there with predator control measures 'in place', imagine if we couldn't impact bears, wolves, and cougars?

[Rob Chipman]

Hi HankBC,

Thanks for sharing this! Sent! Is there any info on who owns this anti hunting campaign and how far the reach is?

We should however also aim for change in the own corner, as this entire movement is solely initiated by unnecessary social media provocation of a Vancouver island huntress.
It outrages me that the biggest threat for hunting comes from within, by unfortunate and unmindful Instagram posts. We all pay the price.


This campaign is pretty easy to link to Raincoast's recent paper on Social License to Hunt. That paper dropped, then it was picked up by the media, then the wolf-trapping woman handed them an unforced error, leading the the livestream between Premier Horgan and the G&M, then the radio interview with Rebeka Breder and Jesse. I know WSS and BCWF are responding, and while I'm sure GOABC and BHA are also probably doing something, I'm not sure what it is.

Steve Hamilton on BC Hunting Fishing FB group also makes sending MLA letters pretty easy (he has blanks in the files section of the Facebook group).

Visits, phone calls, emails and especially written letters in the mail to your MLA are really worth doing. The idea is that they'll demonize and outlaw trophy hunting of big carnivores, with the understanding that big carnivore trophy hunting includes everything down to shooting a grouse.

[VLD43]

This campaign is pretty easy to link to Raincoast's recent paper on Social License to Hunt. That paper dropped, then it was picked up by the media, then the wolf-trapping woman handed them an unforced error, leading the the livestream between Premier Horgan and the G&M, then the radio interview with Rebeka Breder and Jesse. I know WSS and BCWF are responding, and while I'm sure GOABC and BHA are also probably doing something, I'm not sure what it is.

Steve Hamilton on BC Hunting Fishing FB group also makes sending MLA letters pretty easy (he has blanks in the files section of the Facebook group).

Visits, phone calls, emails and especially written letters in the mail to your MLA are really worth doing. The idea is that they'll demonize and outlaw trophy hunting of big carnivores, with the understanding that big carnivore trophy hunting includes everything down to shooting a grouse.

So why is it, that none of the hunting groups are pointing out the fact that "trophy Hunting" in this province is illegal. To the general public Trophy hunting means harvesting and animal just for the head or fur. The regulations are quite clear on this, that all edible portions must be removed or used. The only exceptions are some predators such as coyotes and wolves. The anti's need to be called out on this disinformation campaign. And I would expect that hunting and wildlife organizations as well as hunters should be having this conversation with the general public and politicians. Presently it seems were on the defensive but letting their narrative stand if that makes sense. We need to chance the conversation and talk factually.

[HankBC]

I'm not sure what the other organizations are doing, hopefully sending out emails and templates for members as the sheep society has.

You're correct in the fact that the main goal is to stop hunting. It started with Grizzlies, now it'll continue until we can't hunt rabbits.


This campaign is pretty easy to link to Raincoast's recent paper on Social License to Hunt. That paper dropped, then it was picked up by the media, then the wolf-trapping woman handed them an unforced error, leading the the livestream between Premier Horgan and the G&M, then the radio interview with Rebeka Breder and Jesse. I know WSS and BCWF are responding, and while I'm sure GOABC and BHA are also probably doing something, I'm not sure what it is.

Steve Hamilton on BC Hunting Fishing FB group also makes sending MLA letters pretty easy (he has blanks in the files section of the Facebook group).

Visits, phone calls, emails and especially written letters in the mail to your MLA are really worth doing. The idea is that they'll demonize and outlaw trophy hunting of big carnivores, with the understanding that big carnivore trophy hunting includes everything down to shooting a grouse.

[andrew5]

thanks for the link. It was so simple.

I followed up with a second custom email directly to my MLA as well. I still can't accurately gauge how legitimate the threat of potentially losing something as sustainable and arguably necessary as the black bear hunt is right now, but the time to "wait and see" seems to be behind us.

I don't want to take any chances and am ready to get involved.

[adriaticum]

It doesn't say anything about what organization is now working to ban large carnivore hunting.
Other than the known ones.

[cuervosail]

Done! That was too easy. Thanks WSSBC

[TARCHER]

Done in less than 2 minutes

[huntingfamily]

Done, and thanks for sharing!

[Kos]

Done thanks for sharing.

[180grainer]

Done. It never ends.

[Ride Red]

Now that was easy and done.

[Bigdoggdon]

Done, submitted

[backcountry98]

thanks, and shared! Lets keep this going

[backstrap]

Done. I Emailed Dan Coulter the (NDP) MLA for chilliwack a couple weeks ago stating that I only support science based management and I hope he does as well on my family’s behalf. Got a fairly generic response from a part time employee of his stating that they manage with science and the regulations are reviewed and revised every two years. It also said that while the government takes into consideration the views of the public, seasons and limits to things like hunting are based on good conservation practices.

[porkypine]

Done, I've had enough of all the ANTIS

[dru88]

Done and shared

[eric]

Done, Donated, and shared

[3than]

Done. Thanks for sharing!

[RobTurbo]

Done and shared on all my social platforms

[Skull Hunter]

Done, simple and easy!

[Imdone]

So done Imdone

[Arctic Lake]

Done !
Arctic Lake

[charlie_horse]

Guys seriously, this is important. Print off the letter or write your own as well. Mail in a physical copy. Print out the copies and give to friends and family and coworkers to physically mail in a letter as well. Like for FFS shit is getting serious when elk is potentially on the chopping block.

[mwj]

Done and DONATED

[Yuritau]

Sent and shared as far as I can share it.

[whitlers]

Done. Will send out hard copies this weekend.

[silveragent]

shared on my club site

[jan.wi97]

Done and will mail as well

[HankBC]

Thanks folks! Appreciate your involvement. If you’d like to double down there’s a couple threads on here with other chapters doing the same thing.
cheers,

[porthunter]

Thanks for posting this Buddy, I may be about to be the most hated dude on HuntingBC or even kicked off but going to bump this thread every time it disappears from the recent bar on the home page.

This page wont exist if this happens, this is the start of them trying to take away all hunting and every single person on these pages needs to sign these initiatives. PERIOD.

[Imdone]

Thanks for posting this Buddy,

This page wont exist if this happens, this is the start of them trying to take away all hunting and every single person on these pages needs to sign these initiatives. PERIOD.

Well said PH.
This is far from the start. Unfortunately this has been happening for years, and the NDP we have here now, is the same Dirt we had when we lost Grizzly management ripped from us. Yes hunting is a huge part of management.
This Present Government provincial and federal cater to these Voters that judge by emotions not science.

If you don't do your part and at least try to protect your heritage, your tradition s, your way of life, you have no one to blame but yourself for not doing anything.

It's proof we have seen, federally and provincially, Government will stretch truth any way possible to get votes.

Do your part now.

[Rackmastr]

I started a petition (on my own) when I first moved and got settled in BC in 2012 to show support for the Grizzly bear hunt and to use both science based management as well as hunting as a tool in wildlife management. That petition got 12,300 signatures and did it rather quickly.

With WSSBC and BCWF pushing these campaigns, and with social media where it is today, I'd hope to see 50,000 letters created as a result.

If anything, the thread of this title could even be changed as it runs so much deeper than just 'large predators' these days and protecting hunting in general.

Engage your local MLAs, write them, phone them up, have a coffee with them (where restrictions allow) or get on the phone with them. Drop a letter off to their office as well as mailing them. The more we do, the better!

[hardbull]

Letters submitted. Also booked a phone meeting with my MLA to discuss. Hopefully he is receptive.

[Fella]

I'm not sure what the other organizations are doing, hopefully sending out emails and templates for members as the sheep society has.

You're correct in the fact that the main goal is to stop hunting. It started with Grizzlies, now it'll continue until we can't hunt rabbits.

hey Hank, BHA is encouraging its members to write/call/meet with their MLA’s as well as directing them to the WSS letter. On Vancouver island we are also pushing back against a petition to close he Cowichan estuary to hunting after someone poached a swan so if anyone feels like it, please help us out by reaching out to the MLA for tha area as well as Katrine Conroy

[3than]

Thanks for posting this Buddy, I may be about to be the most hated dude on HuntingBC or even kicked off but going to bump this thread every time it disappears from the recent bar on the home page.

This page wont exist if this happens, this is the start of them trying to take away all hunting and every single person on these pages needs to sign these initiatives. PERIOD.

Well said. I’ll jump on that as well if need be. This thread needs to continually be pushed we have social media as well let’s use it to our advantage this time.

[porthunter]

Well said. I’ll jump on that as well if need be. This thread needs to continually be pushed we have social media as well let’s use it to our advantage this time.

Absolutely dude.

Lets bump this up guys, sign, sign, sign.

[RackStar]

Signed....

keep this bitch bumped

[Crom]

Signed and joined WSSBC today

[caddisguy]

Done!

With regard to a "concerted attack now in place" against bears, wolf, cougar and elk hunting, are there any more specific details on the parties involved, efforts/measures being taken?

I have not been able to find anything online. I have absolutely no doubt of the validity, but I do believe that more details--if feasible--could be particularly useful.

I do believe the blueprint will be very similar to what we saw with the grizzly strategy with the main deviation of including a basket of animals to gather additional support--both provincial and international as we saw before--as some people are fond of bears, others are fond of wolves, etc. Anyone who has a "favourite animal" on the list will be in support.

Now remember, what we observed last time (with the grizzly ban) was our government simply set up an email address "to get feedback from BC residents". However, the feedback had nothing to do with residence. We had celebrities and anti hunting groups from all over the world encouraging people to send feedback, as well as setting up automated forms similar to what WSS has in place. The NDP then simply counted "emails in support" vs "emails against" and deemed the result to be "social acceptance", further admitting they will base policy/law off of social acceptance. There was no validation with regard to residency or even authenticity. And while such dirty pool tactics need to be called out as deception and an attack on sovereignty, the main message of course should still be that social acceptance (or "social media acceptance" if we call it what it is) should not even be a factor in conservation.

I am very pleased to see this circulating on sites such as CGN which are not localised to BC. We will need to see more of that. As mentioned, policy will be based on "number of emails for and against" with absolutely no consideration as to whether it is from BC resident, let alone an authenticate individual. Someone in the UK could create 100 gmail addresses, send their emails and our government would value that in policy making. No doubt that PETA, Miley Cyrus and Axl Rose will be engaging their Twitter flocks with call to action.

Going forward, hunters / conservationists need to band together on every issue regardless of the location. Joining efforts based on locality is for the most part no longer viable.

[scttcanuck]

To increase your influence, you can print, sign, and snail mail to your MLA.


It doesn’t take long. Probably 5 minutes.

[porthunter]

Sign it up everyone, dont skip it, just sign it and bump this when you do. Lets keep this at the top.

[5jackz]

Done . I don't check on here every evening . Little late .:smile:

[andrew5]

No word back from my personalized letter to my MLA. First time ever writing to one actually. Should I expect a reply, or is that a long shot?

[silveragent]

MLAs MPs will respond in order of priority to:

1. Face to face meeting - walk into the office and talk to a rep to get a meeting. They cannot ignore you. Of course not really possible now.
2. Phone call - you are talking to an actual human. Almost certainly their constituency office worker. Again, they can't ignore you and have to listen to what you have to say.
3. Letter mail - if you have taken the effort to write an actual personalized letter, a human then has to actually open the letter and at least skim it. Those letters get put on a desk and if there's a pile of them it makes an impression. Your letter then gets a tick in a column and if there is enough volume it may be brought up with the MLA and at least a response is drafted that may be applied to similar letters. Since we are in COVID times expect a big delay before your letter is even opened.
4. Email - a human may skim it but also easy - like spam - to filter - even automatically. Again I would expect a constituency worker to make a tick in a column on the issue (pro or against) and if there is enough volume to bring it to the attention of the MP / MLA.
5. Form email - a worker will know after the first few emails that these are generated by a form. It makes it even easier for them to filter by subject and less effort to filter. They won't even bother reading it. If there are hundreds there is no time in the day to do much more than that. Again, a tick in a column on a spreadsheet.

For letters, emails, all of these would elicit, at most, a form response that states the position of the MP / MLA that his workers can hit bulk reply to or stuff into a letter. The response may even be one drafted by the Party so that there is consistency of messaging from across the party. There will be no dialogue, no nuanced debate of issues. So what you have done in essence is just to get a tick in a column so that your local MP / MLA realizes that there is support for or against an issue.

Based upon your level of effort, you want to force your representative to know the depth of your feeling and to at least acknowledge there are issues that matter more than the issues the other side are pushing - which may be a simple and emotional message. And in the end they have to realize how much of a political cost it is to them.

The best result really is for the MP / MLA to realize there is a large enough group who are committed, emotional enough that they might cost them politically. If they are a decent representative, they may set up a meeting with a group of you - because they have no time for individual meetings - where you get to air out your views in a concise matter. With your few minutes you hammer at the most salient points and tell them these are the same points you will raise in the media and to the community and if they are on the other side of it, they will look foolish and it may cost them support in the next election.

I have spoken to the MP in my club's constituency three times in person and other times virtually. While the MP / MLA could ignore you, it could also cost them if they do if you can show they are ducking a committed group who have a legitimate issue. For them, even if their party mandate is against your issue, they still get some value out of a meeting because it shows they are willing to listen. They'll get to put something up on their Facebook showing - look I'm meeting with all sides. The one that represents my club's constituency, yes but again his party, the Liberals, are our obviously opposed to firearms. I do give him credit for actually making the effort to meet, however. My own MP in my own riding - Vancouver Center - has NEVER once responded to my letters. So your mileage may vary. Those of you who are in rural ridings, you will have a much better opportunity to get direct action.

[chilcotin hillbilly]

As Caddisguy stated above, resident hunting community did not show up for the "public engagement" on the government website during the grizzly hunt debate.
To this day it pisses me off to think out of 4500 responses only 15% of them where pro grizzly hunting . Do that math! pathetic and weak from our community. Horgan used those numbers 85-15 to claim that 85% of the public ere against the hunt.
We as a hunting community should have been able to crush that poll the other way. Pathetic when only 700 or so hunters even responded, I guess we are to stupid to see what was coming in the future.
In the end engaging your MLA's and MP's is important but I think it is more important to change the opinion of the non hunting population.

[Ron.C]

As Caddisguy stated above, resident hunting community did not show up for the "public engagement" on the government website during the grizzly hunt debate.
To this day it pisses me off to think out of 4500 responses only 15% of them where pro grizzly hunting . Do that math! pathetic and weak from our community. Horgan used those numbers 85-15 to claim that 85% of the public ere against the hunt.
We as a hunting community should have been able to crush that poll the other way. Pathetic when only 700 or so hunters even responded, I guess we are to stupid to see what was coming in the future.
In the end engaging your MLA's and MP's is important but I think it is more important to change the opinion of the non hunting population.

Absolutely correct! If resident hunters don't step up in numbers and make a case for ourselves, we are done.

[labguy]

As Caddisguy stated above, resident hunting community did not show up for the "public engagement" on the government website during the grizzly hunt debate.
To this day it pisses me off to think out of 4500 responses only 15% of them where pro grizzly hunting . Do that math! pathetic and weak from our community. Horgan used those numbers 85-15 to claim that 85% of the public ere against the hunt.
We as a hunting community should have been able to crush that poll the other way. Pathetic when only 700 or so hunters even responded, I guess we are to stupid to see what was coming in the future.
In the end engaging your MLA's and MP's is important but I think it is more important to change the opinion of the non hunting population.


Good post. Hunters have to be the slackest group on the planet when it comes to standing up and being counted. After sitting on their hands while everything they supposedly value goes south, will jump on the internet and bitch and moan ad nauseam. Pathetic really......

[porthunter]

To the top, lets go

[Cabled]

Not sure how many of you are on Rokslide. I started a post there yesterday, in the general discussion forum, over 400 views in 24 hours , 9 responses saying they visited WSSBC and signed. If you’re on that site, maybe bump the thread and generate interest. Thanks.

[Fella]

Good post. Hunters have to be the slackest group on the planet when it comes to standing up and being counted. After sitting on their hands while everything they supposedly value goes south, will jump on the internet and bitch and moan ad nauseam. Pathetic really......
Canadian hunters are lazy. You should see how the US groups react to stuff like this, they get out En mass and call their representatives, blast them with phone calls and even picket outside their offices. That’s why F&W is so well funded and front of mind in most states because the users actually give a crap

[Ron.C]

Not sure how many of you are on Rokslide. I started a post there yesterday, in the general discussion forum, over 400 views in 24 hours , 9 responses saying they visited WSSBC and signed. If you’re on that site, maybe bump the thread and generate interest. Thanks.

Done!!!!!!

[dany]

It would be great if we could gain one of the large names in hunting to support our hunting rights on social media, e.g. meat eater. Ryan Callaghan was a hunting guide in BC, he should have a personal buy in...

[HankBC]

I'll go look for it now mate, thanks for taking the time to do that!

Maybe some of them will pipe up with advice on all this crap too, good info on this thread already. I'll look into the other info on MLA's.

Cheers,

Not sure how many of you are on Rokslide. I started a post there yesterday, in the general discussion forum, over 400 views in 24 hours , 9 responses saying they visited WSSBC and signed. If you’re on that site, maybe bump the thread and generate interest. Thanks.

[porthunter]

Back on the recent bar.

[LBM]

Canadian hunters are lazy. You should see how the US groups react to stuff like this, they get out En mass and call their representatives, blast them with phone calls and even picket outside their offices. That’s why F&W is so well funded and front of mind in most states because the users actually give a crap

I wouldnt say there lazy maybe to complacent personally i see this as a B.C. issue posable Canadian, and feel only responses from B.C. should be involved I dont want the laws and regulations here made or decided on from the states or europe or
people that have no clue of what is going on.

[Redthies]

I dont want the laws and regulations here made or decided on from the states or europe or
people that have no clue of what is going on.

This is possibly the funniest thing I’ve read on here ever! This is EXACTLY who is making our laws right now!!! Social pressure from outside the country and people who have no clue about animal numbers etc are causing our idiot governments to fold and pass bad laws. They’re bad laws for us as hunters, but worse for the animals involved.

[porthunter]

I wouldnt say there lazy maybe to complacent personally i see this as a B.C. issue posable Canadian, and feel only responses from B.C. should be involved I dont want the laws and regulations here made or decided on from the states or europe or
people that have no clue of what is going on.

Many hunters travel from international countries to hunt sheep, cougars, elk, black bear, etc. We need all voices as it affects more than just BC residents.

Just so you're aware from the anti side, they aren't focusing on the voices of just BC residents either... they are advocating at large to many other places, fight fire with fire or get burnt alive my friend.

[Rackmastr]

Should this be a BC resident (voter) issue? Yep most likely.

Is it? No, most certainly not.

[IronNoggin]

This is possibly the funniest thing I’ve read on here ever! This is EXACTLY who is making our laws right now!!! Social pressure from outside the country and people who have no clue about animal numbers etc are causing our idiot governments to fold and pass bad laws. They’re bad laws for us as hunters, but worse for the animals involved.

This https://www.tnof.ca/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/Good.gifIn Spades.

Nog

[Cabled]

Many hunters travel from international countries to hunt sheep, cougars, elk, black bear, etc. We need all voices as it affects more than just BC residents.

Just so you're aware from the anti side, they aren't focusing on the voices of just BC residents either... they are advocating at large to many other places, fight fire with fire or get burnt alive my friend.
I couldn’t agree more. We need to take a look around, if we continue to stay in our little “bubble” and share our ideas within our community only, we are done. The other side is far more organized and years ahead of us in a lot of ways, we have 2 big organizations here providing an easy way to start contributing. So far we haven’t got anywhere near the numbers we need. Start reaching out and advocating people. Please.

[porthunter]

Lets go, no one better be ordering bear tags and licenses without having signed these forms first.

[3than]

To the top. Lets keep on sharing and signing!

[porthunter]

Keep the pressure on

[Legacy Solocam]

Letter sent

[twoSevenO]

Canadian hunters are lazy. You should see how the US groups react to stuff like this, they get out En mass and call their representatives, blast them with phone calls and even picket outside their offices. That’s why F&W is so well funded and front of mind in most states because the users actually give a crap

They just simply have more hunters down there. The hunting heritage is strong and their hunter population isnt being as diluted as it is here with immigrants who couldnt care less about any hunting traditions.

Population of bc: 5,000,000
Number of hunters: ~100,000

Population of Colorado: 5,700,000
Number of hunters: 1,100,000

That's damn near 10 times more folks concerned over the state of their hunting and damn near 10 times the number of folks buying licences and tags and supporting the management.

[3than]

To the top.

[Mark-R]

Done and donated. Just one of many fronts of the culture war.
Now I can order my bear tags.

[porthunter]

Only around 5K so far, lets go

[Kos]

Keep the ball rolling

[3than]

To the top.

[LBM]

This is possibly the funniest thing I’ve read on here ever! This is EXACTLY who is making our laws right now!!! Social pressure from outside the country and people who have no clue about animal numbers etc are causing our idiot governments to fold and pass bad laws. They’re bad laws for us as hunters, but worse for the animals involved.

oh there has been lots of regulations and laws made by hunters/trappers and there organizations that have been bad for the animals.

[LBM]

Lets go, no one better be ordering bear tags and licenses without having signed these forms first.

Sorry but will be getting bear tags, but wont be signing these forms/letters dont agree with some of the points on how there writing.
I dont hunt for you, jesse, or rebeka i hunt for my own reasons. Have to follow the rules and laws that are in place,yes, but so many are
being changed to appease others. If i remember correctly use to only have to bring out a quarter on sheep, goats and caribou then changed
to 4 quarters then all edible portions all because of what other people think. As mentioned before i have to talk to alot of non hunters
and not going to hide or lie to them and tell them i do not hunt for meat, this quit often gets the oh you hunt for trophy then, which i say no
i hunt for what i want and all is brought out. Then explain in the last 25 years have shot 3 animals here where as a meat hunter can shoot
2 or 3 a year so that could be 50 in the same amount of time. Then say they should think about that on which is worse or harder on animal
populations the one they call a trophy hunter which they think is bad or the meat hunter which they think is ok.

Any way here is your bump for this page.

[porthunter]

Sorry but will be getting bear tags, but wont be signing these forms/letters dont agree with some of the points on how there writing.
I dont hunt for you, jesse, or rebeka i hunt for my own reasons. Have to follow the rules and laws that are in place,yes, but so many are
being changed to appease others. If i remember correctly use to only have to bring out a quarter on sheep, goats and caribou then changed
to 4 quarters then all edible portions all because of what other people think. As mentioned before i have to talk to alot of non hunters
and not going to hide or lie to them and tell them i do not hunt for meat, this quit often gets the oh you hunt for trophy then, which i say no
i hunt for what i want and all is brought out. Then explain in the last 25 years have shot 3 animals here where as a meat hunter can shoot
2 or 3 a year so that could be 50 in the same amount of time. Then say they should think about that on which is worse or harder on animal
populations the one they call a trophy hunter which they think is bad or the meat hunter which they think is ok.

Any way here is your bump for this page.


You're really missing the point here, and I'd be more than happy to give you my number for a phone call.

I'm not questioning or telling people to hunt for any specific reason, I just want to protect hunting in general, whether its for trophy, meat, or whatever urges you to pull the trigger.

We are facing an uphill battle with people who want to shut down hunting completely. This is our way to fight back, to put our names in the media, in front of politicians and advocate in any way possible. I grew up and live amongst many hunters with the "if we dont post what we do they wont care" bullshit approach, and guess what, its exactly that, bullshit. We need to be out there, we need to be raw, we need to show what we do, and most of all we need to show everyone who we are. We believe it or not, are a minority group, and we need to act like it. We need to form relationships, build bonds, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot with the "It wont happen" or "I'll just do my own thing and noone will care" approach cause again, its bullshit.

I'll be meeting with my MLA to discuss hunting and my traditional views on life. I hope you would see the need for this and do the same.

Go ahead and buy your bear tags this year, but if you're foolish enough to think not helping and supporting the hunting/conservation organizations who are taking steps to protect that very privilege, don't be surprised to see that privilege of buying bear tags abolished in the next few years.

[LBM]

You're really missing the point here, and I'd be more than happy to give you my number for a phone call.

I'm not questioning or telling people to hunt for any specific reason, I just want to protect hunting in general, whether its for trophy, meat, or whatever urges you to pull the trigger.

We are facing an uphill battle with people who want to shut down hunting completely. This is our way to fight back, to put our names in the media, in front of politicians and advocate in any way possible. I grew up and live amongst many hunters with the "if we dont post what we do they wont care" bullshit approach, and guess what, its exactly that, bullshit. We need to be out there, we need to be raw, we need to show what we do, and most of all we need to show everyone who we are. We believe it or not, are a minority group, and we need to act like it. We need to form relationships, build bonds, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot with the "It wont happen" or "I'll just do my own thing and noone will care" approach cause again, its bullshit.

I'll be meeting with my MLA to discuss hunting and my traditional views on life. I hope you would see the need for this and do the same.

Go ahead and buy your bear tags this year, but if you're foolish enough to think not helping and supporting the hunting/conservation organizations who are taking steps to protect that very privilege, don't be surprised to see that privilege of buying bear tags abolished in the next few years.

Not sure why need to phone, been dealing with people or groups wanting to change or shut down hunting for years and quit posable before you were even born.
Your last comment about being foolish when you dont no what people do or support , well that says enough.

[porthunter]

Not sure why need to phone, been dealing with people or groups wanting to change or shut down hunting for years and quit posable before you were even born.
Your last comment about being foolish when you dont no what people do or support , well that says enough.

Simply to view perspective and chat about ways to combat what we face? While you may be right that for years, people have been trying to shut down hunting(and yes before I was born as I was born in '95), I don't think there has ever been an organization as strong and influential as Raincoast, it showed when they were the ones who literally drove the Grizzly Bear Ban...

My statement directly referred to being foolish for not supporting organizations directly working to protect what we value... I could care less what else you do/support, well unless its Raincoast. Sorry if I may come across as rude, but I'll be honest, I'm scared for our/my future, this is the biggest threat to hunting in BC has ever seen. My generation doesn't understand a lot of traditional values and the reason we do what we do, and that's a scary thought... I try to educate all but as a minority we are only so many voices.

[VLD43]

You're really missing the point here, and I'd be more than happy to give you my number for a phone call.

I'm not questioning or telling people to hunt for any specific reason, I just want to protect hunting in general, whether its for trophy, meat, or whatever urges you to pull the trigger.

We are facing an uphill battle with people who want to shut down hunting completely. This is our way to fight back, to put our names in the media, in front of politicians and advocate in any way possible. I grew up and live amongst many hunters with the "if we dont post what we do they wont care" bullshit approach, and guess what, its exactly that, bullshit. We need to be out there, we need to be raw, we need to show what we do, and most of all we need to show everyone who we are. We believe it or not, are a minority group, and we need to act like it. We need to form relationships, build bonds, and stop shooting ourselves in the foot with the "It wont happen" or "I'll just do my own thing and noone will care" approach cause again, its bullshit.

I'll be meeting with my MLA to discuss hunting and my traditional views on life. I hope you would see the need for this and do the same.

Go ahead and buy your bear tags this year, but if you're foolish enough to think not helping and supporting the hunting/conservation organizations who are taking steps to protect that very privilege, don't be surprised to see that privilege of buying bear tags abolished in the next few years.

Sir while I admire your passion and support this letter writing campaign, I believe you are missing some important points. The first and most important point is that wolf culls have always been controversial. Back in the early 80's they did a cull and green peace tried to get up to northern BC and fly in to disrupt the cull . They were quickly shut down when they arrived. Second: Let me point out that back in the 70's when I first started hunting, the wildlife branch strongly urged hunters to not display their game when returning from hunting, like in the old days when guys draped deer, moose, etc over the hood of their vehicle. Most of us complied to this request and all was quiet. Third - As you point out, most people don't like hunting and don't want to see dead animals and blood. So why on earth would you taunt them? They don't want to see what we do or know what we do. As the old saying goes "Let sleeping dogs lie". Fourth - If your honest with your self, you then know that the reason we are in this position "AGAIN", is because of #@$KING social media. The younger generation can't help themselves when it comes to social media, and need to learn to be discrete and show some sell discipline. This whole mess we are in is arguable the consequence of social media. The guy that shot the lion, the hockey player that shot the grizzly and posted on facebook, the young lady who posted a picture of a dead wolf on face book and then stated she wanted to kill every wolf she saw. Really? Maybe it's youthful defiance, but what is it we have to say to you, to convince you to stay off social media with your hunting pictures. You keep shooting yourself and fellow hunters in the foot with these posts and also create a shit storm with the general public. We wouldn't be fighting this fight right now, if some people had shown some good judgement and discretion. If you think you can throw your hunting activities out on social media without paying a price for that, then you need to reconsider. The general public will throw you and me under the bus in a heart beat, and the Politicians will accommodate them.

[porthunter]

Sir while I admire your passion and support this letter writing campaign, I believe you are missing some important points. The first and most important point is that wolf culls have always been controversial. Back in the early 80's they did a cull and green peace tried to get up to northern BC and fly in to disrupt the cull . They were quickly shut down when they arrived. Second: Let me point out that back in the 70's when I first started hunting, the wildlife branch strongly urged hunters to not display their game when returning from hunting, like in the old days when guys draped deer, moose, etc over the hood of their vehicle. Most of us complied to this request and all was quiet. Third - As you point out, most people don't like hunting and don't want to see dead animals and blood. So why on earth would you taunt them? They don't want to see what we do or know what we do. As the old saying goes "Let sleeping dogs lie". Fourth - If your honest with your self, you then know that the reason we are in this position "AGAIN", is because of #@$KING social media. The younger generation can't help themselves when it comes to social media, and need to learn to be discrete and show some sell discipline. This whole mess we are in is arguable the consequence of social media. The guy that shot the lion, the hockey player that shot the grizzly and posted on facebook, the young lady who posted a picture of a dead wolf on face book and then stated she wanted to kill every wolf she saw. Really? Maybe it's youthful defiance, but what is it we have to say to you, to convince you to stay off social media with your hunting pictures. You keep shooting yourself and fellow hunters in the foot with these posts and also create a shit storm with the general public. We wouldn't be fighting this fight right now, if some people had shown some good judgement and discretion. If you think you can throw your hunting activities out on social media without paying a price for that, then you need to reconsider. The general public will throw you and me under the bus in a heart beat, and the Politicians will accommodate them.

Touche in some regards.

But point one, this is not just about wolf culls, when they've included bears, elk, and bighorn sheep. Second, I whole heartedly agree that no one should be publicly draping animals over their hoods or anything of that sort, I try to hide as much as I can while transporting. Third, and I guess the fourth as well, while you may be right and poor judgement of posting on Social Media could be the cause for this or probably is, what about hunting shows? It's still in the public eye to some regard. We can't avoid the situation we currently sit in, and going with the "Stop posting your stuff on social media" isn't going to help now. I like to use hunting pictures to show a positive light on all aspects of hunting, from vistas, sunsets, relatable moments to yes, trophy pictures. I can speak from personal experience as a millennial, tasteful hunting pictures I have posted, have lead to positive engagement from non hunters.

Steven Rinella has been in the New York Times discussing different aspects of hunting? Should he have not done that to keep it out of the public eye?

While I agree, there's without a doubt some pictures that don't belong on social media. But we as hunters need to have a presence, the common trend today is supporting minorities based on their way of life, love that. But we are a minority with a way of life and we need to act accordingly and gather support through social media in my opinion.

Up until about 5 years ago, no one online would have been able to guess I was a hunter. I live in Vancouver, frequent local nightclubs, posted similar to what everyone else my age would post, and I hid it to be frank. In conversations that would come up from time to time with people who knew me would be hunting... they were shocked, outraged, and simply didn't understand. As hunting more consumed my life, to the point that I now can't go 5 minutes without talking or thinking about it, I changed my social media, slowly but I did. Did I have some outrage? absolutely, but it brought the opportunity to teach. I get some of the coolest messages from people trying to understand, admiring time spent in the outdoors, able to connect on levels of my tent pictured in snow to their hiking trip they did last summer or a sunset up above tree line, that I captured while hunting.

Last year, I posted a picture I knew would get some interesting feedback, a friend skinning out a bear for a euro mount. It sparked quite a few conversations, but it also gave opportunity. The opportunity to teach how every portion of that bear would be used, from the meat, to the cape, to the simple euro skull on the fireplace as a memory of a time with a friend.

While I truly respect your side of things and the critique and feedback, it gives me an opportunity to further think and evaluate, I just wanted to put my side of it out there from someone who may have a little bit different perspective. It's the same as LBM, I respect his opinion and his outlook on everything as well.

[VLD43]

Touche in some regards.

But point one, this is not just about wolf culls, when they've included bears, elk, and bighorn sheep. Second, I whole heartedly agree that no one should be publicly draping animals over their hoods or anything of that sort, I try to hide as much as I can while transporting. Third, and I guess the fourth as well, while you may be right and poor judgement of posting on Social Media could be the cause for this or probably is, what about hunting shows? It's still in the public eye to some regard. We can't avoid the situation we currently sit in, and going with the "Stop posting your stuff on social media" isn't going to help now. I like to use hunting pictures to show a positive light on all aspects of hunting, from vistas, sunsets, relatable moments to yes, trophy pictures. I can speak from personal experience as a millennial, tasteful hunting pictures I have posted, have lead to positive engagement from non hunters.

Steven Rinella has been in the New York Times discussing different aspects of hunting? Should he have not done that to keep it out of the public eye?

While I agree, there's without a doubt some pictures that don't belong on social media. But we as hunters need to have a presence, the common trend today is supporting minorities based on their way of life, love that. But we are a minority with a way of life and we need to act accordingly and gather support through social media in my opinion.

Up until about 5 years ago, no one online would have been able to guess I was a hunter. I live in Vancouver, frequent local nightclubs, posted similar to what everyone else my age would post, and I hid it to be frank. In conversations that would come up from time to time with people who knew me would be hunting... they were shocked, outraged, and simply didn't understand. As hunting more consumed my life, to the point that I now can't go 5 minutes without talking or thinking about it, I changed my social media, slowly but I did. Did I have some outrage? absolutely, but it brought the opportunity to teach. I get some of the coolest messages from people trying to understand, admiring time spent in the outdoors, able to connect on levels of my tent pictured in snow to their hiking trip they did last summer or a sunset up above tree line, that I captured while hunting.

Last year, I posted a picture I knew would get some interesting feedback, a friend skinning out a bear for a euro mount. It sparked quite a few conversations, but it also gave opportunity. The opportunity to teach how every portion of that bear would be used, from the meat, to the cape, to the simple euro skull on the fireplace as a memory of a time with a friend.

While I truly respect your side of things and the critique and feedback, it gives me an opportunity to further think and evaluate, I just wanted to put my side of it out there from someone who may have a little bit different perspective. It's the same as LBM, I respect his opinion and his outlook on everything as well.

Great feedback and I truly appreciate the way you are approaching how you present hunting to others. Unfortunately there are people who do not share or use the care you do. Introducing people to your life style in a gentle way is the way to do it, but graphic displays of animals being shot and or wounded should never be posted anywhere. Lots of people eat meat, but I can tell you with great confidence, there are few of those people who want to see the workings of a slaughter house. This is the point I am trying to get across here. Discretion and tasteful presentation of our sport. Have you every really considered why people have to post pictures of the game they have harvested for the general public to see. In my opinion it's more about ego than accomplishment. Sharing in the hunting community is fine, but just throwing it out there for everyone to see is a really bad idea. Ask yourself how many lives have be ruined by social media. Social media is like a firearm, in the hands of a responsible person, it's a tool, and in the hands of the wrong person, it can create a lot of damage, intended or otherwise. Again I appreciate your enthusiasm and support your efforts. I wish more people had your perspective on hunting. I have really enjoyed hunting for 50 + years, and want to pass this lifestyle on to the younger generation in good condition. Part of passing the torch on, is to insist that the younger generation takes the same care we did, and learns from our mistakes. Remember that for the most part, my generation has "Been there done that"

[porthunter]

Great feedback and I truly appreciate the way you are approaching how you present hunting to others. Unfortunately there are people who do not share or use the care you do. Introducing people to your life style in a gentle way is the way to do it, but graphic displays of animals being shot and or wounded should never be posted anywhere. Lots of people eat meat, but I can tell you with great confidence, there are few of those people who want to see the workings of a slaughter house. This is the point I am trying to get across here. Discretion and tasteful presentation of our sport. Have you every really considered why people have to post pictures of the game they have harvested for the general public to see. In my opinion it's more about ego than accomplishment. Sharing in the hunting community is fine, but just throwing it out there for everyone to see is a really bad idea. Ask yourself how many lives have be ruined by social media. Social media is like a firearm, in the hands of a responsible person, it's a tool, and in the hands of the wrong person, it can create a lot of damage, intended or otherwise. Again I appreciate your enthusiasm and support your efforts. I wish more people had your perspective on hunting. I have really enjoyed hunting for 50 + years, and want to pass this lifestyle on to the younger generation in good condition. Part of passing the torch on, is to insist that the younger generation takes the same care we did, and learns from our mistakes. Remember that for the most part, my generation has "Been there done that"


Absolutely, part of the education portion, is educating fellow hunters on public perception IMO. and 100% agree on peoples opinion on seeing slaughterhouse and where there meat comes from, but I've again used that to my benefit, to compare that to the picture of my clean cut backstrap.

Harvest pictures are a tough one to vocalize, and I often struggle with it. I can't argue that ego is a small portion of it, it is. and even writing this now, I'm trying to find a way to put it to words. But I feel its part of it, my goal is to show every different aspect of hunting, from packing a bag, setting a tent, building a camp, hiking a mountain, taking an animal and finally eating that animal. I know it is a hard concept to wrap ones head around.

I grew up in a hunting family. Highlights of nights around a campfire with people who I no longer am able to go see other than spiritually, were a big part of hunting and something I also want to pass on. But like you said, the key is to pass it on and teach the do's/don't's. Again, I truly do appreciate this kind of feedback and maybe one day once our world returns to some level, possibly have a conversation and share stories over a beer or coffee!

[Dash]

Just thought I would share the response I received from the office of my local MLA in response to the letter....



Good morning, Tracy.

Thank you for taking the time to write and share your concerns with Vernon-Monashee MLA, Harwinder Sandhu.

Hunting and trapping are an important part of the lives of many British Columbians. Opportunities for licensed harvest, founded on the basis of sound scientific principles, are only provided where such activities are biologically sustainable.

Under no circumstances does the BC government allow hunting that threatens the conservation of any species, nor does it condone unethical hunting practices.


Wildlife harvest is managed on a four-tiered system; the top priority is conservation, the second priority is to ensure constitutional obligations to First Nations, the third priority is resident licensed hunters, and the fourth priority is for non-resident licensed hunters.

Hunting regulations require that all licensed hunters remove the edible portions of meat, including that from predators like cougar and black bear. For some species (e.g., wolf, lynx and bobcat), the hunter must remove the edible portions or the hide and may remove both.

On August 28, 2020, the Province announced the final Together for Wildlife Strategy, which was the culmination of work under the mandate to “improve wildlife management and habitat conservation and collaborate with stakeholders to develop short and long-term strategies to manage BC's wildlife resources.”

The Strategy outlines five goals and 24 actions that together support the vision “wildlife and their habitats thrive, are resilient, and support and enrich the lives of all British Columbians.”

To support implementation of the Strategy a budget of up to $10M per year is committed, the approximate annual revenue from wildlife hunting and permit revenue, in additional to the regular program budget.

A Minister’s Wildlife Advisory Council was established to oversee implementation of the Strategy, as well as provide advise to the Minister on important issues related to wildlife stewardship and habitat conservation including ways to improve funding models.

For more information and a copy of the Together for Wild Life strategy, please visit: Together for Wildlife - Province of British Columbia (gov.bc.ca)

Thank you,

Josh.


Josh Winquist
Constituency Assistant to Harwinder Sandhu, MLA for Vernon-Monashee
P:250-503-3601 | B - 2920 28th Ave, Vernon, BC V1T 1V9
Harwinder.Sandhu.MLA@leg.bc.ca


Thank you,


Kind regards,


Harwinder Sandhu
MLA Vernon-Monashee

[whitlers]

"Hunting regulations require that all licensed hunters remove the edible portions of meat, including that from predators like cougar and black bear. For some species (e.g., wolf, lynx and bobcat), the hunter must remove the edible portions or the hide and may remove both."

Well that's not entirely correct.

I also find it amusing that the "Four Tier System" puts resident hunters below First Nations. Of course we always knew that but just find it interesting comming from the horses mouth.

[VLD43]

Absolutely, part of the education portion, is educating fellow hunters on public perception IMO. and 100% agree on peoples opinion on seeing slaughterhouse and where there meat comes from, but I've again used that to my benefit, to compare that to the picture of my clean cut backstrap.

Harvest pictures are a tough one to vocalize, and I often struggle with it. I can't argue that ego is a small portion of it, it is. and even writing this now, I'm trying to find a way to put it to words. But I feel its part of it, my goal is to show every different aspect of hunting, from packing a bag, setting a tent, building a camp, hiking a mountain, taking an animal and finally eating that animal. I know it is a hard concept to wrap ones head around.

I grew up in a hunting family. Highlights of nights around a campfire with people who I no longer am able to go see other than spiritually, were a big part of hunting and something I also want to pass on. But like you said, the key is to pass it on and teach the do's/don't's. Again, I truly do appreciate this kind of feedback and maybe one day once our world returns to some level, possibly have a conversation and share stories over a beer or coffee!

Thanks for the reply, and I know where your coming from. Remember "Been there done that". I guess it comes down to being careful who share with. I know that after all the hard work involved to harvest, you want to share your successes with others, but there is a difference between sharing with the like minded and just putting it out there. I think your on the right track and you appear to be considerate to others and that's great. I am sure you will be a good ambassador for the sport. Just hope you can be a good influence to some of our peers. Keep up the good work and straight shootin.

[Bugle M In]

Done and passed on "big time".

I am not surprised by the ridiculousness of the Anti's and the elk.

Also, its why i dont like the term "trophy" in our hunting practices terminology any longer.
And, why i said we need real hunters in Politics now....more then ever!!
We have left science based stuff a long time ago, for the "pull on your heart strings and use emotion thru the I-net.
And why i said i am tired of hunters arguing whether spike or 4 pt should make things better.

The real problems are exactly what the OP posted.
The Anti's are organized because they have "1 Agenda", and that is to ban all hunting.
Ver easy optics to focus on to reach their objective.
We get to "Washed out" because we are looking at too many small issues to concentrate are efforts properly.

Time to wake up folks and support you hunters.
We are all in the same boat, time to paddle together.

[LBM]

Simply to view perspective and chat about ways to combat what we face? While you may be right that for years, people have been trying to shut down hunting(and yes before I was born as I was born in '95), I don't think there has ever been an organization as strong and influential as Raincoast, it showed when they were the ones who literally drove the Grizzly Bear Ban...

My statement directly referred to being foolish for not supporting organizations directly working to protect what we value... I could care less what else you do/support, well unless its Raincoast. Sorry if I may come across as rude, but I'll be honest, I'm scared for our/my future, this is the biggest threat to hunting in BC has ever seen. My generation doesn't understand a lot of traditional values and the reason we do what we do, and that's a scary thought... I try to educate all but as a minority we are only so many voices.

Here is another bump for you, things seem to have slowed down.
I got a chuckle out of your post.

[horshur]

You don't like the word "Trophy"
Lets be clear the attack on trophy hunting is just post modernist bullshit. Trophy implies a hierarchy by definition. Post modern deconstructionist tear down hierarchies. It is why we are watching a bluring of gender, sexuality, ect. It is a culture war. It also serves a marxist bent.
I got into some hot water years ago with some European hunters. When they described there hunting,which was elevated stand hunting at night to what amounted to a food plot to get there "trophy". To me that wasn't a trophy by my definition it had to be difficult and rare..lol they were yelling at me after that. But here is the deal "Trophy " is just a word with many definitions. The unwitting
deconstructionist has been hard at work in our society. Look at sports everyone gets a prize, no one left behind. You can't hardly fail anymore. Hell really they want to get rid of "Sport" too. You don't like that one too? It also carries positive and negative implications. To be sporting is to " play"fair. "Play" problematic as well killing animals should not be play and so the circle goes round and round. Getting rid of the words gets rid of the thing we do every fall. "Tradition"is another they are after. Our words define us and what we do.

[silveragent]

I got the same form letter back from George Heyman, my MLA.


Just thought I would share the response I received from the office of my local MLA in response to the letter....



Good morning, Tracy.

Thank you for taking the time to write and share your concerns with Vernon-Monashee MLA, Harwinder Sandhu.

Hunting and trapping are an important part of the lives of many British Columbians. Opportunities for licensed harvest, founded on the basis of sound scientific principles, are only provided where such activities are biologically sustainable.

Under no circumstances does the BC government allow hunting that threatens the conservation of any species, nor does it condone unethical hunting practices.


Wildlife harvest is managed on a four-tiered system; the top priority is conservation, the second priority is to ensure constitutional obligations to First Nations, the third priority is resident licensed hunters, and the fourth priority is for non-resident licensed hunters.

Hunting regulations require that all licensed hunters remove the edible portions of meat, including that from predators like cougar and black bear. For some species (e.g., wolf, lynx and bobcat), the hunter must remove the edible portions or the hide and may remove both.

On August 28, 2020, the Province announced the final Together for Wildlife Strategy, which was the culmination of work under the mandate to “improve wildlife management and habitat conservation and collaborate with stakeholders to develop short and long-term strategies to manage BC's wildlife resources.”

The Strategy outlines five goals and 24 actions that together support the vision “wildlife and their habitats thrive, are resilient, and support and enrich the lives of all British Columbians.”

To support implementation of the Strategy a budget of up to $10M per year is committed, the approximate annual revenue from wildlife hunting and permit revenue, in additional to the regular program budget.

A Minister’s Wildlife Advisory Council was established to oversee implementation of the Strategy, as well as provide advise to the Minister on important issues related to wildlife stewardship and habitat conservation including ways to improve funding models.

For more information and a copy of the Together for Wild Life strategy, please visit: Together for Wildlife - Province of British Columbia (gov.bc.ca)

Thank you,

Josh.


Josh Winquist
Constituency Assistant to Harwinder Sandhu, MLA for Vernon-Monashee
P:250-503-3601 | B - 2920 28th Ave, Vernon, BC V1T 1V9
Harwinder.Sandhu.MLA@leg.bc.ca


Thank you,


Kind regards,


Harwinder Sandhu
MLA Vernon-Monashee

[hardbull]

Had a phone meeting with my MLA today (Dan Coulter). He was very receptive to my concerns. He is a hunter himself, although confined to a wheelchair now. He assured me several times that the current government, at the MLA level, is not looking at any changes to the current hunting regulations that he was aware of. He stated MLA's are not discussing hunting at all and that any changes in the regs would be coming from wildlife management. We did discuss briefly the "together for wildlife" strategy. When I stated that I felt hunters did not have a great deal of representation on the advisory council he did not disagree. He did say that it was somewhat early days and we would have to see where this new strategy takes us. Overall a fairly positive experience. It was not a difficult discussion as he was very pro hunter. CHeers

[Bugle M In]

You don't like the word "Trophy"
Lets be clear the attack on trophy hunting is just post modernist bullshit. Trophy implies a hierarchy by definition. Post modern deconstructionist tear down hierarchies. It is why we are watching a bluring of gender, sexuality, ect. It is a culture war. It also serves a marxist bent.
I got into some hot water years ago with some European hunters. When they described there hunting,which was elevated stand hunting at night to what amounted to a food plot to get there "trophy". To me that wasn't a trophy by my definition it had to be difficult and rare..lol they were yelling at me after that. But here is the deal "Trophy " is just a word with many definitions. The unwitting
deconstructionist has been hard at work in our society. Look at sports everyone gets a prize, no one left behind. You can't hardly fail anymore. Hell really they want to get rid of "Sport" too. You don't like that one too? It also carries positive and negative implications. To be sporting is to " play"fair. "Play" problematic as well killing animals should not be play and so the circle goes round and round. Getting rid of the words gets rid of the thing we do every fall. "Tradition"is another they are after. Our words define us and what we do.

Most of the time in Europe (Germany in my experience), they actually don't try and take "trophy" sized game, and most, even here consider trophy to be
size of antler or body length.
Truth is, they generally try to harvest what they call "weak", and I don't mean almost dying, but rather poor antler growth for age.
Just an FYI...but they also take decent ones at times too.
And, being Europe, pretty hard to find a place there that is "hard to get to", even if you try to seek out that type of place.
The Alps are only a mountain or 2 wide, not like the Rockies, when on top of a peak, al you can see is peaks in all directions as the curvature of the earth
makes them disappear from site.
So, i can see why they weren't happy.
And, most GO's prefer Europeans compared to Americans as clients also.
Why, because they generally only take a shot when it's right.
No having to chase wounded game for days afterwards....just another FYI.

As for the term Trophy.
Well, i don't hunt for Trophy.
I hunt for "maturity" in some cases depending on game.
Elk is the only exception, as its my 1st choice for meat in the freezer.

Trophy and Sport, to me, are some dinosaur terms used by many .
Its not the terms I use, because it doesn't identify how and what I hunt, and most certainly "not WHY I hunt".

[porthunter]

To the top

[HarryToolips]

Done and passed on "big time".

I am not surprised by the ridiculousness of the Anti's and the elk.

Also, its why i dont like the term "trophy" in our hunting practices terminology any longer.
And, why i said we need real hunters in Politics now....more then ever!!
We have left science based stuff a long time ago, for the "pull on your heart strings and use emotion thru the I-net.
And why i said i am tired of hunters arguing whether spike or 4 pt should make things better.

The real problems are exactly what the OP posted.
The Anti's are organized because they have "1 Agenda", and that is to ban all hunting.
Ver easy optics to focus on to reach their objective.
We get to "Washed out" because we are looking at too many small issues to concentrate are efforts properly.

Time to wake up folks and support you hunters.
We are all in the same boat, time to paddle together.
Amen....we also need to educate the non hunters more, about how hunters put a value on wildlife and put money into wildlife and habitat, and how regulated hunting seasons work from a scientific perspective... organizations such as the BCWF need to post more articles in the newspapers etc, that is, if they'll post them...

[Arctic Lake]

You fellas have been posting some very good points !
Arctic Lake

[dru88]

Just want to get this back to the top. I will be sending my own penned letter as well as the ACT NOW and BCWF letters.At least take the 2 minutes and complete the ACT NOW link on the WSSBC website. I have not written a letter since in high school but figured nows the time to get pen to paper. Lets flood our government with letters phone calls even emails and let them know we care about our wildlife and our traditions.

[brian]

I don’t actually see where there is a direct action to further regulate hunting in bc. The website mentions no active campaign or any specified group. I can only assume they are reacting to the paper linked to by the raincoat society titled the eroding of the social license to hunt large carnivores (https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cobi.13657).The article itself is not anti hunting, it is a research paper discussing the social license to hunt and its impacts on hunting regulation. I’d highly recommend hunters to read it critically. The research paper actually investigates how to preserve the social license to hunt and the realities that threaten it. From my understanding, the segments trying to link a threat to elk and sheep in with large carnivore have been taken entirely out of context. I believe that the outlined recommended action hunters can take seems well informed and based on the reality we are seeing play out in regards to hunting legislation.

[Rob Chipman]

I’d highly recommend hunters to read it critically.

Have you listened to or read much of other related things from Raincoast or Chris Darimont? I'm not trying to be offensive or dismissive, but there's more to the story than just the paper.

[RobTurbo]

I don’t actually see where there is a direct action to further regulate hunting in bc. The website mentions no active campaign or any specified group. I can only assume they are reacting to the paper linked to by the raincoat society titled the eroding of the social license to hunt large carnivores (https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cobi.13657).The article itself is not anti hunting, it is a research paper discussing the social license to hunt and its impacts on hunting regulation. I’d highly recommend hunters to read it critically. The research paper actually investigates how to preserve the social license to hunt and the realities that threaten it. From my understanding, the segments trying to link a threat to elk and sheep in with large carnivore have been taken entirely out of context. I believe that the outlined recommended action hunters can take seems well informed and based on the reality we are seeing play out in regards to hunting legislation.

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=8345&stc=1

So the fact they started their "Ban the Grizzly Bear Hunt" circus in the exact same way should be overlooked?

A group who outspokenly vehemently opposes hunting is giving advice on how we can preserve hunting and should be trusted?

The fact they claim Predator hunts are "Trophy Hunting" even though people eat Cougar, Bears, etc should be skipped over? And threw Elk and Sheep in that category....

We should also overlook the basis they're suggesting that wildlife should be managed off of Social politics rather than sound scientific evidence?

This is a bold outright attack on hunting and our abilities to provide for our families. I agree that hunters need to do a better job at educating the public on all the amazing things that hunting does for the wildlife we cherish. Hunter are conservationists. We plan an extremely vital role in both animal and habitat protection. We pump more money into wildlife funding programs through tags, draws, organized groups than any other segment of the population. Humans have already irreparably impacted the landscapes so much so that we need to take responsibility and mange our wildlife carefully, which includes scientifically managed hunting. Without this wildlife will fail.

I am working hard on educating those willing to listen! There are a ton of people that are in the non-hunting but not anti-hunting camp. They need to understand what real hunters do for the wildlife we care about, why we're important to it's long term survival, and how the animal can provide meat for many people throughout the year. This is my new passion. Anti's will not win this battle.

[REMINGTON JIM]

Done ! :) RJ

[porthunter]

I don’t actually see where there is a direct action to further regulate hunting in bc. The website mentions no active campaign or any specified group. I can only assume they are reacting to the paper linked to by the raincoat society titled the eroding of the social license to hunt large carnivores (https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cobi.13657).The article itself is not anti hunting, it is a research paper discussing the social license to hunt and its impacts on hunting regulation. I’d highly recommend hunters to read it critically. The research paper actually investigates how to preserve the social license to hunt and the realities that threaten it. From my understanding, the segments trying to link a threat to elk and sheep in with large carnivore have been taken entirely out of context. I believe that the outlined recommended action hunters can take seems well informed and based on the reality we are seeing play out in regards to hunting legislation.

I’m on my phone so I don’t have the ability to put together a full response cause it’s a pain on here. But that’s the entire issue, there should be no management by social licence, and anything that even alludes to that should be taken very seriously by hunters AND wildlife managers. You can easily read between the lines to pick up on threats and narratives pushed in the paper, such as separating “food hunters” from “trophy hunters” and ultimately saying if the “food hunters” don’t turn on the “trophy hunters” than the licence to hunt for food could be lost to.

[Weatherby Fan]

I’m on my phone so I don’t have the ability to put together a full response cause it’s a pain on here. But that’s the entire issue, there should be no management by social licence, and anything that even alludes to that should be taken very seriously by hunters AND wildlife managers. You can easily read between the lines to pick up on threats and narratives pushed in the paper, such as separating “food hunters” from “trophy hunters” and ultimately saying if the “food hunters” don’t turn on the “trophy hunters” than the licence to hunt for food could be lost to.


Thats the thing about hunting, there should be no such thing as "Trophy Hunting" as every hunt is for food, ( the trophy is in the eye of the beholder regardless if its a 30" buck or a doe you're still eating it )

and I say it again and again this is one of the main reasons we lost the Grizzly Bear Hunt as we never had a leg to stand on because the hunters and guide/outfitters insisted that Grizzly meat was unfit for consumption and never wanted to take the meat out.....so in turn its deemed a "Trophy Hunt" by the tree huggers....

man I got trashed on here many times for saying they need to change that designation for the Grizzly hunt where all edible portions must be taken out before we loose the hunt, I hate to say I told you so we all know how the GB hunt ended !!!

Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance, its my right to have organic meat to feed my family.

[dru88]

Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance, its my right to have organic meat to feed my family.^^^^^^

This is it in a nut shell

[brian]

To all my detractors, the key is to read it critically. You are so willing to disregard the message because of the messenger. But the message gives key information on how to control the narrative. First it does not matter how wildlife “should” be managed. These are becoming political decisions. Science and facts have very little relevance in political discourse these days. Public perception is everything, you are seriously fooling yourself if you think differently. Therefor all hunting regulation will be subject to social license. The paper shows population percentages of hunters... we are vastly out numbered and are not much of a voting block that needs to be appealed to by any politician. The paper demonstrates the effectiveness of hunter reaction to regulation changes pissing, moaning, shouting are not effective responses. Neither will appeals to science. We have a tremendous amount of public approval for hunting for food. If we want to keep hunting larger carnivores then we must change the narrative from trophy to meat. This could be easy with black bear, much harder with wolf and cougar. I think we could all take lessons from Steve Rinella and show the food we get off of all our kills rather than focus on the size of racks, paws, horns, teeth etc. Assume antis are reading our forums, which they are... and act accordingly. Get this narrative to the public at large so we can change the narrative from trophy to sustainable meat harvests that benefit local ecosystems. Then back that up with science!

[Rob Chipman]

To all my detractors, the key is to read it critically. You are so willing to disregard the message because of the messenger.

I think the conflict here is that you're suggesting reading the paper in isolation and then making a judgement.

Every activity that we undertake in society requires social license. What Raincoast did was take the concept of social license to operate, innovate it into a new phrase, "social license to hunt", then they posited a problem ("hunters don't have social license") that wasn't a real thing (was the government actually considering restricting hunting in BC at this time in response to a wide public outcry?), then they suggested a solution (cut the unpopular minority out of the herd, hunters!), then the academic paper was picked up in the media (because that always happens, right?) leading to multiple media instances of....manufactured public outcry.

Perhaps I'm a crazy Alex Jonesy kind of QAnon conspiracy nut.

Or maybe your detractors are telling you to look at the larger picture.

Just a thought.

It is a Raincoast theme that while science is great, it can't inform the public on what the social decisions a society has to make are. Typically, that's where Raincoast steps in with a helpful suggestion about what the moral and ethical way to behave is. The funny part (and i't probably a complete coincidence) is that Raincoast usually suggests that you stop liking things that they don't like.

[porthunter]

Thats the thing about hunting, there should be no such thing as "Trophy Hunting" as every hunt is for food, ( the trophy is in the eye of the beholder regardless if its a 30" buck or a doe you're still eating it )

and I say it again and again this is one of the main reasons we lost the Grizzly Bear Hunt as we never had a leg to stand on because the hunters and guide/outfitters insisted that Grizzly meat was unfit for consumption and never wanted to take the meat out.....so in turn its deemed a "Trophy Hunt" by the tree huggers....

man I got trashed on here many times for saying they need to change that designation for the Grizzly hunt where all edible portions must be taken out before we loose the hunt, I hate to say I told you so we all know how the GB hunt ended !!!

Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance, its my right to have organic meat to feed my family.

I agree with you there Don, I was more so using the term in the context it was put in the paper put forth by Darimont/Raincoast and the seperation/segregation they try to use in it.


To all my detractors, the key is to read it critically. You are so willing to disregard the message because of the messenger. But the message gives key information on how to control the narrative. First it does not matter how wildlife “should” be managed. These are becoming political decisions. Science and facts have very little relevance in political discourse these days. Public perception is everything, you are seriously fooling yourself if you think differently. Therefor all hunting regulation will be subject to social license. The paper shows population percentages of hunters... we are vastly out numbered and are not much of a voting block that needs to be appealed to by any politician. The paper demonstrates the effectiveness of hunter reaction to regulation changes pissing, moaning, shouting are not effective responses. Neither will appeals to science. We have a tremendous amount of public approval for hunting for food. If we want to keep hunting larger carnivores then we must change the narrative from trophy to meat. This could be easy with black bear, much harder with wolf and cougar. I think we could all take lessons from Steve Rinella and show the food we get off of all our kills rather than focus on the size of racks, paws, horns, teeth etc. Assume antis are reading our forums, which they are... and act accordingly. Get this narrative to the public at large so we can change the narrative from trophy to sustainable meat harvests that benefit local ecosystems. Then back that up with science!

I've read the paper atleast 25 times, I've printed and thrown it out at least 4 times, I currently have a copy sitting on my desk with a note pad highlighting specific lines used and biases pushed forth that clearly highlight agenda along with other articles, papers, and talks Chris Darimont speficially has done. He is a sick, conniving individual who will twist words to try and make people question everything... do you honestly believe Darimont is a hunter as he so claims to be? and if he is, what makes it okay in his mind to harvest certain species but not others? Pretty discriminatory if you want to look at it by logic that tends to be used by groups such as Raincoast.

It would be pretty naïve to not take into consideration who is writing the paper and their resume as it sits, would it not? I feel like that must be taken into account as bias plays a massive part in a piece like this. You're taking this approach that as hunters we should just read this paper, bend over, and take it as they so feel they want to give it to us. The reality is the paper is an attack and a slap in the face of current Government employees... you know, the Biologists who spend every day working with wildlife and for that alone, we should be and they should be raising hell.

I will agree with you on the front of public appeal to hunting for food. But how long is it before that changes to? I mean let's be real here, and they know it already to. When you break down the cost per pound of meat, it doesn't entirely make sense. Now let's take it a step further cause the general hunting community tends to stick to the "easier" to harvest species. IE. Deer, Moose, and Bear(Which I'll highlight as you forgot to, is an omnivore and not a carnivore as they so easily tried to put in the paper) let's go to sheep. You pointed out the idea of trophy in terms of racks, horns, and teeth... well as a Sheep Hunter, the goal is always to take the oldest most mature ram, characteristics of that are; horn growth, body size/stature, and sometimes a lack of teeth. We do this because biology and science tell us that in order to sustain a healthy herd, we should be targeting the most mature of the species. So, now lets take science out of the equation... no longer are we targeting the oldest ram's because social license says its wrong to target an animal that way, well what do you think is going to happen when we start taking the young 2 and 3 year old rams? What will happen to the herd? But hey, why not go a little further than that, since this is all based on social license and public opinion. I probably see 5 does to every buck I see(that's a moderate ratio). If we remove science and the need for wildlife management by it, now well public policy I'm sure will say why not harvest the easiest animal if its solely for food? Well that generally would be a doe? Disagree? Well what's going to happen then, when numerous does are being taken through out the province? Don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure that out... and don't forget, this is all happening while we can't harvest carnivores either... so wolves, bears(even though again as I noted its not a carnivore), cougars, etc will have management at all....

Now, am I going to possibly an extreme here? Maybe. But at this point, I don't think any of that is outside of the realm of possibility when you talk about a social license, and to say we as hunters should just accept this paper and ideology of a social license, sorry but I'm not on board and I'll fight tooth and nail to protect a science based model and further, hunting. We as hunter's spend more time with these animals and I'd argue love these animals more than anyone else, and at the end of the day, we want what's best for them. So to wrap it up, tell the whole story, tell your' story, and do what you can to protect the very thing you love.

PS. Sorry if I took that down a rabbit hole, but I've never been at a point like I have these last 6 weeks when it comes to being confused and trying to understand all of this as well as do what I can to take in all sorts of perspectives on the matter.

[brian]

You all bring up good points. I’m not saying read the paper and bend over. I am saying read the paper critically, (critically is the important word) and observe the tactics they are using. It gives us a road map to organize and fight back. Anybody who doesn’t believe social license doesn’t matter, we just lost the grizzly hunt because of it regardless of the work of wild life biologists. We lost the open bear hunts on Haida Gwaii because of it. Almost all political issues are pushed by small special interest groups that hope to manipulate the larger public by generating emotional responses. That is in essence what we are dealing with. Stats and science won’t matter when emotionally charged issues dominate them. Hunt what you will, but always connect it with a deeper meaning than a trophy hunt. Take the ammo away from the detractors. We can start doing this individually and as a hunting culture. Talk about bear sausage with every bear hunt. Talk caribou habitat with every wolf hunt. The more we focus on trophy aspects, the more we play into the hands of those who will destroy us in the court of public opinion. Will this sustain hunting long term? I have no idea, but I can see how culture is urbanizing and shifting away from the conventions of our forefathers. I personally think it is the best option going forward. I say this because I know a lot of city based left wing “granola crunchers” who are interested in hunting for food based on it being a sustainable healthy organic non factory farmed meat source. It’s a wedge issue for the left.

[VLD43]

You all bring up good points. I’m not saying read the paper and bend over. I am saying read the paper critically, (critically is the important word) and observe the tactics they are using. It gives us a road map to organize and fight back. Anybody who doesn’t believe social license doesn’t matter, we just lost the grizzly hunt because of it regardless of the work of wild life biologists. We lost the open bear hunts on Haida Gwaii because of it. Almost all political issues are pushed by small special interest groups that hope to manipulate the larger public by generating emotional responses. That is in essence what we are dealing with. Stats and science won’t matter when emotionally charged issues dominate them. Hunt what you will, but always connect it with a deeper meaning than a trophy hunt. Take the ammo away from the detractors. We can start doing this individually and as a hunting culture. Talk about bear sausage with every bear hunt. Talk caribou habitat with every wolf hunt. The more we focus on trophy aspects, the more we play into the hands of those who will destroy us in the court of public opinion. Will this sustain hunting long term? I have no idea, but I can see how culture is urbanizing and shifting away from the conventions of our forefathers. I personally think it is the best option going forward. I say this because I know a lot of city based left wing “granola crunchers” who are interested in hunting for food based on it being a sustainable healthy organic non factory farmed meat source. It’s a wedge issue for the left.

Good post. I think your logic is well reasoned. And as you say, the way we have been discussing things to this point isn't working. Continuing down the same path in future will generate a result none of the hunting community wants. Our two biggest enemies at this point are our response (not articulating a well thought out response) and social media (Facebook).

[604Stalker]

Just entertaining a view I noticed that there is a mentioning of ciecle ... However no followup with the factual reprcucions ...ie "the ceicle effect" "social lisence my ass" the value of said wildlife is directly linked to people holding a substancial ammount of intrest .. Ever meet someone with goats ... Their not good for your orchard or yard but people like to keep them otherwise it would seem unlikely that we would allow them in our yards ... Now look at animals 110 x as large and tell me those ranchers who keep those game animals dont care for them the hard fact is trophy hunting does more financially for concervation than any "pro animal right" or "green" movment do I think your stuffing a sock in your pants by hunting a fenced in animal well I wont say but hundreds of acers is a big terrain and if you want to give 30+ thousand dollars almost directly to concervation ... Fill your boots .. As far as preds here in BC do what I do ... Take people. Out in the winter who dont often go find the doe and fawn tracks and show the dogs trailing them for kilometers .. Ask them what the story is based on what they see on the ground in the bush

[Imdone]

Regardless of what these tools succeed in changing, for me it will be SSS.

[KodiakHntr]

Thats the thing about hunting, there should be no such thing as "Trophy Hunting" as every hunt is for food, ( the trophy is in the eye of the beholder regardless if its a 30" buck or a doe you're still eating it )

and I say it again and again this is one of the main reasons we lost the Grizzly Bear Hunt as we never had a leg to stand on because the hunters and guide/outfitters insisted that Grizzly meat was unfit for consumption and never wanted to take the meat out.....so in turn its deemed a "Trophy Hunt" by the tree huggers....

man I got trashed on here many times for saying they need to change that designation for the Grizzly hunt where all edible portions must be taken out before we loose the hunt, I hate to say I told you so we all know how the GB hunt ended !!!

Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance, its my right to have organic meat to feed my family.

And I will say it again; you have to stop preaching this narrative. Hunting for food is NOT the only reason people hunt. It should not be the only acceptable reason to hunt. If you make the argument that "organic meat" is the only acceptable reason to hunt then that gets shot in the foot right quickly, because you CANNOT certify that an elk from the forest hasn't eaten something treated with a herbicide or pesticide. And if the only reason you hunt is for "organic meat" then the only way a person gets "organic meat" is from a farm where every single aspect an animals life is regulated and has a clearly documented chain of custody.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, everyone has reasons to hunt, not all of them are about meat. The reason the grizzly hunt got shut down is because people don't like the idea of someone killing charismatic mega fauna. It wasn't because people don't like the idea of it not being eaten, it's because they have the emotional belief that it is morally wrong to kill an animal.
The reason you and Jesse got trashed on here is because you (whether you understand this or not) directly contribute to the hunt being lost through tacit agreement.
People with that view and speaking point give validity to that belief by saying "you know what, you are right. The only reason us HUNTERS think something should be killed is to be eaten and we agree with you".
We all directly play into the demise of the hunt, by showing agreement with people who are reacting emotionally. You fuel that emotional thought and feed into the passion by saying that you AGREE with them, and you won't stand up against them. Any and all of the work that you have done, is negated the second you start agreeing with them and saying "yeah, you are right. That guys reasons to hunt aren't as good as MY reason to hunt, so I will agree with you and not stand against you. I will stand against people who share some of my beliefs instead, because I think you might win and I want you to like me and let me do MY stuff as long as I can". (And I type that full well knowing exactly how active you are in the WSSBC, and all fo the work and money you have contributed. I've even stood and talked with you in Kamloops about your donation rifles and work done)
By agreeing with someone that the motivation behind hunting a grizzly was wrong (which is exactly what you are doing when you say 'yup, not taking meat bad, only hunt bear for meat'), you indicated that you agree with their emotional viewpoint, and gave them information and passion to push for the entire hunt to be closed. When you did that you in effect said "hey, yeah, you are right, grizzly hunters are a pretty small portion of the hunting community and we won't complain if you shut down the entire hunt, because their motivations to hunt bears is wrong and we don't like that either."

Read that again ,and really think about what it is you are doing by stating that the only acceptable reason to hunt an animal is for meat. And no matter on how you INTEND that to be understood, someone who is emotionally invested in having NO ONE kill a cute fuzzy animal for any reason sees that as an opportunity and agreement with their viewpoint.
Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the motivations behind trying to partially agree and negotiate to retain some segment of something, but that is the wrong track to take. Give an inch, and they will take a mile. This is exactly why we will end up losing sheep hunting, elk hunting, cat hunting, wolf hunting. People agreeing with the emotionally charged and saying "yep, you are right. The only reason anyone should hunt is for meat". And THAT is a losing battle, and here is why:

-NOBODY hunts a sheep for meat. If a person wants meat a whitetail doe is exponentially easier to access, hunt, and process. That is the lowest cost most widely accessible fastest renewing meat resource we have available, with the possible exception of rabbits.
The meat off of a ram is secondary to the entire experience. Being out there, being in the mountains, the effort required to get into sheep country, being able to do and experience something that not everyone has the drive or capability of doing, that is what makes a sheep hunter. Sheep hunting feeds the soul, not the body. People hunt sheep (or cats, or grizzlies, or goats) for the experience. NO ONE looks in the freezer Friday evening and thinks to themselves "getting pretty bare in here... I better head out for a Stone in the morning to put some meat on the table".

I think what a lot of people forget, or refuse to critically think about, is that dealing with people who are anti hunting is that you aren't dealing with anyone who is focused on rational thought. The fact that you hunt, or I hunt, does not have any impact on that person's life in any way, shape, or form other than my activities offends them emotionally. Think about that for a second. Something that I do, offends someone to the point that they feel it should be illegal, even though it doesn't affect their life at all. My activities have no impact on them living their life, other than they don't like it.
Where else have we seen this played out? In recent history gay marriage has been illegal. Why? Because gays were actively trying to go around marrying straight folk against their will? Nope, because people didn't like the idea of other people doing something that they didn't want them to do.
What do we see now? A very vocal minority that has forced everyone to recognize their rights as individuals. It was easy for emotionally charged people to make it look like there were only a few deviants and to make gay marriage illegal, because they were quiet and kept to themselves. Now that segment of the population that was formerly viewed as a tiny minority is loud and proud and people are very cognizant of the fact that it could be anyone out there that they know and it isn't persecuted anymore. (Or at least not to the extent that it was anyway).

Porthunter isn't wrong in his stance or approach to social media. Everyone needs to come out of the closet about hunting. Make the general public realize that a LOT of people they know hunt. We see it here all the time "None of my neighbors know I hunt or own guns".
Where I live it is assumed that EVERYONE owns guns, and everyone hunts. No one bats an eye at seeing antlers or legs sticking out of a pickup. We, and by we I mean people living in more urban areas, need to be more visible. Show people that it is the neighbor that they chat to while cutting the lawn or walking into their apartment building isn't some crazy meth cooking hillbilly who is likely to start a gunfight on the street when they see a demon sneaking up or someone who will kill their poodle just to watch it die because they were overcome with bloodlust.
Hiding in the shadows isn't going to do anyone any favours any more.

And I sincerely hope you don't take this as an attack on you or anything you have worked/are working for, but I sincerely hope that you read this and look introspectively at what you might be giving tacit approval to when you say things like "Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance"

And I have no doubt whatsoever that some folks are going to be offended by this entire post (although I'm betting it is likely going to be the "meat hunting is the only acceptable reason to hunt" crowd) and some folks are going to be nodding their heads, and some folks will be vocal in agreement.

I'm going to end this post, with the statement that hunting to feed your body is not the only valid reason to hunt. It can be your reason, but it doesn't have to be MY reason. My reasons are varied, and personal. And all of my reasons are valid, to me. That doesn't make them less or more valid than your reasons, but I respect your reasons to hunt. Show me the same consideration please.

[whitlers]

I would have to agree with Kodiak. There were a few groups, podcasts and individuals who on their own right decided to play along with the social license bullshit last time around. Look where that got us..

People hunt for many different reasons.

[madcalfe]

And I will say it again; you have to stop preaching this narrative. Hunting for food is NOT the only reason people hunt. It should not be the only acceptable reason to hunt. If you make the argument that "organic meat" is the only acceptable reason to hunt then that gets shot in the foot right quickly, because you CANNOT certify that an elk from the forest hasn't eaten something treated with a herbicide or pesticide. And if the only reason you hunt is for "organic meat" then the only way a person gets "organic meat" is from a farm where every single aspect an animals life is regulated and has a clearly documented chain of custody.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, everyone has reasons to hunt, not all of them are about meat. The reason the grizzly hunt got shut down is because people don't like the idea of someone killing charismatic mega fauna. It wasn't because people don't like the idea of it not being eaten, it's because they have the emotional belief that it is morally wrong to kill an animal.
The reason you and Jesse got trashed on here is because you (whether you understand this or not) directly contribute to the hunt being lost through tacit agreement.
People with that view and speaking point give validity to that belief by saying "you know what, you are right. The only reason us HUNTERS think something should be killed is to be eaten and we agree with you".
We all directly play into the demise of the hunt, by showing agreement with people who are reacting emotionally. You fuel that emotional thought and feed into the passion by saying that you AGREE with them, and you won't stand up against them. Any and all of the work that you have done, is negated the second you start agreeing with them and saying "yeah, you are right. That guys reasons to hunt aren't as good as MY reason to hunt, so I will agree with you and not stand against you. I will stand against people who share some of my beliefs instead, because I think you might win and I want you to like me and let me do MY stuff as long as I can". (And I type that full well knowing exactly how active you are in the WSSBC, and all fo the work and money you have contributed. I've even stood and talked with you in Kamloops about your donation rifles and work done)
By agreeing with someone that the motivation behind hunting a grizzly was wrong (which is exactly what you are doing when you say 'yup, not taking meat bad, only hunt bear for meat'), you indicated that you agree with their emotional viewpoint, and gave them information and passion to push for the entire hunt to be closed. When you did that you in effect said "hey, yeah, you are right, grizzly hunters are a pretty small portion of the hunting community and we won't complain if you shut down the entire hunt, because their motivations to hunt bears is wrong and we don't like that either."

Read that again ,and really think about what it is you are doing by stating that the only acceptable reason to hunt an animal is for meat. And no matter on how you INTEND that to be understood, someone who is emotionally invested in having NO ONE kill a cute fuzzy animal for any reason sees that as an opportunity and agreement with their viewpoint.
Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the motivations behind trying to partially agree and negotiate to retain some segment of something, but that is the wrong track to take. Give an inch, and they will take a mile. This is exactly why we will end up losing sheep hunting, elk hunting, cat hunting, wolf hunting. People agreeing with the emotionally charged and saying "yep, you are right. The only reason anyone should hunt is for meat". And THAT is a losing battle, and here is why:

-NOBODY hunts a sheep for meat. If a person wants meat a whitetail doe is exponentially easier to access, hunt, and process. That is the lowest cost most widely accessible fastest renewing meat resource we have available, with the possible exception of rabbits.
The meat off of a ram is secondary to the entire experience. Being out there, being in the mountains, the effort required to get into sheep country, being able to do and experience something that not everyone has the drive or capability of doing, that is what makes a sheep hunter. Sheep hunting feeds the soul, not the body. People hunt sheep (or cats, or grizzlies, or goats) for the experience. NO ONE looks in the freezer Friday evening and thinks to themselves "getting pretty bare in here... I better head out for a Stone in the morning to put some meat on the table".

I think what a lot of people forget, or refuse to critically think about, is that dealing with people who are anti hunting is that you aren't dealing with anyone who is focused on rational thought. The fact that you hunt, or I hunt, does not have any impact on that person's life in any way, shape, or form other than my activities offends them emotionally. Think about that for a second. Something that I do, offends someone to the point that they feel it should be illegal, even though it doesn't affect their life at all. My activities have no impact on them living their life, other than they don't like it.
Where else have we seen this played out? In recent history gay marriage has been illegal. Why? Because gays were actively trying to go around marrying straight folk against their will? Nope, because people didn't like the idea of other people doing something that they didn't want them to do.
What do we see now? A very vocal minority that has forced everyone to recognize their rights as individuals. It was easy for emotionally charged people to make it look like there were only a few deviants and to make gay marriage illegal, because they were quiet and kept to themselves. Now that segment of the population that was formerly viewed as a tiny minority is loud and proud and people are very cognizant of the fact that it could be anyone out there that they know and it isn't persecuted anymore. (Or at least not to the extent that it was anyway).

Porthunter isn't wrong in his stance or approach to social media. Everyone needs to come out of the closet about hunting. Make the general public realize that a LOT of people they know hunt. We see it here all the time "None of my neighbors know I hunt or own guns".
Where I live it is assumed that EVERYONE owns guns, and everyone hunts. No one bats an eye at seeing antlers or legs sticking out of a pickup. We, and by we I mean people living in more urban areas, need to be more visible. Show people that it is the neighbor that they chat to while cutting the lawn or walking into their apartment building isn't some crazy meth cooking hillbilly who is likely to start a gunfight on the street when they see a demon sneaking up or someone who will kill their poodle just to watch it die because they were overcome with bloodlust.
Hiding in the shadows isn't going to do anyone any favours any more.

And I sincerely hope you don't take this as an attack on you or anything you have worked/are working for, but I sincerely hope that you read this and look introspectively at what you might be giving tacit approval to when you say things like "Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance"

And I have no doubt whatsoever that some folks are going to be offended by this entire post (although I'm betting it is likely going to be the "meat hunting is the only acceptable reason to hunt" crowd) and some folks are going to be nodding their heads, and some folks will be vocal in agreement.

I'm going to end this post, with the statement that hunting to feed your body is not the only valid reason to hunt. It can be your reason, but it doesn't have to be MY reason. My reasons are varied, and personal. And all of my reasons are valid, to me. That doesn't make them less or more valid than your reasons, but I respect your reasons to hunt. Show me the same consideration please.

couldn't agree more!

[LBM]

Thats the thing about hunting, there should be no such thing as "Trophy Hunting" as every hunt is for food, ( the trophy is in the eye of the beholder regardless if its a 30" buck or a doe you're still eating it )

and I say it again and again this is one of the main reasons we lost the Grizzly Bear Hunt as we never had a leg to stand on because the hunters and guide/outfitters insisted that Grizzly meat was unfit for consumption and never wanted to take the meat out.....so in turn its deemed a "Trophy Hunt" by the tree huggers....

man I got trashed on here many times for saying they need to change that designation for the Grizzly hunt where all edible portions must be taken out before we loose the hunt, I hate to say I told you so we all know how the GB hunt ended !!!

Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance, its my right to have organic meat to feed my family.

Nope sorry thats not why i hunt so wont be lying to anyone. Your really no different then the other groups saying what should and shouldnt be hunted.

[LBM]

And I will say it again; you have to stop preaching this narrative. Hunting for food is NOT the only reason people hunt. It should not be the only acceptable reason to hunt. If you make the argument that "organic meat" is the only acceptable reason to hunt then that gets shot in the foot right quickly, because you CANNOT certify that an elk from the forest hasn't eaten something treated with a herbicide or pesticide. And if the only reason you hunt is for "organic meat" then the only way a person gets "organic meat" is from a farm where every single aspect an animals life is regulated and has a clearly documented chain of custody.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, everyone has reasons to hunt, not all of them are about meat. The reason the grizzly hunt got shut down is because people don't like the idea of someone killing charismatic mega fauna. It wasn't because people don't like the idea of it not being eaten, it's because they have the emotional belief that it is morally wrong to kill an animal.
The reason you and Jesse got trashed on here is because you (whether you understand this or not) directly contribute to the hunt being lost through tacit agreement.
People with that view and speaking point give validity to that belief by saying "you know what, you are right. The only reason us HUNTERS think something should be killed is to be eaten and we agree with you".
We all directly play into the demise of the hunt, by showing agreement with people who are reacting emotionally. You fuel that emotional thought and feed into the passion by saying that you AGREE with them, and you won't stand up against them. Any and all of the work that you have done, is negated the second you start agreeing with them and saying "yeah, you are right. That guys reasons to hunt aren't as good as MY reason to hunt, so I will agree with you and not stand against you. I will stand against people who share some of my beliefs instead, because I think you might win and I want you to like me and let me do MY stuff as long as I can". (And I type that full well knowing exactly how active you are in the WSSBC, and all fo the work and money you have contributed. I've even stood and talked with you in Kamloops about your donation rifles and work done)
By agreeing with someone that the motivation behind hunting a grizzly was wrong (which is exactly what you are doing when you say 'yup, not taking meat bad, only hunt bear for meat'), you indicated that you agree with their emotional viewpoint, and gave them information and passion to push for the entire hunt to be closed. When you did that you in effect said "hey, yeah, you are right, grizzly hunters are a pretty small portion of the hunting community and we won't complain if you shut down the entire hunt, because their motivations to hunt bears is wrong and we don't like that either."

Read that again ,and really think about what it is you are doing by stating that the only acceptable reason to hunt an animal is for meat. And no matter on how you INTEND that to be understood, someone who is emotionally invested in having NO ONE kill a cute fuzzy animal for any reason sees that as an opportunity and agreement with their viewpoint.
Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the motivations behind trying to partially agree and negotiate to retain some segment of something, but that is the wrong track to take. Give an inch, and they will take a mile. This is exactly why we will end up losing sheep hunting, elk hunting, cat hunting, wolf hunting. People agreeing with the emotionally charged and saying "yep, you are right. The only reason anyone should hunt is for meat". And THAT is a losing battle, and here is why:

-NOBODY hunts a sheep for meat. If a person wants meat a whitetail doe is exponentially easier to access, hunt, and process. That is the lowest cost most widely accessible fastest renewing meat resource we have available, with the possible exception of rabbits.
The meat off of a ram is secondary to the entire experience. Being out there, being in the mountains, the effort required to get into sheep country, being able to do and experience something that not everyone has the drive or capability of doing, that is what makes a sheep hunter. Sheep hunting feeds the soul, not the body. People hunt sheep (or cats, or grizzlies, or goats) for the experience. NO ONE looks in the freezer Friday evening and thinks to themselves "getting pretty bare in here... I better head out for a Stone in the morning to put some meat on the table".

I think what a lot of people forget, or refuse to critically think about, is that dealing with people who are anti hunting is that you aren't dealing with anyone who is focused on rational thought. The fact that you hunt, or I hunt, does not have any impact on that person's life in any way, shape, or form other than my activities offends them emotionally. Think about that for a second. Something that I do, offends someone to the point that they feel it should be illegal, even though it doesn't affect their life at all. My activities have no impact on them living their life, other than they don't like it.
Where else have we seen this played out? In recent history gay marriage has been illegal. Why? Because gays were actively trying to go around marrying straight folk against their will? Nope, because people didn't like the idea of other people doing something that they didn't want them to do.
What do we see now? A very vocal minority that has forced everyone to recognize their rights as individuals. It was easy for emotionally charged people to make it look like there were only a few deviants and to make gay marriage illegal, because they were quiet and kept to themselves. Now that segment of the population that was formerly viewed as a tiny minority is loud and proud and people are very cognizant of the fact that it could be anyone out there that they know and it isn't persecuted anymore. (Or at least not to the extent that it was anyway).

Porthunter isn't wrong in his stance or approach to social media. Everyone needs to come out of the closet about hunting. Make the general public realize that a LOT of people they know hunt. We see it here all the time "None of my neighbors know I hunt or own guns".
Where I live it is assumed that EVERYONE owns guns, and everyone hunts. No one bats an eye at seeing antlers or legs sticking out of a pickup. We, and by we I mean people living in more urban areas, need to be more visible. Show people that it is the neighbor that they chat to while cutting the lawn or walking into their apartment building isn't some crazy meth cooking hillbilly who is likely to start a gunfight on the street when they see a demon sneaking up or someone who will kill their poodle just to watch it die because they were overcome with bloodlust.
Hiding in the shadows isn't going to do anyone any favours any more.

And I sincerely hope you don't take this as an attack on you or anything you have worked/are working for, but I sincerely hope that you read this and look introspectively at what you might be giving tacit approval to when you say things like "Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance"

And I have no doubt whatsoever that some folks are going to be offended by this entire post (although I'm betting it is likely going to be the "meat hunting is the only acceptable reason to hunt" crowd) and some folks are going to be nodding their heads, and some folks will be vocal in agreement.

I'm going to end this post, with the statement that hunting to feed your body is not the only valid reason to hunt. It can be your reason, but it doesn't have to be MY reason. My reasons are varied, and personal. And all of my reasons are valid, to me. That doesn't make them less or more valid than your reasons, but I respect your reasons to hunt. Show me the same consideration please.


Good post.

[Retiredguy]

KodiakHntr...good post!

[rageous]

Shit that’s a good post kodiakHntr,

[ian745]

Thanks just signed as well and joined

[Bear Chaser]

Great post Kodiakhntr.

I agree completely.
Unless there is a conservation concern my motivation to hunt is nobodies business but mine.

[KodiakHntr]

I appreciate the kind words guys. Glad to know I'm not the only one.

[mod7rem]

And I will say it again; you have to stop preaching this narrative. Hunting for food is NOT the only reason people hunt. It should not be the only acceptable reason to hunt. If you make the argument that "organic meat" is the only acceptable reason to hunt then that gets shot in the foot right quickly, because you CANNOT certify that an elk from the forest hasn't eaten something treated with a herbicide or pesticide. And if the only reason you hunt is for "organic meat" then the only way a person gets "organic meat" is from a farm where every single aspect an animals life is regulated and has a clearly documented chain of custody.

I have said it before, and I will say it again, everyone has reasons to hunt, not all of them are about meat. The reason the grizzly hunt got shut down is because people don't like the idea of someone killing charismatic mega fauna. It wasn't because people don't like the idea of it not being eaten, it's because they have the emotional belief that it is morally wrong to kill an animal.
The reason you and Jesse got trashed on here is because you (whether you understand this or not) directly contribute to the hunt being lost through tacit agreement.
People with that view and speaking point give validity to that belief by saying "you know what, you are right. The only reason us HUNTERS think something should be killed is to be eaten and we agree with you".
We all directly play into the demise of the hunt, by showing agreement with people who are reacting emotionally. You fuel that emotional thought and feed into the passion by saying that you AGREE with them, and you won't stand up against them. Any and all of the work that you have done, is negated the second you start agreeing with them and saying "yeah, you are right. That guys reasons to hunt aren't as good as MY reason to hunt, so I will agree with you and not stand against you. I will stand against people who share some of my beliefs instead, because I think you might win and I want you to like me and let me do MY stuff as long as I can". (And I type that full well knowing exactly how active you are in the WSSBC, and all fo the work and money you have contributed. I've even stood and talked with you in Kamloops about your donation rifles and work done)
By agreeing with someone that the motivation behind hunting a grizzly was wrong (which is exactly what you are doing when you say 'yup, not taking meat bad, only hunt bear for meat'), you indicated that you agree with their emotional viewpoint, and gave them information and passion to push for the entire hunt to be closed. When you did that you in effect said "hey, yeah, you are right, grizzly hunters are a pretty small portion of the hunting community and we won't complain if you shut down the entire hunt, because their motivations to hunt bears is wrong and we don't like that either."

Read that again ,and really think about what it is you are doing by stating that the only acceptable reason to hunt an animal is for meat. And no matter on how you INTEND that to be understood, someone who is emotionally invested in having NO ONE kill a cute fuzzy animal for any reason sees that as an opportunity and agreement with their viewpoint.
Don't get me wrong, I fully understand the motivations behind trying to partially agree and negotiate to retain some segment of something, but that is the wrong track to take. Give an inch, and they will take a mile. This is exactly why we will end up losing sheep hunting, elk hunting, cat hunting, wolf hunting. People agreeing with the emotionally charged and saying "yep, you are right. The only reason anyone should hunt is for meat". And THAT is a losing battle, and here is why:

-NOBODY hunts a sheep for meat. If a person wants meat a whitetail doe is exponentially easier to access, hunt, and process. That is the lowest cost most widely accessible fastest renewing meat resource we have available, with the possible exception of rabbits.
The meat off of a ram is secondary to the entire experience. Being out there, being in the mountains, the effort required to get into sheep country, being able to do and experience something that not everyone has the drive or capability of doing, that is what makes a sheep hunter. Sheep hunting feeds the soul, not the body. People hunt sheep (or cats, or grizzlies, or goats) for the experience. NO ONE looks in the freezer Friday evening and thinks to themselves "getting pretty bare in here... I better head out for a Stone in the morning to put some meat on the table".

I think what a lot of people forget, or refuse to critically think about, is that dealing with people who are anti hunting is that you aren't dealing with anyone who is focused on rational thought. The fact that you hunt, or I hunt, does not have any impact on that person's life in any way, shape, or form other than my activities offends them emotionally. Think about that for a second. Something that I do, offends someone to the point that they feel it should be illegal, even though it doesn't affect their life at all. My activities have no impact on them living their life, other than they don't like it.
Where else have we seen this played out? In recent history gay marriage has been illegal. Why? Because gays were actively trying to go around marrying straight folk against their will? Nope, because people didn't like the idea of other people doing something that they didn't want them to do.
What do we see now? A very vocal minority that has forced everyone to recognize their rights as individuals. It was easy for emotionally charged people to make it look like there were only a few deviants and to make gay marriage illegal, because they were quiet and kept to themselves. Now that segment of the population that was formerly viewed as a tiny minority is loud and proud and people are very cognizant of the fact that it could be anyone out there that they know and it isn't persecuted anymore. (Or at least not to the extent that it was anyway).

Porthunter isn't wrong in his stance or approach to social media. Everyone needs to come out of the closet about hunting. Make the general public realize that a LOT of people they know hunt. We see it here all the time "None of my neighbors know I hunt or own guns".
Where I live it is assumed that EVERYONE owns guns, and everyone hunts. No one bats an eye at seeing antlers or legs sticking out of a pickup. We, and by we I mean people living in more urban areas, need to be more visible. Show people that it is the neighbor that they chat to while cutting the lawn or walking into their apartment building isn't some crazy meth cooking hillbilly who is likely to start a gunfight on the street when they see a demon sneaking up or someone who will kill their poodle just to watch it die because they were overcome with bloodlust.
Hiding in the shadows isn't going to do anyone any favours any more.

And I sincerely hope you don't take this as an attack on you or anything you have worked/are working for, but I sincerely hope that you read this and look introspectively at what you might be giving tacit approval to when you say things like "Every Hunter should preach and say they only hunt for Sustenance"

And I have no doubt whatsoever that some folks are going to be offended by this entire post (although I'm betting it is likely going to be the "meat hunting is the only acceptable reason to hunt" crowd) and some folks are going to be nodding their heads, and some folks will be vocal in agreement.

I'm going to end this post, with the statement that hunting to feed your body is not the only valid reason to hunt. It can be your reason, but it doesn't have to be MY reason. My reasons are varied, and personal. And all of my reasons are valid, to me. That doesn't make them less or more valid than your reasons, but I respect your reasons to hunt. Show me the same consideration please.


Very well said. I’ve said this same thing many times on here, but not as well as you. Thanks.
I’m a long time sheep hunter and I saw where this type of thinking was going a long time ago. Hunters that don’t support other hunters is a big problem.

[KodiakHntr]

Very well said. I’ve said this same thing many times on here, but not as well as you. Thanks.
I’m a long time sheep hunter and I saw where this type of thinking was going a long time ago. Hunters that don’t support other hunters is a big problem.

Absolutely nailed it.

[Bugle M In]

Kodiak,

I agree, not everyone hunts just for meat.
Like you state, no one hunts sheep or goat, just to put meat and the freezer.
And yes, i openly speak to everyone that i hunt here in the city, especially while at the dog park.
And to be honest, i don't get any outward backlash, or at least not very often.
And yes, i am honest that when i hunt MD, late in November, it isnt for meat but rather for maturity.
Which quite often means tag soup, so it isnt about killing something, and they get that as well.
Elk, is a different story, and if its legal, its going down.

BUT, one mistake i think we have done as hunters, that no matter the reason for hunting, is what we have done or said "post kill".
I know hunters who make comments like, shoot the ram thru both shoulders, that way there is "less to pack out".
Or, leaving the whole bear behind except for hide.

Those have made an impact on "how we are viewed".
Many no hunting folks dont mind hunting, and accept it, if we "use the meat".
The issue is, if its left to rot, then there is a backlash by many, and then disapproval sets in.

Hunters dont have to cater to the public, i suppose that is true.
Go ahead, do as one has always done i suppose.
But, its seems approval of hunting by the public is "lessening"....like it or not.
It doesnt matter what a hunter thinks these days, if it isnt obvious by now.
But, understanding what the public "will accept, and under what conditions they will accept it", is important, imo.

If many are like the folks i encounter on a daily basis (city folks), that do accept hunting, it is on the basis that the
"meat comes out" (which basically is the new regs)
Those changes to the regs didnt come out because they wanted to make it harder for hunters.
They did it to give a better overall acceptance of hunting.

Hunting for hide or bone might be some hunters initiatives for sure and thats fine.
But respecting the meat is what will keep the fence sitters at bay.
Like it it or not.