Georgia Straight Article - BC grizzly bear hunt

[msawyer]

Hello all...

I've attached a link to a June 26 article in the Georgia Straight about the BC grizzly bear hunt... Have a read and then tell us your response...

Take care

Mike

:http://www.straight.com/article-151135/hunting-grizzly-bears
________
smoke kills (http://smokekills.net/)

[Steeleco]

What a bunch of un-knowledgeable city @#$%'s Polls, like stats can and have been twisted to achieve the desired outcome. Emotions and Science have never seen things the same way.

[Wolfman]

Ya know, I just forced myself to read that while sitting in...Starbucks yesterday ;-)

This woman next to me said: "Isn't it cruel - that some people are just allowed to go in and kill like that?"

I replied: "Ever lived up north?"

Naturally she had never been up north. I took a moment to briefly educate her about what I knew concerning the Griz population and the modern-day need for wildlife management.

She seemed to think about that.

However, down here in cappuccino land there are throngs of the uneducated who just won't listen or learn.

Wolfman

[mainland hunter]

a poll comissioned by people opposed to hunting and the outcome favors the anti's. go figure. I wish someone would let those grizzlies on grouse mt loose and transplant others into all the park areas of greater vancouver so these morons can appreciate the wilderness better. They make it seem like hunting and bear viewing can't coexist. What really surprised me was that a couple of reader comments seemed to favor the grizzly hunt.

[mainland hunter]

However, down here in cappuccino land there are throngs of the uneducated who just won't listen or learn.

Wolfman
exactly, and the sad thing is their the ones whose voting voice is the loudest

[pikey]

a poll comissioned by people opposed to hunting and the outcome favors the anti's. go figure. I wish someone would let those grizzlies on grouse mt loose and transplant others into all the park areas of greater vancouver so these morons can appreciate the wilderness better. They make it seem like hunting and bear viewing can't coexist. What really surprised me was that a couple of reader comments seemed to favor the grizzly hunt.


Hmmmmm. that's not a bad idea, move grizzlies into the parks, grizzlies eat crack-heads, pinko liberals fight each other, picking sides for the bears or the crack-heads....

A stroke of Genius!!!

[Stresd]

Been hunting the Area south of Hanceville for over 30 years. Up until just recently, according to the Local Ranchers we know and our own observations, there would be a Grizz, wander into the area about every 5 years or so. Lots of years with none sighted by the locals. Last year alone the CO's took out (Not Trapped)six Grizz that were considered to be hazardous to the locals, loggers and Guest Ranches in the area. Sure as hell no shortage in that area now.

[Avalanche123]

Well whether we agree with the article or not, it had some interesting points and likely guaranteed to attract attention, both positive and negative.

What I did find interesting was the discrepancy with the way populations are determined. Hate to see Grizzlies go the way of the Newfoundland cod cause of crappy estimates. I guess if there is enough legitimate concern then if the GOv't closes it to hunting, then they should likely close it to viewing opportunites too.

[mud-dog27]

i couldnt bring myself to read past the first page its the same as every other anti-hunt story ive read that what a surprise uses polls supplied and filled out by antis to get the results they want

[msawyer]

Hello all...

Avalanche's reference to the east coast cod crisis is right on the money... Putting the emotional rhetoric aside for a moment, on both sides of the debate, there seems to be well founded and legitimate concerns about the scientific rigor (or lack thereof) associated with the Government's Gbear population estimates and therefore levels of acceptable mortality from all causes, including hunting...

Personally, I have adopted the precautionary principle and have therefore decided to not intentionally hunt grizzly bears... That others might make other choices is still their lawful prerogative... But let's make sure the science is rigorous and acceptable - there should be no doubt that hunting is not threatening individual Gbear populations and if there is doubt, the hunt should be stopped or at least very conservatively managed.

As for the Government's efforts to manage grizzly bears or grizzly bear habitat, Hamilton's comments are very telling... And $600,000 a year over the past 10 years spent on Gbear population related studies is a paltry amount - no wonder we don't have the science to back the population estimates...

In the end, IMHO we must ensure that Gbears can survive well into the future - if we can't guarantee that, we have no business hunting them for sport...

Now legitimate self defense, well that an entirely separate matter...

Best regards

Mike
________
trichomes (http://trichomes.org)

[hunter1947]

Everyone is entitled to there opinion.

And this is what my opinion is ,we hunters keep the Griz under control and that whats we the hunters and the Griz management do.

If the Griz population was on the decline there would be no hunting of any sort for this species of bear.

I myself think that we are in good hands when it comes to managing the bear populations for both species.

[mainland hunter]

I see more grizz and sign of grizzly every year hunting, If there is a crisis in bear numbers i'm all for shutting it down. It just isnt the case. ask anyone who works or hunts in grizzly country. there is no shortage of them at all. go hunt the east kootenays once. There is a shortage in Vancouver though and they should be reintroduced there.

[msawyer]

Hello all...

I have no reason to doubt the observations and perceptions of those that spend time in the wilds of BC that grizzly bears are doing well... At the same time, this raises the obvious question about the apparent disconnect between the actual reality of the grizzly bear population status and the science (or lack thereof) and the Government management actions...

Let's remember that the same problems existed in spades with the east coast cod until the very day the fishery was closed...

In the end, we need good robust science, an open and transparent public process and a government that is committed to ensuring grizzly bears and grizzly bear habitat are secure well into the future... At this point in time we have none of the above...

Take care

Mike
________
vaporgenie vaporizer (http://www.vaporshop.com/vaporgenie-vaporizer.html)

[Mr. Dean]

The EC Cod and our WC Salmon are and were controlled by commercial interests. IF they were conserved via recreational groups, we wouldn't have 'fish' problems.

Using the fisheries conservation platforms isn't a very good comparison imo. Here we have LOCAL people that ARE interested in sustaining GBear pop's. Not an 'appointed' person doing what he/she thinks to be 'right'.

Our biggest problem is that the appointed boss's don't like hearing what the facts are from the persons who live it (bio's, user groups...) because of political interests.... IMO.

AND, it seems to work; We now have hunters calling for an end of something that they admittedly now little of:
...we have no business hunting them for sport...


Excellent job on spreading the fire of fear. A+ job, Dude.

[Gunner]

THe counting methods used by the BC Government grizzly reasearchers are now used by grizzly researchers in all jurisdictions that grizzly bears populate,and are deemed to be the most accurate available.I've had 2 in my yard in the last 3 years and have seen over 20 others in that time.This is in the North Okanagan,not a noted grizzly area.I think the apparent disconnect with population status is connected with your refusal to accept the numbers stated by the Provincial Biologists.Me,I prefer to believe my own eyes.The Georgia Straight and the rest of the naysayers(living in a grizzly free environment) are not worth listening to. Gunner

[Gunner]

The EC Cod and our WC Salmon are and were controlled by commercial interests. IF they were conserved via recreational groups, we wouldn't have 'fish' problems.

Using the fisheries conservation platforms isn't a very good comparison imo. Here we have LOCAL people that ARE interested in sustaining GBear pop's. Not an 'appointed' person doing what he/she thinks to be 'right'.

Our biggest problem is that the appointed boss's don't like hearing what the facts are from the persons who live it (bio's, user groups...) because of political interests.... IMO.

AND, it seems to work; We now have hunters calling for an end of something that they admittedly now little of:


Excellent job on spreading the fire of fear. A+ job, Dude.Exactly!Hunters dictating to other hunters.This smells of trolling to me.Do the people posting this stuff actually hunt,and if they do could they kindly keep from passing judgement on the rest of us?They are welcome to their opinions but forgive me if I take little notice. Gunner

[Elkhound]

If it's legal and the authorities involved say the population can handle it then get a tag and hunt away. For whatever reason you hunt thats entirely up to you. Don't like it.....don't buy a tag......but don't tell me and others not to hunt an animal cause you don't want to.

[Grumpa Joe]

What kind of opinion would you expect from a publication like the Georgia Straight? I have not and do not expect to go grizzly hunting, not my cup of tea (who knows down the road). However, if the government biologists deem it sustainable and wise to thin the population then those who are willing to hunt them should be given the opportunity. I haven't got specific data to quote from but to the best of my recollection, I recently read some publication that claimed current numbers indicate that the Grizzly population in BC is around 17,000 and the Black bear population is around 95,000. Without any predators besides humans, what will control the expansion of the grizzlies to the more populated areas of the province?

Frontier

[Gateholio]

Hello all...

Avalanche's reference to the east coast cod crisis is right on the money... Putting the emotional rhetoric aside for a moment, on both sides of the debate, there seems to be well founded and legitimate concerns about the scientific rigor (or lack thereof) associated with the Government's Gbear population estimates and therefore levels of acceptable mortality from all causes, including hunting...

Personally, I have adopted the precautionary principle and have therefore decided to not intentionally hunt grizzly bears... That others might make other choices is still their lawful prerogative... But let's make sure the science is rigorous and acceptable - there should be no doubt that hunting is not threatening individual Gbear populations and if there is doubt, the hunt should be stopped or at least very conservatively managed.

As for the Government's efforts to manage grizzly bears or grizzly bear habitat, Hamilton's comments are very telling... And $600,000 a year over the past 10 years spent on Gbear population related studies is a paltry amount - no wonder we don't have the science to back the population estimates...

In the end, IMHO we must ensure that Gbears can survive well into the future - if we can't guarantee that, we have no business hunting them for sport...

Now legitimate self defense, well that an entirely separate matter...

Best regards

Mike

Any idea of how many grizzlies are hunted and killed by hunters per year?

[Avalanche123]

To quote MSawyer fully, he said "In the end, IMHO we must ensure that Gbears can survive well into the future - if we can't guarantee that, we have no business hunting them for sport..."

As a person who hunts grizzly I don't view that as spreading fear. I see that as MSaywer offering his opinion (he did clarify that) on the matter. I also find it tough to argue against it as I know we all want to see Grizzly populations remain healthy. His opinion just hits very close to home as it is a subject we are obviously all passionate about.

I agree the Georgia Straight is certainly the venue to get anybody "anti" about anything up in arms to take on the latest cause. And as I stated, if they restrict hunting, they should restrict the bear viewing too...

Anyway, here is hoping I get my Grizzly LEH for 6-21. (I'll likely get my draw, getting the bear is a different matter!)

[msawyer]

Mr Dean, Gunner and others...


Let me make it very clear that I am not passing judgment on those who hunt grizzlies - after all, as it has been pointed out, it is currently legal to do so... My choice has been to forgo that opportunity because, as I've clearly stated, the jury is out for me on the science behind the BC government's grizzly bear management approach... All I did is bring to your collective attention the publication of a timely and relevant article on the issue and asked for your feedback... Please don't shoot the messenger... particularly if you want an open and honest discussion on the issue...

Also, there are many credible and well qualified scientists who have been publicly critical of the BC Government's approach... Are all of them really out to lunch? I don't know about you, but it raises a big red flag for me!!

There are also many government biologists who have raised concerns, both publicly and privately, about the science underpinning grizzly bear management in BC, Was Dionys de Leeuw, cited in the Georgia Straight article, out to lunch? How about Dr, Bruce McClellan, a grizzly bear biologist with the BC forest service, who in 1999 published a generally ignored peer reviewed paper that estimated that unrecorded bear mortality in BC was approximately 65 percent higher than the known mortality - in 2007 that would mean that the actual mortality would be closer to 710 grizzly bears rather than the 430 reported mortalities... Hell, even Tony Hamilton, architect and defender of the current BC government approach to setting mortality limits for grizzly bears stated in the Gerorgia Straight article that he would like to see total annual grizzly bear mortalities reduced from the reported 430 to 330 - almost a 24 percent reduction!!! And this is the guy who defends the current approach...

The question about what portion of the grizzly bear mortality is attributable to resident sport hunters is a good one but one that I do not have an immediate and accurate response to.... I will follow up tomorrow with those numbers... But it does bring up an important question about the role of outfitters and non-resident sport hunters with respect to this issue... The fact is (to be demonstrated tomorrow?) that the majority of grizzly bears killed by sport hunters are killed by non-resident hunters... Most residents simply cannot afford to get into the remote locations where most of these bears are killed... If it turns out in the end that the science being used by the Government is wrong and grizzly bear harvest levels needs to be curtailed, resident hunters may want to seriously reconsider being joined-at-the-hips with the outfitters when it comes to arguing for the continuation of the Grizzly bear hunt... Time will tell...

And the funny thing is that the current relationship between the resident grizzly bear hunters and outfitters really does mean that the issue is politically controlled by a commercial interest and that means the east coast cod stock collapse analogy is entirely appropriate to this issue...

What say you?

Mike
________
Chrysler LeBaron (http://www.dodge-wiki.com/wiki/Chrysler_LeBaron)

[Gateholio]

What say I?

I say that this isn't 100% honest:


My choice has been to forgo that opportunity because, as I've clearly stated, the jury is out for me on the science behind the BC government's grizzly bear management approach

I'd say that even if there was absolutely no question that the grizzly population was not in danger, and there was no danger of hunting making a negative impact, you still wouldn't hunt grizzly,just as you don't hunt black bears.

What a person chooses to hunt is up to them, but lets be honest about it.



Non residents kill only slightly more grizzlies than residents. Last time I check edit was about 20 -30 more per year. That was when the NDP canceled the grizzly hunt.

There doesn't seem to be any shortage of grizzlies in undeveloped parts of BC.

More and more grizzlies are being reported seen.

400-500 bears taken from BC a year seems like a small number.

How does anyone know what the "unreported" grizzly kill is? It seems more of a wild ass guess than anything else.

When Ontario stopped the spring bear hunt, "problem" bear issues did a huge jump. Presently many grizzlies are killed as problem bears. No hunting of grizzlies would increase the bears killed by CO's. ITo me,that's much more tragic than a hunter spending some money and haivng a good time in the woods hunting grizzly.

FInally, the Georgia Straight is an urban, very liberal paper. Thier readers are, for the most part, people that don't leave the pavement, think all wildlife is "endangered", that BC has no trees left, seal hunting on the east coast is decimating seal populations and when they drive to Whistler for the weekend, cause mini traffic jams because they pull over on the highway to take pictures of one of the "last remaining black bears in BC"

I think the Georgia Straight knows it's readers well, and I can guarantee you if they researched a story about grizzlies, and it turned out that grizzly populations were very high and hunting was needed to manage populations- They wouldn't print it.

[msawyer]

Hey Gatehouse...

On this count you are wrong... I have killed bears in the past, but it was my choice to decide to not hunt them... I made that choice because, after reading much of the scientific literature on the topic, I am not personally convinced that the current grizzly bear hunt is sustainable... Having said that I find the anecdotal reports of abundant bears troubling. There are two camps on the science of grizzly bear management in BC... One says that everything is fine and that grizzly bears are doing very well... The other says that the scientific foundations of the Governments grizzly bear management approach is fundamentally flawed and that unless changes are made, grizzly bear populations are at risk. One of these two positions must be right and the other must be wrong... Do you really know which one is correct or are you just offering up emotionally based responses that seem to serve what you believe to be in your self-interest? I'm not saying you are but a little self refection is good for the soul... Particularly when you claim to know when a person you have never met and do not know is lying (ie not 100% honest)

Having said that, can we drop back from the attack mode and have an intelligent and respectful discussion about grizzly bear conservation/hunting issues?

Take care

Mike
________
iolite vaporizer review (http://iolitevaporizer.net/)

[Gateholio]

]
Hey Gatehouse...

On this count you are wrong... I have killed bears in the past, but it was my choice to decide to not hunt them... I made that choice because, after reading much of the scientific literature on the topic, I am not personally convinced that the current grizzly bear hunt is sustainable...

My mistake. When you posted this:


I'm not a black bear hunter myself but take no issue with others who do hunt black bears

You must have meant that you don't hunt black bear, just grizzlies?




Having said that I find the anecdotal reports of abundant bears troubling. There are two camps on the science of grizzly bear management in BC... One says that everything is fine and that grizzly bears are doing very well... The other says that the scientific foundations of the Governments grizzly bear management approach is fundamentally flawed and that unless changes are made, grizzly bear populations are at risk. One of these two positions must be right and the other must be wrong... Do you really know which one is correct or are you just offering up emotionally based responses that seem to serve what you believe to be in your self-interest? I'm not saying you are but a little self refection is good for the soul...

When the science, personal observations and observations of others that I can trust line up, I'll go with that option. Most of the hunters active in clubs (and here on HBC) are big on conservation. If there was actual great concern with grizzly populations, we would be hearing it from the hunting community, too.

You have clearly made your mind up, choosing the "not sustainable" option. Do you know it is correct, or are you basing your choice on emotion?



Particularly when you claim to know when a person you have never met and do not know is lying (ie not 100% honest)

When a person says "I don't hunt black bears" in one thread, and "I don't hunt grizzlies due to population concerns" in another, it's fair to question what the motive for not hunting them truly is.

Are you saying that if grizzly populations and the hunt were proven beyond any doubt to be sustainable, that you would hunt grizzlies?


Having said that, can we drop back from the attack mode and have an intelligent and respectful discussion about grizzly bear conservation/hunting issues?

This isn't an attack. You took a position and it's fair to establish how you personally feel about bear hunting, to determine if your position is based on a concern for populations, or influenced by other factors, too.

[Laurence_Erickson]

wellit sure would have been nice to be invited into the public poll ,to register my vote.I am guessing the public poll took place in the big city and they forgot about the rest of the province.Just my 2 cents.

[Wolfman]

I never got polled on it either.

I think the PC powers that be must have a specially trained group of 'greenies' who masquerade as 'normal' citizens and it is they who get polled/asked to vote/give their opinions on such things.

Wolfman

[msawyer]

Gatehouse...

You quote me from another post, implying that I am inconsistent in stating my views and/or facts... First of all, your quoting a comment I made in a thread that dealt specially with black bear hunting is to intentionally take my comments made specifically about that issue completely out of context. Not sure why you would do that but if you are confused, let me re-state and clarify my my position on black bear hunting. I have shot several black bears in the 1970s but have not hunted black bears since. My reasons for not hunting black bears is (a) I'm not particularly fond of the meat, and (b) I already have a very nice black bear rug. Just don't see the need when there are so many other options to occupy my time. Having said that I take no issue with other hunters who obey the law and behave in ways that does not bring all hunters into disrepute... OK... I'm not being 100% honest here - I do take issue with hunting bears over bait, like is done in other jurisdictions. I just don't think its particularly sporting...
"You must have meant that you don't hunt black bear, just grizzlies?"
I have no interest in killing a grizzly bear, primarily because I have no intention of eating one... As for killing a grizzly bear for a trophy, my previous statement still stands - I just not convinced that the science supports the killing of grizzly bears for fun...I have had a few face to face confrontations with grizzly bears while armed, but so far have not had to kill one
"When the science, personal observations and observations of others that I can trust line up, I'll go with that option. Most of the hunters active in clubs (and here on HBC) are big on conservation. If there was actual great concern with grizzly populations, we would be hearing it from the hunting community, too."
Are you a scientist? Do you fully understand grizzly bear conservation biology and the complexities of ensuring the sustainability of grizzly bear populations and habitat in a society that places economic growth as its first priority? I didn't think so!!
"You have clearly made your mind up, choosing the "not sustainable" option. Do you know it is correct, or are you basing your choice on emotion?"
Contrary to your point, I have not made up my mind on the issue and in response have taken significant time and effort to educate myself on the issue, including reading much of the primary scientific literature and speaking with numerous private and public sector grizzly bear biologists, both in Canada and in the US. The result of that review, and the apparent increase in the frequency of anecdotal grizzly bear sightings, make me question which version of scientific reality is correct... In my mind, that indecision is enough for me to withhold making a decision about the merits of hunting grizzly bears for sport. Full stop.
"Are you saying that if grizzly populations and the hunt were proven beyond any doubt to be sustainable, that you would hunt grizzlies?"
As it stand now I would not intentionally hunt grizzly bear for sport. If I was convinced of the longterm sustainability of grizzly bear populations and habitat, I might reassess that position... As previously mentioned, I take no issue with those that do want to hunt for grizzly bear, as long as it is done legally and ethically.
"This isn't an attack. You took a position and it's fair to establish how you personally feel about bear hunting, to determine if your position is based on a concern for populations, or influenced by other factors, too."
Gatehouse, you explicitly state that I'm being dishonest, misquote me from an unrelated thread and impugn my motives... In my book those constitute an attack upon my person... Had you stuck to the substantive issues the Georgia Straight article raised, now that would be an entirely different matter...

Now can we stop throwing stones and have a meaningful discussion about grizzly bear conservation/hunting issues?

Take care

Mike
________
weed vaporizers (http://weedvaporizers.org/)

[Gateholio]

[/INDENT]Are you a scientist? Do you fully understand grizzly bear conservation biology and the complexities of ensuring the sustainability of grizzly bear populations and habitat in a society that places economic growth as its first priority? I didn't think so!!

No, I am not a scientist, but I can read studies and gather information just as you can also do the same....




[/INDENT]Contrary to your point, I have not made up my mind on the issue and in response have taken significant time and effort to educate myself on the issue, including reading much of the primary scientific literature and speaking with numerous private and public sector grizzly bear biologists, both in Canada and in the US. The result of that review, and the apparent increase in the frequency of anecdotal grizzly bear sightings, make me question which version of scientific reality is correct... In my mind, that indecision is enough for me to withhold making a decision about the merits of hunting grizzly bears for sport. Full stop.

You've chosen a position based on what you think is correct, just as others have done. If I thought there was an issue with grizzly populations, I'd agree with you.



[/INDENT]As it stand now I would not intentionally hunt grizzly bear for sport. If I was convinced of the longterm sustainability of grizzly bear populations and habitat, I might reassess that position... As previously mentioned, I take no issue with those that do want to hunt for grizzly bear, as long as it is done legally and ethically. [INDENT


Fair enough.


"

Gatehouse, you explicitly state that I'm being dishonest, misquote me from an unrelated thread and impugn my motives... In my book those constitute an attack upon my person...

There was no misquote. I copied your quote exactly. You stated you didn't hunt black bears. Clearly there is no population concerns with black bears, so the reason you gave for not hunting grizzlies couldn't have been the same. Establishing motive for a position isn't an attack, regardless of what your book says.

[Mr. Dean]

Mike, when you say that you don't mind if "others" hunt Gbears and yet then state that we have NO BUSINESS hunting them, it's kinda hard to tell where your apple is falling off the tree.



In the end, IMHO we must ensure that Gbears can survive well into the future - if we can't guarantee that, we have no business hunting them for sport...




A blatant statement such as the one above, is (IMHO) an attack on hunting and yes, as a hunter, I do take it a little personal. I do not, however, take it all that seriously...

Question: Based on your logic of not hunting Grizz, how do you justify hunting for ANY species? :?

After all, none of us really "know" animal #'s for any given species and the science, at best, can only point to estimations - Be it Mule Deer, G-Bears or Eastern Cottontails. According to your logic, we should all hang up our guns because there are studies out there that don't condone near any form of it (hunting).


Hence why I can't take your "personal opinion" seriously and believe it to be skewed.

I'm not sure how much you hunt or how much you get out or where you go if you do, or if you know how to read sign... I'll let my decisions be based on the ones I trust also. Especially when my observations support it. :wink:



.

[Little Hawk]

Howdy,

During the time I researched 'The Bear Hunting Question' for a paper I wrote in school back in 99', I read (Herrero, Shelton, McClellan, Russel, Clayton Mack etc.) volumes on bear-human conflict, bear attacks, bear populations, poaching, and causes of bear mortality here in BC and abroad.

I also know there have been at least two MAJOR bear population census's done in our province in the last 10 years or so that put conservative estimates out there of black-bear populations of 160,000 (nearly equal to rabbits) and grizzlies at 10,000 or more.

Regardless that I am not a bear hunter - though wouldn't hesitate to whack-one if necessary - one thing stood out in the research I did:
Over time, non-hunted bear populations become increasingly aggressive and bold towards humans.

This fact alone, in my humble opinion, justifies hunting as a useful wildlife management tool.

Additionally, I think we need to ask ourselves just how many bears do we want in BC, and where, and to what extent do we tolerate their presence?
Schoolyards? Granville St.?

Cheers,
Terry

[Avalanche123]

So back to the article.....I actually met the author of that article in another capacity and I'll offer up my personal take on it. He is a professional writer and sells articles to different magazines. I suspect the Georgia Strait article may have been free (I have no idea) however it certainly would gain the author access to publications to much larger distributions like Canadian Geographic etc...Mr. Findlay is a very good writer and I feel wrote that piece on grizzly bears to gather attention to himself. It certainly would stand out above all the other articles in the Straight.
I have found with the internet age these sort of discussions have very easy potential to go into defense.offense mode really fast whereas if the same conversation were to be had with everyone present, it would likely be a great discussion.
Little Hawk (Terry), your findings "Over time, non-hunted bear populations become increasingly aggressive and bold towards humans."....
Were these findings for bear populations that existed close to human populations or for bear the population in general? My personal experince is bears (both griz and black) that I have encountered in remote areas are the least aggressive of all and this is one of the reasons I am hunting in a very remote area is based on that observation. I would feel that I would not take the same approach if I were to hunt in say Bella Coola where bears are more habitualized to humans.

[gone hunting]

I was a little surprised to see such an unbiased article in the Georgia Straight. That said, the only study I'm going to believe on the subject of grizzly populations in BC, is based on the fact that I keep seeing more and more of them when I'm in the bush.
Last years moose hunt only lasted about 15 minutes, but the year before we spent about 10 days in the woods (north of McKenzie) and saw 6 grizzlies. We had a stand off with mama bear, who thought we were too close to her cubs. (57 yards) We had a grizzly tag with us, but that's no good for a bear in a family group, and we didn't have to shoot her.
I'll likely have a tag with me again this year but as much as I'd like to have a grizzly hide on the wall, I can't see putting that much time and effort into dealing with a hide from a critter I'm not going to eat.
I do see some merit to the idea of relocating a good grizzly population to Stanley Park.

[Bigbear]

All I Can Say Is , Some of those people should Come up to Williams Lake , and I will take them out Likley way to the Cariboo Mountains or Bella Coola way And Let them out for a while, for a hike in the Bush , to see the wonders of Nature and spend a day and See if they can survive with their Little Bells and get out with out getting Attact or Eaten By A Grizz Bear.

The Difference Between Black Bear Shit and Grizzly Bear Shit??

Black Bear shit, is Black and Brown with little seeds in it.
Grizzly Bear shit , Is Black and Mixed Brown and Red, It Had Little Bells In it and Smells Like Pepper.:lol::mrgreen:


Then

[Gunner]

THe people behind the attempt to close grizzly hunting will trot out any statics they can dream up to further their cause.The people that they are appealing to(the urban population),have no experience with the outdoors and grizzlies in particular.They WANT to believe the skewed facts that the antis put out.Do you for a minute believe that the antis will stop pushing if they should succeed in scaring the government into closing the grizzly hunt for nonscientific (political) reasons?Next it will be "the majestic and threatened moose,or the beatiful but threatened whitetail deer". Anyone who believes David Suzuki's grizzly population numbers must believe that the oil companies are going broke because of the cost of oil!:lol: Gunner

[Little Hawk]

Howdy,

Avalanche: According to the research I (and others) have done you are right on the money in your assessment of bear behavior in remote areas.

Sorry I took a bit to respond; I tend to go online only first thing in the mornings.

As far as the statements I made go, I would highly recommend all my fellow hunters read the following (I'm doing this from memory so hopefully I get it right):

Dr. Stephen Herrerro: Bear Attacks - Their Causes and Avoidance

James (Gary) Shelton: The Bear Encounter Survival Guide/ Bear Attacks: The Deadly Truth (I know of at least one other book by Shelton, but the title escapes me)

Bruce McClellan: The Rates and Causes of Grizzly Bear Mortality - Journal of Wildlife Management.

All of this work is extremely important to those of us who actually spend time in the back country. McClellan's work for example is the publication of a 30-plus year study of some 300 or more radio-collared grizzly bear's in the South Flathead region of our Province as well as over the border. Some highlights from the paper I recall are: Grizzly bear populations fared better and were less problematic in areas of heavy resource extraction (mining/logging) than they were in Park area's where hunting activity was discouraged or prohibited. Grizzly bear poaching was virtually - nonexistant.
Human's were responsible for about 80 or more percent of grizzly bear mortality - hunter's about half of that.

During the time I was researching this topic for a paper I wrote I had the pleasure of corresponding personally with all three of these great Author's/Scientist's.

Most memorably, I recall Herrero's answer to my question,
"After all these years and so many Up-close & Personal encounters with grizzly bears, do they still scare the hell out of you?"

Herrerro (to the effect): Absolutely. I still load my pants on occasion.

Both Hererro and Shelton (and an important Russian or Scandinavian scientist whose name escapes me) agree that bears will, over time, loose their fear of humans if not hunted. I maintain that this is an important point.

Cheers,
Terry

[msawyer]

Hello all...

For those who might be interested the in the Dr. McLellan paper that indicated that unknown grizzly bear mortality in BC is estimated at ~ 65 percent of the known mortality, the reference is as follows:


McLellan, B.N., Hovey, F.W., Mace, R.D., Woods, J.G., Carney, D.W., Gibeau, M.L., Wakkinen,W.L., and W.F. Kasworm. 1999. Rates and causes of grizzly bear mortality in the interiormountains of British Columbia, Alberta, Montana, Washington, and Idaho. Journal of Wildl. Manage. 63(3): 911-920.

If you look at the look at the list of co-authors these guys are some of the best grizzly bear scientists and managers in the world, not just BC.. I ask myself if we have any basis to question their results or motives?

Take care

Mike



________
pot news (http://potwire.com)

[gitnadoix]

Would that be the Russian/Scandanavian bear scientist killed a while back by a grizzly ???
Saw a show on the fatality investigation on the Discovery Channel

And I have to partialy agree with where some of the guys are comming from, every time you have two camps saying the exact opposite you know one of them has to be wrong. And naturaly you will side with the camp you have most faith in. When the outcome of picking the wrong camp is something as disconected to your own actuall survivial as this is, it makes it a lot easier to grab the ring and pull hard.

If on the other hand the two suposed intelligent camps could not agree on if or not smoking causes cancer how many would quit smoking till the two camps came to the same conclusion ......yada yada yada etc you get the point.

The point is some people take a more cautious wait and see approach to possible uncertainty others maintain the current course and over history both of those camps have been able to claim their own victories. So I guess we can all agree that some will wait for scientific concensus others will maintian the course. And we all agree on who we want to win this little standoff.

[msawyer]

Who are you talking about?


Would that be the Russian/Scandanavian bear scientist killed a while back by a grizzly ???

Saw a show on the fatality investigation on the Discovery Channel
________
vaporizer affiliates (http://vaporizeraffiliateprogram.com)

[Gunner]

Some of you may have seen the Video on TV last night.The US Forest Service grizzly biologists have been studying the grizzly population in the Inter-Mountain area surrounding Glacier National Park(Montana,Idaho and area).Their conclusion,after tallying more than 500 different bears,is that the population is fully recovered and no longer threatened.Interestingly they used the SAME method that BC grizzly biolgists pioneered,Bait and Barbwire,then reading the hair samples left behind for DNA.This would be the BC Government grizzly researchers,not the minions of Dr Suzuki and the WCWC.I tend to put my trust in the guys that work with the bears,not the people who pronounce judgement in newspaper articles.It was cool watching the griz backscratching on the video trailcam! Gunner

[Wolfman]

All I Can Say Is , Some of those people should Come up to Williams Lake , and I will take them out Likley way to the Cariboo Mountains or Bella Coola way And Let them out for a while, for a hike in the Bush , to see the wonders of Nature and spend a day and See if they can survive with their Little Bells and get out with out getting Attact or Eaten By A Grizz Bear.

The Difference Between Black Bear Shit and Grizzly Bear Shit??

Black Bear shit, is Black and Brown with little seeds in it.
Grizzly Bear shit , Is Black and Mixed Brown and Red, It Had Little Bells In it and Smells Like Pepper.:lol::mrgreen:


Then

Dude - yer killin' me here! I just about sprayed my coffee all over my keyboard with laughing ;-) ;-)

What you say is so true. And the area around Likely - yeah you ARE likely to be seeing bears - up close and personal like. My sis used to live out there and there were lots.

Wolfman

[sealevel]

In the next couple years the grizzly problem will cure itself . Gbears once were salutary animals that lived way back. But gbears are changing they are starting to live close to man. I like hunting cornfields early in sept. in the last 3 years i have seen a grizz that lives in the thick brush 500 feet from an el. school. I have seen 4 different grizzlies in corn fields close to grinrod. a couple hundred yards from houses.

In the coming years gbear attacks will increase a lot.

[Frosty]

I like how contradictory this can be, Mcallister totes that "A recent public-opinion poll that says most British Columbians—73 percent—want the provincial government to end the hunt is adding fuel to the controversy." Yet Brian Horejsi, a man who has studied B.C. bears extensively says " The average citizen would need a degree in mathematics to thoroughly understand the evolving approach to grizzly-bear population science." So I ask myself why is the uneducated general public allowed a say at all? Myself I don't have enough information or knowledge on the situation to make a decision either way.

[Gateholio]

If you look at the look at the list of co-authors these guys are some of the best grizzly bear scientists and managers in the world, not just BC.. I ask myself if we have any basis to question their results or motives?



Questioning motives largely depends on who was paying them when they came to that conclusion, and what thier personal feelings are on grizzly hunting.

Questioning results depends on how they came to a conclusion about unknown grizzly mortality (at the hands of humans). By it's vary nature "unknown" is a guess.

[Gateholio]

I like how contradictory this can be, Mcallister totes that "A recent public-opinion poll that says most British Columbians—73 percent—want the provincial government to end the hunt is adding fuel to the controversy." Yet Brian Horejsi, a man who has studied B.C. bears extensively says " The average citizen would need a degree in mathematics to thoroughly understand the evolving approach to grizzly-bear population science." So I ask myself why is the uneducated general public allowed a say at all? Myself I don't have enough information or knowledge on the situation to make a decision either way.

Better yet, ask an opinion poll on "DO we have more elk in BC now, or 25 years ago?":tongue:

[fowl language]

mike, i was wondering if you could answer a question or two,please. do you know hunt. if so what species do you hunt.......thx fowl

[Mr. Dean]

" The average citizen would need a degree in mathematics to thoroughly understand the evolving approach to grizzly-bear population science."

So true.

.
.
.

[msawyer]

Fowl et al...

Yes I hunt. Every year since about 1972.... I have hunted elk, moose, whitetailed and mule deer, pronghorn antelope, black bear, and bighorn sheep... most taken with a Ruger #1 chambered in 270 Win. - a couple with a shotgun and slugs... I am happy to report that most years since then my freezer has supplied me with many delicious meals... Also, in the late 1970s I guided backpack hunts for bighorn sheep in the Alberta Rockies and guided for dall sheep, caribou and moose in the McKenzie Mountains in the NWT. From time to time, I hunt coyotes with my son in the winter and I hear that gophers fear my name...

Oh, and I forgot to mention upland birds and waterfowl...

And I don't need to take the fifth...

Take care

Mike
________
Harley-Davidson FXSTD (http://www.cyclechaos.com/wiki/Harley-Davidson_FXSTD)

[fowl language]

mike i was not asking those questions to offend,simply to clarify if we were taking to an anti hunter or not,i dont hunt bears any more only because of personal choice and dont begrudge any one the right to hunt them.i feel the biologists do the best job they can,having said that delta waterfowl has done a coast to coast survey which produced the following results. 10% were in favour of hunting 10% were anti hunting 80% were not opposed to hunting as long as it wasnt trophy hunting. so already we have an up hill battle with the antis on bear hunting and i hope they arent reading this forum and using it against us.we must band together on this issue to keep the antis from getting a wedge in.i urge you to count the number of leh g bear tags issued annually then do the math on the success rates , even on the lesser no. of animals we still are only at a 5 to 10% harvest. i hope you are of the same opinion on sheep as you are on bears, because unless i read it wrong your concerns were with biologist numbers,how then could we not ask the same question on sheep and all the other species we hunt......fowl