The government readily admitted that is has nothing to do with science or sustainability and that hunting did not threaten viability. People just didn't like! So once again a disconnected bunch of SJW's have pushed their moral agenda onto the rest of us.
In many ways it’s our own fault as we allowed them to run rough shod over us. We thought, we’ll be polite and reasonable and nobody will hear them. We didn’t bother to engage them at their level and with their tactics.
There are twenty five guiding territories owned by Indians or Indian bands. They can and very likely will tell this government to go pound sand. Our current governments (at ALL levels) run like scared rats whenever the Indian card is played, so it is possible that someone may be able to buy a hunt from one of the bands.
An interesting statistic they don’t want you to know. The mortality rate, in that small chunk of coast, from bear viewing is the same as what hunting was. The sows and cubs are driven off the prime estuaries and food by over zealous bear lovers.
ARA's are just more determined to ruin hunting than hunters are to save it ... more often than not anyway
That was a pretty low blow Missouribreaks. And yet some truth to it.
If BC offered non-outfitted NR access to hunt Grizzly Bears, there would have been a huge increase in out of province support to keep the season open.
"It is no longer socially acceptable to the vast majority of British Columbians to hunt grizzly bears," Donaldson said Monday. "That's the message.""
- The rationale is frightening. If it's not 'socially acceptable' to kill a G bear, BC folks will all be forced to eat tofu and falafel... all except aboriginals (good for them, by the way). Tell me what objective claim to their history and connection to earth do aboriginals have that no one else can rightfully claim? Man, that's the very definition of racism. And liberals are the "fair ones" amongst us... This whole situation is depraved.
There is a lot of truth in this statement, and not only for grizzlies. There is room for non-resident draws on every species available in BC.
In a way, Alaska does through Next of Kin licensing.
The point is that with the future of hunting under attack around the world, the hunting community needs to support each other in order to face this threat. Divided into small entities, "we" are easy pickings, especially in the world of "social license".
Most people, including hunters, couldn't give two..... unless they have some skin in the game. That's just a natural fact.
If ALL jurisdictions made a portion of ALL hunt-able species available to Non Residents, ALL hunters might take more notice of these lost opportunities outside of their homeland. The effect maybe enough that "WE" could change an outcome.
The situation in BC did not happen overnight, there have been discussions about this for years. Similar situations are happening right here in the United States, better take note. The former great elk hunting area of Missouri Breaks of Montana is headed towards developing into a National Park. Yet,.... the concept is continually backed by city hunters with a Liberal agenda who have no vision for thirty years down the road, or even care to attend the town meetings. From afar, they simply hate BLM grazing, Outfitting, and private ranch owners so a no (or limited twenty year promise of hunting) Park looks good to them. The haves vs the liberal have nots , causing division amongst hunters and eventually loss for all hunting. This liberal agenda is real and is happening in many states, not just California and Montana.
For some hunting is going out on the back 40 and hunting local whitetail, and for others its traveling to the ends of the earth chasing species that 99% of people will never see. Neither is right or wrong but we need to stick together to preserve all our rights to hunt. With grizzly in BC, caribou in Quebec, Lion banned in CA, Arizona is now trying to bad Lion hunting. Hunting unfortunately is only going to get more limited and thus more expensive. If you want to go chase some of these more exotic species, one thing is for certain, go do it NOW cause tomorrow is not guaranteed.
Some speak of the divide within the hunting ranks above, ironically one who would likely be seen as very divisive. Let's not live in fantasyland and pretend there is a side of innocents. Many with money or less-than-stellar financial skills don't care that they drive up prices for hunting, thus pushing the average joe out. Just watch any thread on here where increased costs are discussed and how many simply state it is more for them when someone gets pushed out. Outfitters have played a major role over the course of the last many years as well, so lets not pretend there is no reason or justification for the divide. I myself have simply come to terms with the way things are... don't hate outfitters but don't really like what hunting has become either.
I will only speak to BC and here your statement is incorrect. Guiding territories were initiated many decades ago to give locals (usually farmers, trappers, loggers) the ability to subsidize their incomes and stay "on the land". Territories were allotted for free.
That has evolved into what we have today. There are still some small operations and some bigger, multi generational outfits. Like all businesses we have some great ones that give very good value and we have a few on the opposite end. But there emerged the big money business model. Foreign owned and money'd and using the association to further their interests through political leverage. The Guide Outfitters Association of BC was soon run by an elite executive seeking to increase the value of territories that were already out of the reach of any average BC resident.
Not all outfitters are represented by the GOAoBC and some members certainly do not agree with their methods or objectives. The GOAoBC drove a massive wedge between them and resident hunters before the last election.
The GOAoBC has lobbied hard to cancel the Hunter Host Program where a licence'd BC resident can host another Canadian or other direct relative from anywhere in the world. They will never allow unguided hunting.
Then we have the selfish, myopic resident hunters that want to keep "their" wildlife all to themselves. They rant and rail against "fat, lazy, rich foreigners coming here and shooting our game!" They are an embarrassment. If you put forth the idea that BC should allow draws for non-residents, the knives come out and blood flows, then they go home believing they have "saved their heritage".
There is simply no defensible reason the BC couldn't offer a number of draws for Stone sheep or goats. There could be thousands of black bear draws, particularly in the spring. We have thousands of square miles of lightly hunted land and spreading a few more hunters out there would have little to no impact.
But no, we wanted it all for ourselves!! And now we find ourselves loosing it and no one outside of our little world cares or wants to help. Surprise, surprise!!
Anti hunting org's are international and draw support and money from around the world. Meanwhile we clutch our greedy little fingers tightly around the local scraps that are left and snarl at any other hunter that glances our way. Looking to the future, I sometimes don't mind being old.
Lots bigger problems than worrying about Outfitters.
"quote missouribreaks: "Hunters have created the market for outfitters, therefore hunters are the problem," I will only speak to BC and here your statement is incorrect. Guiding territories were initiated many decades ago to give locals (usually farmers, trappers, loggers) the ability to subsidize their incomes and stay "on the land". Territories were allotted for free.
That has evolved into what we have today. There are still some small operations and some bigger, multi generational outfits. Like all businesses we have some great ones that give very good value and we have a few on the opposite end. But there emerged the big money business model. Foreign owned and money'd and using the association to further their interests through political leverage. The Guide Outfitters Association of BC was soon run by an elite executive seeking to increase the value of territories that were already out of the reach of any average BC resident.
Not all outfitters are represented by the GOAoBC and some members certainly do not agree with their methods or objectives. The GOAoBC drove a massive wedge between them and resident hunters before the last election.
The GOAoBC has lobbied hard to cancel the Hunter Host Program where a licence'd BC resident can host another Canadian or other direct relative from anywhere in the world. They will never allow unguided hunting.
Then we have the selfish, myopic resident hunters that want to keep "their" wildlife all to themselves. They rant and rail against "fat, lazy, rich foreigners coming here and shooting our game!" They are an embarrassment. If you put forth the idea that BC should allow draws for non-residents, the knives come out and blood flows, then they go home believing they have "saved their heritage".
There is simply no defensible reason the BC couldn't offer a number of draws for Stone sheep or goats. There could be thousands of black bear draws, particularly in the spring. We have thousands of square miles of lightly hunted land and spreading a few more hunters out there would have little to no impact.
But no, we wanted it all for ourselves!! And now we find ourselves loosing it and no one outside of our little world cares or wants to help. Surprise, surprise!!
Anti hunting org's are international and draw support and money from around the world. Meanwhile we clutch our greedy little fingers tightly around the local scraps that are left and snarl at any other hunter that glances our way. Looking to the future, I sometimes don't mind being old."
Well said.
Hunters are our own worst enemy..
You see it right here, and on the most elitist of them all, AT...which I haven't been on in years..can't stand that site..
Hunters whinning about other hunters that shoot does and small bucks...to them it should be mature bucks only..
Hunters whinning about others using crossbows..
Hunters whinning about gun hunters...
Hunters whinning about baiting...
Some guys will whine about anything...
Sometimes, it comes back to bite them.
They just outlawed grizzly hunting - yet there will be no negative affects from it. Hunters and sportsman won't boycott, they won't threaten backlash in any shape or form really.
That's the problem - fighting back, its just not what hunters and sportsman do and that's sad and it'll be the death of hunting IMO.
Next they'll take moose or sheep or goat ............ and when they do then what? Nothing, not much
I hope I'm wrong -
Different topic but it keeps reappearing here.....I’ll never bash guides or outfitters as a whole. May not be my cup of tea but I have no problem with guys that use the service. But I sure will make my feelings known when they are given preferential access to public land or tag allocations. That’s just an anti-American, unacceptable welfare program.
The health of wildlife is at the very bottom of the list for our government. Their approach is to “manage to zero” then there is no annoying nagging from a rag tag bunch of throwbacks to do something about it.
When the BC NDP government banned trophy grizzly bear hunting, but allowed hunting grizzlies for meat. I didn't believe them and I said so on numerous occasions. Only to be told that I overact. Well, I hate to tell you, BUT I told you so. Here it is, the NDP just issued a total ban on all grizzly bear hunting. I will make another prediction. Banning black bear hunting will be next on the list. How do I know? Because the anti-hunting groups told the NDP government that they want trophy grizzly bear hunting banned. When it happened they said; "...this is a important first step to ban ALL grizzly bear hunting. When we achieved that, we will lobby the NDP government to ban all bear hunting period." Remind me next year to tell you. "I told you so!" ;) Instead of hunters squabbling among each other about little things, such as who killed the biggest buck or what rifle caliber is better than another one, we should focus more on issues that really matter. Like a corrupt government, in the pocket of anti-hunters, banning one hunting opportunity after another one to gain votes from the urban society." by Othmar Vohinger
That's my nature and has been my method, but maybe we're wrong and should learn from what goes on around us.
We're a small percentage of the population... So what?
Depending on the source, homosexual, bisexual and transgender individuals combined total 4-8% of the population. Their agenda is everywhere I look. It's pervasive in urban areas... heck, in my kids' schools. Did they make these inroads with logical, fact-based arguments that focus on the science, benefit and success of their culture?
No. They did not.
They went obnoxiously public with parades, protests and an assault on the media and pop culture.
We worry about having an animal visible during transport. They march in downtown Chicago wearing assless leather chaps.
We admonish each other to be sure that any hero shots are sanitized. They strip off their clothes and perform and pantomime for news cameras during "Pride" parades.
Who's method has been more effective?
I'm growing weary of the expectation that I should explain, apologize and sanitize my culture for others. Screw them.
PeTA garnered a lot of attention with activists throwing red paint on women wearing furs. Maybe some of these anti-hunting politicians should get something dumped on them to highlight that they're douchebags, something appropriately symbolic and poetic.
Just a thought that doesn't fit in with the season.
I hope that this can be reversed in the future like Ontario's bear season.
This year grizzly, next moose, then deer and small game etc.
Support and development of orgs like SCI etc. will eventually be the only way to keep our hunting rights. Right now the orgs are split up and spread out. RMEF at one point was almost taking anti-hunter stances as they became watered down with Sierra Club members and those mentalities. B&C, P&Y, state orgs..... all these groups need to align and co-ordinate, maybe under the SCI roof as they seem to have a head start on the lobbying basics we need. Tie in closer to NRA help and tap their skill set and power? The anti-hunters have a head start, but many of these other groups are finding ways to integrate themselves and social media, link up together for a cause. At the speed things work in todays world that is going to be critical. But a good deal of dinosaur DNA in hunters and sportsmen..... could be a fatal flaw.....
IMO more support to these orgs by sportsmen (as well as the sporting goods industry) and better co-ordination among the groups to bring more pressure to bear politically as a unit is going to be the key to the survival of hunting.
Bitching about rich hunters or rich groups or the NRA supporting xbows or any of that other decisive crap will be the downfall. We will have the divisive chronic complainers and the perpetually outraged to thank for it.
Second to blame will be those who are apathetic and don't see nor care care to see the bigger picture..... they get to hunt their deer a few days a year and that is fine with them. Nothing is going to change for them as they see it and even if it did..... no big deal.
Bringing those two groups into the mix..... gonna be tough.....
I too believe that is the right approach. We need to be well mannered but, ready to call BS on the notion that we are doing something wrong. People find weakness where it is exhibited. This is no different. Stand strong and stand for what we do. Or, we won't be doing it for long.
This movement has been going on for a long time. And, there intent is as stated above. There will no longer be a need for human hunters if they are replaced in the ecosystem. A chip at a time they are winning because we are letting them win.
God Bless men
B.C. is ending the grizzly bear hunt throughout the entire province.
First Nations still will be able to harvest grizzly bears in accordance with Aboriginal rights for food, social, or ceremonial purposes, or treaty rights.
Forests Minister Doug Donaldson said the decision came about during the ministry's consultation process on implementing the end of the trophy hunt, first announced in August.
"It's mostly a social values issue," Donaldson said. "When it comes down to it, this species is seen as an iconic species for B.C., and people just weren't willing to accept the hunting of grizzly bears anymore in this province."
According to Donaldson, 78 per cent of almost 4,200 respondents called for an end to the hunt altogether.
Follows August trophy hunt ban
Donaldson said the consultation process also involved face-to-face meetings with hunting associations, guide outfitters and First Nations. He said his government is committed to allowing other forms of hunting to continue.
In August 2017 the province announced it would end the trophy hunting of grizzly bears and stop all hunting of grizzly bears in the Great Bear Rainforest.
Those changes came into effect on Nov. 30, 2017.
Donaldson said there will be further discussions with guide outfitters in the province about how the government can support the transition away from grizzly hunting. Outfitters in B.C. charge upward of $17,000 for a guided grizzly hunting tour.
A report from the auditor general's office earlier this year found that the province has not been effectively managing B.C.'s grizzly population. It also found that the biggest threat to grizzlies is habitat loss, not hunting. Donaldson said ending the hunt will actually help to address that problem.
"A really good outcome of this decision is that we'll have more resources to monitor grizzly bear populations, as well as habitat conservation," Donaldson said. "We won't be focusing those resources strictly on managing a hunt."
There are an estimated 15,000 grizzly bears in B.C
https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-story--11-.htm
Please go vote
Liberals support anti hunters because it’s all part of the platform. Conservatives cannot get their messaging right because they view everything as independent actions and not the interconnected web that liberals have built from bottom to top.
Many may ask why make this political and it is not even America and that is the exact reason that why we are condemned to eventually loose the battle.
Ike, said it best in that have lost touch our own reality and that the predator fight is not my fight. This is like many gun owners supporting actions to reduce or limit assault rifles. Lack of insight and understanding that large predators and black rifles is just the first step in the overall plan.
Apathy and lack of rigor in society is allows the malignancy to grow and become lethal to the way we believe and the values are that we hold near and dear.
When I was about 13 I asked my brother who was the best person to have on your side in a fight and he said the guy that wouldn’t run. We want even choose sides until it’s either over or we are knocked down.
My brother also told me that once you get knocked down that it’s a long way back up.
I
elk yinzer's Link
elk yinzer's Link
elk yinzer's Link
Although he was comparing apples to oranges in contrasting viewing/hunting, he used valid figures and juggled them in such a way as to prove a point. Here is what I mean. If you were in a debate and asked to defend trophy hunting for an animal where only head-hide-claws were taken...the meat not used, any competent person could tear you, or me, to shreds. And that is exactly what is starting to happen in some areas of the U.S. The anti's are starting to realize the need to sway the non-hunter vote and this is the way.
But understand this. Big, animal rights groups don't care a flip about banning hunting. That cause is for them, just another vehicle to raise money. That is their true cause-raise more money, get more donations so they can pay the management, higher salaries. That does not mean there are not many serious smaller orgs. and individuals who do want to ban hunting. There sure are and they can have some impact.
That video was professionally done...well done, convincing. The figures quoted are probably, to some degree, accurate. They are also juggled. Data is manipulated to prove a hypothesis...all the time. It is happening right in the state in which I live and has been for at least three years.
There are some major problems facing hunters and the first and probably largest is simply that hunters do not truly understand the dynamics or numbers that make up the hunter-non-hunter-anti hunter demographics and how they interact. There are just about the same number of hunters and anti-hunters. Logically, they should then cancel each other out when it comes to a vote. And they would if they voted in equal numbers. They don't. But it is the non-hunter who will and does make the decision. And in terms of swaying the non-hunter vote, it is the anti-hunting, professionally produced material...just like Elk Yinzer's video link #1, that sways them. Not another diatribe from Uncle Ted. Not an in your face confrontation. Not even valid figures that to most non-hunters, don't mean anything. What sways them is a calm, factual explanation of hunting at its' core and what would be lost, should hunting be banned. It must be narrowed down to something they can easily relate to.
If a person has never seen a bear, how do you convince them they need to be controlled. Substitute almost any animal for bear. Now. Where I live, both deer and turkeys have become and are a nuisance. When I first started writing my newspaper column here, 42-years ago, seeing a deer was big news. Now, you cannot have a garden. It is extremely easy for me to sell deer and turkey hunting and population controll to the non-hunter. Last year, a both a bear and a mountain lion were confirmed sighted in my county. Within an hour, I got an email from someone who wanted to ban bear hunting in this county. We have not had an open season on bear here since the area was settled. I know this is a long post and I also know, probably the point I am trying to make is not getting through. Last week, I had a long and infirmative lunch with a person running for a high, elected office. He pointed out just what a segment of hunting is up against and just what the probable, eventual outcome is going to be. Our talk was off the record but it sure made me re-evaluate the way I am going to write some of my columns and for sure, take a second look at all my pictures.
And Rock-think about your post. Although I may agree with your sentiment, by that argument, we should sue automakers and ban motor cycles.
Last item to ponder: Explain why consumptive hunting should not be regulated to non-consumptive, camera use only if the meat is not eaten. Try and argue that in a debate.
The abolition of ALL hunting, which includes hunting pictures and videos ARE the target.
This really needs to be understood.
As an example, the BC government actually used the potential for "Trophy Photos" to be a deciding factor in their decision to ban Grizzly hunting.
A statement from the BC Green Party leader ( NDP and Green Alliance government) in explaining the reasoning for their new Grizzly Bear hunting ban.
"The government said in August it would ban “trophy hunting” of grizzly bears but still allow a “meat hunt,” meaning hunters could still bag a grizzly as long as they harvested the animal’s meat but not its head or hide.
Anti-hunting critics called it a loophole.
“A hunter could still take a photo with a dead bear,” Green party Leader Andrew Weaver pointed out. “In the Instagram age, that’s the most sought-after trophy.”"
The hockey player with his grizzly was altered to look like he was holding just a severed head. Now you and I know that no grizzly hunter is going to cut the head off a bear behind the skull and leave the rest. But that is exactly the comments that they left up on their anti hunting sites.
I do believe idiots exhibiting extremely distasteful behaviour is bad for our image. But nearly all the rest is just hunting and does more good, through exposure, than bad.
Make no mistake, we are not our own worst enemies. The anti’s have that position by a huge margin!!
I believe the gloves should come off and hunters should smear and beat down the hardcore anti’s with ruthless aggresion. Expose their lies and publicly counter every untruth they portray.
Only the huge non-hunting public can hand us back our social licence to keep hunting. It’s to them we have to present our case, and that can only be done through a professional and relentless media campaign. Just keeping your hunter’s head down and out of the line of fire will get you buried in no time. Those that think just minding our own business will save hunting are incredibley niave.
Plenty of data to point out all predators have to be managed, big and small..... or prey animals suffer as well. Long wild swings in population dynamics from mismanagement completely unnecessary. Habitat destructive animals as well, elephant hunts come to mind. (and not a morsel of meat nor even bone is wasted from them).
You want a true balance of nature and wildlife in the modern world where they are required to interact, man.... sportsmen actually, have proven over and again they are up to the task and do a pretty great job of it, in reality. Reality meaning no unicorns......
The subject of outfitters has been brought up on this post, and I tend to agree with the view of some, that outfitters are bad for hunting. The whole business of outfitting, paying large sums of money to kill animals, leaves many with a poor impression of hunting. In Montana this year, I've talked to two people who used outfitters, and both told of stories where wounded elk were not tracked for fear of scaring the herd onto public land. Seems, at least in Montana, that outfitters tend to limit hunting opportunities, by tying up and leasing land, which can't be good for the future of hunting and the future support of hunting by the masses.
The key to long term success in protecting hunting, is to keep it as something that is popular and available to the public.
Whether we like it or not, public vidoes such as this will lead to fewer non hunting voters supporting hunting. So we have a choice, show the videos to the voting public and accept the fact that some viewers will be turned off and vote against us, or we can only show the videos to our known supporters and fellow hunters, this will not gain us votes, but it will not cost us votes either.
You make the call!
