Should we incentivize treaty harvest of grizzly bears?

[3blade]

Many of us, I'd even say most, believe that the government and their employees are straight up lying about grizzly bear numbers and range. There is certainly no political will to reinstate the hunt, regardless of the status of the species or the damage they do to ungulates, farms or people. F&W and groups like Y2Y have and continue to use grizzlies as an excuse to lock people out of public land, especially during hunting season.

Who would be in favor of, as an outdoors community, raising funds to incentivize persons with the appropriate treaty status to legally harvest grizzly bears?

Does $500 per skin (after registration of course) sound good? More or less?

I don't like having to go down this road. We should all have equal access. But we don't and it does not look like we ever will, and if it means better ungulate recruitment and access, to me it's the significantly lesser of two evils.

[duck duck goose]

Oh boy, where's the "too hot to touch" emoji lol. I can see this one getting heated very quickly.

I probably wouldn't take part in a program like that, more so for the fact that if I am going to spend money on hunting, it is going to be so that I can go hunting. I am not going to subsidize someone else's hunting trip, but maybe I am just selfish.

I get where you are coming from that less Grizzly bears will help out the ungulate population, but you have to keep in mind that Grizzlies are not the only animal out there eating ungulates. If we get rid of the Grizzlies, who is to say that the population of coyotes, black bears, and lions wouldn't expand to absorb the leftover fawns and calves? I think it most certainly would.

Ultimately I think this debate hinges on your initial point that the government is lying to us about grizz populations, and ultimately I am not convinced that is the case. Because of that I would not participate, but maybe others would see it differently.

[Torkdiesel]

It's all hot air anyway.

I know some farmers south of Grande Prairie that were all up in arms over a grizzly that killed a couple ponies. Had a petition going and everything to get special landowners tags because they feared for their lives and needed these bears harvested.
I ran into one guy and said "no worries bud, me and cousin will come out this weekend and thin the herd for you"

All of a sudden the bears didn't need to go that bad. Lol

[3blade]

Yeah there's a bit of this guy in it but I made sure I followed the forum rules.

Fair point though, for any of us, there's only so much hunting budget to go around.

[Smokinyotes]

The grizzlies may be part of the decline in ungulate numbers but so is uncontrolled hunting.

[purgatory.sv]

The poll seems to address the concern though the incentive to register?

Did not vote.

[Norwest Alta]

I'm not to interested in having strangers on my land. Figure I'm safer with the bears.

[Jjolg123]

I think putting your 500 towards hunting wolf and black bear would be better if your concern is ungulates.

[Grizzly Adams]

Thought Natives had a reluctance to kill Grizzlies ?

Grizz

[dshaw]

They can already kill Grizzlies, why would they need an incentive. I guess if the government wants more gone then sure, but that will never happen. If they want grizzlies gone the residents should get the opportunity and make it fair for all.

[guywiththemule]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

Thought Natives had a reluctance to kill Grizzlies ?

Grizz

They apologize to the bear if they need him for food or robe .

[CF8889]

You want me to pay someone to hunt grizz? So we can lower the numbers more.. so that I can never hunt them?

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by CF8889

You want me to pay someone to hunt grizz? So we can lower the numbers more.. so that I can never hunt them?

You'll never be able to hunt them if you're waiting for Alberta !!!

[sns2]

Boys, this one smells like one that could go off the rails quickly. Keep er between the lines please. So far so good.

[CF8889]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

You'll never be able to hunt them if you're waiting for Alberta !!!

Even so, I beleive in certain areas there is enough of them for a LEH hunt.. but not so many that I'm gonna pay someone to kill them. A healthy grizz population is part of our ecosystem.

[Muliespotter]

Originally Posted by CF8889

Even so, I beleive in certain areas there is enough of them for a LEH hunt.. but not so many that I'm gonna pay someone to kill them. A healthy grizz population is part of our ecosystem.

Exactly. I don't know why the rabid response to having to kill grizzlies, when the reality is a] they are omnivores, and the vast majority of their diet is vegetation, with carrion second, and yes, they do kill some ungulates. Some. There are many, many more reasons for ungulates to have a low cycle besides grizzly bears; they are only a minor player in that picture. Don't forget, deer, moose, elk etc. bounce back fast if the habitat is there for them from bad winters.

That being said, I would like to see a LEH in areas such as the Willmore where there is no question that there is a very healthy population. Too bad the endangered species legislation in Alberta applies to the whole province, and not to parts of it. Even if they restricted the LEH to the Willmore proper it would be a bonus for us hunters.

[Slicktricker]

Does any one know what the population of an animal has to be to be no longer listed as endangered I couldn't find it on google or anytjjng

[3blade]

Originally Posted by Slicktricker

Does any one know what the population of an animal has to be to be no longer listed as endangered I couldn't find it on google or anytjjng

From the grizzly recovery plan: "the Alberta grizzly population in the recovery zone is not limited by human-caused mortality...."

The threshold for listing was less than 1000 bears. There is no threshold for delisting.

Long story short, won't happen. The antihunting bios can move the goalposts to avoid ever having a hunt again, as was the plan from the start.

http://aep.alberta.ca/files/GrizzlyB...Jun01-2016.pdf

[Okotokian]

You mean like the aboriginal elk hunt in Suffield? ah, no.

We MAY have more bears than the enviros and anti's think, but we don't have THAT many that we need to indiscriminately kill them.

[Grizzly Adams]

Originally Posted by Okotokian

You mean like the aboriginal elk hunt in Suffield? ah, no.

We MAY have more bears than the enviros and anti's think, but we don't have THAT many that we need to indiscriminately kill them.

x2.

Grizz

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by 3blade

From the grizzly recovery plan: "the Alberta grizzly population in the recovery zone is not limited by human-caused mortality...."

The threshold for listing was less than 1000 bears. There is no threshold for delisting.

Long story short, won't happen. The antihunting bios can move the goalposts to avoid ever having a hunt again, as was the plan from the start.

http://aep.alberta.ca/files/GrizzlyB...Jun01-2016.pdf

Actually there is a threshold for re-instating a hunt.

1000.


To the original question, No.

[J0HN_R1]

Originally Posted by Muliespotter

Exactly. I don't know why the rabid response to having to kill grizzlies, when the reality is a] they are omnivores, and the vast majority of their diet is vegetation, with carrion second, and yes, they do kill some ungulates. Some. There are many, many more reasons for ungulates to have a low cycle besides grizzly bears; they are only a minor player in that picture. Don't forget, deer, moose, elk etc. bounce back fast if the habitat is there for them from bad winters.

That being said, I would like to see a LEH in areas such as the Willmore where there is no question that there is a very healthy population. Too bad the endangered species legislation in Alberta applies to the whole province, and not to parts of it. Even if they restricted the LEH to the Willmore proper it would be a bonus for us hunters.

What was your previous username, before you got banned ?

[Suzukisam]

You do realize when they say the no's are down that they only count the bears south of hiway 16 the ones to the nort are not counted in

[Stinky Buffalo]

Originally Posted by Slicktricker

Does any one know what the population of an animal has to be to be no longer listed as endangered I couldn't find it on google or anytjjng

They were never listed as endangered in Alberta. Even the media has gotten this wrong at times.

Originally Posted by CF8889

You want me to pay someone to hunt grizz? So we can lower the numbers more.. so that I can never hunt them?

Originally Posted by Okotokian

We MAY have more bears than the enviros and anti's think, but we don't have THAT many that we need to indiscriminately kill them.

Agreed! They are part of our ecosystem - and I actually quite fascinated by them - but they need to be managed.

[landowner]

Originally Posted by Grizzly Adams

Thought Natives had a reluctance to kill Grizzlies ?

Grizz

Some do some dont ,from what I understand it depends on the clan. Many native hunters do take problem grizz out of the population in the south end of the province

[cschache]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

You'll never be able to hunt them if you're waiting for Alberta !!!

X2 At least not in our life time, I asked my game warden neighbor a few weeks ago and that was his sentiment also.

[H380]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

Actually there is a threshold for re-instating a hunt.

1000.


To the original question, No.

Bet we are there already...if the true number did come out and it was 1000 I bet the number would mysteriously be raised for the need for a hunt . The antis just can't seem to accept the science they are asking for

Sent from my SM-G930W8 using Tapatalk

[NCC]

Originally Posted by Muliespotter

Exactly. I don't know why the rabid response to having to kill grizzlies, when the reality is a] they are omnivores, and the vast majority of their diet is vegetation, with carrion second, and yes, they do kill some ungulates. Some. There are many, many more reasons for ungulates to have a low cycle besides grizzly bears; they are only a minor player in that picture. Don't forget, deer, moose, elk etc. bounce back fast if the habitat is there for them from bad winters.

That being said, I would like to see a LEH in areas such as the Willmore where there is no question that there is a very healthy population. Too bad the endangered species legislation in Alberta applies to the whole province, and not to parts of it. Even if they restricted the LEH to the Willmore proper it would be a bonus for us hunters.

Did you read the thread I posted a couple weeks ago regarding the bears with cameras mounted on collars? The bios had video evidence of gbears killing 45 calves in one spring season. In many remote areas with limited access (ie between the Blackstone Gap and Brazeau river) I think gbears are the number one reason why there are no ungulates. It sure as hell isnt natives or poachers back there.

[birdee]

why should i give a certain group an incentive when i already pay too much to feed and keep them in there entertainment of choice.They can already shoot and leave to rot all the wildlife they want.

[kw12]

Originally Posted by birdee

why should i give a certain group an incentive when i already pay too much to feed and keep them in there entertainment of choice.They can already shoot and leave to rot all the wildlife they want.

Ya what he said!!!