Ontario spring bear hunt to resume

""When a man wants to murder a tiger he calls it sport; when a tiger wants to murder him he calls it ferocity."

"Whenever I see a photograph of some sportsman grinning over his kill, I am always impressed by the striking moral and aesthetic superiority of the dead animal to the live one."

... Edward Abbey

lukin2006 said:

Everybody raises great points in this discussion.


The point being missed here by some is the fact that the bear hunt in the spring is very likely being allowed in order for the governing party to gain votes in a possible election. Experts say its impossible to distinguish between male and female in the spring ... meaning many bear cubs will be orphaned.

yes that point was glossed, I don't think you will find anyone who really condones bear baiting or spring bear hunts. Shameful.

I jump at the chance to defend hunting because I know people who hunt and none of them are motor city madmen.
You think it is very wrong, a hunter would say that your disconnect from nature and your food is wrong. Hunting is an experience that has been around for a few million years and has only come under criticism is the last 2 decades or so. I understand the knee-jerk reaction but you have to understand that most hunters are full of respect for the animals and are humbled each time they harvest one. I am not saying that just makes it ok, but people who ¡ren't connected to hunting don't think about hunting they only feel about hunting.
Again, if you eat meat from a grocery store, you have no right to judge. Go to a farm and look your food in the eye while it dies and maybe you will come closer to understanding the cycle of life and death. I have watched humans die and I have watched animals die...suffering is my enemy, not death, death comes for everything eventually.

PJPOWER said:

brianlux said:

rgambs said:

lukin2006 said:

rgambs said:

without hunters and all the fees they pay for their sport we would not have the national parks, forests, and wildernesses that we have today, and the measely ones we would have would have zero funding because hikers hike for free. The most beautiful spot in all of West Virginia is only accesible because bear hunters painfully cleared a trail through 6 miles of tangled Rhododendron, so I appreciate that effort. Spring bear baiting is a shameful tactic that a self-respecting hunter would never use.
If you aren't a vegetarian you have no right to judge a hunter.

National parks are federal. I'm pretty sure hunting fees are state fees. I don't see the state turning over their hunting to fees to the federal government ... at least here in Canada that's how it works.

it is an interesting and complicated relationship the state and federal "parks" share. In the case I referred to, the exact most beautiful spot in WV lies within the Monongahela Nat. Forest, Dolly Sods Nat. Wilderness, Seneca Rocks Nat. Rec. Area, and possibly Spruce Knob State Park (not sure of the boundaries) While you are correct that hunting licenses are paid to the state, I think the Fed gets a cut...pretty sure I read that somewhere but I can't stand on it. I know that hunters pay and hikers don't and if I had the internet I could whip up some links to illustrate.
Aside from that, in America Teddy Roosevelt started the whole public lands trend to preserve the animals he liked to kill. Muir was the man, but without Teddy, all our parks would be like Niagara, where you have to pay just to put your eyeballs on it.

The problem with giving TR all the credit he gets for creating parks is that when we hear this we are rarely told also that his original intent was to set aside large areas for him and his elite country club buddies to do their hunting. It was not really an altruistic gesture.

Here's my two suggestions for allowing hunting:

1. Realistic suggestion: If hunters are hunting for food should it not be because they need that food for survival? We live in a society in which hunting is also exclusively unnecessary. AND if someone is going to hunt they should go the full measure and live totally off the land. No weekend warrior hunting. Seems like a fair choice: live in civilization or live off the land- no going back and forth as one pleases- that's cheating!

2. Not-so realistic suggestion but hey, why not! Try this one on: We humans have outgrown our numbers. Without the cheap non-renewable energy source that is oil we would be well beyond carrying capacity. Considering that and the reasonable idea of fairness, why not take the same percentage of our population as the percentage of animals hunted and feed that percentage of people to wild animals? Kill one out of 10 bears, feed one out of 10 people to bears. And since it is the hunters that choose to do the killing they should step up to the plate and be the hunted. The bear population will be more stable and 9 out of 10 hunters will be happy. Seems fair, right?

Let me start off by saying that I AM a hunter. My freezer is stuffed with deer year round. This greatly offsets the expense of overpriced meat in the meat market and is a lot healthier than most of it. I also hunt coyotes and wild pigs, not because I am in love with killing, but because they kill the cattle that all of you steak lovers find tasty. Just last week we had two calfs killed by coyotes as they were being born... The coyote population in many areas are going crazy and they are starting to also feed on domestic pets. The pigs cause havoc on the farmlands and are reproducing exponentially. Your beef is not born on a store shelf, or a feed yard. Every farmer and rancher I know is a hunter to some extent. So before you throw all hunters under the bus, realize that they also are the ones putting the food on your table. How many heads do I have on my wall? ZERO!

First of all, sorry my post offended you.

There isn't a problem with coyotes killing cattle, the problem is that it's 2014 and there are just too many humans, especially humans consuming meat. In some areas wild pigs were introduced and are a problem. That much I agree with, but not killing coyotes. If you know anything about the history of north America you know coyotes are an important part of natural life cycles. (Hopefully we are not to civilized to discuss natural cycles.)

As for farmers being hunters- no. My brother has been a farmer for over 30 years. I worked with him a few summers as well. He has never and would NEVER kill an animal of any kind. I know several local farmers through our farmer's market. None of them kill animals.

And please don't assume anything about "my beef". I don't eat beef anymore and I'm not so stupid as to believe it is born on a shelf.

brianlux said:

PJPOWER said:

brianlux said:

rgambs said:

lukin2006 said:

rgambs said:

without hunters and all the fees they pay for their sport we would not have the national parks, forests, and wildernesses that we have today, and the measely ones we would have would have zero funding because hikers hike for free. The most beautiful spot in all of West Virginia is only accesible because bear hunters painfully cleared a trail through 6 miles of tangled Rhododendron, so I appreciate that effort. Spring bear baiting is a shameful tactic that a self-respecting hunter would never use.
If you aren't a vegetarian you have no right to judge a hunter.

National parks are federal. I'm pretty sure hunting fees are state fees. I don't see the state turning over their hunting to fees to the federal government ... at least here in Canada that's how it works.

it is an interesting and complicated relationship the state and federal "parks" share. In the case I referred to, the exact most beautiful spot in WV lies within the Monongahela Nat. Forest, Dolly Sods Nat. Wilderness, Seneca Rocks Nat. Rec. Area, and possibly Spruce Knob State Park (not sure of the boundaries) While you are correct that hunting licenses are paid to the state, I think the Fed gets a cut...pretty sure I read that somewhere but I can't stand on it. I know that hunters pay and hikers don't and if I had the internet I could whip up some links to illustrate.
Aside from that, in America Teddy Roosevelt started the whole public lands trend to preserve the animals he liked to kill. Muir was the man, but without Teddy, all our parks would be like Niagara, where you have to pay just to put your eyeballs on it.

The problem with giving TR all the credit he gets for creating parks is that when we hear this we are rarely told also that his original intent was to set aside large areas for him and his elite country club buddies to do their hunting. It was not really an altruistic gesture.

Here's my two suggestions for allowing hunting:

1. Realistic suggestion: If hunters are hunting for food should it not be because they need that food for survival? We live in a society in which hunting is also exclusively unnecessary. AND if someone is going to hunt they should go the full measure and live totally off the land. No weekend warrior hunting. Seems like a fair choice: live in civilization or live off the land- no going back and forth as one pleases- that's cheating!

2. Not-so realistic suggestion but hey, why not! Try this one on: We humans have outgrown our numbers. Without the cheap non-renewable energy source that is oil we would be well beyond carrying capacity. Considering that and the reasonable idea of fairness, why not take the same percentage of our population as the percentage of animals hunted and feed that percentage of people to wild animals? Kill one out of 10 bears, feed one out of 10 people to bears. And since it is the hunters that choose to do the killing they should step up to the plate and be the hunted. The bear population will be more stable and 9 out of 10 hunters will be happy. Seems fair, right?

Let me start off by saying that I AM a hunter. My freezer is stuffed with deer year round. This greatly offsets the expense of overpriced meat in the meat market and is a lot healthier than most of it. I also hunt coyotes and wild pigs, not because I am in love with killing, but because they kill the cattle that all of you steak lovers find tasty. Just last week we had two calfs killed by coyotes as they were being born... The coyote population in many areas are going crazy and they are starting to also feed on domestic pets. The pigs cause havoc on the farmlands and are reproducing exponentially. Your beef is not born on a store shelf, or a feed yard. Every farmer and rancher I know is a hunter to some extent. So before you throw all hunters under the bus, realize that they also are the ones putting the food on your table. How many heads do I have on my wall? ZERO!

First of all, sorry my post offended you.

There isn't a problem with coyotes killing cattle, the problem is that it's 2014 and there are just too many humans, especially humans consuming meat. In some areas wild pigs were introduced and are a problem. That much I agree with, but not killing coyotes. If you know anything about the history of north America you know coyotes are an important part of natural life cycles. (Hopefully we are not to civilized to discuss natural cycles.)

As for farmers being hunters- no. My brother has been a farmer for over 30 years. I worked with him a few summers as well. He has never and would NEVER kill an animal of any kind. I know several local farmers through our farmer's market. None of them kill animals.

And please don't assume anything about "my beef". I don't eat beef anymore and I'm not so stupid as to believe it is born on a shelf.

Yes, there IS a problem with coyotes killing cattle. One or two coyotes every now and then are no big deal, but when there are so many of them that they start killing livestock, they are a problem. Yes, pigs were introduced and yes, humans are overpopulating. That does not mean that the pigs are not causing major problems. All of the farmers around here are hunters because it is an area populated by these problem animals. You may not be ignorant to where food comes from, but you do seem pretty ignorant about hunting and general predator control on cattle ranches in Texas.

hedonist said:

Brian - on your earlier post, I'm not sure I get this:

1. Realistic suggestion: If hunters are hunting for food should it not be because they need that food for survival? We live in a society in which hunting is also exclusively unnecessary. AND if someone is going to hunt they should go the full measure and live totally off the land. No weekend warrior hunting. Seems like a fair choice: live in civilization or live off the land- no going back and forth as one pleases- that's cheating!

Why would it be either/or? If it's legit hunting, it's no one's business that they get their meat via that method and maybe hit up the store for other stuff such as rice, fruit, bread, etc.

What about suburban folks going on the occasional fishing trip? Honest question - is that considered hunting as well? Does method (rod & reel vs. spear, for instance) make a difference?

I believe"Legit hunting" is a human concept not applicable to 2014. I just think if you're going to live that way you should live it full time and not be a weekend animal killer. I know- me and my screwy ideas. :-)

brianlux said:

hedonist said:

Brian - on your earlier post, I'm not sure I get this:

1. Realistic suggestion: If hunters are hunting for food should it not be because they need that food for survival? We live in a society in which hunting is also exclusively unnecessary. AND if someone is going to hunt they should go the full measure and live totally off the land. No weekend warrior hunting. Seems like a fair choice: live in civilization or live off the land- no going back and forth as one pleases- that's cheating!

Why would it be either/or? If it's legit hunting, it's no one's business that they get their meat via that method and maybe hit up the store for other stuff such as rice, fruit, bread, etc.

What about suburban folks going on the occasional fishing trip? Honest question - is that considered hunting as well? Does method (rod & reel vs. spear, for instance) make a difference?

I believe"Legit hunting" is a human concept not applicable to 2014. I just think if you're going to live that way you should live it full time and not be a weekend animal killer. I know- me and my screwy ideas. :-)

Well humans have been over consuming and screwing with the balance of nature since they have been in existence. I am not sure I can agree with your notion that hunting is not legit "in 2014" though... Many animals are capable of overpopulating and "screwing with nature" and do.

i have always disliked coyote hunting, coyote murdering & whatever else it may be labeled as. here in rural iowa i am very positive coyotes would have one hell of a time getting at a young calf, killing & dragging it into the timber or far off fields away from the farm house & eating it.

these assholes shoot coyotes all year round & coyote killing is the only animal here in iowa where a bullshit hunter may use a high powered rifle. these jerkoffs load up in their 4x4 trucks equipped with cb radios & they drive coyotes & radio back & forth as well as downing beer after beer & other alcohol, all this on roadways, crossing roadways & just a ridiculous blood thirty operation.

fuck 'em, i call the sheriff department as soon as i see one single beer can & what i consider shooting from the road; gravel road or not, it is a public roadway & the last thing we need is drunk shooters jacked up like your typical redneck dipshit who just like killing something

my neighbor (when i lived over there) is a popular prize winning coyote trapper & he enters coyote trapping competitions all over the southwest & who knows where else. so he is a proud coyote trapper & murderer. bear, a alaskan malamute that lived with me totally did not like this fucking guy at all & often would shit a very large pile on carl's back wood deck & would growl at the prick as well.

carl would call, your dog won't let me out of the house & i can't leave or whatever. i am surprised he never shot bear. bear knew carl was a fucking jackass who enjoys killing coyotes.

bear was so massive & whatnot, a entire pack of coyotes feared being in our backyard. prehaps ranchers in texas might wanna invest in big ass dogs (not malamutes as they would die in texas heat)

i am always amazed as well at people who believe coyotes will attack them & eat them. coyotes are terrified of people. there is not a whole lot more entertaining than sitting out in a pitch black field listening to coyotes chatter

until you get the hick fuckers with 1,000,000 candle watt power spot lights & their whiskey & rifles.... disgusting behavior

Out here, as we've encroached more and more on their land, coyotes have little to no fear of humans. Even in the early 80s, when we lived in Laurel Canyon, there'd be many a late night I'd come home and high-tail it to the door because a pack of coyotes were making their way through the street, not unaggressively.

I was the one terrified! Badass, beautiful animals.

Oh, I know. I certainly wasn't pissed at them but when a pack is moving in my direction, I'm taking no chances! We've seen happenings in similar people-taken-over areas where now mountain lions and bears are coming around and foraging for food, even if that means small pets.

(and the bears have caught onto when it's garbage day. I love 'em)