B. C. Grizzly Anti's Still at It

[BigHornyRam]

British Columbia is thick with grizzlies, but the antis still want to stop the hunt. Why not have both photography and hunting? Wouldn't this bring in more revenue then one or the other?

Paul

Grizzlies said to be worth more for photography than hunting
Posted at 3 p.m. June 19
By Associated Pres


VICTORIA, British Columbia - Grizzly bears are worth more to British Columbia as targets for photographers and sightseers than as prey for trophy hunters, a new study done for an environmental group concludes.

Shutterbugs and those who pay just to watch the big animals in the wild contribute about $6 million ($4.5 million U.S.) a year to the provinceís economy, almost twice the value of the sport hunt, researchers asserted.

According to the report, hunting could lower grizzly populations enough to damage the bear-watching industry, an assertion that contradicts other studies and was disputed by the government.


The study, "Crossroads: Economics, Policy and the Future of Grizzly Bears in British Columbia," was conducted by the Center for Integral Economics of Victoria, a social policy and environmental research group, for the Raincoast Conservation Society.

"The argument to maintain the hunt as a significant economic benefit is flawed," said Donna Morton, a center spokeswoman. "Ecotourism is one of the fastest-growing industries in British Columbia and increases B.C.'s reputation for being "super natural," but it is hurt by the killing of grizzlies."

According to the study, monitoring the grizzly population costs more than the hunt generates and viewing and photographing the bears could easily cover any revenue shortfall from a hunting moratorium.

Raincoast leaders have called for the resignation of British Columbia Water, Land and Air Protection Minister Joyce Murray because of wildlife management policies.

A province-wide moratorium on grizzly hunting was lifted shortly after the Liberal party ousted the New Democrats from power in British Columbia elections in May 2001.

Responding to the study Wednesday, Murray said British Columbia has plenty of grizzlies - at least 13,800 - for trophy hunters as well as bear watchers and photographers.

According to an independent scientific report released by the province last spring, British Columbia's grizzly population can sustain the annual loss of 220 to 250 bears to hunters.

In addition, John Holdstock, a spokesman for the British Columbia Wildlife Federation, said grizzly viewing might be less lucrative in the interior of the province, where bears are spread over a wide area.

 

[JoseCuervo]

So, if somebody wants to promote "industry" over sport hunting/fishing, then they are some "anti-hunter"?

I want to get this right. Supporting Industy (ie..Eco-tourism) is wrong, and we should be supporting the killing of these magnificent bears for sport?

What about fish, this seems the opposite of your position on Salmon, where you want to support industry, and allow the sport to die?

It looks like you are selective on your pro-sport (hunting/fishing), and selective on when you support "big industry".

 

[Moosie]

I'm all for Flying to BC to Take a picture of a GRizz.... After I shoot it

 

[cjcj]

that sound`s like a good idea moosie! then they get double the money, more bang for the buck HAAA Haa.

 

[BigHornyRam]

Elkgunner,

You need to educate yourself on the British Columbia grizzly bear issues before you get on the internet and start talking out of your ass. Where's that picture of the bunny with pancakes on his head when you need it?

Paul

 

[ELKCHSR]

I think it would be a grand thing to just leave it as the norm, shooting and pics, apperently together griz brings in some 6.5-7 million, when the medow muffin brigade can make up the difference, then they have a leg to stand on, but to take out 33 or so % of a budget to make people happy, won't really cut it...

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paul,

I tried to get eD-You-Cay-teD on the subject, so I read your posts a couple of times, but they seem to be a bit lacking. I guess I will have to look elsewhere, other than your posts, for education....

I am really not trying to pick an argument, just trying to understand why you don't label the Grain FArmers in the Palouse, or the Electrical Consumers in California as "anti's" and rally against them? These are the people who are trying to end fishing for Salmon and Steelhead in Idaho.

As for the Grizzly issue in BC, I assume it is their Provincial issue, and should best be managed and debated by Canadians. I have read a bit about it from time to time, and to me, it smacks of Politics stepping in front of Wildlife management. For me to argue the merits of wildlife management in Canada, is as silly as you commenting on Salmon issues in Idaho.

The Canadians do all sorts of silly things, and only some of them make sense. LaBatts would be their greatest contribution to my life.

But, with the above said, any education you want to point me to, I will gladly read it, from an intellectual curiousity point of view.

 

[BuzzH]

Paul C said, "You need to educate yourself on the British Columbia grizzly bear issues before you get on the internet and start talking out of your ass."

Lack of education on issues (particularly salmon) has never gotten in your way of doing the same thing, has it Paul?

 

[1_pointer]

I believe the population should be managed and if hunting is the most cost effective and efficient tool...

This argument will continue until there is overwhelming evidence that populations have to be controlled with lethal measures and that sportsmen (& women) contribute the LION'S (or bear or elk's, etc) share to conservation efforts.

 

[BigHornyRam]

Buzz,

Try staying on topic for at least one post. You already got whooped on the salmon issues, care to give the grizzly issues a try?

Elkgunner,

The B. C. griz issues are pure politics. Hunting was stopped a couple years ago (a politician trying to buy the green weenie vote), and was reinstated last year after the election. You don't think this could happen in Idaho with bear baiting? How many more Californian's need to move to Idaho before the right to bait bear is back up for a vote? Please try to stay on topic with your response.

Paul

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 06-23-2003 06:24: Message edited by: Paul C ]</font>

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paul,

I did change my mind, as I am trying to start an argument. Sportsman's Issues has been terribly boring lately, so bad, that even Ithica is not posting. And given that you are typically the most intelligent of the people who post on the Wrong side of these issues, I might as well point out your double standards.... Yes Paul, you are one of them Anti's...

(Maybe we can get Lost, Ten, MD, and CJCJCJCJCJC to jump in and defend you.....)

I am not even sure what this topic is, that you want Buzz and I to stay on. Is it that Grizzly hunting in BC should be allowed? Or is it that Eco-tourism in BC is evil? Or is that favoring Industry of sport fishing/hunting is wrong? If you start a topic on a hunting site, my guess is you would get 99% agreement that hunting is an activity with merit, and should be considered as a tool for managing the resources.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> How many more Californian's need to move to Idaho before the right to bait bear is back up for a vote? <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And it looks like this quote of Paul's is not "on topic", but I will address it.

Paul, if you knew anything about Idaho's politics, you would know that we are not getting liberal Californians. Study after study shows the immigrants to My Own Private Idaho are republicans. They are right-wing conservatives who move up here to trash our environment, similar to the way they did to their's. Since the great "immigration" of the early 90's, the Democrat party in Idaho ceased to exsist. We now elect people like Chenowith, Otter, Risch, and Klumpthorne with out any checks and balances. I doubt the anti-baiting initiatives would get as far as they did.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The B. C. griz issues are pure politics <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> And finally, how is this different than Salmon issues in Idaho? The Science is in. The Economics are in. The only thing standing between me, and restored salmon runs is pure politics.

 

[Michaelr]

 

[BigHornyRam]

Elkgunner,

Did Ithaca share some of his crack with you? If you want to know what the topic is about ( or aboot in Canadian), go back and read the first post slowly once you sober up.

Here is a key phrase to look at in the article: "a new study done for an environmental group concludes." Much like a study conducted by the friends of dam breaching on how necessary dam breaching is. I wouldn't wipe my ass with either study. But if you want to use such propoganda to push your agenda, go for it. Just don't be upset when everyone else thinks you are an idiot.

Paul

<FONT COLOR="#800080" SIZE="1">[ 06-24-2003 06:03: Message edited by: Paul C ]</font>

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paul,

I still struggle to find education in your posts (other than you have missed a couple of times of wiping your a$$...)

But, if I am to read your last post, then the topic that you want us all to stay on seems to be "Studies done for Environmental Groups". And I really don't care if others think I am an idiot, as I must be, as I seemed to miss that idea of "Studies done for Environmental Groups" as the central topic to this thead.

Thanks for clearing that one up.

As I reread the article, it looks like the benefits of hunting grizzl's in BC does not cover the cost of managing the hunt. That seems like a bad deal for all parties, and if the BC hunters don't get their act together, they will again lose their hunt. Bummer for them dude....

 

[cjcj]

hey elkgrunter i defend, or agree with who I think is right! and if it`s paul so be it i`m not about to consult you before i give my opinion.

 

[JoseCuervo]

CJCJCJC

Thanks, and I feel better knowing that I will not have any responsibility or influence for your opinion/posts.

 

[BigHornyRam]

Elkgunner,

Didn't I tell you to sober up first before you reread the article? Maybe then you would understand? I will not be wasting any more of my time replying to you until you start making sense.

Paul

 

[JoseCuervo]

Paul,
Maybe while you are waiting, you can re-read the article you posted, and develop an opinion or provide some education. I read thru your posts, and the only thing I learned is of your lack of bathroom hygeine.

I thought the issue could have been you Anti-s trying to end Hunting and Fishing by extincting Grizzly Bears and Salmon.

or

People in Idaho have no more knowledege of Canadian wildlife issues than people in Montana know about Idaho wildlife issues and therefore should not comment.

or

Californians will change Idaho Politics

Or

Studies for Environmental Groups are wrong

or

The cost/benefit of hunting Grizzly bears in BC favors the end of hunting Grizzly bears in BC.

But hey, thanks for staying on the Central topic....