www.outdoorlife.com
One argument for baiting in these areas is that you have a better opportunity to properly identify your target in order to prevent this exact situation from occurring. I guess this specific case makes that argument questionable. As for proximity to houses, there is plenty of space out there to select bait sites that are away from residences. There are already requirements about proximity of bait sites to water, solid waste sites, etc. Add a regulation that specifies distance from any residential building. As with all hunting regulations the issue is enforcement.
Yeah, you're right in that there are ways to mitigate the risk. And I see your point that it allows the hunter to be more selective. But to me, bottom line is, you're feeding a grizzly unnaturally. Grizzlies are a lot more defensive of food sources than black bears are, so a hunter is putting himself and maybe others into harms way just with that. Second, if bears begin to associate food with humans they will seek out humans looking for more food. That's dangerous. Here in Montana, FWP spends a ton of money and energy trying to convince people NOT to feed bears, on purpose or inadvertently. Grizzly bears have enormous home ranges, so I'm not sure how big a buffer zone rural home would need, but it would be big. As I said, I'm pro- bear hunting and have hunted black bears over bait and spot-and-stalk in the Idaho Panhandle. I'm just pointing out a real conflict here that will be hard to address if grizzlies continue to expand into Idaho.
already exists, has to be at least half a mile from a “dwelling”. Also includes designated campgrounds, picnic areas or administrative sites
Also the note in the Regs that electronic calls may be used.
Yeah, I mean first and foremost I wouldn’t have shot it because it’s a dink.
Bear baiting is a LOT of work. I've tried it a time or two. I've never had an ATV, so carrying all the stuff into the woods and keeping the bait fresh is above my work/reward ratio.
I think social tolerance for grizzly bears will decline if their presence has an impact on traditional use practices. Idaho has had black bear baiting seasons in areas with known grizzly bear populations for decades with very little direct grizzly bear mortality (actual hunter killed bears). I am not privileged with the data to show if black bear baits have led to food habituated bears that later had to be relocated or lethally removed. I am very aware of how this case can and will be used by antihunters to make the case not only against baiting in areas with grizzly bears but having a black bear season at all. After all, here we had IDFG employees/experts/officials misidentify a grizzly bear leading to mortality, how then can we trust the average joe hunter to make that identification in the field; some will say it is better to not have black bear seasons at all in order to protect grizzly bears. I prefer education and other methods to mitigate the risk.
I was amazed at the speed a lot of the areas in Montana were closed out. Granted, this was my first year following it closely. My initial reaction was many people are shooting the first bear they see. Not sure my opinion has changed.
he did have it on video, and he even sent the video to IDGAF or whatever their acronym is, and they said black bear. The video he took of it is in the link at the top of page 2 of this thread. it's pretty wild that even they misjudged it.
