Spring Bears With Hounds Proposed

[Desk Pop]

Nick, for the record I think that you have given us some great and well stated insight into this topic. Especially from a houndsman that currently lives in a state where this opportunity is a legal method of hunting bears. So thank you for that and your thoughts on this matter.

Thank you. I hope the best for Montana hunters. You have a lot of bills in different stages and a lot of potential change.

 

[Irrelevant]

Not really my argument and if you read my posts you would see that. It was in reference to him saying they are adding something new so it should be treated differently than if all of the sudden deer hunters become ok with all bear hunting going away because it is controversial and makes them look bad to anti hunters. Hound hunting bears is not new to Montana. It was once legal. Now it is not.

So don't support opening a traditional and effective hunting method that allows hunters to be the absolute most selective in terms of sex and age of bears because you are worried it might make your chosen method more difficult. Way to be a team player.

I read all your posts, and while I recognize the point you're trying to make, I think the shift you applied to the discussion toward the dead horse slippery slope argument that x leads to y and y leads to z and now there's no bear hunting because most deer hunters don't hunt bears doesn't fit. We constantly evolve regulations. And because something was legal at one time doesn't mean it needs to be legal now.

 

[Desk Pop]

I wouldn't support a ban ... but sure wouldn't oppose it either.

In regards to this comment on Idaho banning hound hunting for bears, it is a bit of a different situation here. Of course, anything is possible, but thanks to Idaho hunters coming together, we have a section in our state constitution protecting the right to hunt and fish with specific language protecting traditional methods of pursuit.

It could change, of course, just like any amendement to the US Constitution could theoretically be change, but it is a pretty tough threshold. It is not as simple as just passing a bill through both chambers and to the governor's desk.

 

[BWALKER77]

On the fence on this, but if I were forced to make a call I would support using hounds.

 

[EYJONAS!]

So don't support opening a traditional and effective hunting method that allows hunters to be the absolute most selective in terms of sex and age of bears because you are worried it might make your chosen method more difficult. Way to be a team player.

This is a very bold statement IMO, I do whole heartedly agree with this. The other houndsman I've asked have stated this as well

 

[Desk Pop]

I read all your posts, and while I recognize the point you're trying to make, I think the shift you applied to the discussion toward the dead horse slippery slope argument that x leads to y and y leads to z and now there's no bear hunting because most deer hunters don't hunt bears doesn't fit. We constantly evolve regulations. And because something was legal at one time doesn't mean it needs to be legal now.

I think there are some California bear and predator hunters that would see things differently. Propensity became reality there and the latest of the culmination of events that was decades in the making was almost the total loss of bear hunting this year. X, y, y, z....etc

I am an outsider looking in. This is a small sample size on HT, but it represents a dedicated group no doubt. It sounds like you guys don't want this, so be it. I hate seeing an opportunity to add a hunting opportunity not given a chance, but as I stated, I am biased. As a wise tv character once said, "not my pig, not my farm."

 

[EYJONAS!]

On the fence on this, but if I were forced to make a call I would support using hounds.

Care to share

 

[BuzzH]

I think its a weak argument that allowing running bears with hounds is going to secure or strengthen the hunters position of bear hunting if a potential ban on all bear hunting is proposed.

Also don't think its a great argument to just start allowing it since a bunch of poaching outlaws are already running bears with hounds in Montana either.

I would continue to support both baiting and running bears with hounds if it was already established (ID), but no way would I be in favor of adding it where it's currently spot and stalk only.

All that said, IdahoNick's posts gave me pause to really have to think about my position regarding the issue. Thanks for that.

 

[Desk Pop]

This is a very bold statement IMO, I do whole heartedly agree with this. The other houndsman I've asked have stated this as well

It isn't the end all be all to all hound hunting advocacy attempt, but it is certainly one very positive point that is applicable from a management standpoint. You can take the exact sex and age class without any doubt

 

[EYJONAS!]

We constantly evolve regulations. And because something was legal at one time doesn't mean it needs to be legal now.

You'd be pissed of someone said this in Washington while you guys were trying to get hounds usage and lion hunting reestablished....

 

[Desk Pop]

I think its a weak argument that allowing running bears with hounds is going to secure or strengthen the hunters position of bear hunting if a potential ban on all bear hunting is proposed.

Also don't think its a great argument to just start allowing it since a bunch of poaching outlaws are already running bears with hounds in Montana either.

I would continue to support both baiting and running bears with hounds if it was already established (ID), but no way would I be in favor of adding it where it's currently spot and stalk only.

Fair enough. I disagree on your first paragraph.

On your second paragraph, I think you may have misread my intentions. I do not agree they should be doing it, nor think that the fact it is happening in and of itself is a reason to support it. I was rather stating that it is happening at some scale, and it has not ruined spot and stalk.

 

[EYJONAS!]

It isn't the end all be all to all hound hunting advocacy attempt, but it is certainly one very positive point that is applicable from a management standpoint. You can take the exact sex and age class without any doubt

For most yes this rings true others are trying to close every quota to be cool....... bears are obviously a difficult animal to judge and man a lot of young ones get taken especially young sows. That being said it would be difficult to accurately age any bear or classify it's maturity based on being in a tree or a hillside

We took a beautiful cinnamon bear a couple years back that was well..... smaller when we got up to her and were checking things out we didn't realize how old she truly was. It wasn't until we opened her jaw that we realized that. She was 17. Looking at her face and everything being dry we though a middle aged sow at first......

 

[thusby]

I don't like to wade into these things either, well I guess I just did. Unless your state has a strong tradition of hound hunting it will be unsustainable in the future. It takes a large mass of people with a large mass of constituents to wield public favor.
Even if it went through in Montana it would be over after a season.

 

[BuzzH]

Fair enough. I disagree on your first paragraph.

On your second paragraph, I think you may have misread my intentions. I do not agree they should be doing it, nor think that the fact it is happening in and of itself is a reason to support it. I was rather stating that it is happening at some scale, and it has not ruined spot and stalk.

I don't disagree with the premise of more bear hunters (whether hunting with hounds or spot and stalk), isn't going to increase participation and advocates.

Just that in general, hunters are NOT organized at all...and even with the addition of a few hundred hound hunters, a vast majority of over-all hunters just don't care.

Most elk hunters won't bother to comment on the crap bills that are about to pass in Montana that would crush elk hunting...you think they'll bother to comment on a bear hunting ban?

How many strict waterfowl hunters are going to oppose a ban on bear hunting?

Point is, a ban on all bear hunting won't be saved by adding a few more dedicated hound hunters. It will take a LOT more than that.

 

[Irrelevant]

You'd be pissed of someone said this in Washington while you guys were trying to get hounds usage and lion hunting reestablished....

I'm sure some people would be. I wouldn't be. But again I get the point, I just don't necessarily follow that line of reasoning as the basis for my support... on any topic.

 

[Irrelevant]

Point is, a ban on all bear hunting won't be saved by adding a few more dedicated hound hunters. It will take a LOT more than that.

Ok, so my first thought is how many spot and stalk hunters can an area hold vs hound hunters? If the only want to save bear hunting is through bear hunters, then you need more bear hunters. Would adding houndsman simple add more bear hunters, or would they displace existing bear hunters in the process? Would that displacement be 1:1 or...?

 

[BuzzH]

Ok, so my first thought is how many spot and stalk hunters can an area hold vs hound hunters? If the only want to save bear hunting is through bear hunters, then you need more bear hunters. Would adding houndsman simple add more bear hunters, or would they displace existing bear hunters in the process? Would that displacement be 1:1 or...?

There won't ever be enough bear hunters to save bear hunting.

It's going to take help from ALL hunters...not just ALL bear hunters.

I also agree that there could be some displacement and spot and stalk bear hunters that just hang it up. I doubt it would be 1:1 by adding hound hunting, just what I think...could be wrong.

I think where you would see a significant drop in participation is if you took away baiting and/or hounds were those methods of take are legal. One of the big reasons why I would NOT support stopping baiting and hound hunting in Idaho.

 

[runningmt]

Frankly, all of this “biology” by by ignorant politicians is making me ill

 

[EYJONAS!]

Ok, so my first thought is how many spot and stalk hunters can an area hold vs hound hunters? If the only want to save bear hunting is through bear hunters, then you need more bear hunters. Would adding houndsman simple add more bear hunters, or would they displace existing bear hunters in the process? Would that displacement be 1:1 or...?

This is where I'm at, being in Billings most of the bear hunters are going to the Pryors or Beartooths, bet it is 8 out of 10. Sure some will venture further to say Paradise Valley the Crazies Snowies Castles whatever. There's TONS of competing road hunters and spot and stalk guys going to "their" one spot. Adding say an extra 10 houndsman with hunters cause let's be honest the first few that get caught unless they have cubs aren't getting turned away from. While the beartooths are one of the largest and most diverse areas in the state. The limited accesses in the spring I don't think could sustain it.....

Every main drainage would be a shit show.....

Then I am at the firm belief there's lots of wanna be houndsman, the real ones know what it takes. Lots don't.

 

[Desk Pop]

There won't ever be enough bear hunters to save bear hunting.

It's going to take help from ALL hunters...not just ALL bear hunters.

I also agree that there could be some displacement and spot and stalk bear hunters that just hang it up. I doubt it would be 1:1 by adding hound hunting, just what I think...could be wrong.

I think where you would see a significant drop in participation is if you took away baiting and/or hounds were those methods of take are legal. One of the big reasons why I would NOT support stopping baiting and hound hunting in Idaho.

Buzz, I'd say we probably agree on 95% on the subject of saving and protecting bear hunting. We think perhaps it is different lanes to and avenues to get there and disagree on strategy, but you are 100% correct that it will take ALL hunter, not just bear hunters, to preserve bear hunting.

Strategies aside, if we all thought like this, hunters would really be a force to be reckoned with.