Grizzly Bear Shooting Video Reignites B.C. Hunting Debate

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fratri

Gun Nut..... your comments above are a little hard to swallow........ it looked like a pretty good hunt to me..... I don't have an issue with the hunt or film....just the posting of it on youtube.... silly guy ruined a great hunt by doing so...

---

If that looks like a pretty good hunt, why are they offering a $3500 reward for information pursuant to it. I have to suspect that the payoff had to be quite something, or somebody among them would be singing like a canary by now. On the first shot the shooter had the whole broadside of the bear to shoot at, given that the sights might have been a bit off, that's quite a deviation from the boiler room of that bear to his rump. Odd that the second shot found the same mark. Then there was the one just behind him as he was moving down the slope. Then, as he was laying sprawled broadside on the slope, stock still, where was the finishing shot? If you don't think these guys were following a script, we as a hunting community are in deep trouble.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut

I've been watching this thread all along but only just now watched the video. Based on everything that's been said here, I expected to see some kind of a horror show. What I saw looks pretty typical of how long it takes for a 1000+ pound animal to expire. People seem to base a lot of what they expect to see around what happens on edited for TV hunting shows. "Drop on the spot" shots are a pretty rare thing in the real world.

Shot in the rump? Judging by the impact behind the bear on the first shot, it looks to me like a bullet through the boiler room, probably the first two. While I haven't shot anything in the hind quarters to compare, I doubt you would push a bullet through that much hide, bone and muscle to impact behind the bear. Also, watch the last few seconds. The blood on the snow where the bear is coming to rest shows that it is obviously spraying blood from the mouth and nose (lung shot). Large animals tend to take an awful long time to realize they're dead unless you break them down.

I fully agree with Frosty and the others here, except I'm not even sure that it was a bad shot. Just a bear that didn't realize he was dead on his feet and then tumbled down the mountain. It was an incredibly stupid thing to post this kind of video for the general public to see, but it should be obvious to anyone who's shot big game that it's rarely a pretty thing.

As an aside... I'm sure the antis can guarantee that every bear, moose or deer will die a quick and painless death at the hands of mother nature, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

I've been watching this thread all along but only just now watched the video. Based on everything that's been said here, I expected to see some kind of a horror show. What I saw looks pretty typical of how long it takes for a 1000+ pound animal to expire. People seem to base a lot of what they expect to see around what happens on edited for TV hunting shows. "Drop on the spot" shots are a pretty rare thing in the real world.

Shot in the rump? Judging by the impact behind the bear on the first shot, it looks to me like a bullet through the boiler room, probably the first two. While I haven't shot anything in the hind quarters to compare, I doubt you would push a bullet through that much hide, bone and muscle to impact behind the bear. Also, watch the last few seconds. The blood on the snow where the bear is coming to rest shows that it is obviously spraying blood from the mouth and nose (lung shot). Large animals tend to take an awful long time to realize they're dead unless you break them down.

I fully agree with Frosty and the others here, except I'm not even sure that it was a bad shot. Just a bear that didn't realize he was dead on his feet and then tumbled down the mountain. It was an incredibly stupid thing to post this kind of video for the general public to see, but it should be obvious to anyone who's shot big game that it's rarely a pretty thing.

As an aside... I'm sure the antis can guarantee that every bear, moose or deer will die a quick and painless death at the hands of mother nature, right?

---

Well GW11, Here how the anti's feel about:

The Wildlife Defence League (WDL), based in Vancouver, Canada, posted the footage on its Facebook page.

“It’s absolutely horrific,” Tommy Knowles, the group’s campaign director, told the Globe and Mail.


“It’s completely unethical, completely inhumane. It’s a bear being shot over and over again, sliding down a mountain, bleeding out.”


The WDL has also renewed calls to end the grizzly hunt as British Columbia prepares to open its fall season on Oct. 1.




The group told the Huffington Post: "We want people to see that this is how grizzly hunting exists across the board, whether it’s in British Columbia or not.


"Trophy hunting of predators is unsustainable and unethical and we’re hoping this footage puts forces the government to take note and move towards banning the hunt."


The video does not reflect responsible hunting, Mark Werner, the past president of the Guide Outfitters Association of British Columbia said.


He added: "They were making bad comments, they’re sensationalizing the suffering of an animal.


“We don’t endorse that. That’s not what we’re about, and I’m disappointed."


[email protected]


The line that really bothers me is:

"We want people to see that this is how grizzly hunting exists across the board, whether it’s in British Columbia or not."

And they would know this?

The other line that stands out, and its not from an anti is:

The video does not reflect responsible hunting, Mark Werner, the past president of the Guide Outfitters Association of British Columbia said.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
-Gun Nut

Gun Nut - I couldn't care less about what the antis think. There is NO acceptable form of hunting to a true anti-hunter, so to worry about whether or not that video offends the antis is a moot point. They are offended by hunting. Period.

The problem with posting this type of video is that it gives the antis ammo to sway the non-hunting "on the fence" public to their side. Which is exactly what it sounds like they're doing. That's the unfortunate part. While I have no idea who Mark Werner is, his comments sound to me like he just didn't want to get dragged into a heated debate. After all, he is the "past president" of the Guide Outfitter's Association of British Columbia, not the current president. Why would he want to take the reins on this one?

The fact is, we've all made shots in the field that we weren't entirely proud of, and even good shots that may have ended with something you wouldn't want a non-hunter to see. If you dropped a deer in front of you, would you turn on the camera and record it's final few seconds or minutes before it dies and then post it on the internet? What happens with an animal after the shot (except for a brain/CNS shot) is enough to turn some new hunters off of it entirely. I've seen it personally.

The time between the impact of the shot and when you recover the animal should be between the hunter and the animal. You botch the shot, you deal with the consequences. It's not something to be posted online for the uniformed masses to watch and judge.

GW11, I agree. My point is that this video was scripted and produced by the anti's. They fundamentally admitted to it when they made the statement: "We want people to see that this is how grizzly hunting exists across the board whether in B.C. or not." They know this, because they have witnessed numerous grizzly trophy hunts. Right? They know this because they have a stereotypical view of how grizzle trophy hunting has to be done, and they had this production done as bait to prove it. Any excuse the hunting community makes, as to why this hunt went so badly i.e it was poor shooting, or grizzlies are tough and stubborn to died, adds credence to what they believe and have portrayed in this video. This hunt went so badly because they scripted so. The shooter or shooters as they intimate, deliberately and with malaise of intent put that bear through a living hell. Because these people believe this is the only way trophy hunter can assure those parts of an animal they hang on the wall are not messed up by bullet wounds. I see no evidence in the video that any of the shots ever went through that bears boiler room, for them such a shoot might have risked damage to the cape. Again they appear to have little knowledge of what a good taxidermist is capable of. Nor would any hunter who botched such a hunt put such a video online. There is nothing in the destruction of this animal to be proud of. As for Mark Werner he was quick enough to see this video, for what it was, and was smart he enough not to lend any legitimacy to it.

You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut
,

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

The time between the impact of the shot and when you recover the animal should be between the hunter and the animal. You botch the shot, you deal with the consequences. It's not something to be posted online for the uniformed masses to watch and judge.

---

amen...excellent post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gun Nut

GW11, I agree. My point is that this video was scripted and produced by the anti's.

---

just to clarify; according to few guys on another B.C. hunter forum, the original video was taken in Alaska, was 15 minutes long and being filmed for a TV show. It was posted in 2013 by the original hunter and was witnessed/seen by a few posters on that forum.

The video we're seeing now was edited down to less to 2 minutes, so you can say it was 'scripted' to show the worst parts, but it's still real.

and at this point..trying to discrete the video is pointless....the people who are appalled by it, aren't asking those questions.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by poltrojan

Actually you do have a point. I remember this was done before with the clubbing of the seal by a Canadian but producers were from outside of country with agenda for hunter/firearm disarmament; yes i know its sounds like a conspiracy however if you think about it, the name of the hunter should've leaked by now or give it a couple more weeks; just like Cecil incident.

however there is something off about that video, nothing concrete surfaced yet. who's actually behind the whole incident. especially this guy (picture) should have the story if he is part of the hunt. he seems to be either a guide or an observer and not too pleased about it.

http://i1382.photobucket.com/albums/...ps5ohhok7u.jpg

---

Hi poltrojar

Look it up on the internet and see what you think. I was watching, " Alaska - The Last Frontier," on the Discovery Channel, this evening, the guy in this photo bears a remarkable resemblance to one of the cast of that program, Eivin Kilcher.

You don't stop hunting because you get old. You get old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GW11

Gun Nut - I couldn't care less about what the antis think. There is NO acceptable form of hunting to a true anti-hunter, so to worry about whether or not that video offends the antis is a moot point. They are offended by hunting. Period.

The problem with posting this type of video is that it gives the antis ammo to sway the non-hunting "on the fence" public to their side. Which is exactly what it sounds like they're doing. That's the unfortunate part. While I have no idea who Mark Werner is, his comments sound to me like he just didn't want to get dragged into a heated debate. After all, he is the "past president" of the Guide Outfitter's Association of British Columbia, not the current president. Why would he want to take the reins on this one?

The fact is, we've all made shots in the field that we weren't entirely proud of, and even good shots that may have ended with something you wouldn't want a non-hunter to see. If you dropped a deer in front of you, would you turn on the camera and record it's final few seconds or minutes before it dies and then post it on the internet? What happens with an animal after the shot (except for a brain/CNS shot) is enough to turn some new hunters off of it entirely. I've seen it personally.

The time between the impact of the shot and when you recover the animal should be between the hunter and the animal. You botch the shot, you deal with the consequences. It's not something to be posted online for the uniformed masses to watch and judge.

---

Excellent post GW11, right from the beginning to end. Covers all aspects of what can go wrong on a hunt. The repercussions of idiocy, and an overall objective analysis. Not viewed through rose coloured glasses or sugar coated. Well done!!

what matters is that uninformed masses are now screaming for blood for something that is scripted, misinforming, misleading and worse of all was actually used a live tv footage for a hunting show. so whoever gained the media infamy used the right timing because of the Cecil incident.

it'll die down, eventually. MNR isn't that stupid.