Bear Speared

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JBen

Fox, I've seen and heard of deer that run hundreds of yards. I personally haven't seen a bear recovered, if, it's not piled up in under 30. Either way, I don't know how much it matters in this instance. The damage being done is due to all I'll considered video, that leaves the perception in the publics mind. Of both "red neck blood sport" (wonder why) and subsequently an inhumane kill.

Is spear hunting a humane way to hunt?
There is some guy that hunts big game in Africa with spears. The vids he post, don't call it into question, nor do they cause a firestorm with the public.

---

That is exactly it, it was the fact that it was recorded and put on the internet.

I have friends who are bear guides, they hate that guys want to bow hunt, not that it is not a good way to take them but rather that in the fall the fat and fur plugs up the hole and reduces the blood letting out of the body as well as the soft feet do not dig into the ground like a deer hoof would, so tracking them becomes a big problem, good thing they had a great dog.

What I am concerned about is the attack by other hunters, where will this stop? Will bow hunters be next? What about traditional bow hunters? Rifle hunters wound lots of deer and shotgun hunters, should they not be able to use buckshot because some guys shoot it beyond what its effective range is?

I understand that many people could not ethically take a bear with a spear but I do not have that thought with this guy after watching his training videos and learning that he was a trained thrower. Many people should not be in the bush with a traditional bow because they do not practice but should we ban traditional archery because someone took a video of it?

I have seen a lot more bad shots with high powered rifles for deer hunting than bow hunters.

Forgot to mention this. While it doesn't occur all the time and maybe we should be thankful it wasn't heard on tape, because I have no doubt this guy would have kept it in. A bears death moan. I can only imagine how much worse the "backlash" would be, if that had been picked up in the audio.......and it normally occurs very shortly after..........

its absence one way or the other doesn't say a lot, because it's not all the time you hear a "wounded bear crying like a babe for its mom". I wonder why any hunting show I've ever watched edits that out.......but it, (absence iof) like the 60 yards ( maybe not unheard of, but for black bears maybe uncommon). Not saying it wasn't "humane" but there's "circumstantial", enough, to raise the question, even amongst hunters....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawbill

The one account I read stated that's the bears intestines were strung throughout the trees. If factual, this bear in no way died a quick humane death as he's claiming.
Because spearing is a legal method in Alberta does not mean we should automatically support this guy as a hunter. Game laws are continually in flux as harvesting methods are examined for their humaneness. It wasn't all that long ago that an almost total revamping of Ontario's trapping regs were undertaken. Clearly the changes were aimed towards cleaning up the industry standards before the antis had their way.

---

5 inch cutting diameter, half a meter penetration, I would be surprised if he didn't hit some intestines but it doesn't mean that he completely missed vital organs. What happens when the bear gets hit, I believe he turns and runs (I have tried to find the full length video to confirm but I am having trouble as the links are now useless). That spearhead will start to move around as the bear moves and runs (Newton's third law: For every action there is an opposite and equal reaction) and the spearhead will start cutting inside and creating an even larger wound so the fact the bear lost some intestine doesn't necessarily negate the spearhead hitting the vital organs.

If you want to look like a "neanderthal" in 2016, hunt with a spear. If you want your fellow hunters to look like "neanderthal,s" hunt with a spear and then put it on the Worldwide internet.

You then compound this by advertising the "baiting process" on the video and you have successfully added to the ranks of the anti,s.

Why is it ok for a Masai hunter to kill a lion with a spear but a North American hunter does the same with a bear and gets flak?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dythbringer

Why is it ok for a Masai hunter to kill a lion with a spear but a North American hunter does the same with a bear and gets flak?

---

I guess the general public look at this and say its OK because the Masai hunter probably tracked his animal skilfully over miles of bush and used the only tool he can afford to dispatch the animal,which he will skilfully track and recover and is essential to fed or protect for his family.

On the other hand the general public might look at the North American hunter as being engaged in a past time that is not essential,
using a spear and putting the animal through unnecessary suffering,when he could have used a rifle.Taking the animal "over bait" which to the general public is seen as cheating and to top it off the "recovery time" and the fact this hunter does not need the meat to sustain himself.

Also the Masai hunter is probably not going into his mud hut in the evening and posting it worldwide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I guess the general public look at this and say its OK because the Masai hunter probably tracked his animal skilfully over miles of bush and used the only tool he can afford to dispatch the animal,which he will skilfully track and recover and is essential to fed or protect for his family.

On the other hand the general public might look at the North American hunter as being engaged in a past time that is not essential,
using a spear and putting the animal through unnecessary suffering,when he could have used a rifle.Taking the animal "over bait" which to the general public is seen as cheating and to top it off the "recovery time" and the fact this hunter does not need the meat to sustain himself.

Also the Masai hunter is probably not going into his mud hut in the evening and posting it worldwide.

---

So you are only allowed to use a rifle? What caliber? 50 BMG to make sure nothing suffers? What happens if you miss slightly and it feels something, go to a bigger rifle?

It is feeding the beast that wants to get rid of hunting.

It is all about education, the people who want to ban it will spin any hunting into a very painful experience but those people will also do the same thing for a chicken in a pen or a cow in a field.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

I guess the general public look at this and say its OK because the Masai hunter probably tracked his animal skilfully over miles of bush and used the only tool he can afford to dispatch the animal,which he will skilfully track and recover and is essential to fed or protect for his family.

On the other hand the general public might look at the North American hunter as being engaged in a past time that is not essential,
using a spear and putting the animal through unnecessary suffering,when he could have used a rifle.Taking the animal "over bait" which to the general public is seen as cheating and to top it off the "recovery time" and the fact this hunter does not need the meat to sustain himself.

Also the Masai hunter is probably not going into his mud hut in the evening and posting it worldwide.

---

No, National Geographic used to cover the Maasai hunters. Now you can find a lot of videos of Masai hunters on you tube.

The Maasai people don't eat game meat. They use 3 parts from the lion and leave the rest (this guy eats the meat). They don't kill the weak or sick lions. They kill the alpha males (unless provoked). I would also venture the spears they use are not anywhere near as large as the one this guy used. They have access to modern technology (some tribes have incorporated industrial technology (which would mean they have access to firearms).

Separating the actions of the hunter post hunt from the hunt itself, why does a hunter who uses a spear in one set of circumstances get a pass (Maasai, I believe the Brazilian Indigenous people still hunt with spears, spear fishing) while another causes people to throw around terms like barbaric and archaic? Moral outrage seems to be a little selective in this circumstance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dythbringer

No, National Geographic used to cover the Maasai hunters. Now you can find a lot of videos of Masai hunters on you tube.

The Maasai people don't eat game meat. They use 3 parts from the lion and leave the rest (this guy eats the meat). They don't kill the weak or sick lions. They kill the alpha males (unless provoked). I would also venture the spears they use are not anywhere near as large as the one this guy used. They have access to modern technology (some tribes have incorporated industrial technology (which would mean they have access to firearms).

Separating the actions of the hunter post hunt from the hunt itself, why does a hunter who uses a spear in one set of circumstances get a pass (Maasai, I believe the Brazilian Indigenous people still hunt with spears, spear fishing) while another causes people to throw around terms like barbaric and archaic? Moral outrage seems to be a little selective in this circumstance.

---

The answer it seems is clearly posted on their own [COLOR=#333333] Maasai Association website and I quote as follows:


" [COLOR=#000000] We regret the loss of six cows, seven goats, seven sheep, one donkey and six lions in the outskirts of Nairobi National Park. From our sources the killing of six lions was not done to satisfy a cultural tradition. The herdsmen hunted the lions as an act of revenge for the loss of cattle. It is our hope that Kenya Wildlife Service and the Maasai of Ilkeek-Lemedung'I will meet soon and agree on a lasting solution to avert the loss of precious lions and Maasai cattle in the future. Maasai Association does not support lion hunt.[COLOR=#000000]

http://www.maasai-association.org/lion.html


So it seems the difference is evident the Maasai by hunting with their spears use the traditional tools at hand,show bravery and this is clearly accepted by the general public because they are protecting their cattle and goats from predators.

Your spear hunter is not doing that,he is showing off, trying to make himself somebody to admire and in the course of doing this offends the general public and makes his fellow hunters look bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gilroy

The answer it seems is clearly posted on their own [COLOR=#333333] Maasai Association website and I quote as follows:


" [COLOR=#000000] We regret the loss of six cows, seven goats, seven sheep, one donkey and six lions in the outskirts of Nairobi National Park. From our sources the killing of six lions was not done to satisfy a cultural tradition. The herdsmen hunted the lions as an act of revenge for the loss of cattle. It is our hope that Kenya Wildlife Service and the Maasai of Ilkeek-Lemedung'I will meet soon and agree on a lasting solution to avert the loss of precious lions and Maasai cattle in the future. Maasai Association does not support lion hunt.[COLOR=#000000]

http://www.maasai-association.org/lion.html


So it seems the difference is evident the Maasai by hunting with their spears use the traditional tools at hand,show bravery and this is clearly accepted by the general public because they are protecting their cattle and goats from predators.

Your spear hunter is not doing that,he is showing off, trying to make himself somebody to admire and in the course of doing this offends the general public and makes his fellow hunters look bad.

---

Read the entire website, not just the parts you want to cherry pick:

Why do the Maasai warriors hunt lions?
The Maasai tribe sees lion hunting experience as a sign of bravery and personal achievement. In the past, when the lion population was high, the community encouraged solo lion hunting. However, over the last ten years, due to the decline of the lion population, mainly because of rabies and canine distemper virus, the community has adapted a new rule that encourages warriors to hunt in groups instead of solo lion hunt. Group hunting, known in Maasai as olamayio, gives the lion population a chance to grow.

According to Maasai customary laws, the warriors are not allowed to hunt a lion, suffering from drought, snared or poison. The Maasai believe that females are the bearers of life in every species. As a such, it is prohibited to hunt a female lion-- unless the lioness has posed threat to human or livestock.

The Maasai understands that lions are important to the savanna's ecology and culture. For that reason, the Maasai takes extra caution when it comes to lion hunt. The Maasai warriors do not just go out and hunt lions because they can. The rules are there and are followed by every warrior

Lion hunting experience allows the Maasai warriors to show off their fighting ability on a non-human target. At the end of each age-set, usually after 10-15 years, the warriors must count all the lions hunted, then compare them with those hunted by the previous age-set. The purpose is to compare lion hunting age accomplishment between previous and current age-set.

The disclaimer you put up is denouncing that particular lion hunt as an act of revenge against the lions for raiding livestock, not lion hunting by the Maasai in general. In the passage I put up, the group even claims the lion hunting experience allows the Maasi warriors to show off their fighting ability against a non-human target.

So using the Maasai's own words, they are doing this to show off (they don't even eat the lion per the website's information) but the worldwide reaction to the Maasai isn't as vitriolic than the worldwide reaction to what the bear hunter did. I am not talking about his behavior post hunt, that issue is a separate one. I am talking about why he didn't do anything wrong hunting a bear with a spear. And by the way, he isn't my spear hunter. I have no relationship with this person whatsoever and alluding to one in order to try to cast my debate points in a negative light because of the negative reaction he is getting is an extremely weak tactic. If you want to debate, let your argument stand on it's own merit.