Bear Spearing was illegal

[MikePal]

If it was an illegal act, do you think we would know by now?!? Like the media wouldn't be all over it.......

A quick look at the media/news coverage..the video hit YouTube back in June....but didn't become news worthy till Aug 17th when it was a splashed across the headlines clear across the country, even Globe and Mail.

By the 19th (2 days later) the only related front page headlines was the story about how Under Armour responded.

Then it was done..nothing since.

I guess since Wayne Lowry, president of the Alberta Fish and Game Association, ( the boss of the guys who would be laying the charges) has already admitted publicly that at the time the video was made it was not illegal..that pretty much ended the story.

Pretty hard to come back later with charges..after that public admission.

So as far as the media is concerned.."move along folks no story here".

[Bluebulldog]

A quick look at the media/news coverage..the video hit YouTube back in June....but didn't become news worthy till Aug 17th when it was a splashed across the headlines clear across the country, even Globe and Mail.

By the 19th (2 days later) the only related front page headlines was the story about how Under Armour responded.

Then it was done..nothing since.

I guess since Wayne Lowry, president of the Alberta Fish and Game Association, ( the boss of the guys who would be laying the charges) has already admitted publicly that at the time the video was made it was not illegal..that pretty much ended the story.

Pretty hard to come back later with charges..after that public admission.

So as far as the media is concerned.."move along folks no story here".

As it happens on CBC radio, had an Alberta Guide on Sat night, who spoke to the very hunt. He apparently has been spear hunting for the past 7 years, as it took him 2 years of practice to become proficient enough to embark on a hunt.

Not illegal at the time, may in fact become so shortly.

Anyone want to wade into the UA issue of supposedly being an active hunting company, but yet cutting sponsored people off, despite legal hunt status?

I know UA just hit my boycott list.

[TrapJack]

I just pulled this wording out of the Alberta Hunting regs under the Bowhunting section...it would appear that there is a specific category or season for hunting with 'primative' weapons...



May put to rest the question of legality, I'm sure it can be argued that a spear is a 'primative' weapon.

Got a little behind on this thread. In the primitive weapon category you still have to meet the "firearm, bow and arrow, and crossbow" stipulation, this primitive hunt is used for people such as powder-loaded rifles.

[TrapJack]

I guess that is the 'legal' loop hold..there is no specific definition for a primitive weapon.

He misspoke, weapon is irrelevant, it's not a word used in regulations. firearm is the important word, and it is specifically defined.

[TrapJack]

If it was an illegal act, do you think we would know by now?!? Like the media wouldn't be all over it.......

he's being investigated, they are considering charges, read more articles you'll see that it is all over the place as you suggested. obviously alberta wants this to go away, and doesn't want to make a huge fuss about it.

[TrapJack]

As it happens on CBC radio, had an Alberta Guide on Sat night, who spoke to the very hunt. He apparently has been spear hunting for the past 7 years, as it took him 2 years of practice to become proficient enough to embark on a hunt.

Not illegal at the time, may in fact become so shortly.

Anyone want to wade into the UA issue of supposedly being an active hunting company, but yet cutting sponsored people off, despoite legal hunt status?

i know UA just hit my boycott list.

This is common practice, it's not only a hunting issue. Optics are everything these days, no matter how legal something is, the truth about UA, is that although they have a hunting arm, that isn't all they do, so they have to protect their brand for all the yoga enthusiasts out there too who use their other lines... it's a lot easier for a hunting only company to stand by a hunter no matter what. UA is doing the right thing unfortunately (for their bottom line at least) because hunting is a tiny branch to them, they can't risk their larger brand for the sake of hunters. If they were sponsored by cold steel instead of UA they'd be getting raises and be all over the place...

[Bluebulldog]

This is common practice, it's not only a hunting issue. Optics are everything these days, no matter how legal something is, the truth about UA, is that although they have a hunting arm, that isn't all they do, so they have to protect their brand for all the yoga enthusiasts out there too who use their other lines... it's a lot easier for a hunting only company to stand by a hunter no matter what. UA is doing the right thing unfortunately (for their bottom line at least) because hunting is a tiny branch to them, they can't risk their larger brand for the sake of hunters. If they were sponsored by cold steel instead of UA they'd be getting raises and be all over the place...

Statement of the obvious.

I wonder if UA weighed out the hunter backlash that this would have? I'm sure their other lines ( Hockey etc) contribute more to their bottom line than hunting. Yet, there's a definite impact, should the hunting community decide to act.

[Miller97]

I posted something along these lines in an ontario hunting group.. Specifically that "The method he used to harvest the bear didn't meet the regs or definitions under weapons." The amount of backlash I faced was laughable, considering once they all read the definition of weapon that didnt include 'Spear' alot of them quickly changed their tune.

[trimmer21]

UA isn't REALLY a "hunting" company any more than Ford or Toyota is a "hunting" company simply because they build trucks that some hunters use. UA makes clothing for ALL sports,hunting is merely a market niche and a relatively small one at that. If their marketing gurus see that this hunting issue is causing adverse PR that affects sales of all other markets,they'll throw all things "hunting" under the bus like it was snake bit.

[Bluebulldog]

UA isn't REALLY a "hunting" company any more than Ford or Toyota is a "hunting" company simply because they build trucks that some hunters use. UA makes clothing for ALL sports,hunting is merely a market niche and a relatively small one at that. If their marketing gurus see that this hunting issue is causing adverse PR that affects sales of all other markets,they'll throw all things "hunting" under the bus like it was snake bit.

Unlike Ford or Toyota, UA markets itself as a hunting company. Their product lines are distinctly designed and produced for various methods of doing so, ( bow hunting, waterfowl etc)....