-
August 24th, 2016, 06:10 AM
#61
Trapjack?......*crickets chirping*
"Camo" is perfectly acceptable as a favorite colour.
Proud member - Delta Waterfowl, CSSA, and OFAH
-
August 24th, 2016 06:10 AM
# ADS
-
August 24th, 2016, 06:20 AM
#62
Has too much time on their hands

Originally Posted by
MikePal
Isn't what was said a week or two ago, "The hunt was legal".
Then the antis stuck their noise in it and the government had to show it listens....
-
August 24th, 2016, 06:36 AM
#63

Originally Posted by
welsh
Which regulations are those?
Alberta's Animal Protection Act does not apply to wildlife. Neither do the animal cruelty provisions of the Criminal Code of Canada.
Dyth quoted the law itself, and it does not in fact say that. And he is 100% correct that anything not prohibited is allowed.
"The regulations," as published in summary form, are not the law. They aren't even the regulations. They're a simplified summary published to aid the public, and that summary may not have anticipated that somebody would hunt a bear with a spear. Something written on a government website is, similarly, not the law. The law is found in the law itself, the regulations made under that law, and in case law.
These are the sources you need:
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Acts/W10.pdf
http://www.qp.alberta.ca/documents/Regs/1997_143.pdf
https://www.canlii.org/
Unless you can point to something in one of those sources that bans hunting other than with firearms and bows, I'm going to suggest you desist.
Not entirely correct, Criminal Code offence of causing unnecessary suffering does apply to wildlife !
https://www.thestar.com/news/crime/2...l_cruelty.html
-
August 24th, 2016, 06:42 AM
#64
I stand corrected on that point ... but of course one would then have to prove that the standard of unnecessary suffering applies here.
"The language of dogs and birds teaches you your own language."
-- Jim Harrison (1937 - 2016)
-
August 24th, 2016, 06:58 AM
#65
Has too much time on their hands

Originally Posted by
welsh
I stand corrected on that point ... but of course one would then have to prove that the standard of unnecessary suffering applies here.
And one would also have to prove that the hunter was willfully permitting the bear's suffering/pain/injury. As I argued in the other thread, evidence of the bear's intestines on the ground does not negate a moral wound. The spear's cutting head was 5 inches in diameter which is a lot of cutting area when the spearhead starts to move around as the bear moves. If hitting the intestines of an animal while hunting is a crime (either by accident or after the fact), there have been a lot of hunters who have broken the law.
One other piece of legislation we have to abide by is the Firearms Act.
-
August 24th, 2016, 03:02 PM
#66
NEWS FLASH: [COLOR=#333333]An Alberta government spokesperson says a U.S. hunter who posted a video of himself baiting and then killing a bear with a spear will not face charges.[COLOR=#333333]The spokesperson with Alberta Justice said the investigation into the video, posted on YouTube in June by hunter Josh Bowmar, is done and there was no evidence to suggest any law was broken.
This is not to say they liked what he did, and intend to make a regulation against spearing bears. I wonder of other provinces will as well.
You don't stop hunting because you grow old. You grow old because you stop hunting.
- Gun Nut