Clark County urges state to ban ‘barbaric’ wildlife killing contests

Clark County Commissioners, from left, Chairman Marilyn Kirkpatrick, Tick Segerblom and Jim Gib ...Clark County Commissioners, from left, Chairman Marilyn Kirkpatrick, Tick Segerblom and Jim Gibson during a break in a commission meeting at the Clark County Government Center in Las Vegas Tuesday, March 2, 2021. (K.M. Cannon/Las Vegas Review-Journal) @KMCannonPhotoClark County Commissioners, from left, William McCurdy II, Michael Naft, Justin Jones, Chairman ...Clark County Commissioners, from left, William McCurdy II, Michael Naft, Justin Jones, Chairman Marilyn Kirkpatrick, Jim Gibson and Tick Segerblom during a commission meeting at the Clark County Government Center in Las Vegas Tuesday, March 2, 2021. (K.M. Cannon/Las Vegas Review-Journal) @KMCannonPhotoMore StoriesNellis AFB commits land for first responder vehicle training complexFood service and hospitality workers can now get vaccinesNevada adds highest one-day total of new COVID cases in nearly a monthState: Vaccine groups not changing, despite unused appointments

By Shea Johnson 

Las Vegas Review-JournalMarch 2, 2021 – 4:21 pm   Don’t miss the big stories. Like us on Facebook. https://www.facebook.com/plugins/like.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Freviewjournal&width=105&layout=button_count&action=like&size=large&show_faces=false&share=false&height=21&appId=846558002155573

Clark County commissioners on Tuesday formally urged Nevada to ban wildlife killing contests — a form of hunting competition already barred by neighboring states that activists have castigated as “unethical,” “barbaric” and a “sick bloodsport.”

In such contests, single shooters or teams of two set out at dawn to kill as many coyotes, rabbits, bobcats or other small mammals as they can, according to activists, who say that animals are then often thrown away and that lead ammunition strewn on public lands risks being ingested by wildlife and poisoning the food chain.

Participants compete for money or other prizes, the county said, and because western states such as California, Arizona and New Mexico have already banned the practice, Nevada has recently become a destination for contest organizers.

There have been more than two dozen competitions in Nevada in recent years, at least four which have occurred in the county, according to a resolution unanimously adopted by the commission imploring the Nevada Department of Wildlife “to take immediate action” to outlaw the contests.

“I am proud to have sponsored this resolution, which will help to ensure that the public is safe from stray bullets by unethical shooters in a hurry to kill as many animals as possible and protect our state’s wildlife from inhumane practices and unnecessary slaughter,” Commissioner Justin Jones said in a statement.

Ultimately the authority to establish a ban falls on the state Board of Wildlife Commissioners, a nine-member panel appointed by the governor, and not the state’s wildlife agency.

State biologists will, however, provide scientific information requested by the Wildlife Commission when the board considers any regulatory changes, which is a lengthy and public process, Nevada Department of Wildlife spokesman C. Douglas Nielsen said.RJ POLITICSTeam coverage from Las Vegas, Carson City and DCSign up for our free RJ Politics newsletter. SIGN UP By signing up you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. Unsubscribe at any time.

“It is not our role to determine what is acceptable to society,” Nielsen said in an email about the state agency, adding that “if the department is asked for its recommendations, they are based on science.”

Resolution supported by activistshttps://bd47ccc157bea08d92e1d5d6b4cdb75d.safeframe.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-37/html/container.html

Wildlife activists immediately praised the county’s decision, noting that it marked the first forward movement against the contests in Nevada six years after the state Wildlife Commission voted 7-1 to deny a petition seeking to end them.

“With the passage of this historic resolution to condemn the scourge of wildlife killing contests in our state, Nevada has been put on the path toward joining the bevy of other states that have already eliminated these barbaric practices,” said Annoula Wylderich, the Nevada state director for Animal Wellness Action, in a statement.

Connie Howard, the chair of conservation and public lands for the Sierra Club Toiyabe Chapter, had written a letter of support stating that “nothing is more antithetical” to the club’s mission of wildlife preservation and protection than “killing contests that glorify the killing of animals purely for blood sport with the intention of seeing who can kill the most.”

And Patrick Donnelly, the Nevada state director at the Center for Biological Diversity, underscored that there was no evidence that killing coyotes reduces human conflict or the depredation of livestock.

“We need to show respect for our native wildlife, not treat it as fodder in some sick bloodsport,” Donnelly said in a statement.

In passing the resolution, commissioners also clearly delineated a distinction between the competitions and hunting. The county, according to its resolution, “values hunting as a method of food gathering, recreation, wildlife management, and protecting private property.”

France considers extending the boar hunting season

Wikimedia Commons

The government is preparing a decree which, if passed, will extend the boar hunting season. According to the government the aim of the law is to limit the significant damage caused by big game on farmland every year. Animal rights activists, however, are not happy.

Public consultation on the law finished during the week.

Hunting organisations, in their defense, say that they pay €30 million to farms every year to compensate for any damage caused mainly by wild boar.

Among the proposals, is one which will extend the hunting period, thus enabling hunters to start hunting in June.

As the season ends at the end of March this means hunting boar will be allowed for most of the year. It will also extend the hunting season for deer and fox.

n that is already tense

“Obviously there’s a risk of tension,” says its director-general, Yves Verilhac. “We have more and more people testifying, telling us that there were problems because they were denied access to a road [because of an ongoing hunt].

“France is the country that hunts the most species over the greatest period of the year. And we want to be champions of biodiversity! There is a problem”

Hunters say that they are not all going to take their rifle out as early as June even though the law would give them the opportunity to do so.

The derogations already existed previously. This public consultation process was highly subscribed. More than 25,000 comments were submitted and received.

Hunter gets death threats after posting picture of grizzly bear he just killed

Rob WaughMonday 17 Sep 2018 11:48 am Share this article via facebookShare this article via twitterShare this article via messenger A hunter has received death threats after posting images where he posed with a dead grizzly bear he had just killed. Former professional hockey player Tim Brent, 34, posted the images after killing the bear in Yukon, Canada. Brent said, ‘Alright folks, here is my Mountain Grizzly! We put an awesome stalk on him but he spotted us at about 75 yards. ‘Instead of taking off he turned and came right at us. It was very easy to tell this bear owned the valley we were hunting in and wasn’t scared of anything!’ 999 operator describes harrowing 40 minute call with mother she couldn’t save in Grenfell In another photo, Brent poses holding up the dead animal’s paw saying, ‘Did you know on average a single Grizzly eats around 40 Moose and Caribou calves during each calving season?’ The posts provoked a flood of anger and revulsion when he shared them on Instagram – with some commenters posting death threats. Some posters said they hoped he would be mauled to death by a bear – and one suggested they would call in a ‘Mexican cartel’ to kill him. In response, a defiant Brent posted images of his fridge filled with meat from animals he has killed. Share this article via facebookShare this article via twitterShare this article via messenger

 

Read more: https://metro.co.uk/2018/09/17/hunter-gets-death-threats-after-posting-picture-of-grizzly-bear-he-just-killed-7952015/?ito=cbshare

Twitter: https://twitter.com/MetroUK | Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/MetroUK/


A former Canadian pro-hockey player has come under fire after tweeting about hunting and killing a grizzly bear earlier this week.

Posting on Twitter a photo of himself posing with the bear, 34-year-old Tim Brent said they’d ‘put an awesome stalk on him’.

Explaining that the animal had spotted them at about 75 yards, he added: “Instead of taking off he turned and came right at us. It was very easy to tell this boar owned the valley we were hunting in and wasn’t scared of anything!”

Brent, who used to play for the Toronto Maple Leafs in Canada’s National Hockey League, has since also posted photos of ‘his’ Yukon moose, which he said ‘absolutely humbled’ him.

Brent has since received backlash for both his hunting habits and openly boasting about them. His tweet where he poses with the dead bear has racked up 20,000 comments.

It’s even caught the attention of several big names, including comedian Ricky Gervais, who regularly speaks out about animal rights. He tweeted: “I bet killing this beautiful bear put ‘an awesome stalk’ on Tim too.”

Sherlock actor Amanda Abbington also condemned Brent’s actions – and was clearly not holding back, writing: “You are a c***. A stupid, inbred, unfeeling piece of s*** c***.”

Others said the photo and caption were ‘disgusting’, ‘horrible’ and ‘nauseating’.

Brent later tweeted to say he’d even received death threats, writing: “These are the types of messages I am getting on twitter in response to my moose and bear hunts.

“I would love to know what constitutes a threat or abuse for Twitter? This is what we are up against as Hunters.”

Featured Image Credit: Twitter/Tim Brent

Fierce critic of Wyoming grizzly bear hunt scores license

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/fierce-critic-of-wyoming-grizzly-bear-hunt-scores-license/

JACKSON, Wyo. (AP) — A fierce critic of grizzly bear hunting who has made a career photographing the animals has drawn a tag for Wyoming’s first such hunt in 44 years.

The Jackson Hole News & Guide reported Thursday that Tom Mangelsen drew No. 8 on an issuance list that will allow up to 10 grizzly hunters into the field starting Sept. 15. He was up against 3,500 Wyoming residents and 2,327 nonresidents vying for a shot at the tags.

Mangelsen, who credited being chosen to “dumb luck,” was among scores of people from around the country who applied for the tags as a means of civil disobedience intended to slow the hunt. Wildlife managers say the tactic is legal.

The hunt for which Mangelsen’s tag is valid will end after the first female bear is killed. Up to 10 male grizzlies can be killed.

___

Information from: Jackson Hole (Wyo.) News And Guide, http://www.jhnewsandguide.com

Columnist wants to know what you think about hunting, conservation

The column this week will be a little different – an invitation for readers, especially the hunters and fishers out there, to share your thoughts on a question I have been thinking about since college. It’s a topic that keeps popping up in the media again and again, most noticeably with Cecil the Lion but repeatedly since then as well. So here it is, the question in two parts:

1. Can hunting (or fishing) play a part in wildlife conservation?

2. And should it?

The reason I started thinking about this again was because this past weekend, I read a news article about an American woman, Tess Talley, who traveled to Africa to shoot a giraffe in a trophy hunt. The photo of this woman, standing next to this downed mountain of an animal with her rifle in hand, went viral and received immense amounts of backlash. Initially, some of the uproar was because the giraffe in question had a darker hide than normal and was being called a rare black giraffe. I didn’t research it too heavily, but it seems like the hunted animal’s coat color was largely because of age (with older individuals becoming darker). But that, I think, is beside the point. Once the photo went viral, the hunter would’ve received backlash regardless of the animal’s coat color. It was enough that it was a giraffe, and she killed it.

A few facts: While it’s not legal to hunt giraffes everywhere, this particular hunt was perfectly legal.

Talley and the hunting company she worked with in Africa both say the trophy fee (about $2,000-$3,000) stayed in the local community.

The overall giraffe population in Africa has declined as much as 40 percent since the ’80s and is predicted to keep declining in the future.

In college, I took a course called Ethics of Conservation, which was easily one of my favorite courses. It covered everything from how we think of wildlife and natural areas, to bioprospecting to ecotourism. And, yes, there was a big section on trophy hunting in the middle, too. As with all other topics, my professor was very good at selecting readings and examples that highlighted both sides – those in favor of hunting for conservation and those against. As a result, I have a well-rounded view (I think). I see both arguments.

Responsible hunters are very careful to follow bag limits, quotas and other restrictions that limit them to manageable take. Tess Talley was, all evidence suggests, very careful to select a company in an area of Africa where it was legal to shoot giraffes. She even took an individual that was not, or so she claims, contributing to the breeding population (although I don’t know if there’s solid proof of that). If done correctly, a large part of the trophy money does stay in local communities and provides jobs and a source of income for residents, either as part of the hunting company or working in the mini-lodges and tourist shops that support guest hunters. Theoretically, in an ideal world, this would mean that locals would be less likely to feel inclined to develop wildlife areas or poach game unsustainably. Why go out and shoot all the giraffes yourself for your own subsistence when you can make more money and secure a better livelihood, hosting hunters who shoot maybe one or two at a time? Whether or not the money does contribute to local communities is another question, cases of corruption being common, but that’s the best-case scenario.

Hunters also say they enjoy spending time in nature, they respect the animals they take, and they have a personal and deep connection with the wild areas that still exist. They also often involve their children in the activity – embedding a love for the outdoors in them at a young age. I have a friend who entered the world of conservation biology only because of his childhood hunting experiences, or so he says.

On the other hand, to the nonhunter, it all seems a little contradictory. If you love something, say giraffes, why do you then kill it? Why not just donate the $2,000 dollars directly to one of the many organizations that work to preserve giraffes or giraffe habitat? This question cuts a little more sharply when it’s a known fact that giraffes are indeed declining across the African continent. They aren’t our mallards or wood ducks: they are big, charismatic mammals that are dropping in number and will continue to drop in number in the future. For a lot of the angry people commenting on the photos of the dead giraffe, it is impossible to make the connection between wildlife conservation and the dead animal center frame. They read Tess Talley’s comments about how magnificent a creature the giraffe is and don’t believe her. Again, how can you call something magnificent and mean it, and then put a bullet through it? How can you claim to want to save or conserve something, and then reduce it to meat?

I’m not a hunter myself, and I don’t come from a hunting family. I caught a sunfish once when I was a kid and that’s about the extent of my fishing. We even put it back. But like I said, I can see both sides of the conservation/hunting debate and have no problems with hunting myself. More than that, I am very interested in the questions that situations like this bring up.

If you have an opinion, a perspective, an insight into the world of hunting and conservation, I’d love to hear it. Shoot me a line at eshelly@gcbo.org with your thoughts.

Emma Shelly is the Education and Outreach Manager of the Gulf Coast Bird Observatory. The GCBO is a nonprofit organization dedicated to saving the birds and their habitats along the entire Gulf Coast and beyond into their Central and South America wintering grounds.

‘Hunt Like a Girl’: Meet the women who spend their weekends looking for a kill

Bec and Sharna don’t look like the kind of people you’d call “psychotic murderers”, “disgusting whores” or “killers with a sick fetish”.[… but they are.]

They’re normal, friendly women. They’ve got normal jobs. They live in normal, regional towns.

Bec and Sharna

Bec and Sharna

But when killing wild animals on the weekend is what you call fun, they’re the kind of names they’ve come to expect.

Between them, Bec and Sharna have killed enough animals to pretty much fill a zoo. Deer, a zebra, a giraffe, a mountain lion, a pigeon, foxes, kangaroos, impalas, baboons, a feral cat, a cow and a wild dog have all found themselves in the crosshairs of Sharna’s rifle or the target of Bec’s bow.

Some end up on their dinner table, some in their dog’s bowls, and some end up hanging in their living rooms.

Hunting hangings

Sharna’s living room

“In a way it’s a trophy, it’s a memento of the hunt,” Sharna told Sarah McVeigh for the ABC’s new podcast, How Do You Sleep At Night?

“Each of those have their own story and for us, we don’t want to see any of it go to waste either. That’s probably the best use of those skins.”

The Hunting “lifestyle”

Hunting has been part of her life for so long, Bec can’t even remember the first time she fired a gun. A sixth-generation hunter; it’s in her blood.

“It was the same as other kids going and playing footy. We went hunting. It was just something that was done.

“I learnt really quickly that when I went to school that not all families were like my family. We ate a lot of homekill meat; I grew up on a sheep farm so Dad always slaughtered our own lambs.

“Sometimes that meant that we even ate our pets,” Bec says, remembering her pet lamb Blinky who eventually ended up on her plate.

“I remember friends coming over after school and they were like, ‘What the hell is going on here?’ and then I started to realise that that wasn’t how other families did it.”

Bec and Sharna are both licensed hunters and only hunt animals permitted by local authorities. They both insist hunting, for them, is more than a hobby.

Why hunters find joy in the kill

Sarah McVeigh spent five days with Bec and Sharna in the Victorian High Country to understand how they tick and why they get satisfaction from killing animals.

“Hunting is a challenge. And sitting around the campfire is fun,” Sharna says. “Pushing myself when it’s freezing cold up that mountain, that’s the fun part. Taking the actual shot is something where, you’re in the moment, there’s that adrenaline rush.

“I think they say it’s the same chemical release as kissing and that sort of thing. You’re getting that big rush of endorphins.”

Critics of Bec and Sharna – mostly on their public posts on Facebook – don’t buy their argument. They call Bec and Sharna serial killers; they call them sick; they say Bec and Sharna should turn their weapons on themselves.

“Put a rifle up your c***,” someone wrote, “and pull the trigger”.

Sharna with her gun

Sharna

Bec and Sharna understand why people are quick to judge hunters. But they say criticism tends to be clouded by false assumptions, and – unless their critics are vegans – embedded in hypocrisy.

“They think we go out there to torture animals where we don’t,” Sharna says. “They don’t understand what we do. That’s definitely an aspect of why people dislike us so much.”

But Bec and Sharna’s reasoning for hunting boils down to a few things: they enjoy hunting for fitness, they eat the animals they’ve killed, and they only kill animals that are a sustainable resource.

“I’d much rather know where my meat is coming from,” Sharna says. “I don’t want to just walk into the supermarket, pick it up off the shelf and not know where it’s come from.

“There’s a genuine respect for the animal. There’s no regret [when we kill]. But there’s… it’s very hard to describe. It’s not remorse, it’s not regret.

Hunter Bec with her bow

Bec

Are all animals equal?

Bec and Sharna often go back to this existential point: when it comes to hunting in the animal kingdom, there is no hierarchy. Apart from endangered or rare species, no life is worth more than another. Squishing a spider is the same as shooting a baboon in South Africa – where they are a sustainable resource, Bec says.

Bec shot a giraffe in South Africa, and the animal was butchered that day for the locals to eat.

Bec in South Africa

“The amount of food that this guy provided for the local community is possibly still being enjoyed,” Bec says.

“I’m not a serial killer”

Bec says none of the criticism she’s received online has made her “second-guess” her hobby and lifestyle choice.

But for Sharna, one comment caught her off guard.

A commenter once took issue with Sharna’s taxidermy animals. “That’s what a serial killer does, a serial killer collects tokens,” the commenter told Sharna.

“For me I was like, ‘I want to know what separates me from a serial killer’ and that’s a pretty big thing to think about within yourself. That comment made me sit down and think about that.”

So what does separate Sharna and Bec from, say, Ivan Milat? Is it just the victims they choose?

“There’s plenty of things,” Sharna says.

“I’m a nurse and I have compassion for people. Obviously serial killers don’t think about their actions – they’re sociopaths. So there’s quite a bit that separates me from a serial killer.

Sarah McVeigh with Bec and Sharna

Sarah McVeigh with Bec and Sharna

Both Bec and Sharna are careful about calling killing “fun”. They insist the act of hunting – the whole experience – is fun, but pulling the trigger is not.

“If I were to say that to pull the trigger is fun, the way people view me might change,” Sharna admits.

“You take the shot, pull the trigger, and if that animal falls over straight away, hasn’t really known what’s going on, that’s a success. So you do get excited about it, and it is a fun activity.”

Sharna and Bec know it’s hard for people to understand how killing could be fun.

“Instead of just sitting behind a keyboard and telling me that what I’m doing is wrong, come and see it.”

Listen to Bec and Sharna in episode 1 of How Do You Sleep At Night? a new ABC podcast hosted by Sarah McVeigh. Download all the episodes now on the new ABC Listen app, or subscribe on Itunes.

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke’s Hunting And Fishing Revival

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20170912/interior-secretary-ryan-zinkes-hunting-and-fishing-revival

TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 12, 2017

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke's Hunting And Fishing Revival

Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke is leading a revival. It’s not the kind that occurs under a big tent full of folding chairs, fiery sermons, and hallelujahs, but the kind that occurs when hunters, fishermen, and outdoorsmen in general feel liberated from the shackles of an overbearing federal government; when they experience anew the freedom to take their guns and gear into America’s wild places and fish and hunt the way their fathers and grandfathers fished and hunted before them.

Zinke set the tone for this revival on his first day as Interior Secretary. He did so by repealing the Obama administration’s lead ammunition ban—a ban which served as a last slap in the face to hunters and fishermen everywhere.

The Obama-era ban was contained in National Fish and Wildlife Service’s Director’s Order 219. The order came from Director Dan Ashe and required regional directors to work with state-level agencies to begin phasing out the use of lead ammunition on federal land. This included requiring the “Assistant Director, Migratory Birds, in consultation with National Flyway Councils and individual states, … [to] establish a process to phase in a requirement for the use of nontoxic ammunition for recreational hunting of mourning doves and other upland game birds.”

The Obama administration avoided calling the order an all-out ban by fashioning it so that its implementation occurred over a period of time rather than all at once.

On March 3, 2017, Breitbart News reported that Zinke had repealed the ban and that the repeal was one of his first actions as interior secretary.

The reason Zinke made this one of his top priorities upon taking office is that he understands that hunters and fishermen are a crucial part of wildlife conservation: They preserve a balance in nature whereby fish and wildlife are kept at sustainable levels, rather than being able to overpopulate and ruin food supplies and habitat. And he also understands that hunters and fishermen bring a tremendous amount of money into the U.S. economy annually.

On Sept. 1, 2017, Fox News published a column by NRA-ILA’s Chris W. Cox, in which Cox observed:

Zinke knows that America’s hunters and anglers are the backbone of successful fish and wildlife management in the United States. In 2016 alone, $1.1 billion in hunter and angler excise revenues was invested by the 50 state fish and wildlife agencies to fund wildlife projects benefiting all wildlife—game and non-game species alike.

Crucially, Zinke also acknowledges the role hunting and fishing play as traditions in America. For example, a childhood in a state like Kentucky is marked by the time a son and his father spend getting ready for hunting season. They plan the hunt, tend the food plot, build the tree stand, study the movement and habits of the deer, then go out on opening day intent on bringing home food the family can eat and stories the father and son will share for the rest of their lives.

Cox put it this way:

[Zinke] also understands … within our own local communities, hunting and angling is an important tradition that’s often passed down through the generations and enjoyed by the entire family, helping to forge lifelong support of wildlife conservation and the full appreciation of our fish and wildlife resources.

In short, Zinke’s convictions about the importance of hunting and fishing mean more opportunities for outdoorsmen. This is seen via announcements like the Department of the Interior’s Aug. 9, 2017, announcement that Secretary Zinke was expanding “hunting and fishing opportunities at 10 national wildlife preserves.”

This expansion will result in responsible conservation practices, money for the U.S. economy and traditions that link generations together over time.

End of the trophy hunt: Proposed B.C. rules on killing grizzlies leave hunters and activists unhappy

End of the trophy hunt: Proposed B.C. rules on killing grizzlies leave hunters and activists unhappy

The province, citing poll results, says it’s taking action because the ‘vast majority’ of people in B.C. take the view that grizzly trophy hunting is not ‘socially acceptable’

Under revised B.C. regulations grizzly bears can still be hunted, but only in restricted circumstances for meat. No trophy parts — hide, skull or paws — can be kept by the hunter.Getty Images

The hunter wearing the camouflage ball cap could barely contain his excitement.

He had just fired his bolt-action rifle at a grizzly grazing in the wilds of northern British Columbia, sending the bear tumbling down a hill to within 10 yards of him.

“Holy, Toledo!” the hunter says in a dramatic 2014 YouTube video of the kill. He flashes a wide grin and fist bumps his son and hunting guide.

“This is a dream come true for me. I’ve been wanting a grizz for a long, long time.”

Such videos could soon become a rarity after B.C.’s NDP government announced plans this summer to ban grizzly bear “trophy hunting” — hunting for thrills and bragging rights — and to restrict the harvesting of grizzlies only for meat.

But the proposed regulation, set to take effect Nov. 30, is drawing rebuke from all sides of the emotionally charged debate — hunters who say they should be able to take home mementos of their kills, guide outfitters who say their livelihoods are at stake and activists who say killing grizzlies for food should also be banned.

“The whole thing hasn’t been thought out,” said Ian McAllister, executive director of Pacific Wild, a non-profit focused on conservation.

Currently, B.C. residents can apply for permits to hunt grizzlies in certain designated areas under a lottery system. Those living outside the province can hunt grizzlies only after they have hired a guide outfitter.

The province says its motivation for ending the trophy hunt is not because the grizzly population is in jeopardy. According to the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development, about 250 grizzles are taken by hunters each year out of a “stable and self-sustaining” population of roughly 15,000.

Instead, the province, citing poll results, says it’s taking action because the “vast majority” of people in B.C. take the view that grizzly trophy hunting is “not a socially acceptable practice.”

Under the new regulation, it will be illegal for a hunter to possess “trophy parts” of a grizzly, including the skull, hide and paws. The province has not decided if it will require hunters to leave those prohibited parts at the kill site or require hunters to take them in for government inspection.

But in an open letter signed earlier this month, Humane Society International/Canada, the BC SPCA and numerous other environmental and animal-welfare organizations expressed concern that the trophy hunt ban will be difficult to enforce and that trophy hunting will likely continue “under the guise” of meat hunting.

“People do not travel hundreds or thousands of kilometres, pay tens of thousands of dollars, and risk their lives shooting at grizzly bears to put meat on the table. … Even if the head, hide and claws are left on the ground, or given to a conservation officer, the hunter will take away trophy videos, photographs and bragging rights. The bears will still be killed for sport,” the letter states.

As they called for a complete ban of grizzly hunting, the groups also disputed the province’s claim that the grizzly population is sustainable, saying the species is threatened in some regions due to human conflicts, habitat destruction and hunting.

They would prefer if the province threw its support behind businesses that promote grizzly viewing instead of hunting.

Meanwhile, the province’s guide outfitters worry the new regulation could put a big dent in their business.

“This is not a science-based decision; this is purely an emotional decision,” said Mark Werner of the Guide Outfitters Association of B.C.

Werner pointed out that while current regulations require hunters to harvest edible portions of black bears, they permit hunters to take home other parts of the bear, such as the head and hide. Why allow it for black bears but not grizzlies? It would be such a waste to leave behind those parts of the grizzly, he said.

Werner and other pro-hunting advocates said logging and other big industries do far more harm to the grizzly population than selective hunting.

If the ban proceeds, expect the encroachment of grizzlies into urban centres and attacks on hikers and campers to rise, they added. Sometimes, you need that “human fear factor” to keep grizzlies at bay, Werner said.

Neither the father-son duo in the 2014 YouTube video nor the hunting outfitter they hired, Love Bros & Lee Ltd. of Hazelton, B.C., could be reached for comment. But other hunters say the braggadocio depicted in the video is not representative of their behaviour.

Carl Gitscheff of Dawson Creek, B.C., recalled a grizzly hunt that he did with his 34-year-old son, Krostin, this past spring in the northeast part of the province.

“At this stage in my life, to be honest with you, I don’t care if I kill anything. I just enjoy the hunt. My purpose was to go with him and accompany him on his bear,” Gitscheff said.

But when they spotted a grizzly in the distance on the second day of their trip, Gitscheff’s son let him take the shot.

“He actually proved himself as the man and extended his compassion, his love, by insisting that I take it. … It was the gentleman thing to do, which really for a father, touched my heart in a way that’s hard to describe.”

The end result was a “picture perfect” one-shot kill.

Gitscheff said he harvested the entire bear and is in the process of tanning the hide.

“Upon my expiry, perhaps one of my grandchildren may hang it in their home and say this belonged to Papa,” he said.

“You’ll never see a picture of my bear on social media. If you walked into my home, you’ll never see that bear. It’s not on display. I’m not beating my chest over this animal.”

Donald Trump Jr. Ditched Secret Service to Go Moose Hunting

 http://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trump-jr-ditched-secret-service-to-go-moose-hunt

Donald Trump Jr. gave up his Secret Service detail in mid-September to go on a moose-hunting trip in the Yukon, according to a report in The New York Timesthat details one reporter’s quest to locate the eldest son of the president during his adventure. Trump voluntarily abandoned the protections when he traveled to the sparsely populated northwest Canada territory, where he spent a week with a few friends and a hunting bow. Trump Jr.’s Secret Service protection has since been reactivated.

A crossbow hunter thought he shot a coyote. It was a family dog named Tonka

 September 23 at 2:46 PM

Tonka, a 1-year-old Alaskan shepherd, sleeps next to James Mongno, 9, and Lauren Mongno, 3. Tonka died Sept. 20 after a hunter mistook him for a coyote and shot him. (Courtesy of Elizabeth Mongno)

Elizabeth Mongno was walking Tonka around her wooded property in rural New Jersey when the 1-year-old dog spotted a deer and decided to chase it.

Tonka liked to roam free on the 3-to-4-acre parcel of land divided among a handful of homeowners, and he usually came back within seconds. But when he dashed into the woods Wednesday evening, he didn’t return. She screamed for Tonka to come back, and about 30 seconds after her dog took off, she heard a yelp. She knew Tonka was hurt, and thought he had been bitten by another animal.

About 10 minutes later, her husband found Tonka on the ground about 50 feet from their property line. He’d been shot directly in the heart with an arrow. Tonka tried to walk home, Mongno said, but he didn’t make it.

“It didn’t occur to me that there’s a hunter in the woods,” Mongno told The Washington Post. “I started screaming.”

Police said Tonka was killed by a crossbow hunter who mistook the 95-pound Alaskan shepherd with white and gray fur for a coyote chasing a deer. The hunter, Romeo Antonucci, was licensed to hunt and was within the proper distance from houses when he fired, police said. But Antonucci has been charged with careless discharge of a weapon and damage to property. (In this case, Tonka is considered property, a spokesman for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection told NJ.com.)

Antonucci, of Kenilworth, N.J., did not respond to requests for comment.

Bowhunters in New Jersey are allowed to hunt deer as long as they are 150 feet from residences. The state legislature passed a bill in 2010 to shorten the minimum distance requirement from 450 feet to 150 feet, in an effort to curb the deer population.

Tonka sits on the couch with James Mongno. (Elizabeth Mongno)

State law also allows hunters to shoot coyotes. Only bows are allowed during the fall hunting season, which began this month. Firearms and bows are permitted from November to March.

Mongno said Antonucci is a relative of one of her neighbors, who gave him permission to hunt on their property, which is not far from Mongno’s. She said she and the other neighbors should’ve been made aware that somebody was hunting on the property, which is dotted with five houses, so that they knew to be more careful.

“We didn’t know that there was anybody hunting. . . . Children played in those woods,” Mongno said. “It didn’t even occur to us that anybody would even hunt there because it’s a small piece of property.”

Mongno said she is not against hunting. Though she doesn’t hunt, her husband is an avid hunter.

“If the rule is 150 feet, and that is what it is, that’s fine,” she said. “But we have the right to know if somebody is hunting in the property adjacent to us. . . . It never occurred to us that we needed to have hunting laws for our back yard.”

Tonka, an Alaskan shepherd, with  Lauren Mongno. (Courtesy of Elizabeth Mongno)

She also criticized Antonucci for mistaking her dog for a coyote.

“If he couldn’t tell the difference between a dog and a coyote, he should not have a weapon. . . . You need to know your target,” she said.

Mongno’s family got Tonka last year, when he was still a puppy. The beloved dog had become Mongno’s third child and her little boy’s best friend.

“I will never forgive myself for letting him get away from me. My poor kids couldn’t be more broken, especially my 9-year-old.  . . .  Tonka put so many smiles on so many faces. His lovable, goofy personality made everyone around him happy,” Mongno wrote on Facebook.

Mongno’s Facebook profile has many pictures of Tonka with her children.

One photo showed Tonka sleeping in the car with Mongno’s son James, 9, and daughter Lauren, 3. James was resting his head on Tonka, who was curled up in the middle seat between him and his little sister. Another photo showed a younger and smaller Tonka sitting on the couch with his tongue sticking out as James lay next to him with a big smile on his face.

“My son cried himself to sleep every night,” Mongo said.

James skipped school last Friday because he knew his friends and classmates would ask about what happened to his dog, Mongno said, but he didn’t want to talk about Tonka.

Read more:

Family dog found dead in plane’s cargo hold after a two-hour flight delay

Game wardens killed a deer — in front of the family that kept it as a pet

This Alabama hunter shot and killed an 820-pound hog — after it wandered into his front yard