this is a good video. i don't understand why people downvoted this video.. you should downvote a video because you don't agree with hunting you should only downvote if its a crappy quality video.
nicely made video. am just wondering what is the reason for killing these bears? i know you are not eating them so what damage or problems are they causing? or is it like a cull where you just need to keep numbers down? please let me know - am sincerely interested in your answers. thanks.
many hunters eat their bear. Killing bear is done as the same than we do for deer or other games. On the area bordering the forest where bears are leaving, crops damage are more than what you ever gone see from deers. This hunt is taking place in a 1000²mi Wildlife reserve and estimated population is around 700 bears. We are harvesting around only 30 per years since we started 15 years ago, the moose population had triple since to reach a total of 1000 few years back.
So they're no need to really keep the numbers down more than moose or other animals really, but the biggest damage of all those game is more the ignorant cities peoples ( not pointing you ) having a their summer cabin right in the wildlife habitat. then animals have no more place to leave and start to be to many for their environement
Excellent video, and some great shots. I always understood that baiting was a sure way of picking the male over the female. Stalking is great, but theres no guarantee that the cubs are a few yards away, and its Mommy that gets shot.
Man there are alot of pussies in this country. Those are some good, efficient and humane shots.
Every animal needs to be managed.
Heres a question for those against hunting:
Would you rather have a hunter buy a liscense, buy a tag(or multiple tags), buy gear, ammo and gas to go hunting or have the citizens pay fish and game officers to control the populations? F&G will probably do it by trapping, poisoning and possibly by shooting them from a helicopter.
I use a 1945 .303 British for bear,deer and moose...It has anew handcrafted ash montecarlo stock...with a 9 power variable Bushnell scope....It is a great all-round Hunting rifle and is great for bears!
I don't agree with bating, and neither does the 315lbs bear I shot in 07. I was deer hunting and he came within 30 yards of me on his own. Yesterday while scouting for the sept. 1st opener I had a decent sized bear come within bow range of me. Sure, baiting is easy, but if you don't want to take the easy road you can find where they are in their natural habits. My 07 bear and the bear I have recently spotted were/are both up on a mountain in thick areas, but I'm up to an actual challenge.
I understand your point of you, once you come on the eastern area you'll see than it 's not possible to do spot & stalk in our kind of wood. Plus by baitng we can be more selective and save sows.
excellent shooting , nice to see the girl joining in too. not too fussed about the bow hunting , but that shot at the beginning was impressive when it put the bear down , must have hit the heart . keep em coming
love hunting, and some great shots, i must admit im not the biggest fan of baiting its kinda a lazy mans way of doing it....each to there own though. great vid
You can do the same with Bows and they're quite old. I think it is better that we have the technology to kill our food with minimal risk to ourselves and in a minimally brutal way that doesn't damage much of the meat. Other animals have to deal with ripping their targets to shreds, sufficating them and often times eating them alive. We and everything we do is part of nature. We're not special. We like to put ourselves outside of nature because we think we're special, but we're not.
You're right; we are not outside of nature. We are not only NOT special, we are mass-murderers of entire species of fellow animals. We are the worst species ever to come along in the 5 billion years of this planet.
PS we don't neet to kill any sentient creatures "for food"; I haven't eaten meat in over a year and I"ve never felt better in my life.... and I sleep better knowing it.
sitting in a stand in front of a barrel full of food and waiting for a bear isnt hunting. why dont u go for a wander in those woods so it evens it out a little.
If you think cows are killed humanely then you need to do some more research. After growing up on a cold concrete slab they are herded into a metal pen and they have a spring loaded contraption smack them in the head until they die. Pigs are much the same but they are hung from the ceiling by their feet and get their throats slit. Look into it. Bear is delicious and very healthy compared to beef. It tastes just like pot roast but is a much healthier alternative. I ALWAYS eat what I kill.
ok my freind u seem like a nice guy and i guessif u eat everything u kill its all gd, but dayam thts alot of bears ure killing there and the amount of meat u get of 1 bear must be huge so whos eatin it all?
I think we have a misunderstanding. I'm not in this video. I did shoot a bear in 2007 and I just finished up the last of the meat. I was simply commenting as an observer. I am totally against shooting bears at bait. Maybe this clears some things up.
haha. I thought that might clear some things up. One thing to keep in mind is that they might have taken the meat back to a large hunting lodge or to some sort of charity dinner or something. When I shot my bear I was deer hunting and he literally walked right up to me, fair and square. I do not like baiting, it seems unethical to me. Glad we could clear things up!
Bears can climb trees, dummy. Further, I doubt YOU could possibly know what Chinua3 meant by defenseless, unless you ARE Chinua3. Finally, when did I ever say I enjoyed this? If you don't know shit, don't say shit.
mopar dave why are you watching this shit if all your going to do is bitch about you moron. bear baiting is needed to keep bear populations in check. look at new jersey they banned bear hunting a few years back now everybodies bitching cause theres too many of them.
Like all subjects, there are two sides. There are pros to baiting and a lot more skill than most understand. If you would like me to list them I sure would. But, I also realize I am probably talking with someone closed minded who has never baited or probably hunted in general.
But, I have a feeling you aren't being very honest, you use to many phrases that are very uncommon in this country. And if I had to guess.......Australia.
Yes, my friend. I could ask this question too. If you hunt for food, it's ok. If you kill to defend yourself in dangerous situations, it's ok too. But, if you do only for fun, it's not ok I think. What's the fun of killing animals ? What's the fun of killing ? Me being idealistic, I could never understand and accept this. I wish Timothy Treadwell would be still alive in these days. Peace. :)
The point of killing bears is so that fat, pathetic, and poorly endowed men can feel better about themselves. They want to boast about they're "manly" kills. Something they do not realize though is that a person who boasts about his own manhood is just trying to drown out his own self doubts.
Main difference b/w most hunters and most AR activists is we don't think we're better than anyone else. The arrogance it takes to say "I know better than you therefore you should do as I say" astonishes me. I don't knock people for being vegetarians. Also, it has nothing to do with intelligence or education. The vice president of the Fish and Game club at my university is now getting his Masters in Chemistry. Debate is awesome, I invite it, but you advocate taking away my personal freedoms.
Whoa, whoa, whoa... you're either throwing a stereotype on vegans, or you've failed to see that this isn't about us. It's about the animals. We're not vegan to feel superior or to put down other people. We're vegan because we're making a very serious choice to participate in a movement we are very passionate about and feel is necessary for many reasons.
That's assuming my prey has personal freedoms. Once again, that is your viewpoint (Sentientism I'm assuming) not an absolute. Owning a pet is violating its personal freedom. building a house is violating the personal freedom of the worms that lived there. Clearing forests for agriculture violates the personal freedoms of the cavity nesters that occupied the stands. If your argument is 'truth', then I violate dozens of personal freedoms each day.
The past is the past. Evolution is guided by the present. Domesticated companion animals are wholly dependent on us. Therefore it's not the same situation. True that at some point in time, we violated the rights of animals to make them domesticated, but that's the past and we have to take responsibility for the present.
Then what about livestock. They have been selectively bred to the point that they are no longer capable of surviving on their own. Should we keep them all as pets now if we're not going to eat them. Then you'd have to neuter millions of animals, and violate their natural right to bread; personal-freedom methinks :-p
You are correct in that they are also domesticated animals.
I spent a weekend volunteering at a farm sanctuary this past summer. It was a very positive environment. I'm sure as veganism grows over the years, there will be more and more farm sanctuaries.
I'm not saying this is going to be easy. Change can be difficult, though necessary.
We have an evolutionary responsibility to only kill other lifeforms when it is absolutely necessary... in survival or self-defense situations. What's happening to these bears is a violation of their right to evolve on their own without our trivial interference for recreation or pleasure.
For bears to evolve on their own we'd have to go back in time and kill all the humans. We've modified their environment so much that any concept of 'nature' no longer truly exists. We've increased the abundance of some food sources while depleting others. We've blocked travel routes, cleared shelter, and even affected the conditions in which they hibernate (global warming).
To say that they could evolve 'naturally' in this radically changed environment is laughable. We should manage bears.
No, you're stuck hanging onto the past. Bears are always evolving "naturally". "Nature" is all of existence. The point is that as humans we would not wish to have inflicted upon us what we are doing to other species. Since we can rationally escape killing other animals and since we don't require meat and other animal food products to live healthy, we have a higher evolutionary responsibility.
...especially because of how much good we'd be doing for food supplies and the environment if we were to stop breeding animals for food... which is a tangent from the hunting debate on some levels, but directly related in terms of our overall view of animals as "inferior" and "disposable".
Bear populations are stable to increasing across our country, so the only detrimental effect hunting has is to your feelings. This "higher evolutionary responsibility", if there is such a thing, would include responsible management in my eyes. A bears death at the hands of a hunter would likely be less painful and drawn out than if it died of "natural causes", so whats the harm?
Hang on a second. Tell me the criteria with which your sources have found that bear populations are "stable". I'd really like to know how they determine that.
My problem is that I disagree with you. I've watched all this hunting footage and it looks extremely painful. Our higher evolutionary responsibility means we're in charge of leading a more peaceful life on Earth. If we lead, the rest of the planet will follow over centuries. That's how natural selection behaves.
hunter interest is down, bear numbers are stable to increasing. This is for Canada atleast, can't speak for the US. Just google Ministry of Environment bears numbers, or something along those lines. Here in BC, I can go out in the morning and get a bear by lunch, without much difficulty. Maybe in provinces with more agriculture and ranchers are shooting more bears illegally then there may be the odd area where there numbers are down. But I never seen evidenvce of that.
bears eat alot more vegetation than animal product. BC has a forestry driven economy. Forestry practices create opening which provide an abundance of grasses and berries which are bears primary food source. Milder winters have decreased overwintering mortality.
Hunting does not have to be justified. In order to discount an established tradition you must make the case on how this would better benefit society or the environment as a whole. In my eyes, you have consistenly failed to do so.
Hunting has been around forever, therefore it is up to you to justify why it should cease. As far as I can see the pros outweigh the cons. pros: healthy food source, conservation money generated thru hunting (National Geographic did a 9 page article on this), promotion of healthy lifestyle, tradition. Cons: Bleeding hearts feel bad.
Healthy food source? I don't think so. Meat lowers the ph level of your blood causing calcium oxalate stones to form after stealing calcium away that should be put to use for strengthening your bones. I don't care about how much money it generates. I'm sure slavery was once very profitable. "Tradition" is irrelevant if you're doing these things to animals for trivial reasons such as pleasure and convenience. It's not acceptable.
Yes, but meat is unhealthy. The studies make sense. The only thing it's really good for is high-bioavailable protein which can be achieved from a properly planned vegan diet and possibly B12 because of the high presence of bacteria.
Global warming, I don't know. I stopped taking the whole scare seriously once I saw "an inconvenient truth". I've heard most scientists don't even think it's real, but I haven't done my homework with regards to that.
What I do know is that animal factory farms are heavy point-source polluters and because of how centralized they are, require heavy fossil fuel consumption to maintain and transport their products (i.e. mutilated animals).
ya, i stay out of the global warming debate because i only got a c+ in climatology.
Seen an article on buying fresh fruit in the winter and how intense the carbon foot print is. Either major fossil fuel to transport from more tropical climates or huge amounts of natural gas to heat greenhouses in the more temporate climates.
For a very long time, native people have needed to hunt for survival. This is no longer true. According to their way, all of creation is sacred and should never treated in vain. The unnecessary hunting of animals is a very vain course of action. Sure, it was wrong what has been done to them and their way of life was far more balanced then those who arrogantly conquered the americas... but that doesn't mean they are exempt from listening to the cries of our Earth Mother.
Well, what choice do I have? You stumbled right into my spiritual experience when you mentioned Native Americans. I can't trace myself to any tribe though we suspect I have about 1/8 blood. You gotta understand that I agree wholeheartedly with much of native spiritual beliefs... except I take those teachings in the present context. It's not a "tradition" to me. It's an understanding of life. My animal spirit guide is the wolf.
The term "Earth Mother" is rather whimsical and people usually associate such terms with superstition and irrationality. It never occured to those people that maybe it's metaphorical or representative of something very real that could be rationally explained if they opened their eyes.
If we were to stop hunting, that would make the world a better place because there would be less unnecessary suffering. With you making the decision to stop taking life with your own hands for unnecessary reasons, makes the world all the more peaceful. That is not just superstition or wishful thinking, it's sound logic based on an understanding of evolution and scalar adaptation.
Where's the unnecessary suffering? Natural death= starvation, blood infection, or bleeding out after being attacked. There is no net increase in suffering from hunting. Do you think the bears cares how 'holistic' of a death it has.
Did it ever occur to you that the wild be more peaceful if humans didn't come barging in firing weapons? We have to take responsibility for our actions. We are just as much to blame for those violent causes of death as this separate detached entity you refer to as "nature".
Hunting is the exact opposite of a detachment of nature. Hunting is participating in nature as we always have. The argument i'm making is that the idea of nature that most people seem to hold is a farce. There is no ecosystem that is untouched by man. Look at the ungulate explosion that has happened in the U.S. Look at whats going on with the endangered mountain caribou (moose follow logging roads uphill, wolves follow moose, wolves eat caribou). Biologists suggestion= management hunts.
The high demand of meat in the world has lead to a serious problem requiring us to stop animal agriculture. Can you imagine if a population addicted to meat and not conscious of animal rights shifted over to hunting?
Populations will regulate themselves. Over time, things will become more peaceful.
I just want to clarify "Populations will regulate themselves. Over time, things will become more peaceful." I didn't mean to say that's what would happen if the whole human population started to hunt. That's what will happen if we go vegan.
I understood that. But I don't understand your ideal of peaceful. Animals would still get injured and starve to death, bison will still be eaten while still alive by wolves, wolves will still kill coyote pups on site, moose will still gore other moose leaving them with blood infections and slow deaths, male bears will still kill a sow's cubs to make her sexual receptive, etc. Peace is a very relative term. And for self-regulation , alot of the natural mechanisms are no longer in place.
Yes they may get injured and starve to death. It should then be our job to only interfere in a healing capacity. Hunting is not healing anything. The wild is a very violent place. Let it heal over time. We don't need to hunt for survival anymore.
All mechanisms are natural. If you mean "healthy", we have to let the wounds heal.
Yeah but you talk about "nature" as if it's separate from you in terms of evolutionary responsibility. The reason the wild is so violent is because the entire circle of life is lost in a food chain. We help make it that way with our choices in the present. As humans who are capable of living without actively seeking to harm other sentient beings, we are in a position to evolve beyond that animal food chain, thus making the world more peaceful.
You're right in that humans are very much part of the 'entire' ecosystem on Earth, which means our interference is unavoiable, but take a look at how we could be reducing our interference. Imagine if we freed up all the land being used for animal factory farming, and put it to use growing crops for local communities. Imagine if we did that on a global scale... we could save other nations from starving. We could allow the cows to live off grass and hay, which I'm sure there's an abundance of.
You can't do that on a global scale though. The conditions do not exist or will exist, atleast not for a very long time, if ever. Thinking in those kind of terms is like living in a dream world, with people holding hands skipping across dewy meadows.
& how about those aliens again? What if they decided Earth needed a bit of human population control and reduction? What if they thought our lives were so unbearable and full of suffering anyway?
Haven't you ever found it odd that biologists and naturalists fail to take into account that evolution isn't temporally uni-directional? We evolve in the present, not the past since the past is over. That means natural selection is guided according to our lifestyle choices now in the present.
We should not "manage" bears. We should clean up our act and stop polluting the environment with factory farming and concentrate less on development and more on being responsible and spiritually intelligent.
It doesn't have to be an oxymoron. It could be a term that refers to the outcome of conjoining both rational intelligence and holistically aware spirituality.
That usually not what occurs. Rationality usually goes out the window and people are consumed by their emotions on this topic. And I don't think anyone can argue emotions are rational.
Okay, you're talking worms now, not bears. Although I wouldn't actively go out to find worms to kill, I think it's safe for us to agree that there is a big difference between a worm and a bear.
Think about how much damage is done to ecosystems to clear land for animal factory farms. Then think of how much land is used to grow plant food for livestock feedlots... Do you realize the mathematical implications?
Laws change, the truth remains the same. Our job is making sure the law conforms with the truth. That's why many activists want to see a charter of rights and freedoms for animals.
So yes, one day, killing animals will be
1. unlawful
2. killing
3. of a nonhuman being
4. coupled with "malice aforethought" as society accepts that killing animals for pleasure or convenience is wrong
Laws do change. Hopefully law makers see through the purely emotional arguments of the animal rights lobby and do not embark on the shift toward ecofacism that you are advocating.
I'm not advocating ecofascism. Society will change before laws are made. As activists, it's our job to defend the truth, from an animal rights POV, scientific POV, nutritional POV, environmental POV, and food security POV. ;-)
2nd: like you said, your 'truths' are from a skewed point of view, they are not absolutes.
3rd: Animal rights organizations have an awful track record for observing laws.
I wish there was a higher character limit on this so we could delve into cultural relativism, the state of 'nature' i.e. self-regulation, environmental ethics, predator-prey oscillations, etc.
I advocate for the defense of all sentient lifeforms. ;-)
Which "skewed point of view"? When did I say that? I'm using Star Trek as a tool to convey a message. For god's sakes man, it's a bicycle not a bible. ;P
I'm pretty sure activists from any radical movement in history had an awful track record for observing laws.
I wrote an essay on cultural relativism in my moral philosophy class. My conclusion was that according to cultural relativism, cultural relativism is, in fact relative, and therefore cancels out. ... That makes perfect sense since there is such a thing as right and wrong. ;-)
wow. you must be a masochist. you are grossed out by the thought of bears being killed yet you watch watch a video where you are 100% guaranteed to see several bear kills. could you explain this to me? i hate the backstreet boys but when i go on youtube i don't torture myself by watching their videos and then complain about what i just watched.
I'm watching these videos to find suitable clips for my mini-documentary about Star Trek and animal rights. There's nothing wrong in itself with seeing evil. It's whether or not you're participating in the evil.
There are some inconsistencies with respect to vegetarianism on Earth, but mainly identifiable with pragmatic script conventions, and given that the overall point of view of starfleet seems to be "it's wrong to exploit another species"... other inconsistencies can be easily explained with the replicator.
I'm all for hunting the right way. Hiking, stalking and work for the game. And then putting it to good use. Not just the trophy. but these asshats sit in lawn chairs by a dump. a 5 year old could shoot the bear. Now if they would hide in the trash can and then jump out on the bear and kill it using only a bowie knife, that would fair.
this is a good video. i don't understand why people downvoted this video.. you should downvote a video because you don't agree with hunting you should only downvote if its a crappy quality video.
any way nice shots.
andrewjconners 5 months ago
nice shooting!
logicalwipe0908 7 months ago
very good !!
so cool !!
272577 7 months ago
good shooting
MrJuice18 2 years ago
Nice death moan at 1:57...........
JBodine67 2 years ago
so nice.
misaki212212 2 years ago
nicely made video. am just wondering what is the reason for killing these bears? i know you are not eating them so what damage or problems are they causing? or is it like a cull where you just need to keep numbers down? please let me know - am sincerely interested in your answers. thanks.
NostradamuzZ 2 years ago 7
thanks for your comment.
many hunters eat their bear. Killing bear is done as the same than we do for deer or other games. On the area bordering the forest where bears are leaving, crops damage are more than what you ever gone see from deers. This hunt is taking place in a 1000²mi Wildlife reserve and estimated population is around 700 bears. We are harvesting around only 30 per years since we started 15 years ago, the moose population had triple since to reach a total of 1000 few years back.
bigbearguide 2 years ago
So they're no need to really keep the numbers down more than moose or other animals really, but the biggest damage of all those game is more the ignorant cities peoples ( not pointing you ) having a their summer cabin right in the wildlife habitat. then animals have no more place to leave and start to be to many for their environement
bigbearguide 2 years ago
Bear hunting is fun, I hunt mine with a M4 fullauto.
FreeDogdylan 2 years ago
illeagal but your very right real fun
klrdrummer 2 years ago
not true, it is legal and is about the only way to kill a bear except by luck.
Same exitement than any other games
bigbearguide 2 years ago
2:15 DONE! lol
BranPHILhop 2 years ago
The one at 0:26 didn't look very humiliating...
stonejeffrico 2 years ago
Just a question what do you do with the dead bear ? They killed so many.
ABHEE123UT 2 years ago
bear meat is good and people keep the skin for rug or any kind of mounts
bigbearguide 2 years ago
thats how its done. dead before they hit the ground.
alawoo01 2 years ago
great video!
superdivamom 2 years ago
Man, this is fucking awesome
Gihaal 2 years ago
Is that legal Man Fight a grizzly not black bears!
userflock 2 years ago
nice shot at 2:10 that bear didn't get a chance to utter not even a letter. just went
down in a second.
eddieochocinco 2 years ago
Excellent video, and some great shots. I always understood that baiting was a sure way of picking the male over the female. Stalking is great, but theres no guarantee that the cubs are a few yards away, and its Mommy that gets shot.
Downedworker 2 years ago
stop bitching.
toutnu 2 years ago 4
yep thats why i perfer the idea of baiting bear over stalking. it should be legal everywhere it keeps mommy from getten shot.
Bowhunter82393 2 years ago 2
Beautiful bears!
Nice piece of shooting!
mjsm7641736 2 years ago
Man there are alot of pussies in this country. Those are some good, efficient and humane shots.
Every animal needs to be managed.
Heres a question for those against hunting:
Would you rather have a hunter buy a liscense, buy a tag(or multiple tags), buy gear, ammo and gas to go hunting or have the citizens pay fish and game officers to control the populations? F&G will probably do it by trapping, poisoning and possibly by shooting them from a helicopter.
Formuladude 2 years ago 13
how did you get them home?
the12221 2 years ago
Don't understand your question?
You mean back to the camp or back to your country?
bigbearguide 2 years ago
I use a 1945 .303 British for bear,deer and moose...It has anew handcrafted ash montecarlo stock...with a 9 power variable Bushnell scope....It is a great all-round Hunting rifle and is great for bears!
shanegiggie 2 years ago
I use a 1903 Springfield 30-06.
jgomez900 2 years ago
Humane bear population control at its best !
Nice shooting!
Nice death moan at 1:54...
Happy 2009 season !!
shanegiggie 2 years ago
From my experience,baiting is necessary .
I've shot 4 bears...3 near a bait and one in a field.
My friends hunt bears over baits by use of a ground blind.
The chances of getting a decent shot on a bear out on foot is slim.
It's not impossible...but baiting makes for successfull bear population control.
The video contains proof that these animals are harvested in the most humane way...No dogs...no traps....and no poison.
Excellent hunting and sportsmanship!
shanegiggie 2 years ago 2
I don't agree with bating, and neither does the 315lbs bear I shot in 07. I was deer hunting and he came within 30 yards of me on his own. Yesterday while scouting for the sept. 1st opener I had a decent sized bear come within bow range of me. Sure, baiting is easy, but if you don't want to take the easy road you can find where they are in their natural habits. My 07 bear and the bear I have recently spotted were/are both up on a mountain in thick areas, but I'm up to an actual challenge.
actionsports111 2 years ago
I understand your point of you, once you come on the eastern area you'll see than it 's not possible to do spot & stalk in our kind of wood. Plus by baitng we can be more selective and save sows.
bigbearguide 2 years ago
excellent shooting , nice to see the girl joining in too. not too fussed about the bow hunting , but that shot at the beginning was impressive when it put the bear down , must have hit the heart . keep em coming
sentinal2000 2 years ago 2
love hunting, and some great shots, i must admit im not the biggest fan of baiting its kinda a lazy mans way of doing it....each to there own though. great vid
rotamanX 2 years ago
nice shots guys!
catlover4351 2 years ago
nice :)
gary77777778888888 2 years ago
Lovely shots.........nice camera coverage.
kingkhan911 2 years ago
thanks for the positive comments
bigbearguide 2 years ago
i use M82 sniper rifle for deers :) works fine
Butthungryassclown 2 years ago
Nice shots, but is it legal in North America to hunt with bows?
BiltemaPower 2 years ago
yes.
rensmaag 2 years ago
what gun is that 330 win or 30 06
NightStalker1995 2 years ago
this was a 50 cal. muzzleloader
bigbearguide 2 years ago
sometimes we need to pickup all hunters around then comeback loading the beast, it take all of 4 -5 guys together.
bigbearguide 2 years ago
as i say curiosity killed the bear
worldpeace9090 2 years ago 2
nice i hope i get one this fall
Jacobey96 2 years ago
arnt bears an endangered species
davemrakaelmo 2 years ago
Bear are not an endangered species at all. Last estimation in Quebec was over 70,000 and keep growing!
in my areawe figure close to 1000 and we're killing less than 50.
bigbearguide 2 years ago
Wow, I didn't know bear hunting is done at such a close distance.
I would prefer deer hunting, but that's only because I like taking long range shots
BTW,
It obviously that curiosity is the major reason for bear deaths. :D
ArianM2 2 years ago
yeah, bears are a lot harder to kill than deers, the have so much fur and fat. and theyre like 3 to 4x heavier than a full grown buck
8GOAT 2 years ago
You can do the same with Bows and they're quite old. I think it is better that we have the technology to kill our food with minimal risk to ourselves and in a minimally brutal way that doesn't damage much of the meat. Other animals have to deal with ripping their targets to shreds, sufficating them and often times eating them alive. We and everything we do is part of nature. We're not special. We like to put ourselves outside of nature because we think we're special, but we're not.
eurohim 3 years ago
You're right; we are not outside of nature. We are not only NOT special, we are mass-murderers of entire species of fellow animals. We are the worst species ever to come along in the 5 billion years of this planet.
PS we don't neet to kill any sentient creatures "for food"; I haven't eaten meat in over a year and I"ve never felt better in my life.... and I sleep better knowing it.
journeyman47 3 years ago
sitting in a stand in front of a barrel full of food and waiting for a bear isnt hunting. why dont u go for a wander in those woods so it evens it out a little.
psedakota 3 years ago
i agree
91usmcsniper91 3 years ago
If you think cows are killed humanely then you need to do some more research. After growing up on a cold concrete slab they are herded into a metal pen and they have a spring loaded contraption smack them in the head until they die. Pigs are much the same but they are hung from the ceiling by their feet and get their throats slit. Look into it. Bear is delicious and very healthy compared to beef. It tastes just like pot roast but is a much healthier alternative. I ALWAYS eat what I kill.
actionsports111 3 years ago
ok my freind u seem like a nice guy and i guessif u eat everything u kill its all gd, but dayam thts alot of bears ure killing there and the amount of meat u get of 1 bear must be huge so whos eatin it all?
91usmcsniper91 3 years ago
I think we have a misunderstanding. I'm not in this video. I did shoot a bear in 2007 and I just finished up the last of the meat. I was simply commenting as an observer. I am totally against shooting bears at bait. Maybe this clears some things up.
actionsports111 3 years ago
haha ah ok yer i guess tht clears things up a bit, coz in this vid these guys cud never eat all tht meat and full credit 2 u! hi 5 lol
91usmcsniper91 3 years ago
haha. I thought that might clear some things up. One thing to keep in mind is that they might have taken the meat back to a large hunting lodge or to some sort of charity dinner or something. When I shot my bear I was deer hunting and he literally walked right up to me, fair and square. I do not like baiting, it seems unethical to me. Glad we could clear things up!
actionsports111 3 years ago
way to kill those beautiful bastards without losing your "soles"...lol
Great shots. Keep 'em coming!
activeorpassive 3 years ago
nice bears man keep it up!
30secblade 3 years ago
you are lazy fat guys , certainly not HUNTERS....
go to a zoo that would be easier and less trouble.that type ofkilling animal is the reason why people are so angry at hunters, you are a disgrace !!
saliesdebearn 3 years ago
great video, keep it up.
erushbass 3 years ago
same here. i dont even have any problem with lion hunting in south africa, but u just cant handle bear hunting somehow.
maybe thats just me
berettam92s 3 years ago
Bears can climb trees, dummy. Further, I doubt YOU could possibly know what Chinua3 meant by defenseless, unless you ARE Chinua3. Finally, when did I ever say I enjoyed this? If you don't know shit, don't say shit.
ronarprfct 3 years ago
What's the fuxking hell with those 2 or more guys??
Killer!!
vistacreative 3 years ago
mopar dave why are you watching this shit if all your going to do is bitch about you moron. bear baiting is needed to keep bear populations in check. look at new jersey they banned bear hunting a few years back now everybodies bitching cause theres too many of them.
andover09 3 years ago
Like all subjects, there are two sides. There are pros to baiting and a lot more skill than most understand. If you would like me to list them I sure would. But, I also realize I am probably talking with someone closed minded who has never baited or probably hunted in general.
But, I have a feeling you aren't being very honest, you use to many phrases that are very uncommon in this country. And if I had to guess.......Australia.
Eaglecreekbrewer 3 years ago
If u don't like it don't watch it it's that simple u don't see hunters critizing on other thing in the world why should u critize hunters. Nice bear
rackman4 3 years ago
these are not hunters....these are fucking idiots
craigslists123 3 years ago
very good video!
sublime2525 3 years ago
God why are u hunting those bears? u gonna eat them?
PhasedVisor 3 years ago
Comment removed
rensmaag 2 years ago
i wish one they bears kill u
kalemci678 3 years ago
Nice video! Don't mind the dipshit liberals below me.
l
l
V
SusanTheHunter 3 years ago
This isn't to hunt. This is like to shoot against lamps. Maybe was sameone tied? It's ridiculous!!!
videosdearte 3 years ago
this aint hunting they are lame faggots who cant take them in the woods, you should hunt like they do in sweden you lame ppl
Motard231 3 years ago
wat if someone killed ur family and started laughing! this is just sick
mangococo24 3 years ago
hey retard try hunting before you say bad stuff about it and if you dont like it dont look up these videos
Bjskates1 3 years ago
what is the point in killing bears?
purpletable348 3 years ago 2
Yes, my friend. I could ask this question too. If you hunt for food, it's ok. If you kill to defend yourself in dangerous situations, it's ok too. But, if you do only for fun, it's not ok I think. What's the fun of killing animals ? What's the fun of killing ? Me being idealistic, I could never understand and accept this. I wish Timothy Treadwell would be still alive in these days. Peace. :)
NeoBarockLoki 3 years ago 5
The point of killing bears is so that fat, pathetic, and poorly endowed men can feel better about themselves. They want to boast about they're "manly" kills. Something they do not realize though is that a person who boasts about his own manhood is just trying to drown out his own self doubts.
motogpracer87 3 years ago
You're a failure.
You Can't even get a little bear down with one single shot. You seriously fail as a human being.
dickzntube 3 years ago
HOW DID I KNOW... That the comments section would be filled with idiots arguing. Hunting rules shut the fuck up.
lowfiwhiteguy 3 years ago
Yeah, hunting rules. But is this hunting?
o0Dreamlike0o 3 years ago
Main difference b/w most hunters and most AR activists is we don't think we're better than anyone else. The arrogance it takes to say "I know better than you therefore you should do as I say" astonishes me. I don't knock people for being vegetarians. Also, it has nothing to do with intelligence or education. The vice president of the Fish and Game club at my university is now getting his Masters in Chemistry. Debate is awesome, I invite it, but you advocate taking away my personal freedoms.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Whoa, whoa, whoa... you're either throwing a stereotype on vegans, or you've failed to see that this isn't about us. It's about the animals. We're not vegan to feel superior or to put down other people. We're vegan because we're making a very serious choice to participate in a movement we are very passionate about and feel is necessary for many reasons.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
It's not your personal freedom to trample on the personal freedoms of your prey.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
That's assuming my prey has personal freedoms. Once again, that is your viewpoint (Sentientism I'm assuming) not an absolute. Owning a pet is violating its personal freedom. building a house is violating the personal freedom of the worms that lived there. Clearing forests for agriculture violates the personal freedoms of the cavity nesters that occupied the stands. If your argument is 'truth', then I violate dozens of personal freedoms each day.
rensmaag 3 years ago
The past is the past. Evolution is guided by the present. Domesticated companion animals are wholly dependent on us. Therefore it's not the same situation. True that at some point in time, we violated the rights of animals to make them domesticated, but that's the past and we have to take responsibility for the present.
.....
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Then what about livestock. They have been selectively bred to the point that they are no longer capable of surviving on their own. Should we keep them all as pets now if we're not going to eat them. Then you'd have to neuter millions of animals, and violate their natural right to bread; personal-freedom methinks :-p
rensmaag 3 years ago
You are correct in that they are also domesticated animals.
I spent a weekend volunteering at a farm sanctuary this past summer. It was a very positive environment. I'm sure as veganism grows over the years, there will be more and more farm sanctuaries.
I'm not saying this is going to be easy. Change can be difficult, though necessary.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
We have an evolutionary responsibility to only kill other lifeforms when it is absolutely necessary... in survival or self-defense situations. What's happening to these bears is a violation of their right to evolve on their own without our trivial interference for recreation or pleasure.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
For bears to evolve on their own we'd have to go back in time and kill all the humans. We've modified their environment so much that any concept of 'nature' no longer truly exists. We've increased the abundance of some food sources while depleting others. We've blocked travel routes, cleared shelter, and even affected the conditions in which they hibernate (global warming).
To say that they could evolve 'naturally' in this radically changed environment is laughable. We should manage bears.
rensmaag 3 years ago
No, you're stuck hanging onto the past. Bears are always evolving "naturally". "Nature" is all of existence. The point is that as humans we would not wish to have inflicted upon us what we are doing to other species. Since we can rationally escape killing other animals and since we don't require meat and other animal food products to live healthy, we have a higher evolutionary responsibility.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
...especially because of how much good we'd be doing for food supplies and the environment if we were to stop breeding animals for food... which is a tangent from the hunting debate on some levels, but directly related in terms of our overall view of animals as "inferior" and "disposable".
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
i don't view them as inferior or disposable, just a resource to be used responsibly.
rensmaag 3 years ago
to be "used" is to be "disposable".
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
then everything in the world is disposable, including people. We are all used in some way at some point in our lives.
rensmaag 3 years ago
People are not disposable. However, they are treated as disposable objects by some other people sometimes.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Bear populations are stable to increasing across our country, so the only detrimental effect hunting has is to your feelings. This "higher evolutionary responsibility", if there is such a thing, would include responsible management in my eyes. A bears death at the hands of a hunter would likely be less painful and drawn out than if it died of "natural causes", so whats the harm?
rensmaag 3 years ago
Hang on a second. Tell me the criteria with which your sources have found that bear populations are "stable". I'd really like to know how they determine that.
My problem is that I disagree with you. I've watched all this hunting footage and it looks extremely painful. Our higher evolutionary responsibility means we're in charge of leading a more peaceful life on Earth. If we lead, the rest of the planet will follow over centuries. That's how natural selection behaves.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
hunter interest is down, bear numbers are stable to increasing. This is for Canada atleast, can't speak for the US. Just google Ministry of Environment bears numbers, or something along those lines. Here in BC, I can go out in the morning and get a bear by lunch, without much difficulty. Maybe in provinces with more agriculture and ranchers are shooting more bears illegally then there may be the odd area where there numbers are down. But I never seen evidenvce of that.
rensmaag 3 years ago
And this justifies hunting because?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
RE: hunting interest is down, bear pop. up
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Has more to do with climate and increased food availability than hunting. When hunting was at its peak there numbers were still stable.
rensmaag 3 years ago
What are you referring to here? "Has more to do with..."
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
bears eat alot more vegetation than animal product. BC has a forestry driven economy. Forestry practices create opening which provide an abundance of grasses and berries which are bears primary food source. Milder winters have decreased overwintering mortality.
rensmaag 3 years ago
And this justifies hunting because?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Hunting does not have to be justified. In order to discount an established tradition you must make the case on how this would better benefit society or the environment as a whole. In my eyes, you have consistenly failed to do so.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Hunting has been around forever, therefore it is up to you to justify why it should cease. As far as I can see the pros outweigh the cons. pros: healthy food source, conservation money generated thru hunting (National Geographic did a 9 page article on this), promotion of healthy lifestyle, tradition. Cons: Bleeding hearts feel bad.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Healthy food source? I don't think so. Meat lowers the ph level of your blood causing calcium oxalate stones to form after stealing calcium away that should be put to use for strengthening your bones. I don't care about how much money it generates. I'm sure slavery was once very profitable. "Tradition" is irrelevant if you're doing these things to animals for trivial reasons such as pleasure and convenience. It's not acceptable.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Yes you can find nutritionists that say meat is unhealthy, just like you can find climatologists that say global warming doesn't exist.
The money it generates goes toward habitat restoration and wildlife introduction and study.
Tradition is not irrelevant. Try telling the to Native Americans or practitioners of the different religious faiths.
You have still failed to prove why no hunting would make the world a better place, except when from your narrow viewpoint.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Yes, but meat is unhealthy. The studies make sense. The only thing it's really good for is high-bioavailable protein which can be achieved from a properly planned vegan diet and possibly B12 because of the high presence of bacteria.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Global warming, I don't know. I stopped taking the whole scare seriously once I saw "an inconvenient truth". I've heard most scientists don't even think it's real, but I haven't done my homework with regards to that.
What I do know is that animal factory farms are heavy point-source polluters and because of how centralized they are, require heavy fossil fuel consumption to maintain and transport their products (i.e. mutilated animals).
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
ya, i stay out of the global warming debate because i only got a c+ in climatology.
Seen an article on buying fresh fruit in the winter and how intense the carbon foot print is. Either major fossil fuel to transport from more tropical climates or huge amounts of natural gas to heat greenhouses in the more temporate climates.
rensmaag 3 years ago
For a very long time, native people have needed to hunt for survival. This is no longer true. According to their way, all of creation is sacred and should never treated in vain. The unnecessary hunting of animals is a very vain course of action. Sure, it was wrong what has been done to them and their way of life was far more balanced then those who arrogantly conquered the americas... but that doesn't mean they are exempt from listening to the cries of our Earth Mother.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
oh god, you just said Earth Mother. I was waiting for that.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Well, what choice do I have? You stumbled right into my spiritual experience when you mentioned Native Americans. I can't trace myself to any tribe though we suspect I have about 1/8 blood. You gotta understand that I agree wholeheartedly with much of native spiritual beliefs... except I take those teachings in the present context. It's not a "tradition" to me. It's an understanding of life. My animal spirit guide is the wolf.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
The term "Earth Mother" is rather whimsical and people usually associate such terms with superstition and irrationality. It never occured to those people that maybe it's metaphorical or representative of something very real that could be rationally explained if they opened their eyes.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
If we were to stop hunting, that would make the world a better place because there would be less unnecessary suffering. With you making the decision to stop taking life with your own hands for unnecessary reasons, makes the world all the more peaceful. That is not just superstition or wishful thinking, it's sound logic based on an understanding of evolution and scalar adaptation.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Where's the unnecessary suffering? Natural death= starvation, blood infection, or bleeding out after being attacked. There is no net increase in suffering from hunting. Do you think the bears cares how 'holistic' of a death it has.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Did it ever occur to you that the wild be more peaceful if humans didn't come barging in firing weapons? We have to take responsibility for our actions. We are just as much to blame for those violent causes of death as this separate detached entity you refer to as "nature".
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Hunting is the exact opposite of a detachment of nature. Hunting is participating in nature as we always have. The argument i'm making is that the idea of nature that most people seem to hold is a farce. There is no ecosystem that is untouched by man. Look at the ungulate explosion that has happened in the U.S. Look at whats going on with the endangered mountain caribou (moose follow logging roads uphill, wolves follow moose, wolves eat caribou). Biologists suggestion= management hunts.
rensmaag 3 years ago
***supposed to be "from" nature.
I'm not sure most people realize the implications of ceasing hunting. First thing that springs to mind is massive CWD outbreaks.
rensmaag 3 years ago
The high demand of meat in the world has lead to a serious problem requiring us to stop animal agriculture. Can you imagine if a population addicted to meat and not conscious of animal rights shifted over to hunting?
Populations will regulate themselves. Over time, things will become more peaceful.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
I just want to clarify "Populations will regulate themselves. Over time, things will become more peaceful." I didn't mean to say that's what would happen if the whole human population started to hunt. That's what will happen if we go vegan.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
I understood that. But I don't understand your ideal of peaceful. Animals would still get injured and starve to death, bison will still be eaten while still alive by wolves, wolves will still kill coyote pups on site, moose will still gore other moose leaving them with blood infections and slow deaths, male bears will still kill a sow's cubs to make her sexual receptive, etc. Peace is a very relative term. And for self-regulation , alot of the natural mechanisms are no longer in place.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Yes they may get injured and starve to death. It should then be our job to only interfere in a healing capacity. Hunting is not healing anything. The wild is a very violent place. Let it heal over time. We don't need to hunt for survival anymore.
All mechanisms are natural. If you mean "healthy", we have to let the wounds heal.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Yeah but you talk about "nature" as if it's separate from you in terms of evolutionary responsibility. The reason the wild is so violent is because the entire circle of life is lost in a food chain. We help make it that way with our choices in the present. As humans who are capable of living without actively seeking to harm other sentient beings, we are in a position to evolve beyond that animal food chain, thus making the world more peaceful.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
You're right in that humans are very much part of the 'entire' ecosystem on Earth, which means our interference is unavoiable, but take a look at how we could be reducing our interference. Imagine if we freed up all the land being used for animal factory farming, and put it to use growing crops for local communities. Imagine if we did that on a global scale... we could save other nations from starving. We could allow the cows to live off grass and hay, which I'm sure there's an abundance of.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
You can't do that on a global scale though. The conditions do not exist or will exist, atleast not for a very long time, if ever. Thinking in those kind of terms is like living in a dream world, with people holding hands skipping across dewy meadows.
rensmaag 3 years ago
That means we participate in the causes of violence on all scales. We have to reduce that and let things heal.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
& how about those aliens again? What if they decided Earth needed a bit of human population control and reduction? What if they thought our lives were so unbearable and full of suffering anyway?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Haven't you ever found it odd that biologists and naturalists fail to take into account that evolution isn't temporally uni-directional? We evolve in the present, not the past since the past is over. That means natural selection is guided according to our lifestyle choices now in the present.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
We should not "manage" bears. We should clean up our act and stop polluting the environment with factory farming and concentrate less on development and more on being responsible and spiritually intelligent.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
spiritual intelligence is a bit of an oxymoron don't you think?
rensmaag 3 years ago
Really? Why do you say that?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Because spirituality can't be quantified, validated, or otherwise measured. Intelligence can. 2 conjoined contradictory terms=oxymoron.
rensmaag 3 years ago
It doesn't have to be an oxymoron. It could be a term that refers to the outcome of conjoining both rational intelligence and holistically aware spirituality.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
That usually not what occurs. Rationality usually goes out the window and people are consumed by their emotions on this topic. And I don't think anyone can argue emotions are rational.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Logically, we have a higher evolutionary responsibility to contribute to a healthier, more peaceful existence on Earth.
Logic without love is just cold and robotic and empty.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Okay, you're talking worms now, not bears. Although I wouldn't actively go out to find worms to kill, I think it's safe for us to agree that there is a big difference between a worm and a bear.
Think about how much damage is done to ecosystems to clear land for animal factory farms. Then think of how much land is used to grow plant food for livestock feedlots... Do you realize the mathematical implications?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Then you'd have to conceed there is a big difference between a bear and a human.
This is a hunting debate is it not. Therefore your second paragraph is mute. wrong debate.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Why are you thrilled at the thought of murder?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
i'm not. murder is defined as the: 1. unlawful 2. killing 3. of another human being 4. with a state of mind known as "malice aforethought".
I don't hunt to kill, i kill to have hunted. I know that statement won't make much sense to you, but i'm sure the hunters on here get it.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Laws change, the truth remains the same. Our job is making sure the law conforms with the truth. That's why many activists want to see a charter of rights and freedoms for animals.
So yes, one day, killing animals will be
1. unlawful
2. killing
3. of a nonhuman being
4. coupled with "malice aforethought" as society accepts that killing animals for pleasure or convenience is wrong
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Laws do change. Hopefully law makers see through the purely emotional arguments of the animal rights lobby and do not embark on the shift toward ecofacism that you are advocating.
rensmaag 3 years ago
I'm not advocating ecofascism. Society will change before laws are made. As activists, it's our job to defend the truth, from an animal rights POV, scientific POV, nutritional POV, environmental POV, and food security POV. ;-)
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
1st: you're defending, you're advocating=HUGE DIFFERENCE!
2nd: like you said, your 'truths' are from a skewed point of view, they are not absolutes.
3rd: Animal rights organizations have an awful track record for observing laws.
I wish there was a higher character limit on this so we could delve into cultural relativism, the state of 'nature' i.e. self-regulation, environmental ethics, predator-prey oscillations, etc.
rensmaag 3 years ago
I advocate for the defense of all sentient lifeforms. ;-)
Which "skewed point of view"? When did I say that? I'm using Star Trek as a tool to convey a message. For god's sakes man, it's a bicycle not a bible. ;P
I'm pretty sure activists from any radical movement in history had an awful track record for observing laws.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
I wrote an essay on cultural relativism in my moral philosophy class. My conclusion was that according to cultural relativism, cultural relativism is, in fact relative, and therefore cancels out. ... That makes perfect sense since there is such a thing as right and wrong. ;-)
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
*correction
My essay was about moral relativism. Cultural relativism is an empirical fact. Moral relativism is much trickier.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
The state of "nature"... please, I'd like to hear your point of view.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
wow. you must be a masochist. you are grossed out by the thought of bears being killed yet you watch watch a video where you are 100% guaranteed to see several bear kills. could you explain this to me? i hate the backstreet boys but when i go on youtube i don't torture myself by watching their videos and then complain about what i just watched.
rensmaag 3 years ago
I could never answer better,
Thanks Rensmaag
bigbearguide 3 years ago
I'm researching the "sport" of hunting. I'm an animal rights activist. Does that make me a masochist?
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
I'm against pedophilia, does that mean I should go out and watch videos of children being molested?
rensmaag 3 years ago
I'm watching these videos to find suitable clips for my mini-documentary about Star Trek and animal rights. There's nothing wrong in itself with seeing evil. It's whether or not you're participating in the evil.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
Be sure to include when Worf teaches Toq to hunt, reacquainting with his culture and where he came from.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Klingons are Klingons. My documentary is about Earth.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
then why invoke a series about space travel and sexy aliens.
rensmaag 3 years ago
Star Trek is not about space travel and sexy aliens. If you ever paid any attention to it, you would know that.
Star Trek is about re-evaluating our principles and laws to correspond with the truth, and the truth is a voyage of discovery.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
There are some inconsistencies with respect to vegetarianism on Earth, but mainly identifiable with pragmatic script conventions, and given that the overall point of view of starfleet seems to be "it's wrong to exploit another species"... other inconsistencies can be easily explained with the replicator.
utopiapraxis 3 years ago
very sad....
Wish those bears had a gun and that they could shoot at you
chotcun 3 years ago
what calibers are most common for black bear?
NamelessFTW 3 years ago
I like the music
Flagstaff12 3 years ago
I'm all for hunting the right way. Hiking, stalking and work for the game. And then putting it to good use. Not just the trophy. but these asshats sit in lawn chairs by a dump. a 5 year old could shoot the bear. Now if they would hide in the trash can and then jump out on the bear and kill it using only a bowie knife, that would fair.
inkhound 3 years ago