Hunters, please sign.

[Muthagoose]

""Is it that important to shoot a bear one is willing to stop research?""

Its not a valid research. Its useing wildlife to profit.. NOTHING they have done that hasn't already been done by Ben Killian,Craigheads and MANY states.....

""Choose a different fight like limiting the number of bears collared""

Thats the problem they want to protect as many as they can in a extended gene pool. They are not restricted to how many they can collar or when...

[pulleye16]

I'm also with you JwMiller-

20 bears top with collars...the petition looks horrible. Why can't someone do research on wildlife? It's 20 bear! And to the people who stated why can "HE" or "THEY" have the right to these animals and say "WE" can't shoot them? How many bear have you shot? Cause thats "x" amount of bear some else can photograph or a hunter can't shoot.

Basically what I'm saying is all the wildlife in MN doesn't belong to one group of people. If he collars a bear, it's like you shooting a bear(but actually his bear can still go reproduce). After you shoot a bear, you can keep it and aren't forced to give it to others. WE just need to limit the amount of collared bears!

[gk0116]

#73

[jwmiller33]

20 bears top with collars...the petition looks horrible. Why can't someone do research on wildlife? It's 20 bear! And to the people who stated why can "HE" or "THEY" have the right to these animals and say "WE" can't shoot them? How many bear have you shot? Cause thats "x" amount of bear some else can't photograph or a hunter can't shoot.

Basically what I'm saying is all the wildlife in MN doesn't belong to one group of people. If he collars a bear, it's like you shooting a bear(but actually his bear can still go reproduce). After you shoot a bear, you can keep it and aren't forced to give it to others. WE just need to limit the amount of collared bears!

+1

Well said pulleye!

[jwmiller33]

Isn't saying "I should be able to shoot any bear I want" as much of claiming ownership to a bear as a researcher who doesn't want a collared bear shot?

[mrklean]

If the DNR did the research and said it was illegal to shoot a collared bear i honestly think it wouldn't be an issue and no one would care. But the fact it is an outside group who broadcast den web cams and birthing and all of this other stuff all over the internet, claims these bear are so innocent and helpless and cry's foul when a hunter legally harvest a bear that they had collared, that's what makes probably makes most hunters mad, at least it does for me. I guess i didn't know bear research meant having facebook pages for bears.

[BigNasty]

I would just like to add, that this isn't about 20 bears. This group is pushing for ALL collared bears in MN to be protected. Who knows how many the DNR has collared. As it stands Rogers group says they want to collar 25 bears in their area. My question is, how do you keep tabs on that number? Who's to say he won't collar more bears.

Some of you haven't signed because you don't like the wording of the petition, it's not the wording, it's the point of it. If the anti's were to get this, then we are heading down a slippery slope. They will want more and more IMO.

IMO the "research" that Rodgers does is a sham. When ever a animal doesn't flee or fight, it's not wild. They are playing to the emotions of all the bleeding hearts out there and seem to be winning. On their petition of over 25,000, only a handful are even from Mn. I would bet over half of them have only ever seen a bear in a zoo.

I was the 2nd one to sign and I encourage everyone to do the same. If for no other reason than to show the anti's we have a voice too.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/keep-it-legal-to-hunt-collared-bears-in-mn/

[fishinfey8]

As far as fair goes, the current regulations are obviously the most "fair". He can collar them, but hunters can also shoot them. No one wins. If he would like to conduct his "research" without the chance of them being shot (which means his research ends on that bear) then he should use the funds he has collected from the research to obtain a permit, and build a bear research facility (similar to the wolf center in Ely).

As far as shooting a tagged bear goes well that's an individual choice. I personally wouldn't shoot one; it doesn't really seem like hunting when you have to cut a collar off of the animal before butchering. To each their own and that's how it's supposed to be. My 2cents...

[MJ1657]

I would just like to add, that this isn't about 20 bears. This group is pushing for ALL collared bears in MN to be protected. Who knows how many the DNR has collared. As it stands Rogers group says they want to collar 25 bears in their area. My question is, how do you keep tabs on that number? Who's to say he won't collar more bears.

Some of you haven't signed because you don't like the wording of the petition, it's not the wording, it's the point of it. If the anti's were to get this, then we are heading down a slippery slope. They will want more and more IMO.

IMO the "research" that Rodgers does is a sham. When ever a animal doesn't flee or fight, it's not wild. They are playing to the emotions of all the bleeding hearts out there and seem to be winning. On their petition of over 25,000, only a handful are even from Mn. I would bet over half of them have only ever seen a bear in a zoo.

I was the 2nd one to sign and I encourage everyone to do the same. If for no other reason than to show the anti's we have a voice too.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/keep-it-legal-to-hunt-collared-bears-in-mn/

Very well said BigNasty.

[jkcmj]

I have no dog in this fight, as I don't hunt nor do I have an interest in protecting the bears, but I have a few questions.... So there are what, 20 collared bears in MN and you guys are petitioning so it is legal to shoot them?(even though it already is legal to do so, if I'm not mistaken) If I did hunt bear, I would pass on shooting a collared bear

I think it would make more sense to fight to limit the number of bears that researchers can collar. Isn't that what you guys are afraid of, is researchers (or "tree huggers" according to some of you folks) are going to collar as many bears as possible to try to "save" them?

When the average Joe Shmoe American citizen who doesn't hunt looks at a bunch of hunters petitioning so they can shoot collared bears, it looks bad. The whole purpose behind putting collars on bears is to learn more about them so the species can be more effectively managed to benefit YOU, the hunter.

I guess my question is, if your afraid of them putting a collar on every bear possible, why don't you start a petition to limit the number of bears that can have collars on them? To me, it seems like that would be the better way to go about this problem. I guess if you really don't care about the species, go ahead and blast away all the collared bears you want. To each his own I guess

Since some do not understand the idea here, I will try one more time to help them get it.

There are over 30 bears being collared by the DNR, and another 25 being proposed to be collared by WRI if they gain legal protection. This amounts to far more than 20 bears. If you own land or you hunt public lands within the territory of the bears they study, it is often overwhelmingly collared bears on your bait sites. This is largely due to the fact that they collar yearling offspring of the origianlly collared sow. They female offspring take a territory adjacent to it's mother, and so on, until, like in the case of WRI, your study bears overwhelm a 20-30 mile area of territory, and of course, they want to continue collaring the offspring and spreading the protected zone. If you own hunting property in the vicinity of Tower and Ely, especially in the Eagles Nest Township around Trygg road, you would be very limited in what bears you could hunt if the WRI bears would gain legal protection. This is as much a property rights issue as it is a hunting issue.

The bears filmed by WRI are NOT representative of the wild bears in MN, therefore following them around and filming them does not promote the health and well being of wild bears, or learn much about their life that would be useful to wildlife managers or hunters.

And, last but not least, in the case of the DNR, limiting the number of bears collared, limits the value of the research, because the sample size to small. In the case of WRI, who films bears primarily for entertainment, the limiting of bears collared would make more sense. They could limit them to say 2 bears, Lily and Hope, or June, or whichever one they can get the most footage out of. Better yet, they could just film the ones they already have captive, that way the public would not be so upset when a "research bear" was killed by a hunter.

[jkcmj]

Isn't saying "I should be able to shoot any bear I want" as much of claiming ownership to a bear as a researcher who doesn't want a collared bear shot?

We "manage" the bear population through hunting, not collaring, of bears. You pay for a bear liscense so you can take part in the hunt and that gives you the right to take that bear home for you very own. Pretty simple concept.

Lynn is making hundreds of thousands of dollars off a few bears, and now wants all of their extended family protected as well. Not for science, or research, or to help the bear population, but to protect "his" bears, and to keep the cash coming in. He is then turning around and using all that money, to the detriment of sound wildlife management and our bear hunting rights. Tell me now....Why should we agree to "protect" these bears Lynn Rogers uses to damage the future of bear hunting in MN?????

[Muthagoose]

Well put,jkcmj

[rbs]

Well put,jkcmj +2

[MJ1657]

+3

[Boar]

nice, vey well said. jk.

[mrklean]

very nice

[KMR85]

#84

[jerkbait]

Very well said JK. #81 here.

[BigJakeL]

#90 here!