this just chaps my hide.

[bowhunternw]

Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. I would definitely have no trouble passing a collared bear, deer or whatever. It is actually Universtiy of Minnesota students doing alot of the work. Let them study and in a few years they will be done.

Research based on I just know that is what they isn't really gonna hold up, they need some scientific data. JMO

[bobbymalone]

Doesn't seem that unreasonable to me. I would definitely have no trouble passing a collared bear, deer or whatever. It is actually Universtiy of Minnesota students doing alot of the work. Let them study and in a few years they will be done.

Research based on I just know that is what they isn't really gonna hold up, they need some scientific data. JMO

+1

I find it interesting that people assume that the collaring of these bears is to study their mortality and since shooting them is one cause of bear mortality, a certain number of them must be shot, "in order for the research to be valid"

Right, if you are studying bear movements and range... well a dead bear doesn't go too far.

[Neiko]

One of those collared bears might have eaten some of the meat they put out to study the population so by not shooting them I am going to mess up another persons study. Can't win either way.

[MUSKY18]

So what are the odds that one of the 35 collared bears out of 22,000 is going to walk past your stand and hit your bait? There is a 0.00159% chance that the bear in front of you has a collar on it. Unless everyone is hunting a one square mile that has all 35 bears within it, seems that everyone is getting pretty upset about something that they wont even have to deal with. If you are put in that spot, its your choice. Shoot or pass....... I know working at Ripley and knowing the DNR guys there, I know how much work they put into studying the bears on Camp, but they are not pressured at all by hunting, so there are not the worries of hunter predation there.

The DNR is never going to make ALL hunters happy with their decisions, or in this case request, but it is what it is. We need to be happy that we still have th opportunity to hunt and harvest a bear, deer or other game. Look at a state like California. Population is 36 million and they sell approx 270,000 license a year. The restrictions are getting tighter and tighter and pushing hunting to a thing of the past. Our DNR is just requesting that you don't shoot a collared bear. As stated above, its your choice......just be happy you still have that choice.

[Muthagoose]

Exactly we should be happy and protect our right....

By allowing collared restrictions you are opening the gate to other fanatic researchers to step right in..Being they are putting transmitters in waterfowl,to see the exact same travel data as bear should we now restrict banded birds???

[Neiko]

"Look at a state like California. Population is 36 million and they sell approx 270,000 license a year."

Unfortunately I am afraid we are moving more and more in that direction with all these California wannabee researchers. More tree huggers we don't need.

[bobbymalone]

Being they are putting transmitters in waterfowl,to see the exact same travel data as bear should we now restrict banded birds???

[skolfoppa]

Environmental politics is all about actions and reactions. The pendulum swings back and forth. That said, if the media gets a sniff of a dead radio collared bear, the war wagons will circle and the pendulum is going to hit the bear hunters hard. As much as it may be your right to shoot a rc bear, there is a bigger picture that should be considered. If you get blinded by ignorance or personal vendettas you are hurting your sport. At least give it a few years and let the firestorm die down. When the lead story on the news is a picture of a dead rc bear and that bear's facebook status is "deceased", it will be too late. Think about it. My $.02. Skol.

[RumRiverRat]

A collared Bear rug would be sweet!

[bowhunternw]

So you guys are saying that you want the DNR to abort all studies? History has proven that the general public does not have the qualifications to manage wild game.

[TooTallTom]

Well, either the DNR should abort all studies or the private "bears are people too" crowd should rally the general public in order to force political concerns on what should be a wildlife biology decision.

I guess the "I'll shoot a collared bear and no one can stop me." attitude seems kind of like cutting off your nose to spite your face, regardless of the value of the studies being conducted.

[MUSKY18]

So you guys are saying that you want the DNR to abort all studies? History has proven that the general public does not have the qualifications to manage wild game.

I don't believe that the DNR should abort all studies, sure the majority would agree. Research is vitally important to maintaining our wildlife, and without it, who knows what kind of situation we would be in. However, they are studying wild animals who are hunted, and if said animal is harvested, its the circle of life. What most are saying, is don't put hunters in the situation where they are forced to not shoot a research animal. Put the choice into the hunters hands, and let them make that decision. To shoot it or not that is the question, and only the one with the crosshairs or pin on the target can make that decision and thats the way it should stay.

[Muthagoose]

Ill ask again.. What value. Nothing new has been produced in decades.. The same intell packet is sent out from the state as was 6 years ago. Nothing new there of value. As for U researchers all they are doing is training the same training they can do on any game species.And for whats being done in the NW corner and food source opportunity is a bear main aspect....

The privates are doing nothing but producing profit and creating a sypathetic hoard of antis and now they are doing it in schools.Peer preasure on youth as young as 1st grade.. C'mon they know where to hit and they go there.

Also cohersing the public into a supplimental feeding dangerous animals.Many of the locals in that area think they are safe and do it by hand.Its illegal in most states.Its in the MN bear handbook and thats dates back years...

Supplimental feeding....

Thats the most recent data/ paper produced by the privates. It was their base of thier lecture at that recent conference in canada...

They've went from Dont feed the bears and dumps were closed due to creating poor habitat as well as eco negative as per thier research..

So what valuable about that? Its basically contradicting..

Again I'll ask show me where we are gaining anything with the DECADES of study??

[certified jumbo]

Studies are important, bottom line!!

[Recon]

So your reason for shooting a collard bear is because of your expenditures. Maybe you are hunting for the wrong reason. No wonder the anti's are gaining strength. Just my opinion!

[Muthagoose]

No Im not saying shoot the collared bears because of money..Aint saying that at all,others have..BUT if the states gonna run a program with no results and coddle a private thats unregulated and considering nothing new has come out of any of the research. Then end it and spend the money in areas needed.

As fo the antis winning things just look at why theres a new trappers group formed in Embarress.The MTA listened to the vast majority of its members that DONT trap in that area and let the state impose tight regulations on the area with little resistance from the group.

So keep that in mind. But Im sure most of you have never trapped so its meaningless.

Again show me any "new" valuable itell produced....

Well I have to go bait...

[TooTallTom]

Muthagoose, my last post wasn't very clear. I do think that the DNR (and universities) should continue studying bears if they so choose. As was mentioned, the public doesn't do a very good job of managing the resource without help from the State. I would hope that resource-management decisions are driven by science and not politics. I also think that if researchers ask hunters to not shoot a collared bear (since it would be more important for that specific study to have the bear alive) it would make sense (and be pretty neighborly, frankly) to oblige.

I don't really have any time for the "bears are people too" crowd. It's that same mentality (or ignorance if you prefer) that gets people stomped to death by bison in Yellowstone with some regularity. I blame Walt Disney (in part, at least) for doing a lot to create and contribute to this particular monster. And I agree with Steve Foss in the other thread about moving away from the land impacting our collective perception of the natural world and our place in it.

[Muthagoose]

Honestly I do agree.YES state researchers are needed and do provide "in time"..

Got miffed when I seen the notice come out again funded by the state for the privates.If the states going coddle then get a grip on the privates.Otherwise end the circus cause if you have state your gonna have the privates pushing.....

As for not shooting a collared bear I see no problem with not shooting state research but unless the limit the private no dice they can collar any bear and claim its valuable and they have in years past....

What just happened is only the tip of the iceberg with much below the surface. Ive said all along someones going to think they are Lynn and get mauled and from the sounds of things its happened. Look at the recent contradiction from dont feed to supplimental and now someones probably gotten slapped due to following DUMB advice.

The privates dont share and actually what they are doing is not considered research by the state. Its being allowed because of internet and area commercial popuarity thats all...

Steve Foss is pretty much dead on.

Which is why they need to end the commercialization of a animal thats going to be the only one paying the price.

Again who pays the price in the end the Bears......