The real face of subsistence hunting...

nekred · #1 05-12-2008, 09:28 AM

I was out bear hunting this weekend and while we were on our way we came across three people in a pickup truck on the side of the road. We stopped and chatted and they mentioned they had a moose down. I asked if it was bull or a cow. They said a dry cow. On the ay out 2 days later we decided to stop and see and we went back in and found the hide, guts and a full term calf that died in utero.

I have pictures on my cell phone and will post when I can.

A few things have struck me wrong here! and am fairly disturbed. This was aboriginal subsistence hunting.

1) Cow moose with full term calf = two animals from population killed
2) How much food value is in a cow moose.
3) what happened to using as much of animal as possible? (hide left)
4) Truck had a company name on the door and the three people mentioned they were on way to another jobsite
5) Why hunting for meat in spring? Is it not better for meat quality in fall as well as management perposes?

One other thing I noticed is many aboriginals out duck and beaver hunting as well.

Someone else see the irony....
500 ducks die in a tailings pond and we have a huge media response....
Yet every spring we have "subsistence" hunters with company vehicles doing oilfield service contracts out killing game in the spring from oilfield roads?

Aboriginals are the first to preach that they are stewards of the land and live in harmony with mother earth and then in the spring I see them shooting pregnant cow moose. How is that being one with mother earth. I don't see them living off the bounty, and thinking about conservation. To me waiting until next fall and shooting the claf and leaving the cow would make mucj more common sense!...

This is a rant but still I am very disturbed. perhaps you may be disturbed as well.

If anyone wants any info more info on this please post and I will fill in anything I have missed.

We have talked about ethics and respect in other posts and have always posted that when people are acting legally that I have no right to question their ethics.

But to me the fact that this activity is legal and is allowed is more wrong. To me this is not a legal hunting season but some people are given an exemption from the laws and hunting seasons which are based in common good sense.

I a not questioning the participants ethics, or morality as they are acting in their own best interests. What I don't like is that the law allows this and needs to be changed.

Seeing the calf moose in its ripped amniotic sac is fairly disturbing....

honda450 · #2 05-12-2008, 09:38 AM

Feel the same way Nekred. Sickens me. Phone the company that was on the side of the truck.

Dakota369 · #3 05-12-2008, 09:47 AM

I would guess that their ancestors woud of never done that. Unfortunatly it would appear that many of today's subsistence hunters are to say the least out of touch with their enviroment. The old ways are gone and we are left with a group that can essentially take whatever game whenever they want with little to no regard as to the impact on the local population. I would be willing to bet that they people in question were not intimatly familiar with that particular reigon of the province and would therefore have no idea as to what impact, if any, their act has. It is way past time that something should be done re; this and many other 100 year old laws/contracts that are still in force today.

270WIN · #4 05-12-2008, 09:54 AM

Good post Nekred. Any additional info you might have would be appreciated.

Waxy · #5 05-12-2008, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nekred

I was out bear hunting this weekend and while we were on our way we came across three people in a pickup truck on the side of the road. We stopped and chatted and they mentioned they had a moose down. I asked if it was bull or a cow. They said a dry cow. On the ay out 2 days later we decided to stop and see and we went back in and found the hide, guts and a full term calf that died in utero.

I have pictures on my cell phone and will post when I can.

A few things have struck me wrong here! and am fairly disturbed. This was aboriginal subsistence hunting.

1) Cow moose with full term calf = two animals from population killed
2) How much food value is in a cow moose.
3) what happened to using as much of animal as possible? (hide left)
4) Truck had a company name on the door and the three people mentioned they were on way to another jobsite
5) Why hunting for meat in spring? Is it not better for meat quality in fall as well as management perposes?

One other thing I noticed is many aboriginals out duck and beaver hunting as well.

Someone else see the irony....
500 ducks die in a tailings pond and we have a huge media response....
Yet every spring we have "subsistence" hunters with company vehicles doing oilfield service contracts out killing game in the spring from oilfield roads?

Aboriginals are the first to preach that they are stewards of the land and live in harmony with mother earth and then in the spring I see them shooting pregnant cow moose. How is that being one with mother earth. I don't see them living off the bounty, and thinking about conservation. To me waiting until next fall and shooting the claf and leaving the cow would make mucj more common sense!...

This is a rant but still I am very disturbed. perhaps you may be disturbed as well.

If anyone wants any info more info on this please post and I will fill in anything I have missed.

We have talked about ethics and respect in other posts and have always posted that when people are acting legally that I have no right to question their ethics.

But to me the fact that this activity is legal and is allowed is more wrong. To me this is not a legal hunting season but some people are given an exemption from the laws and hunting seasons which are based in common good sense.

I a not questioning the participants ethics, or morality as they are acting in their own best interests. What I don't like is that the law allows this and needs to be changed.

Seeing the calf moose in its ripped amniotic sac is fairly disturbing....

Nekred,

I completely agree with you reagrding this situation. This is a sickening act IMHO, and it SHOULD be illegal. I'm glad I wasn't there to witness it. This represents the worst possible case scenario of "subsistence" hunting, and it should be ended. I can't imagine that the vast majority of native hunters, much like non-native hunters, would support this act.

However, I have to disagree with your statement regarding not questioning ethics and morals. That is EXACTLY what you're doing. You (and I) would like to see our values imposed on these people by enacting them into law and making the act illegal. What are laws if not written moral codes? Just calling a spade a spade...

Waxy

CNP · #6 05-12-2008, 10:37 AM

Spare me the pics………….I can visualize the fetus without the graphics. I am not fully read up on subsistence hunting but I support it in principle. Without getting emotional over the issue…..a cow moose is a cow moose and it might conceive a dozen or more/lesss (?) calves over its lifespan. If you intentionally do not hunt in the fall and wait till the spring it doesn’t really make any difference in the overall population picture. Killing a cow prior to, or post contraception, is still a dead cow and all it’s potential offspring are not realized. At one time there were no hunting seasons. What if there were no seasons now? What if you got a moose tag and you could fill it any time of the year? Does it really make any difference on which date you kill it? That may be too cold for some to accept. I don’t need to hunt, I want to hunt and I like hunting the rutting periods for obvious reasons. I’m not in a position to ever claim to be a subsistence hunter…..but to those who qualify I can’t see how you can limit real subsistence hunting (as in limiting the season). If a person or family needs the meat as food to support life, they need it when they need it. Do I personally like the idea of killing a cow moose in its third trimester? No, not at all. I don’t like the idea of killing a cow a day/week/month after delivery either. You better shoot the calf too. You’re calling it what it is – “the real face of subsistence hunting”……….but was this truly subsistence hunting? Like you say, it does make good sense to create seasons in which to hunt, for the most part………but if you also legislate a real subsistence hunting allowance and impose limitations on it, how genuine is the subsistence hunting allowance in the first place? I’m for real subsistence hunting, defined and meaningful (means of subsisting: as a: the minimum (as of food and shelter) necessary to support lifeb: a source or means of obtaining the necessities of life). Guys using company trucks, presumably employed with that company, hunting lease roads, don’t fit into my definition of subsistence hunting either.

honda450 · #7 05-12-2008, 10:50 AM

Geez ehntr maybe the font could be a little larger for us old guys could read it. Thanks

nube · #8 05-12-2008, 11:40 AM

I think it should get reported whether it is legal or not just to make sure and the more it is reported the more stats that are kept of what is going on ,on this topic.

PlayDoh · #9 05-12-2008, 12:10 PM

Some very good points, and insights guys. I would be weary of stereotyping natives, based on the actions of 3. I know natives that live in complete harmony with the land and have a moral compass I envy. I also know natives that are as ignorant about nature as the worst or the worst.

I find comfort in that for every one or more, ignorant hunter/angler/trapper/human, there are those like the above posters who I consider 'stewards' of the wild, who's concern and understanding are respectable. I also respect the ability and desire to never be afraid to question the morals, ethics, laws in order to preserve the wild. Open discussion is the most objective way to see the whole picture, IMO.

The only 'issue' I'd think your justified in having is regarding the company truck, and I'd bet its against company policy. If I owned the company, I'd want to know about it, and I'd suggest you talk to the highest member of management you can regarding it.

If its an oilfield company I'd also assume action will be taken, if only to prevent it again. The last thing they need is to be associated with sponsoring hunting, let alone this kill.

As ehntr, Waxy & Dakota369 stated, I'm not sure one could really condone the kill since you don't know all the details. The common sense assumption is that these were ignorant hunters who almost needlessly killed a pregnant Cow Moose. Yet there are so many possibilities, like the Moose was deathly ill, injured.

Don't forget there are resources available to voice your concerns to those who manage the resources.
http://www.srd.gov.ab.ca/fishwildlif...rta/moose.aspx

Kanonfodder · #10 05-12-2008, 02:10 PM

Sustinance hunting doesnt really bother me either. They negotiated the right so they do have the right. Its a shame they took a pregnant cow but again its allowed so I may not agree with it but again I cant condemn it. I would however contact the company whos truck they were using as they probably would like to know about it. One question and I mean no disrespect but how do we know the three were practising sustinance hunting? I mean no offence but put 3 native looking people in a truck and tell me who is treaty, who isnt and who maybe metis in fact? I realize thesustinance hunters dont wear big signs but how are we to tell if it may be legal or poaching? This would be my greatest concern....

nekred · #11 05-12-2008, 02:15 PM

The cow moose was not ill or injured

3 guys in the truck, one between 20 and 30 one about 35-40 and one other close to 60. the company that owned the truck does slashing, equipment operation etc. for the resident oil company. No point calling that service company as it is owned by a relative of the perpetrator. As for the oil company....

I understand they really don't give a duck!

capthook · #12 05-12-2008, 02:20 PM

Hello all...

In my view a point of clarification is needed. If these 3 individuals were in fact first nations folks, they were not subsistence hunters within the meaning of the Wildlife Act. Rather they were exercising their first nations hunting rights. Two completely different circumstances.

Over the years, I have had more than a few reasons to be concerned about first nations hunting practices but having said that I accept that, rightly ore wrongly, those are their rights to abuse or do as they see fit... If we want to correct it we will need to go back and renegotiate the treaties, the contract that facilitated the expropriation of these lands we call Alberta and now presume to be rightly ours... Is that a kettle of fish we want to open up? If not, it may be important to not go hyperbolic on the subsistence hunting issue, particularly when the individuals are just exercising their rights...

Fact is that for the most part, we have exploited first nations people and their resources, and in true white European fashion, have tried to do that with as little cost possible and without honor... It is about time we do the right thing - what about the long outstanding Lubicon land claim - they have never ceded their aboriginal title!!

History is important!!

Best regards

Capthook

Okotokian · #13 05-12-2008, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota369

I would guess that their ancestors woud of never done that. .

What, hunt in May?

The original poster also didn't make it clear whether they were treaty indians or metis, and where this took place....

It's really pretty simple. Is what they were doing legal? If it wasn't, report a poacher. I have no trouble with that at all. If it was legal, get off of it. Would you phone the employers of white hunters who were doing something perfectly legal that you didn't happen to like (like our new favourite, posing a dead bear with bear cans LOL)? The original poster complains about them leaving the hide. Is that illegal? Anyone here ever not used the hide of a moose or deer? I thought the regs only said the meat of big game animals couldn't be wasted. Seems he has thrown everything he could think of into this one, most of in nonsense and irrelevant.

Dakota369 · #14 05-12-2008, 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okotokian

What, hunt in May?

.

No Oko...... shoot a pregnant moose. As the initial poster mentioned they stated that they had shot a dry moose cow, not a pregnant and ready to drop cow......is that plain enough for you??

nekred · #15 05-12-2008, 03:02 PM

I di not ask to see a treaty card...

geographically it does not matter other than it was off a reserve and on crown land.

The shooting a pregnant cow is what I was referring to as being the most offensive....

As a youngster I was always taught the importance of conservation. Why we hunt in the fall vs. the spring.

Okotokian · #16 05-12-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dakota369

No Oko...... shoot a pregnant moose. As the initial poster mentioned they stated that they had shot a dry moose cow, not a pregnant and ready to drop cow......is that plain enough for you??

I'm sorry. As I don't know native hunting tradition, I don't know whether they would ever take a pregnant animal. Is that the case? I'll have to take your word for it. And back to the point, is it presently illegal?

back at ya.

Snap Shot · #17 05-12-2008, 03:03 PM

The fact of the matter is the 3 men lied.. They said they shot a dry cow when the damn well knew other wise..This give me doubt in this whole situation.. So they obviously felt like they did something wrong.. This is disgusting and should of been reported no matter if they where first nations metis or any other ethnicity..Let F&W settle it out some charges may have come... Discharging a firearm from a vehicle to the 60 year old being the metis and not actually shooting the moose..

And in all honesty most companies dont want there work vehicle used for hunting vehicles these 3 amigos could of lost there jobs which would of been good to see... Lets see them try and practise there rights while actually paying for the 1.30/L for the fuel they are burning for hunting.. instead of the company picking up the tab and them having another good day in the Spring air...poaching moose..

nekred · #18 05-12-2008, 03:07 PM

I do not know if they shot from the vehicle or not....

Dakota369 · #19 05-12-2008, 03:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Okotokian

I'm sorry. As I don't know native hunting tradition, I don't know whether they would ever take a pregnant animal. Is that the case? I'll have to take your word for it. And back to the point, is it presently illegal?

back at ya.

I don't believe that this discussion is about wheather it is legal or not....... more of an ethical thing........

I know I said the "E" word.........

Okotokian · #20 05-12-2008, 03:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snap Shot

The fact of the matter is the 3 men lied.. They said they shot a dry cow when the damn well knew other wise..This give me doubt in this whole situation.. So they obviously felt like they did something wrong.. This is disgusting and should of been reported no matter if they where first nations metis or any other ethnicity..Let F&W settle it out some charges may have come... Discharging a firearm from a vehicle to the 60 year old being the metis and not actually shooting the moose..

And in all honesty most companies dont want there work vehicle used for hunting vehicles these 3 amigos could of lost there jobs which would of been good to see... Lets see them try and practise there rights while actually paying for the 1.30/L for the fuel they are burning for hunting.. instead of the company picking up the tab and them having another good day in the Spring air...poaching moose..

lets deal with facts here rather than obviously made-up stuff. First of all, if you come up to me in the field and start questioning me, I'm under no obligation to tell you the truth. In fact I'll probably tell you where to put your question (NOT you nekred. I like you. We always agree LOL). Secondly, where did discharging a firearm from a vehicle come from? You have a very active imagination Snap. I'd refrain from making things up to fan fires. Finally the company truck... the original poster himself said phoning the company would be pointless, as the owner was a relative and wouldn't care. So the owner of the truck didn't care. No problem then... besides, I know plenty of people who drive company vehicles for personal business. I bet there are plenty here on this board. It's just another red herring thrown in to fan the flames. If you wanted to get technical, you don't even know if what you found was their kill. You didn't see it that day (or didn't mention it anyway) and you didn't go back until two days later. Resonable doubt. But lets assume it was them for sake of argument.

Now, all this is predicated on what they did being LEGAL. If it isn't, then I take it all back. Completely.

capthook · #21 05-12-2008, 03:20 PM

Lets get real here... There is nothing inherently wrong with harvesting an animal in the spring... First nations (and others) regularly hunt in the spring... you know, the "fresh meat after a long hard winter" arguement... The bottom line here is that if they were first nations and have the right to hunt on unoccupied crown lands, they did nothing wrong... If not, report them to the officials and let the system deal with them...

Oh, and by the way, how many of you can differentiate between a pregnant and non-pregnant cow moose... When it's running through the bush... In less than ideal light... Yea... I thought so...

Take care

Capthook

outlaw'd · #22 05-12-2008, 03:21 PM

"...poaching moose.."

If they were indeed First Nations, its not poaching. Second, maybe read what Okotokian said, instead of trying to stir up crap on this board. Wether or not you agree, they are within thier rights

Suka · #23 05-12-2008, 03:23 PM

I wonder if maybe they thought it was a dry cow when they shot it?

Dakota369 · #24 05-12-2008, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capthook

Oh, and by the way, how many of you can differentiate between a pregnant and non-pregnant cow moose... When it's running through the bush... In less than ideal light... Yea... I thought so...

Capthook

So from your comment can we all believe that you are a proponent of shooting at something when it has not been properly identified?? Remind me not to go turkey hunting with you!!

Waxy · #25 05-12-2008, 03:35 PM

I don't think any of the original posters in this thread said or claimed that the actions were illegal, in fact, the opposite is true. I'm not sure where that came from. I don't like it, for obvious reasons, but from the story that was reported by nekred, it doesn't sound as though anything illegal occurred, certainly nothing that could be proven or verified. I think we should all be cautious of speculating too much.

I believe the original question surrounded the killing of a very pregnant cow moose, and whether or not that should be legal, and yes the "ethics" of such an action. My opinion is that no, it shouldn't be permitted, however, I am fully aware of the fact that it is currently legal for treat Indians.

As for if a person can tell if a moose is pregnant, I would think a person could tell in most cases, and if you can't tell, DON'T SHOOT. Seems pretty simple to me.

Waxy

Okotokian · #26 05-12-2008, 03:43 PM

Completely rational position Waxy.

Obviously would not affect me directly if a law was passed to that effect. However, I'm never in favour of laws that aren't relatively cut and dried and enforceable, so the question really goes back to "Can you reliably tell when a moose or deer is pregnant?". And if we have that rule, then we have to decide how far along the animal could be.... could anyone tell if a doe was one month pregnant by looking at it? Would it still be illegal to kill it?. I think perhaps better to not have a law on it.

Do we have this problem with other legal spring hunts? Like bear? wolf, cougar, coyotes?

Snap Shot · #27 05-12-2008, 03:49 PM

All im saying is if when he encountered this "substance hunters" the proper authorities should of been contacted.. If an investigation was conducted who knows what may have been found or chargers brought up..its only speculation at this time because its was never reported.Everything might have been perfectly legal.. All im making a point at is these type of situations should be reported... If for any other reason to get awarness of this topic as i dont stand for the "spring moose hunting season"... Just isnt ethicaly moral..

Snap Shot · #28 05-12-2008, 03:56 PM

Okotokian... Bears give birth during hibernation & mate during the spring... They are not pregnant during this time...

Regulations all state its unlawful to hunt black bear accompanied by a cub under the age of one year..

So bear isnt related to this topic

LongDraw · #29 05-12-2008, 04:05 PM

What about hunting any species AFTER the rut? Forget about the whole sustinance thing. Elk, deer, moose, bear? Seems we hunt females of most species when they could be pregnant?

Last I checked there is a cow elk season running until December 20th in some parts of the Province. Those elk were bred 3 months earlier.

LongDraw · #30 05-12-2008, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snap Shot

Okotokian... Bears give birth during hibernation & mate during the spring... They are not pregnant during this time...

Regulations all state its unlawful to hunt black bear accompanied by a cub under the age of one year..

So bear isnt related to this topic

What about shooting a bear in the fall snapshot? How can you tell if it is pregnant?