A scandalous charge for killing a grizz

[Newview01]

http://calgaryherald.com/news/canada...2-5613c0346107

EDSON, Alta. — An Alberta man charged with killing a collared grizzly bear that was being tracked for research will pay nearly $13,000 in fines, but some say it doesn’t go far enough to protect the threatened species.

Ronald Raymond Motkoski pleaded guilty earlier this month in an Edson, Alta., courtroom to possession of wildlife and was fined $2,500. He’s also required to pay $5,000 to Alberta’s BearSmart program and $5,202.76 for the cost of the tracking collar.

Neither he nor his lawyer could be reached for comment this week.

Motkoski was charged in June 2016 after Fish and Wildlife officers were notified by fRI Research that a collar put on grizzly bear No. 141 in Jasper National Park had stopped working near Edson, about 200 kilometres west of Edmonton.

It's absolutely scandalous. The grizzly bear in Alberta is a threatened species
It was determined the three-year-old male grizzly, which weighed about 250 pounds, had been shot and killed.


Motkoski told researchers he shot the bear, but the Crown prosecutor withdrew the charge of hunting wildlife in a closed season and providing a false or misleading statement.

A spokesperson for the province said the charges were withdrawn because some of the evidence did not suggest a reasonable likelihood of conviction.

Another man, John Peter Grant of Fort McMurray, pleaded guilty on Feb. 2 to unlawful possession of wildlife related to the death of the same bear and was fined a total of $6,000.

Some say the fines are too low.

“It’s absolutely scandalous,” said Jill Seaton, chair of the Jasper Environmental Association. “The grizzly bear in Alberta is a threatened species.”

Gordon Stenhouse, a scientist with the fRI Research Grizzly Bear Program, said he also had higher expectations.

“I thought there would be a different outcome,” he said, noting the maximum fine is $100,000.

Grizzly bears were listed as threatened in Alberta in 2010 when it was determined there were only about 700 left. The numbers led to a recovery strategy aimed at reducing conflicts between bears and people.

Poaching remains a problem in Alberta, with statistics showing at least 39 grizzly bears have been killed illegally since a legal hunt ended in 2005.

The movements and habitat use of this bear were of significant interest to us in learning more about home range establishment and response to human activities
Bear No. 141 was considered important because he was fitted with a GPS collar in Jasper and left the park within a few weeks.

“It’s quite rare that a bear in Jasper takes off,” said Stenhouse.

Officials with Jasper National Park declined to comment.

Stenhouse said that they lost valuable research with the death of the bear.

No. 141 “was one of a very few bears that we have seen make long-distance movements from Jasper National Park over the past 18 years of research in this area,” he said in an impact statement prepared for court.

“The movements and habitat use of this bear were of significant interest to us in learning more about home range establishment and response to human activities.”

Despite getting about $5,000 to replace the bear’s tracking collar, he said it’s also a financial hit for the program.

“This is an unfortunate loss and does not address any of our time, effort or cost that our research team invested in the successful capture of this bear,” he said.

Losing even one bear hurts the province’s recovery plan, he said.

“From a broader perspective, the key issue is on the common and ongoing problem of the illegal killing of bears,” said Stenhouse. “Some members of the public appear to remain unwilling to share a common landscape and co-exist with this species.”

Should those attitudes continue, he said it’s unlikely that future generations will see grizzly bears anywhere other than the most remote areas of the national parks.

Not sure if this is satire or not.

[Nayr]

Just returned from the willmore, saw 7 grizzlies the first day all within 5 miles of our camp. No shortage there.

[Little red riding hood]

Jury is still out on this one for me, a friend of mine lost 7 heifers to a grizz last summer and he was only compensated for 5, it was kinda tempting to go make the bear pay for the other 2, see if grizz grills up as nice as beef on the BBQ! Yes I realize that grizzly bears are not common in Alberta, but penguins are pretty rare in the Sahara too! Grizzly are quite popular in BC because mountains are their preferred habitat. I hauled logs around Hinton and I saw plenty of grizzly bears, more so than moose, or mule deer.

[catnthehat]

Threatened species or not, there is a lot more to this story than simply shooting a grizzly bear.
Cat

[pgavey]

Wednesday evening there were 4 in the meadow at Beaver Mines Saw them from our supper table. No shortage of bears there.

[Marty S]

I would like to hear the suspected victim's side of the story, victim of the law that is. I suspect he had a reason to kill the animal.

This is not an objective news story.

[Taco]

I need to hear the rest of the story as well. That said and seeing how many people seem to get spooked if a grizzly gets within 200 yds of their personal space, you shoot a grizzly and the bullet wounds are not deemed "defensive" you will be charged with shooting that bear. And by defensive I mean at close range and the front of the bear's body as it was charging in on you. Wounds in the side or back of the bear and you got some plausible explaining to do.

[270man]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Threatened species or not, there is a lot more to this story than simply shooting a grizzly bear.
Cat

So what's the rest of the story.

[ehrgeiz]

I'm not sure how many Grizzly Bears we need for a species to be moved out of the threatened category, but it seems like we're getting there if anecdotal evidence and reports from hunters is to be believed. In 2005 they estimated 700 I wonder where we're at in 2017.

I think a small, mortality based season for boar Grizzly's in Alberta would be helpful. Might help install a healthy sense of fear of humans in the population and reduce some of the regular encounters we're seeing multiple times every year. We are the apex predator after all.

[Bighorn River]

We support likely poachers on here now?

Would like to hear more of the story, but I doubt very much this a story of a self defense kill.

Self defense you either call it in, or shoot shovel and shut up.

It doesn't generally lead to possession of dead wildife.

[The Spank]

Motkoski told researchers he shot the bear, but the Crown prosecutor withdrew the charge of hunting wildlife in a closed season and providing a false or misleading statement.

A spokesperson for the province said the charges were withdrawn because some of the evidence did not suggest a reasonable likelihood of conviction.

And this right here suggests there is much more to the story than a "poaching" charge for all the armchair judges on here handing out a hanging conviction!!

[artie]

The press is our worst enemy. They jump all over things like this like there is no tomorrow. Some day when the big bears start coming into the city then we might get some understanding of the problem in the back country.

[warriorboy10]

Originally Posted by Marty S

I would like to hear the suspected victim's side of the story, victim of the law that is. I suspect he had a reason to kill the animal.

This is not an objective news story.

Ageed!! Not getting the full story in this article...

All about the bear, the research, the cost of the collar and nothing about the reasons for the shooting. Can't have that may have to shot to save his life and not one word.. Unbelievable, actually so typical!!!

Sickening!!!

[catnthehat]

Originally Posted by warriorboy10

Ageed!! Not getting the full story in this article...

All about the bear, the research, the cost of the collar and nothing about the reasons for the shooting. Can't have that may have to shot to save his life and not one word.. Unbelievable, actually so typical!!!

Sickening!!!

You missed the part about the possession of wildlife
Cat

[Newview01]

Originally Posted by The Spank

Motkoski told researchers he shot the bear, but the Crown prosecutor withdrew the charge of hunting wildlife in a closed season and providing a false or misleading statement.

A spokesperson for the province said the charges were withdrawn because some of the evidence did not suggest a reasonable likelihood of conviction.

And this right here suggests there is much more to the story than a "poaching" charge for all the armchair judges on here handing out a hanging conviction!!

Pretty crucial part of the article there. Funny how it is ignored.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by warriorboy10

Ageed!! Not getting the full story in this article...

All about the bear, the research, the cost of the collar and nothing about the reasons for the shooting. Can't have that may have to shot to save his life and not one word.. Unbelievable, actually so typical!!!

Sickening!!!

Iirc back in 2015-16 there was someone in the Edson area poaching. Lots of game found shot and left including a grizzly bear. If this is the same dude he should of been jailed.

BW

[3blade]

Originally Posted by Bigwoodsman

Iirc back in 2015-16 there was someone in the Edson area poaching. Lots of game found shot and left including a grizzly bear. If this is the same dude he should of been jailed.

BW

Not the same, that was a group of kids that were deranged and trigger happy. They got caught. Don't remember if we ever saw the fines.

Meh, anyone smokes a grizzly in Alberta, I'll buy em a beer. To hell with bios who can't count. They betrayed their own profession and the trust of every hunter. Pretty obvious at this point they intend to never find enough grizzlys to satisfy them, so all that whining and carrying on about "research" is just public funding preservation.

[ward]

Originally Posted by ehrgeiz

I'm not sure how many Grizzly Bears we need for a species to be moved out of the threatened category, but it seems like we're getting there if anecdotal evidence and reports from hunters is to be believed. In 2005 they estimated 700 I wonder where we're at in 2017.

I think a small, mortality based season for boar Grizzly's in Alberta would be helpful. Might help install a healthy sense of fear of humans in the population and reduce some of the regular encounters we're seeing multiple times every year. We are the apex predator after all.

I have no issue with hunting Bears, but I never understood how shooting a few will " install a sense of fear of humans in them". The ones that get shot are dead. How does that fear of humans get conveyed to the others ? I have heard this statement on numerous occasions, but have never heard an explanation.

[3blade]

Originally Posted by ward

I have no issue with hunting Bears, but I never understood how shooting a few will " install a sense of fear of humans in them". The ones that get shot are dead. How does that fear of humans get conveyed to the others ? I have heard this statement on numerous occasions, but have never heard an explanation.

Same way as any other game animal. They smell a dead bear carcass and a whole lot of human scent around it, or see another bear get dropped. Bears are very perceptive and capable of learning and remembering. Thus, the need to remind them that humans are dangerous and should be avoided, or else they eventually decide the opposite, as we have now seen with the increasing number of attacks.

[Bigwoodsman]

Originally Posted by 3blade

Same way as any other game animal. They smell a dead bear carcass and a whole lot of human scent around it, or see another bear get dropped. Bears are very perceptive and capable of learning and remembering. Thus, the need to remind them that humans are dangerous and should be avoided, or else they eventually decide the opposite, as we have now seen with the increasing number of attacks.

So what you're saying is the average bear is a hell of a lot smarter then your average politician or Prime minister!

BW

[3blade]

Originally Posted by Bigwoodsman

So what you're saying is the average bear is a hell of a lot smarter then your average politician or Prime minister!

BW

Wait what? We can shoot politicians now and it'll scare off other ones?!? Or it won't...either way SIGN ME UP

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by ward

I have no issue with hunting Bears, but I never understood how shooting a few will " install a sense of fear of humans in them". The ones that get shot are dead. How does that fear of humans get conveyed to the others ? I have heard this statement on numerous occasions, but have never heard an explanation.

Lol you beat me to it. Always thought it was word of mouth. lol

[huntsfurfish]

Originally Posted by 3blade

Same way as any other game animal. They smell a dead bear carcass and a whole lot of human scent around it, or see another bear get dropped. Bears are very perceptive and capable of learning and remembering. Thus, the need to remind them that humans are dangerous and should be avoided, or else they eventually decide the opposite, as we have now seen with the increasing number of attacks.

Not supposed to be shooting bears with cubs.

Guess the education is from missing the bear. lol

[Shekka]

Originally Posted by Bigwoodsman

Iirc back in 2015-16 there was someone in the Edson area poaching. Lots of game found shot and left including a grizzly bear. If this is the same dude he should of been jailed.

BW

It is not the same person. This is a one off incident with Ron.

[^v^Tinda wolf^v^]

Tagged, boxed, wearing a too too...under the proper circumstances and regardless of cost, Bang bang 💥 and ask questions later.

National park on the other hand, What ever doesn't go bang bang and ask questions later if your tongue is still attached 😁

[waterninja]

Originally Posted by The Spank

Motkoski told researchers he shot the bear, but the Crown prosecutor withdrew the charge of hunting wildlife in a closed season and providing a false or misleading statement.

A spokesperson for the province said the charges were withdrawn because some of the evidence did not suggest a reasonable likelihood of conviction.

And this right here suggests there is much more to the story than a "poaching" charge for all the armchair judges on here handing out a hanging conviction!!

X2

[amosfella]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

Threatened species or not, there is a lot more to this story than simply shooting a grizzly bear.
Cat

I agree. They didn't even talk about what the shooter's claim or statement was...

[robson3954]

Originally Posted by catnthehat

You missed the part about the possession of wildlife
Cat

Yeah, possession screams bad actor. You shoot in self defense/live stock defense etc and don't report, you should know better than to retain it.

[woods_walker]

Should have got higher fines than they did. Definitely more to the story than the article says. Definitely not a shot the bear as it surprised them. It should mention something about 'never seen a grizzly there on the property yet there was evidence and gps data of it being there' and then there should be some information about where the gps collar was found, like it had to be fished out of the water kilometers away...

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by woods_walker

Should have got higher fines than they did. Definitely more to the story than the article says. Definitely not a shot the bear as it surprised them. It should mention something about 'never seen a grizzly there on the property yet there was evidence and gps data of it being there' and then there should be some information about where the gps collar was found, like it had to be fished out of the water kilometers away...

Woods, can you expand abit more please??