Why do some take belief in Global Warming as a political issue?

[westwall]

I must have missed something. What bear hunting retort are you waiting for?

You claimed that we halted polar bear hunting way back in 1973 and I pointed out your information was flat wrong. You can book a polar bear hunt today and I posted a link to a guide for you.

You must have a permit to hunt Polar Bear.

Really? Gosh in a world where you have to have a permit to hunt a damned dear you have to go and ruin it for me by telling me I have to have a permit to hunt a bear. Really? DUDE, you can't hunt or fish for anything ANYWHERE without a permit!

The fact that people do doesn't make it permissable either.

As I stated earlier, your ignorance is astounding.

And it doesn't address the fact you claimed there was NO hunting of polar bears as the reason for their recovery.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Boy, your say-so is totally insufficient.

What have we done to protect Arctic ice -- the polar bear's natural habitat?

Links. Provide them.

You are claiming arctic ice to be the bears "natural habitat"?

Prove it.

Gosh you are ignorant.

This is one of many sources that will tell you the exact same thing. Polar Bears in general stay with the Arctic ice. There were a few that remained on land. Most of those were killed off.


"Early Eurasian explorers viewed polar bears as fearless marauders (Larsen 1978). They killed polar bears in self-defense, before they could become a threat, or just because they could. For centuries, Arctic travelers killed as many polar bears as possible (Seton 1929). In Alaska, explorers of the late 1800s and local residents both affected polar bears. Historically, polar bears occupied St. Matthew Island, which lies over 350 km south of the Bering Strait. Unlike polar bears of the Beaufort Sea and other parts of the polar basin, many of these individuals spent the summer on land instead of remaining with the sea-ice as it retreated to the north. Commercial hunters eliminated polar bears from St. Matthew Island by the early 1900s (Hanna 1920). Likewise, overwintering commercial whalers, along with local residents, may have nearly eliminated the bears that once denned along the north coast of Alaska (Leffingwell 1919)."



Hunting - Polar Bears International

Right... and where do polar bears mate and have their young... you know, the thing that makes more polar bears?

 

[westwall]

You are claiming arctic ice to be the bears "natural habitat"?

Prove it.

Gosh you are ignorant.

This is one of many sources that will tell you the exact same thing. Polar Bears in general stay with the Arctic ice. There were a few that remained on land. Most of those were killed off.


"Early Eurasian explorers viewed polar bears as fearless marauders (Larsen 1978). They killed polar bears in self-defense, before they could become a threat, or just because they could. For centuries, Arctic travelers killed as many polar bears as possible (Seton 1929). In Alaska, explorers of the late 1800s and local residents both affected polar bears. Historically, polar bears occupied St. Matthew Island, which lies over 350 km south of the Bering Strait. Unlike polar bears of the Beaufort Sea and other parts of the polar basin, many of these individuals spent the summer on land instead of remaining with the sea-ice as it retreated to the north. Commercial hunters eliminated polar bears from St. Matthew Island by the early 1900s (Hanna 1920). Likewise, overwintering commercial whalers, along with local residents, may have nearly eliminated the bears that once denned along the north coast of Alaska (Leffingwell 1919)."



Hunting - Polar Bears International

Right... and where do polar bears mate and have their young... you know, the thing that makes more polar bears?

Ummmm, my guess would be on the ICE. Polar Bears actually like the ice. They thrive there. They can also swim for over 60 miles at a stretch. Do you actually know anything about polar bears or just what your high priests tell you?

 

[Sweet Willy]

You claimed that we halted polar bear hunting way back in 1973 and I pointed out your information was flat wrong. You can book a polar bear hunt today and I posted a link to a guide for you.

You must have a permit to hunt Polar Bear.

Really? Gosh in a world where you have to have a permit to hunt a damned dear you have to go and ruin it for me by telling me I have to have a permit to hunt a bear. Really? DUDE, you can't hunt or fish for anything ANYWHERE without a permit!

The fact that people do doesn't make it permissable either.

As I stated earlier, your ignorance is astounding.

And it doesn't address the fact you claimed there was NO hunting of polar bears as the reason for their recovery.

No dumb ass... you really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

The only way to kill a Polar Bear is with a permit that can only be issued to a native tribe member. YOU can not get a permit.

YOu're in way over your head, but keep swimming out.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Gosh you are ignorant.

This is one of many sources that will tell you the exact same thing. Polar Bears in general stay with the Arctic ice. There were a few that remained on land. Most of those were killed off.


"Early Eurasian explorers viewed polar bears as fearless marauders (Larsen 1978). They killed polar bears in self-defense, before they could become a threat, or just because they could. For centuries, Arctic travelers killed as many polar bears as possible (Seton 1929). In Alaska, explorers of the late 1800s and local residents both affected polar bears. Historically, polar bears occupied St. Matthew Island, which lies over 350 km south of the Bering Strait. Unlike polar bears of the Beaufort Sea and other parts of the polar basin, many of these individuals spent the summer on land instead of remaining with the sea-ice as it retreated to the north. Commercial hunters eliminated polar bears from St. Matthew Island by the early 1900s (Hanna 1920). Likewise, overwintering commercial whalers, along with local residents, may have nearly eliminated the bears that once denned along the north coast of Alaska (Leffingwell 1919)."



Hunting - Polar Bears International

Right... and where do polar bears mate and have their young... you know, the thing that makes more polar bears?

Ummmm, my guess would be on the ICE. Polar Bears actually like the ice. They thrive there. They can also swim for over 60 miles at a stretch. Do you actually know anything about polar bears or just what your high priests tell you?

Yup... you are guessing.

We protect critical habitat, we have for decades.

You are going on about sea ice and hunting grounds where they take seals. Not home range / mating range.

 

[westwall]

You must have a permit to hunt Polar Bear.

Really? Gosh in a world where you have to have a permit to hunt a damned dear you have to go and ruin it for me by telling me I have to have a permit to hunt a bear. Really? DUDE, you can't hunt or fish for anything ANYWHERE without a permit!

The fact that people do doesn't make it permissable either.

As I stated earlier, your ignorance is astounding.

And it doesn't address the fact you claimed there was NO hunting of polar bears as the reason for their recovery.

No dumb ass... you really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

The only way to kill a Polar Bear is with a permit that can only be issued to a native tribe member. YOU can not get a permit.

YOu're in way over your head, but keep swimming out.

Actually dumb ass, it's YOU who don't know what the fuck you're talking about. There two Canadian provinces where Polar Bear can be hunted (currently there are no polar bears on US territory so you can't hunt them because they don't come that far south, as the globe cools that may change) and of course you can obtain permits to hunt them on the Ice pack as well.

Northwest Territory polar bear hunting is great fun and there are many guides and outfitters that are ready to book trips and guided hunts to this remote area. The Northwest Territory has over 530,000 square miles of land to polar bear hunt on and a trip here can be very exciting as the area offers the Northern Lights depending on weather conditions. This big game animal has much to offer a hunter, as it is in normally far from any towns or villages. The polar bear hunting outfitter or guide you hire should know their hunting fields and are worth their weight in gold when it comes to supplies and traveling the wilderness areas. Hunting-Trips-R-Us have listed these big game hunting guides and outfitters in the Northwest Territory for your convenience. Take your time in picking the right hunting guide or outfitter."



Northwest Territory, Canada Polar Bear Hunting Guides and Outfitters

 

[westwall]

Right... and where do polar bears mate and have their young... you know, the thing that makes more polar bears?

Ummmm, my guess would be on the ICE. Polar Bears actually like the ice. They thrive there. They can also swim for over 60 miles at a stretch. Do you actually know anything about polar bears or just what your high priests tell you?

Yup... you are guessing.

We protect critical habitat, we have for decades.

You are going on about sea ice and hunting grounds where they take seals. Not home range / mating range.

What a clueless nimrod you are. Thanks for falling into the trap little froggy. Now hop your way under a rock. I even used wiki for you so you could understand it easier. Bufoon.


"Reproduction and lifecycle

Cubs are born helpless, and typically nurse for two and a half years.
Courtship and mating take place on the sea ice in April and May, when polar bears congregate in the best seal hunting areas.[71] A male may follow the tracks of a breeding female for 100 km (62 mi) or more, and after finding her engage in intense fighting with other males over mating rights, fights which often result in scars and broken teeth.[71] Polar bears have a generally polygynous mating system; recent genetic testing of mothers and cubs, however, has uncovered cases of litters in which cubs have different fathers.[72] Partners stay together and mate repeatedly for an entire week; the mating ritual induces ovulation in the female.[73]

After mating, the fertilized egg remains in a suspended state until August or September. During these four months, the pregnant female eats prodigious amounts of food, gaining at least 200 kg (440 lb) and often more than doubling her body weight.[71"

 

[Sweet Willy]

The ONLY WAY to hunt a polar bear is with a Native Tribe member. The permits are only issued to native tribes. YOU can not get one. You can go on a hunt with a native and shoot one on his permit, but YOU can not get the permit. It is HIS tribal permit. It's the same way with salmon and other game exceptions made for natives.

 

[Uncensored2008]

And consider this:

While global warming has been a concern for many many many many many many many decades some things are for certain:

1. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions of humans polluting planet earth

2. Never before has there been billions upon billions of gasoline burning vehicles
spewing pollution into the atmosphere

3. Never before has there been billions of homes demanding energy from polluting sources

4. Never before has there been billions of buildings demanding energy from polluting sources

5. Never before has there been billions of polluting energy generating sources

6. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans supporting the clearing of the rainforest for food products not knowing the long term impact of removing massive numbers of trees and medicinal plants.

7. Never before has planet earth been expected to absorb tons and tons and tons and tons of pollution with human beings having no idea what the impact might be.

8. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of human beings believing THEIR pollution is having zero impact ....... can we say ignorance is bliss.

9. Never before has there been billions upon billions upon billions upon billions upon billions of humans applying millions of gallons and or pounds of toxic chemicals to the landscapes.



Sloan's proposal for an electric car fee met with skepticism / LJWorld.com

Did we make Gaea cry? Repent for we have gravely sinned by being alive and intelligent!

Thus speaketh the left.

 

[Sweet Willy]

At any rate, westwall, did you think that a US law applied to Canada?

It has been illegal to hunt Polar Bears here under the Marine Mammal Act since the early 1970s.

So.... the point being, dumb ass, we used to shoot a lot of Polar Bears and now you can't, unless you are a native or one of a handful of outsiders who can get his hands on a permit from the tribe.

Again.... taking hunting pressure off the bears is likely why we have not seen their numbers drop. We stopped shooting them.

 

[Robert_Stephens]

Oh, I posted the truth of matter back on page 48 or 49 so, no, i did not wade through it all. Man's effect on the biome for warming over all is .7%.........

Not even 1% but it sells a lot of green shit.

Oh well....

Robert

Really? Is that why all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities say otherwise?

We have increased the CO2 in the atmosphere by 40% and are allready seeing the consequences of that. Denying reality for reason of politics is indictates a pretty substandard mind.

What consequences doofus? Show me any disaster or "weather event" you wish and I'll show the same or worse from before man could have done anything at all.

FAIL

You are correct.

Robert

 

[westwall]

The ONLY WAY to hunt a polar bear is with a Native Tribe member. The permits are only issued to native tribes. YOU can not get one. You can go on a hunt with a native and shoot one on his permit, but YOU can not get the permit. It is HIS tribal permit. It's the same way with salmon and other game exceptions made for natives.

Bullshit. See there where it says NON RESIDENT HUNTING FEE? That would be for me. You see the POLAR BEAR TROPHY FEE? That's how much I would have to pay the Canadian government to KILL a polar bear. I would then get to send it to a taxidermist and have it mounted for around 10K.

NON-RESIDENT HUNTING LICENSE $50.00 C
POLAR BEAR TROPHY FEE $750.00 C
MUSK OX TROPHY FEE $150.00 C

There is also a 7% Goods and Services Tax due on each license and fee.

PLEASE CONTACT RICK FOR AVAILABLE OPENINGS AND PERMITS
[email protected] (907) 373-4658

GOOD HUNTING!

Rick Herscher
Alaska Hunting Safaris



Your ignorance is simply stunning. Once again, do you know anything about anything?

 

[westwall]

At any rate, westwall, did you think that a US law applied to Canada?

It has been illegal to hunt Polar Bears here under the Marine Mammal Act since the early 1970s.

So.... the point being, dumb ass, we used to shoot a lot of Polar Bears and now you can't, unless you are a native or one of a handful of outsiders who can get his hands on a permit from the tribe.

Again.... taking hunting pressure off the bears is likely why we have not seen their numbers drop. We stopped shooting them.

Where exactly did the polar bears live in the US? Hmmm? The North coast of Alaska OCCASIONALLY see's a polar bear and you are correct they can't be hunted there. Not do to the Act you proclaim, but do to the fact it is a NATURE PRESERVE. And the TREATY is what prevents polar bears from being hunted on the ICE. Before the MMA you could hunt polar bear wherever you found them. Now they are treated like any other game animal; and you have to have a permit to do so. However the TREATY that I mentioned earlier prevents them being hunted on the water or ICE by ANYONE. Even the Inuit. Now if the Inuit wish to hunt them the old way they still can. No motor boats or motor craft of any kind. They have to hike in. If they do that they are legal to take a polar bear. That is their one priviledge for being aboriginals.

Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, amended 1994

The U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) protects all marine mammals, including cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), pinnipeds (seals and sea lions), sirenians (manatees and dugongs), sea otters, and polar bears within the waters of the United States. The Act makes it illegal to "take" marine mammals without a permit. This means people may not harass, feed, hunt, capture, collect, or kill any marine mammal or part of a marine mammal. The Act also formalized the marine mammal health and stranding response program to improve the response of stranding and unusual mortality events. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration web site gives the complete text of the Act.

http://www.marinemammalcenter.org/what-we-do/rescue/marine-mammal-protection-act.html

 

[Sweet Willy]

The ONLY WAY to hunt a polar bear is with a Native Tribe member. The permits are only issued to native tribes. YOU can not get one. You can go on a hunt with a native and shoot one on his permit, but YOU can not get the permit. It is HIS tribal permit. It's the same way with salmon and other game exceptions made for natives.

Bullshit. See there where it says NON RESIDENT HUNTING FEE? That would be for me. You see the POLAR BEAR TROPHY FEE? That's how much I would have to pay the Canadian government to KILL a polar bear. I would then get to send it to a taxidermist and have it mounted for around 10K.

NON-RESIDENT HUNTING LICENSE $50.00 C
POLAR BEAR TROPHY FEE $750.00 C
MUSK OX TROPHY FEE $150.00 C

There is also a 7% Goods and Services Tax due on each license and fee.

PLEASE CONTACT RICK FOR AVAILABLE OPENINGS AND PERMITS
[email protected] (907) 373-4658

GOOD HUNTING!

Rick Herscher
Alaska Hunting Safaris



Your ignorance is simply stunning. Once again, do you know anything about anything?

Westwall... you are trying make the point on a technicality. Yes, there are two places left on the face of the Earth where native tribes in Canada can hunt polar bears. A small handful of non - tribal hunters take a small number of bears every year. OK.... there are EXTREMELY special and EXTREMELY limited numbers of white men who can kill a Polar Bear, in Canada. What? 20 a year?

The point remains.... the Marine Mammal Act and the treaty with Russia and Canada ALL BUT ended Polar Bear hunting.

 

[Sweet Willy]

Canada allows natives to hunt polar bears under a quota system that divides permits among native communities. However, Canada is the only nation that allows sport or trophy hunting by non-natives and non-citizens. This enables native hunters to sell their permits to sport hunters for large sums, a windfall for communities that have no other source of income. To take their trophies out of Canada, U. S. hunters must obtain an import permit from the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which, in turn, requires that Canadian quotas be based on sound management principles.

The permits available are Native permits westwall. You have to get them from the tribe.

THis is how it has been for a long time, unless there have been recent changes.

None of this alters the point that the reason for the current Polar Bear numbers is that we put a moratorium on shooting them. You can't do it unless you are a Native or can get a permit off a native that goes for thousands of dollars.

 

[Sweet Willy]

At any rate, westwall, did you think that a US law applied to Canada?

It has been illegal to hunt Polar Bears here under the Marine Mammal Act since the early 1970s.

So.... the point being, dumb ass, we used to shoot a lot of Polar Bears and now you can't, unless you are a native or one of a handful of outsiders who can get his hands on a permit from the tribe.

Again.... taking hunting pressure off the bears is likely why we have not seen their numbers drop. We stopped shooting them.

Where exactly did the polar bears live in the US? Hmmm? The North coast of Alaska OCCASIONALLY see's a polar bear and you are correct they can't be hunted there. Not do to the Act you proclaim, but do to the fact it is a NATURE PRESERVE. And the TREATY is what prevents polar bears from being hunted on the ICE. Before the MMA you could hunt polar bear wherever you found them. Now they are treated like any other game animal; and you have to have a permit to do so. However the TREATY that I mentioned earlier prevents them being hunted on the water or ICE by ANYONE. Even the Inuit. Now if the Inuit wish to hunt them the old way they still can. No motor boats or motor craft of any kind. They have to hike in. If they do that they are legal to take a polar bear. That is their one priviledge for being aboriginals.

Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, amended 1994

The U.S. Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA) protects all marine mammals, including cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), pinnipeds (seals and sea lions), sirenians (manatees and dugongs), sea otters, and polar bears within the waters of the United States. The Act makes it illegal to "take" marine mammals without a permit. This means people may not harass, feed, hunt, capture, collect, or kill any marine mammal or part of a marine mammal. The Act also formalized the marine mammal health and stranding response program to improve the response of stranding and unusual mortality events. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration web site gives the complete text of the Act.

The Marine Mammal Center : Marine Mammal Protection Act

You are arguing shit you don;t know anything about westwall. It is illegal to grow marijuana but you can get a permit for that too if the circumstances are right. I can get a permit to shoot deer at night if they are eating my garden and YES, when a polar bear takes to eating out of trash cans or threatening people, they will issue a permit to kill it.

You are a dumb ass.

 

[Robert_Stephens]

You don't know.

That is the only truth of the matter. No one does.

You're in error. They actually do.

A cabal of science folks worldwide have been matrixing this for some time now and it is the overall consensus it is normal and one of many warming periods over the last 30,000+ years. This might be a good read for you and others.

Global warming? It's natural, say experts | Mail Online

This is only one but there are hundreds of links to the same effect. It is natural with man's influence being quite small.

Hope that is helpful.

Robert

Robert, for every report you can cite there are ten others that say something different. You don't know, you CHOOSE. There is a difference in choosing what to believe and knowing.

You have a choice of many "facts" and lots of "science". Because you chose one, does not mean you know. You don't know.

Hope that helps you understand the difference.

I don't know.

You don't know.

In any case, if you are convinced that 1% or 0.7% is an insignificant amount ..... I'll make you a deal: I will prepare you a glass of lemonade. I promise that 99.3% of it will be actual lemonade. The remaining 0.7% will be of my choosing. Insignificant and harmless amount... right?

I totally understand the difference. Let me offer this as an overview and let it fall where it may since I am NOT a climatologist.

Ok, over the last 40 years I've been in 154 of the Earth's 166 nation states so far. In that time period, the biome seems to be in a warming period caused by natural events as the planet is a salt water, fresh water and biome sphere.

Examples first hand of localized warming is places like the Nazca Lines of Peru or the whole central section of the Sahara. In these locations, at very high elevation and very low, with monitor stations positioned at random here and there over the years, it shows the Earth is cooling, and that induces localized heating by the Earth's thermocouple.

So, if ask, I would say the Earth is warming in its 14th warming trend over millenia. It is normal.

Not much but an offering of something.

Robert

 

[Sweet Willy]

You're in error. They actually do.

A cabal of science folks worldwide have been matrixing this for some time now and it is the overall consensus it is normal and one of many warming periods over the last 30,000+ years. This might be a good read for you and others.

Global warming? It's natural, say experts | Mail Online

This is only one but there are hundreds of links to the same effect. It is natural with man's influence being quite small.

Hope that is helpful.

Robert

Robert, for every report you can cite there are ten others that say something different. You don't know, you CHOOSE. There is a difference in choosing what to believe and knowing.

You have a choice of many "facts" and lots of "science". Because you chose one, does not mean you know. You don't know.

Hope that helps you understand the difference.

I don't know.

You don't know.

In any case, if you are convinced that 1% or 0.7% is an insignificant amount ..... I'll make you a deal: I will prepare you a glass of lemonade. I promise that 99.3% of it will be actual lemonade. The remaining 0.7% will be of my choosing. Insignificant and harmless amount... right?

I totally understand the difference. Let me offer this as an overview and let it fall where it may since I am NOT a climatologist.

Ok, over the last 40 years I've been in 154 of the Earth's 166 nation states so far. In that time period, the biome seems to be in a warming period caused by natural events as the planet is a salt water, fresh water and biome sphere.

Examples first hand of localized warming is places like the Nazca Lines of Peru or the whole central section of the Sahara. In these locations, at very high elevation and very low, with monitor stations positioned at random here and there over the years, it shows the Earth is cooling, and that induces localized heating by the Earth's thermocouple.

So, if ask, I would say the Earth is warming in its 14th warming trend over millenia. It is normal.

Not much but an offering of something.

Robert

And you may be completely correct.

Or maybe not.

I don't know.

You don't know.

What we do know is that man has the ability to make large scale impacts on his environment. Perhaps you have seen photos of the previously "dark" side of the Earth from space lately? Perhaps you have seen the South American continent shrouded in smoke from the fires of piled and burned timber?

While I do not know if man has or is making a large scale impact on the Earths climate, I do know that he is capable of large scale impacts that just a few decades ago, people would have lined up to convince me that man wasn't capable of. I tend to keep in mind that man is the single most intelligent thing in the Universe we know of and we constantly have surprised ourselves with the things we have done, both intentionally and accidentally.

I don't know.

You don't know.

 

[Robert_Stephens]

Robert, for every report you can cite there are ten others that say something different. You don't know, you CHOOSE. There is a difference in choosing what to believe and knowing.

You have a choice of many "facts" and lots of "science". Because you chose one, does not mean you know. You don't know.

Hope that helps you understand the difference.

I don't know.

You don't know.

In any case, if you are convinced that 1% or 0.7% is an insignificant amount ..... I'll make you a deal: I will prepare you a glass of lemonade. I promise that 99.3% of it will be actual lemonade. The remaining 0.7% will be of my choosing. Insignificant and harmless amount... right?

I totally understand the difference. Let me offer this as an overview and let it fall where it may since I am NOT a climatologist.

Ok, over the last 40 years I've been in 154 of the Earth's 166 nation states so far. In that time period, the biome seems to be in a warming period caused by natural events as the planet is a salt water, fresh water and biome sphere.

Examples first hand of localized warming is places like the Nazca Lines of Peru or the whole central section of the Sahara. In these locations, at very high elevation and very low, with monitor stations positioned at random here and there over the years, it shows the Earth is cooling, and that induces localized heating by the Earth's thermocouple.

So, if ask, I would say the Earth is warming in its 14th warming trend over millenia. It is normal.

Not much but an offering of something.

Robert

And you may be completely correct.

Or maybe not.

I don't know.

You don't know.

What we do know is that man has the ability to make large scale impacts on his environment. Perhaps you have seen photos of the previously "dark" side of the Earth from space lately? Perhaps you have seen the South American continent shrouded in smoke from the fires of piled and burned timber?

While I do not know if man has or is making a large scale impact on the Earths climate, I do know that he is capable of large scale impacts that just a few decades ago, people would have lined up to convince me that man wasn't capable of. I tend to keep in mind that man is the single most intelligent thing in the Universe we know of and we constantly have surprised ourselves with the things we have done, both intentionally and accidentally.

I don't know.

You don't know.

What exactly is the method man has to effect both the surface and thermocouple of the Earth's biome. Hint, there is only one.

Robert

 

[westwall]

The ONLY WAY to hunt a polar bear is with a Native Tribe member. The permits are only issued to native tribes. YOU can not get one. You can go on a hunt with a native and shoot one on his permit, but YOU can not get the permit. It is HIS tribal permit. It's the same way with salmon and other game exceptions made for natives.

Bullshit. See there where it says NON RESIDENT HUNTING FEE? That would be for me. You see the POLAR BEAR TROPHY FEE? That's how much I would have to pay the Canadian government to KILL a polar bear. I would then get to send it to a taxidermist and have it mounted for around 10K.

NON-RESIDENT HUNTING LICENSE $50.00 C
POLAR BEAR TROPHY FEE $750.00 C
MUSK OX TROPHY FEE $150.00 C

There is also a 7% Goods and Services Tax due on each license and fee.

PLEASE CONTACT RICK FOR AVAILABLE OPENINGS AND PERMITS
[email protected] (907) 373-4658

GOOD HUNTING!

Rick Herscher
Alaska Hunting Safaris



Your ignorance is simply stunning. Once again, do you know anything about anything?

Westwall... you are trying make the point on a technicality. Yes, there are two places left on the face of the Earth where native tribes in Canada can hunt polar bears. A small handful of non - tribal hunters take a small number of bears every year. OK.... there are EXTREMELY special and EXTREMELY limited numbers of white men who can kill a Polar Bear, in Canada. What? 20 a year?

The point remains.... the Marine Mammal Act and the treaty with Russia and Canada ALL BUT ended Polar Bear hunting.

The numbers are small because it is difficult and expensive. Only wealthy hunters can afford to make the trek. We have no idea how many polar bears are killed in Russia but it is substantial. Russia has become one of the premier places to go to for big game hunting because your money goes further.

The MMA does very litte to protect the bears. All it did was make them the same as any other big game animal which meant you had to get a permit to go kill one. Before the Act you didn't. The TREATY does a great deal more because it deals with their breeding areas ON THE ICE which allows their numbers to increase so rapidly.

You can continue to believe your little silliness but I have proven you to be completely wrong. You know it, I know it, and every one else knows it too. So just stop trying to save what little face you think you have. You have none. Move on and learn something from this.