# 2 Busted buying Bear and Bear parts



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

I saw this blog, here's the link.
http://www.blogsmonroe.com/hunting/2014/03/


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

Holy cow!!! $30k!!! I knew fall bladders were big money, didn't know it was THAT much. With that type of money on the line I'm surprised more ppl aren't out poaching bears.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Jager Pro, sorry about that....I should have been more specific about my concern over selling antlers. I am referring to antlers attached to the skull. Trophy antlers attached to the skull is where the money is and they are easy for poachers to remove in the field.


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Jager Pro, sorry about that....I should have been more specific about my concern over selling antlers. I am referring to antlers attached to the skull. Trophy antlers attached to the skull is where the money is and they are easy for poachers to remove in the field.


Well I think there are 2 major points that we should consider when talking about the DNR's motivation. 

1) there are a lot more deer in this state than there are bears. With only about 15-18,000 bears I think the DNR are more worried about a bear being poached than they are about a deer, a bear means more to the state and it's a bigger loss when a bear is poached than a deer. 

2) with the link above there appears to be a lot more motivation to illegally kill a bear than a deer. I'm not sure how much a set of antlers sells for but I'm sure it's no where close to 5 digits, let alone $30k. The fact that a dead bear can bring in so much money encourages people to break the law because it's worth the risk. Sure there are plenty of deer poachers, but I think most people poach deer because the oppertunity is provided, not because it outweighs the risk.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Pro, you make a good point on the antler thing....if there is not as much money in trophy deer antlers there is no need to include them in the ban on selling animal parts.

Need to correct you on the statewide black bear population. The latest press release I saw (August 2013) MDNR stated Michigan statewide bear population was currently at 8,000 to 10,000 bears. Down from January 2010 when their press release stated the statewide population was
18,000 to 19,000. MDNR press releases sometimes are similar to white house statements on progress in the Affordablle Care Act. So, maybe we should take their population estimates with a grain of salt. But, at the March 2011 NRC meeting in Lansing an MDNR spokesman from the Wildlife Division did acknowledge their computer model was wrong....and the state's black bear population was in decline. Further more, he stated in the Red Oak they would need to cut tags by 52% for three years before the decline would stop and numbers begin to increase. Obviously, they did not cut the tags by 52%, they cut them by a little over 30%. In the Bergland BMU for the past several years....in spite of cutting tags by 30% there have been more kill tags allocated than sportsmen applied for. Last year there were 267 tags left over after the drawing that nobody even applied for. In other words, the supply of kill tags exceeded the demand for them. Naturally, MDNR opted to sell the left over tags rather than address the problem of why nobody applied for them in the drawing. Sort of a negative approach to the "hunter retention" concerns we often hear about. It may take the legislature to get the word out to DNR administrators....SB 221 is now the law that requires sound science management, not social science....and it applies to MDNR the same as it does to the NRC.


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

Regardless of the actuall bear population it is still only a fraction compared to the deer population. But I get your point.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Pro, I agree with you.

A little off topic, but I just got an email from a friend updating me on the latest APR turn of events. Reportedly, over 100 sportsmen hunting in the APR zone were cited for not counting antler points more accurately before harvesting a deer. I'm told the court fined each $1,000, $2,000 reimbursement for the deer, and loss of hunting license for 3 years.
Another home run for the Wildlife Division and the NRC's decision making. Seems to me its a no-brainer that most of those 100 plus violations were not intentional. Wonder how many young hunters were among the 100 plus who got caught up in the heat of the moment.
Now the APR has scarred them for life with an illegal deer kill on their record. Big price to pay for the quest for antlers.

For a department that expresses so much concern for hunter retention, the APR fiasco seems to be taking things in the wrong direction.


----------



## Liver and Onions (Nov 24, 2000)

Rooster Cogburn said:


> ..........
> A little off topic, but I just got an email from a friend updating me on the latest APR turn of events. Reportedly, over 100 sportsmen hunting in the APR zone were cited for not counting antler points more accurately before harvesting a deer. I'm told the court fined each $1,000, $2,000 reimbursement for the deer, and loss of hunting license for 3 years.
> ...................


That sure does sound like something you might hear around closing time at a bar.
I will take another look at the CO reports on the DNR site, but there has been nothing close to that report this winter on the site. 

Haters will always hate. Liars will always lie.

L & O


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Rooster I think you should be doing a little fact checking before you post you buddies email.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

I will post a formal appology if my information turns out to be false, but before you start accusing me how about checking out Michigan Outdoor News. Based on the information I received that's the source of the information.


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

http://www.outdoornews.com/March-2014/Illegal-buck-kills-increase-in-APR-counties/

I am glad they issued warnings to those who self reported.

Ganzer


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

Rooster Cogburn said:


> Pro, I agree with you.
> 
> A little off topic, but I just got an email from a friend updating me on the latest APR turn of events. Reportedly, over 100 sportsmen hunting in the APR zone were cited for not counting antler points more accurately before harvesting a deer. I'm told the court fined each $1,000, $2,000 reimbursement for the deer, and loss of hunting license for 3 years.
> Another home run for the Wildlife Division and the NRC's decision making. Seems to me its a no-brainer that most of those 100 plus violations were not intentional. Wonder how many young hunters were among the 100 plus who got caught up in the heat of the moment.
> ...


There were *35 tickets issued* in those seven counties for APR violations and 46 verbal warnings issued. Most of the verbal warnings were for hunters who self-reported, Shaw said. In no cases did we let the people who shot illegal bucks keep the deer.

35 is a far cry from over a 100. You say the DNR is over stating the bear population by a factor of about 2 but over stating illegal deer kill by a factor of 3 is OK? I know you weren't making the numbers up but your buddy was, hence the BS meter.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Luv2huntup, Just called my friend to follow up. He was quoting from information in Richard P. Smith's article in Michigan Outdoor News. He agreed with your statement of 35 citations issued in 7 of the 12 APR counties. But, citations were also issued in the other 5 APR counties.During our phone conversation I was unable to pinpoint the additional number of citations. But, reportedly, 112 illegal deer were confiscated where the shooters were identified. 

Another factor I just picked up on is the undersized bucks getting left in the woods when the shooter finds out he made a mistake.

P.S. Luv2huntup, You wrote, "you are saying the DNR is overstating the bear population by about a factor of 2."
I did not state that....I only quoted DNR's press release on bear numbers in January 2010, and their press release in August 2013 stating the statewide population of black bear is 8,000 to 10,000 bears. 

For what ever its worth, I like honest debate on here...and my reply to you is meant to be a friendly response to your statements....free of attitude.


----------



## griz01 (Jun 11, 2012)

Very poorly written or edited article

http://www.outdoornews.com/March-2014/Illegal-buck-kills-increase-in-APR-counties/


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

I understand Rooster. I know you were not making up things and did attempt to clarify that but I do have to question some of the sources. 

RPS is not a poster child for the DNR so I take much of what he says with a grain of salt.


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

We're in full agreement on RPS.


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

I don't want to digress this thread with APR BS but hunters shooting illegal APR deer (forkies, spikes, and nubbie "3pts") is one of several negative consequences of APR's that was already documented in other states who experimented with APR's. It was brought up in a SWAFWA report as a contributor for getting rid of APR's in at least one state.


Anywho.....gall bladders sounds like big business still. The guide I had in Ontario this past Sept asked if I was going to sell the gall bladder of the bear I shot. I didn't know if he was jazzin' me or serious. I don't know if it is legal in Canada???? I'm speculating it's illegal.


----------



## Luv2hunteup (Mar 22, 2003)

I've gutted 6 bears and have never figured out where the fall bladder was, not that I was looking for it. If I did somehow figure it out I don't know what I would do with it. At least I can say I discarded $180,000 and not blinked an eye.


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

Luv2hunteup said:


> I've gutted 6 bears and have never figured out where the fall bladder was, not that I was looking for it. If I did somehow figure it out I don't know what I would do with it. At least I can say I discarded $180,000 and not blinked an eye.


It's located behind/under the liver. It's a green colored sac and is similar to a water balloon. You can't miss it.


----------



## dawgball (Sep 15, 2007)

griz01 said:


> ```
> The law in my opinion is to cut down on poaching.
> ```
> HUH? Is that because poachers are such law abiding citizens? I did say if I taken legally! How is it better to waste the parts I do not care to use? This law follows the same flawed logic that the gun grabbers do. The "Criminals" will be law abiding if we just make enough laws.




I couldnt agree more!!!!! Finally someone with a brain who uses it!!


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

dawgball said:


> I couldnt agree more!!!!! Finally someone with a brain who uses it!!


 
You honestly do not think poaching will increase if you have a gall bladder worth $30,000??? If selling gall bladders were legal the bear population would drop instantly cause of poaching. Its the same as the Ivory trade, once countries began to ban the sale or import ivory the elephants began to grow in numbers. People would look at a bear any bear (sow cub boar) and see $$$$$$$$ so yes poaching would go up. There is someone using thier brain 

Ganzer


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Years ago Natural Geographic did a documentary on the illegal bear gall bladder trade. They traced it from the woods to the market in Asia. Some of the documentary included testimony from undercover wildlife law enforcement officers. And, even videoed a couple sting operations. Back then it was reported a processed bear gall bladder could be worth up to $1,500 at the end destination. Not nearly as much money went to the illegal seller.

If you do an online search for the illegal trade in bear parts you will find some of the reporting originates from HSUS and other anti organizations.
And, some of the black market prices quoted are just plain propaganda.

I am in no way supportive of selling bear parts, but just calling attention to the fact some of the stuff we see on the illegal sale of bear parts is manufactured propaganda against hunters.


----------



## dawgball (Sep 15, 2007)

MERGANZER said:


> You honestly do not think poaching will increase if you have a gall bladder worth $30,000???
> *I think gull bladders bring the money they do because of legalities getting them. The more strict the laws against something illegal, generally the more money it is worth. For instance, Look at illegal street drugs. Bout as good of example as "black market" i can think of. LEGAL Medicinal marijuana has taken a huge toll on the black market version.*
> 
> If selling gall bladders were legal the bear population would drop instantly cause of poaching.
> ...



So since you asked me honest question, my turn.

You want poaching to stop, or go down? Why not up the penalty for those found guilty of poaching. Offer someone a few years in the pen and i would then be willing to bet most think twice... or more. Dont make a bunch of laws that are BS!!!! 

I bet if the state could collect its 6% tax from that $30,000 they might think differently!!!


----------



## dawgball (Sep 15, 2007)

I sell hundreds of ****, rats, and mink every year and never eat a single oz of the meat. In fact the only part of the animal i keep/use other than the pelts are the rat meat. And it is just bait for my mink and ****. I have made thousands from my fur over the years and never poached or illegally taken a single one! I dont feel bad one bit about it either.

A person who legally takes a bear and USES ALL of that bears resources shouldnt be penalized either. 


A poacher, of any animal, should be taken to the bank and/or pen! I bet that slows your poaching down...


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

dawgball said:


> I sell hundreds of ****, rats, and mink every year and never eat a single oz of the meat. In fact the only part of the animal i keep/use other than the pelts are the rat meat. And it is just bait for my mink and ****. I have made thousands from my fur over the years and never poached or illegally taken a single one! I dont feel bad one bit about it either.
> 
> A person who legally takes a bear and USES ALL of that bears resources shouldnt be penalized either.
> 
> ...


 
You will get no argument from me on upping the fines, jail time etc. for poaching. There is nothing illegal about you selling fur if you have the license etc. The asian markets do some extreme things for thier medicinal beliefs and they dont seem to care about the results of such practices on wildlife. But when you are talking about the money they are mentioning I think it would pose a problem for the bears. You wont poach a bear for money and neither would I but we there is a percentage of dirtbags out there that will.

Ganzer


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

dawgball said:


> I sell hundreds of ****, rats, and mink every year and never eat a single oz of the meat. In fact the only part of the animal i keep/use other than the pelts are the rat meat. And it is just bait for my mink and ****. I have made thousands from my fur over the years and never poached or illegally taken a single one! I dont feel bad one bit about it either.
> 
> A person who legally takes a bear and USES ALL of that bears resources shouldnt be penalized either.
> 
> ...


The difference between bears and the fur trade is that populations can handle the fur trade. IMO if selling gall bladders were legal then people would try to profit off of it. You would see people in the woods hunting bears that normally wouldn't be if it were illegal. An increase in bear hunting would be a decrease in population numbers. Which the species can't handle.


----------



## griz01 (Jun 11, 2012)

Jager Pro said:


> The difference between bears and the fur trade is that populations can handle the fur trade. IMO if selling gall bladders were legal then people would try to profit off of it. You would see people in the woods hunting bears that normally wouldn't be if it were illegal. An increase in bear hunting would be a decrease in population numbers. Which the species can't handle.


I have read this since my first query, all i can say is ***! Are the people posting here all shills for the anti hunting crowd? I haven't commented again because most posts contained absolutely no logical reasoning. More laws will not stop poachers! Now, I have two questions for this post:
If it were legal, why would you not profit from it? 
I see people in the woods hunting all the time that should not be there, but how does legally selling bear parts increase the number of permits being issued?


----------



## dawgball (Sep 15, 2007)

griz01 said:


> I have read this since my first query, all i can say is ***! Are the people posting here all shills for the anti hunting crowd? I haven't commented again because most posts contained absolutely no logical reasoning. More laws will not stop poachers! Now, I have two questions for this post:
> If it were legal, why would you not profit from it?
> I see people in the woods hunting all the time that should not be there, but *how does legally selling bear parts increase the number of permits being issued?*



Exactly what i was thinking when i read it!


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

griz01 said:


> I have read this since my first query, all i can say is ***! Are the people posting here all shills for the anti hunting crowd? I haven't commented again because most posts contained absolutely no logical reasoning. More laws will not stop poachers! Now, I have two questions for this post:


What makes you believe that I am anti-hunting? Correct laws don't stop criminals-- that's why they are criminals, but why would you want to make it easier for them to get away with it? 



> If it were legal, why would you not profit from it?
> I see people in the woods hunting all the time that should not be there, but how does legally selling bear parts increase the number of permits being issued?


Ahh you got me there, I guess I'll have to eat my words on that one and feel stupid for the rest of the day.


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

I went looking around to answer my own question about selling bear parts in Canada. This from Nova Scotia. Take it for what it's worth.




http://novascotia.ca/natr/wildlife/sustainable/beargalls.asp


> *Bear Gallbladders to sell or not to sell*
> 
> div.feature {overflow: hidden;} #main { width: 730px; }
> 
> ...


_
_

Here is a great read on this gall bladder topic. It is long and includes alot of good data and pictures.

http://www.wspa.org.uk/Images/BearBileUSACanada_tcm9-2717.pdf


----------



## Nostromo (Feb 14, 2012)

TVCJohn said:


> I went looking around to answer my own question about selling bear parts in Canada. This from Nova Scotia. Take it for what it's worth.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't know anything about the WSPA. But this article doesn't really change the fact that people somewhere want to use Bear Gall Bladders. Something the law requires I leave in the woods for the ants.


There is no logical reason a legally taken Gall Bladder cant be used for medicinal purposes that I can see.


Good hunting!


----------



## TVCJohn (Nov 30, 2005)

Nostromo said:


> I don't know anything about the WSPA. But this article doesn't really change the fact that people somewhere want to use Bear Gall Bladders. Something the law requires I leave in the woods for the ants.
> 
> 
> There is no logical reason a legally taken Gall Bladder cant be used for medicinal purposes that I can see.
> ...



True....there is a market for gall bladders. We can also say there is a market for deer and elk tarsal glands, orbital glands, beaver parts, chicken hearts and giblet's, etc. 


What folks do with the parts from their legally harvested animal is an interesting debate. Is it legal to sell the ivory from your legally harvested elephant or walrus? As mentioned previously, I suspect it boils down to the animal in question, how many there are and is there a poaching-for-parts market?


----------



## Jager Pro (Nov 8, 2013)

TVCJohn said:


> As mentioned previously, I suspect it boils down to the animal in question, how many there are and is there a poaching-for-parts market?


Agreed 100%


----------



## MERGANZER (Aug 24, 2006)

Jager Pro said:


> Agreed 100%


 
X2!

Ganzer


----------

