Archery specific draws
Does anybody have any inclination as to whether or not the 2017 regs might have some archery specific draws / seasons? Thanks
|
I hope so
|
That would be nice... but not sure it will happen. Archery still offers a longer season and more access to the same species in certain cases (cow and bull elk).
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I wish they would split draw to!!!
|
Quote:
Won't be able to enter both draw pools. LC |
Archery specific draw pool would be the best thing to happen to the regs in many years. so it wont happen
|
Or if you get drawn and want to hunt bow use bow don't use rifle pretty easy
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
LC |
I prefer the way it is. General tags with my bow. Changing it will likely reduce those opportunities further. Already lost out on my moose season with a bow and general tag and don't want to see it happen to elk too. If that happens I'll be eating a lot of bear lol
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Tags
I don't shoot many animals with the rifle as I'm predominantly a bowhunter however I think I like it the way it is now. The system works, it's fair to everyone and we take our turns. Th only reason to bring this in is for archery hunters who want more opportunity than they have now. Then when the crossbows make their way into the "archery only" season we'll all be singing the blues.
No sir, it's fine like this |
IMHO there are other things to spend time to focus on, like defining "resident" and bringing in a minimum amount of resident time to be considered as one....much like BC and the Yukon.
LC |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I was in the split draw camp previously, and it does seem like that is the preferred option, but all is not well...hearing (second and third hand, so it's worth what you paid for it) rumblings that the allocations are not going to be what any resident hunter hoped for, nor are the waits going to be lower. They are using some rather optimistic success percentages in their calculations, and poor population estimates, among other things. A certain ethnic group is likely going to become a much large factor in game management policy and we know how that plays out for the rest of us.
I don't think any of us, regardless of hunting method of choice, are going to benefit from changes made by antihunting biologists, during the reign of an antihunting government, all done behind closed doors. It should have been done 3 years ago with the previous open process or put off until after the next election. I really hope I'm wrong. But I'll go on record here saying the vast majority of hunters, of all stripes, are going to wish these changes never happened. |
Agree
Quote:
Morb |
We need fewer draws and less over the counter tags for NON RESIDENTS.
|
I would like to see that happen down here in the states but doulbt I'll ever
see it. I'm sure we do have archery only draws in many states today but all I've seen are inside of city limits. Hunting for deer inside town or city limits is disscusting, like shooting a dog next door cause nobody else had the heart to put him down. Sucks. Funny how there is a big difference between hunting and culling. Aint it. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I think you're out of line. Does "JK" mean we can say anything we want? I already told you I'm predominantly a bow hunter but yes I do like to rifle hunt too and I love black powder hunting...I'm not advocating for a black powder season benefit myself. I collect my points and hunt how I see fit. This is anothe of Brent Watsons bright ideas his specific words were "there's too many bowhunters in Alberta." He's mostly upset that he can't hunt Mulies every year on a general tag because there's lots of other folks who like bowhunting Mulies too. Ergo if the seasons are split the folks who would patiently collect priority points and wait their turn to hunt with the weapon of their choice will be required to choose. Is this where I put in the "JK?" Brent and company want to weed out the hunters of convenience, the people who use a bow to take advantage of more hunting opportunity. Folks collect priority and should be allowed to use the hunt as they see fit. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Interested
Quote:
At the end of the day I also agree with the fewer draws and fewer over the counter tags to non-residents. Morb |
Not refering to zone 248 directly.
Indirectly yes, we have "zones" down here in the states that are designated as "Bow only" many are within or around city/town limits. Reason being it is understood that it is a much safer way of maintaining deer and bear etc. herds in human populated areas using a projectile that will average a range of impact 30 yards or less. Example .. A bow hunter in a tree stand 17 feet high shooting down at a deer standing 20 yards away. The angle of the shot will put the projectile into the ground at less than 50 yards no question about it. All the above is about safety first and foremost, herd population and health is second. This is all fine and correct. And restricting hunting of these areas for that reason alone is justified. There is another aspect of the difference hunting with a bow versus hunting with a gun, a big difference and it relates to herd management as much as it relates to managing hunters, maybe more so hunters. What I have not seen yet is designated areas or zones in areas outside of city limits dedicated to bow hunting only. Where populations of animals not humans are bordering healthy to fair or fair to poor for example. |
Edmonton bow zone is one. And there's plenty of zones that are archery all the way to November 1st how much more do they need? I'm a bow hunter and love the way it is
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:31 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.