Split Draw.

[walking buffalo]

I bet that No One, not even esrd can provide a Policy document that states archery hunting is to either be awarded or limited to 15% of the allowable harvest.

Certain f&w employees are playing games with archery and draw seasons based on their desires ( and their buds within cetain hunting associations) ... and all the rest are falling for the charade..

[3blade]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

I bet that No One, not even esrd can provide a Policy document that states archery hunting is to either be awarded or limited to 15% of the allowable harvest.

Certain f&w employees are playing games with archery and draw seasons based on their desires ( and their buds within cetain hunting associations) ... and all the rest are falling for the charade..

That is a pretty serious statement.

Grounds for a official freedom of information request.

I'm going to be looking what it will take to force a public release of that policy.

[sakogreywolf]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

I bet that No One, not even esrd can provide a Policy document that states archery hunting is to either be awarded or limited to 15% of the allowable harvest.

Certain f&w employees are playing games with archery and draw seasons based on their desires ( and their buds within cetain hunting associations) ... and all the rest are falling for the charade..

Agreed. There are some with an agenda.......and it will get rammed down our throats no matter what.

That survey/"consultation" was brutal in that the respondent was limited in which answers could be provided.......and I am willing to bet that the additional comment section will largely be ignored.

[338Bluff]

If the draw was split I would apply for the archery tag every time

[CBintheNorth]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

I bet that No One, not even esrd can provide a Policy document that states archery hunting is to either be awarded or limited to 15% of the allowable harvest.

Certain f&w employees are playing games with archery and draw seasons based on their desires ( and their buds within cetain hunting associations) ... and all the rest are falling for the charade..

Let me guess, you looked and couldn't find one?
Where do YOU think that magical number of 15% came from?
Pretty serious allegations, no? I'm assuming you have proof or some sort of supporting document?
I have no proof of anything, just hoping to get educated on the topic.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by CBintheNorth

Let me guess, you looked and couldn't find one?
Where do YOU think that magical number of 15% came from?
Pretty serious allegations, no? I'm assuming you have proof or some sort of supporting document?
I have no proof of anything, just hoping to get educated on the topic.

Dozens of specific requests to esrd asking them for this document. .. no one has been able to provide it.

Even the afga cannot get an answer to where archery allocations are stated in policy.

The number is from f&w priority species. I suspect the number comes from an evaluation of archery licence sales. I am not stating that I disagree with the number, but that there is no policy on this matter. Decisions are being made by individual desires claimed to be policy. This is wrong in more than one way....

[dmcbride]

If there is no policy that states, 15% is exclusive to archers why or how is this being pushed through?

Who does a guy contact to voice there concerns when it is happening at this level?

[coyotekiller]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

Yes, change the dates. 2 draws. 1 draw for September (Archery only) 1 draw for October- November. October is for bow only and November would be for what ever weapon you choose. This would give the guy's who do both an opportunity to do both while still having a bit of a archery only season.(October)

Hope that makes sense.

I like the way u think You could even have a archery only draw for sept-October and then a October-November draw for whichever weapon u want

[dmcbride]

I put this question on the http://wildlife-regulation.mindmixer.com/. hopefully get an answer or maybe if enough people support it we will get some answers.

Is the 15% allocation to the archery season Policy?
From what I understand is that some wmu's were put on draw because archers were taking over 15% of the allowable harvest. This makes sense when only 18% of hunters are archers. It should also be noted that of those 18% not all of them are full time archers, a lot hunt with both, rifle and bow.
If there is a policy that say's archers get 15% of the harvest why don't other methods of hunting have there own % of the harvest. There are lot's of other methods of hunting that have similar success rates as archery. Without addressing all methods of hunting on success rates this shouldn't even be considered.
It is a choice to use what ever legal weapon one chooses. If we want to go down the road of allocating % of tags to user groups all methods of hunting need to be included, not just archery and general. Anything else is catering to special interest groups.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

I put this question on the http://wildlife-regulation.mindmixer.com/. hopefully get an answer or maybe if enough people support it we will get some answers.

Is the 15% allocation to the archery season Policy?
From what I understand is that some wmu's were put on draw because archers were taking over 15% of the allowable harvest. This makes sense when only 18% of hunters are archers. It should also be noted that of those 18% not all of them are full time archers, a lot hunt with both, rifle and bow.
If there is a policy that say's archers get 15% of the harvest why don't other methods of hunting have there own % of the harvest. There are lot's of other methods of hunting that have similar success rates as archery. Without addressing all methods of hunting on success rates this shouldn't even be considered.
It is a choice to use what ever legal weapon one chooses. If we want to go down the road of allocating % of tags to user groups all methods of hunting need to be included, not just archery and general. Anything else is catering to special interest groups.

Amazing how, without a compulsory harvest registration, how the can extrapolate harvest numbers!

[3blade]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

I put this question on the http://wildlife-regulation.mindmixer.com/. hopefully get an answer or maybe if enough people support it we will get some answers.

Is the 15% allocation to the archery season Policy?
From what I understand is that some wmu's were put on draw because archers were taking over 15% of the allowable harvest. This makes sense when only 18% of hunters are archers. It should also be noted that of those 18% not all of them are full time archers, a lot hunt with both, rifle and bow.
If there is a policy that say's archers get 15% of the harvest why don't other methods of hunting have there own % of the harvest. There are lot's of other methods of hunting that have similar success rates as archery. Without addressing all methods of hunting on success rates this shouldn't even be considered.
It is a choice to use what ever legal weapon one chooses. If we want to go down the road of allocating % of tags to user groups all methods of hunting need to be included, not just archery and general. Anything else is catering to special interest groups.

Now your back to sounding like yourself. Be careful what you wish for, because you might get a 3 day season for 6 different weapons exclusively. Doesn't that sound like fun? Oh but you would rather that, just so the bow only guys get screwed. You are exactly what you despise in others.

Stop with the bow hunter bashing. It's getting old.

I figured that was the aim of this thread, but gave you the benefit of the doubt. And your usual bs came out again.

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by 3blade

Now your back to sounding like yourself. Be careful what you wish for, because you might get a 3 day season for 6 different weapons exclusively. Doesn't that sound like fun? Oh but you would rather that, just so the bow only guys get screwed. You are exactly what you despise in others.

Stop with the bow hunter bashing. It's getting old.

I figured that was the aim of this thread, but gave you the benefit of the doubt. And your usual bs came out again.

The point of this thread was to try and find a way for guys who like to hunt with different methods to still be able to hunt with rifle or bow without being confined to the general season. Hunting shouldn't be about having to choose a specific weapon and season.

If I didn't bow hunt I wouldn't give two beans if this splitting of the draw went through. It wouldn't really effect me.

You said careful what I wish for. I wish that this proposal of spitting of the draws never happend. The proposal of spitting the draws brings us closer to what you describe."because you might get a 3 day season for 6 different weapons exclusively" Isn,t splitting the draw the first step in starting the 3 day seasons as you put it? What's to stop the next user group from demanding there piece of the pie after the bow hunters get theirs?

I am not trying to bash bow hunters, but I am curious why some think they are so special that they should have a exclusive draw.

[super7mag]

For ESRD to give out copious amount of moose tags in certain zones, to starve out the wolves . And hopefully prevent them from eating caribou ( really great plan) and not even address the habitat issues which is really the key to the caribou problem. Then decide to cut archery harvest of moose over a good portion of the rest of the province is not only hypocritical it's bad management !!! They are simply cluless . With oil taking a tumble and the provincial budget taking a beating you can bet that the real problems within the department will not be addressed and band aid , make it look like we are doing something, decisions will be the flavour of the month.

[Lefty-Canuck]

Will All of the zones that surpassed the 15% magic number for harvest, go back to no draw archery only seasons if the Bowhunting population drops below 15-18% or if the harvest success drops below the magic 15% threshold?

Another thing that has not been mentioned or addressed is who gets what under the new system?

What are the allocation to the archery only draw vs the general season draw?

I think some are hoping to have less wait time if they put in for archery, but that depends on allocation to those seasons....also if the "fringe" not fully committed archers switch to general season only draws....the archery voice gets smaller, less support and less involvement.

I think the "split season" has the potential to backfire on those pushing so hard for it.

I feel it is just a band-aid solution that may decrease wait times for a period until the population catches up again.

LC

[Lr1000]

I'm good the way it is. I bow and gun hunt. Mostly bow if I count the hrs in the field a year. Still lots of opportunity for bow. There are 2 zones still were everything is open. Also elk from sept 1 to oct 25. Heck I even still bow hunt 349 thanks giving weekend for whitetails and its general.

[bigbfidaddy]

I hope it is left alone. The family and I hunt both.

[elkoholik]

Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck

Will All of the zones that surpassed the 15% magic number for harvest, go back to no draw archery only seasons if the Bowhunting population drops below 15-18% or if the harvest success drops below the magic 15% threshold?

Another thing that has not been mentioned or addressed is who gets what under the new system?

What are the allocation to the archery only draw vs the general season draw?

I think some are hoping to have less wait time if they put in for archery, but that depends on allocation to those seasons....also if the "fringe" not fully committed archers switch to general season only draws....the archery voice gets smaller, less support and less involvement.

I think the "split season" has the potential to backfire on those pushing so hard for it.

I feel it is just a band-aid solution that may decrease wait times for a period until the population catches up again.

LC

I am in support of the split draw system and truly hope it goes through as long as the percentage of draws at least matches the percentage of archery licenses sold and stays that way going forward. I agree with you Lefty that the split may drop some archery participation but I think that the guys that drop out are the last minute archers that pick up their bow days before the season, hit a 10" pie plate at 20yrds and say they are good to go. Those individuals do not need to be in the field in my opinion. The remainder are the people that take bow hunting seriously, practice and are not satisfied unless their bows are tuned, broad heads are hitting with field points and have put in many weeks/month of shooting for that clean humane kill. I have seen too many individuals that scare the hell out of me at the ranges that pick up a bow the night before the archery season shoot a group the size of a tank and say "yep, ready to go get my moose". My biggest concern is that we archers get our fair percentage of tags.

Cheers, Elk

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by elkoholik

I am in support of the split draw system and truly hope it goes through as long as the percentage of draws at least matches the percentage of archery licenses sold and stays that way going forward. I agree with you Lefty that the split may drop some archery participation but I think that the guys that drop out are the last minute archers that pick up their bow days before the season, hit a 10" pie plate at 20yrds and say they are good to go. Those individuals do not need to be in the field in my opinion. The remainder are the people that take bow hunting seriously, practice and are not satisfied unless their bows are tuned, broad heads are hitting with field points and have put in many weeks/month of shooting for that clean humane kill. I have seen too many individuals that scare the hell out of me at the ranges that pick up a bow the night before the archery season shoot a group the size of a tank and say "yep, ready to go get my moose". My biggest concern is that we archers get our fair percentage of tags.

Cheers, Elk

I agree those kind of people shouldn't be out hunting with a couple hours of practice, although the same can be said for people who go into Cabela's and by that new rifle that has been bore sighted and go hunting or go to the range and take 3 shots at a pie plate and call it good.

I am confused about your last comment. Why wouldn't archers get there fair percentage of tags? They can apply in the draw as it is now and have the same chance of getting drawn as everyone else. Am I missing something?

[Lefty-Canuck]

I am on the fence about a split draw....some questions need to be answered first for me to decide if it's a good thing or not.

LC

[elkoholik]

My concern would be how they split the draw allocation for general vs. archery. If there are 100 tags and there are 100 people that bought general licenses and 20 of those bought 20 archery permits then the allocation should be 20% to the archery draw. My concern would be they give 5 tags to archery then the rest to general draw. Would have to keep it fair amongst both groups including harvest percent ratio they take into account for.

I agree with the rifle aspect as well but in general if one was to sight their rifle in with say 10 shots they are far more affective with that firearm to say 100-150yrds than a person with a bow even out to 20yrds as there is a lot more form and control involved with archery. Buck fever will screw with a guy with a gun and it considerably worse with a bow. I enjoy both but there is nothing like having an animal so close you can hear it breath.....

Cheers, Elk.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by dmcbride

I agree those kind of people shouldn't be out hunting with a couple hours of practice, although the same can be said for people who go into Cabela's and by that new rifle that has been bore sighted and go hunting or go to the range and take 3 shots at a pie plate and call it good.

I am confused about your last comment. Why wouldn't archers get there fair percentage of tags? They can apply in the draw as it is now and have the same chance of getting drawn as everyone else. Am I missing something?

Critical thinking skills? An ability to see beyond your own limited view of the world?


This has been discussed 'ad nauseum' on AO for 5 years or longer. If you can't figure out the nuances of archery seasons, success rates, participation rates, harvest targets, allowable harvest, opportunity, etc., etc. there is no point even having a discussion with you and those like you.

Do some reading on wildlife / game management.

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

Critical thinking skills? An ability to see beyond your own limited view of the world?


This has been discussed 'ad nauseum' on AO for 5 years or longer. If you can't figure out the nuances of archery seasons, success rates, participation rates, harvest targets, allowable harvest, opportunity, etc., etc. there is no point even having a discussion with you and those like you.

Do some reading on wildlife / game management.

I am sorry, I don't want to sound like a !##, but this is the way I see it.

Limited view? There are other methods of hunting that have similar success rates as archery. Fact is it is a choice to use archery gear exclusively. Just like it is a choice to use a crossbow in the general season. Crossbow users aren't as successful as rifle hunters. Should we give out more tags to to make sure the crossbow hunters get there full share of the harvest? I don't think so.

The limited view, I see is some bow hunters just thinking of there own selves and not hunting as a whole. The harvest target vs. success should be determined by all methods of hunting, combined success rates. Then give out the set amount of tags.

If we are going to go down the road of giving tags based on success rates,(which I do not want to happen) all methods of hunting need to be included, not just archery.

[nekred]

For me the split draw is a good idea, I have more time in bow season than in rifle season. I hunt both but I would rather choose a bow draw, thus not taking away a rifle draw for someone else which is what I am really doing now.

I am sure many of us (myself included) started bow hunting because of added opportunities in bow season eg. moose. I think it is only fair to make hunters choose their season.

What I wish is that we could go to an electronic system that would be like the paper system in BC, where you would get a paper tag and "punch" the tag. So that you could tag your animal (as currently done) but that there was an additional responsibility to be able to phone in, log in, or text in and notify ESRD of your successful harvest so that ESRD has more information. then at end of archery season they could use this data and perhaps reallocate some more tags for the general season that were not used in archery season.

This would also help ESRD gather information much more quickly and accurately than the surveys they send out. Maybe it would then free up some cash to do better wildlife surveys and then with harvest results be able to ensure sustainability.

Having the split season will also give a better representation of how many bow hunters there are as opposed to general hunters.

Could even split it so that you could apply bow only, general only or both and have different priorities for all three.

[dmcbride]

Originally Posted by nekred

For me the split draw is a good idea, I have more time in bow season than in rifle season. I hunt both but I would rather choose a bow draw, thus not taking away a rifle draw for someone else which is what I am really doing now.

I am sure many of us (myself included) started bow hunting because of added opportunities in bow season eg. moose. I think it is only fair to make hunters choose their season.

What I wish is that we could go to an electronic system that would be like the paper system in BC, where you would get a paper tag and "punch" the tag. So that you could tag your animal (as currently done) but that there was an additional responsibility to be able to phone in, log in, or text in and notify ESRD of your successful harvest so that ESRD has more information. then at end of archery season they could use this data and perhaps reallocate some more tags for the general season that were not used in archery season.

This would also help ESRD gather information much more quickly and accurately than the surveys they send out. Maybe it would then free up some cash to do better wildlife surveys and then with harvest results be able to ensure sustainability.

Having the split season will also give a better representation of how many bow hunters there are as opposed to general hunters.

Could even split it so that you could apply bow only, general only or both and have different priorities for all three.

I would prefer it stay the same, but I kind of like your idea of the 3 different groups. (Archery, General and combined archery general.) At least one wouldn't have to choose between one or the other.