Hunting from horseback

[u_cant_rope_the_wind]

how many years have peolpe used horses in the mountains????
and now some bunny hugger wants to stop them?????
i just dont think the impact on tame controlled horses in the mountains is the problem, even the government winter ranged their forestry and, fish and wild life horses in the mountains, (ya ha tinda) and now some bunny hugging hiker thinks they are hurting the envirorment, i could say yes to this if there was great heards of hoses roaming those hills but there isnt,what hurts the envirorment is when people just take horses out and turn them loose to fend for themselves ,(because they are to much expence to look after) I believe there had been a post on that about a year ago, (Dumping Of Horses )the acumulation of those typse of things will harm any natural envirorment

[Highcountry]

I really dont see an issue, everyone is on a level playing field. The way I think of it is that every person has the right to own a horse so go buy, borrow, or rent one. And about the so called erosion issues thats a load of crap, sure there are some trails cut through the valleys and most are about 3" deep in the bottom of a grassy flat. But what I dont think people remember that those trails were used on a daily basis by people for the past 120+ years. Does that really amount to a substancial amount of impact? people can keep complaining about the populations of game in the west country but I dont think its a grazing issue or a horse issue, its come down to a game management issue if there are too many sheep harvested cut them back, heres an idea how about only letting trophy hunters take 3 sheep in a lifetime that way you wouldnt see those young ones get knocked off on opening day every year people might just hold out for one, letting them grow allitle more and for those that think they need ten rams on the wall well maybe your the problem!

[Sheepcrazyguy]

Originally Posted by Tonto

I agree with you. I was just trying to find out the reasoning behind the poster's statement.

I guess I may have originally started all of this with my statement about foot access only. I was only offering a different idea to making sheep hunting better as some on here seem to want to find it easier to kill a big ram. I could care less about horses being used to sheep hunt. As I've stated numerous times I DO NOT want to see any changes! I think it's fine the way it is. But one way to improve sheep hunting is to limit access. That way the harder a hunter works to get farther back into the mountains the better his chance of killing a big ram. The farther back you go the less hunters. That way no one has to stop hunting sheep and if you want one you just have work for it. I think you get the idea. I don't like the idea of not ever being able to hunt sheep because I've already shot one, a 5 year wait or any other changes proposed on here.

[Tonto]

No, it wasn't you sheepcrazyguy.

[Vindalbakken]

Originally Posted by sheepguide

LOL you bet 209 because we all know how many guys pack bales into high alpine basins and canyons to feed their horses

Still dont think its worse than ripping through beaver dams and creeks with an argo is it. Everyone on here leaves there mark somewhere. Dont bash one group when your just as guilty or more so in other areas!!!!

SG

2 wrongs do not make a right, only 3 lefts can do that.

There is a problem with habitat degradation by invasive plant species in the high alpine and one of the biggest sources of that problem is horse feed. Denying that problem because someone destroyed a bog with an argo is disingenuous.

[crazyfish]

i think the cows need to be taken out of the mountains first, never have understood the reasoning behind that, we have lots of good areas for cows east of the mountains, the amount i saw this summer going down the 40 along the upper oldman was crazy !

I also believe that the horses have a place, all within a sustainable context, but i don't see the willmore being well utilized without them. The atv's i belive to be a more contentious issue, a couple long weekends of intense quading and biking can leave far more damage than a few years worth of horses. ( i own a quad, not a horse )

Alberta has a long and proud history of horses in the mountains, i think it should continue !

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by Vindalbakken

2 wrongs do not make a right, only 3 lefts can do that.

There is a problem with habitat degradation by invasive plant species in the high alpine and one of the biggest sources of that problem is horse feed. Denying that problem because someone destroyed a bog with an argo is disengenuous.

Im not denying anything!

The biggest part of guys wanting other groups moved out or banned has nothing to do with enviroment.

99% of guys out there couldnt tell the diff. between invasive plants and native ones but yet they sure say its the problem. If the people trained in this figure there is such a large problem then why hasnt anything been done previously.

I also see how many bales of hay are packed into the mountains in a year. Very few. The odd guy that takes in a wagon or get there camp and some feed flew in with a chopper. The majority of guys that are packing in take very minimal feed if any.

Maybe we should ban sunflower seeds while we are at it!

Lots of guys feed oats to horses but you pretty much never see oats growing in a pile of horse ****. About all you will see growing in horse **** is mushrooms and toadstools.

SG

[Matt L.]

Well, here's the fairest solution: Ban all access to the mountains.






Thought you wouldn't like it.

Originally Posted by Vindalbakken

2 wrongs do not make a right, only 3 lefts can do that.

There is a problem with habitat degradation by invasive plant species in the high alpine and one of the biggest sources of that problem is horse feed. Denying that problem because someone destroyed a bog with an argo is disingenuous.

Ya, the old two wrongs make a right is a very slippery slope indeed. User groups need to take responsibility for their own actions and try to mitigate their impact as much as possible and not try to deflect attention from their impact to another group's. The danger is both wrongs could be eliminated!

People also need to become more educated on the impact their activity really has. Shouting that it doesn't have an impact really does little to divert attention. Environmental issues are huge in this province right now, especially in the mountains and it's good to understand how errosion is caused and what can be done to prevent it and it's good to understand that invasive plant species are easily transported through horse manure. Look at some of the regs in the U.S. regarding horse use in the mountains. Two wrongs didn't make it right there.

[Tonto]

Originally Posted by Matt L.

Well, here's the fairest solution: Ban all access to the mountains.






Thought you wouldn't like it.

Actually, that is the perfect solution, if the goal is to level the playing field.

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Sheepcrazyguy

I guess I may have originally started all of this with my statement about foot access only. I was only offering a different idea to making sheep hunting better as some on here seem to want to find it easier to kill a big ram. I could care less about horses being used to sheep hunt. As I've stated numerous times I DO NOT want to see any changes! I think it's fine the way it is. But one way to improve sheep hunting is to limit access. That way the harder a hunter works to get farther back into the mountains the better his chance of killing a big ram. The farther back you go the less hunters. That way no one has to stop hunting sheep and if you want one you just have work for it. I think you get the idea. I don't like the idea of not ever being able to hunt sheep because I've already shot one, a 5 year wait or any other changes proposed on here.

Yep, you and I agree on this and I can clearly see that you're not a bunny hugger either! LOL.
I can clearly see your thought process too and if we are worried about how man and how mature the ram population is your suggestion is the best one I've seen so far.
Those acting obtuse and sneering at your suggestion doesn't make them look glib just, well obtuse.

[Matt L.]

Originally Posted by Tonto

Actually, that is the perfect solution, if the goal is to level the playing field.

It is isn't it? Now can you imagne the reaction of those who are complaining about 'unfairness'?

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Yep, you and I agree on this and I can clearly see that you're not a bunny hugger either! LOL.
I can clearly see your thought process too and if we are worried about how man and how mature the ram population is your suggestion is the best one I've seen so far.
Those acting obtuse and sneering at your suggestion doesn't make them look glib just, well obtuse.

Cant wait to see the next hunt you have in New Zeland. LOL wonder how many mountains you will rip around on this time with an OHV. But I guess since them arent ours they dont matter!!!

Horse guys understand the enviromental impact as much as anyone. They arent ignorant people. They gunna do what they can to protect it. To ban them or the quaders is only to keep guys out!! You guys talk about increased opurtunities for hunting and stuff but it is very obvious that you dont mean for everyone.

[buddyhunter]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Yep, you and I agree on this and I can clearly see that you're not a bunny hugger either! LOL.
I can clearly see your thought process too and if we are worried about how man and how mature the ram population is your suggestion is the best one I've seen so far.
Those acting obtuse and sneering at your suggestion doesn't make them look glib just, well obtuse.

I am not sure exactly why feel the need to insult people's intelligence and opinions in the majority of your posts. It's a little rude.

Also, you were the one who brought that maybe horses should be booted from the back country to put everyone on a level playing field. That may be your opinion and that's fine if it is. However in the sheep on a draw thread you keep talking about creating opportunity rather then removing them. I am just not sure what you are trying to get at? Perhaps maybe you were trying to start a fight, who knows?

[209x50]

Originally Posted by buddyhunter

I am not sure exactly why feel the need to insult people's intelligence and opinions in the majority of your posts. It's a little rude.

Also, you were the one who brought that maybe horses should be booted from the back country to put everyone on a level playing field. That may be your opinion and that's fine if it is. However in the sheep on a draw thread you keep talking about creating opportunity rather then removing them. I am just not sure what you are trying to get at? Perhaps maybe you were trying to start a fight, who knows?

If you took my comment about being obtuse (def: not quick or alert in perception) as an insult then I apologize.
Many ideas have be pushed forward in this or the other thread on how to improve sheep numbers. Most have been suggestions that outlined curtailing opportunity. Removing horses and ATVs form the mountains only makes it harder to hunt sheep or elk but doesn't remove any seasons or tags. Easy access has been the detriment of sheep populations and making that access a little more arduous would mean less people in the mountains, less sheep killed and better populations with perhaps better trophy potential. The line that has been used by so many to defend their proposal has been "what can it hurt and why shouldn't we try for the good of the sheep?" Well what could it hurt to try?

[Tonto]

Originally Posted by 209x50

If you took my comment about being obtuse (def: not quick or alert in perception) as an insult then I apologize.
Many ideas have be pushed forward in this or the other thread on how to improve sheep numbers. Most have been suggestions that outlined curtailing opportunity. Removing horses and ATVs form the mountains only makes it harder to hunt sheep or elk but doesn't remove any seasons or tags. Easy access has been the detriment of sheep populations and making that access a little more arduous would mean less people in the mountains, less sheep killed and better populations with perhaps better trophy potential. The line that has been used by so many to defend their proposal has been "what can it hurt and why shouldn't we try for the good of the sheep?" Well what could it hurt to try?

To many places have been shut down to hunting already. By banning horse access, it would shut down hunting to more people. The goal is not to have less access, is it???
What could it hurt?? Banning one area would just be a start. We are seeing that with ATV bans. One or 2 areas have an ATV ban, and all that does is over-populate the areas that allow ATV's. Then the powers that be see the overuse and they ban more areas. And their reason will be, well that's what the outdoorsmen wanted.
Kinda like the grizzly bear hunt. Once it's gone it may be impossible to get back.

[shooter]

When it comes to overuse of Horses and Atv's in the mountains, I'd say that most likely the hunting population is not the leading cause. I'm sure that there are way more weekend Trail Riders and ATVer's.
To single out the ones that utilize trails and transportation for hunting would be a mistake.

I also agree with the cattle grazing having way more impact than horses using the country. To see some areas after the cattle have been in there for a few months is a real eye opener.

As for horses being "easy access" to get to spots, I wouldn't exactly call it that. Anyone who has ever taken an outfit to the hills using horses works just as hard or maybe harder than a backpacker and sure as heck gets less sleep. Sure the legs are fresher at the end of the trail but the maintenance and care that the horses need is a job in itself. It's not like you park your horse and forget it for a few days.

If easy access is the true problem with sheep size then we should ban the use of vehicles and all walk from home too while we're at it! I would love to see stats of successful sheep hunts relative to how they got in the area. I'd be quite sure that many would be backpackers, some mountain bikes, some horses and atvs and frankly maybe the backpackers would have the edge. Maybe then someone would say let's ban foot access....

[crazyfish]

Originally Posted by Tonto

Kinda like the grizzly bear hunt. Once it's gone it may be impossible to get back.

We should stay focused and compare two similar things....the grizzly hunt was stopped due to numbers based on "?science" , the idea of removing horses from the equation is only an idea and based on personal preference and the atv use is a bigger issue with more "recreational =non hunting users on a yearly basis , not just hunting ! We may lose the atv battle because of things out of the control of hunters. The weekend warriors are the biggest culprits!
Most of the north and middle parts of the province already have rules regarding horse use and times of year etc .( i'm not familiar with anything south of the south ram area) Willmore will probably always have horses in it , and i don't see that changing! There are alot of areas that can only be accessed by foot, and thats where you can usually find me, i think there is a decent balance in place between access for all users in a time and place frame ! not perfect, but also not broken ! I'm all for open discussion, and have learned a bunch over the last two large treads... but would prefer to see things kept on topic and positive !

I think better information at trailheads, better enforcement, and maybe education can go a long ways to keeping our opportunities open and accessable to all !

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Easy access has been the detriment of sheep populations and making that access a little more arduous would mean less people in the mountains

You talk about easy access. To me guys day hunting on foot off highways or roads(kananakis, cadomin and many other places), walking in three or four miles and camping is alot easier access than a person trying to get a pack string back in 20 miles! If its so easy to do these hunts maybe you should come try and organize one and get everything there without any mishaps.

I think you try and hide your own ignorance on the subject by saying others are!!!

[209x50]

Originally Posted by Tonto

To many places have been shut down to hunting already. By banning horse access, it would shut down hunting to more people. The goal is not to have less access, is it???
What could it hurt?? Banning one area would just be a start. We are seeing that with ATV bans. One or 2 areas have an ATV ban, and all that does is over-populate the areas that allow ATV's. Then the powers that be see the overuse and they ban more areas. And their reason will be, well that's what the outdoorsmen wanted.
Kinda like the grizzly bear hunt. Once it's gone it may be impossible to get back.

Banning horses doesn't mean a loss of access - that is the beauty of it. The places where ATV's have been banned people on foot and horses still have access don't they? I'm not arguing for a second about trail damage or anything else. It just a fact that no horses would mean less penetration into the back country by fewer people. The hardcore guys will still be there, to them it doesn't matter how they get there - they are hardcore. There will still be the easy access areas around the edges for those not so inclined to work. But the big winner is the herd, less pressure means more and bigger animals and we do it all with out losing a day of sheep season or a single tag. So where is the loss? JMHO

[Vindalbakken]

It would be interesting to see what the cost of an outfitted sheep hunt would go to when they start using helicopter drops to get the equipment and men in there.

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Banning horses doesn't mean a loss of access - that is the beauty of it. The places where ATV's have been banned people on foot and horses still have access don't they? I'm not arguing for a second about trail damage or anything else. It just a fact that no horses would mean less penetration into the back country by fewer people. The hardcore guys will still be there, to them it doesn't matter how they get there - they are hardcore. There will still be the easy access areas around the edges for those not so inclined to work. But the big winner is the herd, less pressure means more and bigger animals and we do it all with out losing a day of sheep season or a single tag. So where is the loss? JMHO

The loss is the great guys that are out there "EVERY YEAR" for multiple weeks at a time that have a huge passion for sheep hunting and the outdoors. We arent here just about the hardcore(cause if we were you sure wouldnt be out there). And guys would be loosing alot of days of sheep season as many guys would never hunt sheep again if the atvs and horses werent allowed. That is our loss.
We are looking at getting a more mature ram population but dont want guys to give up the sport because they cant go anymore. Stuff like the 5 year rule or age limits and other options discussed here still allow everyone to hunt the way they love. They just may have to wait a few extra years or hunt a little longer to get that older ram, but it doesnt kick them out all together.

[buddyhunter]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Banning horses doesn't mean a loss of access - that is the beauty of it. The places where ATV's have been banned people on foot and horses still have access don't they? I'm not arguing for a second about trail damage or anything else. It just a fact that no horses would mean less penetration into the back country by fewer people. The hardcore guys will still be there, to them it doesn't matter how they get there - they are hardcore. There will still be the easy access areas around the edges for those not so inclined to work. But the big winner is the herd, less pressure means more and bigger animals and we do it all with out losing a day of sheep season or a single tag. So where is the loss? JMHO

So let me get this straight; you think that banning horses in the mountains will result in less presure therefore more and larger sheep? (Which is pure speculation, since these people that use horses can also walk if they so chose) But having a 5 year wait and ACTUALLY removing hunters from the mountains, which will result in less presure, won't help produce more and larger rams?

I just don't get the argument you have here?

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by Vindalbakken

It would be interesting to see what the cost of an outfitted sheep hunt would go to when they start using helicopter drops to get the equipment and men in there.

The equipment deal is happening fairly frequently already by outfitters and residents in many zones. The just cant transport hunters guns or game.

Originally Posted by Vindalbakken

It would be interesting to see what the cost of an outfitted sheep hunt would go to when they start using helicopter drops to get the equipment and men in there.

It's illegal to:

transport big game hunters, except those requiring medical aid, or big game by helicopter over WMUs 400-446.

land or take off in a fixed-wing aircraft that is carrying big game, big game hunters or firearms of a calibre larger than .22 at or from any location in WMUs 400-446 except those locations where aircraft routinely land and take off.

[shooter]

Originally Posted by 209x50

So where is the loss? JMHO

The loss is the freedom and choice of how you want to experience your mountain sheep hunt. Options are a nice thing! Once that is gone it will be an enormous task to claw it back!

The loss is the shared experience with my son on future horseback hunts!

Why change what isn't broken?! Give me a break!! Like I said in my previous post, odds are that backpack hunts account for the majority of successful sheep kills anyhow.

I you looked at the gun bill the same way as you look at this, we'd all be left with only spears to hunt with.

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

It's illegal to:

.

[sheepguide]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

It's illegal to:

Exactly TJ I said guys guns or game wasnt allowed to be transported and for the second part I dont beleive a chopper is a fixed wind aircraft.

[sheepguide]

I dont agree with the use of helicopters but it does happen.

[Tonto]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Banning horses doesn't mean a loss of access - that is the beauty of it. The places where ATV's have been banned people on foot and horses still have access don't they? I'm not arguing for a second about trail damage or anything else. It just a fact that no horses would mean less penetration into the back country by fewer people. The hardcore guys will still be there, to them it doesn't matter how they get there - they are hardcore. There will still be the easy access areas around the edges for those not so inclined to work. But the big winner is the herd, less pressure means more and bigger animals and we do it all with out losing a day of sheep season or a single tag. So where is the loss? JMHO

Banning any mode of transportation is a loss of access to certain groups. Maybe a fellow with a bum knee is on his last few sheep/elk /moose hunts.
His only mode of transport is by horse, because ATV's have been banned.