AFGA Position on Crossbows

[209x50]

Just got this email from AFGA.
Important notice re: Annual Hunter Harvest Survey

If you are registered at www.albertarelm.com, you should have recently received an email regarding the annual Hunter’s Survey. Please take the time to fill out the survey as it provides valuable information for our game managers. At the end of the survey there is a question regarding your opinion on the inclusion of crossbows in archery season.

Below is the resolution re: crossbows that was passed at the 2010 AFGA annual general meeting followed by the reasoning for it.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT Alberta Sustainable Resource Development include crossbows in all archery seasons.

BRIEF: This would enhance hunting opportunities for all Albertans, and not just those with traditional archery equipment. The choice of equipment should be up to the individual.

Please take a few minutes to fill in the survey and make your vote count.

[Pudelpointer]

Only half the story. Unlike AFGA's past resolutions on RAMP that were unanimous or nearly so, the crossbow resolution had to be counted because it was quite close. About 55/45 - 65/35 or so.

It will be interesting to see if there is another vote on it this year.

[HunterDave]

"AFGA Position on Crossbows"

No surprise there. I'd like to see a similar thread started with ABA position on crossbows though.

I think that I'll sit this one out.

[Mountain Guy]

Originally Posted by 209x50

Just got this email from AFGA.
Important notice re: Annual Hunter Harvest Survey

If you are registered at www.albertarelm.com, you should have recently received an email regarding the annual Hunter’s Survey. Please take the time to fill out the survey as it provides valuable information for our game managers. At the end of the survey there is a question regarding your opinion on the inclusion of crossbows in archery season.

Below is the resolution re: crossbows that was passed at the 2010 AFGA annual general meeting followed by the reasoning for it.

BE IT RESOLVED THAT Alberta Sustainable Resource Development include crossbows in all archery seasons.

BRIEF: This would enhance hunting opportunities for all Albertans, and not just those with traditional archery equipment. The choice of equipment should be up to the individual.[COLOR=black][/COLOR]

Please take a few minutes to fill in the survey and make your vote count.

Boy... now isn't that a broad and ''loaded'' statement. We can take that one to who knows where.
Just like the guy on the other thread who wants to use his 22-250 for deer.
Same thing isn't it???

[Rockymtnx]

Rich, thanks for posting this info for us to read.

As for the FOUR of you that had snide remarks(all have been deleted) regarding the OP and his info, this is a warning for you. Keep your comments and cheap shots to yourself or at least to PMs.

[SLH]

Originally Posted by Mountain Guy

Boy... now isn't that a broad and ''loaded'' statement. We can take that one to who knows where.
Just like the guy on the other thread who wants to use his 22-250 for deer.
Same thing isn't it???

I'm still having trouble getting past the "This will enhance hunting oppurtunities..." part, but your point is interesting as well.

Of all the resolutions at conference and this one leads the way.

[crazyfish]

i wonder how many of the AO members that were part of the other crossbow thread, are also AFGA members and didn't realise the stance that was voted upon and PASSED by them.....if you don't participate and vote etc., you can't complain about the results ! THanks for the info Rich !

[SLH]

Originally Posted by crazyfish

i wonder how many of the AO members that were part of the other crossbow thread, are also AFGA members and didn't realise the stance that was voted upon and PASSED by them.....if you don't participate and vote etc., you can't complain about the results ! THanks for the info Rich !

At the same time I think the AFGA has this wrong as stated in the brief. Oppurtunity and choice are two different things and I beleive that oppurtunity will be limited not enhanced.

Also AFGA is not the only voice of importance on this issue.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by crazyfish

i wonder how many of the AO members that were part of the other crossbow thread, are also AFGA members and didn't realise the stance that was voted upon and PASSED by them.....if you don't participate and vote etc., you can't complain about the results ! THanks for the info Rich !

I WAS there, I DID participate, and I DID vote. So I will bit*h all I want, thank you.

I agree that the AFGA is NOT the only voice of hunters and anglers in AB, though their voice is important. As I stated earlier, the vote was far from unanimous, though it is the association's "official position", from a vote of delegates (150 or so representing how many thousand?) at a meeting from one year ago; take that as you may.

At the same conference a motion was passed that the AB Gov should remove the prohibition against hunting with restricted (hanguns) firearms. It was not unanimous either, but it was supported by a greater majority then the crossbow motion. What does that mean? Nothing. Just information for thought.

[crazyfish]

Originally Posted by SLH

At the same time I think the AFGA has this wrong as stated in the brief. Oppurtunity and choice are two different things and I beleive that oppurtunity will be limited not enhanced.

Also AFGA is not the only voice of importance on this issue.

Well the AFGA is the biggest representative of hunters in alberta , and have alot(IMO) of influence with SRD on issues ! With this being a resolution passed by the AFGA , they would then recomend this to SRD for the next years regulations. SRD obiously thought that this was a potentially devisive issue, and therefore decided to gather some more info/data and included the question in the survey. Sounds to me like a fairly democratic way of getting what the majority of hunters in the province would like to see for the future of the sport ! Agreed they aren't the only voice, but they are the biggest one for hunters !

[hwkirby]

Being such a contentious issue you would think that the AFGA would not have put this resolution forward if the vote was so close as was mentioned earlier. It gives the impression that the club is in general is in favour of this issue. Clearly, it is not! So now people who are unaware as to what took place at the annual meeting will think that the AFGA as a "whole" is in favour of this resolution. IMHO it makes for a poor statement. I realize that it is a democratic club but I also believe that before they push a contoversial issue forward they should have a much stronger majority, like maybe 70-30 as an example. I wish there was more information in the "brief" as to why, other than just to claim it "will enhance hunting opportunities for all Albertans." It is not that simple. I will have to give it some more thought but I am seriously thinking of not renewing my membership this year as a result of this resolution.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

I agree that the AFGA is NOT the only voice of hunters and anglers in AB, though their voice is important. As I stated earlier, the vote was far from unanimous, though it is the association's "official position", from a vote of delegates (150 or so representing how many thousand?) at a meeting from one year ago; take that as you may.

So how does that work? There are approximately 20K members and 150 or so of them are delegates. Do the delegates represent the membership in the various clubs that they belong to in the zones that they are in?

Who are the other organizations that represent hunters and anglers in Alberta?

[Poco]

Originally Posted by hwkirby

Being such a contentious issue you would think that the AFGA would not have put this resolution forward if the vote was so close as was mentioned earlier. It gives the impression that the club is in general is in favour of this issue. Clearly, it is not! So now people who are unaware as to what took place at the annual meeting will think that the AFGA as a "whole" is in favour of this resolution. IMHO it makes for a poor statement. I realize that it is a democratic club but I also believe that before they push a contoversial issue forward they should have a much stronger majority, like maybe 70-30 as an example. I wish there was more information in the "brief" as to why, other than just to claim it "will enhance hunting opportunities for all Albertans." It is not that simple. I will have to give it some more thought but I am seriously thinking of not renewing my membership this year as a result of this resolution.

I know of a lot of friends that aren’t renewing their AFGA memberships because they are unhappy with the representation over the past few years and its way more than just the crossbows. Are they voting for a new executive this year?

[jungleboy]

I am thinking that if the vote had gone the other way by say ...52% to 48% the argument would be, well the majority voted against so that seals it.

[Drop_Tine]

Well this is BS.......just another smart move on preserving our animals and trophies .... Deer numbers are already low (down south) .... And trophy quality is almost non existent....not Even close to what it was 3-4 years ago..... I will be voting "NO"....

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

So how does that work? There are approximately 20K members and 150 or so of them are delegates. Do the delegates represent the membership in the various clubs that they belong to in the zones that they are in?

Who are the other organizations that represent hunters and anglers in Alberta?

That is pretty much how it works. Do we, as delegates represent our club members? In our club we try and represent a unanimous vote, but some things I can not in good conscience vote for (or against, as the case may be). Democracies are run by those who show up. Our club has over 1200 members, yet we are lucky to see a dozen at most meetings, maybe 2 dozen at our Christmas or Summer break events. Yet, we sell out our banquet every year! So do we really represent our members? Or do we represent the same 12-24 people who bother to show up? You tell me.

As for other organizations, well there is the Alberta Bowhunters Association, the Southern Alberta Bowhunters Association, Trout Unlimited, used to be RMEF but they are gone now, but there is the Elk Federation (?), Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever... I am sure I am missing others, but these are the one that are active in AB.

[HunterDave]

Originally Posted by Pudelpointer

That is pretty much how it works. Do we, as delegates represent our club members? In our club we try and represent a unanimous vote, but some things I can not in good conscience vote for (or against, as the case may be). Democracies are run by those who show up. Our club has over 1200 members, yet we are lucky to see a dozen at most meetings, maybe 2 dozen at our Christmas or Summer break events. Yet, we sell out our banquet every year! So do we really represent our members? Or do we represent the same 12-24 people who bother to show up? You tell me.

As for other organizations, well there is the Alberta Bowhunters Association, the Southern Alberta Bowhunters Association, Trout Unlimited, used to be RMEF but they are gone now, but there is the Elk Federation (?), Foundation for North American Wild Sheep, Ducks Unlimited, Pheasants Forever... I am sure I am missing others, but these are the one that are active in AB.

How hard would it be to enter everyones email address into a computer and flash out a survey for the most important issues such as the one about crossbows?

I'm not sure that I understand what you mean about voting for or against something if you personally don't agree with it. Are you saying that if the majority of your members voted "yes" on an issue and you didn't agree with what the majority of your members wanted then you would vote "No"? If so, aren't you just representing yourself and not your members?

[outlaw'd]

[QUOTE=crazyfish;788967]Well the AFGA is the biggest representative of hunters in alberta , and have alot(IMO) of influence with SRD on issues !

" There are approximately 20K members and 150 or so of them are delegates." - HunterDave

"There are nearly 110,000 licensed hunters in Alberta annually.
The total number of hunting licenses sold in 2007 was 404,000."

(Quoted from link from below) http://www.huntingfortomorrow.com/HF...20Oct%2008.pdf

So, let me get this straight ............ roughly 150 delegates of AFGA are speaking for 20000 members( without an actual vote or survey ) and this group is speaking on behalf of the other 380000+/- hunters because they have the most influence with SRD and know what the rest of the hunters in Alberta want..........

[bobcatguy]

You can draft a resolution right where you are sitting .As long as u are a member of AFGA your resolution has as much chance as mine of being seen by SRD. Join your club & let the Gov know what you want.150 represent 20,000but there are over 100,000 hunters. Not to mention the fishers. Where are the other 450representatives , sitting behind their keyboards?Join a club.
HD When a delagate votes at conference it is several months after the club votes & sometimes new info comes up. AS long as your able to tell your buddies at club level why you voted in good conscienceagainst there wishes then all is aryeee

[HunterDave]

[QUOTE=outlaw'd;789835]

Originally Posted by crazyfish

Well the AFGA is the biggest representative of hunters in alberta , and have alot(IMO) of influence with SRD on issues !

" There are approximately 20K members and 150 or so of them are delegates." - HunterDave

"There are nearly 110,000 licensed hunters in Alberta annually.
The total number of hunting licenses sold in 2007 was 404,000."

(Quoted from link from below) http://www.huntingfortomorrow.com/HF...20Oct%2008.pdf

So, let me get this straight ............ roughly 150 delegates of AFGA are speaking for 20000 members( without an actual vote or survey ) and this group is speaking on behalf of the other 380000+/- hunters because they have the most influence with SRD and know what the rest of the hunters in Alberta want..........

No, AFGA represents their membership but they are about 20K strong and can be taken seriously enough to be able to bring resolutions forward to SRD. The rest of the hunters that you mentioned are all individuals and represent themselves or may belong to a different organization.

If you don't want to belong to any outdoors organization then that is your right, as it is the right of everyone else that doesn't want join. Or, you can join an organisation that is large enough to be taken seriously by SRD, poll your votes, etc together and be heard.

There's truth in the saying about strength in numbers.

[ram crazy]

Thanks Rich for the post, I think I'll buy a crossbow if it's a go!!!!

[packhuntr]

Like others I think my family's membership money would be better represented with another club. If all a guys membership is worth is a number used to pack more punch and lobby government, self/club imposed problems are not what im paying for. As much as I might believe splinter groups have weakened the collective voice of outdoor folk, its looking like its high time I moved in that direction. My money would be better served with the ABA, and I think Ive put joining this club off for too long.

[Duk Dog]

Every year there are a bunch of resolutions brought forward that cover a broad range of topics. Some people are going to like, dislike or be indifferent towards each and everyone of them. If you feel strongly one way or another - get involved with your local F&G club. Anyone can submit a resolution. The coles notes version of how it works is - 1) submit a resolution to your local F&G club, 2) it gets debated at a meeting than voted on, 3) if it passes it goes on to the zone (same as our hunting zones - ie there is a zone 1, 2, 3, etc..) for further debate and vote - again if you feel strongly about it give your zone rep some feedback so they know what stance the majority wants to take on a resolution, 4) if it passes at the zone level it goes on to conference where again it is debated and voted on - and again tell your F&G club members that are attending how you feel about certain resolutions so they can vote accordingly. In all of these phases majority rules - so you need to attend meetings and you need to make your voice heard. If you aren't a member of a F&G club, and you don't attend some meetings, and you don't get involved in the resolution voting process than it makes it tough to complain as you have missed a number of opportunities to have had your voice heard.

[leo]

Only thing I wish to point out before there are slanderous remarks made about the AFGA is this. THEY REPRESENT ALL HUNTERS AND FISHERMEN(WOMEN) of Alberta. Other groups while beneficial tend to be self serving. Carry on.

[outlaw'd]

My money would be better served with the ABA, and I think Ive put joining this club off for too long. - packhuntr
__________________

x 2

[whitetail Junkie]

Originally Posted by Drop_Tine

Well this is BS.......just another smart move on preserving our animals and trophies .... Deer numbers are already low (down south) .... And trophy quality is almost non existent....not Even close to what it was 3-4 years ago..... I will be voting "NO"....

Dont worry,if you dont get your Archery Muledeer draw,I'll lend you my semi-Auto Fabarm 12G, and you can come and hunt Flea Bags with me at Rattlesnake all September\October.

P.S,Me and Flint are YES Men!!!

[Mountain Guy]

Originally Posted by Duk Dog

Every year there are a bunch of resolutions brought forward that cover a broad range of topics. Some people are going to like, dislike or be indifferent towards each and everyone of them. If you feel strongly one way or another - get involved with your local F&G club. Anyone can submit a resolution. The coles notes version of how it works is - 1) submit a resolution to your local F&G club, 2) it gets debated at a meeting than voted on, 3) if it passes it goes on to the zone (same as our hunting zones - ie there is a zone 1, 2, 3, etc..) for further debate and vote - again if you feel strongly about it give your zone rep some feedback so they know what stance the majority wants to take on a resolution, 4) if it passes at the zone level it goes on to conference where again it is debated and voted on - and again tell your F&G club members that are attending how you feel about certain resolutions so they can vote accordingly. In all of these phases majority rules - so you need to attend meetings and you need to make your voice heard. If you aren't a member of a F&G club, and you don't attend some meetings, and you don't get involved in the resolution voting process than it makes it tough to complain as you have missed a number of opportunities to have had your voice heard.

Wonder how these debates went at all the local clubs?
We can't seem to agree around here, and there was no clear cut winner with HunterDAve's poll was there?
If I recall I think the no's were ahead last I looked.
You'd think that the same would have applied at the club level, more or less.
FWIW, I did not hear anything about this from my local club, so not sure about the representation. I am fairly new to my local club ( joined in Oct ) so maybe wasn't on the list or was too late joining for the meeting regarding this.

[Pudelpointer]

Originally Posted by HunterDave

I'm not sure that I understand what you mean about voting for or against something if you personally don't agree with it. Are you saying that if the majority of your members voted "yes" on an issue and you didn't agree with what the majority of your members wanted then you would vote "No"? If so, aren't you just representing yourself and not your members?

Maybe I can put this in terms that everyone can relate to:

The recent vote on the Firearms Registry lost because the Liberal Party "whipped" the vote. In other words they forced all party members to vote against the motion under threat of sanction (i.e. expulsion from the party, loss of position, etc.). It is obvious from the polling done that these politicians voted against the wishes of their constituents, right? What about the other end of the spectrum, say the roles were reversed: when Bill C-68 went to final vote in Parliament my MP at the time was Reform. After polling his constituency he announced that he would vote for the bill, even though he personally thought it was bad law, because it appeared that most in his riding (Seymour - Deep Cove) supported it. Should Manning have whipped the vote forcing him to vote against C-68? Considering the bill created criminals out of thousands of Canadians for a "licensing" issue?

My point is this, as a representative you can vote 3 ways in a democracy (well more, but lets keep it simple): for what the majority of your constituents want, for what you morally and ethically believe is right, or how you are told under duress.

So, you tell me, should I cast my vote to support a motion calling for inclusion of crossbows in archery season because IF the motion is accurate (i.e. the inclusion will increase "opportunity") the 12 people out of 1200 who show up for a meeting, who may not even be hunters, think that IF it increases opportunity then yes they should? What do the other 1188 members think? Or, if in the case of the motion last year about crossbows, I believe that it may actually REDUCE opportunity; so should I still vote for it even though I may understand the ramifications of it better/differently and conclude that it is not a benefit to hunters in AB? Or should I vote the way YOU want me to?

As has been said, democracies are run by those who show up. If 51% of the people who show up vote yes, when I vote no, then the answer is yes. But be clear, it does not mean that everyone in the organization supports the result of a vote, but they should respect it.

While others may decide that this issue is the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back, and decide to join another organization, that is their choice, which I can also respect. For me, I accept the democratic process and choose to try and influence the decisions made by being involved in the process. I do not get mad about it, or call names, or accuse others of being stupid, short sighted, or unethical. It is just the way it is.

FWIW, I often vote against my own personal preferences on motions at conference, because I have a pretty good idea about how the membership feels. I do not vote for my own selfish benefit, but for what I truly think is the right thing, sometimes regardless of how much I do not want it. IMO including crossbows is not the right thing, for numerous reasons, most of which have been discussed to death on this and other threads.

Vote the way you believe you should and I will vote the way I believe I should. I will respect the results either way.

[HunterDave]

I understand the issue with federal parties whipping their members to vote the way that the party wants them to. It just happened last year with the vote to repel the gun registry where numerous Liberal MPs were whipped into voting no when the clear majority of their constituents wanted them to vote yes. I expect that it will be a big issue in the next election and I would not be surprised if some of them don't lose their seats in the house over it.

To answer your question, IMO Yes, you should vote the way that the majority of your members have voted regardless of the number of people in attendance. If a meeting was scheduled, all members were advised of it and the importance of the agenda and they chose not to attend then it should be assumed that anyone that doesn't show up is not interested in giving their input and doesn't care about the outcome of the vote. Who knows, perhaps the people in attendance have spoken to numerous other members and they are acting as their unofficial delegate.

It's unfortunate that there is such poor attendance at meetings but I still don't understand why on important issues such as the crossbow issue an email survey of members isn't done. After the initial work of entering emails is done it wouldn't be very difficult to send out a bulk survey to everyone. That would allow for more input from members that can't or don't want to attend meetings and take the guesswork out of what someone might think the members want.

I agree, whatever the majority decides on, regardless of whether or not I'm in agreement with the decision, should be adopted and respected. I have a hard time with politicians, or anyone else for that matter, that think that they know better about what's good for the people than the people themselves. When they go against what the people want then it stops being democratic and becomes autocratic.

As for people not renewing their memberships with AFGA over issues (ie crossbow) not going their way, I don't understand the logic. Being a member gives you a vote in controversial issues in AFGA. What does leaving it achieve?

[300magman]

Originally Posted by jungleboy

i am thinking that if the vote had gone the other way by say ...52% to 48% the argument would be, well the majority voted against so that seals it.

absolutely