Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Archery Discussion

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #121  
Old 03-25-2015, 08:30 PM
FCLightning FCLightning is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 3blade View Post
So the backlash has little to do with atlatls, and everything to do with the hate-on for archery only seasons.
Diversion tactics are useless. It has nothing to do with hating archery seasons and everything to do with an unwarranted attack on fellow sportsmen.
  #122  
Old 03-25-2015, 08:44 PM
dmcbride dmcbride is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Bazeau County East side
Posts: 4,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kujoseto View Post
Is the proposed ban not on the premise that it is needed because there is no regulation? I see that as putting the onus on those interested to find adequate regulations and put forth a solid plan for the future of the sport. Archery wasn't permitted without regulation. This just evens the playing field and holds other groups to the same standard! You want to hunt? Use a regulated weapon.
This is painful reading through all the bickering. Focus on a goal together. I have not read one post saying it should be out-right banned. Stop pointing fingers, and work together. I must say, I now have more interest in a spear and atlatl, but if nobody comes up with regulations I won't know what I'm missing and I'll stick to my bow.
I suppose the problem with spears and atlatl's comes down to the user. Other than implementing a minimumum sharp broad head standard and weight it is up to the user. On the same token my spear of just under 4lbs. dropped (which a 4 year old could do) from a tree at 20ft has more kinetic energy than most bows.

One can put all the regulations out in the world and there will still be ways for them to fail. Would you suggest hunting elk with a 243 with 58gr. Varmint rounds? It is legal by the book and is more than likely done more per year than there is spear or atlatl hunters. Point is eventually common sence comes into play and hunters need to use it. Hunters are taught to make a humane kill, if one isn't strong enough to use a spear than they shouldn't use one.
  #123  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:00 PM
FCLightning FCLightning is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kujoseto View Post
but if nobody comes up with regulations
What is it you think needs regulated? Spears and atlatls must have a sharp cutting edge head..... is it even worth mentioning? Do we need a regulation to say that any knife used to dispatch a big game animal must be sharp? You are trying to make something of nothing.
  #124  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:10 PM
BigRackLover's Avatar
BigRackLover BigRackLover is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 4,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stinkhammer View Post
I think the ABA side was thinking about hunting as a whole. Having no rules on certian weapons and the the guidelines for there use was a hudge oversite by SRD.
Stinkhammer nails it!!!!! I'm glad I wasn't the first to point it out.

Both sides sticking to their guns (or spear) in this thread - gotta love the passion. Some think the ABA went out to purposely throw spear and atalas hunters under the bus, when it fact, it was the complete opposite. They brought a concern to AGMAG (the point of that process) that could affect how the public views all hunters/sportsmen (since the antis don't care about different hunting styles ). I can certainly see, in the way it came about, how many could think that the ABA was attacking a smaller group, but as a member of the executive, I can assure you that was never the case. It's too bad more can't see the actual purpose being the intiation of the discussion. Yes it did start out as "ban spears ... etc", but was quickly change to "define legal equip....etc" because after intial discussions, that made more sense to protect ALL hunters - based on feedback from other groups/ABA members. We're one of two provinces left who haven't defined legal weapons.

I personnally think it's wise, this day in age, to have a regulated sport, especially to defend against the antis. Some may called that naive, I call it being prepared, kinda like keeping your house in order or 'ducks in a row'. The fact the spears, rock throwers, nunchucks and skipping ropes to strangle deer aren't taught at hunter saftey course as effective killing tools is low hanging fruit for anti hunters to attack hunters as being illprepared for the challenge of hunting. That's like someone going to work for the first time, working with mechaninal devices that can kill you without any training whatsoever ... what organization would ever allow that? And if a near miss or death was the result, the root cause would surely be identiied quickly. Anti hunters don't need more ammo against us, especially easy loop holes in the regulations like that.

I have no desire to hunt with a spear/atalas/rock ... etc. I love bowhuting and that's where I devote my time. I wish all the best to whomever wants to go through the process of legalizing 'different' weapons to hunt with. I have no dought they'll come prepared to discuss their position, but they also need to be prepared to handle questions/concerns of the image risk that would apply to all hunters - just like the archery community had to so many years ago. Yes it sucks that you can hunt with a rock (or spear) today and that might not be the case in the future, but it's best for all hunters to have clear regulations.

I (not the ABA) suggest this:

- Have a 3 year test season of weapons, who's passionate members can defend and prove them as efficient killing tools
- So that'll give 3 years for the ~6 people who own spears in Alberta to get 'r done.
- After that, the AGMAG (or whatever other process the hunting community needs to partcipate in at that time) will evaluate the results.
- i suspect the harvest rate will be low and the public scrutiny even more so.
- i suspect this thread will be on page 129 (just like the crossbow debate)
__________________
Check out my page, even like it perhaps

Last edited by BigRackLover; 03-25-2015 at 09:33 PM.
  #125  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:10 PM
nelsonob1's Avatar
nelsonob1 nelsonob1 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Nelson BC
Posts: 2,031
Default

Not wanting to derail the thread but is there any legitimate information that spear hunting is more or less effective than archery in terms of killing in a humane way? Is the concern academic or real?
  #126  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:16 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nelsonob1 View Post
Not wanting to derail the thread but is there any legitimate information that spear hunting is more or less effective than archery in terms of killing in a humane way? Is the concern academic or real?
Well... The 2 spear hunters this year in Alberta were both successful, so spears are 100% !!!!!!!!!
  #127  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:24 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Well said BRL

LC
__________________
  #128  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:32 PM
FCLightning FCLightning is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRackLover View Post
I can certainly see, in the way it came about, how many could think that the ABA was attacking a smaller group, but as a member of the executive, I can assure you that was never the case. .....I wish all the best to whomever wants to go through the process of legalizing 'different' weapons to hunt with. ....... Yes it sucks that you can hunt with a rock (or spear) today
Well, if this isn't a classic case of contradictions.

Why should you have thought to take it upon yourselves to force a process of legalizing different weapons on folks whose weapons were not illegal?

Oh.. because in your not so humble opinion, it SUCKS that you can use them.

That whole attitude just stinks worse than that thawing out bucket of dog feces in my back yard. If you want folks to believe that your intention was not one of attacking a minority group of fellow sportsmen, then you really should quit attacking them.
  #129  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:34 PM
dmcbride dmcbride is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Bazeau County East side
Posts: 4,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCLightning View Post
Well, if this isn't a classic case of contradictions.

Why should you have thought to take it upon yourselves to force a process of legalizing different weapons on folks whose weapons were not illegal?

Oh.. because in your not so humble opinion, it SUCKS that you can use them.

That whole attitude just stinks worse than that thawing out bucket of dog feces in my back yard. If you want folks to believe that your intention was not one of attacking a minority group of fellow sportsmen, then you really should quit attacking them.
Yep.
  #130  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:38 PM
BigRackLover's Avatar
BigRackLover BigRackLover is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 4,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCLightning View Post
Well, if this isn't a classic case of contradictions.

Why should you have thought to take it upon yourselves to force a process of legalizing different weapons on folks whose weapons were not illegal?

Oh.. because in your not so humble opinion, it SUCKS that you can use them.

That whole attitude just stinks worse than that thawing out bucket of dog feces in my back yard. If you want folks to believe that your intention was not one of attacking a minority group of fellow sportsmen, then you really should quit attacking them.
quoting only half the sentence completely changes the meaning. Fix it.
__________________
Check out my page, even like it perhaps
  #131  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:41 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCLightning View Post
Well, if this isn't a classic case of contradictions.

Why should you have thought to take it upon yourselves to force a process of legalizing different weapons on folks whose weapons were not illegal?

Oh.. because in your not so humble opinion, it SUCKS that you can use them.

That whole attitude just stinks worse than that thawing out bucket of dog feces in my back yard. If you want folks to believe that your intention was not one of attacking a minority group of fellow sportsmen, then you really should quit attacking them.
Classic case of cherry picking.

LC
__________________
  #132  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:51 PM
dmcbride dmcbride is online now
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Bazeau County East side
Posts: 4,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nelsonob1 View Post
Not wanting to derail the thread but is there any legitimate information that spear hunting is more or less effective than archery in terms of killing in a humane way? Is the concern academic or real?
Spear, atlatl, arrow through the heart lungs=dead animal and neither kill better than the other. It comes down to the user. I have never heard of any concern about spears or atlatls other than what the ABA has said.
  #133  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:55 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

I encourage everyone to read and understand what BRL posted above, and then form their own opinion as he is the only one here who was actually part of the process.

Don't consider the clever "misquote" that FCLightning fabricated.

On that note I am out.

LC
__________________
  #134  
Old 03-25-2015, 09:57 PM
Talking moose's Avatar
Talking moose Talking moose is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: McBride/Prince George
Posts: 14,520
Default

BRL.... You sounded very educated, unbiased, and sincere in your take of the situation until you threw that jab in at the end. Many people are still on the fence with this. Not sure why you chose to end with a dig.....everything else you wrote could not be denied....
  #135  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:00 PM
xxclaro xxclaro is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,011
Default

Talking Moose said it right.
  #136  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:01 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
BRL.... You sounded very educated, unbiased, and sincere in your take of the situation until you threw that jab in at the end. Many people are still on the fence with this. Not sure why you chose to end with a dig.....everything else you wrote could not be denied....
The funny thing is....he owns a crossbow (I have seen it), it was a dry humour attempt and not a dig I can guarantee you that

LC
__________________
  #137  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:10 PM
FCLightning FCLightning is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRackLover View Post
quoting only half the sentence completely changes the meaning. Fix it.
I suspect you mean this sentence:
"Yes it sucks that you can hunt with a rock (or spear) today and that might not be the case in the future, but it's best for all hunters to have clear regulations."

Please, please and please explain how I changed the meaning.

You said "It sucks that you can hunt with a rock or spear today." a straighforward and explicit statement "That might not be the case in the future."a clear indication you believe banning is in the future "It's best for all hunters to have clear regulations."and I would say it is best for all hunters to not have to worry that other hunters will be making up a mountain where a molehill didn't even exist.

The simple fact is that you fabricated a "problem" for the sole purpose of ostracizing and ousting a small faction of legal hunters and you - the ABA? - remain unabashadly non-apologetic for such despicable behavior and continue to lay straw men and diversions to promote the "agenda".
  #138  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:14 PM
BigRackLover's Avatar
BigRackLover BigRackLover is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 4,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Talking moose View Post
BRL.... You sounded very educated, unbiased, and sincere in your take of the situation until you threw that jab in at the end. Many people are still on the fence with this. Not sure why you chose to end with a dig.....everything else you wrote could not be denied....
That was my attempt to lighten the mood, not a dig. Perahps a mistake (as you suggest), especially for people that don't know me. Let's face it though, the spear/atalas huning population size isn't large, so it's going to be tough for them because, as I hear often in the hunting community, "strength in numbers". My suggestion is legit, wish it was that easy and quick. I like to suggest ideas/alternative, not just state my opinion and perhaps complain about what others have done, just how I roll.

I really have no evidence that there are ~six spear hunters in Alberta. That's just my educated guess. And I have nothing against those that with to pursue their passion for hunting.
__________________
Check out my page, even like it perhaps
  #139  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:15 PM
CBintheNorth's Avatar
CBintheNorth CBintheNorth is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Communist Capital of Alberta
Posts: 3,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCLightning View Post
There would be absolutely no need for folks who wanted to take to the field with a spear to "defend" their choice of weapon if they hadn't been openly attacked by another "hunting" organization. There was no issue till the ABA decided to make it one. It was a grossly irresponsible, myopic and spineless action that is continuing to be perpetuated by folks on this thread
I have no interest in hunting with a spear or an atlatl, but I will most certainly speak for sportsmen to have that choice.
While I can see both sides of the arguments here, this statement comes closest to describing my thoughts on the subject.
The issue was raised by a hunting organisation (the president to be more precise), not an anti-hunting group.
And they didn't ask for it to be regulated, they asked for a ban.
Poor decision in my opinion.
  #140  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:22 PM
BigRackLover's Avatar
BigRackLover BigRackLover is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 4,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
The funny thing is....he owns a crossbow (I have seen it), it was a dry humour attempt and not a dig I can guarantee you that

LC
Oh, he meant the crossbow thing. Good old forum talk. I should know better. All I meant was that there are some individiuals that'll never come again (or will) respect the ABA after this incident. We've lost potential members so they'll always be out there jabbing the ABA, making this thread go on and on and on - like the crossbow debate.

Crossbow hunting is tough, you still need to get close. I refuse to discuss crossbows in archery seasons on this forum, gladly have a beer/coffee with anyone. It's complicated and this isn't the best media to debate as written words can often be misinterpreted, especially sarcasm and/or humor as I've demonstrated in this thread.
__________________
Check out my page, even like it perhaps

Last edited by BigRackLover; 03-25-2015 at 10:27 PM.
  #141  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:28 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBintheNorth View Post
While I can see both sides of the arguments here, this statement comes closest to describing my thoughts on the subject.
The issue was raised by a hunting organisation (the president to be more precise), not an anti-hunting group.
And they didn't ask for it to be regulated, they asked for a ban.
Poor decision in my opinion.
Yes initially, but as was explained the focus was changed to define and regulate, not ban (BRL statement above)....which some folks can't get past, and perhaps never will get past.

Like many I do not support an all out ban without first trying to define/regulate.

I had a discussion with a F&W officer today and this doesn't even seem to be on their radar....maybe I shouldn't have told them

LC
__________________
  #142  
Old 03-25-2015, 10:53 PM
FCLightning FCLightning is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,914
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRackLover View Post
Let's face it though, the spear/atalas huning population size isn't large, so it's going to be tough for them because, as I hear often in the hunting community, "strength in numbers". My suggestion is legit, wish it was that easy and quick.
You are right - there is strength in numbers and the spear aficionados need not fear the antis because they are backed by the strength of the numbers in the hunting fraternity.

And then comes the rabbit punch, with full intent to injure.
What kind of a suggestion is take 3 years to defend your choice of weapon and prove it's efficiency? Defend??? How about you quit being ass backwards. How about status quo unless proven on compelling grounds that it should not be. Do you really need someone to prove to you that if you stick a spear into the lung cavity of an animal that it will die? Do you honestly question that?

Last edited by FCLightning; 03-25-2015 at 11:03 PM. Reason: spelling
  #143  
Old 03-25-2015, 11:03 PM
CBintheNorth's Avatar
CBintheNorth CBintheNorth is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Communist Capital of Alberta
Posts: 3,706
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lefty-Canuck View Post
Yes initially, but as was explained the focus was changed to define and regulate, not ban (BRL statement above)....which some folks can't get past, and perhaps never will get past.

Like many I do not support an all out ban without first trying to define/regulate.

I had a discussion with a F&W officer today and this doesn't even seem to be on their radar....maybe I shouldn't have told them

LC
As with all things, it takes a multitude of rights to undo a single wrong.
The original statement presented on behalf of the ABA raised a lot of hackles and it will be tough to repair the damage done to the organization's image.
  #144  
Old 03-25-2015, 11:05 PM
Lefty-Canuck's Avatar
Lefty-Canuck Lefty-Canuck is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Look behind you :)
Posts: 27,774
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBintheNorth View Post
As with all things, it takes a multitude of rights to undo a single wrong.
The original statement presented on behalf of the ABA raised a lot of hackles and it will be tough to repair the damage done to the organization's image.
Agreed!

LC
__________________
  #145  
Old 03-25-2015, 11:14 PM
BigRackLover's Avatar
BigRackLover BigRackLover is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Beaumont
Posts: 4,642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CBintheNorth View Post
As with all things, it takes a multitude of rights to undo a single wrong.
The original statement presented on behalf of the ABA raised a lot of hackles and it will be tough to repair the damage done to the organization's image.
yup. But we're working at it.
__________________
Check out my page, even like it perhaps
  #146  
Old 03-25-2015, 11:29 PM
Luxor Luxor is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,347
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRackLover View Post
yup. But we're working at it.
You'd better work alot harder.
Because what you've written on this thread is not helping.
  #147  
Old 03-26-2015, 12:06 AM
kujoseto's Avatar
kujoseto kujoseto is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Strathcona County
Posts: 2,171
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FCLightning View Post
What is it you think needs regulated? Spears and atlatls must have a sharp cutting edge head..... is it even worth mentioning? Do we need a regulation to say that any knife used to dispatch a big game animal must be sharp? You are trying to make something of nothing.
I'm not trying to make something of nothing. I am trying to make a sensible suggestion in a forum where I assumed intelligent discussion could be made. So I will continue to assume that is what you are doing as well.
It doesn't matter what I think needs regulating. It matters what the larger group of us can come up with as reasonable regulations. We regulate calibre of bullets, arrow construction, and other things. Is it that preposterous to suggest regulating another weapon or two? I'm all for spears and atlatls. I'd like to try it too. But why is this thread turning into such an argument?
Maybe blade width, minimum length, density or mass, materials, manners in which the blade can be fastened? ? ? .... i'm sure more of us could come up with something appropriate better than I could on my own.
  #148  
Old 03-26-2015, 12:25 AM
Luxor Luxor is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Calgary
Posts: 2,347
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kujoseto View Post
I'm not trying to make something of nothing. I am trying to make a sensible suggestion in a forum where I assumed intelligent discussion could be made. So I will continue to assume that is what you are doing as well.
It doesn't matter what I think needs regulating. It matters what the larger group of us can come up with as reasonable regulations. We regulate calibre of bullets, arrow construction, and other things. Is it that preposterous to suggest regulating another weapon or two? I'm all for spears and atlatls. I'd like to try it too. But why is this thread turning into such an argument?
Maybe blade width, minimum length, density or mass, materials, manners in which the blade can be fastened? ? ? .... i'm sure more of us could come up with something appropriate better than I could on my own.
Its not the actual spear/atlatl that is causing the hubbub.
Its the manner of which it came to everyone's attention that made it such a mess.
From the youtube footage grew a monster.
Then people started worrying about the image of hunters by putting stock in what the anti's think of us hunters.
Then someone wanted to ban it.
Then someone wanted to regulate it.
Then someone wanted it to be a separate hunting association.
Then on and on and on.......

Now its a runaway train with all the passengers fighting over who's gonna conduct the train.

Does this help your confusion? Lol
  #149  
Old 03-26-2015, 12:29 AM
FCLightning FCLightning is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,914
Default

Well, an intelligent discussion would not begin with the assumption that we would need to ban any particular weapon or method of hunting simply because someone does not like it. Then the discussion moves further into the realm of overbearing pomposity when a magnanimous offer is made that it would be possible to regain legal status if you should like to "prove your method/weapon is worthy".

Other than assuring that the weapons had the same amount of bladed cutting surface as is required for other cutting edge weapons there would be little else to "regulate". Unless the archery folks want to open discussions on what materials, weight, fasteners for broadheads etc. they would like listed as allowable for their arrows and which should be 'banned'. I know this bow hunter would not like to enter into those discussions.

Last edited by FCLightning; 03-26-2015 at 12:36 AM.
  #150  
Old 03-26-2015, 12:54 AM
HunterDave HunterDave is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Copperhead Road, Morinville
Posts: 19,290
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRackLover View Post
Stinkhammer nails it!!!!! I'm glad I wasn't the first to point it out.

Both sides sticking to their guns (or spear) in this thread - gotta love the passion. Some think the ABA went out to purposely throw spear and atalas hunters under the bus, when it fact, it was the complete opposite. They brought a concern to AGMAG (the point of that process) that could affect how the public views all hunters/sportsmen (since the antis don't care about different hunting styles ). I can certainly see, in the way it came about, how many could think that the ABA was attacking a smaller group, but as a member of the executive, I can assure you that was never the case. It's too bad more can't see the actual purpose being the intiation of the discussion. Yes it did start out as "ban spears ... etc", but was quickly change to "define legal equip....etc" because after intial discussions, that made more sense to protect ALL hunters - based on feedback from other groups/ABA members. We're one of two provinces left who haven't defined legal weapons.

I personnally think it's wise, this day in age, to have a regulated sport, especially to defend against the antis. Some may called that naive, I call it being prepared, kinda like keeping your house in order or 'ducks in a row'. The fact the spears, rock throwers, nunchucks and skipping ropes to strangle deer aren't taught at hunter saftey course as effective killing tools is low hanging fruit for anti hunters to attack hunters as being illprepared for the challenge of hunting. That's like someone going to work for the first time, working with mechaninal devices that can kill you without any training whatsoever ... what organization would ever allow that? And if a near miss or death was the result, the root cause would surely be identiied quickly. Anti hunters don't need more ammo against us, especially easy loop holes in the regulations like that.

I have no desire to hunt with a spear/atalas/rock ... etc. I love bowhuting and that's where I devote my time. I wish all the best to whomever wants to go through the process of legalizing 'different' weapons to hunt with. I have no dought they'll come prepared to discuss their position, but they also need to be prepared to handle questions/concerns of the image risk that would apply to all hunters - just like the archery community had to so many years ago. Yes it sucks that you can hunt with a rock (or spear) today and that might not be the case in the future, but it's best for all hunters to have clear regulations.

I (not the ABA) suggest this:

- Have a 3 year test season of weapons, who's passionate members can defend and prove them as efficient killing tools
- So that'll give 3 years for the ~6 people who own spears in Alberta to get 'r done.
- After that, the AGMAG (or whatever other process the hunting community needs to partcipate in at that time) will evaluate the results.
- i suspect the harvest rate will be low and the public scrutiny even more so.
- i suspect this thread will be on page 129 (just like the crossbow debate)
Yeah, that sounds great. Unfortunately, it does not jive with what Brent Watson stated in his email that I posted on this thread. It doesn't even come close to resembling what his sequence of events was. In other words, it's total BS!

Brilliant rationalization of things.....The ABA is being proactive by proposing to ban spears/atlatls before the anti's have a chance to do it......What genius! Who the hell is worried about the anti's when the ABA pulls stuff like this off and attacks hunting groups from within.

It's been 2 years......Do you hear a public outcry about hunting with spears/atlatls.....other than the BS from the ABA?

Last edited by HunterDave; 03-26-2015 at 01:04 AM.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.