Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:39 PM
Dan Boone Dan Boone is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Red Deer
Posts: 555
Default

Is what I'm trying to say really this hard to understand?
If you want to bow hunt then bow hunt.
No problem.

Choose your weapon and hunt your season!
Is it really that difficult?

This would probably eleminate the need for archery mule deer to go on a draw.
Sask is a good example of what I would like to see!

First 6 weeks archery then a limited draw muzzle loader season.
I would happily give up my rifle season for any animal for a muzzle loader season. Supposing it was only a few days.


As to seasons being cut back. I enjoy hunting as much as anyone.
But I would not mind a reduction in seasons.
Especially if it increases trophy opportunities!

I like hunting big deer, and will continue to do so.
Are u suggesting that I should arrow a deer I do not want, just so I can say I shot one with my bow?
If I don't get in range of a big buck, then I will not be attempting a 75 yard shot.

But 75 yards with my smoke pole is just fine!





Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
Wow, the type of logic that has been thrown around in here is enough to make one's head implode.

First, I'll start by saying that I'm a die hard bow hunter, and if I have to make a choice between whether I hunt with a rifle or bow then there is no question that I'll choose bow. I'll also say that I think mule deer going on a draw for archery sucks. My main reason for saying it sucks that I really question the reliability of the online survey as a means of determining that our general season should be removed. Also, I have no doubt that now that the general hunting public is being made aware that the online survey can be used as a means to take away hunter opportunity, that the results of it will be amazingly skewed in the future. I don't think there is any doubt that people will be lying about what they shot and where they shot it out of fear of losing their hunting privileges. Call it selfish, call it dishonest, hell, condemn it in any way out like, but the bottom line is that it will almost certainly happen from here on out. All that being said, if it can be reliably shown that archers are taking more than their fair share of the harvest, then I guess that I can live with it going on a draw, even though I still don't like it. Lets face it, once the general season is taken away, its not likely to ever come back. A loss of opportunity hurts us all, not just a single group. Today it is archers' hunting allocations, next it will be rifle hunters' allocations.

Now, I have to address some of the drivel that has been all over this thread. I honestly had a hard time wrapping my head around what I was reading at times. I'll start here:



First, why do you feel the need to imply that he feels its his god given right to hunt 3 months out of the year? The bottom line is that the rules stipulated that we could hunt 3 months out of the year if we bought and archery tag and also got drawn for the rifle season. Was it his god given right to hunt within those stipulations? Sure as hell was. Does he have a god given right to be upset by the loss of opportunity? Sure he does. I have no idea what this particular statement had to do with anything - it was essentially nothing more than an ad-hominem attack that had no substance.

Next, your statement that "we should just let rifle hunters start on Sept 1, that way we can kill all the deer" is just silly. Want to make sure all the deer are killed? Remove bow hunting all together and just let the rifle hunters take care of it - they'll do it in short order. This statement is just ridiculous. You speak about inequality, well the reason for the so called "inequality" is that the weapon you have such a gripe about is so much less efficient an effective than the other one you speak of. It takes bow hunters 2 months of being able to hunt 6-7 days per week to meet or exceed the 15% allocation in some zones (and they don't even meet the 15% of many zones), while it takes rifle hunters a whopping 4 weeks to meet the 85% allocation of kills - it also takes less hunting days per week since the prairie zones only allow you to hunt 4 days a week. Evening out the playing field? Please explain to me how taking opportunity away from the group that harvests 15% of the animals evens the playing field? Ok, so archery success may drop from 15% to 10%, please tell me how the playing field has been evened? Archers shoot less animals, but rifle hunters will still shoot as many as they ever did. Yes, this sounds like a great way to bring the 2 sides together.





So let me get this straight, its ok for you to kill deer with your muzzie but not with a bow? I don't follow what you are trying to get at here. You ask the rhetorical question "why shoot an animal I don't want" as justification for you not killing a mule deer with your bow, but on the very next line you say that you did, in fact, shoot several animals that you didn't want with your muzzie. You later state that you gave the animals to a friend of yours, that's fine, but it doesn't change the fact that you totally contradicted yourself in saying that you don't shoot mule deer with a bow because you don't like them but that you will shoot them with a muzzie.

Next, no, you are not to be shipped off to hell for your preference to use a muzzie. Use whatever you like! But by that same token, bow hunters should not be shipped to hell for not wanting to give up a season that they have had for years and years.



Ok, by that logic, please tell me where it states that putting in for the draw isn't open to just anyone, whether or not they can hit a 1" dot or can't hit a 1' square at 100 yards? Do you really think that the draw acts as a deterrent for those with less skill? Not very likely. The same guys that can't hit a barn at 30 with a bow are likely the same people that can't hit a 1' square with their rifle - they will be out there regardless. Again, your logic does not support your argument.





So let me get this straight, you want to remove a portion of the season that belongs to a weapon that accounts for 15% of the harvest over a 2 month period, in favor of adding a season for a weapon that is more or less as effective as a rifle? Please explain where the logic lies in that. The success rates for muzzle loader will absolutely dwarf the success that occurs in bow season. You will actually end up having more animals killed in the month of October by doing this than you would if you left bow season alone. Again, you totally undermine your own argument. Please refer back to the first thing I quoted wherein you stated that we should just turn the rifle guys loose early and kill all the animals.

I'm guessing your justification for this will be that we should just offer a very limited number of muzzie tags. Well, yes, I suppose that will work fine, but it will be at the expense of even more hunting opportunity. That's all we need, just keep taking our own opportunities away until we have none. That leads me to my next point.



Ok, now I see the pattern. Are you sure you actually like hunting? Because as far as I can tell, you are all about removing opportunity at ever turn. Not only do you want bow season to go on draw or be cut in half, but you would like rifle hunters to have their time reduced from 4 weeks to 11 days. Gotcha. That's great. This may come as a surprise, but every year Alberta puts out some of the biggest animals in the world, despite the seasons that are currently in place. The genetics are clearly being passed on. You want to look for the culprit of reduced mule deer numbers? Look no further than the massive CWD culls and the issuing of astronomical tag numbers throughout the south over the past several years - yes, tags that were issued to rifle hunters. Don't put the blame on bow hunters - that's clearly not where it lies.




I don't even know why I'm going to acknowledge this because its just clear that you don't like bow hunters. I'll rephrase it for you so that it reflects what some of my experiences have been.

Rifle season has been reduced to 2 weeks? GREAT!!! Couldn't be happier! I know far too many guys that consider themselves superior sportsmen or true purists simply because they shoot the latest Coopers or Christianson rifle. Yet in my area (various areas of the south), they are all out there opening morning with their rifles, running any mule they can...knowing that the entire south has been crushed by the mismanagement of tags, cwd, and influx of road only hunters from Medicine Hat, Calgary, and beyond.

See how ridiculous that looks? Yeah. I don't even know why I wasted the effort to type it out.
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:40 PM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pottymouth View Post
2 points....

Harvest reports by hunters ARE VOLUNTARY , so the whole population is not surveyed. The information also has no way to be qualified either. I also believe there is no question on the survey , asking type of weapon. But yet this is their #1 resource for saying that archers are over their cap. It also includes bow only zones, that show100% muley mortality by bow and 0% by rifle.

Srd , also has ZERO interest in managing herds for quality.
Date of kill would pretty closely represent weapon usage

212 and 248 being included is confusing.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:42 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eggo View Post
If what you are saying is true about bow hunting percentages then if it goes to draw every bow hunt will get drawn 100 percent of the time
And if that is the case, why should the season be shortened?
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:43 PM
hal53's Avatar
hal53 hal53 is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
I never went there at all, but you did, so lets go! If we are going to start counting how many deer each hunter as found with bow wounds as compared to rifle wounds you really aren't going to like the outcome. Do I need to start by talking about how many rifle shot animals I've found with shots nowhere near the kill zone? Because I'll tell you right now its a hell of a lot more than the number of deer I've found with arrows in their ass, which is a grand total of 1! Its a simple numbers game, one hell of a lot more bullets get flung at deer each year then arrows - therefore, based simply on math, one hell of a lot more deer are going to be wounded by bullets than arrows.

Your arguments just don't hold any water. They are considering a draw because the 15% is being met in some areas? Well no kidding, I already said that. I also said that if the 15% is being met then the season should go to draw. What about the areas (which is most areas) that it 15% is not being met? Bottom line, you guys are complaining about the length of the bow season, but can't provide a reason as to why it should be shortened outside of arguing that its not fair.
atta boy!!!!...thats why I said we won't go there...but nope you couldn't stop. We as hunters have enough issues to deal with , without fighting amongst ourselves, right???....let it be... We, I am sure can find some common ground where everyone is relatively happy and the game is at a sustainable level for everyone....and as a hunter in East Central, believe you me, I KNOW what happens when they close a zone, and leave some open....it ain't pretty....doesn't work.....
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:43 PM
6mmhunter 6mmhunter is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 511
Default

I'm all for it and yes I'm a bowhunter and a rifle hunter. Every bowhunter I know already puts in for the draws every year and heads out with a rifle as often as I do. So no difference in tag demands there. Also with putting archery mule deer on draw the previous allowance of 15% for archers should be added to the number of draw tags available for that zone. Everyone wants to blame the CWD culls for the decreasing herd numbers and yes this was a huge problem but lets not forget that bowhunting success met or exceeded the 15% during those years as well so everyone holds some responsibility for that. I think the seasons are fine as they are. Everyone waits to get drawn and then if you choose you can try and harvest your mule deer with archery tackle for Sept-Oct and then use a rifle or a bow in November, your choice.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:44 PM
pottymouth's Avatar
pottymouth pottymouth is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In the 400's
Posts: 6,581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter View Post
Date of kill would pretty closely represent weapon usage

212 and 248 being included is confusing.
Date of kill still doesn't qualify it as accurate. Especially with zones opening up for rifle early , and any weapon being allowed in November. That makes things even more confusing.
__________________
How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait ....
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:45 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Boone View Post
I like hunting big deer, and will continue to do so.
Are u suggesting that I should arrow a deer I do not want, just so I can say I shot one with my bow?
If I don't get in range of a big buck, then I will not be attempting a 75 yard shot.

But 75 yards with my smoke pole is just fine!
That's not what I'm saying at all. You are the one that raised the question of "why should I shoot an animal that I don't want" then the very next sentence you said that you, in fact, shot animals that you didn't want. I was merely pointing out the contradiction in your statements.
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:46 PM
eggo eggo is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
And if that is the case, why should the season be shortened?
Why shouldn't every weapon have the same amount of time if tags are given out in the right proportions
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:47 PM
hal53's Avatar
hal53 hal53 is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eggo View Post
why shouldn't every weapon have the same amount of time if tags are given out in the right proportions
bingo!!!!!!!
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:47 PM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pottymouth View Post
Date of kill still doesn't qualify it as accurate. Especially with zones opening up for rifle early , and any weapon being allowed in November. That makes things even more confusing.
That would only skew kills to the rifle side though....my point was, any kill in the archery only season would be counted as an archery kill and any kill outside of those seasons wouldn't be. Likely the archers are getting some freebies in the stats....not likely something to complain about. I think the real concern is the kill in the non draw portion of the season...not in the draw portion.

Anyhow, I'm pretty sure I've been asked what weapon I used the last few times I participated in surveys. Can't guarantee it but pretty sure. While SRD does take some liberties, I suspect they have some basis for determining archery kills since they are basing this change on that. I think that arguement is a non starter potty.
Reply With Quote
  #101  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:47 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal53 View Post
atta boy!!!!...thats why I said we won't go there...but nope you couldn't stop. We as hunters have enough issues to deal with , without fighting amongst ourselves, right???....let it be... We, I am sure can find some common ground where everyone is relatively happy and the game is at a sustainable level for everyone....and as a hunter in East Central, believe you me, I KNOW what happens when they close a zone, and leave some open....it ain't pretty....doesn't work.....
This is confusing to me, simply because nowhere in any of my posts did I bring up the issue of weapon mortality or wounding, YOU DID. Please find a single line in any of my posts where I talked about wounding animals, because I'll point out to you where you brought it up. Don't blame me for responding to an issue that YOU brought up.
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:49 PM
hal53's Avatar
hal53 hal53 is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
This is confusing to me, simply because nowhere in any of my posts did I bring up the issue of weapon mortality or wounding, YOU DID. Please find a single line in any of my posts where I talked about wounding animals, because I'll point out to you where you brought it up. Don't blame me for responding to an issue that YOU brought up.
Okay, you're right, I apologize,,...carry on....
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 10-13-2012, 05:52 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eggo View Post
Why shouldn't every weapon have the same amount of time if tags are given out in the right proportions
Okay, so if it takes 8 weeks or 2 months for archers to kill 15% of the deer, and 4 weeks for rifle hunters to take 85%, then we should do something like this.

Based on the current math, an archer has twice the time to hunt, and shoots about 5.6 times fewer animals than a rifle hunter. So lets take 4 weeks, or half the season, away from archer hunters, which in theory should mean they will then take 11.2 times few animals than rifle hunters, but well give them 11.2 times the amount of tags in order to make up for reduced harvest. That way, everyone will hunt the same amount of time, the harvest numbers will stay the same, and the tags will be proportioned accordingly.

It just doesn't work.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:02 PM
Dan Boone Dan Boone is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Red Deer
Posts: 555
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
That's not what I'm saying at all. You are the one that raised the question of "why should I shoot an animal that I don't want" then the very next sentence you said that you, in fact, shot animals that you didn't want. I was merely pointing out the contradiction in your statements.
I didn't want to shoot a small buck but I did indeed want to shoot the one I did. The meat was given to a good friend and I'm quite certain he ate it all.

I do not kill for the sake of killing! I will shoot big deer or any legal moose or elk. We eat 1.5 elk or moose each year.

I guess I'm in my trophy phase when it comes to deer, next is the archery phase I'm told. If it happens good, but if it do happen I won't feel the need to hunt with smoke pole or rifle if I am not successful during archery.

As for hunting and shortening seasons. I believe you asked if I enjoyed hunting at all! There are plenty of opportunities to hunt other than big game.

Go wack some coyotes or wolves if you feel the need.
I enjoy it after Xmas and there is nothing else to chase.
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:02 PM
eggo eggo is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 92
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
Okay, so if it takes 8 weeks or 2 months for archers to kill 15% of the deer, and 4 weeks for rifle hunters to take 85%, then we should do something like this.

Based on the current math, an archer has twice the time to hunt, and shoots about 5.6 times fewer animals than a rifle hunter. So lets take 4 weeks, or half the season, away from archer hunters, which in theory should mean they will then take 11.2 times few animals than rifle hunters, but well give them 11.2 times the amount of tags in order to make up for reduced harvest. That way, everyone will hunt the same amount of time, the harvest numbers will stay the same, and the tags will be proportioned accordingly.

It just doesn't work.
No where did I say to shorten bow season if the amount of tags are right for the wmu who. Cares how long the season goes give the other weapons as long you are still taking a fixed amount of deer out of that wmu
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:10 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eggo View Post
No where did I say to shorten bow season if the amount of tags are right for the wmu who. Cares how long the season goes give the other weapons as long you are still taking a fixed amount of deer out of that wmu
Well, the only way for that to be possible would be to have overlapping rifle and bow seasons, otherwise its not doable. So, keeping fairness in mind, how would it be fair to bow hunters to have to hunt while rifles are shooting all around them? Let's also look at the safety issue. How long do you think it would take before a bow hunter who was stalked with within 20 yards of a big buck was either shot, or had lead flying over him?

Honestly, that's the only way to implement what you are suggesting. Otherwise, you couldn't keep the 2 month bow season without giving rifle hunters a 2 month season which clearly isn't an option considering that rifle hunters already take 85% of the harvest in a 4 week period. Similarly, if you shortened the bow season to 4 weeks, the 15% harvest numbers would most certainly not be met. Therefore, in order to make up for the lack of animals shot in bow season, more tags would have to be given to rifle hunters. Essentially, you would be taking half the bow season away, and giving the tags to rifle hunters who already take 85% of the animals. That's definitely not fair. So yes, in essence, you are saying that the bow season should be shortened, unless you suggest, as I said, having overlapping seasons.
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:15 PM
Dan Boone Dan Boone is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Red Deer
Posts: 555
Default

Bow and rifle seasons should not overlap. Agreed.

How about bow then rifle then muzzle loader?
Alot of seasons go to December 20th already.
How bout adding a week of muzzy at the end?

Limited draw muzzy of course, and if I'm drawn I can't hunt the other 2 seasons of course.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
Well, the only way for that to be possible would be to have overlapping rifle and bow seasons, otherwise its not doable. So, keeping fairness in mind, how would it be fair to bow hunters to have to hunt while rifles are shooting all around them? Let's also look at the safety issue. How long do you think it would take before a bow hunter who was stalked with within 20 yards of a big buck was either shot, or had lead flying over him?

Honestly, that's the only way to implement what you are suggesting. Otherwise, you couldn't keep the 2 month bow season without giving rifle hunters a 2 month season which clearly isn't an option considering that rifle hunters already take 85% of the harvest in a 4 week period. So yes, in essence, you are saying that the bow season should be shortened, unless you suggest, as I said, having overlapping seasons.
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:15 PM
hal53's Avatar
hal53 hal53 is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
Well, the only way for that to be possible would be to have overlapping rifle and bow seasons, otherwise its not doable. So, keeping fairness in mind, how would it be fair to bow hunters to have to hunt while rifles are shooting all around them? Let's also look at the safety issue. How long do you think it would take before a bow hunter who was stalked with within 20 yards of a big buck was either shot, or had lead flying over him?

Honestly, that's the only way to implement what you are suggesting. Otherwise, you couldn't keep the 2 month bow season without giving rifle hunters a 2 month season which clearly isn't an option considering that rifle hunters already take 85% of the harvest in a 4 week period. Similarly, if you shortened the bow season to 4 weeks, the 15% harvest numbers would most certainly not be met. Therefore, in order to make up for the lack of animals shot in bow season, more tags would have to be given to rifle hunters. Essentially, you would be taking half the bow season away, and giving the tags to rifle hunters who already take 85% of the animals. That's definitely not fair. So yes, in essence, you are saying that the bow season should be shortened, unless you suggest, as I said, having overlapping seasons.
you could always have the lease holder at the gate, directing rifle hunters to door #2 and Bowhunters to door (gate) #3??? I'm sure they wouldn't mind....LOL!!! joking
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:22 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan Boone View Post
Bow and rifle seasons should not overlap. Agreed.

How about bow then rifle then muzzle loader?
Alot of seasons go to December 20th already.
How bout adding a week of muzzy at the end?

Limited draw muzzy of course, and if I'm drawn I can't hunt the other 2 seasons of course.
I know I sound like I'm against a muzzle loader season, but I'm definitely not. I just feel that the people arguing against shortening the bow season simply have put forth pretty poor reasons for doing so. I have no problem at all with a muzzy season, I was just poking holes in your argument earlier. It really wouldn't hurt my feelings if we utilized the Sask model - it seems to be working for them. I guess the drastically lower population doesn't hurt though.
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:23 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hal53 View Post
you could always have the lease holder at the gate, directing rifle hunters to door #2 and Bowhunters to door (gate) #3??? I'm sure they wouldn't mind....LOL!!! joking
Hahaha. But that damn lease holder has a cow on the land and said I can't go in with my rifle, but that bow guy is trucking across the field as we speak! Hahah.
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:25 PM
hal53's Avatar
hal53 hal53 is offline
Gone Hunting
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lougheed,Ab.
Posts: 12,736
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Icefisher2885 View Post
I know I sound like I'm against a muzzle loader season, but I'm definitely not. I just feel that the people arguing against shortening the bow season simply have put forth pretty poor reasons for doing so. I have no problem at all with a muzzy season, I was just poking holes in your argument earlier.
the few zones that had Deer open until Dec. 20th, have thankfully been shut down...
__________________
The future ain't what it used to be - Yogi Berra
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:34 PM
ruttnbuckcojack ruttnbuckcojack is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by H380 View Post
The 3 point or larger idea is truly a joke ... We have a large population of 3 point bucks in our area now that will never be any better . If you want to clean up the gene pool to good bucks make it 3 point and smaller .These are the ones left to do the breeding after you clean up all the good 4x's.
First off they tryed this with elk and all that happened was every dumb ass shot all the little bulls and the population started to decrease. The same thing happened in 314 when they put it on draw the numbers started to drop.If it was to be 3 point or larger more bucks survive which in the long run produces more larger bucks, doesn't take a rocket sciencetist to figer this out
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 10-13-2012, 06:54 PM
Dacotensis's Avatar
Dacotensis Dacotensis is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sherwood Forest
Posts: 5,176
Default

As far as I know, there has never been a MDB season in 248.
If a season is introduced, then why not put it on draw-take it slow and see what happens.
Being so close to a big population it may take a hard hit.
While I have not been able to hunt them, it has been nice to see the big boys.
A zone I hunt in the 100's used to be 3pnt +. Years a go it produced some hogs. Now there are still big deer comming out of the zone but a lot of the young bucks get killed as well. It enjoys a good population of deer. I would like to see big MDB come out of the zone again.
Why can't the zones be managed rotationally? say 4 years of 3pnt or bigger and 3-4 years of anything?
Ya I know, too much managing
__________________
We must reject the idea that every time a law's broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.
Ronald Reagan

Either get busy living, or get busy dying!
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 10-13-2012, 08:07 PM
H380's Avatar
H380 H380 is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: WMU 108
Posts: 6,286
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruttnbuckcojack View Post
First off they tryed this with elk and all that happened was every dumb ass shot all the little bulls and the population started to decrease. The same thing happened in 314 when they put it on draw the numbers started to drop.If it was to be 3 point or larger more bucks survive which in the long run produces more larger bucks, doesn't take a rocket sciencetist to figer this out
You are correct ,you are no rocket scientist.. How many guys do you think are gonna take a 3 pointer ? Possibly you ? Lots of 3's in my area and very few 4x's left . Not trying to be a smartazz but I can't think of many folks limiting their take to a 3 .

Last edited by H380; 10-13-2012 at 08:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 10-13-2012, 08:15 PM
jryley jryley is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lougheed
Posts: 991
Default

Icefisher you seem to be confused. Re-posting what i stated in my first post has no correlation to rifle season as 232 is already, and has been for years, on a draw for mule. So saying every rifle hunter is out pushing mules is a disaster of an arguement. I dont hate bow hunters....as i bow hunt myself. However, i havent gone after a mule deer in over 10 years. I am borderline a local
In 232. Ive seen what the deer numbers habe become. How, in
Your infinite wisdom, does it make sense to you to stay on a general tag for any weapon, when speaking of a species that is at horrendous numbers when
Compared to even 5 years ago. That lacks serious logic. If putting archery mule on draw saves even 10 deer a year in any given 10 km square radius its easily better than doing nothing at all. Your arguement is
Stupid at best. When you get a chance to honestly watch specific herds for longer than a season in any given wmu you might grow a sense of reality.
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 10-13-2012, 08:50 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jryley View Post
Icefisher you seem to be confused. Re-posting what i stated in my first post has no correlation to rifle season as 232 is already, and has been for years, on a draw for mule. So saying every rifle hunter is out pushing mules is a disaster of an arguement. I dont hate bow hunters....as i bow hunt myself. However, i havent gone after a mule deer in over 10 years. I am borderline a local
In 232. Ive seen what the deer numbers habe become. How, in
Your infinite wisdom, does it make sense to you to stay on a general tag for any weapon, when speaking of a species that is at horrendous numbers when
Compared to even 5 years ago. That lacks serious logic. If putting archery mule on draw saves even 10 deer a year in any given 10 km square radius its easily better than doing nothing at all. Your arguement is
Stupid at best. When you get a chance to honestly watch specific herds for longer than a season in any given wmu you might grow a sense of reality.
Haha, ok. Yes, bowhunters are having a drastic effect on the herds in 232 as evidenced by the press release issued by the ABA. Oh, wait. No they aren't, in fact, bow hunters are taking so few deer in that area that not only is 232 not being considered for a draw, but neither are any of the surrounding zones. You want to save mule deer in the area? Try reducing rifle tags. I know what 232 is like - I used to live in Sedgewick.

My restatement of what you said earlier wasn't an argument at all, it was simply an illustration of how remarkably asinine the comments that you made were. I guess that went over your head though. You are right about one thing - someone does need to get a sense of reality, unfortunately its you.
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 10-13-2012, 08:54 PM
Deer Hunter Deer Hunter is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 4,158
Default

Srd only throws certain wmus on archery draw, everyone flOcks to the few remaining general zones. Omg! They can't believe that now all zones are in excess of the magic 15% figure. Soon they'll all be on draw. Forever. Kiss it goodbye fellas.
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 10-13-2012, 08:55 PM
Icefisher2885 Icefisher2885 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 460
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Deer Hunter View Post
Srd only throws certain wmus on archery draw, everyone flOcks to the few remaining general zones. Omg! They can't believe that now all zones are in excess of the magic 15% figure. Soon they'll all be on draw. Forever. Kiss it goodbye fellas.
Unfortunately, I believe that you are right on the money.
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 10-13-2012, 09:09 PM
muledeerking muledeerking is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter View Post
I don't think either group is really to blame. The harvest is pretty well set by draw for the rifle hunters so you point really doesn't hold water. Always important to look at the big picture.
what is the big picture??? All this crap is to do cause people like Rich that dont like bohunters because he does not want to bow hunt and feels we have more oppertunity then them. We I am sorry but the slaughter that has went on in this province is why tag numbers are way down and there is a concern at all. Like I have stated in this and in many others. Why is it sask has no mule deer draw for archery hunters???? Also we have way more of them aswell and we still cant figure out how to manage them corectly so really why is there this giant push??? I know the draw in the bow zones is a joke as only the people that have built permission over the years will ever get a chance to hunt most muledeer. I am againnst this whole thing as an outdoorsmen as we all loose more oppertunity like always.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 10-13-2012, 09:10 PM
muledeerking muledeerking is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 228
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
While Rifle licences drop while Landowner Licences increase.


There is a finite allowable allocation on Antelered Mule Deer.


If it is deemed neccessary to put Archery on a draw, perhaps Landowner Licences need to be reduced and put on a draw as well.

This should at least be on the table with AESRD.
You mean they loose them. This is a huge issue.
Reply With Quote
Reply

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 02:40 PM.


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