similar reasoning to the original 400 m road closures nightmare but likely easier to enforceOption #1
- Meeting Objective #1:
- This option aligns with the adjacent WMUs in the Peace region, so it should help alleviate some increased hunter pressure from areas of the Province with more restrictive moose season regulations
- This option should help alleviate some of the potential waterbed effect that may result from proposed regulation changes in the south.
- The option will reduce harvest, while not limiting hunting opportunity.
- Meeting Objective #2:
- This option excludes licensed hunters from taking middle age-class bull moose in the northern portion of the Skeena Region for most of the season, providing a class of bulls for First Nations to exclusively harvest.
Option #2
- Meeting Objective #1:
- This option creates restriction in the ‘frontcountry’ which aligns with the regulations in the Peace region, and may discourage the increased hunter pressure resulting from more restrictive moose season regulations in other parts of the Province.
- This option should help alleviate some of the potential waterbed effect due to regulation changes in the south.
- The option will reduce harvest, while not limiting hunting opportunity.
Meeting Objective #2: This option excludes licensed hunters from taking middle age-class bull moose in the ‘frontcountry’ portion of the northern portion of the Skeena Region where the primary competition with First Nations is occurring. In addition the SOFT-10 maintains a class of bulls for First Nations to exclusively harvest within their high cultural use areas.
Never say whoa in the middle of a mud hole
The proposed changes to the moose hunting regulations presented here are to address land use conflict, be proactive in addressing increased hunter pressure from increased restrictions in other parts of the Region and Province, and are not focused on an immediate conservation concern. Of note, First Nations are reporting lower numbers of moose in the region.
There it is in black and white, kids. Apparently, I have moved up North for no reason now.
A spiritual being trying to have a human experience
It’s sad knowing these changes will make very little difference to the population, and only regulates “some people”. After this winter, moose will be even more slim pickings, in all my life in 6-04, this is the most snow Iv ever seen here, and still coming down.
off topic, but still importantThis proposal:
- replaces the term “ATV” with “Registered Off Road Vehicle”, which allows for the use of Utility Terrain Vehicles and purpose built off-road trailers
- increases the maximum weight limit from 500 kg to 750 kg
- Reduces the allowable distance from the midline of the road/trail from 400m to 10m in all instances where 400m is permitted
- allows for operators of registered Off Road Vehicles to go beyond 10m distance from the midline of the designated road/trail to bypass impassable features or to access an established camp
Never say whoa in the middle of a mud hole
I actually dont mind option 2 that much. My issue with option two is the high cultral use areas, if those are removed I think this would be fair. It would open up prime rut hunting along the roadways creating more oppurtunities to hunt while also limiting the the harvest. It also does not change the backcountry areas for those who fly or horseback in to hunt where there is significantly less pressure.
Option 1 is complete rubbish and should not even be considered.
If they want to limit our moose hunting further they need to first restrict guide outfitters and First Nation groups as well.