Atv's closed beginning of the end

[kootenaihunter]

If anyone can provide a link stating all ATVs are banned from the area I will be happily proven wrong. Anything I find refers to the Hunting Closure

The conjecture that gets spread on this site is mind boggling. Not a hunting closure.


The Province is taking action to restore portions of Elephant Hill that were severely affected by wildfires this past summer.
Effective Thursday, May 17, 2018, the area known as the Elephant Hill Wildfire area of the Thompson Rivers Natural Resource District and 100 Mile House Natural Resource District will be closed to motorized vehicles, including automobiles, trucks, motorcycles and all types of off-road recreational vehicles, except on existing roads. The closure will be in effect until Dec. 31, 2018, while restoration activities for the area are being planned and implemented.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018FLNR0122-000925

[Ltbullken]

The conjecture that gets spread on this site is mind boggling. Not a hunting closure.


The Province is taking action to restore portions of Elephant Hill that were severely affected by wildfires this past summer.
Effective Thursday, May 17, 2018, the area known as the Elephant Hill Wildfire area of the Thompson Rivers Natural Resource District and 100 Mile House Natural Resource District will be closed to motorized vehicles, including automobiles, trucks, motorcycles and all types of off-road recreational vehicles, except on existing roads. The closure will be in effect until Dec. 31, 2018, while restoration activities for the area are being planned and implemented.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018FLNR0122-000925

Read page 43 of the regs. Looks pretty black and white to me...

[bighornbob]

You guys are talking about two different things.

Rule #1 The actual burned area (elephant Hill fire area) is closed to all motor vehicles for this year for restoration activities. So yes you can hunt it just cant drive anything off main roads.

Rule #2 MU's 3-28, 3-29, and 3-30 are closed to ATV use only while hunting. So you can still bomb around with a ATV as long as you dont have a weapon with you. Or you can use a truck and drive anywhere you want while hunting (see rule #1).

Two differnt rules with an overlapping area.

Rule #1 is put in place to protect plants growing back.
Rule #2 is put in place to protect animals from guys on ATV's.


I hope that clear it up.

BHB

[Mulehahn]

The conjecture that gets spread on this site is mind boggling. Not a hunting closure.


The Province is taking action to restore portions of Elephant Hill that were severely affected by wildfires this past summer.
Effective Thursday, May 17, 2018, the area known as the Elephant Hill Wildfire area of the Thompson Rivers Natural Resource District and 100 Mile House Natural Resource District will be closed to motorized vehicles, including automobiles, trucks, motorcycles and all types of off-road recreational vehicles, except on existing roads. The closure will be in effect until Dec. 31, 2018, while restoration activities for the area are being planned and implemented.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2018FLNR0122-000925

Thanks for the link and map, but it still raises several questions. Why is the ban listed as only ATVs while the FLNRO closure is to all motorized vehicles? Why they extended an extra year for hunters only? Why 3-28 was closed (when so much of it lies out side of the burned area)? If it is because some of it burned and they are taking a safe approach then why wasn't 5-01 included; it had a fair bit of fire damage in the southern half?

For the record, I don't own an ATV and I fully support a ban of all vehicles leaving pre-exisiting roads. But I cannot wrap my head around how full ban on only one class of vehicle; one that already prohibited from leaving the roads through out the vast majority of the area (at least for this 201 for only 4 months of the year is going to help in recovery? It cannot be about enforcement because if they can enforce "road only travel" through out the summer and the height of tourist season they should have no problem enforcing it in the fall. Now it may be to save animals, but a person can still drive the roads in a truck or car so that argument doesn't really work either. A dead animal is a dead animal, it just makes recovery more difficult for some.

I am honestly trying; but I just don't see how changing the laws and creating new ones that are only in affect during hunting season is not an attacking hunters!?

[DarekG]

Any loss of privilege or rights for a hunter is a loss for all hunters. You guys shouldn't be taking glee in something being shut down just because you don't use it or agree with it for the sake of one upping an internet argument.

To the person comparing a helicopter to an ATV, you are an idiot. You are comparing apples to oranges. This is the exact thinking that will erode hunting and fishing culture in BC/Canada. The great thing about people is that they will whine about anything, so as soon as you show a crack in your armour you're as good as done when it comes to the anti's.

> You use a truck to drive out to your hunting area? I disagree with this because somehow it's less "natural" or something.


> Oh you use an ATV instead of a truck to get to your hunting area because it burns exponentially less gas? You're still using modern technology.


> You're using a horse? That's like slavery for horses. Horses should be free. You should give up all vehicles and forms of transportation other than your feet for 100% of anything relating to hunting. (Including going to the LGS to buy more ammo or tags!)


> Oh you're using a rifle to shoot a poor defenseless creature from a distance? Way to use space age technology. I hope it makes you feel like a big man, why don't you use something that takes skill?


> You're using a crossbow to hunt? That's basically just a gun that shoots arrows. Does killing make you feel good?


> You're using a compound bow to hunt? Geez, what are you too weak and stupid to use a classic implement?


> You're using a recurve bow? What do you like watching animals suffer you psychopath?! Surely there are more humane methods.


> A spear?! Are you crazy? I watched that guy in 'Berta kill a bear with one so this one isn't allowed just on principle.


> What? You're throwing rocks at the animals to kill them? What are you a stupid caveman?


> Strangling deer with your bare hands? Why don't you just go to Safeway and buy some "beef" that came from a factory farm you idiot?

This is how it works, this is how it's always worked, this is how it will happen.
I'm just shocked a relatively new 20-something year old hunter has to come onto a forum of long-time hunters to remind them.


There are about a hundred thousand more things that can be done about wildlife conservation and hunting preservation instead of pretending a insanely small demographic of ATV "abusers" are solely responsible for the destruction of the back country in BC. I'm starting to doubt the main demographic of this forum is even hunters anymore.

(The fact that you guys think full size 4x4's don't do as much, if not more damage is so laughable I'm not even going to address it.)


EDIT: Worth noting also that I don't use my ATV for hunting, though I do own one.

[Jelvis]

MU 3-28 29 and 30 were all closed to all vehicles off main roads period! These MU's need to be studied by the Ministry and Indian Bands for perfect rehabilitation.
-- Chooch and the Loops and the Cilly Cootins have major insight to be out right -- hiking and hunting, walking and looking, seeing big four points
It's written in plain Ingrish.
Jel -- Skull Mt Iz Back -- Fish Trap - Rexford and Goudreux -- still hunting better then Colorado -- - better muley hunting then Idaho, Wyoming or Nevada --

[Keta1969]

The self righteousness and indignation of some of the quad riders pretty much says it all.Don't tell us cant use our quad,we have a machine, we paid for it, we have a "right" to use it. Take a hike, you can still hunt. For those that say hunters on quads don't do damage I call BS. I've seen it and the only one that would have any cause to build trails where I've seen them is hunters. Just drove some of those areas this is the right decision.

[Hublocker]

With no disrespect meant for people who really do park and hike; I keep seeing people say they only use their quad to get to their fave hunting spot and hike in, but in the 32 years since I moved to the mainland, I've seen two parked quads in the bush. And one of them was in a motor vehicle closed area.

[bighornbob]

MU 3-28 29 and 30 were all closed to all vehicles off main roads period! These MU's need to be studied by the Ministry and Indian Bands for perfect rehabilitation.

Wrong Wrong Wrong Wrong

From the hunting regs, page 43:


ATV for Hunting Closed Areas: The
operation of all ATVs to hunt
wildlife, transport wildlife, trans
-
port equipment and supplies which
are intended for or in support of
hunting, or transport hunters to
and from the location of wildlife
is prohibited in Management
Units 3-28, 3-29 and 3-30 from
September 1 to December 10.

[Pemby_mess]

To the person comparing a helicopter to an ATV, you are an idiot. You are comparing apples to oranges. This is the exact thinking that will erode hunting and fishing culture in BC/Canada. The great thing about people is that they will whine about anything, so as soon as you show a crack in your armour you're as good as done when it comes to the anti's.

No! NO I'M NOT! ...............(wait for it)............You're an idiot!

Nice counter argument; what are we in kindergarten? Even if I am in fact an idiot, what does that have to do with the helicopter metaphor? You can go ahead and call the argument idiotic, or try to make the case that some literary device used was idiotic, but then the burden is on you to back up your counter with a premise of your own. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and momentarily concede that making a comparison between helicopters and quads is indeed "apples to oranges": Back it up......Tell us all why you feel that's the case. Cause I obviously feel it is applicable - You don't; so tell us all why and maybe we'll get somewhere toward seeing things from one an other's perspectives.

Do you make a habit of going around calling strangers "idiot" to their faces? How old are you? Have any teeth left? If you do go around saying things like that in person, I'd have to hope for your sake that your suit of armour is stronger than your understanding of metaphor.

I don't personally think ''ORV rights" (is there such a thing?) have anything to do with hunting and fishing culture. In fact I'm prepared to make the case that confusing the two is exactly what will lead to the erosion of hunting and fishing. By hunters trying to own ORV issues, it diffuses focus away from some pretty darn important counter veiling wildlife conservation issues. Also hunting is a whole lot easier for antagonistic interests to attack if we also have to defend recreational motor vehicle use at the same time. I will always defend hunting and fishing as a sport and a way of life, but I'm not prepared to do the same when it comes to motor vehicle use. Are you therefore telling us, that you're willing to deep six my defence of hunting on your behalf, simply because I won't also defend your unbridled right to ride your quad anywhere you please?

Any loss of privilege or rights for a hunter is a loss for all hunters. You guys shouldn't be taking glee in something being shut down just because you don't use it or agree with it for the sake of one upping an internet argument.

It's not about internet arguments. Messy thought processes have real consequences. Our mutual privilege to flood all the alpine areas with motor vehicles 365 days a year, has an adverse affect on myself both as a hunter and a general outdoors person. The cumulative effects are significant to wildlife and therefore my lifestyle., especially when were discussing a sensitive area like a fresh burn. I understand why hunters that also use quads, want to defend access; but if that one set of interests is adverse to the primary, the conflict must be resolved.

Let's take your line of reasoning out to FN hunting rights: I can expect to see you defend their right to hunt and fish their traditional territories in the future. Is that correct?

This is how it works, this is how it's always worked, this is how it will happen.
I'm just shocked a relatively new 20-something year old hunter has to come onto a forum of long-time hunters to remind them.


There are about a hundred thousand more things that can be done about wildlife conservation and hunting preservation instead of pretending a insanely small demographic of ATV "abusers" are solely responsible for the destruction of the back country in BC. I'm starting to doubt the main demographic of this forum is even hunters anymore.

(The fact that you guys think full size 4x4's don't do as much, if not more damage is so laughable I'm not even going to address it.)


EDIT: Worth noting also that I don't use my ATV for hunting, though I do own one.

The issues regarding ORV land use are actually pretty broad in scope and depth. Trying to trivialize the problem exacerbates a whole slew of others where they relate to wildlife management. The policies being discussed in this thread aren't even targeting the "abusers"; They're exerting a tiny bit of control over a widening demographic of ORV assisted hunters. Even I'm not so bold as to call that demo "abusers". However I'm fully cognizant of their unique impacts in the special case of a large recovering fresh burn.

I'm completely willing to discuss the separate impacts of the "Abuser" demo, and your suggestions as to how we might protect ourselves from that- but it's probably best for an other thread.