bowhunting/BCWF

[TPK]

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the BCWF support all hunters, regardless of method?

bow hunter = hunter
rifle hunter = hunter
crossbow hunter = hunter
muzzle loader hunter = hunter

I see all of the above as one hunting group and the BCWF acts on behalf of all of the people above.

Yes, and that's my point in not wanting a specific "Bow Hunting Committee" in the BCWF. You can petition and bring forward "Bow specific" issues to the MOE or whom ever you want as a Bow Hunter or a Bow Hunting organization now, you don't need a BCWF Bow Committee to do that. For example ... 1000 signatures on a petition is 1000 signatures on a petition, whether they are gathered as a BCWF sub-committee or done on your own or through your club, it really makes no difference.

[Bowzone_Mikey]

I been following this thread since its inception ....

Now .. I am a true blue bow hunter ... and as far as bunhunters advocacy is concerned I am all for it ..... But .....

I dont see the point of a special commitee in the BCWF when allready I understand the UBBC and the BCWF work hand in hand ...

I fail to see how having a Bowhunting commitee on the BCWF will put another Bowhunting seat at the governmental round table when the UBBC should allready have one ..as should a Muzzleloaders advocate group...etc.... the only thing I can see coming from haveing a Bowhunting commitee in the BCWF is possibly a fight within the organization ...between the bow hunting chair and the president (if the president at the time is extremly pro rifle ....or pro muzzle etc.... )

In fact i dont want see any sub commitees in the BCWF based upon weapon of choice as it will be the demise of the organisation.
Keep it as it is ... an umbrella group for Hunting advocate in general in British Columbia.

[sealevel]

BCF- I would like nothing better than the BCWF having a bowhunting committee. This would unite the bowhunters and rifle hunters under one cause. Right now most bowhunters think the BCWF should read BCRH or BC Rifle Hunters. The birth of this bowhunting committee in the BCWF would breath new life into a hunting organization that desperatley needs it.

Now i havn`t been bow hunting for 20 years but i know a lot of bowhunters and non of them think that way. Bow hunters i know support BCWF as i do .

[The Hermit]

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the BCWF support all hunters, regardless of method?

bow hunter = hunter
rifle hunter = hunter
crossbow hunter = hunter
muzzle loader hunter = hunter

I see all of the above as one hunting group and the BCWF acts on behalf of all of the people above.

I agree that the BCFW represents hunters in general on issues like access, conservation, education, lobbying against gun registration, gravel extraction, research, recruitment in general, wilderness watch, fishery issues etc. I think they do a good job on these vital programs and in addressing issues. I am the VP of a BCWF member club with 1400 members and am supportive of the aims of the BCWF.

However, the BCWF does not seem to get that bow hunting presents an opportunity for expanded seasons at times and locations where game populations would not support a rifle season, (bow hunter success is typically so low as to have negligible impact whereas use of rifles would put the herds at risk or worse). We do not wish to take any time afield away from rifle hunters. Since they don't get THAT they FAIL to adequately represent bowhunting opportunities on PHRAAC.

Also, the BCWF does not seem to get that they could have a huge increase in membership if they did embrace the notion that bowhunting opportunities should be increased. There are LOTS of bowhunters that might well join-up as individual members, and or join BCWF affiliated fish and game clubs if they felt better represented.

The BCWF seems to understand that the implementation of LEH, antler restrictions, (lost opportunity), increased license fees, and gun registration red tape, were the main causes of a drastic reduction in hunter numbers over the last decade. Therefore, I am mystified that the BCWF membership and apparently the executive fail to grasp that bowhunting represents huge potential to increase hunter recruitment through significantly increased opportunity.

Closely related to the above point is the reality that archery attracts a lot of youth into target shooting. Further recruiting them into the hunting ranks would be far less onorus than trying to recruit them into rifle hunting with their parents support... due to reduced red tape money and hassle, don't need a PAL, negative social judgments etc.

The reason the UBBC, TBBC and BC Archery associations want a bowhunting committee as part of the BCWF is that we would like to work collectively within the larger hunting fraternity because together we would have a louder voice when advocating with MOE for the above principles and objectives. We want to work closely within the BCWF to support increased hunting opportunity,and hunter recruitment especially youth recruitment in the area of our subject matter expertise.

If the BCWF declines the request of a number of their member clubs and at least one BCWF Region that has already made their wishes known by way of tabling a motion to strike a bowhunting committee, then I think that the executive policy decision is divisive and disrespectful.

To be honest, I was blown away that the motion was dismissed summarily by a past president who said that, to paraphrase, "the delegates shouldn't supersede the power of the president to strike committees and he sees fit." More so that no one challenged that statement!

I guess I was operating under the misguided assumption that the executive ought to take some direction from the membership and their delegates. If the executive simply disregard the wishes of the membership to put the issue to a vote on the AGM floor and then thereafter choose not to strike the committee then I would loose a lot of faith in their moral right to lead!

It is at that point, with genuine disappointment that the bowhunting fraternity through the UBBC, TBBC, and BC Archery Association will continue our support of the broader bowhunting fraternity as the primary voice for bowhunting in BC.

Bill Tozer
Vice President VFGPA
Vice President UBBC

[Gateholio]

Should the BCWF have separate committees for all disciplines?

Rile
bow
muzzle loader
spin casting
fly fishing
trolling

etc?

[The Hermit]

It is my understanding that the BCWF does have a special weapons committee (read black powder)

If there is a group of members with a special interest and expertise, whose intentions are to support the aims of the organization in the area of increased hunting opportunity and recruitment by collecting data and information, compiling research, and creating cogent argument and recommendations that the BCWF can take forward to the MOE then yes!

[Bigbear]

If the BCWF is so Picky about it then Leave It be and Let Bow Hunters Speak for Bow hunters. Join the UBBC For a Voice. The More the Better.

[aggiehunter]

Back to the beginning, BC Farmer, you were the one that started the thread about rumours and that is what I was trying to get at. What rumours, who is saying what, I have heard none and yet we have a whole debate based on your opening statement. I truly hope the BCWF adopts the idea of a bowcommittee, its really a no brainer. But don't start fear mongering about rumours if we don't have any. Let the thing run its course. Thank you and keep us informed please.

[Mr. Dean]

Mr Dean. And there is no division now between bowhunters and others? That is why there are 3 major bowhunting organizations in BC. All hunters would be much better served if there was one organization that supported bowhunters and rifle hunters.

Agreed - A united federation of hunters WOULD ring loud and serve the hunter better.

Correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the BCWF support all hunters, regardless of method?

bow hunter = hunter
rifle hunter = hunter
crossbow hunter = hunter
muzzle loader hunter = hunter

I see all of the above as one hunting group and the BCWF acts on behalf of all of the people above.

All for one and 1 for all!! (said earlier)

Should the BCWF have separate committees for all disciplines?

Rile
bow
muzzle loader
spin casting
fly fishing
trolling

etc?

My point exactly. Where would it end. (complicated) - Gate's, you forgot Road Hunters and Pack Hunters.
All of these groups offer/contribute something specific/unique.

Again, where would it end???

If the BCWF is so Picky about it then Leave It be and Let Bow Hunters Speak for Bow hunters. Join the UBBC For a Voice. The More the Better.

That's nice... I support several organizations, but the Fed gets their dues 1st. As a hunter, we ALL should make this priority 1!

It doesn't matter what a person uses, we are all in the same boat (tree-stand). How a hunter can't justify the necessity of becoming a member, mystifies me. Bow or no bow...

I'll say it again; I can see the good natured intent, but can't get past that this could also be the last nail in the coffin and the demise of the BCWF.

[6616]

It is my understanding that the BCWF does have a special weapons committee (read black powder)

If there is a group of members with a special interest and expertise, whose intentions are to support the aims of the organization in the area of increased hunting opportunity and recruitment by collecting data and information, compiling research, and creating cogent argument and recommendations that the BCWF can take forward to the MOE then yes!

Incorrest, the BCWF does not have a special weapons committee.