bowhunting commite

[aggiehunter]

Very Valid point, well said.

[aggiehunter]

True words Trapper Dan.

[Tuffcity]

As long as we keep splintering

...

I disagree. In this case it's not splinter groups weakening the system but the problem of a long time group refusing to be forward thinking and recognize that by remaining static and exclusionary you drive potential allys away.

To be healthy and vibrant, every once in awhile you have open the doors and windows and let some fresh air in. The BCWF is a closed house and their myopic tunnel vision is slowly, but surely, dragging the credibility and effectiveness of that organization down.

Instead of acknowledging and recruiting new ideas and standing shoulder to shoulder with a group like the UBBC, the BCWF is forcing it to strike out on it's own. And it will be to the detriment of the BCWF somewhere down the road.

Hopefully, sooner rather than later, the light will come on at BCWF HQ and that they will realise that united, we really can stand.

RC

[Gateholio]

Great support at the AGM for the bowhunting committee according to the reps I have spoken too. It was defeated there due to a technicality and there was great enthusiasm that it would come about. How did that enthusiasm get killed by the good 'ol boys at the top I wonder? Oh well it's the bcwf's loss and it will show gov't they don't really want to help their own bowhunters.

IIRC it wasn't a "technicality" it was that they would have to break a bylaw in order to instate a bowhunting committee.


Just wondering something - Should the BCWF have hunting committees based on weapon choice? Separate committees for bow, rifle, shotgun, muzzleloader?

And should these committees compete with one another for hunting opportunities for hunters using that particular weapon?

[horshur]

IIRC it wasn't a "technicality" it was that they would have to break a bylaw in order to instate a bowhunting committee.


Just wondering something - Should the BCWF have hunting committees based on weapon choice? Separate committees for bow, rifle, shotgun, muzzleloader?

And should these committees compete with one another for hunting opportunities for hunters using that particular weapon?

Gate you must of been napping during sesame street....Comprimise.

[Gateholio]

Gate you must of been napping during sesame street....Comprimise.

Compromise?

People have been talking about unity. It may end up to be divisive having separate committees, due to weapon choice.

The question I've raised is a valid one.

[threedhunter]

just heard from our zone rep at bcwf. the main reason that a "bowhunting" committee was not struck as i heard it was that the bcwf represents ALL hunters in bc. not just gun, blackpowder or otherwise. yea you say there is a gun committee, that was put in place when c-64 was trying to be enacted to help either get rid of it or at least make it workable. is that committee still active?i can not say for sure, even though it remains in effect as a committee.please do not believe i support the decision that was made, just understand it as it was given as reasonable that bowhunting/bowhunters were included in all aspects of dealing with the moe.as i understand the vision of bcwf, they represent all of us , not just gun hunters,if we all desire to change TOOLS,ie;become bowhunters, well then having a seperate voice for bowhunters makes sense. as i see whats going on, a few guys that don't want to become members of any joint group, to become part of a louder voice , are trying to get attention by being a squeeky wheel,yet have nothing new to add except maybe a personal agenda/opinion as to how they think the scientists should give dates for what animals.as a bowhunter, for example, my opinion is that all gun hunters should have to hunt in november and december. all bowhunters should hunt in september and october.yup, key in on the rut, makin it easier for bowhunters.harder for gun hunters.but common sense dictates that hunting season is for ALL HUNTERS, not just bowhunters/ gun hunters.please read the bcwf vision statement and aims before condemning the new presidents carefully thought out answer to the bowhunting committee proposal.threedhunter just a thought, UNITED WE STAND ,DIVIDED WE CAN ONLY TALK ABOUT THINGS THAT WERE.

[mntbowhunter]

First of all how does a different commitee for bow hunters weaken the whole?? That makes no sense? Bowhunters are not against rifle hunters but just have a different choice of weapon. What difference does it make? So we would like to see more archery seasons? So what?? Second if any of you want to talk about "UNITY" Just ready every post on this site. Half the freakin time anything gets posted on here people who are ignorant about the subject post their thoughts anyway in a contentious way trying argue with people. If you want to talk about "UNITY" maybe try supporting all types of hunting as long as its legal and ethical instead of trying to cause a fight with your fellow hunters that you share the bush with. More methods of hunting gives more support to the whole. The people who just try and be contentious all the time on this site should log onto Jerryspringer.com instead and find someone to fight with there instead of fighting with you fellow hunters.

[threedhunter]

mtnbwhuntr, where do you stand on the bcwf decision?are you a bcwf member , maybe through your local club? just looking for more input. threedhunter

[GoatGuy]

Any movement should come from the entire or at least the majority of the BCWF membership.

The BCWF membership is driven by its members.

The place to encourage change is at convention and it should be done properly not haphazardly without proper research.

If you want some form of 'recognition' it has to come from the membership - to point fingers at one individual or the executive is immature and really shows a lack of understanding when it comes to an organization that is driven by its members.

All I hear is "it's _______ fault". Someone is going to have to buck up and go after this properly if they really want it - to date it would seem all they're looking for is a scape goat.

Further, as we go through the motions the purposely mis-quoted and out of context quotes and statistics, generalizations without any support and finger pointing at individuals that occurs on here, and is occurring on a regional and provincial level will continue to drive credibility further and further into the ground. And no, I'm not talking about credibility with the BCWF.