United we stand / divided we fail?

[SSG-man]

I've noticed a lot of threads (issues) have polarized sides to them and seems there is no compromise on either side?

>The cross bow/ compound/ long bow debate? really?
Most non hunters I talk to about it see it one way…..and thats "What a horrible way to die. Sharp razor blade arrows. Fear, Pain, Suffering"

>Shooting of predators, griz, wolf, cougar, without eating meat. Reactions…. "what a waste of animal !"
Ad shooting of peoples pets/etc running loose to this section for simplicity.

>Access and use to gated lands, specifically formerly accessed crown land etc. Select few have privileged access anytime.
Reaction: It's private land they can do as they wish with resources and wildlife within.

There are other topics as well but my main concern is how divided we are as a hunting community and how they all relate to our future hunting privileges of where and what we get to hunt and how.

Anyone else have concerns for the future of our sport/way of life? Thoughts additions? No problems with you?

[adriaticum]

The worst scourge of Socialism is that people start to develop intolerance for different opinions.
We see it every day. Everywhere.

[Rob Chipman]

The test is to think of us as all being in the same boat. As long as a fellow hunter isn't chopping holes in the boat he's welcome to stay in it.

Non-hunters think a particular method is a terrible way to die? Compared to what? Death by exposure? Disease? Injury? Starvation? Being hit b a car? Being eaten alive? (search Youtube for video of the latter - it exists and makes it easy to connect the dots).



Waste of an animal? If you buy into science (not everyone does, regardless of what they say) nothing is wasted. If I shoot an animal and leave the entire thing to rot it will feed something somewhere along the spectrum from grizzly bear to plant life. The proper question to ask is: was the animal killed for a legitimate purpose? Most predator killing meets that requirement.

That said, it is a challenge we have to face.

[rocksteady]

Everyone one is entitled to their opinion and free speech, so I have no issue with it...

If the guy (or gal) is talking trash about a particular method etc, someone very knowledgeable usually jumps in and sets them straight or it just gets ignored.

I don't believe that hunters debating against something with each other is bad.. It is all healthy discussion, as long as it stays on track and civil.

Sure the antis monitor these sites, but who knows maybe if they read enough they will start to understand, rather than just being out in left field preservation land..

[boxhitch]

Certainly not unique to this site.
Seems to be the fabric of the 'net, to have contrarians and nay-sayers no matter what the topic.

[Cyrus]

Hunters are selfish and opinionated by nature and each have their own set of ethics ranging from none to extreme...and views on what is right and wrong.... Most do not want to see the next guy succeed and its a very me me me hobby. I mean who actually likes seeing other hunters when you are out there trying to get something??I know I don't...There will never be any uniting hunters anywhere.

[Fisher-Dude]

Lots of people confuse conservation with what they want from the resource.

Solve that, and there would be little debate about does/bows/quads/etc.

[Fisher-Dude]

Hunters are selfish and opinionated by nature and each have their own set of ethics ranging from none to extreme...and views on what is right and wrong.... Most do not want to see the next guy succeed and its a very me me me hobby. I mean who actually likes seeing other hunters when you are out there trying to get something??I know I don't...There will never be any uniting hunters anywhere.

Saw 3 bucks with some does in early season when I was bow hunting a couple of years ago. Along comes a couple of kids with dad and grandpa as I'm planning an ambush on the herd. I quickly told gramps and the kids to get down to the bottom end of the swale that the deer had headed into, hoping one of the kids would get a shot.

I've killed somewhere between 80 and 100 deer since my first in the 1970s. Do I need one more, or should a kid get his/her first? Easy choice for me.

[Wild one]

I agree BC hunters a very divided and at this time I see little change

Reality of it no matter what some want to believe BC is not even at a fraction of its potential

[Boner]

I agree BC hunters a very divided and at this time I see little change

Reality of it no matter what some want to believe BC is not even at a fraction of its potential

I agree with this, but I wonder how heavily regulated some of the more successful US states are concerning their game species.

[GoatGuy]

Will take a line out of a friends book.

There's two trains:

1) the bit#h train
2) the fix train

You can't ride both.

[Wild one]

Will take a line out of a friends book.

There's two trains:

1) the bit#h train
2) the fix train

You can't ride both.


Issue lies on the definition of fix is not the same for everyone

[tuner]

The test is to think of us as all being in the same boat. As long as a fellow hunter isn't chopping holes in the boat he's welcome to stay in it.

Non-hunters think a particular method is a terrible way to die? Compared to what? Death by exposure? Disease? Injury? Starvation? Being hit b a car? Being eaten alive? (search Youtube for video of the latter - it exists and makes it easy to connect the dots).



Waste of an animal? If you buy into science (not everyone does, regardless of what they say) nothing is wasted. If I shoot an animal and leave the entire thing to rot it will feed something somewhere along the spectrum from grizzly bear to plant life. The proper question to ask is: was the animal killed for a legitimate purpose? Most predator killing meets that requirement.

That said, it is a challenge we have to face.
Good perspective, good post.

[GoatGuy]

Issue lies on the definition of fix is not the same for everyone

True story.

Albert Einstein. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"........

Any guesses which train A.Einstein is referring to?


Plenty of science and research on natural resource management.

Needs:
1) Money
2) Science
3) Social support
.
Without those you will have failure.

[Wild one]

True story.

Albert Einstein. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results"........

Any guesses which train A.Einstein is referring to?


Plenty of science and research on natural resource management.

Needs:
1) Money
2) Science
3) Social support
.
Without those you will have failure.



Example of the issue OP is talking about. You ever think that sometimes people don't agree on everything because thier goals are not the same.

What is truly lacking in BC is compromise between the different styles and goals of hunters.

Most seem to agree with habitat enhancement and predator control from there is where the lines blur

It often comes down to how do we utilize what is available now. This is where the lack of compromise often is as styles and goals differ

[GoatGuy]

Example of the issue OP is talking about. You ever think that sometimes people don't agree on everything because thier goals are not the same.

What is truly lacking in BC is compromise between the different styles and goals of hunters.

Most seem to agree with habitat enhancement and predator control from there is where the lines blur

It often comes down to how do we utilize what is available now. This is where the lack of compromise often is as styles and goals differ

Styles and goals of the user are a part of natural resource management, but they are measured through social science. Quite often people want to insert social issues into science or vice versa. This is a common issue, part of the human condition. The lines are very clear for scientists (both social and wildlife management scientists), not always so clear for the individual who sees themselves as a focal point in the resource, or in isolation of other users. "Why can't everyone be like me?"

Compromise, blurred lines, styles, goals, should be managed through the multiple-use approach. There are plenty of tools to support research on that end but it is about the people of BC as a whole, not about the individual.

Until BC has a properly constructed model to manage the resource, BCers will never be able to fully understand social issues, never mind manage them.

Conversation continues to come back to trains.

[chele]

The worst scourge of Socialism is that people start to develop intolerance for different opinions.
We see it every day. Everywhere.

to answer your question, above is a perfect example why there isn't unity amongst hunters. We have have different experiences that forged our values and opinions on what wrong or right... I could reply to adriaticum with a comment against capitalism and then it will be the beginning of a long and unnecessary argument that at the end it will not change nobody's opinion on that matter

[Wild one]

GG you are thinking along the lines of the population of a species. Nothing wrong with that as all hunters would agree is important

Often the issue is more so the amount of legal game or quality of buck/bull many hunters are looking at. Many act as this is a population issue but instead it is they would like to see a closer ratio than is present. We have all heard guys complain they see x many does and no to few bucks. Managment stand point the population could very well be healthy. This is just 1 issue that is common and creates a divide some don't want to loose any kind of opertunity well others would like to see more harvestable game or more trophy quality in exchange for restrictions.

Than add in the fact some species are in decline and many are worried about it. Even if legal hunting has little impact it will always be ?. My self I will never support harvest of females from a declining population. No matter the science behind it the fact that is where future stock comes from many hunters won't support it.

Than add in the weapon issue don't need to explain it we all have heard it

Trophy issue well known as well

All of the above are common issues that creat the divide. It all comes down to the kind of hunt trophy, meat, weapon and you can find a few more. This often leads to well your effecting MY HUNT this is what truly creates the divide

There is very little compromise between the different hunting groups and their different goals/views

Want to cause an up roar start managing sheep as a meat hunt in BC.

[scoutlt1]

Hate to say it but the "antis" have a very solid understanding of the phrase "Divide and conquer". They are damn good at it! An easy example is how you can see them drool over quoting a "hunter" who is opposed to hunting grizzly bears.

I've found that hunters (and firearm enthusiasts) are some of the most opinionated people out there. That is a good thing I would say! We solve all kinds of world problems by the fire in camp!

It is important however, in my opinion, that while we rightly argue and debate things, all of us must stand firmly united in upholding what we all (ultimately) believe in.

[GoatGuy]

GG you are thinking along the lines of the population of a species. Nothing wrong with that as all hunters would agree is important

Often the issue is more so the amount of legal game or quality of buck/bull many hunters are looking at. Many act as this is a population issue but instead it is they would like to see a closer ratio than is present. We have all heard guys complain they see x many does and no to few bucks. Managment stand point the population could very well be healthy. This is just 1 issue that is common and creates a divide some don't want to loose any kind of opertunity well others would like to see more harvestable game or more trophy quality in exchange for restrictions.

Than add in the fact some species are in decline and many are worried about it. Even if legal hunting has little impact it will always be ?. My self I will never support harvest of females from a declining population. No matter the science behind it the fact that is where future stock comes from many hunters won't support it.

Than add in the weapon issue don't need to explain it we all have heard it

Trophy issue well known as well

All of the above are common issues that creat the divide. It all comes down to the kind of hunt trophy, meat, weapon and you can find a few more. This often leads to well your effecting MY HUNT this is what truly creates the divide

There is very little compromise between the different hunting groups and their different goals/views

Want to cause an up roar start managing sheep as a meat hunt in BC.

These issues are social. There are ways to research and manage for hunter expectations. That is how you manage different 'goals/views' - through science, but that is done across the hunter base, not based on what a handful of individuals want. Recognizing that 1) Wildlife comes first 2) Wildlife is a public resource and 3) Everyone gets a say. None of that work can be done, or those issues resolved, until you have a properly funded model - which you don't. Working on a funding model for wildlife is the fix train.

If people want the resource managed to exclude others, or see themselves as a focal point, there's no sense in having a discussion. Quite frankly there's a pile of takers out there who can't or won't ever be bothered to pick up a beer can on the side of the road, never mind chip in some time or money, BUT they are really good at complaining.

To paraphrase: "I agree that there we need to fix the big problems, but, for now, what about the hunting regulations in 3-20c, it should be a 23.5 day 5 and a half point season. We should have a road closure at 14.4kms. The doe season should be shut down because there was 1 doe killed last year (fails to mention there were 300 run over with vehicles). There's lots of brush. Habitat isn't a problem. I don't believe in science. The youth grouse season needs to be closed. The youth rifle season needs to be closed. YOU really need to do something about that." Following year: "I didn't have time to go to a meeting, pick up a pen and paper, meet with my MLA, but when are YOU going to change the hunting regulations in 3-20c?"

There's the excuses about time, not liking other people, how they hunt, because they shoot 'dink bucks', shoot does, because they ride horses, truck hunt, xbow hunt, traditional bow hunt, want road closures, not liking a group because one person didn't support them, a decision someone made, they don't want road closures and on and on and on and on some more.

Those issues are "divisive?" Would you divorce your wife if she shot a wt doe? Disown your kids because they shot a 2 pts buck? Stop huting with your dad because he bought a crossbow? Stop talking to your uncle because he got a horse? From my perspective those issues are trivial and if you're willing to work for wildlife I really don't care what you shot, what it looked like, or how you hunt so long as you follow the rules and don't damage hunting's image. Those 'issues' aren't divisive, they are excuses.

Again, two very different trains. Sometimes it seems people convince themselves they are on the fix train, when really they are the conductor on the bit&h train.

[Wild one]

These issues are social. There are ways to research and manage for hunter expectations. That is how you manage different 'goals/views' - through science, but that is done across the hunter base, not based on what a handful of individuals want. Recognizing that 1) Wildlife comes first 2) Wildlife is a public resource and 3) Everyone gets a say. None of that work can be done, or those issues resolved, until you have a properly funded model - which you don't. Working on a funding model for wildlife is the fix train.

If people want the resource managed to exclude others, or see themselves as a focal point, there's no sense in having a discussion. Quite frankly there's a pile of takers out there who can't or won't ever be bothered to pick up a beer can on the side of the road, never mind chip in some time or money, BUT they are really good at complaining.

To paraphrase: "I agree that there we need to fix the big problems, but, for now, what about the hunting regulations in 3-20c, it should be a 23.5 day 5 and a half point season. We should have a road closure at 14.4kms. The doe season should be shut down because there was 1 doe killed last year (fails to mention there were 300 run over with vehicles). There's lots of brush. Habitat isn't a problem. I don't believe in science. The youth grouse season needs to be closed. The youth rifle season needs to be closed. YOU really need to do something about that." Following year: "I didn't have time to go to a meeting, pick up a pen and paper, meet with my MLA, but when are YOU going to change the hunting regulations in 3-20c?"

There's the excuses about time, not liking other people, how they hunt, because they shoot 'dink bucks', shoot does, because they ride horses, truck hunt, xbow hunt, traditional bow hunt, want road closures, not liking a group because one person didn't support them, a decision someone made, they don't want road closures and on and on and on and on some more.

Those issues are "divisive?" Would you divorce your wife if she shot a wt doe? Disown your kids because they shot a 2 pts buck? Stop huting with your dad because he bought a crossbow? Stop talking to your uncle because he got a horse? From my perspective those issues are trivial and if you're willing to work for wildlife I really don't care what you shot, what it looked like, or how you hunt so long as you follow the rules and don't damage hunting's image. Those 'issues' aren't divisive, they are excuses.

Again, two very different trains. Sometimes it seems people convince themselves they are on the fix train, when really they are the conductor on the bit&h train.

like I said long ways from bringing hunters together. That fix train will become a lot more effective when you learn to gain some support laying track.

["No Choke"Lord Walsingham]

I love each and every one of you, my Blood Sisters and Brothers!

Always have, always will.

I have killed many, many animals (numbers get real high when you spend much time on Birds and Small Game). I sincerely hope that I myself may die as well as each and every one of them did! With true balls and spirit.

PS. - I have still not ever tried Grizzly Hunting, really want to get my shot one day.

Best to All

[adriaticum]

to answer your question, above is a perfect example why there isn't unity amongst hunters. We have have different experiences that forged our values and opinions on what wrong or right... I could reply to adriaticum with a comment against capitalism and then it will be the beginning of a long and unnecessary argument that at the end it will not change nobody's opinion on that matter



Feel free to start another thread so you could educate me on the subject. :)
And yes expect an argument.
More like a discussion.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Will take a line out of a friends book.

There's two trains:

1) the bit#h train
2) the fix train

You can't ride both.

I think I know a couple of the conductors of train #1.

[boxhitch]

Want to cause an up roar start managing sheep as a meat hunt in BC.imo thats exactly how they are managed, with max opportunity where safe .
A GOS hunt for thinhorn rams, that meet the criteria for that portion of the population that is deemed surplus, and that can be taken without upsetting the balance/ratio/recruitment, is a meat hunt.
Same with bighorns, though the lines are drawn different, the take portion is regulated to the portion of the pop. that can be taken and not missed. there are even a few ewe opps where they need control and can be taken with no adverse effects.

Do you think the horn curl reg is about trophies?

[hunter1947]

Everyone one is entitled to their opinion and free speech, so I have no issue with it...

If the guy (or gal) is talking trash about a particular method etc, someone very knowledgeable usually jumps in and sets them straight or it just gets ignored.

I don't believe that hunters debating against something with each other is bad.. It is all healthy discussion, as long as it stays on track and civil.

Sure the antis monitor these sites, but who knows maybe if they read enough they will start to understand, rather than just being out in left field preservation land..

X2 Mike good point couldn't agree with you more on your post..

[Langleybushcrafter]

It's pretty sad when adults who enjoy the same activities can't have a simple discussion without devolving into something that kindergarten kids would find childish. I've seen it too many times on this and other forums and if we cannot have peaceful respectful debates amongst ourselves then how the hell are we going to with those who are opposed to us?

I've tried to live by a few simple rules:

-don't hurt people
-respect private property
-keep your word
-respect others opinions even if they don't respect yours
-never argue with the ignorant they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

there are a lot of things I don't agree with but as long as everyone is abiding by the law and being safe I would never speak a negative word against them. I've often found that looking at it from the opposing perspective helps to understand that point of view and I usually don't feel the need to drag myself into a debate that has no real purpose.

[Chopper]

I agree BC hunters a very divided and at this time I see little change

Reality of it no matter what some want to believe BC is not even at a fraction of its potential

There are some good posts on this thread, but ... this post ^^^ is spoken by someone that truly knows what we have in BC. There are lots of hunters that do know , Lots that take what we have for granted

BC has one of the best wildlife resources on the planet, and it is completely missmanaged

something needs to ne done before it turns into a giant fail. I am concerned that in my lifetime "38 now" i will be able to look back and remeber what we used to have.

[Iron Glove]

It's pretty sad when adults who enjoy the same activities can't have a simple discussion without devolving into something that kindergarten kids would find childish. I've seen it too many times on this and other forums and if we cannot have peaceful respectful debates amongst ourselves then how the hell are we going to with those who are opposed to us?

I've tried to live by a few simple rules:

-don't hurt people
-respect private property
-keep your word
-respect others opinions even if they don't respect yours
-never argue with the ignorant they will bring you down to their level and beat you with experience

there are a lot of things I don't agree with but as long as everyone is abiding by the law and being safe I would never speak a negative word against them. I've often found that looking at it from the opposing perspective helps to understand that point of view and I usually don't feel the need to drag myself into a debate that has no real purpose.

You are making way too much sense. :wink:
Great post.

[Wild one]

imo thats exactly how they are managed, with max opportunity where safe .
A GOS hunt for thinhorn rams, that meet the criteria for that portion of the population that is deemed surplus, and that can be taken without upsetting the balance/ratio/recruitment, is a meat hunt.
Same with bighorns, though the lines are drawn different, the take portion is regulated to the portion of the pop. that can be taken and not missed. there are even a few ewe opps where they need control and can be taken with no adverse effects.

Do you think the horn curl reg is about trophies?

Would not argue sheep managment is done in a sustainable fashion or would I want to see changes in it. Yes there is ewe LEH options in areas there is surplus.

would I say it is managed with meat harvest as the first and for most goal nope.

[boxhitch]

Same as regs for all other species, managed for max opportunity where safe.
But I see where you are coming from, and your circle that wishes quality was better and that management led to better quality.

[Wild one]

Same as regs for all other species, managed for max opportunity where safe.
But I see where you are coming from, and your circle that wishes quality was better and that management led to better quality.

Not so much about trophy quality my self but would be nice to exchange max harvest for more conservative harvest that prompted closer male female ratio than present goals. Fully aware it does not increase population and is only a benefit to hunting quality.

often you will see an increase in trophy class from higher buck/bull ratio as a by product

fully support hunters being able to harvest their choice of age class. Spike or giant got nothing against a hunter choosing either their tag their choice. I am not a fan of point restrictions unless they are a must

[rocksteady]

I hunt simple... if it's legal... kill it..

dont care are if you use a bow, muzzle loader or a sharp twig.. dont look down on others choices..

i can can only change the things I do.. not what others do, so no need to get bent..

[boxhitch]

Not so much about trophy quality my self but would be nice to exchange max harvest for more conservative harvest that prompted closer male female ratio than present goals. iirc the current male/female targets for BC are doubble or trippple what science says is the minimum ideal, extra conservative already


often you will see an increase in trophy class from higher buck/bull ratio as a by productinteresting, if that can be proven.
I can see it being an issue in areas with intense hunting pressure, but BC has lots of turf that never gets a boot print and there is lots of any-buck escapement that live another year.


I am not a fan of point restrictions unless they are a must completely agree. Someone decided that having an any-buck and a pointed-buck combo gives the best results

Which is all moot as hunters are not the controling factor in any pop.

[Wild one]

iirc the current male/female targets for BC are doubble or trippple what science says is the minimum ideal, extra conservative already

interesting, if that can be proven.
I can see it being an issue in areas with intense hunting pressure, but BC has lots of turf that never gets a boot print and there is lots of any-buck escapement that live another year.

completely agree. Someone decided that having an any-buck and a pointed-buck combo gives the best results

Which is all moot as hunters are not the controling factor in any pop.

Agree if you find locations others don't hunt in BC you experience the natural ratio and no doubt you find more bucks young and old. This I figured out years ago and caused me to ? How much impact we have. At the min it show hunters do impact the make up of the population

From hunting out side of BC where buck harvest is basicly limited to 1 of each speciecs for the prov yes I noticed again more bucks. Also notice more mature bucks and more hunters willing to hold out. More mature bucks maybe the result of hunters holding out more or higher buck numbers unsure. Still guys hunting whatever's legal which is good as well

No doubt BC still has bucks and some big ones % is what I put in ?

I am not going to debate the quality of data BC has on harvest and ratios. If BC buck harvest is meeting well within attended ratios on average in most parts of BC I experience lower buck numbers than I experienced outside of BC

We are going a little off track in the thread. Basically yes I would like to see changes how BC is managed. In my opinion yes BC could manage with different managment tools and goals. Biggest one I would like to see is our managment have more accurate data to work with

Truth of the matter is yes there is large portion of hunters that would like to see change in BC and at this time feels they do not have a true voice. What they would like to see will no doubt vary

You have been on this forum long enough to see the mixed views. The trend of it even here most will fade away do to negativity. Samething has gone on with those who are suppose to represent BC hunters.

As for those that scream get involved some are involve just on a smaller level or privately.

[GoatGuy]

Agree if you find locations others don't hunt in BC you experience the natural ratio and no doubt you find more bucks young and old. This I figured out years ago and caused me to ? How much impact we have. At the min it show hunters do impact the make up of the population

From hunting out side of BC where buck harvest is basicly limited to 1 of each speciecs for the prov yes I noticed again more bucks. Also notice more mature bucks and more hunters willing to hold out. More mature bucks maybe the result of hunters holding out more or higher buck numbers unsure. Still guys hunting whatever's legal which is good as well

No doubt BC still has bucks and some big ones % is what I put in ?

I am not going to debate the quality of data BC has on harvest and ratios. If BC buck harvest is meeting well within attended ratios on average in most parts of BC I experience lower buck numbers than I experienced outside of BC

We are going a little off track in the thread. Basically yes I would like to see changes how BC is managed. In my opinion yes BC could manage with different managment tools and goals. Biggest one I would like to see is our managment have more accurate data to work with

Truth of the matter is yes there is large portion of hunters that would like to see change in BC and at this time feels they do not have a true voice. What they would like to see will no doubt vary

You have been on this forum long enough to see the mixed views. The trend of it even here most will fade away do to negativity. Samething has gone on with those who are suppose to represent BC hunters.

As for those that scream get involved some are involve just on a smaller level or privately.

Broadly, this post expresses a fundamental issue with wildlife management, particularly in BC.

Without a properly funded model, it's nearly impossible to manage wildlife, never mind hunters 'expectations'.

[GoatGuy]

like I said long ways from bringing hunters together. That fix train will become a lot more effective when you learn to gain some support laying track.


Life is about selection.

Self-interest is not a desirable characteristic as it relates to social change.

[GoatGuy]

Would not argue sheep managment is done in a sustainable fashion or would I want to see changes in it. Yes there is ewe LEH options in areas there is surplus.

would I say it is managed with meat harvest as the first and for most goal nope.

Number of sheep LEH hunts managed under any ram, and 3/4. Age of harvest all of the board, often people taking rams <6. Management of 'trophy hunt' would be a focus on 8+ harvest.

[Wild one]

Broadly, this post expresses a fundamental issue with wildlife management, particularly in BC.

Without a properly funded model, it's nearly impossible to manage wildlife, never mind hunters 'expectations'.

This we can agree on

[Wild one]

Life is about selection.

Self-interest is not a desirable characteristic as it relates to social change.

This can be look at in many ways it comes down to ones opinion on what is right or benifical to all.

[Wild one]

Number of sheep LEH hunts managed under any ram, and 3/4. Age of harvest all of the board, often people taking rams <6. Management of 'trophy hunt' would be a focus on 8+ harvest.

Not going to debate sheep managment we both know the goal of the any ram LEH is not to target young rams

provided data for one of these draws. Know exactly why the draw was put in place and why the dates are what they are

[Fisher-Dude]

often you will see an increase in trophy class from higher buck/bull ratio as a by product



Science says the opposite. Genetics and nutrition determine antler growth.

Genetics are predetermined.

Nutrition for antler growth is best when competition for scarce, finite resources is minimized.

Do you see the biggest fish in a pond with 100,000 trout or one with 1,000 trout?

[Wild one]

Science says the opposite. Genetics and nutrition determine antler growth.

Genetics are predetermined.

Nutrition for antler growth is best when competition for scarce, finite resources is minimized.

Do you see the biggest fish in a pond with 100,000 trout or one with 1,000 trout?


Both are factors BC has proven the ability to produce big bucks so nutrition and genetics are available . Age is no doubt another factor if they don't have time to grow they don't reach maturity. This is not going to produce big deer behind every tree I don't think that at all. Goal of this is not so much about creating big deer anyway. Increaseing the number of bucks that survive each season does increase % of mature deer as a by product.

Like has been stated managing for higher buck ratio does little for overall numbers. Intern you are not creating a large increase of demand on food resources.

What I am stating is not a far stretch. This is not something that has never been done before just not in BC

Already know you don't support anything that may effect days in field or bag limit. Expect no support on any change in this direction.

This thread is about why hunters remain divided not managment. But we are keep seeing why we are divided.

[rocksteady]

Why do we remain divided???

Jealousy...

Rifle hunters are jealous of extra seasons for archery.

Archery is jealous cause rifle hunters have a long season.

Region 8 is jealous because of the seasons in Region 4 (just an example)...
Elk hunters are jealous of moose hunters.
Moose hunters are jealous of elk hunters...


blah blah blah...

Be happy with what is available to you where you hunt, not what is available to others where they hunt...

[Husky7mm]

Hunters are selfish and opinionated by nature and each have their own set of ethics ranging from none to extreme...and views on what is right and wrong.... Most do not want to see the next guy succeed and its a very me me me hobby. I mean who actually likes seeing other hunters when you are out there trying to get something??I know I don't...There will never be any uniting hunters anywhere.
That's a pretty bleak outlook.

[SSG-man]

Never thought or heard of that but maybe the case now.
I always considered hunters to be ethical, responsible, considerate, caring, down to earth/nature.

Certainly more if it's there, take it attitude.





Hunters are selfish and opinionated by nature and each have their own set of ethics ranging from none to extreme...and views on what is right and wrong.... Most do not want to see the next guy succeed and its a very me me me hobby. I mean who actually likes seeing other hunters when you are out there trying to get something??I know I don't...There will never be any uniting hunters anywhere.

[Frango]

Hunters are selfish and opinionated by nature and each have their own set of ethics ranging from none to extreme...and views on what is right and wrong.... Most do not want to see the next guy succeed and its a very me me me hobby. I mean who actually likes seeing other hunters when you are out there trying to get something??I know I don't...There will never be any uniting hunters anywhere.
Wow,this is a depressing post. I have hunted for 50 plus years.I don't consider myself selfish or opinionated.I feel good for someone who has had a successful hunt. Perhaps it is just you??

[GoatGuy]

Not going to debate sheep managment we both know the goal of the any ram LEH is not to target young rams

provided data for one of these draws. Know exactly why the draw was put in place and why the dates are what they are

If the management was for 'trophy only' the regulations for the hunt would focus the harvest on 8+.

It doesn't.

[GoatGuy]

This can be look at in many ways it comes down to ones opinion on what is right or benifical to all.

Not really, or at least there's no empirical or theoretical evidence to support ones self-interests being broadly applicable or beneficial to all. By definition being self-interested puts ones needs/desires/goals first, and above all others.

As said not a desirable characteristic as it relates to social change.

[Wild one]

If the management was for 'trophy only' the regulations for the hunt would focus the harvest on 8+.

It doesn't.

Odds are you know why the 8+ option was pulled from 317. Might be a reason curl is the proffered option. Odds are you know the issue with Cali bighorn and why the 3/4 LEH.

Managed for huge trophy no managed as mature animal harvest yes

only option I would call a meat hunt ewe LEH

You are a smart man lets call sheep hunting managment for what it is

again thread is about divide in hunters not managment.

[Wild one]

Not really, or at least there's no empirical or theoretical evidence to support ones self-interests being broadly applicable or beneficial to all. By definition being self-interested puts ones needs/desires/goals first, and above all others.

As said not a desirable characteristic as it relates to social change.

Great at trying to push that wedge if you realize or not at least on topic

Something you should also realize with your train theory some don't ride your train but have invested time, effort and $ doing some good for outdoorsmen

If you can't understand your view on what is needed for hunters is only 1 opinion. You will never be open minded enough to hear there is many things your missing

[SSG-man]

Some hunters are like bullets…..once fired they can only travel one direction.:)

[jagen mit DDrs]

We talk about management of wildlife...we should be talking about management of hunters.We are the ones that execute our goverments nonsense.The ridiculesness of their managements plans,the LEH quotas,the cull of wolves etc...
Money and time is wasted in certein fruitless endevours while where it would be needed there is none to be had.
We shoot prime bucks and bulls because we are after a trophy but mostly we should let them live and shoot inferior animals ...if we want to manage.
I believe that most hunters in BC dont have near enough training and knowledge to even talk about managing wildlife,most think hunting is a right not a privilege,equipped with pathetic knowledge aquired by the weekend C.O.R.E.test,dont know enough before,during and after the shot.
When we start checking ourselves and improving our knowledge and have better hunter education,only then can we as a united group bring changes forward to the government.

[GoatGuy]

Great at trying to push that wedge if you realize or not at least on topic

Something you should also realize with your train theory some don't ride your train but have invested time, effort and $ doing some good for outdoorsmen

If you can't understand your view on what is needed for hunters is only 1 opinion. You will never be open minded enough to hear there is many things your missing

Never been huge on opinions. When people say things like 'large portions', 'all my friends', 'the people I know', or start bashing someone else's way of hunting, it's usually to line up a self-fulfilling prophecy. Again part of the self-interest, and not about the broader public interest. If you are concerned about the hunters (all hunters, not just your own) experience it's easy to figure out what they want - put some money in a hat, pay someone with expertise and ask the hunters what they want to see. Just remember, wildlife is a shared resource - it is not yours, mine, or anyone else's. We all share it and we all get a say, but we don't get it managed for our personal whims, wants and desires.

Over the past couple weeks you've made several inferences and predictions about wildlife, and wildlife management, only to later backtrack or change. The comments in the wt thread were epic. You made inferences about what has happened (hunters increased, that is why wt harvest increased was what you were saying in a round about manner), and when asked what your hypothesis was the tune changed because you realized that the data and reality didn't support what was in your head. You keep bringing up social issues and try to disguise them as wildlife management issues or you attempt to set the rules after you've brought the conversation up. Now we can't talk about sheep management because it's off topic - remember, you were the one that brought it up. Clearly, that is because the harvest data doesn't support your assertion - it was convenient to say they are managed for trophy only, but when the data starts to come out we need to 'stay on topic'. You also wanted to compare mule deer management in Alberta to BC, but only for bucks, right? Nothing about habitat, predators, antlerless harvest. we can't take anything out of Alberta's management regime.... except what I like! What you were saying is I want to cherry pick the parts I like, discard what I don't like, and make something up that suits me.

To summarize, there are parts of hunting/hunters are divided for sure, but there are a pile of people, including non-hunters, who are willing to work on wildlife. There are people who would like to see wildlife managed differently, we probably all would for various reasons, but they are still there for the resource first and foremost.

There's wildlife problems and there's people problems. Some people want to work on people problems, and that's perfectly fine, but right now is it appropriate? From a conservation perspective they would call that fiddling while Rome burns. Recognize there is an appetite for social management, and you are extremely hungry, but is that a wise investment in resources? Should we take our paltry budget of a couple million dollars and spend it on managing for hunter expectations when we have migratory elk, mule deer in parts, and significant moose population declines across the central interior? Is that really appropriate? Or should we be trying to find $100 million so we can fix wildlife, then figure out how to understand, and if possible manage for, hunter expectations. One of those approaches is a train wreck.

What you are saying in your posts is, I won't get on board until I get the hunting seasons that produce deer like I see when I go to Alberta. That's ok, but from my perspective "me first" isn't palatable.

[Fisher-Dude]

We talk about management of wildlife...we should be talking about management of hunters.


What can I say? First person that admits it.

It's the wrong thing to do, but bravo for the admission.

[GoatGuy]

Want to cause an up roar start managing sheep as a meat hunt in BC.

1..

Would not argue sheep managment is done in a sustainable fashion or would I want to see changes in it. Yes there is ewe LEH options in areas there is surplus.
would I say it is managed with meat harvest as the first and for most goal nope.
2..

Not so much about trophy quality my self but would be nice to exchange max harvest for more conservative harvest that prompted closer male female ratio than present goals. Fully aware it does not increase population and is only a benefit to hunting quality.

often you will see an increase in trophy class from higher buck/bull ratio as a by product

fully support hunters being able to harvest their choice of age class. Spike or giant got nothing against a hunter choosing either their tag their choice. I am not a fan of point restrictions unless they are a must
3..


Not going to debate sheep managment we both know the goal of the any ram LEH is not to target young rams

provided data for one of these draws. Know exactly why the draw was put in place and why the dates are what they are

4..


Odds are you know why the 8+ option was pulled from 317. Might be a reason curl is the proffered option. Odds are you know the issue with Cali bighorn and why the 3/4 LEH.

Managed for huge trophy no managed as mature animal harvest yes

only option I would call a meat hunt ewe LEH

You are a smart man lets call sheep hunting managment for what it is

again thread is about divide in hunters not managment.

5..

[Wild one]

Never been huge on opinions. When people say things like 'large portions', 'all my friends', 'the people I know', or start bashing someone else's way of hunting, it's usually to line up a self-fulfilling prophecy. Again part of the self-interest, and not about the broader public interest. If you are concerned about the hunters (all hunters, not just your own) experience it's easy to figure out what they want - put some money in a hat, pay someone with expertise and ask the hunters what they want to see. Just remember, wildlife is a shared resource - it is not yours, mine, or anyone else's. We all share it and we all get a say, but we don't get it managed for our personal whims, wants and desires.

Over the past couple weeks you've made several inferences and predictions about wildlife, and wildlife management, only to later backtrack or change. The comments in the wt thread were epic. You made inferences about what has happened (hunters increased, that is why wt harvest increased was what you were saying in a round about manner), and when asked what your hypothesis was the tune changed because you realized that the data and reality didn't support what was in your head. You keep bringing up social issues and try to disguise them as wildlife management issues or you attempt to set the rules after you've brought the conversation up. Now we can't talk about sheep management because it's off topic - remember, you were the one that brought it up. Clearly, that is because the harvest data doesn't support your assertion - it was convenient to say they are managed for trophy only, but when the data starts to come out we need to 'stay on topic'. You also wanted to compare mule deer management in Alberta to BC, but only for bucks, right? Nothing about habitat, predators, antlerless harvest. we can't take anything out of Alberta's management regime.... except what I like! What you were saying is I want to cherry pick the parts I like, discard what I don't like, and make something up that suits me.

To summarize, there are parts of hunting/hunters are divided for sure, but there are a pile of people, including non-hunters, who are willing to work on wildlife. There are people who would like to see wildlife managed differently, we probably all would for various reasons, but they are still there for the resource first and foremost.

There's wildlife problems and there's people problems. Some people want to work on people problems, and that's perfectly fine, but right now is it appropriate? From a conservation perspective they would call that fiddling while Rome burns. Recognize there is an appetite for social management, and you are extremely hungry, but is that a wise investment in resources? Should we take our paltry budget of a couple million dollars and spend it on managing for hunter expectations when we have migratory elk, mule deer in parts, and significant moose population declines across the central interior? Is that really appropriate? Or should we be trying to find $100 million so we can fix wildlife, then figure out how to understand, and if possible manage for, hunter expectations. One of those approaches is a train wreck.

What you are saying in your posts is, I won't get on board until I get the hunting seasons that produce deer like I see when I go to Alberta. That's ok, but from my perspective "me first" isn't palatable.

You do get grumpy and try your best to insult my character.

Fun points when I mentions increase in WT harvest may not be do to increase number. I said it was a posibility not fact increase in hunter numbers and increase in those targeting WT could be a factor in the increased. You got all grumpy once again lol. Here's the thing if you want to reach a proper conclusion you should address all possibilities. I only mentioned there is anoth possible factor to the equation. You again got grumpy demanding numbers and I was honest that I would not make up estimated numbers to support my theory. Why because I stated only a possible factor not saying your straight out wrong yet there multiple reason why the could be what they are. Far stretch no there has been a increase in new hunter this is fact and there is a lot of circumstantial evidence showing an increase in hunters targeting WT

Only stated a theory on factors that effected the harvest numbers. Now if this factor was already addressed a smart man would have simple said it was factored into his theory. Usually those who can't hand a possible factor brought up either over looked it or are try to only use numbers to support there view only. No back peddling here

As for Alberta system it is only an example of another managment style. Dig around and you will find not once did I say BC should adapt this system completely. Do I believe BC should consider parts of it yes. I have also stated BC needs its own system but should look at examples beyond its boarders. Basicly yes I would like to see a more conservative system than how much we can take system.

You have little understanding of what I stand for or don't

Keep thinking I never put in my time and effort for wildlife lol. My wife wishes you were right

You get a break anyway I am in camp for work this week don't think I will have wifi

[Dannybuoy]

And then there is Reality .... Until there is a management plan in place with the "other government" in Canada any and all conservation efforts are short term at best .
That's the elephant in the room guys .... even united "we" do not equal even 1/2 of the equation .

[curt]

Human nature is the reality very seldom anyone will comment take action or opinion unless it directly effects them personally that will likely never change, the majority of people are only concerned with their own interests
bow hunters versus rifles
quad versus horses
young versus old
aboriginals versus non aboriginals
guides versus residents (my biggest issue)
the list goes on and on and i get it and I'm also not saying for a second I'm any different than anyone else

[curt]

we are an ignorant self destructive animal that seldom if ever learns from it's own mistakes..............very sad but very true!!

[adriaticum]

Human nature is the reality very seldom anyone will comment take action or opinion unless it directly effects them personally that will likely never change, the majority of people are only concerned with their own interests
bow hunters versus rifles
quad versus horses
young versus old
aboriginals versus non aboriginals
guides versus residents (my biggest issue)
the list goes on and on and i get it and I'm also not saying for a second I'm any different than anyone else



What's your guides versus residents issue?

[Dannybuoy]

What's your guides versus residents issue?

Hahaha , Poke the proverbial bear !

[Pemby_mess]

Human nature is the reality very seldom anyone will comment take action or opinion unless it directly effects them personally that will likely never change, the majority of people are only concerned with their own interests
bow hunters versus rifles
quad versus horses
young versus old
aboriginals versus non aboriginals
guides versus residents (my biggest issue)
the list goes on and on and i get it and I'm also not saying for a second I'm any different than anyone else

Someone can be very self-interested yet still intelligently work with others to reach common goals. Humans are selfish, I'll give you that - but we are also very social and have proven time and time again, from our Palaeolithic history until this age of hyper modernity, that we can leverage that social aptitude to achieve many great things - impossible things really.

Hunters have more interests in common than not, obviously. The holy grail is finding natural allies outside of their internal pact. We just need to agree what our common ground is both inside and outside of the group and work on succinctly communicating that.

Do this not, and no one in our greater culture will give two sh*ts over what happens to our interests as a group.

[Rob Chipman]

"we are also very social and have proven time and time again, from our Palaeolithic history until this age of hyper modernity, that we can leverage that social aptitude to achieve many great things - impossible things really."

OK, you're talking about getting Trump elected, right? :-)

I'm only half joking, and you're 100% right: our recognition of our own self interests, combined with our demonstrable ability to make sacrifices that do not personally benefit us, are what's going to help us achieve what we need to achieve. Recognizing those two qualities in other people and finding overlap leads to the natural allies you mention.

[adriaticum]

Hahaha , Poke the proverbial bear !

My speciality :mrgreen:

[adriaticum]

Something that boggles my mind is that we have not been able to find common tongue with first nations and we have more in common with them than any other group
on the planet.
We both live off and for the resource.
One day when we figure this out, we will be a force to be reckoned with.
I have nothing in common with this guy

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/03/07/article-0-187EE568000005DC-185_964x638.jpg


and lots in common with this guy


http://data2.collectionscanada.ca/ap/c/c100014k.jpg

[Pemby_mess]

I have nothing in common with this guy

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2013/03/07/article-0-187EE568000005DC-185_964x638.jpg




Don't be so sure!;)

[Pemby_mess]

Something that boggles my mind is that we have not been able to find common tongue with first nations and we have more in common with them than any other group
on the planet.
We both live off and for the resource.
One day when we figure this out, we will be a force to be reckoned with.

This throws me for a loop too. I've heard some attitudes within this community that simply astonish me in their ignorance. I realize there are equal and opposite attitudes in the indigenous extreme as well.

But what blows me away, is that these respective perspectives seem to take centre stage. They don't appear to be helpful to anybody. I know there are fine people, indigenous and non, that see synergy and will try to work together. It just seems like there is one set back after the next with respect to that relationship. Honestly, most of it seems to be a divide and conquer mindset delivered from up high, but at the end of the day its the people on the ground that buy into it and shoot themselves in the nuts.

[wideopenthrottle]

as conservationists, we of course relate to the concept of "the keeper of the land"...reality is of course, in any group there will be dickheads that ruin it for everyone and that applies to all groups...it is sad, as you say, that we are not working together more against the common enemies

[jagen mit DDrs]

Everybody talks about what we want.....when we talk about proper management then it is about what the wildlife needs.

[Pemby_mess]

Everybody talks about what we want.....when we talk about proper management then it is about what the wildlife needs.

Good point.

Anyone not familiar with this concept should read the wikipedia article below:

Tragedy of the Commons:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons

[curt]

look at our fishery for an example the east coast completely wiped out their fishery did we learn any lesson from their mistakes????? nope! The west coast is well on their way to doing the very same thing, fish farms we all no they are poison to our eco systems being in the ocean, we all know they should be land based and filtered properly...............have they implemented that????? nope...............certain interest groups getting free reign to harvest whatever whenever they want regardless of the population issues, are management practices (both on land and sea) do they man up and put a stop to it???? nope........... time and time again we get to sit back and watch bureaucrats who think they know what they are doing f**k up management constantly, it's a never ending cycle of stupidity and ignorance that fails to act until the resource is gone just like the east coast fishery!!............I may be wrong but it would be tough to convince me!!

[adriaticum]

look at our fishery for an example the east coast completely wiped out their fishery did we learn any lesson from their mistakes????? nope! The west coast is well on their way to doing the very same thing, fish farms we all no they are poison to our eco systems being in the ocean, we all know they should be land based and filtered properly...............have they implemented that????? nope...............certain interest groups getting free reign to harvest whatever whenever they want regardless of the population issues, are management practices (both on land and sea) do they man up and put a stop to it???? nope........... time and time again we get to sit back and watch bureaucrats who think they know what they are doing f**k up management constantly, it's a never ending cycle of stupidity and ignorance that fails to act until the resource is gone just like the east coast fishery!!............I may be wrong but it would be tough to convince me!!



No, wrong you are not.

[Pemby_mess]

look at our fishery for an example the east coast completely wiped out their fishery did we learn any lesson from their mistakes????? nope! The west coast is well on their way to doing the very same thing, fish farms we all no they are poison to our eco systems being in the ocean, we all know they should be land based and filtered properly...............have they implemented that????? nope...............certain interest groups getting free reign to harvest whatever whenever they want regardless of the population issues, are management practices (both on land and sea) do they man up and put a stop to it???? nope........... time and time again we get to sit back and watch bureaucrats who think they know what they are doing f**k up management constantly, it's a never ending cycle of stupidity and ignorance that fails to act until the resource is gone just like the east coast fishery!!............I may be wrong but it would be tough to convince me!!

nope.....not wrong