Up For Discussion: (Proposal) Apply 6 pt antler restriction to west Kootenay bow only

[dapesche]

Apply 6 pt antler restriction to west Kootenay bow only elk season





https://www2.gov.bc.ca/icons/last-updated-star.svgLast updated on February 20, 2024The public is invited to comment on the proposed hunting regulation described below.
Status: Proposed
Region: 4
Management unit (MU): 4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38
Regulation type: General Open Season
Species: Elk
Closing date: 16:30, March 22, 2024
Decision statement: Pending
Current regulation
4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38 6 point bulls Sept 10 to Oct 5
Bow only 4-1 to 4-9, 4-14 to 4-38, 4-40 Bulls Sept 1 to Sept 9
Proposed regulation
4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38 6 point bulls Sept 10 to Sept 30
Bow Only 4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38 6 point bulls Sept 1 to Sept 9
Bow Only 4-1 to 4-7, 4-20 to 4-26, 4-34 to 4-36, 4-40 Bulls Sept 1 to Sept 9
Rationale
Elk composition surveys have shown a steady decline in bull:cow ratios in the West Kootenay (2022/23 survey indicated 13:100 bull to cow ratio), despite shortening the season by 10 days in 2020. Harvest modelling suggests that more bulls are being harvested than recruited so a further reduction in harvest rate is needed. A substantial proportion of harvest (30%) is coming from the archery season, when hunters are able to harvest any bull elk. The proposed season changes are expected to reduce bull harvest by approximately 35%, while maintaining GOS opportunity for 6-point bulls. Harvest rates and composition will be closely monitored to evaluate change in harvest rates and bull:cow ratios.
Restricting the bow season to 6 point or better, and shortening the general open season should reduce harvest enough to provide some opportunity for bull escapement through the hunting season. Providing this escapement will 1) help meet ministry bull:cow ratio objectives, 2) continue to provide hunting opportunity, and 3) increase representation of mature bull elk.

[dapesche]

https://i.imgur.com/1zy3ud5.png

[Bullreaper]

If they are gonna implement an archery point restriction, I think it should be 5pt+. Not sure what the influx of hunters flocking to the East koots is gonna be like…. Time will tell I guess. So much for the 7B moose closure only being 2 years. Nothing about opening that back up. All I can say is engage, make sure you voice your opinion, whether it benefits you or not. Fill there inbox’s and make sure they know there’s still lots of people who care about hunting in B.C.

[Steeleco]

I'm NO expert on these matters, but now my Son lives in Cranbrook I hunt there 1 or 2 weeks annually when I can. Last Oct we saw so many bulls and BIG bulls it was hard for a coaster like me to not be in awe. Problem was NONE of them were 6pt, all the huge ones were big 5's. Can the 6pts be closed and only target the 5's?

When I was a young man fishing in the Georgia straight a spring was a spring size be damned. Nobody wanted small ones. Now there's no big ones left. IIRC there is now an upper and lower size restriction. Can this logic not be used to protect all mature game, elk, deer moose and on?

[Bullreaper]

Exo’s Backcountry hunting podcast just did a really good one with Idaho fish and game. They have a biologist on who talks about point restrictions and studies that have been done in Utah with mule deer. Basically the point restriction has done the exact opposite of what they wanted to accomplish. Here’s a link for anyone (with Apple Podcasts) who wants to listen.
https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-hunt-backcountry-podcast/id1020880772?i=1000643675699

For those of you who use different podcast app. Hunt Backcountry Podcast by Exo mtn gear. Episode #442

[Gateholio]

Exo’s Backcountry hunting podcast just did a really good one with Idaho fish and game. They have a biologist on who talks about point restrictions and studies that have been done in Utah with mule deer. Basically the point restriction has done the exact opposite of what they wanted to accomplish. Here’s a link for anyone (with Apple Podcasts) who wants to listen.
https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-hunt-backcountry-podcast/id1020880772?i=1000643675699

For those of you who use different podcast app. Hunt Backcountry Podcast by Exo mtn gear. Episode #442


I'll listen in the future but could you fill us in on what they wanted to achieve and what actually happened?

BC oves it's point restrictions and many have questioned if it's the best way.

[Bullreaper]

I'll listen in the future but could you fill us in on what they wanted to achieve and what actually happened?

BC oves it's point restrictions and many have questioned if it's the best way.

Please don’t quote me word for word, you’ll hafta listen to if for yourselves. The jist of it was they had a 4 point season and it ended up killing off a lot of the mature bucks and then more and more 2 points and less mature bucks were showing up. They found that it was actually the younger bucks that were more susceptible to winter kill and much lower survival rates than the mature bucks. There’s a lot more to it, I’ll have to go back and listen again to be able to have a good conversation about it, but at the end of the day, point restrictions were not good for deer populations. I really encourage people to have a listen, it was a really good, informative piece and if it’s a topic that interests you, there’s a lot of rabbit holes to go down on different studies going on in the states about antler restrictions and there impacts. I warn you, the podcast is a bit dry at the start, talking about Idaho draw system and a few things that don’t matter (unless you wanna learn how to hunt Idaho) but it gets good.

[savage10]

Initial reaction is that this will mean more guys will be heading to the east koots for bow season. Thus putting more pressure there, increasing harvest numbers. Then what? Make the east koots bow season 6 point next year? Makes no sense. Has to be another way.

[stephane110]

Still don’t understand why they don’t just follow what the western states do for elk management with a long archery season only during the rut. Surely they know what they’re doing…Idaho is 5x smaller landmass than BC, but they spend 4x the money on their Fish and Wildlife. The table on page 3 of this report (2019) data compares our spends. Idaho has 107k elk, bc estimates between 15-40k.

https://bcwf.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/WildlifeHabitatResponse.pdf

[grouse14]

How effective and what’s the thoughts on road closures? I just listened to a podcast where they talked about how they killed a koots bull from the truck mule deer style. I feel like Elk hunting shouldn’t be that easy.

[jackson13]

does anyone have the link to the proposed changes?

[Bullreaper]

does anyone have the link to the proposed changes?


https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/sports-culture/recreation/fishing-hunting/ahte/hunting-trapping

[stephane110]

Or another idea..why not remove crossbows during bow season instead, unless you have a medical waiver from a doctor? Like similar to what Alberta does.

[Steeleco]

Current regulation

4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38 6 point bulls Sept 10 to Oct 5
Bow only 4-1 to 4-9, 4-14 to 4-38, 4-40 Bulls Sept 1 to Sept 9
Proposed regulation

4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38 6 point bulls Sept 10 to Sept 30
Bow Only 4-8, 4-9, 4-14 to 4-19, 4-27 to 4-33,4-37 to 4-38 6 point bulls Sept 1 to Sept 9
Bow Only 4-1 to 4-7, 4-20 to 4-26, 4-34 to 4-36, 4-40 Bulls Sept 1 to Sept 9



I only read shortening the rifle season 5 days and splitting somewhat the existing bow season. Area's like 4-03 where I go will get hammered even more. If your going to protect the elk, do it for the whole of reg 4

[dapesche]

I only read shortening the rifle season 5 days and splitting somewhat the existing bow season. Area's like 4-03 where I go will get hammered even more. If your going to protect the elk, do it for the whole of reg 4

I guess they are saying they only need to protect the elk in certain areas and in other areas they are in good shape.

[dapesche]

Now elk would be in better shape if some guys learn how to count to 5.

[HappyJack]

Still don’t understand why they don’t just follow what the western states do for elk management with a long archery season only during the rut. Surely they know what they’re doing…Idaho is 5x smaller landmass than BC, but they spend 4x the money on their Fish and Wildlife. The table on page 3 of this report (2019) data compares our spends. Idaho has 107k elk, bc estimates between 15-40k.

https://bcwf.bc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/WildlifeHabitatResponse.pdf

How many wolves, bears and other predators do they have in Idaho?? They are hunters too, 365 days per year, 24 hours per day.

[HappyJack]

How effective and what’s the thoughts on road closures? I just listened to a podcast where they talked about how they killed a koots bull from the truck mule deer style. I feel like Elk hunting shouldn’t be that easy.

That works good for those that hunt from horses or are young enough to pack in on foot. Why not just say no elk hunting for those over 65, the handicapped, the overweight out of shape ones, heck toss in wimmin.

[kevingm1987]

I guess they are saying they only need to protect the elk in certain areas and in other areas they are in good shape.

It will change in two years. Is their way of slowly taking more and more away. Its the same thing they have done with moose in region 6. If you read through the rationale it mentions "Concerns have also been raised regarding the potential for increased hunting pressure from licensed hunters due to moose hunting restrictions implemented in the Peace Region in 2022."

I also read that moose in portions of 7B LEH will go from tri, spike, 10 to any bull. They say this will increase the opportunities for moose to be taken. It notes that there has been an increase pressure on other ungulates in the area due to the moose restrictions placed in 2022. They're are lining up the Peace for more elk restrictions for 2026-2028 in my opinion!

[PYGuy]

To help me and others digest this proposal does anyone on here have the actual WK harvest and breakdown numbers? If not does anyone know if that is available through the Regional Office or would I have to go through a FOI request? Thanks

[TheObserver]

It will change in two years. Is their way of slowly taking more and more away. Its the same thing they have done with moose in region 6. If you read through the rationale it mentions "Concerns have also been raised regarding the potential for increased hunting pressure from licensed hunters due to moose hunting restrictions implemented in the Peace Region in 2022."

I also read that moose in portions of 7B LEH will go from tri, spike, 10 to any bull. They say this will increase the opportunities for moose to be taken. It notes that there has been an increase pressure on other ungulates in the area due to the moose restrictions placed in 2022. They're are lining up the Peace for more elk restrictions for 2026-2028 in my opinion!

Somebody who gets it, refreshing. The people who actually run your system do not want you eating healthy, even eating meat for that matter or having firearms, or living in anything but c40/15 minute cities and private ownership abolished, this all ties in and they openly say this through their mouthpieces and NGOs, this is not conspiracy you can find them online saying this and quote them from the NGOs websites.

For those that have no balls and spine, enjoy it while you can because you don't have many years left, especially for certain species.

[TheObserver]

The writing is on the wall, read it. Pay attention

[KootenayKiller]

Maybe a middle age class GOS instead? For example, one antler has to have at least 5 points, but no 6x6 or greater. Sprinkle in some LEH for trophy hunts.

Build a population of big breeding bulls, and maintain a steady supply of hunting opportunity.

[TheObserver]

It will change in two years. Is their way of slowly taking more and more away. Its the same thing they have done with moose in region 6. If you read through the rationale it mentions "Concerns have also been raised regarding the potential for increased hunting pressure from licensed hunters due to moose hunting restrictions implemented in the Peace Region in 2022."

I also read that moose in portions of 7B LEH will go from tri, spike, 10 to any bull. They say this will increase the opportunities for moose to be taken. It notes that there has been an increase pressure on other ungulates in the area due to the moose restrictions placed in 2022. They're are lining up the Peace for more elk restrictions for 2026-2028 in my opinion!

Kill a Moose save a Caribou is what they said, now both are closing. Using the same with the Deer. Now they are doing it on a regional basis, close down 6 well because ya know 7 we got too. Lol, their not geniuses, but good enough at what they do to reach the end goals of their agendas, too bad the people didn't put so much time and effort into fixing issues in the country instead of hoping for/relying on others.

[SWRO]

To help me and others digest this proposal does anyone on here have the actual WK harvest and breakdown numbers? If not does anyone know if that is available through the Regional Office or would I have to go through a FOI request? Thanks

All the hunting data is at https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/sports-culture/recreation/fishing-hunting/hunting/hunting-data

[PYGuy]

Thankyou SWRO

[Elkaholic]

It was this option or LEH for WK from what I seen on the table. I know the archery harvest was a very high portion, 30% of total harvest. Their (government) modelling data still suggested that more bulls are being harvested than being recruited despite the shortening of the rifle season by 10 days. So they needed to reduce the harvest some way and this was the device they chose as its a big percentage and the 6 point will no doubt change that. The WK groups wanted LEH, so this could be seen as a way to keep the opportunity while avoiding LEH.

[J_T]

It was this option or LEH for WK from what I seen on the table. I know the archery harvest was a very high portion, 30% of total harvest. Their (government) modelling data still suggested that more bulls are being harvested than being recruited despite the shortening of the rifle season by 10 days. So they needed to reduce the harvest some way and this was the device they chose as its a big percentage and the 6 point will no doubt change that. The WK groups wanted LEH, so this could be seen as a way to keep the opportunity while avoiding LEH.There were other options submitted and discussed.
The decision by Government to proceed with the introduction of a point restriction in the WK is another political decision. If they really believe harvesting is the greatest impact, consider a decision to stop rifle hunting in the rut.

[Elkaholic]

There were other options submitted and discussed.
The decision by Government to proceed with the introduction of a point restriction in the WK is another political decision. If they really believe harvesting is the greatest impact, consider a decision to stop rifle hunting in the rut.

I fully agree with you on trying to remove the gun hunt from the rut, and yes that was briefly discussed at the table. But the two main ideas that seemed to be batted around the most was 6 point archery and LEH which the WK groups were after. Again they stated the 30% harvest during archery was what they were looking at. Other ideas may have been talked about at the table but that to me was just to satisfy them saying they talked about it, they were never going to seriously look at them. I too sit on the KWHAC and feel most times our meetings satisfy a government check box that stakeholders were consulted.

[J_T]

I too sit on the KWHAC and feel most times our meetings satisfy a government check box that stakeholders were consulted. Completely agree. In fact, I sent Government a letter today stating the same. That these committees (for Government) are a check box to confirm their due diligence. Thanks.

[LBM]

Should of just left it LEH like it was things were fine.

[PYGuy]

Perhaps a bit more forward thinking, and perhaps experimental for BC, would have been the extension of the archery season to say September 20. It’s pretty safe to expect the archery harvest to drop substanially so give the bowhunters a bit of the rut as a compromise. Oh hold on a second that wouldn’t be on the checklist as an option!

[Walking Buffalo]

Someone needs to gather the data, crunch the numbers and prove that the regulation change will not effect the desired outcome.
There will be lots of evidence available in the period after the last season shortening.

Without this foundational evidence, hunters will once again be asked to give up just a little bit more in a few years in place of a real solution.

[HappyJack]

Perhaps a bit more forward thinking, and perhaps experimental for BC, would have been the extension of the archery season to say September 20. It’s pretty safe to expect the archery harvest to drop substanially so give the bowhunters a bit of the rut as a compromise. Oh hold on a second that wouldn’t be on the checklist as an option!

30% of the harvest could be cut back by eliminating the archery season completely, remove any allocations from the outfitters and there would be more available for the remaining BC Resident hunters. Probably not put forward as an option though.

[Everett]

30% of the harvest could be cut back by eliminating the archery season completely, remove any allocations from the outfitters and there would be more available for the remaining BC Resident hunters. Probably not put forward as an option though.

Personally not a fan of archery seasons even though I hunt with a bow. But this season kills all age classes of Bulls and is much better in long run for the herd then a trophy hunt that some stakeholders want. I also agree that we should not be allowing outfitters to hunt any species that there isn't enough animals to meet resident demand.

[Redthies]

Personally not a fan of archery seasons even though I hunt with a bow. But this season kills all age classes of Bulls and is much better in long run for the herd then a trophy hunt that some stakeholders want. I also agree that we should not be allowing outfitters to hunt any species that there isn't enough animals to meet resident demand.

Good points. I also am not a bow hunter (I have taken a nice whitetail buck with a bow, but it’s just not my thing), but I agree a more varied age of bull being harvested makes sense. I feel the same about the 4 point mule deer restriction. It doesn’t make sense to shoot only the biggest specimens.

[.300WSMImpact!]

Real issue is the predators and unlicensed kills, until we deal with that there will be less and less hunting opportunities, hunting will be gone before we know it

[roymil]

So what % of the 30% archery harvest were 6 point bulls. It wouldnt suprise me if a large number of bulls harvested in the archery season were 6 points. A 6 point restriction in the archery season may not reduce the harvest that much. Also how many of those unsuccessful bow hunters will pick up a rifle and harvest a bull in the GOS anyhow. Also reducing the season a week after the peak rut doesnt seem like the best way to reduce the harvest , reduce the season in the rut.

[roymil]

Originally Posted by HappyJack https://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=2439167#post2439167)
30% of the harvest could be cut back by eliminating the archery season completely, remove any allocations from the outfitters and there would be more available for the remaining BC Resident hunters. Probably not put forward as an option though.

Two things, first eliminating the archery season completley will just delay most of the archery 30% harvest to the GOS. Secondly I am a BC Resident who bowhunts archery seasons, so lets eliminate the GOS completley and have more available to the BC bowhunters………….now doesnt that sound reasonable ������������

[Redthies]

The jist of it was they had a 4 point season and it ended up killing off a lot of the mature bucks and then more and more 2 points and less mature bucks were showing up. They found that it was actually the younger bucks that were more susceptible to winter kill and much lower survival rates than the mature bucks.

I am quoting you (sorry:wink:), but only to agree with what you’ve said. I’ve always maintained that they should let people hunt 2 and 3 point md and let the big boys take care of the breeding. I have never understood the supposed logic behind forcing people to shoot the mature bucks.

[HarryToolips]

If they are gonna implement an archery point restriction, I think it should be 5pt+. Not sure what the influx of hunters flocking to the East koots is gonna be like…. Time will tell I guess. So much for the 7B moose closure only being 2 years. Nothing about opening that back up. All I can say is engage, make sure you voice your opinion, whether it benefits you or not. Fill there inbox’s and make sure they know there’s still lots of people who care about hunting in B.C.

Agree on all points... all need to take the time and submit your opinions..

[HarryToolips]

To help me and others digest this proposal does anyone on here have the actual WK harvest and breakdown numbers? If not does anyone know if that is available through the Regional Office or would I have to go through a FOI request? Thanks

That's a good question, as I know the WK WMU's that they're proposing the change for are all compulsory inspection...

[KBC]

How many archery kills are done with a crossbow?

[IronNoggin]

How many archery kills are done with a crossbow?

Really??? https://www.tnof.ca/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/Maybe.jpg

[KBC]

Ha I think you get what I was hinting at…

[j270wsm]

30% of the harvest could be cut back by eliminating the archery season completely, remove any allocations from the outfitters and there would be more available for the remaining BC Resident hunters. Probably not put forward as an option though.

let’s go the the other way…….70% of the harvest could be cut back by elimination the rifle season and eliminating the outfitter allocation!! Why do hunter constantly try to screw each other over??

[HarryToolips]

I'll bet a bigger issue, at least from what I've heard, is the amount of non 6 pointers that are killed mistakenly during the rifle season.... certain % of hunters need to be a little more diligent on ensuring its a legal animal before shooting..

[j270wsm]

The high number of 5pts killed every yr in 4-23 is a problem.

[hunterdon]

I've never been a fan of point restrictions for 2 main reasons.

1- It opens up the door for mistakes to happen. Yes they happen way too often. And, for various reasons. No point in listings the why's.
2- Point restrictions target a certain age/class of animal. This puts a lot of pressure on this class. In the case of elk, 6 point or above which is nature's best breeding class. So here we upset the balance by targeting the best breeding class.

As a result of greatly reducing the numbers of 6 pointers, over time, their genetics eventually fade from the gene pool. That leads to more and more 5 pointers to do the breeding. Many of these bulls will never develop more than 5 points because of their genetic determination. And so now, we are seeing a lot more big bulls, having only 5 points.

That's my 2 cents worth.

[IronNoggin]

Ha I think you get what I was hinting at…

Nope, not at all.
What I see is simply more divisiveness on your part.

I am no longer capable of drawing my compound bow (long since donated to a buddy) due to physical constraints.
Thus I hunt with a crossbow.
Your inference suggests that is somehow inferior to those that use the former.

Sad to me...

[KBC]

I think if you can’t draw a bow for medical reasons, you should be allowed to use a crossbow. If you can draw a bow, then I think you shouldn’t be allowed to use a crossbow.

[J_T]

So what % of the 30% archery harvest were 6 point bulls. It wouldnt suprise me if a large number of bulls harvested in the archery season were 6 points. A 6 point restriction in the archery season may not reduce the harvest that much. Also how many of those unsuccessful bow hunters will pick up a rifle and harvest a bull in the GOS anyhow. Also reducing the season a week after the peak rut doesnt seem like the best way to reduce the harvest , reduce the season in the rut.
The Ministry does not collect data on the size of an animal taken in a BOS or a GOS where point restrictions are not applied.
What they do know, is the BOS in West Kootenay results in about 18,000 hunter days. Which if it shifts to a 6pt season will result in a shift of those days afield to other MU's.


Originally Posted by HappyJack https://huntingbc.ca/forum/images/shades_of_green/buttons/viewpost-right.png (https://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?p=2439167#post2439167)
30% of the harvest could be cut back by eliminating the archery season completely, remove any allocations from the outfitters and there would be more available for the remaining BC Resident hunters. Probably not put forward as an option though.

Two things, first eliminating the archery season completley will just delay most of the archery 30% harvest to the GOS. Secondly I am a BC Resident who bowhunts archery seasons, so lets eliminate the GOS completley and have more available to the BC bowhunters………….now doesnt that sound reasonable ������������
Shifting the rifle hunt, out of the rut is the most efficient method of reducing bull harvest. Though if we want to talley mortality, highways and railways account for a lot more dead elk than hunters do.
FYI, in Region 4, 52% of hunters utilize BOS. (Bow Only Season). As a result BOS is a high value opportunity, with low harvest rates. Maintaining opportunity for 'all' hunters. Regarding the 6pt GOS, any rancher will ask you, 'why are you killing your breeding bulls?'. Doesn't matter that 50% of the bulls prominence comes from Mom. A bull must prove himself to be worthy. You aren't born a king in the wild, you are born with the potential. You aren't given the right to breed, it must be earned. The basic concept of survival of the fittest.


I am quoting you (sorry:wink:), but only to agree with what you’ve said. I’ve always maintained that they should let people hunt 2 and 3 point md and let the big boys take care of the breeding. I have never understood the supposed logic behind forcing people to shoot the mature bucks.
Ya, doesn't matter that the DNA can come from both parents, the reality, if you are a rancher, you preserve your 'proven' breeders. Not just those with the right equipment. BOS allows for harvest across the age class.


How many archery kills are done with a crossbow?
There is no data on this. I have personal observations, but nothing formal. This could change in the coming years as the crossbow continues to fall into the mid range weapon category and I'm sure Gov will start to collect weapons harvest data.


I've never been a fan of point restrictions for 2 main reasons.

1- It opens up the door for mistakes to happen. Yes they happen way too often. And, for various reasons. No point in listings the why's.
2- Point restrictions target a certain age/class of animal. This puts a lot of pressure on this class. In the case of elk, 6 point or above which is nature's best breeding class. So here we upset the balance by targeting the best breeding class.

As a result of greatly reducing the numbers of 6 pointers, over time, their genetics eventually fade from the gene pool. That leads to more and more 5 pointers to do the breeding. Many of these bulls will never develop more than 5 points because of their genetic determination. And so now, we are seeing a lot more big bulls, having only 5 points.

That's my 2 cents worth. Agree, see my point above about targeting the bigger bulls all the time.
FYI, I believe, most of the 49 illegal 5 pt harvests were in the EK.

[IronNoggin]

... There is no data on this. I have personal observations, but nothing formal. This could change in the coming years as the crossbow continues to fall into the mid range weapon category and I'm sure Gov will start to collect weapons harvest data.

I concur with everything you posted with the exception of the above.
Crossbows do not offer any extended effective hunting ranges over modern compounds.
That is reality.

If the steps are taken to label crossbows as "mid range weaponry" I for one will be insisting the same hold true for anything but traditional long bow and recurve bows.

Cheers

[kevingm1987]

I've never been a fan of point restrictions for 2 main reasons.

1- It opens up the door for mistakes to happen. Yes they happen way too often. And, for various reasons. No point in listings the why's.
2- Point restrictions target a certain age/class of animal. This puts a lot of pressure on this class. In the case of elk, 6 point or above which is nature's best breeding class. So here we upset the balance by targeting the best breeding class.

As a result of greatly reducing the numbers of 6 pointers, over time, their genetics eventually fade from the gene pool. That leads to more and more 5 pointers to do the breeding. Many of these bulls will never develop more than 5 points because of their genetic determination. And so now, we are seeing a lot more big bulls, having only 5 points.

That's my 2 cents worth.

Point 1 - the only other options would be LEH for any bull or 3 pt and better. This would remove a portion of the hunters from the landscape. Anything that goes to LEH isn't coming back though.
Point 2 - If its the genes, would that mean the 6pt is destined to be a 6pt from the day it was born? If he had a chance to breed a cow when he was a 5pt, wouldn't his offspring have the chance at a 6?

Don't pretend to know the answers, just creating conversation.

[KBC]

I concur with everything you posted with the exception of the above.
Crossbows do not offer any extended effective hunting ranges over modern compounds.
That is reality.

If the steps are taken to label crossbows as "mid range weaponry" I for one will be insisting the same hold true for anything but traditional long bow and recurve bows.

Cheers

I will speak from personal experience on this but while you may be right-ish about distance(I still think xbows can shoot farther with more lethality) it’s a way different game.

Compounds and trad bows are far closer than compounds and crossbows. I’m a decent shot with my compound, I practice out to 100 yards and feel I can shoot out to 60 on something living in the right circumstances. It’s taken me many hours of practice to get to this point and many many hours of tuning and getting my bow set up to be able to shoot like this.

I have seen on several occasions in the last week of August while I am at the range making sure my stuff is dialed in just before hunting season, someone shows up with a crossbow they either just borrowed or bought. They spend an afternoon sighting it in and shooting groups as good or better than I am with my compound.

It’s not the same game at all. If you don’t have a disability preventing you from drawing a bow and you shoot a crossbow in archery season, I think you are cheating.

[HarryToolips]

I will speak from personal experience on this but while you may be right-ish about distance(I still think xbows can shoot farther with more lethality) it’s a way different game.

Compounds and trad bows are far closer than compounds and crossbows. I’m a decent shot with my compound, I practice out to 100 yards and feel I can shoot out to 60 on something living in the right circumstances. It’s taken me many hours of practice to get to this point and many many hours of tuning and getting my bow set up to be able to shoot like this.

I have seen on several occasions in the last week of August while I am at the range making sure my stuff is dialed in just before hunting season, someone shows up with a crossbow they either just borrowed or bought. They spend an afternoon sighting it in and shooting groups as good or better than I am with my compound.

It’s not the same game at all. If you don’t have a disability preventing you from drawing a bow and you shoot a crossbow in archery season, I think you are cheating.

Agreed..... no disrespect to ppl like Nog who can't shoot a bow due to physical disabilities but if you're able bodied, you shouldn't be allowed to use a crossbow for a BOS...

[KBC]

I’ll just add that the requirements for draw weight and arrow weight etc. are quite low. With practice, I think most guys that shoot a crossbow could easily shoot a compound that meets the performance rules.
People with a disability should absolutely be allowed to shoot a crossbow, just like some disabled can hunt from an ATV.
I hope this isn’t too off topic but since the archery season is being discussed, I think it fits. Just my opinion.

[Redthies]

I've never been a fan of point restrictions for 2 main reasons.

1- It opens up the door for mistakes to happen. Yes they happen way too often. And, for various reasons. No point in listings the why's.
2- Point restrictions target a certain age/class of animal. This puts a lot of pressure on this class. In the case of elk, 6 point or above which is nature's best breeding class. So here we upset the balance by targeting the best breeding class.

As a result of greatly reducing the numbers of 6 pointers, over time, their genetics eventually fade from the gene pool. That leads to more and more 5 pointers to do the breeding. Many of these bulls will never develop more than 5 points because of their genetic determination. And so now, we are seeing a lot more big bulls, having only 5 points.

That's my 2 cents worth.

Some wisdom shown here!

[Redthies]

Agreed..... no disrespect to ppl like Nog who can't shoot a bow due to physical disabilities but if you're able bodied, you shouldn't be allowed to use a crossbow for a BOS...

I have a shoulder injury that makes a compound bow challenging. Not completely out of the question, but not ideal. I have taken only 1 animal with a crossbow, and none with a compound. I am a rifle hunter. Why? Because I want the best, fastest death for my animals.

That said, I think the challenge in both types of bows is the necessity to be within 40-50 yards for a fairly certain shot. I know some guys are comfortable with longer shots. My point is, compound or cross, the close distance required is the same. I don’t see a need to differentiate between the two.

[J_T]

I concur with everything you posted with the exception of the above.
Crossbows do not offer any extended effective hunting ranges over modern compounds.
That is reality.

If the steps are taken to label crossbows as "mid range weaponry" I for one will be insisting the same hold true for anything but traditional long bow and recurve bows.

Cheers
I want to follow up on this. Not to take the thread in a different direction from the proposed regulation discussion, but to provide a bit more clarity on this.

For clarity, in R4 West Kootenay, the most effective method of 'managing elk, and ensuring healthy populations', is NOT implementing further restrictions on BOS.

I think at the end of the day, there are far to many, who do not fully understand various weapon choices. Each hunter is left to their own ethic when they are afield.

What we must do, is develop more awareness about weapons. I see any number of times, when we are discussing LEH vs BOS, there is always (from within the hunting community) the comment we must deal with, "if you take the crossbow out, we're fine with..... that".
It isn't the weapon, it's the personal assurance, that an ethical, experienced hunter brings to the hunt. It's easier to make a poor shot with Trad gear at 20 yards than with a crossbow. So what is the criteria?

We would like to build up the IBEP here in BC to provide additional assurance that hunters, who choose archery tackle, are undertaking that activity as a bowhunter should.... with skill, experience and knowledge.

Bowhunting IS different than rifle hunting. That's just how it is. 40 - 50 yard shots, questionable. Not on an ethical basis, on an efficiency basis. Wound loss. I've taken a lot of animals with my bow, and every one gives me new understanding about effective range.
Tracking, is a critical component of bowhunting. A person with experience tracking, knowing what to expect from the shot taken, the mannerisms of a wounded animal, all contribute to the recovery of that animal.

In terms of rifle, dropping an animal efficiently, there is something more to be realized about the effectiveness and humane way in which animals succumb to a well placed arrow.

I enjoy/love hunting. Have no issue with rifle, crossbow etc. I enjoy the people I hunt with. Their weapon of choice, is their own.

[IronNoggin]

... That said, I think the challenge in both types of bows is the necessity to be within 40-50 yards for a fairly certain shot. I know some guys are comfortable with longer shots. My point is, compound or cross, the close distance required is the same. I don’t see a need to differentiate between the two.

Ed Zachery.


What we must do, is develop more awareness about weapons. I see any number of times, when we are discussing LEH vs BOS, there is always (from within the hunting community) the comment we must deal with, "if you take the crossbow out, we're fine with..... that".

It isn't the weapon, it's the personal assurance, that an ethical, experienced hunter brings to the hunt. It's easier to make a poor shot with Trad gear at 20 yards than with a crossbow. So what is the criteria?

I do not think that personal biases should enter into the matter at all.
Some here have the same mentality as the Alberta Bow Hunting Org in their desire to rid all bow seasons of crossbows, regardless of whether there are background constraints that will not allow the hunter to use vertical bows.

You still have to get damn close.
You still have to have the required skill level in all related matters.
I see that in general we agree on that.


I enjoy/love hunting. Have no issue with rifle, crossbow etc. I enjoy the people I hunt with. Their weapon of choice, is their own.

Also Ed Zachery.

Cheers

[Ron.C]

Done, just made comments of several proposals I agree/disagree with.

Regarding WK archery elk to 6 pt, I'm ok with this but make 6pt elk archery only until mid Oct and open a 15 day late rifle season mid-end Oct.

Matter of fact, would like to see this across the entire Kootenay region.

Ive killed elk with bow,rifle,and muzzleloader and don't favour one method over other.

[KBC]

Some here have the same mentality as the Alberta Bow Hunting Org in their desire to rid all bow seasons of crossbows, regardless of whether there are background constraints that will not allow the hunter to use vertical bows.


Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m picking up a little gaslighting here. I’ve been pretty clear about my thoughts which include allowing crossbows for people with a disability. I’m not the only one in this thread who has commented the same.

[hunterdon]

Point 1 - the only other options would be LEH for any bull or 3 pt and better. This would remove a portion of the hunters from the landscape. Anything that goes to LEH isn't coming back though.
Point 2 - If its the genes, would that mean the 6pt is destined to be a 6pt from the day it was born? If he had a chance to breed a cow when he was a 5pt, wouldn't his offspring have the chance at a 6?

Don't pretend to know the answers, just creating conversation.

On point 1. I think there can be other options in addition to what you mentioned. In regards to going leh and never coming back.....That's not always the case. Example, Oh about 8 years ago or so, and prior, for many years antlerless whitetail was pretty much all leh. Now for the past several years, antlerless whitetail leh has disappeared completely. In many units now, there is a general open rifle season in addition to late bow only season.

So, leh is not necessarily a no return policy to a general open season. When population numbers bounce back strongly, policy changes will need to adapt. I actually do think elk populations can come back strongly in certain areas given the right conditions. They are very adaptable.

In regards to your question on genetic determination. If the breeding bull is genetically inclined to produce 6 point plus, regardless of his age at the time of breeding his offspring inherits that trait. For example, if a human parent has red hair, his child stands a good chance of having red hair. Of course mother's genes are also a factor here. But, no matter what his age at time of parenthood, his genetic code doesn't change. Same with bull elk. Good question Kevin!

[Ambush]

In regards to your question on genetic determination. If the breeding bull is genetically inclined to produce 6 point plus, regardless of his age at the time of breeding his offspring inherits that trait. For example, if a human parent has red hair, his child stands a good chance of having red hair. Of course mother's genes are also a factor here. But, no matter what his age at time of parenthood, his genetic code doesn't change. Same with bull elk. Good question Kevin!


But if you keep shooting six points, at any age, then there will be fewer bulls and cows around with the six point genetics. Also a mature five point will out compete a smaller younger six point for breeding rights, so the five point genes are passed on more often. Any animal can be selectively bred to exhibit certain traits. That’s all that’s being done by point restrictions.

And I don’t think it is even debatable that a modern cross bow has a much farther effective range in the hands of the general ranks of hunters. If you would like to argue that, I’ve got a contest for you.

[HarryToolips]

But if you keep shooting six points, at any age, then there will be fewer bulls and cows around with the six point genetics. Also a mature five point will out compete a smaller younger six point for breeding rights, so the five point genes are passed on more often. Any animal can be selectively bred to exhibit certain traits. That’s all that’s being done by point restrictions.

And I don’t think it is even debatable that a modern cross bow has a much farther effective range in the hands of the general ranks of hunters. If you would like to argue that, I’ve got a contest for you.
Fully agree on the crossbow comment, my last posted opinion still stands on the matter....has it been quantified that not all bull elk eventually make it to 6 pt? As in, have there been studies conducted on this topic?

[hunterdon]

But if you keep shooting six points, at any age, then there will be fewer bulls and cows around with the six point genetics. Also a mature five point will out compete a smaller younger six point for breeding rights, so the five point genes are passed on more often. Any animal can be selectively bred to exhibit certain traits. That’s all that’s being done by point restrictions.

And I don’t think it is even debatable that a modern cross bow has a much farther effective range in the hands of the general ranks of hunters. If you would like to argue that, I’ve got a contest for you.

I think that's generally what I've been saying about 6 pointers. I never mentioned a single word about archery equipment. Not sure why that came up. So, nothing to argue here.

[Walking Buffalo]

Someone needs to gather the data, crunch the numbers and prove that the regulation change will not effect the desired outcome.
There will be lots of evidence available in the period after the last season shortening.

Without this foundational evidence, hunters will once again be asked to give up just a little bit more in a few years in place of a real solution.


Isn't anybody or any hunting organization actually interested in developing a scientific argument against the continuous reduction of hunting opportunity through government Assumptions?

All the talk here, yet there remains a dire lack of data, just a government proposal mired with an admission that it is based on a furtherance of a failed decision.


Straight up BC boys.
It sounds like you're doing nothing of any consequence.
Just whimpering while getting whipped.

[J_T]

Isn't anybody or any hunting organization actually interested in developing a scientific argument against the continuous reduction of hunting opportunity through government Assumptions?

All the talk here, yet there remains a dire lack of data, just a government proposal mired with an admission that it is based on a furtherance of a failed decision.


Straight up BC boys.
It sounds like you're doing nothing of any consequence.
Just whimpering while getting whipped.

Hmmm, WTF? Stab me in my f-in heart. For a comment like that, it is clear, your neither involved, nor in the know. I've seen your statement for data, and much of the data you mention in various threads is available. And I continually share it. I have neither the energy or desire to keep spitting out statistics on a web site when very few care.

There has been active discussions and work to collect and generate data, to develop funding projects around collecting data, developing funding partnerships, working from the wildlife objective perspective and then from the harvest and opportunity perspective, is an ongoing activity. But sadly, only for a few.

Government staff are neither as experienced, or committed to hunting opportunity as we are. We submit stewardship requests (approx $250k for WK elk) to enhance science behind the decisions.

In short, the defense has been developed. It just isn't palatable to many. and decisions remain political in nature. What is difficult, is getting people to step up and get involved. It doesn't happen overnight. But people need to show a desire and stay committed.

[LBM]

As said before should of left it LEH from the start, from what its saying sounds like GOS hunting is causing the problem.
Hunting should be hunting use the weapon you choose be it bow or rifle, no special season for bow etc.

[high horse Hal]

As said before should of left it LEH from the start, from what its saying sounds like GOS hunting is causing the problem.
Hunting should be hunting use the weapon you choose be it bow or rifle, no special season for bow etc.IF the problem is purely social, then yes

[HappyJack]

As said before should of left it LEH from the start, from what its saying sounds like GOS hunting is causing the problem.
Hunting should be hunting use the weapon you choose be it bow or rifle, no special season for bow etc.

GOS gives everyone the same opportunity to hunt the game animals, LEH gives special access to tags to commercial interests, antler restrictions means more shot and left animals with antlers that are too small. I prefer a GOS myself because I have an issue accepting that a rich foreign hunter has more rights to the game than a resident.

I hunt mostly for the meat, so I'd be happy with a doe or a cow elk, maybe it's time to consider something like selling cow/doe tags that will remove your ability to use a regular tag on a bull/buck for the season you have the cow/doe tags? Maybe sell tags that are moose/elk/bison combined, so you can only harvest one from each species per year. Really who needs a moose, an elk and a bison in the freezer every year?

[Ambush]

Archery season IS a GOS. You can have more hunters, more hunter days and less impact on game populations.

Since many claim that it’s all about the opportunity and an animal is simply a bonus, then it’s definitely a win/win.

[j270wsm]

^^^^most of the western states use this exact system..gos bow then late season leh for rifle and muzzle loader.

[HarryToolips]

Archery season IS a GOS. You can have more hunters, more hunter days and less impact on game populations.

Since many claim that it’s all about the opportunity and an animal is simply a bonus, then it’s definitely a win/win.

Fully agree......... no GOS and leh only wouldn't be good...

[J_T]

For clarity in BC, we refer to a "GOS Archery" opportunity as BOS. Bow Only Season. Government hesitates to adopt the term in regulation. Which tells you something of their knowledge, plan, desire. Just start using it, and eventually they will too.
BOS meets the criteria:
* maintains opportunity for all
* moves high harvest out of the rut
* Supports an increase in hunter days afield (on the premise that any day/opportunity afield is a good day)
* while reducing the human footprint in other MU's

[IronNoggin]

Hunting should be hunting use the weapon you choose be it bow or rifle, no special season for bow etc.

Blasphemy! You are well indicating your uninformed biases once again. :roll:


For clarity in BC, we refer to a "GOS Archery" opportunity as BOS. Bow Only Season. Government hesitates to adopt the term in regulation. Which tells you something of their knowledge, plan, desire. Just start using it, and eventually they will too.
BOS meets the criteria:
* maintains opportunity for all
* moves high harvest out of the rut
* Supports an increase in hunter days afield (on the premise that any day/opportunity afield is a good day)
* while reducing the human footprint in other MU's

Thanks for clarifying the matter JT. Appreciated! https://www.tnof.ca/styles/default/xenforo/smilies/Pozitive.gif

Cheers

[Ron.C]

^^^^^ JT fwiw, I agree with you 100%. But I've spoken with plenty of rifle hunters and they fail to see a BOS as "mantaining their opportunity ".

That said, many of these guys are not residents of the east or west koots. I suspect there is far more willingness by those living in the areas they hunt to utilize any and all methods that would extend their season, improve opportunity and benefit wildlife populations. I also suspect many folks that have to travel to hunt will simply travel to another region before adopting a new hunting method to take advantage of an opportunity like BOS.

[J_T]

Thanks Ron.
Yup, we know the dynamics of various regions, who submits for LEH, who submits the most, who hunts within their region of residence, and what weapons they utilize. There is a segment of the hunting community that submit LEH for everything and hunt what they get authorizations for. And, there is a segment of the hunting community that hunt on the BOS/GOS, primarily in their home region. These are all 'things' we should consider when looking at the requirement to accommodate people who want to hunt, seasons and regulation changes. FYI, again, in R4, 52% of hunters check the 'bowhunt' box when buying a licence. Whether they "identify" as a bowhunter or not, it is an indication they do view the BOS as a viable season to harvest an animal.

To be clear, as I've stated, most hunters, including myself, are less worried about weapons use than developing viable opportunity. I have never been about intruding on an existing season, or taking something away from one user group. But I'm getting real tired of the solution always being a compromised BOS. When we leave that elephant in the room, in the corner and what we should be talking about is rifle hunting in the rut. And look at what MOST jurisdictions do.

Government put restrictions on all manner of user. Loggers, mineral exploration, guides, hunters. If Government told the mineral exploration industry that they could only operate in the field with one arm behind their back. They would. Because they are passionate about that endeavour. Hunting regulation change, should align with wildlife stewardship plans and data analytics. And this is what drives me nuts. We are always less worried about creating opportunity than we are about developing a political stance to hold on to something. Hunters don't really support 'sound wildlife management', unless it favours them personally.

The response, that bowhunting limits who can hunt, is such an antiquated statement, it no longer has substance or value. I would suggest as a counter comment, rifle hunting in the rut, results in lost opportunity for all, as we look to reduce harvest to preserve, what? Wildlife? Or the "hunt"?

LEH in the WK for elk, is not the solution. But, addressing road kill of elk in the WK might ensure 'more' elk survive. Developing better winter habitat is something that needs to be addressed.

If we want to ensure viable elk populations and enjoy open opportunity, here is an observation to digest. Traveling this road, every day we observed road kill. This is a 40km stretch of highway 3 west of Cranbrook.

EK Road kills observed and counted from December 1st to February 28th
3 whitetail spikes
7 Whitetail bucks
19 Whitetail does
9 whitetail yearlings
5 Spike Elk
2 Bull Elk
14 Cow Elk ( most likely pregnant)
3 yearling cow Elk
2 mule deer buck
4 mule deer does
1 great horned owl
1 northern saw whet owl
5 muskrats
2 racoon
1 coyote
8 large unidentifiable

[HappyJack]

Don't forget to add in the animals killed by trains...

[HarryToolips]

Thanks Ron.
Yup, we know the dynamics of various regions, who submits for LEH, who submits the most, who hunts within their region of residence, and what weapons they utilize. There is a segment of the hunting community that submit LEH for everything and hunt what they get authorizations for. And, there is a segment of the hunting community that hunt on the BOS/GOS, primarily in their home region. These are all 'things' we should consider when looking at the requirement to accommodate people who want to hunt, seasons and regulation changes. FYI, again, in R4, 52% of hunters check the 'bowhunt' box when buying a licence. Whether they "identify" as a bowhunter or not, it is an indication they do view the BOS as a viable season to harvest an animal.

To be clear, as I've stated, most hunters, including myself, are less worried about weapons use than developing viable opportunity. I have never been about intruding on an existing season, or taking something away from one user group. But I'm getting real tired of the solution always being a compromised BOS. When we leave that elephant in the room, in the corner and what we should be talking about is rifle hunting in the rut. And look at what MOST jurisdictions do.

Government put restrictions on all manner of user. Loggers, mineral exploration, guides, hunters. If Government told the mineral exploration industry that they could only operate in the field with one arm behind their back. They would. Because they are passionate about that endeavour. Hunting regulation change, should align with wildlife stewardship plans and data analytics. And this is what drives me nuts. We are always less worried about creating opportunity than we are about developing a political stance to hold on to something. Hunters don't really support 'sound wildlife management', unless it favours them personally.

The response, that bowhunting limits who can hunt, is such an antiquated statement, it no longer has substance or value. I would suggest as a counter comment, rifle hunting in the rut, results in lost opportunity for all, as we look to reduce harvest to preserve, what? Wildlife? Or the "hunt"?

LEH in the WK for elk, is not the solution. But, addressing road kill of elk in the WK might ensure 'more' elk survive. Developing better winter habitat is something that needs to be addressed.

If we want to ensure viable elk populations and enjoy open opportunity, here is an observation to digest. Traveling this road, every day we observed road kill. This is a 40km stretch of highway 3 west of Cranbrook.

EK Road kills observed and counted from December 1st to February 28th
3 whitetail spikes
7 Whitetail bucks
19 Whitetail does
9 whitetail yearlings
5 Spike Elk
2 Bull Elk
14 Cow Elk ( most likely pregnant)
3 yearling cow Elk
2 mule deer buck
4 mule deer does
1 great horned owl
1 northern saw whet owl
5 muskrats
2 racoon
1 coyote
8 large unidentifiable

Well said..... you if I'm not mistaken have routine convo's and contact with regional Bios and people in power regarding wildlife.. is there a plan in place to address the wildlife highway mortality issue? Can hunters donate $ in some way towards mitigating these issues? As I stated before, what about ICBC? I'm sure they'd contribute, I don't believe they enjoy paying claims..

[J_T]

^^ Probably talk to 'them' (Government) too frequently.

I really do hope to create awareness within Government about the impacts of highway and railway mortality.
We (Collective we, BCWF, BHA, UBBC) are working to develop a sound, evidence-based, elk stewardship plan for R4. With recommendations, actions and an implementation plan.
We clearly identify highway and railway mortality as issues we would like to address. We are working on this now. It is SLOW working with Government. Takes patience.

Government will say, that managing hunter harvest is the 'easiest' way to manage elk.... And that, sets me off in a direction Government don't like to see.

We have a collaborative view of elk, elk stewardship, impacts around the health and population of elk.

As members of the regional wildlife advisory committee, we have, and will continue to, make recommendations to Government, to provide THE NECESSARY FUNDING, to address these issues.

We would like, to be able to source out partnership arrangements regarding activities and funding.

A long game, work in process.

[Greenthumbed]

Keep at it, Jim! All of us in Reg. 4 appreciate you and your efforts. It’s a huge hill to climb. I can’t help but feel we are fighting a losing battle.

[HarryToolips]

^^ Probably talk to 'them' (Government) too frequently.

I really do hope to create awareness within Government about the impacts of highway and railway mortality.
We (Collective we, BCWF, BHA, UBBC) are working to develop a sound, evidence-based, elk stewardship plan for R4. With recommendations, actions and an implementation plan.
We clearly identify highway and railway mortality as issues we would like to address. We are working on this now. It is SLOW working with Government. Takes patience.

Government will say, that managing hunter harvest is the 'easiest' way to manage elk.... And that, sets me off in a direction Government don't like to see.

We have a collaborative view of elk, elk stewardship, impacts around the health and population of elk.

As members of the regional wildlife advisory committee, we have, and will continue to, make recommendations to Government, to provide THE NECESSARY FUNDING, to address these issues.

We would like, to be able to source out partnership arrangements regarding activities and funding.

A long game, work in process.

Right on, great work... if at some point you want a hand with those partner arrangements for funding let us know.. I'm sure there's quite a few on this site even that would gladly help for the benefit of wildlife...