Bowhunting License? Extended Archery Seasons? More Archery LEH's?

[TheProvider]

As promised. So we stop hi jacking the other thread.

Should bow hunters have to purchase a cheap license in order to find out the true numbers of bow hunters in BC?

Should there be more more or extended bow only seasons?

More bow only LEH's?

No insults or cursing. If you have had more than 3 drinks please wait to respond till tomorrow ;)

[igojuone]

I pay enough taxes, should we have a wilderness/camping licence to know how many people use the forests?

[Onesock]

I think a 5 dollar bow license would be wuite affordable and it would give the govy valuable about bowhunters.

[Wild one]

I have no problem paying a small fee for a bowhunting license

No there is not a need for more archery LEH's unless it is for an area unsafe to use firearms

If there is no conservation concern with the GOS in place do not shorten it in exchange for extended archery season

Where it is not a conservation concern hand out less LEH tags and create an archery season. This provides more opportunity to anyone wanting to utilize this season rather than just the few drawn for a tag. Still have some tags available for LEH so those who don't want to bowhunt or cannot still get opportunity.

This is my view on how to utilize archery seasons

[Ozone]

No, No and No

[igojuone]

I think a 5 dollar bow license would be wuite affordable and it would give the govy valuable about bowhunters.

What makes you think it would end at $5, that wouldn't even cover administrative costs, the licensing fee(tax) would need to start at $15-20 just to cover costs.
On top of that what is it the government needs to know about bow hunters that we just can't live without knowing?

[Gateholio]

$32 base price + $10 bow fee. I think it would drive people away from bow hunting, personally.

[igojuone]

Is this in the works already?

[Gateholio]

No, it's aggiehunters brainchild. :)

[Wild one]

$32 base price + $10 bow fee. I think it would drive people away from bow hunting, personally.


Alberta bowhunting permit is $9.20 lots of other places you must buy a bowhunting permit. With proper utilization of archery seasons giving opportunity hunters don't have a problem paying it

[Gateholio]

What is the purpose of Alberta's $9.20 additional fee for the privilege of using a bow?

what would be the purpose for BCs bow fee??

[TheProvider]

Like I said in the other thread. If they need to know how many bowhunters are in BC. Simply out a check box with "Do you plan to bowhunt thid year?" On the paper work when purchasing a license.

There's no need for extra fees.

[Ozone]

Alberta bowhunting permit is $9.20 lots of other places you must buy a bowhunting permit. With proper utilization of archery seasons giving opportunity hunters don't have a problem paying it
But whats the point of it? To find out how many people use bows?

[calvin L]

We pay enough to enjoy our sport . Every day there seems to be another cash grab why would you pay more for no reason . If I had to pay to hunt with a bow I would . I love it that much . But I would like some thing from the govt to show why I would be paying . Better seasons ,more opertunity for different animals . The money back into habitat some thing like that .

[TheProvider]

Alberta also has "bowzones" which contain thousands and thousands of acres for bow only.

[Onesock]

There already is a check box on the license for bowhunters to check. It just doesn't get checked !

[Drillbit]

I do not bow hunt and do not have any desire to. I respect the guys that do it and will stand up for their rights as hunters, although I'll tease them every chance I get.

I do not agree with any further fees for hunting, or enjoying any part of BC or Canada for that matter. We're fee'd & taxed enough and the proceeds aren't managed to our benefit.

We already check off a box for bowhunting, I trust bowhunters. That is enough for Gov stats.

Same seasons for all. I don't mind youth/rookie seasons though, have to promote the sport somehow.

[Krico]

Yes please! More license fees! More regulations! More restrictions! While we're at it, let's make a bow safety/bowhunting course mandatory! And let's restrict crossbows to certain age groups and those with disabilities. Might as well put in some age restrictions to keep those pesky annoying kids from bowhunting before they're olympic calibre shooters and potentially wounding something. Maybe we should have special fees for what type of broadhead you use, say $5 for fixed head and $10 for mechanicals too.
What a joke.

[Ambush]

I buy the archery licence, in Alberta, but then I buy the bird licence to, just to shoot a few pheasants. I don't grumble about the extra few bucks, I'm just very happy to have the opportunity to hunt. Cheaper than a movie, more fun and lasts way longer. Bow hunters in Alberta pay more for having more hunting days in the field than rifle hunters. That seems fair
.As far as $10 keeping someone from hunting; When the price of gas goes up $0.02 a litre do you stay home. If you buy a coffee, donut and an app for your I-Phone, do you stay out of the woods that weekend or that season?

The problem with checking the "bow hunter box" when you buy your BC licence is that it doesn't mean you are actually going to bow hunt. Maybe just sounds fun at the time.

IMO there should be archery LEH's for most areas/species that have them for rifles. If, for instance, there are 150 bull moose tags available in 7-07 then just add 10 archery only LEH's. A number of hunters would apply for the archery LEH which would better the draw odds for the rifle hunters. And with the low success rates for the archers very few more moose would be taken. Maybe even fewer moose would be killed, because the guy that decides to take on the extra challenge of killing his moose with an arrow, may be one of the more successful rifle moose hunters anyway.
Keep in mind that the archer would have to hunt in the same area open to the rifle LEH. No restrictions on area, only weapon choice.


Any licensed hunter can participate in an archery only season. It doesn't restrict WHO can hunt, only WHAT you can hunt with. It's funny, I never hear anyone bitch about shotgun only areas.

It's pretty simple really. Almost all of the areas/seasons that are archery only are there because of conservation and safety reasons. If there was no archery season, there would be no season at all, for anybody.
But some people are just selfish enough that they would rather have nobody hunting if they can't [won't] hunt themselves.

I believe archery LEH could create more opportunity for bow and rifle hunters.

[Riverbc]

But whats the point of it? To find out how many people use bows?
Alberta's bow season is much longer than BC.s Many areas are bow only Sept 1- Oct 31..so the hunters there,(including myself) have no issue paying the archery license. I see no reason why we need an archery license in BC as our bow only season is very short.

[Onesock]

Well said Ambush. Sounds to me like alot of guys don't want a bowhunting license because those damn bow hunters may get a few extra days afield from the knowledge gained by the license. I don't 5 bucks will restrict anyone from hunting. LOL

[uraarchr]

Im sure the BC govt would find a "valid" reason to charge triple what Alberta charges.

[Wild one]

What is the purpose of Alberta's $9.20 additional fee for the privilege of using a bow?

what would be the purpose for BCs bow fee??

Just like any licence fee part of it goes back into conservation. For the species that are available in other prov BC tags are cheap in comparison so there is a savings there already.

Funny how guys think a small fee would deter people. I would place bets that if BC used more archery seasons instead of going only LEH it would be no issue. If all the areas with a high number of moose LEH gave say a 10 day any bull archery season combined with some LEH tags this added opportunity allow would justify it. This would also give opportunity for hunters beyond the sad excuse immy season with low opportunity of seeing legal game and increases the number of illegal bulls shot every year by guys trying to make a 3pt shrink.

With the legal use of crossbows in BC's archery seasons it is a lot easier for hunters to utilize an archery season than hope for an LEH in some cases.

LEH deters people and lowers hunters numbers more than anything and so do point restrictions. If BC learned to utilize archery seasons properly it actually gives more opportunity than LEH.

As I said in the other thread there is only 1 example I can think of the uses archery seasons properly and that is the southern part of region 6. I know locals in that area are happy to utilize the archery moose//GOS/LEH they have. They get opportunity to hunt moose every year with out dreaming of a 2pt or LEH.

[416]

We pay enough for tags as it is.............where as Alberta does offer advantages with longer bow season, and special areas, BC offers very little in the way of incentive for the pointy stick and string crowd. I believe it would be just another tax grab. Just like original the PAL and RPAL were one course, then they figured they could make more $$$ by splitting courses that were almost 90% over lap .........similar to rifle and archery hunting, make the two disciplines separate pursuits and charge the public accordingly, no thanks.

[GoatGuy]

I buy the archery licence, in Alberta, but then I buy the bird licence to, just to shoot a few pheasants. I don't grumble about the extra few bucks, I'm just very happy to have the opportunity to hunt. Cheaper than a movie, more fun and lasts way longer. Bow hunters in Alberta pay more for having more hunting days in the field than rifle hunters. That seems fair
.As far as $10 keeping someone from hunting; When the price of gas goes up $0.02 a litre do you stay home. If you buy a coffee, donut and an app for your I-Phone, do you stay out of the woods that weekend or that season?

The problem with checking the "bow hunter box" when you buy your BC licence is that it doesn't mean you are actually going to bow hunt. Maybe just sounds fun at the time.

IMO there should be archery LEH's for most areas/species that have them for rifles. If, for instance, there are 150 bull moose tags available in 7-07 then just add 10 archery only LEH's. A number of hunters would apply for the archery LEH which would better the draw odds for the rifle hunters. And with the low success rates for the archers very few more moose would be taken. Maybe even fewer moose would be killed, because the guy that decides to take on the extra challenge of killing his moose with an arrow, may be one of the more successful rifle moose hunters anyway.
Keep in mind that the archer would have to hunt in the same area open to the rifle LEH. No restrictions on area, only weapon choice.


Any licensed hunter can participate in an archery only season. It doesn't restrict WHO can hunt, only WHAT you can hunt with. It's funny, I never hear anyone bitch about shotgun only areas.

It's pretty simple really. Almost all of the areas/seasons that are archery only are there because of conservation and safety reasons. If there was no archery season, there would be no season at all, for anybody.
But some people are just selfish enough that they would rather have nobody hunting if they can't [won't] hunt themselves.

I believe archery LEH could create more opportunity for bow and rifle hunters.

At first blush this looks like circular logic - odds are about demand versus supply?

[Dannybuoy]

No, No and No

What he says !

[Gateholio]

Just like any licence fee part of it goes back into conservation. For the species that are available in other prov BC tags are cheap in comparison so there is a savings there already.

Funny how guys think a small fee would deter people. I would place bets that if BC used more archery seasons instead of going only LEH it would be no issue. If all the areas with a high number of moose LEH gave say a 10 day any bull archery season combined with some LEH tags this added opportunity allow would justify it. This would also give opportunity for hunters beyond the sad excuse immy season with low opportunity of seeing legal game and increases the number of illegal bulls shot every year by guys trying to make a 3pt shrink.

With the legal use of crossbows in BC's archery seasons it is a lot easier for hunters to utilize an archery season than hope for an LEH in some cases.

LEH deters people and lowers hunters numbers more than anything and so do point restrictions. If BC learned to utilize archery seasons properly it actually gives more opportunity than LEH.

As I said in the other thread there is only 1 example I can think of the uses archery seasons properly and that is the southern part of region 6. I know locals in that area are happy to utilize the archery moose//GOS/LEH they have. They get opportunity to hunt moose every year with out dreaming of a 2pt or LEH.


so the purpose of the additional fee is for conservation purposes?

[Onesock]

Its funny how just the mention of bow only opportunity strikes fear into the hearts of so many. Some people have to loose the"if I can't have it nobody can" attitude.

[Muliechaser]

$32 base price + $10 bow fee. I think it would drive people away from bow hunting, personally.

I would pay it. I personally enjoy early and late season to much to let that stop me .
Im sure alot of other die hards would agree. :mrgreen:

[Gateholio]

I would pay it. I personally enjoy early and late season to much to let that stop me .
Im sure alot of other die hards would agree. :mrgreen:

Wouldn't you want to know the reason you are paying additional fees over rifle hunters?

[TheProvider]

I only use a bow. If there was a fee I would pay it no problem.

But the idea that the money will go to conservation isn't a good argument. There's more gun hunters so charging them an extra fee instead would benefit conservation more.

[Wild one]

so the purpose of the additional fee is for conservation purposes?

No different than a waterfowl stamp. Is it needed no but it would not be the end of the world either. If the extra money goes into proper management in BC $10 a year is a small price to pay in my opinion. Start comparing tag prices of other provinces compared to BC and a yearly $10 archery permit is really nothing.

I bet there are many here who already donate more then $10 a year to help with wildlife conservation and it is not killing them

Many here spend a lot more in fuel just to get an opportunity to hunt so if it can lead to there being added opportunities in BC it may save people a lot of money in fuel.

[TheProvider]

Still haven't answered the question. Why would bowhunter pay an extra fee and not gun hunters?

[TheProvider]

Also with your argument. Would a bowhunter have to pay the fee if he only hunted during the regular season and did not hunt during bow only season?

[Stone Sheep Steve]

. We're fee'd & taxed enough and the proceeds aren't managed to our benefit.


Bingo.
I would have no problem paying for an additional bow hunting license if all the money would go into habitat enhancement, wildlife research and enforcement where it actually belongs...but to have the additional $ go into the general revenue coffers like has been happpenning for years, I say "no thanks".

SSS

[anotherone]

if there were more bow only areas, if the bow only season was longer than the 9 days at the beginning and a few weeks at the end, then yes it would be great to have an extra licence, but for the pitiful seasons we have in BC then a simple question such as " did you bowhunt last year?, do you bowhunt?" when purchasing a licence would suffice
JMO.

[Geo.338]

I am guessing Alberta bowhunters pay it because they have to in order to be in compliance . A extra fee for a bowhunter license in BC would just be another cash grab for government . We are already paying enough for licenses and tags . We check the box on our license . The ministry should have all the data they need regarding bowhunter numbers without extra charges .

I think that bow seasons and areas are pretty liberal and I can't really see giving more special seasons to bowhunters over and above what we already have .

I am all for more opportunity for hunters in the way of new leh areas and draws based on herd expansion and new transplants .I would even support new archery leh opportunities but only in areas that require archery gear for safety or conservation reasons , not just so archers can have their own special seasons and areas. Remember most of these opportunities are the direct result of volunteer effort and funds raised by conservation groups and license fees . I doubt that an extra $5 or $10 would make a noticable difference .

[J_T]

This discussion does stem from the current model of decision making. That if a GOS hunt is not sustainable, the next option is LEH. Without clear information about the number of bowhunters, Gov cannot manage the risk of introducing less consumptive, more conservative harvest models where they don't have information to predict the outcome. They need to manage hunter numbers. And when hunter numbers are the management approach (LEH), it compromises opportunity. For all hunters.

At present, we know the bow check box on the licence is not providing reliable data and we also know the year end hunter questionnaire asks no questions about weapons use, therefore it horribly skews the information about how long it takes a hunter to kill.

Having a bow licence (I'm not suggesting I support it, but rather than bully like some, I can at least see the why of it) would help Government capture some very much needed information about how many bowhunters are out there. It also can work regarding the enforcement issue if you have overlapping rifle and bow opportunities. And adding weapons use questions on the questionnaire would also be very valuable in determining the sustainability of seasons.

[r106]

3 things,

1 - I'm surprised to see some hunters wanting to add more fees to this already costly sport, I say no more fees

2 - bow hunters already have a couple more weeks of hunting than rifle hunters and open to doe's or cows in some cases. Bow hunters sound like natives, always crying how they have it rough when they already have more privileges then everyone else. :mrgreen::mrgreen: This province is huge, I don't see how there isn't enough room for every one as it is.

3- the bow only LEH not a bad idea in areas close to town were discharging a rifle might not be safe

[Onesock]

Hopefully the additional fee would result in more bow only opportunity. There, that is the reason. I don't think the GOS would loose opportunity but that the extra funds would pay for more bow only opps.
JT-are you suggesting that you don't support it?

[Gateholio]

Still haven't answered the question. Why would bowhunter pay an extra fee and not gun hunters?

Seems to be lots of dancing around trying to avoid answering. It's a pretty simple question?

[Wild one]

Seems to be lots of dancing around trying to avoid answering. It's a pretty simple question?

A firearms hunting permit would not bother me but I bet it would cause more crying than a bowhunting permit.

[Geo.338]

Seems to be lots of dancing around trying to avoid answering. It's a pretty simple question?

I guess since bowhunters have more opportunity than rifle hunters you could justify dumping an extra fee on them for extra seasons .

[Gateholio]

Hopefully the additional fee would result in more bow only opportunity. There, that is the reason. I don't think the GOS would loose opportunity but that the extra funds would pay for more bow only opps.
JT-are you suggesting that you don't support it?

How will paying extra fees = more bow opportunity? If rifle hunters paid extra then could they get more opportunity too?

Do we want to set the precedent of more $$$= more opportunity? Purchasing ( or bribing ) opportunity in a sense?

[J_T]

Hopefully the additional fee would result in more bow only opportunity. There, that is the reason. I don't think the GOS would loose opportunity but that the extra funds would pay for more bow only opps.
JT-are you suggesting that you don't support it? The internet is a great place to jump to conclusions and solutions. A new licence fee is a solution. (Solutions are the last step in working through something important) Is it the right one? Who knows? What is important is that the solution serves a purpose and meets the objective. In my post I tried to clarify what the issues are. If a licence fee resolves those issues, then I support it. I'm not sure that simply attaching a fee, does solve the issue, or that it is the only solution. But it is consistent with the models used in fishing. We have to understand, what needs fixing first. What is the objective second, and then we can talk about strategies and solutions.

If we just implement a fee, then everyone has their own ideas (expectations) about what that means. And we haven't done the work to clarify what we're trying to change. IE your example of more bow only opportunity. I don't actually agree paying a new fee would entitle someone to more opportunity. I don't see it as about entitlement. But I do feel that more bow opportunities can be found if we have a model to work with.

I believe the Province will not consider bow opportunities in the plethora of options they possibly could, until they can quantify bowhunter numbers and harvest models with archery equipment. At present, they collect very little data in this regard.

For me, its about not collecting information about a significant user group.

[The Hermit]

I agree completely with J_T's analysis and approach.

I'm not in favor of a bow hunting license or stamp or for paying more for one at this point. At some point soon the government will implement the sale of hunting licenses on-line and when they do it will be SIMPLE to make the bow hunting check box a mandatory field for completion... yes or no. They also could easily add a couple questions to the annual harvest questionnaire too.

[Phreddy]

Nyet. Nyet. Nyet! Just what we need. Another way for the government to milk us.

[TheProvider]

J_T is correct about stating the fact that knowing how many bow hunters there are in BC is not enough data. Also need to know harvest stats for bowhunters.

The argument that the fee is cheap and people will pay it is a poor statement. #1 we wouldn't know the actual amount of the fee. #2 If you truley beleive that "people will pay it" is a reasonable answer. Than your suggesting that anytime fees or taxes or gas for example is raised. That that it is perfectly fine because "people will pay it. Why not raise the price of hunting licenses and LEH Draws? People will pay. Its only another $10 or so.

Bowhunters get special seasons and extended periods to hunt? Yes we do but its ok. We don't mind if you aquire a bow and hunt during the bow season also.

[new hunter]

How about if instead of adding a fee , they make a reduction .
$10 bucks off if you only hunt with a bow .
Or allow bow hunters one free deer tag , that can only be harvested with an arrow.
I`m sure ther are all kind of ways to figure out how many bow hunters there are out there , I`m just not entirely sure why its valuable info.
The only thing I could see would be a shortening of the bow only season if thre are a lot of guys taking advantage of it .

[Wild one]

The truth of the matter is paying another fee will only give a reliable number on the number of bowhunters. Many place don't even ask if you bowhunt or not when you buy a hunting license so checking the box is not very reliable. I know the only time it gets check with my license is when I mention it to them and I don't always remember to tell them.

Bowhunting permit is of little importance. The true issue is BC's poor utilization of archery seasons as a tool to give opportunity over LEH only in my opinion.

Most are too blind to see a chance at added opportunity but instead think one group is trying to steal there game. People will start crying about not getting an LEH in a few months and go on about how they cannot hunt close to home. Well BC lacks the mind set to utilize any other option but LEH and point restriction as a management tool.

Odd how BC is struggling to recruit hunters and keeps creating youth season to do so. Yet other places utilizing special weapon seasons to keep things from being straight LEH are not.

[bassplayer]

When i started hunting in 1982 you had to purchase a bow license. It cost $6.00 and allowed you to hunt with your bow.

[goatdancer]

Do I like paying more fees - not a a chance. Would I pay if it was implemented - yes. I have paid the fee in Alberta. It was the cheapest part of the whole trip. I can't believe the whining over a $10 (estimated) fee. How much do you spend on your hunting trips? Gas, food, booze, other transportaion costs......... Take a 1/2 dozen less beer and you'll be money ahead. I am sure that fees will increase over time, just as everything else goes up. Better get used to it.

[IronNoggin]

No, it's aggiehunters brainchild. :)

More like Brain Fart IMHO...

I would pay it if it was made mandatory. Doesn't mean I would like nor support it. Simply means I like to hunt with a bow.

In order to offer support, I would need to have it CLEARLY Identified that the funds generated would be going Directly into the system of management (habitat, research etc) and certainly NOT into General Revenue. We already pay enough into that for the luxury of enjoying ourselves outdoors, and padding the various Politico's wild schemes and ideas with that does not sit well with me at all.

There are other ways to identify the number of bow hunters in BC without imposing yet another cash grab for doing so. The Gov is already bleeding us to death at every opportunity, I cannot support any further attempts at collecting even more.

Cheers,
Nog

[Gateholio]

The truth of the matter is paying another fee will only give a reliable number on the number of bowhunters. .

If the fee is only to count bow hunters, there are easier, less controversial and less costly ways to do it than adding a fee.

Adding a fee is a negative action that will bring negative results.

[TheProvider]

The biggest thing is why would bow hunters need to pay it only? Would the money only go to conservation in bow only areas? Example as theres no truth to this next question. If I go hunting with my buddy who uses a rifle and I only hunt with a bow. We hunt together on weekends during the GOS. Why should I pay an extra fee to carry a bow instead of a rifle? Should hunters who hunt in shot gun only areas have to buy a shot gun license?

I don't think anyone is complainingor whinning about spending "$10" You also cannot compare it to other provinces or states unless there GOS and LEH's are the exact same.

"Take have 1/2 dozen less beers...." Government raises property taxes 20%. No worries just sell your vehicle

[Wild one]

If the fee is only to count bow hunters, there are easier, less controversial and less costly ways to do it than adding a fee.

Adding a fee is a negative action that will bring negative results.

I agree there is better options but when you are dealing with govt when it comes to anything wildlife related the response is we lack funding.

It sucks but sometimes you need to bite the bullet to get things done

[416]

More like Brain Fart IMHO...

I would pay it if it was made mandatory. Doesn't mean I would like nor support it. Simply means I like to hunt with a bow.

In order to offer support, I would need to have it CLEARLY Identified that the funds generated would be going Directly into the system of management (habitat, research etc) and certainly NOT into General Revenue. We already pay enough into that for the luxury of enjoying ourselves outdoors, and padding the various Politico's wild schemes and ideas with that does not sit well with me at all.

There are other ways to identify the number of bow hunters in BC without imposing yet another cash grab for doing so. The Gov is already bleeding us to death at every opportunity, I cannot support any further attempts at collecting even more.

Cheers,
Nog

Well said! We all enjoy our hunting tradition no matter which form it takes, if they want to charge an extra fee, l would like to KNOW its staying in the hunting portfolio and not into general coffers.

[Sofa King]

why on earth would someone want this?
who cares about them learning more about the #'s of bowhunters.
they've proven that they don't know what they are doing half the time and there's endless posts here proving that.
i can't believe that some are saying they'd be happy to pay for a bow permit.
you must not like your money i guess.

i'm kinda surprised this doesn't already exist in bc.
we love our rules and regulations in this province.
this thread will help put the idea in their heads some more though.
i'm blaming the op if we have to have a bow permit next year.:tongue:

[Sofa King]

Do I like paying more fees - not a a chance. Would I pay if it was implemented - yes. I have paid the fee in Alberta. It was the cheapest part of the whole trip. I can't believe the whining over a $10 (estimated) fee. How much do you spend on your hunting trips? Gas, food, booze, other transportaion costs......... Take a 1/2 dozen less beer and you'll be money ahead. I am sure that fees will increase over time, just as everything else goes up. Better get used to it.


maybe because we don't have to now.
all it would be is another money-grab.
maybe we should also implement a fly-fishing extra licence.
you'd probably love that too.

[aggiehunter]

I vote yes even though it wasn't my idea...I consider bowhunters to be a segment of the governments clientel...if they don't know how clients there are how can they provide the proper service...

[Muliechaser]

Wouldn't you want to know the reason you are paying additional fees over rifle hunters?

Well of course and if it goes to a good cuase awsome!
Id like too see that extra cost go into developing bow only sections
Or maybe even towards the wolf problem.

All in all when it boils down to it . Even if it didnt go to a good
Cuase . Which it always should anyways! I would still pay it.
If u want to bow hunt you gotta pay it if not u dont hunt. With a
Bow. I wont let it stop me and many more wont

It would be nice to see it go towards bow hunting in some way or another .

And as others keep saying about bow hunter numbers.
They allready know becuase when u get your hunting licence they usually ask if.
Your a.bow hunter?

[r106]

The government shouldn't care if your bow hunting or rifle hunting? All they should care about is harvest numbers. Why the hell are we volunteering and making up a extra fee to pay to the government? If you want to put money into conservation then do it, if you want to give extra money to the government then do it. Just don't go making up some stupid extra fee I have to pay.

If this is about getting more time and area dedicated for bow hunting only then you can all go pound sand. I currently do not bow hunt but I do plan on getting into it. But not if I'm going to have to pay more. I understand that all the current bow hunters will go on with business as usual because of there investment and there already hooked. But potential new bow hunters will be discouraged. But hay if this about extended or dedicated seasons or areas for bow hunters only then it's not a big deal if others are discouraged, it just means the few bow hunters will have more bush to them self which seems to be something that they do want. :twisted::icon_frow

Not meaning to come off as a dick but this topic is ******ed. Willingly raising hunting fees. :confused::confused::confused:

[604redneck]

If u can't afford 5 or 10 bucks u shouldn't be hunting anyways

[J_T]

maybe because we don't have to now.
all it would be is another money-grab.
maybe we should also implement a fly-fishing extra licence.
you'd probably love that too.

Most of the time on here, everyone talks about final solutions IE having a bow licence and a fee, we all get wrapped up in this topic, when we don't really know why we're having this conversation.

Just like you're going on about a money grab in this post. It isn't at all about increasing revenue. Wake up.

Bottom line:
There could be a lot more bow seasons out there. Not taking anything away from GOS or rifle, simply there could be more bowhunting opportunity.
You can't have more bow seasons unless you can quantify the factors. IE how many bowhunters are there? What is the harvest model for bowhunting? How does introducing a bow season impact others? IE Allocation? GOS?

I thought most people supported science based decision making. Why then are most of you going on about social fricking issues?

A bow licence "could" be a solution to capturing bowunter participation numbers. But a licence doesn't have to have a fee attached to it. Regulatory change is one thing, reg change for fees is more complex. Why make it hard?

If we want to talk about a bowhunting licence and fees attached to it, that's fine and what we'll get is a bunch of opinions. But the real discussion should be around, what it takes to introduce positive change. And more opportunity.

[TheProvider]

Most of the time on here, everyone talks about final solutions IE having a bow licence and a fee, we all get wrapped up in this topic, when we don't really know why we're having this conversation.

Just like you're going on about a money grab in this post. It isn't at all about increasing revenue. Wake up.

Bottom line:
There could be a lot more bow seasons out there. Not taking anything away from GOS or rifle, simply there could be more bowhunting opportunity.
You can't have more bow seasons unless you can quantify the factors. IE how many bowhunters are there? What is the harvest model for bowhunting? How does introducing a bow season impact others? IE Allocation? GOS?

I thought most people supported science based decision making. Why then are most of you going on about social fricking issues?

A bow licence "could" be a solution to capturing bowunter participation numbers. But a licence doesn't have to have a fee attached to it. Regulatory change is one thing, reg change for fees is more complex. Why make it hard?

If we want to talk about a bowhunting licence and fees attached to it, that's fine and what we'll get is a bunch of opinions. But the real discussion should be around, what it takes to introduce positive change. And more opportunity.

Very well said

[TheProvider]

If u can't afford 5 or 10 bucks u shouldn't be hunting anyways

I mentioned at the start of the thread "if you have had more than a few drinks please wait to respond till the following day."

[Wild one]

Most of the time on here, everyone talks about final solutions IE having a bow licence and a fee, we all get wrapped up in this topic, when we don't really know why we're having this conversation.

Just like you're going on about a money grab in this post. It isn't at all about increasing revenue. Wake up.

Bottom line:
There could be a lot more bow seasons out there. Not taking anything away from GOS or rifle, simply there could be more bowhunting opportunity.
You can't have more bow seasons unless you can quantify the factors. IE how many bowhunters are there? What is the harvest model for bowhunting? How does introducing a bow season impact others? IE Allocation? GOS?

I thought most people supported science based decision making. Why then are most of you going on about social fricking issues?

A bow licence "could" be a solution to capturing bowunter participation numbers. But a licence doesn't have to have a fee attached to it. Regulatory change is one thing, reg change for fees is more complex. Why make it hard?

If we want to talk about a bowhunting licence and fees attached to it, that's fine and what we'll get is a bunch of opinions. But the real discussion should be around, what it takes to introduce positive change. And more opportunity.


This is the correct mentality ^^

The biggest down side I see in BC is hunters look at bow seasons as taking away from there opportunity. If implemented correctly bow season should increase opportunity.

[604redneck]

I mentioned at the start of the thread "if you have had more than a few drinks please wait to respond till the following day."
Haha I'm not even off work yet...u would get a better response at about 4:00 today from me

[TheProvider]

Well everyone knows bow hunters are selfish and want the mountains all to themselves.

Proud hunters working against each other instead of with.

Bowhunters tend to look at using bow season and bow only areas for improving conservation. While quite a few gun hunters look at it as bowhunters taking away from them.

Bow hunting is s great sport and a great way to get new people into hunting. Also a grest way to get youth involved. I have talked to a lot of people who want to hunt but don't like guns. Or people who have spouses who don't want guns kept in their house. So therefore they just don't get into hunting.

[Gateholio]

Most of the time on here, everyone talks about final solutions IE having a bow licence and a fee, we all get wrapped up in this topic, when we don't really know why we're having this conversation.




Tried a few times to ask why we were having the conversation, but nobody really wanted to answer it. :)

[goatdancer]

maybe because we don't have to now.
all it would be is another money-grab.
maybe we should also implement a fly-fishing extra licence.
you'd probably love that too.

A lot of things we didn't have to pay for at one time now cost us. It could very well be a money grab, who knows.
If fly fishing had a special fee, it wouldn't matter to me because my fishing license drops to $5 this year. :mrgreen::mrgreen:

[Gateholio]

If you want to see how many bowhunters are in BC, it's pretty easy to do, and requires no great regulation change.

Just change the form that is used to fill out the licenses. Apparently the bow box never gets checked, so change the format a bit.

All that is needed is to have 3 boxes, and make filling them out mandatory or the HL is void, just like recording your address incorrectly.

Circle only ONE. Are you a :

Firearm hunter
Firearm and Bow hunter
Bow only hunter

Put a disclaimer saying that this is for information purposes only and that you won't be limited to your circled weapon, because hunters being what they are will start to concoct tales about how you can ONLY use a gun if you circle the gun box...:)

There you have all the information you need. It's clear and about as detailed as you can get by just ticking a box or circling a weapon. If you want more detail it coudl be broken down to

Firearm
Bow
Primarily firearm but use bow
Primarily bow but use firearm
Use bow and firearm equally

etc.

Make it mandatory, print new forms, and in 2-3 years you will have all the data anyone could ever want on the subject. And no additional fee.

[J_T]

If you want to see how many bowhunters are in BC, it's pretty easy to do, and requires no great regulation change.

Just change the form that is used to fill out the licenses. Apparently the bow box never gets checked, so change the format a bit.

All that is needed is to have 3 boxes, and make filling them out mandatory or the HL is void, just like recording your address incorrectly.

Circle only ONE. Are you a :

Firearm hunter
Firearm and Bow hunter
Bow only hunter

Put a disclaimer saying that this is for information purposes only and that you won't be limited to your circled weapon, because hunters being what they are will start to concoct tales about how you can ONLY use a gun if you circle the gun box...:)

There you have all the information you need. It's clear and about as detailed as you can get by just ticking a box or circling a weapon. If you want more detail it coudl be broken down to

Firearm
Bow
Primarily firearm but use bow
Primarily bow but use firearm
Use bow and firearm equally

etc.

Make it mandatory, print new forms, and in 2-3 years you will have all the data anyone could ever want on the subject. And no additional fee. A number of these have been attempted with Government. Specifically:
making the checking of the bowhunting box mandatory, not with a fee, just mandatory.
Showing that the box was checked, on the hunting licence itself,
A selection of 1) rifle hunter, 2) bowhunter, 3) both

In addition, there have been numerous discussions with Government about the hunter harvest questionnaire and asking questions about weapons use. Lots of promises, but no action. So while these solutions seem easy, they haven't been implemented. If making a proposal to introduce a fee helps government sit up, take notice and take action, then perhaps the introduction of a fee works to start to capture information that supports a science based decision methodology.

[Gateholio]

If a fee is added, then there will have to be enforcement for non compliance, too. The casual bow hunter will probably just quit.

Nothing hunters complain about more than the cost of ammo, gas, tags and licenses! ;)

[Gateholio]

A number of these have been attempted with Government. Specifically:
making the checking of the bowhunting box mandatory, not with a fee, just mandatory.
Showing that the box was checked, on the hunting licence itself,
A selection of 1) rifle hunter, 2) bowhunter, 3) both

In addition, there have been numerous discussions with Government about the hunter harvest questionnaire and asking questions about weapons use. Lots of promises, but no action. So while these solutions seem easy, they haven't been implemented. If making a proposal to introduce a fee helps government sit up, take notice and take action, then perhaps the introduction of a fee works to start to capture information that supports a science based decision methodology.


Sounds as if they don't believe that information is of any real value to them.

[.300WSMImpact!]

most guys bow hunt because they can, and maybe a day or two, if you add a cost to that you will lose alot of bow hunters. I like bow zones or bow leh, but no more fees, and I like the idea of check a box if you plan on bow hunting

[TheProvider]

Even if it has been 2-3yrs that isnt alot of "government time" as we know they rarely move fast unless it is for their benefit.

Proposing to the government to introduce a fee just so the government will look at us and perhaps start moving seems like a bad idea. Basically shows the government anytime we want them to look at hunters interest that we will give them money to do so.

[chilko]

Seeing how we're just making random generalizations, I'll make one. Judging from your tag lines , I think it's fair to say that a lot of bow hunters feel quite superior to rifle hunters , both morally and skillwise. If that's the case I'm not sure why they can't just " get er done" during rifle season.


Well everyone knows bow hunters are selfish and want the mountains all to themselves.

Proud hunters working against each other instead of with.

Bowhunters tend to look at using bow season and bow only areas for improving conservation. While quite a few gun hunters look at it as bowhunters taking away from them.

Bow hunting is s great sport and a great way to get new people into hunting. Also a grest way to get youth involved. I have talked to a lot of people who want to hunt but don't like guns. Or people who have spouses who don't want guns kept in their house. So therefore they just don't get into hunting.

[r106]

If u can't afford 5 or 10 bucks u shouldn't be hunting anyways

It's not about if you can afford it. It's the principle of it. Another Fee or Another License, do we really need another. Why not just expand hunter survey to include do you hunt with Rifle or Bow or Both

[r106]

Seeing how we're just making random generalizations, I'll make one. Judging from your tag lines , I think it's fair to say that a lot of bow hunters feel quite superior to rifle hunters , both morally and skillwise. If that's the case I'm not sure why they can't just " get er done" during rifle season.

I get the same feeling from them on here as well

and I agree the rest

[J_T]

Sounds as if they don't believe that information is of any real value to them. In fact that is correct.

Again, with the current model, it is either GOS or LEH. A conservative approach to maintaining opportunity is not something they consider. IF they had bowhunter data and if we could establish a bowhunter harvest model, we could move toward a model that is GOS >>> Bow >>>> LEH.

It's been made before, the single biggest killer to recruitment and retention is LEH. So accept that, and come up with a solution in the middle. Archery. A non consumptive pursuit, which maximizes participation.

Its a culture. It takes time to shift peoples thinking.

To reiterate, for those who work on this shit, it isn't about taking anything away from GOS. There are options to find new opportunities using archery tackle, and if GOS is at risk due to science and over harvest, then consider an archery season before LEH.

It's just common sense.

I have said, I'm not a strong proponent for a bowhunting licence fee. But I'd rather pay a bowhunting licence fee and be able to hunt over submitting LEH's (at $5 a pop) and less than good odds at getting it.

[TheProvider]

Bow hunters do "get er done" during the general firearm season. However the neither hunters nor the government know exactly how many are successful let alone whether its during the bow season, general firearm season or in a bow only area. Hence the discussion.


Seeing how we're just making random generalizations, I'll make one. Judging from your tag lines , I think it's fair to say that a lot of bow hunters feel quite superior to rifle hunters , both morally and skillwise. If that's the case I'm not sure why they can't just " get er done" during rifle season.

[Wild one]

Seeing how we're just making random generalizations, I'll make one. Judging from your tag lines , I think it's fair to say that a lot of bow hunters feel quite superior to rifle hunters , both morally and skillwise. If that's the case I'm not sure why they can't just " get er done" during rifle season.

And many bowhunters hunt during GOS myself I rarely use the archery seasons we have available. Bowhunting does not make you a superior hunter at all it is just a different approach. I share my hunting camps with hunting partners that use anything rifle, crossbow, muzzle loader, compound, or trad and it makes no difference to me. Many times I have done spot & stalk with a hunting partner that is using a rifle and the deal is if the stalk holds a good chance for me to get within bow range it is mine if not he will take the stalk with a rifle. Most bowhunters also hunt with firearms not a lot of bow only hunters in BC.

I do it because I like the challenge of getting close and enjoy shooting archery. I get more of a rush being within 30yards waiting for the right angle to make the shot. I do it because I enjoy it and could care what others think of my hunts as it is what I enjoy.

Yes there is the odd Ahole elitist but most bowhunters could care less what others use. It has nothing to do with who is better it is about choosing the method you enjoy. Seems to me the ones that are usually talking trash are doing it against bowhunter not the other way around.

But hey what do I know I am just an evil bowhunter who must hate kids and wants to keep others out of the wood well I hunt sound about right :roll:

[GoatGuy]

This discussion does stem from the current model of decision making. That if a GOS hunt is not sustainable, the next option is LEH. Without clear information about the number of bowhunters, Gov cannot manage the risk of introducing less consumptive, more conservative harvest models where they don't have information to predict the outcome. They need to manage hunter numbers. And when hunter numbers are the management approach (LEH), it compromises opportunity. For all hunters.

At present, we know the bow check box on the licence is not providing reliable data and we also know the year end hunter questionnaire asks no questions about weapons use, therefore it horribly skews the information about how long it takes a hunter to kill.

Having a bow licence (I'm not suggesting I support it, but rather than bully like some, I can at least see the why of it) would help Government capture some very much needed information about how many bowhunters are out there. It also can work regarding the enforcement issue if you have overlapping rifle and bow opportunities. And adding weapons use questions on the questionnaire would also be very valuable in determining the sustainability of seasons.

Maybe the first push is to drive all license revenue and fees back in to wildlife management as a dedicated revenue stream.... then bow license?

[goatdancer]

Maybe the first push is to drive all license revenue and fees back in to wildlife management as a dedicated revenue stream.... then bow license?

Now that is the best idea yet.

[Onesock]

Maybe start a new thread on where hunting license revenue goes and not hijack this one!

[Pioneerman]

No not at all , some of us use bows part of the season or some areas. So then to have to buy two licenses ? IF they give you extra tags for an extra license then sure, but think we pay enough to carry pieces of mostly uncut paper in our pockets lol

[Gateholio]

Maybe the first push is to drive all license revenue and fees back in to wildlife management as a dedicated revenue stream.... then bow license?

Makes more sense than adding additional fees to obtain info that may not be of any value to the gv't

[islandarcher]

why not have the rifle hunters pay the premium? Why should we have to pay more?

[Gateholio]

why not have the rifle hunters pay the premium? Why should we have to pay more?

Yeah, stick it to the rifle hunters! :)

[TheProvider]

No one should pay if it is not needed.

[bugler]

I would certainly pay the few extra bucks to hunt the bow seasons. I'm in agreement with JT. Having some data on bowhunter numbers and success rates might help to create some opportunities for longer open seasons before LEH has to be implemented.

[J_T]

Maybe the first push is to drive all license revenue and fees back in to wildlife management as a dedicated revenue stream.... then bow license?

I don't disagree that we should also look for opportunities to ensure that our environment and our wildlife are well cared for through dedicated budgets. I agree that a baseline % of fees collected is returned to wildlife and habitat management, but I'm not entirely worried about where the money comes from. Just so long as a sufficient budget is maintained (to which there are alot of solutions). If there was a push on a higher level to modify fee structures then its wise to include the topic of a bow licence. Is the discussion of a dedicated revenue stream from fees collected really on the table? If we simply promote an economy, there is always budget allocation for 'giving back'.


Makes more sense than adding additional fees to obtain info that may not be of any value to the gv't If we build it, they will come. Create a way to collect the information. Analyze the data and the trends, test scenarios into a wildlife management module, look for anomalies, consider options (GOS, BOW, LEH), implement opportunity, and monitor the outcome post implementation. Process oriented. NOT socially driven. But you can't do it, until you have the information.

[Onesock]

This is funner than chunkin rocks at a sign! Duck Dynasty quote.

[aggiehunter]

I think guys have done a good job of answering the question...some are just refusing to either listen or accept the answer..in some ways I find it strange that rifle guys wouldn't insist bowhunters pay more...we get more....a month extra for $10...does and cows to harvest...that is some cheap entertainment...oh I feel another brain fart comin' on.

[Gateholio]

]
I think guys have done a good job of answering the question...some are just refusing to either listen or accept the answer..

It was like pulling teeth, but we finally got an answer.



in some ways I find it strange that rifle guys wouldn't insist bowhunters pay more...we get more....a month extra for $10...does and cows to harvest...that is some cheap entertainment...oh I feel another brain fart comin' on.


If bow hunters pay more, I don't really care, I just think it will discourage casual bowhunters and prospective new bowhunters, especially if it means getting a ticket from a CO for trying out a friends bow hunting gear without the bow stamp.

But knock yourself out. Pay more :)

[Ambush]

One important thing to keep in mind when complaining about fees. The more money the government makes from your activity, the more important it is for them to have you continue that activity. To the bean counters you are an entry on the fiscal page. When what you contribute is no longer worth the cost of keeping you, then off to the glue factory you go.

Votes and money are mainly what politicians are concerned with. When you no longer contribute much of either, your position is tenuous and your presence short lived.

And if other hunters are eager and willing to throw bow hunters under the bus simply because of petty imaginings about "special treatment" then don't be surprised when that group sets out to improve their own lot through independent petitioning. If you want all hunters to stick together to form a strong, united front, then you have to be willing to fight for ALL hunters. And that may mean you have to accommodate some views that differ from yours.

[Ambush]

Here's the scenario:

You have an area that can withstand 100 LEH tags and the odds are 10 - 1. One thousand people apply, but only one hundred people get to hunt. Theoretically, you will get to hunt once every ten years. Some will hunt more, some will never get drawn.

Or:
The same area could withstand a 30 day open archery-only season. Anybody can hunt every year.

Which one would you chose?

[calvin L]

Very well put ambush . Just think of the out rage if the govt set the hunti
ng season as aug - closed sept-archery Oct - muzzle loader Nov - rifle for 2weeks . the sparks would fly

[bowhunterbruce]

omg what a bunch of whining sniveling pussies.
we are some of the luckiest people on the planet when it comes to the amount of huntable animals and our ability to get over the counter tags at real cheap prices (when compared to the rest of the world)
sure some of the numbers have dropped in availibility ,however we can still hunt something all year long. and aside from hunting related expences its again still cheap.
every year i put out for 3 deer tags, 2 bear tags,a moose,an elk tag as well as goat and sheep if i get either of those draws. yes i put in for numerous leh draws and usually only successful at 1 of them.
in reality i spend a pretty cheap amount on a passion that not only allows me an opportunity to challenge both myself and my abilities to fill a freezer and put a rack or 2 on the wall.
there isn't a single place on the planet that hands out these same over the counter tags at these cheap prices.
sure adding a few "bow only zones" ie: gulf islands and around alot of cities outter limits would be nice but its not going to lessin my efforts or anyone elses for that matter if they don't ever do it.
bottom line is archery hunting allows us both before and after rifle season opportunities . would i pay an extra 5 or 10 bucks, yes in a heartbeat. its again a cheap expence for an additional month to use as a scouting with a weapon and holding out for the big one type of hunting expierence.
bhb

[TheProvider]

Most people are only looking at it narrow minded.

Yes bow hunters get to go first, yes they get a week or two extra

But..... No one has any idea of how many bow hunters are using the bow seasons and whether or not they are being successful. If the government woukd start collecting data on how many bowhunters there are, how many use bow season and if they are being successful or not.

Yes throughout BC there are multiple bow seasons. Every region is different. Some region only offer one week before the normal rifle season. So therefore some may see it as unfair that they get an extra week to hunt they still only have the same amount of tags to fill. Not every bow hunter is going to travel across BC to try for a late season doe. Also depending on the bow hunters personal life they may not even get to hunt the early bow season.

If the government could get more data on numbers of bow hunters, harvest rates not only across BC but each region/unit. Then we canlook at more options for bow hunters. Depending on regions and species it might be better instead of charging a archery license. Too offer an additional archery tag. Depending on region and species purchase the tag that is only valid during bow seasons. Its not valid for bow only areas during the GOS that are geared for safety reason. Of courses this would need lots of studying and data collected.

You just cant simply say charge bowhunter more because they get more. That statement is false untill data is collected and then it can be proven correct or false.

Also do hunters really think its smart to simply say "get rid of the bow seasons."? Hunters no matter what type of gear they use should work together to enchance the hunting seasons we already have and also develope newer ones. Closing huntings seasons is a step back for all hunters. We need to be taking steps forward.

[TheProvider]

I apologies for spelling and grammar I was typing on the phone

[GoatGuy]

JT,

We don't have the capacity for basic management functions at this point and it's only gonna get worse.

If hunters were to get onboard and push for a dedicated funding model a bow license would be a no brainer if it's something all hunters supported. Given the status of the provincial program I think there are much bigger fish to fry.

[GoatGuy]

Here's the scenario:

You have an area that can withstand 100 LEH tags and the odds are 10 - 1. One thousand people apply, but only one hundred people get to hunt. Theoretically, you will get to hunt once every ten years. Some will hunt more, some will never get drawn.

Or:
The same area could withstand a 30 day open archery-only season. Anybody can hunt every year.

Which one would you chose?

I think the Region 6 moose bow season would be a good case study. I have not looked at the participation rates but it would give us a good idea of what we can expect in terms of participation, harvest and most importantly demographics.

The rhetorical questions aren't going to contribute to the over-arching goals.

[GoatGuy]

One important thing to keep in mind when complaining about fees. The more money the government makes from your activity, the more important it is for them to have you continue that activity. To the bean counters you are an entry on the fiscal page. When what you contribute is no longer worth the cost of keeping you, then off to the glue factory you go.

Votes and money are mainly what politicians are concerned with. When you no longer contribute much of either, your position is tenuous and your presence short lived.

And if other hunters are eager and willing to throw bow hunters under the bus simply because of petty imaginings about "special treatment" then don't be surprised when that group sets out to improve their own lot through independent petitioning. If you want all hunters to stick together to form a strong, united front, then you have to be willing to fight for ALL hunters. And that may mean you have to accommodate some views that differ from yours.

Good insight, however you need to ensure both money and votes (votes being more important). License fees and demand are elastic.

The special treatment issue is one that all hunters of BC should have their say on. It is funny where people land on this stuff because you will find individuals which are totally against FN harvest but in the next breath believe they should have special seasons or restrictions depending on where they live, weapon, physical ability and age. Heck, even met people who believe they should be able to hold on to their LEH for 5 years to wait for the 'right one'. Others who think they should be able to pay more for increased opportunities or buy unlimited numbers of LEHs because they can afford it. It really is a sliding scale and often it is the individuals personal interests that they try to sell as representative of all hunters.

[J_T]

Maybe the first push is to drive all license revenue and fees back in to wildlife management as a dedicated revenue stream.... then bow license?


Makes more sense than adding additional fees to obtain info that may not be of any value to the gv't


JT,

We don't have the capacity for basic management functions at this point and it's only gonna get worse.

If hunters were to get onboard and push for a dedicated funding model a bow license would be a no brainer if it's something all hunters supported. Given the status of the provincial program I think there are much bigger fish to fry.
Because we don't have capacity, does not make the concept of collecting data on a user group, or looking at unique opportunities for a user group, wrong. So frequently on this site, the bullies come out in fear and push back, derail a conversation and erodes into infighting amongst hunters.

A dedicated funding model is definitely an objective, however I still don't see the link to a bow licence. We don't need a funding model that is based on revenue from tags and licencing. We need a dedicated funding model period. One that might come from a variety of sources. We can reach out to other sectors and quantify the energy/cost that they are contributing. IE the large mines all have wildlife habitat people on board, we should tap into those resources, when we carry out stakeholder consultation in BC around resource extraction, a component could be cost sharing around managing the impacts to wildlife. It's about partnerships and working together. Virtually everyone cares about nature and our wildlife, what they need, is an opportunity to give back.

If habitat enhancement is a requirement, then lets get back to those volunteer days of the 90's, rather than the current costly model we use. And then we can re-allocate budgets where we need to.

If carrying out winter site specific counts/surveys is important, have we considered the much lower cost approach of using drones? Capture great usable data at a fraction of the cost of having 3 biologists sitting in a helicopter.

[GoatGuy]

Because we don't have capacity, does not make the concept of collecting data on a user group, or looking at unique opportunities for a user group, wrong. So frequently on this site, the bullies come out in fear and push back, derail a conversation and erodes into infighting amongst hunters.

A dedicated funding model is definitely an objective, however I still don't see the link to a bow licence. We don't need a funding model that is based on revenue from tags and licencing. We need a dedicated funding model period. One that might come from a variety of sources. We can reach out to other sectors and quantify the energy/cost that they are contributing. IE the large mines all have wildlife habitat people on board, we should tap into those resources, when we carry out stakeholder consultation in BC around resource extraction, a component could be cost sharing around managing the impacts to wildlife. It's about partnerships and working together. Virtually everyone cares about nature and our wildlife, what they need, is an opportunity to give back.

If habitat enhancement is a requirement, then lets get back to those volunteer days of the 90's, rather than the current costly model we use. And then we can re-allocate budgets where we need to.

If carrying out winter site specific counts/surveys is important, have we considered the much lower cost approach of using drones? Capture great usable data at a fraction of the cost of having 3 biologists sitting in a helicopter.

What I'm saying is we don't have the capacity to properly compile harvest stats in a timely fashion, adding another license isn't going to help. Given those constraints, the survey intensity required for such a small sample will be a resource hog. Our current sampling method does pick up bowhunting participation rates and harvest although I don't recall if bias has ever been checked. The data for bowhunting participation and harvest is there.

I don't think it's a bad idea, just don't think we're in a place to really do something with it. Believe the focus right now should be on a dedicated funding model to get wildlife management back on track. Studies on licensing options (electronic, species, weapon specific etc) to follow. At the NGO level there's also a resource limitation and if everybody's running in different directions there will be no net benefit (that's where we're at). Everybody needs to be on the same page to get some wins - funding is the big one.

[Wild one]

I think the Region 6 moose bow season would be a good case study. I have not looked at the participation rates but it would give us a good idea of what we can expect in terms of participation, harvest and most importantly demographics.

The rhetorical questions aren't going to contribute to the over-arching goals.


I know most locals to the area in region 6 where this season is in place own a bow/crossbow and use this season. The ones I know personally are happy to have opportunity beyond LEH

[Gateholio]

Good insight, however you need to ensure both money and votes (votes being more important). License fees and demand are elastic.

The special treatment issue is one that all hunters of BC should have their say on. It is funny where people land on this stuff because you will find individuals which are totally against FN harvest but in the next breath believe they should have special seasons or restrictions depending on where they live, weapon, physical ability and age. Heck, even met people who believe they should be able to hold on to their LEH for 5 years to wait for the 'right one'. Others who think they should be able to pay more for increased opportunities or buy unlimited numbers of LEHs because they can afford it. It really is a sliding scale and often it is the individuals personal interests that they try to sell as representative of all hunters.

That's very accurate, and we see that all the time. Want FN to be on even playing field but want to claim special privileges for themselves. It's pretty ironic now that I think of it. :)

And that touches on what I said earlier about paying extra. When a group of people pay extra, they are going to want something "more" than the other guy who is paying less. They are going to want gov't to put their interests above others, even if they voted in the extra cost themselves. That's just human nature.

After all- they did pay more.

I do wonder how well an extra fee would berecieved by the majority of bowhunters in BC though. Especially if it's for collecting data that probably won't be used, because the ministry lacks the resources.

[The Hermit]

Bottom line is that LEH generates WAY more money for the Gov than implementing a bow license would. The fact that GOS - Bow - LEH would mean reduced revenue is the reason why they are dragging their feet on implementing data collection on bowhunter numbers and bow harvest stats that might lead to the logical solution above. GOS, BOW - LEH would increase opportunity to get out for many more people than those that win the LEH lottery, enhance recruitment to some extent, while decreasing harvest rates.

BTW - Fear and Loathing on HBC is getting pretty old. The vast majority of bowhunters hunt with rifles as well as the bow and do not advocate taking anything away from rifle hunters!

[Gateholio]

]
Bottom line is that LEH generates WAY more money for the Gov than implementing a bow license would. The fact that GOS - Bow - LEH would mean reduced revenue is the reason why they are dragging their feet on implementing data collection on bowhunter numbers and bow harvest stats that might lead to the logical solution above. GOS, BOW - LEH would increase opportunity to get out for many more people than those that win the LEH lottery, enhance recruitment to some extent, while decreasing harvest rates.

BTW - Fear and Loathing on HBC is getting pretty old. The vast majority of bowhunters hunt with rifles as well as the bow and do not advocate taking anything away from rifle hunters

If changing from LEH to bow = reduced revenue, then it's quite possibly a non starter.

Still like to hear specific LEH hunts that could be changed from LEH to bow, as I'm not sure everyone would be happy with that. With low odds LEH hunts, I'd much rather have the low odds than be forced to use a bow if I wanted to hunt. With the very high odds hunts changing to bow season may have unintended consequences of much higher hunter traffic which results in higher harvest than desired.

Maybe adding muzzleloading/bow season would be better than a LEH? Lots of opinions out there. :)

[J_T]

]

If changing from LEH to bow = reduced revenue, then it's quite possibly a non starter.

Still like to hear specific LEH hunts that could be changed from LEH to bow, as I'm not sure everyone would be happy with that. With low odds LEH hunts, I'd much rather have the low odds than be forced to use a bow if I wanted to hunt. With the very high odds hunts changing to bow season may have unintended consequences of much higher hunter traffic which results in higher harvest than desired.

Maybe adding muzzleloading/bow season would be better than a LEH? Lots of opinions out there. :) Right, and that's just it. Some just want to hunt. Not play a lottery game.

[Onesock]

Gatehouse-just so I understands this. You would rather not hunt at all than hunt with a bow? I don't think we can lump muzzle loaders in with bow seaons what with the distances the modern muzzle loaders are capable of.

[TheProvider]

Modern muzzleloaders are a capable of shooting far distances . But it would promote another form of hunting which is always good.

[Wild one]

]

If changing from LEH to bow = reduced revenue, then it's quite possibly a non starter.

Still like to hear specific LEH hunts that could be changed from LEH to bow, as I'm not sure everyone would be happy with that. With low odds LEH hunts, I'd much rather have the low odds than be forced to use a bow if I wanted to hunt. With the very high odds hunts changing to bow season may have unintended consequences of much higher hunter traffic which results in higher harvest than desired.

Maybe adding muzzleloading/bow season would be better than a LEH? Lots of opinions out there. :)

The LEH with high number of tags and lower odds are the ones that would be most effective without creating a conservation concern. A short GOS/bow/LEH would give the best opportunity like you see in parts of region 6 the LEH in those regions have even stayed reasonably low odds around 6 to 1.

If it is an area that can handle a muzzleloader season it would be a reasonable option but it would have a higher impact do to the longer range of modern muzzle loaders in my opinion. If this was taken into consideration I could see it as a good way to add opportunity as well. Even a primitive weapon season like used in some areas could be effective done correctly.

Many would rather have the opportunity to hunt over low odds LEH because it makes it easier to plan a hunt with hunting partners. LEH is something that splits hunting parties and partners that would like to hunt together.

[Gateholio]

I'm talking about real low odds hunts here. Like 1-2 to 1. That sort of LEH. Easy to draw, especially if a couple in my hunting party apply. Considering the great GOS opportunity in BC, I'd rather take the chance on the LEH than be restricted to using a particular weapon. Both LEH and bow only are a form of restriction, lets not forget that.

If we are looking at replacing LEH draws with a special weapons GOS then we should factor in other weapons like muzzleloaders, too. If the weapons are considered too high tech (like 100 yard bows and 300 yard muzzle loaders) then they are easily restricted by putting design restrictions on them.

[Onesock]

If you want to wait for ten years to get an elk/moose/sheep tag go ahead. I would guess the majority of guys would rather hunt every year for 10 years than sit and wait for a tag. With the shit the moose and mule population are taking maybe the GOS in BC won't be that liberal in a few years.

[Gateholio]

If you want to wait for ten years to get an elk/moose/sheep tag go ahead. I would guess the majority of guys would rather hunt every year for 10 years than sit and wait for a tag. With the shit the moose and mule population are taking maybe the GOS in BC won't be that liberal in a few years.

I doubt you will have to wait too long for a 1.5-1 hunt. Especially if its a moose or elk and you and a buddy apply. I'm not aware of any 1.5-1 odds sheep hunts. :)

[Wild one]

I'm talking about real low odds hunts here. Like 1-2 to 1. That sort of LEH. Easy to draw, especially if a couple in my hunting party apply. Considering the great GOS opportunity in BC, I'd rather take the chance on the LEH than be restricted to using a particular weapon. Both LEH and bow only are a form of restriction, lets not forget that.

If we are looking at replacing LEH draws with a special weapons GOS then we should factor in other weapons like muzzleloaders, too. If the weapons are considered too high tech (like 100 yard bows and 300 yard muzzle loaders) then they are easily restricted by putting design restrictions on them.

BC does have a good amount of GOS but a lot of it involves a lot of travelling for many or a lot of point restriction. These 2 factors and LEH are the most common ones I hear for reasons that people have stopped hunting other than the new wife don't like it. In my opinion LEH is one of the biggest killers to hunter numbers.

Other than the variety of animals in BC I do not find it that amazing of a place to hunt unless it is north of PG. If anything the potential BC holds is being held back by poor management. I have met a shocking number of hunters who live in BC but prefer to hunt out side of it.

[Gateholio]

LEH is definitely not a good thing for overall hunter satisfaction, but I'm not sure replacing it with only a bow season would increase satisfaction or meet conservation concerns either. Would a bow season for high odds hunts even work? Make some sheep LEH into a bow season and I predict huge amounts of hunters and too many animals killed just due to hunter volume! :)

[TheProvider]

Don't be turning this thread into a "LEH Sucks" thread fellas ;)

The government collecting data about bowhunter numbers/harvest rates and getting them to look into bow seasons, LEH vs bow seasons. Might be a great start for them to continue studying seasons and perhaps changing them adding more bow, muzzle loader and shot gun seasons. Sure that might not make everyone happy. But is a day out in the woods with a buddy and a bow/shot gun or muzzleloader that bad instead carrying your preferred hunting tool?

It would be nice instead of having to change a particular area from a GOS to a LEH. Too be able to bump it into a specialty season.

[Wild one]

LEH is definitely not a good thing for overall hunter satisfaction, but I'm not sure replacing it with only a bow season would increase satisfaction or meet conservation concerns either. Would a bow season for high odds hunts even work? Make some sheep LEH into a bow season and I predict huge amounts of hunters and too many animals killed just due to hunter volume! :)

Once in a life time draws should be just they way they are. I don't believe it should ever be bow only in an area for a whole season unless it is a safety issue. I have seen the mention of Alberta's bow zones they are in place do to safety issues 2 around major cities and 1 is in a popular hiking area for tourists not just to make it an opportunity just for bowhunting. Special weapon season combined with LEH should be used to add opportunity over just LEH is the way I see it.

In my opinion the LEH combined with short special weapon and GOS is one of the best management tools when the situation allows it. I think most hunters in BC can agree there is potential for better opportunity in BC.

[Onesock]

Enough of this. If changing some areas to bow only from LEH creates more hunting opportunity than I am for it. If 100 hunters can be out there rather than just 5 guys we should be looking at making some changes. If a hunting opportunity can be created in some area but not sustain a GOS than it should go to bow hunting. I am not saying to get rid of all LEH's but lets at least look at the number of hunters that can enjoy a bow opportunity v/s LEH.

[Stone Sheep Steve]

Enough of this. If changing some areas to bow only from LEH creates more hunting opportunity than I am for it. If 100 hunters can be out there rather than just 5 guys we should be looking at making some changes. If a hunting opportunity can be created in some area but not sustain a GOS than it should go to bow hunting. I am not saying to get rid of all LEH's but lets at least look at the number of hunters that can enjoy a bow opportunity v/s LEH.


Yes. We should start with Kamloops lake:-D

[GoatGuy]

Bottom line is that LEH generates WAY more money for the Gov than implementing a bow license would. The fact that GOS - Bow - LEH would mean reduced revenue is the reason why they are dragging their feet on implementing data collection on bowhunter numbers and bow harvest stats that might lead to the logical solution above. GOS, BOW - LEH would increase opportunity to get out for many more people than those that win the LEH lottery, enhance recruitment to some extent, while decreasing harvest rates.

BTW - Fear and Loathing on HBC is getting pretty old. The vast majority of bowhunters hunt with rifles as well as the bow and do not advocate taking anything away from rifle hunters!

I don't think that's accurate either.

The data is collected and there are other ways to do it - it simply isn't a priority.

[Gateholio]

Once in a life time draws should be just they way they are. I don't believe it should ever be bow only in an area for a whole season unless it is a safety issue. I have seen the mention of Alberta's bow zones they are in place do to safety issues 2 around major cities and 1 is in a popular hiking area for tourists not just to make it an opportunity just for bowhunting. Special weapon season combined with LEH should be used to add opportunity over just LEH is the way I see it.

In my opinion the LEH combined with short special weapon and GOS is one of the best management tools when the situation allows it. I think most hunters in BC can agree there is potential for better opportunity in BC.

Populated areas that could support a bow season are a great way to increase bow opportunity IMHO. Fill in any gaps between population and rifle areas. :)

[GoatGuy]

Don't be turning this thread into a "LEH Sucks" thread fellas ;)

The government collecting data about bowhunter numbers/harvest rates and getting them to look into bow seasons, LEH vs bow seasons. Might be a great start for them to continue studying seasons and perhaps changing them adding more bow, muzzle loader and shot gun seasons. Sure that might not make everyone happy. But is a day out in the woods with a buddy and a bow/shot gun or muzzleloader that bad instead carrying your preferred hunting tool?

It would be nice instead of having to change a particular area from a GOS to a LEH. Too be able to bump it into a specialty season.

Try to be a little more obvious - government doesn't have the resources to study this. We don't even have enough money or staff to properly conduct inventory at regular intervals, staff to do data analysis, or run the LEH draw for that matter.

It's great to talk about all these 'solutions' but there are a few fundamentals that need to be properly addressed way before that.

[AFR]

In my opinion Alberta is way ahead of this province in regards to the bow hunting zones. It does take a rocket scientist to know bow hunting (not crossbows) success rates are lower than rifle. Alberta has it right with crossbows as well. You can't hunt with one unless you are disabled. Im not going to hunt big game in BC this year and just head to Alberta. Just my two cents.

[Gateholio]

In my opinion Alberta is way ahead of this province in regards to the bow hunting zones. It does take a rocket scientist to know bow hunting (not crossbows) success rates are lower than rifle. Alberta has it right with crossbows as well. You can't hunt with one unless you are disabled. Im not going to hunt big game in BC this year and just head to Alberta. Just my two cents.

What areas in BC would be good candidates to designate as a bow zone?

[Boner]

What areas in BC would be good candidates to designate as a bow zone?

I'd say hard no access areas where they won't bother the road and quad hunters.
J/K
I think the people who want bow hunting zones should approach people who own larger tracts of land. Places where there are game, but the property sizes can't guarantee the safety of the neighbourhood around it. For example, like 80 acre and larger sized parcels of land where in many situations a bullet could clearly pass through into a neighbours property.

[Wild one]

Populated areas that could support a bow season are a great way to increase bow opportunity IMHO. Fill in any gaps between population and rifle areas. :)

Lots of no discharge of firearm near populated areas in BC they just don't call them bowzones :wink:. This is not a way to create an new opportunity as the option is available except in municipalities that have a law against it but I bet if they were re named bowzones it might make a few happy :lol:.

The only reason the bowzones in Alberta have everyone's attention is the hold better game numbers and land owners in Alberta are more open to giving permission to hunt. Edmonton/Calgary bowzones are all private and the Canmore bowzone is the same idea as the area around Whistler. Game population is just better in Alberta do to better management making these areas more appealing

[aggiehunter]

There goes Gatehouse not wishing a measly bow licence but willing to accept "design restrictions...OMG....bottom line...if your in business..you need to know your clientel..gov't is in business even if we don't like that notion.

[aggiehunter]

Hermit...all respect intended...how do you know how much a bow licence could generate vs. LEH...cause I sure would like to know...I'm guessing there are at least 15,000 bowhunters in BC...and with Gatehouse increasing our licence to twenty five bucks. This is now offically my favourite thead...almost nearing 14 pages.

[Gateholio]

There goes Gatehouse not wishing a measly bow licence but willing to accept "design restrictions...OMG....bottom line...if your in business..you need to know your clientel..gov't is in business even if we don't like that notion.

Get it right- I don't care if you want to vote yourself an extra fee, but I don't think it will help bowhunter recruitment.

And if there is going to be seasons based on special weapons, then it shouldn't stop with bows. Traditional muzzle loaders should get the same considerations.

[aggiehunter]

Gate, I have nothing against a special muzzeloader season....say from Sept. 10th to Sept. 20th BC wide....I think that would be feakin awesome....sell it baby...see if you can get Elk included in that will ya'...

[Gateholio]

Gate, I have nothing against a special muzzeloader season....say from Sept. 10th to Sept. 20th BC wide....I think that would be feakin awesome....sell it baby...see if you can get Elk included in that will ya'...

I'm thinking we just add an extra fee to buy a special ML hunting license, and that would get gv't to drop LEH add more traditional ML seasons.

[aggiehunter]

sounds good also...I've been putting in for a Cali for too many years to remember..smokepole might be fun...just gotta decide which one to put in for...bow LEH or MZ LEH...

[The Hermit]

Hermit...all respect intended...how do you know how much a bow licence could generate vs. LEH...cause I sure would like to know...I'm guessing there are at least 15,000 bowhunters in BC...and with Gatehouse increasing our licence to twenty five bucks. This is now offically my favourite thead...almost nearing 14 pages.

GoatGuy no doubt has a much better memory than this old fart, but I recollect that the MOE revenue from LEH is north of $1M annually. Lets assume that moving to "GOS - Bow - LEH" cuts their LEH revenue in half to only $500K which is a stretch IMHO.

At $25 for a bowhunting license then $25 per x 15,000 = $375,000. An immediate shortfall of $125,000. Plus they would have to design, administer, collect, pay retailers their commission, etc eroding their revenue even more. AND that is assuming that charging yet another fricken fee would have no impact on bowhunter retention and recruitment which in my view is a big assumption.

Of course before they could/should/would go there all the proper studies would need to be funded, a harvest model be adopted, all at the expense of higher priorities like moose recovery plans, surveys, etc. Frankly, I just don't see it happening.

In my view the best we can hope for is for the MOE to lean a little on the municipalities to loosen their no hunting/no shooting by-laws and allow "permitted" bow hunting in the urban/rural boundaries, which is where most of the game is these days anyway! ;-) Would I like to see a significant increase the number of bow hunting days? Absolutely! We can do that with little added cost in areas where there are no conservation concerns, and especially in areas where the human population density essentially rules out firearms. Example - The Municipalities of Saanich, Central and North Saanich, Sooke, the Gulf Islands, and the entire eastern seaboard of Vancouver Island and probably the mainland coast as well could easily sustain a bow only season through February with an increase in bag limits too. The typically low success levels of most bowhunters would have little impact on populations, and that could be monitored via the permit process, but the main point I want to drive here is that the above approach would not take anything away from the rifle only crowd but would provide a lot more opportunity TO ANY LICENSED HUNTER THAT IS WILLING TO PICK UP A BOW AND GO HUNT!

[aggiehunter]

Hermit...don't you know theres a hockey game on...well obviously tomorrow I'm gonna add up all the LEH's and then do the math...no wait a minute I'm busy...all I was trying to get accross is no one knows how many bowhunters there are and quite possibly never will...oppression is an endearing force to some.

[igojuone]

Its funny how just the mention of bow only opportunity strikes fear into the hearts of so many. Some people have to loose the"if I can't have it nobody can" attitude.

You want to make it bow only all year long that's ok with me but I'm not interested in giving the government any more of my money to flush down the toilet.

[igojuone]

No different than a waterfowl stamp. Is it needed no but it would not be the end of the world either. If the extra money goes into proper management in BC $10 a year is a small price to pay in my opinion. Start comparing tag prices of other provinces compared to BC and a yearly $10 archery permit is really nothing.

I bet there are many here who already donate more then $10 a year to help with wildlife conservation and it is not killing them

Many here spend a lot more in fuel just to get an opportunity to hunt so if it can lead to there being added opportunities in BC it may save people a lot of money in fuel.

So if all the other provinces jack their fees up 200% then BC should too because everyone else is, so what your saying is 2 wrongs make a right.

[igojuone]

I guess since bowhunters have more opportunity than rifle hunters you could justify dumping an extra fee on them for extra seasons .

More days yes but as for more opportunities I'm not so sure. Maybe being relatively new to bow hunting I found it much harder to get within shooting range with my bow then my rifle.

[igojuone]

Do I like paying more fees - not a a chance. Would I pay if it was implemented - yes. I have paid the fee in Alberta. It was the cheapest part of the whole trip. I can't believe the whining over a $10 (estimated) fee. How much do you spend on your hunting trips? Gas, food, booze, other transportaion costs......... Take a 1/2 dozen less beer and you'll be money ahead. I am sure that fees will increase over time, just as everything else goes up. Better get used to it.

One day the fees will be so high that your cheque won't cover them all, better get use to it. One day someone might ask you to bend over, better get use to it.

[Wild one]

I am only in favour of a bowhunting permit if BC is willing to use bow seasons as a way to add opportunity. At this time I see most regions in BC giving a small bow season in hopes to get bowhunter to not bother them. I have seen bow seasons proposed and shot down every year not because of conservation concerns but instead they are shot down because resident hunters and GO think bowhunters will shoot all THERE game. Examples of this are the Sept 1-9 6pt elk region 8 and Nov fullcurl sheep region 4 bow seasons that were proposed and shot down hard to see a conservation concern with these season :roll:

And people think bowhunters are trying to keep all the game for them selves :lol:

The common response when dealing with govt when it comes to wildlife is they lack funding so maybe giving them some can put that excuse to rest. I would even be willing to pay more for tags if we seen better management in BC even. Would I enjoy paying more no but sometimes you need to pay to play.

It is true funding is lacking when it comes to wildlife management in BC so maybe instead of hunters complaining about it expecting the money to magically appear we should all pony up a little to improve things.

This is just how I see it but if you have a better way to find funding for BC's wildlife management my ears are open but the present system is failing

[GoatGuy]

GoatGuy no doubt has a much better memory than this old fart, but I recollect that the MOE revenue from LEH is north of $1M annually. Lets assume that moving to "GOS - Bow - LEH" cuts their LEH revenue in half to only $500K which is a stretch IMHO.

At $25 for a bowhunting license then $25 per x 15,000 = $375,000. An immediate shortfall of $125,000. Plus they would have to design, administer, collect, pay retailers their commission, etc eroding their revenue even more. AND that is assuming that charging yet another fricken fee would have no impact on bowhunter retention and recruitment which in my view is a big assumption.

Of course before they could/should/would go there all the proper studies would need to be funded, a harvest model be adopted, all at the expense of higher priorities like moose recovery plans, surveys, etc. Frankly, I just don't see it happening.

In my view the best we can hope for is for the MOE to lean a little on the municipalities to loosen their no hunting/no shooting by-laws and allow "permitted" bow hunting in the urban/rural boundaries, which is where most of the game is these days anyway! ;-) Would I like to see a significant increase the number of bow hunting days? Absolutely! We can do that with little added cost in areas where there are no conservation concerns, and especially in areas where the human population density essentially rules out firearms. Example - The Municipalities of Saanich, Central and North Saanich, Sooke, the Gulf Islands, and the entire eastern seaboard of Vancouver Island and probably the mainland coast as well could easily sustain a bow only season through February with an increase in bag limits too. The typically low success levels of most bowhunters would have little impact on populations, and that could be monitored via the permit process, but the main point I want to drive here is that the above approach would not take anything away from the rifle only crowd but would provide a lot more opportunity TO ANY LICENSED HUNTER THAT IS WILLING TO PICK UP A BOW AND GO HUNT!

Probably north of 170,000 applications if I had to guess.

The change in revenue hasn't been calculated or considered but you've done a great job of sussing out other issues that are a priority (losing 50-70% of moose - more important?).

In terms of the Municipal approach, I believe there will be something on this at the BCWF AGM this year! This project will need champions at the local level - government won't be the one taking it on. Great opportunity for archery hunters to get involved to drive positive change.

[Husky7mm]

Also a great why to deal with urban deer problem for free, as it starts on the outskirts. I am sure that all the town deer were once acreage/fringe deer. Of coarse there will be those that push the boundries both into town and to far into the woods.......

[GoatGuy]

I am only in favour of a bowhunting permit if BC is willing to use bow seasons as a way to add opportunity. At this time I see most regions in BC giving a small bow season in hopes to get bowhunter to not bother them. I have seen bow seasons proposed and shot down every year not because of conservation concerns but instead they are shot down because resident hunters and GO think bowhunters will shoot all THERE game. Examples of this are the Sept 1-9 6pt elk region 8 and Nov fullcurl sheep region 4 bow seasons that were proposed and shot down hard to see a conservation concern with these season :roll:

I don't think this is accurate - sheep are an exception, but I'm pretty sure the 6 pt bow season in Region 8 was supported.


The common response when dealing with govt when it comes to wildlife is they lack funding so maybe giving them some can put that excuse to rest. I would even be willing to pay more for tags if we seen better management in BC even. Would I enjoy paying more no but sometimes you need to pay to play.

It is true funding is lacking when it comes to wildlife management in BC so maybe instead of hunters complaining about it expecting the money to magically appear we should all pony up a little to improve things.

This is just how I see it but if you have a better way to find funding for BC's wildlife management my ears are open but the present system is failing

The problem right now is license fees and surcharges go in to general revenue (other than HCTF). The money is then 're-distributed' as government sees fit. We need all license revenue to go directly into management, then we can talk about license fees and way to generate revenue for improved wildlife management. Need the horse first, then we can build the cart.

[GoatGuy]

Also a great why to deal with urban deer problem for free, as it starts on the outskirts. I am sure that all the town deer were once acreage/fringe deer. Of coarse there will be those that push the boundries both into town and to far into the woods.......

With the reappearance of wolves and poor habitat urban conflicts and deer moving in to town is becoming a bigger problem every year. If we had a few champions in the archery community there will be some huge bow opportunities in interface areas - those areas typically hold a lot of wildlife and in some spots they hold some monster wt's.

[J_T]

I don't think this is accurate - sheep are an exception, but I'm pretty sure the 6 pt bow season in Region 8 was supported.



The problem right now is license fees and surcharges go in to general revenue (other than HCTF). The money is then 're-distributed' as government sees fit. We need all license revenue to go directly into management, then we can talk about license fees and way to generate revenue for improved wildlife management. Need the horse first, then we can build the cart.

I'm not sure about that distribution model. This takes the topic far away from the real issue. I get that you are linking revenue to opportunity, but I don't feel that's the link or approach. It is important to establish a reasonable and responsible budget, absolutely, but the model to get there doesn't have to be built on a direct fee (revenue) to budget (expenditures) correlation.

Most other resource programs that collect fees don't have their fee collection equivalent channeled directly back in to that program area. It does come down to Government prioritizing. Where to put the revenue they do get. Lots of royalties, rentals and chattel fees being paid by the resource sector.

Making a case to allocate greater funds into something like our wildlife management or regulatory process will be based on putting a business case together. I'm not aware of a Government program establishing a capital or operation budget without justification. Justification starts with a business case. I don't agree that it must be the holistic approach one size fits all. Everyone on the same train.

Build a number of business cases, based on REAL issues and establish a direct relationship between tangible and intangible (net benefit) benefits and start small. Secure funding for something and build momentum from there.

Back to the issue, hunting opportunity supports an economy, in all communities. Creating hunting opportunity will generate more money, simply because hunters need more gear, hunt more, travel more. LEH is required in many cases. No question. But LEH is hard on recruitment and retention. Therefore LEH is hard on the revenue side. LEH also keeps the question of allocation (residents vs non-res) in check.

To put fees (tangible revenue) and intangibles into perspective, The provincial government raises about $10million in mining related fees each year, but generates $400million into local economies, just because exploration is out there and happening. So they allocate a greater budget to support mining exploration.

Let's get more diverse in our approach to hunting and get more hunters out there.

[Husky7mm]

With the reappearance of wolves and poor habitat urban conflicts and deer moving in to town is becoming a bigger problem every year. If we had a few champions in the archery community there will be some huge bow opportunities in interface areas - those areas typically hold a lot of wildlife and in some spots they hold some monster wt's.
For sure....
And yes its a bigger problem every year. Once the fawn is born in the town enviorment its screw for life. But putting pressure on them close to town will likely keep them wild and out of town.

[J_T]

Interface area opportunity come with an increase in risk to the image of the hunter. Must understand that, going in to the discussion, and Government must be seen as supportive to the efforts of hunters, not hunters demanding a hunt close to town. Otherwise Government will drop hunters as quick as a piece of fresh shit as soon as the social escalation occurs.

[GoatGuy]

I'm not sure about that distribution model. This takes the topic far away from the real issue. I get that you are linking revenue to opportunity, but I don't feel that's the link or approach. It is important to establish a reasonable and responsible budget, absolutely, but the model to get there doesn't have to be built on a direct fee (revenue) to budget (expenditures) correlation.

Most other resource programs that collect fees don't have their fee collection equivalent channeled directly back in to that program area. It does come down to Government prioritizing. Where to put the revenue they do get. Lots of royalties, rentals and chattel fees being paid by the resource sector.

Making a case to allocate greater funds into something like our wildlife management or regulatory process will be based on putting a business case together. I'm not aware of a Government program establishing a capital or operation budget without justification. Justification starts with a business case. I don't agree that it must be the holistic approach one size fits all. Everyone on the same train.

Build a number of business cases, based on REAL issues and establish a direct relationship between tangible and intangible (net benefit) benefits and start small. Secure funding for something and build momentum from there.

Back to the issue, hunting opportunity supports an economy, in all communities. Creating hunting opportunity will generate more money, simply because hunters need more gear, hunt more, travel more. LEH is required in many cases. No question. But LEH is hard on recruitment and retention. Therefore LEH is hard on the revenue side. LEH also keeps the question of allocation (residents vs non-res) in check.

To put fees (tangible revenue) and intangibles into perspective, The provincial government raises about $10million in mining related fees each year, but generates $400million into local economies, just because exploration is out there and happening. So they allocate a greater budget to support mining exploration.

Let's get more diverse in our approach to hunting and get more hunters out there.

I guess these are different philosophical approaches. Personally, I don't believe business and government fit in the same sentence. Government generally does a poor job of managing it's 'businesses', never mind what it sees as costs centers. Hunting and angling are treated as cost centers, no different than health care. You don't have to convince me otherwise, I'm sure we agree they aren't - however, that's just the way government sees it. You could try to educate the MLAs on that, but there aren't many bright lights that 'get it', trust me. Most of them are so terrified about health care and education they don't care about making jobs or generating wealth.

On the bureaucratic side you can try the same, but unfortunately most bureaucrats are experts in their field (forestry, wildlife, what have you) and not business. Wasn't too long ago I had a bureaucrat tell me there was no business case for internalizing the millions of dollars from hydro compensation fund - :cry::cry: and that hydro is better at managing those dollars. WOW! Really? The same BC Hydro that axed all the employees last fall, has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars and consultation and sounds like it is now hiring all those employees back. How's that for planning?


Anyways, I would like to see a self-sustaining model and have the on the ground and management side moved out of government, the same as freshwater fisheries society. Government's debt loads and historical lack of planning has turned it into a sinking ship, quicker we get off the better chance we have of not being sucked down in the undertow.

[GoatGuy]

Interface area opportunity come with an increase in risk to the image of the hunter. Must understand that, going in to the discussion, and Government must be seen as supportive to the efforts of hunters, not hunters demanding a hunt close to town. Otherwise Government will drop hunters as quick as a piece of fresh shit as soon as the social escalation occurs.

In Kelowna we have a park that borders city limits where people ride bikes, horses, hike and hunt. It's a very, very small park and everyone gets along because there are hunters involved in the process. Has nothing to do with government - hunters are taking the lead on it. We have other areas that are adjacent to development where the same occurs. Fields and golf courses where people hunt geese, other areas where they hunt deer with shotguns and on it goes.

We have hunters that attend city council meetings are in touch with the regional district, their MLAs and so on. There was even a proposed no discharge of firearms bylaw and the meeting was FULL of hunters - the bylaw sure as heck wasn't being proposed because government was supportive.

All it takes is a champion or two inside the hunting community to make things happen.

[The Hermit]

Check out the thread on the Saanich Deer hunting issue. There are real opportunities and some progress being made here, and no doubt our progress and approach will be considered and hopefully adopted around the Province in other municipalities where there are wildlife conflicts and hopefully for broader hunting consideration too. The purpose of last week's public meeting was to connect farmers with local hunters and to spell out the by-laws, permit process, and to encourage more hunting! Awesome!

I have since been contacted by the police to provide them with some feedback on their process, requirements, and to help them better understand more about legal archery tackle. We are setting up a department wide training session for them hopefully later this month where officers will get some hands on time with traditional, compound and crossbows, a mini IBEP if you will plus a little review on transportation of firearms laws. ;-) On behalf of the UBBC I made some recommendations regarding public safety, property evaluations, neighbor involvement, shooting set-ups etc. I stressed to him that as bow hunters we are VERY concerned about the public perception of bow hunters and hunting in general and talked about how best to minimize the risk of having deer running around the neighborhood with an arrow/bolt sticking out of its ass... I dread the press if/when that happens. So do the farmers I've spoken with... everyone wants to move forward with as little public outcry as possible.

So once again Jesse and J_T are correct in so much that a few hunters with an accommodating yet persistent involvement at the local level can make a difference.

[GoatGuy]

Check out the thread on the Saanich Deer hunting issue. There are real opportunities and some progress being made here, and no doubt our progress and approach will be considered and hopefully adopted around the Province in other municipalities where there are wildlife conflicts and hopefully for broader hunting consideration too. The purpose of last week's public meeting was to connect farmers with local hunters and to spell out the by-laws, permit process, and to encourage more hunting! Awesome!

I have since been contacted by the police to provide them with some feedback on their process, requirements, and to help them better understand more about legal archery tackle. We are setting up a department wide training session for them hopefully later this month where officers will get some hands on time with traditional, compound and crossbows, a mini IBEP if you will plus a little review on transportation of firearms laws. ;-) On behalf of the UBBC I made some recommendations regarding public safety, property evaluations, neighbor involvement, shooting set-ups etc. I stressed to him that as bow hunters we are VERY concerned about the public perception of bow hunters and hunting in general and talked about how best to minimize the risk of having deer running around the neighborhood with an arrow/bolt sticking out of its ass... I dread the press if/when that happens. So do the farmers I've spoken with... everyone wants to move forward with as little public outcry as possible.

So once again Jesse and J_T are correct in so much that a few hunters with an accommodating yet persistent involvement at the local level can make a difference.

Got a report on it last weekend, sounds like things are moving forward.

Good job!

The wounding thing needs to be addressed and acknowledged.

[Onesock]

As most bow hunters know,or should know, an arrow shot deer/elk/whatever does not go down immediatley and can cover a couple hundred yards or more with a fatal hit. I've been on enough recovery missions to know how hard it is to track a mortally wounded animal in snow let alone no snow. As JT has stated our(hunter)image within the non-hunting population is our blessing or curse. Have some greeny find a dead deer that didn't get recovered or have a deer with an arrow sticking out of it die on Mrs Smith's lawn and bowhunters would be the scum of the earth. While I am in agreement that alot of critters live in these fringe areas I am not in agreement about this being a great bowhunting opportunity. I for one would rather be away from population when I bow hunt.

[GoatGuy]

That's the difference between taking a proactive versus a reactive approach.

[Wild one]

I don't think this is accurate - sheep are an exception, but I'm pretty sure the 6 pt bow season in Region 8 was supported.



The problem right now is license fees and surcharges go in to general revenue (other than HCTF). The money is then 're-distributed' as government sees fit. We need all license revenue to go directly into management, then we can talk about license fees and way to generate revenue for improved wildlife management. Need the horse first, then we can build the cart.


You very well may be right about the region 8 elk season this is just the reason I was given and not by the best source. Do you know the reason the elk bow season is not in place?

As for license fee's going into general revenue instead of wildlife management that is an issue and can see this as a very difficult thing to change.

[GoatGuy]

You very well may be right about the region 8 elk season this is just the reason I was given and not by the best source. Do you know the reason the elk bow season is not in place?

As for license fee's going into general revenue instead of wildlife management that is an issue and can see this as a very difficult thing to change.
It was just proposed this year - it will be discussed in April at the hunter advisory committee meeting.

The second is easy, if everybody pushes. Wildlife management and hunting is a rounding error in terms of the big picture.

[Onesock]

You can be as proactive as you want to be. Have a greeny see one wounded deer and we are all Bambi killers. Period. Proactive or not you won't get to the entire population and it only takes one TV news cast or newspaper story to paint the bloody picture!

[GoatGuy]

You can be as proactive as you want to be. Have a greeny see one wounded deer and we are all Bambi killers. Period. Proactive or not you won't get to the entire population and it only takes one TV news cast or newspaper story to paint the bloody picture!
You worry about the 70% in the middle and acknowledge animals will be wounded out of the gates. Use other examples ie road collisions, starvation etc.

[Husky7mm]

Yes and predator expanding in urban areas following the habituated deer. The NEED for organic meat, taking the burden off the tax payer for a cull......

[J_T]

Anyways, I would like to see a self-sustaining model and have the on the ground and management side moved out of government, the same as freshwater fisheries society. Government's debt loads and historical lack of planning has turned it into a sinking ship, quicker we get off the better chance we have of not being sucked down in the undertow.
How about a model that integrates to existing corporate data sources and services, provides enhanced online services, reduces the data entry and data capture costs, provides any number of offline or internal data management reports, integrates to GIS map data, with a return on investment of 1 or 2 licensing cycles, and reduces ongoing operational costs?

im skiing this weekend and this will be my last post until Monday. Cheers.

[Ambush]

The wounding thing needs to be addressed and acknowledged.

Fifteen or more years ago this very same scenario presented it's self in the eastern states. Burgeoning deer herds and no hunting. Many counties had been pushed into becoming no hunting zones. They all soon regretted it. It became expensive and burdensome to municipalities and to land owners.

Along comes some innovative and creative bow hunting clubs. With some cajoling, lobbying and financial figures they convinced councils, over the anti's frantic squeals, to let them try to control the problem, FOR FREE. It worked so well that those first few clubs gave seminars to other interested clubs. Urban bow hunting is now just a regular part of management.

In most cases a hunter had to take a proficiency test at the range and had to have harvested a certain number of big game animals already. This was administered by the presiding club. That prevented the "weekend warrior" from grabbing his buddies old bow and letting loose enough arrows to finally bring a deer down.

The general public can still be convinced to side with common sense and fair play, especially if it saves taxes and private dollars.

[GoatGuy]

How about a model that integrates to existing corporate data sources and services, provides enhanced online services, reduces the data entry and data capture costs, provides any number of offline or internal data management reports, integrates to GIS map data, with a return on investment of 1 or 2 licensing cycles, and reduces ongoing operational costs?

im skiing this weekend and this will be my last post until Monday. Cheers.


Absolutely, if it's outside government you can run it like a business, no need for a 'common platform'.

[GoatGuy]

Fifteen or more years ago this very same scenario presented it's self in the eastern states. Burgeoning deer herds and no hunting. Many counties had been pushed into becoming no hunting zones. They all soon regretted it. It became expensive and burdensome to municipalities and to land owners.

Along comes some innovative and creative bow hunting clubs. With some cajoling, lobbying and financial figures they convinced councils, over the anti's frantic squeals, to let them try to control the problem, FOR FREE. It worked so well that those first few clubs gave seminars to other interested clubs. Urban bow hunting is now just a regular part of management.

In most cases a hunter had to take a proficiency test at the range and had to have harvested a certain number of big game animals already. This was administered by the presiding club. That prevented the "weekend warrior" from grabbing his buddies old bow and letting loose enough arrows to finally bring a deer down.

The general public can still be convinced to side with common sense and fair play, especially if it saves taxes and private dollars.

Absolutely, like that common sense, or as I now like to refer it as the 'uncommon sense' approach.

[Onesock]

I never said the urban bow hunting shouldn't be pursued but caution should be used. Sounds like Bill is going down the right road. I don't think to mnay bowhunters will be up for the profiency tests though. Not with rifle hunters shooting 500yds plus.

[aggiehunter]

We all saw the nice ladies on the news complaining about the goose hunt in Kelowna...you could see the condos in the background...not where I prefer to hunt geese but each to their own. As far as the 6pt BowOnly Elk in Region 8, that was turned down before and it was the biologist of the day that stated in writing "there was no surplus of Elk to allow the hunt"....then theres a GOS...????? Anywhoo you can't always blame the GO or the Resident if your own Bio won't back it.

[GoatGuy]

We all saw the nice ladies on the news complaining about the goose hunt in Kelowna...you could see the condos in the background...not where I prefer to hunt geese but each to their own. As far as the 6pt BowOnly Elk in Region 8, that was turned down before and it was the biologist of the day that stated in writing "there was no surplus of Elk to allow the hunt"....then theres a GOS...????? Anywhoo you can't always blame the GO or the Resident if your own Bio won't back it.
Most of the people in town who saw that thought she was a wing nut including people I know who are vegans and vegetarians...... Full support for hunting.

[Wild one]

Urban bowhunting can give opportunity but it comes with a few issues

A bowhunting test would be good for this scenario to limit conflict with public

If you are talking about areas that consist of only private land access will be an issue unless you have land owners supporting it. One thing that can hinder access is it is legal in BC for land owners to except money for hunting rights in BC. I know of a few ranches in BC that outfitters pay land owners for exclusive hunting rights to there property already. It is also common for waterfowl clubs to to do the same. This has potential to create access issues.

The reason it works in Alberta is it is illegal for landowner to except money for hunting rights. Also if a land owner is proven to be refusing all hunting they cannot claim crop damage. Most land owners would be pissed if these laws were put in place here.

Unfortunately I have found hunter have a bad name in some areas of BC the common responses I have heard from land owners is because idiots have shot livestock, lots of hunting without permission, and safety concerns created by idiots shooting deer in someone's drive way as they are going by.

Done correctly yes I can see it creating opportunity but between access issues and bad press created by idiots it could be a waste of time if it is majority private land without support of land owners.

If it consisted of OK amount of crown land as well it could work with less grief. If all private land it could be a success or a complete waste of time depending on local land owners

[bugler]

I never said the urban bow hunting shouldn't be pursued but caution should be used. Sounds like Bill is going down the right road. I don't think to mnay bowhunters will be up for the profiency tests though. Not with rifle hunters shooting 500yds plus.

I know what you're saying regarding the proficiency test but I think it might be a good thing to implement for bowhunters wanting to hunt in urban or interface areas, where otherwise it would be no hunting at all. When it comes to the rest of BC hunting opportunity I'll accept a bow proficiency test when rifle hunters have to take one.

[bugler]

That's very accurate, and we see that all the time. Want FN to be on even playing field but want to claim special privileges for themselves. It's pretty ironic now that I think of it. :)

I'm thinking even you can see the difference. A bowhunting opportunity is open to everybody. First nation hunting "rights" are based strictly on race, a trait that is unattainable for most of us. I will not be eligible for this right no matter how hard I practice, how old or young or disabled or able bodied.

Clearly, promoting bowhunting opportunity for all to enjoy is not in conflict with a desire to have all hunters follow the same rules in this province, regardless of race.

[Gateholio]

I'm thinking even you can see the difference. A bowhunting opportunity is open to everybody. First nation hunting "rights" are based strictly on race, a trait that is unattainable for most of us. I will not be eligible for this right no matter how hard I practice, how old or young or disabled or able bodied.

Clearly, promoting bowhunting opportunity for all to enjoy is not in conflict with a desire to have all hunters follow the same rules in this province, regardless of race.

\You need to take my response in context of what I was replying to:


The special treatment issue is one that all hunters of BC should have their say on. It is funny where people land on this stuff because you will find individuals which are totally against FN harvest but in the next breath believe they should have special seasons or restrictions depending on where they live, weapon, physical ability and age. Heck, even met people who believe they should be able to hold on to their LEH for 5 years to wait for the 'right one'. Others who think they should be able to pay more for increased opportunities or buy unlimited numbers of LEHs because they can afford it. It really is a sliding scale and often it is the individuals personal interests that they try to sell as representative of all hunters.




Some of the conditions Goat Guy listed are voluntary, some are not.

Bottom line is that sometimes we see when a person demands equality for everyone else then chooses his circumstance and then demands special treatment because of his choice. Bow seasons are not open to everyone, they are only open to those that have a bow. GOS are open to everyone, regardless of weapon.

[aggiehunter]

I wonder if we can get this thread over the magic marker of 20 if I mentioned a mandatory IBEP course for all who wish to bowhunt??? Still great conversations guys and I've only been insulted once...awesome...

[The Hermit]

I still think we should be working hard to have a beefed up bowhunting section as part of CORE! I could insult you but I'd hate to risk losing my cooler privileges! :-)

[Wild one]

\You need to take my response in context of what I was replying to:




Some of the conditions Goat Guy listed are voluntary, some are not.

Bottom line is that sometimes we see when a person demands equality for everyone else then chooses his weapon and then demands special treatment because of his choice. Bow seasons are not open to everyone, they are only open to those that have a bow. GOS are open to everyone, regardless of weapon.


Special weapons season do restrict the use of weapon but I would not call it special treatment. Most can pick up a different weapon but nobody can change there race or age. Areas where a good amount of opportunity is offered do to special weapons seasons you will find a lot more hunters willing to pick up that weapon to use those seasons. I understand why a good number of rifle hunters will not consider picking up a bow in BC as the common 9 days of any buck is not worth paying out the money for a bow or crossbow to many. I can say there are a lot more active bowhunters in places like Alberta because of the seasons.

Point restrictions in a lot of ways are the same thing you are telling a meat hunter they must only take 4pt, 6pt, 10 pt, tri palm ext when they just want to put meat in the freezer. There is a lot of meat hunters who will not participate in these seasons because of it. You hear it all the time how 4pt season has a lot less hunters in the bush compared to any buck season. I know many meat hunters who would rather hunt any buck with bow/crossbow over 4pt GOS

Special weapon season are just another way manage hunters impact on game and are common practice in many areas. They have been run successfully giving hunter opportunity and are being utilized by hunters. This is not a far fetched idea that has never been used successfully and there are many examples of it here in North America.

[Gateholio]

You can look at it several ways, depending on your particular agenda. Bow hunters will say that anyone can participate, so it's not really special. I say it is special because it exclusive based on weapon choice. Many bow seasons aren't in place due to conservation concerns, they are in place becuase bow hutners wanted special treatment. The early bow seasons in many regions are good examples of that.

[The Hermit]

Please be more specific Gate. Provide references, minutes of meetings, prove that "Many bow seasons aren't in place due to conservation concerns, they are in place becuase bow hutners wanted special treatment. The early bow seasons in many regions are good examples of that."

I haven't been hunting with a bow or politically active for long enough to have the details but my guess is that there are always a number of factors and considerations when decisions like these are made.

[Gateholio]

You don't really think that the reason the bow seasons for the first 9 days of September in some regions were put in place because there is a conservation issue, do you?

[Ambush]

You can look at it several ways, depending on your particular agenda. Bow hunters will say that anyone can participate, so it's not really special. I say it is special because it exclusive based on weapon choice. Many bow seasons aren't in place due to conservation concerns, they are in place becuase bow hutners wanted special treatment. The early bow seasons in many regions are good examples of that.

Are bow hunters a special interest group? Yes by definition, the same as water fowler's. You have to have a shotgun to shoot ducks. The same as hounds men have a special " pursuit" only season. The uplands guys can put their dogs on birds out side of regular season.

The world, country and province are made up of "special interest" groups. Golfers, skiers, hikers, bird watchers, hunters, hockey players, sports watchers, etc..
AND it is incumbent on the government to provide and maximize these opportunities for the various groups. I didn't attend the Olympics nor do I visit Whistler, but I helped pay for the road and infrastructure to enable those that do participate.

They should close hockey rinks, because only people with expensive skates and gear can play there. No more forestry camp sites. For sure no handi-cap fishing docks.
No more sturgeon fishing. You need a boat and special gear to do that. Pretty exclusive club, don't you think?

When the anti's threaten to shut down a shooting club somewhere, the cry is for "all hunters" to defend the cause. If the rifle guys said. " ah, it's just a trap club anyway, special interest group, you know".

Special treatment?? Does the Pemberton gun club get non-profit status?

Gatehouse. You don't like bowhunters and all the time I've been on here you've never missed a chance to poke the archers in the eye. You drive a wedge, usually in a subtle, yet easily decernable way. And that's your privilege to do so, but it really is an un-flattering trait, especially for a moderator.
You want every hunter to jump on the "AR-15 train" and defend your special interest group.

Do bow hunters lobby for bow hunting? Of course! Who should do it, the Wild Steel Head Society, maybe the Trap Shooters Ass., or why not the local fly fishing club? People naturally advocate for their own interests.

From the guy who can't wait to take a doe to the fellow that hunts for ten years waiting for that special Stone's sheep, from the worm drowning shore fisherman to the dry fly purist, we are ALL special interest groups. So are you.

We expect "Divide and Conquer" to come from the outside. It's a shame when you have to be on guard against "Friendly" fire to.

[BRrooster]

If a Bow Hunting fee is to be introduced , it should be for the benefit of "Bowhunters". The cost of the fee should sponser anything to do with bowhunting. NOT to be
put into GENERAL REVENUE , perhaps to add to the pension fund of our esteemed political members!!!
I am a bowhunter and have been for 30 years. More special seasons and limited entry tags would be a bonus. With the special requirement for Moose harvesting in BC
, it is very hard for the average guy to experience that hunt. Havent seen a 2pt in the last 5 years, and have only been drawn for a LEH once in the last 25 years.
Perhaps select or special seasons would be a good thing. I would pay an aditional fee for a bow hunting liscence for the right reasons. But , alas, its usually someone
who doesnt know anything about the subject at hand that makes up the rules and regulations.
(going for my second drink now so I better stop here)
cheers

[Gateholio]

Yeah, it's clear that I just CAN'T STAND bowhunters....I mean, look at this thread:

http://www.huntingbc.ca/forum/showthread.php?53368-Bowhunting-often-leads-to-slow-and-agonizing-death&highlight=whistler+bowhunting

I showed up for bow hunters. Completely absent were any of the bow organizations

[Onesock]

Yea Gate u are such a martyr! Bowhunting forever,

[Gateholio]

Yea Gate u are such a martyr! Bowhunting forever,

Didnt see you step up at all. Or maybe you were advising the whistler bow hunter that said that his bow hunting was okay but crossbows should be banned?

[Ambush]

Yeah, it's clear that I just CAN'T STAND bowhunters....

I didn't say you can't stand bow hunters, but you seldom miss an opportunity for a dig against them.

No problem, I just accept it as one of your flaws. The cost of doing business on HBC.

Oh yea. You may want to check the thread "Lower Mainland hunters ......." Special interest group looking for "special" treatment. Where will it end? :-?

[Gateholio]

I didn't say you can't stand bow hunters, but you seldom miss an opportunity for a dig against them.

Sure you did. In the post above you said that I don't like bowhunters. Same thing, different words.


No problem, I just accept it as one of your flaws. The cost of doing business on HBC.


Just being honest....I don't think anyone can argue that there is any reason for early bow seasons other than that bow hunters wanted a special season.



Oh yea. You may want to check the thread "Lower Mainland hunters ......." Special interest group looking for "special" treatment. Where will it end? :-?

Just as I fully supported the bow hunters when bow hunting in Whistler was threatened, I fully support the waterfowl hunters who are being threatened. I'm pretty sure the BCWF will step up to the fight too, just as they did with Whistler.........

[aggiehunter]

Wild One, All respect intended..you say there are a lot more active bowhunters in Alta...but do you or us even know that????? I will tell you for a fact that I have moved my choice of MU's and Regions due to an overabundance of bowhunters...don't get me wrong that's not a bad thing just my choice....so every year I see more and more bowhunters in BC..we just need to know that's all.

[Wild one]

Wild One, All respect intended..you say there are a lot more active bowhunters in Alta...but do you or us even know that????? I will tell you for a fact that I have moved my choice of MU's and Regions due to an overabundance of bowhunters...don't get me wrong that's not a bad thing just my choice....so every year I see more and more bowhunters in BC..we just need to know that's all.


In my opinion yes there is a higher number of bowhunters in Alberta. I can honestly say almost every hunter I met out there would hunt with a bow at some point in the season and met a lot of bow only hunters. Very common for me to come across other bowhunters out well hunting in Alberta as well. I did practice at an archery range in Alberta

In BC most hunts I go on I do not see another bowhunter but I don't hunt during bow season often. Majority of people I have met who bowhunt in BC only bowhunt for a few days a year during archery season. That being said I have not bothered to go to a shoot or target practice at a range in BC in years. I shoot on my property instead.

It could be the areas I have hunted and when I hunted them or where I choose to practice. I don't chase the popular archery season like it seems most bowhunters do in BC so this could play a roll in it. I don't doubt there is more bowhunters each year as it is becoming more popular with the advances in gear

[Wild one]

You can look at it several ways, depending on your particular agenda. Bow hunters will say that anyone can participate, so it's not really special. I say it is special because it exclusive based on weapon choice. Many bow seasons aren't in place due to conservation concerns, they are in place because bow hutners wanted special treatment. The early bow seasons in many regions are good examples of that.

Can you tell me why a hunter could not participate in bow season then?

You seem to have a preconceived opinion on what every bowhunters goal is on this issue

In my opinion the sept bow season is what you called it giving bowhunters a crack at the new young bucks first. Good way to get new bowhunter started and as you have see a good season to get youth started. You could easily change it to another sept 1-30 under utilized 4pt season with no conservation concern you are correct. Every trophy rifle hunter would love you for it to.

This is far from the only season that was created by pressure from a group of hunters. Trophy hunter push there agenda as do meat hunters each group has a different opinion on how to manage wildlife best.

The thing is the way BC is managing it's game is failing crash in moose number mule deer doing poor in areas. The GOS's in place here are not going to last forever the way things are in BC.

[Gateholio]

]
Can you tell me why a hunter could not participate in bow season then?

They can if they use a bow. GOS you can use whatever you like. Bow season is therefore an exclusive season based on choice of weapon. Just being honest.


You seem to have a preconceived opinion on what every bowhunters goal is on this issue

At first I had no idea why some wanted more fees. Now I see that some feel it will allow them to gather information that gv't won't use.

I really don't care about either the early bow hunts or the extra fees. I was pretty much out of the conversation until bugler brought me back, so I clarified what I was commenting on.

[J_T]

Sure you did. In the post above you said that I don't like bowhunters. Same thing, different words.

Just being honest....I don't think anyone can argue that there is any reason for early bow seasons other than that bow hunters wanted a special season.

Just as I fully supported the bow hunters when bow hunting in Whistler was threatened, I fully support the waterfowl hunters who are being threatened. I'm pretty sure the BCWF will step up to the fight too, just as they did with Whistler.........bow seasons are normally created on the shoulder of GOS when conservation is an issue. Animals are more vulnerable and a rifle season is not sustainable at that time. Most of us accept that as conservation.

I would also submit that a bow requires no special skill over a rifle, and a rifle requires courses to own and operate, and that, makes rifle the special interest. We seem to equate majority with the norm and the reality is rifle hunting represents the majority because its the most efficient method to take an animal. The reality is rifle IS the special interest, greater effort, more skill and greater cost to get into. It's really quite simple for most of us to see that.

[J_T]

Gatehouse, you say you don't care about bow hunts or seasons or extra fees, but you are the biggest bully on here about an activity that you don't approve of. As a moderator how about adjusting your position and being a bit more supportive of hunters.

[Gateholio]

Gatehouse, you say you don't care about bow hunts or seasons or extra fees, but you are the biggest bully on here about an activity that you don't approve of. As a moderator how about adjusting your position and being a bit more supportive of hunters.

JT could you tell me exactly what activity that I don't approve of please?

[Gateholio]

bow seasons are normally created on the shoulder of GOS when conservation is an issue. Animals are more vulnerable and a rifle season is not sustainable at that time. Most of us accept that as conservation.

I would also submit that a bow requires no special skill over a rifle, and a rifle requires courses to own and operate, and that, makes rifle the special interest. We seem to equate majority with the norm and the reality is rifle hunting represents the majority because its the most efficient method to take an animal. The reality is rifle IS the special interest, greater effort, more skill and greater cost to get into. It's really quite simple for most of us to see that.

I think it's going to be pretty hard to convince anyone that a 9 day bow season prior to a 60+ day GOS when the deer are spread from peak to valley is there for conservation reasons! :)

As for "the norm" that's GOS when any weapon is legal. Restricting weapons makes it an exclusive ( or special) season.

Regardless, these seasons are in place and there doesn't seem to be any reason to change that. As I said- I was pretty much out of the conversation. Now I'm a bully because I have opinions and state them. Oh well....

[GoatGuy]

Guys need to get over the philosophies, anecdotal rhetoric and wild definitions.

Need to make informed decisions on this stuff so we know what the costs/benefits are and long-term implications for decisions. That takes money for research and monitoring.

[field marshal]

The only special interest groups that need increased opportunity, are us SENIORS :mrgreen: and YOUTH!!! Flyfishers, bowhunters and the rest of them can go pound sand!!! Modern bow tackle and cross-bows with scopes are not primative weapons!! Lots of whinning goes on here on this site about 1 law and rules for ALL residents of this province!!! Gatehouse is right, NO MORE FEES for anything!!!----Cheers---Field Marshal.

[Wild one]

The only special interest groups that need increased opportunity, are us SENIORS :mrgreen: and YOUTH!!! Flyfishers, bowhunters and the rest of them can go pound sand!!! Modern bow tackle and cross-bows with scopes are not primative weapons!! Lots of whinning goes on here on this site about 1 law and rules for ALL residents of this province!!! Gatehouse is right, NO MORE FEES for anything!!!----Cheers---Field Marshal.

Let me guess you are afraid if a bow season is put in place it may take away from your opportunity and that is your real issue. If you read through this thread it is not bowhunters trying to take away from your GOS but instead to give an option beyond just LEH/point restriction.

No one is calling it primitive weapon either. They are just a weapon that has a shorter range and you need to be pickier about shot placement do to bone and relying on haemorrhage not shock. Because of this it limits the success rate of hunters over a rifle and can be used as a tool to limit harvest just the same as LEH/point restrictions do. It is common practice to use bow seasons as a management tool to give opportunity for people to hunt a less restrictive season through out North America. Same is done with shotgun/muzzle loader and again if you read through the thread you would see people are not against this either.

This is not a new idea but instead a proven effective management tool that is utilized throughout North America with success.

I will pass on your advice to go pound sand as it does not sound like an enjoyable experience. If you have a better suggestion I maybe willing to listen

[field marshal]

Wild one!! Typical bowhunter rhetoric! You stated bowhunting limits the success rate?? Okay, then how is it an effective management tool??
Do you have facts to back-up this statement? I am a goose hunter. We have special seasons supposedly to keep the population in check!
Here in the Cowichan district hundreds are shot every year. It does Jack shit to control the population. Every year Spring recruitment is phenominal!
Yes I take full advantage of it, but I seriously don't say we are an effective management tool. Bowhunters do not need special consideration!!!
Cheers-----Field Marshal.

[Wild one]

Wild one!! Typical bowhunter rhetoric! You stated bowhunting limits the success rate?? Okay, then how is it an effective management tool??
Do you have facts to back-up this statement? I am a goose hunter. We have special seasons supposedly to keep the population in check!
Here in the Cowichan district hundreds are shot every year. It does Jack shit to control the population. Every year Spring recruitment is phenominal!
Yes I take full advantage of it, but I seriously don't say we are an effective management tool. Bowhunters do not need special consideration!!!
Cheers-----Field Marshal.

If you have a game species that the population is too high in an area it is safe to discharge a rifle it is plain to see GOS is the way. Bow seasons can be used to give opportunity incases where the population can not handle the GOS same as point restrictions and LEH are used. Closest place you can see it used effectively is with the moose season in parts of reg 6 the combo of GOS/LEH/bow seasons works and gives hunters the opportunity to hunt any bull every season to all hunters. If used correctly it gives opportunity and anyone can use these seasons unlike LEH only.

As for waterfowl it is not my thing so I know little about it but I can see it being a lot harder to manage a species that travels as much as they do in a year.

You display the typical BC hunter who is too afraid of change to look at the different management tools. Like I said this is common practice throughout North America and proven effective. This is not some crazy idea that has never been tested it WORKS and after experiencing the use of combining LEH/GOS/bow season first hand yes I will support it.

Wouldn't you think if it was just about special interest groups it would not be such a common management tool? It is not like bowhunter out number rifle hunters as many are combination of both.

[The Hermit]

LOL more fear and loathing on HBC...

[Ambush]

The only special interest groups that need increased opportunity, are us SENIORS :mrgreen: and YOUTH!!! Flyfishers, bowhunters and the rest of them can go pound sand!!! Modern bow tackle and cross-bows with scopes are not primative weapons!! Lots of whinning goes on here on this site about 1 law and rules for ALL residents of this province!!! Gatehouse is right, NO MORE FEES for anything!!!----Cheers---Field Marshal.

Well this thread about to degenerate beyond redemption as is the fate of most of it's kind. So I might as well speed along it's demise.

Field Marshal. You are part of a group that has special seasons open to you based on no merit or virtue of your own, solely your age. AND you get greatly reduced licence fees as well. Then you claim there should be " one law for ALL". Kind'a hypocritical, don't you think?

If it really is about retention and recruitment, then any opportunity that forwards that goal should be embraced by all. Otherwise you're just doing the talking without the walking.

And as Wild One has said several times, the moose model used in parts of Reg. 6 has been able to offer enhanced opportunities for a many users. I have never drawn an LEH for 6 and I don't rifle hunt anymore, so I take advantage of the archery season. The hunters that don't bow hunt, plan for their yearly moose hunt, with friends, families and guns. Some do both. The lucky LEH winners have their choice. Sounds like a lot of win!

[bugler]

Of all the "restrictive" seasons we have in place to provide opportunity while limiting harvest, bow seasons are the most inclusive. While I don't have a problem with youth and senior seasons, they do in fact discriminate by age. LEH excludes those who don't draw. Bow seasons are available to everybody! More and more people are hunting with them and I, for one, would like to see the managers made aware of that fact in some way. If it takes an extra license to accomplish that I'm good with it.

[Husky7mm]

The wheels will get road off every opportunity given out, history confirms that.

[aggiehunter]

hey Hermy'....for a pastime that ain't particularly popular it sure can garner some long conversations hey?

[Wullfen]

When I bought my licence and bear tag a few weeks ago, the girl at wholesale asked me if I bow hunted and recorded my "yes" on a government form. So the government is tracking numbers in that way.

[Sofa King]

so, do the people who seem to "want" to pay for a bowhunting licence also think gas prices aren't high enough?

how 'bout food and beer? maybe we should be paying more for those also.

maybe we should have to show our bullets before each hunt and pay a fee for each round fired off. just for the sake of shelling out more $$.

this is as stupid as paying for an extra flyfishing licence.
or how about a whole second licence to be legal to drive a car "and" a truck?

[Sofa King]

Of all the "restrictive" seasons we have in place to provide opportunity while limiting harvest, bow seasons are the most inclusive. While I don't have a problem with youth and senior seasons, they do in fact discriminate by age. LEH excludes those who don't draw. Bow seasons are available to everybody! More and more people are hunting with them and I, for one, would like to see the managers made aware of that fact in some way. If it takes an extra license to accomplish that I'm good with it.

why are you concerned about the "managers"?
what is it you think they need to be doing?

here's what they would do if they were to realize that there's a huge base of bowhunters.
they would bring in more restrictions to bowhunting.
and find ways to apply more money-grabs.
similar to everything else that is found to be getting popular.
text messaging was free when cell phones started. but once they were able to see how popular it had become, "bang", start charging for that shit.
propane used to be dirt cheap. then they started seeing more and more people converting their vehicles over to it. "bang", propane prices soar.

that's what's nice about bowhunting being viewed as not that popular.
even if they went crazy and started the procedures of eventully confiscated everyone's firearms.
at least we'd always be able to still hunt, since there's always the bowhunting option.
but sure as shit, if it became licenced, they'd be viewed and regulated like guns eventually.
then, it could get to the point where our only option to still hunt would be with a sharpened stick.