Zone 212

[BUD]

l know we can use shotguns in 212 for birds but l dont see where it says we can use shotgun slugs for Deer in this zone , does anyone know for sure , also l see theres a new shotgun/slug season for Cow Elk this year in 212, but its deer i,m interested in for now.

[Sandalius]

Bud, I think it's under the " foothills deer licence" . Late season - additional hunting opps

[TreeGuy]

Bud, I think it's under the " foothills deer licence" . Late season - additional hunting opps

BUD, X2! Any other questions hit me with a PM!:wave:

Tree

[Stinky Coyote]

yeah, you can get a couple antlerless with boom sticks in december, usually two weeks where you can hunt mon-thurs with the primitive weapons....foothills lisc. is what its called from memory....time to get that crossbow in for the the general archery seasons me thinks...

[Sharpedge]

Absolutely the crossbow should be allowed during the archery season in WMU 212. But try getting the powers that be to agree to this. The evidence in support of such a qualified tool as the crossbow is has been presented to successive Alberta F&W officers, managers and ministers for well over 20 years and still they collectively refuse to acknowledge and act upon all the sound research, whilst other enlightened jurisdictions in North America faced with similar problems do. Instead of allowing crossbows in archery seasons where conditions warrant more harvest we instead have organized Rifle Quota Hunts and now an Antlerless Elk Special License Draw that includes firearms under the pretence that they are less dangerous but nevertheless effective weapons. And when push comes to shove because the animals have exceeded the available habitat or the populace won’t tolerate such large numbers, ASRD might have to find the money for a helicopter gun platform; and then some contract marksman with a semi-auto .308 will do the necessary. No bows and arrows of any kind will be employed. And then we archers will stand together with heads bowed in witness of what has come about. We need to stand together now! With our heads held high and proud.

Meanwhile we have citizens effectively writing to local F&W enforcement and having the hunting rules changed so that they and their friends might go about their daily lives in peace and without fear of getting shot, and rightfully so. But why do landowners or occupiers have to effectively host an annual influx of strangers with mixed weapons and other means of disturbance? Because our wildlife is owned by them and us: The public. Public, de facto ownership of wildlife implies that there must be fair allocation of that very renewable public resource too. This is done through the regulation of hunting and the way a harvest is conducted. And whilst such a harvest used to be largely a matter of putting food on the table, it has since become a selective recreational activity for many people who oft come from outside of the rural areas and are not recognised as being local. Local people, if you will, are usually aware of neighbours and their lifestyles and thus they invariably act accordingly. Unfortunately, with the ever increasing urban tax paying populations that typically seek their rightful recreation through hunting, and are encouraged to do so by Alberta government, the nearest playing fields sometimes become overrun and quality of life becomes an issue for many.

This quality of life and the hunt are ones that have traditionally been enjoyed by those of us who chose or choose, for whatever reasons, to take up the bow and arrow. To stalk or wait quietly with primitive tools is very natural and appealing to those who appreciate our very being on this earth. Man against beast and the elements conjure up a time when a man would be a real breadwinner inasmuch as he brought home the bacon and all would rejoice and thank him for doing so. It is a basic human need to be wanted, or loved if you like, and although millions of years have since passed, we humans have not changed all that much. Applause and recognition are still basic needs and we continue to seek and respond to them. Taking an animal cleanly with a bow and arrow is definitely not easy, and definitely is an achievement worthy of recognition, but this ideal should not be at the unbalanced expense of either the animals or those who choose not to participate.

The wildlife management unit (WMU) 212 was not established as a preserve for quality bowhunting. It came into existence because some frightened tax-paying residents at the time wanted to ban all hunting with firearms. This of course met with much reasoned opposition from those people who recognised the need for predator and pest control as well as some means of managing big game numbers. The bow and arrow was promoted and accepted as the least offensive and yet practical solution to this conundrum and the quiet, short range, broadhead shooting crossbow was either rejected or ignored. Why exactly, remains obscure.

With respect,

Sharpedge

[Nationwide]

l know we can use shotguns in 212 for birds but l dont see where it says we can use shotgun slugs for Deer in this zone , does anyone know for sure , also l see theres a new shotgun/slug season for Cow Elk this year in 212, but its deer i,m interested in for now.
Bud i would stay away from wmu 212 i have heard reports of guys parking off the road sitting in the ditch with there dog wing shooting while eating chocolate bars and smokeing there cigs next to posted land be advised to avoid this area and there dressed in green:sick:.

[Jamie]

bud i would stay away from wmu 212 i have heard reports of guys parking off the road sitting in the ditch with there dog wing shooting while eating chocolate bars and smokeing there cigs next to posted land be advised to avoid this area and there dressed in green:sick:.

huh????

[Cowtown guy]

Jamie you may have been in Alaska when that particular discussion took place. It was in regards to a question Mish posted regarding goose hunting. It should be in the archives. It was a pretty good chat that one.

[choclab]

Sharp the ABA (Alberta Bowhunters Association) got the bow zones in place not frightened taxpayers.

[collectornine]

BUD Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 553



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sit in the ditch between the lake where they stay and the field where their feeding , and keep your head down , no black or red hats , no movements.
No need for a bunch of expensive gear , rubber boots and a warm parka in olive light green or tan , lotsa smokes and a choclate bar , yer good ta go.





http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showthread.php?t=14741

[TreeGuy]

Nine, BUD takes some getting used to, but in the end he's a good guy that I'll vouch for at least 40% of the time!:D

Honestly, thanks for the link, as I missed that one. Interesting, and my take is that if BUD ain't breakin' the law, then he's good in my books.

Tree

[Sharpedge]

Sharp the ABA (Alberta Bowhunters Association) got the bow zones in place not frightened taxpayers.

Dear choclab,

Rather than write a one line contest, why don't you do some homework like I have? I do not write without foundation and I have done some considerable research on the subject matter. The evidence is on record with various councils and the F&W department. A simple telephone call to the Area Biologist office will confirm what I have originally written in this thread.

The Alberta Bowhunters Association were influential in having bows and arrows approved for hunting in certain areas, but is was because of, yes frightened, citizens concerns for safety that "archery only for big game" in WMU 212 came into being in 1974. How do I know this? Because I was there and I was a member of the ABA and a local resident at the time too.

I would be delighted if you could provide some real facts instead of simply suggesting that I'm misleading anyone.

Regards,

Sharpedge

[choclab]

Sharp what am I suppose to prove, you state the aba was influential in getting the bowzones in place, enough said. what evidence are you talking about that I need to research?

[Stinky Coyote]

sharp, you still an aba member?

[Stinky Coyote]

Sharp the ABA (Alberta Bowhunters Association) got the bow zones in place not frightened taxpayers.

hmmmmm, i'm going with sharp on this one...not worth bickering about really but hurray for the aba for exploiting an easy one because of the 'frightened people'...where the heck is the ABA now? sounds like a good time for them to play super hero (again) and leap into action on the crossbow thing eh?...:rolleye2:

or would they rather see the culls and more firearms stuff open up in their 'archery only' zones?....

i should clarify as i might have been a bit sarcastic....i agree with sharp and sounds as though he is right and done his homework....and if the boom sticks were still allowed in the bowzone i would be frightened too!....cross hwy22 west during the hunting season and its scary, i could only imagine! yikes....the rest was basically taking a jab at the aba....i won't let up on doing that until they get with the program on the crossbow lol, if you wanna defy all logic etc. and be outright selfish about something then you deserve a few jabs here and there me thinks:tongue2:

[tracker]

I've taken 3 deer with slugs under a foothills deer license on a friends property. There are very few places around to hunt though. If you check the regs, you are only allowed to hunt certain tracts of land (40 acres or larger I think). With the amount of acreages that have sprung up lately that limits the available huntable land.

[Sharpedge]

sharp, you still an aba member?

Hi Stinky Coyote,

Your question is polite and deserves my answer. No, I am not any longer a member of the ABA, but that doesn't mean that I have anything against them. It's more because of the miles that once separated us and the fact that I come from a bygone era where politeness was not seen as being a weakness.

It's a great pity that some subscribers will use this valuable forum in a confrontational manner rather than as a means of sharing and conveying sound information relating to the hunting issues at hand. And there is always more than one deserving stakeholder attached to any of them.

It is obvious that this forum is read by many influential people; some of whom are now conspicuous by their absence from any level-headed debates. Those who have a genuine thirst for knowledge are the losers.

I do not wish to be remembered for having shot the biggest or the best, but rather for having made a difference to the life of a child. Conservation hunter education is my vehicle.

Sincerely,

Sharpedge

[Stinky Coyote]

thanks sharp, was just curious, wonder how many members they have 'for' the crossbow inclusion but just keeping mum on it?....thought you might be one of the renegades lol:D, no need to explain yourself, we're all different, hard to be at your best all the time;), i'm definitely on your side when it comes to this particular situation...

[choclab]

Sorry guys not fighting here, but to downplay what the aba does because they don't support crossbows is crazy, adding muzzle loaders and shot guns will do squat to reduce deer numbers, it will only hurt trophy potential, just look at strathcona. bottom line if you want to reduce #'s you need to shoot does, and this can be done with bows, its just getting people to shoot does and actually getting permission to hunt in the first place........adding muzzleloaders and crossbows should make that easier......sharp sorry if you took me as confrontational, I was just adding that the aba had a big part in the creation of the bow zones.
to you stinky learn how to shoot a bow and enjoy our bow zones,lots of places don't have what is available to us in Alberta. And yes the ABA is around,

[Sharpedge]

Hi choclab,

There is no need for you to apologise. And please forgive me, but it is obvious from what you have written that you are somewhat confused. The whole issue of “bowzones” and the ideal instruments and best ways for effective wildlife management through sustainable harvesting, has become clouded by mixed emotions. Instead of us all working together and arriving at a win-win solution we waste our precious lives arguing about things like ‘what is a real bow’.

WMU 212 in particular is as about as diversified a piece of this great province as one could imagine. Some parts are developed and contain lush and manicured country residences; some parts contain larger acreages; and other parts are almost as God created them. The human beings who choose to live in this desirable part of the world are also diversified. Not all of them come from rural beginnings and some still believe that meat originates at their local supermarket. Other members of this very old and established wide ranging community come from a different era and invariably they do know exactly where meat comes from and how this fundamental exercise ought to be carried out.

Before the misuse of firearms became an issue in this particular part of the woods, people could use the appropriate tool to kill (harvest) any large animal destined for the table. There can be no argument that the well-placed bullet is the best way we know how, outside of the slaughterhouse, to humanely dispatch an animal. However, the ‘sharp cutting head of at least 7/8 inch in width’ has since been recognised and apparently accepted by society as being equally humane: if placed in a vital area. Unlike the bullet, which usually renders an animal immobile through massive shock trauma, a sharp blade is meant to sever blood vessels resulting in immobilisation and eventual unconsciousness through massive haemorrhage.

So what is the best available tool for the task at hand? Minister Morton has said that there is no consensus for crossbows in archery seasons. I say that a consensus is not necessary. Any proposed tool should be judged on its scientific merit and "all" the mitigating factors should be brought to the table of reasoned discussion. The fact that a few people think that their tool is the only tool that should be authorised is absurd. I too was once a die-hard stick and string man and a custom longbow with self fletched Port Orford shafts tipped with genuine Howard Hill or Fred Bear broadheads, was the only way. I still believe in this method and will tip my hat to those who are still able to ‘do it the hard way’, but I can’t. I have become old and my tired body won’t follow my deepest desires in the way it used to. And because a few misguided younger folks think that I and many others like me should hang up our bows and reminisce, I can’t take a crossbow to where there are plenty of barren does or cows that need quietly thinning out, during the archery only seasons in WMU 212. Nor can I take a physically weaker child with his or her crossbow and show them that there are certain ways that things should be done. A lot of us have already been there and done it, as the saying goes, and we should not be dismissed because we don’t fit the profile selfishly championed by those more fortunate.

Sincerely, and yours in conservation,

Sharpedge

[Stinky Coyote]

So what is the best available tool for the task at hand? Minister Morton has said that there is no consensus for crossbows in archery seasons. I say that a consensus is not necessary. Any proposed tool should be judged on its scientific merit and "all" the mitigating factors should be brought to the table of reasoned discussion. The fact that a few people think that their tool is the only tool that should be authorised is absurd. I too was once a die-hard stick and string man and a custom longbow with self fletched Port Orford shafts tipped with genuine Howard Hill or Fred Bear broadheads, was the only way. I still believe in this method and will tip my hat to those who are still able to ‘do it the hard way’, but I can’t. I have become old and my tired body won’t follow my deepest desires in the way it used to. And because a few misguided younger folks think that I and many others like me should hang up our bows and reminisce, I can’t take a crossbow to where there are plenty of barren does or cows that need quietly thinning out, during the archery only seasons in WMU 212. Nor can I take a physically weaker child with his or her crossbow and show them that there are certain ways that things should be done. A lot of us have already been there and done it, as the saying goes, and we should not be dismissed because we don’t fit the profile selfishly championed by those more fortunate.

Sincerely, and yours in conservation,

Sharpedge

One of the best single paragraphs on the subject i've yet to read! Thanks for that.

Choclab, i know how to shoot my bow lol, i've currently got a mathews switchback xt and shoot carbon express cx300's with blazer vanes and 100 gr montecs at i forget how fast but quick enough with a 70lb draw weight and 29.5" draw length. I shot a legacy before that, have over 15 deer with bow and 4 pope class in past 5 years....ALL IN THE BOWZONE 212 TOO! I just followed the logic on the tool itself and i cannot believe that it is not an option available to us wherever the other archery tackle is allowed. I want to take people and introduce them to the sport also, and would also like the option for if physically limited later in life or for whatever reason, it would be a lot nicer to do it with an easier tool to use and use proficiently....aka crossbow. These are all things easy to do with a gun (shoot when old/hurt/young/weak etc.....here we have a bow that can make it that easy for the young/older etc. but people don't want to include it? Why? Its boils simply down to selfishness.....i think thats something we could do without in our hunting sports right now...how bout you?

Having said that how can such a great organization such as the aba not recognize this tool on its merits and what it offers us overall?????? Absurd is the right word for it. I'm sorry i'm not as diplomatic as Sharp on the subject (i'll work on it i promise:innocent:) but facts is facts and just because the aba doesn't support the inclusion of this great option to us is a HUGE thing in my mind and all hunters in Alberta should know they don't support it imo.....as it affects all hunters in Alberta imo.....it limits options when it doesn't have too.

For the record i agree with everything else the aba does, so i'm just waiting for them to see the light on this issue and support it......then i'll have nothing but nice things to say....this is all logic motivated talk, i'm not trying to downplay someone/organization etc. just speaking the truth....a tool fits and gives great opportunity to us all but this otherwise great organization completely missed the boat here to support a great thing, hopefully it changes and Alberta changes and we can at least get with the times and not be the last province or state standing.....as you've read, life is short, lets get on with what makes sense.....why does it have to be so slow and painful?

[choclab]

Yep sharp A little confused, Parkland has proposed muzzleloaders, shotguns, and x-bows for that county, a little different than just wanting x-bows. (should clear up some of my post)

All I want to add is the bow zones are small, and getting smaller, there is still some quality hunting left if you are lucky enough to get permission.

What is wrong with having three tiny zones for archery only, if you want to use other weapons you have the rest of the province during the rifle season, or now the start of some primitive weapons seasons.

Sharp if a youngster has practiced enough to prepare for his first season bowhunting I don't know any 12 year olds that wouldn't be pulling 40 pounds. As far as the other end of the scale I will leave that one alone.

[Sharpedge]

Dear choclab,

With respect.

Quote: "What is wrong with having three tiny zones for archery only, if you want to use other weapons you have the rest of the province during the rifle season, or now the start of some primitive weapons seasons."

Everything is wrong with having 'three tiny zones' for archery only. And where should these special areas be? And who should maintain sufficient inventory to ensure a "quality" experience? You are essentially asking everybody to sponsor your chosen way of hunting at their expense. And any kind of firearms are out of the question for many rural residents. Noise, range and fire risk are some of their concerns.

I am well aware of the opportunities to hunt with a crossbow during general (rifle) seasons. But you, like far too many other people, seem to think that I have a burning desire to kill something with a crossbow! This is myopic thinking. I do not! And it's about time that folks understood that "in some areas of 212" we do have a problem with "too many" animals. I'm trying desperately to get the powers that be and others to agree that the proven crossbow should be fully "authorized at the time of year when it is possible to approach big game with a quiet, limited range weapon, that can effectively do the job. Period. The vertical bow with broadheaded arrow is but one tool. However it would seem to simple 'ol me that when ASRD has to conduct rifle quota hunts and other culls with fancy names, we really ought to at least give a few old boys like me (and perhaps some ladies) a crack at them first with our crossbows. Not at the end of the season or year when conditions can make our lives harder than they already are, but when conditions are ideal: just like they are provided for "bowhunters" eh.

Quote: "Sharp if a youngster has practiced enough to prepare for his first season bowhunting I don't know any 12 year olds that wouldn't be pulling 40 pounds."

I don't presume to know the physical abilities of so many youngsters. However I do know that there is evidence to suggest that the Alberta regulated bow of 40 lbs @ 28" shooting an arrow of 24" in legal length, might not be ideal. My lay interpretation is that as long as the subject bow scales out to 40 lbs @ 28" it is a legal weapon. But if a child/youth can only draw such a bow at less inches: does this bow still meet our ethical requirements? I know that large animals have been shot with light weight bows, but it seems that most male archers I've known have always striven to pull as much weight as they can. Why? Is it to mitigate 'jumping the string'? Is it to ensure sufficient penetration? Is it to extend their range? Or is it merely part of the image? Personally I am not comfortable asking a kid to use lesser equipment than I would ethically use myself. That is why I believe that we should also accommodate any supervised willing child/youth in the archery seasons with crossbows.

Quote: "As far as the other end of the scale I will leave that one alone."

Oh, come on, I'm only shooting with blunts for now.:D

Yours in conservation,

Sharpedge

[choclab]

Sharp, I have only hunted 212 a couple of times 15 years ago, then someone shot the landowners dog and all hunting was shut down by the landowners wife. I live and farm 248 and I feel our deer numbers are down not up, at least in my region of 248. Others will probably disagree because of increased vehicle collisions but there are 3 times the vehicles on the roads compared to 5 to 7 years ago.
Th e x-bow will not increase harvest #'s this is proven in any area that has allowed x-bows. It would allow people like you that feel you can't shoot a bow but If it was me I would try a new 80% letoff bow @ 50 pounds before a x-bow.
The quality experience I am talking about is not animals alone, it is not having 20 people hunting the same property. This is the problem hunting next door to 1 million people, either you can't get permission or everyone gets permission.

What if they looked at revising the regulation as to who can get a x-bow licence for not only disabled but old as well, maybe even the young to start.
I think I just called you old!

[Stinky Coyote]

most of the young strong guys will shoot compounds anyhow (like you and i and most of the guys i know) but nice to have the option for the others not so fortunate and for when we are not so fortunate...it's almost like prejudism not having it included imo....there is not one single reason not to include it where it fits and a bunch of reasons TOO include it, its win win, all positive, no brainer

[AbAngler]

The bow and arrow was promoted and accepted as the least offensive and yet practical solution to this conundrum and the quiet, short range, broadhead shooting crossbow was either rejected or ignored. Why exactly, remains obscure.

cough....A.....cough......B.......cough........A

:sick:

[Stinky Coyote]

:lol:

[BUD]

Sharp the ABA (Alberta Bowhunters Association) got the bow zones in place not frightened taxpayers.

NOPE , Sharp is right it was turned into a bow zone by all the nesters that moved into the area , west of spruce meadows for example , heck i hunted with rifle in that area for years ,all around Mannixs too , then the nesters movrd in and lobbied the Govt to ban hunting in the area , frighted for their kids playing in their yards they said , the Govt gave in and turned it into a bow zone ,and chinook archers were right there to jump on the bandstand, they had a club already in the area.
I remember the first meeting at the Millerville Community , where all the new nesting landowners first took up their plight ,inviting their mp of the zone to be there.

[choclab]

boy you make one generalization and they jump on you, the nesters wanted no hunting so they did not get the bow zones. The ABAA at the time, along with other concerned hunters lobbied to get an alternative to no hunting......a couple more bow only zones. The Edmonton and Calgary zones were added to the canmore zone that the ABAA (ABA was not the ABA yet) helped to get prior to 212 and 248 in 1975.

[Sharpedge]

boy you make one generalization and they jump on you, the nesters wanted no hunting so they did not get the bow zones. The ABAA at the time, along with other concerned hunters lobbied to get an alternative to no hunting......a couple more bow only zones. The Edmonton and Calgary zones were added to the canmore zone that the ABAA (ABA was not the ABA yet) helped to get prior to 212 and 248 in 1975.

Okay choclab,

Here we go again.

If you don't like being "jumped on" as you put it: then be specific and don't generalize.

And not everybody in the subject area in 1974 was a "nester". I can assure you that some very old and knowledgeable families were involved in seeking a workable sollution. The problem now is: that sollution has not worked in all areas of WMU 212. Otherwise: Why the need for firearms? You tell us eh.

And once again: The bowhunters of the day were virtually handed an exclusive hunting preserve on a plate. No lobbying was necessary. Why do I use the term exclusive? Because all 'others' (non-bowhunters) were excluded by definition. However this has not meant that firearms have never been employed in 212 since. On the contrary: They have been employed when farmers and others have demanded that 'something must be done'!

To continue to refer to this large area of our provinced as a "bowzone" is quite misleading too. WMU 410 is, and has always been the only true 'bowzone'. And even that once pristine and magical place has been spoilt by man's greed.

I have been trying to get people (including you) to understand that we must get together on this and other issues, otherwise we hunters will end up with nothing. Unless of course we are willing to pay to effectively do pest control. Don't believe me eh? Then try getting some wood-pigeon shooting in jolly old England today. It's not that many years ago when farmers were crying loudly that something must be done about these pests (pigeons) and the local government would hand out free cartridges to whoever had the time and inclination to do a bit of welcomed pest shooting. Not anymore bud. It's all pay me, pay me, pay me, and then pay some more, over there these days.

Now you can have the last word if you like choclab. I'm done with this crap. Let some of the lurkers here have a crack.

Sharpedge

[rae61]

Sharp,

“The problem now is: that sollution has not worked in all areas of WMU 212. Otherwise:
Why the need for firearms? You tell us eh.”

Before you can manage wildlife you need access to the land. Huntable land in the Calgary bow zone
is getting smaller every year, what with the proliferation of 1-4 acre acreages and Calgary’s expansion
outward.


How is putting more hunters with different weapons into limited acres that are accessible to hunters
In 212 now going to increase the harvest to the degree that is needed.

My take from some of your earlier posts is that you take exception to the current archery only zone,
as you referred to it as “exclusive hunting preserve” It sounds like form your posts that
you like me and thousands of other hunters have taken part in the archery zones over
the years. As you know anyone can take up this form of hunting and enjoy this hunting
area.


“I have been trying to get people (including you) to understand that we must get together on
this and other issues, otherwise we hunters will end up with nothing.”


I totally agree that we need to try and not fight amongst ourselves but does that mean we can never disagree?
You talked about the “physical abilities of so many youngsters” and people like yourself ”I have become
old and my tired body won’t follow my deepest desires in the way it used to.”
Well the province allowed people with physical disabilities to hunt with crossbows maybe
we should look at including those who have the troubles you mentioned. I would like to think
this is not all or nothing but finding compromise.

Who are these people that are calling for the population reduction in the local big game numbers,
the local residents?? The ones who won’t let hunters on there land but want them somehow to disappear.
Sadly it seems that the most effective “weapon” in 212 these days is the automobile and no one gains
by that.