Quote:
Originally Posted by BigRackLover
Stinkhammer nails it!!!!! I'm glad I wasn't the first to point it out.
Both sides sticking to their guns (or spear) in this thread - gotta love the passion. Some think the ABA went out to purposely throw spear and atalas hunters under the bus, when it fact, it was the complete opposite. They brought a concern to AGMAG (the point of that process) that could affect how the public views all hunters/sportsmen (since the antis don't care about different hunting styles ). I can certainly see, in the way it came about, how many could think that the ABA was attacking a smaller group, but as a member of the executive, I can assure you that was never the case. It's too bad more can't see the actual purpose being the intiation of the discussion. Yes it did start out as "ban spears ... etc", but was quickly change to "define legal equip....etc" because after intial discussions, that made more sense to protect ALL hunters - based on feedback from other groups/ABA members. We're one of two provinces left who haven't defined legal weapons.
I personnally think it's wise, this day in age, to have a regulated sport, especially to defend against the antis. Some may called that naive, I call it being prepared, kinda like keeping your house in order or 'ducks in a row'. The fact the spears, rock throwers, nunchucks and skipping ropes to strangle deer aren't taught at hunter saftey course as effective killing tools is low hanging fruit for anti hunters to attack hunters as being illprepared for the challenge of hunting. That's like someone going to work for the first time, working with mechaninal devices that can kill you without any training whatsoever ... what organization would ever allow that? And if a near miss or death was the result, the root cause would surely be identiied quickly. Anti hunters don't need more ammo against us, especially easy loop holes in the regulations like that.
I have no desire to hunt with a spear/atalas/rock ... etc. I love bowhuting and that's where I devote my time. I wish all the best to whomever wants to go through the process of legalizing 'different' weapons to hunt with. I have no dought they'll come prepared to discuss their position, but they also need to be prepared to handle questions/concerns of the image risk that would apply to all hunters - just like the archery community had to so many years ago. Yes it sucks that you can hunt with a rock (or spear) today and that might not be the case in the future, but it's best for all hunters to have clear regulations.
I (not the ABA) suggest this:
- Have a 3 year test season of weapons, who's passionate members can defend and prove them as efficient killing tools
- So that'll give 3 years for the ~6 people who own spears in Alberta to get 'r done. 
- After that, the AGMAG (or whatever other process the hunting community needs to partcipate in at that time) will evaluate the results.
- i suspect the harvest rate will be low and the public scrutiny even more so.
- i suspect this thread will be on page 129 (just like the crossbow debate)  |
The part in bold is laughable. I haven't seen anyone on this or other threads trying to justify rocks and skipping ropes.
This is a statement from the hunter Ed. course.
From sticks and simple stones to modern archery equipment, imagine early man being able to project an arrow downrange accurately enough to be able to harvest food or protect himself from predators.
Some would say that language, fire and these simple tools assured mans rise above the animals. The skill of mastering the bow and arrow to send a simple implement to it’s mark was an essential part of our very survival in our early days. Bow and arrow became an absolute necessity in obtaining food and defending mankind in battles for many centuries. While the stakes may not be as high today, the rewards are still great.
Today archers take up the bow and arrow for fun, recreation, hunting the pursuit of excellence and their pleasure and satisfaction comes from connecting with a skill that dates back to our earliest ancestors. For more than 5000 years the archer has played a major role in human existence and modern equipment has allowed us far greater accuracy and dependability. Our course will introduce you to archer and help reconnect you to this challenging and historic pastime.
Would it really be a stretch to change bow and arrow in that statement to Spear and Atlatl? Honestly I just don't get your reasoning. They are all cutting weapons and when the time comes to make the kill it comes down to the user, nothing else.
So what would you like to see on how Spears and Atlatl's are regulated?
Other than implementing a sharp 7/8" cutting head and having a minimum weight of 2 pounds for a spear what else would you like? (I am not very familiar with Atlatl's so I will let someone with more experience chime in)
Are you trying to say we need to regulate ethics?
You said "since the antis don't care about different hunting styles". So what is the point of banning spears and atlatl's? I guarantee unethical bow and rifle hunters are more of a threat than a small group of Spear and Atlatl hunters if that really is the reasoning.
On a side note the people who I have talked to about hunting with spears and atlatl's almost welcome it. More of a traditional way of doing things. Gives the animals a chance, or fair chase if you get my meaning. Anti's don't like people killing animals period. I am actually quite surprised a bow hunting association would even bring something like this up considering that spears and atlatl's kill the same way a bow and arrow does.