Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #271  
Old 12-29-2011, 12:25 AM
Speckle55's Avatar
Speckle55 Speckle55 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CANADA
Posts: 6,268
Default

as i have said before why make any changes leave it as is no more draws please ..draws only reduce the number of Albertan,s that can hunt.. and we are all trying to promote hunting the numbers are shown(sheep kills) that they have not changed for years and they were supposed to come up in the 80's 90's and 2000's and now they are even hunting the rut.. did not happen only so many sheep that are legal and only so much habitat that is suitable and natural.. these mines site up here are only taking away from hunting in 438 there used to be up too 400 sheep now there was 267 in huntable areas and 1067 in unhuntable area unless they step across the line to Slaughter Hill and with the horn rot issue and long hoofs from sheep not being in natural hills area. that is 100 plus Sheep- per square mile on mine sites .. and if that is not Game Ranching what is .. WOW.. what are we doing and why are we allowing this Game Ranching to happen here in Alberta .. with the mine sites being industrial site and haveing spills etc and Selenium being there too. why are we allowing these ungulates to be on these is a question that even the leading biologist's in the world are scratching thier head and they are saying that a collapase in going to happen due to diseased etc.. i sat in on afew of these meeting and we asked that there be no more closures and no more draws but they close more of Greg river minesite and draws now are held in the rut.. like some have said it is the special intrest group that have the pull and conservation is thrown out the window. the thing about this is that all Albertans are losing the right to have the same chance to hunt sheep in our province and a few the rich have bought the draw system if one person can buy 20000$ in tickets in a 40000$ draw.. before draws we went to a 3/4 curl and we did not have to draw and no sheep kill exceeded the quota that was deamed to be acecptable.. 3000?tags sold now they want to limit to 200 to hunt the 300 Rams that are 3/4 curl


now some want change
why?
reason?
who wants?

even with extended seasons there is only X number to be harvested

Last edited by Speckle55; 12-29-2011 at 12:32 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #272  
Old 12-29-2011, 07:59 AM
Single Malt's Avatar
Single Malt Single Malt is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 76
Default

Hey all,

I have been involved in this debate before and have followed this one as well. I still feel, as many others have stated, that this is an APOS driven initiative to further limit resident hunting. I do not want to see any restrictions to resident hunting (and there needs to be valid reasons for those in the first place) without significant restrictions to non-residents (APOS sheep allocations) first. It is that simple. (this also goes for all the other species)
__________________
"...to those hardy sportsmen of the world who prefer to meet the challenge of the climb and secure one fine sheep head, rather than to hunt at lower levels for easier game." J. L. Clark
Reply With Quote
  #273  
Old 12-29-2011, 09:35 AM
Huntnut's Avatar
Huntnut Huntnut is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Beaverlodge
Posts: 1,764
Default

So has anybody recieved any replys to their emails/inquiries-I haven't yet.
__________________
Hunting isn't a matter of life and death......it's more important than that
Reply With Quote
  #274  
Old 12-29-2011, 09:36 AM
209x50's Avatar
209x50 209x50 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 5,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntnut View Post
So has anybody recieved any replys to their emails/inquiries-I haven't yet.
Nope!
Reply With Quote
  #275  
Old 12-29-2011, 09:53 AM
pottymouth's Avatar
pottymouth pottymouth is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In the 400's
Posts: 6,581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntnut View Post
So has anybody recieved any replys to their emails/inquiries-I haven't yet.
Notta!
__________________
How to start an argument online:
1. Express an opinion
2. Wait ....
Reply With Quote
  #276  
Old 12-29-2011, 10:20 AM
avb3 avb3 is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Central Alberta
Posts: 7,861
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rackmastr View Post
Or hunted at all??
Many of the current F&W staff do hunt or fish. That is not the problem.

The problem is that very few of the new hires in the past 8-10 years have an exposure to hunting or fishing, and they will be the decision makers in the next 5-6 years as the current staff starts retiring.

I have long had a concern about this trend, and had discussed it with senior F&W in the past. I was told due to anti-discrimination policies they could not restrict hiring to consumptive users, or even advertise that it was a desirable trait that would be considered in hiring.

There are current F&W staff who have similar concerns to myself, and are doing as good a job as they can to get newer staff to understand our concerns, to some success.

Again, the problem will occur when that new staff trains even newer staff in years to come. If they have not had experiences in the field, what will they be able to transmit about our ethos?
Reply With Quote
  #277  
Old 12-29-2011, 11:28 AM
jrs
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speckle55 View Post
as i have said before why make any changes leave it as is no more draws please ..draws only reduce the number of Albertan,s that can hunt.. and we are all trying to promote hunting the numbers are shown(sheep kills) that they have not changed for years and they were supposed to come up in the 80's 90's and 2000's and now they are even hunting the rut.. did not happen only so many sheep that are legal and only so much habitat that is suitable and natural.. these mines site up here are only taking away from hunting in 438 there used to be up too 400 sheep now there was 267 in huntable areas and 1067 in unhuntable area unless they step across the line to Slaughter Hill and with the horn rot issue and long hoofs from sheep not being in natural hills area. that is 100 plus Sheep- per square mile on mine sites .. and if that is not Game Ranching what is .. WOW.. what are we doing and why are we allowing this Game Ranching to happen here in Alberta .. with the mine sites being industrial site and haveing spills etc and Selenium being there too. why are we allowing these ungulates to be on these is a question that even the leading biologist's in the world are scratching thier head and they are saying that a collapase in going to happen due to diseased etc.. i sat in on afew of these meeting and we asked that there be no more closures and no more draws but they close more of Greg river minesite and draws now are held in the rut.. like some have said it is the special intrest group that have the pull and conservation is thrown out the window. the thing about this is that all Albertans are losing the right to have the same chance to hunt sheep in our province and a few the rich have bought the draw system if one person can buy 20000$ in tickets in a 40000$ draw.. before draws we went to a 3/4 curl and we did not have to draw and no sheep kill exceeded the quota that was deamed to be acecptable.. 3000?tags sold now they want to limit to 200 to hunt the 300 Rams that are 3/4 curl


now some want change
why?
reason?
who wants?

even with extended seasons there is only X number to be harvested
Cadomin never had that many sheep pre mining, pretty sure the number in the Gregg and Sphinx headwaters was actually under 50 before the Gregg River Mine Opened. If you search around there's some old data from the initial assessments. Same thing with elk, very low numbers until the mining created winter range. If the land is turned over to the crown as is the plan, management hunts may drastically expand the huntable sheep population in Alberta. The genetics have always been there (one only has to look through the photos at the hole in the wall) but the numbers haven't.
Reply With Quote
  #278  
Old 12-29-2011, 02:42 PM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robmcleod82 View Post
I think hunters should have some input on hunting regulations but I'm glad they dont get to make all the rules. There is a reason biologists go to university and spend all that tax payer money studying our ecosystem, I dont think they are right all the time either, but im guessing they have a hundred times more knowledge than your average hunter.
Very well put!
Reply With Quote
  #279  
Old 12-29-2011, 02:53 PM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Single Malt View Post
Hey all,

I have been involved in this debate before and have followed this one as well. I still feel, as many others have stated, that this is an APOS driven initiative to further limit resident hunting. I
I guess the thing to remember is that there are three options on the table, I definitely wouldn't say two of them benefit or disadvantage outfitters anymore than residents and the third would only benefit them if they did not see a similar 50% reduction in allocations like residents would face. There's alot of information missing in the three proposals to allow anyone to make an informed decision right now. We need a lot more answers to questions. I'd also like to know why the numbers used to predict wait times in a potential draw were so sugar coated. SRD did not paint an accurate picture of a draw scenario...far from it actually. And, they have not indicated if outfitter allocation numbers would be reduced by a similar percentage if residents go on draw. We need to keep asking why they used the numbers they did and what will happen to outfitter allocations if resident opportunity is reduced 50%. It's unfortunate that outfitter allocations will we set before a decision is made regarding changes to sheep hunting as one has such a profound impact on the other.
Reply With Quote
  #280  
Old 12-29-2011, 03:20 PM
gopher gopher is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,391
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robmcleod82 View Post
If we had the majority of hunters making the rules we wouldnt have any game left to shoot. Have you ever seen any pre conservation fishing and hunting pictures? People take and take until there is nothing less. I think hunters should have some input on hunting regulations but I'm glad they dont get to make all the rules. There is a reason biologists go to university and spend all that tax payer money studying our ecosystem, I dont think they are right all the time either, but im guessing they have a hundred times more knowledge than your average hunter. I am embarresed/sorry to say that I would say at least 50% of hunters are morons that give us all a bad name.
Rob and I did the right thing this year and decided not to take any 180 class deer there’s just not enough of them!
Reply With Quote
  #281  
Old 12-29-2011, 03:57 PM
Gulo gulo Gulo gulo is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 60
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter View Post
I guess the thing to remember is that there are three options on the table, I definitely wouldn't say two of them benefit or disadvantage outfitters anymore than residents and the third would only benefit them if they did not see a similar 50% reduction in allocations like residents would face. There's alot of information missing in the three proposals to allow anyone to make an informed decision right now. We need a lot more answers to questions. I'd also like to know why the numbers used to predict wait times in a potential draw were so sugar coated. SRD did not paint an accurate picture of a draw scenario...far from it actually. And, they have not indicated if outfitter allocation numbers would be reduced by a similar percentage if residents go on draw. We need to keep asking why they used the numbers they did and what will happen to outfitter allocations if resident opportunity is reduced 50%. It's unfortunate that outfitter allocations will we set before a decision is made regarding changes to sheep hunting as one has such a profound impact on the other.

I agree more information is needed. The draw scenario seems like an attempt at an easy sell to the residents. I think it is important to make sure our voices are heard, as we are not buying those sugar-coated draw numbers. If the past is an indication, I personally do not hold much faith in the allocations being reduced by any amount not to mention 50%. I do not expect any reply’s until the New Year when the SRD staff is back to work, but when they come back I want answers.

I think it is important for all involved to realize that this is not only about sheep; it’s about antelope and mule deer etc. With the increase in hunter populations in the province the resource has been divided among resident hunters but the non-residents have been keeping their ample slice. Unfortunately this slice will have be taken(partly) away, it will not be given as too much money is at stake. In order for this to happen a wealthy resident will have to take legal action. The SRD staff mentioned at the beginning of the post are like most government employees – they take the path of least resistance. The reduction of resident opportunities is that path. I believe outfitters are an important part of hunting in Alberta and have value to all hunters, but there needs to be some equality between user groups.
Reply With Quote
  #282  
Old 12-30-2011, 06:01 AM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Single Malt View Post
Hey all,

I have been involved in this debate before and have followed this one as well. I still feel, as many others have stated, that this is an APOS driven initiative to further limit resident hunting. I do not want to see any restrictions to resident hunting (and there needs to be valid reasons for those in the first place) without significant restrictions to non-residents (APOS sheep allocations) first. It is that simple. (this also goes for all the other species)
I think there was a resolution brought forward to alberta fish and game that wanted these changes from a trophy club from what I herd.
Reply With Quote
  #283  
Old 12-30-2011, 07:44 AM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,777
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ram crazy View Post
I think there was a resolution brought forward to alberta fish and game that wanted these changes from a trophy club from what I herd.
Which club?
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”

-Billy Molls
Reply With Quote
  #284  
Old 12-30-2011, 09:56 AM
MW1266 MW1266 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 5
Default More information needed please

To all
I just joined the forum this week and boy am I glad. Maybe I live under a rock, but have heard very little to date on the proposed changes to sheep regulations. So thank you to you all for the update. Since I read this forum last night I have had a hard time focusing on anything else. As Sheep Hunting is a very much a passion of mine. I have spent most the morning researching what I could find on line on APOS, SRD and still have a couple of questions that I hope you can help me with.

Who is Rob Corrigan (quoted as a contact for SRD) cannot find him in the org chart.

What is the AGMAG?

Thank you , Mark
Reply With Quote
  #285  
Old 12-30-2011, 01:06 PM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Alberta Game Management Advisory Group

Alberta Bowhunters Association
Alberta Fish & Game Association
Hunting For Tomorrow
Alberta Professional Outfitters Society
SRD (Game Management & Enforcement)
Tourism & Parks
Pheasants Forever
Wild Sheep Foundation (Alberta)
Alberta Association of Municipal Districts & Counties
Alberta Beef Producers
Alberta Chapter of the Wildlife Society
Delta Waterfowl Foundation
Ducks Unlimited Canada




Corrigan, Rob
Provincial Big Game Specialist
Game and Priority Species
Reply With Quote
  #286  
Old 12-30-2011, 02:26 PM
MW1266 MW1266 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Grande Cache
Posts: 5
Default Sheep reg changes

Thank you very much.

My concerns are?
The why question! What is the data that supports the need for changes? It would be nice to see the science behind the proposals. Then a person can rationalize if they feel the changes are warranted or not?

APOS? What is the impact to outfitters? We as Alberta hunters should not have less hunting rights than a private industry that caters to out of province and out of country clients?

I will keep you posted as to any reply I get.
Reply With Quote
  #287  
Old 12-30-2011, 02:40 PM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MW1266 View Post
Thank you very much.

My concerns are?
The why question! What is the data that supports the need for changes? It would be nice to see the science behind the proposals. Then a person can rationalize if they feel the changes are warranted or not?

.
According to SRD, they are below their goal of 5% legal rams on winter range and age, length and basal circumferences have all decreased in harvested rams. That's what precipitated the proposed changes according to them.
Reply With Quote
  #288  
Old 12-30-2011, 04:18 PM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by chuck View Post
Which club?
You should talk to your local club.
Reply With Quote
  #289  
Old 12-30-2011, 05:57 PM
Dark Wing's Avatar
Dark Wing Dark Wing is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: The elbow of Alberta
Posts: 1,362
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by drake View Post
www.mccowans.com

is it just a coincidence that 10 NR sheep tags are currently for sale in Alberta?......or do outfitters know something we ("unconnected residents") don't?
The 4 tags in wmu 445 may be up for sale to cover legal fees for an outfitting business due to wildlife offences.
Reply With Quote
  #290  
Old 12-30-2011, 08:48 PM
drake's Avatar
drake drake is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,553
Default

Care to share?....

I haven't heard about any major offenses.
Reply With Quote
  #291  
Old 12-30-2011, 09:26 PM
Pathfinder76 Pathfinder76 is offline
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 15,777
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ram crazy View Post
You should talk to your local club.
If this is truly the case I'll do more than just talk. When was this proposed, because I'm quite certain it wasn't recently. Although I do know the local biologist made an appearance at at least one meeting.
__________________
“I love it when clients bring Berger bullets. It means I get to kill the bear.”

-Billy Molls
Reply With Quote
  #292  
Old 12-30-2011, 09:45 PM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

I think it was 2009 if I remember correctly.
Reply With Quote
  #293  
Old 12-30-2011, 11:45 PM
Speckle55's Avatar
Speckle55 Speckle55 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CANADA
Posts: 6,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter View Post
According to SRD, they are below their goal of 5% legal rams on winter range and age, length and basal circumferences have all decreased in harvested rams. That's what precipitated the proposed changes according to them.
In the last 10 years more 195 plus sheep have been mounted and found dead than ever ..

wtf!!! i call BS

208 5/8 , 207 ,206 205 and more someone need's to do their home work WOW

rams.jpg

Food for Thought
David

Last edited by Speckle55; 12-30-2011 at 11:51 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #294  
Old 12-30-2011, 11:54 PM
ishootbambi ishootbambi is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: medicine hat
Posts: 9,037
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Speckle55 View Post
In the last 10 years more 195 plus sheep have been mounted and found dead than ever ..

wtf!!! i call BS

208 5/8 , 207 ,206 205 and more someone need's to do their home work WOW

Food for Thought
David
yup thats absolutely true......IN SANCTUARIES!!! cadomin is of course the biggest contributor, but sheep river produced one, and the sparwood coal mine produced another. that one happened to get caught on the alberta side that day. he will be in the sheep pic thread tomorrow i bet.

as for that 5%....a lot of places arent even at that. there have been a few counts showing ZERO legal rams on winter range.
Reply With Quote
  #295  
Old 12-31-2011, 12:18 AM
Speckle55's Avatar
Speckle55 Speckle55 is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: CANADA
Posts: 6,268
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
yup thats absolutely true......IN SANCTUARIES!!! cadomin is of course the biggest contributor, but sheep river produced one, and the sparwood coal mine produced another. that one happened to get caught on the alberta side that day. he will be in the sheep pic thread tomorrow i bet.

as for that 5%....a lot of places arent even at that. there have been a few counts showing ZERO legal rams on winter range.
its just like Ram Mountain die off's /Mount Robson 1994/etc in Montana 2009 194 sheep in fall 19 left in spring .. we have had die offs before in Alberta.. if there are no legal sheep how can you have a draw for nothing.. there was a survey done in 70.s before we went to 4/5 and full that we could harvest X number rams and we have never even got close .. yes some areas have had down turns just like deer and antelope this year .. numbers are down in the north Jasper Park i suspect die off(1994 ex) if it remains at 4/5 every year you will have some coming up .. unless Blue Tongue etc die off.s
nothing to due with hunting

they have said a complete die off in lakes then some one catches a 10 lb Rainbow
Reply With Quote
  #296  
Old 12-31-2011, 12:30 AM
ishootbambi ishootbambi is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: medicine hat
Posts: 9,037
Default

im not getting your point. you said that there are lots of giant rams around in the last 10 years. i agreed but pointed out that they are only coming from sanctuaries. what does disease and winterkill have to do with it? srds issue is that away from sanctuaries in areas you can hunt, there are very very few mature rams surviving the hunting seasons. thats fact that just cant be argued.

how to address it can be argued to death, but the numbers are what they are. the numbers also show that sheep hunter numbers arent up either. it just seems that we are getting more efficient at killing rams as soon as they are legal.

as for the horn base size decreasing....where did that come from? i read an article published in about 2003 that showed 2 things quite clearly. (it was in canadian geographic and was titled "sacrificial ram". it was written by a fish cop). first, southern sheep have larger horns on average than northern sheep. and second, that horn size had actually increased by half an inch of cirumference on all sheep in alberta over the last 40 years. that was a concern as sheep regulations have forced hunters to shoot only larger rams, and the worry was that sheep with smaller horns would survive passing on those genetics. that article showed that notion to be false, yet now we are hearing the opposite. which story is true?
Reply With Quote
  #297  
Old 12-31-2011, 01:05 AM
sheephunter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
im not getting your point. you said that there are lots of giant rams around in the last 10 years. i agreed but pointed out that they are only coming from sanctuaries. what does disease and winterkill have to do with it? srds issue is that away from sanctuaries in areas you can hunt, there are very very few mature rams surviving the hunting seasons. thats fact that just cant be argued.

how to address it can be argued to death, but the numbers are what they are. the numbers also show that sheep hunter numbers arent up either. it just seems that we are getting more efficient at killing rams as soon as they are legal.

as for the horn base size decreasing....where did that come from? i read an article published in about 2003 that showed 2 things quite clearly. (it was in canadian geographic and was titled "sacrificial ram". it was written by a fish cop). first, southern sheep have larger horns on average than northern sheep. and second, that horn size had actually increased by half an inch of cirumference on all sheep in alberta over the last 40 years. that was a concern as sheep regulations have forced hunters to shoot only larger rams, and the worry was that sheep with smaller horns would survive passing on those genetics. that article showed that notion to be false, yet now we are hearing the opposite. which story is true?
Actually Sid Marty, the authour of The Sacrificial Ram, was a Federal Park Warden...not a fish cop.

SRD told me their observations are from registered ram info.
Reply With Quote
  #298  
Old 12-31-2011, 01:08 AM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
yup thats absolutely true......IN SANCTUARIES!!! cadomin is of course the biggest contributor, but sheep river produced one, and the sparwood coal mine produced another. that one happened to get caught on the alberta side that day. he will be in the sheep pic thread tomorrow i bet.

as for that 5%....a lot of places arent even at that. there have been a few counts showing ZERO legal rams on winter range.
ISB, Where is your information coming from? Please share, as no one else claims to have the data used for these changes, and SRD has refused requests to provide it.


Some "Sanctuary" sheep end up on surveyed winter ranges. Some huntable rams Winter in "Sanctuaries" and are not counted. Some known winter ranges are never surveyed. SRD suspects they do not know of all sheep winter ranges.

This makes the surveys a 'Minimum' estimate of populations.

Look at the 2010/11 Aerial survey WMU's 437-446.
http://www.ab-conservation.com/go/de..._ACAJune07.pdf

POST HUNTING season legal rams accounted for 4.88% of the population. Don't forget that many of the 3/4 curl rams ( 4% of the population) will be 4/5 curl by the next fall.


Unless Alberta F&W provides the data to the Public, I consider their actions to be very suspect, leading me to feel great unease with this Government.

^^^^ I WILL VOTE WILDROSE, GOODBYE RED PC.
Reply With Quote
  #299  
Old 12-31-2011, 01:13 AM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sheephunter View Post
Actually Sid Marty, the authour of The Sacrificial Ram, was a Federal Park Warden...not a fish cop.

SRD told me their observations are from registered ram info.


As I told you, I felt ACA was making a Big Mistake in funding Coltman.

A continuation of Coltman's refusal despite being proven wrong, and ACA is funding the study to "Prove" that hunting is detrimental to Big Horn Sheep.

http://www.acabiodiversity.ca/archiv...011AwardYr.pdf
Joshua Miller
David Coltman
University of Alberta
A conservation genomic assessment of bighorn sheep harvesting
Reply With Quote
  #300  
Old 12-31-2011, 08:43 AM
ram crazy ram crazy is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,843
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishootbambi View Post
yup thats absolutely true......IN SANCTUARIES!!! cadomin is of course the biggest contributor, but sheep river produced one, and the sparwood coal mine produced another. that one happened to get caught on the alberta side that day. he will be in the sheep pic thread tomorrow i bet.

as for that 5%....a lot of places arent even at that. there have been a few counts showing ZERO legal rams on winter range.
It was the line creek mine. SRD doesn't know of all the winter ranges so how can the 5% be accurate, plus are they doing counts in BC winter ranges because some of those sheep may end up coming into Alberta as well during hunting season!!!!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:39 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.