Go Back   Alberta Outdoorsmen Forum > Main Category > Hunting Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #241  
Old 04-03-2014, 02:00 PM
Alley Oop Alley Oop is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 62
Default

Re read your post.
You said anything outside what already exists should be illegal.
Your words.....not mine.
I interpret you just fine.
Reply With Quote
  #242  
Old 04-03-2014, 02:14 PM
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alley Oop View Post
Re read your post.
You said anything outside what already exists should be illegal.
Your words.....not mine.
I interpret you just fine.
Fair enough there is confusion in the regulations... some methods are mentioned as being illegal, poisoning etc..... then for all the other acceptable methods mentioned there are specific criteria...

Atlatls fell smack dab into the grey as they are not in the definitions of the legal methods, yet don't fall in the prohibited category... thus there is a need for a decision.

If they fall into the legal category then specifications and definiotions need to be made like the other accepted harvestingl methods.
Reply With Quote
  #243  
Old 04-03-2014, 02:19 PM
Alley Oop Alley Oop is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 62
Default

About the Atlatl

I say let sleeping dogs lye.
There was no problem until someone opened their big mouth and in turn is up for criticism.
And who knows what's next on the list.

It's sad and sickening.
Reply With Quote
  #244  
Old 04-03-2014, 03:36 PM
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,772
Default

The problem with letting a sleeping dog lie is you never know when it is going to bite you and then at that point you wished you did not let it lie....
Reply With Quote
  #245  
Old 04-03-2014, 03:59 PM
Pudelpointer Pudelpointer is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Back in Lethbridge
Posts: 4,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nekred View Post
The problem with letting a sleeping dog lie is you never know when it is going to bite you and then at that point you wished you did not let it lie....
??? You really don't understand what that saying means...

If you wake a sleeping dog you are likely to get bitten.

If you let it sleep, it will wake on its own and not bite anyone.
Reply With Quote
  #246  
Old 04-03-2014, 07:57 PM
albertaatlatl albertaatlatl is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 103
Default

We should let sleeping dogs lie. With the number of Atlatl hunters in the province reaching an unprecedented 4, there is no reason to regulate or define an Atlatl or spear for hunting! If the numbers ever reach those attributed to muzzleloaders or such, then maybe look at regulating. Until that time, we need to drop this issue, as a nonissue!!
Reply With Quote
  #247  
Old 04-03-2014, 07:58 PM
albertaatlatl albertaatlatl is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 103
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudelpointer View Post
??? You really don't understand what that saying means...

If you wake a sleeping dog you are likely to get bitten.

If you let it sleep, it will wake on its own and not bite anyone.
Good point! Leave it alone, or take what's coming!
Reply With Quote
  #248  
Old 04-04-2014, 12:01 PM
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,772
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albertaatlatl View Post
We should let sleeping dogs lie. With the number of Atlatl hunters in the province reaching an unprecedented 4, there is no reason to regulate or define an Atlatl or spear for hunting! If the numbers ever reach those attributed to muzzleloaders or such, then maybe look at regulating. Until that time, we need to drop this issue, as a nonissue!!
Archery was once viewed in the same light and there were no regulations in place for archery then. The ABA formed and lobbied to get archery included as a legal and efficient method for harvesting game, by setting specifics and providing information and they even got their own season by showing that this was a very good managment tool because it was quiet and less intrusive in more populated areas such as around Edmonton and Calgary creating the archery only zones. Over time with more lobbying it became even more widespread as a valid game management tool and thus where we are today. When dealing with government you have to put things in terms they accept/want such as "management tool" "less intrusive" "environmentally sustainable" etc. etc. etc.

Right now the atlatl hunters fall into a loophole. if you want to expand your ranks; many people are not comfortable living in a loophole because it can be closed very quickly. ESRD has the power to make a ruling and they don't need any association to ask for it. That is only a courtesy.

As for the sleeping dog... guys it is already awake and barking! and this has to be dealt with... It is in Forums, outdoors media and is going to hit mainstream media and imagine how the anti-huntig crowd will look at things and see a way where they can get an easy win....Some people have looked at this as a rabid big dangerous dog and others are looking at it like a puppy.... it is hard to get the cat back into the bag now or close the can of worms....pick your metaphor!....

Do you not understand that you are one civil servants ruling away from being able to hunt in the manner you have chosen. I would not like to see that personally, while I do not hunt with an atlatl I belive it is a viable harvesting practice.

How do you know there are not more atlatl hunters in alberta? You have stated your numbers are at 4... how do you back this up... politically you have just marginalized yourself and the minister in charge of ESRD can decide the political fallout from making your hunting practice illegal is minimal....or even beneficial!... if it makes others more happy...especially if it appeases the anti-hunting crowd....by throwing the atlatl guys under the bus.
Reply With Quote
  #249  
Old 04-04-2014, 12:22 PM
Alley Oop Alley Oop is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudelpointer View Post
??? You really don't understand what that saying means...

If you wake a sleeping dog you are likely to get bitten.

If you let it sleep, it will wake on its own and not bite anyone.
Thank you.

Yes the dog has been rudely and unnecessarily awaken.
It's too bad.
Now we gotta keep the mutt at bay and tranquilize it.

Just one more hunting regulation to deal with.

I wish AA and walking buffalo all the best.
I'll do what I can to help.
GŔRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!! More teeth nashing required.
Reply With Quote
  #250  
Old 04-04-2014, 02:31 PM
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,772
Default

Just remember who woke the dog first....it was when somebody posted about atlat success on the interweb/youtube/social media and then it almost went exponential from there....
Reply With Quote
  #251  
Old 04-04-2014, 02:36 PM
Alley Oop Alley Oop is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nekred View Post
Just remember who woke the dog first....it was when somebody posted about atlat success on the interweb/youtube/social media and then it almost went exponential from there....
I don't know who started it.
But I do know who's gotta put up their dukes and fight now.
Reply With Quote
  #252  
Old 04-04-2014, 03:06 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nekred View Post
Just remember who woke the dog first....it was when somebody posted about atlat success on the interweb/youtube/social media and then it almost went exponential from there....

The ABA executives used the internet excuse to propose Spear/Atlatls be banned in case somebody saw a video and then complained. Who would have guessed that the complainant they warned about would be the ABA?

The ABA execs were the first to bring this topic up for discussion at the May 2012 AGMAG meeting. Brent Watson has stated in his letters that he did so at this time because a couple of people (remaining anonymous) complained to him. ABA execs took the next step by introducing their proposal to Ban spears/atlatls at the may 2013 AGAMG meeting. This proposal was never brought up for discussion or a vote by the ABA membership, which is against the By-Laws governing the ABA.


Until the ABA publically states that their proposal to Ban Spears/Atlatls has been withdrawn or has been voted on and rejected by the AGMAG membership the Proposal must be considered to still be active. To date the ABA has not publically stated that the proposal to ban Spears/Atlatls has been withdrawn. To date, the ABA has not stated that they are no longer opposed to Spears/Atlatls being used for hunting big game. All that the ABA has done is to agree to forward an information package from AlbertaAtlatl to the AGMAG table.


It's one thing to wake up a dog, quite another to keep on kicking it.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #253  
Old 04-04-2014, 03:18 PM
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,772
Default

Youa re quite unaware of the facts.... in fact the minutes of the AGMAG meeting were changed and there was information presented at ABA meeting again where wordplay ended up in resulting with a complete misinterpretation....so......

maybe you need to get more up to date information...or read a post by Alberta Atlatl here in this thread that is clarifying what is happening on a go-forward basis where they can present their information at an upcoming AGMAG meeting...
Reply With Quote
  #254  
Old 04-04-2014, 03:23 PM
nekred nekred is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,772
Default

Do people think that not speaking about this will make it go away.... the kicking a dog reference no longer applies....

Anyways I have said all i want to say on this issue... and I hope for two things...

1) people are allowed to hunt using their chosen effective method

2) Effective methods are defined in hunting regulations to get rid of grey...

In order to define what is effective then some objective information needs to be gathered and presented for review.

Or we can leave it until ESRD just makes a ruling to make all methods illegal other than those listed in regulations as currently acceptable established practices by specific criteria and that is that!...

Debate over...
Reply With Quote
  #255  
Old 04-04-2014, 03:52 PM
Pudelpointer Pudelpointer is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Back in Lethbridge
Posts: 4,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nekred View Post
Youa re quite unaware of the facts.... in fact the minutes of the AGMAG meeting were changed and there was information presented at ABA meeting again where wordplay ended up in resulting with a complete misinterpretation....so......

maybe you need to get more up to date information...or read a post by Alberta Atlatl here in this thread that is clarifying what is happening on a go-forward basis where they can present their information at an upcoming AGMAG meeting...
Who changed the AGMAG minutes? To what effect? What information was presented at an ABA meeting that was "misinterpreted"?

You appear to have "facts" that we are not privy too. Please detail what is going on...
Reply With Quote
  #256  
Old 04-04-2014, 03:57 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
The ABA executives used the internet excuse to propose Spear/Atlatls be banned in case somebody saw a video and then complained. Who would have guessed that the complainant they warned about would be the ABA?
This is first mistake/untrue fact. This was not initiated IN CASE there was a complaint, there in fact WAS a complaint. The ABA acted on that complaint by bringing it to the AGMAG meetings.
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #257  
Old 04-04-2014, 04:09 PM
Pudelpointer Pudelpointer is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Back in Lethbridge
Posts: 4,647
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tox View Post
This is first mistake/untrue fact. This was not initiated IN CASE there was a complaint, there in fact WAS a complaint. The ABA acted on that complaint by bringing it to the AGMAG meetings.
A complaint from whom? To whom?

Are you saying someone was offended by a YouTube video..., not even in Alberta, and then complained to the ABA of all people? Really?

And instead of explaining to the offended party that the ABA did not represent Atlatl / spear / stick / rock / endurance / stranglehold hunters, and saying thNks for the call, the ABA executive decided to make a proposal to government and other groups that this equipment BE BANNED in Alberta?

What gives the ABA the self-righteous gall to go after anyone else's hunting methods?

Mr. Watson's own explanation stated that a ban would help deflect possible criticism from the public, not just of Atlatls and spears, but of archery as well. Or did I read that wrong?
Reply With Quote
  #258  
Old 04-04-2014, 04:17 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pudelpointer View Post
A complaint from whom? To whom?
This is old news, already stated in the brief. They were members that brought it to the attention of the association. This is no different than the ABA going to AGMAG with info on behalf of Albertaatlatl.
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #259  
Old 04-04-2014, 04:21 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tox View Post
This is first mistake/untrue fact. This was not initiated IN CASE there was a complaint, there in fact WAS a complaint. The ABA acted on that complaint by bringing it to the AGMAG meetings.
That's what I said. The ABA was the one to complain. As stated by Brent Watson in his Jan 2014 letter. "Spear/Atlatl Issue
(Jan 15 2014)
This issue popped up a couple of years ago when ABA President Brent Watson had two ABA
members contact him about the use of spears/atlatls in Alberta, what they had seen on YouTube and one
had a friend who had used a spear on a bear. Several TV shows on WILD TV also showed spears being
used for hunting bears and bison/hogs. Brent checked with the ESRD head of enforcement (Pat Dunford)
and he said there were no laws on the books not allowing them, etc. They had a few negative comments
made to them but nothing really more than that. Brent brought the issue up at an ABA exec meeting June
18 2012 after he raised the question at the AGAMG (Alberta Game Management Advisory Group)
meeting in May 2012 to get the opinions of other stakeholders."


The ABA was the first and only hunting group to want the discussion on Legal Weapons, they are the group that initiated the discussion at AGMAG and are the only hunting group to make a proposal to ban spears and atlatls. None of the other hunting groups support the ABA's position.


Don't forget how this internet discussion and the discussion at the AGM all began. After I spent several hours speaking with Brent last Dec.4, 2013, he confirmed the history of how the issue began, the ABA's current position, and provided me with the ABA's proposal to Ban Spear's and Atlatls. Brent confirmed that this proposal was never brought to the membership for review/vote (against the ABA constitution), and that there was no possible way to convince him that Spears/Atlatls should be legal, defined or not. Remember, this is on Dec. 04, 2013, a year after claiming in his Jan 2014 letter that there was a Misinterpretation of the May 2013 AGMAG minutes.

In further discussions with other AGMAG members, members of the ABA and their affiliated clubs, NO ONE was aware of the ABA proposal! That is when I decided to started the thread Five Reasons To Ban Spears and Atlatls. http://www.outdoorsmenforum.ca/showt...hlight=reasons


We likely wouldn't be in this mess of a discussion if the ABA executive followed the ABA constitution.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #260  
Old 04-04-2014, 04:42 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nekred View Post
Youa re quite unaware of the facts.... in fact the minutes of the AGMAG meeting were changed and there was information presented at ABA meeting again where wordplay ended up in resulting with a complete misinterpretation....so......

maybe you need to get more up to date information...or read a post by Alberta Atlatl here in this thread that is clarifying what is happening on a go-forward basis where they can present their information at an upcoming AGMAG meeting...

Yes, I am aware of the facts. The ABA stated on Jan 14 2014 that the AGMAG minutes were misinterpreted. I guess that the ABA is suggesting that the title of their AGMAG Proposal ---- Make the use of spears and atlatls illegal for hunting big game in Alberta. , and their suggestion RECOMMENDED CHANGE - Make the use of spears and atlatls illegal for hunting big game in Alberta. was misinterpreted?

How stupid of people to misinterpret what they meant compared to what they wrote and verbally proposed.



I have spoken with Albertaatlatl and several others that were at the meeting. I suspect Albertaatlatl might respond to his earlier post. Until the ABA publically states their position regarding the use of spears and atlatls for hunting big game and confirms that the ABA proposal is dead, it must be assumed that there is no change. The only motion passed appears to be an agreement for the ABA to deliver an information package from Albertaatlatl to the AGMAG table.


Now if the ABA will publically give an update on their Spear Ban Proposal and position regarding the use of Spears and Atlatls within the F&W Legal Weapons discussion then possibly this particular debate can truly be over.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #261  
Old 04-04-2014, 04:49 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tox View Post
This is old news, already stated in the brief. They were members that brought it to the attention of the association. This is no different than the ABA going to AGMAG with info on behalf of Albertaatlatl.
Can you get the ABA to provide that position in writing, that they are now in support of Spears/Atlatls for hunting?

My understanding is that the ABA did not agree to support Albertaatlatl, but to simply be the mailman.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #262  
Old 04-04-2014, 04:52 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
The ABA was the first and only hunting group to want the discussion on Legal Weapons, they are the group that initiated the discussion at AGMAG and are the only hunting group to make a proposal to ban spears and atlatls. None of the other hunting groups support the ABA's position.
Doesn't just one group make a first proposal? You claim the other groups do not support the proposal. The ABA claims there was no opposition to the proposal. Were you at the AGMAG meetings? Which was it? Do you have the minutes of the AGMAG meetings?
How many people actually know what other proposals are at the AGMAG meetings? How many people knew what AGMAG was before this issue was posted here?
If in fact there is no support for the proposal by all the other user groups at AGMAG, what happens to the proposal? I guess it dies. Maybe I'm wrong, judging by the circus here, the ABA runs the show at AGMAG. LOL
I am still collecting data so I can't really comment on all your claims.
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #263  
Old 04-04-2014, 05:05 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tox View Post
Doesn't just one group make a first proposal? You claim the other groups do not support the proposal. The ABA claims there was no opposition to the proposal. Were you at the AGMAG meetings? Which was it? Do you have the minutes of the AGMAG meetings?
How many people actually know what other proposals are at the AGMAG meetings? How many people knew what AGMAG was before this issue was posted here?
If in fact there is no support for the proposal by all the other user groups at AGMAG, what happens to the proposal? I guess it dies. Maybe I'm wrong, judging by the circus here, the ABA runs the show at AGMAG. LOL
I am still collecting data so I can't really comment on all your claims.
-Sometimes.
-No opposition is not the same as support. As I mentioned before, the "no opposition" statement meant that no members opposed the ABA at this time. Since then, the AFGA and SCI have changed their position to oppose the ABA proposal, other groups have abstained from the discussion.
-No.
-Yes. Pm me your email and I'll send them to you.
In addition to just having the minutes, I have spoken extensively with other AGMAG reps who were at these meetings as this is the only way to get a true understanding of what happened.
-No idea.
-Sometimes they die. F&W has the authority to eventually do as it pleases with or without approval.
-No, the ABA certainly does not run AGMAG. In regards to this issue, it is their baby.
- As mentioned, I'm happy to pass on the documents that I have and will continue to answer questions as possible.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #264  
Old 04-04-2014, 05:08 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
Can you get the ABA to provide that position in writing, that they are now in support of Spears/Atlatls for hunting?

My understanding is that the ABA did not agree to support Albertaatlatl, but to simply be the mailman.
I was at the meeting. No, I cannot get the ABA to provide that. This is what the ABA had agreed upon, take info on behalf of Albertaatlatl to the AGMAG meetings. This was also agreed to by HFT. Simply providing an avenue for Albertaatlatl to be involved in the AGMAG meetings (somewhat like having another user group at AGMAG).
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #265  
Old 04-04-2014, 05:23 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

No opposition is not the same as support. As I mentioned before, the "no opposition" statement meant that no members opposed the ABA at this time. Since then, the AFGA and SCI have changed their position to oppose the ABA proposal, other groups have abstained from the discussion.

No opposition is not the same as opposed to! So in reality, a proposal is brought up for discussion, groups go collect information/opinions, decide where their group stands on an issue, and returns to next meeting to discuss further and a decision is made whether or not to pursue the topic. Is this not what AGMAG was created for?
Best I can surmise is that you are unhappy an issue has been brought to light when rather you believe it best to bury your head in the sand and no one will know any different.
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #266  
Old 04-04-2014, 05:30 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tox View Post
No opposition is not the same as support. As I mentioned before, the "no opposition" statement meant that no members opposed the ABA at this time. Since then, the AFGA and SCI have changed their position to oppose the ABA proposal, other groups have abstained from the discussion.

No opposition is not the same as opposed to! So in reality, a proposal is brought up for discussion, groups go collect information/opinions, decide where their group stands on an issue, and returns to next meeting to discuss further and a decision is made whether or not to pursue the topic. Is this not what AGMAG was created for?
Best I can surmise is that you are unhappy an issue has been brought to light when rather you believe it best to bury your head in the sand and no one will know any different.
Sorry, By "you" I don't mean you specifically. It was an attempt at an analogy.
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #267  
Old 04-04-2014, 10:56 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by walking buffalo View Post
This proposal was never brought up for discussion or a vote by the ABA membership, which is against the By-Laws governing the ABA.
Which bylaw is it you claim the ABA has violated?
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
Reply With Quote
  #268  
Old 04-05-2014, 09:45 PM
creighton creighton is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 108
Default

WOW!!! Well done!!!
Reply With Quote
  #269  
Old 04-07-2014, 01:34 PM
walking buffalo's Avatar
walking buffalo walking buffalo is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,208
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by albertaatlatl View Post
There was no other equipment proposal. Only to define a legal weapon.The previous proposal to ban has been withdrawn and replaced by a proposal to define a legal hunting tool. We at Alberta Atlatl, and primitive groups do not think that a regulation is required, nor do we think a definition is required at all. Our package will contain Atlatls and spears mainly, if you have any extra input on other bladed weapons please forward it to me by DM. We think that the proper unbiased info on these weapons must go to the AGMAG table with a proposal to drop the "define a weapon" and banning a weapon proposal. We are not taking part of the craziness because of inevitabilty but because of necessity to keep the historical and traditional use of these tools to be allowed.
AA

The ABA did not withdraw their proposal to ban spears and atlatls, however it does appear that it was swallowed by the F&W discussion to redefine legal weapons during the Jan. '14 AGMAG meeting. Perhaps this proposal is technically dead.

However, the ABA still has not publically stated their current position regarding spears and atlatls to hunt big game. As there was no motion at the recent ABA AGM to declare a position, it is still in the hands of the executive.

As you mentioned, the ABA has agreed to be a "courier" for your information package, and that is all. They have not declared that they will change their position from requesting that spears and atlatls to be banned.

I suggest that until the ABA declares otherwise, it is wise to conclude that the ABA exec. will continue to lobby AGMAG for the banning of spears and atlatls.
__________________
Alberta Fish and Wildlife Outdoor Recreation Policy -

"to identify very rare, scarce or special forms of fish and wildlife outdoor recreation opportunities and to ensure that access to these opportunities continues to be available to all Albertans."
Reply With Quote
  #270  
Old 04-07-2014, 02:18 PM
Tox Tox is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 224
Default

Lets move this to where it belongs. After review of some of these post, if not all, this thread has been TOTALLY highjacked. My apologies to Albertaatlatl.
__________________
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking, don't you think?”
-Scarecrow
― L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz
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 02:46 AM.


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