2013 Archery Mule deer going on Draw

[mulecrazy]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Apparently you don't know many hunters. I was surveyed every year as was just about everyone else I hunt with. AFGA volunteers conducted them. I'm sure many on here can attest to the countless phone calls they made conducting surveys.

Unfortunately, last year and the years before it there was no reason not to answer truthfully....now with the rumblings I hear, there is a motivation. Sad I know but I've heard many people talking about it.

I hunt with at least 10 different guys/gals, none of them have ever had the call. I make sausage with another 6-10 guys every year and none of them have had the call. strange.......

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by mulecrazy

Does being strictly a rifle hunter make commons sense vanish?

im both and im not having trouble with the math. the argument that the data may not be complete makes sense. id like to see some real numbers before committing, and further, if this is in response to the massive mistakes of srd over the last few years regarding tag numbers, then a few people in that department need to be on the unemployment line. however, to argue that there are zones not over that 15% limit is nonsense. there is no question that a few wmus are exceeding the cap and complaining that incomplete information about zone xxx means that zone yyy isnt an issue doesnt make sense.

as i said, if srds insanity is being used to skew the numbers....for example the very low draw mule tags in zones like 118, 119, 148 from last year.....then to say that archery harvest is over the 15% is likely true, but that fault lies with srd, not with bowhunters. this is kinda like the gafuffle over outfitter antelope tags last year. they were way out of proportion as well, but it was not a long term thing.....just a result of the population blip for that year. it will be again this fall, but by next year, the percentage i suspect will be closer to nromal.

Originally Posted by mulecrazy

Yet those 100% of archers make up only 15% of hunters in a FEW zones, much less in others. And yet, many whine about it when 100% of HUNTERS can pick up a bow and do it themselves.

Another reason I find the whole thing bogus is they do not account for how a person spreads out their bowhunting. If a guy hunts 1 day in 4 different zones in a given season is his tag going against all of them?

With all the BS around the crazy tag numbers in virtually all of the south zones where up until last year you could get a tag every-every other year in most zones there is suddenly an issue with wait times?

I can see you still don't understand mule and quite possibly don't want to. It's got nothing to do with where they hunt and everything to do with where they kill. Math is not everyone's strong suit so let's just leave it there.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by mulecrazy

I hunt with at least 10 different guys/gals, none of them have ever had the call. I make sausage with another 6-10 guys every year and none of them have had the call. strange.......

ive been the guy making calls. when it was done by telephone, i would call about 100 every year. i was called myself by other volunteers in the same time period. im not sure how the selection process went. sometimes i would call the same guy 3 straight years, then miss him a year and get him again the following year. most years i was called, but not every year.

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

im both and im not having trouble with the math. the argument that the data may not be complete makes sense. id like to see some real numbers before committing, and further, if this is in response to the massive mistakes of srd over the last few years regarding tag numbers, then a few people in that department need to be on the unemployment line. however, to argue that there are zones not over that 15% limit is nonsense. there is no question that a few wmus are exceeding the cap and complaining that incomplete information about zone xxx means that zone yyy isnt an issue doesnt make sense.

as i said, if srds insanity is being used to skew the numbers....for example the very low draw mule tags in zones like 118, 119, 148 from last year.....then to say that archery harvest is over the 15% is likely true, but that fault lies with srd, not with bowhunters. this is kinda like the gafuffle over outfitter antelope tags last year. they were way out of proportion as well, but it was not a long term thing.....just a result of the population blip for that year. it will be again this fall, but by next year, the percentage i suspect will be closer to nromal.

Some of these zone have been over the cap for many years according to ESRD bambi.....it's not a one year look. This data goes back to 2003.

[mulecrazy]

Originally Posted by ishootbambi

im both and im not having trouble with the math. the argument that the data may not be complete makes sense. id like to see some real numbers before committing, and further, if this is in response to the massive mistakes of srd over the last few years regarding tag numbers, then a few people in that department need to be on the unemployment line. however, to argue that there are zones not over that 15% limit is nonsense. there is no question that a few wmus are exceeding the cap and complaining that incomplete information about zone xxx means that zone yyy isnt an issue doesnt make sense.

as i said, if srds insanity is being used to skew the numbers....for example the very low draw mule tags in zones like 118, 119, 148 from last year.....then to say that archery harvest is over the 15% is likely true, but that fault lies with srd, not with bowhunters. this is kinda like the gafuffle over outfitter antelope tags last year. they were way out of proportion as well, but it was not a long term thing.....just a result of the population blip for that year. it will be again this fall, but by next year, the percentage i suspect will be closer to nromal.

I totally agree with what your saying ISB. If you look through my posts you will see that I acknowledge the fact that some zones are likely going over the 15% according to their numbers. I do question their accuracy, but I would not be surprised to see that. I also feel that if 3-4 zones have gone over the cap, there is no real reason to do a complete change of the system. Putting them on draw will have a major effect on the neighbouring zones with the pressure just going to the non draw zones.

[ishootbambi]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Some of these zone have been over the cap for many years according to ESRD bambi.....it's not a one year look. This data goes back to 2003.

i agree that some are over the cap. ive said that all along. IF however last years numbers are being held in higher regard in SOME zones, then that is complete bullsnot. i can likely guess a few zones that are above the 15% pretty easy. i just wonder how many zones are being targeted that maybe shouldnt? id like to see some info from srd that is guiding them right now. id be particularly interested in the eastern border wmus stats over the last decade.

[mulecrazy]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I can see you still don't understand mule and quite possibly don't want to. It's got nothing to do with where they hunt and everything to do with where they kill. Math is not everyone's strong suit so let's just leave it there.

Wow, nicely done there chief, I guess I must bow down to hind end kissing ESRD poster boy big shot writer. Am I not allowed to question your opinion there big shot? Its not about the math, its about their methodology and accuracy. I am now seeing why so many on this site really do not like you.

[Big Daddy Badger]

[QUOTE=The Bit Runner.;1503117]

Originally Posted by pesky672

You are right you can get close to elk in the rut, Close to me is a 100 yards,You bet i can do that all day every day in the rut but now bring that bull to with in shooting range, Mine is 30-40 yards on Elk. Now thats were i gets interesting my friend, It is far from easy. If you picked up a bow and tried you would quickly see.

I dont bow hunt for the longer season, I bow hunt because its my passion and there is nothing more rewarding for me to harvest a animal on his terms, to out smart him on the ground. When rifle season comes i dont pick up my rifle i bow hunt. I could of harvested so many thropys with a rifle in the last 10 years but its just not about the throphy, Its all about the hunt and exsperince to me and I get it all from bowhunting.

Each and everyone of us will have our own reasons why we bowhunt but i think you will be surprised as to the people that still bowhunt in rifle season for the same reasons as mine.

On a side note if you look at the thread's on bowhunting and rifle hunting you will quickly see there is no comparison. There are way to many people out there that think that it is so easy to kill a Elk with a bow in the rut, Go through the tread and see how many are killed with rifles compared to bow's and you will understand that it is not easy my friend.

First I never said it was easy...I said it wasn't that hard.
I've been hunting elk for over 30 years now and I think the longest rut season shot I ever made was still only about 75 yards.
The rut makes it easier...period and I can appreciate that because of the whole distance thing bow hunters need that.

But this argument isn't about the rut or even elk.
It isn't about bow hunters vrs the rifle guys.
It's about draws for big game being imposed upon all of us and the advantages/disadvantages that may come with that.

I see a draw for bow hunters as being more fair to all and as a great way to discourage riff raff who are only interested in filling a tag from showing up during the bow season to bugger up the dedicated bow hunters good time.
It might have the windfall effect of limiting that season to those that are truly passionate about bow hunting. As it is now...a lot of guys buy bows ONLY because they know they can get a tag and many of them seem to be more interested in filling a tag than in how they fill it.

So my comments are not intended as an attack on bow hunting or bow hunters.
I've got lots of friends that do it and have considered it myself.
My comments are aimed at leveling the paying field a bit and minimizing the BS that comes when some people see an opportunity but are unwilling to apply ethics or effort towards exploiting it the way dedicated ethical bow hunters do.

I'm pretty sure that once draws became the norm for many species during rifle season there was an almost immediate reduction in the number of guys that showed up every year to wreck mayhem... because they didn't have the patience or the dedication that serious hunters have... so they just quit.

I might be incorrect but why not give it a shot for a couple years and see what happens? It might not be a bad idea and if it is... it can always be undone down the road.
Finally with numbers down in many MU's after that disastrous spring last year... it would be a perfect opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

Originally Posted by mulecrazy

Wow, nicely done there chief, I guess I must bow down to hind end kissing ESRD poster boy big shot writer. Am I not allowed to question your opinion there big shot? Its not about the math, its about their methodology and accuracy. I am now seeing why so many on this site really do not like you.

LOL.....no need to be rude. My only opinion is that the numbers are pretty accurate...on that we disagree. I totally respect that. The rest is simple math formulas.....not opinion. You seem to be struggling with some of the math formulas.....no shame in that......but not understanding it doesn't mean it's wrong or that's it's a contrary opinion. It's just plain old math and stats.

You can question my opinion all you want and I'll totally respect that but you are obviously not getting some of the factual math formulas and apparently it's frustrating us both. No harm meant. I apologize if you took offence...none meant.

[flyguyd]

Originally Posted by mulecrazy

And yet, many whine about it when 100% of HUNTERS can pick up a bow and do it themselves.

If 100 % picked up a bow and a general mule deer tag , it would all be on a draw anyway ,so whats the difference

[Sledhead71]

I have tried to follow most of this thread, but may have missed some

Personally, placing a draw system on the archery general tag is foolish in my mind, miss management and the hard winter of 2010 has created more issues than a person with a stick and string. IMO

There are more animals killed from vehicle collisions in most WMU than the archery tackle. I have always wondered why the county's allow volunteer alfalfa to take over ditches bringing all species from antelope,elk, moose, mule and white tail deer in close proximity with traffic. One of the easiest cures would be to spray out the weed (alfalfa) preventing many deaths and costs to insurance companies, not to mention a human fatality here and there.

Placing restrictions on a general tag is not feasible either, some trophy hunt, others fill freezers, to each their own here. The trophy hunter feels the potential will increase with less archer's in the field, well the dedicated hunting community will continue to be successful, weapons aside.. Genetics play a major role in the quality, don't forget the ladies determine more of the genetic outcome than the gentlemen

I certainly hope we do not have archery Mule deer on draw, it allows many to get out early season and enjoy our sport, is this not why we have not chose this recreational passion ? Remember, once a system has been altered, it will take a long time to change, and all for what, miss management and a hard winter ?

One a good note, mother nature has always out smarted the general public, I am seeing twins, and triples in all species this year.. Easy past winter, great spring conditions, great recreational prospects ahead for the sportsmen and women !

Best of luck to all !

[KCL]

Why even use a bow, everybody knows that a rifle is more efficient and effective at killing a deer.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by flyguyd

If 100 % picked up a bow and a general mule deer tag , it would all be on a draw anyway ,so whats the difference

Then, srd would have to eliminate rifle hunting all together because there survey says nobody rifle hunts!

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

Are mandatory surveys going to be accurate? Lots of talk about people fudging numbers now that they know what's on the horizon. In some WMUs, one or two people not telling the truth could totally skew the numbers. We have 6-7 years of data already, including some very extensive telephone surveys.....I can't see the results changing a lot......if people are honest answering the questions that is. Truthfully, I'd trust the data more from earlier a lot more than what might come in the next few years. There was no motive to fudge them before.

Why didn't anyone ask for this type of scrutiny when the elk and moose draws were announced??????

No different than alot of successful sheep hunters fudging the location of their kills! It's always goning to happen !

When it came up for moose and elk, I never heard or read anything about it! I believe it flew under the radar for alot of hunters.

The draw stance on the Bighorn sheep, opened alot of people's eyes what we as individuals can do, when united in the same cause! Mule deer is now the next issue right after sheep !

Anyone who accepts artificial numbers, from srd doesn't have the best interest of hunters, and the animals in Alberta! They would want accurate, real numbers, much like the fight against the sheep proposals.

[flyguyd]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Then, srd would have to eliminate rifle hunting all together because there survey says nobody rifle hunts!

They do . Once every 5 years.....lol

And then 100% of us draw archers would hunt every 5 years also...

[Lefty-Canuck]

The thing about these "surveys" and "votes" (ie. on the crossbow issue) is that most folks who answer them probably have no idea of the apparent "weight" they carry.....I can tell you on the crossbow issue I personally had no idea the survey was the only data they were taking into consideration.

LC

[packhuntr]

Originally Posted by packhuntr

Esrd is confident in a lot of things that don't jive with real life. If mule deer management is back on the menu for this province and they indeed want to buck the trend being realized NA wide with this species, our provinces archers are not the place to look. Matter of fact it's one of the last things needing adjustment. Anyone in disagreeance with this need spend less time playing politician/talking, and more time in the field. Anyone care to ask why ESRD will not welcome the Mule Deer Foundation and associates into this province?

.The sheer number of mule deer tags handed out the last x number years to anyone with a heart beat shouldn't be cause for concern, yet a handful of archers in the province is enough to cause concern and immediate need for restructuring??? You guys have got to be drunk...

[KCL]

I've been thinking about this thread a lot. I really love hunting mule deer. I have never shot a mule deer with a bow, have shot several with a rifle. Every year I buy a general tag and bow license, (if I'm not drawn). I love shooting my bow at targets and can get close enough to shoot a mule deer but I'm really scared of wounding a deer so I never shoot. I know several large deer are getting shot by archers in the area I hunt, my finger is fairly on the pulse. I know I come across as a bow hunting hater but I'm not, the most successful hunter I know is a bowhunter and I have respect for a lot of bowhunters. The thing is there's people on here saying draws aren't the answer to anything, that's wrong. When I was a teenager, it was spiker and fork horns. Then they put rifle hunting on draw and mule deer got a lot bigger. Now, bowhunters have better equipment, there's more money and time for recreation so more days are spent in the field and success rates are up. It is now the bowhunters turn to give up some opportunity for the sake of trophy mule deer. Bow hunters should have their own season, their own draw and their own opportunity, but that opportunity should not be unlimited. It would be the equivalent of saying fly fishermen who fish from shore on lakes should be able to keep all the fish they want because they are at a disadvantage but people with boats and spinning gear can't keep anything. The resource can't handle it, it's Alberta boys, make some sacrifices to protect it before it's too late.

[jack88]

Originally Posted by packhuntr

.The sheer number of mule deer tags handed out the last x number years to anyone with a heart beat shouldn't be cause for concern, yet a handful of archers in the province is enough to cause concern and immediate need for restructuring??? You guys have got to be drunk...

There's more than a handful of us now, I’m sure a large % of new bow hunters got into it because of the no draw system, ok I’m very sure of it.
Put things on a draw and watch the "weekend archer" numbers fall. As bad as it sounds, but bow hunting in Alberta has exploded. Whether the success is there or not how many of you would like to see half the people you do in the field each year if it meant you drew a tag every other year? A draw will only help out the truely dedicated archers, I welcome it with open arms after brewing over it the last few nights. (Pretty sure Ive even flip flopped from my previous feelings)
The hard winter 2 years ago was just an accelerated eye opener, things have been going into the toilet for the last few years province wide, doesn’t matter what weapon you’re packing.

[Dr Death]

I think we have lots of great information and ideas on this thread. No one is right, no one is wrong. We can all use 'hand picked' information to make our view the best one.

I am using the example of weak WMU 404 surveys to make my point. Should this zone go on draw based on the info they have? Definitely not!

Sheephunter cites the fact that in WMU 106, if 1 mule deer buck is taken then the harvest exceeds the 15% and therefor it should be on draw. I'm sure there is more than 1 mulie arrowed a year in that zone. Should it go on draw? Yes.

My concern is with all of the other zones. WMU's 404 and 106 are on the extreme opposite ends of the spectrum. It helps knowing they are using survey data from the past several years, but how much is enough? These numbers should be made public as they claim to have all the info they need to determine if a draw is warranted. But it is next to impossible to get even an WMU or two's data. Again, something is amiss. I strongly suspect the data is very weak across the board and that there are other reasons a draw is being pushed. If the numbers are good then let's see them! It's very simple.

Once again, mandatory surveys would be the answer and they would not be hard to administer. Most are already registered at AlbertaRELM. A one time fee of $5 added to our licences would likely cover the cost. If the numbers are indeed surpassing 15% then absolutely...draw.

Originally Posted by Dr Death

Once again, mandatory surveys would be the answer and they would not be hard to administer. Most are already registered at AlbertaRELM. A one time fee of $5 added to our licences would likely cover the cost. If the numbers are indeed surpassing 15% then absolutely...draw.

I'm not saying mandatory surveys are a bad idea but "most" hunters are defitely not registered at AlbertaRelm. Last count I saw was right around 50%. That's what makes mandatory surveys nearly impossible or at the very least extremely expensive to impliment...... And add to that compiling all the data and you are looking at several extra staff positions. Not saying it's a bad idea but definitely not as simple as you portray. Statistically speaking, representative samples still provide a very accurate picture of harvest in Alberta.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I'm not saying mandatory surveys are a bad idea but "most" hunters are defitely not registered at AlbertaRelm. Last count I saw was right around 50%. That's what makes mandatory surveys nearly impossible or at the very least extremely expensive to impliment...... And add to that compiling all the data and you are looking at several extra staff positions. Not saying it's a bad idea but definitely not as simple as you portray. Statistically speaking, representative samples still provide a very accurate picture of harvest in Alberta.

Why when it came to bighorn sheep was there such a push, for actual facts, and people didn't want to accept what was being rammed down or throats by esrd?

Why such acceptance of a mediocre survey sample?

Something stinks!

Again anyone who doesn't want real proof, and real numbers, has an agenda!

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Something stinks!

Again anyone who doesn't want real proof, and real numbers, has an agenda!

Yep... hit the nail on the head.

[pottymouth]

.

Originally Posted by pottymouth

Why such acceptance of a mediocre survey sample?

Something stinks!

Again anyone who doesn't want real proof, and real numbers, has an agenda!

I haven't heard anyone say they are against "real" numbers but sadly, the economics and logistics of a mandatory survey play into the decision. We live in a world of shrinking budgets and Fish and Wildlife has already been gutted to the point where they can barely do their jobs. I'd welcome 100% accurate results but just don't believe they are feasible nor affordable. Plus, I'm not convinced that a mandatory survey would reveal "real" numbers anyhow. You've pointed out in this thread a couple times how current mandatory registration doesn't even work. What makes you feel mandatory surveys would?

I'm 100% in favour of each user group getting their fair share and I think most are.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by sheephunter

I haven't heard anyone say they are against "real" numbers but sadly, the economics and logistics of a mandatory survey play into the decision. We live in a world of shrinking budgets and Fish and Wildlife has already been gutted to the point where they can barely do their jobs. I'd welcome 100% accurate results but just don't believe they are feasible nor affordable. Plus, I'm not convinced that a mandatory survey would reveal "real" numbers anyhow. You've pointed out in this thread a couple times how current mandatory registration doesn't even work. What makes you feel mandatory surveys would?

The margin of error in a sample surveys is huge. Those numbers can easily be misconstrued , to depict events that aren't actually occurring! Do actually have a number of actual surveys completed?

The margin of error on a mandatory surveys would be a lot less margins of error, only cause the sample size would be greater!

Implementing a mandatory survey would cost no more than a voluntary one! Before purchasing draws applications, attach the survey to a precursor to the draws.

Who is to say that the voluntary survey doesn't have more flaws the registry one! How many people actually took that survey seriously , being voluntary? At least with a mandatory registry, like with sheep, there's always a fear that F&W can follow up on your info, and charges could be laid for falsifying information to an officer. That fear makes people be more honest! It the experienced guys that circumvent and manipulate the system, because of their knowledge and experience.

[BigRackLover]

Better information is needed for sure.

Surveys are the answer. Statically speaking, we'd only need 10% (which is high) of the actual people that hunted each WMU to fill out a survey and we'd be done.

There are a ton of options for surveys to get 10% of each WMU. SRD needs to look at that fast!!! I mentioned it a pigeon lake open house one year and they dismissed the idea because they figured people would lie to get what they want - that's old school thinking. Surveys these days can be designed to weed out those who are purposely putting in inaccurate date.

I just can't think of why us outdoorsmen would cheat on our own surveys ... just shooting ourselves in the foot.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by BigRackLover

Better information is needed for sure.

Surveys are the answer. Statically speaking, we'd only need 10% (which is high) of the actual people that hunted each WMU to fill out a survey and we'd be done.

There are a ton of options for surveys to get 10% of each WMU. SRD needs to look at that fast!!! I mentioned it a pigeon lake open house one year and they dismissed the idea because they figured people would lie to get what they want - that's old school thinking. Surveys these days can be designed to weed out those who are purposely putting in inaccurate date.

I just can't think of why us outdoorsmen would cheat on our own surveys ... just shooting ourselves in the foot.

I agree!

How many people in one wmu, would have falsify information to really sway the accuracy of the survey? The more people the harder it becomes, justifying a mandatory survey!

Originally Posted by pottymouth

The margin of error in a sample surveys is huge. Those numbers can easily be misconstrued , to depict events that aren't actually occurring! Do actually have a number of actual surveys completed?

The margin of error on a mandatory surveys would be a lot less margins of error, only cause the sample size would be greater!

Implementing a mandatory survey would cost no more than a voluntary one! Before purchasing draws applications, attach the survey to a precursor to the draws.

What would you attach the survey to? How would you get the survey to everyone? Who would compile all the extra data? Who would set up the monitoring system to ensure all surveys were completed? To say it would cost no more is just plain falacy. All of those things would cost money....IBM doesn't work for free. ESRD is under staffed now. I'm sure the printing company would want to be paid? Canada Post requires stamps on envelopes. You could make the arguement that we need to spend the money but to say it wouldn't cost anymore is outright dreaming.

Yes, they know exactly how many surveys are completed. The number might surprise you....I know it did me. Potty I appreciate your passion here but you are criticizing a system that you don't even know the numbers for. The basis of forming an informed opposition is becoming informed. That's why ESRD listened to sheep hunters.