Changes To Archery Mule Deer.

[Mutter87]

Nope, NO Archery draw! Take away from the Landowners and Outfitters first! This "15%" is crap! If the gun owners choose to not put on the miles and be successful then why should the archers suffer?

[Pudelpointer]

In the interest of fairness, since there appears to be a small number of rifle hunters who think bow hunters have an 'unfair advantage', I suggest the following:

A separate archery draw be create for all species that are on draw. Since currently 15% of hunters are archers, 15% of all species harvest be dedicated to bow hunters - including sheep, moose, goats, bison, everything. Every 3 years the percentage of bow hunters can be evaluated and the target archery harvest adjusted.

Since those who only bow hunt because of the 'extra opportunity' will not put in for archery draws if they have to choose between rifle and bow, the 'true archers' can get drawn every year for almost every species. I figure I can then finally hunt moose, closer than 1200 km from my house, every 3 or 4 years instead of the 10-14 years it currently takes. Of course rifle guys might have to wait an extra couple years, but does it really matter if it takes 17 years instead if 14?


Sarcasm off.

[Deer Hunter]

The 15% number is another number that hasnt been properly vetted or reserched by anyone but has apparently caught on as the number to use.

Look at antelope as a starter
If you look at 6400 archery applicants and 27000 trophy applicants, you would come to the percentange of 20% of the people bowhunt antelope.

I caution the 15% number as it is as false as the rest of the recommendations coming from ESRD.


Cheers and Happy New Years!

[Lefty-Canuck]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

The 15% number is another number that hasnt been properly vetted or reserched by anyone but has apparently caught on as the number to use.

Look at antelope as a starter
If you look at 6400 archery applicants and 27000 trophy applicants, you would come to the percentange of 20% of the people bowhunt antelope.

I caution the 15% number as it is as false as the rest of the recommendations coming from ESRD.


Cheers and Happy New Years!

X2.....the 15% seems to be related to the number of "bow hunter" permits sold. I think it was SH who explained how that number was arrived at a couple months ago in a different thread.

So I don't know if that was actually how the 15% was decided or if it coincidentally coincided with the number of permits sold....if the numbers of bow hunters has increased, then why doesn't the "draw threshold" increase to that amount as well?.....or proportionally? are there more rifle hunters now taking up archery? are there more "hybrid" hunters out there? are more people choosing archery over rifle?

I fail to see how the "management stategy" has been defined to leave the landowners and outfitters out of the "strategy" and choose to only hammer on only the archers? One would think that for the better of the resource.....all parties with a vested interest in this should be making sacrifices for the greater good? no?

The way they arrive at these numbers is by the number of archery permits sold......I guess that is the only way to get the number?

LC

[Deer Hunter]

15% was the number of archery permits over all wildlife certificates sold which included exclusive bird hunters too... This number was actually 16% IIRC.

So if you take out the exclusive bird hunting group, the percentage of bowhunters increases....maybe to near 20% as the antelope specific group shows.

Regardless the 15% number is garbage and no long term policy should be implemented based on it.

[pottymouth]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

15% was the number of archery permits over all wildlife certificates sold which included exclusive bird hunters too... This number was actually 16% IIRC.

So if you take out the exclusive bird hunting group, the percentage of bowhunters increases....maybe to near 20% as the antelope specific group shows.

Regardless the 15% number is garbage and no long term policy should be implemented based on it.

You got that Right DH!!!

[Gun+Rod]

all bickering a side. Does anyone know what the plan is? New draw/tag? One draw, one tag either or bow or rifle?
I dont have time to read 12 pages on BS.

[HuntingAlberta]

They should keep it a "General" tag but make it so it is only good in a designated WMU so that some areas don't get hunted and have people driving around hunting on properties that they don't have permission on.

Or have it so that it remains a "General" tag but if you harvest an Archery mule deer it eliminates your Priority points in the draw back to 0. Thay way everybody has the same chances of harvesting an animal.

[walking buffalo]

Originally Posted by Gun+Rod

all bickering a side. Does anyone know what the plan is? New draw/tag? One draw, one tag either or bow or rifle?
I dont have time to read 12 pages on BS.

The debate is over.

While not finalized by legal, the following changes are pretty much written in stone, starting this fall.


For 2013, archers will need the draw to bowhunt mule deer in the archery season in the following WMUs –

100 WMU Series- 104, 108, 110, 130, 132, 134, 138, 140 and 156
200 WMU Series- 206, 208, 210, 214, 216, 220, 221, 222, 224 and 226
300 WMU series – 300, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308 314, 318, 320, 322, 324, 332, 337, 357, 358, 359 and 360
400 WMU Series – 400 and 402
500 WMU Series - 502, 504, 506, 509, 510, 521, 522, 523, 526 and 527

Bowhunters will enter the general draw pool. The idea for a separate draw cannot happen for two years under the current draw system contract.


Additionally, the following Antlered Mule Deer General Season will now go on draw.
REQUIREMENT OF AN ANTLERED MULE DEER SPECIAL LICENCE FOR HUNTING ANTLERED MULE DEER IN WMUS 351, 354, 356, 520, 524, 525 and 544

[Don K]

Makes sense to me...

[pikergolf]

Originally Posted by Don K

Makes sense to me...

Not to me, they should get their own draw for their own allotments. Bow hunting is the best way to get the most guys in the field for the longest time, that precept should have been respected. I don't bow hunt by the way.

[Mutter87]

So they should wait 2 years before making archery on draw then. Get rid of non res oppourtunities all together!!

[WildCanuck]

Originally Posted by Mutter87

So they should wait 2 years before making archery on draw then. Get rid of non res oppourtunities all together!!

agreed with the first statement, but I'd rather see landowner tag allocations be for antlerless only, and a reduction in mule deer outfitter tags as argued in Deer Hunter's post rather than getting rid of non-resident opportunities. The idea of a landowner tag on a crown resource bugs me; i know too many landowners that take nice mule deer every year, and it has nothing to do with protecting their crops!

WildCanuck

[H380]

Originally Posted by WildCanuck

agreed with the first statement, but I'd rather see landowner tag allocations be for antlerless only, and a reduction in mule deer outfitter tags as argued in Deer Hunter's post rather than getting rid of non-resident opportunities. The idea of a landowner tag on a crown resource bugs me; i know too many landowners that take nice mule deer every year, and it has nothing to do with protecting their crops!

WildCanuck

I agree that landowners shouldn't be able to hunt on crown land or other land they rent with this tag , however I don't think they are given it to protect their crops . More of a token thanks for giving the animals some habitat to live . I know a number of landowners that get the tag and only a few of them kill every year .

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by walking buffalo

The debate is over.

While not finalized by legal, the following changes are pretty much written in stone, starting this fall.


For 2013, archers will need the draw to bowhunt mule deer in the archery season in the following WMUs –

100 WMU Series- 104, 108, 110, 130, 132, 134, 138, 140 and 156
200 WMU Series- 206, 208, 210, 214, 216, 220, 221, 222, 224 and 226
300 WMU series – 300, 302, 303, 304, 305, 306, 308 314, 318, 320, 322, 324, 332, 337, 357, 358, 359 and 360
400 WMU Series – 400 and 402
500 WMU Series - 502, 504, 506, 509, 510, 521, 522, 523, 526 and 527

Bowhunters will enter the general draw pool. The idea for a separate draw cannot happen for two years under the current draw system contract.


Additionally, the following Antlered Mule Deer General Season will now go on draw.
REQUIREMENT OF AN ANTLERED MULE DEER SPECIAL LICENCE FOR HUNTING ANTLERED MULE DEER IN WMUS 351, 354, 356, 520, 524, 525 and 544

This is the best news I've heard all week. Putting the 356 Mule deer on draw is really going to help the 357 Mule deer population.
However I do think archery hunters should have their own draw as well, and not be able to apply in both rifle and bow. This would give dedicated bow hunters a tag almost every year.

Now if they just put archery moose on draw it would be perfect

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

This is the best news I've heard all week. Putting the 356 Mule deer on draw is really going to help the 357 Mule deer population.
However I do think archery hunters should have their own draw as well, and not be able to apply in both rifle and bow. This would give dedicated bow hunters a tag almost every year.

Now if they just put archery moose on draw it would be perfect

WMU 357 currently has 20 outfitter tags for antlered mule deer. And 23 people were drawn there in 2012 out of 1742 applicants. So outfitters had 46% of the tags last year... I wouldnt be looking to the archery mule hunters next door in 356 as the problem here.

[swift1]

Archery mule deer for Alberta resident's only!.....no outfitter or non-resident tags in southern half of province and landowner tags are antlerless or 2pt or less. I lived in Sask. and how much I would love to go back there and archery hunt mule deer but no go ...they just keep their mule deer hunting to resident only and it seems to work. My 2cents.


I would prefer to see a Archery MD "draw tag" as privilege to hunt in that WMU but not being restricted to hunt in that WMU. The draws restrict you to one WMU and doesn't allow you to even hunt General Areas or Crown Land when your buddys are heading out on a weekend hunt and your not because you got drawn. The draw has it's +'s and -'s.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

WMU 357 currently has 20 outfitter tags for antlered mule deer. And 23 people were drawn there in 2012 out of 1742 applicants. So outfitters had 46% of the tags last year... I wouldnt be looking to the archery mule hunters next door in 356 as the problem here.

356 is going on rifle draw Deer Hunter, it was over the counter before. The main problem with 357 besides the tough winters is the residents shooting deer in the farmland ( 357 ) and gutting them in the bush ( 356 ). 3-4 years ago our one butcher was seeing over a hundred 160-180 class bush mule deer every year, I've only ever seen one in the wild. But the byes get bringing them in.

As for the outfitter allocations in 357 from what I'm hearing from our local guys is Byron is going to loose all but 4 allocations for Mule deer. I'm sure he'll get them back when our numbers return to historic levels.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

356 is going on rifle draw Deer Hunter, it was over the counter before. The main problem with 357 besides the tough winters is the residents shooting deer in the farmland ( 357 ) and gutting them in the bush ( 356 ). 3-4 years ago our one butcher was seeing over a hundred 160-180 class bush mule deer every year, I've only ever seen one in the wild. But the byes get bringing them in.

As for the outfitter allocations in 357 from what I'm hearing from our local guys is Byron is going to loose all but 4 allocations for Mule deer. I'm sure he'll get them back when our numbers return to historic levels.

You wanted to help the MD pop in 357 i thought? The best way to do that is for outfitters to get their allocation/tags restricted like the residents have, not in other WMU's, but in 357.

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

You wanted to help the MD pop in 357 i thought? The best way to do that is for outfitters to get their allocation/tags restricted like the residents have, not in other WMU's, but in 357.

Please read my comments again you quoted. They are shooting them in 357 (draw) but saying they are shooting them in 356 ( not draw )

and they are cutting the outfitter allocations. That was the second part of my comment, not sure how you missed that

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

Please read my comments again you quoted. They are shooting them in 357 (draw) but saying they are shooting them in 356 ( not draw )

and they are cutting the outfitter allocations. That was the second part of my comment, not sure how you missed that

How do you expect me to comment on animals that are shot out of zone? Do you have the numbers?

You should be reporting it, not using it as an arguement to reduce resident opportunity through the archery draw...
or using it to justify having 46% of the tags going to outfitters...

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by Deer Hunter

How do you expect me to comment on animals that are shot out of zone? Do you have the numbers?

You should be reporting it, not using it as an arguement to reduce resident opportunity through the archery draw...
or using it to justify having 46% of the tags going to outfitters...

My original comment was that I was happy 356 General is going on draw and that I'm happy 357 achery is going on draw. You turned this into a big bad outfitters should loose allocations discussion not me. I said nothing about the 20 NR allocations in a zone that covers 2000+ square miles. At least with the outfitter I know he's only killing 20 MD max, I have no idea how many deer are getting poached or shot with archery gear. This is supposed to be about allowing ungulate numbers to recover, not about complaining because joe blow got to hunt before me.

[Deer Hunter]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

My original comment was that I was happy 356 General is going on draw and that I'm happy 357 achery is going on draw. You turned this into a big bad outfitters should loose allocations discussion not me. I said nothing about the 20 NR allocations in a zone that covers 2000+ square miles. At least with the outfitter I know he's only killing 20 MD max, I have no idea how many deer are getting poached or shot with archery gear. This is supposed to be about allowing ungulate numbers to recover, not about complaining because joe blow got to hunt before me.

I stated some factual numbers based on what you were indicating the problem was - mule deer over harvest in 357. Never said the outfitters were "big bad" as you suggest.

And now you turn it into big bad resident poachers trying to justify the over allocation to outfitters.

Now you throw in ungulate recovery as in residents should be the only people responsible for getting tags numbers cut back.

Go ahead, you can have the last word here.

[Jamie]

This should allow for a good chunk of extra tags in the draw for those WMU's
It will mean a bunch of guys will get drawn a year or two earlier. (This year only)

Jamie

[Torkdiesel]

Originally Posted by deer hunter

i stated some factual numbers based on what you were indicating the problem was - mule deer over harvest in 357. Never said the outfitters were "big bad" as you suggest.

And now you turn it into big bad resident poachers trying to justify the over allocation to outfitters.

Now you throw in ungulate recovery as in residents should be the only people responsible for getting tags numbers cut back.

Go ahead, you can have the last word here.

they are cutting the outfitters allocations down to 4. Please slow down and read this.

Everybody is responsible for ungulate populations recovering

i'm frustrated because you only choose to read parts of peoples comments.

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Torkdiesel

they are cutting the outfitters allocations down to 4. Please slow down and read this.

Everybody is responsible for ungulate populations recovering

i'm frustrated because you only choose to read parts of peoples comments.

It is cause he is a greedy person only worrying about him self.

[Jamie]

Ever stop and think that if the ABA had been more open minded towards cross bows and ML's, that they wouldnt be in this sittuation?

See what happens when we all dont work together and compromise a bit.

Jamie

[Bowhunter102]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Ever stop and think that if the ABA had been more open minded towards cross bows and ML's, that they wouldnt be in this sittuation?

See what happens when we all dont work together and compromise a bit.

Jamie

Crossbows were a tactic to push harvest even higher to put all muledeer on a draw province wide. I read the minutes from agmag meeting a friend forwarded me and no one is in favor of crossbows from SRD. So I would not say just the Aba is for this. Afga is the only ones pushing for crossbows.

[SLH]

Originally Posted by Jamie

Ever stop and think that if the ABA had been more open minded towards cross bows and ML's, that they wouldnt be in this sittuation?

See what happens when we all dont work together and compromise a bit.

Jamie

I'm curious how this train of thought works.

[Jamie]

Originally Posted by SLH

I'm curious how this train of thought works.

SLH
Basicly the ABA had a huge issue with cross bows, it caused a bit of a stink a few years back.

Imagine what would have happened if some far thinking groups had gotten together, drafted a workable plan and presented it to the gov.


My thoughts were that if all the groups worked together, they could have approached the gov with a resonable plan and had that implemented.
They still could have had designated seasons, but would have had to give up some time.

If we all dont work together and respect each other, the gov will continue to dictate what they think is best.

We could have one of be bet hunting programs in the world, with increasing opportunitys and better access. Instead we lose opportunities and we continue to loose access..

The present way of doing things is not working.

Bow hunter.. AFGA speaks for all hunters, not just specialty groups.

Jamie