BC Proposal to BAN Scopes on Crossbows

[Timbrhuntr]

I found this of interest too !

Eluding Harvest: In the evolution of hunting and wildlife management, we can delineate four
categories related the probability of an animal avoiding being killed once it has been detected by
a hunter:
1. Short Range (maximum, ethical range less than 50 yards): The ability for a game
animal to elude a hunter increases significantly at distances greater than 50 yards. Based
upon the general need to be within this range to place a vital shot with arrow or bullet.
a. Hunting Ethos: Hunters choosing to limit themselves to short range harvest
generally appreciate a primitive hunting experience with ample opportunity to
pursue game. The ethos of the hunt is often centered upon the overall hunting
experience and connection to the outdoors to a relatively greater extent than the
harvest or trophy. Some hunters may simply enjoy using primitive methods of
take. Hunters choosing this category normally expect lower harvest success in
return for more hunting opportunity and a greater bonding experience with the
game they pursue and the habitats in which they find them.
b. Equipment:
i. Longbows, recurve bows, compound bows.
ii. Depending upon loading, cocking, sighting, and firing mechanisms, may
include some crossbows, percussion cap, and flintlock muzzleloaders.
iii. Non-magnifying, or “open sights.”
iv. Binoculars, spotting scopes, rangefinders used to help find game and get
within range, but none of these devices are directly linked to harvest
implements.
c. Management Implications:
i. Increased season length and license issuance are possible due to lower
average hunter success.
ii. Wounding loss will normally exceed 10% due to primitive methods of
take and must be considered in season structures.

2. Mid-Range (maximum, ethical range less than 300 yards): The ability for a game
animal to elude a hunter increases significantly at distances greater than 300 yards.
Based upon the general need to be within this range for the majority of hunters to reliably
place a quick killing shot.
a. Hunting Ethos: Hunting is about the overall experience. Generally consistent
with using the tools and techniques that were developed for the most part in the
20th Century. Accurate and consistent shooting (depending upon method of take)
beyond 300 yards in field conditions is not a reality for most hunters.
b. Equipment:
i. Everything from the short-range category.
ii. Compound bows with “all the bells and whistles.”
iii. Most crossbows (including those with telescopic sights).

EXPLORING NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR HUNTING – Review and Recommendations – December 2017 Page 14
iv. Modern muzzleloaders (including in-line muzzleloaders and the use of
telescopic sights on muzzleloaders).
v. Handguns, rifles and shotguns (often with telescopic sights).
vi. Rifle scopes with generally less than 10X magnification.
vii. Binoculars, spotting scopes, and rangefinders – but these are not
connected directly to the hunting implement.
viii. Use of holdover and “Kentucky windage,” including multiplex reticles
rather than adjustable turret scopes.
ix. Real time weather data collection and calculations of ballistic performance
are not normally made prior to taking a shot.

c. Management Implications: Traditional season dates, bag limits etc. apply, and
wounding loss is currently assumed to be about 10%.

3. Long Range (maximum, ethical range can be extended well beyond 300 yards to
distances over 1,000 yards): The use of certain equipment and techniques significantly
increases the probability that once detected, an animal’s ability to elude a hunter at under
1,000 yards may be significantly diminished. Being able to harvest an animal at such
extended ranges often places the hunter outside the game’s normal flight zone, while the
hunter is still able to make a reasonable attempt at take.
a. Hunting Ethos: The hunt can be centered on a variety of paradigms. For some it
is about maximizing the odds of harvesting a truly outstanding trophy using all
the tools available. For others, it is about the shooting experience, setting up and
making a difficult shot with precision and accuracy. For some it is about
maximizing harvest opportunity relative to effort given the amount of money and
time they are able to invest. For others it is just a logical extension of hunting as
technology advances and the latest in “revolutionary” or “game changing”
technology becomes available.
b. Equipment used:
i. Some of the equipment from short and mid-range may be used.
ii. Custom and factory firearms with precision machined parts with tight
tolerances.
iii. High quality range finders (reliably accurate at over 1000 yards).
iv. Handheld weather measuring devices.
v. Ballistic calculators
vi. High magnification and illuminated “tactical” scopes (some exceeding
20X) using adjustable turrets to “dial in” a ballistic solution to a given
shooting situation, such that the hunter can confidently hold dead on an
animal at ranges in excess of 1,000 yards as ballistic compensations are
taken into account to allow accurate shooting.
vii. Mechanical shooting rests (including bipods and tripods).
viii. Loaded and scoped rifles in excess of 10 pounds.

EXPLORING NEW TECHNOLOGIES FOR HUNTING – Review and Recommendations – December 2017 Page 15
ix. Shooting systems wherein the “scope” acts as a rangefinder and condition
sensor, automatically adjusting the reticle such that a hunter simply needs
to “lock” on target and pull the trigger.

c. Management Implications:
i. Wounding loss at mid-ranges (200 to 400 yards may be reduced), but
depending upon a hunter’s experience and abilities may exceed 10% in
situations where shots in excess of 400 yards are taken, or conditions
significantly impact wind drift of bullets or terminal performance is
compromised due to extended range given cartridge and bullet selection.
ii. Stricter bag limits or reduced license issuance may be warranted as hunter
success rates climb and harvest pressure on “trophy” animals is focused
and increased.
iii. Extreme range hunting compromises the hunter-prey relationship, as an
animal can be harvested at distances where the prey’s senses of sight,
smell and sound are ineffective at alerting them to a hunter’s presence.
Such a tip in the balance of the hunter-hunted relationship could be a
detriment to the long term acceptance of sport hunting.

4. Special Management – The intention of the hunt is to cull or significantly reduce a sub-
population or remove specific, individual animals for the protection of human health and

safety, property damage, radical population control, or disease management.
a. Essentially, this is the true “it doesn’t matter how the game dies,” scenario
because the management goal is the requirement to have dead game. As such,
methods and techniques not generally considered acceptable under fair chase
standards or sport hunting may be used. Examples include baiting, spotlighting,
or harvesting radio collared animals.
b. Provides for increased opportunity and relaxed regulation to increase the
assurance of taking specifically targeted animals to protect or enhance public
safety, reduce or prevent specific damage and depredations issues, reduce specific
sub-populations, or monitor and control wildlife disease.
c. Some current examples: Goose conservation order; kill permits for deer
damaging a plant nursery or a herd of depredating elk; chronic wasting disease
mitigation through radical harvest; removal of trophy game in conflict with
humans; authorization to kill rabbits near human dwellings during tularemia
outbreaks; urban deer removal programs.

[Timbrhuntr]

Bottom line is we can all scower the internet looking for support for our views and I don't really want to carry that on.

I hope you are successful in your efforts as they seem very important to you. Personally like I said makes no real difference to me I will still hunt with what is legal and available to me. Do I think too much technology will bite us in the special seasons yes I do but I hope I am wrong in that and I guess I must be as most here seem to have the opposite opinion !

I haven't been able to get out the last week or so because of my hip (bored as you might be able to tell as I probably wouldn't have even comment on this normally) but gotta sign off for now headed out to see if I can kill that elusive now noctornal buck I'm after and yes I will be using my micro with all the bells and whistles until I can't

On a side note my brother lives in Bring Cash (BC) and while he doesn't hunt he did have a buddy that hunted. I used to talk with him and to here about all the hunting you could do there I was thinking of maybe moving there. That was years ago. However reading some of the BC regs on archery seasons and the ABCDE hunts is just nuts so I can see why this would be another addition to the insanity.

ARCHERY
Bow A (Crossbow)(does not include compound crossbow) - Must have a
pull of no less than 68 kg (150 lbs) or a bolt (quarrel) weighing no less
than 16.2 g (250 grains). For big game, the bolt (quarrel) must have a
broadhead of at least 2.2 cm (7/8 in) at the widest point.
Bow B (Crossbow) (does not include compound crossbow)- Must have
pull of no less than 55 kg (120 lbs) or a bolt (quarrel) weighing no less
than 16.2 g (250 grains). For big game, the bolt (quarrel) must have a
broadhead of at least 2.2 cm (7/8 in) at the widest point.
Bow C (Compound Crossbow) - Must have pull of no less than 45 kg
(100 lbs) at a peak weight or bolt weighing no less than 16.2 g (250
grains). For big game, must have an arrow with a broadhead at least 2.2
cm (7/8 in) at the widest point.
Bow D (Longbow, Recurve, Compound) - Must have pull of no less
than 18 kg (40 lbs) within the archer’s draw length. For big game, must
have an arrow with a broadhead at least 2.2 cm (7/8 in) at the widest
point.
Bow E (Bison only) - For bison, the bow (does not include compound
crossbow) must have a pull no less than 22.6 kg (50 lbs) within the
archer’s draw length, an arrow greater than 26 g (400 grains) in weight,
and a broadhead greater than 8.1 g in weight and 2.2 cm (7/8 in) at its
widest point.

What is kinda supprising to me is that they make a seperate part for compound crossbows I think that is as bad as the scope issue .

[Patcon]

I spent two hours the other day trying to help a neighbor who made a bad shot on a nice buck. He was using a vertical compound at about 30 yards. We never recovered that deer. I believe he is still alive and I have him on camera. Now whether he survives until next year waits to be seen.

I believe some of the reason that scopes haven't affected deer harvest numbers is because hunting over all is in decline. If you want to keep hunting alive then we need to try to encourage hunters to be in the woods. If you are going to regulate that a hunter uses decades old technology then they will get discouraged and stop hunting. I don't hunt vertical and never have because I don't have the spare time to practice enough to be confidant in killing the animal swiftly. There are a lot of variables in making a good vertical bow shot. Many fewer variables with a scoped Excalibur. My crossbow is not so demanding of my time

I also agree a less accurate weapon will result in more deer loss to wounding. If I'm trying to put meat in the freezer, then I keep hunting until I recover an animal. If you believe that hunters will self impose distance limits because of less accurate sights, then I don't think you are fully aware of how our cultures are trending. People on the whole become less responsible and less accountable each year. So trying to switch to an older technology and expect self control is paddling against the current.

I am also in the boat of not seeing well enough to use iron sights anymore. Even handgun sights can be a challenge for me

[ko4nrbs]

I have grown very tired of Bureaucrats and spiteful people trying to regulate my life!! To everyone supporting crap like this here and in Canada get a life and mind your own business!!
Bill

[IronNoggin]

The government website has been flooded with so many negative responses to their proposal listings, it has been taken down for "maintenance" purposes.

Stay Tuned. Will let you know when it's back up...

Cheers - Nog

[IronNoggin]

Hi Folks,

Here is something to ponder. This is a draft of the Bowhunters response which they are circulating to their members for comment / review / submission, have shared with me, and allowed me to go public with it. From this, it is pretty easy to see what transpired, and just who was directing the flow...

"To whom it may concern,

Upon reviewing the 2020 hunting regulation change proposals, I am strongly opposed and deeply concerned with the proposal to eliminate a low impact resident bow hunting opportunity as outlined in the South Skeena Bow Only Moose Seasons (2020-06-06) proposal. It is very upsetting, as a resident hunter, that this government is even considering eliminated and "transitioned" a long standing low impact archery season to a LEH season as proposed by the local commercial guide outfitting association. Bowhunting, by its very limitations, is a widely used wildlife management tool that maximizes hunter opportunity while minimizing impacts to wildlife. Bowhunting will always equate to the maximum amount of hunters buying licenses and tags and pursuing wild game with the smallest impact on wildlife populations. I am strongly opposed to this proposal for many reasons, some of which are listed below.

The proposal is in direct conflict with the Provinces "Resident Priority" model:

The moose General Open Season in Skeena South was cut from 7 days to 3 days in 2018 to address a possible over harvest in some MU's - this should realize an immediate ~50% reduction in bull harvest. The impacts of this very dramatic reduction in resident hunter opportunity (and allocation) has not yet been tabulated or realized. Local Guide Outfitter allocations were not reduced in-step through this process!

Although not listed anywhere in this proposal - this reduction to resident hunter opportunity was proposed and submitted by competing interest groups (commercial guide outfitters association and one R&G club), and not government wildlife biologists. This proposal is based on anecdotal information and absolutely no harvest data as it is clear the biologists have no harvest data to support this proposal. Proposal originated from competing commercial pressures with no supporting data and was not discussed during the 2019 Skeena Wildlife Hunter Advisory Committee (SWHAC) regulation change proposal meetings.

The commercial allocation of the Annual Allowable Harvest (AAH) should have been adjusted prior to the significant reduction of the 7 day general open season in 2018 and it is not addressed or justified as a part of this proposal because there is no data to support it.

This proposal is based on anecdotal information and is being pushed as a data acquisition/management problem not a moose harvest or population problem:

It is clear from this proposal that the Biologists have very poor harvest data related to Skeena South Moose harvest and cannot reliably determine when and how moose are harvested. This is an easy and attainable fix and the fact it is a supporting rationale to eliminate a low impact resident hunter opportunity is exceptionally concerning.

To further obvious lack of harvest data, a proposal is also in place with broad stakeholder support that will address this shortfall in detailed harvest data (Skeena South Compulsory Inspection for Moose 2020-06-07). The harvest breakdown (date, method of harvest, unit, effort, etc.) will be clear once this CI program is in place and wildlife managers could make informed decisions in short order, not poor decisions to further reduce resident hunter opportunity. Would it not be preferable to simply wait and have defensible harvest data to support a fair and defensible statutory decision making process before eliminating more resident hunter opportunity?

Within the rationale of this single proposal the following language is used "this assumption", "will likely result in", "has likely lead to", "given the uncertainty", "the conservative approach". This language must call to question the weakness and validity of this proposed reduction of more local resident hunter opportunity. As a BC Resident Hunter this level of uncertainty used as rationale to eliminate my opportunity is simply unacceptable.

Also, within the rationale of this proposal it is clear a perceived increased use of newer more high tech crossbows is being used as a reason for a perceived increase in harvest (all anecdotal information), but within this same regulation change cycle there is also a proposal to limit the technology that can be used on any bow during bow only seasons (Scopes on Bows During Bow Only Seasons 2020-0-05). If limiting the technology that can be used during Bow Only Seasons is a concern and is currently proposed province wide how can that be the bulk of the supporting rationale for this reduction to resident hunter opportunity?

In closing, it is alarming that a proposal such as this has even made it to final review and comments through this process (regulation change process review highly recommended). The simple fact that the complete rationale of concerns for this proposal is also being proposed to be addressed in this very regulation change cycle (lack of detailed harvest data and high tech archery equipment) supports the statutory decision makers quick rejection of this application. Contrary to the closing remarks of this proposal, any open season hunting opportunity is preferred to a restrictive hunter management tool such as LEH. It is disingenuous to state that a transition from an open opportunity (bow only) to a limited one is maintaining this unique opportunity! Government should not be using a lack of management tools/data to justify limiting more resident hunter opportunities, particularly in light of recent, long overdue, budget uplifts within the Wildlife Branch. On the wings of many recent resident hunter opportunity reductions across the province, if approved this proposal will erode public confidence and trust in the government’s ability to effectively and fairly manage British Columbia's amazing natural resources (Objective 1.1 of the 2018/19 - 2020/21 FLNRORD Service Plan).


Sincerely,

Resident (Bow) Hunter"
.......................................................................................

I have learned a lot regarding this proposal, and the processes involved in creating them, since I first wrote the provincial government in this regard. As such, I am writing them again very shortly. When I finish that I will post it here for others to formulate ideas from.


Cheers,
Nog

[Boo]

Disgusting!

[IronNoggin]

The response from the BCWF is actually a quite underwhelming:

This, from the Fed's home page, doesn't look much like a rebuttal of the crossbow proposal to me. In fact, it appears somewhat defensive of their actions which leads me to believe they voted in favor of this BS:

"Regulation Proposal: “Prohibit the use of scopes on bows during bow-only seasons”

We have been hearing from members concerned with one of the proposals in the hunting/trapping regulation engagement process regarding the elimination of scopes on bows during bow-only seasons.

The proposal that was discussed at the Provincial Hunting and Trapping Advisory Team’s subcommittee on “hunting methods” was to “regulate electronic, magnifying, or telescopic sights on short range weapons (bows) during special weapon seasons.” Government has chosen to modify the intent of the proposal and to focus on crossbows in their posting on the engagement website and the accompanying rationale.

The BCWF supports the use of archery/bow-only seasons as a means of increasing hunting opportunities. The focus of the hunting methods sub-committee, when discussing this proposal, was to maintain archery-only hunting seasons that include crossbows. The committee is not a decision-making body and only provides advice to government regarding hunting methods.

Government is in the process of reviewing and updating the hunter harvest questionnaire and the BCWF has asked for the government to collect more data on hunting methods, whether it be vertical bows, crossbows or rifles.

The scopes regulation proposal is posted, and input from the public will ultimately influence the outcome.

Here is the link to the proposed regulations regarding crossbows apps.nrs.gov.bc.ca/ahte/content/scopes-bows-during-bow-only-seasons

Remember, you will need your BCeID number to comment."

bcwf.bc.ca/hunting-and-trapping-regulations-engagement-open/

................................................

I sat on this a few days while I waited for the Fed to get back to me on the matter. After having reached out to the Fed (again) I sadly got nothing but crickets in return. From the above, and their lack of response (weeks) it appears that they are fine with this, and so have lost any chance of my support at this time whatsoever.

The government continues it's shenanigans on all proposals. you can vote and comment, but you cannot see, nor alter your own comment, nor anyone else's. Many believe this is being done so they can say the majority of the public sided in favor of their suggestions, when in fact that may well not be the case. Getting tired of all the ass-covering going on here...

Regards - Matt

[AJ01]

I have grown very tired of Bureaucrats and spiteful people trying to regulate my life!! To everyone supporting crap like this here and in Canada get a life and mind your own business!!
Bill

Bill you said a mouthful!!
What Our collective countries need are folks with "more spine and less whine"!! I do believe Our Constitution starts out by stating "We the People...", not they the government!!!
Thomas Jefferson said it best, "Any government strong enough to give you all you want, is strong enough to take all you have"!
Stay Frosty!!!

AJ

[IronNoggin]

I hereby publicly eat my own words regarding the BCWF on this topic:

The strongest statement yet from the BCWF:

The BCWF does NOT support the proposed ban on scoped technology on bows during any hunting season.
I wrote the following short essay explaining my reasoning.

Chuck Zuckerman

Is the Crossbow Scopes Regulation Proposal a scientifically based -recommendation or a public relations faux pas?
If the optics on a crossbow are viewed as a temptation for a hunter to shoot further than they are capable of, then this proposal should be accepted; however, if optics are viewed as a tool to more effectively harvest game in an ethical and humane manner then the proposal must fail.

If you believe that the accuracy of your shot greatly improves with a cross hair scope on a bow as opposed to using a distance pin system you would be against this regulation proposal to banish scopes from bows.
Further, if achieving greater accuracy was the intention of the proposal, then incorporating a range finder in to the scope would make more sense than clumsily holding a range finder in one hand while you positioned your bow for the desired accurate humane shot, again not banishing scopes from bows.

What needs to be considered is that the method of harvest is secondary to the ethical use of the harvesting tool. Once the tool user has a sufficient skill level the association of similar harvesting tools during a season is of no concern.
The opportunity to hunt a week before the beginning of the general hunting season is available to anyone who wishes to purchase a bow or crossbow and become proficient with it.

The season provides a unique opportunity to encourage, recruit, and retain hunters because it is prior to the beginning of school, as well being the only convenient time available for some participants.
Our youth is the future and further opportunities must be made available to them.

More restrictions also affect the economics of hunting.
Sporting goods providers generally, and archery suppliers and local businesses specifically will lose the revenue generated by this early season hunt.

Additionally gathering harvesting and observation data would be diminished because there would be observers available for reporting.
The emphasis should be the teaching of ethics not legislating morality.

The CORE program of the BC Provincial Government, delivered by the BCWF, devotes the entire Chapter 2 Ethics of the CORE manual to that subject.

The Chapter paraphrased reads:
Ethics are standards of behaviour which are generally considered to be morally correct.
Personal ethics are unwritten laws that govern your behaviour when you are alone or with others.
Your personal code of ethics is based on your respect for other people and their property, for all living things, their environment and your own image of yourself.

Hunters have a Code of Ethics and they are judged in society by the values and deeds of each member and those of the hunting group as a whole.

Without the Code of Ethics developed by hunters over the years, today’s society would not tolerate hunting for long in spite of its long and significant role in human history.

Hunting ethics support behaviour that emphasizes the quality of the hunting experience and the way the hunt is conducted.
A hunter’s pursuit of game should always be governed by the “fair chase” principle.

“Fair Chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit and taking of any free-ranging wild, native North American big game animal in a manner that does not give the hunter an improper advantage over such animals. Free-ranging is any native North American big game animal that is unrestricted within its biological home range, has adequate protective cover, and reasonable opportunity to elude the hunter.” The Boone & Crockett Club

Achieving these ethical guidelines will demonstrate your respect for wildlife:
1. Before you go hunting be certain your harvesting instrument is accurately sighted in and is suitable for the species you plan to hunt.
2. Practice using the harvesting tool and learn to safely and effectively use it. Learn the distance at which you can be most confident in harvesting game quickly and humanely.
3. Don’t shoot until you have a clear shot at a vital part of the animal.
4. Make sure you have properly identified the species and get as close as possible to the target.
5. Make certain it is completely safe to take the shot.
6. Determine that you can recover the animal considering its location, the time of day, and the time that may be needed 
for retrieval?
7. Make every effort to find the animal. The law requires you to remove all edible portions of your harvested prey.
8. If you miss a shot, carefully examine the place where the animal was to ensure that it was not hit.
9. Wait for 10-15 minutes before pursuing the animal.

The attached chart shows that every State allows crossbows with scopes, except for Oregon. Fifteen of fifty states have age restrictions for crossbow use, however all states allow the disabled to use crossbows throughout their hunting seasons.
It could be argued that the use of crossbows is safer than the use of firearms because their effective range is usually less than 50 yards. Their use beyond seventy yards can be problematic.

Limiting available technology rather than emphasizing its ethical use would be similar to restricting the taking of rifle shot to a maximum of two hundred yards because it is assumed most people could not shoot that far accurately.
I do not support restricting the ethical use of technology.

Chuck Zuckerman

AWESOME!!!

[Timbrhuntr]

"however all states allow the disabled to use crossbows throughout their hunting seasons."


This a bit misleading what does throughout their hunting seasons mean. Montana doesn't allow the use of a crossbow during archery season even if you are disabled !

[IronNoggin]

Given the near complete turn-around from wishy washy to full on support, I will choose to overlook the nit picking!

Taking it for what it is.

Cheers,
Nog