Click Here - Official OBH Position Statements

 

05/20/13 Legislative Report

To all,

I hate to "scoop" the upcoming issue of our OBH magazine, but the ODFW proposal to open archery seasons to crossbow use is so important that I think it's necessary in this case. Because we've gone to a quarterly magazine out of fiscal necessity, the publication schedule is such that our next magazine issue won't hit the streets until after the June Commission meeting.

I've attached two (2) items above -- a short article on ODFW's crossbow proposal and a list of nine (9) "talking points" reacting to the proposal. The "talking points" have been developed cooperatively with TAO. The first attachment includes both E-mail and postal (snail mail) addresses for the Fish and Wildlife Commission. If you have concerns about opening archery seasons to crossbow use, please send the Commission an E-mail or letter as soon as possible so they have it prior to their meeting on June 6th. Please don't just forward the "talking points" to the Commission, but feel free to use any of the information in the "talking points" when preparing your comment to the Commission.

It is important that the Commission hear from bow hunters who have concerns about opening archery seasons to use of crossbows!! Let them hear from you!!

Also, if any of you plan to attend the Commission's June meeting and are willing to testify on the crossbow proposal, please let me know as soon as you can. We might be able to coordinate testimony to make the best use of the limited time we'll have available. The June Commission meeting will be in Tigard, but I still don't have an address. I'll find out where the meeting will be and let everyone know.

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation
Oregon Bow Hunters

attachment 1 -

Crossbows in Oregon?

ODFW is once again considering allowing "disabled hunters" to use crossbows in archery seasons. The crossbow issue was included in ODFW's proposals for 2014 regulatory changes that were recently out for review in public meetings around Oregon.

ODFW tried this in 2010, but their Commission rejected the proposal to open archery seasons to crossbow use after strong objections by a few TAO and OBH members who became aware of the secretive proposal only shortly before the Commission meeting where it was to be considered. Both TAO and OBH are strongly opposed to any use of crossbows during archery seasons.

Since the ODFW proposal became known this time, representatives of OBH and TAO have been working together to develop a list of "talking points" on the crossbow issue. The bottom line - if crossbows are allowed in archery season, look for archery seasons to become more restrictive - shorter and controlled!!!

ODFW's proposal will go before their Commission at the June 6th meeting in Tigard for initial consideration. As this is written, the outcome of the Commission's consideration of the ODFW proposal is uncertain. Unless the proposal dies in that meeting, it would be considered for adoption at the Commission's October 4th meeting in Newport.

To make comments on whether crossbows should be allowed in archery season, contact the Commission by letter at 3406 Cherry Street NE, Salem OR 97303 or by E-mail at odfw.commission@coho2.dfw.state.or.us to express your opinion. We need your help!!

attachment 2 -

CROSSBOWS IN OREGON

1. Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) and Traditional Archers of Oregon (TAO) have historically opposed use of crossbows in archery-only seasons, and are still strongly opposed today.
   
2. At the Archery Technology Review meeting on July 24, 2010, all participants involved, including OBH, TAO, Oregon Hunters Association (OHA) and representatives from ODFW and OSP Game Enforcement Division are on record as not favoring use of crossbows in archery-only seasons in Oregon.
   
3. Crossbows are not at all similar to vertical bows, and, in fact, have more in common with rifles than with bows and arrows.
   
   Vertical bows must be hand drawn and the string held by the archer for release. Crossbows are locked and loaded at full draw, minimizing the need for the drawing movement that often foils the opportunity for a shot with a vertical bow. Crossbows can readily be used over a rest, from behind a rock or log, or even from within a vehicle thus making them much more effective as an ambush or poacher's weapon.
   
   Crossbows have many features in common with rifles: shoulder stock, cheek piece, forearm grip, scope, trigger with kill switch, and features which allow them to mate up with tactical- style rifle accessories. Vertical bows have none of these features!
   
   Vertical bows commonly have draw weights between 50 and 80 pounds, and typically produce a kinetic energy between 40 and 80 foot-pounds. Crossbows typically have cocking weights of 150 to 200 pounds and produce a kinetic energy of 120 to 200 foot-pounds.
   
4. In state after state across the U.S., opening archery season to use of crossbows by disabled hunters has been the "toe in the door" that crossbow manufacturers have then used to continually expand crossbow use to additional users. In Kansas, for example, crossbows were initially only allowed in archery season for use by disabled hunters. Then, it was anyone under 15 years of age or over 55 years of age regardless of physical ability. Now, the push is to open archery season for use of crossbows by anybody. Oregon shouldn't head down that slippery slope!
   
5. Unlike eastern and mid-western states with an overpopulation of whitetail deer where use of crossbows is common, Oregon's deer herds are struggling to maintain management objectives and buck/doe ratios. Mule deer numbers have been on the decline due to predation and habitat issues as noted by ODFW's Mule Deer Initiative. Blacktail deer also suffer from habitat loss with the decrease in timber cutting, predation and the effects of Hair Loss Syndrome. Increased effectiveness of crossbows in archery-only seasons would surely result in a loss of opportunity for all Oregon hunters.
   
6. If disabled hunters want to hunt in Oregon's archery only seasons, they should do it using a vertical bow fitted with Adaptive Archery Equipment", not with an entirely different kind of weapon. ODFW should establish specific medical standards for disabilities similar to those in place in Washington which must be certified by a physician before an individual is entitled to an accommodation to the standard archery equipment regulations. Then, ODFW should identify equipment modifications to vertical bows similar to those established by Montana which can be used during archery season as an accommodation for a physical disability certified by a physician.
   
7. In addition to provisions for approval of "Adaptive Archery Equipment" for disabled hunters during archery season, crossbows could be considered as a lesser weapon during rifle season and/or an equal or lesser weapon during muzzleloader hunts where they more closely resemble the weapons legal for such seasons.
   
8. The combination of provisions for "Adaptive Archery Equipment" and identification of crossbows as a lesser weapon in rifle and/or muzzleloader seasons will provide a legally defensible reasonable alternative to opening archery season to use of crossbows.
   
9. While crossbow manufacturers claim they want to help wildlife agencies RECRUIT, RETAIN & REACTIVATE hunter numbers, the truth is that every trade magazine article ends with a "pitch" that selling crossbows will enhance dealers' bottom lines. The crossbow manufacturers are eager to have their products legalized in archery seasons only to enhance their sales.

04/15/13 Legislative Report

What's happening at the Legislature and ODFW.

There is lots of apparent activity around the whole issue of gun rights vs. gun control in the aftermath of Sandy Hook and other fairly recent mass shooting tragedies, both at the federal and state legislative levels. Most of the gun control proposals seem intended more to give the illusion of "doing something" than to actually address issues that might make a real difference in gun violence.

In the Oregon legislature, Oregon Outdoor Council's (OOC) bill (HB-2624) which would allow counties to vote to allow use of dogs and bait for hunting cougars and bears has received initial hearings. Also, OOC's effort to include Constitutional protections for hunting, fishing and trapping is in the legislative hopper. Support from us is important on these issues!

ODFW's proposed 2013 tag numbers and 2014 regulatory proposals should be coming out any time now for the public meetings in May. OBH has proposed establishment of a late-season archery deer hunting opportunity in several northeast Oregon units as a partial offset to the opportunities lost as a result of ODFW controlling archery elk hunts in that area of the state. If that's something you'd like to see, let ODFW know at the public meetings.

Finally, there has been some preliminary indication that ODFW may be preparing to take another run at legalizing use of crossbows by disabled individuals during archery seasons. At this early point, we don't know if there will be a proposal presented for the May public meetings or if ODFW will move forward in some other way. OBH will be closely monitoring the situation and will provide updates as the situation becomes more clear. OBH has an established position opposing use of crossbows during archery season.

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

2/23/13 Legislative Report

CENTRAL OREGON HUNTING ACCESS  

Our Fall 2012 edition of “Oregon Bowhunter” included an E-mail letter to editor Jack Elbert from Fred Maurer of Bend expressing substantial concern about a report in the Bend Bulletin regarding access agreements on two (2) private ranches in central Oregon .  The news report indicated that ODFW was funding habitat improvement projects on the ranches in exchange for hunting access only for rifle hunting.  Mr. Maurer was obviously (and understandably) concerned that public funds were being used for the projects, but that bow hunters would apparently be excluded from access to the ranches.

After receiving a copy of Mr. Maurer’s E-mail, I did some checking and, as is often the case, found that the newspaper report omitted several important facts.  First, much, if not all, of the funding for the habitat improvement projects was from a federal farm program that was being eliminated and the funding needed to be used within a short time window.  The ranches involved had “shovel-ready” habitat improvement projects that could start quickly and the work would benefit important wintering grounds for Mule Deer that spend much of the year on public lands.  Second, the projects were not regular ODFW Access and Habitat (A&H) projects (projects funded from license/tag fees) which give priority to projects that do not restrict access based on seasons or hunting methods.  Third, the ranch in the Maury unit will be open for bow hunting under the access agreement beginning in 2013.  The ranch did not allow bow hunting access in 2012 because the habitat improvement work was under way over much of the hunting area during archery season and the property owner was concerned for worker safety.  Finally, the rancher in the Ochoco unit has a long history of not allowing archery hunting, not even by family or friends.  While the prohibition on archery hunting on the ranch in the Ochoco unit is still bothersome, the bottom line is that the complete story creates less cause for concern than did the news report to which Mr. Maurer was reacting.

All access for hunting on the two (2) ranches, including bow hunting on the Aspen Valley ranch in the Maury unit, will be on a reservation basis.  All hunting will be on a walk-in basis only and hunters will be required to park in designated areas.  No motorized access will be permitted beyond the parking areas.  Information regarding reservations can be obtained by contacting Meg Eden in ODFW’s Prineville Field Office at (541) 460-2266.  The number of hunters allowed access at any one time will be limited so advance contact is recommended!  Of course, hunters will be required to have the appropriate controlled hunt tag(s) in order to hunt on the ranches.

These projects are the first of their kind in central Oregon and we’re fortunate that ODFW was able to find ranchers who were willing to open their property to hunters in exchange for the habitat improvement projects.  Unfortunately, far too many ranchers have had bad past experiences with “slob” hunters who tear up the land, litter or otherwise leave messes, damage fences or other property, and harass, injure or even kill livestock.  Whether we can gain access to hunt on other private properties in central Oregon in the future probably depends to a great extent on whether the hunters who take advantage of these new access agreements leave a positive impression on the ranchers involved in the projects.  If any of you take advantage of this new central Oregon hunting access opportunity, please remember that you are acting as good will ambassadors for all of us.  Please go out of your way to leave your host with a good impression and do more than your part to be sure the owners and their properties are treated respectfully!

Craig Starr
2^nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

10/10/12 Legislative Report

ODFW MAKES 2013 HUNTING CHANGES

The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission had its major big game meeting of the year on October 5, 2012 in Salem to consider new regulations proposed for the 2013 hunting seasons. Following are some of the more significant proposed regulation changes adopted by the Commission for 2013:

1. The previous S. Paulina controlled archery antlerless deer hunt will be replaced with a unit-wide hunt.
2. Controlled archery elk tags for the Ochoco unit will be divided between bull only tags and any elk tags rather than all being for any elk.
3. Spike-only elk hunting in the Wenaha, Walla Walla and Mt. Emily units will be controlled. Elk tags in these units will be a hunter's only elk hunting opportunity and hunters who do not draw a controlled elk tag will not be able to hunt for deer in the units.
4. Elk hunting for all hunters (rifle, muzzleloader or bow) hunting the west slope of the Cascades will be bulls only on National Forest lands, but will remain any elk for archers on lands outside of the National Forests.
5. A $25 penalty for failure to make a mandatory hunting report will go into effect beginning with purchases of a 2014 hunting license.

Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) strongly opposed the restriction on deer hunting in the Wenaha, Walla Walla and Mt. Emily units only to holders of a controlled elk tag. Although the staff recommendation was adopted over OBH's objections, several Commissioners expressed concern about the impacts of the proposal especially since these units are part of the small portion of Oregon where Whitetail deer can realistically be hunted on a general archery tag. This concern may open the door for more serious consideration of some late-season Whitetail deer opportunities for Oregon's bowhunters in northeastern Oregon as OBH has been seeking for years.

Several OBH members again urged the Commission to legalize use of lighted nocks for hunting in Oregon. Even against the usual opposition from Traditional Archers of Oregon (TAO), a motion was put before the Commission to legalize lighted nocks as an exception to the current total prohibition against any electronics on the bow or arrow. The motion failed by a 3 to 3 tie vote, but even just having the Commission vote on legalizing lighted nocks was a small step toward eventual approval of an effective tool for improving recovery of wounded game.

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

9/25/12 Legislative Report

Long Shots and Bowhunting Ethics

As you surely know, Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) ran an opinion poll on our web site a few months ago regarding legalization of lighted nocks. During the course of that poll, exchanges occurred on two (2) internet hunting forums in which proponents of traditional archery repeated their myth that modern archery equipment has become so hi-tech and effective that it threatens to cost Oregon's bowhunters the relatively generous hunting opportunities we still enjoy. Several of those who made such arguments suggested that shooters of compound bows routinely take shots at game at 70 yards, 80 yards, 100 yards or more while implying that those using traditional equipment are restricted to much lesser distances by their equipment choice!

To put it bluntly - I think such arguments are, for the most part, baloney!!

While there unquestionably are some bowhunters using modern equipment who take shots at
longer distances than many of us may consider appropriate, there have always been individuals who will take exceptionally long shots regardless of the equipment they use. Dr. Saxton Pope wrote about taking hunting shots at 150 yards or more, and reported several instances where deer, sheep, moose and bear were taken by him and/or hunting companions Art Young and Will Compton at 65 to 85 yards. In his early years, Howard Hill figured his effective range was 200 yards - using a longbow! Among his successful shots, Hill reported taking a running Pronghorn at 70 yards, a Bald Eagle (in Canada) at 150 yards and a bull Elk at an amazing 185 yards!! While on a hunt in British Columbia, Hill and a hunting companion, Fred Woodley, each killed a Mallard duck with consecutive shots at 160 yards! Most modern compound shooters should no more be characterized by the exploits of a relatively few individuals who take long hunting shots today than traditional shooters should be characterized by those individuals from traditional archery's documented past. Archery equipment has always had a deadly range far greater than the capability of most shooters using it, and that's true for both traditional and modern equipment!

It isn't the equipment each of us prefers to use that determines whether or not we will take a long shot. It's something inherent within each of us - our respect (or, unfortunately, the lack of it in some cases) for the game we pursue and our individual bowhunting ethics - that guides how long of a shot we are willing to take. I'm a firm believer that hunting ethics can't be "legislated" (e.g., controlled by equipment regulations). However, I believe just as strongly that we each have a moral obligation to the game we pursue and to our sport of bowhunting to be sure that we aren't taking shots that are beyond our competence level regardless of the capability of our equipment. When the average shooter's competence is the measure, the difference between the length of hunting shots taken by traditional shooters and most compound shooters is much, much less than those who object to all modern equipment options (except, of course, the ones they now accept as "traditional") would have us believe.

Anyway, the sad fact of the matter is that Oregon's archery seasons have little or nothing to do with the effectiveness of archery equipment, whether traditional or modern! Since 1979 when separate firearms and archery tags were initiated in Oregon, archery seasons have been determined primarily, maybe even entirely, by the politics around ODFW's management of firearms seasons and tags. A couple of times over the past three (3) years, I've had ODFW staff tell me directly that they won't do something OBH is requesting for Oregon's bowhunters because of the blowback they would get from firearms hunters! So long as archery seasons remain constrained by the politics of firearms seasons, the difference, if there is any, between the effectiveness of traditional and modern archery equipment is meaningless!

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting & Legislation

 

7/3/12 Legislative Report

A Short History of Oregon's Bow Seasons

I recently did a little research to follow up on concerns expressed by "traditional" archery advocates responding to OBH's poll on legalizing lighted nocks. Several people commented on internet hunting forums that the effectiveness of modern archery technology could lead to shorter hunting seasons. Although I didn't find even a single instance where modern archery technology has shortened Oregon's archery seasons, the exercise of reviewing old hunting regulations and communicating with some archery "old timers" was both informative and interesting. I thought you, too, might be interested in some of the information I found about the history of Oregon's bowhunting seasons.

1928 - Hunting with the bow and arrow first became legal in Oregon. There were no special archery seasons and hunting with a bow was just an option in the general hunting seasons.

1935 - Oregon's first archery-only hunt was established in the Canyon Creek area south of John Day. Oregon was the second state to have an archery-only season following only Wisconsin which had its first archery-only season just a year earlier. I was unable to find any information on the length of the hunt or the bag limits of that 1935 archery season so if anyone out there has that information I'd like to know it.

From 1935 through 1978, additional archery hunts came (and some also went away) in areas scattered around the state. Any hunter who desired to hunt with a bow could do so during the archery-only hunts and then, if unsuccessful, hunt using a rifle during the general hunting season on the same tag. In 1969, as an example, archery hunts lasting from 13 to 61 days were provided in what would now be comparable to our early general archery season. However, only seven (7) areas were open for elk and eighteen (18) areas for deer. In some cases, the open area included an entire unit, but several hunts were limited to only part of a unit. Only a couple of areas in the whole state had a late season for deer, and the only late elk seasons were in a few areas in western Oregon where hunting was limited to within 400 yards of agricultural lands.

1979 - Hunters were first required to choose between a rifle tag or an archery tag for deer and elk hunting, and Oregon's first statewide general archery season was initiated for bowhunters choosing to bowhunt. ODFW Commissioner John Boyer and OBH representatives negotiated a general archery season that was 49 days long. Cow elk could not be taken during the first three (3) weeks of the season in western Oregon. Several late deer and elk hunts of substantial length were also provided in both eastern and western Oregon.

1980 - Unfortunately, the general season negotiated with ODFW Commissioner Boyer only lasted a single year. As a result of complaints from a grand total of seven (7) rifle hunters, ODFW reduced the 1980 general archery season from 49 days to 37 days - a loss of 12 hunting days after only a single year of a statewide season!!

2012 - Fast forward to today and we now have a general archery season of 30 days - another 7 days lost since 1980! We no longer have any late general seasons for either deer or elk in eastern Oregon. The late archery deer season in some western Oregon units has been reduced by a week, supposedly over safety concerns related to a muzzleloader hunt that ODFW allowed to encroach on the previously existing late archery season. Antlerless hunting opportunities for both deer and elk have been drastically curtailed in much of the state. We now have at least 24 controlled archery hunts where there were NONE in 1980!! And, many of the controlled hunts seem to serve no purpose other than to inconvenience Oregon's bowhunters!

Comparing the archery seasons from 1979 with those of today, it is easy to become frustrated over the loss of archery hunting opportunity, especially when much of the lost opportunity seems due to nothing more than an attempt by ODFW to appease firearms hunters who are jealous of our opportunities! However, consider what our situation might be like if it weren't for OBH fighting to preserve the hunting opportunities we still enjoy. I've been told by some of the "veterans" of the battles to preserve archery hunting seasons that we'd be lucky to have a two-week general archery season today if it weren't for the efforts of OBH and, based on my experiences working with ODFW over the past 3 or so years, I believe it!!

If you don't like the ever more restrictive limits on archery hunting in Oregon, look in the mirror and ask yourself if you've done all you can do to help preserve our archery hunting seasons! OBH has been in there fighting for bowhunting opportunities since 1948! We need the other 29,000 or so bowhunters in Oregon to pull their weight!!

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

6/29/12 Legislative Report

LIGHTED NOCKS - IS OBH PRO OR CON?

At a June 7th meeting in Salem, two (2) individuals, both members of Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH), asked the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission to legalize lighted nocks for hunting in Oregon. They told the Commission that lighted nocks are legal to use in 44 states placing Oregon in the small minority of states in which lighted nocks are still not legal for use while bowhunting. The individuals argued that lighted nocks provide no advantage to a bow hunter before a shot is taken, and that they only aid in recovery of the arrow and information about a hit that could aid in recovery of a game animal that might otherwise be lost. In particular, they indicated that lighted nocks would be helpful during the late archery Blacktail deer season when hunting often occurs in low-light situations even at mid-day and arrow flight is often extremely hard to follow.

During the Commission's discussions following testimony by the individuals, an ODFW staff member told the Commission that testimony at their September 30, 2010 meeting was "overwhelmingly opposed to legalizing lighted nocks." Unfortunately, this serious mischaracterization of the testimony from the September 2010 Commission meeting seems to have made its way into the lore regarding legalization of lighted nocks as I've also heard it other places in the past year or so. Even OBH Editor Jack Elbert, in his editorial comments in the new issue of "Oregon Bowhunter", said, "An attempt by ODFW to legalize lighted nocks was presented before the Commission (at their September 30 meeting) but was opposed by OBH because it would have opened the door for crossbows in Oregon, NOT something that OBH is in favor of."

Jack was absolutely correct that OBH strongly opposed and helped defeat ODFW's proposal to allow disabled individuals to use crossbows during archery seasons at the September 2010 Commission meeting. However, he was dead wrong in stating that OBH opposed legalizing lighted nocks at that same meeting. In fact, except for passing comments by a couple of Traditional Archers of Oregon (TAO) representatives opposing lighted nocks, there was NO testimony from OBH or anyone else opposing the part of ODFW's proposal that would have legalized lighted nocks. It was the Commissioners themselves who had reservations about easing the existing prohibition against electronics on bows or arrows and who rejected the ODFW's proposal to legalize lighted nocks in spite of having received no significant amount of testimony opposed to that part of the ODFW proposal.

Without question, OBH strongly supports legalization of lighted nocks for hunting in Oregon. As Jack said in his editorial comment, OBH has a formal, written policy statement expressing our support for legalizing lighted nocks. As an organization, OBH decided at our 2012 Convention not to actively pursue legalization of lighted nocks this year. However, we fully support the efforts of the individual OBH members who have decided to continue the effort on their own!

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

6/20/12 Legislative Report

June Commission Meeting Report

At their meeting on Thursday, June 7th, the Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission addressed several issues important to hunters generally and bowhunters specifically. Following is brief summary of the issues discussed at the meeting and the Commission's actions:

Black Bear Plan Update

Oregon Department of Fish and wildlife (ODFW) staff reported that the population of Black Bears in Oregon has grown from about 9,000 bears some thirty (30) or so years ago to an estimated 25,000 - 30,000 bears today. In spite of generous seasons and lots of tags sold - about half through SportsPac sales - the actual harvest of Black Bears today is only now approaching the harvest levels of the early 1990's. Relative to the greatly increased bear populations, today's harvest is effectively only about 1/3 of what it was before BM-18 was approved by Oregon's voters. Is it any wonder the Black Bear population in Oregon is still increasing and their impact on game populations, especially newborn elk calves, is substantial?

The Commission unanimously adopted the updated Black Bear Plan and related administrative rules.

Big Game Tags and Proposals

I testified in support of ODFW's proposal to resume allowing archery either-sex elk hunting in the Catherine Creek and Chesnimnus units, and the Ritter portion of the Heppner unit in 2013. I also testified against the ODFW proposal prohibiting archery deer hunting in the Wenaha, Walla Walla and Mt. Emily units unless the hunter holds a controlled elk tag. OBH member John Erickson expressed his concern that ODFW's current system for managing archery antlerless elk hunting is causing more and more bowhunters to crowd into fewer and fewer units still open for either-sex hunting to the detriment of both bowhunters and the game. Finally, OBH members John Stone (The Archery Hut) and Mike Slinkard (Winner's Choice bow strings) urged the Commission to legalize lighted nocks. A representative of Traditional Archers of Oregon (TAO) testified in opposition to lighted nocks.

The Commission unanimously adopted the 2012 tag proposals submitted by ODFW. Final action on the regulation changes for 2013, including another chance for legalizing lighted nocks, will occur at the Commission's meeting in early October.

Trapping Regulations

The usual cast of anti's - the Audubon Society, the Human Society of the US, Cascadia Wildlands, Predator Defense and Trap Free Oregon - were on hand to urge the Commission to make more severe changes to trapping regulations than were proposed by the ODFW staff. On the other hand, sportsmen's groups (including OBH and OHA), livestock and timber interests, and trappers' organizations supported the staff proposals. Several people expressed concerns about the impacts of a proposal to ban trapping within 50 feet of any "public trail".

The Commission adopted the regulatory changes proposed by the ODFW staff with revisions to the definition of a "public trail".

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

5/23/12 Legislative Report

ODFW Proposes 2013 Regulation Changes

ODFW's proposals for regulatory changes for the 2013 season are finally out. Unlike some past years when there was little, if anything, of much interest to bowhunters, the ODFW proposals this year are loaded with concepts that, if adopted, will impact us, some positively and some negatively.

The ODFW proposals include:

1. Archery either-sex elk hunting would be resumed in the Catherine Creek and Chesnimnus units, and in the Ritter portion of the Heppner unit. I'm sure this proposal is in response to OBH's criticisms regarding the inequity of ODFW's overall management of antlerless elk hunting opportunities in central and eastern Oregon. The only concern with this proposal is that opening the Ritter portion of the Heppner unit to archery either-sex elk hunting may be more ODFW "window dressing" along the lines of South Sumpter and East Fort Rock in that there may be few, if any, elk available to bowhunters in the Ritter area during our general archery season.

2. Antlerless elk hunting would be severely reduced on USFS lands on the west slope of the Cascades. The general archery bag limit would be changed from "one elk" to "one bull elk". The proposals don't indicate how ODFW would change regulations to make a distinction between USFS lands and adjacent private lands, or whether the bag limit change would simply be applied unit-wide. Although ODFW implies that firearms hunters would also be restricted, the written proposals didn't provide any details on firearms antlerless tag numbers, etc.

3. ODFW would establish a new archery bag limit restriction on at least a portion of the Ochoco unit archery controlled hunt tags. Currently, all archery tags in the Ochoco unit have a bag limit of "one elk". The proposal would divide tags into "one elk" and "one bull elk" categories for 2013. The written proposal doesn't provide any proposed tag numbers so it is hard to judge the impact this proposal might have, but I think it should be expected that the number of "one elk" tags offered will be significantly reduced from previous tag levels. ODFW would also eliminate the current unit-wide Ochoco antlerless elk firearms hunt and replace it with two private land hunts intended to move elk back onto public forest lands.

4. The current South Paulina archery controlled hunt for antlerless deer would be extended to the entire Paulina unit.

5. "Spike only" archery hunting in the Mt. Emily, Walla Walla and Wenaha units would become controlled hunts, and all tags in these units would become the hunter's only elk hunting opportunity!!!!! The proposed changes are intended to address a serious enforcement issue with the current general "spike only" season where individuals without a controlled bull tag have been poaching branch-antlered bulls in the "trophy elk" units.

ODFW is interested in hearing how bowhunters feel about the ODFW proposals. If you support or oppose any of ODFW's proposals, be sure to let ODFW know.

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

4/21/12 Legislative Report

I attended the ODFW Commission meeting in Salem today. They had testimony and/or discussed the following issues:

Lighted Nocks

Rich Thompson, President of Traditional Archers of Oregon (TAO), commented during the "Public Comment" portion of the agenda urging the Commission to "hold the firm line in the sand" against allowing electronics on bows or arrows. This was obviously a pre-emptive strike by TAO to offset any effort by OBH members at the June meeting urging the Commission to legalize lighted nocks. No action can be taken on "Public Comment" items.

Black Bear Plan

Four (4) people, including me, testified on the draft Black Bear Plan 2012 update. I testified that the Plan needs to identify a role for sport hunting as part of managing Oregon's Black Bears. I mentioned concerns about the spring season in northeast Oregon being subject to weather and access problems. I also mentioned the possibility of moving the general opening of bear season up from August 1st to April 1st or even making the season a year-round season as was done with cougars. This agenda item was mostly just to update the Commission and no action was expected or taken.

Anti-Trapping Petition

This item was to respond to a petition submitted by the Humane Society of the US, Audobon Society, Sierra Club and Cascadia Wildlands which would require onerous changes to current trapping regulations. The proposal would require all traps to be checked at least every 24 hours, require a trapper's name and phone number to be on all traps, prohibit trapping within 100 feet of any trail, campground or other premises used or frequented by the public, and require posting a sign warning of any trap set on public lands. I expressed OBH's support for all huning opportunities, including trapping. The Commission voted unanimously to reject the petition and to deal with trapping regulations through their normal process at the June meeting.

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting and Legislation

 

4/1/12 Legislative Report

Antlerless Elk Management Unfair to Archers

I'm sure that most of you know that ODFW convened an Archery Review Committee (ARC) between May 2003 and February 2005 to address the archery elk bag limit in units that fall below elk population Management Objectives (MOs). Since 2005, ODFW has used the findings from the ARC process to close antlerless elk hunting in all or major parts of 23 central and eastern Oregon units that were previously open to archery either-sex hunting!! Further, several of the units and portions of units that ODFW still leaves open to archery either-sex elk hunting have extremely low elk numbers and correspondingly low bow hunter effort or success, if any. Essentially, ODFW has so far used the result of the ARC process to put nearly three-fifths of central and eastern Oregon's best elk country off limits for archery antlerless elk hunting!

OBH strongly supports protecting Oregon's game resource and Oregon may well be at a time when all antlerless hunting should be suspended in many units for the good of the game resource!! When ODFW closes all firearms antlerless hunting in a unit because the game resource needs that protection, I believe it is entirely safe to say that OBH will not object when antlerless archery hunting is likewise closed in the unit. But, that isn't what's been happening in units that are below MOs, and the one-sided approach ODFW has used for managing the antlerless elk opportunity since the ARC process concluded in 2005 has been and remains entirely unfair to bowhunters!!

From OBH's perspective, one key finding from the ARC process seems to be totally ignored by ODFW. That finding reads:

The Committee felt if there were biological reasons for restricting cow tags, then everyone should be restricted equally - bow/rifle/Permanent Disabilities Permit (PDP) holders.

Remember the phrase -- "restricted equally" -- from the ARC report as I continue to describe the current situation.

While bowhunters are now effectively restricted from hunting antlerless elk in all or major parts of 23 central and eastern Oregon units as previously mentioned, 19 of those same units had firearms tags allowing for harvest of antlerless elk in 2010, the last season for which a harvest report is currently available. Only 4 of the 23 units closed to all archery antlerless elk harvest were completely closed to firearms antlerless elk harvest opportunity. While a few units closed to archery antlerless hunting had only a small number of firearms tags, there were significant numbers of tags available in 13 of the 19 units where firearms antlerless tags were offered. In total, about 2,400 firearms antlerless elk tags were available in 2010 in the 23 units closed to archery antlerless elk hunting, likely resulting in a harvest of 800 - 1,000 cow elk from units already below MOs. And, many of the cows taken in the late firearms hunts are pregnant, essentially doubling the effective impact of that part of the harvest on the next season's game population.

In addition, new firearms antlerless elk hunts are being created by ODFW with fair regularity in units that remain closed to all archery antlerless elk hunting. This year, for example, a new Zumwalt Prairie hunt with an estimated 100 tags is being added, and that's on top of three (3) other hunts and some 150 or so existing firearms antlerless tags in the Chesnimnus unit which not only has a bulls-only bag limit but is also controlled-entry for archers. Over half of the 130 existing Zumwalt tags were new just this past 2011 season as were the 22 tags in the Crow-Pine Creek hunt. If there is a need for an antlerless elk harvest of a magnitude that now warrants four (4) separate firearms antlerless hunts totaling some 250 firearms tags in the Chesnimnus unit, it sure seems like ODFW could come up with some equitable approach to allow archers an opportunity to effectively participate in that harvest. New 2012 hunts added in the Heppner, Starkey and Catherine Creek units further reflect the one-sided ODFW approach to the opportunity for an antlerless elk harvest in units below MOs, adding another 105 new firearms antlerless elks tags to the existing imbalance in those units. With the new 2011 and 2012 hunts, there will be about 2,700 total firearms antlerless elk tags this fall in the 23 units closed to archery antlerless elk hunting, up about 300 tags from just the 2010 season.

So, is the current situation really what ARC meant in stating that antlerless elk hunting opportunity should be "restricted equally" in units that are below MOs? Does any bow hunter out there think that archery antlerless elk hunting opportunity in central and eastern Oregon is currently being "restricted equally" to the firearms opportunity in those same units?

OBH has been working with ODFW for at least the last three (3) years to try to get them to address the inequities and other problems associated with management of antlerless elk hunting opportunities in central and eastern Oregon with no meaningful response. In that time, ODFW has closed all or major portions of at least three (3) additional units to archery either-sex hunting, and has added several new hunts and hundreds of new firearms antlerless elk tags in units below MOs. If an antlerless elk harvest is to be allowed in units below population MOs, everyone should share in the opportunity equitably! Otherwise, it should be closed to everyone! It's time for ODFW to work cooperatively with bowhunting organizations to address the problems with their current archery antlerless elk management system!

Craig Starr
2nd VP Bowhunting & Legislation

2/1/12 Legislative Report

Nearly 300 bills were introduced even before the 2012 legislative session began on February 1^st.  The 2012 session is the first even-year regular session under a new law providing for annual legislative sessions.  The law limits even-year sessions to 35 days and the legislative leadership is aiming for a February 29^th adjournment date for the session.  Since much of the 2012 session will no doubt be taken up in addressing declining revenue and associated budget issues, any attention paid to the myriad of submitted bills addressing other issues will have to occur in a fast and furious manner if they are to become law. 

Following are some of the bills that have been introduced prior to the start of session:

      HB 4005 – Wolf Kill Income Tax Credit

      Establishes credit against income taxes in compensation for livestock killed by predators.  Applies to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012.

      HB 4119 – Hunting Cougars with Dogs

      Requires ODF&W to recommend rules to the Commission regarding creation of a pilot program that allows persons to use dogs to hunt or pursue cougars.  Allows Commission to adopt rules to create and implement pilot program.  Requires persons to possess certain permits or tags to use dogs to hunt or pursue cougars. Allows county governing bodies to request inclusion in pilot program.  Requires ODF&W to report to Legislature.  Sunsets January 2, 2020.

      HB 4158 – Killing of Wolves for Depredation of Livestock

      Allows killing of wolves to address depredation of livestock.

Several bills have been introduced in both the House and Senate dealing with various provisions related to firearms and especially related to concealed firearms licenses.  Of particular interest, one bill (HB 4045) would address an issue recently in the news and prevent public bodies from disclosing information identifying applicants for or holders of concealed firearms licenses.

Also, this is an early reminder that ODF&W will soon be taking their proposals for changes to the 2013 hunting regulations out for review in public meetings.  As in the past, the public meetings will be held in several communities around the state.  These meetings are your opportunity to hear what may be coming at us in the way of regulatory changes and to offer comments in either support or opposition to the proposed changes.  Keep an eye out on the OBH web site for the next month or so for the proposed changes and public meeting schedule.

Craig Starr, President

Oregon Bow Hunters

 

 

06/14/2011 Last Ditch Effort for HB2337 Cougar Bill

In a somewhat unusual legislative step, Senator Frank Girod (R-Stayton) recently tried to get the Oregon Senate to pull HB-2337 out of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee for a vote by the full Senate membership. Although the effort failed, the rest of the story is very interesting!

Senator Girod made the unusual effort after his sister-in-law came face-to-face with a cougar in her driveway near Mill City . She was awakened at about 3:30 AM by a ruckus outside her home. When she got up and went outside, she saw something under a Jeep parked in the driveway and went to investigate. As she bent down to look, the cougar came out from under the vehicle and faced her at hand (paw??) shaking distance. After a lengthy face-off, the cougar turned and moved away.

The Girod’s were awakened again the very next night and found the cougar on their front porch. Then, the Girod’s installed a heat-sensing alarm system and saw the cougar again the following night walking across their pasture after the alarm sounded. The cougar was back the next morning and the following night.

Unfortunately, Senator Girod’s effort to breathe life into HB-2337 failed along party lines in the Oregon Senate.  Every Senate Democrat voted to let HB-2337 die in Committee while every Senate Republican voted to move the bill out of Committee for a floor vote.  With the Democrats holding a slim 16-14 edge in the Senate, the effort to bring HB-2337 out of Committee for a floor vote failed.

A change of only two (2) positions in the Senate could have completely reversed the dynamics of the 2011 Legislature, especially regarding HB-2337 but also on a number of other bills significant to outdoorsmen and outdoorswomen. It’s something to remember the next time you have an opportunity to vote for your State Senator!

Craig Starr, President

Oregon Bow Hunters

 

06/08/2011 HB2337 Cougar Bill Received "Kiss of Death"

House Bill 2337 (HB-2337) which would have allowed Oregon counties to authorize hunting of cougars using dogs died an unfortunate death in the Oregon Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee. HB-2337 was the brainchild of State Representative Brian Clem (D-Salem), Chair of the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee, who had the bill drafted prior to the session based on the system now in place in Washington state. At least two (2) other cougar bills were also considered by the House Committee. OBH and several other sportsmen's organizations supported HB-2337, as well as the other bills, in hearings before HB-2337 was passed out of the Committee. HB-2337 was presented on the House floor by Representative Sherrie Sprenger (R-Lebanon) and passed the House by a vote of 45-14.

Unfortunately, HB-2337 was assigned to the Senate Committee chaired by State Senator Jackie Dingfelder (D-Portland) and thus received its "kiss of death". Senator Dingfelder and her Democratic cohorts on the Senate Committee; Floyd Prozanski (D-Eugene) and Mark Hass (D-Beaverton), were able to kill the bill without even allowing it a hearing in spite of the efforts of OBH, other sportsmen's groups and livestock interests. Once again, the liberal urban interests of the Portland and Eugene areas were clearly allowed to take precedence over the interests of most of Oregon.

HB-2337 was probably the best chance in well over a decade for the Oregon Legislature to do something constructive to correct the mistake Oregon voters made in 1994 by approving Ballot Measure 18 (BM-18) to ban use of dogs for hunting cougars and bears, and use of bait for hunting bears. Even though HB-2337 didn't get all the way through the 2011 legislative process, the good news is that the resounding passage of HB-2337 by the Oregon house is a sign that people are finally beginning to wake up to the impacts of excessive predation, both on game and on livestock, by Oregon's apex predators in the absence of effective population management. It seems likely that the momentum from HB-2337 before it ran into Senator Dingfelder's roadblock will give rise to whole new efforts to undo the damage caused by BM-18. Stay tuned in!!

Craig Starr, President

Oregon Bow Hunters

 

04/21/2011 HB2337 Cougar Bill Receives Approval!

To all,  

See the following message regarding the Oregon House’s approval today of HB-2337, a bill allowing resumption of cougar hunting with dogs on a county-by-county basis, by a vote of 45-14. Now it goes to the Senate for consideration where its chances are more uncertain. I imagine we’ll hear something whenever the bill gets scheduled for consideration in the Senate and we’ll need to contact our State Senators to ask for their support. Stay tuned!!  

To any of you who contacted your State Representative asking him/her to support the bill – THANK YOU!  

Craig Starr, President
Oregon Bow Hunters

Update - 5/5/2011

I attended one of the ODF&W meetings last evening and there was quite a bit of concern expressed regarding cougar predation on deer and elk as you might well imagine. Wayne Endicott said that there is some indication that the Chair of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee to which HB-2337 (the cougar bill) has been assigned may not even allow the bill to receive a hearing.

We need to mount all of the pressure we can to try to get HB-2337 to the floor of the Senate for a vote.  The Chair of the Committee is Senator Jackie Dingfelder. Please send her an E-mail urging her to conduct a hearing on the bill and pass it to the full Senate for a vote. Her E-mail address is:  sen.jackiedingfelder@state.or.us  

Also, please send an E-mail to your local State Senator asking them to support HB-2337 and to urge that they contact Senator Dingfelder to get her to move the bill out Committee.

HB-2337 offers the best chance hunters have had in years to overcome the adverse impacts of BM-18 and allow resumption of managed cougar hunting using dogs. However, it isn’t going to happen unless we work to make it happen!  I hope you will all assist in trying to get HB-2337 moving in the Oregon Senate.  And, if you have the chance, urge others to do the same.  

Craig Starr, President

Oregon Bow Hunters

 

 

Sports Group Hears Cougar Study Report  

Darren Clark, a PhD candidate from Oregon State University (OSU), recently gave an interim report on a study that he is conducting on cougars in the Mt. Emily unit. This report was given to the leaders of a variety of outdoor sports groups, including Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH). The study is a joint effort by OSU and ODF&W.  

The study was initiated in the 2008-9 winter because of concerns that elk populations were decreasing in northeast Oregon , largely due to poor calf recruitment. A previous study had generally concluded that the problem with calf recruitment was, in large part, due to predation, especially by, but not limited to cougars. The purpose of the current study was to try to better quantify the extent of cougar predation on mule deer and elk.  

From 2008-9 to now, a total of 32 cougars were collared in the Mt. Emily unit – 22 females and 10 males. Because of subsequent mortality, movement out of the study area and other factors, a total of only 14 collared cougars are currently being actively monitored in the unit. However, some of the cougars no longer being monitored were able to be monitored for some portion of the study period and provided important information before going “off line”.  

The study has monitored a total of 20 cougars for about 4,900 total days. When a cougar is monitored more than once within 200 meters of one location over a relatively short period of time (this situation is called a “cluster”), the study team visits the location and searches for a kill site. So far, the study team has located 772 kill sites in their search of clusters. A few kill sites (about 20 total) actually involved multiple kills, such as both a doe and her fawn.  

Non-ungulate remains were found at about 5 percent of the kill sites. Such prey included badgers, coyotes, domestic sheep, domestic dogs and other animals. Deer were the prey located at about 67 percent of the kill sites and elk were the prey located at about 28 percent of the kill sites. About half of the deer killed by cougars were fawns – about the same proportion as in the general deer population on an annual average. On the other hand, over ¾ of the elk killed by cougars were calves – a much higher proportion than in the general elk population. The remains of only four (4) branched bull elk were found at kill sites – all killed by adult male cougars.  

The old “rule of thumb” has it that a cougar makes a kill on an average of once a week and that kill rate has been borne out in the Mt. Emily study with cougars in the study making a kill each 6.96 days on average. Interesting, the study indicates that adult male cougars kill the least frequently – on average about every 9 days or so. Since adult male cougars tend to take the larger prey animals, a kill lasts longer and they apparently need to kill less often in order to sustain themselves. On the other hand, females with older kittens (older than 6 months of age) kill the most often – an average of one kill each 5.6 days or so. In this case, the female has to feed herself and young cats that may be nearly as large as she is. Since she typically kills smaller prey and has more mouths to feed, she must kill more often than other cougars.  

Until recently, locating kills required humans searching “cluster” areas on foot to locate kill sites which was very time-consuming. However, the study team now has two dogs that have been specially trained to find prey remains and cougar scat. Use of the dogs has made it much less time-consuming to locate kill sites once a cluster has been established. The dogs have located kill sites this winter even under 2-3 feet of snow whereas location of the kill site would likely have had to await the snow melting off in previous years.  

The dogs are also going to be used to locate and sample cougar scat beginning later this year in an effort to estimate the total population of cougars in the Mt. Emily unit. Samples from the scats will be tested for cougar DNA and the expectation is that the total population of cougars in the unit will be able to be individually identified in that matter.  If the approach works as anticipated, the technique could be used in other locales to closely determine resident cougar populations.  

The study is still on-going, but the results to date have already provided some interesting and important information on predation of deer and elk by cougars in northeast Oregon . Hopefully, the rest of the study effort will prove equally beneficial.  

Craig Starr, President
Oregon Bow Hunters

 

OBH Supports House Cougar Bills

On Monday, March 7^th, OBH President Craig Starr testified before the Oregon House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee in favor of three (3) bills that would resume managed use of dogs for hunting cougars.  On behalf of OBH, Starr joined representatives of the Oregon Hunters Association (OHA), Federation for North American Wild Sheep (FNAWS), Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation (RMEF) and other hunters’ organizations in supporting the bills.  Other OBH members also attended the hearing to support the bills.

The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), the Oregon Cougar Coalition and other anti-hunting groups and individuals opposed the bills.  As usual, the individuals representing these groups made emotional, if not factually based arguments against the use of dogs and, in fact, any killing of cougars.  They essentially argued that the more cougars, the better!  (NOTE:  they almost certainly weren’t reflecting the viewpoint of all the deer, elk and other prey animals that have been killed by cougars as the cougar population has burgeoned since BM-18 was approved by Oregon ’s voters!!)

The three (3) bills considered at the hearing were:

·         HB 2337 – requires State Department of Fish and Wildlife to recommend rules to State Fish and Wildlife Commission regarding creation of pilot program that allows persons to use dogs to hunt or pursue cougars.  Allows commission to adopt rules to create and implement pilot program. Allows county governing body to request inclusion in pilot program.

·         HB 3326 – allows the use of dogs to hunt cougars during the final three months of general cougar hunting season if the state Fish and Wildlife Commission determines that harvest quota for particular hunt zone might not be met.

·         HB 3428 – directs the state Department of Fish and Wildlife to create pilot program that allows persons hunting or pursuing cougars to use dogs.  The department is to designate game management areas of the following counties as areas in which the use of dogs in the hunting and in the non-lethal pursuit of cougars is allowed: Umatilla, Wallowa, Union, Baker, Grant, Douglas, Coos, Curry, Josephine, Jackson , Linn and Marion . Any county not specified can on or after June 30, 2014, adopt a resolution requesting inclusion in the pilot program.

As this is written, no further consideration of the bills has been scheduled.  There will likely be at least one work session scheduled at some point to select one of the bills or combine aspects of all three (3) into a new bill for approval by the Committee.  It seems likely that a cougar bill will pass the House this session, but, if so, its fate in the Senate and before the Governor is less certain.

If you support allowing managed use of dogs for controlling the cougar population in Oregon , be sure to communicate that to your elected Representatives, Senator and the Governor!  

 

ODF&W Bills Receive Legislative Hearing

Four (4) legislative bills introduced on behalf of the Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODF&W) recently received an initial hearing at the Oregon Legislature in the House Agriculture and Natural Resources Committee. The bills are:

" HB-2125: would allow ODF&W to establish a penalty of up to $50 for individuals who fail to report under the mandatory reporting system.
" HB-2126: would allow ODF&W to provide free big game tags as an incentive for mandatory reporting.
" HB-2127: would allow ODF&W to create a "Habitat Conservation Stamp", similar to an "Upland Bird Stamp" or "Waterfowl Stamp", to provide a way for non-hunters to support wildlife management and viewing sites.
" HB-2128: would eliminate a "loophole" in existing law and require individuals convicted of game law violations to satisfy all requirements of the conviction before qualifying to obtain hunting privileges again.

Reports are that some members of the House Committee were not supportive of mandatory reporting (which is already required by law) or the idea of establishing a penalty for failing to report. Mandatory reporting has long been urged by OBH and most other hunters' organizations in Oregon so that ODF&W has good, accurate harvest data on which to base game management decisions. Even with the incentive of possibly winning a special statewide tag similar to the highly desirable "auction tags", reporting compliance has yet to reach 40 percent after four (4) seasons under the current (voluntary) mandatory reporting system. A reporting compliance rate of at least 85 percent (and, preferably, higher) is necessary to have reliable game management information. At our 2010 Convention, the OBH membership supported actions necessary to obtain that compliance rate.

In addition to the ODF&W bills, HB-2175 also received an initial hearing in the same Committee. HB-2175 would address feeding of "potentially habituated wildlife", including bear, coyotes, deer, elk, feral swine, raccoons and wild turkeys. The intent of HB-2175 is to prevent habituating animals (that is, making them dependent on feeding) such that they pose a nuisance, like occurred in Lincoln County with bear in the story that was in the news last year.

Finally, there are several bills in the legislature (with a likelihood of more yet to come) that would try to address cougar control in one way or another. HB-2337 is one such bill that OBH will try to track as the legislative process continues.

OBH will try to keep updated information available on the web site regarding the status of bills involving hunting and other wildlife. Please contact the legislators from your local area on bills that you think are important - whether to support or oppose them. If legislators don't hear from you, they have no way to know what bills you think are important or how you would like them to vote on bills!

 

In the big game public meetings in May and at the June 4th Commission meeting, ODF&W staff rolled out a proposal to establish late-season controlled hunts for antlerless elk in the Alsea, Stott Mountain, Santiam, McKenzie and Indigo units beginning in 2011. The proposal is for these controlled hunts to replace the general late archery antlerless elk season that has been in place in these same units for years.

 

PROPOSALS FOR ANNUAL MEETINGS - February 27, 2011

The following proposals will be discussed and voted on at the annual General Membership and Field Governor meeting or the annual Hunt Program meeting, to be held February 27, 2011 at Chinook Winds Convention Center in Lincoln City, OR. According to the Oregon Bow Hunter organization By-Laws, every OBH chartered club should have a Field Governor and a Hunt Program officer to represent their Club at the annual meetings to discuss and vote on any proposals presented.. The Club President can attend in their place. Each OBH chartered club has one vote at each meeting per proposal, and that vote can be sent with the person attending the meeting. Each OBH member has one vote, so if only one person is attending from any one OBH chartered club, and representing that club, that person could possibly have two (2) votes per proposal.

An emergency proposal can be submitted at either of the annual meetings by Title only. The membership present at the meeting votes whether or not to hear the entire proposal from the Title given. If the proposal is heard in it's entirety and a motion is made, then the proposal can be discussed and voted upon by the membership present. This works the same for both the Field Governor's meeting and the Hunt Program Committee meeting. There may or may not be emergency proposals to submit at either of the meetings. PLEASE attend both of these meetings to show your support for OBH. The annual Field Governor meeting also doubles as the Annual Membership Meeting. Thank you for your time and see you at the Events Weekend/State Indoor shoot the weekend of February 25, 2011- February 27, 2011.

 

Proposal #1-General Membership & Field Governor Meeting

TITLE: OBH BY-LAWS, ARTICLE XI, SECTION 3-b

SUBMITTED BY DICK MAXSON

WHEREAS, as the members of Oregon Bow Hunters through a democratic procedure of voting at the annual meeting of members and field governors, decide the adding or changing of rules or procedures with-in OBH's By-Laws; and
WHEREAS, as Article XI, Section 3-b is not clear cut if one fourteen unit or one twenty-eight round will be shot at State Field; and
WHEREAS, a polling of the archers at the 2009 State Indoor and again at the State Field shoot at Sylvan Archers clearly and strongly showed support for the three twenty-eights;
THEREFORE BE IT PROPOSED to the OBH membership & Field Governor annual meeting on February 27, 2011 at Chinook Winds Convention Center in Lincoln City, Oregon that Article XI, Section b-3 that now reads:

Official tournament round shall be: Official N.F.A.A. 14 or 28 Field, Official 14 or 28 Hunter round and Official 14 or 28 Animal round. Two rounds to be shot on Saturday, and one round to be shot on Sunday.

Be changed to read: Official tournament round shall be Official N.F.A.A. 28 field round, Official N.F.A.A. 28 hunter round and Official N.F.A.A. Animal round. Two rounds to be shot on Saturday, and one round to be shot on Sunday.

VOTE: Yes-11    No-8

 

Proposal #2-General Membership & Field Governor Meeting

TITLE: Allow 2010 OBH State Field Animal scores in record book.

SUBMITTED BY DICK MAXSON

WHEREAS, The record breaking scores that were shot on the field round Saturday; and
WHEREAS, The record breaking scores that were shot on the hunter round Sunday were allowed to go into the record book even though the wrong target was used on both field and hunter rounds;
THEREFORE BE IT PROPOSED to the OBH Membership & Field Governor annual meeting on February 27, 2011 in Lincoln City, Oregon that the record breaking scores that were shot on the animal round, Saturday, also be allowed to go into the record book, even though the wrong target was also used on that round.

VOTE: Yes-5     No-15

 

Proposal #3-General Membership & Field Governor Meeting

TITLE: Establishing New Article VI in OBH By-Laws

SUBMITTED BY OBH Executive board

WHEREAS, Article V of the By-Laws of Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) establishes the duties and responsibilities of the OBH officers; and
WHEREAS, the OBH By-Laws establish eight (8) District Committeeman positions representing defined regions of Oregon on the OBH Executive Board; and
WHEREAS, the OBH By-Laws currently do not define the duties and responsibilities of the District Committeeman positions to any significant extent;
THEREFORE BE IT PROPOSED to the OBH membership and Field Governor annual meeting at the 2011 OBH Convention at the Chinook Winds Convention Center in Lincoln City on February 27, 2011 that a new Article VI be added to the OBH By-Laws as follows and further that any needed renumbering of subsequent provisions of the By-Laws resulting from such adoption, but not specifically shown in the changes be accomplished:

ARTICLE VI. DISTRICT COMMITTEEMEN
Section 1. Area and Scope of Representation. Each membership district of OBH shall be represented by a District Committeeman who resides in and is nominated and elected by members residing within the membership district. The District Committeeman for a membership district shall represent the members residing in that membership district on the Executive Board and in Committee assignments.
Section 2. Membership Recruitment. District Committeemen shall actively recruit new members to OBH from within his or her membership district. District Committeemen should attend such events as 3-D trail shoots, archery competitions, sportsmen's shows and other, similar events where archers may congregate or attend in significant numbers to conduct specific membership recruitment activities such as establishing and staffing an OBH table or booth. When authorized by the Executive Board or these By-Laws, a District Committeeman may offer a discounted rate for OBH membership when the application for membership occurs at a Chartered Club activity, an Affiliate Shop special event, a sportmen's show or other, similar event where the District Committeeman has established an OBH table or booth for membership recruitment.
Section 3. Liaison with Chartered Clubs. District Committeemen shall develop and maintain cooperative and construction working relationships with all Chartered Clubs existing within his or her membership district. District Committeemen shall regularly provide the Chartered Clubs with information regarding OBH and its activities, and shall report information from Chartered Clubs to the Executive Board as needed. District Committeemen shall attend at least one and preferably more general membership meeting(s) of each Chartered Club existing within his or her membership district each year. Whenever possible, District Committeemen shall attend the annual banquet and/or other special activities of the Chartered Clubs within his or her membership district. District Committeemen shall work with Chartered Clubs which conduct 3-D trail shoots and/or other organized archery shoots to try to have them establish entry fees which provide a financial incentive for OBH membership.
Section 4. Liaison with Affiliate Shops. District Committeemen shall develop and maintain cooperative and construction working relationships with all Affiliate Shops existing within his or her membership district. District Committeemen shall regularly contact other archery pro shops within his or her membership district and encourage them to affiliate with OBH. District Committeemen shall work with the owners or managers of Affiliate Shops to place OBH information, membership applications and other materials where it is readily visible and available to the shop's customers. If an Affiliate Shop holds any special events where archers will congregate in significant numbers, District Committeemen shall work with the owner or manager of the shop to establish and maintain an OBH presence at such events in order to publicize OBH and recruit new members. District Committeemen shall work with the owners or managers of Affiliate Shops to try to have them establish membership incentives such as a contribution toward OBH membership when a customer purchases a new bow and/or other archery equipment of substantial value.
Section 5. Liaison Between Chartered Archery Clubs and Affiliate Shops. District Committeemen shall assist in developing cooperative and constructive relationships between Chartered Clubs and Affiliate Shops serving the same area(s). District Committeemen shall try to facilitate the working together of the Clubs and Shops to further both membership in the clubs and business for the Shops. District Committeemen shall try to have the Clubs and Shops establish mutual incentives for improving membership in the Clubs and business for the Shops.
Section 6. Media Relations, Publicity and Outreach. District Committeemen shall actively develop and maintain cooperative and constructive relationships with representatives of the news media (newspapers, radio and television) within his or her membership district. District Committeemen shall distribute any OBH news releases or other news materials to the news media within his or her membership district, and actively encourage that it be printed or broadcast. District Committeemen may prepare and distribute news releases or other news materials on OBH interests or activities of local interest to the news media within his or her membership district, and shall, whenever possible, provide supplemental information to generic, state-wide OBH news releases when local members or other local archers are involved in an OBH activity which is the subject of a news release. District Committeemen shall assist in and/or reinforce OBH's efforts to reach out to and inform the clubs, pro shops and all bow hunters regarding legislative and/or regulatory issues that will adversely impact bow hunters and/or other archers.
Section 7. Other Duties and Responsibilities. District Committeemen are the primary local contact point for OBH within his or her membership district. Except as certain duties and responsibilities are reserved to officers by these By-Laws, District Committeemen shall perform such other duties and responsibilities as needed to effectively represent OBH's interests within his or her membership district.

VOTE: Yes-22   No-1

 

Proposal #4-General Membership & Field Governor Meeting

TITLE: Revising Article X of the OBH By-Laws

SUBMITTED BY OBH Executive Board
WHEREAS, Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) currently has single membership dues that are the same ($25 per year) for both adults and youths; and
WHEREAS, a major purpose of OBH is to foster, expand and perpetuate the practice of archery in cooperation with national associations; and
WHEREAS, most national associations and local archery clubs have reduced youth rates to encourage the introduction of youths into archery; and

WHEREAS, introducing youths to archery is crucial to perpetuating the practice of archery in Oregon; and
WHEREAS, the Executive Board of the Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) established a temporary new membership policy at their October 2009 meeting in Bend, Oregon; and
WHEREAS, the temporary policy was scheduled to sunset in one (1) year unless extended by the Executive Board to allow further consideration of a new membership policy at the 2011 OBH Convention; and
WHEREAS, on October 2, 2010, the OBH Executive Board voted to extend the temporary policy until the 2011 OBH Convention; and
WHEREAS, the OBH Executive Board further voted to recommend continuation of a new membership policy which would sunset annually unless extended by action of the OBH Executive Board; and
WHEREAS, the OBH Executive Board further voted to establish a single annual date for renewal of club and pro shop charter fees or dues to reduce the amount of work and confusion associated with annual renewals based on date of initial affiliation;
THEREFORE BE IT PROPOSED to the OBH membership and Field Governor annual meeting at the 2011 OBH Convention at the Chinook Winds Convention Center in Lincoln City on February 27, 2011 that Article X of the OBH By-Laws should be revised as follows and further that any needed renumbering of subsequent provisions of the By-Laws resulting from such adoption, but not specifically shown in the changes be accomplished:

ARTICLE X. DUES

Section 1. Annual Dues. The annual dues of OBH shall be:
(a) Single membership adult or youth is $25.00 per year. Single membership is $10.00 per year for youths age seventeen (17) or younger. Family membership, two (2) people or more is $35.00 per year, with a family maximum of $35.00 per year. This includes one year subscription to the official publication of OBH and all members eighteen (18) years of age or older have the right to vote on all field Governor and Hunting Program Committee proposals. Optional five-year renewal: five year term for individual adult or youth member is $120.00. Five year term for family maximum membership is $155.00.

Section 6. New Membership Discounts. The OBH Executive Board may establish a program of new membership discounts for encouraging and assisting with recruitment of new OBH members. Any such program shall be adopted as a policy of the OBH Executive Board and shall sunset annually unless extended by specific action of the OBH Executive Board.

Section 67. Club Charter Fees.
(a) There shall be an annual club charter fee of $25.00.
(b) Club charters shall be granted for one (1) year, renewal on the anniversary month of joining. on an annual basis. Initial membership shall be prorated from the time of joining through December 31st of that year. The renewal date for all club charter fees except those handled through NFAA shall be January 1st of each year.
(c) Renewal notices shall be mailed out two (2) months before charter expiration.
(d) Any club chartering with the NFAA will pay the amount stated on the renewal application form at the same time as the OBH renewal and shall renew OBH membership on the schedule established by NFAA.
(e) ……

New Membership Discount Policy

9. a. Any OBH officer or District Committeeman, or any OBH member being directly supervised by an individual in one of the previously mentioned positions, may give a discount when a new member joins OBH at an event where OBH has established a booth or table specifically for the purpose of recruiting for new members. The amount of the discount shall be:

1. $5 at 3-D shoots and similar OBH-affiliated club events, or
2. $10 at Sportsmen's Shows and special events at OBH-affiliated archery pro shops.

b. OBH shall provide a new member discount that will apply when OBH has established an understanding with an OBH-affiliated archery pro shop that the shop will provide a "free" OBH membership when a customer purchases a new bow and/or other archery equipment valued at $500 or more. The affiliated shop may purchase the new membership from OBH for a $10 discount when the membership application is accompanied with a cash register receipt or other acceptable proof of the required customer purchase.

c. Membership discounts are intended to be one-time only for recruitment of new members to OBH. This should be a matter of honor between OBH and its members.

d. This policy shall sunset annually on the final day of the annual OBH Convention unless extended by specific vote of the OBH Executive Board on or before December 31, 2011 and annually thereafter.

VOTE: Yes-24   NO-0 (zero)

 

Proposal #5-General Membership & Field Governor Meeting

TITLE: Updating Hunting Contest Rules

SUBMITTED BY OBH Executive Board

WHEREAS, Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) conducts a hunting awards contest; and
WHEREAS, some of the animals currently listed as eligible for OBH's hunting awards program may no longer be legally taken or require special licenses and/or tags; and
WHEREAS, OBH wishes to be certain that its hunting awards program does not inadvertently cause any OBH member to violate any applicable license, tag or season harvest requirements;
THEREFORE BE IT PROPOSED to the OBH membership and Field Governor annual meeting at the 2011 OBH Convention at the Chinook Winds Convention Center in Lincoln City on February 27, 2011 that following changes to OBH's hunting awards contest rules be adopted and further that any needed numbering revisions resulting from such adoption, but not specifically shown in the changes be accomplished:

General Hunting Contest Rules

E. Any animal entered for OBH awards must be taken legally with a bow and arrow in accordance with all applicable rules and regulations for the location in which it is taken. Some animals, especially but not limited to fur bearers, listed as eligible for hunting contest awards may require special licensing and/or tag requirements in addition to general hunting licenses and/or tags. Individuals submitting animals for OBH awards are solely responsible for determining and complying with all applicable harvest rules and regulations.

F. Only animals legally taken in the state of Oregon shall be eligible for the Bow Hunter of the Year (BOHTY), Husband and Wife Bow Hunter of the Year and Trophy Contests. Entries for the Big Game Awards and Small Game Awards may be taken in any state, province or country provided they are taken according to the laws, rules and regulations of the locality(ies) where they are taken.

Big Game Awards

3. Definition of Big Game: Alligator, Antelope, Bear, Bison, Bobcat, Caribou, Cougar,…
4. Fur bearer: Bobcat. Legal taking of Bobcat in Oregon requires either a trapping license or fur bearer hunting license, and special tags.

Small Game Awards

d. Definition of Small Game: Armadillo, Badger, Beaver, Carp, Coot, Cottontail Rabbit, Crab, Crow, Duck, Eel, Fox, Frog, Gar, Goose, Gopher, Ground Hog, Ground Squirrel, Grouse, Jack Rabbit, Jay, Lemming, Magpie, Marmot (Rock Chuck), Mink, Mole, Mouse, Mountain Beaver, Muskrat, Nutria, Opossum, Partridge, Pheasant, Porcupine, Prairie Dog, Quail, Raccoon, Rat, Raven, Ringtail Cat, Scavenger Fish, Skunk, Squirrel, Stingray, Turtle, and Weasel.

e. The following small game are fur bearers and may only be taken in Oregon under a trapping or fur bearer hunting license: Beaver, Fox, Mink, Muskrat, and Raccoon.

f. Protected species in Oregon: Bats, Chickaree (Pine Squirrel), Chipmunks, Fisher, Golden-Mantled Ground Squirrel, Northern Flying Squirrel, Pika (Cony), Pygmy Rabbit, Ringtail Cat, Washington Ground Squirrel, White-footed Vole, White-tailed Antelope Squirrel, and White-tailed Jackrabbit. All marine mammals. All non-game birds except English (House) Sparrow, Rock Dove (Common Pigeon) and Starling. Western Painted Turtle and Western Pond Turtle.

F D. Points shall NOT be given for any Federal or State protected species such as the following: Golden-mantled ground squirrel, Pica, amphibians, lizards and snakes other than poisonous.

G E. The miscellaneous division shall be established with a limit of six (6) points in aggregate. The following animals to be included in the miscellaneous division: Mouse, Bull Frog, English (House) Sparrow, Redwing Blackbird, Starling, Mole, Stellar Jay, and Rock Dove (Common Pigeon).

VOTE: Yes-26   No-0 (zero)

Proposal #1-OBH Hunt Program

TITLE: Splitting the General Elk Hunting Season

Submitted By John Erickson

Whereas, Oregon is experiencing severe overcrowding in most units during the general archery elk season; and
Whereas, overcrowding is forcing many elk off accessible lands; and
Whereas, ODF&W has been adding more and more units for controlled hunting only, exacerbating overcrowding in other areas; and
Whereas, ODF&W permits over the counter sales of bow elk tags to all customers, residents and non-residents alike, for most units in Oregon through the day before the bow elk season starts; and
Whereas, unlike other options such as expanded controlled hunting, this proposal does not eliminate any person's bow hunting opportunity, and only shortens the time available to hunt elk; and
Whereas, cow elk have young calves still nursing during the early part of the current general bow elk season, which are still getting nourishment to provide reserves for the upcoming winter;
THEREFORE BE IT PROPOSED to the OBH Hunt Program annual meeting at the Chinook Winds Convention Center on February 27, 2011 that OBH request ODF&W change the general bow elk season as follows:
5. Split the general bow elk season into two parts.
6. Hunters would be required to choose which part of the season to participate in when purchasing a tag.
7. The first bow season would begin the next to last Saturday of August and would last for twenty-three (23) days.
8. The second season would begin the following Wednesday and would continue through the last Saturday in September.
9. The bag limit would be bulls only through August 31st of the first season.
The bag limits during the remainder of the first season and the entire second season would be any elk, except in units where ODF&W does not allow harvest of antlerless elk.

John made a motion to table the proposal and President Craig Starr set up a committee to study and attain more information, and come back to the 2012 Game Committee Meeting with the proposal and any amendments. Second. Motion passed unanimously.

Call for emergency proposals. Available votes in room: 37. Need three-fourths (27) to hear rest of proposal.  

Emergency Proposal #1. Lighted knocks. Vote to hear rest of proposal: Yes-25, No-6. Did not pass to hear proposal.

Emergency proposal #2. Extending Cooperative Road Closure Periods To Include The General Archery Season. Vote to hear rest of proposal: Yes-8, No-20+. Did not pass to hear proposal.

 

ODF&W Establishing Archery Technology Advisory Committee

ODF&W is currently in the process of putting together an advisory committee of archery representatives to reviewing archery hunting technology, particularly (but not exclusively) the use of electronic devices on bows and arrows. The committee, to be known as the Archery Technology Advisory Committee, will consider some of the equipment types that are currently prohibited for use in Oregon for hunting in archery-only seasons. The advisory committee may propose that ODF&W change its regulations to allow some of the new equipment while hunting in Oregon. Some of the technology to be discussed is listed below: " Lighted nocks " Lighted sights " Red/Green dot sights " Rangefinders " Cameras " Expandable broadheads " Scopes " Crossbows Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH), Oregon Hunters Association (OHA) and Traditional Archers of Oregon (TAO) will be represented on the advisory committee. OBH will be represented by Wayne Endicott, OBH's VP for Bowhunting, and Craig Starr, OBH's President. If you have interests or concerns regarding equipment that is currently prohibited for hunting in Oregon, please contact Wayne or Craig with your comments.

Craig Starr, President Oregon Bow Hunters

 

ODF&W Proposes Controlled Late Archery Antlerless Elk Hunts to Replace General Late Season in Western Oregon

In the big game public meetings in May and at the June 4th Commission meeting, ODF&W staff rolled out a proposal to establish late-season controlled hunts for antlerless elk in the Alsea, Stott Mountain, Santiam, McKenzie and Indigo units beginning in 2011. The proposal is for these controlled hunts to replace the general late archery antlerless elk season that has been in place in these same units for years.

ODF&W's rationale for establishing the controlled hunts is that elk populations in the Alsea and Stott Mountain units are significantly below management objectives (MO) "despite years of reducing controlled rifle (cow elk) tags." The proposal includes controlling archery tags in the three (3) Cascade units because of vague concerns about lack of hunter success in the general rifle and muzzleloader hunts in those units, and because there is a concern that archers who don't draw tags in the Alsea or Stott Mountain hunts would simply shift to hunting the Cascade units.

ODF&W's conclusion in proposing the change to controlled archery hunts is: "To gain better control of the antlerless harvest a reduction in the harvest by bow hunters is necessary." Simply put, ODF&W's conclusion is BALONEY!!!!!!!!

First, during the last six (6) hunting seasons (2004 through 2009), rifle hunters harvested 1,695 cow elk in the Alsea and Stott Mountain units combined while bowhunters harvested 455 cow elk. Rifle hunters harvested 3.7 cow elk in the units for every cow elk taken by a bow hunter. Second, rifle cow harvests through the 2004-2009 seasons averaged nearly 45 percent while the success rate for bowhunters over the same period averaged less than 3 percent.

ODF&W makes a great deal of the fact that they have gradually been reducing rifle cow elk tags in recent years while the number of bowhunters hunting in the Alsea and Stott Mountain units has increased substantially. However, they fail to note that rifle success rate has maintained while the success rate for archers has generally trended down as the bowhunter numbers have increased. During the 2004 - 2008 seasons, there was no statistical increase in the actual archery cow elk harvest in the Alsea and Stott Mountain units even though bowhunter numbers increased by almost 42 percent. ODF&W's proposal appears to be based entirely on the single exception of the 2009 data, which appears to be a statistical anomaly that defies the trend of harvest success rates. As a bowhunter, it is interesting that ODF&W chose to submit their proposal following the first year when the data would finally show some modest improvement for bowhunters rather than all of the previous years when the harvest trends clearly favored rifle hunters.

ODF&W has proposed to reduce rifle cow tags in the Alsea and Stott Mountain units to 377 tags for 2010. This will be a 47 percent reduction from the 711 rifle cow tags in 2004 and a 17 percent reduction from the 453 tags in 2009. On the other hand, ODF&W proposes to limit late-season archery antlerless elk tags in the same units in 2011 to 750 tags. This would be a 64 percent reduction from the 2,068 bowhunters using the units in 2004 and a 78 percent reduction from the 3,436 bowhunters in 2009. In other words, even though rifle hunters have harvested far more cow elk in the units than bowhunters, ODF&W proposes to impact bowhunters' opportunities to a much greater extent in one (1) action than rifle hunters have been cumulatively impacted over the past six (6) seasons.

Using the tag numbers proposed so far by ODF&W and the historic success rates for rifle hunters and bowhunters, ODF&W's proposal is likely to increase the relative harvest of cow elk in the Alsea and Stott Mountain units from 3.7:1 to 8.0:1 - more than doubling the historic advantage which already greatly favored rifle hunters. How can ODF&W see this as being fair to bowhunters?

I have focused on the Alsea and Stott Mountain units because the concern over elk populations being below MO in those units seems to be driving the entire proposal. However, many of the same arguments applicable to those units can also be made with respect to the three (3) Cascade units that are part of the proposal even though the proposed impacts on bowhunters would be less severe in those units. ODF&W's proposal would reduce the number of bowhunters in the Cascade units by about 320 hunters per year from existing effort levels even though rifle hunters also harvest many more cow elk in those units than do bowhunters.

I don't have any problem with ODF&W limiting the harvest of antlerless elk when the elk population is below MO and needs help. However, I strenuously object to them doing it in the manner of the ODF&W proposal which is clearly and substantially biased against bowhunters and in favor of rifle hunters. I want to see a proposal from ODF&W that maintains the historic balance between rifle and archery harvests. If you agree, I encourage you to write or E-mail the Fish and Wildlife Commission on this matter prior to their October 1st meeting in Bend when they will consider the ODF&W proposal for adoption.

Craig Starr, President Oregon Bow Hunters

 

ODF&W Proposes Antlerless Elk Controlled Hunts

ODF&W’s staff biologists are proposing changing the rules regarding the late antlerless archery elk hunt in a portion of the Coast Range and the Cascades.  The Alsea, Stott Mountain , Santiam, McKenzie and northern Indigo units that have been open for the late general season would become controlled hunts under the proposal being made by ODF&W.

The initial information from ODF&W indicates the following likely tag numbers:  Alsea (500), Stott Mountain (250), Santiam (800), McKenzie (800) and Indigo (600).  Hunters applying for and drawing tags for the proposed controlled hunts would also be able to hunt elk during the early general archery elk season, but those not drawing a tag would be excluded from hunting the late season.

The following information is based on reviewing two of the last five years of ODF&W’s big game hunting statistics:

Rifle hunters outnumbered bowhunters about 14,000 to about 9,500 in the five (5) units that the proposal would impact.  In other words, only about 1.5 times as many rifle hunters were hunting the units as bowhunters.

	Rifle hunters harvested 3.8 times as many antlerless elk as did bowhunters.
	Rifle hunters harvested about 2.7 times as many bull elk as did bowhunters.
	Rifle hunters harvested about 3 times as many total elk as did bowhunters.

	The overall success rate for the five units was over twice as high for rifle hunters (9%) as for bowhunters (4%).
	The success rate for bowhunters in the late antlerless elk season varied from 0 to 4% depending on the unit over the two (2) years reviewed.  The success rate for rifle hunters in their controlled antlerless elk hunts varied from 14 to 47% over the same period.

Without any indication that rifle tags will be reduced, the proposal seems to be another case where bowhunters are being singled out by ODF&W to address a problem that is to a larger extent being caused by rifle hunters’ harvests (along with increased predation and other factors, of course).  Although not as severe, this proposal is more of the type of misdirection that was involved last year with the MDI units where rifle hunters take 10 to 12 times as many deer as bowhunters, but bowhunters were singled out for regulation.

ODFW staff will present and accept public comment on the proposal at the series of statewide meetings that began May 3rd. Comments can also be emailed to ODFW.Comments@state.or.us or mailed to ODFW, Information and Education, 3406 Cherry Ave NE , Salem , OR 97303 .  E-mail or written comments should be submitted as soon as possible so they can be considered by the Wildlife Commission at their meeting on June 4, 2010.

Craig Starr, President

Official OBH Position Statements Legislative and Regulatory Matters At the Convention on February 28, 2010, Oregon Bow Hunters (OBH) adopted the following statements to establish a “platform” to officially guide efforts related to regulations and legislation pertaining to bow hunting and game management: The start of the late archery deer season in the Alsea, McKenzie, Santiam, Stott Mountain and Willamette units, and a portion of the Indigo unit, should be moved forward by one (1) week to the second Saturday prior to Thanksgiving. The Dixon unit and the rest of the Indigo unit should be added to the above units open during the late archery season. The start of the general bear season should be moved forward by two (2) months, from August 1st to June 1st. The number of tags available in any controlled-entry archery hunt established in eastern Oregon should be at least double the number of rifle tags available for the comparable rifle hunt.  Additional archery tags should be available in any controlled-entry archery hunt when the rifle harvest in the hunt area exceeds the archery harvest by more than 5:1. In any controlled-entry archery hunts, the limitation on archery hunting should apply only to the species for which hunting is being controlled and hunting for all other game species should be subject only to the general season requirements. Drawing a controlled-entry archery tag should not prevent a bow hunter from hunting during any general archery season. Antlerless (or either sex) archery hunting should be permitted in any unit in which there is any antlerless (or either sex) rifle or muzzleloader hunting allowed. The mandatory hunt reporting system should be fully implemented as rapidly as possible, including establishment of sufficient penalties or incentives to achieve and maintain a reporting level of at least 85 percent. The current restrictions against use of illuminated nocks and mechanical broadheads for bow hunting should be eliminated. Crossbows (aka “stringed rifles”) should never be permitted for hunting during Oregon ’s archery seasons. During rifle elk seasons, hunting of bears and cougars should be permitted state-wide by any legal means other than use of rifles of .24 caliber or larger. Use of dogs by sportsmen and sportswomen should be re-established in Oregon as a “management tool” for controlling populations of bears and cougars, and for reducing their predation impacts on other big game animals. At least ten percent (10%) of any increases in sporting licenses and tags should go to the Oregon State Police (OSP) for game law enforcement.  Such new revenues should not be used to allow diversion of existing OSP game enforcement funding to other uses, but should be for the purpose of enhancing current game law enforcement. Revenues from sporting licenses and tags should not be used to fund non-game management activities.  Those activities are for the benefit of all Oregonians, not just outdoor sportsmen and sportswomen, and should be funded through a general, state-wide source of funding, not through sporting license and tag fees. Successful completion of a certified Bowhunter Education course should be mandatory for all individuals under 18 years of age and all individuals, regardless of age, who have not hunted with bow and arrow in the last five (5) years before they are allowed to purchase archery tags. The current law establishing the Guides and Outfitters Tag Program should be changed so that the tags in that program may be purchased by Oregon residents as well as by nonresidents.  The change should also prevent a guide or outfitter from simply reselling (“scalping”) tags to individuals other than clients of the guide’s or outfitter’s services.