Now that we're all sitting "on the nest"

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenelon

Nothing wrong with posting pics of a successful fall hunt with a beautiful dog. I do much of the same, but I can't say my Lab does the job as well as your dog! We're lucky if we get ten birds in a season. The issue is intentionally hunting the birds during a closed season. Re: "population was so threatened". What part of 60% loss of the continental population, and and a further loss of another 9% per decade are you not understanding?

---

Your logic just doesn't add up. A pointed bird allowed to fly away some how adversely effects the survival rate of woodcock whereas killing them doesn't?
Please if you really want to advocate for the woodcock work to shorten seasons and/or reduce bag limits. Live birds breed, dead don't

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenelon

?? ? You're still in total denial, The simple act of you intentionally training your dog on these birds during closed season is hunting, as defined under the MBCA. Re: "administrative error" ?? There is absolutely zero chance that any issued permit from CWS is going to contravene the law. You cannot get a permit to hunt Woodcock out of season, nor would the feds issue one. The permit you would be issued would allow you to hunt "non-native" birds that are the norm for a shooting pen eg. Ring-necked Pheasant, Chukkar ore Gambels pen-reared bids.
Re: : "dog is immediately called back". I call major B.S. on that statement. I admit I don't know as much about training pointing dogs, but are you telling me that when your dog points a bird, you don't complete the intended action (to get the dog to flush the bird) by giving your dog a command to flush? I think you's end up with one very frustrated, confused dog!

---

As I thought you have no real knowledge of what is being done. I'd encourage you to familiarize yourself before judging what you know nothing about. Also your definition of hunting I believe is not applicable. Its all about intent. Kill and Injure are pretty self explanatory to which you have to admit that is not applicable. You now use the term Harass as a cover all. I interpret Harass as anything done to cause the animal to leave an area and not return. It would be against my interest to disturb them enough to leave and area.

Now it's become the proverbial "beating of the dead dog". If you truly still think you're not breaking any game law, and you're interpretation makes it OK to keep doing what you're doing, then why not get some closure on the matter for everyone who intentionally trains their dogs on spring returning birds, and contact enforcement yourself for clarification. Ask them yourself what defines the term harassment as a chargeable offence under the Act, and ask them to assess if what you're doing constitutes harassment. A post on your findings would be greatly appreciated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenelon

Now it's become the proverbial "beating of the dead dog". If you truly still think you're not breaking any game law, and you're interpretation makes it OK to keep doing what you're doing, then why not get some closure on the matter for everyone who intentionally trains their dogs on spring returning birds, and contact enforcement yourself for clarification. Ask them yourself what defines the term harassment as a chargeable offence under the Act, and ask them to assess if what you're doing constitutes harassment. A post on your findings would be greatly appreciated.

---

That's certainly good advice for someone getting into the sport and uncertain about the ramifications. Until someone with some authority questions what I do I will continue to practice what I believe too be correct. In the light of no authenticated citations, or official written response there seems no need to act further. Certainly give no weight to third hand verbal interpretation.

This thread has become yet another reason why guys like Tim who would have a lot to contribute don't bother to post much anymore.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, argue about it on the internet...

II

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by be2man

This thread has become yet another reason why guys like Tim who would have a lot to contribute don't bother to post much anymore.
Those who can, do. Those who can't, argue about it on the internet...

---

Amen to that...