More Opportuities for Hunters

[Altjaeger]

Rained in this weekend I am catching up on several months reading I have ignored. A while back I reported that Texas has legalized the use of crossbows during archery season. The August issue of Hunting magazine reports that Michigan and Pennsylvania have as well, plus New jersey is considering it.

At least 12 states have now legalized crossbows as legitimate weapons of choice during archery season. Though there will always be naysayers I think our own membershp shows it can be a good thing spreading recreational opportunities with some late switching to wheel and cable, some staying with crossbows and others later dropping out just as they do with other forms of archery.

[LampLighter]

Actually, to disect the issue, those states had a provision for the crossbow to be used by :

a) people with injury preventing use of vertical pull bow

b) anyone having reached his or her 60th birthday


so, the issue you highlight here does NOT technically open any new doors that were not ALREADY open. Anybody with injuries could have used the crossbow before. So there's nothing new there.

Anybody who was healthy without injuries were free to bowhunt in the archery season before, so there's nothing new there either.

So, I do not see your point because there is nothing new to provide opportunity THAT WAS NOT ALREADY THERE.

All I see is the new law will just MAKE IT UN-NECESSARY for the non-injured persons to do all the work & practice that regular bow and arrow requires. Again, a shortcut in work ethic. Right on schedule with the trend of laziness today.

Who I ask, may now hunt that could not hunt before ? I am dying to know.

[Altjaeger]

According to the article I read these are new season opportunities to all hunters with any archery weapon (and crossbows are archery equipment), not just the disabled. The rest is just your personal opinion that has been shared by you many times before. Your opinion is binding or meaningful to no one else.

You know as well that I feel modern gun hunters made room for archery and black powder. Later Trad archers made room for lazy guys like you to use wheel and cable. Now in my opinion it is time for guys like you and the trad BP guys to make room or forfeit all special seasons with only one general season for hunters choice of weapons. My opinion is neither meaningful or binding on anyone else.

In the end only each states fish and game departments opinions and rulings are meaningful and if we don't like it that is where our opinions need expression.:D

[LampLighter]

So, again, please answer the following :


Who I ask, may now hunt that could not hunt before ? I am dying to know.

[Altjaeger]

LL, I was modifying my response while you responded.

[LampLighter]

I know. I snuck in on your "what is altjaeger doing" window.


Who I ask, may now hunt that could not hunt before ? I am dying to know.

[Altjaeger]

I know. I snuck in on your "what is altjaeger doing" window.


Who I ask, may now hunt that could not hunt before ? I am dying to know.

None, but their choices have expanded significantly. Right now I can think of one forum member who still hunts the majority of the time with a crossbow and another who began on crossbow before switching to the equally easy wheel and cable.

Now equally easy I am relying on the words of others in past discussions of this issue. I don't know because my limited experience was before wheel and cable consisting of recurve bows and instinctive shooting. You know back when men were men!:D

[LampLighter]

None, :D



That is what I knew. None. All the law did is cater to the laziness of today's society. Nobody new gets to hunt that couldn't already hunt. You can butter it up, disguise it any way you want, but in the end, it always boils down to the same thing.

They seek to avoid labor and work. A shortcut in life. So therefore, I declare that you're thread title is wrong. No new opportunities were created. There are no new batch of deer that can be hunted that couldn;t already be hunted. That same outlook on life will catch up to those who hooray this law. Human nature of those who seek shortcuts in work are also prone to obisety, diabetes, and yet more reliance on shortcuts. Eating habits tend to go downhill. This is precisely some of the things Obama points out.

You need to get over the search for shortcuts around work. Get out there and work, in your yard, whatever. Sweat! Good ol hard work. Learn nutrition and cut out bad foods. Exercise. You'll forget about that sofa bow in no time.

[Altjaeger]

They seek to avoid labor and work. A shortcut in life.

You must be talking about those guys who abandoned the long bow and recurve bows for the easy to hold at full draw compound bows and short cutted the aiming process from instinctive shooting for the ease of sights.:D The ones who went to using riding lawn mowers and lawn tractors from the push mower!!!:D

[Bob S]

Actually, to disect the issue, those states had a provision for the crossbow to be used by :

b) anyone having reached his or her 60th birthdayMichigan did not have an over 60 crossbow rule.

To answer your question about increased opportunity. In Michigan the majority of hunters now purchasing crossbows are those who are over 50 and find it difficult to draw a vertical bow. It is not about taking the time to practice, it has more to do with the physical limitations brought on by age.

[LampLighter]

And Michgian should have had the over 60 law before. They were neglectful for that. When I get 60, I may get one too. I fully understand that.


Don't try to turn the clock back. I don't believe in monkey see monkey do. Recurves and compounds are not the issue here. I'll really throw a wrench into the equation: lets say we're back in those times. I show up in the woods with an Oneida Eagle. :eek: Oh oh. now what ? What do I have ? A recurve, a compound, or a Hybrid ? ahhhhhhhh ;) I see said the blind man. :D

[Altjaeger]

And Michgian should have had the over 60 law before. They were neglectful for that. When I get 60, I may get one too. I fully understand that.


Don't try to turn the clock back. I don't believe in monkey see monkey do. Recurves and compounds are not the issue here. I'll really throw a wrench into the equation: lets say we're back in those times. I show up in the woods with an Oneida Eagle. :eek: Oh oh. now what ? What do I have ? A recurve, a compound, or a Hybrid ? ahhhhhhhh ;) I see said the blind man. :D

I see that life progresses and you have simply chosen a point comfortable for you. But my example is no less applicable than yours, except in your prejudices. Maybe we should simply require all archery hunters to start with cutting and osage-orange tree and making their own bow then draw their own cedar arrows while napping their points.:D

You don't just get to define the rules for others.

[LampLighter]

I see that life progresses and you have simply chosen a point comfortable for you.


No, I have always stated that the age factor was a valid factor. The issue is and always was, about laziness. Able-bodied people looking for a shortcut around work. People who have attained the age of 60 have already earned their way in life, and along with retirement, deserve an easier method. Arthritis becomes a problem too , I hear.

You wanna work for me cap you betta hustlle. No shuffling the feet in a zombie fashion. I go, go, go. :p

[Altjaeger]

No, I have always stated that the age factor was a valid factor. The issue is and always was, about laziness.

Yup, describes those wheel and cable guys perfectly. To wimpy to hold a recurve or long bow at full draw and to lazy to practice enough to learn to shoot instinctively. Should have to be 60 before you can use them.:D:D:D

[Sabre]

No, I have always stated that the age factor was a valid factor. The issue is and always was, about laziness. Able-bodied people looking for a shortcut around work. People who have attained the age of 60 have already earned their way in life, and along with retirement, deserve an easier method. Arthritis becomes a problem too , I hear.

You wanna work for me cap you betta hustlle. No shuffling the feet in a zombie fashion. I go, go, go. :p

I'm only 50 and have rheumatoid arthritis so bad I can't even straighten up and walk fully upright until I've been up and around for at least an hour in the morning. I've already had knee surgery because of it and need shoulder surgery now. Despite that, I just spent all afternoon splitting firewood with a 16 lb. monster maul and have little trouble getting my 80 lb. Browning Mantis to full draw. I don't "need" to use a crossbow and don't think I'm "lazy" but I'd still like the chance to deer hunt with a crossbow simply because it's something different and I've already taken deer with rifle, handgun, bow, muzzleloader and shotgun.

[LampLighter]

But you know sometimes in life we do not get everything we would like. Yall need to instill that into your kids. What is wrong with saying, " I would like to try an xbow, but I understand the original intent of the early archery season, so maybe when I get 10 more years old I'll get one- or maybe ol Doc can sign those state papers for me now with all this arthritis and I can get one now."

What is wrong with that ? People in hell want ice water. I would like to use remote trail cameras on the refuge. But I cannot. I quickly done let that go and moved on. A non-issue. Man this is as clear as glass.

[Sabre]

But you know sometimes in life we do not get everything we would like. Yall need to instill that into your kids. What is wrong with saying, " I would like to try an xbow, but I understand the original intent of the early archery season, so maybe when I get 10 more years old I'll get one- or maybe ol Doc can sign those state papers for me now with all this arthritis and I can get one now."

What is wrong with that ? People in hell want ice water. I would like to use remote trail cameras on the refuge. But I cannot. I quickly done let that go and moved on. A non-issue. Man this is as clear as glass.

You can't count on living to see 60 LL. I've buried a hulluva lot of people that didn't make it. Altjaeger is right, the "original intent" of the early archery seasons never included wheels and cables. You have no more right to hunt the archery season with a compound than I with a crossbow.

[LampLighter]

We are faced with several states contemplating the law NOW. To become an old geaser constantly dwelling on the past will lead to nowhere in today's society. Forget the old days. Concentrate on now. Let the states decide what they want to do, and move on. You cannot stay stuck on what happened in the past, and dwell, and dwell, and dwell. Command decision- then move on to the next.

[Altjaeger]

But you know sometimes in life we do not get everything we would like. Yall need to instill that into your kids. What is wrong with saying, " I would like to try an xbow, but I understand the original intent of the early archery season, so maybe when I get 10 more years old I'll get one- or maybe ol Doc can sign those state papers for me now with all this arthritis and I can get one now."

What is wrong with that ? People in hell want ice water. I would like to use remote trail cameras on the refuge. But I cannot. I quickly done let that go and moved on. A non-issue. Man this is as clear as glass.

As you point that finger you simply do not see the other 3 pointing right back at you.:D

Nothing gave you the right to lay the rules down nor do you see that you are like the man who snuck in the door trying to close it to others behind you. :D

[Altjaeger]

But you know sometimes in life we do not get everything we would like. Yall need to instill that into your kids. What is wrong with saying, " I would like to try an xbow, but I understand the original intent of the early archery season, so maybe when I get 10 more years old I'll get one- or maybe ol Doc can sign those state papers for me now with all this arthritis and I can get one now."

How many kids have you raised?

The original intent was to allow hunters with a limited range weapon the chance to hunt relatvely undisturbed deer. That seems to match the crossbow perfectly.

What is wrong with simply allowing people to hunt with the tool of their choice matched to the season design for tools nearest matching their own as long as it does not harm the overall well being of the herd?

[purple heart]

I would like to see more states allow anyone to use a crossbow.
Here in Vermont it's disabled with a doctors letter only.

I think we're going through the same thing we did when compounds
first came along. There was an uproar against them to start but
when it settled down and the sky didn't fall, it now seems like a lot to do
about nothing.

What will be interesting to me is when people who never handled a crossbow
try one for the first time. Some think crossbows are a hundred yard bow.
Actually some compounds shoot faster and flatter than a cross bow.
Most people also don't realize that cross bows are heavy, clumsy, awkward,
noisy, and difficult to lug around or up into a tree.

I don't think archery hunting is going to be hurt by allowing crossbows.
Archery hunting could be better off for it. IMHO:)

[Twanger]

Maryland allows two weeks in early season and two weeks in late season for anyone to hunt deer with a crossbow. In general, at other times hunters require a doctors note to hunt with a crossbow.

In some suburban counties, Montgomery County for example, anyone can hunt deer with a crossbow during the entire hunting season - 4-1/2 months from Sept. 15 through Jan 31.

I believe that introducing the crossbow has increased opportunities for hunters that otherwise would not be hunting. In an 'hunter rich' environment this might not be desirable, but the fact is that here in Montgomery county we are 'hunter poor' and 'target rich.' If hunters are to control the deer population here in the Maryland suburban area we need to lower the barriers to entry. Get 'em hooked on hunting using a crossbow and then 'sweet talk' 'em into using a vertical bow. Worked for me! The last thing I want to see is hunters appearing ineffective in deer control. That would be the kiss of death to us. If we can't control the deer population, somebody else will. Sharp shooters, or perhaps with enough pressure somebody will figure out how to make contraception work, thought it doesn't really work right now. I say we do our 'job' and don't encourage the government to find another way to control the deer.

It's interesting... now that I'm an accomplished bow hunter I'm more accurate with my vertical bow, it's quieter, and the rate of fire is much higher than with a crossbow. However, that's not how it was when I started out. I had such great performance anxiety that I would miss deer by three feet with a vertical bow. A crossbow helped me break the ice, and now with a vertical bow they don't want to get within 25 yards of me if they want to keep their skin. :D

[dave-t.]

I know that I will have to get a crossbow in the future. It will be that or quit the bow season altogether. I have a sports related injury in my bow arm (left) that is on borrowed time. It is not strength that I am lacking, I honestly don't know what my diagnosis is, but when I hold much weight with my left shoulder, that joint aches like a s.o.b. I get all kinds of squishy and crunchy noises out of it when I swing that left arm around over my head.

I am 33 yrs old, and I'd be the one everyone would point out as 'cheating the system' if I had a doc's excuse for a crossbow today. I have no doubt I could get a note tomorrow, but then I'd have to buy a new set up and be judged by folks like LL on appearences alone.:(

I don't care what people hunt with. In the bow season, equipment doesn't really change the outcome as much as folks think. If MO were a crossbow legal state for all, I'd use one. But, I fully admit to thinking a bow is a silly weapon, and the only reason I hunt with one is because of the 4 months of deer season. I'd hunt with about any weapon if it was 4 months of season, our next longest deer season is 11 days.:o

[GF.]

The original intent was to allow hunters with a limited range weapon the chance to hunt relatvely undisturbed deer. That seems to match the crossbow perfectly.


Except that comparing the effective range of a tradbow vs. a crossbow is a farce.





What is wrong with simply allowing people to hunt with the tool of their choice matched to the season design for tools nearest matching their own as long as it does not harm the overall well being of the herd?


You hit it when you mentioned 'relatively undisturbed [animals]'.

A man who only trusts his shooting to 15-20 yards is a very different hunter than someone who has convinced himself that he's capable of clean shots at 40 and that 65-80 shots are probably doable. The close-range hunter will be - of necessity - a lot quieter and sneakier than the 40-yard hunter has learned to be (or will ever learn to be, if he's able to punch a tag at 40-50 yards now and again). And consequently, the 20-yard man will disturb the animals a hell of a lot less than his less-careful counterpart.

And not only is the 20-yard hunter a lower-impact individual, there are just a lot fewer of him around causing disturbances in the first place. It's the difference between scattered raindrops falling on a pond vs. a rain that gets harder and heavier with each 'advance' in technology and finally turns into a full-blown hail storm.

The more popular an early-season hunt gets, the harder the hunting gets for the next bunch coming through. Not necessarily because the 'early' guys have killed off all the critters, but they've surely educated the ones that they missed. No matter, though, the later-season (rifle) guys will think that the bowhunters got 'their' deer, and that can get pretty ugly.

So what's wrong with letting people use whatever they want, provided that it meets some insanely loose definition of a 'bow' or 'muzzleloader'?

What's wrong with it is that it breeds what I would consider to be poor sportsmanship. Call it bad ethics if you want. The guys with the least interest in the TRADitional seasons bring a never-intended-for-the-season level of technology into what they see as ADDitional seasons. They get a greater lethal range than the tradshooters and a lot less pressure than the rifle-only guys. It's 100% up-side for them, because they get to hunt as they please in 2 or 3 seasons a year, and all down-side for those most committed to the spirit of the season.

That disproportionate sharing of costs and benefits just strikes me as bad manners.....:mad: It's not as if it's malicious, but when you get a really sweet deal just handed to you, it never hurts to question whether your gain is actually someone else's loss, and to ask yourself how you'd like it if the tables were turned.....:rolleyes:

I've said this before: implement either a traditional-only or a 'one method per year' policy, and all this bickering goes away..... The Rifle Camp is Happy. The Trad Camp is Happy. And the only ones still complaining are the ones who were cashing in at everybody else's expense.

[GF.]

BTW - I revised that prior response so many times that I dropped a point or two.... :o

In areas where the primary objective of deer management is Reduction, and the primary obstacle to gettin' it done is Access to private land, all bets are off. Especially considering that so much private land is in firearms-free zones. Private land considerations change the entire equation, but on public lands, the tradshooters and the animals both deserve a break.

[dave-t.]

That 'one method per year' policy is why a relative of mine is leaving New Mexico. Many willing residents don't get to hunt big game at all for years at a stretch because of their tag drawing system. I don't think that is the way to bring new hunters into the fold. In fact, that would be a way to stop it completely, imo.

If there was a trad weapons season (bows and black powder combined), and gen firearms season....you'd see who the diehard bow guys were real quick. I know a couple that wouldn't miss a beat. If those were the rules, I'd only use a bow in bow only areas, that's where the good hunting would be.;)

[Altjaeger]

GF, years ago we had a fellow around from the Northeast that swore that crossbows would decimate his states herd and that he had studies to back that claim. Further he claimed to be very active in lobbying the State legislature to continue their prohibition. Despite many promises to email them to me he never produced. Untimately he had some gear stolen in the woods and blaimed gun hunters swearing he would never hunt again. Last heard from he was off to take up golf, presumably with sticks and feathered leather balls.

At the same time I have heard claims for studies saying that the crossbow offers no effective increase in range due to the slower speed than that offered by compounds bows and a tendency to jump string after 25-30 yards. Again no one has ever offered a copy of those studies or a citation.

You have a prejudice that makes you want to believe your claims and I have a prejudice to the other claims. That said I am not prepared to fully recognize either claim without documented studies. Therefore for the moment I will not recognize the claims as you present them . I am open to consider any study that shows one way or the other. :)

[Twanger]

For the Maryland 2008-9 deer hunting season.

Last season a total of 18,577 deer were taken with all archery equipment. Vertical bow hunters bagged 17,649 deer. Crossbow hunters harvested 358 deer during the 2003-04 four-week crossbow season. Total crossbow deer harvest (disabled hunters, firearm season, muzzleloader season, 4 week crossbow season) was 908.

See: http://www.biggamehunt.net/sections/Maryland/Deer_Archery_Hunting_Season_Opens_September_15_090 20412.html

Oh yes, those crossbow hunters are shooting out the deer population with 6% of the bow harvest, and about 1% of the total harvest. :rolleyes: :D

During the combined 4 weeks of vertical/crossbow season the crossbow hunters took 358 deer. Not exactly competing with the vertical bow crowd.

Not many, but hey, it's 358 less deer in the woods. A good thing here in Maryland.

[GF.]

I'm not talking about a prejudice, Alt... I've shot tradbow long enough to have a very realistic view of its effective range, and 30 yards is really the extreme case for well over 90% of the population, even among those who practice regularly (and I'm talking about hunting big game here, not parlor tricks....).

Most hunting-class tradshooters are really comfortable at 15-20 yards, if they're honest, and I have no doubt whatsoever that most crossbow hunters - especially the newbies - are going feel rock-solid at twice that.

Also, while it is true that some of the very fastest bows will shoot faster than a crossbow, those bows are not easy to shoot well; they also require heavy poundage in order to produce those velocities and oh, yeah, did I mention the 30" draw length? Damn few bowhunters can wring anything near the advertised crossbow speeds out of their hunting set-ups, but a crossbow shoots exactly the same no matter who pulls the trigger.

And none o' that is prejudice or opinion.

It is also a matter of neither prejudice nor opinion that archery license sales have gone up in tandem with the ever-increasing let-offs and AMO/IBO speed ratings. But of course the single biggest factor was the advent of the multiple-season option. If hunting bow or ML season will cost you your rifle tag for the year, you're gonna think twice about switching. If you're not switching, but just adding a season, the only trade-off is whether you spend the money on a bowhunting/ML kit or something else....

I don't think for a minute that permitting crossbows onto private land in CT is going to make any meaningful difference to anybody; access is the thing here, so if a few dozen guys get a couple extra deer here or there, who's gonna notice? But on the hard-hit public lands? Those've already got way more pressure than they can stand, and getting a few more guys out there via crossbow is not going to help anybody but those merry few....

In Tejas, you don't really care anyway, because it's virtually all private land. The ones most likely to be affected by that sort of change in TX are the guide/outfitter services that are now looking forward to booking a few more hunts--and I'll bet that more than a few of them will have crossbows available for their clients' use -- no extra charge.:rolleyes:

[Twanger]

... a total of 21,991 deer (8,631 antlered bucks, 11,498 does, 1,862 button bucks) were taken with all archery equipment. Vertical bow hunters bagged 18,649 deer. Total crossbow deer harvest (disabled hunters, firearm season, muzzleloader season, 4 week crossbow season) tallied 3,342 (1,375 antlered, 2,285 antlerless). Crossbow hunters harvested 1,057 deer during the 2006-07 4-week crossbow season.

So... during the general crossbow season crossbow hunters took about 4% of the grand total taken by all bows during the year. Crossbows are not exactly turning the deer into an endangered species, eh? :D

[Altjaeger]

I'm not talking about a prejudice, Alt... I've shot tradbow long enough to have a very realistic view of its effective range, and 30 yards is really the extreme case for well over 90% of the population, even among those who practice regularly (and I'm talking about hunting big game here, not parlor tricks....).

Most hunting-class tradshooters are really comfortable at 15-20 yards, if they're honest, and I have no doubt whatsoever that most crossbow hunters - especially the newbies - are going feel rock-solid at twice that.

Also, while it is true that some of the very fastest bows will shoot faster than a crossbow, those bows are not easy to shoot well; they also require heavy poundage in order to produce those velocities and oh, yeah, did I mention the 30" draw length? Damn few bowhunters can wring anything near the advertised crossbow speeds out of their hunting set-ups, but a crossbow shoots exactly the same no matter who pulls the trigger.

And none o' that is prejudice or opinion.

It is also a matter of neither prejudice nor opinion that archery license sales have gone up in tandem with the ever-increasing let-offs and AMO/IBO speed ratings. But of course the single biggest factor was the advent of the multiple-season option. If hunting bow or ML season will cost you your rifle tag for the year, you're gonna think twice about switching. If you're not switching, but just adding a season, the only trade-off is whether you spend the money on a bowhunting/ML kit or something else....

I don't think for a minute that permitting crossbows onto private land in CT is going to make any meaningful difference to anybody; access is the thing here, so if a few dozen guys get a couple extra deer here or there, who's gonna notice? But on the hard-hit public lands? Those've already got way more pressure than they can stand, and getting a few more guys out there via crossbow is not going to help anybody but those merry few....

In Tejas, you don't really care anyway, because it's virtually all private land. The ones most likely to be affected by that sort of change in TX are the guide/outfitter services that are now looking forward to booking a few more hunts--and I'll bet that more than a few of them will have crossbows available for their clients' use -- no extra charge.:rolleyes:

Starting with the last Texas is of no real meaning here, especially since I hunt public land. Also contrary to your seeming impression few hunting properties are anything except a landowner who accepts cash from a group to hunt on his land. He does not typically provide a camp, blinds or any other amenities, let alone hunting weapons. They get the use of land period.

Deny it until you are blue in the face, but you are prejudice against crossbows to a large degree because like so many you wish to hold your woods to a relative few. I am prejudice in favor because I want to expand opportunities wherever possible as long as they do not harm the herd. That is hardly debatable.

I am not talking perceived advantage orvantages on the range, but real provable advantages in the hunting fields. From everything I can learn there are none as exemplified by Twanger's data. Give me some real data and I will consider it.

I see no reason for limiting hunters to only one season when my goals are the opposite. But even if that were the choice I would support the rights of individuals to hunt with crossbows in archery season as they share more in common with bvertical bows than firearms. If archers cannot understand then let there be one season period, end of discussion then use whatever you wish including knives, rocks and spears.:D

[GF.]

Twanger's data did not include the relative percentages of hunters using crossbows, only the number of deer that they got. I'm guessing that they're at least as small a minority as the number of deer that they shot, but I'm sure Walt will come up with them.

As to my wanting to hold 'my' woods to a relative few.

Well, no shit, Sherlock!

It varies with the region, the animal you're after and the method of hunting that people use, but Tradbow hunting is hard enough without adding substantial numbers of people who face less of a constraint in terms of effective range.

So let's not try to make this personal, shall we? It's not about what 'I' want, it's about what makes sense for a seasonal structure and who benefits from each rule change at the expense of whom.


Obviously, a bowhunter benefits from strict equipment restrictions and an either-or season structure, because there is less pressure overall, and he is in the company of others who are up against the same, long odds that he is and have to be just as careful as he is about disturbing the animals.


But likewise, a rifle hunter in an either-or state will benefit from the animals having been less pressured during bow season, and--compared to a both-and state, it won't make a dime's worth of difference in terms of hunting pressure during rifle season, because the both-and boys will be there anyway. There might well be a few more hunters in the field during rifle season in an either-or state-- because the majority of 'former' two-season hunters will stick to firearms and ditch the bows-- but hey, if you're going to have to compete with those guys anyway, then why the hell would you want to give them a whole month's head start pressuring those animals before you've even got your boots on?:eek:

So as it stands, yes, I do think that the bowhunters in the both-and states ought to consider the ramifications of expanding the season participation a bit further still, and the impact that that will have on other hunters. And I believe they're needlessly trying the patience of the quiet majority, who hunt by modern rifle only and who, by all rights, should be able to stand up & holler Enough is Enough!


Seems to me that the most reasonable place for crossbows is in bow-only areas during rifle season and/or a post-rifle late season in those same spots. But again, where overpopulation is the overriding issue, they've gotta do what they've gotta do.... In most of the East and a good chunk of the midwest, that's got potential to open up a whole lot of territory, but precious little of it is going to be on public land.

[Altjaeger]

Twanger's data did not include the relative percentages of hunters using crossbows, only the number of deer that they got. I'm guessing that they're at least as small a minority as the number of deer that they shot, but I'm sure Walt will come up with them.

It varies with the region, the animal you're after and the method of hunting that people use, but Tradbow hunting is hard enough without adding substantial numbers of people who face less of a constraint in terms of effective range.

I agree Walts figures do not tell the whole story, but lets look at them a moment anway. If the crossbow is a mass jump in efficiencency and effectiveness as you seem to believe the number of Xbow hunters in terms of percentage of hunter population is smaller that the percentage of the total deer kill. That translates to little disturbance in the deer woods.

If the weapons are equally efficient and success is relatively the same I would say the increase in the number of hunters would still be of little effect. That does does not consider that some vertical bow hunters may switch to X bow meaning no change at all.

Now if the numbers increased so as to make a meaningful difference in the deers behavior most likely the X bow is less efficient and possibly indicates that it is the wheel and cable crowd that has an unfair advantage.

Everything I understand is that in fact the compound bow represented much more of an increase in effectiveness over traditional archery gear than a crossbow does over the wheel and cable. Especially with mechanical releases, glow in the dark sights etc. But still room was found for the compound bows after some squabbling and that is what I expect with the crossbow as well.

In the meantime I will hold where I stand until someone provides real, on the ground, in the hunting field data to show my assumptions that the weapons are near equal wrong

[LampLighter]

The only thing I might go for is a moratorium . If, you first hunted with vertical bow for 5 years, then maybe we will grant you an xbow. Other than that- tough sh%$. Go use a regular bow. No shortcuts. You do not get everything you want. Now enough of this. No crossbows- end of story.

[Altjaeger]

The only thing I might go for is a moratorium . If, you first hunted with vertical bow for 5 years, then maybe we will grant you an xbow. Other than that- tough sh%$. Go use a regular bow. No shortcuts. You do not get everything you want. Now enough of this. No crossbows- end of story.

I will buy that only if you eliminate compound bows, mechanical releases and sights. No sense giving them an unfair advantage if you don't allow x bows. After all when you talk original intent of laws compound bows were undreamed of. At least the crossbow has been around for centuries. Only allow long bows and recurves constructed of materials commonly available before 1970. Oh and ban graphite arrows also. Wood, aluminum and fiberglass shafts only.

What goes around comes around.:D

[LampLighter]

I'll go for that. I shoot aluminum anyway right now. And I'll use an Oneida Eagle.


http://www.oneidaeaglebows.com/


I don't want to see no crawfishing now. You said what I could use. That's it.

[Altjaeger]

I'll go for that. I shoot aluminum anyway right now. And I'll use an Oneida Eagle.


http://www.oneidaeaglebows.com/


I don't want to see no crawfishing now. You said what I could use. That's it.

No crawfishing.

Now we are talking enactment of law here. To prevent the legalization of crossbows you have to convince a few hundred thousand archers across the country to lobby their game agencies or legislators to lobby for leislation restricting archery equipment to the commonly available technology at the time their state enacted a special archery season and have it enacted in law. For most states that would be the 1950s. That means no mechanical releases, tru glo or even pin sights etc.

I said I would accept that which means I would not campaign against such regressive restrictions in regulations. Until such time such aggressive lobbying is seen I will continue my stance. Get busy concensus building and lobbying. :D

[Altjaeger]

Uhhhh, G.F. Are you in with Lamplighter on this? Anyone else?:D

[Sabre]

I'll go for that. I shoot aluminum anyway right now. And I'll use an Oneida Eagle.


http://www.oneidaeaglebows.com/


I don't want to see no crawfishing now. You said what I could use. That's it.

No Oneida's either. The technology didn't exist at the time archery seasons were first established. Are you too much of a wimp to shoot a recurve or longbow or are you just too lazy to put in the time to get good with one ?

[Altjaeger]

Only allow long bows and recurves constructed of materials commonly available before 1970.

Good catch Saber. I did not go to see the bow at the link. This was the wording from my post. I will be curious to see how long he holds a 55 lbs or 65 lbs recurve or long bow at full draw compared to a compound.

:D

LL, think in terms of a 1960s Ben Pearson or Bear hunting bow. If you have trouble maybe NC can help you. :-)

[Bob S]

While you guys are making an archery season with pre-1970 technology, be sure you go all the way. No camouflage clothing, no scent elimination products, and no tree stands.

A hunter in a tree stand, wearing scent elimination, head to toe camo, and shooting a compound bow with sights and a trigger release is not what archery was meant to be.

And while we are on the subject. Fred Bear didn't push for an archery season so he could hunt unpressured deer. He pushed for an archery season so he could sell more bows. Ol' Fred knew firearm hunters weren't going to give up their guns and hunt with a bow unless they had a separate season. Fred's motivation was making money, not expanding opportunities for bow hunters.

[LampLighter]

Fred also agreed with the use of the poison pod. I can direct you to a 3 page letter written by Fred advocating the use of it. For those who do not know how the poison pod works, it is a rubber balloon capsule which seals around the arrow just behind the broadhead. In the capsule, one pours a powder drug which is succunlic acid, a muscle paraylzer. It shuts down the diaphram so the animal cannot breathe. It was used one time to kill somebody, a well-documented forensic case. The doctor got caught. These were legal to use for deer hunting in Mississippi in the 80's.

Oneida Eagle bows I'm sure existed in 1969, so I can indeed use one. :p

[Altjaeger]

Fred also agreed with the use of the poison pod. I can direct you to a 3 page letter written by Fred advocating the use of it. For those who do not know how the poison pod works, it is a rubber balloon capsule which seals around the arrow just behind the broadhead. In the capsule, one pours a powder drug which is succunlic acid, a muscle paraylzer. It shuts down the diaphram so the animal cannot breathe. It was used one time to kill somebody, a well-documented forensic case. The doctor got caught. These were legal to use for deer hunting in Mississippi in the 80's.

Oneida Eagle bows I'm sure existed in 1969, so I can indeed use one. :p


I knew you could not abide by the terms when you said, "I'll live with that". I clearly stated "commonly available", plus cross and long bows only.:D

You are willing to jump on the band wagon with the other sheep and use a new technology commonly available only about 35 years or so that makes the development of strength and skill much less demanding. At the same time you wish to ban a technology that is centuries old and truly historical.

Such a stand seems inconsistent smacking of getting through the door before attempting to slam it on others. Certainly it belies all the squawking of soft life, potato chips, this society is going to the dogs we hear when it is convenient. Nope, I don't see sincerity. Instead it seems to smack heavily of mock elitism to cover possessiveness of public resources.

Oh and Hiawatha didn't use any poisoned dart!!!

[LampLighter]

Ah, you jumped the gun. Not usual for you. The Oneida is a recurve. There are no limb wheels . Ah ha. Even you fall for the occasional self-fulfilling prophecy.

And you jumped roght over the physical work requirement. You're slipping. You use the acient medevil existance of the xbow as a sorry excuse to get in on the early archery season without having to do all the physical work. More time on the recliner eating chee-wees watching football. No, I know the true intentions. I didn't just fall off a turnip truck.

[DaveHawk]

My crossbow is a recurve and been around for centuries LOL

[Altjaeger]

Ah, you jumped the gun. Not usual for you. The Oneida is a recurve. There are no limb wheels . Ah ha. Even you fall for the occasional self-fulfilling prophecy.



:D:D:D
Not quite so fast slick!

Wheels of any kind were not commonly available in 1970. But the capper comes from the site you provided, Onieda's home page which states, "Our bows look different, feel different, and have been bows of choice since 1982".

A child born in 1970 was 12 years old when Onieda came into existance.:D:D:D

[Altjaeger]

And you jumped roght over the physical work requirement.

You better reread paragraph 2. If you are inconsistent with yur argument by going to a wimpy wheel and cable the strength needed for the crossbow is inconsequential. :D

[Altjaeger]

Bo S. you are right about Fred Bears motivaton. In that way he shared a lot with Roy Weatherby in terms of showmanship.

However, I bought my first camo from J.C. Penneys in 1968 and was hunting off board nailed in trees which is now prohibited and enforced on public land. I'll agree to states deciding that issue.

[GF.]

After all when you talk original intent of laws compound bows were undreamed of. At least the crossbow has been around for centuries.

That is entirely correct, and crossbows were specifically and expressly prohibited from use in archery seasons in – If I’m not mistaken – all 50 states, because they don’t pass the sniff test for what bowhunting was believed to be about at that time


Only allow long bows and recurves constructed of materials commonly available before 1970. Oh and ban graphite arrows also. Wood, aluminum and fiberglass shafts only. What goes around comes around.:D

You’re not so clever as you think here, Bud….Idaho has already experimented with that, though I don't recall what the current status might be. I do hope the toughened restrictions are still in place….


In the meantime I will hold where I stand until someone provides real, on the ground, in the hunting field data to show my assumptions that the weapons are near equal wrong

If you’d been paying attention, you’d know what I don’t pretend that crossbows are going to cause any kind of quantum leap in killing efficiency; what I am concerned about, though, is the impact of a new market segment entering into the ‘bow’ season. It’s not reality, but perception that is going to drive the bulk of the sales, and because the mechanics of shooting a crossbow are identical to those of shooting a rifle, a good number of people (which is not to suggest a very large percentage) will decide that the ease of use of a crossbow is just what they needed in order to be willing to risk the cost of a new kit and an extra tag against their perceived chances of punching said tag.


If the weapons are equally efficient and success is relatively the same I would say the increase in the number of hunters would still be of little effect.

You’re talking about absolute numbers; I’m talking about the straw that’s going to break the camel’s back.

I just got back from an Elk trip in an area that is not at all easy to get into, but over the past ten years, has seen bowhunter density grow from 1 or 2 hunters in the drainage to 9 or 10, and you should see the changes in the animals’ behavior :eek:

It used to be that if you got busted at 40-60 yards or more, the Elk would sidle uneasily out of the immediate area; now, they bolt. And they don’t settle down again within a half an hour or so, either. Now, they’ll keep trotting for a good half a mile.




Now we are talking enactment of law here. To prevent the legalization of crossbows you have to convince a few hundred thousand archers across the country to lobby their game agencies or legislators to lobby for leislation restricting archery equipment to the commonly available technology at the time their state enacted a special archery season and have it enacted in law. For most states that would be the 1950s. That means no mechanical releases, tru glo or even pin sights etc.

And that’s letting the coyotes guard the henhouse. Obviously. This is the problem with running the game departments by mobocracy instead of as units of a Republic. After the sacking, looting, raping and pillaging is over, the men & boys all killed or conscripted and the occupying forces are settled in, are you going to ask the ‘population’ of a town to vote for mayor and expect a Native Son to win?


Uhhhh, G.F. Are you in with Lamplighter on this?

Don’t be insulting, Alt. :mad:


:rolleyes:



Now, Bob….


While you guys are making an archery season with pre-1970 technology, be sure you go all the way. No camouflage clothing, no scent elimination products, and no tree stands. A hunter in a tree stand, wearing scent elimination, head to toe camo, and shooting a compound bow with sights and a trigger release is not what archery was meant to be.

I’ll agree in principle, but you’re just flat wrong about tree stands. Teddy Roosevelt felt they were ‘unsporting’, so let’s assume they go back at least that far and acknowledge that they’ve most likely been in use since we learned that you could drop a large rock on a deer’s head.

And I’m OK with your suggestion of banning camo, so long as you let me keep on wearing my trusty plaid shirts… But good luck out-lobbying Team Real Tree once they start protecting their financial turf. And to Alt’s point about buying camo from Jacque Penné, there is that nagging fact that Uncle Sam has been issuing camo for quite a little while now, and army-surplus stores have been catering to thrifty hunters from Day One. So my 1983 Woodland Camo BDUs actually have to get a pass under the requirements proposed ;)


And while we are on the subject. Fred Bear didn't push for an archery season so he could hunt unpressured deer. He pushed for an archery season so he could sell more bows. Ol' Fred knew firearm hunters weren't going to give up their guns and hunt with a bow unless they had a separate season. Fred's motivation was making money, not expanding opportunities for bow hunters.

True, but that’s Fred Bear, who was simply the Tony Knight of his day & season. There were also thousands of field archers who simply wanted the chance to bowhunt, and back then, the commonest method employed by gunners was the deer drive, which is a pretty crappy alternative for a bowman and is you wanna talk about pursuing ‘undisturbed’ animals….. :rolleyes:




You are willing to jump on the band wagon with the other sheep and use a new technology commonly available only about 35 years or so that makes the development of strength and skill much less demanding




. At the same time you wish to ban a technology that is centuries old and truly historical.

And since we’re talking about hunting season regs here… Don’t be a dope, Alt. The crossbow has absolutely zero historical use as a hunting implement in the US of A.

In addition to thousands of years use as the primary hunting weapon of the natives, the longbow holds a tradition going back to the Thompson brothers (as in Maurice Thompson), Pope, Young, and Ishi himself.


You are willing to jump on the band wagon with the other sheep and use a new technology commonly available only about 35 years or so that makes the development of strength and skill much less demanding

So you want to take it a step further? If it’s a character flaw, then what honor lies in exaggerating it?


It’s bad enough that the compound & in-line camels have sneaked into the tent, but what’s really galling is that they seem to have done it ass-first, and somebody’s been feeding them Alpo!

Insert ‘puke’ smiley here!

[dave-t.]

Crossbows were used in the Smokey mountains when they were being settled. Poor folks not being able to buy guns, but still needing game for the table had to come up with somesort of weapon that could be made at home. The crossbow was the solution.

Yes I do believe that more folks would participate in the bow season if crossbows were allowed. I'm not at all worried about the increased competition that would ensue. Surely a couple first year bow season hunters aint going to kill'em all.:rolleyes:

I figure crossbows and bow tags would be hot items for about 2-3 years, and then sales, and participation would drop off pretty quick.

You can't legislate against stupidity, and honestly some of the mistakes I made along the way with a compound would have fit that criteria.:o I'm glad I had the chance to work through it though, just like any new hunters with any weapon would have to sort through. There is a learning curve for everyone. You don't step out on the first day being a pro at anything.

Worrying about giving the sport a bad name is just as bad as giving the sport a nail in its coffin by keeping folks out. Yes antihunters would point fingers at the incompetent. Yes, antihunters would also like to stop successful, respectfull and viable bowhunters as well.

But, gaining hunters, lobby support, and giving more opportunity to sportsman, will build and strengthen our core group. That is a long term gain for the sport, even if you have to share the woods for an extra weekend or two throughout the season.

Hunting is not what it was or has been for the last 300years in America. Wild places aren't so wild anymore. Pretending that it is and keeping others out of the experince will not turn back the clock. Figuring out how to increase the ranks of hunters, and use them for the bennefit of the wildlife and game management, is the new hunting in America. It is also the only way I can see protecting what is left of that herritage for the long term.

Some guys on here seem to think that Daniel Boone or Jim Bridger would have turned down a 30-06 on principle if they had the opportunity to use one. I'd lay money down that either one would have taken it pretty quick. Technology advances are a jump forward, and we will always have to deal with them as the come down the pike. They aren't ever going to stop. Finding a way to make them fit in is the better solution.

[GF.]

Which of the both ways did you want this, Alt?

If crossbows aren't going to draw more hunters into archery seasons in any meaningful numbers, then for whom does the real opportunity exist?

I mean, besides the guys selling crossbows.....:rolleyes:

Practically speaking, I don't think it'll make a huge impact on bowhunting for whitetails, so I'm really not opposed. You keep overlooking that point, by the way... I really don't care that much about crossbows in deer seasons in overpopulated areas.

And did I mention that I really don't care that much about crossbows in deer seasons in overpopulated areas? Because I really don't care that much about crossbows in deer seasons in overpopulated areas. The need to get the herd under control (unfortunately) has to trump the philosophical and aesthetic concerns of bowhunters unless there's a way to get it done via modern firearms season regs.

But whenever you get onto public land, the 'overpopulation' is one of hunters far more often than game; so while the crossbows might 'create' a low (perceived) quality opportunity for a few people to begin hunting a season they've never before given a damn about, they can also - outside of deer-dense private property - degrade the quality of the hunting opportunity for a much larger number of hunters who really only care about this one season in the first place.

So how is it, under the rules of either a Republic or a Mobocracy, that a minority group should be permitted to infringe upon the rights of a larger group??? And why should that majority be expected or required to give away something of great value to them for the benefit of a comparative few who really never gave a shit in the first place?

:confused::confused::confused::confused::confused: :confused:

[dave-t.]

So how is it, under the rules of either a Republic or a Mobocracy, that a minority group should be permitted to infringe upon the rights of a larger group??? And why should that majority be expected or required to give away something of great value to them for the benefit of a comparative few who really never gave a shit in the first place?


Does that go for the minority of Americans that are gun owners as well? Or just the minority of the population that hunts anything at all? Or the minority that are actual minorities (black, hispanic, women, etc), or a political party who should have no voice because they are smaller in numbers?

Minority groups can have an awesome lobbying force, and can change the rulles to their liking, good or bad.

NRA lobby=good
Planned Parenthood lobby=bad
But by whose standards, mine, or the Presidents, or your neighbor's, or do you want it put to a vote?

Unless you want the majority to make your decisions for you in every case, hearing out the minority's in whatever group they associate with, ain't always such a bad thing.

Do you want "the majority" to tell you when your next hunting opportunity will be, where, and when. Would "the majority" give permission for you to hunt elk, or deer?

Looks like a dangerous road to have to wait for acceptance of the majority, imo. Pursuit of happiness for the individual be damned by the majority.


Also, looking for high quality hunting in every public access area, is like looking for a high quality setting in a public restroom. Unrealistic expectations.

Hunting quality in public land is a rules/regulations arguement, not a legal weapons arguement. The state controls tags, liscensing, and limits. It is not the weapons fault that the state allows too many hunters, or too few.

[dave-t.]

One more.

Why are you, in a bowhunting minority compared to gun hunters, more important than the crossbow hunters? It seems to me that they are the ones who are being infringed upon, moreso than a vertical bow user who can hunt legally just about anywhere.

One more hunter on public land is infringing upon you, but you are not infringing upon him by hunting the same ground????:confused: Why is that? Do you enjoy it more than the next guy, or do you deserve the public land more than him?

[GF.]

Crossbows were used in the Smokey mountains when they were being settled. Poor folks not being able to buy guns, but still needing game for the table had to come up with somesort of weapon that could be made at home. The crossbow was the solution.


In that case, I would cheerfully make an exception for those few states - assuming that yo're not just yankin' my chain. ;) But I do find it interesting that those states deliberately ignored that bit of history when they set up their archery seasons in the first place...


Some guys on here seem to think that Daniel Boone or Jim Bridger would have turned down a 30-06 on principle if they had the opportunity to use one. I'd lay money down that either one would have taken it pretty quick. Technology advances are a jump forward, and we will always have to deal with them as the come down the pike. They aren't ever going to stop. Finding a way to make them fit in is the better solution.

I see it this way: The guys who think the Mountain Men would have passed up tools which would have made their work easier and their lives safer and their profits soar are full o' crap.

But archery seasons and most ML seasons were instituted as a deliberate rejection of modern technology; and you can't rationally or ethically use 'we wanna go retro' as the basis for creating a season and then greedily embrace & incorporate every last bit of emerging technology as soon as it becomes available. That's changing the rules to suit your own desires as the game goes along. My 6-year-old and I had a little discussion of that sort of thing just last night, and he knew that it was neither right, fair, nor honorable, so I think it's fair to expect it of anyone old enough to hunt solo.

And honestly, Dave, the "we'd better close ranks" argument is crap. Multi-season hunters aren't additional hunters, and they're not going to quit hunting entirely if things change such that they find it necessary to focus their efforts in a single season, rather than 3.

Meanwhile, the increasing quantity of technology is making rifle-only hunters increasingly nervous/suspicious that the bowhunters are getting 'their' deer; they're a big block of the license-buying population, and they have to be kept happy. On the other end, the true-to-the-tradition bunch are fed up with the intrusion on 'their' season. So the multi-season guys in the middle have largely created the divide between the interests of the single-season specialists, and now they want to introduce technology to sharpen the arguments for complaints against them from both sides, and somehow they've managed to spin it such that the tradshooters are causing all of the discord/

Gimme a heffin' break.

We could all 'get along' just fine by going back to the pre-compound, pre-in-line interpretations of the 'special' seasons. The tradshooters would be Happy. The modern-rifle-only guys would be Happy. And the only people complaining would be those who would be forced to grow up enough to learn that they can't have their cake and eat it, too.

And the guys who are currently making a fortune selling all this crap.:rolleyes:

[dave-t.]

Why can't we have the cake and eat it too, when there are unlimited tags available in every season open to the public? It makes zero sense not to allow it, when the states keep extending seasons, and all but giving away tags.

There have been a ton of set firewalls that have been broken for the future improvement. Everything from the breaking the 4 minute mile to getting 60 miles to the gallon. To turn an advancement or improvement down is blocking the next three improvements behind that. You don't know what it will lead to next, but I'm not willing to pass judgement on it before its been invented!

Obviously the 1930's-80's had limited ideas on what these new seasons would hold. What is to say that blocking the next new thing is a good idea, because 50years ago it wasn't what was intended. 50 years ago climbing stands, camo, gortex, thinsulate, hand warmers, etc. wasn't thought of, but I know you use some of it now, no matter what was intended when or by who. Not very traditional is it?;)

You are also wanting it both ways. Going by rules that were set when deer numbers were low, and impact of the special season was about nill, to now being a tool for managment where real impacts can be made with archery/muzzleloader hunting in certain areas.

Do you want the protection of game management reasoning "for the good of the herd", but not be willing to allow tools that can reach those goal numbers? Then what good is any special season at all if it doesn't work toward the states managment plan? Other than to serve the bow/muzzleloader minority, of course.:rolleyes:


Also, I have kids, I know about leading them to the 'right' conclusion on their own.:cool: 2+2=4;)

[Twanger]

But archery seasons and most ML seasons were instituted as a deliberate rejection of modern technology

I would say that you're correct... but times have changed since Fred Bear created the archery season (and sold thousands of bows). These seasons were conceived and instituted in a world very much different than today.

The facts today include deer populations that are far out of control in areas where guns will never be allowed. Without quiet and effective weapons there is no hope of controlling deer populations in these area. The use of bows or crossbows in these areas has nothing to do with rejection of modern technology. If somebody made a quiet semi-automatic crossbow, and if it was legal, I'd certainly consider using it. :D I embrace all competent weapons for deer management purposes, where appropriate.

So why don't I hunt with a crossbow during the entire archery season, since I can?

I consider it an inferior weapon in my hands in the early season when the cover is good. I'm more accurate with the compound and have a higher rate of fire. Plus the compound is far quieter. I'm simply more effective with a compound bow in the early season. It doesn't hurt that I also prefer to shoot it.

I get the crossbow out in the late season when the leaves are down, it's easier to get busted on the draw by deer that have been hunted all season, and when I'm wearing 3 layers of thick clothing to stay warm. It become the weapon of choice.

Weapons are no different than golf clubs. Sometimes a driver is required, and sometimes a 9-iron.
Same as tools. You don't break out a chainsaw with a 30 inch bar to nip off a 1-inch branch. You don't drive in a nail with a screwdriver.

[GF.]

One more hunter on public land is infringing upon you, but you are not infringing upon him by hunting the same ground????:confused: Why is that? Do you enjoy it more than the next guy, or do you deserve the public land more than him?

It's not about individuals, Dave... The crossbow shooter is infringing upon the archery season by changing (or exploiting changes in) the requirements for participation in a season in which limited hunting pressure can be extremely important to an individual's chances for success. You can't change the rules to suit yourself and call it a fair deal all around.

He is altering the equation under which the archery season was permitted - by the good will of the gun-only majority - in the first place, which jeopardizes the opportunity for those who have abided by the original rules from day one.



Do you enjoy it more than the next guy, or do you deserve the public land more than him?

No, tradbow shooters don't deserve the opportunity 'more than' multi-season hunters, but that's not what's at work here. What's happening is that the multi-season guys are reducing the quality of the hunting experience available to tradshooters (which is a taking, on their part) by the manner in which they are receiving the opportunity to hunt in multiple seasons. It's not a question of whether they're carrying a crossbow or a longbow, it's the undeniable fact that the majority of them would not be there at all were they required to stick to the limitations that come only with the use of trad equipment or choose to hunt only one season per year, or both.


Under the pro-crossbow logic espoused by Alt & some others, we should also be allowing smoothbores using either slugs or buckshot, or both, because those, too, are really just 40-60 yard weapons, just like a compound or crossbow.

JMO, if the rules are going to be watered down to the point where they are essentially meaningless, then they should be scrapped entirely.

And then we could start all over again....from the beginning.... and in exactly the same place we were 50 years ago....and have 'progress' to thank for it.


:rolleyes::confused::rolleyes::confused::rolleyes: :confused::rolleyes::confused:

[GF.]

I don't think it'll make a huge impact on bowhunting for whitetails, so I'm really not opposed. You keep overlooking that point, by the way... I really don't care that much about crossbows in deer seasons in overpopulated areas.

And did I mention that I really don't care that much about crossbows in deer seasons in overpopulated areas? Because I really don't care that much about crossbows in deer seasons in overpopulated areas. The need to get the herd under control (unfortunately) has to trump the philosophical and aesthetic concerns of bowhunters unless there's a way to get it done via modern firearms season regs.


I dunno.... did I mention that I really don't care so much about hunting for whitetails in overpopulated (largely suburban, overwhelmingly private-land) areas because management concerns occasionally do have to trump other concerns?

I'm thinkin' that you might come home from New Mexico with a slightly better appreciation of my POV, Dave - unless, of course, those impossible-to-get tags keep the hunter density so low that you won't be contending with roadhunters, illegal ATV use and the '500-yard riflemen' who have trained some animals to bolt at the sight or scent of a human from a quarter mile or more away... I, uh, noticed that you mentioned that you're not gonna carry your bow on this one....

'Cuz really, if all those other guys aren't gonna have any effect on your hunting, why not take the bow instead of the .300 mag?

[GF.]

I get the crossbow out in the late season when the leaves are down, it's easier to get busted on the draw by deer that have been hunted all season

Yep, and the more guys out there, the quicker they get educated.... And oh, yeah, just out of curiosity - how long can you hold your 80-pound compound at full draw vs. your target-weight recurve?


:rolleyes:

[dave-t.]

Why aren't you hunting with the recurve instead of the compound? Intentions of the season and what-not.;)

Another thing, if a beginner were more comfortable and accurate with the crossbow, why is it a good idea to turn him loose in the bow season with a weapon he is less capable with? It would be 100% legal and to 'the letter of the law' no matter if he is a horrible bow shot. Is that going to make things turn out better for the deer, or other hunters?




'Cuz really, if all those other guys aren't gonna have any effect on your hunting, why not take the bow instead of the .300 mag?

I put in for 3 archery hunts and 1 gun season hunt as my choices for the draw. I got the gun season. What can I say? I'm sure I'll have an effect on "the other guys" as much as they do me, it is public land after all.

As you know the bow seasons are typically in the rut, and have their own advantages with calling, more visible animals and so on. I'll stick with the rifle for the rifle season 99% of the time though.:cool: I'm not a weapon snob, I'll participate in the open season, whatever it is.


Also, multi-season hunters infringing on one season specialists???? Who cares. If you've picked one season, where multiple seasons are available to everyone....then they've picked their hill to die on, nobody made that choice for them and they can live with their decision no matter how bitter they get over it. The specialist can pick up a new technique, just like everyone else did, or can claim sour grapes until the cows come home.

Hunting one season and complaining about the others is the same as driving 40mph on the hiway and complaining that folks keep passing you.:rolleyes:

[dave-t.]

Can anyone think of one state where it is a 'pick one season' type of tag system, where the crossbow would be an advantage over the compound?

Out west has the only places where I have heard of such a thing. Does anyone thing the crossbow would be the better weapon for spot and stalk type of hunts over a compound?

It seems to me that in that type of setting, the crossbow would be at a disadvantage, and it would make the hunter hunt harder to be as successfull as a compound user.

The drawing odds and tag system would already be the firewall on how many hunters could be in the field 'ruining the hunting'. So added hunting pressure is a non-event.


Anyone?

[Twanger]

Yep, and the more guys out there, the quicker they get educated.... And oh, yeah, just out of curiosity - how long can you hold your 80-pound compound at full draw vs. your target-weight recurve?
:rolleyes:

I really don't see how this is relevant. If you want to have a he-man competition about how long you can hold a bow, then fine with me. I frankly try very hard not to get into that kind of situation with a deer. The longer I have to hold a bow back the poorer my shooting. The sweet spot for me is to hold between 3 and 8 seconds. I would hazard a guess that 90+ percent of the time I hold the compound bow no more than 5 seconds prior to release. Beyond 30 seconds and my accuracy is markedly poorer. At 60 seconds I'm about half as accurate as I am with a 5 second hold. I practice this so that I know exactly what I'm dealing with when I'm on the clock.

Since we're gonna get to this next point sometime, let's cover the ground now...

Q - How many more deer a year would I kill if I could hunt the whole season with a crossbow vs. a compound?

A - I truly believe that the answer is that I would actually kill fewer deer per year hunting with a crossbow... for the reasons stated above. I would get fewer doubles. Not wanting to brag, but I am very conservative with my first shot at a deer, almost never miss the kill zone, and I rarely get busted on the draw anymore. On the rare occasion I need a second shot it's far easier to send it on it's way with a vertical bow vs. hopping around the stand trying to cock a crossbow. :eek: Simply put, in my hands the crossbow is not usually the right golf-club.

Everyone's results vary. In my early years, first 5 years, I was nowhere as competent as I am now and was far better off with a crossbow because of buck fever - acute performance anxiety. I would often shake uncontrollably with a deer in range. Not good for accuracy. :D A crossbow on a rest is far better. In a beginners hands I would say that a crossbow is definitely the right golf club. If you want them to maim a lot of deer, force them to use a recurve. :rolleyes:

[dave-t.]

If you want them to quit hunting all together, force them to use a recurve and don't let them hunt with anything else the rest of the year.

GF- Do you know of anyone who only bow hunts with a recurve, takes enough deer to earn the title of 'deer managment specialist' (:rolleyes:), never misses or wounds, and is thought of highly by all those who might see or hear of his actions?

That is your ideal isn't it? What's his name?

Do you think he wants the rest of us to stop hunting 'his season'?

[Twanger]

Out of the 20-30 bow hunters I know, maybe half shoot trad bows, and only two I know of could pass our deer management qualifier which is putting 4 out of 4 arrows into a 4 inch square at 15 yards from an elevated position. One has passed it, and I was EXTREMELY impressed.

I shoot 3D with these guys and while I'm pissed if I miss the 10 ring they seem pretty happy just hitting the animal from the 'trad' stakes which are up to half the range of the compound stakes. :rolleyes:

It seems to be a different mentality. To first order, they seem to be all about the hunt vs. the kill, which is fine. Hunting is a very enjoyable activity. My big concern is for the animals. My $0.02 is that when you start flinging arrows the expectation should be that you will kill the animal, not just hope you do.

[GF.]

Colorado is a 'pick one' state, and the one cow I drew on lived because she A) caught the movement on my draw and B) stopped in a spot with poor light while she checked me out.

Given a crossbow with a scope on it, she'd be in my freezer right now.

Next question????



Also, multi-season hunters infringing on one season specialists???? Who cares.

Ummmmmm... Trick question? How about the one-season specialists? You know, all those guys who grossly outnumber the multi-season hunters???


If you've picked one season, where multiple seasons are available to everyone....then they've picked their hill to die on, nobody made that choice for them and they can live with their decision no matter how bitter they get over it.

No traditionalist has any ground to stand on provided that the 'interlopers' come in on a level playing field. But when they come in with a whole new class of weaponry, your claim sounds pretty silly. That's like entering a horse race on a motorcycle and 'wondering' why the jockeys are all pissed off. Why should the one-season hunter's experience be compromised for the benefit of a multi-season hunter?

Seriously - as a multi-season hunter, don't I have an added responsibility to be a polite guest of the single-season guys who have been compelled to share it with me???

[dave-t.]

The majority of single season specialists I know of are gun hunters only, and they decided long ago not to bowhunt, for their own reasons. I know one guy that strickly bow hunts. He also hunts bow only land, and his chances are better than the average Joe for taking a trophy during the gun season...but with his bow. He has a gun, and has made his choice. Heck if I was in his shoes, I might do it too. (side note, my biggest bow kill came under similar circumstances, and was tagged with a rifle tag, shot in rifle season with a bow.;) )


Colorado is a 'pick one' state, and the one cow I drew on lived because she A) caught the movement on my draw and B) stopped in a spot with poor light while she checked me out.

Given a crossbow with a scope on it, she'd be in my freezer right now.


That is speculation, she very well could have busted you raising up a crossbow to aim. Or while taking it off of your shoulder while carrying it by a sling. (also speculation;) )




Seriously - as a multi-season hunter, don't I have an added responsibility to be a polite guest of the single-season guys who have been compelled to share it with me???

No more than they are responsible to you. You are both equal participants in the same season, you share nothing but time on the calender. That they don't do more than one season is not your fault, or your responsibility. State regulations say you both have the opportunity to hunt every season that you are willing to participate in. Why should one be favored because he chooses less of the hunting opportunities? He's made his choice, and he can change his mind any time he is willing to make the investment, like the rest of us, and just like my buddy that does exactly that, one weapon for all seasons, by his own choice, no complaints.

There is no reason to feel shame over filling you limit with a bow, black powder and rifle, if you hunt all three seasons. The state sets those regs, and if you put the time in to do it, you've earned your success. It's nobody elses business what you take or what weapon you take it with, as long as you are doing it legally.

Letting more people in with whatever legal gadgets they want to use, doesn't effect or diminish your hunting any more than you let it. Deer are deer, and it's the hunters job to figure them out whether they are skittish and pressured, or not. They are still there to be hunted. If you hunt private land the majority of the time, I don't see how this effects the quality of the hunting at all. If you hunt public, you are going to deal with the public either way, good or bad, high hunter density or low. Allowing different weaponry (with the same max range) doesn't change the makeup of the game.

A fly fishing guru may get mad at the kid reeling them in with worms. But it's his own damn fault for not bringing his own worms. He chose his method, and it's no fault of the kid for finding the winning technique for the day. The fly fishing guru put his own limits on himself, there is nobody else to blame. The opportunity was there to choose any legal technique, he made his choice and can live with it.

[Altjaeger]

Looks like you fellows had a busy day.:)

GF I am not even going to try addressing every point you have in two pages and I would guess a half dozen entries, but instead provide some general comments.

I do not believe there is any camels back about to be broken. Give me the choice of easier hunt for a smaller hunter or a hunt opportunity to a larger number the larger number will win.

If the number that will increase is so small then the effect will be small. If you don't care about crossbows in deer hunting why have you got yourself so exercised?

Physical strength comments are not provided in serious argument but tongue in cheek picking at Lamplighter about his comments in so many threads attempting to show that to argue against the crossbow as your shoot a compound is a bit like the pot calling the kettle black.

As far as I can tell there is no increase in effective range as applied to hunting when using a crossbow over a compound and they both are a gain over traditional bows. Once you allow one there is no real argument that logically argues against the other.

You may argue that America has no crossbow heritage but again that is a convienent time line. Our heritage with much modification is from the European hunting heritage, so it is in our hunting heritage.

I am not so sure about your claims that the crossbow was considered and rejected in the original enactment of special seasons as you present it. Until a few years ago they were illegal in all seasons in Texas and I was told had been since the 1920s. The reasons as presented by game wardens and other hunters in discussions dating back to the early 1960s were fear of it as a poachers tool. I think few would argue that was a reasonable argument today unless you applied it to compounds as well.

I would not propose the use of smooth bore foster slugs or buckshot in archery season for a variety of reasons. One is I think they would double the effective range of any archery equipment discussed here as used in the field. The report of a firearm seems incongruent to a bow season. Last is that to me archery means a bolt of some kind fired by a tool that utilizing mechanical energy in the form of releasing stored tension. Air guns and firearms do not meet that definition

This country was established as a Federation based on democratic principals. As such game is managed by states attempting balancing the good of wild animals against the will of the states citizens. Lobbying is but a part of participatory government as intended by our founding fathers. To argue against it is to argue against the precepts upon which this government was established. The coining of a term like mobacracy strikes me as something that might be coined by a member of a small aristocracy, real or self-perceived, when they find the will of the society threatens their privileged status.

As I have said in other threads I am comfortable with any one of three solutions. 1) Allow all three classes of weapons in the field in a single archery season. 2) Take the current archery seasons and split them segregating the opposing factions. In fairness each could get the first half in alternating years. or 3) Go back to the "original intent" of hunting seasons setting a single season under the assumption almost everyone will use firearms and others are insignificant.

[LampLighter]

You can cry baby all you want, but you are not coming in my woods with one. end of subject.

[Altjaeger]

You can cry baby all you want, but you are not coming in my woods with one. end of subject.

:D Cry baby?

I am still waiting to hear if you can really give up bows with wheels and really go back to traditional or primitive archery equipment now that you realize you were the one that jumped the gun to trap yourself and not me. You really should have checked the date on that Onieda before saying you were in.:)

[Sabre]

:D Cry baby?

I am still waiting to hear if you can really give up bows with wheels and really go back to traditional or primitive archery equipment now that you realize you were the one that jumped the gun to trap yourself and not me. You really should have checked the date on that Onieda before saying you were in.:)

The guy has trouble killing deer with a .308 and you expect him to be able to do it with a longbow ? ;) Fat chance I'd say !:rolleyes:

[LampLighter]

I'm your huckabee. ;)

[LampLighter]

:D Cry baby?

I am still waiting to hear if you can really give up bows with wheels and really go back to traditional or primitive archery equipment now that you realize you were the one that jumped the gun to trap yourself and not me. You really should have checked the date on that Onieda before saying you were in.:)

and I am still waiting for you to answer the same question that has remained unanswered for years now.

WHY, when before Joe Blow whom was able bodied, could have obtained a regular bow and arrow, done the necessary work to practice, then joined in on the October early season chose not to, but now wants to come into our quiet October woods with a cross bow ? Why, when could have before, chose not to, but now with the advent of crossbow legalization wants to participate in the early archery season ?

Why before chose no, but now yes ? Well- ( foot tapping on floor)- waiting. There is only one answer and That is why you won't say it.

[Scout]

The real advantage to the crossbow (at least here in Virginia) is the fact it's use just generated more $$$ for the state. At least, that's what the state sees as an advantage. The weapon is no more deadly....it doesn't extend your range.....it doesn't have it's own special season....nor is it the ultimate killing machine that will destroy a deer herd.

The same principles of stalking, scent control, getting close and shooting ability apply to archery tackle in general (although I will most certainly agree that the crossbow generally requires much less practice pre-season). Advantages....it's kinda like putting that $700 scope on your rifle....it can make things a little "easier" for the hunter. Easier in that, like that scoped rifle...once it's sighted in, one doesn't generally feel the need to practice, practice, practice as someone shooting open sights. Then again, doesn't most of what sportsmen purchase do the same?

Heck...if you wanna go primitive....get a friggin rock.

Now if you want to talk about more opportunities for hunters...at least in Virginia....let's talk about Sunday hunting:D

[LampLighter]

Scout

the debate has never been about the effectiveness of the weapon. It is all about principle and why, when before ( see post above yours) Joe Blow was able to go get a bow and arrow, practice, and join in CHOSE not to, but now wants to come into the quiet October woods with an xbow ? Assume Joe Blow is able-bodied. Why chose not to before but now wants to ?

Look back , say, to the 90's and work forward. Notice how trends lean toward how to make tasks easier and easier. Ways galore to avoid work. Then with that in mind, really look at people, not all, but a porportion of >50% are overweight, and notice the drive-up lanes now. Banking, pizza, daquaris, conveinence stores, even drive up drug store perscription pickup. Society as a hole is getting Lazy each year. Able-bodied persons who choose not to go to his or her local pro shop, get fitted with a vertical bow and arrow, do the work of practicing to become proficient, then join in the October hunting , but who now wants to join in with the crossbow is plum lazy seeking a shortcut around work- period. THAT is why we oppose it.

[Altjaeger]

and I am still waiting for you to answer the same question that has remained unanswered for years now.

WHY, when before Joe Blow whom was able bodied, could have obtained a regular bow and arrow, done the necessary work to practice, then joined in on the October early season chose not to, but now wants to come into our quiet October woods with a cross bow ? Why, when could have before, chose not to, but now with the advent of crossbow legalization wants to participate in the early archery season ?

Why before chose no, but now yes ? Well- ( foot tapping on floor)- waiting. There is only one answer and That is why you won't say it.

The same answer as before and you just don't like the answer. Those are your prejudices and standards and of no meaning elsewhere. Those are inconsequential in my view and in the equation. Before you launch once more into one of you sheeple and I am a leader speeches spare us. For in the end you lack one key ingredient of a leader, a following.

As I always said it is about expanding hunters participation, political clout and the general good of the hunting movement.

It is also about fair play. Gunners made room for archers in the 1950s, archers and gunners made room for compound bowmen in the 1980s which was as big or bigger a gain in weaponry than crossbows. To deny crossbowmen now the same advantage would be hypocritical unless the wheel and cable guys are ready to give up the advantage they so gladly embraced. The challenge to go pre 1970 was to see how serious you were. You jumped on it to thinking you could weasal around in a lawyerly kinda way and it blew up in your face and now you backed out so we know the sincerety of your arguments.

Remember that when you start to present the original intent argument it does not include your hunting bows as they were a technological advance not conceived of at the time of original legislation. There is also at least one willing to go back in original intent of the setting of hunting seasons which was conceived as guns seasons.

[Altjaeger]

Look back , say, to the 90's and work forward. Notice how trends lean toward how to make tasks easier and easier. Ways galore to avoid work. Then with that in mind, really look at people, not all, but a porportion of >50% are overweight, and notice the drive-up lanes now. Banking, pizza, daquaris, conveinence stores, even drive up drug store perscription pickup. Society as a hole is getting Lazy each year. Able-bodied persons who choose not to go to his or her local pro shop, get fitted with a vertical bow and arrow, do the work of practicing to become proficient, then join in the October hunting , but who now wants to join in with the crossbow is plum lazy seeking a shortcut around work- period. THAT is why we oppose it.


Who is this mysterious "WE"? I have never seen anyone else opposed to crossbows place that argument though you have in one version or the other on many topics.

[LampLighter]

So why, when before, Joe Blow whom was able bodied, could have obtained a regular bow and arrow, done the necessary work to practice, then joined in on the October early season chose not to, but now wants to come into our quiet October woods with a cross bow ? Why, when could have before, chose not to, but now with the advent of crossbow legalization wants to participate in the early archery season ?

Because he was too lazy and now seeks the easy shortcut- that's why. It is also why you won't answer it. You know. And you know it fits in with trends today of obisety, diabetes, and lazy habits such as drive up services. We know cap, we know.

"WE" are many of good ol country boys I hang with who have no interest in looking at nor operating a home computer. They hunt. We hunted together in 1979 with school recurves. Never killed anything back then with a recurve. We's sit on the fence and chew Apple Jack. They all grown now. @ work for the power company. Kevin he works for the school board now. All these boys hunt big time, with bow and arrow. They kill some deer too. By the way, how bout posting some of your kills. Don't remember seeing any.

[Altjaeger]

So why, when before, Joe Blow whom was able bodied, could have obtained a regular bow and arrow, done the necessary work to practice, then joined in on the October early season chose not to, but now wants to come into our quiet October woods with a cross bow ? Why, when could have before, chose not to, but now with the advent of crossbow legalization wants to participate in the early archery season ?

Because he was too lazy and now seeks the easy shortcut- that's why. It is also why you won't answer it. You know. And you know it fits in with trends today of obisety, diabetes, and lazy habits such as drive up services. We know cap, we know.

I will try again and see if you can grasp it. Because that is your standard having nothing to do with hunting and everything to do with boosting your chest beating ego. As far as setting hunting regulations it is meaningless.


"WE" are many of good ol country boys I hang with who have no interest in looking at nor operating a home computer. They hunt. We hunted together in 1979 with school recurves. Never killed anything back then with a recurve. We's sit on the fence and chew Apple Jack. They all grown now. @ work for the power company. Kevin he works for the school board now. All these boys hunt big time, with bow and arrow. They kill some deer too. By the way, how bout posting some of your kills. Don't remember seeing any.


No you don't remember seeing any. I hunted a marginal population in 1967, 1968 and 1969 at the ages of 15, 16 and 17 without success. I see you and your crew could not make it without technologically advanced equipment either. Guess you and they were leaders in the move to convenient and easy methodology.

But then what you or they do has nothing to do with the setting of regulations either. In the end when a agency is responsible to a number of citizen it should and does in most cases serve the will of the majority people. That is why these changes are coming. Aren't you glad you live in a free nation where the people still have an influene on their government?

[LampLighter]

the end (yawn). ahhhhhh. good night.

Guillermo. :)

[Altjaeger]

the end (yawn). ahhhhhh. good night.

Guillermo. :)

:D

[Scout]

Scout

the debate has never been about the effectiveness of the weapon. It is all about principle and why, when before ( see post above yours) Joe Blow was able to go get a bow and arrow, practice, and join in CHOSE not to, but now wants to come into the quiet October woods with an xbow ? Assume Joe Blow is able-bodied. Why chose not to before but now wants to ?

Look back , say, to the 90's and work forward. Notice how trends lean toward how to make tasks easier and easier. Ways galore to avoid work. Then with that in mind, really look at people, not all, but a porportion of >50% are overweight, and notice the drive-up lanes now. Banking, pizza, daquaris, conveinence stores, even drive up drug store perscription pickup. Society as a hole is getting Lazy each year. Able-bodied persons who choose not to go to his or her local pro shop, get fitted with a vertical bow and arrow, do the work of practicing to become proficient, then join in the October hunting , but who now wants to join in with the crossbow is plum lazy seeking a shortcut around work- period. THAT is why we oppose it.


So...what you're saying is that able bodied individuals shouldn't have the right to CHOSE what they hunt with? Just because you and some friends don't make the same choice? Why do you hunt with a heavy barrel beavertail stocked scoped rifle? Perhaps me and some of my buddies believe rifle hunting should only be done with an open sighted single shot rifle. Why should you and your buddies be allowed to come into our season with your fancy scoped guns holding multiple rounds? Perhaps we believe there are far too many people who are too darn lazy to learn good ol fashioned open sighted marksmanship.

Perhaps Joe Blow the able bodied guy just simply makes a CHOICE to hunt with the crossbow instead of a compound. Isn't it great that we live in a place where we can make a choice? You and some buddies trying to tell me what I can hunt with sounds a bit like communism to me (at the very least it's a little bit of Obamanism). The argument in question boils down to CHOICE and not worrying about keeping with with the next guy....

[GF.]

As I have said in other threads I am comfortable with any one of three solutions. 1) Allow all three classes of weapons in the field in a single archery season. 2) Take the current archery seasons and split them segregating the opposing factions. In fairness each could get the first half in alternating years. or 3) Go back to the "original intent" of hunting seasons setting a single season under the assumption almost everyone will use firearms and others are insignificant.

How about #3, with modern archery gear permitted during firearms seasons so that additional pressure can be applied to bow-only areas :D


Funny though, that you mentioned something about a shotgun's report being incongruous with an archery season.... Some of us feel that way about stocks and triggers, too....:rolleyes:

[dave-t.]

LL-You can't stop a person from hunting becuase they are obese, or not as knowledgable, or flat out more lazy than you. It is still their hunting season too. That is their opportunity. They have as much right as you or any of your buddies, as long as they hunt legal methods.

Are you intimidated by the fat, lazy, inexperienced guy? That guy is going to get all of your deer, and leave you nothing?:rolleyes:



The arguement of "the way it was" is over. That was 40-50+yrs ago. Nobody is still using the same bow as back then, and would be on a hardship to buy new equipment, or fail to see what their options are in the present. Anyone in the last 25years who bought a bow or has been bowhunting, knew what they were getting into when they bought their equipment.

Either they were getting brand new top of the line or a modern design at least, or they took it upon themselves to make the hunt harder with trad gear. They knew right off it would be more time consuming, harder, less accurate, less powerfull, and then did it anyway. Don't blame guys for having an unfair advantage when the same equipemnt is just as available to you.

Original intent of bowseasons is 40 years dead and gone. This change in equipment hasn't snuck up on anyone. That there was/is more technology coming down the pike as we speak shouldn't be surprising.

Who thinks that freezing the rules forever is a sound practice for long term planning in anything? The world is going to change, putting your head in the sand and hoping it won't is going to get you nowhere.

In two years there will be a new rifle cartridge, a new camo, a new stand, a new swamp buggy,etc., and if they design a compound bow that shoots 450fps, or a horizontal bow that shoots 550fps, they are going to sell like hotcakes, sure as the world.

[GF.]

As I always said it is about expanding hunters participation, political clout and the general good of the hunting movement.


So just how many 'new' hunters are you expecting to see coming into the sport because of crossbows? How many old, crippled-up bowhunters are going to stop voting in the interests of bowhunters - or all hunters - because they can no longer draw a hunting-weight 'vertical' bow?

There are no 'new participants' here, Alt; there is no 'political clout' to be gained...

And if you want to talk about the 'general good of the hunting movement'....

I'm pretty sure is has not escaped you that crossbows are a divisive issue in the bowhunting side of 'all of hunting'.

I haven't seen any recent, hard & fast data on this, but my overwhelming sense of the issue is that current bowhunters are, in the majority, still opposed to allowing crossbows into the regular archery season. According to you, their individual reasons, rational or not, for opposing compounds are of no consequence. What matters is that they're in the majority.

So do the game departments not have a responsibility to serve the interests of the majority of the stakeholders? And the would-be participants - those whose position is "Sure, I'm in - after you change the rules to my liking" - do they deserve the same voice in the discussion as those who are already involved? What about those who won't hunt bow season even if crossbows do get authorized? Do you mean to tell me that someone thick enough to believe that he has no stake whatsoever in archery seasons should be given either voice or vote in the decision???

(Frankly, a guy who won't take advantage of the rule change would be a complete idiot to favor it, because he's taking deer out of his own patch of woods by doing so. He's going to face fewer, spookier deer than ever and they'll be in worse condition than ever. Where's the up-side in that????)


I'm sure that you're going to argue that all hunters deserve the same voice in this because they're all hunters, and it's 'too restrictive' to ask the opinions of current bowhunters only. But if I'm correct in my assumption that a significant majority of current bowhunters still oppose crossbows, then in order to get a majority of the total hunting population to favor them you're going to have to recruit not just a few percent more here or there, but very considerable numbers of 'new' (cross)bowhunters in order to get even a plurality, let alone a majority among the expanded pool of 'string season' participants.


So just so that we're clear on this, we're not talking about 4-5% more archery-hunt participants; we're talking serious numbers of people who are very likely to participate--otherwise, why would they favor the change?? So we're talking about enough additional hunters to have a considerable impact on pressure during the 'bow' season, and enough to put a noticeable dent in the herd before the overwhelming majority of hunters - the gun-only guys - even set foot in the field.


And BTW, don't most people come into deer hunting using modern firearms? So we want to make it tougher on the newest members of the hunting fraternity to get started??? Call me crazy, but I always figured that going 5-6 years before tagging your first deer was kinda bad for recruitment..... Where's the 'political clout' in that???

So while you may like to promote this idea that a divisive issue can be 'resolved 'by cramming a new regulation down the throats of those already actively participating and clearly don't want it - simply because you think that after a while they'll just get used to it and stop their complaining... I just don't think it's gonna go anywhere near that easy. Hell, that ain't even workin' for Obama!

Especially if you wake the sleeping giant and the gun-guys stand up and holler 'nuff.

Dave maintains that they have no grounds for complaint because they have the same chance to hunt archery season as everybody else. Well, then, what's keeping them? According to Alt, a crossbow doesn't provide any edge over a compound... soooo..... An equipment restriction perhaps? And somehow, in a season established on the basis of an equipment restriction, that's somehow not an acceptable answer? 'Cuz if it ain't, we might as well just go straight to automatic weapons and settle it all at once instead of having to go through this again with the next thing down the pike.

:confused::confused::confused:

But here's the thing; whether you believe that the gun-only gang has an 'approved' reason for complaining about the number of animals taken by 'archers' or not, if they're in the majority, Alt tells us, then their wishes will rule the outcome of any solutions that come down. And once they decide that archers are taking 'too many' deer, then something's gonna have to give.

It happened in VA and CT when in-lines got allowed into ML seasons, and it can happen on a far greater scale if we just push the definition of a 'bow' far enough.....

And seriously - what's the difference between

A) "well, they already have the option of hunting archery season [with a compound], so to hell with 'em"

vs.

B) "well, they already have the option of hunting archery season [with a crossbow], so to hell with 'em"

Honestly, Dave, your argument is no better than Lamplighter's.... :eek:

[Altjaeger]

GF, you and I are repeating ourselves and neither is likely to change the mind of the other. Your "facts" are largely opinion and so are mine.:D

Its time to agree to disagree and let the political process proceed as they were designed to do. I think the trend is evident. If you are serious then it is time for you and those of your opinion to get busy with your game departments as obviously the other side is.

I will continue to post changes as I read of them partly as a matter of news update and partly because active discussion is good for Hunt America in general to keep it alive and active.:)

[dave-t.]

Oh, but I believe that it is.

We are talking about a weapon with equal or less range here, not full auto firearms.:rolleyes: The restriction is the range that the weapon can be used effectively.

The big part of the equation here, is what part of the hunting are you protecting, and what part are you making more challenging. I don't see that making the shot more challenging by limiting equipment as a bennefit. The range is set, you have to get close. Making the kill shot the hardest part of the whole-shebang leads to bad experinces, and poor stewardship to the animals.

The kill shot should be the easiest and most sure part of the hunt, for humane reasons if nothing else. Getting close to the animal is the hunt, making the kill harder than it needs to be is a faulty line of reasoning for the long term of hunting, imo.

Allowing different equipment, under the same restrictions of: season, wound damage, range/distance, stealth etc., lets the individual choose what works best for him, instead of being restrained by "the way it used to be". The way it used to be wasn't that ethical, if you recall.

Have you ever seen videos and pics of the way Fred Bear used to hunt? The long shots, misses, wounding, running shots, and so on. Hell, the guy advocated poison pods because the shooting was so horrific. That is the part of bow hunting that gives the sport a black eye, the unsure kill shot, and wounded game. Making the kill more clean and sure is good for the sport, not bad for the sport.

Also, if a person is willing to take up an issue to speak up about, or participate in, then he is free to do so. If a guy who never had bowhunted a day in his life, takes to the field with any type of archeryy equipment, he is now a bowhunter. He needs no invitation or acceptance to be one, he is valid, he had a right to try it just as everyone else has. He's not taking the sport away from you any more that you took it away from the folks hunting before you decided to try it.

Cleaner kills (even if only a limited few), more options, and a bigger following of support for the sport in general. I just don't see the downside.

Rifle hunters are free to try it at any time, no body is stopping them. If bowhunters are cheating the gun hunters, they can jump on board for the earlier season too, just like every bowhunter has. That is the part that makes bowhunting challenging, learning new techniques, getting close, and pushing yourself, staying within your limits, not the equipment used to make the kill, or wound as it may be.



Also, if you think the state game agencies are only in it for the majority of hunters, then why are antler restrictions being pushed through without majority support? PA, and MO had a ton of opposition to AR's, yet the game departments knew better. The game departments job is to control the situation for the good of the herd, not to cater to the -fill in the blank- goup.

[GF.]

But a longer season of high-pressure hunting can't be too good for the animals, can it?

Lemme just pick away at this one for a minute....


The big part of the equation here, is what part of the hunting are you protecting, and what part are you making more challenging. I don't see that making the shot more challenging by limiting equipment as a bennefit. The range is set, you have to get close. Making the kill shot the hardest part of the whole-shebang leads to bad experinces, and poor stewardship to the animals.

The kill shot should be the easiest and most sure part of the hunt, for humane reasons if nothing else. Getting close to the animal is the hunt, making the kill harder than it needs to be is a faulty line of reasoning for the long term of hunting, imo.

Killing cleanly with a tradbow is no harder than with anything else; you just have to get a bit closer to do it. So the range is not 'set' as you suggest; it's fluid, depending on the equipment. If a 300-fps crossbow is a 40-yard weapon, are you going to tell me that a 450-fps crossbow isn't a 60-yard weapon? And are you going to tell me that at 60 (and honestly, even at 40) yards, a scope makes no difference in a hunter's ability to make a good, clean hit on a shot which would be unthinkable with iron sights?

Not on a bright, sunny day at the range, mind you, but right around sun-up/down on a cloudy day with deer-brown oak leaves all over the ground and a few trees, sticks and leaves thrown into the picture. Like the shot on that cow that I couldn't take even with fiber-optic pins glowing like neon.

The technology makes clean kills at longer range possible for more people. And the farther people can shoot, the more people believe that their chances of punching a tag are good enough to participate. And the farther people do shoot, the more they disturb the animals, which makes it harder on the animals and on the other, less disruptive hunters who depend more on undisturbed animals in order to have (roughly) the same odds of success as the guys who can shoot farther at more jittery animals.

So the tradshooters 'reward' for making room for compounds is a lower-quality hunt with lower odds of sucess, and now people expect them to happily accommodate a whole new class of high-tech shooters????

Your perspective is that of a consumer. You want more, more, more of everything. It's good for you, so you figure it's good for everybody else, too.

But bow (and ML) seasons weren't intended as 'more' opportunity, they were - by and large - set up to create a different kind of hunting opportunity, and your kind of 'more' is simply taking more and more away from the only season that these other guys ever wanted in the first place.

[dave-t.]

No, I'm not saying it is a 40yd weapon, or a 60yrd weapon, not at all.

Are you saying Fred Bear never took a 40, or 60yds shot with a recurve? He didn't spook the animals that someone else in his party would have liked to go after?

I shoot a big flat shooting gun. I don't shoot past 200yds 95% of the time. Not that the equipment isn't capable, it is that I am choosey about my shots. That goes for all equipment. My bow is capable of kills past 80yds, plenty of power, but I've never killed past 18yds with it, my fastest quietest bow yet.

A newb with a compound more likely to take a bad shot, than an experience hunter with a crossbow, imo.

Does that make the compound a bad weapon, or the user a bad hunter?

Saying the crossbow is lethal farther out is a losing arguement. Too many know the truth, that they are a shorter distance weapon than the high tech comounds, by far.


It ain't the equipments fault for being used poorly. You also can't idiot proof laws. Folks have to learn the right way of doing things, and we've all had our worst case scenarios show up. We all learned our lessons, spooked some game, and are still hunting too.;)

[dave-t.]

Trad shooters didn't invite the compound users in, by the way. The compounds were declared legal by each state for the archery seasons. What the trad shooters wanted had nothing to do with what the states allowed.

Technology does make killing more sure, and hunting more ethical in a lot of cases. That is something we owe the animals no matter what legal equipment any of us choose to use. What we owe to the animal carries a lot more wieght, imo, than what we owe to the other guy hunting the same season as us.


How far out do you think your compound would kill a deer GF, 90yds?110yds?

[LampLighter]

LL-You can't stop a person from hunting becuase they are obese, or not as knowledgable, or flat out more lazy than you. It is still their hunting season too. That is their opportunity. They have as much right as you or any of your buddies, as long as they hunt legal methods.

Are you intimidated by the fat, lazy, inexperienced guy? That guy is going to get all of your deer, and leave you nothing?



The arguement of "the way it was" is over. That was 40-50+yrs ago. Nobody is still using the same bow as back then, and would be on a hardship to buy new equipment, or fail to see what their options are in the present. Anyone in the last 25years who bought a bow or has been bowhunting, knew what they were getting into when they bought their equipment

Of all the new text that appeared since Alt and I shut it down last night, this is the only words I need to address. The rest is riff raff.

You kinda made my point. I want ALL those who, before could have picked up a regular bow and arrow, done all the work of practicing, learned woodsmanship of how to draw with game present, but voluntarily chose not to, whom NOW wants to hit the woods with a crossbow, to openly admit that they were too lazy to do the work before. That is the point I make. In all of life, I cannot stand to see a freeloader who sits back and lets others do the work, then trys to reap the rewards. So the above Text sort of begins to admit to laziness.

Statistics show that the above described individuals just happen to be smokers, obise individuals, people who eat poorly ( chee-wees) and couch potatos ( sofa). Society may be leaning toward change for these individuals . Have been quite a while. Seek out a book titled The dumbing down of America . So think about that when you are able-bodied, chose not to bowhunt before, but now want to go buy a crossbow and enter the quiet October woods and mock the true woodsman archers. We see you. When you run in to one of us on the woods trail, we'll be sizing you up in our minds to see if you meet the normal criteria for a xbow ( injury or 60 yr. old) or are a lazy newbe. You'll always have that in the back of your mind.

[DaveHawk]

LL are you a black powder hunter , what do you shoot?

[LampLighter]

It doesn't matter Dave. This crossbow issue is over. Able-bodied persons who chose not to pursue archery before and whom now want to- were too lazy to do the work. That is crystal clear. I don't care what spear was used in medival times, it doesn't change what we know. The very best thing to do is just to admit it. Or wait till gun season. Now no more of this humbug. I hereby close this thread.

[Scout]

"I want ALL those who, before could have picked up an open sighted single shot rifle, done all the work of practicing, learned marksmanship of how to aim with game present, but voluntarily chose not to, whom NOW wants to hit the woods with a scoped heavy barreled beavertail stocked multi round firearm, to openly admit that they were too lazy to do the work before. That is the point I make. In all of life, I cannot stand to see a freeloader who sits back and lets others do the work, then trys to reap the rewards."

[DaveHawk]

LL then what dose it mater what kind of bow someone shoots? You can't have it both ways unless your of the elitist mind set.

Scott, I agree, I want them who hunt with rifle to build there own and learn to shoot a flint lock. All others are lazy who just go buy a gun have it pre sighted in and take a few shots at the range and then go hunt.

[dave-t.]

Now no more of this humbug. I hereby close this thread.

You may as well close it, I won.:cool::rolleyes:

:D:D:D

Laziness cannot be legislated against, any more than stupidity, or poor decision making.

But, a guy can decide to get better once he's found his passion. ;)

[My buddy]

The only thing I might go for is a moratorium . If, you first hunted with vertical bow for 5 years, then maybe we will grant you an xbow. Other than that- tough sh%$. Go use a regular bow. No shortcuts. You do not get everything you want. Now enough of this. No crossbows- end of story.


You're an idiot.

Go shoot a traditional bow and stop taking the lazy way out shooting your compound with all of its gadgets to make things easier for you.

[My buddy]

Oneida Eagle bows I'm sure existed in 1969, so I can indeed use one. :p

Well, if that is the case, the crossbow was invented around 400 BC so I can indeed use one.

[GF.]

So, Dave... Which is it?


Technology does make killing more sure, and hunting more ethical in a lot of cases.

or....



It ain't the equipments fault for being used poorly.

A river cobble is every bit as sure and ethical as that .300 of yours.... if you know how to use it.... And you can get close enough to put it to good use.

Arrows have been capable of killing cleanly from as far away as bows can throw them since the first stone broadhead was lashed to a twig. What has been advancing ever since is the range at which an arrow can be reliably dropped into the right part of the target and, in my personal experience, the compounds expand tradbow range by a factor of at least two--which gets a shooter into ranges at which a scope can and does make a very meaningful difference in the 'makeability' of a shot.

And your complaint against Fred Bear taking horribly irresponsible shots at ranges at which any decent compound shooter can keep 'em in the 8-ring all day long only proves the point - a tradbow is just not well-suited to shots at that kind of range.

So a crossbow is a little slower than a compound. So what? You laser your range and the trajectory is basically a moot point. You add a scope and the upper end of the 'makeable' range increases in terms of both yards and the number of minutes before or after sun-up/down during which the target can be seen well enough to ensure a clean, solid hit. And also important at these longer ranges, a crossbow need not be shot off-hand. And let's get real about that one for a moment, shall we? Shooting a bow well at ranges past 35 yards comes down to form, which is, to a very large degree, another way of saying 'how well you can shoot off-hand'.

And I ain't never seen no kinda vertical bow gittin' shot off'n no damn bench rest.

Look.... There are ethical hunters with a 5 yard max range and there are probably about the same number of hunters with an ethical 500-yard max range - we agree on that.

The reason, though, that these hunters are 'ethical' (at least in terms of making sure, clean kills) has nothing to do with how much or how little technology is involved; you said it yourself: a bad kill is not the fault of the equipment, but the user.

But we also agree that the technology makes killing more sure. What???

Of course it does. And it makes it more sure from farther away. And being able to kill cleanly from farther away increases a hunter's chances for success. And increased odds of success brings in more hunters. And 'more hunuters' is what a lot of people got into the 'trad' seasons to get away from....



What the trad shooters wanted had nothing to do with what the states allowed.

Nope, it didn't. Except in CO, where the trad muzzleloaders got off their cans and lobbied hard for restrictions that kept the rules of the muzzleloading game essentially the same as they always had been - true to the spirit of the law. Yeah, you can still use an ugly rifle with a shotgun primer if you want to, but it won't buy you any meaningful ballistic advantage inside of what most shooters would consider to be responsible iron-sights range, and no, you may not use a g#####n scope, so you'd better think that over before you choose which one weapon you'll be using this year....

What the states allowed into archery seasons was, by and large, determined by the lobbying efforts of people who've made a ton o' money selling compounds (and in-lines) and all of the related high-tech accoutrements to multi-season hunters who would never trade off their centerfire season for just one season per year with the 'primitive'. Too, the early compounds were loud, they were slower than a good recurve, and at the time, the sights were nothing new or different from what a number of recurve shooters were using already. For that matter, the let-offs were so low that some shooters (incl. yours truly) found that they were more accurate shooting instinctively than using pins anyway.

Simply put, the bowhunters in the early days of compounds had no idea what they were letting themselves in for.

And bear in mind - in states where archery seasons were opportunities for additional hunting, rather than trad-itional hunting, the trad guys were screwed from the outset. Their interests were overruled by guys (like you) who never gave a damn about bowhunting in the first place, but cared quite a bit about getting more tags punched and/or more time in which to do it.

Maybe you think that's as it should be, because loosening the equipment restrictions has always been pure gain for you. In my experience, each round of technological 'advancement' has brought with it a wave of newcomers whose very presence has resulted in either a degradation of the quality of my hunting opportunities, a reduction in the number of opportunities available to me, or the complete elimination of a season in which I would have been very, very interested in participating, not only in spite of the equipment restrictions, but because of them.

It's one thing if the newcomers size up the season as it stands and jump in according to the same set of rules by which the existing participants are already playing. It's quite another when the game departments keep bending and stretching the definition of what a bow or muzzleloader 'is' as if to say, "But wait! There's more! So now how much would you pay?" or "Please, please, please... would you buy a license if we let you use __________".

Fill in the blank, man. Crossbows won't be the end of it.

[dave-t.]

So, Dave... Which is it?

Technology does make killing more sure, and hunting more ethical in a lot of cases.

or....

It ain't the equipments fault for being used poorly.


Those are not mutually exclusive ideas. My bow and rifle have much longer ethical killing energy and range than I use. I stay within my limitations, and with all limited range weapons, or long range ones, the ethical hunter has to figure that out on his own..




in my personal experience, the compounds expand tradbow range by a factor of at least two--which gets a shooter into ranges at which a scope can and does make a very meaningful difference in the 'makeability' of a shot. .

You know that for Chuck Adams that would be by a factor of about 5, and that was before laser range finders. You can't hold it against a guy for being better with his equipment than you are with yours. Many of my hunting buddies will shoot farther than me. That means I have to hunt in a way to get the deer closer. I've never killed a deer with a bow that was out of tad bow range. 20yds and in for me with my first wheel bow, and still the same with my current whizzbag bowtech.



The reason, though, that these hunters are 'ethical' (at least in terms of making sure, clean kills) has nothing to do with how much or how little technology is involved; you said it yourself: a bad kill is not the fault of the equipment, but the user..

Thank you.


But we also agree that the technology makes killing more sure. What???


Of course it does. And it makes it more sure from farther away. .

Only if you intend to shoot farther away. Howard Hill could out shoot me any place, any time, in any weather condition withh his long bow. That doesn't mean Howard Hill should not hunt the archery season, just because he could make kills at a typical rifle shot range. That means I have to place myself so that I can be successfull, and Howard can hunt places where he can be successfull. Sour grapes for me if I blame Howard for making a good shot.





Simply put, the bowhunters in the early days of compounds had no idea what they were letting themselves in for. .

Yes they did, they had the best equipment that they could find. And when the next round of bows came out, they bought them up too. They knew exactly what they were getting equipment wise.


And bear in mind - in states where archery seasons were opportunities for additional hunting, rather than trad-itional hunting, the trad guys were screwed from the outset. .

No they weren't. They had a bow season. Limited range weapons of anyones choice depending on what part of the hunt they wanted to accent. Nostalgia, or effectiveness.



Maybe you think that's as it should be, because loosening the equipment restrictions has always been pure gain for you. In my experience, each round of technological 'advancement' has brought with it a wave of newcomers whose very presence has resulted in either a degradation of the quality of my hunting opportunities, a reduction in the number of opportunities available to me,

It's one thing if the newcomers size up the season as it stands and jump in according to the same set of rules by which the existing participants are already playing. It's quite another when the game departments keep bending and stretching the definition of what a bow or muzzleloader 'is' as if to say, "But wait! There's more! So now how much would you pay?" .....

Fill in the blank, man. Crossbows won't be the end of it.

The next thing after the crossbow won't be the end of it either.

It's a shame you think so low of your fellow hunters. Their peace, time, and solitude means very little to you as well.:(

If you place yourself in the whipping boy position, you're always going to be beat up, and the rest of the crowd will always be "winning" at your expense. Land is out there to hunt. Put your money where your mouth is, and lock some of it up if you want solitude and less competition. I've never leased land, but that is always an option if you feel strongly about having your own private place all to yourself. Lots of guys do it and they have success with it. You can say "it shouldn't be that way", but when you come right down to it, it is that way, and it is a viable option. Modern hunting, take it or leave it, because the old ways are gone. You can bet your thinsulate, climbing tree stand, and deer decoys on it. ;)

What you are failing to see, is that game departments have evolved themselves and are using these seasons as a way to make meaningful changes in herd management. They have changed the roll that limited range weapons play in the total season take, due to necessity in a lot of cases, but not in all. In some cases they openned up to rules to be more inclusive, no matter which crumudgeons wanted to keep it to themselves. Passing on the hunting herritage and whatnot.;)

By the way, I'm not going to write my state congress person about this topic. :D The state will set the rules as they please, and I will make my choice as to what weapon suits me, just like everyone else. I'm not so special that I need to limit the options of other hunters, to have a deer season only for the worthy. Going by some of your statements, I'd be on the wrong side of worthiness, and I ain't afraid to say, I'm a pretty darn good bowhunter(if only in my own mind!:D;) ) at 20yds, and my next bow won't change that wether it is vertical or horizontal.

[GF.]

I'm not failing to see that the F&G guys have altered the way that they incorporate the bow & ML seasons, I'm just not sure that their only responsibility is deer management; if they really want to provide 'opportunties' for hunters, why not create a broader spectrum of opportunities instead of just 'more' opportunities per year to hunt in essentially the same manner as all the others? (stock/scope/trigger).

What ever happened to hunter management?

After all, different hunters want different things out of their hunting experience; some want solitude, others want camaraderie, others still just wanna kill something (those guys give me the creeps, though....:rolleyes: )

For instance, I took up black powder because I hunted one CO centerfire season and absolutely hated it. People everywhere you turned, firefights breaking out on every ridge - or you'd think so, from the sounds of it - and the constant sound of pickup trucks grinding up and down anything & everything that bore the slightest resemblance to a 'road'. If someone had driven there before, somebody was driving there again. :eek:

In-lines were brand new back then. But I knew that the ML season had been created specifically as a set-aside for 'settlement era' shooters, so I got one that looked as much like an antique as I could afford, in a period-correct caplock. You see, I saw what the rules were meant to be, not what a lawyer could parse them out to mean, and I abided by the higher standard - not because of what was in it for me, but because it seemed to be the right thing to do.

Anywho.....

JMO, the ideal solution for most states would be - hope I don't shock anybody with this - a longer 'modern' season in which you use whatever you want, within limits - no firearms in bow-only zones, no rifles in slug zones... No surprises...

But only long enough to expect to hit the harvest quota, less what the managers expect the tradshooters to take, and of course, the length of the modern season would have to vary by whatever management unit system they've got, since some areas need herd reductions and some actually do need (or could stand) some growth.

So for the suburban 'modern' bowhunters, they'd get a little 'help' from crossbow shooters, but seriously - if not enough deer are being taken in the bow-zones now, then what's the difference gonna be?

Zip.

But in firearms units and those with lower harvest targets, yeah, the season will be shorter, but if the compounders don't like that, they can use crossbows or firearms instead. Nobody's forcing them to use their Contraptions, right?

And tradshooters - just to be generous, let's make it easy - say BP & equivalent powders & full-bore projectiles only, no scopes other than 0X, with non-illuminated crosshairs, and no fiber-optic or otherwise illuminated sights; no electronics of any kind For bows, that's easy enough - no let-off, no mechanical releases & no 'lectronics of any kind here, either. Crossbows are obviously out (at 100% let-off), but hey, go ahead and swap out the cams on your pet compound for something with zero let-off and go hunt with it. Several compound manufacturers are already making the cams, so its not as it that's not an option.

And no rangefinders in either ML or bow season.

And the trad seasons would be long enough to allow the hunter success rate in each trad season to get as close to the modern season's success rate as the calendar will allow. In other words, tradbows would likely get Sept 1 - Jan 31st or so, and muzzleloaders would probably get a week or two immediately before the choose-yer-weppins season.

Two catches - everybody gets the same number of tags to fill, regardless of how many seasons they hunt, and 1 buck/year, regardless of method, with exceptions for surplus does and earn-a-buck programs.

JMO - this creates an 'opportunity' for every hunter to use as many distinctly different weapons as possible, every year, and it creates the highest potential for those who seek solitude to find it--provided that they're willing to sign up for the weapon required in the season which offers the kind of solitude they desire.


Whats not to like?:confused:

[dave-t.]

Success rates would never be the same.

Trad guys ain't going to keep up with a dedicated rifle or even compound guys. Don't be offended here, but the trad guys have a personal viewpoint that just won't let them, whatever their case may be. My dad is a firm flintlocker, he competes, weighs his balls (careful now;) ), wears the kit, etc. For him it is the exprerience, and if he kills one, that adds to what is already a successful season. Successful in that he got to go at all, have a bit of time in the deer woods, without the additional gunfire and fanfare of the general firearms season.

That doesn't kill deer where deer need killin' though. It also doesn't let newbies have any option but the hard way right off the bat, which is a losing proposition in todays world, right or wrong as it may be. Maybe not withh your kids or my kids, but we need to be somewhat inclusive for the newbie/younger crowds.

Is it better to be the last old man in the woods with yester-years equipment, or to be in a crowded area in with newfangled gear? Who really knows?

Good discussion GF. For the last couple pages I was just seeing if I could outlast ya.;) Glad nobody got ugly with it.

Good luck this season.

[Altjaeger]

Now no more of this humbug. I hereby close this thread.
As many times as you have tried it you should know by now the only person that closes a thread is Swamp when he locks it up. Silly stuff like that just challenges people to keep it going. Besides this time you cannot even claim to have originated it.

[Altjaeger]

Statistics show that the above described individuals just happen to be smokers, obise individuals, people who eat poorly ( chee-wees) and couch potatos ( sofa).

Can you provide a citation on that study of the crossbow hunter's personal habits? Hopefully it compares the Trads and the compound bow users as well.



So think about that when you are able-bodied, chose not to bowhunt before, but now want to go buy a crossbow and enter the quiet October woods and mock the true woodsman archers. We see you. When you run in to one of us on the woods trail, we'll be sizing you up in our minds ... You'll always have that in the back of your mind.

What makes you believe anyone is going to give a second thought to what a few good old boys in Northeast Louisiana think of them?

[LampLighter]

No crossbows. This thread is closed.

[ncboman]

No crossbows. This thread is closed.

If you'll send a $50 donation to the site, I might ok it.

Otherwise, this thread's not closed until I say so. :cool:

[Altjaeger]

If you'll send a $50 donation to the site, I might ok it.

Otherwise, this thread's not closed until I say so. :cool:

$25for you and $25 for Swamp?:D:D:D

[Altjaeger]

No crossbows. This thread is closed.

You found that source on the statistics yet? The ones about the fat, cigarrete smoke, chee-wee eating counch potatoes that hunt with crossbows yet?

[ncboman]

$25for you and $25 for Swamp?:D:D:D

:D

Swamp can have it all. I'll donate my part to the site fund. ;)

[Scout]

Fellas...quit trying to drag this out with your fancy logic and facts and common sense and such. The thread is now closed. So let it be written....so let it be told:D

Besides.....if it goes on much longer....someone might try to smash it with a sledge hammer and throw it in the garbage pile out back of the shed!

[LampLighter]

Otherwise, this thread's not closed until I say so.
__________________



It is done.

[Altjaeger]

It is done.

I don't think I want it it close until I see the source of those statistics.:D

[LampLighter]

Never Question Authority. ;)


I see you http://mapper.acme.com/

[Altjaeger]

Never Question Authority. ;)


I see you http://mapper.acme.com/

Where?

You found that source yet?

[LampLighter]

You might as well give it up about me posting any link to studies involving fat people using crossbows. Ever see one of those chinese finger trick things where you stick a finger in each end, and the more you pull trying to get your fingers out, the tighter it grabs the fingers ?

Use that as an analogy. The more you run your mouth and try to altimate me, the more you will not be shown what you want. Never question Lamplighter. My proof is on the wall. It says Bacelor of Arts in ....
It is on the wall also on a polyuratheyne covered plaque that says Agent of the year . You see, I know human nature too well, and I took statistics and I did do a study in my senior year. Therefore you should never question me. When I say jump, you say "how high?"

Now, you want an altimatum? Post the answer to my long asked question of WHY when before, the able-bodied persons could have bought a bow-and-arrow, learned to use it, and joined in but Chose Not To, but now Wants to participate in the early archery season with a crossbow ? Why before chose not to, but now wants to ?

Answer that and maybe I will give you the privledge of accessing the fat people study.

[GF.]

:eek::eek::eek::eek:


Pretty cool party trick, there LL :D

Got any chocolate chip?

[Scout]

Oooo....Ooooo...I wanna answer this one.

"Now, you want an altimatum? Post the answer to my long asked question of WHY when before, the able-bodied persons could have bought a bow-and-arrow, learned to use it, and joined in but Chose Not To, but now Wants to participate in the early archery season with a crossbow ? Why before chose not to, but now wants to ? "

Is it because God and the US Military gave us the RIGHT to CHOSE??? I'm right ain't I? I've always been good at these types of games;)

[My buddy]

You might as well give it up about me posting any link to studies involving fat people using crossbows. Ever see one of those chinese finger trick things where you stick a finger in each end, and the more you pull trying to get your fingers out, the tighter it grabs the fingers ?

Use that as an analogy. The more you run your mouth and try to altimate me, the more you will not be shown what you want. Never question Lamplighter. My proof is on the wall. It says Bacelor of Arts in ....
It is on the wall also on a polyuratheyne covered plaque that says Agent of the year . You see, I know human nature too well, and I took statistics and I did do a study in my senior year. Therefore you should never question me. When I say jump, you say "how high?"

Now, you want an altimatum? Post the answer to my long asked question of WHY when before, the able-bodied persons could have bought a bow-and-arrow, learned to use it, and joined in but Chose Not To, but now Wants to participate in the early archery season with a crossbow ? Why before chose not to, but now wants to ?

Answer that and maybe I will give you the privledge of accessing the fat people study.

Damn, I thought when you said the thread was closed multiple times that you were going to leave....

Then you post some more blather. WTF are you even taling about?

BTW, speaking in the 3rd person is pretty pompous. But I expect nothing less from you at this point, as it is obvious with your selfish attitude, that you think you are more important than everyone else.

[45seventy]

The answer to your question LL is.... 'That they can!'

[GF.]

Well, Scout, that'd be the big question, wouldn't it?

First, let's agree that we're fortunate enough to live in a country where we have the right to choose which one (or more, in most cases) of several deer seasons we want to hunt.

We have the right to choose which one, but we don't necessarily have a 'right' to all of the choices provided to us.

Huh?

I don't believe the F&G departments are under any particular obligation to provide the 'additional' opportunities that we have in bow and muzzleloader seasons; consequently, it's my position that these seasons are privileges for which individual hunters must qualify by using the prescribed equipment.

And as with all privileges, these can be lost if abused.

So again, I maintain that if the majority of hunters were to come to the belief that having stretched the definition of 'archery' equipment to include Xbows constitutes abuse of the privilege - a breach of the gentlemen's agreement under which bow seasons were authorized - then archery seasons as a stand-alone proposition could be eliminated by the will of the majority.

We'd all still have the right to choose to hunt with tradbow, crossbow, smokepole, in-line or centerfire, mind you, just all in that One Big Season I like to call OBS.

So here's your analogy...

Once upon a time, bow seasons were part of a vast meritocracy among hunters. If you were willing to put in the effort to learn to shoot a recurve or longbow, you earned the opportunity to hunt with it. And if you were a skilled enough hunter to get within your own effective & ethical range, you could 'earn' the occasional deer through your own talent, hard work and dedication.

And this being the Land of the Free, the opportunity to hunt the bow season was open to all comers, regardless of race, color, creed, ethnicity, education, socio-economic status or sex-yool orientation. It was the perfect level playing field, and all ya had to do was wax up the string of a longbow or recurve and sharpen up yer heads.

But then the social engineers known as 'deer herd managers' and 'legislators' decided to make this opportunity 'accessible' to more participants, and under the affirmative action program called the compound bow, they were able to expand the opportunity to include those who were less hard-working, less-dedicated & less-skilled as hunters, yet provide these newcomers with the same opportunity and in many cases even more success than the tradbow shooters who had come before. It was better for everyone, so the compound shooters said, so even though those nasty old conservative tradshooters complained about unfair competition and a reduction in their own 'earning potential', it was decided - by the Democratic process - that everybody was better off this way.

And then along came Hope for the downtrodden masses of gun hunters who had never even considered working hard enough to become successful bowhunters, even under the affirmative action compounds - Hope, in the form of the crossbow. And when the election came to pass, the never-before-a-bowhunter demographic came pouring out to vote in numbers that the majority of 'bowhunters' had never dreamed possible; but they had Hope, they had the voting power, and they were by-God ready to take their rightful place as the ruling majority and claim their 'fair share' of hunting opportunity. It didn't matter that they hadn't the talent or the work ethic of the prior generation, because they were in Power, and they were entitled to all of the same opportunities, rewards, and benefits as those crabby, irrelevant trad-shooting conservatives.

And they all lived Happily Ever After. :rolleyes:

Except the tradshooters, of course, who went quietly insane with grief over what once had been and now would never be again.

[dave-t.]

they were able to expand the opportunity to include those who were less hard-working, less-dedicated & less-skilled as hunters,

:rolleyes:

[GF.]

Gotta have some fun! :D

[Scout]

Well, Scout, that'd be the big question, wouldn't it?

First, let's agree that we're fortunate enough to live in a country where we have the right to choose which one (or more, in most cases) of several deer seasons we want to hunt.

We have the right to choose which one, but we don't necessarily have a 'right' to all of the choices provided to us.

Huh?

I don't believe the F&G departments are under any particular obligation to provide the 'additional' opportunities that we have in bow and muzzleloader seasons; consequently, it's my position that these seasons are privileges for which individual hunters must qualify by using the prescribed equipment.

And as with all privileges, these can be lost if abused.

So again, I maintain that if the majority of hunters were to come to the belief that having stretched the definition of 'archery' equipment to include Xbows constitutes abuse of the privilege - a breach of the gentlemen's agreement under which bow seasons were authorized - then archery seasons as a stand-alone proposition could be eliminated by the will of the majority.

We'd all still have the right to choose to hunt with tradbow, crossbow, smokepole, in-line or centerfire, mind you, just all in that One Big Season I like to call OBS.

So here's your analogy...

Once upon a time, bow seasons were part of a vast meritocracy among hunters. If you were willing to put in the effort to learn to shoot a recurve or longbow, you earned the opportunity to hunt with it. And if you were a skilled enough hunter to get within your own effective & ethical range, you could 'earn' the occasional deer through your own talent, hard work and dedication.

And this being the Land of the Free, the opportunity to hunt the bow season was open to all comers, regardless of race, color, creed, ethnicity, education, socio-economic status or sex-yool orientation. It was the perfect level playing field, and all ya had to do was wax up the string of a longbow or recurve and sharpen up yer heads.

But then the social engineers known as 'deer herd managers' and 'legislators' decided to make this opportunity 'accessible' to more participants, and under the affirmative action program called the compound bow, they were able to expand the opportunity to include those who were less hard-working, less-dedicated & less-skilled as hunters, yet provide these newcomers with the same opportunity and in many cases even more success than the tradbow shooters who had come before. It was better for everyone, so the compound shooters said, so even though those nasty old conservative tradshooters complained about unfair competition and a reduction in their own 'earning potential', it was decided - by the Democratic process - that everybody was better off this way.

And then along came Hope for the downtrodden masses of gun hunters who had never even considered working hard enough to become successful bowhunters, even under the affirmative action compounds - Hope, in the form of the crossbow. And when the election came to pass, the never-before-a-bowhunter demographic came pouring out to vote in numbers that the majority of 'bowhunters' had never dreamed possible; but they had Hope, they had the voting power, and they were by-God ready to take their rightful place as the ruling majority and claim their 'fair share' of hunting opportunity. It didn't matter that they hadn't the talent or the work ethic of the prior generation, because they were in Power, and they were entitled to all of the same opportunities, rewards, and benefits as those crabby, irrelevant trad-shooting conservatives.

And they all lived Happily Ever After. :rolleyes:

Except the tradshooters, of course, who went quietly insane with grief over what once had been and now would never be again.


Yea....that's what I said....:D

[Altjaeger]

You might as well give it up about me posting any link to studies involving fat people using crossbows.

Never question Lamplighter. My proof is on the wall. It says Bacelor of Arts in ....
It is on the wall also on a polyuratheyne covered plaque that says Agent of the year .

Now, you want an altimatum? Post the answer to my long asked question of WHY ...

Answer that and maybe I will give you the privledge of accessing the fat people study.

Do you mean ultimatum?

As far as answering your question many others and myself have answered it. You simply do not like the answer. The question is irrevelant to the topic.

My certificate also says Bachelor of Arts but is spelled correctly and is in an envelope filed away. I also have mine own awards and medals for service to our nation. The certificates for them are filed away as well.

But the real truth bottom line as I believe everyone knows is that those statistics do not exist except in Lamplighter fevered and runaway keyboard. :D

[LampLighter]

:p:p:p:p:p:p:p


Well, it needs to get cold so we will all have something to do. :)


I hear the 10x model is the better one.

[Altjaeger]

:p:p:p:p:p:p:p


Well, it needs to get cold so we will all have something to do. :)


I hear the 10x model is the better one.

Well is has cooled off tolerably and I am heading out in the morning for three days of kayaking, camping and fishing, from a base camp this time. Maybe you can have it all sorted out when I get back. :D