Post by: Straitshot on April 27, 2007, 11:36:00 AM
Louis
Post by: Ray Hammond on April 27, 2007, 02:17:00 PM
what WERE his remarks? Can you paraphrase?
Post by: beachbowhunter on April 27, 2007, 02:36:00 PM
Post by: bm22 on April 27, 2007, 04:07:00 PM
basically his remarks were
the easier and more technologically we advance and the easier it is to kill game the more they are going to have to set limits and make the seasons shorter. we are getting to good at killing stuff w/ the high powered compounds and rangefinders. they will be the end of the liberal hunting seasons.
Post by: DarkeGreen on April 27, 2007, 04:16:00 PM
It's nice to see folks being a little more truthful these days. Folks should know what they are getting themselves into when they switch to traditional, otherwise they just think they suck at it. ;)
Post by: One eye on April 28, 2007, 10:25:00 AM
dan
Post by: TSP on April 28, 2007, 10:53:00 AM
I understand and identify with the concern of Norm, Dick Robertson, and some (seemingly fewer all the time) trad followers on this issue. But, as a group its sure hard to understand why the average modern day stickbower calls the compound kettle black when our own ranks are constantly turning a darker shade of gray.
!["[dntthnk]"]("graemlins/dntthnk.gif" "\"\"")
Post by: fflintlock on April 28, 2007, 11:18:00 AM
Now it's "trophy" time in the woods. Publications and tv are full of it. How to kill more and bigger game with extended seasons and their prepective weapons.
Used to be rifle season, 30 30 , slug gun, etc then bow season, recurve, long bow, wood arrows. Now look at the vast array of weapons one has to choose from.
We'll probably hunt ourselves right out of a hunting season.
I have'nt read it yet, but I look forward to it though.
Post by: Roadkill on April 28, 2007, 11:56:00 AM
Post by: Stone Knife on April 28, 2007, 11:59:00 AM
Post by: Tom Mussatto on April 28, 2007, 12:31:00 PM
I don’t think the compound is the biggest factor here. The introduction and large scale use of the compound came about around the same time as the proliferation and wide scale use of the portable treestand. I think the portable treestand has had a much bigger impact on archery hunting than the compound bow, and not just for whitetail. I’ve heard of guys hanging portable stands on power poles and windmills for antelope, in trees over wallows for elk, calling varmints form treestands, and even guys using them to hunt groundhogs. The success rate would drop more without the use of treestands than it would without the use of compounds. Since many stickbow hunters use treestands this issue really isn’t one about trad vs mod equipment but about hunting methods.
We hunt small game today much the same as we did 30, 40, and 50 years ago. Given all the advancements in equipment over that time has the success rate on small game risen? I doubt it, and it probably won't until somebody finds a way to make big bucks off of squirrels and rabbits like they now do deer and elk.
Post by: ethan on April 28, 2007, 01:00:00 PM
Post by: Molson on April 28, 2007, 02:12:00 PM
Very good posts. There's alot more truth in what both of you said than most are willing to accept.
Post by: Stone Knife on April 28, 2007, 02:52:00 PM
Post by: GEREP on April 28, 2007, 04:09:00 PM
Deer in my neck of the woods have long ago adapted to the use of treestands. Anyone that has ever hunted Michigan whitetails would most certainly agree. Deer around here need chiropractors due to the fact that they look up so much. Some of my hunting buddies are even convinced that it is now EASIER to hunt from a well placed ground setup that it is to hunt from a tree.
Hunters adapt and before you know it, game adapts. Yes, success rates have increased but nobdy seems to want to admit that it is due at least equally to the fact that we have three times the deer that we had 40 years ago. When I started bowhunting, there were between 50,000 and 100,000 thousand bowhunters. Now in Michigan there are 300,000 plus, (95% being compound shooters) not to mention the 700,000+ firearm hunters. All these hunters, all this technology and the only way to reduce deer numbers was to offer one doe permit PER DAY in most areas.
Sorry guys, you can count me in the group that does not think the sky is falling.
:thumbsup:
KPC
Post by: bm22 on April 28, 2007, 04:24:00 PM
i also believe a large reason for the numbers coming up in alot of the country is due to the hunters looking for quaility, large rack animals. alot of people have quit shooting the first deer they see and calling it "freezer meat" and are allowing the animals to live and thus breed more before being shot. the numbers in alot of the south east counties in texas have the new minimum horn rules in place to allow the deer to grow. and from what i have heard from people hunting these areas the deer numbers are doing great.
now i am not say that the hunt should be only be about the horns but it shouldn't be shoot everything that walks out.
Post by: Strutter on April 28, 2007, 08:35:00 PM
Post by: Ray Hammond on April 28, 2007, 09:48:00 PM
And anyone that hunts whitetails in the East from treestands has observed over the last 10 years that DEER LOOK UP, like they never have before. I see deer adapting to tree stand use so much that hunting ground blinds can be a real effective way to take deer.
In fact, I took two deer this year by placing a shirt on a hanger in my stand, and walking 150 feet away and sitting in a brushpile. The two does I shot were walking on a main trail that passed the stand, and I shot both of them while they LOOKED at my stand in the opposite direction from me. They never knew what happened.
Post by: xia_emperor on April 28, 2007, 10:15:00 PM
I don't think the sky is falling yet.
Post by: jonesy on April 28, 2007, 10:28:00 PM
Post by: LC on April 28, 2007, 10:34:00 PM
Post by: xia_emperor on April 28, 2007, 10:50:00 PM
Post by: jonesy on April 28, 2007, 11:10:00 PM
Post by: LC on April 29, 2007, 12:02:00 AM
I personally don't think most hunters are trophy hunters either. The key word their is "trophy". The local DNR holds a annual bowhunters survey where huntes volunteralily report times hunted, game seen, taken etc. They post the resulsts every year and the kill percentage hasn't changed for eons but the percentage of bucks and does sure has. 90% of the bowhunters hold out and kill a bucks "trophy" . Now that may be a spike, four point etc cause their truly ain't that many trophy bucks in my home state and killing bucks doesn't do alot to reduce deer population as all us true hunters know. They've expanded the doe seasons here every year for the last several years but still never meet their expectations by hunting. Why? My believe based on talking to local hunters is as stated above most guys do not butcher their own deer and are not gona pay to have 7 does butchered every year. Especially considering the macho mind set it ain't macho to kill a doe. Think about it how often do you see a picture of someone with a doe as compared with a buck. Years ago the local newspaper would include pics of bowhunters with does! Now adays he'd better be a new state record or close to it.To prove the point for the last couple years locally you cand send in your pic with game taken for a small fee of $20 to the local paper. I've not seen one picture of someone with a doe. All of this above is to back up my point that just because you still have long bow seasons doesn't mean all is well with hunting in general.
Post by: snag on April 29, 2007, 01:29:00 AM
Post by: GEREP on April 29, 2007, 07:21:00 AM
I have friends that routinely shoot 300 with over 55 X's on the NFAA 300 round yet still manage to completely miss or worse yet, wound deer at normal hunting ranges. Regardless of what the marketing says, technology quite often does not translate into hunting success. Actually, I think it could be said that it very seldom translates. Traditional or modern, bowhunting is still about scouting, playing the wind, getting close and being able to close the deal. All the technology in the world isn't going to help you if you don't hunt where the game is. Another 100fps isn't going to help you much when the buck of a lifetime comes in down wind. Fiber optic sights don't do much good when all you see in them is a white flag. Last but not least, when we shoot an indoor NFAA 300 round, there isn't 6 hours between shots in sub freezing weather and fortunately Mackenzie targets never jump the string. (well, at least not usually but I swear I've seen it happen...lol) Sometimes I really have to laugh at what I read on some of these sites. Literally, how many hundreds of times have we all read and even wrote about how traditional equipment is the "better" hunting equipment? How many hundreds of times have we read about switching back to traditional because of all the things that can and do go wrong with modern equipment in the field? How many hundreds of times have we heard that switching to traditional has made us "better hunters?" Now we want to say the sky is falling because all those things that don't work in the field, are working to well in the field?
:confused:
I guess the argument could be made that technology does attract more hunters and therefore when you have more hunters vying for a finite resource, limitations on seasons and bag limts may have to be made but I think that's a stretch. If we say we want more hunters to protect what we enjoy (the right to hunt), we must also be prepared for what additional boots on the ground means. Personally, what I think it all boils down to is that many of us don't want other's hunting "our" elk, or "our" deer or "our" bear. At the end of the day, it has very little do do with wheels, sights or back tension releases. In my home state of Michigan, if we had 375,000 traditional bowhunters, and no modern bowhunters, would things really be all that different than what they are today? I don't really think so.
:campfire:
KPC
Post by: jonesy on April 29, 2007, 08:13:00 AM
Post by: Straitshot on April 29, 2007, 03:39:00 PM
He also hinted at our unwillingness as a whole to exercise selfcontrol over our incessant need for easy success. Unchecked it becomes like the proverbial snow ball. Once it begins rolling it grows larger and larger. If one's desire is to move from a primitive culture to a more modern and advanced culture then unlimited technology is a good thing. However, unlimited technology in a primitive sport will eventually only render it modern and ultimately the loss of it's true identity. At some point it will loose those identifying marks that first drew us to it. My point being that our constant unabated selfish desire to always want to make things easier for our own success, to take more and bigger game, or to shoot bigger and better scores than someone else, only fuels the flames of technological advancement. To keep the sport of bowhunting a "Primitive" sport requires limits, and limits will require selfcontrol on both our parts, compound and traditional, if future generations are to enjoy the sport as we have been able to enjoy it.
Louis
Post by: yleecoyote23 on April 29, 2007, 03:45:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by Straitshot:Well said Louis.
To keep the sport of bowhunting a "Primitive" sport requires limits, and limits will require selfcontrol on both our parts, compound and traditional, if future generations are to enjoy the sport as we have been able to enjoy it.
Louis
I also enjoyed the article/interview about Norm. He sounds like a very insightful person.
Post by: tim roberts on April 29, 2007, 09:49:00 PM
So what can be done to keep the "Hunting the Hard Way" identity closely assoicated with bowhunting, and more so with traditional bowhunting? Some think that the best way to do this is to dictate the gear that we can use, including the materials that some of it is made from. Others belive that re writting the rules to the record books is a way to go, and there are many other ideas out there. Myself, I have to agree some what, on redefining what a trophy is. When it gets down to the nuts and bolts of this issue though, I feel that education is a meaningful way of handling this. In the Tim Pool, and before era of bowhunter education there was a lot of time and a lot of information in the bowhunter education manuals about the history of modern day bowhunting. Today in the M. Bentz era there is but a few small paragraphs, that do nothing more than mention a few names, not much at all about what they did to promote bowhunting. Very few "Newbies" today know of, Ishi, Will Compton, or Glenn St.Charles, and the list goes on. In todays world it is go buy a bow put on all the latest greatest gadets, sprinkle with water and a bowhunter instantly appears.
A very large part of the Traditional Values of Bowhunting, is working and practicing to become more profecient with the gear that we choose to hunt with. Work and practice is not something that the ATA can package and sell, so it has no value to them, but to those of us who still belive that hunting the hard way is the way to go, it means everything, and when everything comes together it can't be bought for all the money in the world!
>>>Tim------->
Post by: MCNSC on April 29, 2007, 10:40:00 PM
Mike
Post by: Orion on April 29, 2007, 10:50:00 PM
Post by: ChuckC on April 29, 2007, 11:09:00 PM
ChuckC
Post by: johnnail on April 30, 2007, 06:55:00 AM
Tom, your comment reflects one I've held for many years. I know YOUNG guys who are so fat and soft, they couldn't stand the hump of hunting all day in the mountains, and "accomplished" hunters who only know how to hunt from a tree.
The above was not meant as a slam, only to show how very Easy and scientific bowhunting has become. It's a long way from the old "walk in the woods" idea.
I don't mean to sound holier than. Only to point out what I believe to be a wrong turn we've taken.
Post by: GEREP on April 30, 2007, 09:38:00 AM
The "technology train" is one that each individual has to make a choice as to where to get off. Many people seem to want to draw the line coincidentally, right at where they got off. Interesting huh?
Norm himself stated in his interview that he has switched to a CNC machine in the production of his bows. Can it be construed that he himself has given in to the trappings of technology? I certainly don't think so but it certainly could be implied by some of the opinions here. Or is it that bowyers can use all technology available but the end users (hunters) can't?
Could someone please explain to me how "Individual A," in an attempt to make a living doing what he loves, endorses products that he uses, uses modern equipment, writes books and articles, etc. can be labled as a pariah on the sport, accused of being in it "just for the money" and has lost all sense of what "bowhunting was meant to be."
Now, "Individual B," In an attempt to make a living doing what he loves, uses the utmost in computer technology to increase production, uses what he thinks are the best and most suitble materials for his product and in effect endorses them because after all, he sells them, even though they may be on the cutting edge of technology, maybe writes books and articles for about "traditional archery and bowhunting" and somehow this individual is a "keeper of the flame?"
Everyone is entitled to their opinion but it seems that a little consistency would be in order.
Just my humble opinion, but what do I know? This is coming from an overweight, 40 something guy that has hunted with a bow and arrow for over 30 years, that chooses to hunt deer from treestands, bears over bait, spot and stalk hogs, pheasant on the wing and carp in the shallows and porcupines that chew my cabin in any lethal manner I can find, including but not limited to a baseball bat. :thumbsup:
KPC
Post by: IndianaBowman on April 30, 2007, 12:53:00 PM
“Wow, what a buck! He’s 60 yards out, but I can make the shot;” Bubba thought to himself. Bubba drew his 85% let-off, 70#, dual cam compound bow, with his three ball-bearing ultra smooth trigger release, and settled his 60-yard fiber optic pin on the buck. Upon squeezing the trigger the rest dropped away and the 200-grain, spiral wrapped carbon arrow with the 85-grain expanding mechanical head was on its way! At 330 fps it only took a nanosecond for the arrow to find its mark. The buck traveled about 50 yards before expiring in a heap. Bubba was ecstatic! He couldn’t help but think to himself that his carbon-filtered camo had kept the buck from smelling him. He was also proud of himself for shooting a buck he had on film from his trail camera. The buck was indeed magnificent. Five matching points per side and long tines and width. The buck would surely score well above the P&Y minimum. Bubba’s first buck eligible for the “books”!
Many would see this as a fantastic example of what bowhunting embodies today. Utilizing every technological advantage to take a great animal. It was all completely legal and exactly what the outdoor hunting shows depict on a daily basis. So, what’s wrong with the above scenario? The 60-yard shot, the scent shielding suit, the ultra fast bow, the trail camera, the 85% let-off bow?
The above scenario fails to address one of the core elements of a successful hunt, the chase! Only half of the equation was satisfied, the kill! To kill is not success unless accompanied by the chase. Vance Bourjaily eloquently stated this interrelationship in his article “Hunting is Humane” in the February 15, 1964 issue of the Saturday Evening Post. “The two parts of the sequence must occur together, or there is no satisfaction. Killing, and this is generally misunderstood, is not pleasure at all if the challenge of hunting does not accompany it.” Most will agree that the feeling of accomplishment, pride, satisfaction, and culmination of a truly successful hunt, is not the size or score of the animal harvested, but in the effort and energy expended in the pursuit! In fact, a truly successful hunt often times does not even include the killing of an animal. Robert Ruark summarized a short anecdotal quotation as follows: “There was a Russian school of acting which once maintained stoutly that a good tragic actor had to suffer. The same must be true of all hunters… The value of a trophy is computed directly in terms of personal investment in its acquisition.” Theodore Roosevelt was also a student of the chase, as evidenced in the following quote: “Of course in hunting one must expect much hardship and repeated disappointment; and in many a camp, bad weather; lack of shelter; hunger; thirst, or ill success with game, renders the days and nights irksome and trying. Yet the hunter worthy of the name always willingly takes the bitter if by so doing he can get the sweet, and gladly balances failure and success, spurning the poorer souls who know neither.” I would venture a guess that Bubba is a poor soul.
I doubt Bubba is alone in his lack of knowledge concerning the chase. Bubba is most likely a late 20s to early 40s guy who grew up on instant information and gratification. The television and Internet have brought a whole world of information and experiences into his home at the touch of a button. The problem lies in that the whole story is not being shown or described. It is simply a glimpse of a series of events and a choreographed ending to provide instant gratification and satisfaction to Bubba. What are we to expect of Bubba? All he knows is that you can purchase product “X” and have nearly instant success as depicted on TV. Of course, success doesn’t come that easy; therefore there must be another short cut or gadget that Bubba overlooked. The killing of game ultimately comes, but at the expense of shortcutting the wilderness experience. The technology available allows this! It is technology that most threatens our sport of bowhunting. Not only for traditionalist, but also for all bowhunters. As technology advances and shortcuts emerge the chase is lessoned and the kill increased.
Dedicated seasons for bowhunting were developed in recognition of the fact that bowhunting is supposed to be hard. The allotted days a field were apportioned in direct relationship with the degree of difficulty for attainment of management goals. Success rates for bowhunters are soaring, and it is only prudent to expect the allotted number of days a field to be reduced. I also submit that the chase is also lessoned as described above. This interrelationship of technology and diminished “thrill of the chase” is described in the following quote from Aldo Leopold: “Our tools for the pursuit of wildlife improve faster than we do, and sportsmanship is a voluntary limitation in the use of these armaments. It is aimed to augment the role of skill and shrink the role of gadgets in the pursuit of wild things… I have the impression that the American sportsman is puzzled; he doesn’t understand what is happening to him. Bigger and better gadgets are good for industry, so why not for outdoor recreation? It has not dawned on him that outdoor recreations are essentially primitive, atavistic; that their value is contrast-value; that excessive mechanization destroys contrasts by moving the factory to the woods or to the marsh. The sportsman has no leaders to tell him what is wrong. The sporting press no longer represents sport; it has turned billboard for the gadgeteer. Wildlife administrators are to busy producing something to shoot at to worry much about the cultural value of the shooting."
Hunting in general is also threatened by technology. The days when the public perceived the hunter as one who matched wits with the beasts on a level playing field are long gone. Gone also is the prestige and allure of the sportsman. Theodore Roosevelt described the past allure and the sportsman as follows: “In hunting, the finding and killing of the game is after all but a part of the whole. The free, self-reliant, adventurous life, with its rugged and stalwart democracy; the wild surroundings, the grand beauty of the scenery, the chance to study the ways and habits of the woodland creatures – all these unite to give the career of the wilderness hunter its peculiar charm.” The charm is gone and the public now sees a fully gadgeted nimrod heading a field to slay the defenseless creature. Technology has eliminated the defenses of the prey. Instinctive safety zones of game have been breached. Superior eyesight, sense of smell, and the desire to procreate are all addressed and manipulated by technology to increase kill rates.
It is the general non-hunting population who will determine our hunting future. If the degradation of the hunter, in the minds of Joe Public continues, they will legislate out our ability to pursue game.
I choose to self-limit and pursue game, not just kill it. I choose this for the reason verbalized by Sitting Bull, “when the buffalo are gone, we will hunt mice, for we are hunters and we want our freedom.” I want my freedom and to use every form of technology and gadget available ensures nothing more than “Techno Death”.
A closing prayer to our future by Saxton Pope: “May the gods grant us all space to carry a sturdy bow and wander through the forest glades to seek the bounding deer; to lie in the deep meadow grasses; to watch the flight of birds; to smell the fragrance of burning leaves; to cast an upward glance at the unobserved beauty of the moon. May they give us the strength to draw the string to the cheek, the arrow to the barb and loose the flying shaft, so long as life may last.”
Post by: doctorbrady on April 30, 2007, 01:02:00 PM
The one and only thing that differentiates us from compound shooters is our equipment. For various reasons, we as traditional bowhunters choose to keep it simple. Most of us do it because of the personal satisfaction that we get through the accomplishment of hitting our mark without the aid of formal sight aids or gadgets. That said, most of us shoot bows or arrows which are manufactured through the same high tech processes as the compound guys. We should be very careful to not make this a "we are better than you" endeavor. You see how that mentality has already overflowed to include "less traditional" traditional bowhunters. If you're shooting a stickbow so that you can shake your finger at someone who is not, you've missed the point, in my opinion. Traditional bowhunting is a personal journey. What each of us gains is a little different, as is our equipment. Still, we all struggle to be a little better archer, hunter, and woodsman and should be careful in our finger pointing and criticism of others who do it just a little differently.
Post by: johnnail on April 30, 2007, 01:22:00 PM
Post by: doctorbrady on April 30, 2007, 02:39:00 PM
Percentage wise, I am sure that there are just as many out of shape guys shooting self bows and more modern traditional gear as there are compound shooters. All of us would like to see everybody in this sport of hunting to be better woodsmen. We like to see guys like Schafer who can carry themselves and their buds out of the mountains on their backs. However, most will never be able to do that, no matter what kind of hunting gear they have in their hands. It is easy for us to say that these high tech recurves or souped up compounds are destroying our sport by allowing "slob hunters" into our ranks. Though it takes less time and effort for most to shoot a compound than it does a stickbow, that doesn't make all "techys" bad hunters, or even less of a hunter. In fact, I suspect that it is all the gadgets that have turned so many folks back to the basics of traditional gear. It may be the very process that has increased our numbers. I stopped shooting compounds 15 years ago when the fun stopped. If it ever happens with trad gear, I will start using a slingshot :) . Still, it's unfair to catergorize an entire group of hunters or blame them for the potential destruction of our hunting seasons simply because we don't choose to shoot such equipment.
Post by: WildmanSC on April 30, 2007, 02:59:00 PM
Bill
Post by: DesertDude on April 30, 2007, 03:12:00 PM
Mark
Retired Navy and Father to a Marine
Post by: John Nail on April 30, 2007, 03:44:00 PM
Post by: doctorbrady on April 30, 2007, 05:34:00 PM
True enough. I love traditional bowhunting because of the joy that it brings to me through the "struggle." It demands a certain amount of my time and effort to remain a good traditional bowhunter. It's just easy to pass off someone who doesn't seem to struggle or work as hard at it, but it's my joy from my effort I receive in the end.
Bill, you are absolutely right about Rick. I have stood beside him when he made some amazing shots on critters. This is not a short range sport for him.
Post by: GEREP on April 30, 2007, 06:15:00 PM
Good point...which I think leads us right back to what I stated before. I guess it just all depends on when you choose to get off the technology train.
After all, bowhunting in it's earliest form was indeed the "easy way." It was developed as an easier method than hunting with a spear, which of course was developed becuase it was easier than using a rock or club. To many, using modern archery equipment IS the hard way. It is harder than hunting with a gun. Every one of us is on his or her own journey. Who am I to tell the young man that picks up a compound because shooting deer at 200 yards with a rifle has lost it's lustre, that he is less a hunter than me. To him, he IS taking the road less travelled. Not any more or any less the the experienced hunter that decides to craft his own bow and arrows out of chunk of osage and some river cane because that happens to be where he is on his own personal journey.
The vast majority of the people on this site have hunted with more modern equipment at some point in their lives...some still do. I started with traditional gear because that's all there was. I hunted with a compound for years and a number of years ago, I came back to where I get the most enjoyment. I am no different today than I was when I shot a compound. The idea that a recurve or longbow in someones hand somehow transforms them into a more spiritual, ethical, thoughtful bowhunter is offensive to me, and quite frankly detrimental to bowhunting as a whole. I just think we need to be very careful how we categorize people based on what they shoot and where they choose to get off the train.
Back to the original point of the thread, the idea that technology is going to be the ruin of bowhunting. I just don't think that argument is supportable. Game populations indicate otherwise. Hunter numbers may very well become a problem or availability of hunting land may become a problem but technology in and of itself is not the problem in my opinion.
:campfire:
KPC
Post by: Bonebuster on April 30, 2007, 09:08:00 PM
Honorable pursuit, the thrill of the chase, has been lost by too many hunters for the public not to notice. The kill has become too important. The more technology a hunter uses to achieve the kill,
the less honor the public sees in the whole affair.
I don`t believe it is technology in itself that is to blame. Just take a good look around. People are just different. Too many people want something for nothing. Hunter Joe wants to shoot a big buck to impress everyone. So he buys everything he can to make it easier, and quicker.
He is the same guy that gets mad if he has to wait for more than thirty seconds in the drive-thru to get his burger.
I`m worried about the things to come. Not just the future of hunting. I for one, am doing my best to show the honor, and truth about hunting, as I am sure you are all doing the same. And we don`t have to hunt with a recurve or longbow to do it.
Post by: Nate Fikkert on April 30, 2007, 11:24:00 PM
You can't compare loosing opportunity in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, to Utah, Nevada, or Arizona. In the latter states residents quite often can't draw tags to hunt. Tags are alloted based on success rates. If a game department wants to harvest 20 elk, and the success rate is 50%, they give out 40 tags. Now, in this typically open type terrain, with spot and stalk/ground hunting being the predominant method of hunting, the difference between 25% success rates and 50% success rates often is the difference in shooting 30 yards and shooting 60 yards. The more people who take animals at 60 yards, the higher the success rates are, and the fewer tags are handed out, decreasing opportunity. This is where technology decreases hunting opportunity.
I went to a 3-D shoot this past weekend. There were 42 targets. Maybe, and I mean maybe, 5 were in the 20 yard range. A few more in the 30's, but the vast majority were 40, 50, 60, and up to 88 yards. The youth stakes at the longer shots were in the 50's and 60's. IS THIS WHAT WE ARE TEACHING THE NEXT GENERATION OF BOWHUNTERS??? Bowhunting is no longer about getting close and loving every minute of it. It is about getting "close enough" and flinging an arrow.
Are bowhunters in the Mid-west/east going to loose hunting opportunity to technology? Probably not. Will bowhunters who live in the west and those who want to hunt in the west be affected by technology and subsequent higher success rates be affected by a loss of hunting opportunity? I think it has already happened.
Nathan
Post by: GEREP on May 01, 2007, 07:11:00 AM
You bring up a very interesting point Nathan. I live and do most of my hunting in Michigan and when I do go out of state, it is still on this side of the country or Eastern Canada. I cannot comment on what it is like out west becuase I don't have any experience there. I will have to take your word for it and I have no reason to doubt you.
What I do find interesting though is how regional differences can mold one's opinions on what is or is not "right" considering bowhunting methods. For example, being from Michigan, I can't for the life of me understand why you would be so concerned about the things that you are concerned about. On the other hand, I have been told in no uncertain terms by a couple of westerners that hunting bears over bait is simply unethical and should be banned. In that wide open spot and stalk country of yours, I could see why one might think that. You western folks are welcome to come to the upper peninsula of Michigan or Wisconsin or Northern Ontario and try that if you'd like...but I will give you one tip. Leave your binocs and spotting scope at home, instead, bring a machete and a brush hog. ;) I have friends that actually use a string tracker when they bear hunt. Not attached to their arrow or to find their bear mind you, but when they shoot a bear, they tie it to their tree so they can find their way back. :scared: (no, im not kidding)
I guess this goes to show us all that there are no cookie cutter answers to all our "problems."
KPC
Post by: Talondale on May 01, 2007, 09:52:00 AM
Quote
IS THIS WHAT WE ARE TEACHING THE NEXT GENERATION OF BOWHUNTERS??? Bowhunting is no longer about getting close and loving every minute of it.As I remember it the early bowhunting white man was all about shooting game at 75 yards +. Look at how Pope, Young, Hill, Bear, et al. hunted. Didn't the LDB take a caribou at over 100 yards? Sounds like they were flinging them too. At some point someone said to themselves: "I know I can kill them far out now let me see how close I can get." Well now it's come full circle. They are saying: "I know I can kill it close, let's see how far I can kill them." To them the distance has now become the challenge, not the closeness. Can they be proficient at a longer distance than most? Same motivation - different outcome.
As far as the accusation that those who use modern "gadgets" are taking the easy way out. I propose that maybe they are seeking the most proficient and ethical methods given the limitation of a bow. Most guys I know who hunt compound want to be good at it and be able to shoot where they want and have confidence in their ability to kill the animal quickly and clean. That is a goal to be applauded. Their not using more primitive weapons often stem from their lack of confidence in their ability to effectively use that weapon. This may be unfounded but it is the right decision to not use a weapon they don't feel confident with.
I also think it's a mistake to assume an universal reason for everyone using primitive weapons. I, for one, don't use a bow because it's hard. I use it because it's fun. I like the romantic image of the bowyer, the thrill of up-close encounters, the fun of making my own equipment and accessories, the simplicity of pointing and shooting rather than using sights, the beauty of the early bow season. If it was a constant struggle for me I'd probably not do it, but with a moderate level of effort on my part I can be proficient enough that I feel confident in going afield with my bow. I feel no compulsion to put as many obstacles in the way of my success as possible. I don't feel I have to make my own arrows and such in order to feel a sense of accomplishment. I may make some of my own stuff but that's just because the project seems fun, not because it's hard.
We're all wired differently and it's usually a mistake to paint with a broad brush. I don't think technology is going to be the end of hunting, but public perception may be. We need to make sure our image is clean and that our message gets in front of the public as much as PETA's/Disney/Greenpeace does. We have to foster a positive public personna in the pop culture and in the classroom. Think about how many kids wanted to learn to shoot a blackpowder and a bow from watching Davey Crockett and Daniel Boone. Education and entertainment are the key to securing our hunting future.
Post by: sidebuster on May 01, 2007, 10:57:00 AM
"Get Close" "Experience The Tradional Way"
In my opnion we hunt for the sport of it and not for the need of survival. I feel we must respect the game and give the game every opportunity the ability to detects us. If we hunt from far away and the animal cannot detect us then I am not equal with the game. I try not to use any high tech items. like special scent inhibitors, camo clothing, carbon clothing etc that give me a greater edge than the game I am hunting. I want my shot to be no greater than 15 yds. I use the wind in lieu of scent destroyer and make sure I am clean of sweat. When the animal is close I move very little or move very slowyly. I want the animal to know that something is not just right but I was able to outsmart him using the major senes , of sight, smell and hearing that I and the animal have. I know that it is almost impossible to rid of all technology, especially on the glass bows and high end string material, high end arrows but you can try to lessen your high tech items. My greatest hunting experience was using a wood selfbow, common string and home made cedar arrow and harvesting a buck at 12 yds. I enjoy the challenge but only with the least amount of technology and in trying to be as equal to the game as possible.
Post by: Frank V on May 01, 2007, 03:47:00 PM
Post by: Nate Fikkert on May 01, 2007, 06:53:00 PM
Just wanted to clarify a few of my points. First, I can't prove this but I am pretty sure its true because of talk I hear, I believe wounding rates have increased with higher shot distances. That is why I used the term "flinging". Second, my use of 50% success rates was somewhat of a hypothetical. Wyoming archery elk success hovers around 15%, I am not sure what Utahs is. I imagine quite high in the Limited entry areas, and quite low in the general elk areas.
Talon, have you been out west? Do you know the demands on the resources out here? Range, timber, recreation, development, etc. Summer and fall habitat is never the problem. Big game animals in the west depend on winter range. Problem is, most of the prime winter range is looked upon by people as prime real estate. I am all for saving habitat, saving animals, and creating more opportunity. My point is, that is not going to happen. Hunting dollars, can't really compare to real estate, ski-resort, golf course dollars. Overall what I am saying is most game and fish departments manage strictly on a numbers basis, and they don't care how they hit the numbers. Unfortunately, they have more of a job of people management than game management.
I am not necessarily saying most guys use modern gadgets for the easy way out. I know plenty of guys that shoot modern equipment, but they still have the "heart" of a bowhunter. I have no problem with this, and these aren't the guys "flinging" arrows and wounding critters. The issue I have is technology creating "instant" bowhunters. This is where Talon's point of public perception is spot on. These are the guys giving us a bad name, they have no respect for bowhunting.
I remember first reading "Trailing a Bear" and I couldn't believe the shots Fred Bear and his companions took at game. They would definately be considered "unethical" by many today. But they were trying to turn bowhunting into something. Now we(some)are trying KEEP bowhunting something. There is a big difference.
Anyway, good points everyone, I just wanted to bring the east/west perspective to light because there are some differences.
Nathan
Post by: Nate Fikkert on May 01, 2007, 06:55:00 PM
I grew up in Wisconsin and have spent the last 3 1/2 years living and hunting in Wyoming, and now Utah. I feel I have a pretty good grasp of hunting on both sides of the Mississippi.
Nathan
Post by: Jeff Strubberg on May 01, 2007, 08:23:00 PM
In my home state bowhunting is such a non-issue that year-round seasons have been brought up several times.
If our success rate was 100%, the impact would still be negligible. There simply aren't that many bowhunters.
Post by: Plumbob on May 01, 2007, 09:43:00 PM
In my opinion poor shot selection and poor follow up are to blame most of the time. Once or twice a year I end up helping on a lost Elk to find that the person is not sure where the bull was, where they were, and so on.
Experience is hard to come by, yet everyone wants to be succesful now.
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on May 02, 2007, 11:58:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by snag::clapper: :clapper: :clapper:
Game management? Heck, in some states like Oregon they have made laws that have turned predators into their management tools...and if it keeps going this way the predators will replace us as the ONLY management tool...wolves are crossing over into Oregon now. Look what they have done in parts of Idaho. This is just what the environ-tree hugging-tofu eating crowd want. No hunters, just nature.
Tear em up Snag!!! I agree 100% the environmentalists and animal activists that have slowly Califonicated Oregon, have got the poor game commission running in circles. We can't bait bears, or use hounds anymore...and now the dad burn things are moving into the city trashing out garbage cans! They did the same thing with cougars! The average sightings of cougar in Oregon has risen ten times in the last two years....I saw one myself in broad daylight right down in the camping area last fall....it's just a matter of time before we start loosing kids again.....you watch! You guys back east with seven doe tags should come out west and fight the tree huggers for awhile....I'm hoping they open an either sex hunt on them myself....it's disgusting.....The advanced technology in compound bows isn't helping matters much out west either....the best we can hope for is "Traditional archery only Seasons" which is likely...it won't be long and the compounders are going to be dodging bullets and hunting with the rifle hunters out here....Kirk
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on May 03, 2007, 12:21:00 AM
Quote
Originally posted by Plumbob:I'm not far from you bro...and it's the same story on the Oregon coast.....the technology of the compound bow is giving the average archer the ability to shoot much further distances accurately.....well maybe the CAN shoot 6" groups at a target at 60 yards....most of em can't hit a pie plate at forty! But these guys are out there shooting up to 80 & 100 yards cross canyons!!!! I/ve seen these yahoos flock shooting at elk herds like this!!!!.....This is the main reason why i have chosen to go traditional. I was guilty myself....the last two elk i harvested were at 50 & 60 yards.....I'll bet i tracked a dozen other elk people shot at that distance that were never found...I shoot year round and could group arrows at 4" at 80 yards....Those animals don't stand still for the full second it takes the arrow takes to get there guys......I'm done with it myself....I'm going to take my elk with a long bow at 12 yards this year, or not take one at all.....
I have enjoyed this thread, some great opinions. I would like to add that in my small corner of the world the pressure to be successful is unreal. Speaking mostly of Elk, {and archers in general} there is some type of shame associated with not notching a tag. Last year alone the amount of bulls that were "stuck" and loss were shocking. {Amazing how it doesn't bother some people}
In my opinion poor shot selection and poor follow up are to blame most of the time. Once or twice a year I end up helping on a lost Elk to find that the person is not sure where the bull was, where they were, and so on.
Experience is hard to come by, yet everyone wants to be successful now.
90 percent of the animals harvested,(Not just killed or wounded) are annually taken by 10 percent of the hunters....That is a fact!....I plan on staying in that 10 percent area myself......Kirk
Post by: Nate Fikkert on May 03, 2007, 12:21:00 AM
Nathan
Post by: GEREP on May 03, 2007, 08:22:00 AM
"This is the main reason why i have chosen to go traditional. I was guilty myself....the last two elk i harvested were at 50 & 60 yards.....I'll bet i tracked a dozen other elk people shot at that distance that were never found...I shoot year round and could group arrows at 4" at 80 yards....Those animals don't stand still for the full second it takes the arrow takes to get there guys......I'm done with it myself....I'm going to take my elk with a long bow at 12 yards this year, or not take one at all....."
So let me make sure I have this right. When it comes to your journey, you have decided that harvesting elk at 50 and 60 yards just wasn't satisfying anymore so you made the switch to traditional. Now should we legislate that everyone else do the same? I can assure you that the same slugs that would "flock shoot" elk across a canyon with a compound would do the same think with a recurve, longbow, or slingshot. The equipment that you choose does not determine your ethics.
My mother used to say "honesty is like pregnancy...either you is or you ain't." I suspect the same thing can be said about ethics.
It seems to me what this all boils down to is that we constantly hear about how we need to "pass it along." We need to encourage more people to hunt, we need to protect our way of life. We just don't want them hunting the land WE hunt or "our" game.
Last but not least,and make no mistake about this. The anti hunting crowd hates ALL hunting. If you think for one second they like us more becuase we kill "nicer" or because we "do it the hard way," you are sadly mistaken. Once they have taken out the "modern" crowd, they will come after us in a heartbeat. They know what they are doing by taking a little bite here and a little bite there but the ultimate goal is to stop all hunting. If we turn our backs on our modern counterparts, it will most surely come back to haunt us. Sad to say, perception is reality. When they do the "shocumentary" on bowhunting, do you want the video taken of the guys "driving tacks" at 50 yards with their compounds or do you want them taking the video at most of the trad shoots we all attend? You know, the ones with those beautifully crested cedars sticking out of the neck, the legs and the hams of the foam deer, all shot from 18 yards?
If we want bowhunting to last, we cannot let the romance of what we do cloud the reality of what we are up against. Those that wish to take it away do not care one bit that we carved our own bow from an osage stave, or that we wear wool plaid and a Fedora. In their minds, we are killing Boo Boo and Bambi. The weapon is simply not relevant.
:campfire:
KPC
Post by: IndianaBowman on May 03, 2007, 08:32:00 AM
Post by: GEREP on May 03, 2007, 08:48:00 AM
"It's not about the anti hunters. It's about the non-hunting 80% that have no strong allegiance one way or another. If our public perception slips they will gain an opinion."
You are so right...but unfortunately that's not the whole story. It IS the anti hunters that are setting the agenda and painting the picture for the 80%. Unfortunatley, in our zeal to paint ourselves as the "good killers," and them (modern bowhunters) as the "bad killers," we are in effect doing their job for them. Once we have been successful in achieving what we think we want, we will no longer have the numbers or the clout to effectively fight anything and hunting as we know it will be over.
:readit:
KPC
Post by: pseman on May 03, 2007, 09:55:00 AM
Ditto everything GEREP has said.
By the way, if you're not some sort of official spokesperson for hunting, you should consider it. You make many excellent points.
Post by: GEREP on May 03, 2007, 10:07:00 AM
ARE YOU KIDDING?? I'd just be happy to be the "official spokesperson" for my family. As it stands right now, it's my 11 year old daughter.
:knothead:
:biglaugh:
KPC
Post by: Talondale on May 03, 2007, 10:50:00 AM
Quote
Talon, have you been out west? Do you know the demands on the resources out here?Nate, I've fished and camped WY,CO,OR,WA,AK,and MT but I've never hunted any of it. The regulations always seemed too convoluted for my tastes. I'd like to though. So I'm no expert at west hunting but I do understand the dynamics and that some species have too large of a homerange to ever get their numbers near what they are out east. Even if we could that wouldn't be best for the species health anyway. I understand what you're saying though. We have similar issues here with farmland being bought up to make subdivisions. Thankfully whitetail are able to adapt if there's any type of habitat left intact. Habitat improvement isn't going to solve the problems out west but it can be a part of the solution. I can't believe that all good habitat is being snapped up by real estate when in some states out west the Feds own 80% of the whole state unless the 20% the don't own are all the valleys. :)
As far as tree huggers setting the agenda I think it's like most politics: The squeeky wheel gets the grease. Most Americans are decent hard working people who don't have an opinion either way and are busy leading their own lives. A few malcontents dedicate their lives to poking their noses into everyone elses life and if they can make enough noise to get the attention of a large segment of the populace who are busy running their own lives they can sometimes move them to do their bidding based on misrepresented "facts". Most of those same people could be just as easily persuaded the other way if they were made to see things from our perspective but usually they don't have the time to listen to two camps argue so it's usually the group that gets to them first that wins. That's why control of the popular culture (entertainment and "news") are important. Unfortunately those two areas tend to lean the wrong way. I'm not sure the one person at a time approach will work swiftly enough for us to forestall the oppositions plans.
Post by: GEREP on May 03, 2007, 11:00:00 AM
BULLSEYE !!!!!
To carry that one step further, if those "malcontents" can manage to get one segment of the the hunting community to do their bidding for them (which apparrently they are able to do) it makes their job infinately easier.
We as bowhunters, modern or traditional, should not be willing to let that happen, much less encourage it.
:campfire:
KPC
Post by: IndianaBowman on May 03, 2007, 01:18:00 PM
Post by: doctorbrady on May 03, 2007, 04:57:00 PM
I am not familiar enough with the regs out west to chime in on the battle of lobbying for traditional only seasons. In the south and midwest where I do most of my hunting, it certainly doesn't make any sense. There is just too much game. I can see the argument, perhaps, in quota areas, but even there I don't think a few gadgets on folks' bows make them that much more successful in the field. Can they shoot 50 instead of 30 yards? Maybe, but how much difference does that make. We tout ourselves as hunters and woodsmen in one breath then gripe that the "slob hunting gizmo guys" are killing more game than us. Am I missing the point. If the techys are killing more stuff than us...and they are, it is primarily because there are more of them, and...I hate to say this, they can shoot better than most traditional guys...even at 20 yards. Should we have limited seasons just for guys that shoot badly so that they don't take as many critters? Surely not. Personally, I am more successful in the woods than most of the compound shooters I know, simply because I put in the effort. It doesn't anger me that I shoot all year and they only have to shoot the week or two before season. I like to shoot anyway. It doesn't tick me off that they can hit the kill zone on a deer target every time at 50 yards when I can't. I'll just get 20 yards closer to critters I want to kill. There are definitely differences in equpment, but they don't separate us by THAT much. Rest assured, if any state opens longer traditional only seasons, there will be a lot of guys picking up stickbows the week before season and trying to take game. A good example...when I was a teenager, my folks owned an archery shop in Arkansas. Not too far away in Oklahoma they started having primitive weapons hunts on one of the military bases where there were some whopper deer. A lot of guys would put in for the draw, and when they got drawn they would come in wanting to buy a recurve for their upcoming hunt. That doesn't help us. It hurts us.
Lastly, like it or not, this is a perception game with the non hunting public. On our side is the fact that we are "doing it the hard way." Against us is the fact that most of us can't hit a quarter at 50 yards, or even 20, every shot. The easiest way for the antis to paint us as the bad guys is to paint us, the traditional bowhunters, as the slobs because we are less effecient hunters. It is the same argument that has been used to shut down bow seasons in other countries while preserving rifle hunting. They care less about the number of critters that we take than how effeciently we dispatch them. Our strength is being the most effecient, ethical, and humane hunters that we can be and being able to articulate why we do what we do to others. Our strength is also in numbers. This is one of many reasons why we shouldn't malign other law abiding bow hunters. States simply don't sell enough tags to traditional bowhunters to make an archery season even worth their time. I, personally, don't mind being in the company of techy bowhunters. It's simply not the way I choose to hunt. Keep up the positive discourse.
Post by: Jeff Strubberg on May 03, 2007, 05:55:00 PM
Be a good neighbor. A good parent. Involved in your community.
Let folks know occasionally that you hunt. That type of one on one impression lasts a heck of a lot longer than a tv spot.
Post by: joebuck on May 03, 2007, 08:01:00 PM
Post by: **DONOTDELETE** on May 03, 2007, 09:20:00 PM
Quote
Originally posted by GEREP:
[QB] One other thing that I think is important and should be mentioned is this notion that modern compound bows are 80 yard killing machines.
I agree, modern bows have gotten pretty technologically advanced. Having said that,
not much has really changed in real life bowhunting situations.
Horse feathers!!!!
What has changed is the type of hunter carrying a bow.... the real life bowhunting situations are being ignored....the modern technology is giving a killing instrument which doesn't even look like a bow any longer, to wanna-be -hunters who don't respect our sport.....
Whether we choose to use traditional equipment or modern equipment, bowhunting is primarily a "30 yard and in" endeavor. For probably 90% of all bowhunters, its "20 yards and in."
This statement is absolutely false in present day.....
Maybe that WAS the case....but not any longer.....Take a good look around....
If in using the term "Bowhunters" you ment The True bow hunters, who respect the sport..... i'd have to agree with those figures.....There are not as many TRUE bow hunters out there any more as you would like to believe.....we are the minority......
Yes, its easier to become proficient with modern equipment. Yes, you can be accurate out to pretty impressive yardages.
Having said that, I know very few if any compound users that would take a shot at live game at anywhere close to those ranges"
Obviously you really are not paying much attention to the majority of the modern bow hunters in the woods these days.....THEY ARE the majority now....the fact that you don't KNOW anyone that does that kind of shooting has nothing to do with FACTS....The FACTS are...that they outnumber the conscientious bowhunter, and do take ridiculously long shots, and wound as many animals as they harvest....These "So Called Bowhunters" give the true bowhunter a bum representation......in the public eye, it don't look good....
(and quite frankly, those that would try shots at those ranges would probably try the same stunt with their recurve or longbow) Yep, you have 50 or 60 yard stakes at the 3D events but how often don't we read about all the trad guys and gals that routinely practice out to 80 yards with there recurves and longbows?
Good point here....but just how much practice would it take to be proficient with a trad bow out to 60 & 80 yards?
A guy can buy one of these new rocket launchers out there, and become proficient enough with sights to do the deed in two weeks.....
That's the whole point I'm trying to make here....the technology of compound bows is mutating into something that is not archery hunting any more....But they still call it archery hunting because they are still spitting arrows......it's nuts!!!
Post by: Straitshot on May 03, 2007, 09:39:00 PM
As we all know there are responsible compound bowhunters just as there are responsible traditional bowhunters and those traditionalists who take the holier-than-thou attitude over their responsible compound counterpart are way out of line. Thankfully, I have not sensed that here. The problem at hand does not lie simply in whether or not I shoot a compound or traditional equipment, but instead in a mind set that has permeated our culture to include not only our thinking but also in how we persue the things that bring us pleasure. Tragically it's about our Americanized incessant push to find the easy way to any and everything. It doesn't matter what gets lost along the way as long as my itch gets scratched first and often. The ends justifies the means, as long as I am number one. We don't want to have to work for it and we certainly don't want to have to make any sacrifices for it. We just want what we want and we want it RIGHT NOW with little, or better yet no effort. I believe this selfish type of mind set only fuels a growing need for easy unearned success and whether we like to admit it or not there is an industry anxiously waiting to satisfy that need for the next gadget that will make our habitual desire for easy success even easier. I have heard it said that our constant desire for more is only superseded by our desire to supply more.
It is my personal belief that the incidents we sometimes see on the internet or the nightly news about the goose, deer, or other animal attempting to survive after being shot with the field point tipped arrow was more than likely done by one of those irresponsible want-to-be "bowhunters" eat up from head to toe with this selfish easy success mind set. Is this the mind set our children are learning to accept? Is the mind set that teaches honesty, hard work, patience, and self control being gradually eroded away?
I do see traditional and compound archery as two different paths. There are similiarities yet there are some ways quite different. Is one path better than the other? That is for each to choose and decide for himself, but what is required regardless of which path you take is to act responsibly and with integrity. In my personal oppinion we need to earnestly seek and recapture a mind set which taught us that success is weighted not only by the end results but also the means by which it is accomplished.
Thanks, Louis
Post by: IndianaBowman on May 04, 2007, 07:08:00 AM
I also appreciate the civil manner of this thread. Thank you to everyone.
Post by: GEREP on May 04, 2007, 09:03:00 AM
"A guy can buy one of these new rocket launchers out there, and become proficient enough with sights to do the deed in two weeks....."
If you are attributing this quote to me, sorry I didn't make it...nor do I agree with it.
With all due respect, you refer to "FACTS" that are just simply not facts at all. It may well be your experience or your perception of what may happen in your neck of the woods, but its just not happening as you describe it in my neck of the woods. I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a fact, but I suspect you can take this one to the bank. There is certain segment of the hunting population that is going to push the limit in regard to ethical shot distances and hunting tactics. What some people fail to realize (or simply just deny) is that this is a personality flaw, not an equipment flaw. Do you think for one second that if we legislate equipment limits, all the unethincal "hunters" are simply going to change and become what you refer to as "real bowhunters" or just give up bowhunting all together? How naive is that?
I sense that this thread is starting to get a little personal so I'm going to bow out. Before I do however I would like to reiterate one thing. For the betterment of hunting, we MUST get beyond this notion that there are "real" bowhunters and something else based on chosen equipment. We MUST also get beyond this rediculous notion that just because you carry a longbow or recurve, you are somehow more worthy and you are doing the right thing as far as carrying the torch. I have been to quite a few traditional shoots and I can say quite confidently that either the good shooters choose not to shoot, or the effective range of the masses is about 7 yards (give or take about 4 yards) but they all get a pass because the carry the right stick and carry a leather back quiver.
Last but not least, technology is not what is going to threaten bowhunting. This constant bickering about what is "real" bowhunting and what is not, and the FACT that many of us seem to be more than willing to throw other hunters hunder the train in an attempt to get what they want is what is eventually going to end bowhunting.
I know it's not popular but the truth seldom is.
:wavey:
KPC
Post by: ChuckC on May 04, 2007, 02:04:00 PM
If it becomes illegal to hunt, or fish, or own a gun...then what ? I am not so certain I will just put my "stuff" away and listen. I have a feeling there are a TON of others who feel the same. Then what ?
This opens the door to lots of unsavory thoughts, and it worries me greatly.
I hope I am worrying for nothing.
ChuckC
Post by: IndianaBowman on May 04, 2007, 04:02:00 PM
I also agree that what you are toting around in the woods does not define you as a hunter. It is how you act when no one is looking!
Post by: Labs4me on May 04, 2007, 09:35:00 PM
Why is it that, with these meat and potato variety topics - i.e., these politically touchy issues- that the "who's who" of bowhunting never seem to offer up an opinion. Surely you are following this post and have an opinion on the topic.
What say you, Byron, Gene, Barry, Ron, Tim, et al.
Post by: Van/TX on May 04, 2007, 10:01:00 PM
Post by: LC on May 04, 2007, 11:19:00 PM
Good point Van. I think that would be most of the fine folks that have replied to this thread and all the others who have just read through it.I think the cream of the crop visit this site.
Lots of good points and thoughts from both sides of this issue. Heres my final thoughts on this issue.
Some folks in a nutshell says that with all the advancements we have in a archery it's still a 20 yard and in sport, thats where most of the killing takes place. Thats true without a doubt. I'd be willing to bet that most kills are around 25 yards and under. Notice I said kills. Problem is there are lots of folks that take longer shots with the same equipment because of all the advertising and 3D shooting are convinced they can make longer shots with poor results. My best bud works at a professional archery shop. The folks come in there all the time and drop 8 hundred on a bow,100 on fiber optic sights with 6 pins, 80 on a release, 120 on a drop away rest, 120 on light weight carbon arrows. 50 on open on impact broadheads. Are they doing this to go bowhunting and only take 20 yard shots? They go to 3D ranges to shoot where the average shot is probably 35+ yards.I've been to a couple that didn't have a single 20 yard shot on the course. They leave there satisfied they can consistently hit what they are aiming at to 60 yards. Do most of them wait or pass on shots till one comes into they 20 yard range. From the stories I hear regularly I regret and hate to say it but NO.
I agree totally just because of the equipment you carry doesn't make you a ethical bowhunter. I too know several "compound" hunters that are top notch moral and ethical hunters. I also know several "trad" hunters who should be spending more time at the practice butts. I regularly hunt with a compound hunter who will not take a shot over 15 yards even though he can regularly bust a ping pong ball at 30 yards!! By the way he hunts strickly from the ground also.
Lastly I'd like to restate my arguement that just because your local wildlife populations are still too high with even all the "modern high tech" weapons that all must be well is bull crap. Reread what I posted earlier I still stand by it, too many folks are caught up in the "trophy" only hunting and are not taking enough deer for management purposes. I honestly think most every state now adays could have a deer a day season and still not meet the quota. Why? Simply most guys will not shoot does anymore and simply because most pay to have their game processed and are not going to fork over the money to process any number of deer. Sad they'd get some great venison if they'd learn or take the time to process their own.
I've been very fortunate to bowhunt from as far north, south, east and west on this continuent as one can go and my pereceptions seems to be the same where ever I go so I personally don't think it's a matter of loacality as to how this debate is seen.
Post by: Brian Krebs on May 05, 2007, 12:52:00 AM
The bowhunters the public saw were mostly in the time between the time it took to change reels at the movie theatre.
Fred Bear and Howard Hill were the most seen guys out there. Fred was a gentleman; Hill was more of a showman- not to 'nock him'; it was just his way.
Both were though HAVING FUN when they shot.
So were other people. Goodness sakes; Robin Hood shooting and splitting his own arrow was a cool thing was it not?
But we saw as kids- people shooting bows accurately and taking game consistantly. But fun; it was moderated as fun; and done with fun built right into it.
I shot a Ben Pearson that I lent out before I went into the service; and when I got out- people were shooting compounds. The local sporting goods store only sold compounds. I bought a compound.
I went though from having fun; to missing and looking at my bow. Did the cables stretch; was my sight off; and missing was no longer something I could laugh at- my god I had to find out WHY I MISSED!
I have told the story before about shooting a bear whitetail hunter; which had more wheels than a semi- and shooting little groups at 30 yards.
Then I bought some razorback 5 broadheads and shot them; and missed the hay bales completely.
Know what this dumba$$ did? I called Fred Bear. I didn't know him save shaking his hand at the museam he had; but I got his phone number and called him up!
Gosh what a guy! He told me eventually that my fletch was not helical; and that I needed to get some helical fletched arrows.
It worked; but jeepers; he talked to me for an hour while we tried to figure out what my shooting problem was.
Fred did it because he loved archery; and wanted everyone to love it.
I started hating missing - I had compounds break in half in my hand in competition because I wanted that arrow to be totally perfect. I got target panic; and when one bow broke in competition and the company gave me a brand new- newer model.. I went out carp fishing with it. I sold it; took the money and bought a takedown Bear recurve.
I missed shots; but when I did; I had to think about what 'I' had done wrong.
It was all about me. The bow worked good enough to kill a running ground hog at over 30 yards; and if I missed a buck at 6 feet; it was MY doing.
I have never looked back.
What I do see is that money in our society can buy anything you want. Anything.
Handfed deer and elk - shot with BB guns to make them 'wild' for the guy with the money. High fences; high standards...not about how much fun you had; but how big a bull or buck or bear you got.
I have gone to many shoots where there are compound shooters and trad shooters; and can anyone say that they have been to such a shoot and not seen the way the two differ? Stakes for the trad shooters right next to the stakes for the kids with compounds.
But the laughter is coming from the trad guys. That is a fact. I have been in competitions many times when the trad guy stranger says ' here shoot my bow' right in the middle of the competition!
Because he was having fun; and I was having fun; and shooting someone elses bow and arrow set up is FUN!
Remember Fred Bear shooting at the Grizzly bear and missing; and how he let the moderator make fun of him? He was a serious hunter; but he saw the humor in missing!
What scares me the most about this whole situation is when I hear ( and I have) compound shooters say they want 'profeciency testing'; and when they say they don't mind giving up "THEIR" bow season time to keep a little longer time to hunt with a gun.
Here in Idaho we had a game biologist; the head game biologist tell anti hunters in an anti-hunter group that bear baiting should be outlawed because " with the new compounds- anyone can take a bear with a bow nowdays!".
He was a great guy; he said something that he felt as a gun hunter looking at bow hunting. Fact was and is- in the same seasons; a gun hunter can sit in the treestand over bait and they certainly have an accuracy advantage and a range advantage- but he pointed out the technology advances of compound bows.
Here is something I have NOT heard here yet; and that is that the law has changed when it comes to muzzleloaders. A convicted felon can no longer get out of jail or prison and hunt with a muzzleloader because they are not a primative weapon anymore.
I am not a convicted felon or a convicted misdemeanor person- but that decision should have shook us.
Because - the court could see that the new muzzleloaders : inline; gauranteed out of the box accuracy -- made the muzzleloader a weapon; a real weapon that bad guys should not have.
And 'bad guys' can mean and do mean to many- from antihunters too non-hunters:too hunters!!.....'people that could not pass a profeciency test'.
Wake up. Just look at what just happened in Africa! four years ago I talked with a judge that has now retired to hunt full time in Africa.
He told me 4 years ago that "rich people were buying presighted compounds and going out and making bad shots on game".
Look what happened.
That was numbers of hunters; and people that were not devoted to bowhunting and only devoted to getting 'credit' [sic] for shooting something with a bow.
It is soooo hard for us to get together on anything as bowhunters because we come from different localities with different realities.
In some states hunting is a RIGHT; in most a 'priviledge'. The numbers of animals to hunt varies; the amount of public land and the preasures on it varies; and we all come from the angle of knowing our own situation and making judgments from that and that alone.
I am guilty too.
Vans comment about letting them do away with the bow seasons and see who hunts then - quite frankly makes me ill. I do not at all disrespect Van- gosh we all love him. But getting to the point where archery seasons are gone to see what things would be like is perhaps a funny jest; but in reality-- it is where we are headed.
Because we are afraid to stand up for what we believe in; and we don't even have a grasp of that - that we can put into words.
Collectively the anti hunters are acting with tons of money behind them in one direction; and we hunters are going ten different directions and none of us seem to accept the challenge of taking a stand.
And we had better.
Recently the horrible shootings at Virginia Tech ended up with the "realization" [sic] that we need to stop people from getting guns ( weapons people weapons- and now muzzloaders are weapons) from people who are judged ' a danger to themselves or others'.
WE have a whole bunch of veterans coming back home that are exceeding the Veitnam percentage of the existance of PTSD.
Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
And it looks like those people; as they are a danger to themselves or others by definition of the condition: are not going to be able to own a weapon.
"thanks for watching your friends die and be maimed for life- and bravely serving your country" "now that the effects of being in a war longer than WW2 have hit you- ask for help: and you CAN NEVER OWN A GUN OR MUZZLELOADER OR BOW AGAIN!!"
Do I want people to know that there is a difference between the compound bow and the traditional bow? YES!!
We see on tv 99% of bowhunters waiting for the chance to "pull the trigger" ( on their release) and send an arrow flying. And that's not the way I see bowhunting.
And yes I think its time we drew a line and said this is the way traditional hunters look at bowhunting; and this is the way compound bowhunters look at it.
And I do not want to be in the compound hunter definition. Even though as pointed out it doesn't mean less desire or commitment to be either.
Look at your tvs people. Your kids are; the non hunting kids are! Do you know what "JUST ROAR" means to US???
I don't believe most lemming intentionally fall to their deaths of cliffs. I think they get in the group and when it gets too big they get pushed where the group gets pushed to.
Lets not let that happen to us; because while we joke and twidle our thumbs the anti hunters are out there recruiting kids against us in MASSIVE numbers.
I know it is easy to just run from it and go have some fun shooting your bow- just like I do and will continue to do.
But trust me; if we do not wake up to reality; we will be pushed off the cliff with guys who slap down big dollars to kill high fence tame animals and call it hunting.
Again- look at Africa; and remember that our new game biologist are people trained to look to the future; and that future right now that they see is what is availible for them to see!!!
I remember Marion Johnson- do you Gerep?
Post by: GEREP on May 05, 2007, 07:46:00 AM
I wasn't going to post on this thread anymore but since you directly asked me a question, I thought it would be rude not to respond. No, I don't remember Marion Johnson.
As a side note, I shoot traditional equipment becuase I enjoy it. Like you, I think it's fun. If it isn't about fun, I don't want to do it any longer. When my buddies and I shoot a 3D course, whether it be for fun or competition, it still is all about a good time. Anyone that knows me outside of this forum will most certainly tell you that seriousness is not one of my strong points. Having said that, I don't know how you can reconcile the two beliefs that one needs to be dedicated, ethical, and in keeping with what traditional bowhunting values are supposed to be and yet find it "funny" to miss shots on game. In my opinion, the only thing good about a "miss" is that you didn't make a poor "hit." Missing shots on game makes me sick to my stomach, as I think it should. Even worse is hitting an animal poorly. I also believe that when someone decides to release an arrow on a living creature, it's pretty serious business. If that release results in a miss, in my opinion, reflection on "why" is indeed in order. Was it me? Was it my equipment? Did I pick a spot? Was my shooting lane clear? Did I shoot at the most opportune time? Was the animal calm? Was he moving...and on and on and on. When I miss an animal, I want to know why. I don't ever want it to happen again, even though I know it probably will.
With all due respect Brian, one thing I do find funny is the notion that people are attracted to traditional equipment because then they have no excuses. "It's not the equipment, it's me..." Let's be honest with ourselves here. We are all human beings. How many bows have you personally owned in the last ten years? Have you tried different arrow materials? Different broadheads? Tip weight? Arrow weight? Different string materials? I know I have. If most of us wern't constantly looking for THE right combination of equipment (the Holy Grail, if you will) most custom bowyers would be out of business. We all want to shoot better and score when it counts. May I ask you a "do you remember" question now? How many times, in all the threads that you have read, on all the traditional archery forums that you visit, have you read "Well boys, my new XYZ bow doesn't shoot nearly as good as my previous 13 bows, as a matter of fact it don't shoot worth a Da**, but she's a keeper cuz man is she pretty? Let's face it, if equipment didn't matter and it was all about "us" the classifieds would be empty and we both know thats not the case.
I don't know you Brian but I do respect your opinions. For all I know, you only shoot primative equipment of your own making. If this is the case, my hat's off to you and the above does not apply to you, seriously. But you and I know it applies to the VAST majority of us.
One thing I do find funny about this whole crazy sport is when I read the posts of some people that want to keep things simple, the way they used to be. You know, never looking for the easy way out, never looking for the "edge," never giving in to the trappings of technology...then two days later I hear (read) the same person saying that they just got their new ACS or their new DAS. How they are getting the energy of a 50 lb bow and they're only shooting 43 lbs. (NO, I don't think this is a bad thing so all you ACS and DAS fans, take a breath...lol Heck, I've got a modified Hoyt Gamemaster that I love shooting.) We just need to be honest with ourselves and be consistent.
As I said before, let's not let the romance of what we all do cloud our judgement about what we are up against with those that want to put an end to it all. I know, I've been told on this very thread that the "big tent" does not work. Tell that to the lone wolf trying to take down a moose.
:saywhat:
KPC
Post by: Ybuck on May 05, 2007, 11:53:00 AM
Post by: Brian Krebs on May 06, 2007, 06:15:00 AM
In the fifties and sixties and early seventies; Marion Johnson; who had a habit of lighting matches with his thumb; used to go to the Michigan legislature and warn that the chemicals being dumped into the marshes and waters of Michigan was a horrible thing that needed controls.
Every year he testified to that; and every year he was laughed at; and then; when the situation was that he was right; others stepped in and became the warriors.
He was forgotten. He was a 'nobody'. He also was right.
He lived at least part time near the Chippawa river near Barryton; where I met him through my Uncle Dan Robbins; who was a leader in conservation movements in Michigan. When he had a disabling stroke that in time led to his death; he was totally forgotten.
I say what I say; not to gain notority; I have learned that its just not the point; and way to seldom to your credit.
I know Gene Wensels movie is really good; but its already seemed to fall from our attentions.
And it is really good for all hunters; and traditional hunters the same.
Brian
Post by: korn stalker on May 06, 2007, 01:27:00 PM
Post by: Brian Krebs on May 06, 2007, 06:07:00 PM
Post by: doctorbrady on May 07, 2007, 06:06:00 PM
My guess as to why some of the "who's who" are not talking has to do with the politically charged nature of this debate. When you earn part of your living from trad folks, you stand to alienate yourself from either the self described "purists" or the "big tent" guys by taking one side or the other.
As for me, I am who I am. I have my own beliefs as dose everyone hear, yet I respect the beliefs of others...even when I think they are a little misguided :) . I continue to agree with GEREP point for point. I commend you for clearly stating and supporting your beliefs. I continue to see some of the same old "we're better than them" mentality which saddens me for our sport. Some, I believe, do things simply so they can feel a little superior than another. It's human nature, I guess, but unfortunate.
I guess, in the end, this will be a debate often argued, but never settled. There will always be strong opinions on both sides. The best that we can do is respect one another's choices and beliefs, and live as good stewards and examples of our sport. Best wishes to everyone who participated in this discussion.