bigcountry Did I say Fred Bear wounded a lot of animals ? He writes in his field notes that he missed a lot. Only one wounded animal I remember reading about so far. I don't doubt he did wound animals, he didn't write about them though as far as I know.

You really overthink things and have a conspiracy theory mind, did you know that ? I'm not trying to trap anyone, I'm discussing the man who made traditional archery what it is, he forged it, almost single handedly. Without his mass production bows, his many patents on archery equipment including fiberglass, the millions of bows and accessories he sold ......... archery might not have ever gotten to where it is. Certainly others did much too - Fred had the spot light though, and was a great inventor of new ideas.

That said, I don't think we can really say he was ........ less smarter than we are today, do you ?

You said

I again ask how ?

Traditional isn't a state of mind - no way ever I can shoot my Mathews Q2 and claim it to be traditional and it BE traditional because I claim it so. It don't work that way, just like calling a puppy a kitten - its not, never will be.

I'm certain Fred Bear could outshoot anyone who's posting on this thread. I'm cerain he could outshoot most traditional hunters period. I'm also certain his hunting skills were better than anyone elses on Hunting.net and his love for the wilds and the animals were equal to or exceeds everyone here. I beleive that not in idoization of the man, its just who he was, nothing more, nothing less.

So why would a man like that take shots that today's trad shooters wouldn't ?

Its a compelling question. I don't think Fred would have taken a shot he didn't think he could make, do you ? But that he missed a lot .......... is that simply part of the Hunt ?

I think intent is the key. If I took 20 shots this year, had confidnece I could make all 20, missed 16 deer, wounded 3 and killed 1 ....... is that ethical ? Why or why not ? I was 100% certain I could make the shots, they just didn't fall.