This topic seems to have evoled into, "What grouop takes the most ethical shots?" There appears to be an opinion that the more difficult the method, the more ethical the hunter. If I hunt with a longbow, then I will not be tempted to shoot out of my effective range. If I hunt with a rifle, then 700 yard shots are taken all the time, because I might get lucky.

I've hunted with a recurve for 15 years, a compound for 20 years and a shotgun intermittently for 35 years. In that time, I knew lots of hunters that participated in each. I found that in every group, there were hunters that would shoot at animals out of their effective range. The temptation was just too much for them when game was just out of optimal range. I've never noticed that their weapon of choice had anything to do with it. In these groups there were also those who would never take a questionable shot, regardless of the weapon used.

My opinion is that it's the person, not the weapon that determines whether a hunter will only take high percentage shots. I will grant you that the traditional archers may have a greater percentage of ethical hunters, but if you take away hunter's other options, I guarantee you that the unethical hunters will use traditional equipment and continue to be just as unethical. Forcing them or even encouraging them to be part of the traditional archers doesn't make much sense to me. It may mean even more wounded animals, because they won't have the skills to hit a deer in the kill zone at 5 yards. Personally, I prefer to let each group hunt with as much technology as they want, but to separate hunting seasons by ease-of-use. Crossbows are probably similar to muzzel loaders in that regard. Put their seasons together. Add bows with a draw-loc device to this group. Shotguns and pistols together. Rifles by themselves. Maybe, we should have a separate season for longbows and recurves. The problem is, that the season is only so long and every group is fighting for their share of the time involved. The fact that compounds have an effective range that is 15 or 20 yards farther than traditional equipment, isn't enough to justify a different season in my opinion. Even another 10 yards gained through technology wouldn't be significant.

The answer is definitely not to limit what equipment an archer has available. I believe that if something makes the kill significantly easier, then group it in a season with similarly effective weapons.