The letoff rule was 50% until 1988, when it was raised to 65%. When you say, " Now suddenly a line in the sand is drawn over letoff..." you are incorrect. There isn' t any suddenly about it. That rule has been in effect for 15 years.
Okay, I stand corrected. Again, we see a pretty large increase in success...basically we go from 1 in 12 harvesting a deer to 1 in 5...from 1966 to 1988, or 15 years ago. Now we are approximately at 1 in 3. The largest magnitude of increase occured in the earlier years.
Make it easy enough and anyone can kill a deer.
Easy - rubber boots and scentlock instead of being extra careful about the trails you walk and the wind direction. 300 fps instead of 200 fps. Carbon arrows and mechanical broadheads instead of aluminum arrows and fixed, resharpenable heads. Fiber optic sights (or telescopic or holographic or lazer sights) instead of brass pins - or no sights at all. Designer camo, dropaway rests, harmonic dampers, hydraulic stabilizers, mechanical releases.... Anyone that thinks none of that stuff has greatly affected the hunters success rate is pretty much saying he can have the same amount of success with a recurve as he can with all the doodads.
I agree completely, Arthur. I shoot a compound...with 65% letoff may I add...because I know I would not be nearly as successful with a recurve. No argument there. I still believe that a good part of the reason for increased success has as much to do with higher herd densities as it does with technology. Also, I completely agree that technology has made a significant impact in the ways you stated so well.
That being said, Arthur, do we see a limitation on bow speed by P&Y? Or how about the above-mentioned carbon arrows, mechanical broadheads, fiber optic sights...where are P&Y on those innovations that have a
greater impact on harvest success than letoff? Again, where is the consistency? If the concern is keeping bowhunting " sporting" and " challenging" , why the silence on a host of technological improvements that have, as you stated, " greatly affected the hunters success rate" ?
So where is the restriction on mechanical broadheads? What about the fiber optic sights? If this is truly an issue about maintaining the " sporting nature" of bowhunting, why don' t we hear a peep out of P&Y about restricting these innovations? Are they trying to say that they don' t have much of an impact on success...which you yourself state..., or is it that too many trophy book bucks were taken using such gadgets by
existing P&Y members who now want to try to maintain their own feeling of exclusivity by limiting let-off?
Again, a little consistency? Of all of the advances over the past 40 years that may have contributed to increased hunter success, I would say allowing let-off over 65% would rank pretty far down the list.