I think some guys took it differently than I did (the original question).IMO, It was about making the KILL optional...not whether or not it was an option for you to choose to kill a certain animal. Like, a 150 inch buck walks out and you know you want to shoot him. If possible, would you opt for him to keep living afterwards (tranquilizer type deal, suction arrows..idk how) or would you kill him anyway to end your successful hunt? In other words, if your arrows could strike without causing harm, would you do this instead of a razor sharp broadhead to put him down for good? I hunt to kill, and when I draw my bow on an animal I have been hunting for and makes me happy, I want to put it down for good. For the success, for the meat, for the trophy, and most of all for the memories. Just my opinion.
Maybe the best wordage would have been "resuscitate" optional. If this were the case. then no. I would not want to resuscitate something I desired to kill.
I too love trying to photograph animals...and on ones I have no interest in shooting, I find it a rush to get pics/film as well. I was more referring to
only the animals you would shoot with your bow.
I have been in situations where I struggled with picking up the bow or the camera.That's the beauty of hunting. You are in control of your own destiny. You guys are talking about photographing animals you don't really want to shoot in the first place.
Not necessarily, see the photo below. I absolutely wanted to kill this deer with the bow. My desire, however, to capture his essences superseded killing him. At twelve yards, he was mine for the taking.Would you be reaching for your camera or bow if a 200" buck walks out? That should answer whether or not you would want the kill optional.
Will, I LOVE that pic of Rob. I'm not sure how he got it, who took it, or the details...but that is by far hands down the COOLEST bowhunting photo I have ever seen. I would love to get a print of that made. Talk aboutup close and personal. I have it saved on my hard drive for good since the last time he posted it up. I agree, he won on that day...but in a different way. I'm sure Rob was hoping like hell he could skewer an arrow through that huge billy.
No doubt! I think he could have simply killed the goatif he wanted to but not at that close range. He opted to take the game to a higher level. He rolled the dice on the kill and lost. Take another look at that photo and ask yourself, could Rob have gotten off a shot with a greater gap? My thoughts would lead me to say yes. You don't have to kill everytime out to be successful or enjoy your experience, but without the occasional kill...it takes away the hunting aspect of it.
Agreed. I enjoy a fruitless day in the woods just as much as the next guy, but I know I enjoy it a heck of a lot more when I have an animal taking a dirt nap.
Not just an animal, a specific animal...
I would enjoy a hunt with you Trevor.
