.........the use of crossbows in archery seasons has for years DIVIDED us as a hunting community.
Well yes, it has, but its not the crossbows thats done it, its the compounders that have. Score again for the argument that compounds are the problem every bit as much so as crossbows.
So your saying you feel that compounds have already tainted the general archery season so why not ruin the rest of it by allowing crossbows as well?
How pessimistic is that?
I don't care what kind of bow a person uses - really I don't - because I'm froma state that allows ALL archery equipment in archery season.
Here's what compounds have done. They have resulted in bows that shoot faster, quieter, better and more accurately with less and less practice required every year they exist. They are also responsible for an absolute BOOM in archery participation. When they first came out, everyone was complaining about the fears of what they would od to archery season, not at all unlike the current fears of crossbows. And what happened ? Archery participation boomed because of them.
The only ill's that one can point out on compounds of course is that they're so much easier to use and an element has been lost on what the archery of old (recurve/longbows) was like. Is that good ? Is that bad ? I submit that its really NEITHER as long as there's no negative impact on the herds. On a personal level, I do feel that compounds have come too far, as well as modern muzzleloader that are anything BUT a muzzleloader except that they are loose powder and single shot. You know what I mean ?
But thats a personal belief, and not at all reason to want to restrict archery season to recurve/longbows only, is it ?
And thus we come full circle to crossbows, and the unfounded fears people have against them. We KNOW those fears are false because of several states that allow crossbows and not one single fear has come true in them. The seasons are just as long, the bag limits just as liberal - not one single bad thing comes from crossbows, do they ?
Now, if its a fear about equipment becoming too easy ? HA ! Look at compounds. If its about technology ? Look at compounds. If its about bows shooting better, farther, easier ......... look no further than the compound. What those arguments argue is ALREADY HERE in the form of the compound bow.
Arthur P realizes this, LBR does - most people do. But most people also shoot the compound and don't want to put 2 + 2 together.
Unfortunately I know there's way too many!! If half of them switched to a x-bow and stopped wounding deer because of it , I guess that would be a good thing.
BOWFANATIC theres truth to that, but its an argument that is not a winning one. It would be disasterous to try and set up archery based on how well a person shoots. The best thing to do ? Allow bows - like the compound and like the crossbows - and let people decide whats best for them.
For a moment lets assume a big reversal and archery season is now longbow/recurves only. What would I have done last year in Kansas ? I'd have continued hunting with my longbow, as poorly as I was shooting, and likely shot at and missed/wounded a deer. But because I could choose a compound, I made the decision and it was a good one.
A person in Arkansas that for whatever reason can choose a crossbow to archery hunt with. Thats never resulted in any negative impacts to our herd either. Can that be anything BUT a good thing ?
Are you "lobbying" to allow them?
No need to, they're legal here.
What I am "lobbying" against is the unfounded notions that crossbows are bad. If they're bad, TELL ME how. Give me a reason why they're any worse than the compound bow. Show me a stat, throw me a bone - but don't give me an argument that can be applied to compounds and say thats your reason. Back to the lion anaology - you want the lion free, and you want to cage the tiger based only on a cosmetic stripes - knowing that the tiger can't do anything more (because some states allow the tiger to be free too)
I personally don't have a problem with the easy to use compound. Why then would I have a problem with crossbows ? We've got easier, whats wrong with a bit MORE easy ? The compound is vastly different than a recurve, whats wrong with a bit more different than a compound ? The difference might be higher kills, more bowhunters ? If so, those are not BAD things. Bad things would be herd impacting, less season, less bag limits. Well, look at the states that allow crossbows - has it happened ? If the answer is NO then that fear is unfounded and you're back to a personal thing on easy vs easy.
What you nore Matt / PA nor anyone can say is that the kid in the above photo wasn't a bowhunter. Ya'lls argument is that crossbows aren't bows, they're not archery ....... why don't you step forward and say the kid shot his first buck by cheating, by shooting a deer in archery season with a gun ? That he choose a route that Matt /PA's web site there calls " who are not willing to put forth the time and effort to learn to shoot archery equipment proficiently. " that maybe he was " opportunistic hunter who lacks the dedication and commitment required to be a bowhunter "
Go ahead. I'm waiting. Ya'll cannot change your core argument because of a kids success can you ? You drew the lines - the crossbow cannot magically change from a bow to a non-bow when it crosses state line, and the motive for using one cannot change either. The boy in the photo chose a crossbow because he likely couldn't shoot the poundage needed to shoot a compound/longbow/recurve. The crossbow allowed him to archery hunt anyway because for him it was easier, and he was more accurate with it.
For you, a compound is easier and more accurate than a recurve/longbow, isn't it ?
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
compounders do NOT want to take the time and effort to learn to master a recurve/longbow, so they shoot compound because they are inherently EASIER.
Is that a bad thing to say ? I'm not sugar coating anything. Guns are the easier thing to kill deer with. If you want to have the BEST chance at killing deer, get a gun. Muzzleloaders are pretty easy to but single shot. A compound bow is right there with a crossbow as far as how easy they are. Recurves/longbows are the hardest - but because of that they also account for more deer shot at, missed and wounded.
Those are things that are true, like it or not. I choose a recurve (today) and with I'm I'm more likely to shoot at, wound or miss a deer than if I were shooting a compound. ANd with a compound I'd have a greater chance of missing/wounding than if i'd have chosen a rifle.
So I'm not really bashing compounds at all, I'm just pointing out the differences that exist. Ethics is a personal thing - it cannot be legislated and it cannot be tied to a weapon and it cannot be controlled.