I do think Crossbow hunters should hunt, and they CAN hunt.
That's evading the issue. They can't hunt during the archery season which I assume is a much larger portion of the season so they aren't being treated equally despite the trivial differences in the equipment. You know if it was just able bodied guys that just didn't want to pick up another type of equipment i could possibly see your point of view. However, to punish all of those other folks out there that could potentially benefit from the legalization of crossbows just so some other guys has a little more of an advantage than you do or because a few more deer may get killed is beyond me. You say you are for more hunters in the ranks and that you would embrace the change and even welcome a shortened season if that happened, yet you refuse to let the change take place. You stand in the way and block the entrance of that change taking place. IMO if you are sincere then giving up 30% or your states archery harvest should be irrelevant and you should be happy those people had the oppurtunity. After all those deer belong to them every bit as much as they do you
I believe they realize the weapon lacks the following to reach that number and as such it gets added to firearms season.
If they have no following the the 30% is an aboration and the numbers should be insignificant and there should be no reason to prevent those women and children from getting out there and joining in, should there?
For those who are disabled and can not archery hunt.. we make an exception and allow those disabled people to use crossbows during archery season.
Women and children are asked to practice with their bows if they desire to hunt archery season just as every other healthy person is.
If both groups aren't physically capable of drawing hunting weight then why should they be treated differently? Just because those women and children practice and can shoot proficicently doesn't mean they can draw enough weight to be legal and ethical. Why should we be putting up those kind of hurdles that delay and in many cases prevent entry into our sport?
But they still can hunt in a firearm seasone .. or they may have to wait till they are strong enough, or proficient enough to shoot with a bow. But nowhere do we tell them they can't hunt .. in fact there is some animal they can chase from September 1st through December here.
If someone changed the rules and made it where you weren't eligible to hunt anything but the gun season would you think it was unfair? Afterall, you still get to gun hunt. It would look a little different from that side of the fence. However, unlike you I just can't look a kid straight faced and so "sorry son you can't go hunting because the use of crossbow's offend my sense of sensabilities"
What sport??? The SPORT of Crossbowing?
The sport of hunting. The sport that lost a couple of million participants in the last 10 years. The sport that we need to be recruiting members to instead of preventing intrance to.
Trying to make Archers call Crossbowing archery is helping the sport of Archery how?
I don't care what you call it so long as you don't try to keep them from hunting with them.
It is not allowed at Archery shoots, they are not part of the records we keep, it does not require the same skills Archers practice ... how does that help Archery?
I use the term archery improperly. What i really mean when I say archery is bowhunting. I could give a crap less about archery. My interest is in the hunting aspect and the rights of those that wish to participate. I am a bowhunter not an archer.
It doesn't. It only helps Crossbowing. So instead of trying to stretch Archery to accomodate a weapon that doesn't fit .. call it what it is.. a Corssbow, and manage it accordingly.
Agreed it is a crossbow and compound is a compound and a longbow is a longbow and they should allbe included in the "archery" season. I don't care what you call them just don't be like the anti-hunter's and lobby to keep other hunters from having the right to hunt.