Zelazny

Arthur P - One in the same.

Cougar Mag - Of course it works - why ? Because the same argument YOU use against crossbows when applied to compounds is also valid. I am using your definitions, your argument and applying them full spectrum and not just where you want them to be.

The result ? If YOUR argument is true, then compounds (your choice of weapon eh ?) do not belong in archery season because they are vastly different in draw letoff and draw holding when compared to "real" bows.

Tough one eh Cougar ?

Zelazny

Oh, I have also come to terms that the site I like to visit accepts sponsors that sell canned "hunts". Hunting as a whole has been going downhill sometime and the acceptance and validation that Hunting.net gives canned hunts is no different really.

I personally do not accept killing non-wild animals as hunting, and thats what matters most. My kids will see this, understand the difference and the world will continue to rotate (I think).

Will canned hunts be the demise of hunting as we know it ? It will contribute, no doubt, and its provable that it already has.

stealthycat

I agree with Zelazny ... brilliant argument set forth, excellent challenge for Cougar (using his own arguemtn against him) !

Cougar Mag

Zelasky......aka Stealthycat, I do agree with you on canned hunts! You probably knew that.

No, you are not using my definition correctly. Traditional and compound equipment are hand held and hand drawn. Crossbows are not.


If you are going to tell me more people use crossbows in states that have legalized them, than traditional or compounds, please show me the proof. And do not get your information from a crossbow site either!

Arthur P

Coug, I don't think it's the case in Arkanasa, certainly not in Georgia, but in Ohio there certainly ARE more crossbow hunters than compound and traditional combined. Of course, the majority of Ohio's archery deer harvest is also taken by crossbow hunters. You can find that information on the Ohio Department of Natural Resources website.

Arthur P

Coug, I don't think it's the case in Arkanasas, certainly not in Georgia, but in Ohio there certainly ARE more crossbow hunters than compound and traditional combined. Of course, the majority of Ohio's archery deer harvest is also taken by crossbow hunters. You can find that information on the Ohio Department of Natural Resources website.

www.ohiodnr.com/wildlife/news/deerfacts.htm

Cougar Mag

Alrighty Arthur, I relent on that. Guess I should be glad I don't hunt in Ohio!

As far as popularity......that means little to me really. I mean comon, Bill Clinton won 2 presidential elections and Al Gore won the popular vote in 2000 for God's sakes!!!!![8D]

Arthur P

And bear in mind where Bill and Hillary came from! [X(] Same place as some of these guys that are promoting the crossbow!

To save everyone the time and hassle of clicking, here's the lowdown for Ohio's 02-03 archery season. I even figured up the success rates for you.:

Crossbow: Hunters - 105,954; Deer Taken - 28,352; Success Rate - 26.76%

Vertical: Hunters - 87,773; Deer Taken - 20,552; Success Rate - 23.41%

Not much difference in success rate. In fact, the traditional hunters probably kept the 'vertical' success rate down several percentage points. One interesting thing was that the 'vertical' hunters took more antlerless deer than the crossbowers did.

So, on one hand Stealthy's point that the crossbow not being much different than the compound is correct. Conversely, my point that there's no real reason to use a crossbow is equally valid. No overwhelming reason to exclude them based on game harvest numbers. When compared ONLY to the compound, that is.

But there are still those pesky traditional shooters, whose numbers keep growing at every leap in compound technology. Convince me why allowing crossbows would be fair to them, Stealthy!

You can't.

stealthycat

Of course they are - they do not draw themselves !

Cougar - I think even in Arkansas, where crossbows have been legal for like 20 years now, the majority of hunters use compounds. Why ? They are better, more proficient, funner ... you get the picture. Legalizing them in every state would not be the end of bowhunting as we know it nor would it have a negative impact. If it did, then steps could be take - FAIR steps.

Arthur P is correct that Ohio has a high number or crossbow hunters. But SO WHAT ? People can choose to NOT shoot them Arthur, but they don't, its all about choice. I can see the view that it'll hurt the deer numbers, more people in the woods , fewer tags etc etc but to my knowlegde thats never been the case, even in Ohio (directly as the result of crossbows). Selfish wants could see that though, easily.

Again, take Ohio as an example. If 60% use crossbows, 35% use compounds and 5% other, and theres a need for restructure, how could you possibly do it fairly and NOT make an impact on compound hunters ? They too are a problem with the overcrowding and overkill (hypothetically) right ? Crossbows in this scenario would be but one part of the problem, no more or less the only part as compounds would be.

Right ?

Zelazny

Thank goodness popular vote doesn't rule and that we live in a Republic eh Cougar ? Hunting would be totally banned if that were the case.

More excellent points from that wiley Zelazny feller - dang sharp mid that one has .... LOL !!



Anyone else confused yet ?