Are they mutually exclusive?
 

OK here is my question. Have you noticed, and I am not referring to anyone here on the forum, that the best hunters are not the best shots and definetly not the most knowledgeable about equipment. I have. I fancy myself a good hunter and I think my track record speaks for itself. However, I know several hunters in my area that are not only more dedicated but also consistenly kill more deer and bigger deer than I do. None of these guys buy into the you got a have a new bow and it has to be this brand etc. etc. stuff. Most of these guys know that you take your bow to the shop and they "tune it" and that's about it. Most of the really really good hunters that I know spend very little time talking about equipment and know very little about KE but they know a whole lot about getting close to critters and they spend the majority of their time practicing it. I know some good hunters that are techies but I don't know any really really good hunters that are techies so are the two mutually exclusive and have you found this to be true also?

[Deleted]
 

[Deleted by Admins]

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Hunting comes down to 3 things time, money and knowledge. Some people have better property to hunt then others. I hunted 5 years on my 300 acre farm, i killed one 8 pointer. I have hunted property i bought 2 years ago and have killed 2 "Big" deer. I'm not that much better of a hunter, i just have a better place to go. I would never kill a deer that big on the old property.

I could kill 3 Pope and Young deer a year if i had the CASH. Anyone can, size doesn't matter to me, the effort, experience, and story behind the kill counts.

I would never enter an animal into the Pope and Young record books. If i was making a living shotting and hunting i would to get my name out. If you are a hunter and your dream is to shot a Pope and Young animal just to get you name in the books, you need to take a deep look at your self. Why are you hunting to impress other people? Spend about 200 bucks to just to see your name in a book. It does not make my animals any less impressive because they are not in the record book.

I don't believe in the scoring system either. Buddy of my doesn't have the biggest bow kill in Ohio(typical) because his deer has to be scored as a non typical or take a 30+ inch deduction as a typical. A point off of a point because the tine doesn't come off the the top of the main beem. I have a less impressive deer that scores higher because of this. He told P&Y to shove it.

Sorry for going on and on.. i know some won't agree and thats fine just the way i see it.

Just because they can't shot quarters at 40 yards doesn't mean they can't kill big deer. Who has killed a buck past 30 yards? I have one Whitetail kill past 30 and that was 36 yards.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

ewolf,

Paying to go where big deer are and then killing them is not how I would measure a really really good hunter. A really really good hunter is the guy who consistently kills P&Y deer in an area where there are low numbers of P&Y deer. Of course that doesnt' make you less of a hunter if you consistently kill them in higher percentage areas, that just makes you fortunate to be able to hunt areasa like that. But, the hunters that I am talking about are consistely killing P&Y deer on public ground in Arkansas which is not exactly known for trophy bucks. I could talk circles around most of these guys in a tech conversation but they have the horns to back up their lack of technical knowledge. One case in point is a guy a hunted with a few times last year. This guy has been absolutely slaying big deer in my area for the last 10 years. He was shooting a PSE dual cam (forget which model) at like 88 lbs the bow has a 6 5/8 braceheight and he is shooting 2215s with it. He is way underspined but had no idea. All he knew was that he could hit with the bow and the shop had set him up so he thought he was shooting the best setup and he was and is slaying deer. He trusted the shop had set him up correctly and knew he could hit with his equipment and the rest of his time he spent figuring out these public land deer he was hunting. This is just an example. I realize that it is possible to be both and I don't really think they are mutually exclusive but I wonder if this is true for other people in other parts of the country. Think about the 5 best hunters that you have ever personally known. Are they or were they "techies"?

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

The 5 best hunters I have ever known had these things in common:

1. They wore old camo, old boots, etc
2. Were definitely not techies, very old equipment
3. Most importantly, hunted EVERY chance they got. They all seem to have jobs that allow them to spend atleast twice as much time in the woods as the average weekend hunter. BUT, it was not just the time they put in, they really understand the whitetail. They no which areas to hunt and what time of the year to do it. It's really quite amazing to me. I truly believe some guys are just more in "tune" with deer than the average. They look a piece of land and see something totally different than the average guy.

I am talking about hunters that consistently kill larger deer than what is expected for their area.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I would definetly agree with those two!

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

First thing SA....no one shooting a PSE could kill a big deer, ....or at least that's what I've been told :( ;);)

Now to your point...I'd say that that is probably more true than not, but I wouldn't say mutually exclusive. However, I know a couple guys that kill big deer regularly....and are very techie.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I agree - many big buck slayers don't know their [:o]ss from their elbow when it comes to tech.

Its really all so meaningless - this tech stuff...........but its fun:)

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Not always exclusive but usually I'd say.

Some of the older guys that kill monsters every year...I smoke on the range. Not great shots even. But they consistently spot, pattern and hunt mature whitetails and won't take a small buck...doe for the freezer the last week.

One guy I met last year at the club was a rock star shooter. Won a couple of 3D's and was a 600 shooter indoors ; flubbed a shot @ 12 yards on opening day. Twice and by a mile! "Doe Fever"!LOL!

A good shot does not make a good hunter.
Eqipment does not make a good hunter (although I think it can give the mediocre hunter an edge...I spend a lot of money on that belief;))
Seem like most I know are hunters first and just have the weapons as tools.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Yep, the techie stuff has alot hype behind it. I'm certainly "not" techie. I've had my current bow for about 4 years, same rifle for many more and love the sport to no end. I have taken several quality animals of various species and don't get all wrapped up in KE, tournaments, etc. I am by no stretch saying that I am Joe The Hunter, I just love the sport and do okay at it. I do know a few good old boys that are up near my place in far northern WI that have taken some incredible whitetails...big racks and really big bodies. The one guy in particular who I have know for years (and my Dad knew him for many years, then I hooked up with him) has several brutes that have never seen a tape on the rack...and a few of them would no doubt be well into the B/C book. He could really care less. The guy is so mellow and knows the woods like the back of his hand (big big woods mind you) I truely look up to him and others who handle themselves the same way.

This is a really good topic....

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

You bet! Thats why I have to laugh when I hear (or read) someone say something like "anyone who doesn't tune their bows and practice on a regular basis doesn't belong in the woods":D

I work with several guys that fall into that category and yet are awesome hunters! Face it , most hunters dont have the passion for it like we have. They get the itch maybe a month before season. Most of us get the itch a month after season ends!

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

My old neighbor shot big bucks every year on public land! He didn't have the newest bow or the neatest stuff but what he did have was a complete knowledge of the Welfare System. His girlfriend and mother of his four children was on welfare. He received Social Security for a disability of some sort, but looked and acted normal to me.[X(] Anyway, being in his mid 30's he was unemployeed and had everyday, all day long to hunt and fish. Guys like me working 50 - 60 hours a week paid his way. Bought his groceries, paid his rent, paid his utilites. And I get to go out once in a while.[:o]

The guy did kill some big bucks though. I moved away from him which was probably a good idea. I started wondering if maybe my wife and I should divorace, have a couple more kids and I become a drunk. Then I could retire at the rest of the country's expense.[:@]

Sorry about the rant, but my point is that if you have unlimited time in the woods...you'll eventually kill some monsters.

I step from my soapbox and head to the fridge.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

That's where BF and I are in complete, utter disagreement. I feel the same way about guns too. Just because people manage to bring home deer doen't mean they didn't wound and lose 20 others before they managed to put one down.

I've had a belly full of hearing, "I stuck several, but I got this one." [>:]

A good hunter knows how to shoot. He practices enough IN HUNTING CONDITIONS to know his limitations. He stays within those limitations. He also knows the land he hunts on and how the deer use that land.

The really good bowhunters I know do most of their practice while scouting. They take a couple of judo points and stump shoot while doing their scouting. They scout their hunting area a couple of times a month; spring, summer, fall and winter. You rarely see them in a pro shop. They'll come to the range every month or so and check their sights, maybe shoot with some friends, and they're gone again.

Even as retro as I am, I'm a flaming techie compared to them.


[&:]

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I cant argue with that! I'm sure we all know folks who fall into that category as well.

The guys I'm speaking of don't "wound or lose 20 others" in the process. They regularly harvest deer every year with excellent shot placement. The closest one of them came to wounding one was about 4 or 5 years ago when we tracked a doe for several hundred yards on our hands and knees (in circles) just trying to find a trickle of blood. As it turned out she made a loop and died about 30 yards from his stand. That errant shot was one lung and heart with no exit hole.(no blood)[&:]
They just dont share the same passion as I do with the archery equipment. They do however spend all year scouting.

On the flip side , I know one a-hole who picks up his bow a week before season , cant hit a pie plate with 3 arrows at 30 yds , wounds deer on a regular basis and has no ill feelings towards wounding deer. He falls into my category of those that dont belong in the woods.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

The blanket statement that all the really really good hunters are not techies is rediculous at best! Some good hunters are "techheads" and some are not. I also know a few "good hunters" who can get close to game but can't hit a bull in the arse, as well as some techheads who never seem to get as close to game. Being a good hunter is a total committment to scouting, stand or ground placement, gaining access to good hunting land AND being proficient with a bow.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

And the more you insist that people don't have to practice, the more of those a-holes you help create.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

This part I have to say is all you need to shoot big deer.
Time - You need to go out as much as possible

Money - You need as much of it to get you equipment, travel (local or to another state) and license.

Knowledge - This is the most important. It's not knowledge about the equipment but knowledge of your hunting area.

I did a post way back about "You aint getting it if". The point of the post was you have to hunt where the deer are that you want to kill. Sure you can stumble on the biggin kicked up by another hunter or event, but I would rather consistently see huge everytime out or at least know that one more the likely will be there.

It's possible and if you have that spot that's great. If your still looking don't over look residential areas. They are crawling with deer. Home owners want them gone. They are not only a nuisance but a health threat as well. The best thing of all is that it is prime hunting and the spot is free.

Good luck!

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Your misreading me Arthur. I'm not saying that people dont have to practice. You must know that I believe practice is the most important role in becoming a proficient hunter.

What I am saying is that I know two guys personally that practice shooting their bows what I would consider to be insufficient , and yet when they do pull out their bows a month before season and start shooting it's as if they haven't missed a beat. I've been humbled by them at the range on more than one occasion![&:] Is there such a thing as being a Natural when it comes to archery? If there is , I know two of them.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

It's kinda hard to misread comments like, "I have to laugh when I hear (or read) someone say something like 'anyone who doesn't tune their bows and practice on a regular basis doesn't belong in the woods.'"

You're pretty darn up front with things when you scoff at an idea. It means total disagreement and complete lack of respect for it.

Then you turn around and say, "You must know that I believe practice is the most important role in becoming a proficient hunter." Pardon me, but I'm getting a little confused with your John Kerry impersonation.

So.... Which is it?

I'm sure there are some 'naturals' out there. There are always exceptions to the rule. But, by and large, someone that doesn't put an arrow on his bowstring for months at a time is not going to humble ANYBODY on the archery range.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Only because I think statements like that dont cover everyone! I used the term "have to laugh" because of the two hunters I work with who fall into the category of "no bow tuning knowlege or regular practice" and yet are awesome hunters. Doesn't mean I laugh because I think practice is unimportant and I'm not scoffing at anything. I laugh to myself because when I hear those blanket statements the first thing that comes to mind are the two fellows at work who would be welcome at any deer camp by anyone here if you knew them. I'm sure I'm not the only one who knows people like I described. Maybe I am?

Does anyone else see the point I'm trying to make? Yes practice is important , very important!
Does everyone need the same amount of practice? Apparently there are exceptions to the rule or a few naturals out there!


I give up!

Wasn't trying to argue with you or anyone on this thread!

Have a nice day:)

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I'm sorry but I have to believe that shooting a bow at 25yrds is the same as shooting a shot gut at 60yrds. I practice more than my friends but they shoot bigger deer.

You practice what you feel you need and I won't bring up the lost deer won't go waste. Secondly, that dosen't mean take a bad shot or a shot you can't make.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Hunting ability and shooting ability are two different things. A really good hunter will typically become proficient enough to take game, but not necessarily good enough to win any shooting contests. That would often take too much time and practice, of which they devote their time to field work and actually hunting. Of course, there are exceptions. I know several exceptional archers, who are also very good hunters.

One thing I have noticed, is that most great hunters are low tech, simply because most are older and learned on "low tech" equipment. There was nothing else at the time they learned. They have a tendancy to stick with what has worked in the past.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I am surprised that nobody has considered my next comment yet especially considering some of the members who have posted....:).

I guess the converse of your statement could also be true.

Well then maybe the best techs are not the best shots or the best hunters. ;) I have not shot a deer in 10 years! :D

Seriously though, I can and do agree with your statement. I know of several very successful hunters (read as they shoot big bucks year after year) who have literally no understanding of the equipment they use. They know that they should wax their strings periodically and that they need to have their string and cable(s) replaced every other year or so but they have no recognition of some of the finer aspects of the equipment that they continue to utilize.

In my opinion that is what makes this sport as great as it is. Each one of us can approach it from an entirely different perspective and yet no single perspective is entirely "right" or "wrong" just different.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I think the best hunters are the luckiest hunters, have good location, time to do it, and good patience and woodsmanship above all else.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

There is a very well known saying about luck, that I fully believe in.

"Luck occurs when prepardedness meets opportunity, and opportunity is everywhere."

Nothing could be more true then when it is applied to hunting. Sure, anyone can get lucky once in a great while, but when it happens every year, like it does to some, it's not luck. :)

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

;) I do not think they are mutualy exclusive. From my own humble experience I know for a fact that I am a better hunter, overall, than my son, Joe. He out techs me something aweful and is a better shot. What I do is learn our areas very well so that I can place him in a great situation for the great shots he makes. He knows the deal and just looks my way after finding his kill & says, "thanks dad"! That is when you know you are a good hunter and a fairly good dad to boot. I would not trade that for any techie knowledge but I must admit some of you techsters have enlightened me this past year. Thanks to all.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I defeinetly agree about the best hunters being the luckiest.

Luck= Preparation + Oppurtunity

The harder I work the luckier I seem to get!

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Not mutually exclusive. I personally am a horrendous bow tech, a mediocre shot, and a mediocre hunter. I've got all the bases covered!

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

An interesting post. I could be considered a novice techie as I like to try out the new stuff that looks interesting. I have a small shop and usually try out stuff before I'll recommend it to others. I don't get out to do my scouting like I should - scout & hunt at the same time - which isn't good. I have friend that has shot quite a few big bucks, which is important for HIM, but I always tell him that if I worked as hard at it as he does I wouldn't enjoy the hunt - but he does get the big ones. As far as some "naturals" I don't know about that, but my youngest son seems to fall into that category. Shot (and dropped in its tracks) a deer the lst day he hunted. He has had to let the bow sit for a couple of years sometimes, but when he picks it up he is right back in there after a few shots. Shot fingers too - couldn't get him sold on a release until he got a newer high let-off bow a few years ago, then he got one that shoots on releasing the trigger instead of pulling it. Seem where ever I set him up he has deer come in. I have seen good target shots that for whatever reason cann't seem to hit a deer,. and guys that do fair on targets, but get their deer every year. There's more to hunting than shooting.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

That might be true with compound shooting because the bows are easy to shoot and accurate ... really good traditional archers practice a lot I think to keep their edge in shooting and it all rolls into hunting too. JMO

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Come on now Stealth...ya didn't have to go turning this into a compound vs. traditional argument. ;)

...and what is with the Brother Bear logo. You a big fan of the Mckenzie brothers?
:D

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

I honestly think if you're a good hunter... Luck plays only an occasional roll and maybe not always a good one. Normally it his little to do with the outcome.

If you're a wannabee.... you count and pray on luck.

If you have NO clue.... lucks about all you got.

Shooting skill is a small part of the picture. The best shots are probably seldom the best hunters.... but they sure can maximize their opportunities.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Sorry davidmil, but I think hunting is all about luck. I'll try to explain this, but it all boils down to being in the right place at the right time, which is another way of saying being lucky.

(I think a really interesting thread here would be a study on this issue. Ask the following questions in a poll on here: How many days did you you hunt last year? What state did you hunt in? What age buck did you kill?
Then if we got a large enough sample size, a real stat cruncher - I could do it in a pinch - could run some correlations.)

Anyhow, I'll bet my newest set of thermal longjohns that such a study would find a monster correlation between the most successful hunters and the guys who spent the most time out there. In short, these guys are maximizing their luck by spending lots of hours in the woods, rolling the dice a lot. If you gotta roll snake eyes to win, who are you betting on - the guy who rolls the dice once or twice, or the guy who rolls it twenty or thirty times?

Suppose the best hunter in the world sees a P&Y buck every 20 hours he's in the woods, and a novice hunts the same woods but only sees a book buck every 100 hours, both hunters are still playing on luck, it's just that the good hunter is playing at a higher level of luck than the novice. Back to the dice illustration, the good hunter wins every time he rolls '6' and the novice only wins on snake eyes. Does it make the game not a game of luck because the good hunter is essentially playing by a different set of rules? I don't think so.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

For the most part I don't think being in the right place at the right time on a consistant basis has very little to do with luck.

If it where luck they would both see deer the same amount of time:eek:

Rolling dice thirty times is easy. It ain't luck that gets a working man up at 3:30AM every day off he has for three months to sit in a tree.

The top pros in any sport will probably be the ones who practice and work the hardest. Same thing for hunters.

I consider luck a non factor - I have had just as much bad luck as I have good - I call it a wash. The only thing left is what knowledge, preperation, and determination you bring to the table.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

For someone to say that them killing big deer has nothing to do with luck.... GET OVER YOURSELF. Last season i shot a 170 class buck... I was lucky. I put my buddy on that stand for 3 days, and he saw only one buck and that was a 3 1/2 year old 10 pointer at over 100 yards in a field. He didn't want to hunt the spot the following day so I did, shot the buck 5 minutes after daylight. Was it not luck that that buck walked by that mourning and not the mourning before, yes its luck. I do beleive in improving your luck (Stand placement, shot placement, concealment, getting in and out without spooking game...), but there is still lots of luck involved.

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

ewolf,

I think the word that you are overlooking is "consistently"!

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

Sure is...Good luck for you.......Bad luck for your friend;)

Again luck is a wash - whats left - two determined hunters with a good stand setup:)

RE: Are they mutually exclusive?
 

As far as the "techie" side of things, I cannot see any link between that and the level of hunting competence.

For example, some guys just drive their vehicles, others insist on knowing about and tinkering with the systems within. The point is that some people are simply more inclined to learn about the dynamics of the bow (and arrow, etc) itself. Naturally they tend to be more "hands on." How can that be linked to hunting skill?

If you tune your equipment, and I have a highly competent pro-shop tune mine, do we not wind up with two tuned bows? What happens in the woods thereafter is an unrelated matter.

Great topic, silentassassin.