RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

one word - GUNPOWDER


And that is based on what evidence ?

BOWFANATIC - what is your point with that high tec recurve ??

Actually, self bows are STILL what bows were back in the days of P&Y. Some all wood bows like Saluki's are too with jiust differnt glues. And even the laminate bows now made are till 100% full weight of draw, shot off the shelf, using instinctive shooting. Aren't they ?


You're wrong. Blacktail, Morriosn, Acadian Woods, Bear's Paw, Hummingbird, Robertsons, Shafer Silvetips - the list goes on and on for trad boywers making recurves. Fact is - Black Widow don't even hand make them anymore - machines do it.


Well, you're one of the few being honest here. You choose a modern compound because you don't have the time and effort and dedication to master a recurve. And thats okay - it really is. However, why not let people who have evern less time and want to spend a bit less effort use a crossbow ? Seriously ............ why not ? They have no negative impacts in archery season and if we're splitting hairs on who shoots the easier bow - surely I can look at your equipment (being a trad archer) and say the same things about your compound that you say about crossbows - right ??



Near you or in the presence like P&Y preaches ? To answer your question - No, I don't see much difference anymore because neither is anything like shooting a recurve.

No, not really. So few people would use them - it would have no impact overall.

No, I don't believe so in almost every situation. Why ? Read this - its the most important part of my argument - please. The modern compound bow is responsible for hundreds of thousands being led into archery season - many two-seaon hunters. Gun hunters wanting "more" season to hunt. And they fell in love with bowhunting. By the thousands. Archery would be nothing that it is today without the modern compound bow. And in the past 10 years theres been a resurgence of traditional archery. Bowyers popping up everywhere, the Leatherwall and Tradgang websites booming - and it compounders who are finding the compound to be ..... not as challenging as it once was. So they are going trad. But overall, you need only to look at the states that allow archery season , the impacts they have, those that allow only compound and those that allow crossbows - and its easy to see that archery hunters all total don't take NEAR the % of the deer killed that rifle do. The compoud is used by what, 90% of archers ? Yet we still haven't come anywhere close to reaching the numbers or success rates to threaten archery season.

So no - allow the easy to use compound :D becuase it has no effects on my archery season in the least little bit. And neither do draw locks, and neither do crossbows. Thats not to say I don't feel like archery is somewhat lost with all the technology ....... it certainly is, but I'm not forcing my beliefs on anyone especially if its based soley on my personal opinions.

Mattiac - I've hunted in more states that most guys here have. I've killed elk, mule deer, antelope and whitetails. I've compound hunted for over a decade, and I've been damn good at it. I've also got 3 years traditonal experience and I'm telling you and everyone else that trad hunting is a vastly different ballgame. Any deer - and I mean ANY DEER - within 35 yards of my stand with a compound I'll kill if I want to with few things to stop me. A recurve in my hand ? I need 15 yards - I'll take 20 yards or so but the deer has to be RIGHT THERE - perfect situation ............ and even then things can happen. The old "presence of game" thing was P&Y rhetoric - before the 80% and greater letoffs.

gasoline engine - its why guns are not allowed in archery season - they shoot bullets and use gunpowder as the propellent.

If crossbows used gunpowder I'd be against them.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

MaJay,

You're ducking me like a championship fighter. As I have said now twice already.
Crossbows represent slightly more than 2% of the deer killed in the state of AR after 30 years of being allowed in archery season. If we apply those numbers to your state it would increase the deer harvest by roughly 270 animals. Even in states where there are very few deer killed, 270 animals is inconsequential at best. So if we run a trend based on Arkansas' numbers after 30 years of allowing crossbows NH could potentially see up to 270 deer a year being killed by crossbows[:-][&:];) I don't really think that is going to cut your season. But where I get confused is when you guys say that crossbows won't bring in any new hunters and then your turn around and say the woods would be over crowded and every deer in the state would be killed on the first day of the season etc. etc. I guess I am just confused. Are they going to bring in additional hunters or aren't they? If they are, from what I understand about the anti-hunting climate in the NE, you guys ought to be welcoming addittional hunters to the season, because even if your fear is realized and the season is cut, a shorter season is better than no season at all, which is where you are going to wind up if you keep inisisting on alienating those whom support you will ultimately need. If they aren't going to bring in any new hunters it shouldn't affect you guys anyway because it will just be a wash on the number of deer killed because they same number of hunters will be hunting and killing the same number of deer, only they will be killing them with different weapons which will be irrelevant if the numbers remain the same.


Then you guys talk about increased success rates. So that's a bad thing? I thought the whole point was to kill the animal as quickly and cleanly as possible and to try never to wound one and let it get away and now you want to punish crossbows for that:eek:[:'(]:( By saying that you are saying that you would rather see more wounded deer in the field????????

Statistically the number of deer killed with archery equipment is insignificant anyway. You are not going to alter the outcome of the deer herd one way or the other by shortening the bow season because the number of deer killed is so statistically insigificant. There are 10 times more deer killed in AR on opening day of gun season than there is in the entire 4.5 month bowseason. Now if they were going to cut days inorder to have an affect on the herd, where would it make the most sense to cut them from? If you answered the gun season then you would be correct because due to the number of hunters and the capability of their weapons they have much more ability to control the herd with this method. Relying on archery to have an effect on the overall deer herd is unreliable at best.

That may be 100% correct but if it is it's purely a lucky guess because you have no way of knowing why and what each different state based their decisions either to allow or disallow crossbows on.

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

I try to give, and see your side, which I am to a point, but you are not being realistic in your answers. You make no attempt to see where we are coming from. Failing to acknowledge the good points made. Merely pointing out your side, over and over. Where does that get us? No where.

When you sit here and make your own definition for the word "presence" I cant debate you. Its impossible to debate someone when they change the definitions of words around to suit their needs. You REFUSE to listen to legitimate reasons. Passing them off as opinion. How am I to convey a message to you? I cant, nor should I bother to try any further.

I rattled off the good points you made, and there were many, yet you still ignore the points Ive made. Its a very good way to win an argument, in your own mind that is. Whether you are FOR or AGAINST crossbows being introduced into archery seasons, you can see that a few of our points against them are infact legitimate.

Denying that they are, only makes you look less credible. I gave ground on points, yet you stand like a rock, never budging, whether right or wrong. Only wanting to hear what you want to hear. When I read your second post, I knew immediately that you had no intentions of swaying the general public to allow crossbows. I never should have entered into this mockery of a thread. But I felt obligated to point out the holes in your case, whether you consider them valid or not. The majority of archers do. Thankfully the majority of hunters, and state wildlife divisions CAN see the clear difference, and refuse to let this weapon into the archery seasons. Should it be introduced around here, I will do my best to stop it. If it is incorporated, then I will outwardly treat those "archers" with as much respect as I treat any hunter who harvests game legally and ethically.

Last two questions, and then I give up.

What were your honest intentions when you started this thread?

Why is a traditional hunter such as yourself pushing for the use of a weapon that offers much advantage over your own?

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Okay.

I agree.

Its tough - I agree

Again, I agree - but we also agree that technolgoy is NOT stopping.

correct

notice that I did answer - in detail

I disagree and said why

Yes - as I stated before. Drawing on a deer with a compound vs a recurve is vastly different. Moving the crossbow around to get a shoot - that is different too.


gas engines - I've said that before

I can think of many reasons why. None of which really have anything to do with hunting. Why do we have so many types of auto racing ? NASCAR, Formula 1, all the other kinds. Why ? Lots of reasons - none based on hunting though

The legalities of suicide are lengthy, post that one on the political forum. :D

I tend to like to KNOW what I believe and why. I went for years going along with the crossbow hating crowd. Until I had to PROVE why I hated them - then I realized I had no good reasons. And honeslty ? I hate having a view simply becuase its the way it is.

.

Barely retaining it is reason to keep allowing it ? You're starting to sound anti-compound :) But I agree with you. However - what are you basing all this on ? Are archery seasons being shortened due to too many hunters ? Too many deer killed ? Maybe the "spirit" of archery has been lost ? WHY ?

Mattiac - you cannot say that i don't respond to your posts - its simply untrue

To make people THINK why they are against crossbows. When people have to justify WHY they have ac ertain idea - over the internet - you best really know WHY you believe something. And most people don't

Becuase I realized long ago that you shooting a compound doesn't effect my archery season not one little bit. And facts are - as seen in the states that allow crossbows - that archery season isn't affected much at all by their legality in general archery season.

You cannot be pro-technology and anti-crossbow. Doing so iis calling the kettle black. You (and I don't mean you specifically) want your easy - your compounds - your bows that don't require much practice but afford great accuracy and ease of use and it doesn't matter than you yourself are taking the easy road. Why ? Your choice, of course. But dammit, lets not let those easier to use crossbows huh ? Why ? Easier to use and even LESS dedication that you yourself are willing to invest.

But isn't that exactly what recurve shooters can say about compounders ?


Don't you see the HUGE hypocracy there ?


So I looked at it all, and I came away saying hey, you know what ? Arkansas allows ALL bows in archery season. We have 4 1/2 months to hunt, we take maybe 10% of the total kill, we have liberal bag limits ............. what do I care if you decide 3 days before archery season to dust off your compound and go hunting and kill a big 10 pointer ? What do I care if you shoot a crossbow or a compound or a recurve ? It won't affect me at all, will it ?

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

You mean like you are doing by refusing to listen and or admit the reasons for allowing them?

What are your opinions based on. Do you live in a state where crossbows have been legalized and do you have firsthand knowledge of their effect on the archery season and the archers they share the woods with? Several of us do yet you seem to discount our opinions as though they have little relevance yet we are the ones with the firsthand knowledge and experience with which to base our opinions. All you have to base them on so far as I can tell is your own personal predjudices toward crossbows and irrational fears.

OK I I read through the posts but maybe I didn't read through them well enough because I didn't see any good points that you made. I saw you express some concerns over what could possibly happen though you have examples of states where the bad things did not actually happen though you dismiss those good points that have been made eventhough I have do have examples of states that have seen none of the negatives that you fear.

I have nothing to win or lose in this argument other than seeing the numbers of hunters in archery increase and therefore our strength. But they are already legal in my state and barring some type of injury I won't be shooting one anyway. The only people losing here are those that are being excluded from the archery season and those that are to close minded to look at the other side of the coin. I have spent time on the other side of this argument so I feel extremely confident in telling you that I have seen both sides of this argument and after sharing 16 archery seasons with those hunting with crossbows, I have changed my opinion on them and came to realize that far more good than bad comes from allowing them in archery season.

No I really don't and certainly no more legitimate than data's rebutal's of the differences between compounds and traditional equipment.

If I seem less credible to you because I want others, to no benefit of myself, to be able to enjoy archery season, then maybe you need to re-evaluate your reasons for opposing them.

Maybe that's because there is more ground to give on your side;)

I am assuming that you aren't talking to me here because my only intention is to enlightened those that have not been exposed to the admittance of crossbows into the archery season that there was infact nothing to fear and that there are more positives than negatives.

Which you have failed to do and you have been out debated after doing so and you are taking it personally. We all tend to do that at times. It's just a little easier to stand firm when you know are supporting the best interest of our sport;)

I will concede that point but i will tell that the tides are changing and I can only hope to help the effort. While there are many that will never concede to there being a positive side to their introduction, if I can convince just one person that maybe crossbows aren't evil and the scurge of bowhunters everywhere and don't infact pose any threats to the archers they will share their seasons with, then it is worth and it's a moral victory for me regarless of how you feel about the outcome of this debate. Adams appears to have some what reconsidered his stance so that in itself was worth this whole 74 pages IMO.

I will say it again now as I have said many times in this thread, hunters shouldn't lobby against other hunters because when we do there is no need for anti-hunters because we are doing their jobs for them.

[quote]What were your honest intentions when you started this thread?

Because why should he care or get to decide if another archer chooses to use a weapon that gives them slightly more advantage than him. We all hunt for our own reasons and why would you even want to try to dictate your own principles on everyone else when the weapons are so similar in their performance and the differences between them are so trivial and ultimately inconsequential?

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Do you guys ever sleep? I leave work and come back this morning and there are three or four new pages since yesterday afternoon! IMHO every conceivable point has been covered. What does it take to kill this thread? Maybe a diversion, like deer dogs running over your property during deer season univited. Now that would be a good one for discussion! :D

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Silent, I see how you came up with you figures.. now please try and see how I arrived at mine. I see you factored on the 2% of total harvest, but I think that is the wrong number to use to give you the clear picture of what a crossbow group does to an archery season.. that number is 30% of deer killed during archery season in Arkansas were from crossbows. 30% ... to get 30% you have 3 options, 1. some "bow hunters" put down their bows and started hunting with crossbows 2. some gun hunters who did not bow hunt before felt comfortable enough with a crossbow to hunt with it and started using the archery season 3. Brand new hunters who never hunted before grabbed crossbows and entered the woods during archery season. If just 10% of the harvest during archery season were to be made by gun hunters who did not care to learn archery but felt comfortable with a crossbow.. and I am leaning WAY to the conservative side as I would put money it was closer to 25% of crossbow kills ... but say 10% for arguments sake were gun hunters who killed deer with crossbows, but would not hunt with archery gear. In Arkansas that's no big deal, we're talking hundreds of thousands of deer. But in NH, with 10,000 total deer killed, and 2000 in archery, an extra 10% is significant. Which is why we chose to allow crossbow hunters to hunt during the firearms season so they still have the opportunity to hunt, but will not raise the total deer kill during archery to high. I would support a Crossbow Season as well, as that would allow the Fish and Game to vary the season according to overall season goals. What I don't think is smart in our state is to add a new weapon to our archery season as crossbow hunters could affect the dynamic's of the season so greatly as to possibly cause the season to be made shorter. Do you see why???? If "Archers" kill 20% of the deer in my state over a 3 month season, and due to a large influx .. hell, even a small to medium influx of additional deer harvested during archery season it would require the shortening of the season to meet the 20% goal harvest for archery season. But do you see what happens? That means less of the archery kill is done by "archers". Shorten the season a bit and less deer will be taken by bows. If NH's archery deer kill numbers were to be made up of 30% crossbows.. then only 70% of deer were killed with Archery equipment. Do you know why? Because 20% of the deer harvest is not an arbitrary number. It is the percentage of deer that NH feels comfortable having killed by archery. 80% are firearms killed, and percentage of about 20% is allocated for ML's.

So my point is .. the deer harvest has been almost flat here in NH for years. If 20% is what Archery takes .. and you are telling me that 30% of archery kills in Arkansas are from Crossbows .. then I tell you that means "Archers" get a lot less deer. So when our state said the "Crossbows" allowable harvest can come from the largest deer kill allotment, the 60% of the total during the firearm season.. I say they got it right.

If you had a state that wanted to kill more total deer, and there are a few, it would make sense to add a Crossbow Season that may or may not be as long as the Archery Season, but could be adjusted, as all seasons are based on what the harvest objective is.

Guys, I don't know how to make it more clear than that .....

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

GRIZZLYMAN - I can type 300 words per minute - thats helps tremendously because I can wear out my opponents who only type with 2 fingers :D

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

MA Jay - so what you're saying is, you think theres just the right ammount of archery hunters right now, your state cannot add an additional few hunters. Correct ?

What if, in the next 2 years, an additional 20% of the gun hunters in your state double up and shoot compounds ?

Will your archery season be destroyed ?

With your point of view - it would seem that we cannot AFFORD any new hunters at all ????

RE: please tell me just one negative to crossbows
 

Even if we use your numbers and say that roughly 20% of your deer are killed by archers in NH. Then let's says 30% of that 2000 were killed by crossbow hunters. You are still only talking about 600 deer. Now that's after 30 years of allowing people to use crossbows that we have reached those percentages. But as several people have mentioned, there isn't a crossbow following out there that wants them to be legalized so there shouldn't be any massive influx of hunters. However, even if 600 are killed by crossbow we can't automatically assume it's all new hunters because a fair percentage of that may be converts, in which case there kills would be neglible because they would have killed the same amount either way. But even in a state like NH, 600 deer as a worst case scenario isn't going to have an overhwhelming effect on your deer herd and if it did they wouldn't look to cut days from the archery season. Do you have large winter kills? If so do they adjust season lengths accordingly for particularly bad years? If so where do they take the days from? Also, is it not worth losing a few days of season for others to have the same oppurtunites to hunt that you do? If not aren't you just serving your own self interest? If so then let's just call it what it is and say "I don't want to share my deer and my season with others who may be less fortunate than myself because I am greedy". I would repsect that answer a lot more. I would still disagree with the stance but at least you guys would have the backbone to admit what you are really saying.