Some comments. John Nail, you have summed it up better than anyone, conduct yourself in a manner that reflects positivly at all times on your sport, a good idea in our lives as well. RL. you are correct, we should never lump people into catagories, ethics have little to do with equipment choices. Author P. The point on rules is well thought out, look at the sports that have had long steady growth and you will see they had few rule changes. Golf is a great example, the material used in a club may have changed but it is still a golf club in FORM, maybe we should look at the form the equipment takes rather than the material to define what is a bow. Towerrat, you certainly offend no one, this forum has a number of people who are very passionate about our choosen sport and all show the maturity to have a disscussion rather than personal attacks on each other, much different than some I have participated in. I admit I have become somewhat of a bow snob, I dont care what another person uses in equipment but I do not consider the modern bow real archery because the form of it has changed and I fear few will speak up and say enough to some of the equipment that is being manufactured. I see that I was wrong in that regards. As long as peolpe can convince others that they must have the latest gadget to enjoy the sport or be successful then we will continue to re invent the gun and that will hurt us in the long run.

I have to admit I was a compound junky for awhile.A 50 yard shot was nothing just another walk in the park a trained ape could do it. I shot ocasionaly just to check my pins and make sure nothing rattled loose.Then a about a year ago I tried a longbow and was hooked.I shot everyday just because i loved to shoot.I then tried a recurve and will NEVER look back I shoot everyday and truly enjoy it.Some of todays high tech toys push the envelope a bit but if the person using it truly enjoys it then more power to them but if they use it because it prolongs the season with no real effort or skill then they will be the ones to end our sport,because it means nothing to them. Troy

RL, I can' t say I remember an e-mail conversation between us. I do so much of it that I can' t keep track. But you know that I' m telling the truth when I say I help out when someone is having problems, regardless of what kind of gear they shoot.

And yes, I am going thru one of my severe anti-technology phases right now. Seems to hit me every year, right after the AMO show, when everyone is talking about all the latest whiz-bang doodads, and griping because nobody has brought out a bow that will break 400 fps.

while reading the feb/mar issue TBH magazine an article stood out to me after viewing this topic so many time with everyone' s opinions and i would like to Quote
the author of this article and he write as follows:

" While i agree that the limits have to be imposed on advancing technology in bowhunting equipment, we are all still bowhunters and our our sport is not well served by trying to fabricate distinctions between us."

the author Michael Dziekan
from Lyons, CO

LBR- i hope that i am allowed to quote other people materials; if not i am sorry.

i write this article because i recently made the decision to switch back to my roots as a youngster. mainly because this is how my dad hunted.but were i am getting at my friends are all compound hunters since i reverted to trad hunting they all like to make lude jestures and comments that i feel that don' t respect me

Ossage,

As Arthur said, P&Y' s 65% rule was put into effect LONG before everyone and their mother had to have 80%.

Also, again...P&Y has NO rule about mechanical broadheads. They do have a minimum broadhead weight, which only one mechanical that I know of it below (70 grains, I think).

JRW

[Deleted by Admins]

John

Interesting comments, some good thoughts. I' m curious to your comments about the sport always being the bastard children of hunting??? Appreciate your view point about this.

Thanks

On the 65% thing, I don' t have the least concern that P&Y did it. I just think it was a mistake.

I said " in retrospect" Arthur, not that at the time they cut people out. I think they hoped it would draw a line, but if nobody observes it, I think it risks making P&Y irrelevant. Of course, they have never been a complete list, so I guess that doesn' t mater.

What is worst for their credibility is that it wasn' t a meaningful restriction. Modern bows are just as hard to hold at 80% as 65%, on a 70# bow, that is an 11 pound difference in holding weight. The holding weight of the 65% bow is about the holding weight of a child' s recurve 25.5# (insome cases easier to shoot that the floppy 80% bow). The majority of archer' s can' t even hold that weight long enough to get off a shot before their form crumbles, because they blew their strength rolling over a massive cam. It it is more difficult, as regards strength, to shoot a 70#/80% cam bow than a 70# recurve, assuming the recurve isn' t being used like a FITA bow with sights etc.... The fact is that most people are overbowed, and will always take more bow than they can manage, regardless of the technology. If a person stayed within the 190 fps area we enjoyed with recurves, back in the early 80s, and applied all the modern gizmos, they would find their new bows trivialy easy to shoot. That isn' t what I see on the range or in the groups. People are still overbowed. The let-off issue wasn' t a threat.

Ossage, I agree with everything you say. It' s what I' ve been trying to tell people all along. Theyre beating themselves up drawing these silly cams, wrench their shoulders when the cam rolls hard into the letoff and pretty much have to pull and hold into the wall to keep the b*stards from ripping their shoulders out of joint. 65% or 80% letoff is meaningless when you have to pull against the wall just to keep the bow drawn!

HOWEVER, P&Y' s reason for making the 65% rule is plain and simple - to maintain a clear and demonstrable difference between bows and crossbows. In other words, and what I believe is true, higher and higher letoffs are an open invitation for crossbows to get into bow seasons. P&Y laid their whole deck of cards on the table, explaining the rationale for their rules, in the Fifth Edition of Bowhunting Records of North American Big Game.

Today' s cams ARE too radical for most people that are shooting them. A whole lot of people are definitely overbowed, and it' s the high letoff that lets them to shoot too much draw weight.

I' ve seen some ladies complaining that 65% letoff would knock them out of hunting. More meadow muffins. There were more ladies shooting and hunting when letoff was 50% than there are now. What they' re basically saying is they aren' t nearly as much woman as those women were a generation ago.

And I could say the same thing about the men who claim they MUST have 300 fps bows in order to keep from wounding animals because of yardage misjudgements. In the first place, sitting there in their comfy treestands with lazer rangefinders, there is absolutely NO reason for a blown yardage estimate. They are also saying they aren' t as good as bowhunters were a generation ago when speeds were only around 200 fps.

I also say that if an animal is so far away that you need a rangefinder, it' s too darn far away to shoot at it.

There' s a guy on another site that signs off, " It' s supposed to be simple, not easy." I agree with that.

Good evening' s work Arthur, we are in total agreement. I had forgoten about all that crossbow (and pod) panic back them. Not sure I agree about the crossbow argument, in the sense that your history is right, but if we agree the bows aren' t easy to shoot, at least as regards holding, then I don' t think it lets the crossbow in. But then I never said they were wrong to try to draw a line, and a line against crossbows is real inportant. In a lot of respects I don' t mind CBs, but the reality is a lot of folks in the field who haven' t given it much thought. That woundings post a few weeks back that I posted was a crossbow deal.

Anyway when your right your right.

Having been a trad shooter, I don' t really buy the argument it is harder. Certain things are harder. My limit is about 30 yards no mater what, but with a compound I can hold a group out to 70 yards though that kind of shooting isn' t easy. I mean it is all easy after 30 some years, when I' ve forgoten the rough bits. I could never shoot like that with a longbow, except with contrived holdover.

Technology promises certain advantages, but so does Trad. So it all depends on the tactical situation. The compound shooter is a bit like the sniper, but snipers only rule certain tactical situations. Anyway it' s all fun.