Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

I know it is not politically correct to be anti modernist but the April issue of Bow hunting World which I receive as an IBO member has several articles that make me proud to not be correct in this sense. First, Chuck Adams and his article , Accuracy lessons learned afield. This camo clad menace as he calls himself has sight pins set at seventy yards and has no problem shooting at such yardage. Second, the Pete Sheply article where he states that Pope and Young has a number of " sillyrules" we need to get rid of such as open on impact broadheads and 65 % let off, and then states he is a bit of an archery romanticist. Third Bernie Pellerite and his article on bow tuning ( not neccessary sez Bernie) Why do we as traditionalist feel we must stay united with such garbage when it is exactly this sort of thing that will hurt bow hunting for all of us. The idea of stand united or all fall seems some what false if we realise that eventually it will be the non hunting public (not the antis) that decide our fate and how will we be able to say lazer sights, trigger releases,high let off bows and the like is a primitive sport deserving of a seperate season ?

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

I can' t come up with a politically correct response, other than to say I' ve always felt the air inside the ' big tent' was a little foul.

Actually, most compound shooters don' t give a flip about how trads feel about where they are taking the sport. Lack of consideration and respect is something I' ve never been able to stomach. And you have to recognize that compounds make up anywhere from 92-95% of all bowhunters, according to whatever stats you happend to be looking at, so THEY are the ones that are driving the truck. But since they don' t care what we think, I don' t think they would have any right at all to cry when they wreck the truck and we decide to walk off on our own.

I just hope it doesn' t come to that.

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

I don' t think it' s politcaly correct to hunt at all from the general public view. It' s not the first thing they' ve a corrupted view of though. As far as the 70 pin sight thing goes, if he can handle it, go for it. I know a lot of people don' t agree with this ' cause of unseeable branches, but in open country where trees are scarce I don' t think that' ll be a problem. All the same, in common deer woods a 70 yard shot would be unneccessary. As for the Pope and Young deal about silly rules, it' s my understanding that Pope and Young is a private organization. If they decide you have to chew gun and wear your shoes backwards while hunting to make it in, they have every right. If Mr. Sheply doesn' t like it, he can start his own club. A little technilogical advancement isn' t such a bad thing, but some of the stuff I' ve seen sounds ridiculous. If it' ll get more people into hunting responsibly, then hey why not; but if it' s just a gimic to get more game, I think the hunting world in general can do without. As far as a separate season, that' s a mighty wicked hornets' nest you' re stirring if you' re saying what I think you' re saying. :D I guess I' ll need my Raid :D I think the concept is pretty novel as long as it doesn' t take away from the other seasons. However, I fear there would be a lot of people who shouldn' t hunt with the stuff that will do it anyways just so they can spend more time hunting and have another shot at getting some game. If that' s going to be the result, I' d rather just hunt with all the high tech stuff.

Brandan

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

That Pete Shepley......states that P & Young ought to get out of politics. He thinks anything is ok, short of a CO2 power assisted arrow(I think) or maybe he said bow. Maybe his trouble was that he couldn' t make an Osage bow that lasted longer than one Summer.
I thought I had let my subscripton to that magazine go. My wife must have sent in a payment.

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

First, P&Y has no rule about mechanical broadheads. However, I' m not suprised that the founder/owner of Pull Shoot Explode, and a crossgun manufacturer, would have an axe to grind with P&Y.

Second, about bow tuning: Sadly, that' s what it' s come down to. Plum the bow in a vise, level the nock, centershot the rest, screw on mechanicals, and go hunt. Ever wonder why some people think they need 60 foot punds of Ke to shoot through a deer? Because they' re shooting them with corkscrews.

JRW

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

It is NOT politically correct to have this discussion in this forum. It would best be held in the bowhunting or technical forum where it is perfectly acceptable to shoot mechanical heads. As for the rest of it, it is not even acceptable there. It is buffoons like that gives archery a bad name!

Bill - Maybe I' m not PC on this one - Lamb

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

May not be politically correct to discuss it here. Probably politically correct at all for that matter, but it' s appropriate. My personal feeling is that the further compounds ' progress' the harder it' s going to be to maintain our season' s status as a primitive weapons season. When you' ve got guys shooting game at 50-60 yards and further, you' re talking handgun distances.

In fact, last time I went to one of our game commission' s public input meetings, there were a couple of guys wanting to open up bow season to handguns. And then there' s the crossbow lobby that' s been trying to push their way in. LOTS of people don' t like bowhunters having exclusive access to the pre-rut (and, in states with l-o-n-g bow seasons, the whole rut too).

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

When I say it is not P.C I mean that we as traditionalist are often hesitant to say what we may feel because then you come across as someone who is against compounds. Since the majority of people shoot compounds what they do must be ok it seems. Who is going to say when we have " progressed" enough. Mr Sheply points out that he thinks we can go to far but he has never seen any of the more outrageous equipment choices in the woods. I am glad he has not but if these people can afford to keep advertising this stuff then somebody is buying it. There is even a kit available to make a Ruger 10/22 rifle shoot an arrow. Is this archery? Whos to say it is not anymore. As far as standing with the majority because there is strength in numbers and we need to stand together to fight the anti hunters then consider this. We will not change the antis mind anymore than they will ours. The vast majority of people are not hunters or anti hunters they are non hunters and when the image that is being presented when we go to far is looked on by them as non primitive they will vote to regulate us right in with the gun hunters because they will not see the difference between a modernist and a traditionalist. It seems we can all fall together just as easily by standing together and being afraid to go against the majority. Our own silence will be our end.

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

Darryl

I understand what you' re saying about not changing some peoples minds, whether they be hunters or anti-hunters I don' t waste time in discussions with them anymore. It' s their opinion and I' ve decided to simply agree to disagree, then move on to the people whom we can influence.

I agree with you about the non-hunters being the opinion we need to influence.

RE: Politically correct to be a traditionalist ?
 

I don' t see the problem with any of those coments. Chuck Adams at 70 yards is old news. I don' t entirely know why he writes these things, but he is by all accounts (usualy his own) a good archer, starting back in recurve at college days. Tiger Woods can hit it 340 and keep it in the fairway, doesn' t mean I can. There are guys out there shooting 3D every weekend who are hitting the 12 ring with a large percentage of shots, their group might open out to a tennis ball at 70 yards. I personaly think this is risky, but so are a lot of shots. Anyway, the tradtion of traditionalists is nicely expressed throughout the literature with 100+ yard shots.

The P&Y thing is complex. On the one hand I think it is good that they drew a line. Like any line it is arbitrary, and open to rebutal. In retrospect I think the 65% let-off was a mistake, they cut out a lot of shooters, and most compounds, and yet I don' t think there is a big difference in shooting between 80 and 65, so it may have been a mistake. The open on impact broadheads are a big mistake. In the right circumstaces they are a better bet than regular heads, so I think it is counter ethical.

Bernie is a great guy. Very ethical, did me a big favour over some product lost in the mail. He has a boastful maner, but my dealings tell me he is a good guy. There is no way he believes you don' t need to tune. I mean there are ways of getting around tuning, and perfect tune isn' t always the most accurate, but no tune isn' t the answer either. Until the Black Widow video/manual came out a while back the majority of trad archers tunned their bows by installing large fletches, so tunning degrees mean different things to different archers. On the compound side, people seem to spent a lot of time tuning, and little time shooting, tunig isn' t as demanding as trying to improve your score. Like the guys who think they are great rifle shots, because they work on their handloads every weekend on the bench. SO I think there needs to be a little ballance.

I think trad archery is for some people a similar kind of avoidance. If you can do with a longbow what most can only do with a compound, then you are a hell of an archer. But take hunting for a minute, 80-90 percent of hunters aren' t succesful. Far better to be an unsuccessful trad archer, than an unsuccessful compound hunter, and no particular effort is required.