LBR

Come on now--you are picking and choosing. A bow doesn't have a stock, forearm, or trigger; it can't be pre-cocked (a bow isn't cocked at all--it's drawn) and it isn't shoulder fired. Calling a crossbow a bow is the same as calling a motorcycle a bicycle or a 30.06 a muzzleloader. They have some similarities, but are very different. How about a muzzleloading shotgun--is it the same thing as a muzzleloading rifle? Is a gas-powered scooter the same thing as a Harley?

I have stated my opinion on where compounds have gone and are going. I really don't know what to say there--I'm not anti-hunting or anti-compound by any stretch, but I worry about what will happen in the next 10 years. The same as I worry about compounds if they are allowed in bow season nationwide. Take the advances that have been made to compounds in the past 10 years and apply that to compounds--it don't look good for bowhunters.

I want to pose a question. Say a person owns a house. They may have built it themself, worked hard to pay someone else to build it, or even inherited it and just own it through the hard work of those that went before them. A new family comes over and wants to move in. It's a big house, plenty of room, but this new bunch, nor their relatives or forefathers, had a thing in the world to do with building this house. They just like it and want to make it their own, or at least make you share it with them. Would it be pure selfishness for the owner of the house to turn them away or protest their wanting to move in? By the way, those wanting to move in have their own house also, but they like the looks of this one and want to spend time there too. Or maybe you have some property--50 acres or so. You have your house on it, but there is plenty of room for several more houses--are you going to let them build on it for free? Would you consider yourself selfish?

Chad

datamax

Chad - A bow doesn't have wheels, cams, triggers, sights, sims vibration technology, carbon and aluminum all wrapped up in it, horizontal limbs, 350 fps, drop away rests etc etc either do they ? Oh, wait, they DO

What you are trying to debate is the APPEARANCE of a given bow. A bow can be wrapped in any package and as long as it is two limbs, a string and an arrow - and the functionality of those components stays the same its a bow. Now, G&F adjust what THEY think is legal for an archery season, but thats really not what we're talking about because what is and isn't legal is NOT what truly is and isn't, is it ? Proof ?

Abortion. Its legal, but you and I know its killing an innocent life, don't we ? We KNOW what it is, regardless of what others want to call it (like calling the cat a dog)

Heres the thing with your house scenario Chad. The people that own the house that others are trying to get into are justly upset with the whole scenario, aren't they ? In your example they are archery people, and the people trying to get in are crossbows people. The ironic part ? The people in the house ran out and demanded to have the house from the original occupants 40 years ago and they have forgotten about that. Archery season WAS recurve/longbow primitive season, then came the compounds who demanded to be let in.


And now, crossbows are demanding what compounds once did - and now they are fighing against that which they once were. Irnoy at its best, isn't it ? And they are losing, with more and more states realizing that hey, modern compounds are NOT primitive, might as well make crossbows legal. besides, nothing negative have come from them being legal in AR,IA, GA etc etc.

Arthur P

datamax, it certainly IS entirely true. Watch those deer hunting shows and tell me how many of those guys get into their stand, draw their bow first thing and hold it for hours, waiting for an animal to show up. NONE of them do. They don't draw until the animal is sighted and it's obvious the animal is coming into their range. I've already voiced my disgust at the concept of drawing and holding for an extended period of time before taking the shot. But I also know that tapes can be edited and scenes lengthened to heighten the viewers anticipation and interest. In other words, don't believe everything you see on TV.

Crossbowers get into their stand and immediately cock and load their weapon. Rifle hunters get into their stand and immediately load their weapon. Shotgun hunters, muzzleloaders and handgun hunters do the same. Again, effective range and method of propulsion are meaningless. Mode of operation is what puts the crossbow into the same category as guns.

I DO want more BOWhunters because there is, indeed, strength in numbers. Key word there being bowhunters, not crossbow hunters. And I want those new hunters to be active in defending BOWhunting and promoting BOWhunting to the masses. The crossbow contingent is focused solely on promoting their agenda by trying to shove bowhunters aside and taking over established bowseasons rather than doing the work to establish their OWN seasons. Like archers did. Like buckskinners did for muzzleloaders. The very fact they refuse to work for their own seasons precisely illustrates the opportunistic, lazy, greedy, selfish nature of the crossbow community at large.

Are there exceptions? Certainly. I'm sure there are many ethical, hard working individuals who simply to like hunting with crossbows. I'd be proud to share a campfire with them - in the appropriate season of course. But, just like what's happened with the compound, for every one of those guys the crossbow will bring several unethical slobs into the mix. And that will erode our strength rather than benefit us.

Two years ago, all the local TV stations ran a story about a wounded goose at a local park, which was portrayed as being shot by a 'bowhunter' and had an 'arrow' sticking in it's neck. It had actually been shot with a crossbow and had a crossbow bolt sticking in it. The short length and dished metal nock was a dead giveaway that it had been shot with a Barnett crossbow. I called each station to point out the true facts. Only one station - Fox 4 - actually ran my comment on air and corrected the mistake.

Did that idiot with a crossbow help strengthen bowhunting? NO. Quite the contrary. Whoever it was played right into the hands of the anti-hunters and the footage the stations ran probably turned a lot of public sentiment against us.

Do the loudmouthed, camo-clad urban commandos smeared with mud and blood who waltz into an eatery and make a spectacle of themselves help strengthen bowhunting? NO. They are disgusting morons and the public who is exposed to them will tend to judge us ALL by their actions.

The compound has brought way too many of that kind of people into bowhunting. We don't need the crossbow to make things even worse.

datamax

LOL ! Did you watch Primos big Bulls 7 I believe it was ? The guy HEARS a bull coming through the woods and draws. It steps out and starts coming full bore towards the hunter - head on. No shot. The guy must have held for maybe 2 minutes at VERY close range. The second he turned to run the guy released and the bull was double lungs. No way it would have been done with a recurve. No way. Scenes like that are in every show I watch. Absolutely no was a trad hunter could have shot with that animsl looking up, or walking, or after the guy grunts etc etc. I watch a lot of shows, I know what happens and what doesn't.

You comments on quality bowhunters, wounded animals, participation in archery ......... absolutely non of that has to do with choice of bow.

Want proof ? I'm active in my States Archery association (non-crossbow). I'm pretty quality as far as ethics and all. I could go out and buy a crossbow tommorrow, hunt with it this fall and what say you ? I'm a bad hunter ? I'm not quality ? Im bad for hunting ?

No, you couldn't say that at all. So, how are you judging who IS good for archery and who isn't ? I went to tradgang one day, months ago, and read a thread on missing deer. Absolutely astonishing the replies. Missed 8 times,l 12 time, 20 times ........ the replies were almost unbelievable except they were turhtful responses. Look at Ricardo's polar bear hunt. How "clean" was that ? had he used a compound/crossbow that bear would have been one shot one kill. He even said as much, that he uses a compound now for big game like that.

You see, the crossbow isn't brining in bad hunters, it really isn't, no more so that compounds and recurves/longbows do.

Now, what i really respect are guys who draw the line and say "no technology" and its all inclusive. No crossbows, no compounds - they've drawn a clear line and their argument is sound and without flaw.

Arthur P

If you're arguing that people should only hunt with weapons that never miss, then there will never be any hunting of any kind, anywhere. I've seen people miss, even with scoped rifles. I've seen animals wounded and lost by guys using with scoped rifles, far more often than I've seen them wounded and lost with traditional bows. If you are arguing that people should only hunt with weapons that give them the best chance of killing an animal in the easiest, most efficient way possible, then you are arguing against using a bow or crossbow. If you are saying that the crossbow will only bring genuinely concerned, ethical people into our ranks, then you know you are telling a huge whopper!

FYI, a nearby WMA requires a proficiency test for prospective hunters for their annual draw hunt. Our club has put on an annual shoot so those hunters could complete their proficiency test to hunt there. For the past 11 years, I have seen quite a collection of guys trying to pass the test. It's quite simple. 14 deer size McKenzie targets, 30 yards max, scoring is 10-8-5 and, to qualify, the hunter has to score a minimum of 80% of the total possible score. I have yet to see a traditional shooter fail the test. On the other hand, I've seen a suprizing number of compound shooters walking off to the lanes while wiping cobwebs off their sights and rests. Most of them didn't even take a few warmup shots on the practice range to check their sights! The stink they raise when they fail to qualify! And, naturally, they got extremely ticked when I suggested they might have done better if they had practiced a couple of weeks before trying to qualify.

Right now, I'm only 17 days shy of having 50 years of bow shooting under my belt, and including my days of hunting rabbits and squirrels and varmints as a kid, have been using a bow for hunting for 47 years. I've served 20 terms as an officer in two different local clubs. With more members but fewer willing to devote their time and energy to serving as officers themselves, I've been forced into holding several different offices at one time over the past 11 years. I've been on the planning committee for at least 500 archery tournaments (local, state and regional) and served as a tournament director for nearly a hundred of those. So much of my time has been devoted to working on the local level that I've not been very active in my state orgs, but I do go to the game commission public input meetings as often as I can, to give my support. And that is where this debate will be decided, not on these forums.

I believe I have earned the right to be a bit judgemental over the kind of people and equipment that is in the sport nowadays. And I probably have a far better knowledge of how the attitude of bowhunters has changed over the years than you do. Your variety of stinkin' thinkin' is a symptom of what is wrong with bowhunting today. Technology has given the majority of 'bowhunters' the impression that shooting a modern bow is so easy that they don't have to devote any of their time and energy into practicing. They feel they can safely ignore archery until bow season starts. You have the mistaken notion that MORE technology (ie. the crossbow) will save us, while I believe it will only worsen our condition.

Why is traditional bowhunting growing so fast compared to the compound segment? Because more and more people every year are finding it is more challenging and they're finding that the challenge is what makes it more enjoyable. Since they enjoy their shooting more, they are more likely to be involved in archery as a sport and recreation. And they are more willing to share their sport with their friends, neighbors and relatives, rather than stuffing their gear into a dark corner in the closet and ignoring it for months at a time.

If you really want to promote the growth of bowhunting, then quit trying to shove the crossbow down everyone else's throat and promote traditional archery.

Banned Back

Almost exactly opposite what I have seen and experienced. Granted I've only been trad shooting for 3 years and have only been to a handful of shoots and all. But if what you're saying is true, recurves/longbows are much better weapons to shoot with if you use your proficiency test observations as a guidline. It would stand to reason then that a lot of 3D shoots are won by trad shooters ? A lot of pop up 3D's won by trad shooters ? P&Y record book is dominated by recurve/longbow kills ?


No, compounds dominate all the above because they are vastly more accurate contrary to what you've seen.

Promote archery by saying you shoot my kind of bows the way I like them and adhere to my personal ethics etc etc - who's shoving what ? On the contrary I say if compounds are allowed, there is absolutely no reason to not also allow crossbows. They are not that much unlike anymore Arthur, they really aren't and neither is anything at all like shooting a trad bow.

So for bowhunting sake, since I know compound will never go away, I'm all for strengthening bowhunting numbers and adding the crossbows as legal archery weapons. Why not ? We've had them almost 30 years in Arkansas, we have 4 1/2 months of season and NEVER EVER have they been a negative to bowhunting/archery contrary to what you might believe.

You are personally against them, but what you lack is any definitive proof at all to BE against them, and that is the crux of your losing battle. I can prove that too - GA and MS and now KY and others realizing there is no reason to not allow them, and they are and no, its not just based on special intrest lobbying groups. Its also based on G&F data

LBR

As far as I know there is no legislation pending in MS to allow them--that was Alabama. That decision wasn't based on the will of the people or findings by the dept. of wildlife--it was decided by a committee, at least one of which has strong ties to the industry and a strong conflict of interests in being on that board. They made the decision IN SPITE of petitions signed by the people and evidence given by the dept. of wildlife.

Chad

Arthur P

Banned Buck/datamax/Stealthycat, I might have been born at night, but it wasn't LAST night. It's the crossbow special interest group that is pushing the crossbow! Duh!!

I've already shot down the false premise you brought up in the post under one of your other handles (datamax) that adding the crossbow will add to our numbers and strength, so there's no reason to go through all that again.

But I AM glad you point out that bowhunters are losing. Very precise and accurate terminology. I wish more bowhunters would wake up and see that they are losing something special to the crossbow faction. It also illustrates the militant pro-crossbow crowd's point of view. They don't simply want us to share the woods with them. In their mind, we are here to be conquered and have our special time in the woods stripped from us by force. Why? Blind jealousy is the only reason I can think of.

LBR

First, I want to apologize to everyone. I let my personal feelings take over. This thread doesn't touch on tradtional archery much at all, has largely been a compound and crossbow thread, and has the makings of going downhill. I'm going to lock it, and ask that another thread on this subject isn't brought up on the trad board.

Thanks,

Chad