Well frankly, we never used the term Traditional in everyday language until after the compound bow hit the market. We had no need, it was all just archery. Now it seems we must define what we do when it is almost indescribable.

I’m an archer. I hunt with the bow, I shoot stumps and I love watching arrows fly. It has nothing to do with words or terms….it’s a personal kinship….me, my bows and my arrows.
To me they are constituents, to be entertained and respected; to share my time with, and to take care of. Just touching the riser of my favorite bow can take me to the deepest woods, in the farthest forest destination, without a single step being taken. That’s my archery.

When I use the word “traditional” as a modifier — whether “traditional archer” or “traditional-values hunters” (the latter to include all weapons choices but a similar worldview) — I am thinking and implying an attitude of “doing more with less.” More personal involvement, less purchased shortcuts. There are of course endless degrees of traditionalism, with the purest exemplified by what we call “primitive,” as embodied by Chad Sivertsen who builds his own selfbows and arrows and accessories and hunts with exceedingly strict personal “fair chase” rules. Is primitive, being the purest example of traditional, therefore “the best it gets”? Well it sure is for Chad and that’s all that counts! I’m somewhere in the middle and cut myself the slack to hunt more primitive or less, depending on situation and mood. I own two wood longbows I built myself, and two gorgeous Shrews. I shoot woodies and I shoot carbons. I don’t use blinds or treestand mostly because I don’t like sitting in trees and I don’t want anything I have to haul with effort and set up and take down and worry about leaving in the woods when I’m not there;and I’d rather spend what little money I have for hunting on travel than on gear. It’s more a practical than an aesthetical decision. Seems easiest, bottom line, to define “traditional” with a simple broad distinction between traditional and not: Traditional archers and bowhunters basically are do-it-yourself folks who want to invest as much of themselves as possible in our sporting passions … while non-traditionalists are seeking every advantage they can buy or hire, viewing the goal single-mindedly as “Success equals killing, period!” All arguments of “better” and “superior” aside, I am convinced of this much: We traditionalists have a lot more fun! :D:D

I’m here, therefore I’m Traditional. My words are as I hunt.

Well said Dave. I’d like to add that traditional methods, whether they be with bow or rifle, tend to draw a certain type of hunter. Traditionalists count among their ranks, some of the most ardent and skillful woodsmen. When talking about traditional bowhunters, the weapon is only part of what defines him. His words and actions can’t, in technical terms, exclude him from our ranks, but he will never be truly traditional, in my mind, if he shoots a longbow but talks and acts like an idiot. There are a few “traditional bowhunters” that have the right weapon but the wrong attitude. These folks never last and, after proving to themselves and their buddies that they can kill something with a recurve (usually with the aid of a range finder, scentlock, and every other gadget they can find to give them an edge), they scurry back to the compound. I’ve always said that when a traditional bowhunter can have a very nice critter just out of range, but well within range of the compound or rifle they could be hunting with, and not wish for a more efficient weapon, he’s there.

Oh, this will be an interesting confluence of conforming and differing opinions!
Grabbing my ever present American Heritage(?!) dictionary, let us define ‘Traditional’adj. from [< Latin tradere, hand over; TRANS- +dare, give]- Tradition n 1. The passing down of a culture from generation to generation, esp. orally. 2a. A custom handed down. b. A set of such customs viewed as a coherent body of precedents influencing the present. Syns are heritage, inheritance, legacy.
I think we would agree, most erudite gentlemen(and ladies if present) that definition 2a&b seems most appropiate to our discussion of what is a Traditional Bowhunter but #1 is of no less importance. Since none of us invented the bow, the string and arrow but they have been passed down from a distant past by a human or humans not unlike ourselves in basic aspects, if they were flashforwarded to our 21st century would they understand and know how to use those three basic components. Well, hell yes!, and then they could teach us how to hunt!
We, as trads of this time, choose of our own volition to follow the old paths, the harder but, to us, more fulfilling method in kind if not with more modern materials configured like the same instruments of the past. We choose to limit ourselves in our equipment and methods of shooting and hunting- the burning question is, why? Are we some kind of Neanderthal troglodytes mired in a romantic, nostalgic quest for a past that never was when we could, at the cost of many iou notes, possess the treasures of American ingenuity, marketing and our love of shiny, new gadgets? Behold! the new 323fps compound with all the bells and whistles-the Whizzer and it shoots the new nano Whizzies- be able to wound at unprecedented distances in comfort and ease!
The answer, of course, is a resounding-Yes! Along with respect for our ancestors and the game we pursue, the physical and mental challenges that we constantly try to overcome-or, in my case, accomodate!
Simplicity in a stick, a string and an arrow, eyes and muscles sharpened by practice, to walk in a pristine wilderness where others have passed with the same items in hand, with the same intent-connection with them, ourselves and companions and that which is higher than us. The bow of a new moon; the gorgeous arc of a rainbow, the swirling feathers of a well-loosed shaft do and will always continue to amaze me.
Or,I think Idabow said it much more concisely, Mr. Stout more poetically and our one and only Dave Petersen is right- We just have more fun!
Bert- P.S. If I have a 1980’s Bear Whitetail II, is that considered a ‘traditional’ compound? Ha!!! (for those who don’t know me, I prefer to shoot my 50# longbow)

bates777 wrote: How is a traditonal bowhunter defined through his (her) words, actions, or equipment?:?:

I agree with everyone who has posted here. I think George put it most simply. My only addition to would be the personal challenge and the romance of the bow. There is just something wonderful about the simplicity of longbows/recurves. It all equals fun, fun, fun!

For those of us that started hunting in BCE (Before Compound Era), it was just called Archery then, as George has stated. Last I looked most state regulations still call it – just Archery Season. I prefer laminated longbows and wooden arrows, sure it may mean I’m more “traditional” than the compound bowhunter in terms of equipment, but what if I use treestands, all the deer scent money can buy, UV Killer, the latest scent free, electro-magnetic free camo patterned clothing, grunt tubes, etc, etc, am I still traditional? Why heck the guy going into the woods with his wool pants and plaids on carrying only a 30-30 is more traditional than that! I am a bowhunter, as are my compound brothers, what makes us traditional are the self imposed limits of fair chase and values that we bring along with us, in pursuit of our game.

I believe Dave nailed it again! Well said!