Treed-itional?

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#3158

Note: I broke this up until several posts so it hopefully wouldn’t be too lengthy….

I read Kirby Kohler’s piece in the latest issue, “Treed Partridges” with interest. I fully respect the author’s point of view, and if the goal was simply to make the reader think more consciously about the choices they make and the technology that they employ (or don’t) while hunting, then I’d say it was a successful piece, whether you agree with the author’s point of view or not.

But it also made me think more about this whole slippery, nebulous idea of “traditional,” and specifically how/why we make the choices we do, being based on whether something is “traditional” or not. To be clear – I’m not criticizing the article or the author, just sharing thoughts that occurred to me while reading it;

Here’s the danger I see in adhering to something because you feel it’s “traditional,” particularly when you’re talking about an activity that spans thousands of years – what “tradition” are you adhering to, exactly? And why do most people who pursue something because it is “traditional” seem to arbitrarily stop the clock at some random point on the timeline and declare that this was the era that embodies whatever “traditional” is about? (fly fishing, with “traditional purists” adhering to dry flies, when wet flies are actually much older, is another classic example of this)

For example, I see a lot of “traditional” archers who seem to choose the era of Fred Bear (roughly the 30’s to the 50’s) as the peak of the traditional era, and model their ideas of what is “traditional” based on that. They eschew modern camoflage for example, because Fred wore a wool shirt and a fedora (actually, he did wear camoflage once it became readily available, but that’s not how most people seem to want to romanticize it…).

But let’s pretend Fred never wore camo – what about the hundreds of generations of hunters before him who did? Why don’t we revere that tradition? Without a doubt, archers throughout the centuries have used a variety of techniques to camoflage themselves – from mud, paint and leaves applied directly to the body, and even particular types of clothing that broke up the human profile. Why do we not acknowledge this as “traditional” and instead think that a wool shirt and a fedora is? Rather, again because of some completely arbitrary turning point in the romanticized timeline, Pre-Fred (for lack of a better term) approaches would get referred to instead as “primitive.” If there is a consistent logic to any of this, I’m failing to find it.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#17073

Another example – wood shafts. It’s common to perceive wood shafts as “more traditional” than aluminum or carbon. I think that the reality for most of archery’s history is that archers used the best damn material they could get their hands on, which until quite recently, was wood. But do you think they would have turned their noses up at something that performs better, is more durable and requires less maintenance and tuning? I highly doubt it. They weren’t consumed with romantic ideas of being “traditional” – they used whatever worked best and gave an advantage, and I bet they would have been happy to use a more modern, durable material if it had been available.

Dacron strings? Why not sinew, if you have a problem with non-wood shafts as well? Accepting Dacron, and turning your nose up at carbon or aluminum seems pretty inconsistent to me. And why exactly is a pop-up blind so philosophically different than cobbling together a natural one? Is this really some sort of dividing line? Again, I see no consistent logic to any of this. But maybe it’s my mistake for expecting it to be logical.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#17076

I’m the first one to point out that hunting has gone WAY overboard in terms of reliance on gadgetry and marketing and just sheer laziness, to the detriment of skill. But at the same time, I really don’t care about adhering to some vague notion of “tradition.”

Which isn’t to say that I don’t have a great deal of respect for those who came before me, and that I don’t strive to be well-versed in history. But shooting a longbow for me, and hunting with it, isn’t about acting out some sort of nostalgic costume game from an arbitrary era in the past that I perceive as ideal – it’s about the fact that, for me, shooting a longbow is aesthetically pleasing, provides challenge and also makes a lot of practical sense in the backcountry, in terms of keeping things as simple and reliable as possible. We all make our choices, but for me, I’m just saying – it doesn’t come down to whether something is viewed as “traditional” or not. This is 2011, not 1940, and I believe I can still adhere to the principles of simplicity, craftsmanship, skill and restraint – the very values that Kohler advocates for, and that have guided archers throughout the ages, without needing to pretend I’m living in the past.

And I would suggest that it’s possible to be a “modern” archer and still hunt with a longbow, while living in our own era, without subscribing to training wheels and all the other associated crap. I think that particularly if we want to get more young people excited about it, this is essential. If we live in the past, we run the risk of being left there.

[SteveMcD]

#17140

Smithhammer… I totally agree with you. Traditional does mean different things to different people. I believe the term “Traditional” was born out of the need to separate
Longbow and Recurve Archery & Bowhunting, from the newly developed “Mechanical Arrow Launcher” back in the mid to late 70’s. It is not a Bow. It is a mechanical device that launches an arrow. And I don’t apologize for this opinion. As Confucius stated, “if the shoe fits, wear it”! When I first started bow hunting it was still just called Archery then. No need for distinction then. I had a Ben Pearson Model 304 Take Down Fiberglass Longbow.

Were there Metal Risers in the 50’s & 60’s – yes there were.
Were there bow sights in the 50’s & 60’s – yes there were.
Were there Non-Wooden Arrows in the 50’s & 60’s – yes there were (MicroFlites).
And there was plenty of WWII Camo available to wear too.
The Baker Treestand did not come out yet, so we built treestands out of 2×4’s and plywood.

Again I agree. I really don’t care of someone wants to hunt with a Mechanical Arrow Launcher or a Crossbow for that matter. Whatever rows your boat. I know the Elite Trad Police have a different opinion here. But, again to each his own. I choose the longbow for many reasons, the beauty and aesthetics of the bow itself, watching the true muscle guided flight of the arrow I made myself, the personal challenge, the history, the allure and romance that “traditional” archery has to offer. A Wooden Bow and A Wooden Arrow has a natural connection to nature, the earth, the past and the future – it is my (our) connection. They are works of art and skill combined.

The more alarming things I see, such as what I saw on TV last night……. Now you do not have to scout or even go into the woods (except once maybe). Moutrie is offering package programming deals to “hunters”, just slap that Moutrie on a tree, and sit back and they will send all the pictures you want directly to your computer or cell phone. That.. and the new “programmable” Code Blue DOUBLE SCENT Dispenser so you can spread twice as much stink in the woods, and waste twice as much money at one time. THIS MY FRIENDS IS PARADISE LOST. It is not hunting, in any sense of the term.

SH.. yeah I agree. A twenty-something in a Fedora is almost comical. Although, I hate baseball caps myself. And Fred Bear.. personally, He preferred Bucket Hats!!! The Fedora was his marketing image.

[MCuiksa]

#17198

My definition of traditional is simple (but not necessarily agreed upon by all):

1) Shoot a bow without wheels, without sights, without releases. (Although I still have not decided if the carbon nano coming out is a traditional bow – since it’s advertised in TBM and I have the utmost respect for TBM I’ll assume it is traditional until proven otherwise).
2) Put time in before the season tuning your setup, sharpening broadheads, etc out of respect for the game you hunt for a quicker, higher percentage kill.
3) Doff your cap after the kill and thank God and the animal for what’s been provided.
4) Keep the ATV out of the hunting area.

After those “standard” requirements, I think we all just vary on whether we are at the “Primitive” end of the traditional spectrum or at the “Modern” end. Decisions such as factory made treestands vs 2×4’s, treebark camo vs wool breakups, popups vs natural blinds, wood vs carbon, factory game calls vs none (or natural), etc are small sub-categories for our overall large family of Traditional Hunters. Just my opinion. Mike.

[Dan Sweeney]

#17303

Woe unto us, pharisees.

Most people, even the best of folks, have a natrual tendency to settle into a comfort zone of some sort/type and then to look askance at anyone who does not conform.

Here is an irony. See if you noticed/agree: We tend to view with the most suspicion those who are very similar, but different in relativly few ways rather than those who are vastly different. I have noticed this in myself. I look down upon crossbow hunters more than I do modern gun hunters, and look down upon inline muzzleloaders more than I do modern gun hunters, BECAUSE THE MODERN GUN HUNTER IS NOT TRYING TO IMITATE ANYTHING. Does this mean the crossbow or inline muzzleloader is INHERENTLY wrong, or is it a problem with my own perception? Good question. This is something I know that I, at least, must keep a close watch upon. While I certainly believe in self-imposed limitation and restriction, it’s all too easy to heap burdons on others’ backs.

Naturally, this same line of thought can be applied to camo, arrow shaft material, bow material, hunting “tactics” (sorry. Infantryman), and any number of other situations.

I’m eschewing any position or side of anything here; just offering some food for thought.

[MCuiksa]

#17310

Dan, I’ll dispute your point about crossbows and inline muzzleloaders for one reason:
Archery season and Muzzleloader seasons were set aside for those of us who prefer a challenge. By allowing crossbows in the archery season or inline muzzleloaders in the muzzleloader season then we are tainting that special season with weapons that are more powerful than originally intended. I have no qualms with inlines or crossbows if they are part of the gun season. They, in my opinion, should not be part of a special season. With respect, Mike.

[strait-aero]

#17531

What Mike said! 8) It hit the nail on the head…..:roll:
Wayne

[SteveMcD]

#18059

Well… I rather not comment any further on this thread. These arguments on what is more traditional get too divisive.
Time to pick up the bow and go shoot!

Good Hunting, Everyone!

[Nate Bailey]

#18192

Traditional has more to do with the Hunter than the equipment, as far as I am concerned. I know traditional rifle hunters, bow hunters, and such. Most of my direct mentors were rifle hunters, yet they were the most traditional “woodsman” I know. Most of them are to old, or gone, to do what they once did, but they have instilled in me the values I have carried season after season. it was natural I gravitated to traditional archery, as it seems to be in line with those values. The hunting “industry” continues to move farther away from them. Traditional Hunting lives in the old philosophy of being part of nature rather then ruleing it. Just my two cents.

[David Petersen]

#18277

I’ll comment on two points brought up in this good thread. First, harking back to Bruce’s original take on personal equipment choice — like so many issues these complex days, the “what is traditional” question is to some degree just a matter of semantics. The subset of trad folks who choose to use only the simplest and generally oldest technologies, and to make as much of it themselves as possible — selfbows with sinew backing, dacron and even sinew strings, hand-carved wood arrows and flint points, and who sometimes enjoy dressing in skins they’ve prepared themselves — these folks, technically, are not traditionalists but “primitive” bowhunters. Often in discussions about these issues we neglect to separate them out and roll them into “traditional” as “extremists.” Second, what Mike said is the beating heart of the “what is traditional” argument and the only part that really counts; yet it often goes unrecognized. Whose business is it what other hunters choose to hunt with so long as it’s ethical and sporting? None of mine, even though I believe that the more shortcuts and crutches you use, the less you get out of hunting. Where equipment choice DOES matter is the politics of hunting seasons. Archery and BP seasons are long and early because they are considered by most states as under the category of “primitive weapons,” and thus inefficient. Gradually, as states succumb to techno-creep by allowing far more modern and functionally efficent weapons into nominally “primitive weapons” seasons — compound and now xguns in archery, and all manner of modern improvements in the BP world from inlines to sabots to modern sighting systems–the more hunters use these seasons and the more game gets killed, threatening the continuation of our privileged “inefficient weapons” seasons. Why is NRA a major supporter of xguns in archery seasons? See above: the more modern weapons we have in “primitive weapons” seasons, the stronger the argument becomes from the gun lobby to shorten archery season in favor of longer rifle seasons. This, thus, becomes far far more than merely a matter of what gear a person tends to hunt with discussion, morphing into a matter of the very survival of our traditional “traditional” seasons. And so far, bowhunters have remained largely asleep at the wheel insofar as speaking out in favor of keeping modern hi-tech weapons out of primitive-weapons seasons. This is not a mere matter of personal opinion, but rather a matter of the very survival of traditional bowhunting. So much of politics these days is insidious, that the majority, who aren’t paying attention, just don’t see it until it’s too late. Dave

[Nate Bailey]

#18558

David Petersen wrote: I’ll comment on two points brought up in this good thread. First, harking back to Bruce’s original take on personal equipment choice — like so many issues these complex days, the “what is traditional” question is to some degree just a matter of semantics. The subset of trad folks who choose to use only the simplest and generally oldest technologies, and to make as much of it themselves as possible — selfbows with sinew backing, dacron and even sinew strings, hand-carved wood arrows and flint points, and who sometimes enjoy dressing in skins they’ve prepared themselves — these folks, technically, are not traditionalists but “primitive” bowhunters. Often in discussions about these issues we neglect to separate them out and roll them into “traditional” as “extremists.” Second, what Mike said is the beating heart of the “what is traditional” argument and the only part that really counts; yet it often goes unrecognized. Whose business is it what other hunters choose to hunt with so long as it’s ethical and sporting? None of mine, even though I believe that the more shortcuts and crutches you use, the less you get out of hunting. Where equipment choice DOES matter is the politics of hunting seasons. Archery and BP seasons are long and early because they are considered by most states as under the category of “primitive weapons,” and thus inefficient. Gradually, as states succumb to techno-creep by allowing far more modern and functionally efficent weapons into nominally “primitive weapons” seasons — compound and now xguns in archery, and all manner of modern improvements in the BP world from inlines to sabots to modern sighting systems–the more hunters use these seasons and the more game gets killed, threatening the continuation of our privileged “inefficient weapons” seasons. Why is NRA a major supporter of xguns in archery seasons? See above: the more modern weapons we have in “primitive weapons” seasons, the stronger the argument becomes from the gun lobby to shorten archery season in favor of longer rifle seasons. This, thus, becomes far far more than merely a matter of what gear a person tends to hunt with discussion, morphing into a matter of the very survival of our traditional “traditional” seasons. And so far, bowhunters have remained largely asleep at the wheel insofar as speaking out in favor of keeping modern hi-tech weapons out of primitive-weapons seasons. This is not a mere matter of personal opinion, but rather a matter of the very survival of traditional bowhunting. So much of politics these days is insidious, that the majority, who aren’t paying attention, just don’t see it until it’s too late. Dave

this is wisdom!

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#18586

David Petersen wrote: Why is NRA a major supporter of xguns in archery seasons? See above: the more modern weapons we have in “primitive weapons” seasons, the stronger the argument becomes from the gun lobby to shorten archery season in favor of longer rifle seasons.

This is an insight that really needs to see more attention and coverage. I don’t underestimate the NRA one bit when it comes to things like this.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

#18594

And I guess all I’m really trying to point out here is that the notion of “traditional” is merely subjective at best, if not fairly arbitrary (and culture-specific). It’s good to keep that in mind, and not be tossing the word around as though there is some universally-accepted definition.

But I suppose I wouldn’t want it any other way. A strict definition would be a real buzzkill.

[Steve Sr.]

#20367

Quite interesting replies. As usual, you, I, we don’t/won’t “agree” again. Thankfully, IMHO!

Pick any terminology that is intended to describe something and the reader will have his own thoughts of exactly the meaning of such, even if it is not exactly the same as the author using it.

Pick a factor of this discussion above and I’ll show you someone that “thinks differently” about it.

I much prefer this description adverse to “disagrees” because, IMHO, there isn’t a “right and wrong” nor a ruler by which all of us use to measure things within our lives.

Within such, many of you have already noticed 😀 , I am, have been and will be the Devil’s advocate when the terms “work better” or “need” arise.

No one thing will fit either catagory for us all and whoever says it works better or indicates something is needed is carved from that person’s own ideas of such..as well as whatever goal he or she is aiming for.

Turning back the clock a ways, similar discussions existed debating if MANY things were “traditional” or even archery at all, as the crossbow is debated today.

fiberglass laminations in bows
the mentioned aluminum and even fiberglass arrows
elevated arrow rests
plastic vanes
sights
releases
compounds
mechanical broadheads
camo, treestands, scent blockers, scents for attracting game, baiting, fenced hunting

ALL the above were before or are now debated as to wherein they fit….or not…..within “traditional” archery, archery as a whole or even hunting in general.

A single “case in point” (and I could name several) within my life is pre-treestand hunters/hunting where the introduction of such (as is many times the case) were viewed by many as “the easy way out” versus the “more productive” thinking.

To each their own yet, those two trains of thoughts will never lie within the same plane to those thinking of them.

I am willing to wager that, within each of us, there is a “line” that each individual will not cross to “make things more productive” feeling doing so aborts from his/her thoughts of their own perspective of what we do or wish to do/feel as goals are reached from our personal efforts. Therefore a line of what is or is not tradition has been created for ourselves….and ourselves alone.

It’s no secret that I personally feel that things used that may require a little extra care, or are simply “old school, or may require a little more “work” using or learning TO use, has within each one a way to increase my goal of increased satisfaction that are unobtainable any other way…FOR ME, this works handily….but that does not mean someone else’s goals of satisfaction are not happily reached, nor are less important, obtained otherwise…..and vice versa.

“better”
“needed”
“more productive”

“traditional”

…all are limited in description by each individual’s desired goals, personal ideals……and even our degree of experience (that most of us can related to thinking back within our own bowhunting) that will, more often than not, “mature” (aka change) into something altered as the years pass.

An excellent read, thank you for the thread and the replies. It got the ol’ bean awhirling, once again, resulting with me stepping back from myself and my actions to take a good look.

A healthy thing I’ve found I’ve “needed” to do occasionally. 😆

God Bless
Steve Sr.

[rnorris]

#20528

“Why is NRA a major supporter of xguns in archery seasons?”

Because the NRA is not about hunting….either is the 2nd Amendment…I don’t agree with crossbows in archery season, but I understand where the NRA is coming from.

“Traditional Archery” is a phrase I use less and less. I just don’t care if folks understand what kind of bow I shoot. I hunt for myself, my ethical base is for my own satisfction and pride. I don’t apologize for a unmatching mix of carbon arrows, longbows, sometimes camo, usually plaid, etc.

And with major respect to those who disagree, I think a Fedora is a pretty damned uncomfortable bow hunting hat 😆

[Author]

Posts