Home Forums Campfire Forum What if …?

Viewing 60 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • David Petersen
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Excuse me for being ornery (again), but … What if … all the animals we hunt looked like this cute fellow, and had personalities to match? And no tree stands allowed. Might not that situation have some bearing on the seriousness we bring to selecting the broadheads and arrow set-ups we use? Might not “Arrow placement is everything” suddenly seem a bit uncertain? Might not Ashby’s saying “There’s no such thing as overkill in arrow set-up” suddenly take on a more personal and pressing urgency? It’s one thing to wound an animal and see it run away, yet another thing entirely if that animal runs toward us rather than away, white fangs flashing? Just fleeting thoughts. Please forgive 😛

      attached file
    • William WarrenWilliam Warren
      Member
      Post count: 1384

      Dave,

      If those had inhabited this continent at the beginning of the European invasion they would now be extinct or driven back to remote pockets of wilderness like the timber wolf was. Today the Anti’s would be lobbying hard to re-introduce them to their original range to help control the out of control “Outhouse” hunters. 😯

      Yeah if that was reality would you really worry about arrow weight?

      Duncan

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      This might have had a bit to do with the migration of man out of Africa to less birdy places in Europe. Sorry too. 😕

    • Troy Breeding
      Post count: 994

      Trust me,,, they don’t need those fangs to make you almost fill your britches….

      Found that out just a few weeks ago.

      Please don’t hate me or ban me for this,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

      but lets just say one of the local boys handled a 50cal. 250gr’er thru both shoulders and was still able to grunt, grawl, shake his head and lunge at me when I walked up on what I thought was a hugh mount of venison still in it’s home grown wrapper.

      Luckly for me he was brokedown in both shoulders and could only make short lunges of about 2 foot.

    • Ben M.
      Post count: 460

      Photoshop does some creepy things.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      Hmmmm…..blunts or broadheads?

    • horserod
      Member
      Post count: 78

      You guys have too much time on your hands or you have the onset of cabin fever already! and/or both…..:lol: Bullseye

    • Mark Turton
      Post count: 759

      Go back a few years wooly mammoths, short nosed bears and saber toothed tigers roamed the streets and what was the long range weapon of choice, a stone tipped arrow.

      Is it us that have failed to evolve?

      Smithhammer, I’m not one for trophy’s but I really want one of those over the fireplace.

      Mark.

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      Borrowing from the movie “Jaws” , kinda, “I think we need a bigger stick”.

      Some critters better taken trapped in a pit or stampeded off a cliff.

    • lyagooshka
      Post count: 600

      I don’t think we need to look at mythical or extinct creatures to have an appreciation as to what we need to carry out there. Anyone who has hunted wild boar with a stick ‘n string from the ground will attest to not only the armor these beasts have (making shot placement and equipment in top shape mandatory), but the terror of even a 100# porky charging you, let alone a po’d 350#er with half an arrow sticking out of it.

      I also remember reading about bowhunting brown bear in Alaska (forget what book it was. It was the Dr. who hunted Alaska and Russia. I’m sure it’s on the book thread). 800# of po’d bear 15 yards away from you. Is that the time to think “maybe I should have given that FOC thing a look-see prior to coming out here”.

      Lastly, and probably most important INHO, it is owed to the game we chase, not just for OUR well being. It goes to the well being of hunting. When a non-hunter sees a groundhog / woodchuck running around with an arrow sticking out of it, the hunter was not in danger, but hunting sure will be. Be well.

      Alex

      😀

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Joking aside, Lyagooshka said: “Lastly, and probably most important INHO, it is owed to the game we chase, not just for OUR well being. It goes to the well being of hunting. When a non-hunter sees a groundhog / woodchuck running around with an arrow sticking out of it, the hunter was not in danger, but hunting sure will be.”

      THAT was precisely my point! 😛

    • skifrk
      Post count: 387

      I agree with owing it to the animal but how often is that ethic taken to the back seat to get the result of a deer like Dave showed in his first picture.

    • James HarveyJames Harvey
      Member
      Post count: 1130

      David Petersen wrote: no tree stands allowed.

      Hah. I’ve never met anyone in Australia that uses them, but I understand they’ve very popular up your way. I was a bit shocked to read a whole story centred around them in the latest mag (maybe that’s commonplace but I only started reading the TradBow mag this Christmas).

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      Joking aside from me too, it behooves us to use the proper equipment for what we pursue and have the ability and knowledge to properly use it. If not we need to go to the grocery store and buy our steaks.

      Ethics seem to fall short with regularity any more and not always in the pursuit of “trophy”. “I got one” is out there too.

      Use the right tool and know how to use it well.

    • Stumpkiller
      Member
      Post count: 193

      Reminds me of the local skwerls.

    • James HarveyJames Harvey
      Member
      Post count: 1130

      Some blokes found the fossils of a carnivorous kangaroo a few years back…

      Apparently some lanky dark skinned chaps did away with them a while back. Incredibly their sticks didn’t even have strings, just pointy ends.

    • Michael Scott
      Post count: 80

      If the squirrels had teeth like the ones above, and the kangas looked like that right up there…EESH!!! Brings a new meaning to the survivalism concept, doesn’t it? LOL!!

      All joking aside. This thread brings back to the surface our primary goal as hunters. Whether our quarry be the ferocious squirroat, the vicious were-deer, or the savage sabre-tusked kangaroo, we must keep our ethics in the highest degree, our gear in top condition, and have complete confidence in our ability to cleanly and humanely harvest the animal (or monstrosity) we are chasing (or is chasing us).

      Shoot straight, practice hard and eat well, my friends. Ethics and hunting are swiftly parting ways in lieu of easier, more “technologically advanced” methods of taking game. Let us be the stitching that holds these things we hold dear together.

    • Bruce Smithhammer
      Post count: 2514

      I think you bring up some really good points, Michael.

      I’m frequently surprised, and dismayed, by the number of fellow non-trad bow hunters who dismiss trad bow hunting as being “too likely that you’re going to merely wound an animal and not recover it.” Or even worse, the look of incredulity and the comment, “you are really hunting with that?”

      If anything, in my experience, the path we’ve chosen tends to make us all that much more acutely aware of our skills, and just as importantly, our limitations. In general, serious trad hunters in my experience are some of the most conservative, conscientious hunters I know of when it comes down to making that ultimate decision to take the shot. We are committed, and we practice year-round, because we know that taking a month or two off from shooting will result in a noticeable step backwards in our skills foundation. We shun gimmickry, which ultimately leads to far more wounded animals than time-tested, tried-and-true equipment. We combine that with sound judgment not based in over-eager trophy fever. We emphasize getting as close as possible, rather than going for bragging rights about how far away we were when we took the shot.

      But for many, there is an unshakeable faith, continually fed by the media, that it is technology and ever greater contraptions that make us “better” hunters. This has been a great mentality to cultivate for selling gear and lining pockets, but as we all know, if we spent more of our hard-earned dollars protecting habitat outright, and less of it on the faddish hunting gadgetry of the moment, the experience would be better all around, for all involved.

    • lyagooshka
      Post count: 600

      Smithhammer wrote: “you are really hunting with that?”

      Too funny! I just had someone say that to me not too long ago. That person was using a compound. We met after the hunt (it was hogs). Both of us had seen some. Neither one of us had one. Only difference is that I had all my arrows, he did not. I’m sure you can figure it out. Though what upsets me a little is that I am seen with my longbow, I will automatically be “at fault” in the eyes of the non-hunters, and definitely in the glowing beady eyes of the anti-hunter.

      So, that brings me to the next quote that:

      Smithhammer wrote: …that it is technology and ever greater contraptions that make us “better” hunters.

      I really wish this could get cleared up because it’s just the opposite. I guess the issue is that people define a “hunter” as someone who kills. This past year I had several deer just outside my “kill zone”. Had I been a better hunter, I would have some venison in the freezer now. The other option it to extend my zone. This could be done by A) practice or B) gizmos. Either way, in the second scenario, I am becoming a better “shooter” not “hunter”. I guess people need to re-think what a “hunter” is. At any given moment, I can, within 15 minutes, walk to any of 3 supermarkets which are open 24/7. I don’t NEED to hunt. I CHOOSE to. IMHO the difference between hunters and gatherers is not meat and veggies. Look at folks in the “meat” isle of the grocery store. Do they really look that different while picking out their steak than they did while picking out their head of lettuce? They are gathering. Meanwhile, I could (haven’t, but could 😆 ) go to the woods with a bow and come home with a bunch of morels. “Hunting” trip successful? You Betcha. Any meat in the freezer? Nope.

      Well, enough beating a dead (insert animal / vegetable of choice). Hope all is well here. Again, INHO, it is easy to preach, but much harder to lead by example. Sad part is, in my first example, I would bet that the other hunter thought I was the loser since I didn’t even get a shot. I think the opposite for exactly the same reason. Be well.

      Alex

      😀

    • Michael Scott
      Post count: 80

      I’ve gotten similar reactions from compounders at bow shoots. It’s always fun to shoot from the compound stakes at shoots and watch their reaction when you make the same quality of shot on a target with a trad bow that they make with a compound and fancy sights. 😀

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      When I go hunting deer I have every intention of putting meat in the freezer but if it doesn’t happen I’ve had a perfectly wonderful day, being alive, enjoying nature unless

      something comes along that ain’t too cool.

    • doug krueger
      Post count: 55

      Speaking of arrow set up. Do you guys think that I would be better off going after elk with a 780 grain arrow with 150 up front and an foc of 10-12 or an arrow that weighs 575 total with 250 up front. (I dont know what the foc is on that). Keep in mind this is out of a 60-63lb recurve. I seem to get similar arrow flight from both, the heavier arrow has a weight tube. Just for fun say the 150 grain head is double bevel and the 250 grain head would be a single bevel. I currently shoot the lighter double bevel head and the heavier 780gr total arrow.

      Dk

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      lyagooshka wrote: …I guess people need to re-think what a “hunter” is. At any given moment, I can, within 15 minutes, walk to any of 3 supermarkets which are open 24/7. I don’t NEED to hunt. I CHOOSE to.

      Hmmm. I usually don’t add to a thread when it goes the way this thread has because I usually come off sounding self-righteous… But how ever are we going to truly share our experiences with others (read non trad hunters) if we see ourselves as soooo much better?

      And for me, I am the opposite of Lyagooshka. It’s not that I want to hunt. I need to hunt. I have no choice in the matter (not picking on you L. Just saying how I am). And for myself, grocery stores are not an option. Industrial “food” is canned cancer. Living the traditional life doesn’t end with a walk in the woods with a bow. It starts there.

      If you want snobby self righteous, here goes : If I don’t catch it, kill it, or grow it, my family doesn’t eat it. Now there’s a commitment to traditional hunting.

      And again L, not picking on you, just using you for a sound board… because I hear this all too often from my trad friends. To claim that hunting with a trad bow puts us in touch with nature and the real human soul, while at the same time buying industrial “meat” and “veggies” is being oblivious to the truths we claim, so self-righteously, to know.

      God, I hope I don’t get my arse handed to me for this one 😳

    • paleoman
      Member
      Post count: 918

      Steve Graf wrote: [quote=lyagooshka]…I guess people need to re-think what a “hunter” is. At any given moment, I can, within 15 minutes, walk to any of 3 supermarkets which are open 24/7. I don’t NEED to hunt. I CHOOSE to.

      Hmmm. I usually don’t add to a thread when it goes the way this thread has because I usually come off sounding self-righteous… But how ever are we going to truly share our experiences with others (read non trad hunters) if we see ourselves as soooo much better?

      And for me, I am the opposite of Lyagooshka. It’s not that I want to hunt. I need to hunt. I have no choice in the matter (not picking on you L. Just saying how I am). And for myself, grocery stores are not an option. Industrial “food” is canned cancer. Living the traditional life doesn’t end with a walk in the woods with a bow. It starts there.

      If you want snobby self righteous, here goes : If I don’t catch it, kill it, or grow it, my family doesn’t eat it. Now there’s a commitment to traditional hunting.

      And again L, not picking on you, just using you for a sound board… because I hear this all too often from my trad friends. To claim that hunting with a trad bow puts us in touch with nature and the real human soul, while at the same time buying industrial “meat” and “veggies” is being oblivious to the truths we claim, so self-righteously, to know.

      God, I hope I don’t get my arse handed to me for this one 😳

      Nah. Most of us are somewhere in the middle as you set the scene up there. Everyone has some version of the “truth” and good luck to anyone who claims they’ve found it.

    • Raymond CoffmanRaymond Coffman
      Moderator
      Post count: 1035

      Doug Kruger –

      Hit a Bull elk in the heart with either set up and I think you would have elk for supper.

      I also hunt with 60-65 lb bows and would prefer and use an efoc arrow with single bevel tuffheads on the front. total arrow weight 730gr most of it in the {400grs} head. They are my favorites so far. shoot fast [for their weight] penetrate very well {have to be careful what tgts I use} – I like em for me-

      Scout.

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      “To claim that hunting with a trad bow puts us in touch with nature and the real human soul”

      Paleo:

      I don’t understand that concept totally either, but each to their own. If that’s how one enjoys that’s their cool.

      People are as they are but I don’t see where a trad bow becomes the “holy grail” necessary to be in tune with nature. Nature is there trad bow or not. It’s takes the human brain, senses and desire to appreciate and admire nature, not what we’re carrying in our hands. It’s what we carry in our soul.

      Nature is and what we make of her is ours to enjoy or muck up. As long as my enjoyment and that of others leaves her as she be that’s cool with me.

      Back to the “What if”… What if we don’t treat Mother Nature right, what have we got?

      Blessed Sunday y’all:D:D Some probably would like for it to warm up whereas some others of us are going “What if it would rain????

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      What if… I could get out and shoot before the 30-40 mph wind blows…

      Ha!!

      Waste of a perfectly good arrow though :~{

    • lyagooshka
      Post count: 600

      Steve,

      No offence or any other negative emotion taken. As a matter of fact, I somewhat envy you. Those mornings when it’s just a pain to get out of bed, it is easy for me to make excuses. Not for you. In my post, I was giving an overview of me. I know I am not the only one out there, nor am I any kind of “gold standard”. Heck, I’m not even brass. I appreciate you chiming in. The point I was trying to make in my ranting was that I wish people (non-hunters, or even some of the anti-hunters who have the capacity for reason) would define hunters as those who hunt. Killing is a part of it, but not the only part. I use the supermarket example (I could not agree more with you there, I really am trying to decrease my family’s dependence on the chemical warfare you find in some of those isles) as a rebuttal to what I am often asked (I guess I should have mentioned that). My family still does not understand why I would “waste” my time hunting when I can get a steak at the local store, or the local organic farm if I am concerned about hormones, etc. They also think it has something to do with a “blood-lust” I have. I really can’t explain it to them, but I know there are people out there that only define hunting as killing. I don’t think that is doing any of us any good.

      As far as the “holier than thou”, I have no such opinion of myself. I especially don’t believe that one’s hunting weapon of choice makes them any more or less a “hunter”. I used an example of a compound hunter in my post. For every one of those I have 10 times as many stories about compound hunters who are true outdoorsmen (and women), who hunt ethically and are all-around advocates of archery. They don’t shoot traditional equipment, but that is their choice. The fact that I do does not make me better, only different. Same goes for rifles, muzzle-loaders, airguns, etc.

      Lastly, feel free to use me as a sounding board whenever you want. The one thing I know is that there isn’t really much that I know. I am always open to learning, and I don’t mind getting smacked back into place every now and again. Good to hear from you. Be well.

      Alex

      😀

    • WICanner
      Post count: 136

      Here is a pic of the Mastadon housed at the Ft Robinson State Park facility in NE. Took this while on a PBS bowhunt this fall. Look at the ribs on this baby. A caveman who brought one of these down was a ‘big man on campus’, because to me it looked like the most likely way of mortally wounding this with a spear was from underneath. Tough and dangerous work.

      (Hope this doesn’t copy too tiny. Sized as big as I thought possible)

      attached file
    • James HarveyJames Harvey
      Member
      Post count: 1130

      Steve Graf wrote: It’s not that I want to hunt. I need to hunt. I have no choice in the matter (not picking on you L. Just saying how I am). And for myself, grocery stores are not an option. Industrial “food” is canned cancer.

      That sounds exactly like a choice. And if you live in any part of the developed world, it’s a choice afforded to you by the vast bulk of the population choosing otherwise.

      I applaud you for that choice by the way, sounds like an admirable way to live. But a choice none the less.

      Steve Graf wrote: Industrial “food” is canned cancer.

      I challenge you to support such a bold claim with evidence. In anticipation of your reply, here is my rebuttal:

      http://sandwalk.blogspot.com.au/2007/06/natural-foods-contain-lots-of.html

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      “ausjim”)

      …[quote=Steve Graf wrote: Industrial “food” is canned cancer.

      I challenge you to support such a bold claim with evidence. In anticipation of your reply, here is my rebuttal:

      http://sandwalk.blogspot.com.au/2007/06/natural-foods-contain-lots-of.html

      It is well known that american food has high concentrations of pesticides and less nutritive value than it should. Some good books to read to get a “taste” of how america’s food has changed is the series by Michael Pollan.

      The connections between high fructose corn syrup and poor health is also pretty well documented, though not “proven”

      The problem with your challenge is that it is hard to prove something like this without a study which includes people not exposed to the food. Which is impossible. The argument you make is the same argument that the sludge dumpers make: “Prove that putting sludge on fields is bad” and the climate change deniers make “prove the CO2 causes global warming”

      But here’s a quote from your rebuttal : “we are far more likely to get cancer from eating “healthy” foods than from eating at a fast food restaurant” So I challenge you. Eat only at a fast food restaurant for a year and see how you feel (if you are still alive).

      And if you feel great, then good for you!

    • lyagooshka
      Post count: 600

      Gents,

      Without intention of high jacking the thread, there has been plenty of evidence that “fresh” is better than “preserved”. That being said, it is all about HOW it’s done.

      Example: I grow some veggies in my garden, take the tomatoes, make pasta sauce (salt, fresh spice), can it at 15# for 90′, put it in the basement until I need it. When I need it, I have some organic flour (that I don’t/can’t grow, especially mill). I make my own pasta, use my own sauce. So far so good.

      Now the other way: I go to the store, buy some pasta and sauce. (Read the ingredients on both. If it’s anything more than tomatoes, spice, flour and water, it’s too much, IMHO).

      Remember, there’s good, gooder and goodest (and also grammar lessons 😆 ).

      I’m sure we could go into causes of disease, causes of environmental issues, etc. Point is, I don’t know. I don’t accept anything anyone hands me, but I am not an expert. Thing is, I always start at common sense. If something is picked from a tree growing in the wild, it is better [for you] than something forcefully grown in whatever kinds of chemicals, sprayed with heaven knows what pesticides. Now, does that mean the latter is going to kill you? I would say you could eat that your whole life and be better off than the person downing 12 doughnuts for breakfast, chips and dip for lunch and an extra large Philly cheese-steak (with whiz) for dinner. That’s not counting a six-pack or two. Again; good, gooder, goodest.

      I am trying to wipe out as much (junk) food as I can, and grow/kill as much of my own as I can. Does that mean I never go to the supermarket? No, I go quite often. I just try to make “better” choices. I support local farmers and only buy things in season. I learned to can food. I got a freezer. Will I live forever? Probably not. Will someone who eats junk all day, every day outlive me? Maybe. But it’s all about odds. My odds of being in better health lie in exercising, quitting smoking (been 6 months now) and trading in the whiz for a salad here and there. Will it work? Only time will tell.

      Well, enough of my preaching. Take care. Be well.

      Alex

      😀

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      Hey WIcanner, take a big ol’bucket Jack D’s BBQ sauce for them ribs :P!! Ain’t even worried bout what’s in that. :lol::lol: Give me a roll of, I guess the way these discussions are going, a roll of recycled paper towels and let me go to town. Yum, yum!!

    • WICanner
      Post count: 136

      Geez, not a canned food – fresh debate??

      Don’t lump all processed foods together when talking about nutrition, safety.

      The ingredients of our canned peas are pretty simple, i.e. Peas, Water, Salt. Shelf stable for three years, promise not to send you to the porcelain gods if you store, heat, and serve it correctly. With that, you can be rolling the dice with ‘fresh’ foods. Those bacterium are wee little fellows, and they have a tendency to travel in groups on fresh foods. They all have it, just depends on how ‘fresh’ it is when you get it, how you store it, how you prepare it. Slip up anywhere in that chain before consumption, and things can get ugly.

      Remember to leave the vegetables out of the conversations on problems with processed foods. They are generally not the root of the problems so stated. You are actually much better off eating your vegetables from a can. Just saying . . .

      R2 – I like Sweet Baby Rays BBQ sauce out of Chicago. . . OOOOhhh that’s realllyyy good. Whole pork tenderloin cut in chunks, smoked on the grill with hickory, then boiled down while simmering in a large roaster, pulled apart just prior to the application of the sauce. Large party food. Very little has ever made it back into the fridge, cause rarely are there leftovers.

    • James HarveyJames Harvey
      Member
      Post count: 1130

      Steve – I don’t dispute much of what you have said above. The pesticides issue is largely irrelevant however. The evidence that synthetic pesticides do not cause cancer is circumstantial, but here it is in a nutshell. Per mass of pesticide, naturally occurring varieties have been shown in all tests available (Ames tests on bacteria and rodent tests) to be equally carcinogenic as synthetic pesticides. Americans in an ‘average’ diet apparently consume approximately 0.09 mg of synthetic pesticides daily. They consume approx. 1500mg of natural pesticides daily. There is no suggestion that the natural pesticides cause cancer. Beyond the ‘boogy man’ that is ‘synthetic chemicals’, there is no suggestion that that miniscule percentage of dietary carcinogen intake is causing it either.

      It is worth noting I’m not talking at all here about industrial exposure. Someone who works in the ‘pesticide production plant’ may do well to take care.

      Steve Graf wrote: The problem with your challenge is that it is hard to prove something like this without a study which includes people not exposed to the food. Which is impossible. The argument you make is the same argument that the sludge dumpers make: “Prove that putting sludge on fields is bad” and the climate change deniers make “prove the CO2 causes global warming”

      I am shamefully ignorant of sludge dumping Steve so can’t make any comment. As far as global warming is concerned, to prove CO2 causes global warming is an experiment so simple it can be and is conducted by school children. You simply use a smaller system than our atmosphere and introduce CO2. It’s called a greenhouse. You can do the same thing with natural and synthetic chemicals. It’s called the Ames test.

      Steve Graf wrote: But here’s a quote from your rebuttal : “we are far more likely to get cancer from eating “healthy” foods than from eating at a fast food restaurant” So I challenge you. Eat only at a fast food restaurant for a year and see how you feel (if you are still alive).

      Steve, you have either misunderstood or taken that quote out of context. The author was saying that given there is roughly equal amounts of carcinogenic chemicals in ‘healthy’ and ‘fast’ food and we eat more ‘healthy’ foods, that is statistically more likely to give you cancer than the occasional ‘fast’ food.

      Honestly though, it seems like we’re talking about two different things. I’m simply discussing the merits of synthetic vs natural pesticides. You are more broadly discussing diet choices. And I agree with you whole heartedly. High calorie diet is a much greater risk increaser for cancer than any pesticide. So let us agree that you can easily kill yourself eating from the supermarket. But I would suggest that has to do with the choices you make buying from there, rather than anything inherently nasty in industrial agriculture.

      I would contend that if you ate a diet of similar content from the supermarket (mainly vegetables and unprocessed meats) you would be equally healthy.

      Finally, I apologise for highjacking a bowhunting thread. I’ll accept anything more you have to say Steve, but I think I’ve said my bit 😛

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Michael said: “Let us be the stitching that holds these things we hold dear together.” BRAVO!

      The compound bow is merely the dominant symbol and centerpiece of a whole huge set of things going wrong with hunting today. I don’t care what a hunter carries. But I darn sure do care about using that tool to take crazy long shots with toothpick arrows and the most inefficient heads possible, leaving animals running around with poorly-penetrated arrows dangling. I care about all the whole big set of technology, and mindset, that follows compounds like an entourage of idiots. I care about compound shooters in some areas driving up the success rate so high that we are increasingly threatened with losing all the special privileges originally granted to “primitive” weapons and now abused by space-age technology. I care about the militarization of hunting. So when someone among us is critical of the compound, it’s an oversimplification to accuse us of being snotty. If trad hunters used inefficient arrows and winged them as far as we can see an animals, we would be no better than the compound shooters. But we don’t, and they do. So we are not talking nearly so much about weaponry choices as we are about differing mindsets and yes, skill sets.

      Doug, I know from experience that almost no 125 grain head will take an angled impact into heavy elk bone without bending or breaking, esp. if shot from a heavy bow. I would start with the broadhead and work back from there. In order to get sufficient broadhead strength you’re going to have to move up in weight a fair amount. Just because you are shooting will with arrows set up at the extremes, doesn’t mean you won’t shoot well with a compromise in the middle.

    • Roger Norris
      Post count: 91

      I think for the most part, traditional bowhunters DO consider the important details of our arrows. Ask an average compound shooter about thier set tup….I have met darn few that could tell me how much thier arrow wieghs. Fewer yet that actually SHARPEN a broadhead.

      A worse concept than arrow construction, is the long shot. How many guys can honestly say that they would hold thier fire on a record book whitetail if it were slightly out of range? I meet guys at every shoot who talk about thier self imposed range limits….mine is about 20 yards (I say ABOUT because I never actually measure it)…yet you hear stories that go like :

      “Well, he was a little far (or the wrong angle) but he was the biggest buck I have ever seen!”

      In my mind, a perfect trophy is all the more reason to only take slam dunk shots. How sad is it to have the best buck in your area die deep in the swamp, unrecovered, with an arrow through the guts?

      Sorry Dave, different direction, but same theme…

    • BuckyT
      Post count: 138

      I’d take my chances.8)

    • BuckyT
      Post count: 138

      Roger Norris wrote: I think for the most part, traditional bowhunters DO consider the important details of our arrows. Ask an average compound shooter about thier set tup….I have met darn few that could tell me how much thier arrow wieghs. Fewer yet that actually SHARPEN a broadhead.

      A worse concept than arrow construction, is the long shot. How many guys can honestly say that they would hold thier fire on a record book whitetail if it were slightly out of range? I meet guys at every shoot who talk about thier self imposed range limits….mine is about 20 yards (I say ABOUT because I never actually measure it)…yet you hear stories that go like :

      “Well, he was a little far (or the wrong angle) but he was the biggest buck I have ever seen!”

      In my mind, a perfect trophy is all the more reason to only take slam dunk shots. How sad is it to have the best buck in your area die deep in the swamp, unrecovered, with an arrow through the guts?

      Sorry Dave, different direction, but same theme…

      You know…..

      I’ve been reading this thread and pondering a few things?

      I’m new to trad bows and trad hunting. I’ve been bowhunting in general for 21yrs now. I’m 34yrs old.

      My father was not a big hunter when I was a child. He worked all the time. He did manage in his free time to instill the spirit of the hunt in me. He small game hunted as a child. He’d never shot a bow in his life.

      I’m basically a self-taught hunter. I had no mentors to guide me through the process. I picked up a compound when I was 13yrs old. That was pretty much all I knew about. I learned how to shoot it by myself.

      I actually taught my father about bow hunting. He’s been bowhunting with me ever since I drug a little button head up to the house when I was 15. My 2nd big game kill and I killed him with a wheelie bow. My first was the prior year with a 30-30.

      My two good friends Tailfeather and Etter got me interested in trad hunting a couple of years ago. I shot Etter’s bow at hunting camp and became instantly hooked on it. Next thing I know, I’d ordered a bow from a bowyer, and everything else to go with it.

      I wanted that extra challenge and I got it.8)

      I still shoot my compound. I enjoy it. I enjoy my recurve. I enjoy any kind of hunting honestly. It’s all fun, spiritual, exciting, peaceful, etc..

      I know how much my arrows weigh with any bow I shoot. I know how to tune my bows. I take care of my equipment. I respect the quarry I’m hunting.

      About 7yrs ago, I was hunting in Illinois. No outfitter, private land I had permission to hunt on. Didn’t pay a dime for it.

      I rattled up the largest whitetail I’ve ever had the shear pleasure to lay eyes on in the wild. A magnificent animal. 10pts adorned his head. I’m not into scoring animals, but I’d say he was in the 160’s as a typical.

      He came in directly facing me. I had drawn my wheelie bow and he stopped at 40yds….. Facing me…. I can stack arrows on a target at 40yds, but………..I didn’t shoot at that great buck. I sat there…..A quivering mess hoping he’d come closer and turn, but he didn’t………………

      He knew the jig was up and turned and trotted another 15yds, looked back, and trotted right out of my life…

      I got into trad for something new, exciting, a new spark to stoke my hunting flame so to speak.

      I have one big game kill under my belt with my recurve. It was a fantastic experience, and I look forward to many more in the future!!

      I guess what I’m trying to say is that not all people who dare to pick up a compound are the same as described above…

      I take no offense to the comments listed above either, but felt compelled to state my opinion on the subject.

      I’m not judgemental of other hunters equipment. I’m very open minded about the subject. I’d call a compound hunter a idiot for taking a unethical shot at 15yds just the same as I’d call a trad hunter for taking the same shot.

      This is a great forum and I enjoy reading all topics here!:D

    • bruc
      Member
      Post count: 476

      Well said !!

      Bruce

    • Roger Norris
      Post count: 91

      BuckyT wrote: I’d take my chances.8)

      When contemplating a fatal arrow, I take as few chances as possible.

    • lyagooshka
      Post count: 600

      For a moment, compare…

      BuckyT wrote: I guess what I’m trying to say is that not all people who dare to pick up a compound are the same as described above…

      I take no offense to the comments listed above either, but felt compelled to state my opinion on the subject.

      I’m not judgemental of other hunters equipment. I’m very open minded about the subject. I’d call a compound hunter a idiot for taking a unethical shot at 15yds just the same as I’d call a trad hunter for taking the same shot.

      With…

      Dave wrote: If trad hunters used inefficient arrows and winged them as far as we can see an animals, we would be no better than the compound shooters. But we don’t, and they do.

      I have to say that the emotions seem to be running high. I always try to sneak this in, but now I am just going to come out and say it. With all due respect Dave, I believe you are wrong. Statements like that are an anti-hunter’s #%$ dream. Those antis know darn well they will never defeat us outright. We have silly things like science, logic and proof on our side. On their side is “Bambi” and “Fox and the Hound”. But make no mistake though, they are dangerous. And if they can stick into their propaganda “Famous hunter says…”, hunting will be in trouble.

      Does anyone think anti-hunters will stop until ALL hunting is banned, trad or otherwise? Do you think they don’t troll the forums for ammo? I have said it in many places that “this will come back to haunt us”. When some slob take an inappropriate picture of some yearling shot in the neck, arrow still lodged, barely stopped breathing, it is GREAT ammo for the likes of PETA. All ethical hunters need to band together. We need to wipe our own selves of the slobs (I think you get the imagery there) and flush them where they belong. We need to be the ones turning in the poachers. We need to be the ones out there promoting who we are and changing everyone’s idea of what makes a hunter. To paraphrase the beginning quote of T.J.’s book (Only got a few pages in last night. Was tired. Plan to get about ½ way tonight), “killing is part of the hunt, not the hunter”. We are not blood-thirsty morons roaming the woods. We choose to do it “the hard way” for a reason. Fair chase is not just some slogan to us. I have had several successful hunts this past year. And yet my freezer is empty. I want non-hunters that I know to think about that and understand what it means.

      I went through the gun, compound, x-bow phase. Even when my “bow” had a 40-yard pin, I never took a shot that for at game, or even targets. That’s me. That’s my ethics. I know my limitation. I think marketing has told people that having a certain piece of equipment makes them Gods. Shame is, some believe it, so they may not even know their limitations. Their fault? Yes. But that doesn’t mean they are bad or shouldn’t hunt. On the contrary, these are the people we want to teach. Otherwise, the “teaching” will be by the mega-company selling the latest “must-have” gear. And their messages carry power.

      But [IMHO] what you hunt with does not define a hunter. How you hunt does. I never want to make generalizations. I know I have, and it’s not right of me. But Dave, no matter what you say about being “a product of his times”, etc. 187 yards at an elk. And yet it is the compound shooter who “…and winged them as far as we can see an animals”? I am sure you see what I am saying. And, even though I know I don’t need to put it here, it is meant with all due respect and not to offend. Only to pose an alternate viewpoint. I support hunting, I prefer to hunt with a longbow. Period. Be well.

      Alex

      😕

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Alex, your opinions are as good as mine. My emotions are not running high. But I should make explicit my understanding that all generalities have exceptions, yet generalities are generalities because they are true in general, as borne out by common observability. I personally have known some admirably ethical compound hunters and know there are many. I have not personally known any really stinky trad hunters though I know they exist. All you have to do is look at any commercial bowhunting magazine catering to the hi-tech persuasion to see the evidence of my assertions–in advertisements, articles, headlines. The hi-tech industry and the magazines that grow rich by servicing this industry openly encourage light arrows and long shots and crappy broadheads. Of course not everyone who carries a compound, or x-gun for that matter, will follow that pattern, yet long shots with light arrows and lousy broadheads is the neon-visible mindset, the proclaimed worldview, of the hi-tech bowhunting industry and media, and most folks assume “that’s the way it’s supposed to be done” without questioning it. I know one compound hunter here, this year, who killed a muley buck with an 80-yard shot. I know another who wounded and lost a bull elk with an 80-yard shot. Neither was using a heavy arrow or good broadhead. Sometimes the magic works and sometimes it doesn’t but it happens all the time in that mindset and culture: long shots with light arrows. What are the priorities here? Just as I suggest to start with the broadhead and work back when designing a lethal arrow set-up, I likewise start with strong respect for the animal and work back from there when building a personal hunting ethic. Anything that disrespects the game, I am against. Any sacrifices we make on behalf of our prey, I applaud. I am not arguing, because your opinion is as good as mine, but only trying to clarify my own worldview a bit. All any of us are trying to say here is “how I feel” about these important issues in hunting today. It’s all good to hear and work into the mix. However, the “prove what you say” tactic is generally not a viable debate strategy when dealing with big broad many-faceted issues. If I say that a unicorn lives on the dark side of the moon, and someone else says “prove it’s true,” and I rebut with “prove it’s not true,” we have gotten nowhere, as neither challenge is achievable. “Finally, I don’t worry about the antis. They are a mouse that roars and have for too long had us spooked. And in some distinct cases they have been right. Not all of hunting, or what passes as hunting, is defensible. But it’s the general public who will make or break hunting’s future, and that public generally has a lower opinion of the PETA goofies than they do of hunters. The more centric our views and deeds are, the more we’ll be accepted as a positive part of American culture. The more extreme we are, on either side, the more we are marginalizing ourselves. It’s up to us to keep the high ground, based on our conviction to do the right thing, not from fear of the antis. There is always more than one efficient way to skin a cat, but how we do it is secondary to why we do it. Now I must leave the pleasure of mature debate for the drudge of shoveling heavy wet snow. 🙄

    • lyagooshka
      Post count: 600

      Dave,

      Agreed. Eloquently stated. That’s why we need more of you, not less like some guy said on another thread 😈 . Just cannot stress enough

      David Petersen wrote: But it’s the general public who will make or break hunting’s future, and that public generally has a lower opinion of the PETA goofies than they do of hunters.

      So let’s keep it that way. The slobs among us will only fuel the “goofies” of this planet and turn the average non-hunter against us.

      OK. Consider this dead horse well beaten on my end. I look forward to reading others’ posts here. I digress with a humble tip of my hat to all ethical hunters and those who support them. Be well.

      Alex

      😀

    • David CoulterDavid Coulter
      Member
      Post count: 2261

      I just reread this thread top to bottom. I thought I was going to have something to add, but I think you guys pretty well covered. The only thing that makes me somewhat uncomfortable is the grouping of different hunters by what they choose to hunt with. That said, some of my favorite humor had to do with stereotypes, because it’s making fun of stereotypes.

      So the only thing I really have to add is… great discussion. I appreciate the entries in this thread and truly admire the lot of you for having such convictions. Keep your sticks bent and your arrows straight. best, dwc

    • BuckyT
      Post count: 138

      Roger Norris wrote: [quote=BuckyT]I’d take my chances.8)

      When contemplating a fatal arrow, I take as few chances as possible.

      I’ll see how it goes if I ever meet up with a 300+ lb whitetail that is armed with a mouth full of hair popping incisors, and pretending to be a very angry wolverine.

      😀

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      I can’t remember anything anymore so it seems. Perhaps in a situation like that described above and my not being weighed down with the knowledge that I can’t remember, I can run just little bit fast enough. :lol::lol:

    • David Petersen
      Member
      Member
      Post count: 2749

      Alex — Yeah, my bucket is empty also. 😀 Man, do I get longwinded on morning coffee! 😛

      A banner on the cover of the current issue of the biggest bowhunting magazine proclaims: “50 yard shots every time? 7 tips to make it happen.” Nuff said …

      R2 — You don’t know how good it makes me feel to hear folks younger than me say they couldn’t remember poop if they were standing in it. Names are the hardest. A few years ago, when I discovered I couldn’t even remember a pretty lady’s name after being introduced–in one ear, through the vacuum briefly, then out the other–I knew I was in really big trouble. So long as I can remember opening day of hunting seasons I guess I can justify hanging around and using up oxygen. 😉

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      You mean there’s still hope for me when I turn 68 in April if I don’t for…………:D Will I be an official old f..t then?

      One thing about my memory, I haven’t forgotten what not to do loading a deer. My hand is way better but deep inside there’s a constant reminder.

    • CareyE
      Member
      Post count: 111

      I have good friends and family who hunt with compounds. Honestly, I am the only one that hunts with a stick in my little world. They make fun of my “kids” bow and then I show them a pic of the one shown in my profile and say, “He couldn’t tell it was a kids bow.”

      I hunt trad now because its right for me. I do my preaching by example.

    • paleoman
      Member
      Post count: 918

      Very nice deebate up there. I enjoyed it. Truthfully the best part was noting Daves’ signature quote. That’ s a brilliant observation.

    • Stephen Graf
      Moderator
      Post count: 2361

      David Petersen wrote: Alex — Yeah, my bucket is empty also. 😀 Man, do I get longwinded on morning coffee! 😛

      A banner on the cover of the current issue of the biggest bowhunting magazine proclaims: “50 yard shots every time? 7 tips to make it happen.” Nuff said …

      R2 — You don’t know how good it makes me feel to hear folks younger than me say they couldn’t remember poop if they were standing in it. Names are the hardest. A few years ago, when I discovered I couldn’t even remember a pretty lady’s name after being introduced–in one ear, through the vacuum briefly, then out the other–I knew I was in really big trouble. So long as I can remember opening day of hunting seasons I guess I can justify hanging around and using up oxygen. 😉

      You guys are a hoot!

    • WICanner
      Post count: 136

      In the little bow club that I belong to, the trend is to attempt long shots at animals. To most newer shooters, this is what they see as THE WAY to put the proverbial feather in ones hat. These younger members are requesting that we set up longer range targets. (We have them up to 40 yards now.) 😕

      One can argue specifics on individuals, but the trends in ‘bowhunting’ are undeniable.

    • James HarveyJames Harvey
      Member
      Post count: 1130

      WICanner wrote: One can argue specifics on individuals, but the trends in ‘bowhunting’ are undeniable.

      My bowhunting experience is less than a decade old so there will be many here who have a better idea of trends than I do. I recently read ‘Hunting With the Bow and Arrow’ by Saxton Pope. He and his hunting companions seemed to regularly take shots at animals at the limits of their range. Is it possible that hunting ethics is a never ending battle against the risk taking, glory hungry drives of young men? Particularly young men who have come from a non-hunting family, so have had no childhood education in the matter?

      I introduced myself to bowhunting (and hunting in general) when I was about 20, after watching ‘Deliverence’ of all things. I took some wildly unethical shots with my shiny new compound bow. The virtue of being a terrible shot was the only thing that saved me and my prey from having to live with the results. I wouldn’t characterise my younger self as generally unethical or risk taking. Just an ignorant young man who had spent a childhood reading about Robin Hood splitting shafts at 100 yards.

      I’ll tell you the real flaw in the character of that younger man though. He thought rather than investing time into developing woodcraft and talent with a simple new tool, he could invest money and buy talent and craft with a fancy new tool. That there is probably the moral failure underpinning the later unethical practices.

      Apologies for my wandering mind, but perhaps a slightly different perspective to that normally found here?

    • WICanner
      Post count: 136

      ausjim wrote: He thought rather than investing time into developing woodcraft and talent with a simple new tool, he could invest money and buy talent and craft with a fancy new tool.

      Yep, that’s pretty much the entire tech ‘bowhunter’ problem in a nutshell. I was only identifying one problem that I see repeatedly that really rubs me the wrong way. The quest for a 50+ yd kill as a high priority. My thoughts are that animals can move too much at such yardage no matter what you are shooting.

    • BuckyT
      Post count: 138

      WICanner wrote: In the little bow club that I belong to, the trend is to attempt long shots at animals. To most newer shooters, this is what they see as THE WAY to put the proverbial feather in ones hat. These younger members are requesting that we set up longer range targets. (We have them up to 40 yards now.) 😕

      One can argue specifics on individuals, but the trends in ‘bowhunting’ are undeniable.

      Are these individuals planning on taking super long shots on game or simply having fun target shooting?

      I shoot at water bottles, pine cones, and targets with my recurve at 50+ yds all the time. It’s fun! But…. I’d never in my life dream of taking a shot on an animal past 20yds.

    • Roger Norris
      Post count: 91

      BuckyT wrote: [quote=WICanner]In the little bow club that I belong to, the trend is to attempt long shots at animals. To most newer shooters, this is what they see as THE WAY to put the proverbial feather in ones hat. These younger members are requesting that we set up longer range targets. (We have them up to 40 yards now.) 😕

      One can argue specifics on individuals, but the trends in ‘bowhunting’ are undeniable.

      Are these individuals planning on taking super long shots on game or simply having fun target shooting?

      I shoot at water bottles, pine cones, and targets with my recurve at 50+ yds all the time. It’s fun! But…. I’d never in my life dream of taking a shot on an animal past 20yds.

      Long range practice is my favorite. I love watching the fletching hurtle away….and it realy points out flaws in your form. But I haven’t shot at deer further than 17 yards or so, ever.

    • BuckyT
      Post count: 138

      Roger Norris wrote: [quote=BuckyT][quote=WICanner]In the little bow club that I belong to, the trend is to attempt long shots at animals. To most newer shooters, this is what they see as THE WAY to put the proverbial feather in ones hat. These younger members are requesting that we set up longer range targets. (We have them up to 40 yards now.) 😕

      One can argue specifics on individuals, but the trends in ‘bowhunting’ are undeniable.

      Are these individuals planning on taking super long shots on game or simply having fun target shooting?

      I shoot at water bottles, pine cones, and targets with my recurve at 50+ yds all the time. It’s fun! But…. I’d never in my life dream of taking a shot on an animal past 20yds.

      Long range practice is my favorite. I love watching the fletching hurtle away….and it realy points out flaws in your form. But I haven’t shot at deer further than 17 yards or so, ever.

      It’s my favorite as well!:D I always start out shooting at least out to 30yds first, then I move back into my hunting ranges.

      That was a practice tactic I used back in my hardcore compound days too.

      I believe it really helps, like you stated to find the flaws in your form fast, which in turn, helps you get them fixed quickly.

    • RalphRalph
      Moderator
      Post count: 2544

      Yeah, not much more fun than watching a yucca pod blow up and seeds scatter on any shot but at 40/50 yards, man that’s right on. But it (the pod) ain’t fixin to bogey for it’s life either, it’s just standing there looking like a cactus pod. Blow it up and you’re propagating the species.

      I shot a buck in my younger days, can’t say dumber cause sometimes I can’t see any improvement there, at 47 paces. He was broadside, totally unaware of me. But some noise, movement :D7th sense:D told him to move. In that distance with a 54# bow he turned from broadside to facing away and the arrow penetrated to the feathers up his arse. Of course absolutely no blood trail with that kind of hit.

      I did all of the proper follow up procedures, I saw where he disappeared in the scrub oak. The sandhill country I was in had a billion deer tracks and sometimes in that sand I can’t tell whether a track was made today, yesterday or tomorrow. In 3 days of searching I never found that deer. You know that was a fatal shot. It bugs me still. I fed the coyotes I’m sure but it broke my heart and broke me from long shots with any weapon. I’ve pretty much kept that to myself for 25 years but just to help somebody who thinks they be mighty mo with a bow, s… happens. We’re not using artillery and firing for effect, we’re using primitive type weaponry and trying to outsmart our game and not out shoot it.

      Still there is fun in the flight of an arrow and the thrill of a long range hit, but at the proper target.

      Good day, Ralph

    • WICanner
      Post count: 136

      Unfortunately it is in preparation for shooting at live animals. In their minds, they are being ethical for practicing for this type of shot, but miss the part about it being just stationary foam. They haven’t had the type of shot that R2 speaks of, but odds are that they will in my opinion. They are buying into the hype of TV shows. Sure they want to take a buck at close range, just like everyone does. But they also won’t pass one at long range either. I guess they think there are extra ‘points’ given for long range shots. As I said before, it’s a feather that they want to place in their cap.

    • James HarveyJames Harvey
      Member
      Post count: 1130

      WICanner wrote: I guess they think there are extra ‘points’ given for long range shots. As I said before, it’s a feather that they want to place in their cap.

      I think you’re spot on. My little peanut mind likes to break up hunting into two broad skill groups: Marksmanship and Woodcraft. One takes considerably more effort than the other to apply, and the lazy hunter is inclined to prove his marksmanship over his woodcraft. I shouldn’t be too judgemental though, because I used to be the lazy hunter and it’s hard for me to differentiate between my matured interest in woodcraft and the growing admission that I’m an ordinary marksman.

      I still think there are worse things than a long shot though. The other day I watched a video on youtube of ‘bowhunters’ plugging away from a treestand at pigs and deer that were nicely framed by the tripod legs of a large feeder. It was honestly one of the most sickening things I have seen in a while.

Viewing 60 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.