[David Petersen]

in reply to: On TeeVee hunting heroes #54563

Jody–

I fear I must correct you on your point 6: “Y’all” is not plural, but singular. The plural is “All y’all,” at least it was when I lived in GA and NC years ago. 😆

But I’ll add my sentiments to Bruce the Bear’s in thinking we’ve gone far enough off course on this thread, though the off-course topic is at least peripherally related … unless you turn the TV sound off. 😛

Dr. Smotherman, I hope you’re enjoying that unique winter weather there in AR. We are forecast for -12 tonight here in SW CO. The coldest temp here last winter was -11 and a month later. I feel sorry for the elk out there. The combo of deep snow and deep cold is deadly for them. At least I aaved one of them from having to suffer through another winter. 😀

[David Petersen]

in reply to: On TeeVee hunting heroes #53654

Duncan wrote: “The ignorant southerner just makes you have to listen to it longer. At least the northerners get it over with quickly.”

True true true! 😆

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Deer are Pests?! #53565

Duncan wrote” “I’d say if the writer wants to see who the overpopulated pest is they can just go look in the mirror.”

Brother, you nailed it there! When squirrels are so numerous they become a problem to humans, we label them “tree rats.” When deer do the same they are “antlered rats.” We have worse names for carnivores. What, I wonder, should we call ourselves at 7+ billion and climbing fast? But it is what it is, we are currently in charge, and must face the realities of the whole mess. Any way you cut it, this article is a real low point for TIME. Here, ironically, is a point of which we are likely in agreement with the HSUS folks.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #53558

I know this is said often here, largely by others than me, but it lifts my spirits every time I see folks outright disagree on an issue, yet express their differences politely, maturely, keeping the focus on the issue, rather than insulting those who disagree. Good stuff.

Loneviking–While I’ve not studied the California lion situation closely enough to have an informed opinion, it has always struck me as a unique situation where–given the large quantity of great lion habitat and large number of deer, then we start building homes in that habitat, thousands upon thousands, with pets running loose, there are going to be encounters and it’s a miracle there aren’t more. It may be that we can, as the study did, talk about “lions in general” for just about everyplace but CA, it being so unique. Do you think that’s possible? I recall decades ago when I lived there, same thing was happening with coyotes and probably still is. Closest thing I know as a parallel are a couple of microcosms here in CO, namely Boulder Canyon and Castle Rock, where much the same situations exist: prime deer and lion habitat being heavily in-roaded by humans, with occasional encounters the result. One size rarely fits all, but in general, generalities are valid, especially those resulting from long-term scientific research. Still, no matter how we feel about predator hunting, to have lion hunting outlawed in an entire state is simply idiot and the opposite of wildlife management. It’s one less tool in the manager’s toolbox.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Wood Arrow #52559

Ralph said: All of archery is not how far you can drive a shaft through an animal.

So true, Ralph–for archery, as you say. For bowhunting, assuming good shot placement, and with a goal of the fastest possible lethality always our priority, it’s hard to imagine another element that’s more important than “driving a shaft through an animal.” That said, you directly addressed Cav’s question, while I did not. 😆

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Wood Arrow #52229

Cav — I agree with ColMike: start with the head weight you want and need for a good lethal arrow as per Ashby, then work back. With all due respect to KK and other respected retailers, most are still way behind on FOC and arrow weight knowledge. Why bother to build a mediocre arrow first and hope you have enough length to increase the spine sufficiently for a good EFOC head? If you’re just hunting deer, you don’t need to start with 300 but can go with one of the several good single-bevels in the 200-225 category. And if you haven’t already, you might consider starting with carbons rather than woods, since it only takes a few seconds to switch heads and experiment with various weights. That’s what I did when I decided to go for the optimum arrow weight and

EFOC–got it together with carbon shafts, then, knowing the total weight and head weight I felt was best for my bow, I started experimenting with wood shafts. Alas, I’m still conducting that experiment years later and have reached a point where I will shoot woods only with my selfbow, and back to carbons with the Java Man r/d longbow. It’s all fun if you have the money and time to play with it.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Takedown sleeve choices #51517

Charles, I haven’t looked into this in a few years, but there was always just one type sleeve–brass male and steel female–so far as I know. I don’t even think it has a name brand but most trad archer places sell it, and Dave Doran’s Archery Past is my go-to choice for such. There are three sizes and two shapes, as I recall. I tried them all and found the oval unsatisfactory to the type handles I was building into my bows, and the large D sleeve too big. The small D works for most wood bows. Only problem I had with them, a consistent problem, was that the sleeve fit into the socket side too tight. On every one I had to sand the male brass insert down for a snug but not impossible fit. Beyond that I never had one fail … naturally, the wood will fail first. A glass sleeve of the same type would be lighter, and you could possibly make it yourself, but it wouldn’t be as strong unless it was really beefy. Excuse me if I’ve misinterpreted what you want … just trying to offer what I can until someone more knowledgeable shows up.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: On TeeVee hunting heroes #51061

Glad to have you here, David.

And yup, the lighthearted discussion of “dialect” is an aside to this discussion and our concern, not the problem per se. But the “coincidence” of people acting stupid and talking stupid on these bogus TV hunting shows is “statistically significant.” 😛 There are accents, and there is ignorance. Sometimes the two overlap, whether Yank or Rebel.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Arrow Integrity #50323

Ed– I second JP … and you need to get it all in a book as well!

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Trad Night Out–Littleton Colorado–Dec 5 #50318

Steve– thanks for this. I interpret the lack of response as a lack of “us” in the Littleton area, not a lack of interest in this great op. Likewise I won’t be there. I’d love to make the Denver rendezvous in March but that likewise is unlikely–since money costs so much these days–though not yet impossible.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: On TeeVee hunting heroes #49980

All of this evokes a youthful memory. As a late teen in Okie City I was a member of a really thriving archery club; this would have been the mid and later ’60s, as I ran off to the Marines in 68. We had an indoor range and a big, nice roving range in the woods. Back then it was all hay bales for targets. Leading club members were Betty Grubbs, who had recently been women’s world or national archery champion, and her hubby, also a successful competitive shooter. They had a young teenage daughter, hardly a princess. These folks were, well, Okies through and through, yet quite enjoyable and entertaining.

For example, one day Mr. Grubbs and I were out doing range maintenance, moving hay bales, etc., when his daughter did something that really annoyed him, at which he yelled at her: “You gol-dang ignoranus, ain’t you got no bringuns-up!” Those folks would have been perfect for a family reality show! 😆

[David Petersen]

in reply to: On TeeVee hunting heroes #49084

Forager, all agreed. The worst such shout-down mobs I’ve encountered are fellow bowhunters on other forums, and the motorized mobs at public travel management meetings. I have also had my life threatened by sheep ranchers for writing letters to the local papers, years ago, exposing their illegal activities re predator control, and so on. No matter what side you are on, or what area of life, if you speak out publicly against various wrongs, you can expect to be “shouted down” in various ways by people who either have no logical counter argument or don’t know how to conduct a civilized discussion. We discuss the problems with hunting here, because we are thoughtful hunters. That sure doesn’t imply there are no other problems in other aspects of life and culture, including hunting’s enemies … which are not the same people as hunting’s critics. Shout-down antis aren’t worth trying to have a dialogue with and getting a rise out of us makes their day. I ignore them, since they are an even smaller minority than hunters are. It’s the big fat majority of nonhunters, many of whom have problems with hunting based on what the see and hear, who we can make a huge difference with … if only we can learn to make distinctions finer than “friend or enemy.” I cringe to hear hunters curse environmentalists, for a familiar example, in the same breath as they curse antis. While there can be overlap, of course, most enviros I have known, absolutely including myself and all the folks I hunt with and many of us here at tradbow.com, are either hunters or only criticize what is wrong with hunting. Nor does any of this matter when it comes back around to the thread topic of TV fools making hunting look foolish to Everyone, except their fellow fools who seem to have an average maturity age around 14, not matter their physical age. Of course, one of the things we detest about the hard-corps antis is their refusal to even try and see what is good about hunting and hunters, preferring to stain us all with the same negative generalizations, as if we were all TV buffoons. We detest them for that, yet we commit precisely the same sins. In all of life, the closer we look, the more complicated things get. Happily, I have a fresh bottle of Bushmills in the cabinet. 😆

[David Petersen]

in reply to: On TeeVee hunting heroes #48933

At risk of hijacking my own thread, :P, I must agree with Steve re the self-defeating tenacity of PBS to stick with a wholly inappropriate name. It is one reason I let my membership lapse. Although some of the best among us are members and officers, there seems to be at least a subconscious desire to be able to say we are associated with that P word.

What started me on this now-long path of self-criticism regarding hunting was my early experiences in writing about hunting in nonhunting publications and (because I wrote some “nature” books in the early days), speaking to audiences, like Audubon groups, who are almost all nonhunters with a few antis, yet intelligent and open-minded people. Through listening to their questions and concerns, I became deeply aware that everything we as hunters say and do in public–including forums like this–influences how the public perceives us. They simply want us to act responsibly, talk and think like grown-ups, and openly respect the animals we hunt and kill. So here we have a spectrum–from a name like Professional Bowhunters at the low end, to the infantile macho posturing of a bunch of under-endowed TeeVee heroes. And they are there because our culture has plenty of even dumber morons to whom soulless blowhards of the Ted Nugent mentality have some sickly appeal. What is wrong with hunting is a microcosm of what is wrong with America, and vice versa. Increasingly, this website is a bright spot in the growing darkness. Whether it’s ranting about the bottom-feeding TV scum “hunting” shows or bemoaning PBS’s refusal to adopt a more public-friendly and accurate name, it all needs to be discussed openly, intelligently and in a civil voice … and where else “in public” can we do that other than here. Thanks, Mom!

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Cougars, livestock and hunting #46686

Good observations and questions, gentlemen. My point in providing this link, bottom line, is to point out, again, how wrong hunters (and ranchers) often are, and at times even counter-productive to our own interests, when we jump on the bandwagon assumption that “the fewer predators, the more the game for us.” At best, most studied intense predator control problems simply have not worked. This same “available habitat is a magnet for life” explanation of why untargeted killing lions can actually increase predation, has also shown up for decades in coyote control studies. You kill ’em all off in an area and before you know it they’re back. Coyote “control” typically stimulates great increased reproduction as well as immigration from outside the ‘controlled’ area. Livable habitat begs to be occupied. The lamest “logical” argument by hunters along this line is common here in CO since baiting and hounding bears were banned in 1992 and bear problems have since increased in small towns and subdivisions. The “logical” but shallow-thinking and uninformed view is “We need to kill more bears to stop human-bear conflicts.” But hey, we don’t kill bears via sport hunting in towns and subdivisions, and garbage-raiding is a learned behavior. Until they open bear seasons in downtown Durango, no amount of bear hunting in the surrounding mountains will make a difference. Bear kill numbers are WAY up since the restrictions were imposed, as is the general population. “Garbage bear” problems are up because people keep moving into bear habitat, combined with an ongoing drought here that some years seriously smacks-down natural bear foods. Similarly, some lions learn to specialize in preying on livestock, while prefer to stick with their natural wild prey.. Helter-skelter lion hunting in the boonies won’t have any bearing on specialists livestock killers; they have to be specifically targeted.

In sum, far too much hunter “logic” is uninformed and wrong. Before anyone responds as if I am arguing against predator control, I am not. I am just saying that this study is one among many, across several predatory species, that says the same thing: general hunting of a predatory species rarely works to reduce predation, which we tend to want to think it does. I understand that those who enjoy predator hunting like to feel they are justified in killing animals they don’t intend to eat, because they are “helping the prey.” In some instances this is true, but in general it is not.

Life is exceedingly complicated, rendering most “obvious truths” and simple solutions suspect. I for one think it’s more fun than if it were all as predictable as we like to think.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: CO wildlife department promotes Ashby research! #39589

Steve– In order for your sense of less accuracy with more weight to be of general concern it would have to be replicable among many archers. I for one have had the exact opposite experience. Within my 20 yard max, my accuracy with heavy arrows and EFOC is better than with light arrows (550 range) with low FOC. They just seem more steady. I suspect it’s “a personal problem” rather than one of physics. If you feel it’s a “time on the shelf” issue after release, you might try increasing your follow-through by another second or so.

[Author]

Posts