[David Petersen]

in reply to: Scent control? #30078

It depends on what we mean by “scent control stuff.” Assuming we’re talking about commercial chemicals, I have used them and I have gone without and I can’t make a case for either way … other than in this world anytime we can avoid a chemical solution to anything, the world is better off. Yet I do not agree with “keep the wind in your face” as the only consideration … unless we’re rifle hunting and don’t plan to circle back through the same area anytime soon. First, the “wind” is by no means always a straight affair, but just as often rising and falling and switching directions. “Suddenly, I felt the breeze on the back of my neck and knew the game was over.” Familiar, ain’t it? So, anything we can do to minimize our scent strength helps to hedge our bet against the fickleness of air currents and at worst, when we are busted, the prey may think we are farther away than we are simply by the faintness of our stench, thus not necessarily panic and run. But for those trad bowhunters, like most of us, who do most of our hunting in the same restricted area/s through which we come and go frequently across the season, in my case daily for at least a month–the most common example would be to and from a stand–then the “second scent” kicks in, and that’s residual scent … the scent trail we leave behind from our boots, clothing and hands (and sometimes heads and hats). In this instance it won’t matter which way the wind blows if we gradually build up our residual scent in an area, because the animals will figure it out and leave. So, “scent control stuff,” no. Scent control wityh cleanliness and learning not to touch the vegetation as we walk through it, absolutely.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Bow weight and FOC #30014

Bruce, thanks, you have clarified my point better than I did. Those three consecutive years’ experiences provided an abrupt learning curve for me. First, I ended a long troubling history of poor penetration on elk by going from 550-grain total arrow weight with aluminum shafts and 125-grain Thunderheads (replaceable-blade three-blades) to 800+ total weight and a narrow two blade. That combo worked great so long as I didn’t hit heavy bone, which I didn’t on the first bull and cow I took with that combo. The second step in the experience/learning process was precisely as you spell out–learning the hard way that a light thin head driven by a heavy shaft is a very weak link. So yes, precisely as you suggest, Bruce, the ticket is to get as little of the total weight as possible from the shaft and as much as possible from the point. (Another reason that heavy heads are preferable to internal weights: strength.) Back then, and this was many years ago, no such as the Tuffhead or its growing number of well-built contemporary counterparts existed, because there was no demand … and no demand due to the widespread and tenacious lack of knowledge in this arena (pre Ashby). The recent and ongoing increased availability of Sherman-tank broadheads following the widespread dissemination of the Ashby reports is the single best example I’ve seen of industry paying attention and providing what is truly needed to maximize success. Knowledge prompting innovation.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Bow weight and FOC #29046

When it comes to arrow weight vs. FOC, in my experience here again Doc Ashby is right when he says, as I interpret and use it, “get the minimum weight first, then worry about FOC.” That minimum weight to assure sufficient penetration for lethality assuming the worst-case scenario of a heavy bone hit, is 650 grains. For white-tailed deer and other smaller big game, I try to hold total arrow close to that in order to boost speed. With today’s increasingly lighter and stronger carbon shafts it’s entirely possible to have a total arrow weight of 650 as well as EFOC, simply by using heavy broadheads. For elk and such I prefer around 800 grains total and with light carbon shafts can attain UFOC. But the bottom line remains weight before FOC. The original Natal Study didn’t address FOC but concentrated on total arrow weight and broadhead design. Using 843-grain total arrow weight (compressed hickory) with a tiny 125 grain broadhead I shot completely through two elk with the same arrow (not at the same time of course). On the third elk I hit the scapula and utterly destroyed the broadhead (Wolverine) with only skin-deep penetration. The point being that without broadhead integrity no amount of arrow weight or FOC is going to help us with heavy bone hits, but in fact promotes broadhead failure. Not a single piece of the puzzle can be left out. I currently shoot a 52# r/d longbow.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Making Amends #28821

I tear up my tag, as I no longer have the stomach to hunt that species that year. I figure I have killed my animal. One year, long ago, I kept searching for a one-lunged bull elk (back in the days before I encountered the Ashby study and ended all penetration problems forever) for, I think three weeks, determined to find and tag its remains. Remarkably, he survived and I got a second chance and made it right. That was something of a miracle.

Biggest thing, to elaborate on what Paleo touches on above, is to ponder honestly what went wrong and what can be done to assure that same type mistake never happens again. A well lived life is a process of bracketing toward wisdom. The real mystery and tragedy is why some people bracket and grow, while others don’t seem to have a clue or give a hoot, go around boasting about having “stuck one,” and never learn anything about themselves or life … and pass that smug ignorance on to their kids.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: 300 Tuffhead testimony #27038

Not to warp the topic, Jans, but man those ribs look good! I recall tossing whitetail ribs on a charcoal grill and loving them, way back when I lived where I could hunt whitetails. Not so for mule deer or esp. elk.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: More international good press for bowhunting #24544

This morning National Public Radio’s morning news ran this story, or one just like it, with a deer running around people’s yards with an arrow through its head and different people expressing opinions. As usual the NPR presentation was intelligent and objective. The HSUS spoke-person was of course against suburban hunting but admitted to a big problem for which her proposed cures clearly are inadequate. A NWF spokesman defended the hunts as not the sole answer but a necessary component of control, but cautioned hunters re the need for extra caution, self-restraint, precision and empathy. In all, hunters came out perhaps looking better than we always deserve. In the big picture this mess is insignificant in comparison to all the bigger impossible situations we continue to create for ourselves and nature by our compulsion to overpopulate our own kind. Nothing will get better until we deal seriously with that, and it seems locked into our genes beyond repair. Such a world!

[David Petersen]

in reply to: More international good press for bowhunting #23706

The issue of most concern for bowhunting that these horrid images bring up is what I call “suburban backyard herd-reduction bowhunting.” As many of you who live in these areas well know, with true wild lands and even woodlot habitat dwindling all the time, whitetails are increasingly adapting to living in suburbia … in people’s yards. In some areas special bowhunting seasons are allowed (usually after lobbying by local bowhunter groups) that focus on does in hopes of thinning out what have become pests in areas where firearms are too dangerous (and loud). This seems obviously the situation in this episode and I fear that similar tragedies happen regularly … deer running around people’s yards, school yards, whatever, with arrows sticking out of them. For this reason I would not hunt under such suburban circumstances … though when you have big bundles of delicious meat eating your garden shrubs, the temptation sure is going to be there, and darned hard to resist. I believe in some areas suburban hunters are required to take special courses intended to minimize such heartrending sights, and where they’re not, they should be. Is requiring suburban hunters to have their names and maybe hunter ID on arrows going too far? I don’t know, but it’s a darned delicate situation and for bowhunting’s sake, not to mention the deer, we should use extreme caution and self-restraint when dancing on such thin ice.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Splintered long bow #22471

My standard advice in this instance has remained unchanged for years: You are FAR better off buying a used custom bow than a new factory bow, as it will be both cheaper and a better-made tool.

Others will have more specific questions. Also, to expand your choices don’t neglect to check out the new species of deflex/reflex longbows, which pretty much offer all the same advantages of a recurve–smooth draw, no hand shock, good speed, no stacking, etc. The two designs are so equivalent in performance these days that it mostly comes down to the shooter’s preference in how a bow looks.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Splintered long bow #22349

Welcome BO7. Is it an all-wood bow or does it have glass? My experience with all wood bows is that they can almost never be satisfactorily repaired because it throws the tiller out. However, we have folks who visit here who know a truckload more about it than me, but they will need a good, clear, close-up photo to make an analysis. Good luck … and you can, at the worst, enjoy the pleasures of shopping for a new bow. 😆

[David Petersen]

in reply to: 300 Tuffhead testimony #22147

Geeze, Jans, that exit wound looks like a hand grenade went off in it! I can’t believe it made it as far as it did and didn’t just drop like a brick. Pretty impressive entry wound as well.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: How many times per week do you hunt? #21444

Troy, respectability is vastly overrated when you consider who it is giving and withholding the respect. Conformity is all the dominant culture really wants, respectable or otherwise.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Squirrels #21436

Actually, Doc, I thought some of the references in your version of a similar story, like turpentine, brought the bitter point home far more sharply than my wordiness. But at this point I think Doug should kill and eat a pine so we can see how he chooses to describe it’s … flavor? For the past many years I’ve enjoyed an unspoken truce with pine squirrels that live around my favorite regular ambush spots. They just flat totally ignore me, as if I’m just another old bear bedded down for a few hours. They don’t sit on my hat like the chipmunks do, but they often run over me, bouncing off a knee or leg. But in the very rare instances another hunter is sitting in the same place, the truce is off. After over an hour of relentless heckling by a pine a few years ago, Alex Bugnon lost his jazzy cool and nailed it to a tree as it was running down headfirst. That big single-bevel Brown Bear shut it right up, let me tell you. Both halves of it. Alex, alas, did not do his duty and eat it. 😛

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Squirrels #21399

Doug– so you done et up all that bull elk you killed in Sept? You must have some serious carnivores at your house!

I have heard a few, very few, folks claim that pine squirrel is OK. My experience agrees with the opinions above–they are too tiny to justify killing for food unless they were a seriously delicious delicacy. Which they are NOT. I forced myself to eat one once, long ago, in penance for killing it for no good reason other than anger because it wouldn’t shut up and was ruining an elk hunt. It was one of those, “Oh hell! Now why did I do that?” immediate regret situations. So I built a little fire on the spot and cooked and ate it … if it had been more than a couple of bites I couldn’t have choked it down. Really bitter, dry and disgusting. Of course you can make almost any meat edible by jerking it or in various spicy concoctions.

While I’ve not eaten an Abert’s (aka tassel-eared squirrel), I’ve been told they eat just fine. But they are rare around here if no way endangered–abundant in some prime young Ponderosa forests and totally absent everywhere else thus scarce overall–and so remarkably “dumb” when it comes to survival I’m amazed they aren’t extinct. You can have one eating from your hand in no time, which we’ve done here back when they were here. And to my eyes they’re the most gorgeous of all squirrels, esp. the black variety that lives only in the high Ponderosa forests of the North Rim Grand Canyon. I could never kill one unless in a survival situation.

Bottom line is that I’ve always considered this a non-squirrel hunting area due to lack of suitable species, which I miss a lot, as I grew up hunting and eating fox and grays. We haven’t had a good cottontail pop here since the fires 11 years ago, even in areas that didn’t burn. And the bunny cycle is supposed to be 8 years. I seriously miss hunting and eating them but don’t think I’ll ever resort to local squirrels. I’d much rather shoot and eat carp from Navajo Reservoir, if it came to that. And it will be a very hungry day indeed before it comes to that.

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Blood trail #21285

Did you wait a while before starting after it? The less lethal a hit (dark red blood can also be liver, fatal but slow), the longer we should wait. I’d take Doc’s advice, get a friend or two, maybe a dog, and either grid search or make widening circles. If it’s cool the meat should be OK until morning. Good luck ..

[David Petersen]

in reply to: Portraits of Remote Tribes #20244

Fantastic and uplifting! I’m not sure how the gauchos and Indian royalty fit in with “ancient tribes before they disappear” theme, but the photos are spectacular and the video at the end even better. With the abovementioned exclusions, these are the real human beings. Thanks Jim!

[Author]

Posts