[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Bring it. #41373

Do you ever get used to hiking out alone, in the dark, in serious bear country? You wait till that last remnant of the gloaming has passed, knowing that, with the continued warm days, this is likely your best chance for the wapiti to reappear from their day beds and come within range. But you also know, in the back of your mind, that this will mean digging out the headlamp; resolving to spend the next hour rolling the dice on whether you’ll bump into something much less welcome in the dark.

The walk out always seems that much longer, dragged out by a familiar anxiety you’ve worked hard to lock away, and have come close to succeeding. But it’s there and there is no use denying it- you are in a place where large bears abound.

You remember how different it has felt in the past when doing this hike out at night with a hunting partner – awareness still keyed to the noise of suspicious movement, but covered over with excited talk of the bull that hung up on the edge of the meadow at dusk, so close and screaming his head off at you, but unwilling to close the distance. But now there are only your own thoughts; of what leftovers might still await in the fridge, of what needs getting done, and the jumpiness at every animal that you disturb on the way. Dried arrowleaf amplifies every movement beyond rationale, and squirrels take on epic proportions, based on sound alone.

But I wouldn’t have it any other way. Wild country devoid of ursids is a little less wild. Sometimes a lot.

Maybe the question isn’t do you ever get used to hiking out in the dark in bear country, but should you?

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: CA Removes Fish and Game President #11969

eidsvolling wrote:

Anyone still think this was just another greenie plot to undermine the standing of hunting?

Ok. I don’t think that recognizing the amount of real political influence that anti-hunting and far-left animal “rights” groups have, particularly in a state like CA, amounts to a “greenie plot” or some sort of conspiracy, and that’s not what what I’m suggesting.

But if you don’t think that it is a factor in this, then I applaud your faith in the political process.

I’l leave it at that.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: CA Removes Fish and Game President #11764

Steve Graf wrote: Smithhammer,

A politician works hard to get elected by saying that gambling is bad and he will make it illegal in his state. Which he does upon getting elected. Then he takes a vacation to Vegas and gambles on somebody else’s dime. From what I read, this seems closer to a reasonable analogy.

Certainly true had this guy gotten up on a soapbox and decried lion hunting previously, and/or was appointed to the position on an “anti lion hunting” platform. And maybe he did at some point, but I’m not aware of it, nor have I read that anywhere. He simply went to another state, and hunted something that was perfectly legal there. I haven’t read anything to indicate that he did it as some sort of agenda, or to make a point about anything. In fact, it seems that if he made a misstep at all (other than accepting the trip gratis), it was in not expecting the amount of blowback he got, which politically was probably pretty naive, given what state he’s from.

Despite all the chatter, I don’t think there is a “growing” population of people opposed to ethical hunting for sport and management. In fact our wildlife commission did a study 2 years ago which showed that over 90% of the population of NC supported hunting as a tool of conservation.

I would go further and say that I can’t remember ever meeting anyone ever that was totally opposed to hunting. I have met people opposed to hunting deer with dogs. Or shooting deer at night with lights, or killing deer to protect crops, etc. I know there are a few folks out there that are adamantly opposed to killing anything for any reason. but they are few and far between in my experience.

Steve – I live in rural Idaho, and I can assure you that my experience is the same here as yours in NC – everyone hunts, or if they don’t they don’t, they don’t tend to think anything wrong of it. But have you ever spent much time on the Left Coast?

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Atom broadhead #11620

“The most lethal and effective broad head in the world for any size of game.”

I’ll be honest – this seems like a lot of hype.

Just take a look at the link on their site, “The Atom’s Technical Data.” Here is but one of several ridiculous quotes:

“Again, problems with fixed bladed broadheads are the ONLY reason mechanical broadheads emerged as an option to consider.”

Patently false. None of the “problems” he cites with fixed blade broadheads are by any means inherent to all fixed blade designs, though they certainly have been problems with some designs. However, using problems inherent to some fixed blade designs as a blanket statement for all is ludicrous. And mechanical broadheads did not come about, or solve, most of these problems, while creating numerous others. Mechanical broadheads were, I’m convinced, created by a marketing department, not an engineering one.

From there, I could barely even continue to read on – it wasn’t about truly technical information, it was mostly a lot of highly personalized conjecture and hype. And really poorly written at that.

In short, I didn’t see anything at all to convince me that this is somehow an improvement over a well-built, 3:1 ratio fixed blade head. And more than enough to make me think that it’s a significantly worse choice.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: CA Removes Fish and Game President #11332

Troy Breeding wrote: If they did indeed let him go from his job for hunting instead of other reason, then yes I say he has one heck of a case.

Until we find out the full facts to this it is nothing more than speculation.

Troy

If we get the facts. I highly doubt the Commission is going to admit that the furor over a legal hunt in Idaho is why they have forced him to step down. They will no doubt have, or come up with, other reasons. Maybe those reasons will be valid, but it also seems highly likely to me, based on everything I’ve read (a lot more than just the link above) that they are simply caving in to a bunch of special interest pressure here.

It’s their state – and if they really feel that his behavior is so inappropriate, then they have the right to remove him. But still, it seems pretty ridiculous and extreme to me, and pretty indicative of where public opinion about hunting has been going for a while now. Just read the comments.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: CA Removes Fish and Game President #11329

Steve Graf wrote:

He took his wife on vacation to Morocco, and on a whim beat her to within an inch of her life. Which is legal in Morocco as long as the marks don’t last longer than 6 months. And indeed her injuries were fully healed within 6 months.

Or should the standard be that he/we should act within the paradigm of our accepted and legal behavior, whether or not we are currently within the jurisdiction of our immediate societal group? Especially as a leader of that group?

Just thought I’d stir the pot 😯

Steve –

I see what you’re getting at in a really broad, philosophical sense, but I’d say that the Morocco example is such an extreme that it’s way beyond what this is about. Again – I’d say a more comparable example would be gambling in Nevada, which is not legal in California. Should no appointed or elected individuals be allowed to go to Las Vegas for the same reason?

It’s one thing to compare the standards between our culture and a very different one on the other side of the globe, but in this case we’re not really talking about cultural standards (well, maybe a little bit…) – we’re talking about a difference in what is legal between two states in the same country, only a few hundred miles apart.

To take another example that seems far more applicable than the Morocco scenario – it isn’t currently legal to hunt grizzlies in the lower 48. Should someone lose their job if they go to Alaska to hunt a grizz?

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Why do you hunt #10818

Because living in denial of thousands of years of my genetic history doesn’t seem healthy.

And because many of the most intense and memorable experiences I’ve had have been while hunting.

And because there are few things in the world I love more than fresh elk meat.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Today's Scout #9418

Hey Wahoo –

Last couple days have definitely been a little hazy/smoky. No fires nearby, but the wind has been moving the smoke this way from fires west of here.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: let go of my insert! #9250

Assuming they’re not epoxied, take the largest diameter, heavy drill bit that will still fit into the shaft and slide easily. Take the nock off, and drop the drill bit in. Then lift the shaft up so the drill bit is sitting at the rear of the shaft, and swing it down forcefully, so the bit hammers the rear of the insert. You might have to do it a few times. I’ve salvaged many arrows that would otherwise have been a lost cause this way.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Is camo necessary? #8389

Pretty cool pic. Fred’s jacket actually looks a lot like Kuiu’s VIAS pattern:

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: sloppy release…help me… #8192

Without seeing your release, it’s really hard to give useful advice. But I know one thing that really helps me is hitting my anchor, and then holding and slowing down for a second or two, rather than releasing too quickly. And following through with my release hand to my rear shoulder. I’m, not sure why this helps, but it does. And again, this is just what works for me. Many paths, same destination.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Upland Game Hunting #8144

You might want to check this out too:

http://www.inflightarchery.com/store/index.php

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Heavy FOC arrow question #8038

DaveT wrote: While these arrows are heavy they fly like darts. Since I always keep my shots to usually 20 yrds and under the weight has never been an issue really. However from reading some of the FOC posts allot of folks are saying that 650 to 700 grains is real heavy which make my arrows downright obese:). I did shoot 2 deer with this set up last year and worked like a charm as expected. I hope to be testing them on some hogs soon:)!

I think that’s all you need to be concerned with, Dave. If they fly like darts, and you’re 100% confident that they’ll do what they need to, I wouldn’t worry about what anyone else might consider “heavy.” After all, your arrow setup will still work on smaller animals, but the opposite isn’t always true with a light setup.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Hey-Dig this! Archery at the Olympics #7947

Hitting the “10” ring on a target at 70 yards is a hell of an accomplishment. Doing it consistently, with one string and no mechanical release is seriously impressive. Imagine being that accurate at a distance 2/3 the length of a football field.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Can't help myself (I'm building again) #61433

Sweetness. Can’t wait to see the final product.

[Author]

Posts