[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Are we forgetting our roots? #13892

J.Wesbrock wrote:
I think it’s also a perfect example of the difference between someone who uses himself to promote a pastime versus someone who uses a pastime to promote himself.

Well put.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Wilderness First Aid Kit #13626

Absolutely. Something to clog the pipes is essential. It’s a little bulky, but a few rolls of sterile gauze can be a lifesaver. Literally. Sterile is obviously preferable, however, if it comes down to it and things are desperate, a t-shirt, bandanna, or anything that can stop the bleeding will work.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Wilderness First Aid Kit #13399

fbahouth wrote: Some of the pre-packaged kits probably have too much stuff and may will tend to be bulky……….and expensive if you want more than one.

Some kits do have too much stuff – depending on your needs. Day hunting? Week-long trip? International? All will require different items, and space. But there are plenty of kits available that are light and simple. I’m not trying to sell anyone on kits – just saying that the ones available from AMK are well thought-out, and worth at least taking a cue from to come up with your own list. But do your own cost comparisons and you might be surprised.

This is my basic kit for day hunts in my area (along with a few things I’ve supplemented). It retails for $12.95, weighs 8oz. and comes in a water resistant pouch with enough room to add some more items in if you need. You’d hardly even know it’s in your pack. It covers the basics of minor-moderate wound mgmt.

I add a few other things like gloves, more gauze, more band-aids. A small syringe for wound irrigation is a good idea. Slings, splints, etc. can usually be improvised, but a small “Sam Splint” can be a good thing to have as well. It packs flat and also takes up no room in pack.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Wilderness First Aid Kit #13238

David Petersen wrote:
As a sidebar to the kit article, some basics on how to improvise in emergencies would be doubly welcome. But then, maybe I’m prejudiced … 😀

Agreed. I think that improvisation is a key component of successful wilderness first aid, and is one of the big differences between first aid in the backcountry and the frontcountry.

Don – if it’s something you’re willing to tackle, I would love to see something like this as well. Unfortunately, I don’t find that it’s a topic that gets much quality focus in most hunting periodicals.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Are we forgetting our roots? #12607

All I can say is that coming up with a phrase like “Tedtosterone” take some serious wordsmithery. Way to put the pen to anvil, sensei.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Are we forgetting our roots? #11387

J.Wesbrock wrote:
The first two answers? Ted Nugent and Chuck Adams.

Wow. That’s almost funny, if it wasn’t so sad.

Friends don’t let friends listen to Ted Nugent. Well, except maybe his first album.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: A REMINDER OF WHY WE HUNT TRADITIONALLY #9999

Agreed, Steve. As a I was writing that, I was thinking about how much of what I was saying could apply to compounds as well. And I know a number of guys who hunt archery-only season with a compound for the primary reason of scouting for rifle season, not because they are committed bowhunters. On the other hand, I know compound hunters who I would consider to be damn good bowhunters. Modern compounds and x-bows both blur the line between what is truly still a “bow” and what is simply a machine.

But if I have to draw the line somewhere, I’d draw it at x-bows, since it just seems to be one step (or several) even further away from a true bow, and that trend seems to be going more and more in that direction.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: A REMINDER OF WHY WE HUNT TRADITIONALLY #9906

SteveMcD wrote:
xBows are not the evil incernate, it was actually the Longbow that replaced the xBow as the superior weapon of choice. Even today’s compounds are far more superior than the xBow.

For me, the issue with x-bows has nothing to do with which weapon is ‘superior.’ It has to do with the fact that it simply isn’t a bow – it’s a bolt shooting machine, with a trigger, which shouldn’t be allowed during archery season.

That, and the fact that too many people who gravitate to modern x-bows seem to be gun hunters (not archers) who want to hunt the early season without having to put the time and effort into learning to become proficient with a bow. Thankfully, for now at least, they are not allowed in Idaho during archery season.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Wilderness First Aid Kit #8679

I probably carry a more extensive kit than I really need to sometimes, but as a Wilderness First Responder for 12 years, it’s just part of my mindset, and experience, to think about all the things that can happen when you’re miles, or days, from help.

There are some very good, pre-assembled, wilderness first aid kits available these days, and if you do a cost comparison, it can be challenging to buy all the supplies separately and put together your own kit more cost effectively, unless you already have a lot of those items on hand.

Adventure Medical Kits offer a variety of well thought-out kits, designed for day trips up to major expeditions. I own several and recommend them highly. Even if you decide to put your own kit together, take a look at the contents of the various kits on their site and you can get a lot of good ideas:

http://www.adventuremedicalkits.com/products.php?catname=MEDICAL%20KITS&cat=26

And keep in mind that the best first aid kit in the world won’t do much if you don’t know how to use it. If you spend much time in the wilderness, do yourself a favor and take, at the very least, a basic wilderness first aid course. It’s money well spent.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Are we forgetting our roots? #8660

It’s an interesting question, but ultimately, I think that history is dynamic and fluid, and not locked into any one era. I have a great deal of respect for those guys from the “Golden Age,” but the history of archery obviously stretches much farther back than that, and has many other facets and cultures and richness tied to it, yet how many of the individual predecessors to people like St. Charles do we remember?

It’s the rare individual who is still revered by the subsequent generation – even more rare if he/she is still remembered several generations hence. That could be a whole other essay, but for better or worse, it is what it is.

Who did Glenn St. Charles, or Fred Bear, or Howard Hill look up to? And who did those people before them look up to?

Their contributions to the sport were many, and we truly stand of the shoulders of giants. But I think the quote in my signature sums it up for me.

What concerns me far more is the lack of younger people at all in our sport.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Who's Hunting the Late Season? #60655

Heading out for the last day of pheasants today. I can still chase whitetails through 12/19.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Good arrows that won't break the bank? #60069

David Petersen wrote: For starters, a simple list of all carbon shafts that take standard inserts would be most helpful. I for one will never (again) buy carbons using off-sized internals.

Here, here. While I’d like to try the ICS, having to track down different internals, plus shipping costs, since I know I won’t be able to find them locally, has put me off of experimenting much. At the end of the day, I haven’t found a reason yet to stray from GTs, and since I already have the internals I need, it’s a no-brainer.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: Good arrows that won't break the bank? #59004

GT Traditionals are what I’ve gravitated to. They’re pretty much all I shoot now, and I have no complaints. Great shaft.

I was curious about trying some Beman ICS Bowhunters, but I haven’t been able to find 100 gr. inserts for them anywhere. Anyone know of a source?

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: My newest set of woods #57871

Very cool. Well done.

[Bruce Smithhammer]

in reply to: recurve vs longbow #57265

The thicker riser and more weight/mass of a recurve tends to make for a more stable, less ‘shocky’ bow as well, or so the conventional wisdom goes. Recurves also tend to have a deeper shelf cut, therefor are more accommodating of a wider variety of arrow spine, etc. So yeah, in some ways, a recurve can be more “forgiving” but as with all of this, I think it really comes down to individual bow design and the shooter’s technique more than anything. Some hyrid longbows integrate the best of both.

But I’m with you – though I own a couple recurves, I really like shooting my hybrid r/ds more and more.

[Author]

Posts