Forum Replies Created
-
Today I pulled all of our carrots and beets out of the garden, shot my bow, and then went to the “lawnmower races” in our city park:
Always a good time. And then I rode my bike to get a hot dog and a beer, and then shot my bow again, and got my stuff ready for an early morning start for elk tomorrow. Hard to imagine a better Saturday.
alexbugnon wrote: I don’t use them. It’s just more crap to carry, and I always felt that it’s an unfair advantage. Just like the slogan says “use the quads God gave you”, I just want to use the eyes God gave me! Slightly rigid thinking, I know! 🙄
Well heck, Alex – by that line of thinking, clothes and shoes probably give one an unfair advantage too!
I was about to cross an open hillside the other morning, in dim pre-dawn light. Before exposing myself as I traversed it, I took a good, long look across the hillside, and couldn’t see anything. Listened for a while, and couldn’t hear anything. And then I figured I’d better glass the hillside thoroughly before proceeding, and bingo – there were half a dozen bulls slowly making their way ahead of me that I couldn’t pick out at all with my naked eye in that light.
A half hour later, I was within 25ft. of two of those bulls as they fed, but that’s another story…
Iron Bull wrote: ….One should …….NEVER EVER in ones Long Lived Life. EVER let their prescription to THIS web site or this magazine EVER RUN SHORT !!!!!
Let this be a lesson to all.
Good to have you back, compadre!
Thanks, folks. Gotta mix it up now and then.
But my bird hunting season is a lot longer than my archery season, so it’s time to get back in the game!
Been bowhunting almost every day since the opener, for at least part of the day. Experience has taught me that if I keep that up, I can burn myself out. So today I got some work done, and since Hank needed a good run, I had a healthy change of pace:
donthomas wrote: … but we are starting a new “Backcountry” column in which we’ll look at many of these issues. Best, Don
Excellent. I’m looking forward to this.
To form any sort of reaction based on the typically shoddy reporting of a local news channel looking to amplify a story into ‘controversy’ would be foolish.
For starters:
1) Was there intent on the part of the hunter to deliberately take the moose in front of witnesses out of a desire for provocation? Nothing in the report indicates this. So instead, a few people happened to witness a legal hunt, while they were on mixed-use public lands. It’s just as possible that some other people witnessed it, and thought nothing of it and were not outraged at all, but since they didn’t serve the angle for the story (“a backlash!”), they weren’t interviewed. The reporter said there were “several witnesses.” Yet we only hear from the two campground hosts. How do we know what anyone besides these two, who seem to want to believe that they live in a “nature zoo,” thought of the event?
A news report is very rarely the whole story, but instead select tidbits to support a pre-determined script. Always a good thing to keep in mind when watching so-called reporting like this.
2) One of the witnesses repeatedly asserts that this was a “trophy hunt,” and suggests that the hunter wasn’t keeping the meat. Does she somehow know this for a fact? Did she learn this from talking to the hunter? Or, is she just making an assumption, and if so, based on what, exactly? Colorado, like many states, has laws against failing to “reasonably dress, care for and prepare wild meat for human consumption. At a minimum, the four quarters, tenderloins and backstraps are edible meat.” This was clearly a legal hunt, and the hunter “did everything by the book.” So we have to assume he kept the meat, and that this was not solely a “trophy hunt.” In other words, the witness is spewing a baseless opinion, which the “news” channel dutifully repeats with no further investigation as to its veracity (which would show that she is wrong) because again – it’s a useful inflammatory statement that helps serve the angle for the story.
I’ll say it again – reacting solely to the paltry information in this poorly investigated little news clip would be a mistake.
tigertrad wrote: So it looks like the 400 spine arrows are working in my 50# recurve. The old arrows were 447 grams with a FOC of 15.4% (at 32.5 inches long); the heavyweights (added 100-grain brass insert, plus 75-grain adapter and 225-grain field tip) come in at 679 grams with 28.75% FOC (at 32 inches). Flying pretty well with slightly over 1/2-inch cut off the back and I added a piece of toothpick under the arrow shelf pad. Brain working arc adjustments pretty well up to about 30 yards after shooting 300 – 400 arrows over five or six practice/tuning sessions to date. Thanks for the help y’all!
Nice work. Like DWC said, it’s fun figuring it out and playing around till you find what works. That setup should be capable of taking just about anything you’ll come across.
