When I was growing up I was attracted to bowhunting because it was a challenge that most people didn't want to take...it's not that way any more. I remember watching my childhood hero, Michael Waddel take a whitetail at 35 yards and say, "that is near my maximum effective range." With modern equipment any hunter can pick up a modern compound or crossbow and drill tacks out to 40 yards easily. With a little practice and a range finder 50-60 yards shots are very reasonable.
How is this going to effect hunting opportunity (season dates and tag availability) long term? My fear is that archery seasons may go the way of muzzleloading seasons. What started as a primitive sport with a loyal enthusiast following and turned into an alternative method for more hunting days. I can remember when the muzzleloading season in Oklahoma was twice as long as it is now. Tell me if I am wrong but I think there really is a lot at stake. We risk loosing the lengthy seasons that our bowhunting fathers such as Fred Bear, Dr Saxton Pope, and Arthur Young fought for.
For instance: When Oklahoma legalized crossbows we increased "hunter opportunity." crossbows allowed young and old who could not or would not normally shoot a bow to enter archery season increasing hunter numbers and slightly increasing harvest ability. We have to understand that this comes at a cost of "hunting opportunity" Can you guys imagine how lengthy archery seasons would be if modern compounds and/or crossbows were not used? I'm not saying they shouldn't be legal, just making the point that increased efficiency through modernization of equipment limits hunting opportunity in the long run through greater hunter numbers and harvest rates.
If crossbows are legalized, what would the issue be with internally powered arrow guns? There are such on the market.
Modern equipment and crossbows have allowed thousands of hunters like Hannah (picture below) to have success such as this, her first buck at 15 yards at age 12. How precious! At the same time more and more modern equipment has the potential to reduce the number of days we can hunt, specifically in Western states where lengthy shots are the norm.
What are your thoughts?
"Bow seasons were established for primitive weapons. You people aren't hunting with primitive weapons anymore. I see your videos and the yardage posted on your trophy photos. You're shooting out past 100 yards accurately. So tell me again why you need a month while the Muzzleloaders only have a week?"
OTOH, urban whitetails need to be controlled, and what better than a modern high-tech compound or crossbow to accomplish that humanely and effectively.
So I see both sides, but the short learning curve has resulted in many more bowhunters, which means more competition for limited tags. So by default, modern equipment has affected hunting opportunity wherever tags are limited.
Last year, I bought a slightly used Rampart 46# recurve - a thing of beauty. I really enjoyed shooting her, and thought I would be well equipped to hunt with it. Well a better job opportunity came up, and my practice time dwindled... I just never felt comfortable or confident enough to hunt with the wood, but had an awesome season with the training wheel bow...
I thought this year, I would re-commit myself to the recurve, but running the chainsaw in March as I always do, I triggered my first ever bout of wicked left elbow tendonitis (I am right handed). I can't shoot either bow at the moment, but am hoping to recover in time to shoot the Matthews... I am about to try - but the point is - when push comes to shove, I am going to go with whatever I am most confident in...
The big dilemma for me will be if it ever comes down to Compound vs. X-Bow... Hunt or don't hunt... (I cringe)
A sad dilemma for sure... I really want to master that recurve, and probably will, but it has to be right, and as a single parent, kid starting college, working my tail off to retire early and pay for college at same time, life has other priorities....
Well said - keep posting, it's good to see such well crafted thoughts from the younger generation...
If anything is going to reduce bow seasons it will be habitat degradation due to mismanagement of wildlife and plant communities in addition to loss of habitat.
I'm your classic Luddite. I don't use or know how to use most of the new gadgets that everyone thinks they must have. I came from an era where the highest honor anyone of the outdoor bent could have was to be considered a woodsman, along with the abilities that come with it, like reading sign, knowing the stars, reading the weather, knowing all the trees in the woods etc. .
I gave up my compounds a decade ago and returned to my stickbow roots because I found the new stuff boring quite frankly. As I get older I like SIMPLE!
But that said I think that whatever enhances the outdoor experience for you is a good thing. I actually like the idea of cameras on every other tree and am hoping for the day when the people who use them can check them right from the computer that they're reading this on right now. That means they will in the woods a whole lot less and I can have them all to myself!
Seriously, if it get's new hunters, especially young people, in the woods and they begin to see and appreciate a world away from a microchip then it's a good thing. All of the other issues aside, the thing that will hurt bowhunting...and ALL hunting for that matter...more than anything else is LACK of hunters!
As a forester that spends 300 or more days a year in the woods, in a lot of different areas, the affect the high numbers have had on the quality of habitat is quite sever in some areas. In a lot of instances, the habitat isn't capable of producing the booming numbers it did through the 80's and 90's. So, hunters blame the biologists for making bad decisions or, selling out the herd to other interests like insurance companies.
I know this seems off course from the opening post but, it really isn't. It's the reason for the concerns being expressed. Not compound or crossbows. Sure bow and user efficiency has increased as technology got better. But, bow hunting was in it's youth and growing right along with the herd and this technology. It isn't the end all nor a reason to think our season will be cut short. Other, more efficient, user friendly weapons has gotten the nod when the herd needs reduced to meet harvest goals. So, it seems to me if bow hunters were more efficient, there'd be more opportunity for more bow hunting. Instead of the opposite, as you suggest.
I hunt with longbows and recurves. I gave up my compound 6 years ago and went back to traditional type bows, due to not functioning well in hunting situations with all the gadgetry. It was simply to difficult a check list to complete at the moment of truth versus simply picking a spot and letting it fly. I see zero benefit of a modern compound or crossbow for my hunting. I shoot my traditional bows very well at ranges most think aren't logical or ethical. Yet, most of my kills have come below 30 yards. With any bow, including compounds. I think that theory holds true for most regardless of where they hunt. With a few exceptions, people adapt to become efficient with their weapon of choice. Guys who hunt out west are probably better long range shots than eastern hunters. Not because they shoot better equipment. Because they have to be, regardless of the weapon they choose. So, the technology is really not a factor.
Anyways, I understand where your thoughts come from. I simply disagree the bows of today or, crossbows offer any threat to shortening our bow season. And, if it gets more people in the woods, what isn't positive about that? BTW, a traditional bow is a short range weapon for most because that is the limit they set. It isn't the bow. It's the guy pulling it. Not the lack of technology. God Bless
First, although I practice a fair amount... I'm far more into hunting than shooting. Not even close, I like to kill stuff. I have trad friends who have NEVER killed anything with em, for YEARS. In some odd way I get the feeling they really don't want to, they're ok with a walk in the woods. Killin' stuff is when the hard work starts. That's fine, it's their hunt.
Never been much into classics or history or... tradition. Could care less how things used to be done, so I have no interest in that respect. And those that are good at trad shooting... good for them. But not everyone is endowed with the same skills. I was never very good at throwing a ball either, they made me a linebacker if that says anything. OK at golf, but no real talent for it like many I know. I get a bit better when I practice. But will never be the golfer many of my friends are. Just is what it is.
Although practice makes one better, some just have more natural talent at things than others. I don't believe I'd ever be real good at it like some. And no way am I going to restrict my hunting to inside 15 yards. (I know my shooting consistency at 20...) I like shooting stuff too much. I don't go for long walks carrying my bow. Are we taking about forcing someone to hunt the way they think you "should" hunt? Really?
If there is an "attack" on modern archery it will come from one or both of two sides. Trad guys wanting more for themselves.... or rifle guys wanting more for themselves. There is a fine line between healthy self interest and envy, jealousy and greed. It's one thing to expand ones opportunities, quite another to take them from someone else.
WRT game management the population objectives and harvest numbers are the primary goal, no matter how they are taken. In many cases I actually hear "the archery guys just aren't taking enough..." from the managers. Although you will never hear those words from a rifle hunter.
When I hear of guys complaining about 100 yard shots or the long range effectiveness of modern gear I have several replies for them. If it's a rifle guy I mention there was a time a 300 yard shot was a great rifle shot. Now you read routinely of 500, 700+ and even tv shows dedicated to that aim, so to speak. Are you going to restrict that? How? If a trad guy.... well, back in the day there were plenty of trad guys taking 100 yard shots as well.
Which brings in another reply. Although the gear gets better and better.. we haven't made folks smarter and smarter....
I'll fight tooth and nail to keep what we have NOW. I'll even fight to expand it if possible. But I see no reason to do anything differently than I do right now. I don't see how switching to trad (is that the point?) will "save" bowhunting. Not in any way shape or form.
More likely would harm it. We have these seasons and such precisely because of it's popularity, numbers and economic impact, not in spite of them.
So let me ask you two questions. First, can you name any state in which any archery technology has reduced the bag limit or the length of season. And second, how, in any way has any technological advancement directly impacted you.
In states where crossbows have been legal for years, absolutely nothing has happened. The sky has not fallen.No limit or season reductions due to crossbows.
What I would suggest is simply this. Worry about you. Just you. Worry about how you hunt, how well you shoot, how ethical are your shots. Enjoy your time in the woods. Let life be what it will be and forget all the things that were supposed to happen and never have. Believe me, subdivisions are going to impact your hunting long before archery technology does.
Biologically, there is no reason for favoring any weapon. It is simply addition of the factors of numbers killed, numbers wounded and stress placed on the resource.
Current archery seasons were set for the days of no camo, no commercial stands, stick bows, low participation and lower success.
Seasons should be drastically shortened but they will not be. The resources will continue to be pounded and quality hunting will continue to decline.
As TD says, all will fight tooth and nail to hold on to their piece of the pie and expand it where they can at the expense of others. The hunters who will sacrifice their piece for the good of the resource are about non existent. Certainly too few to make a difference.
Some states do it with draw a license, but that will not work in other states. I know in my state if anyone wanted to change the 9 day gun season, it would be open season on them. On the other hand if you wanted to shorten the compound season, you'd have all those gun hunters on your side.
My suggestion is that during the rut you have to hunt with a bow. No compounds, no crossbows. This makes sense whether you admit it or not. Most big bucks are killed during the end of Oct and beginning of Nov.
Bowmania
"Never been much into classics or history or... tradition. Could care less how things used to be done, so I have no interest in that respect."
Do you have any idea how lucky we are for our rich bowhunting history? Most nations with hunting opportunities do not enjoy special bow seasons and in many places in European such as Norway, bows are not legal to hunt with. Why? Because they didn't have passionate men and women who lead the fight for primitive seasons and the principal of using weapon limitations to expand opportunity.
You have proved my fear that there is a serious disconnect with the principals that brought us to where we are.
And to all those who said that opportunity won't be effected...please do the math. Yes there have always been fears of doomsday from this or that change. But lets face it! Legal Archery equipment has never been easier to use, more efficient to kill with, or more popular as it is today and the trend isn't changing.
I'm not saying its a bad thing but it is the truth.
For many traditional archery equipment hunters, the method and the gear are very important. For most who bowhunt, even if they don't use trad gear, it's still important, otherwise, in many cases, they'd use a gun (unless they were just extending their season).
I understand it. I shoot a trad bow almost daily and almost exclusively for practice, and rarely shoot my compound, except when I'm hunting. I would like to kill an animal with my recurve and someday I will, but to me, meat, antlers, and confidence add up to make "success" for me mean that I am a compound hunter even though I'm a trad shooter.
I think a lot of folks who wonder about these things may have issues just putting themselves in other's shoes and understanding that there are different strokes for different folks and how that feels. I'm guilty myself. I have a hard time comprehending hunting big game with a rifle because it's not for me. But then I hunt with my friends and brother who use rifles and they sure do seem to enjoy their hunts.
The reason I say that, is because, as bowriter points out, we have no evidence from any state that modern equipment has done anything to significantly alter our seasons. I think it would have happened by now.
The fact remains, it still remains difficult to kill mature animals with a bow, even with modern archery equipment.
Sure, it may be easy to go into many high-density WT areas and kill does/young bucks, but for the majority of bowhunting, it's not "easy." No hunting is easy. Even rifle hunting is no sure thing.
Many of the outlooks, when it comes to this sort of thing, come from the overwhelming majority of WT hunters east of the Rockies. But that's only one species and it is, despite declines from 20-30 years ago, a super-abundant species across large areas. My first WT hunt was last year on public land in Nebraska. I've never seen so many deer in my life - more deer on a 6 day hunt than I'd seen in the previous 5 seasons out west.
You guys are swimming in deer. Your seasons are not in jeapordy. The system is in place and pretty well stable. There's been some pretty massive diseases rampage deer populations which have resulted in little more than cuts to antlerless tags and populations have bounced back or are bouncing back in short order.
The whole idea of bowhunting out west is completely different in almost every way than the world of WT hunting east of the Rockies. That may be your hunting world and the hunting world of most bowhunters, but it's also one piece of the big picture.
To the contrary, as the baby-boomers age, stop hunting, and die off, we're going to lose a huge segment of who "bowhunters" are and I worry about us actually being less relevant in 30 years. We'd have to be more relevant as a group to have our seasons shortened due to a greater impact on the herds.
Why and how does modern technology really effect the future of bowhunting? If anything, modern technology has now helped introduce women and kids into our sport that would of never taken up shooting a bow without modern technology. I hunt with both compound and recurve, love killing animals with a stickbow, and I do get so tired of trad shooters and their "holier than thou" attitude against modern shooters. I hunt with and compete with a recurve, but yet my daughters never had an interest in shooting a stickbow. And it doesn't bother me that they love shooting their compounds and using modern technology. And yessir, it's the trad shooters that are always bringing up the "high success rate" of modern equipment users, but they never mention that amount that success rate is lots of kids and women. I always read about modern shooters killing whitetail at 60 yards from tree stands 30 feet high, but in truth, where I've hunted whitetail, you can't see 60 yards, and can't shoot past 30 yards. It's stuff like this that adds fuel to the fight and separates the two groups, modern shooters and trad shooters. Two weeks ago at a big 3D shoot, I listened for almost an hour about trad shooters complaining about modern equipment. It's getting really old...
Got me there. Never been accused of being connected for sure. Not usually mentioned in the same sentence as principles either I guess. But I've been around the track a few times, that first archery buck I killed was in '71 or '72 if I recall. When you get a bit older you will find that history isn't near as "rich" as you thought when it went up on that pedestal.
I don't bowhunt for any "rich history". Sorry. If you want to go get dressed in buckskins or a loincloth even and go hunt.... have at it. Some like to pretend on weekends they are Jeremiah Johnson or Louis and Clark, whole events to the theme. Go, have fun. Me? I'm going huntin'....
I hunt for me and my reasons. Not to be connected with history or family or friends or anything but me and the game I'm after. I put down the rifle because it had lost it's thrill, the excitement and adrenalin. Remote control, like shooting tin cans. Hadn't missed a rifle shot on big game in so long I can't recall.
Picked up the bow to get that back, haven't shot anything with a rifle but an eradication hunt or two for close to 30 years. Until I get jaded about killing game with a compound I see no reason to pick up a trad bow. None. We must hunt different stuff in different ways, or maybe I have no talent for it. My hunts are far from too easy for me. Very last thing I'm doing is looking for a way to make them harder.
If a person wants to increase his challenge, go for it, knock yourself out. But they have NO right to make that call for someone else. And not allowed to whine about how it's too easy for everyone else.
That's the great thing about it all.... you chose your gear, your hunt, the very shot itself, nobody else. The beauty is in the eyes of the bow-holder....
Well said, no person should be shamed for a legal harvest and I won't go there. It's not healthy for our sport. I've heard many gun hunters make that accusation about bowhunters regardless of the equipment.
For instance: I think any high powered rifle hunter should be able to be proud of his trophy but that doesn't mean his equipment isn't far less challenging then a flintlock for instance. Why do they have different seasons? Well...
To more directly address the OP question, I don't really think that we will see a severe alteration of season structure due to advancement of equipment technology. As has been mentioned, it will most likely be from loss of habitat or from lack of hunting interest. Or it may be from loss of access.
As far as bowhunters shooting up to 100 yards, well I have to share, as a young hunter, who was consumed with bowhunting and hunting in general from a very young age, it was absolutely amazing to me to see a western bowhunters set up around 1985. I was used to using one or two pins, set at 15, or 10 and 20, but while visiting my dad who lived in Colorado, a guy came into his taxidermy shop and had a bow with about eight or ten pins. He had pins set up at out to 100 yards. So this extra long shooting for most any weapon may be more widespread nowadays, it has always been around. From what I understand, Fred Bear shot a lot of animals in excess of 70 yards. So though technology has brought the masses to a greater level of accuracy and consistency at ever increasing distances, for those who were driven to get all they could out of their equipment and their abilities, we are not all that far ahead today.
I promise, that killing a whitetail deer with a rifle in the mountains thick with laurel, dense with tree stems per acre, on steep slopes is as difficult as any bow shot that can be made. When the deer are moving quickly, which most will be, almost impossible. Rifle hunting isn't always easy. Nor is bow hunting, regardless of equipment. Trying to generalize all hunting done with something other than a trad bow as being easier is absurd from your roost in Oklahoma
Relax. Do as TD and bo-writer said and enjoy your hunting. Allow others to do the same. And you are welcome to come and see for yourself why your assumptions are incorrect. God Bless
Bowhunting is what YOU make it, irrespective of weapon. The perception of non-bowhunters does matter, as I mentioned in my first post. So does the perception by many that trad hunters wound a lot of game when they (we) do manage to hit something. Honestly, if only trad bows were allowed we might not have enough of a lobby to influence decision-makers. We may be lumped together with MLs in one season as some in the CO CPW would like.
I'm not sure what disconnect you're talking about. If you study the history of bowhunting, read the stories and watch the old films, you'll discover that their desire, at the core, was to hunt and kill stuff with bows and arrows. They embraced the technology of the day to do that.
Just like bowhunters do today.
Compounds, high letoff, mechanical broadheads and releases - they were going to ruin bowhunting.
And yet almost 20 years later almost nothing has changed. That's the best response I can give the OP. The 17+ guys ahead of you with the same opinion were equally as wrong.
"He had always lived in the borderland anyway, somewhere between this (high tech) world and the Other (trad)".... One Stab. Legends of the Fall (gosh... I love that movie... "Schrew Em! Schrew the govmnt!" )
There is a powerful lobby in numbers. As well as economics. Voices, votes and money. To fractionalize and divide us down into yet smaller niches and corners is a wet dream for many of our enemy. Those who really do actively lobby for our removal, trad, wheels, x-gun and rifle alike.
TD diff intrest hunting groups will never get on the same page human nature.
You've had great success with the compound. A longbow will help even out the odds.. :-)
So that fact, coupled with the fact that prior to making a perfect shot, I missed a couple of deer, and got to thinking, what if I had made a poor shot on one of those deer, and all for the sake of being able to say I had killed a deer with a truly primitive weapon. Personally, it is my responsibility to make the quickest and most humane kill on any game I go after. For that reason, I use what tools are available to achieve that goal with the most consistency possible.
Here is some math that should concern us. Each year, we lose more ground. More areas are closed to hunting. More land is developed and taken out of wildlife habitat. federal lands are being closed at an alarming rate.
It is not technology that threatens bowhunting. It is development. If there were only one, universal season-choose any equiopment you want-bow, rifle, black powder-it would not matter other than financially. What matters is how many more acres we lose each year.
It does not matter one whit, how accurately or how far you can shoot. It does not matter one bit how experienced or inexperienced a hunter may be. What equipment he has in his hand counts for not one thing. That is all a personal issue. I for example, do not care one single bit how you kill a deer or how many you kill. It does not affect me one bit. Nor should how I hunt or what I use bother you.
When one of my farms becomes a subdivision, now that, is a concern.
The overdraws went away and the mechanicals improved to the point, I now use them and have for about five years. I have failed to recover one deer and that was not due to the head. I might not use them for elk or larger game but for deer, a quality mechanical is fine.
The point being, many hunters of my age or near it, have seen a ton of things come along that were going to destroy hunting. Not a one of them did.
What we have to realize and accept is, it is not what you have in your hand, but what you have in your heart that makes you a hunter. If you prefer traditional equipment, fine. I am happy for you. If you shoot a crossbow, great, enjoy the hunt. No single person is going to ruin hunting for me.
Good discussion though.
TD's Link
In the wildlife management end of things.... my impression is bowhunters are almost an afterthought.
So a quick google and a quick look at CO 2014 elk stats to get a bit of a feel for it? All numbers are off the harvest report.
All rifle hunts. 161,076 hunters took 33,181 elk for a success rate of 21%. 766,059 days in the field.
All archery hunts. 44,536 hunters took 6,434 elk for a 14% success rate. 328,680 days in the field.
Don't have my calculator out, you guys are good with stats, correct me if I'm wrong with my top of my head figures. The top of my head isn't what it used to be....
Even given a longer season, there are far fewer bowhunters. (offhand a bit over 1/4 the hunters?), a good bit lower success rate (rifle is 50% higher?), far far fewer elk harvested (5 times more with rifle?) And it took I believe about 50% more days in the field per hunter for bowhunters to get to THOSE numbers.
Where exactly are we too successful again? Where is it our numbers are getting too great? We're a fraction. Far lower success rates even given more time, but apparently some still think they are too high. Really?
The only issue I see is folks that have already, want more.... of ours.... even though they are both free to and quite welcome to join us.
TD's Link
If this one doesn't try a cut'n paste...
http://cpw.state.co.us/Documents/Hunting/BigGame/Statistics/Elk/2014StatewideElkHarvest.pdf
The real problem going forward is lack of new hunters. The best thing we can do is help youth get into the outdoors!
There were a total of 175,700 deer killed by all weapons.
Archery hunters killed 82,200 of those deer or 47% of the total harvest.
The archery buck harvest went UP for '14/'15 while every other category of harvest numbers went down.
Crossbow harvests have out-paced regular archery kills for a number of years...I believe around 60% of the archery harvest in Ohio is done by crossbows now.
Even though Ohio deer numbers are approaching the target numbers set by the ODNR (and the ODNR wants to decrease the overall statewide harvest) they are expanding opportunities for firearms hunters. An example of this is the legalization of several straight-walled centerfire handgun/rifle cartridges for use in the firearms season. Anyone wonder why Ohio would try to recruit additional firearms interest while simultaneously cutting back on the deer harvest?
Are the tech advancements in archery (past 40 years or so) and increasing success/harvest rates (Ohio) having the unintended consequence of pushing interest away from firearms here? I don't have the answers, but the questions remain.
Hunter #s are falling sharply w/ the younger generation and the PC agenda movement is reaching them quickly. IMO, we need ''any and everything'' that makes this countries youth to continue this activity for it to survive.
Crossbows are their own limiting factor. Boredom, physical limitations of carrying them, etc... will revert some people back to the "bow". People say 100 yard weapon. Are you on drugs? Maybe. Or, just worried about the other guy versus getting your experience right.
I don't like them or the idea. But, I like the idea of getting more representation. Which we all agree is necessary. What I find more dramatic and ironic is men who are carrying a weapon that is every bit as efficient and deadly, moaning about it. They are't the end all. They have been around almost as long as the longbow. Which makes them much more primitive than the compound. They aren't going to shorten seasons or end bowhunting as we know it. And their effect on hunting will have a far smaller influence than the modern compound. Which is absolutely boggles my mid when I hear a modern compound hunter complain about them after realizing that a good bit of those same people, would ever be in the woods bowhunting if not for the Compound bow.
Men, go hunt. Introduce someone new this year versus spending $20,000 and all your time on your yearly excursions. Remember, if someone hadn't sacrificed their time and money for you, you'd likely not be here right now on this forum. That's our problem. Not crossbows. If we would have all spent 3 years doing that every decade, Crossbows would have never been considered. If you are that concerned, do something to fix it instead of whine about it.
Hunters need to get on the same page! Stop drawing lines in the sand ! But we are so divided it will never happen .
...hmm. Crossbows have changed that.
I would bet anything it's about more money. Just as legalizing crossbows was here in WI. Sure they used the guise of increased hunter recruitment. But it was really about money.
I get it. I really do. I also get the fact that a hunter could buy 1(ONE) crossbow and, let multiple kids use it, while introducing them to the outdoors. Seems like a win-win to me. If gun hunters that don't bow hunt come over and join our ranks by using the crossbow, it seems to me that it will solidify the better seasons and the longer dates by having their support. I simply see no negative to them being involved in bow seasons. And, I don't fret at night that my neighbor who might choose one, will kill the 3.5 year old buck I have been watching. If he does, I'll pat him on the back. That's just me. And, I'm fine with it. God Bless
In the case of Ohio and the legalization of new firearms, I think there's something else at work. I think Ohio is paying attention to the steadily increasing archery kill/percentages in comparison to firearms. We are currently only 3% away from having all archery kills equal all firearms kills...shotgun, muzzle-loaders, handguns and the new centerfire rifle calibers included. That's an astounding occurrence, and it's absolutely driven by a combination of advanced archery technology plus the desire to kill big bucks...in the rut of course. When looked at objectively, the crossbow is now the FACE of Ohio's archery hunters, regularly killing more deer than all other bow types combined. The crossbow and modern compound (along with related technologies and knowledge of deer behavior/hunting strategies) has accounted for an unprecedented rise in participation and/or success rates of archery hunters. It's to the point that people are achieving their goals with archery weapons and not needing to use firearms...or wanting to.
Enter the strategy of adding in new firearms which will hopefully drive up interest in firearms hunting for deer in Ohio. If the current trend of hunters choosing modern archery weapons and seasons over firearms continues, there may be cause to shorten deer archery seasons or lengthen the gun season, mainly to control the number of deer (especially mature bucks) taken during the rut.
Trying to recruit firearms use instead of archery? In some ways it does look like the chickens might be coming home to roost. I guess only more time will tell for Ohio.
First, in Ohio, crossbows have been legal during the regular achery season for many years. However, due to crossbows, not one day has been cut from the hunting season and not one reduction in bag limits can be attributed to the crossbow. In fact, in some areas both increased. Oddly enough, as of a few years ago, there had been more accidents with traditional equipment than with crossbows.
As of two years ago, in no state had there been a reduction of hunting days or bag limits due to the inclusion of crossbows. I could find not one instance of that.
In most states, when crossbows are first included in the regular season, there is an increase in the number of archery license sales. Then, when hunters discover they are no more accurate than a compound and can shoot no further and are a pain in the tocus to pack around, the number drops to near the level when crossbows were first included. An increase of about 3-4% is about normal.
It does not matter what your oppinion of the crossbow is. State agencies and officials do not care. It is not their job to care. They are charged with managing wildlife and producing revenue. The crossbow is an aid in both. Therefore, opponents can rail and wring their hands and piss and moan all they want. It will do no good and if you just take a deep breath and click your heels, it might occur to you, crossbows are not affecting you in the least. Only the rumors are.
Now, let me say this. Many years ago, when crossbows were first considered for inclusion here, I testified before our commission in strong opposition to them. I was as opposed to crossbows as anyone could be. So I have been on both sides of the fence. Then, I did something really stupid. I got factual information and actually went and shot one of the devil's spawn. Boy! Did that ever make me feel stupid. Almost as stupid as I felt when I was opposed to school integration and found out I had been going to an integrated school for two years.
Gentlemen and ladies, the freakin sky is not going to fall. Try getting some factual information from state agencies, not other bowhunters. I must also admit, I have not kept up with anything that has happened in the last two years. So, it may be all hunting west of Slippery Rock, PA is closed. However, I doubt it is due to the crossbow.
Please tell me how the math isn't adding up Of course this effects public land much more than private
That is my take on why success rates have grown. Now, at this point in many places, just as has been mentioned, the success rates are beating back populations at the states goal populations. When that happens, success rates will drop, and then it will most likely be cyclic. So, I don't think new technology will greatly impact seasons. As I mentioned in an earlier post, other factors will impact seasons to a higher degree than will new technology. Another factor that I may not have mentioned, is hunter numbers.
Actually, everyone keeps saying that we need hunter recruitment, so maybe my area is an anomaly, but there seem to be too many hunters around here, and that abundance of hunters range from 8 year olds, to the elderly. I actually cringe every time that I hear someone say we need hunter recruitment. Yes, I will agree, I enjoy introducing someone new to hunting, but I do not think that we need more numbers, unless I have several hundred prime acres locked up that I can control access. As an example, our turkey hunting has went from being some of the best in the country, to being as tough as anywhere, and this is due to hunters hunting turkey that never hunted turkey 10, or even just a few years ago.
i.e. haven't read too many comments about compound technology's effect on desert sheep tags.. much less crossbows.....
Unless your just a selfish greedy bugger and are trying to swing a way to get more stuff all to yourself..... heheheh...
Also, attached are annual license sales (all hunting). While it appears to be in decline the truth is it all has to do with a very large aging group in Boomers. GenX'ers are a much smaller group.
Millenials will eventually create a spike again especially with their "farm-to-table" mentality. Most see hunting in a positive light compared to my generation GenX.
Anyway, hunting will never be for everyone and always be for the 5% of Americans who love the great outdoors.
In my state, during the long rifle season, that is the way it is and has been for years. Biologically, our deer herd is quite sound and there has been no reduction due to decline in herd numbers.
Once the herd, either statewide or by region has been ecologically and biologically established with numbers in place. There is little in terms of hunting to adversely effect it. That is pretty well guarded against in the setting of limits to begin with. That is what sound management does.
We just voted to turn one of our ponds into the same, in order to develop a large-trout fishery. Howls again. One Board member yelled, "What about the kids and seniors??!" Another Board member replied, "What, kids and seniors can't fish with lures and release fish?"
No matter what we do in the outdoors, those who don't have what others have want their piece of the pie. We hear the rifle and ML hunters in the public meetings demanding part of our CO archery season because "It just isn't fair!!"
We don't need to add numbers just for the sake of adding numbers. We need to add QUALITY hunters to our ranks. If you are the type that agrees with everything just to add numbers, you must be a Liberal.
The overall (all hunters/all weapons) success rate declined by 8.1% from 2012 to 2013.
There was a 14.4% average decrease by county in the gun season harvest. (# deer killed)
There was a 2.07% average decrease by county in the vertical bow harvest. (# deer killed)
There was a 5.54% average increase by county in the crossbow harvest. (# deer killed)
Again, the overall decline in harvest numbers is explained by a reduction in available deer to hunt. What's remarkable is that even in the face of declining deer numbers and a much reduced overall harvest stat, three things stand out: 1. Vertical archery hunters were still able to kill 98% of the deer numbers they took the previous year. 2. Crossbow hunters were actually able to increase the amount of deer they killed vs the previous year. 3. Firearms hunters did not keep pace with archery hunters in terms of harvest numbers.
I wonder about the advancements as is a heat seeking projectile next in the works! Where will it all end? Can and will it affect hunting season bag limits and season length?
I agree with Bowriter and Jaquomo that this argument has been had before....
>>>>-------->
But seriously, I don't judge anyone for their choice of equipment but at least suck it up and admit it if it's more effective than than it has been in the past. It doesn't make you a slob, just means it will increase your success in most cases.
A crossbow is not one iota more effective than compound or a recurve. It has no greater range than a compound and in fact, shoots no flatter. It has as many drawbacks as it does advantages. The fact is, a crossbow only has two advantages.
1-Little or no practice required once it is sighted in. 2- No learning curve if you are reasonably intelligent and have some shooting experience.
Crossbows are not a 100-yard weapon. Yes, they will shoot 100-yards as will a compound. But to shoot it accurately, it must be sighted in for 100-yards. Then, it is useless at any range much less than 100-yards. It is no faster and has no more k e at 35-yards than a modern compound. The true advantage in archery/bowhunting is the person who shoots instinctively.
Now, while comparing crossbows and compounds as to effectiveness, consider, a crossbow cannot be shot at a target behind or even close to behind a tree. The target must be from dead to the side or in front of the shooter. Their weight and design make them extremely cumbersome and almost impossible to stalk with. The time and effort required, make them almost useless for a second shot. They are a pain to hold while sitting in a stand.
However...using one does beat not going at all and they have been an entry to many hunters changing to compounds after a year or so with a crossbow.
it is true, you do not have to draw a crossbow. But the movement required to get into position is equal to drawing a compound. Few people can hold a crossbow in shooting posisition any longer than they can hold a compound at full draw. I cannot hold mine nearly as long.
In the six years of hunting with a crossbow, other than two I mentioned in the earlier post, I have not found an advantage and would trade mine back for a vertical bow in a heartbeat. I have also found that most if not all the people whot hink the crossbow provides a hunting advantage, have not hunted with one. The operative word is hunting. They are far more cumberson that a rifle and are a pain to hunt with. Shooting one a few times, is in no way comparable to hunting with one.
The basic fact is that modern society wants everything easier with less work and effort. It's the human condition. We've built whole societies and markets around that. Most all hunting products are geared towards that fact also and lots of people buy them...me included to some extent.
Some of us just prefer to have more 'hunt' in our hunting. Others want a lot less; and therein lies the basic conflict and why the recurve/longbow shooters distrust compound shooters, bowhunters dislike crossbow hunters and why rifle hunters think the bow seasons 'aren't fair'. The basic differences in equipment make everyone suspicious of everyone elses motives.
There is no fixing it....so I take my nice custom made recurves and go hunting and generally ignore the BS. :)
I have no provable idea where all this use of technology will take us. Anyone with a modicum of sense knows that it has dramatically changed the bowhunting scene over the past 50 years. Archery seasons and revenue are an enormous animal compared to many decades ago. Tech in archery is here to stay.
It seems pretty certain that eventually the archers will kill more big game than do firearms guys in some states. I think anybody who looks at trends would be interested in how it might affect hunting and future regulations. There was a time when bowhunting harvest stats were basically a couple drops in the bucket of water. Today in Ohio archers are accounting for half the water in that bucket now, and the crossbow is steadily leading the charge. I'm not calling that a negative, but I'm equally sure that ODNR officials and wildlife managers are considering where this is going and whether (or not) they will make changes to maintain their objectives. They have amply demonstrated that they will change seasons and weapons as they determine is best for deer hunting. If the shift continues toward more kills during archery season and if that in some way negatively impacts the buck harvest here, I believe we could see strategies implemented which limit or reduce the buck harvest by archery hunters.
Wherever it's headed, it's amazing to watch what continued technology is doing to bowhunting, and hunting in general.
Ohio is a poor example as the crossbow was allowed when the herd grew. People were "raised" on them. I understand that you have addressed this the same and we both agree that the issue is people choosing them versus other choices being the issue here. As, they simply are not more efficient. Easier to be deadly? Yes. Better tools? No.
That's the issue. Since hunting numbers are dropping as a whole, the only issue to consider hen people demand the crossbow is going to affect hunting's longterm existence. Hunting numbers have dropped since the great depression. No difference here. As life gets easier, people get lazy. Will it redefine seasons? Yeah it probably will. By increasing them.
Crossbow introduction is no different than compound introduction, except, there are fewer hunters to participate in the coming years. Maybe we need easier tools to retain our piece of the pie?
RickE, a crossbow is cumbersome and heavy. Front heavy, awkward, etc... Going to be fun listening to the few serious hunters that will choose them by choice, cuss the weapon due to their limitations after using them. That's been my experience anyways. God Bless
Few people choose crossbows because they really really want to hunt with that weapon. They choose crossbows so they can participate in the archery season without putting forth the time, effort, and dedication required to shoot a hand-held bow. While there are some hunters who are physically disabled and have great difficulty shooting a hand-held bow, they are few in number and the people leading the crossbow movement are able-bodied men that want to hunt the archery season without all that practice and dedication stuff.
That is exactly what crossbows during archery season should be. For the handicapped and elderly, not the lazy that want the easy way.
Back in the late '80's, three of use were doing the blood tailing portion of the NBEF course we were conducting at the local community college. While we were setting up, several vehicles pulled up, including a couple from Wyo G&F. They unloaded some haybales, along with a crossbow. We talked to a warden, who told us a couple crossbow reps were putting on a demonstration. There were two female G&F employees that had never touched a crossbow. After 5min of instruction, they had the two ladies shoot at a paper plate. Not one shot failed to hit the paper plate...again, after only 5min of instruction.
Last summer at the local archery range, guy shows up with a crossbow that looked more like an assault rifle. He set up his shooting sticks, rested the crossbow on it, looked through his scope, and proceeded to put all 3 bolts into the bull at 40yds. He then moved over to the 50yd target and not one bolt was further than an inch from the bullseye. He made the comment, "Just wanted to see if it was still on, since I haven't shot it since last year", put the crossbow back in his case, along with the mechanical cocking device he used, and drove off.
I agree, but part of this will be affected by the state, population, terrain, road system, cultural habits...so many factors. Ohio was and is the perfect state for crossbows to overtake all others. The majority of our hunting is done less than a linear mile from a road. Our firearms season was always mainly smoothbore shotgun, so crossbows didn't feel like a huge kick in the nuts for accuracy when a gunner tried one. The vast majority of archery whitetail hunting is done from treestands, so weightier and more tech-complex weapons are easier to manage vs a miles-long hike and ground stalk. ATVS are gigantically popular here and they seem to go with crossbows like peas and carrots.
I don't personally see the appeal in utilizing a lot of technology to make archery kills easier, but that's just me. I think there's a lot of value in the struggle to learn, gain strength, fail many times, stalk close, and hone personal skills to the point that much of it (tech) is unnecessary. In the end, it's better for me to achieve success with less or come home with only stories and photographs. I acknowledge that a majority of archery hunters probably don't feel or think like I do, and I don't try to change that.
Technology has arrived and will stay...grow in our sport. I don't see it ever stopping. Maybe it shouldn't stop. The days of referring to it as 'primitive weapons' are decades behind us now.
