Rifles shooting out to 1000 yards.
Bows shooting to 100 yards.
Very simple question. Would you be in favor of limiting technology? In the sense of limiting the range of bows, ML, and rifles? What would hunting season look like if rifles used open sights, ML were flint lock, and bows where stick bows?
There are guys that can kill stuff and guys that can’t - no matter the weapon or tech. Tech limits would separate the men from the boys very quickly. Wounding rates would probably stay about the same.
Hell yea! Quality would improve rapidly and within a few years, we would see much better hunting for mature animals. We could have much longer seasons. I’d love to see how a selfbow and stone point only season would work out:-)
Today I didn’t take my recurve as the wind made me go to a stand I didn’t think I would have a shot inside 15 yds. I took my compound. Turns out I had a nice doe at 8yds. Didn’t shoot her though because I want to save that tag for my recurve. Personal choice.
I don’t see anything changing these distances people are shooting with today’s technology. I also don’t hunt much with my flintlock though as I find it inferior to a good bow. Again personal choice.
We should toss in moving cross guns to rifle season though. I would be in favor of that.
Sounds good, but ain’t happening.
Remember the rearview mirror is smaller than the windshield for a reason
Wounding rates wouldn't change. The portion of wounding that comes from folks extending their shot choices beyond their range ability has nothing to do with the weapon. A guy proficient out to 600 yards with his rifle but trying a 1000 yard shot or a guy proficient out to 20 yards with his self bow but trying a 35 yard shot are basically the same.
with everything that is available today Hunters still represent about 10% of the US population maybe a shade more when you Count small game only but big game hunters are about 10%
you get much lower than that and you run the risk of becoming too itrelevant to even have a voice
That said, choosing *any* bow is limiting relative to the effective range of any modern long gun (the smooth-bore shotgun with piss-poor sights being the exception here.)
I also agree that crossbows have no place in the archery deer season. If that puts me at odds with the handicapped and those even older than myself, so be it. When I can no longer draw a legal hunting bow I'll stop bowhunting. (I'm 65 and still draw a 50 pound recurve.)
I have two ML... one is percussion Hawken, the other is a in line TC..... they both take the same time, same procedure to load. The difference is the in line has a protected primer....... both are capable of shooting 200 yards.... never killed anything beyond 100 with either.......... In the late 1700's with german engineering, and now a rifled barrel,, the mountain boys, were in the militia, killing British officers, at 300 yards, open sights. think about that.............. I have a book, called "Letters from a Sharpshooter", the true diary of a 17 year old sniper in the Civil War, that he sent home. With a precision rifle, he killed hundreds of Union soldiers, from and up to 500 yards
Yet the average guy continued to shoot well under 100...... today the same goes with compounds etc.........................................
I am against govt regulations, we have enough of them, in fact too many
No matter what you hunt with, you still have to execute it to do your part. I hear how rifle hunting is too easy. Maybe it is setting a food plot or in country where your glass doesthe hunting. However, until you’ve tried getting on, shooting, and killing a animal moving through thick timber chasing, running, or even walking with intent, at a range near maximum visibilty, youd never understand that.
So what are you waiting for?
Archery and ML seasons ALWAYS HAVE BEEN about limiting technology (duh!).
The laws were originally written when ALL muzzleloaders were either antiques or reproductions and (likewise) ALL bows were the functional and ballistic equivalents of technology that was hundreds (of not thousands) of years old.
Inlines, scopes, sabots, pelletized powder and pistol bullets may have existed, but they weren’t expressly prohibited simply because everybody KNEW what a muzzleloader WAS and nobody anticipated the market for exploiting legal loopholes that brought us smokeless inlines with centerfire ballistics.
Crossbows DID exist at the time, and were specifically and deliberately excluded as NOT ARCHERY. Mechanical releases were likewise excluded.
So JMO, Bring It On!
I’ve got the .54 and plenty of powder & ball ready to go. I’ve got 3 longbows and 3 Recurves on the rack, too. And a Marlin lever in .45/70, for that matter.
I’m ready to PLAY! :D
All I ask is one tag per year, and a chance to indicate a preference.
Early crossbows were also considered with their shorter power stroke and arrows to be less powerful and some believe not able to kill large game effectively kinda like trad bows originally . Speaking in terms of limited technology LOL
Pursuing your sport, your way, does not make you a better or more pure person than anyone else. It's a choice. YOUR choice. Same as me and MY choice. It's pretty easy to see who on here pursues their choice out of a passion for it and who does it to feel superior to other's. Why does a dyed-in -the-wool trad hunter also use a muzzle loader that has five times the effective range as his long bow? Or shoot a long range center fire. Because he LIKES to shoot them also.
I have a lot of respect and admiration for the dedicated trad guys that hunt a variety of game in a variety of landscapes and stick to the plan. Same for the compound shooter that is on the last day of a big hunt and turns down the guides rifle, knowing he'd be disappointed in himself if he took it. On the other side of the coin, it doesn't bother me if a bow hunter takes the guide's rifle and kills that archery unreachable ram or billy. As long as HE is happy about the outcome!! Once he starts apologizing, I'm out because that means he's not really satisfied either.
I've got a couple of compounds, one old Browning recurve and a warf franken-bow. Last spring my buddy and I both decided to kill one of our spring bears with a single string and we did. No baiting allowed here, but bears are plentiful and probably on about par with turkeys for many of you guys. It was fun and we both killed bears, but we both concluded that it wasn't any more fun than a big bear at thirty yards with a compound and we both enjoy shooting a compound more. Might try a long bow this spring.
I definitely agree that some technology has been used to take advantage. A compound to trad is like a cap to flint lock. An in-line is like a crossbow to a compound. A thousand yard rifle, for game, is way more target shooting than hunting and where I draw the line.
Can you be accurate with a single string at fifty yards? Sure, Olympians do it all the time at ninety. But not many Olympians stalking the deer woods. Not many people playing sports are major league material either, just a few elites.
I think wounding rates would go up for a couple of years and then participation would just drop way off, at which point the masses would eliminate the few. Probably suit a few just fine as their little world would be more peaceful for the rest of their self-centered lives.
I would also have no problem with some trad only areas or seasons. After all, we are all "special interest" groups and I support that. And soon the trad guys would be fighting about what trad really was. lol.
We can dress up in our quaint little Fred Bear costumes and imagine we are time travelers from yesteryear, but technology marches on, just as it has since fire and the wheel. Unless it affects wildlife populations adversely, and consequently hunting opportunity, I can't tell someone "my technology is ok, but yours is not". That's what the Taliban does.
And I definitely agree! It doesn’t have to be state wide it could be several units. Some of us would like to be able to hunt every other year or so and not being able to have the range effectiveness would be worth it to have the experience.
Range effectiveness has more than doubled for every type of weapon in the last 30 years
The truth is that technology is splitting the bowhunting community. That doesn’t make one group better than the other But the reality is the difference in a compound bows affectiveness and a recurve/longbow has become drastic.
I am what most people would consider a good shot with a traditional bow but if you put me next to someone I consider a good shot with a compound at the target range and handed us both a rangefinder his or her group at 60 would compare to my 30 yard...And that’s on a good day for me.
It’s time we shook hands and separated at least on a trial basis (set aside a few units/areas) where tags are limited in the west.
And as far as muzzleloaders are concerned that season has become a joke. Flintlock or percussion or get out in my opinion but I don’t participate so we can let those guys figure it out.
Technology isn't splitting the bowhunting community. What is splitting it is a small group of hunters who can't stand the fact that others use legal tools that make them more accurate, more effective, and more successful.
Colorado did have archery only sheep units for many years. Some of the best rams were in those units. The numbers were so good that the DOW captured sheep in those units to improve sheep herds around the state. The rifle hunters cried and cried to the Commissioners until they got seasons in those units. The quality has definitely suffered.
I would just like to see Colorado take archery season seriously and get all the rifle hunters out of that time frame. Colorado is ridiculous with rifle hunting right over the top of archery hunting. The advances in archery technology have not helped us at all in that respect.
Hell, can you believe stone points aren’t legal in Colorado? Doesn’t make any sense. They were effective in Colorado for over 10,000 years at keeping meat on the table so why are they not legal now? Pretty sure that the very few hunters that would even consider using stone points would be serious enough to make sure that they were doing it right and probably would have many years experience to know what it would take to actually kill stuff effectively with that limitation.
We have lost a lot in this state as bowhunters and it seems like the Wildlife Commission and CPW base their decisions to put more rifle hunters in what used to be archery season and further limit archery hunting because of the improvements in archery technology.
There are a number of elk units that are draw for archery and OTC for rifle. Why? Because gun hunters complained that bow hunters were pushing elk into private land. It was only supposed to be for a short study period but has now become entrenched in the permanent season structure. The results of the “study” still are not out there and pretty sure the elk would still move to private land if they were not hunted at all in bow season.
Hell, there are discussions right now about further limits to archery like splitting seasons into shorter time frames, making all archery tags draw only, putting more rifle hunters into September seasons, etc, etc.
Technological advances in archery equipment are not helping us with the regulatory agencies.
Single biggest thing, the Internet. All of it. Online forums, live satellite mapping, online info, YouTube, get rid of that and you’d see some serious change. Making an individual limit his compound range to 40 yards from 100 isn’t going to change much. I’m not saying it’s reasonable to expect it could ever be done, but I just think it’s hilarious that guys get so bent out of shape about minor differences, or even big differences in weapon technology, when the internet has become one of hunters’ largest aids in killing animals consistently. I’m on it right now
Another note on technology, just thought worth mentioning. I know quite a few hunters in my life. I’m not labelling the entire population, but just saying out of the guys I know, the hardcore bowhunters are by far decked out with the most technology over the rifle hunters. For the most part, they also consistently kill more
You generally blame technology for the loss of archery opportunity in CO, and yet the one concrete example you cite of a loss of opportunity has nothing to do with technology. That strikes me as odd.
Same guys say it and same guys don’t.
It comes up every time there is any discussion about season structure here in Colorado -
“Archery equipment has advanced far beyond when “primitive” archery seasons were first established. Hell, just watch some of these videos on line of these guys shooting accurately out to 100 yards!”
“Why should bow hunters get such liberal seasons with that kind of equipment?”
Luckily, the CBA has countered that even with the increases in technology, the CPW statistics show that bowhunter success % has not increased. Not sure CPW’s success rate statistics are all that accurate, but so far it has kept our seasons from getting shortened to 1 week in September, probably off the peak of the elk rut.
I will say that the CBA has not helped to get the rifle hunters out of September and that sucks. It always gets twisted to only focusing on muzzle loaders vs bowhunters and if we want separate seasons, bow hunters will have to give up a week. Given the only alternative ever presented with respect to muzzleloaders, most bowhunters are OK sharing our season for a week including the weekends.
Hell, there are early rifle seasons for deer, elk, and bear that are right over the top of archery in Colorado that just get ignored. I have seen several bull elk killed by guys with rifles in archery season that probably had a bear or cow elk rifle tag and their bow strapped to their backpack. Reported it to CPW and was told that there was not enough evidence to press charges on three separate incidents with the same bunch of poachers! There are also sheep, goat, and antelope rifle seasons on top of archery seasons but they have less impact.
So what CPW statistics reflect is the benefit of increased technology is illusory as it does not increase success rates? If they are in fact ignoring their own data when setting seasons/tag allocations, seems like that would be an easy case to make.
You think that’s not already the norm?? LOL! Where have you been hiding???
The thing is, it’s NOT the guys who’ve been at this for 75 years or more who are obnoxious about it. They were using sights and string-crawling and face-walking 50 years ago when Archers shot to 60-80 yards or more in competition and FULLY EXPECTED to hit the bull. It’s the Recent Convert types who rail against any shot past 17.3 yards...
I have to disagree with Lou about Pope & Young, though; they didn’t pull out muzzleloaders or iron-sighted bolt guns. They didn’t even go for the most advanced technology in hand-drawn bows; they were interested in ELB-style bows and Dr. Pope consider making your own tackle to be part or being An Archer.
I’m not saying that anyone should try to emulate their long-bomb shots (outside of fun & practice), but IMHO they would have looked at a compound and figured someone had missed the point of the exercise...
“Range effectiveness has more than doubled for every type of weapon in the last 30 years”
Well THAT’S a load o crap! Roundball MLs haven’t changed at all, and frankly I’d say that the effective range of a typical stickbows SHOOTER is probably closer to HALF of what it was than twice...
“Technology isn't splitting the bowhunting community. What is splitting it is a small group of hunters who can't stand the fact that others use legal tools that make them more accurate, more effective, and more successful.”
You forgot one more “more”...
It’s the More Numerous that I notice and am bothered by the most.
I would mind it less if they were walking away from a firearms tag in order to score the bow-tag.
But I quit hunting firearms in CO because it was a circus. I figured ML was more my speed, so - given that the season was created specifically to provide a high-quality hunting opportunity for those wishing to use a “Settlement Era” weapon, I went roundball.
Dopey me, I was brought up to believe that as the New Guy at the party, the Polite thing to do was to look at what the invited guests were doing and behave accordingly....
I also haven't seen a compound guy without a laser rangefinder in about 20 years.
We're all adopting technology in some way.
- The number of hunters would decrease a lot and so would the revenue for the DNRs leading to budget cuts and cuts in state hunting programs.
- The influx of new hunters would continue to decline.
- The number of kills would decrease exponentially and therefore the deer herds for example, would far exceed carrying capacity. That would lead to worsening habitat and more disease.
If we do change the weapons just so the seasons are harder, I think we should outlaw camo, range finders, binos, spotting scopes, cell phones, web sites that show land and terrain, baiting, ozonics, scent control soaps, blinds, tree stands, etc to make it all about scouting and fair chase.
In short, with all due respect, it is dumb idea. If you want to limit YOUR technology, feel free. That is your right. It is also the right of others not to limit theirs within legal bounds.
Not everyone hunts for the same reasons. Hunting means different things to different people.
Sure some can but the vast majority of hunters cannot. On another thread they are talking MOA for bow groups? Really, I know a bunch of people that cannot shoot moa groups with a rifle. Do not fear technology and don’t expect game departments to placate your emotions if you limit yourself on what technology you find acceptable for your hunting. Remember it is your choice...
Truer words have never been spoken.! Bowsite represents a whole array of people.
If there is one thing I’ve learned from Bowsite....
1) Hunting doesn’t mean the same thing for everyone and... 2) even archery doesn’t mean the same thing for everyone!
Things I find black and white . Many people use black and white to make grey. Hunt hard ( if that’s how you like to hunt) and Happy New Year !
I don't have a trail camera or a drone, no food plot, no feeder and except for a pair of pants, no new equipment or clothing. Bottom line---I hunt the way I want to hunt. I don't care how anyone else hunts, as long as it is legal. I don't care what they kill. It does not affect me. If they make laser-guided broadheads that can kill at 350-yards, I don't care. I'll shoot exactly what I am shooting now.
If I think something is bad wrong, I'll jump on it like a buzzard on a gut pile. But dang a bunch of telling Joe what Joe should do and not do. As long as it is legal, that's on Joe.
Just bye the bye-these two were downwind of me for over 45-minutes, at 30-60 yards. I use no scent product. Why didn't they smell me. Cause the scent vapors never hit their noses. It is called, "Natural Ozonics." :)
I think what most are trying to say here is that people who want the challenge of the harder hunt... should be "rewarded" with longer seasons that coincide with the rut. ie- If I'm going to the trouble of practicing to proficiency with something like a longbow I should be rewarded more than someone who picks up a crossbow the week before season. Effort = reward type of thing.
Bowriter says, what others do doesn't affect him. What a pile of crap. Of course what others do effects other's experiences.
The fact is, quality hunting, as I've known it and define it, is declining. It's inversely proportional to population, both overall overpopulation and number of hunters. That is not going to change. Our organizations that promote hunting have also changed. They purport to be leaders in ethical, responsible bowhunting, with a clear set of values. But in reality, they have given up that leadership role to the manufacturers and whatever they can convince bowhunters to buy. Instead they are concerned mostly with membership numbers, and values that are malleable. From what I've seen, that approach has not worked, nor can it ever work. Successful organizations, have a clear goal and message, and invite like-minded people to join. Trying to entice everyone into your "tent" rarely results in ANY goals being achieved.
Imagine the outrage that would ensue if folks asserted that rationale more broadly in regards to the allocation of public resources based on tax bracket, which actually makes more sense (let those who make outsized contributions have outsized access). How do you think that would fly?
Gun hunter numbers have gone up quite a bit, and some Archety hunters are applying for for elk rifle tags cause they get fed up with non residents pouring into the country. So, they apply and hunt rifle to get away from the crowds. The gun seasons start the third week of October, and guys complain about that and want archery season to now extend into October so they can hunt elk during the rut. It's funny, cause they fail to realize that once the thousands of bowhunters re out of the woods, the elk can rut uninterrupted now. Pressured elk become silent elk, but the bowhunters think the rut just isn't going on because they can't call in any elk. Technology has changed the success rates for a lot of animals in lots of states. Guys are killing elk now at 80 yards with compounds, 40 yards with stick bows, 700 yards with rifles. Heck, I can remember guys killing elk at over 150 yards with the old Hawkins black powders, 200 yards with open sights and old 30/30's.
Traditional only seasons? Umm.. If I recall, the guys from Durango wrote a long letter to CPW several seasons ago, saying as to how they deserved their own season because they used equipment that limits their abilities and deserve to hunt un pressured elk. Seems they thought they deserved a chance to hunt elk at the peak of the rut, without pressure from other hunters. Ummm, wonder how many guys would suddenly start shooting the old struggle stick if that happened? Thank God the CPW dismissed their wild ideas...
Matt - I couldn't agree more, but to say it isn't happening or prevalent is wrong. Just look at the countless posts on this site saying that crossbow hunters are lazy, or have no place in archery season BECAUSE they are too accurate with very little practice. It's very easy to find this "harder work = more deserved reward" attitude here. It's expressed a lot!
I think some are seeking more an Award than reward.
I was talking to an old boss the other day about population growth and he cited a study where people readily identified that there were too many of everybody else, but just enough of them. It's that sort of thinking that is at the heart of the problem.
some folks will use nearly any excuse to not have to deal with a dead animal........ =D
I would have no issue with putting limits on technology when pursuing game. It is after all what the basis for the fair chase concept was all about.
Not up here.
Two factors affect the enjoyment of my hunting experience.
1) the physical effort I put into a hunt is directly proportional to the pleasure I derive from the hunt.
2) For me , as technology increases the enjoyment of my hunting experience decreases.
That’s not to say I don’t use some modern advancements. I do. But as I age I am often shedding technology to derive more satisfaction from my hunts.
Hunters much younger may be embracing new technology.... hunters older than myself may need the latest technology to continue to be a successful hunter. Everyone is at a different place in their hunting journey. There is no right amount of technology for everyone to use . Use what you want or don’t ..... just be safe and enjoy your time afield. Life is short.
I just hope we never lose our 3 month archery season for whitetails
If to you, hunting is all about killing, then to me, regardless if what equipment or method you use, you are not a hunter. If your hunt is a complete bust because you did not kill anything, you are hunting accolades, not an animal. I feel safe in saying, not one poster on this site is subsistence hunting. Some years ago, I would have said, most are hunting for the enjoyment of hunting. Now I would say, a large percentage are concerned with antler size and how to make it easy. If that is not true, then why all the posts about scent control and best food to plant. Converse are the ones who want to vilify anyone shooting anything but a trad. "If you didn't sneak up on him handmade moccasins and shoot him at 12-yards with a stick you made yourself, you cheated." Holy Christ! Can you not realize just how badly we, yes include myself, are shooting ourselves in the freakin foot!
Bill Obeid just posted, "Hunters much younger may be embracing new technology.... hunters older than myself may need the latest technology to continue to be a successful hunter. Everyone is at a different place in their hunting journey. There is no right amount of technology for everyone to use . Use what you want or don’t ..... just be safe and enjoy your time afield. Life is short." I have no idea who he is. But is pretty damn smart. Better listen.
Yeah, he is just a five-point. Damn straight, I shot him. Eight yards...with a compound.
In reality all of archery season, high tech included, is pretty much an afterthought to fish and game. Our harvest numbers could double and still be but a drop in the bucket to rifle harvest. In some cases we may even lose opportunity because our numbers are so low and we are NOT successful enough to be counted on as a management tool. Far from frowning on "high tech",more and more states are embracing crossbows because they want more numbers and better success rates, not because they have stock in crossbow sales. Quite the opposite of the "high tech" arguments and doom and gloom brought forth here. Our main value in many cases is in areas sensitive to rifle hunting.
In reality our numbers is what may keep us in the game. Fewer bowhunters (and make no mistake, that is exactly the result of what is being discussed here) is not a good thing when you have to argue your case before the board. You can see it in states like Utah where rifle has been encroaching, allowed early, during the rut, etc. Hint: that stuff isn't happening because of any "tech"..... quite the opposite. It's happening because of influence of numbers and money. Not enough of either WRT bowhunters.