Sitka Mountain Gear
November citizens petition to commission
Colorado
Contributors to this thread:
Grasshopper 03-Oct-17
Paul@thefort 03-Oct-17
Treeline 03-Oct-17
kscowboy 03-Oct-17
Glunt@work 03-Oct-17
Grasshopper 03-Oct-17
kscowboy 03-Oct-17
Glunt@work 03-Oct-17
Jaquomo 03-Oct-17
PECO 03-Oct-17
otcWill 03-Oct-17
JohnMC 03-Oct-17
Grasshopper 03-Oct-17
Seahorse 03-Oct-17
sticksender 04-Oct-17
sticksender 04-Oct-17
Paul@thefort 06-Oct-17
Treeline 06-Oct-17
Grasshopper 06-Oct-17
Paul@thefort 06-Oct-17
>>>---WW----> 07-Oct-17
Grasshopper 11-Oct-17
Grasshopper 30-Oct-17
Jaquomo 30-Oct-17
Grasshopper 30-Oct-17
yooper89 30-Oct-17
From: Grasshopper
03-Oct-17

Grasshopper's Link
The wildlife commission in November will consider a citizens petition to:

consider modifying the archery broadhead requirements for the archery big game season by allowing some limited curve to the cutting blades.

I took a look at the petition, it appears to be written to make the "Heartaway" broadhead legal. If you want a copy I can email it to you

See the link for the Heartaway video

From: Paul@thefort
03-Oct-17
Steve, I watch the video. Interesting BH and I am sure it will do the job of killing big game animals. The current BH regulation is clear and simple and was developed for a purpose, allowing only " each cutting edge must be in the same plane for entire length of cutting surface". There are already a number of BHs, past and present, that have curved cutting surface, that are not legal, but if this Heartaway BH is allowed, the change may open the door for some of these other BH to become legal.

To make this one BH legal, the regulation might have to specifically use the brand name in the regulation, which I doubt will be allowed.

Something to think about. my best, Paul

From: Treeline
03-Oct-17
Heck, can we petition for chert or obsidian points? They were obviously effective for 10's of thousands of years in Colorado before Europeans came... I would be all for it!

From: kscowboy
03-Oct-17

kscowboy's Link
It's not a new idea by one company. Same concept as the Crimson Talon.

From: Glunt@work
03-Oct-17

Glunt@work's embedded Photo
Glunt@work's embedded Photo
Been around along time. The Serpentine may even be why that wording is even a part of the definitions.

From: Grasshopper
03-Oct-17
So if your opposed or for it, please write the CBA and or the wildlife commission. I'm just stating what I know - so you know, whats being proposed and coming up.

Personally, I get tired of the constant discussion of equipment regulations.

From: kscowboy
03-Oct-17

kscowboy's Link
I'm for it, so long as this head is also made legal. Kidding.

From: Glunt@work
03-Oct-17
I would rather the Commission not make or alter rules for a specific product that doesn't improve opportunity or benefit the resource. If a big group of folks who bowhunt Colorado were asking that this issue be looked at, that could be different.

From: Jaquomo
03-Oct-17
Steve, thanks for bringing this to our attention. Thanks, also, for your contributions to the Sportsman's Roundtable, the BGAP efforts, and to the CBA during this time of transition. Guys like you are invaluable to the bowhunting community and we don't express our appreciation enough.

From: PECO
03-Oct-17

PECO's embedded Photo
PECO's embedded Photo
Can you post a link to the petition? Is Heartaway mentioned? Could it be Toxic behind this?

From: otcWill
03-Oct-17
^What Lou said!

From: JohnMC
03-Oct-17
Someone correct me if I am wrong but I think the second example KS post would be legal. There are three blades all three blades are on a plane so would be legal. I would never use.

From: Grasshopper
03-Oct-17

Grasshopper's Link
The petition will be here when they post up the meeting materials. I received a copy from the regs manager, and would be glad to email it to you if you want to PM me an email address.

I am sure it will be discussed this Friday evening at the CBA meeting.

From: Seahorse
03-Oct-17
I second what Treeline wrote. Would love to see stone points legal.

From: sticksender
04-Oct-17
I don't shoot those spiral type heads and probably never will. Just curious though, what is the technical basis for selecting those particular "twisted style" heads to ban? There are some other head designs, like some poor/weak mechanical designs, that are more questionable as to their effectiveness, but since they have "one-plane" cutting edges, that makes them legal. Was it that someone looked at one of the "spiral" heads and proclaimed them as "bad" and thus the wording as it is currently in the regs?

From: sticksender
04-Oct-17
FWIW, my home state's regulation on broadheads reads as below. The stone head provision was added a few year's back after some lobbying by members of the IBA.

"Arrows must be tipped with broadheads that are metal, metal-edged, or napped flint, chert or obsidian. Poisoned or exploding arrows are illegal."

From: Paul@thefort
06-Oct-17
Sticksender. What you stated is mostly true, on WHY. As we both know there were and are some BH designs, over the years and even today, that were/are way off the chart in design and proven effectiveness and not acceptable even though one might be able to kill something with them. Historically, these were the types of radical designs that the current regulation hoped to prevent in the field that might not do an ethical kill. I would expect 90% of the current modern designed BH, including this one Heartaway BH, will do the job today, but then how does one prevent the other 10%, radical designed BH from being use? The Citizen's Petition before the Wildlife Commission, states, "allow a BH with some twist". As we know, some states are not concerned about the actual design of the BH used in their states so it then seems, any BH design is ok, twisted blades, or not. The easiest way to change the current regulation is just to eliminate the sentence concerning the "along the same plane," statement and then let any metal BH to be used. Most Commission members may not have a clue concerning the past, present or future BH types or even why the current regulation exists.

From: Treeline
06-Oct-17
Again, Paul, why not allow non-metallic? Pretty sure non-metallic points worked to keep meat on the table for far, far longer than any type of metal tipped arrows.

From: Grasshopper
06-Oct-17
I was informed the manufacturer will be at the CBA board meeting tonight asking for CBA support of the petition. Meeting starts at at 6pm. Public is always welcome to attend.

From: Paul@thefort
06-Oct-17
Tavis, that is something, some one with more knowledge and skills in making them or actually using them would have to make a case for them. I know back in the year, 1999, when the DOW asked for the CBA to review the equipment regulations and to make recommendations, "non-metallic" (flint, etc,) BH were recommended but they were not approved.

07-Oct-17
I well remember the 1999 meetings. At the one I attended in Grand Junction, it was overwhelmingly recommended to the CBA reps that mechanicals be outlawed. But for some reason, the message never seemed to have been presented to what was then the DOW!

From: Grasshopper
11-Oct-17
Just a quick update for those interested. I volunteered for and was elected to serve on the CBA board as the CBA liaison to Parks and Wildlife. I am a bit slammed with work and family life right now, but hope to try my best to meet everyone's tall expectations.

This manufacturer was at the CBA board meeting last week discussing his desire to legalize the heartaway broadhead via regulation change.

I spoke to the regs manager today. She indicated this will be a 2 step process, not 3. In november the commission could choose to deny the petition based on staff recommendations and public input. The second option would be to direct staff to provide additional information, and options for regulatory change. The issue would then be set for final action at the January meeting as there is no December meeting.

Look for a CBA member survey on the matter in the near future.

As well, if you have an opinion one way or the other you can always lodge public comment directly to the wildlife commission. I'd encourage both if you have the time.

Stay tuned.

From: Grasshopper
30-Oct-17
Just got word,This petition has been removed from consideration by the manufacturer.

They may consider resubmitting in the future.

No broadhead regulation changes are currently under consideration.

From: Jaquomo
30-Oct-17
Thanks, Steve! Any updates on the mythical ML danger and possible resulting season changes?

From: Grasshopper
30-Oct-17
A couple days ago, I sent an email to the commission clarifying the CBA board consensus position of support for the current season structure or "status quo". CPW suggested we clarify our position, which we have now done. Also stated we do not support any regulatory requirement to wear orange or pink in the field, although any hunter may wear it optionally as they deem appropriate. I suspect we will publish survey results in the January issue, but will try to get them posted online prior to. While the question on season structure options could have been broader in the opinion of some, 79% indicated keep the current structure of 30 day contiguous "as is" as their most preferred option.

The ball is now back in the court of the commission on season structure, it is not on the November agenda, no meeting in December. I suspect they will take the topic up again after the new year.

From: yooper89
30-Oct-17
KSCowboy - I saw an instagram post from Hardcore Pursuit (hunting show on Sportsmen Channel) and they were pimping those out. What a ridiculous looking broadhead!

  • Sitka Gear