Sitka Gear
Pope and Young Fair Chase statement
Colorado
Contributors to this thread:
Paul@thefort 18-Mar-21
Jaquomo 18-Mar-21
Longcruise 18-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 18-Mar-21
Jaquomo 18-Mar-21
JDM 18-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 18-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 19-Mar-21
Jaquomo 20-Mar-21
Nock 26-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 31-Mar-21
Treeline 31-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 31-Mar-21
Nock 31-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 31-Mar-21
Paul@thefort 31-Mar-21
2xLung 31-Mar-21
From: Paul@thefort
18-Mar-21
I post this PY mission statement as a reference to the bow mounted decoy issue. PY does not see bow mounted decoys as a safety or a fair chase issue. I will also add the letter PY sent the CPW commission concerning this issue.

From PY mission statement, as follows: A specific subset of Ethics has to do with the manner in which the Hunt is conducted.

From its beginnings, the Pope and Young Club established, defined and maintains an ethical code of hunting referred to as FAIR CHASE. The concept of fair chase bowhunting is the very core of the Club’s belief system and one of our major advocacy focuses.

The fair chase philosophy reaches to the very foundations of the hunting spirit; it should be a dominant factor in the personal hunting ethic of every responsible individual; it is key to bowhunting’s future with deep roots in America’s hunting heritage.

Simply defined, fair chase is the ethical, sportsmanlike, and lawful pursuit of free-ranging wild game animals in a manner which does not give the hunter an improper or unfair advantage over the animal.

The Rules of Fair Chase

The term “Fair Chase” shall not include the taking of animals under the following conditions:

Helpless in a trap, deep snow or water, or on ice. From any power vehicle or power boat. By “jacklighting” or shining at night. By the use of any tranquilizers or poisons. While inside escape-proof fenced enclosures. By the use of any power vehicle or power boats for herding or driving animals, including use of aircraft to land alongside or to communicate with or direct a hunter on the ground. By the use of electronic devices for attracting, locating or pursuing game or guiding the hunter to such game, or by the use of a bow or arrow to which any electronic device is attached with the exception of lighted nocks and recording devices that cast no light towards the target and do not aid in rangefinding, sighting or shooting the bow. Any other condition considered by the Board of Directors as unacceptable. The fair chase concept does, however, extend beyond the hunt itself; it is an attitude and a way of life based in a deep-seated respect for wildlife, for the environment, and for other individuals who share the bounty of this vast continent’s natural resources

From: Jaquomo
18-Mar-21
Our Commissioner who wants to ban. Ow-mounted decoys is maintaining that bow-mounted decoys give the hunter an unfair advantage. As opposed to treestands, which he uses.. Sheesh..

From: Longcruise
18-Mar-21
Somebody watched too many videos!

From: Paul@thefort
18-Mar-21
Attached is the PY letter to the Commission concerning the bow/decoy attachment. I have only attached the last two paragraph concerning safely and fair chase.

PY states, "From a safety standpoint, we were unable to locate a documented safety incident involving the use of bow mounted decoys. (Note, this is the same conclusion the CPW staff, who actually wrote the issue, reported) There are few decoys on the market designed to be attached to a firearm. The proposed rule change would have an unfair impact on archery hunters."

Continued, " The Pope and Young club does not consider the use of bow-mounted decoys to be an infringement on the rules of fair chase, nor does it seem to be a significant safety concern. Therefore, the PY Club does not support a rule change....."

Source: PY Club letter to CPW Commission, March 18, 2021. Sighed by Jason Rounsaville, Executive Director , PY Club.

The question I might have is, Did any of the Commission member actually read and understand the contents this letter. Do any of the Commission members know who the PY Club is and what they stand for and their mission of safety and fair chase?

From: Jaquomo
18-Mar-21
I don't believe the Commission gives much weight to any public input on issues. They know special interest groups can mobilize for input. They only ask for it because they are required to do so. If our Commissioner only watched videos of successful use of the decoy, he might think it brings 100% success.

From: JDM
18-Mar-21
Funny how each and every item in the statement of fair chase is against the law in CO. In fact, correct me if I'm wrong (I know I didn't have to say that because on bowsite everyone corrects you when you're wrong - sometimes if you're right) but didn't CO change the law regarding lighted nocks AFTER this was allowed by P&Y?

From: Paul@thefort
18-Mar-21
To answer your last statement, Yes CBA did request the regulation that prohibits electronic and battery powered devices at attach to the bow, to, be change and followed the PY Club lead on this issue. Lighted nocks and camera can be attached to the bow. Others can not. Prior to this change, 1999 or earlier, the CBA conducted statewide meeting concerning bow attachments and let off and the results of those meeting were passed on to the DOW and that included no lights nocks , no attached range finders, no lighted pins. Later, the CBA board reviewed the regulation and were convinced that a lighted nock only helped in the recovery of the animal and presented that to the Commission, Thus the requested change was made.

From: Paul@thefort
19-Mar-21
In addition, I believe the CBA, over time, recommend most if not all of the bow/arrow restrictions to the DOW/CPW, that are now listed in the Big game brochure and that includes ATTACHMENTS TO THE BOW , under 4. HAND HELD BOWS.

The CBA BOD was never notified of this Issue until it was discovered on the Commission Meeting agenda and surely we were not asked to comment prior to the issue to be presented.

From: Jaquomo
20-Mar-21
Different times, different Commission makeup. Compare this group to the Commission from 7-8 years ago, and it's more than a little scary what this group might decide. I mean really, an animal rights attorney helping to craft hunting policy?

From: Nock
26-Mar-21
Paul, that is not how I remember the CBA position on lighted nocks. But my memory is not what it used to be. The CBA board was firmly against lighted nocks for many years. They conducted a poll of the membership at the time that showed the majority of respondents were in favor of lighted nocks. However, the CBA board chose to disregard the poll results and maintain their position against lighted nocks.

From: Paul@thefort
31-Mar-21
Nock, not exactly as you stated. I was the one that presented to the Commission, at the request of the BOD and from a past survey of the membership, that battery powered devices like the light nock to be not allowed, and needed to be added into the regulations, as this info was left out of the regulation at the time of the first printing in the Big Game Brochure two year before. A few years later, and after PY changed to accept lighted nocks, the CBA board held a few state wide meeting to address this issue again. The consensus of the members now were that lighted nock are ok to aid in finding the arrow. CBA then presented this new survey info plus the PY change to the Commission, thus the change to allow light nocks and cameras to be attached to the bow.

From: Treeline
31-Mar-21
What I cannot understand is the CBA’s lack of support for and actually speaking out against the use of stone points.

They are proven effective for at least 25,000 years longer than rifles or modern bows and certainly accounted for far more ethical kills and meat on the table than any modern tools.

None of us would be here if stone points were not effective.

From: Paul@thefort
31-Mar-21
Would not be here? What about Vege burgers? Many vegans support that "food".

From: Nock
31-Mar-21
Consider me an "enlightened nock".

From: Paul@thefort
31-Mar-21
Actually allowing stone points were part of the original request presented by the CBA BOD to the DOW Regulation Managers, back in the late 1990s after holding state wide meeting, discussing bow hunting regulations and attachments. Stone points then never made the "cut" from the DOW, allowing them.

From: Paul@thefort
31-Mar-21
Notice, The CPW Commission Chair as placed a Hold on this issue statement,, not to be move forward to the next Commission meeting as Phase 2,, unless staff can present more evidence that these bow attached decoys are a Fair Chase issue. Placing a Hold mean to "postpone or suspend consideration". I really doubt this issue will move forward. Thank you all for your comments and support. Paul

From: 2xLung
31-Mar-21
That's great news Paul. Is the information regarding the hold somewhere on the CPW site as public record? Or can I find it somewhere else? Since I provided comment and attended the meeting, I'd just like to see the latest position by the Chair. Thanks.

  • Sitka Gear