nockes?

[Ray]

To each their own. And I also do not care what tackle you use. But your compound achievement is not measurable to what is done on primitive terms. If record books were only recognizing the animal then there would not be anything but the Boone and Crockett for NA Big Game.

I think the .30-30 was around the same time the .30-06 so that suggestive comparison is obsolete in regards to archery and how the season was founded and applying it to the current situation.

I would venture to say you repeat "to each their own" mostly because you want to suggest my opinion is not a valid one. Just like your Fred Bear comment. Only made in a jest to suggest that I am some sort of elitist with little experience. Simply to discredit an opinion.

[washelkhntr]

Record books are there to recognize the animal not the hunter.   

If that were the case there would be record books for living animals. They don't make the "books" without the hunter, regardless of what tackle he/she uses.

 

[Ray]

Record books are there to recognize the animal not the hunter.   

If that were the case there would be record books for living animals. They don't make the "books" without the hunter, regardless of what tackle he/she uses.

 

As applied it is not entirely correct. There's a reason for the Pope and Young Books. Nobody was suggesting a record book for living animals. That's a strange suggestion. I am not sure where that came from. Certainly not from I.

[Lowedog]

So if a 200" buck is shot @ 5 yards with a compound it is not as great of an achievement as if it was shot with a long bow at the same distance?  

There should only be B&C because all others were created to honor the type of hunting and not the animal.  

And yes the 30-30 came before the 30-06.  And your comparison of traditional vs modern archery can be made with traditional vs modern fire arms also.  

I would venture to say you repeat "to each their own" mostly because you want to suggest my opinion is not a valid one. Just like your Fred Bear comment. Only made in a jest to suggest that I am some sort of elitist with little experience. Simply to discredit an opinion.

I didn't mean to suggest you are some sort of elitist with little experience.  Just an elitist.  At least that is how you come across on this board at times.  I know a lot of traditional archers and have never heard any of them suggest that modern equipment has some how degraded the sport.

[Ray]

No the comparison is not the same traditional versus compound. The season was founded upon primitive archery. Not modern methodology. I think that is the disagreement here.

If a 200" buck is shot with a compound it will never be viewed as great as the same achievement to me as with a longbow. Plain and simple. It is as subjective as any opinion. I am sorry for you that you cannot fathom that I actually possess an opinion contrary to the popular masses.

I checked the web and it looks like the 30-30 and the 30-06 were less than 15 years apart at the turn of the 19th century before hunting regulations existed in most places. Definitely not much of a comparison.

Aha - there you have it. Your argument is more with me than anything else. You simply cannot internalize my opinions. Even if I deliver them on respectable terms. And so your little jabs are personal in nature as I suggested.

Oh and one more thing. This frame of mind is why I do not agree with electronic nocks. It's spelled without the 'e'.

[Jellymon]

Why can't we all just get along Choose your method and have fun! We have enough of a fight with the anti's without fighting over which weapons are better.

[Ray]

Jellymon, I think we can all get along. It's ok to share opinions repectably. Anyway - I don't comment on every topic regarding lighted nocks but about every two or three. Why? Because people always ask why they are not legal. I think that archers should be consciously aware and attentative to what is permitted legally. Simply justifying anything new as "legal" is easy to do but can have consequences. Sometimes postive and other times negative. The measure of that consequence should be analyzed and discussed. I think that if we went back closer to the roots of archery we would have much less crowding and more opportunites as well as longer seasons. What's not to like about that?

[Lowedog]

So we can agree to disagree then?  I feel there is a comparison to be made between modern rifles and traditionals.  If you feel that traditional archery tackle should be awarded it's own season then I feel traditional rifles such as the open sighted model 94 should have a seperate season from modern rifle.  

I don't remember ever reading Boneaddict suggesting that traditional should have opportunities that compounds don't.  Hell he goes out and gets it done durring modern rifle season.  

So the same archer stalks to within 5-10 yds of 200" bucks twice in his life and kills them, once with a longbow and once with a compound then the kill with the longbow is a greater accomplishment?  Yeah, I guess your right I can't internalize that opinion.  

Sorry that your terms don't seem so respectable to me when they come across like you believe your way is better than mine or anyone elses who choses to hunt with modern equipment and that we are somehow taking something away from you.  

[huntnphool]

So lets get back on topic and discuss luminocks

[Ray]

So the same archer stalks to within 5-10 yds of 200" bucks twice in his life and kills them, once with a longbow and once with a compound then the kill with the longbow is a greater accomplishment?  Yeah, I guess your right I can't internalize that opinion. 

Correct. I believe it takes more confidence to hunt with the primitive bow and it arguably requires a different frame of mind. The simple act of committing your entire approach of hunting big game to the primitive bow is a significant departure which many cannot and will not subject themselves to for various reasons. I would suggest many would not feel comfortable and offer excuses that they do not feel effective, that it is not a viable lethal method or other reason for not being capable of making that step. It takes special attention ,confidence and committment and knowing that you may not succeed because of the limitations.

The overall nature of your arguments are more personal than anything else. It has been clearly established. You direct them at the person and not at the opinion. I would venture to guess many hunters are elitists in one form or another. Patently applying to me might be accurate but so are many others and it is not something to be shamed for. Hunters measure animals, number of kills, their effective methods are debated, their methodology for hunting (stalking , bait piles, treestands, etc) and even their equipment choices are somewhat based upon elitism , or other similar values.

Overall the opportunities are diminished because people cannot resist the technology for faster kills, farther and without much training which is required to actually hunt by the terms the seasons were founded upon.

The fact is... my way is better than yours. That is your problem. You want to object to it. I understand human nature is that way. Well I wouldn't resist that your way is better than mine. It's simply your way. But if things were up to me- we would be hunting my way. Just like if things were up to you we would be hunting with your rules. It's really that hard for you to respect?

[boneaddict]

Why does my name always come up. LOL

I'll keep it short.  I don't think Trads need a seperate season, I do however favor against more technology.  Its not the elitist in me,(damn Jack, I made it to February before having to try to spell that word this year) its the fact I see us outdoing our own sport by technology.  Its a tech driven industry.  The higher the success rates, the shorter the seasons and the hunt.  Its about a bible sized explanation of what I am getting at so I don't expect folks to understand.  At what point is it really not fair how we hunt these animals////range finders, scents, muzzels that aren't even "muzzels" any longer.   Different strokes for different folks, I agree.  I like to keep it simple.  I do however see how some aren't quite so primitive any longer.  Enough is enough, and that precisely why I hunt the way I do.  I don't believe I should force my opions on the general public, however somewhere along the line we have to examine what effect we might be having on the future of the sport and the animals we hunt.  Is it really necessary to shoot a deer at 1500 yards, because we can. 

[Lowedog]

No, it's really that hard for you to respect that your way is no better than mine.  You have no chance to resist that my way is better than yours because I would never claim that it is.  I don't have the desire to feel supperior to others.  I am comfortable in my own skin.  

You go on believeing that your way is better and I will go on accepting that all forms of hunting are simply forms of hunting.  One no superior than the next.


I don't object to your form of hunting...I object to the elitist attitude that acts more to devide than anything else.

[Ray]

No, it's really that hard for you to respect that your way is no better than mine.

Patently false and I have admitted common ground there above. You are continuing a perpetration of personal matters.

You object to elitist attitudes because you desire to use that term. You are an elitist in your own terms I am certain. Almost all hunters are in one form or another. I am no more or less of a divider than you are. You are just angry that you cannot be "RIGHT". Nobody is right. There is only perception and that is your problem. You want to attack me and label me elitist, divider. Regardless - because you have your own set of personal values which you want to establish as more correct. I understand that. I respect it. It is not patently more correct though. Only for YOU. Such is the selfishness of hunting. However you do not want to recognize when someone else takes the same sort of position. It is all of a sudden blasphemy and arrogant for you. I think you need to drink some whiskey buddy.

[Lowedog]

Ray, if you feel I am attacking you then I am sorry.  You have your own way of perpetration of personal matters and you know it.  They are more subtle than mine but still there. 

If I am an elitist because I don't feel my way is better than yours then I can accept that. 

[Ray]

I am not perpetrating personal agenda. I have not referenced you personally such as labeling you an elitist or divider or other such terms in order to discredit your opinions. About the only term I have used is compound archer. I think that you have a misconception about my intentions at times.