using illumanock in Wa

[Snapshot]

Since advancement of technology and how it is thought to be a big factor for lost opportunities is being used so much as an argument in this debate I was wondering what the perspective of those who feel that way are on this...why do you think those who had nothing but stick bows back in the day started using compounds when they became available?  

Some didn't. Some walked away from archery and archery hunting. I was out of it for nearly fifteen years, until the 'resurgence' of what then came to be known as "traditional" archery (like a frigging asterisk in the record book for a kill made with a compound with a let-off greater than 65%, don't you think?  )
Some did and (sooner or) later abandoned it when they realized that simple archery (is that less elite?  ) was better suited to the extremely up-close hunting that they were in interested in experiencing.

[Snapshot]

Did you explain to the commissioner that those types of shots are not the typical shot for archery hunters and that the majority of hunters would think of that as an unethical shot?  

I told him, "Commissioner, he isn't a bowhunter; he drew the multi-tag." ...Damage already done.

[Snapshot]

The shortened seasons were based off of one guy who said he shot an elk at 90 yards? 

Questions like that is the type that Ray would pounce on...  ...of course not.

[Lowedog]

So the concern is ethical hunters would suddenly become unethical hunters because of an illumanock?

While it may be true that some may be tempted, no, the concern is that new and future hunters won't have the foundation under them that they may need to successfully guide bowhunting into the NEXT century. Those who fought for and gained the seasons we all enjoy didn't look for an easier way. The rifle was there for those who wanted/needed it to be easier.

And what kind of foundation do future bowhunters need to have that a nock that lights up on the end of their arrow after the shot will prevent them from having?  

You should consider that many hunters chose the seasons they hunt solely on what they feel offers them the best opportunity for success.  There is nothing wrong with that.  Not every one is looking for some kind of spiritual journey.  Or not everyone needs to have stick and string in their hand to have that spiritual journey.

[Lowedog]

Since advancement of technology and how it is thought to be a big factor for lost opportunities is being used so much as an argument in this debate I was wondering what the perspective of those who feel that way are on this...why do you think those who had nothing but stick bows back in the day started using compounds when they became available? 

Some didn't. Some walked away from archery and archery hunting. I was out of it for nearly fifteen years, until the 'resurgence' of what then came to be known as "traditional" archery (like a frigging asterisk in the record book for a kill made with a compound with a let-off greater than 65%, don't you think?  )
Some did and (sooner or) later abandoned it when they realized that simple archery (is that less elite?  ) was better suited to the extremely up-close hunting that they were in interested in experiencing.

But many, many, many switched to compounds and never looked back. 

(like a frigging asterisk in the record book for a kill made with a compound with a let-off greater than 65%, don't you think?  )

You lost me there.  Not sure what you were getting at.   

[Snapshot]

Making the kill easier with a weapon that is easier to master doesn't mean one can't/doesn't enjoy the experience as much as a person who imposes self limitations.

Absolutely correct, but realize that making it easier means more meat on the ground for more people and therefore a greater strain on the resources and so shorter season lengths; whereas self-limitation means more animal survival and so longer seasons to hunt.

[Lowedog]

Did you explain to the commissioner that those types of shots are not the typical shot for archery hunters and that the majority of hunters would think of that as an unethical shot?  

I told him, "Commissioner, he isn't a bowhunter; he drew the multi-tag." ...Damage already done.

If he killed a bull with a bow and was hunting during an archery only hunt then he was a bowhunter.  You are not in an exclusive club just because you have bought more than one archery tag.  

What I gather is you basically threw archery hunters who chose modern equipment under the bus.  

[Lowedog]

Making the kill easier with a weapon that is easier to master doesn't mean one can't/doesn't enjoy the experience as much as a person who imposes self limitations.

Absolutely correct, but realize that making it easier means more meat on the ground for more people and therefore a greater strain on the resources and so shorter season lengths; whereas self-limitation means more animal survival and so longer seasons to hunt.

And no one has proposed making archery hunting any easier. 

[Snapshot]

(like a frigging asterisk in the record book for a kill made with a compound with a let-off greater than 65%, don't you think?  )

You lost me there.  Not sure what you were getting at.  

Ill attempt at humor gone sour... Needing to refer to archery as 'traditional' because what I do and have always done was displaced by the compound feels like I'd imagine a Pope & Young entry with an asterisk beside it might feel like. But I don't know about Pope & Young entries; my deer this year had about a whopping 30" of antler!

[Lowedog]

The shortened seasons were based off of one guy who said he shot an elk at 90 yards?  

Questions like that is the type that Ray would pounce on...   ...of course not.

In short, there will be some objections to such a proposal and when the Game Commission reads or hears these objections then they will see that many archers are more interested in gadgets than seasons.

I have not attended any of the meetings, are you suggesting F&G's stance is that the acceptance of lumenocks would result in shorter archery seasons?

I have attended these meetings and once during my testimony I was asked by a Commissioner, "I just had one guy tell me a few minutes before this meeting that he killed a bull with his compound from 90 yards and that he had practiced out to distances of 100 yards: When are you guys going to draw a line on the technology that you will allow?"

[About a year or two later 1) we lost about 25% of our early deer season 2) our early elk season dates were changed, 3) they tried but failed to take away the Swakane late hunt and 4) they took a couple of days off the front of the late deer season. They said we were too effective at killing "mature" bucks and bulls.]

Reading your post made me believe that is what you were insinuating.  Misunderstood. 

[DBHAWTHORNE]

So the concern is ethical hunters would suddenly become unethical hunters because of an illumanock?

While it may be true that some may be tempted, no, the concern is that new and future hunters won't have the foundation under them that they may need to successfully guide bowhunting into the NEXT century. Those who fought for and gained the seasons we all enjoy didn't look for an easier way. The rifle was there for those who wanted/needed it to be easier.

Ok.. the comment I was replying to appeared to say the concern was that people would suddenly become unethical and take longer shots at lowlight due to a lighted nock.

I deeply appreciate the challenges of self-limitations and their part in the heritage of bowhunting.

I definitely understand the concern on protecting the seasons. I know increased success rates can/does/has lead to shortened seasons. I also know we were the first state to be faced with this becoming an issue back in the 80's. I do recall reading somewhere that Washington State Bowhunters Association and many other archers protected this status by placing restrictions and showing we wanted bowhunting to maintain it's primitive status. Idaho followed suit in the 90's for similar reasons.

However, in the case of illumanock's I don't see there being a case in point to prove that they will lead to higher success rates and result in a danger to bowhunting.

I have been contemplating about this thread and our discussions here for the last few days and some of my ideas have changed as a result. I do believe bowhunting has reached a near pinnacle for "ease of entry", which is a good thing for recruitment and a bad thing for hunting seasons. I am coming to an agreement with many of you that we shouldn't go much further and that it has to end somewhere. We definitely have a tricky road ahead. I think it is important to keep our numbers up or else we could become low hanging fruit for the anti's and unfortunately fellow hunters but it is equally as important that we don't go to much further with our advancements if we are going to have a decent length to our bow seasons. There comes a point where the season  could become short enough that we truly would "need" to add a Trad season for our guys that choose certain self-limitations.

There are definitely a lot of challenges that face us going into the future.

[Machias]

There are definitely a lot of challenges that face us going into the future.

AMEN Brother!!!

[DBHAWTHORNE]

Making the kill easier with a weapon that is easier to master doesn't mean one can't/doesn't enjoy the experience as much as a person who imposes self limitations.

Absolutely correct, but realize that making it easier means more meat on the ground for more people and therefore a greater strain on the resources and so shorter season lengths; whereas self-limitation means more animal survival and so longer seasons to hunt.

See my message before this one.. I am definitely starting catching your drift. I do still think the lighted nock should not be a concern in this but I think it is something we should ask ourselves anytime something comes on the table. If a proposition is something that truly could lead to higher success rates then we could be in for trouble.

[Snapshot]

What I gather is you basically threw archery hunters who chose modern equipment under the bus. 

He wasn't an archery hunter! While we walked side by side from the parking lot to the Natural Resources building and talked about how our seasons had gone, he asked what weapon I hunt with and he looked down his nose disparagingly at me when I told him I was an archery hunter. "Oh," was his reply, like he'd stepped in dog poop. Then he whips out photos of his bull and tells me, "Well, I drew the multi-tag," when I asked him the same question about his method of hunting and says "I shot him with a bow." Then he goes inside and before the meeting was called to order, shows the pictures to any commissioner who would look and brags about the 90 yard shot. He threw archery hunters under the bus, Lowedog.

[WildWind1]

Lets face it.
 The initial success rate might go up up by a hair. but it the long run if more deer / arrows are found then less deer might will get wasted if you cannot find them. Putting more deer back in the woods and more in the breeding pool...