Quick question for you bow pro's

[grizzlyadams]

I was thinking about making the switch to archery from now on due to crowds and better seasons. So I was going through the reg's and found that you cannot use retractable broadheads here in Wa. State. Someone please enlighten me on why this would be. I am confused   

[buglebuster]

 Us bowhunters here in washingtom are to *censored* to need them

[KillBilly]

  Here we go again....

This has been discussed a multitude of times. Go to the Archery section and search, you will find literally 100s of answers

[wildmanoutdoors]

 
Thousands even....

[trophyhunt]

I'm no expert by anymeans but I am certain that retractable broadheads are Illegal in our state. Don't know the real reason but it's probably the same reason we can't use scopes on our muzzy's, or have electronics on our bows. They are trying to keep the technology down to a minimum, which makes sense to me.

[grizzlyadams]

Here we go again....

This has been discussed a multitude of times. Go to the Archery section and search, you will find literally 100s of answers

Sorry.to  I have never seen the thread. But thanks anyway for making me feel like  for asking. Appreciate it.   

[carpsniperg2]

No worries, it has been discussed but oh well. It's Washington lol some of the stuff does not make sense. It has to do with the broadhead working 100% of the time. They feel that with a fixed blade this is the only way to make sure the broadhead works every time. They also can not be barbed, there is some fixed blade heads that are barbed and are not legal Here. They want the arrow to be able to work back out on a bad shot so the animal might have a chance to heal.

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

Here we go again....

This has been discussed a multitude of times. Go to the Archery section and search, you will find literally 100s of answers

Sorry.to  I have never seen the thread. But thanks anyway for making me feel like  for asking. Appreciate it.   

Don't take it too personal, this subject just gets some peoples panties tied in a bunch.
..................................
Back when Archers were lobbying for special seasons, they put some restrictions on the equipment.
One of those restrictions was for it to be unlawful to hunt big game animals with a broadhead blade unless the broadhead is unbarbed and completely closed at the back end of the blade or blades by a smooth, unbroken surface starting at maximum blade width and forming a smooth line toward the feather end of the shaft and such line does not angle toward the point.
This affected SEVERAL FIXED-BLADE BROADHEADS in production at the time.
The feeling was that a poorly placed arrow would work itself out of the animal, and hopefully allow the wound to heal, reducing mortality.
When retractable broadheads became popular (in other states), they were illegal due to the barbed aspect.
to avoid confusion, retractable was added to the language of the restriction, (h). It is unlawful to hunt big game animals
with a retractable broadhead.
This mostly due to the pressure from ARCHERS that were involved in the process of establishing the regulations.
They (those actually involved) were concerned about the poor performance of retractable in production at the time.
And felt that, although they are proven performers on whitetail, Elk sized animals were too tough to achieve proper penetration from an expandable.
The regulation will probably be lifted, as the WDFW is cash driven, and as we all know, the squeaky nut gets the grease.
Retractable Broadheads are more advanced, and reliable, now than they were, but unless the barbed aspect is addressed in the design, this will probably be a few more years.
Also, the common fear from those (again, the ones actually involved in the decision making process) is that expandables are just a small step towards the modernisation of Archery tackle.
 

[grizzlyadams]

STIK...thanks for the answer. I thought it might have something to do with that but wasn't sure.

[NWWABOWHNTR]

Great post Stik...

One disagreement though.  I don't think it is "against modernization" when it comes to expandables, I think it is the unreliabilty factor on BIG game animals, such as bear and elk.  Now I know there has been many advances over the years in the design and the engineering to make them better than the first ones, which failed to open and or broke very easily.  However, until they all are proven to be effective and not flimsy,  then I don't think you will see them legalized here.  My feelings in that are,  how do you select the good ones and say only these are legal?  If the powers that be were against modernizing our sport, then we would all still be just hunting with a longbow or recurve..... hmmmm what a great idea?     Just kidding there!

[STIKNSTRINGBOW]

Great post Stik...

One disagreement though.  I don't think it is "against modernization" when it comes to expandables, I think it is the unreliabilty factor on BIG game animals, such as bear and elk.  Now I know there has been many advances over the years in the design and the engineering to make them better than the first ones, which failed to open and or broke very easily.  However, until they all are proven to be effective and not flimsy,  then I don't think you will see them legalized here.  My feelings in that are,  how do you select the good ones and say only these are legal?  If the powers that be were against modernizing our sport, then we would all still be just hunting with a longbow or recurve..... hmmmm what a great idea?     Just kidding there!

Maybe, but when the seasons were introduced, they were all hunting with a longbow or recurve.
I agree that ANOTHER reason was their reputation, however the main obstacle was that standing between Archers and their own season was that a bow and arrow was considered by the majority a toy, or ineffective and flimsy.
After some significant Archers proved that they could harvest every big game animal with their equipment, then acceptance was the inevitable result.
You could apply this to the expandable debate, some very significant archers have proved that they can harvest every large game animal with expandables, should not their acceptance also be inevitable ??
How would they be able to control which broadheads are acceptable ?
I would hope that the majority of archers would know enough about broadhead selection to make wise decisions, I see no reason myself to use them, but if you feel that it is necessary, then by all means, you are welcome to your own choice.
I do believe it is inevitable, as well as lighted nocks and crossbows in general archery season.
I myself will stick to using my late '60s 75# Damon Howatt Recurve, Bill Sweetland compressed cedar shaft and a 160gr Grizzly Broadhead. White nock, White cresting, and white feather fletching.

[RadSav]

Up until recently expandable broadheads had an extremely high failure rate.  They also had a habit of very poor penetration which this state viewed as a high and unnecessary risk.  A decision that at the time was a very good one in my opinion.  At the same time this rule was established even women had a 400 grain arrow minimum which was unfair.  Traditionalists had a pretty strong control over policy and many of the rules reflected it.  But things are changing even if it is in baby steps.

I am still not a huge fan of expandables, but they have come a long way in a short time.  Some are still barbed and some still take a huge cut out of an arrows energy as they swing open.  Their only real advantage is easier tuning and improved flight in various weather conditions.  Like any broadhead there are some really poor designs and some that I would not even shoot at a rabbit while others perform with great consistency and effectiveness.  Having them legal or not shouldn't change anything we do as hunters other than restrict the size of fletching we can effectively use.

I know I am in the minority on this point, but I am very grateful we have a new director that seems to be listening.  That crooked SOB we had for so many years would never have brought us the positive changes we have seen the past few years.  How often did he ask questions or our opinions before he had actually made an insane decision?  I remember being at a Town Hall style meeting where he sat there laughing at us.  Later we found out the reason was he had already made the rule change and our voice was only to allow us to feel as though we had gotten our say.  Us sportmen were nothing more than a joke to him.  My recent emails to the WDFW have given me hope that internal concerns are much more balanced and respectful of our voice.

Muzzy and archery hunters are far better off than we were just a few short years ago.  It's still not perfect, but for those of us who have been at it here for a long time it is definitely better.  I have to believe it is going to continue to improve as long as we have leadership that is concerned for state revenues, wildlife and us sportsmen.  Rather than the corrupt political hacks we have had here in the past who only represented themselves and the revenue stream they could misuse.  I'm counting on the additional improvements in archery and muzzy rules to continue.  We just need to make sure we respectfully voice our wants and concerns while open minds are still listening.

Just my opinion.  But go ahead - let the hate mail/moron notifications fly.

[Swannytheswan]

your right on RADSAV the disrespectfulness just purpetuates the redneck poacher stereotype and helps the antis take our opportunites

[Matt]

Remember that the goal is not 100% success rate.  We can't kill every animal out there.  Having a broadhead that has field point accuracy isn't going to solve the lack of skill or performance issue.  If you have well tuned equipment and you practice it doesn't matter if you use expandables or fixed blades.  And for those that shoot Montec type BH's they need to be sharp.  Now lets argue something real important like lighted nocks......sorry couldn't help myself.

Griz, until they make an expandable that can, with a high %, work it's way out of the rump roast and give the wounded animal a better chance of survival don't hold your breath waiting for them to be legalized in the west.

[dreamingbig]

RadSav - I must be living under a rock.  How have things gotten better for archers in the last 5 years?  We have lost days in both the early elk and deer seasons, we have lost bull permits (both nominal and percentage) at a faster clip than the other user groups, and they introduced multiple season permits which has brought even more competition.  I have other examples as well but I will stop here.

Please let me know what I have been missing.  And I am asking respectfully; I really don't know.

Thanks!