Lighted nocks

[Dirty Mike]

Voted

[seth30]

Best of Lumenok shots (high quality!!)

[seth30]

at 2:06 the shot in the almost dark... ethical?  Would they have taken the shot without a luminok, as it does allow you to see the hit even after dark?  That is my point.  I think I will stick with Pope and Young on this one.

maybe not as dark to the naked eye I bet buck fever had a huge play in that shot at 2:06.

[JimmyHoffa]

at 2:06 the shot in the almost dark... ethical?  Would they have taken the shot without a luminok, as it does allow you to see the hit even after dark?  That is my point.  I think I will stick with Pope and Young on this one.

Depends on tracking ability.  If you're good at trailing and marking the hit, it seems ethical to me.  If you absolutely NEED a bloody arrow and a 3 inch wide blood trail to find an animal...and the chances of the animal being lost are high...I'd say not ethical.

[huntnphool]

  Would they have taken the shot without a luminok

 No way to know, my bet would be yes they would have.

[Tony]

Voted yes

It still comes down to being an ethical hunter and following the rules. There are always going to be the *censored*s out there that will poach animals or shot them at night with or without these or you can choose to be an ethical hunter that follows the rules and just use them as a tool to better judge shot placement and arrow recovery.

[Machias]

Kain is right on the money, JUST because someone did not buy an archery tag this year does not mean they did not archery hunt.  Bear, turkey, yotes, lion, rabbits etc....so hold on a little on the if they didn't buy an archery deer or elk tag then their opinion doesn't matter.   

[Machias]

P.S. I voted like a Demorcat, early and often using made up and dead peoples Wild ID #s, All NO votes.   

[billythekidrock]

I don't agree that a person voting on a certain issue needs to be a user of that equipment or species. 

Respectfully...
 

It would asinine to give people who don't give a damn about archery hunting the ability to affect the direction of the sport. Totally asinine.

I would agree with Curly.  I think any/all should get to vote...BUT I think the results should have a good breakdown of how different voting groups are feeling.  It should be weighted more heavily so the actual user group has most valid say, but all are somehow affected.  In some cases, people voting may be wanting to move into that sport and are waiting for it to change enough to allow that.  I think it would be perfectly fine for a person that has to use a crossbow during modern to have input into the regular archery season, if the presumption is archery will eventually allow crossbows (just an example).

I too agree with Curly.
Just cause I prefer to hunt deer and bear with a rifle does not mean that I don't have valid opinions or preferences on archery elk.
 
We all need to be involved in all aspects of the outdoors or we will be forever on the losing end.

[Kain]

Unfortunately the WDFW thinks there are only deer and elk hunters in WA and they like keeping us all divided in our little groups. 

[huntnphool]

P.S. I voted like a Demorcat, early and often using made up and dead peoples Wild ID #s, All NO votes.   

 Thought you used mine?

[Machias]

 

[elkslayer99]

 I voted I don't see any reason for people to not be able to use them.

[Tacomahunter]

voted!

[Snapshot]

I don't agree that a person voting on a certain issue needs to be a user of that equipment or species. 

Respectfully...
 

It would asinine to give people who don't give a damn about archery hunting the ability to affect the direction of the sport. Remember what the outcome was when people who didn't hunt or trap were asked to decide the direction of trapping, bear hunting and cougar hunting? Totally asinine...

I agree with you about the bear baiting, using hounds for hunting, and trapping initiatives.......but that is a little different.  Those issues shouldn't even be voted on, those are decisions that should be left up to WDFW not some moron that has absolutely no knowledge of hunting or game management.  I bet if they left those initiatives up for a vote by WILD ID holders the outcome would have been different.

At least they are restricting the survey answers to those people with WILD ID's........ 

And I'm not saying that they should let people who "don't give a damn" about archery.  I think every hunter probably cares about the sport and if they don't then hopefully they won't answer the survey.  They will have a hard time weeding out the answers from someone who hasn't hunted archery from someone who has.  The only way I can see them being able to ask questions like this from only archery hunters is for them to ask the survey question at the time you buy an archery hunting license.

I suggested to Mr Ware that they ought to set their search criteria (easy to do if they wanted) to select only those individuals who had archery hunted both deer and elk for their past ten hunting seasons. That way knowledgeable bowhunters are the ones affecting the rules; people who have put in enough time to know what it is all about.
 
He replied, "...we would be accused of steering the results."
 
Let knowledgeable bowhunters direct bowhunting? I guess that would be too logical...