Down goes illuminated nocks!

[huntnphool]

Good point 'phool.  I didn't start the tangent but I contributed to it!  And I even started this thread... shame on me!

[rooselk]

I will be the first to admit that I am not always a sensible person. It is by choice after all that I hunt with a recurve or longbow rather than a more efficient firearm or compound bow. However, since this lighted nocks issue raised its' ugly head in Washington more than a year ago I like to think I had at least enough good sense to (A) move to Montana; and (B) join a state bowhunting that still subscribes to, and upholds, the Pope & Young Fair Chase ethic, which includes no electronic attachments to archery equipment.

While I'm personally glad that I no longer have to concern myself with this issue in the state where I was born, raised, and lived all my life until just a few months ago, I do wish nothing but the best to those back home who continue to fight the good fight by upholding the time honored Pope & Young Fair Chase hunting ethic.

[huntnphool]

I like to think I had at least enough good sense to (A) move to Montana; and (B) join a state bowhunting that still subscribes to, and upholds, the Pope & Young Fair Chase ethic, which includes no electronic attachments to archery equipment.

http://www.archerywire.com/releases/278319/ 

[buck man]

I like to think I had at least enough good sense to (A) move to Montana; and (B) join a state bowhunting that still subscribes to, and upholds, the Pope & Young Fair Chase ethic, which includes no electronic attachments to archery equipment.

http://www.archerywire.com/releases/278319/ 

    it might be time to move again rooselk. Oh and expandables are legal too in MT.

[turkeyfeather]

I like to think I had at least enough good sense to (A) move to Montana; and (B) join a state bowhunting that still subscribes to, and upholds, the Pope & Young Fair Chase ethic, which includes no electronic attachments to archery equipment.

http://www.archerywire.com/releases/278319/ 

    it might be time to move again rooselk. Oh and expandables are legal too in MT.

[Curly]

It seems like the guys that argue for lighted nocks to remain illegal because of the Pope and Young rules, would actually benefit by the State making them legal.  That way more guys would be using lighted nocks and thus would not be eligible for getting in the book............leaving more chance for you guys that go by P&Y rules to get in the book. 

[huntnphool]

I like to think I had at least enough good sense to (A) move to Montana; and (B) join a state bowhunting that still subscribes to, and upholds, the Pope & Young Fair Chase ethic, which includes no electronic attachments to archery equipment.

http://www.archerywire.com/releases/278319/ 

    it might be time to move again rooselk. Oh and expandables are legal too in MT.

i think Montana will be the 45th state to allow lumenoks, he only has 5 to choose from if P&Y compliance are among his requirements.

[Machias Bowhunter]

While bow hunting, knowing where your arrow hits an animal has a direct correlation on how to proceed and how soon tracking should begin.  Lighted nocks give immediate feedback on where the arrow struck.  For instance, knowing an arrow hit too far back requires a longer wait than normal before following up.  Starting too soon and bumping the animal greatly decreases the chances of recovery.  I believe that lighted nocks would be a huge benefit in preventing losses in this type of scenario.

At this time without the use of lighted nocks, when there is a clean miss finding your arrow is critical in order to verify the animal was not struck.  Very often in Western Washington there is thick underbrush that makes recovering shot arrows difficult. 

Lighted nocks would help in finding arrows because the nock by itself is highly visible.  Secondly, these nocks would make it possible to mark where your arrow went into the brush making recovery highly likely.  Most importantly lighted nocks would aid in accurately noting a miss.

Negatives about possible shooting after dark and extending shooting ranges have little merit.  Hunters need enough natural light in order to see our sights and the quarry. 

As for extending shooting ranges, lighted nocks do nothing to extend the effective range of archery equipment.  Laser rangefinders which are already legal to use in the field have done more to extend the effective range of archery equipment than pulleys, fiber optic sights, carbon fiber arrows or any other advancement in equipment.
   
Overall, I believe that lighted nocks would be an asset in recovering game and shot arrows.   

Thanks and best regards,

James Halvorson

I 100% agree with this post, If your worried about Pope and Young Rules dont use them!! IF you dont like them for any other reason, dont use them!!!!!
But to say that they help when actually shooting the arrow is crazy talk. I would like the ones that feel that these nocks actually give a advantage to the hunter by making them more accurate show the proof! You cant, because the only thing they do is light up AFTER they have left the bow, how does that make it easier for me to hit what I aim at?

"While bow hunting, knowing where your arrow hits an animal has a direct correlation on how to proceed and how soon tracking should begin.  Lighted nocks give immediate feedback on where the arrow struck.  For instance, knowing an arrow hit too far back requires a longer wait than normal before following up.  Starting too soon and bumping the animal greatly decreases the chances of recovery.  I believe that lighted nocks would be a huge benefit in preventing losses in this type of scenario."
How do you argue with this?

"At this time without the use of lighted nocks, when there is a clean miss finding your arrow is critical in order to verify the animal was not struck.  Very often in Western Washington there is thick underbrush that makes recovering shot arrows difficult.  Lighted nocks would help in finding arrows because the nock by itself is highly visible.  Secondly, these nocks would make it possible to mark where your arrow went into the brush making recovery highly likely.  Most importantly lighted nocks would aid in accurately noting a miss."
You really cant argue this as well.

As others have said, we notice focus our resources and wants to things that matter, e.i. extending seasons, getting more permits for archery and so on.

[Smossy]

Mmmmm. Cant wait to "insert illuminated knock here".

[huntnphool]

While bow hunting, knowing where your arrow hits an animal has a direct correlation on how to proceed and how soon tracking should begin.  Lighted nocks give immediate feedback on where the arrow struck.  For instance, knowing an arrow hit too far back requires a longer wait than normal before following up.  Starting too soon and bumping the animal greatly decreases the chances of recovery.  I believe that lighted nocks would be a huge benefit in preventing losses in this type of scenario.

At this time without the use of lighted nocks, when there is a clean miss finding your arrow is critical in order to verify the animal was not struck.  Very often in Western Washington there is thick underbrush that makes recovering shot arrows difficult. 

Lighted nocks would help in finding arrows because the nock by itself is highly visible.  Secondly, these nocks would make it possible to mark where your arrow went into the brush making recovery highly likely.  Most importantly lighted nocks would aid in accurately noting a miss.

Negatives about possible shooting after dark and extending shooting ranges have little merit.  Hunters need enough natural light in order to see our sights and the quarry. 

As for extending shooting ranges, lighted nocks do nothing to extend the effective range of archery equipment.  Laser rangefinders which are already legal to use in the field have done more to extend the effective range of archery equipment than pulleys, fiber optic sights, carbon fiber arrows or any other advancement in equipment.
   
Overall, I believe that lighted nocks would be an asset in recovering game and shot arrows.   

Thanks and best regards,

James Halvorson

I 100% agree with this post, If your worried about Pope and Young Rules dont use them!! IF you dont like them for any other reason, dont use them!!!!!
But to say that they help when actually shooting the arrow is crazy talk. I would like the ones that feel that these nocks actually give a advantage to the hunter by making them more accurate show the proof! You cant, because the only thing they do is light up AFTER they have left the bow, how does that make it easier for me to hit what I aim at?

"While bow hunting, knowing where your arrow hits an animal has a direct correlation on how to proceed and how soon tracking should begin.  Lighted nocks give immediate feedback on where the arrow struck.  For instance, knowing an arrow hit too far back requires a longer wait than normal before following up.  Starting too soon and bumping the animal greatly decreases the chances of recovery.  I believe that lighted nocks would be a huge benefit in preventing losses in this type of scenario."
How do you argue with this?

"At this time without the use of lighted nocks, when there is a clean miss finding your arrow is critical in order to verify the animal was not struck.  Very often in Western Washington there is thick underbrush that makes recovering shot arrows difficult.  Lighted nocks would help in finding arrows because the nock by itself is highly visible.  Secondly, these nocks would make it possible to mark where your arrow went into the brush making recovery highly likely.  Most importantly lighted nocks would aid in accurately noting a miss."
You really cant argue this as well.

As others have said, we notice focus our resources and wants to things that matter, e.i. extending seasons, getting more permits for archery and so on.

Welcome to the debate.

[Smossy]

I guess the way I look at is this:  1.  They don't think archery hunters should hunt close to the rut thus they took away our 8-21st season and replaced with a rotating one.  2.  They said we were taking too many animals (harvest rate too high) so they took one of our days away (13 now).  3.  Archery hunters get 13 days to fill a bull tag in little naches now vs. 11 days for a modern firearm permit holder and to top it off, Oct 1st is closer to peak rut than September 15th (end of archery).

What I am getting at is that they claim they want things to be equitable between user groups and then they try to catch us sleeping by adding more days to other user groups.

Bowhunters are just savage and need to pay more attention to detail.
NO OFFENSE to anyone who hunts with rifles, But It seems like bowhunting is more intimate and actually hunting.
Long range with a rifle, I doubt scent or camo really comes into play.
But then what do I know.
Really to all the rifle hunters do not take that as a stab, Huntings hunting.
Just like people who hunt with recurves or longbows where you have alot less aiming and more instincts when it comes to shooting.
My compound bow is surgical, and goes exactly where I want it.

[rooselk]

I am of course aware of the Montana legislation. Read again what I wrote.

Our Montana state bowhunting organization took a solid stand against the the legislation that would allow lighted nocks in this state, as the article clearly states.

[Chase 1]

Here's the bottom line on this issue. If you want the Commission to vote yes for this change, then you have two options to let your voice be heard. You can write a letter expressing your support for the change (there are some great examples in previous posts) and email or send it to the addresses below…

Written comments may be emailed to wildthing@dfw.wa.gov or mailed to: Wildlife Program Commission Public Comments, 600 Capitol Way N., Olympia, WA 98501.
 
But do it now because the deadline is Feb.15th.

OR…

You can show up at one of the Commission meetings that will take place before the vote in April (no testimony will be heard at the meeting in April).

The next meeting is in Olympia at the end of this week. Your opportunity to express your support of this change will be on Friday Feb 8th at 8:45 …or… Saturday Feb 9th at 8:30. Show up a little early, sign in, and tell the Commission in person that you support a yes vote on this proposal. You will have 3 minutes and you can use as little or much of it as you wish.

The last chance to speak to the Commission (and a lot closer to some of you) is the March meeting that will be held in Moses Lake on March 1-2. The agenda is not yet set so I will update the time when it is or you can check this link.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings.html

THIS IS NOT A DONE DEAL. It could still go either way. Last year the Commission voted 4-3 in favor of approving the change, but a change requires 5 votes. Two Commissioners were not at the last vote and will swing this one way or the other.

And make no mistake; a handful of very vocal opponents will do what they can to keep this from happening.  If history is any indicator, they will attend the meeting and let their opposition be heard loud and clear. They will present themselves as the voices of the archery community, and despite all the information to the contrary, represent that this change is opposed by archers.

Notice a relative lack of posts from those opposing this change?

The voice of the majority cannot be heard if it is not spoken!  So speak up and be heard. If you want to see that this rule makes it to the final draft of the regs, you need to drop a letter to the Commission telling them so by Feb.15th or better yet show up at the meeting to tell them in person. 

[madmack76]

I cant believe they throw such a fuss about this I don't hunt bow but I see nothing bad about them it will help in recovery less wasted meat is a good thing, I find at least one animal a year that this could of helped with the recovery of. This state is going backwards fast. just plain stupid if they don't allow this.

[3Under]

Notice a relative lack of posts from those opposing this change?

Some can't stand to continue beating a dead horse on such a divisive issue (notice the previous 26 pages of arguments, let alone a dozen more threads on the issue), especially when there are greater issues to fight for than allowing electronics on archery equipment.
Thanks for the deadline reminder.