Down goes illuminated nocks!

[jackelope]

Turkeyfeather,
I'm pretty sure you're too new here to have been through this debate the 11 or 12 times its already been hashed out here before. I think I can speak for Bone and say that he is referring to all the past discussions in his statements. The biggest reason I think people are against them is that they go against Pope and Young guidelines and they don't fit into the tradition lines for archery tackle. You know an animal taken with a lighted nock'd arrow does not qualify for the book, right?
For the record, I officially don't care if I can or can't use lighted nocks. 

[Chase 1]

Typical of any agenda that someone wants, if they stand at the front porch and bang loud enough sooner or later someone is going to pass it.   The folks that want it think the folks that don't want it are stupid.  The folks that don't think its right or don't want it will put less energy into the fight and sooner or later will move on to something that is more important, such as saving the 2nd.   The folks that want it will still be jumping up and down screaming and pretty soon you will have it in law.    By the time you have your lighted fire sticks with gps beacons on them so you can find the arrow you shot at a deer 100 yards away, there probably wont be any deer left.   You might of/should have put as much effort into ending the decimation of the herds from wolves, tribal hunting, etc.

Sorry but I couldn't disagree more with your summation of this debate/discussion, especially that I feel that those who don't want the change are stupid. That is absolutely not the case! Most of those on both sides of this debate are fellow archers and sportsman and on 95% of the issues, we have the same agenda! This is a small issue that we disagree on. 

And the idea that folks can't put out effort in many directions at once just leaves me scratching my head. Sportmans intrest are best served if that is what we all do.

My experience as a fairly new to the sport archer but a guy that's been on this forum way way way more than enough says that when you get right down to it..really pick it apart... there's a lot more dividing archers on both sides of the equipment aisle than the lighted nock debate. I've seen bow hunters arguing on here about everything from lighted nocks to training wheels to acceptable shooting distances to flashlights duct taped to bows(inside joke).

That's why I said 95% and not 99%.

[Rainier10]

It is all numbers game and comes down to fighting between user groups and in this case inside of one user group.  It has been said that nothing has been taken away because of improved equipment and that is true.  Days in the field and permit numbers change based on hunter success reports.  When lighted nocks get passed if at any time the archery success numbers go up and the other group stays the same, modern or muzzy will argue that the harvest numbers have increased because there is more technology on the bow and it is not such a primitive weapon anymore, true or not definately debatable, but they will ask to have their season increased so they get their fair share of the harvest.  WDFW won't increase their seasons but they can shorten the archery season or give out fewer permits to decrease archery harvest.  It may have just been a great year for hunting and that is why the numbers seemed higher, not because of the lighted nocks, but logic isn't excatly the basis for WDFW decisions, it is the squeaky wheel or the person yelling the loudest from their porch as others have said.

So instead of fighting to get our archery elk back closer to the rut, we fight over a lighted nock that in the end they give us and because of it the modern and muzzy guys have more fuel (justified or not) that we have too much technology so the game department takes more days away.

I personally don't care if they allow them or not, I think it is a choice for each to make.  If in the end I lose hunting time because of them then I am definately against that.

just my

[turkeyfeather]

Yes, I am absolutely aware of that. And I believe if someone wants to qualify for the books and follow their guidlines more power to them. I think that's great. I also think that if someone is just hunting for meat, and or can't afford to be replacing arrows all the time there is no harm in using them. I believe we as individuals should have that choice. If you don't wanna use them that's fine, if you do that's good too. But when one can use a compound bow, carbon fiber arrows, electronic range finders, tree stands, etc. I could go on and on. All these things take away from traditional archery. So to make the argument that they are wrong because they ruin what archery was meant to be is pissing in the wind. That ship sailed along time ago.

[dscubame]

Yes, I am absolutely aware of that. And I believe if someone wants to qualify for the books and follow their guidlines more power to them. I think that's great. I also think that if someone is just hunting for meat, and or can't afford to be replacing arrows all the time there is no harm in using them. I believe we as individuals should have that choice. If you don't wanna use them that's fine, if you do that's good too. But when one can use a compound bow, carbon fiber arrows, electronic range finders, tree stands, etc. I could go on and on. All these things take away from traditional archery. So to make the argument that they are wrong because they ruin what archery was meant to be is pissing in the wind. That ship sailed along time ago.

TF, dont you know you need to have over 15,000 posts and not be so new to this forum with a mere 1,100 posts to address this issue that has been rehashed so many times? 

[jackelope]

Hah!

[turkeyfeather]

Yes, I am absolutely aware of that. And I believe if someone wants to qualify for the books and follow their guidlines more power to them. I think that's great. I also think that if someone is just hunting for meat, and or can't afford to be replacing arrows all the time there is no harm in using them. I believe we as individuals should have that choice. If you don't wanna use them that's fine, if you do that's good too. But when one can use a compound bow, carbon fiber arrows, electronic range finders, tree stands, etc. I could go on and on. All these things take away from traditional archery. So to make the argument that they are wrong because they ruin what archery was meant to be is pissing in the wind. That ship sailed along time ago.

TF, dont you know you need to have over 15,000 posts and not be so new to this forum with a mere 1,100 posts to address this issue that has been rehashed so many times? 

Well I do now, thanks.

[dscubame]

I have been told your a good guy Jackelope so I was just having a little harmless fun.  No offense meant.

[jackelope]

TF, for the record I agree with you. Just wanted you to know where I think Bone's comments were coming from and that they were likely not specifically directed at you. He can confirm that or correct me if I  am wrong.

[jackelope]

I have been told your a good guy Jackelope so I was just having a little harmless fun.  No offense meant.

Thanks. I'm sure the same holds true for you.
No offense taken.

[h20hunter]

The only reason I have see stated is along the lines of "if we allow this it will open up the possibitly of lights and sirens and this and that".

I've never heard the "for" side say that it will help them kill more deer in a different way.

The gist that I get is the For side says what is the harm and the against says why do you need them?

I agree that bow hunters, both modern and traditional, could better spend the energy working on getting season/tag changes but the debate for and against will never be answered. It will either stay illegal or will become legal.

[jackelope]

For-so I can find my arrows.

Against- not consistent with P&Y standards.

That's my take.

[turkeyfeather]

TF, for the record I agree with you. Just wanted you to know where I think Bone's comments were coming from and that they were likely not specifically directed at you. He can confirm that or correct me if I  am wrong.

Jackelope, I never thought Bone's comments were directed towards me. I just had a problem with the generalization of some of his statements. I thought they were off base and actually made him sound more like an anti. I don't know if Bones a archery hunter or not, but I don't know a single archery guy that thinks the way he appeared to be suggesting.

[jackelope]

He's a traditional wood bow guy.

[turkeyfeather]

For-so I can find my arrows.

Against- not consistent with P&Y standards.

That's my take.

I obviously can't speak for all, but I am in favor for the reason of being able to identify if I may have missed where I was aiming. That way I know whether I can retrieve my animal or give it time to expire without pushing it.