Post by: Sundance on February 02, 2010, 08:14:16 PM
Post by: washelkhntr on February 02, 2010, 08:16:35 PM
Post by: denali on February 02, 2010, 08:19:37 PM
Post by: cwuwildcat on February 02, 2010, 08:22:55 PM
Post by: danceswitharrows on February 02, 2010, 08:25:00 PM
Post by: carpsniperg2 on February 02, 2010, 08:29:57 PM
Post by: cwuwildcat on February 02, 2010, 08:52:01 PM
Post by: washelkhntr on February 02, 2010, 08:53:01 PM
Post by: Snapshot on February 04, 2010, 08:36:27 AM
Now there is a man who recognizes a difference! My hat is off to you, Sundance.
;~)
Post by: poohdog on February 05, 2010, 07:15:29 AM
Post by: Bob33 on February 05, 2010, 07:34:50 AM
Washington law: "It is unlawful to have any electrical equipment or electric device(s) attached to the bow or arrow while hunting."
Post by: passing-thru on February 05, 2010, 09:10:44 PM
Ok I don't want to start a bash, and I know on the RES. its different, but I saw a bear hunt on tv in Wa on the RES. and the guy shot a bear with a lighted nock. Must be ok. Just wondering? :dunno:
"Uncle Ted" was on Rez. I called WDFW and was told that he was on rez near coast to film his hunt. Guess its OK for right price >:( Oh and he was over bait to. If legal I have no problem with either just litl upset by blaten disregard for laws
Post by: rooselk on February 06, 2010, 11:01:28 AM
Although it doesn't get talked about much, I believe in Washington baiting is only illegal for bear. Or perhaps I should say that I've been told on several occasions that it's a common misconception that baiting for deer is illegal in this state. However, since I have no personal interest in using that method I've never really looked into it any further.
Post by: MAVsled on February 06, 2010, 12:18:29 PM
:> shot into a block target (20-30-40-50 yd distances) just to check accuracy and flight with added weight of the Firenocks, all good! No adjustment needed and FOC & same flight-groupings maintained.
:> up in a treestand, purposely shot under 40 yard & 50yd target into a small hill> grass-foilage-some briars. EZ to find.
but adding an arrow wrap-fletched end (my arrows are bright white wrapped) does help find the arrow but not as effective as the blinking light.
Post by: 724wd on February 06, 2010, 08:08:20 PM
Although it doesn't get talked about much, I believe in Washington baiting is only illegal for bear. Or perhaps I should say that I've been told on several occasions that it's a common misconception that baiting for deer is illegal in this state. However, since I have no personal interest in using that method I've never really looked into it any further.
I know a lot of people that bait deer and it seems to be perfectly legal.
Post by: THINK_N_ELK on February 06, 2010, 10:54:48 PM
It is leagal to bait deer and elk, in this state.
However IMHO that is not hunting.
Post by: bearhunter99 on February 07, 2010, 10:44:39 AM
I would love to video some of my hunts but some of the places I go would make it extremely difficult to incorporate a cameraman/woman. Just gotta keep hoping that someday someone comes up with a good extractor that pulls heads from butts :bash:
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 05:24:33 PM
Post by: huntnphool on February 09, 2010, 05:37:21 PM
Too each his own, personally I see no advantage to using luminocks other than being able to recover your arrow or game, how is that bad? Lighted sights give a distinct advantage and I dont think they should be allowed but nocks that don't light up until shot pose no advantage to the hunter. :twocents:
Post by: Michelle_Nelson on February 09, 2010, 05:40:42 PM
Glad all electronic gadgets are off limits. If it was up to me it would be a lot stricter. No sights, no releases, no let off. Got my flame suit on.
Standing by with a fire extinguisher. :chuckle:
Does not mean I agree with him. :chuckle:
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 05:43:19 PM
Glad all electronic gadgets are off limits. If it was up to me it would be a lot stricter. No sights, no releases, no let off. Got my flame suit on.
Guy builds himself a couple self bows and all of a sudden he's Fred Bear :P
Post by: WDFW-SUX on February 09, 2010, 05:45:56 PM
Post by: huntnphool on February 09, 2010, 05:49:30 PM
How are we supposed to shoot things at night without lighted nocks?
GEN-IV NVD :chuckle:
Post by: WDFW-SUX on February 09, 2010, 05:52:07 PM
Post by: huntnphool on February 09, 2010, 05:57:11 PM
Do they make goggles?
Absolutely
Post by: sisu on February 09, 2010, 06:10:06 PM
Glad all electronic gadgets are off limits. If it was up to me it would be a lot stricter. No sights, no releases, no let off. Got my flame suit on.:tup: :yeah: :tup:
Post by: rasbo on February 09, 2010, 06:17:54 PM
Glad all electronic gadgets are off limits. If it was up to me it would be a lot stricter. No sights, no releases, no let off. Got my flame suit on.no flame suits,loin cloth only
Post by: Buckmark on February 09, 2010, 06:19:46 PM
Glad all electronic gadgets are off limits. If it was up to me it would be a lot stricter. No sights, no releases, no let off. Got my flame suit on.Dont forget cedar shafts and hand chipped flint arrow heads. :chuckle:
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 07:22:47 PM
Glad all electronic gadgets are off limits. If it was up to me it would be a lot stricter. No sights, no releases, no let off. Got my flame suit on.
Guy builds himself a couple self bows and all of a sudden he's Fred Bear :P
Not really. Although I do actually take game with my primitive bows now and again. I have never shot a compound or if I recall correctly even a recurve. I respect what he may have done for archery and recognize the difference between what was then and what is now. If that makes me guilty of knowing the truth and admiring what Fred Bear has done so be it. Although I don't really know much about Fred Bear.
Fred Bear clearly had the right spirit but St Charles was much closer to my beliefs and in my opinion more rewarding to the archery community. There's a reason he was part of the movement to create the Compton Traditional Bowhunters. Long after he helped found the Pope and Young... Because the modern archery advancement has created a new sport. It's not the same spirit when guys can buy a bow and shoot 40 yards into a pie plate in less than a week. Many also don't know how to fix their own bows, build their own strings and are completely helpless with repairing their own equipment. The advancement is leading to higher success rates in shorter times and contributing to shorters seasons for archery. The entire archery season was built by people like St Charles who fought on a national level for primitive hunting. Not advanced compound hunting. The sport has turned into a gadget centric (new word) attitude of bloodsport in many circles. A place where the biggest rack is the only challenge of the day because people shoot 70,80,100 yards and slay the critters. As effective as many modern pistols and arguably more modern than the pistols. As far as I am concerned the Pope and Young is interesting but the better records will be in the Compton Books.
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 07:40:51 PM
Where are the guys that only hunt with an open sighted 30-30 blaming all these dang modern rifle hunters for making their seasons too short and turning it into an entirely different sport? Oh yeah...they either accepted technology or just kept on doing their own thing without worrying about what everyone else was doing.
To each their own.
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 07:43:37 PM
I think the .30-30 was around the same time the .30-06 so that suggestive comparison is obsolete in regards to archery and how the season was founded and applying it to the current situation.
I would venture to say you repeat "to each their own" mostly because you want to suggest my opinion is not a valid one. Just like your Fred Bear comment. Only made in a jest to suggest that I am some sort of elitist with little experience. Simply to discredit an opinion.
Post by: washelkhntr on February 09, 2010, 07:49:26 PM
Record books are there to recognize the animal not the hunter.
If that were the case there would be record books for living animals. They don't make the "books" without the hunter, regardless of what tackle he/she uses.
:twocents:
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 07:50:15 PM
As applied it is not entirely correct. There's a reason for the Pope and Young Books. Nobody was suggesting a record book for living animals. That's a strange suggestion. I am not sure where that came from. Certainly not from I.Record books are there to recognize the animal not the hunter.
If that were the case there would be record books for living animals. They don't make the "books" without the hunter, regardless of what tackle he/she uses.
:twocents:
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 08:02:31 PM
There should only be B&C because all others were created to honor the type of hunting and not the animal.
And yes the 30-30 came before the 30-06. And your comparison of traditional vs modern archery can be made with traditional vs modern fire arms also.
I would venture to say you repeat "to each their own" mostly because you want to suggest my opinion is not a valid one. Just like your Fred Bear comment. Only made in a jest to suggest that I am some sort of elitist with little experience. Simply to discredit an opinion.
I didn't mean to suggest you are some sort of elitist with little experience. Just an elitist. At least that is how you come across on this board at times. I know a lot of traditional archers and have never heard any of them suggest that modern equipment has some how degraded the sport.
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 08:09:45 PM
If a 200" buck is shot with a compound it will never be viewed as great as the same achievement to me as with a longbow. Plain and simple. It is as subjective as any opinion. I am sorry for you that you cannot fathom that I actually possess an opinion contrary to the popular masses.
I checked the web and it looks like the 30-30 and the 30-06 were less than 15 years apart at the turn of the 19th century before hunting regulations existed in most places. Definitely not much of a comparison.
Aha - there you have it. Your argument is more with me than anything else. You simply cannot internalize my opinions. Even if I deliver them on respectable terms. And so your little jabs are personal in nature as I suggested.
Oh and one more thing. This frame of mind is why I do not agree with electronic nocks. It's spelled without the 'e'.
Post by: Jellymon on February 09, 2010, 08:22:20 PM
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 08:26:29 PM
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 08:51:00 PM
I don't remember ever reading Boneaddict suggesting that traditional should have opportunities that compounds don't. Hell he goes out and gets it done durring modern rifle season.
So the same archer stalks to within 5-10 yds of 200" bucks twice in his life and kills them, once with a longbow and once with a compound then the kill with the longbow is a greater accomplishment? Yeah, I guess your right I can't internalize that opinion.
Sorry that your terms don't seem so respectable to me when they come across like you believe your way is better than mine or anyone elses who choses to hunt with modern equipment and that we are somehow taking something away from you.
Post by: huntnphool on February 09, 2010, 09:38:10 PM
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 09:54:38 PM
Quote
So the same archer stalks to within 5-10 yds of 200" bucks twice in his life and kills them, once with a longbow and once with a compound then the kill with the longbow is a greater accomplishment? Yeah, I guess your right I can't internalize that opinion.
Correct. I believe it takes more confidence to hunt with the primitive bow and it arguably requires a different frame of mind. The simple act of committing your entire approach of hunting big game to the primitive bow is a significant departure which many cannot and will not subject themselves to for various reasons. I would suggest many would not feel comfortable and offer excuses that they do not feel effective, that it is not a viable lethal method or other reason for not being capable of making that step. It takes special attention ,confidence and committment and knowing that you may not succeed because of the limitations.
The overall nature of your arguments are more personal than anything else. It has been clearly established. You direct them at the person and not at the opinion. I would venture to guess many hunters are elitists in one form or another. Patently applying to me might be accurate but so are many others and it is not something to be shamed for. Hunters measure animals, number of kills, their effective methods are debated, their methodology for hunting (stalking , bait piles, treestands, etc) and even their equipment choices are somewhat based upon elitism , or other similar values.
Overall the opportunities are diminished because people cannot resist the technology for faster kills, farther and without much training which is required to actually hunt by the terms the seasons were founded upon.
The fact is... my way is better than yours. That is your problem. You want to object to it. I understand human nature is that way. Well I wouldn't resist that your way is better than mine. It's simply your way. But if things were up to me- we would be hunting my way. Just like if things were up to you we would be hunting with your rules. It's really that hard for you to respect?
Post by: boneaddict on February 09, 2010, 10:13:07 PM
I'll keep it short. I don't think Trads need a seperate season, I do however favor against more technology. Its not the elitist in me,(damn Jack, I made it to February before having to try to spell that word this year) its the fact I see us outdoing our own sport by technology. Its a tech driven industry. The higher the success rates, the shorter the seasons and the hunt. Its about a bible sized explanation of what I am getting at so I don't expect folks to understand. At what point is it really not fair how we hunt these animals////range finders, scents, muzzels that aren't even "muzzels" any longer. Different strokes for different folks, I agree. I like to keep it simple. I do however see how some aren't quite so primitive any longer. Enough is enough, and that precisely why I hunt the way I do. I don't believe I should force my opions on the general public, however somewhere along the line we have to examine what effect we might be having on the future of the sport and the animals we hunt. Is it really necessary to shoot a deer at 1500 yards, because we can.
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 10:27:53 PM
You go on believeing that your way is better and I will go on accepting that all forms of hunting are simply forms of hunting. One no superior than the next.
I don't object to your form of hunting...I object to the elitist attitude that acts more to devide than anything else.
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 10:31:41 PM
Quote
No, it's really that hard for you to respect that your way is no better than mine.Patently false and I have admitted common ground there above. You are continuing a perpetration of personal matters.
You object to elitist attitudes because you desire to use that term. You are an elitist in your own terms I am certain. Almost all hunters are in one form or another. I am no more or less of a divider than you are. You are just angry that you cannot be "RIGHT". Nobody is right. There is only perception and that is your problem. You want to attack me and label me elitist, divider. Regardless - because you have your own set of personal values which you want to establish as more correct. I understand that. I respect it. It is not patently more correct though. Only for YOU. Such is the selfishness of hunting. However you do not want to recognize when someone else takes the same sort of position. It is all of a sudden blasphemy and arrogant for you. I think you need to drink some whiskey buddy.
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 10:44:02 PM
If I am an elitist because I don't feel my way is better than yours then I can accept that.
Post by: Ray on February 09, 2010, 10:45:43 PM
Post by: Lowedog on February 09, 2010, 11:02:37 PM
Post by: ribka on February 09, 2010, 11:47:11 PM
I have nothing against compounds and own one but you have to limit the technology at some point don't you? It's about honoring and cherishing the primitive hunting season of archery and its history. If not all hunting will end up in the future like that hunting company in that was located in Texas ( I think) a few years ago that offered hunting via the internet. Click a mouse and you can take your animal. Pay $10,000 for trophy deer/ elk and your pic is in a hunting magazine and web site.
I applaud Washington that they limit the use of electronic equipment and limit use of crossbows electronics during archery. And kudos to the state for keeping muzzle loaders primitive weapons with no scopes and 209 primers too. Have been bow hunting over 30 years in many states and you can really tell that the states that allow any equipment ( cross bows , atv's, lighted nocks, scoped ml's) and unlimited baiting offer a different hunting experience and has resulted in a much more limited seasons and lazier and less skilled hunters. :twocents:
I think most of us here archery hunt because we really enjoy the experience of using our practiced skills as "hunters" to get close to game with primitive gear.
Take "primitive gear" and "getting close" out of the equation and what do we have? :dunno:
Post by: huntnphool on February 09, 2010, 11:54:42 PM
Quote
I applaud Washington that they limit the use of electronic equipment and limit use of crossbows electronics during archery.
Back on topic just for a second then you guys can go back to your threadjacking, how does a luminock give a hunter an unfair advantage? And ribka, isnt a rangefinder a electronic device? :dunno:
Post by: Ray on February 10, 2010, 12:01:10 AM
Why not crossbows? Why not scopes? The question isn't "will it work?" The question is why let any electronics on the bow? People are and will continue to be successful without the electronics. It's a great line to draw in the sand for terms of legality. Why? Because that is a lot less primitive and limits the harvest. Mankind is a very creative being and can craft up some amazing things. Why not lights on the animals at night? Why not hunt them in the wintering ranges?
Archers use their rangefinders as a crutch. I have seen countless archers who will not go without them in the field. To me - judging range is part of the hunt. A rangefinder is something I choose to do without. I accept that others need them. I feel that modern day hunters basically rely on technology too often. Not all but very many cannot feel confident without technology. So they must justify one gimmick or another to be legal or to use in order to fulfill their selfish motives. To better their personal chances at success in a shorter period of time. Anything sacrificed in order to ward off the all too mind shattering "tag soup".
Post by: huntnphool on February 10, 2010, 12:07:36 AM
Post by: Ray on February 10, 2010, 12:13:52 AM
Post by: ribka on February 10, 2010, 12:14:12 AM
The range finder is not part of the bow or arrow so I am guessing that is why it is legal. Within a few years there will be some company developing range fingers on arrows the way things are going. Why not use it more effective means of archery hunting?
My point is where does technology end?
Maybe we should have heat seeking/sonic electronic laser guided arrows too that are programmed to strike the beating heart of an animal ?
The technology exists why not use it? :dunno:
Have to have some limits during a primitive hunting season like archery. If guys want all of the new technology they can use their new technology and hunt with their super bows, lighted arrows during modern firearms season If we keep going down this path of more advanced and improved technology archery will be limited to one week a year. I like our longer archery seasons in the U.S.
Post by: Ray on February 10, 2010, 12:18:09 AM
Quote
Maybe we should have heat seeking/sonic electronic laser guided arrows too that are programmed to strike the beating heart of an animal ?I love it. LOL
Post by: huntnphool on February 10, 2010, 12:24:41 AM
Post by: rasbo on February 10, 2010, 04:27:12 AM
Post by: boneaddict on February 10, 2010, 05:48:53 AM
Basically its much more satisfying to me to kill an unsuspecting deer at 30 yards than it is at 500. Yes, I have nightmares of the big ones I didn't anchor because I chose a more "inferior" weapon, bu tthen again I have a pile of bone that shows I didn't need any more technology to kill my deer for the 27th year in a row.
As Ribka said, I do applaud Washington for being supportive of traditional methods.
Again....their is a fine line of interpretation of whether we or someone is pushing thir agenda onto other people, or we are being stewards of our sport. I support the limiting of technology in regards to any primitive weapon season.
Post by: Lowedog on February 10, 2010, 09:05:47 AM
Hunting has become something else to most of us. We hunt for the achievement and gratification of taking an animal with what ever method we all chose. If it is traditional or modern we have a choice and can each do what gives us the gratification we are after. No need to suggest those that don't see it our way are selfish, greedy or whatever.
I understand that we have to have limitations when it comes to technology in regards to what is allowed during seasons for the differant weapons. Whether or not that is drawing the line at light up nocks for archery, I don't know. Again, where do you draw the line? There is modern technology used in all forms of hunting. A lot of todays traditional bow makers use modern tech to make bows. Carbon and kevlar laminations to make a bow faster. Computer generated cad models for creating the ultimate geometry for speed. CNC cut forms to build the bows. Traditional archers are using carbon arrows with glue in points and precision ground broad heads. Many use the latest materials for bow strings like Astro Flight for optimum arrow speed. So where do you draw the line on what is traditional or not?
In my opinion the technology advancement that has had the biggest impact on all forms of hunting hands down has been and will continue to be the internet.
Post by: Ray on February 10, 2010, 09:20:12 AM
Quote
So where do you draw the line on what is traditional or not?
Good Question and nobody is completely correct. It is again a subjective opinion of differences.
I would personally draw the line at some specific definitions which I will outline. The arrow how it might be a big part of the kill is not the major defining factor. Only half. To me - The arrow should not have any mechanical piece to it or the broadhead beyond simplistic attachments for joining the broadhead to the arrow itself. It should have no electronics. It should essentially be made of nuts bolts, wood , carbon and simplistic composition. No moving parts on the broadhead. As far as my views on the bows. They should have wood in the working majority of the limbs and the risers. The strings should be attached within 2 inches of the tips of the limbs and there should be no devices such as pulleys, cables or other such things. I also would not consider sights as part of traditional archery. The act of using a release is debatable and I personally know people use them because they have physical limitations. However I believe they are yet another departure from traditional archery. I believe traditional archery requires using the force of your arms and such to draw the string and retain all that energy without any letoff. What does that leave you with? A mostly wood stick, and a string. Then an arrow which is not very well advanced. I do believe that some wood compositions are actually better than carbon. In fact there are several discussions which support this idea floating around.
Traditional archery is much more than the equipment as well. It will take considerable practice, patience, and determination in order to committ to it on a regular basis. The final experience of success is an exuberance which is known to those who partake in the activity.
Now all these definitions and boundaries are solely my own. I have developed these ideas based upon many experiences, considerations and thought to what is important for me. Each man will have his own view on what is traditional archery.
Post by: rasbo on February 10, 2010, 09:42:08 AM
Post by: Ray on February 10, 2010, 09:43:00 AM
Post by: rasbo on February 10, 2010, 09:44:26 AM
Did you say bob or boob? All right I hope nobody's offended that I said that. LOLat my age any of the above :chuckle:
Post by: sisu on February 10, 2010, 11:26:11 AM
FA/DM: Before I ask my final question Glenn, I want to publicly thank you for all you have done for the sport of Bowhunting. If not for pioneers and dreamers such as you the sport would not be where it is today. So, to end our interview, what advice or words would you like to share with our audience?
Live life to the fullest, the walk in the woods is a short one, leave things better than you found them, If you are a hunter be proud of being a HUNTER not a KILLER. If you can make even the smallest difference, it is all worth the walk
link for credit (http://www.bowhunting.net/artman/publish/Straight_Talk_-_Interviews_107/Straight_Talk_-_Glenn_St_Charles.shtml)
Glenn is still alive and doing as well as can be expected. Here is another link for you to look at. Glenn and his children went with technology in the beginning but after a few years gave it up and went back to their roots of trad archery. They personally don't shoot modern archery but do support all archers. Please look that this next link so you can see the fight that the "old time" archers had to go through to get archery legal as a hunting mode. This link also shows that firearms hunters teamed up with the HSUS to kill off any success archers would have in the United States. :jacked:
Glenn's views (http://bowsite.com/bowsite/features/interviews/stcharles/)
Post by: Snapshot on February 11, 2010, 08:26:23 PM
Lowedog (I believe it was) asked something like, "Why aren't there modern guys who complain about technology taking time in the field away from them." There are! They are out there asking, "How did it ever get so out of hand?" Among them are former WDFW commissioners Kelly from Kettle Falls and Jerry from Wenatchee who have been (and I hope will continue to be) vocal about the impact that 1000 yard shot capabilities has had on rifle hunting.
Another post (I forget who made it; that is not important) said that they rub shoulders with lots of traditionalists and has not heard them espousing ideas of needing to curtail technology. I suggest that many feel that the "cat is already out of the bag" and nothing can be done to "get the train back on the track". But with each and every nip here and cut there in our seasons I think we'll hear more and more people say, "Now just a darned minute! Don't lump me in with them. I'm not killing so danged many animals that you need to keep me from taking my walk in the woods."
Ribka & Boneaddict. You guys made some fines posts that give a glimpse of what makes you tick and why you choose a stick. I hope many, many people will ponder your words. And of those, that a few will spark with a connection.
Ray, keep up the good work. I must mention that a stringent requirement that wood be part of the working limb of a bow would have cost the Khans many a battle won with the power of horn bows. Aside from that I could not agree with your points in this thread more.
Post by: Lowedog on February 11, 2010, 09:30:52 PM
Very few people can make a 1000 yd shot with a rifle in a hunting situation. The fact that a rifle can be built to do it does not mean that any shmo can pick one up head to the mtns and shoot a 1000yds across a basin or even 500 yards for that matter. I would say that it takes the same type of commitment to be proficient enough to kill from extreme ranges as it does to hunting with primitive gear.
To me each form of hunting is just that. A form of hunting. One way is no better than another.
Post by: AKBowman on February 19, 2010, 09:24:19 PM
I shoot a compound but only b/c I am not good enough to shoot a recurve. I need more practice. I wish I could be that good in the field and i envy the traditional hunters out there. I am looking forward to the day i commit to traditional.