Post by: huntnphool on December 07, 2011, 10:25:21 PM
Post by: huntnnw on December 07, 2011, 10:34:58 PM
Post by: JimmyHoffa on December 07, 2011, 10:36:20 PM
Post by: huntnphool on December 08, 2011, 03:01:58 PM
Post by: Atroxus on December 08, 2011, 03:06:54 PM
Id like to hear the reasoning from the 10% who say no..Why??
If only 10% said no, who really cares? It's a tiny minority, and they don't have to use them if they do get legalized. :dunno:
Post by: Machias on December 08, 2011, 03:12:00 PM
Id like to hear the reasoning from the 10% who say no..Why??
There is only about 20+ post on just that subject. ;)
Post by: Machias on December 08, 2011, 03:13:44 PM
Id like to hear the reasoning from the 10% who say no..Why??
If only 10% said no, who really cares? It's a tiny minority, and they don't have to use them if they do get legalized. :dunno:
That is 10% of 3800 folks in this survey. There is widespread support for them, but trust me it is no where near 80+%. It's probably closer to 58% in favor to 42% opposed. That's just a general guess.
Post by: huntnphool on December 08, 2011, 03:29:12 PM
There is widespread support for them, but trust me it is no where near 80+%. It's probably closer to 58% in favor to 42% opposed. That's just a general guess.
Just curious if you have inside information on the poll results Fred, I missed the astrisk saying "poll results are +/- 30%". ;)
Post by: Rainier10 on December 08, 2011, 03:39:50 PM
Post by: doyourtime89 on December 08, 2011, 04:19:40 PM
Post by: Machias on December 08, 2011, 04:46:35 PM
More then likely the 10% that opposed it are all the traditional archers. They always oppose anything to do with archery hunting that is new.
Well that is not even close to being accurate.
Post by: doyourtime89 on December 09, 2011, 07:50:38 AM
Post by: rasbo on December 09, 2011, 07:52:45 AM
Post by: bearpaw on December 09, 2011, 08:03:46 AM
Post by: BLKBEARKLR on December 09, 2011, 08:10:52 AM
Post by: Machias on December 09, 2011, 08:24:42 AM
Post by: blackveltbowhunter on December 09, 2011, 08:31:25 AM
More then likely the 10% that opposed it are all the traditional archers. They always oppose anything to do with archery hunting that is new.
Post by: Gobble Gobble on December 09, 2011, 02:46:57 PM
Now light on your sight I would have to vote a BIG NO on. put a light on your sight with a lumenok and your just asking for people to start shooting game at night. :twocents:
Post by: Kain on December 09, 2011, 04:39:50 PM
I have said before that I would like to see exceptions made for bow mounted cameras and even lighted sight for night hunting outside of deer and elk season but I understand the slippery slope and the possibility of abuse is probably not worth the effort or the division it causes within the hunting community.
Post by: billythekidrock on December 09, 2011, 04:45:13 PM
More then likely the 10% that opposed it are all the traditional archers. They always oppose anything to do with archery hunting that is new.
I am not a trad archer and I voted no. :dunno:
Post by: Tacomahunter on December 09, 2011, 07:00:31 PM
Post by: bwhntr350 on December 09, 2011, 08:13:06 PM
My reasoning is because as archery becomes more advance, we lose more and more season. Now, although, lighted nocks probably will not make any difference, what-so-ever, on killing game, it is still in the general publics eye, another advantage for the bowhunter that will and can be used as leverage against us.
Everything keeps evolving. Back in the day, and no I am not living in the past, but we had 50% let-off bows, at best, and big old heavy aluminum arrows. I am not sure how fast my bow was back then, but I called it a rainbow. Modern technology, if used correctly, should be helping us, but it is taking away our longer seasons.
As bows reach higher speeds with lighter arrows people seem to think that they can shoot animals at a greater range, which is the opposite of what I believe, but that's another topic. But, in the eye of the public, bows are faster, arrows are lighter and straighter, sights are better, releases are now more than common, they are the norm, and people talk about killing animals at greater ranges. All this is seen and heard from the public. Remember, there is a lot of input into setting the seasons, not just harvest report cards and success rates.
So, if I have a choice of saying "No" to lighted nocks and maybe that will save a day or two from being removed from my seasons, then, as political as it may be, I am saying "NO", even though I may be way off base with my way of thinking. It is just me:) If they asked if bowhunters would be willing to go back to 50% let off on compounds but in return we could have 2 extra days to hunt elk, I would vote "Yes" for that.
Post by: npaull on December 10, 2011, 06:45:18 AM
Post by: Okie at heart on December 10, 2011, 09:22:57 PM
I don't really care about the lighted nock issue, but I definitely agree that adding more and more technology to a bow setup makes it less and less truly archery hunting, in my opinion. By the time you have a compound bow, with significant let-off, with sights, giant stabilizer, a mechanical release, etc in my opinion you're not really bow hunting. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's not really bow hunting. I think many non-hunters feel the same way. Again, nothing wrong with hunting this way, but if you choose to hunt with a bow, it just seems odd to me to strive constantly to make it more and more about technology and less and less about skill.So if you use a scope on a gun is that not really gun hunting?
Post by: Kain on December 10, 2011, 11:11:19 PM
I don't really care about the lighted nock issue, but I definitely agree that adding more and more technology to a bow setup makes it less and less truly archery hunting, in my opinion. By the time you have a compound bow, with significant let-off, with sights, giant stabilizer, a mechanical release, etc in my opinion you're not really bow hunting. There's nothing wrong with it, but it's not really bow hunting. I think many non-hunters feel the same way. Again, nothing wrong with hunting this way, but if you choose to hunt with a bow, it just seems odd to me to strive constantly to make it more and more about technology and less and less about skill.So if you use a scope on a gun is that not really gun hunting?
I understand where he is coming from but that was my first thought as well. There are guys pushing guns and optics to some extreme limits. No one suggests they are lacking in skill. There will always be guys pushing things farther than their skill with all weapon types though. But is a guy that can shoot a 30/30 lever with open sites have more skill than the guy that can make 1000 yards shots or are they completely different. Some guys would say yes but the guy who takes a monster animal at a 800 yards is still going to feel proud of his trophy, and he should.
More technology can have an effect on those that choose not to use it. This will always cause conflict. This is true with all weapon types and I just dont see anyway to make everyone happy. You could allow all the bells and whistles to be used on a bow during modern firearms season. That might be a good compromise. :dunno:
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 07:14:37 PM
Because this one is about the game, so we as bow hunters owe it to what we are hunting, and shooting a arrow through, to find what we shoot. for the animals sake!
In doing this we will be helping, our sport out, and returning and showing the respect the animal DESERVES,
Not to mention how it makes a person feel..........like putting the bow up when we hit a animal and can't find it, WE have ALL been there. why not try to do everything we can to help recover our game, I have to deal with this daily during hunting season and finding your arrow (is a must) and can make all the difference in the world, in recovering or even knowing if you hit it ,and knowing how long to wait before tracking your game. please in lighten me?
we are talking about lighted nocs here not contoling what people may or may not do.
Post by: boneaddict on December 27, 2011, 07:23:56 PM
Shoot em in daylight and within range and you should be able to see where that arrow hits. Just a thought
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 07:32:47 PM
Essentially I see no need for them, thus if folks are likely to use them as a crutch, then even more game will be injured and lost as people will take shots later in the day and at further distance. Thats what this bowhunter is thinking.Them same people are going to take them shots with or with out the lighted noc, or just use it any way,
Shoot em in daylight and within range and you should be able to see where that arrow hits. Just a thought
there you go worring about what people are going to do, and not what is real important here and that is the game and knowing if it was hit and when and how to start the recovery of the game, You have to have your arrow in order to make to rite call. what you see is seldom what realy happened as far as your arrow placement.
The need is arrow recovery.
Post by: boneaddict on December 27, 2011, 07:38:35 PM
Post by: jstone on December 27, 2011, 07:41:46 PM
Post by: JPhelps on December 27, 2011, 07:45:20 PM
I've never had trouble seeing exactly where my arrow hit.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 07:49:44 PM
Maybe the people who can never find their arrows will still have problem finding their arrows. :chuckle:well, if you have a LED light flashing, even under the snow,under the brush,30 feet from the the shot animal, 100 yards in the drection he ran off and a tree brakes the arrow and it flys out in the brush you can still find them with ease, so we need this tool to help in the finding of game. most of the time the arrow is stuck in the ground were there animal was standing but that one in 10 that it isn't, the lighted noc can make or break your recovery
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 07:51:54 PM
i wont use them. my arrows are already to much money.you don't have to use them if there legal,
Post by: JPhelps on December 27, 2011, 07:52:17 PM
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 07:58:18 PM
I won't use them. Don't want any more weight on that end of the arrow.I have a 100 yard target range here and there is no differance out to 70 yards.
I've never had trouble seeing exactly where my arrow hit.
You are gifted if you can allways see and know where your arrow hit the deer, they duck so fast i can't ever tell in-tell i watch it back on the video in slow motion on my camers. and it is a real treat to see the arrow go in were it was intended
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 08:00:59 PM
If I hit the animal where I want, I will be following blood and don't care where the end of my arrow is.ya it would be nice to live in a perfict world, and have that happen every time, but there isn't a BOW hunter alive that hasn't lost game and finding your arrow can tell you alot,
Post by: JPhelps on December 27, 2011, 08:06:40 PM
I know there is the extreme response than I should be hunting with a longbow or recurve and no sights.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 27, 2011, 08:18:36 PM
I don't care if they are legalized. There is just a part of me that would like to see the sport stay somewhat primitive.I can respect that awenser, that is your choice, it dosn't matter what you hunt with, if you feel you are loosing part of it.
I know there is the extreme response than I should be hunting with a longbow or recurve and no sights.
mine comes from a guides point of view and i can't stand to see hurt animals that can't befound and the arrow recovery for me is huge, if i cant find it. i feel lost, it tell me a big story, i owe it to my hunters and he deer.
Post by: dreamingbig on December 28, 2011, 02:20:58 PM
Post by: JPhelps on December 28, 2011, 02:48:24 PM
I know archeryoutfitters said he saw no difference.
I would venture to guess that almost every other bows tune would be affected by adding 35-40 gr. to the tail of the arrow.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 28, 2011, 03:46:52 PM
:yeah:I used Easton Full Metal Jacket Arrows to perform my testing. This is the arrow I use while hunting. My arrow with a standard nock installed weighed in at 463 grains. After adding the Tracer Nock total arrow weight was 478 grains. The Lumenock mounted arrow weighed 477 grains. And the arrow with the Firenock weighed 477 grains. So the lighted nocks added roughly 15 grains to my arrows 35 to 40 would cause problems.
I know archeryoutfitters said he saw no difference.
I would venture to guess that almost every other bows tune would be affected by adding 35-40 gr. to the tail of the arrow.
Post by: UptheCreek on December 28, 2011, 06:42:31 PM
make you any less skilled or any less of a bowhunter. I choose to drive a truck with air conditioning and 4 wheel drive. I guess that makes me less of a ..........
Post by: scoyoc5 on December 28, 2011, 07:37:26 PM
Post by: boneaddict on December 28, 2011, 07:45:46 PM
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 28, 2011, 08:24:00 PM
Plus it's fun and very rewarding.
Post by: Quackin_Archer on December 28, 2011, 11:08:12 PM
Post by: JJB11B on December 28, 2011, 11:29:15 PM
Post by: Snapshot on December 29, 2011, 11:16:52 AM
mine comes from a guides point of view and i can't stand to see hurt animals that can't befound and the arrow recovery for me is huge, if i cant find it. i feel lost, it tell me a big story, i owe it to my hunters and he deer.
Do you guide only archery hunters or others as well?
Post by: buckfvr on December 29, 2011, 11:39:43 AM
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 12:07:53 PM
Only archery and primarily non residents, with exception of special permit hunters, i will do gun,muzzle,or bow and resident or non residentmine comes from a guides point of view and i can't stand to see hurt animals that can't befound and the arrow recovery for me is huge, if i cant find it. i feel lost, it tell me a big story, i owe it to my hunters and he deer.
Do you guide only archery hunters or others as well?
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 12:26:05 PM
From what I understand, they are quite heavy, and adding weght to the back of the shaft, means you will have to add corresponding weight forward to address FOC changes. This may cause spine issues, and in some cases, may require people to change shafts. After all that, its time to at least resite your bow, maybe retune......from that aspect alone, legal or not, I will never use them, and could care less who does.....what I think of advantages as far as finding game, thats a complete unknown until there are some real statistics available.....not someones hearsay.the finding of your game is better ALWAYS on a bad hit if you can find your arrow, so you know what took place, how long to wait, what kind of penetration, where the animal went if the arrow stays with him for a wile you can still spot the lighted nock some times 100's of yards of and it can put you back on the trail. (I don't need some one to write it down a a piece of paper to tell me that, i probably look for more bow shot animals in a year or two than most bow hunter do in a life time).
they only add 15 grains total to your arrow, not much but the reward well out weighs that little bit i would be surprised if there was any one, that could tell a difference at 30 yards, i have shot and tested them a lot out to 100 yards.
talk about hearsay read your first line?
Post by: UptheCreek on December 29, 2011, 12:43:30 PM
put the users at a disvantage making it actually harder to shoot an animal therefore requiring more skill. So, by using logic that many on this site use, if you use lumenoks, you are actually
putting more of a challenge on yourself making you much more like a traditional bowhunter.
Post by: buckfvr on December 29, 2011, 12:53:54 PM
I can not say for sure what they weigh, but I have heard from your 15 grains to 25 grains, and either weight added to the back end of a shaft that is in the low end of FOC reccommendations or spine, would be a concern to a discerning archer, especially once you tip that shaft with a broadhead. If you are experiencing no problems out to 100 yards, then you are certainly doing everything right.
Not arguing with you Brian, just sharing my thoughts in hopes of it helping others. :twocents:
Post by: Seabass on December 29, 2011, 02:23:49 PM
I always lean toward less governance where no person is directly impacted in a negative way. I can't see where this issue is going to hurt someone. If you don't want to use them; don't but your personal preference shouldn't drive law.
Post by: Gobble Gobble on December 29, 2011, 02:48:53 PM
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCOn2HkJJt8&feature=related)feature=related [/url]
Post by: Snapshot on December 29, 2011, 02:59:11 PM
Only archery and primarily non residents, with exception of special permit hunters, i will do gun,muzzle,or bow and resident or non residentmine comes from a guides point of view and i can't stand to see hurt animals that can't befound and the arrow recovery for me is huge, if i cant find it. i feel lost, it tell me a big story, i owe it to my hunters and he deer.
Do you guide only archery hunters or others as well?
So what advantageous recovery tool can you offer for your clients who shoot bullets? Or have none ever, ever failed to recover a wounded animal? Archery hunters have been painted with a very broad brushstroke in the argument for electric nocks. [It's been like an anti-hunters' candy store where they can pick up "Wounding Problem!" quotes from actual hunters. Sad.]
Why am I not hearing it suggested that a recovery tool be available that will find animals wounded by bullets and balls?!
I suspect the reason to be that it isn't really about finding a wounded animal but rather about being told that the device cannot be used in Washington.
If it were really about finding wounded game we'd be asking to have the only proven recovery tool known to man (rather than a "looks cool on video" gadget) specifically written into our state regulations, with clear guidelines as to how, when and by whom man's best friend may be used to recover a wounded and lost animal.
Post by: jstone on December 29, 2011, 03:12:18 PM
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 03:15:16 PM
No one is questioning your experience or how many animals you look for in a given season. I merely pointed out what I have read on several posts on a few different archery sites. I added this info more as a heads up to those who choose to use them. As far as seeing some actual statistics, I suppose if you are already using them, you would know more about it than some of the rest of us.hello, i would just like to see then legal i have done a little home work for my self, and would really like to see then OK to use because it would make life a lot easier and i would like to see this valuable tool available to be used, in our state, it is still personal choice.
I can not say for sure what they weigh, but I have heard from your 15 grains to 25 grains, and either weight added to the back end of a shaft that is in the low end of FOC reccommendations or spine, would be a concern to a discerning archer, especially once you tip that shaft with a broadhead. If you are experiencing no problems out to 100 yards, then you are certainly doing everything right.
Not arguing with you Brian, just sharing my thoughts in hopes of it helping others. :twocents:
sorry i feel so strongly about it but i get to talk to a large amount of avid bow hunters from allover the united states every year and not one person who uses them have had a bad thing to say, so this is where i started my option from. but my main goal is animal recovery.so any personal observations i'm truly interested in. but please keep them real.
There actual replacement weight is 15 gr. that is after you take your nock. out and add the lighted one you are adding 15gr. to your arrows.
Thank You Brian
no you can get away with shooting them out to 70 but that is it, for what i experienced here. thanks
Post by: boneaddict on December 29, 2011, 03:20:35 PM
Quote
hello, i would just like to see then legal i have done a little home work for my self, and would really like to see then OK to use because it would make life a lot easier and i would like to see this valuable tool available to be used, in our state, it is still personal choice.
Especially when your out of state hunters want to use them here. What would those Texans do? LOL
Post by: boneaddict on December 29, 2011, 03:22:48 PM
Post by: Machias on December 29, 2011, 03:46:13 PM
:beatdeadhorse: :chuckle:
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 03:49:52 PM
Should there be any limits at all for what archery equipment can do. At what point does technology become too much. Any self imposed lines?ya a stick bow and a wooden arrow we would all be equal and the 1/2 that stuck would fall in love with , but is that fair to our kids that we be the judge for there hunting experience and there kids and there kids just because we felt uncomfortable about a compound bow, or a fall away, or carbon arrows, that revolutionized the archery world.
Post by: boneaddict on December 29, 2011, 03:50:23 PM
Quote
I wonder how we ever found all those bowkilled deer without the little light on the end of the arrow.
I wonder this every time I see one of these threads......... I still say GPS inserts. Hell, they are probably lighter than a lumenock
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 04:03:13 PM
Nope, it should be a free for all, if the archer wants it, no matter what he should be allowed to use it/do it, in the name finding shot game of course. (Extreme Sarcasim) I wonder how we ever found all those bowkilled animals without the little light on the end of the arrow. I guess these will replace tracking skills, finding tracks on the ground and seeing where the animal went, looking at blood and hair, following sign. It'll be awesome we won't have to work on any of these skills, we'll just be able to see the light and find the animals. Awesome! I really should stay away from this subject. Wait, I saw the horse quiver, I better hit it one more time!!! :) I hope this hurries up and becomes legal so we can all go back to fighting about things that are important like shot distance. :chuckle:I agree with utilizing every tracking skill out there, and you will need them all at one time or another, i have followed a drip of blood for miles along with tracks kicked up dirt. we don't know the word quite. and we found all 4 of our gut shot deer this season, but if there is something so simple that might help even a little tiny bit i'm all for it. why not?
:beatdeadhorse: :chuckle:
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 04:07:25 PM
ahhh we just need to get these, then with lighted GPS locating nocks we will never need to learn to track, follow bloodtrails or ... heaven sake ... take a good ethical shot?I think most spoiled shots were interned as a good ethical shots when the arrow left the bow, it is what takes place between that time and the impact that causes us the problems
http://www.clean-shot.com/laser.htm
Is the horse dead yet?
Post by: billythekidrock on December 29, 2011, 06:22:55 PM
QuoteI wonder how we ever found all those bowkilled deer without the little light on the end of the arrow.
I wonder this every time I see one of these threads......... I still say GPS inserts. Hell, they are probably lighter than a lumenock
And then they would actually aide in recovery!
Post by: Snapshot on December 29, 2011, 07:52:02 PM
QuoteI wonder how we ever found all those bowkilled deer without the little light on the end of the arrow.
I wonder this every time I see one of these threads......... I still say GPS inserts. Hell, they are probably lighter than a lumenock
And then they would actually aide in recovery!
Only if it stays in the animal...I've only had one animal that still had the fletch end of the arrow still in him at the end of the trail; and one that still had the broadhead still in it (embedded in bone). On the others the arrow had broken and both ends had fallen out...
The ONLY PROVEN recovery aid that can be implemented is a trailing dog.
Machias, you crack me up. Cheers to you (imagine me taking a sip of my drink). I hear the echo in my head of you writing that a trailing dog is legal...but our regulations aren't written in such a way as to make most people comfortable in taking a dog to the blood trail. That should be changed.
Post by: Snapshot on December 29, 2011, 08:11:06 PM
Should there be any limits at all for what archery equipment can do. At what point does technology become too much. Any self imposed lines?ya a stick bow and a wooden arrow we would all be equal and the 1/2 that stuck would fall in love with , but is that fair to our kids that we be the judge for there hunting experience and there kids and there kids just because we felt uncomfortable about a compound bow, or a fall away, or carbon arrows, that revolutionized the archery world.
Judges are for after the crime. What I feel I owe to my kids is to be a beacon; a guiding light. And I feel that leaving my future grandkids an archery hunting experience that is less than what I've had the privilege to enjoy over the past forty years would be robbing them of the greatest of hunting challenges that modern man has known. If archery seasons get severly whacked (or eliminated) because the justification for them gets rubbed out thanks to advances in equipment, then my grandkids will be justified in viewing this generation as a failure.
Post by: boneaddict on December 29, 2011, 08:22:32 PM
Post by: huntnphool on December 29, 2011, 08:28:01 PM
Post by: Snapshot on December 29, 2011, 08:39:57 PM
WDFW has never restricted hunting seasons in lieu of equipment modernization, nor have they ever suggested it as a possibilty, I don't see why this keeps being brought up.
Dadgumit, H-n-phoo, I've written it before, on topic, and will again, that Commissioner Perry asked me point blank at a commission meeting in Olympia not three years ago (and I am paraphrasing here), "Aren't you guys concerned that you are going to get too efficient? When are you going to draw the line on technology in archery?" They are RECOGNIZING that it is evolving. And if it continues to evolve, the (short-range sport) justification for a separate season will be erased.
Post by: Snapshot on December 29, 2011, 08:50:14 PM
... i get to talk to a large amount of avid bow hunters from allover the united states every year and not one person who uses them have had a bad thing to say.... but my main goal is animal recovery.
Has any hunter from another state ever asked you if you could use a trailing dog to find a wounded animal? Since "a wound is the same as a kill" and they pay for it accordingly I would think the subject might have come up. Has it?
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 29, 2011, 09:05:43 PM
John Jeanneney is more than willing to help any one out that wants to undertake this adventure but our state wont even allow hounds in the woods any more?????
Post by: huntnphool on December 29, 2011, 09:22:18 PM
Dadgumit, H-n-phoo, I've written it before
LOL, at least I know you are paying attention now. :chuckle:
Whats said between two guys having a chat is far from WDFW giving us as hunters a ultimatum. They have NEVER cut seasons or publically suggested that they would, in lieu of improved gear. If they were concerned about lumenoks being the final straw then don't you think they would have worded the poll a little different. "Should lumenoks be allowed in Lieu of a shorter season" type of question? :dunno:
Lets face it, the majority the trad guys are not using "trad" gear but rather improved trad gear, ie; broadheads, modern laminates, modern strings etc. I'd be willing to bet that the majority use range finders at some point too.
What I'm getting at is all the user groups have seen improvements of our gear over the years, I hardly think a "pro active" lumenok is going to be the "determining factor". ;)
Post by: boneaddict on December 30, 2011, 07:28:49 AM
For the most part, I am argueing against the thing because so many are saying its a must have.
Post by: UptheCreek on December 30, 2011, 08:43:07 AM
Post by: Gobble Gobble on December 30, 2011, 09:45:19 AM
My :twocents: let people use Lumenok, it doesn't help to kill the anything... now a light on the sight I would say NO.
Post by: Snapshot on December 30, 2011, 09:49:58 AM
Dadgumit, H-n-phoo, I've written it before
LOL, at least I know you are paying attention now. :chuckle:
Whats said between two guys having a chat is far from WDFW giving us as hunters a ultimatum. They have NEVER cut seasons or publically suggested that they would, in lieu of improved gear. If they were concerned about lumenoks being the final straw then don't you think they would have worded the poll a little different. "Should lumenoks be allowed in Lieu of a shorter season" type of question? :dunno:
Lets face it, the majority the trad guys are not using "trad" gear but rather improved trad gear, ie; broadheads, modern laminates, modern strings etc. I'd be willing to bet that the majority use range finders at some point too.
What I'm getting at is all the user groups have seen improvements of our gear over the years, I hardly think a "pro active" lumenok is going to be the "determining factor". ;)
I wasn't "having a chat" with Commissioner Perry. He asked those questions in follow-up to testimony I had just given before the Commission. As for the wording of the survey question, the Commission had nothing to do with that; the survey was the work of the Department. They are two different entities.
I don't know a single traditional archery hunter who carries a rangefinder around. THAT would be a dirty little secret, eh? ;)
As soon as one electric device is allowed then the door is open to the others that are already being manufactured, as well as those that have yet to even be invented. All of them aim to accomplish one thing: to make it easier. Bowhunting seasons were made longer than rifle seasons because bowhunting was not easy. As it gets easier bowhunters are becoming more effective at killing and so the seasons will have to be shorter to keep us within our harvest quotas. It is that simple.
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 09:55:59 AM
yes it has, i just finished a book about it called.... tracking dogs for finding WOUNDED GAME by: John Jeanneney a very good book and educational but you think lighted nocks is a issue, we just drought it up at the game com. meeting in chewelah last week and there will have to be a lot of education and willingness to ever even get it looked at.
John Jeanneney is more than willing to help any one out that wants to undertake this adventure but our state wont even allow hounds in the woods any more?????
Tracking Dogs are already legal in WA.
Post by: JLS on December 30, 2011, 10:02:53 AM
Don't see that many argueing it is a must have but rather having the option to use it. There is a difference. It is nice to have options.
And it's also nice to have well defined parameters. I think electronics on archery equipment goes beyond what archery parameters should be.
Post by: Snapshot on December 30, 2011, 11:36:24 AM
yes it has, i just finished a book about it called.... tracking dogs for finding WOUNDED GAME by: John Jeanneney a very good book and educational but you think lighted nocks is a issue, we just drought it up at the game com. meeting in chewelah last week and there will have to be a lot of education and willingness to ever even get it looked at.
John Jeanneney is more than willing to help any one out that wants to undertake this adventure but our state wont even allow hounds in the woods any more?????
If hunters REALLY want to do something about finding lost animals (rather than thirty dollar arrows) then this is the avenue for a change that will help everyone.
Machias has pointed out time and time again that walking a leashed dog in the woods isn't illegal so long as the guy doesn't have a hunting weapon on him, and if it happens to lead a guy to his dead deer...well, then that is great. But I have posed that hypothetical to the Big Game Manager at WDFW and he tells me he wouldn't suggest I try to get away with it. Our regulations say clearly that we can't have a dog with us "while hunting". I think that is enough of a deterrent that most people wouldn't even think to try a trailing dog.
There are national organizations dedicated to trailing dog use for finding wounded game. Specifically allowing them by regulation would be a true conservation measure. And the blueprint for accomplishing it already exists because more and more states have been asked by its' citizens to write it into their regulations that a properly controlled dog can be used to find a lost animal. In some states there are outdoorsmen with trained trailing dogs who publicly offer their service in helping recover lost game. Some do it simply because they love working with their dogs; others may charge a fee, I don't know.
The commission has been told that (bow)hunters need a recovery tool. Trailing dogs is something that could be won because there are numerous studies that have proven they are effective in finding lost game. Proof that electric nocks help find lost game is something that could not be provided when the commission asked for evidence to support the claim that they would.
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 01:57:14 PM
Post by: Snapshot on December 30, 2011, 02:28:22 PM
If you were to call Enforcement Chief Bjork and ask him what his interpretation is regarding using a dog to locate a lost animal I believe you'd find his understanding of it to be different than yours. I know that Game Department Manager Ware feels that the practice is prohibited because I asked him directly. I believe he hangs his hat on the rule that contains the words "Allowing a dog...controlled by you...to accompany you while you are hunting...is prohibited." I would love to be proved wrong, too.
I think they'd hang my butt if I, while unarmed, were to be caught using my leashed pooch to trail a deer and claim that I "wasn't hunting" at the time because I didn't have a weapon on me. I certainly don't want to test those waters.
It would be so danged easy to write into the regulations, "The used of a single trailing dog is permitted for the purpose of finding a wounded animal so long as the dog is on a leash in-hand and the controller does not possess a hunting weapon."
Post by: huntnphool on December 30, 2011, 02:31:20 PM
Quote
As soon as one electric device is allowed then the door is open to the others that are already being manufactured, as well as those that have yet to even
Purely speculation on your part, without a fraction of fact.
Post by: wrongway on December 30, 2011, 02:46:33 PM
Quote
[Purely speculation on your part, without a fraction of factote] yes you are right speculation but more power for when one item is allowed people will use this to try to get some othe device allowes as well. You know that people will do this.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 30, 2011, 04:02:54 PM
Are you sure of this, i guess i don't know,we asked about it at the last meeting here last week and they didn't even address it Thanks for the info. going to do some looking now Brianyes it has, i just finished a book about it called.... tracking dogs for finding WOUNDED GAME by: John Jeanneney a very good book and educational but you think lighted nocks is a issue, we just drought it up at the game com. meeting in chewelah last week and there will have to be a lot of education and willingness to ever even get it looked at.
John Jeanneney is more than willing to help any one out that wants to undertake this adventure but our state wont even allow hounds in the woods any more?????
Tracking Dogs are already legal in WA.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 30, 2011, 04:24:16 PM
As of 2010 tracking dogs were not legal in Washington state according to this web site. http://www.skinnymoose.com/moosedroppings/2010/04/28/time-to-make-blood-tracking-with-dogs-legal-during-all-big-game-seasons/ but it is in the majority of the US states there is only 16 states in the US that it is not allowed on any level and guess what Washington is one of them, would really of been nice if it was.Are you sure of this, i guess i don't know,we asked about it at the last meeting here last week and they didn't even address it Thanks for the info. going to do some looking now Brianyes it has, i just finished a book about it called.... tracking dogs for finding WOUNDED GAME by: John Jeanneney a very good book and educational but you think lighted nocks is a issue, we just drought it up at the game com. meeting in chewelah last week and there will have to be a lot of education and willingness to ever even get it looked at.
John Jeanneney is more than willing to help any one out that wants to undertake this adventure but our state wont even allow hounds in the woods any more?????
Tracking Dogs are already legal in WA.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 30, 2011, 04:28:09 PM
Respectfully wrong, :) I'm not suggesting that you "happen" to find a deer. I am saying it is NOT illegal to use tracking dogs. Heck I even suggest your dog wear a tracking vest. Tracking dogs are PERFECT for outfitters to follow up and find wounded game for clients. There is NOTHING shady or sneeky about using a tracking dog to find downed game. If something is not outlawed then it is legal, always has been that way in WA. If you do NOT unsnap the leash and you are not armed you CANNOT be charged with using dogs illegally. You don't have to do it half heartedly, you don't have to do it like "oh I'm not using this dog to find a downed deer, OH look what I stumbled on". It's perfectly legal. Someone, ANYONE prove me wrong!As of 2010 tracking dogs were not legal in Washington state according to this web site. http://www.skinnymoose.com/moosedroppings/2010/04/28/time-to-make-blood-tracking-with-dogs-legal-during-all-big-game-seasons/ but it is in the majority of the US states there is only 16 states in the US that it is not allowed on any level and guess what Washington is one of them, would really of been nice if it was.
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 04:30:10 PM
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 04:31:25 PM
Respectfully wrong, :) I'm not suggesting that you "happen" to find a deer. I am saying it is NOT illegal to use tracking dogs. Heck I even suggest your dog wear a tracking vest. Tracking dogs are PERFECT for outfitters to follow up and find wounded game for clients. There is NOTHING shady or sneeky about using a tracking dog to find downed game. If something is not outlawed then it is legal, always has been that way in WA. If you do NOT unsnap the leash and you are not armed you CANNOT be charged with using dogs illegally. You don't have to do it half heartedly, you don't have to do it like "oh I'm not using this dog to find a downed deer, OH look what I stumbled on". It's perfectly legal. Someone, ANYONE prove me wrong!As of 2010 tracking dogs were not legal in Washington state according to this web site. http://www.skinnymoose.com/moosedroppings/2010/04/28/time-to-make-blood-tracking-with-dogs-legal-during-all-big-game-seasons/ but it is in the majority of the US states there is only 16 states in the US that it is not allowed on any level and guess what Washington is one of them, would really of been nice if it was.
The website is basing this off information from Enforcement...they are wrong as well.
Post by: huntnphool on December 30, 2011, 04:33:38 PM
IF you are UNARMED AND THE DOG IS NOT UNLEASHED you cannot be charged. I have picked apart each element of the RCW/WAC whatever, in their own regs it states walking a dog on a leash is NOT pursuit
+1
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 30, 2011, 04:44:47 PM
That may or may not be the case but law enforcement is the one that is going to give you or me the ticket, and your going to have to explained something that only law enforcement has the answer to? but i will get on the phone Tuesday and find out from Olympia. i would think that if there was a way it would be going on now. I'm sure its not a secret just like baiting 10 years ago i had people swear up and down you could not use bait or salt, but any F&G officer would tell you yes you can and will still tell you this being there the ones that are going to give the ticket out, they should know also.Respectfully wrong, :) I'm not suggesting that you "happen" to find a deer. I am saying it is NOT illegal to use tracking dogs. Heck I even suggest your dog wear a tracking vest. Tracking dogs are PERFECT for outfitters to follow up and find wounded game for clients. There is NOTHING shady or sneeky about using a tracking dog to find downed game. If something is not outlawed then it is legal, always has been that way in WA. If you do NOT unsnap the leash and you are not armed you CANNOT be charged with using dogs illegally. You don't have to do it half heartedly, you don't have to do it like "oh I'm not using this dog to find a downed deer, OH look what I stumbled on". It's perfectly legal. Someone, ANYONE prove me wrong!As of 2010 tracking dogs were not legal in Washington state according to this web site. http://www.skinnymoose.com/moosedroppings/2010/04/28/time-to-make-blood-tracking-with-dogs-legal-during-all-big-game-seasons/ but it is in the majority of the US states there is only 16 states in the US that it is not allowed on any level and guess what Washington is one of them, would really of been nice if it was.
The website is basing this off information from Enforcement...they are wrong as well.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 30, 2011, 05:12:50 PM
Post by: huntnphool on December 30, 2011, 06:44:31 PM
Post by: Snapshot on December 30, 2011, 07:22:47 PM
Machias, are you suggesting that this in NOT a gray area? That instead it is cut and dried in the regulations and I am just unable to understand it? Help me out here, please.
Post by: huntnphool on December 30, 2011, 08:33:14 PM
Quote
The gray area is whether a judge would buy the arguement from me (or Fred) that I was not hunting AT THE TIME that I was found with a leashed dog following a blood trail
In this country we are still innocent until proven guilty. The preponderance of evidence lies squarly on the shoulders of the prosecution. In this case, unless you are brought up in front of some liberal like Sotomayor, I hardly think Fred walking his dog on a leash in the woods would be evidence enough for a conviction.
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 09:15:16 PM
Machias I'm not against you, i really hope you are rite on the $ here but i have to be very careful and i can't/wont cross that line in any way what ever the F&G tells me is what i will have to go with but i will keep digging. and i will ask them if i leave any hunting equipment at home and take the dog out and keep it on a leash if it is legal. a simple yes or no
I TOTALLY understand!! I have a feeling you will still get the wrong answer though. But I know as an outfitter you cannot take those types of chances. Gotcha!!
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 09:23:11 PM
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 09:32:00 PM
Page 58: clearly states a dog on a leash is not pursuit. You CANNOT have pursuit without them being off leash and therefore you CANNOT be charged with "pursuing" if there is no "pursuit". Cannot have one without the other.
Page 72: 9. Using dogs: • Hunting wild animals with dogs during any deer or elk modern firearm season is prohibited. • Allowing a dog, owned or controlled by you, to pursue or injure deer or elk or to accompany you while you are hunting deer or elk is prohibited. • Hunting or pursuing any big game animal, bobcat, or coyote with dogs is prohibited, except cougar hunting as permitted by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. No gun, no bow, no weapon=no hunting!
The whole key is hunting and pursuit, neither of which can occur while the dog is on the leash. No weapon and dog on a leash they cannot cite you according to their own regulations. Everyone gets hung up on the what are you doing while leading the dog when they should realize that until you unsnap the lead you are not pursuing, by their own definition on Page 58: "Transporting a dog(s) in a motorized vehicle or walking a dog on a leash is not pursuit."
Post by: Machias on December 30, 2011, 09:46:27 PM
(55) "To hunt" and its derivatives means an effort to kill, injure, capture, or harass a wild animal or wild bird.
There have been enough instances in the past few years where Law Enforcement swore up and down something was illegal, i.e. being allowed to carry concealed in the woods WITHOUT a permit. The WDFW Enforcement Section even had this wrong. We had a guy here who was a LEO Instructor, teaching class after class of LEOs the WRONG law, even after it was repeatedly pointed out he still would not believe it. We had the lady in charge of explaining the RCWs and WACs to the Enforcement section be completely wrong about hunting coyotes at night. They have been wrong on items enough that just because the Enforcement Sections says it one way or the other means very little anymore. I had the Capt of Region One tell me something a few years ago, so outrageous I had to call Olympia. They said no he didn't say that, he can't say that. But he did, no you misunderstood him. So I got him to put it in writing in an e-mail. They were suprised. They have a tough job, but sometimes things that everyone believes is one way or the other and has become common knowledge, is not backed up by real law.
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 31, 2011, 07:54:55 AM
I kind of wish it was illegal, then maybe the granola eatin hippies in the Methow wouldn't be able to walk their dogs, off or on a leash, right through the areas I'm hunting. Are you telling me that these tree huggers are actually in non compliance of the law?I hear what you are saying load and clear, and if it was me on a individual basis i would be willing to talk the point over if caught doing it, but if i have a hunter with me and we get ticketed, this is something that i don't want to portray so they are holding all the cards in the hand, in-tell i can get some clarification from the F&G law enforcement, there the ones in control and holding the the hand now a far as i can see.
Just like on the expandable they are legal here in Washington i called Olympia, they had no problem telling we can carry them in our bow any time we like, and we can shoot what ever we want with them, except for big game.
All i want is there take on it because there the ones doing the enforcement and i don't think that they have a problem telling a person what you can or can,t do or if you are on the rite side of there line, just like with the mechanical broad heads
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 31, 2011, 08:20:35 AM
Let's break it down:Thanks for the Info, I am on board with you guys i would love for this to be legal BUT it i read what you just posted rite it says, Hunting or pursuing any big game animal, bobcat, or coyote with dogs is prohibited, except cougar hunting as permitted by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. (pursuing) ANY BIG GAME ANIMAL if you and a dog is following a wounded big game animal leash or no leash you are pursuing it in there eyes just because the contradict them self's in a earlier statement isn't going to matter at the time of truth, if you feel you are in the rite very easy way to get to the bottom call the local Medea as soon as you shoot a deer grab your dog and a leash, call fish and game tell them what your doing that would give you the best chance in court.
Page 58: clearly states a dog on a leash is not pursuit. You CANNOT have pursuit without them being off leash and therefore you CANNOT be charged with "pursuing" if there is no "pursuit". Cannot have one without the other.
Page 72: 9. Using dogs: • Hunting wild animals with dogs during any deer or elk modern firearm season is prohibited. • Allowing a dog, owned or controlled by you, to pursue or injure deer or elk or to accompany you while you are hunting deer or elk is prohibited. • Hunting or pursuing any big game animal, bobcat, or coyote with dogs is prohibited, except cougar hunting as permitted by the Fish and Wildlife Commission. No gun, no bow, no weapon=no hunting!
The whole key is hunting and pursuit, neither of which can occur while the dog is on the leash. No weapon and dog on a leash they cannot cite you according to their own regulations. Everyone gets hung up on the what are you doing while leading the dog when they should realize that until you unsnap the lead you are not pursuing, by their own definition on Page 58: "Transporting a dog(s) in a motorized vehicle or walking a dog on a leash is not pursuit."
Post by: Archeryoutfitters on December 31, 2011, 08:25:59 AM
and no matter how a person want to look at this you are doing just that fallowing/pursuing there's no wiggle room?
Post by: Machias on December 31, 2011, 10:22:18 AM
Post by: Snapshot on December 31, 2011, 11:15:37 AM
Post by: Machias on December 31, 2011, 11:53:54 AM