|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 9:12:50 GMT -5
I am curious .... what will you consider "putting this to bed" and what will be the criteria for determining it is in fact in bed?
Are you going to look through numbers for the truth or jump on the first set that says what you want it to say? Are you going to look at a single year or will you look at a 10 year trend and compare it to the previous 10 years trend?
Putting this one to bed will not be a quick process ....
Assuming of course "put it to bed" meaning you were right in your position that it would recruit more hunters and keep hunters in the game longer.... in numbers that are large enough to matter. Then we have to decide what statistical difference is large enough to count.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 9:18:37 GMT -5
I am curious .... what will you consider "putting this to bed" and what will be the criteria for determining it is in fact in bed? Are you going to look through numbers for the truth or jump on the first set that says what you want it to say? Are you going to look at a single year or will you look at a 10 year trend and compare it to the previous 10 years trend? Putting this one to bed will not be a quick process .... I never put a time frame on it but I can assure you that the DNR is happy with what they see in an ongoing trend. I find it rather humorous that multiple states data is apples to oranges for you, but a casual observance by you is 100% spot on what is happening in Indiana state wide. Every state that has gathered crossbow data after inclusion have come up with the same answer.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 9:21:12 GMT -5
lol ... dont start the "saying crap I never said game" Woody. It makes your position look even weaker.
I never said anything about my observation being 100% spot on statewide or anything even remotely similar. I said that recent personal observations from our state are much more valuable than irrelevant historical data from Ohio.
Try and stay on point if you want to have these conversations.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 9:27:28 GMT -5
And ... you kind of did put a time frame on it by saying the DNR will do a survey "before long". Define "before long".
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 9:30:24 GMT -5
lol ... dont start the "saying crap I never said game" Woody. It makes your position look even weaker. I never said anything about my observation being 100% spot on statewide or anything even remotely similar. I said that recent personal observations from our state are much more valuable than irrelevant historical data from Ohio. Try and stay on point if you want to have these conversations. Give me an accuracy percent on your observation then? I kind of doubt that the DNR would think your personal observation is more valuable than the Ohio data (as well as other states) that I know for a fact that they looked over in depth before announcing their crossbow proposal.. The DNR sure did not write off other state's data as "irrelevant", did they?
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 9:36:35 GMT -5
My observations are 100% accurate as they are my personal observations.
I could not even begin to say how accurate my personal observations compare to statewide trends. It would take many, many. many personal observations from our hunters in order to determine statewide tends. That is why I said that "personal observations from the last couple of years, in our state, are much more valuable than data from a different state and a different time."
When our state is wanting to make a determination of the effects of changes in our state they will use data collected from our hunters to make the determination. Not data from other states that have little in common with our state.
That is kind of how a survey and data collection will work in the future. They will ask our hunters to speak of their own personal experiences and observations to be used as a piece of the puzzle to come up with a conclusion for our state.
|
|
|
Post by chubwub on Nov 19, 2014 9:39:24 GMT -5
Crossbows do have their disadvantages for sure but I like mine a lot. I'm not sure why people keep saying it's exactly like hunting with a gun and takes all the guesswork out of archery because in my experience it isn't quite like that. I still had to put in some practice time with the crossbow before I felt I was ready just like with my compound bow. I've also had people tell me that they planned on being able to instantly kill a deer at 80 yards with a crossbow and that never seems to pan out for them.
As long as their are guys who want a different challenge there will always be compound bows and traditional archery just like we still have guys who prefer muzzleloaders and flintcaps despite having access to all those firearms that require "no skill."
I've noticed that as I hunt more and get more waterfowl and small game kills on my belt I think about trying more challenging things, like attempting to take some with a bow, blowgun or slingshot. I can't possibly imagine that my train of thought is unique to the hunting community for any type of game.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 9:53:32 GMT -5
Woody - define the success of crossbows in Indiana in your opinion.
I remember before passage there was much about young folk, old folk, women folk .... how do you determine success?
I only ask because of the "put this one to bed" comment you made earlier .... it seemed to insinuate the jury was still out even though the rule has passed.
Why does it bother you so much when someone has the observation that some folks he knows have changed from compounds to crossbows?
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 9:53:33 GMT -5
My observations are 100% accurate as they are my personal observations. I could not even begin to say how accurate my personal observations compare to statewide trends. It would take many, many. many personal observations from our hunters in order to determine statewide tends. That is why I said that "personal observations from the last couple of years, in our state, are much more valuable than data from a different state and a different time." When our state is wanting to make a determination of the effects of changes in our state they will use data collected from our hunters to make the determination. Not data from other states that have little in common with our state. That is kind of how a survey and data collection will work in the future. They will ask our hunters to speak of their own personal experiences and observations to be used as a piece of the puzzle to come up with a conclusion for our state. Personal observations will not mean squat in an Indiana hunter survey. They will not ask," How many deer hunters did you see last season using a crossbow"? They will ask if YOU used a crossbow, or any other hunting tool. I do not have it readily at hand but I do recall when the DNR proposed crossbows that other states data on hunter recruitment, hunter retention, and deer management was listed as prime reasons why they were proposing crossbows for Indiana.. That sounds pretty "relevant" to me.. The DNR is still inputting data from the last hunter/landowner survey and it wont be released until mid 2015. They attempt these every two or three years so that means 2017 or 2018 for the next one. I'm quite sure that the trends will be well established by then. Then, just maybe, the naysayers will admit that the sky didn't fall and crossbows were a win-win for Indiana, just as they were in other states..
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 9:59:58 GMT -5
Right, they will ask our hunters what they used. That is data collected from our hunters. Their own personal experiences.
Exactly like I said. Of course you just keyed in on the "observations" part and ignored the rest of what I said but we have seen that tactic from you before.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 10:19:38 GMT -5
Out of state data sure sounds relevant to me...and the IDNR.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 10:21:03 GMT -5
Right, they will ask our hunters what they used. That is data collected from our hunters. Their own personal experiences. Exactly like I said. Of course you just keyed in on the "observations" part and ignored the rest of what I said but we have seen that tactic from you before. Just quoting EXACTLY what you said... say what you mean and mean what you say...
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 10:27:47 GMT -5
You did quote exactly what I said and then keyed in on only the observation part and ignored the experience part .... like you always do. Your positions are weakened when you do things like that. It makes you look foolish.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 10:33:24 GMT -5
Relevant to its passage and relevance to what is currently occurring are completely different.
I guess not everyone understands that.
|
|
|
Post by swilk on Nov 19, 2014 10:34:36 GMT -5
Again....why do my personal observations bother you?
|
|
|
Post by beermanbrian on Nov 19, 2014 11:39:28 GMT -5
There is something to be said about drawing back on a deer with a compound bow. No other feeling like it in my opinion. (outside of family of course). I don't get that type of feeling with a crossbow. This is why I will stay with a vertical until my body says I can't.
|
|
|
Post by drs on Nov 19, 2014 12:00:01 GMT -5
There is something to be said about drawing back on a deer with a compound bow. No other feeling like it in my opinion. (outside of family of course). I don't get that type of feeling with a crossbow. This is why I will stay with a vertical until my body says I can't. All I know is that I certainly miss hunting with my Browning compound bow. Darn nerve injury!!!
|
|
|
Post by ms660 on Nov 19, 2014 12:23:11 GMT -5
There is something to be said about drawing back on a deer with a compound bow. No other feeling like it in my opinion. (outside of family of course). I don't get that type of feeling with a crossbow. This is why I will stay with a vertical until my body says I can't. I know the feeling well your talking about, I get it to, but to me the weapon I'm using is not the cause at all.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 13:17:01 GMT -5
Relevant to its passage and relevance to what is currently occurring are completely different. I guess not everyone understands that. I guess that you don't "understand" the discussion at hand. You said that other state's data was "irrelevant" and I just showed you that other states data is VERY relevant to our DNR professionals. You say it ain't and the professionals says it is. But you've seen a few Knox county boys pick up a crossbow is that is relevant all over the state of Indiana. I could not care less what your personal observations were/are. I made a post poo-pooing the outdoor writer and you came back with - "I know several able bodied, fairly young men, who have switched to crossbows. I doubt compounds become as rare as traditional archery but there is no doubt many, many hunters will be choosing crossbows instead of compounds in the future" as if that was a bonafide agreement to the author as to where we are headed. You anecdotal evidence versus our state's DNR professional's use of other states data. Which should I believe? Hmm.. Wow! Tough decision..
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Nov 19, 2014 13:18:51 GMT -5
You did quote exactly what I said and then keyed in on only the observation part and ignored the experience part .... like you always do. Your positions are weakened when you do things like that. It makes you look foolish. Swilk, You said "personal observations" over and over again and again. Then you slip in "experience" along with "personal observations". You moved the goal posts.
|
|