|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Jan 31, 2006 18:50:47 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by solohunter on Jan 31, 2006 22:05:51 GMT -5
From the view from my tree stands,no. I had to work hard at my 4 bow kills this year. Get in with little disturbance, watch the scent/wind,be quiet,be in the right spot,have the deer cooperate,move into position w/o being detected,draww/o being detected and THEN make the shot. ALOT has to go your way to kill an animal with a bow.
Solohunter
|
|
|
|
Post by indianadan on Feb 1, 2006 8:45:22 GMT -5
I didn't read the article, but IMO bowhunting is only as high tech as you, the hunter, make it.  |
|
|
|
Post by DEERTRACKS on Feb 1, 2006 10:23:14 GMT -5
To each his own, when it comes to archery technology.
|
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Feb 1, 2006 11:22:41 GMT -5
To me, when you get to the point that you don't need the deer relatively close (40 yards or less, although I never shoot past 30) then it becomes too high tech. This is only my opinion and should not be construed as the opinion of Hunting Indiana.com or its affiliates.
|
|
|
|
Post by duff on Feb 1, 2006 12:19:52 GMT -5
I agree with Dan, it is only as high tech and dificult as the hunter wants it to be. Regardless of the weapon too.
|
|
|
|
Post by varmint101 on Feb 1, 2006 13:50:32 GMT -5
It was getting too high tech for me with the compounds. So many different things to choose from, not that that's a bad thing, which is why instead of getting the new cream of the crop compound I opted to get a recurve instead. A longbow will follow before too long.
|
|
|
|
Post by Decatur on Feb 1, 2006 14:16:23 GMT -5
I'm tore on this one. While I love high tech gadgets, I also love doing things in a more challenging, simpler way. I do, however believe some bowhunters do go WAY overboard on the high tech stuff.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Feb 2, 2006 8:13:07 GMT -5
As I see it the first priority of hunting with regard to equipment is the ability to kill the animal as cleanly and quickly as possible. Everything else is secondary.
|
|
|
|
Post by camoham on Feb 2, 2006 8:24:05 GMT -5
id have to agree with mbogo.............. in retrospect, im sure the same thing was said by "old timers" when alluminum arrows came out...............  or those "new" fangled "fiberglass" arrows ! in general, bowhunting is still pretty much a "up close" and personal affair. regardless of gadgets and widgets.........its still very much possible to come out of the field empty handed ! camoham |
|
|
|
Post by solohunter on Feb 2, 2006 12:13:21 GMT -5
Hoyt...I somewhat disagree with you on the yardage...I watched a guy shoot a caribou at 70 yards, his bow was no more high tech than my old Martin. Some of the spot and stalk for various game may have distances further than stand hunting etc. He nailed that caribou and he had stalked it for a few hours.
Solohunter
|
|
|
|
Post by hoyt1166 on Feb 2, 2006 12:55:15 GMT -5
I have no problem with that Solo......as I said, it was just my opinion. Do I think there are circumstances that dictate a further shot? Absolutely. Each game animal is different in its own right. I was speaking more along the lines of whitetails in this circumstance. I do agree with Mbogo though. If the distance is great enough that the wind, noise, etc can greatly influence the lethality of the shot, it has to be taken into account. I was in no way meaning that my comfort zone should be the comfort zone of any other. If I implied that, I apologize.
|
|
|
|
Post by mbogo on Feb 2, 2006 13:10:26 GMT -5
I find it somewhat interesting that some of the archery legends (Fred Bear and Howard Hill among others) took shots with low-tech recurves that no one would attempt to take today with even the most hi-tech equipment.
|
|
|
|
Post by jajwrigh on Feb 4, 2006 23:18:47 GMT -5
I have pondered the same thing and concluded that they became legends by regularly taking and making many of those shots. The amount of skill that those guys had is far superior to today' s average bowhunter.
|
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Feb 5, 2006 8:42:20 GMT -5
I have pondered the same thing and concluded that they became legends by regularly taking and making many of those shots. The amount of skill that those guys had is far superior to today' s average bowhunter. I've seen Fred Bear shoot and have seen dozens of his films (pre-video). Although Fred frequently hit what he was aiming at he also missed frequently too. His anchor was anywhere form 3 inches in front of his face to behind his ear. There is no telling how many misses and "dings" these "legends" had over their hunting careers. Just like us they did not hit and kill everything they shot at. |
|
|
|
Post by solohunter on Feb 5, 2006 9:57:13 GMT -5
Amen WW, that film where he shot the grizz on the beach is AWESOME. One rock that he hid behind......
Solohunter
|
|
or those "new" fangled "fiberglass" arrows !