|
Post by jbwhttail on Aug 9, 2005 22:20:29 GMT -5
Kevin: Your whole post was anti -conventional archery, not ONE word was pro vertical bow. I've had it with your lies, here is your post. Now it is up to you do validate. I'll give you one to start with. You state there is not a 3d course within 40 miles of Indianapolis. In all cities the piost office is ground zero. In Indy that is 112 mile marker. Atterbury is at the 80, is that forty miles? But again here is your LIES................. Woody how can you allow this and then delete threads on actual facts concerning crossbows? "I agree 150%!!!! Why in the world would you not want a fella out their with the piece of archery gear they are the best at??? What is wrong with pin point accuracy? What about the folks that never seem to master the compound bow? ? I can ASSURE you that the majority of folks who hunt with archery DON"T shoot year round. We were just advised that 59% of all deer hunters in Indiana shoot/hunt archery....where are they at in the off season? What are they useing for arrows??? With THAT many folks shooting ALL the time....why can't a "archery shop" make it in Indianapolis....the MOST populated area in the entire state!!!!!! Ask the big box retailers when their archery sales pick up? ALL of these archery hunters SHOOTING year round, but they are not wearing out and losing arrows, strings and all the other archery stuff that you go through when you "really shoot archery year round. Remember, not enough demand for year round archery services in the largest city in the state....no range, indoor or outdoor, no "pro shop", no 3-D course within 40 miles of the city limits....NOTHING! Yet 59% of the folks who deer hunt shoot/hunt archery gear and THEY ALL practice year round...lol lol lol " I want someone to show data that disputes wounding rates.......... Kevin Ailes is anti archery............ if it doesn't have a trigger he is agaisnt it.
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Aug 10, 2005 4:09:54 GMT -5
Your splitting hairs over a few miles....lol lol lol
How far is Attebury from the northside of Indianapolis?
Whatever Joe........
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 10, 2005 7:11:04 GMT -5
You guys are going of in a tangent for Steiny's post about accuracy. Throwing rocks at the others equipment about wounding rates is counter productive to hunting. Great accuracy does not necessarily remove all wounded animals from the equation. IMO - A VERY large majority of wounded animals that are not revovered are from ill advised or hurry up shots. Not poor accuracy. The most comprehensive study ever done on bow wounding rates was done at Camp Ripley. That came away with a 13% wounding rate. Good, but not good enough. We should all strive to make a that double 0 percent with ALL hunting tools. That one nipped the ARF ones that Joe posted that he has heard about that the ARFs use. The ARFs use the 50% number that was generated from non-scientific studies done a LONG time ago to prove their point that archery hunting is inhumane. Look for those to be trotted back out when they come after archery hunting in the very near future. Here is the Camp Ripley report... www.nbef.org/ripley.htmlCamby, There are no "practice police" for any weapon, including the crossbow.... to say that one particular group practices any more than another is grasping at straws to prove your point..which is??? You 'might' win the battle with your opponent, but in the long run it is providing ammo for the ARFs to fire back at us..in the BIG war...
|
|
|
Post by cambygsp on Aug 10, 2005 8:52:26 GMT -5
Woody,
Go back and look..........
The point being made is just what you said:
""There are no "practice police" for any weapon, including the crossbow.... to say that one particular group practices any more than another is grasping at straws""
Steiny made refrence to "how fast" his buddy got good with a crossbow...and...that his contention has always been that the crossbow is an easier weapon to learn, use and shoot accurately compared to a compound, recurve or stick bow.
...Joe then said "the real truth hurts"
The only way that would "hurt" is if it had a negetive effect on "wounding rates".....wouldnt anything else be a "positive"?
Regardless of "what study" you subscribe to .... 7%...13%...or the dreaded 50%.....How can any hunter not want to "IMPROVE" upon them?.....
So the point I am making is I don't see how the "real truth hurts".......
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 10, 2005 8:58:39 GMT -5
"...Joe then said "the real truth hurts" "
You read it different than I did then.
I saw that remark as to one that means the crossbow is easier to master. It is, but not that much different.
Besides, what does the degree of difficulty of mastering a certain tool have to do with the actual hunt?
|
|
|
Post by pwalls on Aug 10, 2005 14:46:42 GMT -5
Well.
I am a bow hunter in Georgia. Used a PSE bow for many a year and enjoyed it. Still take it down on occasion.
However, I was always fascinated by the crossbow (especially its history). I always wanted one, but since my state wouldn't legalize it unless you were handicapped, I didn't get one.
I now have an Excalibur ExoMax because my state realized that it is just a viable archery hunting weapon as a compound bow is. I am thankful that I now have the opportunity to hunt with either.
The sky didn't fall. My hunting buddies (all use Matthews bows I believe) didn't ostracize me. I haven't killed any more deer than I used to. Still take the same shots.
It wasn't the end of the world.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 10, 2005 15:01:01 GMT -5
Well. I am a bow hunter in Georgia. Used a PSE bow for many a year and enjoyed it. Still take it down on occasion. However, I was always fascinated by the crossbow (especially its history). I always wanted one, but since my state wouldn't legalize it unless you were handicapped, I didn't get one. I now have an Excalibur ExoMax because my state realized that it is just a viable archery hunting weapon as a compound bow is. I am thankful that I now have the opportunity to hunt with either. The sky didn't fall. My hunting buddies (all use Matthews bows I believe) didn't ostracize me. I haven't killed any more deer than I used to. Still take the same shots. It wasn't the end of the world. Hi PWalls, Great to have a CHOICE isn't it..
|
|
|
Post by pwalls on Aug 10, 2005 15:20:21 GMT -5
Hi PWalls, Great to have a CHOICE isn't it.. Exactly.
|
|
|
Post by multidigits on Aug 10, 2005 16:16:28 GMT -5
For years, pro-hunting advocates(well most of us) have been trying to reverse the slide in the decline in hunters of all ages. We've made good progress in some states with an increase in youth hunters with more oppurtunity for youths and other things that help them be more successful. Most of these advocates, in countless meetings, round tables and other forums have always made reference to the "barriers to hunting" as the key to increasing membership.
One of those barriers is obviously the need for more oppurtunity for all agge groups, not just youth hunters. Obviously, the crossbow will provide more oppurtunity, because that's one of the reason that bowhunters use when the debates get going good. They actually don't want an increase in hunter numbers, or any additional oppurtunity in the early seasons. Where they are in error is that the early season is not bowhunter specific. It belongs to us all, in some form or fashion. Some of us squirrel hunt, some do some dove or early duck or goose hunting, and certainly some will want to do some crossbow hunting when it becomes legal to do so. Those days are coming, because the DNR's need them to come. No man or no group can stop the train when it reaches full speed. At this time, it's just approaching the bend. It'll be here shortly.
|
|
|
Post by steiny on Aug 10, 2005 17:34:28 GMT -5
I can't believe anybody has any decent data regarding "wounding rates". Best they could do is poll voluntary hunters, and I'll bet most hunters that wound, won't fess up about it.
The crossbow being an easier to use more accurate weapon won't improve the wounding rate either. Same dudes that take marginal shots with any weapon, will take marginal shots with a crossbow.
Regardless of the percentage of deer wounded with archery equipment, it's a drop in the bucket compared to how many get wounded during firearms seasons.
|
|
|
Post by Woody Williams on Aug 10, 2005 18:09:57 GMT -5
I can't believe anybody has any decent data regarding "wounding rates". Best they could do is poll voluntary hunters, and I'll bet most hunters that wound, won't fess up about it. WW - Read the Camp Ripley study. They did survys backed up with ground searches after the hunt and then went out by helicopter and searched the areas with infra red heat seeking devices. It was about as thorough as it could get. WW- The ONLY way it is more accurate is if the hunter uses a rest. Not always possible in a hunting situation. I agree on the marginal shots. IMO- That causes more wounding than lack of accuracy. WW- Pure supposition. We have no way of truly knowing that either.
|
|