Archery, modern v/ traditional

Freighter Bait · 08-17-2003, 06:51 AM

Not trying to raise hackles here, but with the incredable amount of technology being put into archery equipment.....it might seem appropriate to split archery weapons and seasons, similar to modern firearms v/ black powder. Say a traditional archery season and GMU's for longbows and recurves. A modern archery season for compound bows.....? I'm surprised I haven't seen any discussion on this, or am I missing something?

kjb · 08-17-2003, 12:33 PM

I have been archery hunting for 20 years and I can see no reason to seperate "modern" from "traditional" I use modern equiptment and I have never had a hunt blotched by a someone shooting traditional gear and I don't think I have blotched any traditionalist hunts. No matter which equiptment is being used the main Rut that happens in september is very important to both and we should be able to share the woods during that time without asking ODFW to stir water and dirt to make a muddy mess. Lets just be happy and HUNT&FISH together. best wishes from KJB

Hoosier Daddy · 08-17-2003, 04:31 PM

There is a split this year in a couple areas.

Gun Rod Bow · 08-17-2003, 09:08 PM

Trying to keep my hackles down...there are areas already set aside for people who like to miss...er, I mean traditional archers.

Trout Creek Mtns are traditional only.

If you choose "traditional", like Yew Wood bows, sineu strings, willow shafts, obsidian heads...good for you.

Let's not become adversaries when we need to stick together to protect hunting rights.

JM not very HO

GRB

Norm · 08-18-2003, 10:26 AM

The number of tradionalist to modern bow hunters is probably 300 to 1. I think it's great to see people using traditional equipment, but splitting the season would be lame. I don't see any advantage to splitting the seasons. Do moderm bows interfear with traditionalists?

outdoor.spec.ops · 08-18-2003, 10:43 AM

I wanted to try traditional bow hunting, but I had a real hard time getting my pointy rocks to stay tied to the shafts I carved out of cedar.

Tilla · 08-19-2003, 11:31 PM

I think the similarities far outweigh the differences.

GutshotApe · 08-20-2003, 06:36 AM

The question is "Does modern high-tech archery gear make hunters more efficient in killing game than when using traditional gear?"

Archery (and blackpowder) regs and seasons were established in recognition that these forms of pursuit were much less efficient than using modern rifles, scopes, etc. Therefore, archers and other primitive weapons users get to hunt every year, during the rut, kill either sex, get to hunt wherever they want statewide, and enjoy longer seasons. More people can hunt a finite area/resource because their primitive weapons are inherently inefficient. If their weapons become more efficient, then something's got to give.

With blackpowder guns, technology improvements (inline ignition, sabotted bullets, improved powder formulations, scopes, etc.) combined to make new blackpowder weapons much more efficient than traditional BP guns. ODFW recently changed the rules disallowing some of the modern improvements in primitive weapons hunts in order to continue having liberal blackpowder hunts.

The same thing may need to happen with archery seasons...no compound bows, no non-wood bows or arrows, no sights, no releases, etc. Either that or look forward to shortened seasons, limited entry, etc.

Gun Rod Bow · 08-20-2003, 07:38 AM

The state of Oregon has taken a different tack than many other western states. In Oregon, access control is now determining harvest. Green dot roads, roadless areas, private lands that allow access, but non-motorized is how this state is controlling impact.

The alternative is the NM or AZ approach where tag sales are severley limited to the point that residents typically only draw 1 year in 7-10.

It would be less than fair to ignore the fact that centerfire rifles, scopes, rangefinders, etc.. have advanced greatly along with archery and BP gear.

I prefer Oregon's approach to management. I would prefer a higher value on predator control and less cow/doe tags, for all hunters.

Remember, hunter succes with archery is very close to the same as rifle, around 10-12% on average. I see no unfair advantage, just opportunity for those who work a little harder.

GutshotApe · 08-20-2003, 09:55 AM

skahorse - The rut is the breeding season and bucks & bulls lose much of their waryness, move around a lot more, and are much more susceptible to hunting.

The Latin Cogito ergo sum, translates: I think therefore I am.

C-lice · 08-20-2003, 10:09 AM

Personally I don't bowhunt. I've thought seriously about taking it up, but those darn summer steelhead in the rivers in September always win out.

IF I were to bowhunt, I would choose to hunt traditional. For one thing, I am turned off by the idea a "primitive" weapon system that features things like mechanical releases, overdraws, carbon shafts, fiberoptic sights, etc. It seems akin to the magnum rifle craze.

For another thing, do the releases, shafts, etc. really increase one's ability to kill? This isn't a rhetorical question--I really don't know. Of the bowhunters I know, even those that are successful each season don't kill anything past about 50 yards, and usually much less. These are folks who shoot 3-D (or whatever) year-round, so it seems safe to assume they'd be good shots no matter what system (hi-tech, middle of the road, or primitive) they chose to shoot. These folks score every year because they are good HUNTERS, not because of the gear they have.

I guess if the choice of primitive vs. hi-tech ultimately makes no difference in who brings home venison and who doesn't, then it shouldn't matter which one chooses to shoot.

I guess I have no point.

Gun Rod Bow · 08-20-2003, 10:38 AM

C-lice,

Are you saying "It's not the arrow, It's the Indian?" (is that not PC?)

I completely agree. A hunter is a hunter regarless of weapon of choice.

Better gear does help improve accuracy, which hopefully means better shot placement.

I took up the bow 6 seasons ago. I changed alot of my pre-concieved notions.

Tilla · 08-20-2003, 12:26 PM

C-lice, I love it!
- you seem to find the answers in your last post. No matter what type of bow you choose primitive or modern, you have to get up on that animal well within 50 yds, draw the bow back and place the shot well.
You have to do this without the animal seeing, smelling or hearing you. I don't care how fancy the bow is, it's tough, the number of things that can go wrong is uncalculatable.

outdoor.spec.ops · 08-20-2003, 12:37 PM

I think it is also important to remember that Bow hunters do not usually get to cover the ground that rifle hunters may enjoy. When bow hunting, you must spot and stalk, ambush, call in, (ect...) the animals you wish to hunt. If your lucky, you may see a group of elk, and spend the whole morning hunt getting close to these animals. If they bust on you, it can be several hours just getting back to your pickup or camp. When rifle hunting you can glass the animals from long range, and if you miss, you can in some situations, be back to your vehicle and covering a lot more ground within minutes.

Freighter Bait · 08-21-2003, 04:46 AM

GSA
Well Said!! You caught my drift.

Tilla · 08-21-2003, 12:20 PM

They answer about hunting efficiency between traditional and new high tech gear is that there is negliable difference in my opinion. I hunt with a group that may walk out in the field with either weapon in the AM. They both suck at it either way.

But the few elk shot have been under 20 yds. It's the archer not the equipment. In either case you have to get to the point where you can make the shot, that is where the hunting part really comes down to.
It's a fly fishing vs gear fishing argument, it's still fishing.
The first time I went elk hunting with a rifle, I shot an Elk. The second time I went Elk hunting with a rifle, I shot an Elk. So I switched to a bow, two elk in 13 years, now that's more like it.