Doc

Let's do it!!

"Bow walking"

Oh no ........ to be a real hunter, tools like spears and stone tips are not allowed! Just a swift leap onto their back and a good bite on the neck and wrestle them to the ground to finish them off. That's a real hunter! On a slightly more serious note, I find it difficult to believe that anyone could seriously argue that the main thrust today is to simply buy some article(s) that will make our hunting easier. People are getting rich off that notion. Actually that has been the case since the mass marketing of compounds ..... and probably to a lesser extent, long before that. I find more emphasis these days on what is available in the sporting goods department than learning more on how to hunt. I didn't really think that was an original observation.....lol. We just want it all to be easier! All this 'challenge' stuff just takes way too much time and effort.

Accidents will happen and occasionally they do turn out with a happy ending. And thankfully, most of us never turn those freak accidents that end well into justifications for trying to do those shots on purpose.

As I have said several times already, anytime this subject comes up, we get all these replies that trot out a whole list of aquaintances or videos that they have seen that demonstrate amazing things done on the archery range, and never is there any mention of any other factors being part of the shooting distance equation. The implication is obvious ...... If you are able to shoot coffee cup groups at 60 or 70 yards, you're ready to take those shots at deer. I have yet to hear any advocates of long bow shots ever acknowledge that there are any other considerations when deciding how far to shoot. My answer has consistantly been that of all the considerations for that decision, archery range performance is way down on the list of criteria. And yet I will guarantee that we will see that same reply repeated many more times that the decision for how far a bowhunter should shoot should be based on his ability.

It's funny how different species relate to each other. They seem to have it all figured out which ones are threats and which ones are not.

Yeah, they haven't convinced me yet. I'm always willing to listen, but as long as their arguments are constantly linked with a sales pitch to sell me something, they have a long uphill battle to get me to listen very long.

Just got back from the Fiddler's fair over in Springwater. First time ever attending that event.That was quite a day. They had a mixture of some very talented musicians with every kind of back-woods stringed instrument you could imagine and then some. Unfortunately the gal in one of the groups (a duet) did sound like an American Idol reject, but their set was short. Mostly it was just a real good time for those of us that like that kind of music. Some pretty good music straight out of the hills and back-woods of the old days. I never saw so many musicians in one place before. Not bad food either. The only problem is that I misjudged the weather a bit and was a bit under-dressed for a day that never did warm up. I froze! I'm already planning on heading down there again next year. Anybody else happen to wind up there today?

Actually, you could bank a shot off a boulder and drill that sucker right in the jugular, and that would also be a deadly shot. So what? Would that be an ethical shot? You can shoot a deer in the brain and kill it (dropping it right in its tracks) ...... if you are lucky and you don't just blow its jaws off. Is that an ethical shot. There are a lot of people who think it might be. We've all seen the pictures. I'm one that's not afraid to say that I don't think any of those kinds of risky shots are ethical. And, I will say the same thing about the so-called Texas heart shot.

There is really only one true way to hunt. You should lie on top of a limb overhanging a trail and wait for a deer to walk underneath. When that happens, you drop down on it's back, bite it in the neck and wrestle it to the ground. Nothing else is real hunting! As far as baiting is concerned, unless you have trained the deer to eat out of your hand, it doesn't count as baiting. That's right isn't it? ...... No????

Ah yes ...... better living through chemicals .... lol. As hard as we try to buy hunting success, all these products that we are lured into buying will never replace good old basic hunting skills. It seems like everybody I run into these days has only one thing on their minds ...... "how do I buy something that will make hunting easy?". That's what hunting has evolved into .... a race to buy success.

And so even with the exact quote, in your own words placed in front of you, you still twist and squirm trying to run away from it. Well frankly, I don't blame you. It was a pretty goofy thing to say. That's like me saying the only reason you are forced to stillhunt is because you lack the patience of a real hunter. Sounds pretty silly doesn't it? kind of crosses over from "opinion" to a back-handed insult.

I'll tell you what ..... you guys are talking about some pretty darn small targets. How big are the femoral arteries? ........ maybe 1 or 2 times the size of an arrow shaft? Perhaps the exact size of a shotgun slug? How about the size of the opening in the rump which is surrounded by massive bones. Softball size .... maybe? And then some are talking about this as a kill zone on a running deer? Now there is a real challenge. Not just a small area, but one that is bouncing up and down and sideways as well. To me that simply boils down to a "spray and pray" style of hunting. Does it ever work? ...... Sure it does. Is it a high percentage shot? ...... not in my estimation. But maybe with a gun, if you let all 5 shots go as fast as you can, you might get lucky .....

That's archery for you .... lol. It definitely is a sport of details!

But you can and should put a number on your own shot distance and it should be based on all of the variables that deer and bowhunting involves. And that number is not established only by the results at the archery range. I know that some people have a problem assessing the variables when they come up with a personal hunting proficiency range that begins to sound like something that you might consider appropriate for a shotgun ..... lol. Perhaps some are more willing to let "luck" play a bigger part in the results than others are. That's a personal decision too because whether we like to admit it or not, no matter what the distance, there is still some level of luck involved. I guess it's our job to minimize the impact of luck as much as we are able to. I suppose that experience helps add a little realism into those shooting distance assessments. When you have personally encountered deflections and finally recognize just how small an obstruction it takes to send an arrow off target, you begin to examine just what distances you can really see something that tiny. I suppose once you see just how good those relexes of a deer are, it dawns on you that you are not shooting at a stationary bale of hay. Once you have had a down-range wind grab ahold of an arrow, you start to realize that conditions where you are standing doesn't necessarily relate to those between you and the deer. And if you ever have the occasion to work out the math of shot distance versus how far and how fast a deer can move with just a casual step, all these things combine to convince you that bowhunting is indeed a very short range hunting activity.

All of my pics are numbered so that I can easily find them. And I also maintain a database that uses those picture numbers as a reference and notes locations, what is pictured, time of day, direction of where they were heading and a comments column. I'm not sure how all this info will ever be used, but I figured I should capture all the info in case I come up with a practical use for any of it in the future. Otherwise, it just serves as a fancy index....lol.

:lol:

For me (and I stress for me) the traditional range of a bow back in 1965 when I first started was 20 yards and under. That seemed to be the distance where I felt that it would take something extraordinary to make me miss. That was the distance where I could clearly see all obstructions and where I spent most of my time practicing. It was also close enough to negate a lot of what the deer could do to evade the arrow (including casual incidental movement). Not guaranteed, because nothing in any kind of hunting is guaranteed), but a shot where the odds were put very heavily in my favor. Over the years, with the advent of the compound, that range for me increased to around 25 and I feel pretty darned confident out to 30 yards. To this day, I absolutely will not take a shot over 30 yards, and almost always, I will wait until I can get back down to my old favorite ..... 20 yards or less. That distance is very clear to me as being a very high percentage shot which is exactly what I am after. Yes, I can do a pretty respectable job of shooting out to 40 yards, but that applies on the archery range. I guess I was brought into bowhunting at a time when archery was considered a close range sport and that was exactly what drew me to it. That was before all the hype about super fast bows got people believing that their latest $1000 purchase performed almost as good as a gun.....lol. Yes equipment has changed radically but it is still a close range hunting activity and most of the things that would foil a shot 40 years ago still exist today. Deer still move. unseen twigs and limbs still exist. unplanned shooting hick-ups still occur. And the farther the shooting distance the more likely one or more of these things will occur. Considering all of that, even with my super fast, low trajectory, miracle-bow (a bit of sarcasm there), I still feel better about a very short shot that emphasizes the hunting part of bowhunting rather than seeing how far I can shoot which is emphasizing the marksmanship (I put in plenty of time on the archery range to satisfy that itch on my archery range). So, considering all that has been talked about in this thread, that magical distance really wasn't that hard for me to arrive at. I think anyone can easily figure out what's a good max distance for themselves as long as they honestly assess all of the real limitations of bowhunting as we have been discussing in this thread. What really bothers me is when people make that decision based only or mainly on what they can do on the archery range. That is one of the least reliable critera.

I think you're probably right. The politics of outdoor activities is actually a pain in the neck. Not only that but do we really want to get involved in that part of the stuff. You're right .... it is the hunting that we are interested in. It's not the wrestling match that all the political hassle involves that we want to get involved with. It's a lot harder for us to get motivated on that end of things. Not only that, but we look around us and realize that hunting won't be changing much for the remainder of our hunting days, and the next generation will have to live with whatever we leave them. Also, we know that there are some people still politically active and trying to keep the organizations afloat, and so there is no reason for us to spend the money or effort as long as we have other people carrying on the fight for us. When you sit down and think about all of that, it's pretty easy to shoot holes in all of that faulty reasoning and excuse-making, but few of us ever do. And that's why we find ourselves in a fight with nitwits and find the nitwits winning. I don't think it is a situation that will ever change because it is all based on common human nature. I do my little bit in supporting our advocacy organizations, but I have to admit that there is probably a lot more that I should do. Unfortunately, I get a bit discouraged when I see the attitudes of some of the other hunters and I get the feeling that it really is a losing fight in the long-run. It's that feeling that makes me not one bit surprised that there still are states with these kinds of blue-laws regarding hunting. It really is actually what I have come to expect. frankly, I am amazed that we don't still have them.

Skillet- This is a rather strange request. I have heard of trappers asking for places to trap but have never seen that reversed where the landowner was looking for trappers. Do you have some kind of animal control problem that you are trying to get fixed? Do you trap the land yourself? Looking for a trapping partner?

You're welcome. I may not be involved in trapping anymore, but I still have an interest in helping others to get into it. It is an activity that I have always been proud to have participated in, and I would love to see it all prosper with new people.

I think that more and more of the decisions are being taken out of the hands of the DEC and being placed into the hands of legislators. Look at who was pushing for the closing of the pheasant rearing farms. It wasn't the DEC, but rather the Governor (Patterson). The operating budget for the DEC is controlled (and pilfered) by the legislature. Even the Commissioner of the DEC is a political appointment by the Governor. The whole damn organization is purely politically motivated and controlled and really has very little that happens because of science anymore. Even some of the AR WMUs have been mandated by legislators. These encroachments by politicians will never get any better, and in fact I expect that they will get more and more blatant. And the worse the economy gets, the more leverage the politicians get.

They certainly are not. The biggest blame lies with hunters themselves in that we have never really learned how to organize and assert ourselves. And that is not something that is improving as time goes on. The liberals have learned the value of organization. Hunters and other outdoorsmen are still delighting in trying to destroy their organizations with their sniping and constant encouraging of non-participation over nearly irrelevant single issue items. I keep thinking how much differently this thread would look if the animal rights folks treated their advocacy organizations the way we hunters treat ours. The animal rights people would be an irrelevant non-entity that would have no ability to try to block anything. Well, that's kind of the other way around now isn't it? And hunters have only themselves to blame for that.

So, I guess pawle76 answered your request to "Show me where I said that stand hunters are not hunters at all...". So my comment above still stands ....lol.

If I wasn't absolutely perfect with the shot, it makes me cringe to think of one of those nice roasts having hair and stuff shoved through all that clot-filled meat. As far as hitting a femoral, they really don't offer that much of a target either. You probably have a better chance at getting it into the poop-chute. Geez this whole discussion along with that picture is really quite unpleasant ..... lol.