send letters for crossbows in NY

[Culvercreek hunt club]

No matter what anyone does there is always going to be those grab it and go kinda hunter... I have always said that if you're complaining that you don't have a lot of time to hunt.. you certainly aren't taking the time to practice. If you have noticed anytime a management topic is put up.. one of the biggest excuses for why it isn't a good idea is because some hunters don't have a lot of time to hunt.. so there ya go. How do you guys feel about proficiency testing before getting a license? Just a question... be gentle.

That is the first thing that came to me this morning after reading the recent updates here. I just couldn't bring my self to type a response on the damn phone.

I probaby wouldn't have an issue with it depending on the test. If we are talking a 6" circle at 60 yards....a little unreasonable for bow testing. how about 6" at 20 for Bow. 6" at 50 off hand for gun and 6" at 150 for the cross bow...lol. sorry couldn't resist. all tongue in cheek but I did do a similiar test to get into a normally not opened bow area out here in Rochester. didn't get drawn for the permit but you had to qualify in order to hunt.

[Doc]

I am not saying they should add guns into bow season, you are trying to put that twist to what I said. How did I know you would be the first one to spin it into some kind of attempt to bury me? Just for giggles, Ill play along.

What are you saying? That you enjoy seeing deer run through the woods with an arrow hanging out of its back or hindquarter? You like hearing all of these posts and questions about wounded deer? You are against archery equipment being implemented in archery season that can more effectively kill a deer in the hands of someone that lacks the time to properly practice? I dont want to hear an answer that consists of "people, especially bow hunters should practice more if they are going to hunt", because we all know darn well that doesnt always happen and will never happen 100% of the time. Im not saying that 100% of shots on deer with a crossbow would be perfect, but Id be willing to say that the percentage would be higher than with a vertical bow.

And a gun would be higher yet .... eh?

Look, I'm not trying to put any twist on anything. I'm only interpreting your remarks the way any reasonable person would have to. There is nothing about that prior comment that you made (or this response either for that matter) that doesn't pertain to guns even more-so than crossbows. So either you believe in what you are saying or you don't. Which is it? Do you believe in it just a "little bit" but only up to the inclusion of crossbows?

I think everybody understood back when bowhunting was first legalized that adding challenge to a deer season by using primitive equipment had some risks of wounding losses. That risk still exists today. If we want to eliminate the risk, we must eliminate the special season and the weapons in it. Your idea of including more and more technologically advanced weapons until you no longer have to see "deer run through the woods with an arrow hanging out of its back or hindquarter" can only lead to one end. That end is a goal shared by others ever since the bow season was created.

You can't expect to raise that point and not have someone point out that you have conveniently but artificially stopped short in your argument.

Doc

[Doc]

How do you guys feel about proficiency testing before getting a license? Just a question... be gentle.

I have mixed feelings about proficiency testing. There may actually be some value in it if only to prove that at one point in time, the licensed bowhunter (or gun hunter) had some skills. However, unless you make it a periodic test and re-test, I'm not sure just what it shows about a hunter's current skills. The other thing that makes me a bit skeptical is the fact (ok, my personal suspicion) that wounding losses occur more from poor shot selection than marksmanship. How do you test for a particular judgement call that will occur sometime in the future under the excitement of an actual hunting condition? Basically, marksmanship also is impacted differently in target situations vs. hunting conditions. Of course, we all know the guy who is a tournament ace, and can perform all kinds of amazing target feats but who also has a long record of misses and wounds. I might also add that I have seen some others that can't hit a target no matter what size or distance, but are deadly on wild game. This is a trait with some (many?) instinctive traditional bowhunters.

Proficiency testing is not a concept that I would throw out without a whole lot of discussion and thought, but I do believe that there are many more different issues involved than come to mind at first glance.

Just a parting thought to keep in mind: All those flaming idiots that you encounter (and try to avoid) daily on the road passed a fairly rigorous driving proficiency test .....

Doc

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I knew driving was going to come into the topic...lol. I would be the first to line up to have periodic testing for that one, Doc. There are a lot of folks that couldn't pass a driver's test now even though they did once.

[WNYBuckHunter]

I am not saying they should add guns into bow season, you are trying to put that twist to what I said. How did I know you would be the first one to spin it into some kind of attempt to bury me? Just for giggles, Ill play along.

What are you saying? That you enjoy seeing deer run through the woods with an arrow hanging out of its back or hindquarter? You like hearing all of these posts and questions about wounded deer? You are against archery equipment being implemented in archery season that can more effectively kill a deer in the hands of someone that lacks the time to properly practice? I dont want to hear an answer that consists of "people, especially bow hunters should practice more if they are going to hunt", because we all know darn well that doesnt always happen and will never happen 100% of the time. Im not saying that 100% of shots on deer with a crossbow would be perfect, but Id be willing to say that the percentage would be higher than with a vertical bow.

And a gun would be higher yet .... eh?

Look, I'm not trying to put any twist on anything. I'm only interpreting your remarks the way any reasonable person would have to. There is nothing about that prior comment that you made (or this response either for that matter) that doesn't pertain to guns even more-so than crossbows. So either you believe in what you are saying or you don't. Which is it? Do you believe in it just a "little bit" but only up to the inclusion of crossbows?

I think everybody understood back when bowhunting was first legalized that adding challenge to a deer season by using primitive equipment had some risks of wounding losses. That risk still exists today. If we want to eliminate the risk, we must eliminate the special season and the weapons in it. Your idea of including more and more technologically advanced weapons until you no longer have to see "deer run through the woods with an arrow hanging out of its back or hindquarter" can only lead to one end. That end is a goal shared by others ever since the bow season was created.

You can't expect to raise that point and not have someone point out that you have conveniently but artificially stopped short in your argument.

Doc

What part of "archery equipment being implemented in archery season" dont you understand? A gun is not archery equipment. Its your typical game of trying to put words in someones mouth or some meaning that was never there in the first place. I did not stop short in my statement, it was pretty clearly cut.

[Doc]

What part of "archery equipment being implemented in archery season" dont you understand? A gun is not archery equipment. Its your typical game of trying to put words in someones mouth or some meaning that was never there in the first place. I did not stop short in my statement, it was pretty clearly cut.

Let me try it for a third time. And this time I will try to use your exact words since you seem to be trying to forget them already: "Id rather see those guys that dont have time to practice with a vertical bow, pick up a crossbow and have the ability to make an accurate shot on a deer rather than injure a deer due to lack of practice."

Please point out any references to archery equipment in that post.

You don't seem to see how easily the word gun could be substituted for crossbow. The fact is that same line of reasoning would apply whether you were trying to cram a crossbow or a muzzleloader or a shotgun or a rifle into the bowseason. And just because you now come back and say "oh no I only meant crossbows" doesn't change the way that same line of logic could be expanded to include almost any weapon.  See, when someone lays out a statement like that, I tend to hold them to the letter of their words. I don't want to hear any of this attempted fancy footwork afterwards about what is archery equipment and blah ... blah. If you think that deer hunting weapons should be changed to minimize the need for practice, fine. Just say so. But don't complain when someone points out that your comments really can go way beyond what you claim they meant.

[WNYBuckHunter]

Doc, substituting the word gun for the word crossbow in that statement is NOT what I said. I never said that I think "that deer hunting weapons should be changed to minimize the need for practice", I said crossbows should be allowed in archery season. Whats your point?  Like I said, you are just trying to make what I said into something it wasnt and isnt. You sure have a twisted way of looking at things. You say that you hold people to the letter of what they said and then start an argument based on what could be substituted into what they said. Which way is it? Are you sure you dont vote Democrat? 

[nyantler]

Sorry Doc..  he said Vertical BOW and crossBOW ... sounds like archery equipment to me. And, I never think of GUN when someone says crossbow. Still a string and an arrow... sights and release... just like most compound bows.

[SteveB]

Still a string and an arrow... sights and release... just like most compound bows.

And a trigger - for both.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

Still a string and an arrow... sights and release... just like most compound bows.

And a trigger - for both.

yup...kinda just like our trigger releases on our compounds...lol

[Doc]

Doc, substituting the word gun for the word crossbow in that statement is NOT what I said. I never said that I think "that deer hunting weapons should be changed to minimize the need for practice", I said crossbows should be allowed in archery season. Whats your point?  Like I said, you are just trying to make what I said into something it wasnt and isnt. You sure have a twisted way of looking at things. You say that you hold people to the letter of what they said and then start an argument based on what could be substituted into what they said. Which way is it? Are you sure you dont vote Democrat? 

Well then I guess all that drivel about allowing the substitution a more efficient weapon for those that don't devote required time to their bows for practice was just meaningless garbage that you really don't believe in. Or maybe it is just a worthless argument that only goes as far as your fanatical promotion of crossbows in bow seasons. I suspect both are true and that was exactly the point that I was getting at.

[Doc]

Still a string and an arrow... sights and release... just like most compound bows.

And a trigger - for both.

yup...kinda just like our trigger releases on our compounds...lol

Well, I'm not going to get into a repetition of all thirty some pages of this thread where the differences between crossbows and compounds has been thoroughly and accurately pointed out. Also, none of that has anything to do with the narrow subject of the post that I have been taking WNYBowhunter to task on.

Just to review for those that apparently haven't really been following, I am not in favor of an argument that says that because there are some archers who do not take time to practice with their bows we are justified in adding in more weapons in bowseason that are not as demanding. There is nothing in that argument that ends with just a crossbow.

Doc

[SteveB]

Just to review for those that apparently haven't really been following, I am not in favor of an argument that says that because there are some archers who do not take time to practice with their bows we are justified in adding in more weapons in bowseason that are not as demanding.

Then I am not in favor of an arguement that says that because there are some archers who do not take time to practice with their recurves and longbows we are justified in adding in more weapons in bowseason that are not as demanding - such as a compound machine that was invented for the sole reason to get women and children into the bow season because it made it far easier then the real bows being used at the time.  Also remember Fred Bear saying now you can now be a 2 season hunter.

30 plus pages and some cannot see the hypocracy of allowing a 40 year old invention (to make it easier) into the bowseason, while resisting archery equipment 100's of years old in the bow season because it may be easier. Anyone shooting a compound and being anti crossbow is just saying I want my easier "bow" but want to deny others their's. At least be honest about it - you don't want to take the time to shoot a real bow accurately enough to hunt with ( for whatever reason) but still want to be in the bow season. It' just that simple.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

yeah Doc....we ALL got you on that. Everyone is following you. NYAntler hit is right on the head and I understood what WNY was saying...most probably did. You are taking it to the extreme...well beyond his intention. I understood is voicing his frustration with some hunters that walk into the woods unprepared....not mater what we do they will be among us. I agree with WNY that since the prep time for the crossbow was less than with a vertical bow, there m ight be less likelihood that an animal would be wounded.

We all understand your position on the crossbow and it NOT being included in Archery season. What I don't understand about your argument and many post you have made on other threads is this.

You are constantly remarking on dwindling hunter numbers, yet an inclusion of crossbows in archery would put more hunters in the field for a larger portion of the year. how do you reconcile you two differing points of view?

[Doewhacker]

...."yet an inclusion of crossbows in archery would put more hunters in the field for a larger portion of the year"

I highly doubt that adding a cross bow to archery season will bring in any new hunters or help to retain that many for that matter. It will however entice some gun hunters into archery hunting in my opinion. I also see crossbows affecting gun hunters long term, the more deer they kill in archery season the less doe permits there will be for gunners. Maybe thats the states way of increasing the doe take with out relying on doe permits as the bread winner so to speak of deer take.

Not to go off on a tangent but... For all of you that want or dont want Ohio's season...to me this is the first step in that direction. Maybe not, just my opinions.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

...."yet an inclusion of crossbows in archery would put more hunters in the field for a larger portion of the year"

I highly doubt that adding a cross bow to archery season will bring in any new hunters or help to retain that many for that matter. It will however entice some gun hunters into archery hunting in my opinion. I also see crossbows affecting gun hunters long term, the more deer they kill in archery season the less doe permits there will be for gunners. Maybe thats the states way of increasing the doe take with out relying on doe permits as the bread winner so to speak of deer take.

Not to go off on a tangent but... For all of you that want or dont want Ohio's season...to me this is the first step in that direction. Maybe not, just my opinions.

I can personally guarantee that 4 that use to bow hunt but physically cant anymore would take it back up if the inclusion of the crossbow happened.

[Doewhacker]

I know, but in the grand scheme of things how many will do the same? I guess there really is no way of knowing until the year after the sales numbers come out.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

I know, but in the grand scheme of things how many will do the same? I guess there really is no way of knowing until the year after the sales numbers come out.

probably not. I can only speak of what I know. I was telling my father and uncle about the inclusion in gun season and they wanted to go out and get one...just to be ready. I told them they might want to hold off for a bit and see what happens

[Doewhacker]

I expect a bell curve of sorts, increasing use of them and then people will either toss them aside for compounds or give up on them when they realize its not as easy as gun hunting.

[Culvercreek hunt club]

and THAT would be the time to buy one....cheap...lol

[Doewhacker]

and THAT would be the time to buy one....cheap...lol

Craiglsit better add a crossbow section..lol

My wifes uncles will be that guy that runs out and buys one and then try's to pawn it off to some one else, he has tried to sell me his 30 year old drunk son's ancient compound for about three years now. I keep telling him I am a lefty and have no use for it but every time I see him I get the same sales pitch. The last one occured at a wake..he is relentless. lol Damn pothead...

[Culvercreek hunt club]

LOL. I know guys lkike that too. woulnd't be bad if they were dumping something you could use or wanted

I have only shot one crossbow and I am sure it wasn't a top of the line and it was about 10 years ago....but the damn thing seemed loud as hell to me.

[Doc]

Then I am not in favor of an arguement that says that because there are some archers who do not take time to practice with their recurves and longbows we are justified in adding in more weapons in bowseason that are not as demanding - such as a compound machine that was invented for the sole reason to get women and children into the bow season because it made it far easier then the real bows being used at the time. 

You may have a very convincing argument. So when are you going to begin the campaign to get rid of compounds? .....lol. Can't be done can it? Once it's there, there is no turning it back is there? I think if you really have a problem with compound bows in bow season, you are probably just a little bit late, don't you think? But I will say that the compound is serving very well as a precedent for the crossbow. Even you are trying to use it that way aren't you? Makes one wonder just what the crossbow will be a precedent for in future bowseasons doesn't it.

[Doc]

yeah Doc....we ALL got you on that. Everyone is following you. NYAntler hit is right on the head and I understood what WNY was saying...most probably did. You are taking it to the extreme...well beyond his intention. I understood is voicing his frustration with some hunters that walk into the woods unprepared....not mater what we do they will be among us. I agree with WNY that since the prep time for the crossbow was less than with a vertical bow, there m ight be less likelihood that an animal would be wounded.

We all understand your position on the crossbow and it NOT being included in Archery season. What I don't understand about your argument and many post you have made on other threads is this.

You are constantly remarking on dwindling hunter numbers, yet an inclusion of crossbows in archery would put more hunters in the field for a larger portion of the year. how do you reconcile you two differing points of view?

You still don't get it do you? Nobody is arguing that a crossbow wouldn't cut wounding losses. I never said it wouldn't anyway. Read the posts!

My problem with his statement (if you take time to read it) is that it implies that just because there are some bowhunters that don't practice, we should start adding in more weapons to bow season to compensate. Well, why do you think that argument stops with crossbows? I'll repeat: If you or anybody really believes that more efficient weapons should be added into bow season to compensate for those that can not or will not practice why do you think the argument stops with crossbows? Now this probably makes about the 4th or 5th time I've repeated that same thought without anyone bothering to reply to it. But maybe the 4th time is the charm .....lol. 

As to your second point, no one has convinced me that crossbows in bow season will add even one more hunter. It may very well serve as a convenient weapon for a crossover of gun hunters into bow season. Is that a good thing? Well, I don't think so but others may. At any rate shifting hunters from one hunting season to another does not add numbers to the overall hunter population.

[Fairgame]

But I bet there will be a DEC fee to hunt with the crossbow which will bring in that extra money. Just like bow muzzle gun and dmps