For Or Against Full Inclusion

[fasteddie]

38 minutes ago, Skillet said:

http://www.nycrossbowcoalition.com/membership/

$20 / year. Come on guys.

There should be at least 66 members on here spending money for the membership if they are firm believers in the Crossbow ........ 

[Skillet]

Yes, Eddie. Somehow I doubt there is, though.

Probably the same fellas who are not NRA members, and expect the rest of us to shoulder the load?

[Hunter007]

2 hours ago, Skillet said:

Full inclusion will happen. Not if, but when. 

Anyone supporting it needs to join the New York Crossbow Coalition, as a paid member. They work hard for us. 

We still have a decent chance of getting it done this year.

Yea probably and so will airbow and Big Bore Airguns 

 

And the laser bow 

Just a question of  time 

 

Edited April 13, 2018 by Storm914

[fasteddie]

Since I don't support Full Inclusion I will give  New York Crossbow Coalition the same amount that I give to the New York Bowhunters Association . NOTHING ...........

[wolc123]

11 hours ago, fasteddie said:

Since I don't support Full Inclusion I will give  New York Crossbow Coalition the same amount that I give to the New York Bowhunters Association . NOTHING ...........

Would you be open to any compromise on that ?  Say for example, letting youngsters 12-15 and other folks over 50 or having physical disabilities use them throughout archery season, coupled with a requirement for the archery course to use one.

Also, as a moderator, do you feel any need to represent the views of the membership here who are showing an increasing level of support for full-inclusion?  This poll is now showing it favored by closer to a 3:1 margin. The ONLY other poll that appeared here over a year ago (and vaporized mysteriously) was showing support by 2:1 when it went away.   Do you have any idea what happened to that poll or why it went away ?   I say it is because someone could not handle the truth.  This poll is showing that truth very clearly now : MOST HUNTERS SUPPORT FULL INCLUSION.    

Edited April 14, 2018 by wolc123

[fasteddie]

Wolc - Just so you don't think I am skipping over this , I will respond later when I get back fron cutting trees in Honeoye .........

[wolc123]

21 minutes ago, fasteddie said:

Wolc - Just so you don't think I am skipping over this , I will respond later when I get back fron cutting trees in Honeoye .........

Thanks, and be careful out there.

[bugsNbows]

21 hours ago, fasteddie said:

There should be at least 66 members on here spending money for the membership if they are firm believers in the Crossbow ........ 

I joined a couple of months ago.

[SteveB]

Quote

Would you be open to any compromise on that ?  Say for example, letting youngsters 12-15 and other folks over 50 or having physical disabilities use them throughout archery season, coupled with a requirement for the archery course to use one.

I support full inclusion.

I do not support the defining a bow by who uses it. So no to including only certain demographics. When the DEC is given control - where it should be, the bow course will be required.

 

[wolc123]

1 hour ago, SteveB said:

I support full inclusion.

I do not support the defining a bow by who uses it. So no to including only certain demographics. When the DEC is given control - where it should be, the bow course will be required.

 

How do you feel about the elimination of draw weight and minimum width restrictions, which I hear is also included in the current bill ?   I would prefer that they be left in. I have done ok with a crossbow, which meets the current restrictions, and I am happy with a maximum range of about 50 yards.  I definitely would not shoot further than that today, with my current equipment, because I learned that it does not provide enough penetration beyond that.  I bought a laser range finder 3 years ago, and I now have all my stands and blinds flagged out to 50 yards, to make sure of that.    I think having those restrictions prevents "too much" escalation of technology.  By that, I mean that it helps keep "archery hunting" a short range game.  That is a good thing, because there is a lot more to be learned from the sport by getting closer to the deer.   A selfish reason that I have, for leaving those restrictions in, is that they put limits on any temptation for me to spend money on upgrading my current equipment. I really don't want to do that, because it has been 100% successful at putting deer down within 40 yards.  That even includes the first one, where I underestimated the yardage and only had 8" of penetration at 59 yards.     

Edited April 14, 2018 by wolc123

[Hunter007]

5 minutes ago, wolc123 said:

How do you feel about the elimination of draw weight and minimum width restrictions, which I hear is also included in the current bill ?   I would prefer that they be left in. I have done ok with a crossbow, which meets the current restrictions, and I am happy with a maximum range of about 50 yards.  I definitely would not shoot further than that today, with my current equipment, because I learned that it does not provide enough penetration beyond that.  I bought a laser range finder 3 years ago, and I now have all my stands and blinds flagged out to 50 yards, to make sure of that.    I think having those restrictions prevents "too much" escalation of technology.  By that, I mean that it helps keeps "archery hunting" a short range game.  That is a good thing, because there is a lot more to be learned from the sport by getting closer to the deer.   A selfish reason that I have, for leaving those restrictions in, is that they put limits on any temptation for me to spend money on upgrading my current equipment. I really don't want to do that, because it has been 100% successful at putting deer down within 40 yards.  That even includes the first one, where I underestimated the yardage and only had 8" of penetration at 59 yards.     

So your shooting almost double the range most compound bow users take shots at and you want more time

Why sounds like your doing ok the way things are now .

My compromise is leave it the way it is now and have no restrictions on  crossbow design.

 

[airedale]

Below

Edited April 14, 2018 by airedale

[airedale]

32 minutes ago, wolc123 said:

 I think having those restrictions prevents "too much" escalation of technology.  By that, I mean that it helps keep "archery hunting" a short range game.  That is a good thing, because there is a lot more to be learned from the sport by getting closer to the deer.   

Exactly what traditional bow hunters have been arguing all along!

Edited April 14, 2018 by airedale

[ncountry]

Can't let this debate die, we only have 18 pages..lol 

I've said it before. I like the progressive season idea. For example.2 weeks traditional, 2 weeks compounds, 2 weeks crossbow. Why not?

I think this will help keep some of our hunting traditions alive. I already have a xbow. Still need to get a traditional bow though.. ( I've been looking)

[wolc123]

1 hour ago, ncountry said:

Can't let this debate die, we only have 18 pages..lol 

I've said it before. I like the progressive season idea. For example.2 weeks traditional, 2 weeks compounds, 2 weeks crossbow. Why not?

I think this will help keep some of our hunting traditions alive. I already have a xbow. Still need to get a traditional bow though.. ( I've been looking)

I would be ok with the two weeks traditional but not the two weeks compound.  That should be in the same class as the crossbow since they are both "high-tech" and have comparable range and accuracy.   The biggest problem I have with this whole debate is the "compound-only" dudes selfishly trying to keep crossbows out, so they can have more "big-bucks" for themselves.   

 

1 hour ago, Storm914 said:

So your shooting almost double the range most compound bow users take shots at and you want more time

Why sounds like your doing ok the way things are now .

My compromise is leave it the way it is now and have no restrictions on  crossbow design.

 

I want more time because I want to be able to use the crossbow to help control the deer population in the grossly overpopulated zone where I live (9F).  Right now, you can regularly see herds of 20 - 60 deer out in the fields.  I have to dodge them frequently with my car on the drive to and from work.  The DEC has been giving out lots DMP tags here for many years, but very few are filled because these deer go nocturnal soon after detecting a little hunting pressure.   If I could get out there starting on October 1, I think I would have little trouble filling all (5) of my antlerless tags.   In (4) seasons with the crossbow, I have not struggled to fill my buck tags, but have yet to have a single antlerless deer walk within my 50 yards range.   

I do not want this for selfish reasons.  In fact, I have probably benefited by the current restrictions.  I process my own deer and I would rather kill and process bucks than does.   Does always have a lot more fat to trim, and take me much longer to process for that reason.  Leaving this area infested with does, no doubt makes it easier to kill bucks here, after the rut kicks in and the crossbows are allowed.  It is selfish of me not to kill does, because that is the only way to get the deer numbers under control.  One look into the fields at dusk can show anyone that it is out of control here right now. 

You are right, I am ok with the way things are right now.  It is not all about me though.  I would like the crossbow to be legal when I could use it to help others, including mothers driving their kids back and forth to school, homeowners trying to grow gardens and landscaping around their houses, farmers trying to raise sweetcorn and pumpkins, and forest managers.  I see the crossbow as the perfect weapon to do this job for two reasons: It is extremely accurate at close range, which minimizes the chances of wounding and not recovering the deer.  It is also silent, which makes it easier to fill multiple tags before other deer in the area are alerted to what is going on.   All other "legal" weapon types currently fall short in one or both of those areas. 

Allowing such an effective weapon to be used at the time when it could do the most good (before the "stink" of other hunters has turned the deer nocturnal), would greatly enhance the ability of the NY state DEC to mange the deer population.   Do you not wish to see them succeed ?

 

p.s, here is a tip for you which I hope you will find helpful and not offensive:  consider proof reading your posts and use the "edit" feature if necessary.  Others have pointed out, and I have also noted an unusual number of spelling errors, etc in your posts.   Do you use a "kindle" (whatever that is) ?  One other semi-departed forum member struggled mightily with one of those for a long time.    

Edited April 14, 2018 by wolc123

[Hunter007]

4 minutes ago, wolc123 said:

I would be ok with the two weeks traditional but not the two weeks compound.  That should be in the same class as the crossbow since they are both "high-tech" and have comparable range and accuracy.   The biggest problem I have with this whole debate is the "compound-only" dudes selfishly trying to keep crossbows out, so they can have more "big-bucks" for themselves.   

 

I want more time because I want to be able to use the crossbow to help control the deer population in the grossly overpopulated zone where I live (9F).  Right now, you can regularly see herds of 20 - 60 deer out in the fields.  I have to dodge them frequently with my car on the drive to and from work.  The DEC has been giving out lots DMP tags here for many years, but very few are filled because these deer go nocturnal soon after detecting a little hunting pressure.   If I could get out there starting on October 1, I think I would have little trouble filling all (5) of my antlerless tags.   In (4) seasons with the crossbow, I have not struggled to fill my buck tags, but have yet to have a single antlerless deer walk within my 50 yards range.   

I do not want this for selfish reasons.  In fact, I have probably benefited by the current restrictions.  I process my own deer and I would rather kill and process bucks than does.   Does always have a lot more fat to trim, and take me much longer to process for that reason.  Leaving this area infested with does, no doubt makes it easier to kill bucks here, after the rut kicks in and the crossbows are allowed.  It is selfish of me not to kill does, because that is the only way to get the deer numbers under control.  One look into the fields at dusk can show anyone that it is out of control here right now. 

So you are right, I am ok with the way things are right now.  It is not all about me though.  I would like the crossbow to be legal when I could use it to help others, including mothers driving their kids back and forth to school, homeowners trying to grow gardens and landscaping around their houses, farmers trying to raise sweetcorn and pumpkins, and forest managers.  I see the crossbow as the perfect weapon to do this job for two reasons: It is extremely accurate at close range, which minimizes the chances of wounding and not recovering the deer.  It is also silent, which makes it easier to fill multiple tags before other deer in the area are alerted to what is going on.   All other "legal" weapon types currently fall short in one or both of those areas. 

Allowing such an effective weapon to be used at the time when it could do the most good (before the "stink" of other hunters has turned the deer nocturnal), would greatly enhance the ability of the NY state DEC to mange the deer population.   Do you not wish to see them succeed ?

 

p.s, here is a tip for you which I hope you will find helpful and not offensive:  consider proof reading your posts and use the "edit" feature if necessary.  Others have pointed out, and I have also noted an unusual number of spelling errors, etc in your posts.   Do you use a "kindle" (whatever that is) ?  One other semi-departed forum member struggled mightily with one of those for a long time.    

If you think there both high tech weapons then I guess you don't mind putting in airbow in that season 

Xbow has better range then a compound bow which has a better range then a recurve. 

To be fair you need 3 different seasons .

Or else most are going to go to the one with the best range and ignore everything else for the most part. 

I think I said this already on page 4  7 lol 8 9 and 11 lol 

[wolc123]

7 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

If you think there both high tech weapons then I guess you don't mind putting in airbow in that season 

 

I would be ok with the airbow only if it was at least 17" wide and propelled and arrow at less than 300 fps.  No dice otherwise.  Onward to 20 pages and over 100 voters.  Come on, we can do it.  Help us keep the truth of overwhelming NY hunter support of full-inclusion right up top for all to see.  

Edited April 14, 2018 by wolc123

[ncountry]

7 minutes ago, wolc123 said:

I would be ok with the two weeks traditional but not the two weeks compound.  That should be in the same class as the crossbow since they are both "high-tech" and have comparable range and accuracy.   The biggest problem I have with this whole debate is the "compound-only" dudes selfishly trying to keep crossbows out, so they can have more "big-bucks" for themselves.   

 

 

 

 

Ha.ha.ha. .lol.. I can hit a tennis ball all day long with my crossbow at 60 yds .At that distance my 420 grain bolt is still travelling faster than my 400 grain arrow is right off my bow. I feel that i am a pretty good shot with my compound but saying they are comparable is a joke. They are certainly very similar balisticly compared to a firearm, but that's it. There is more skill involved (hunting and shooting) hunting with a compound. Probably comparable to a compound vs a traditional bow.

[wolc123]

59 minutes ago, ncountry said:

Ha.ha.ha. .lol.. I can hit a tennis ball all day long with my crossbow at 60 yds .At that distance my 420 grain bolt is still travelling faster than my 400 grain arrow is right off my bow. I feel that i am a pretty good shot with my compound but saying they are comparable is a joke. They are certainly very similar balisticly compared to a firearm, but that's it. There is more skill involved (hunting and shooting) hunting with a compound. Probably comparable to a compound vs a traditional bow.

I know some folks who can do that with a compound, but there is certainly more strength, and more time required to get proficient.  The crossbow puts that same accuracy into the hands of those with less strength and less "free-time".  That should cut down on wounded and un-recovered deer.   The two weapons have comparable range, but the crossbow is more likely to put the bolt on the hair it was aimed at.  To me, that is another HUGE reason to let it in.    I am ok with traditional bows getting in a couple weeks earlier, because very few people these days have the gumption to get good with such weapons.    The number of those who do would probably not be enough to force the deer nocturnal like all the guys with compounds do now.   Giving them an early start advantage would push a few more folks towards "real" traditional archery.   It would also be a special benefit for guys like Moog, who deserve it due to their selfless support of full-inclusion.      

Edited April 14, 2018 by wolc123

[ncountry]

1 hour ago, wolc123 said:

I know some folks who can do that with a compound, but there is certainly more strength, and more time required to get proficient.  The crossbow puts that same accuracy into the hands of those with less strength and less "free-time".  That should cut down on wounded and un-recovered deer.   The two weapons have comparable range, but the crossbow is more likely to put the bolt on the hair it was aimed at.  To me, that is another HUGE reason to let it in.    I am ok with traditional bows getting in a couple weeks earlier, because very few people these days have the gumption to get good with such weapons.    The number of those who do would probably not be enough to force the deer nocturnal like all the guys with compounds do now.   Giving them an early start advantage would push a few more folks towards "real" traditional archery.   It would also be a special benefit for guys like Moog, who deserve it due to their selfless support of full-inclusion.      

You get 1/2 a like. 

[Hunter007]

1 hour ago, wolc123 said:

I know some folks who can do that with a compound, but there is certainly more strength, and more time required to get proficient.  The crossbow puts that same accuracy into the hands of those with less strength and less "free-time".  That should cut down on wounded and un-recovered deer.   The two weapons have comparable range, but the crossbow is more likely to put the bolt on the hair it was aimed at.  To me, that is another HUGE reason to let it in.    I am ok with traditional bows getting in a couple weeks earlier, because very few people these days have the gumption to get good with such weapons.    The number of those who do would probably not be enough to force the deer nocturnal like all the guys with compounds do now.   Giving them an early start advantage would push a few more folks towards "real" traditional archery.   It would also be a special benefit for guys like Moog, who deserve it due to their selfless support of full-inclusion.      

What ever range you think someone good with a compound bow can hit with someone good with a crossbow can hit much farther if all things being =  and in fact with less skills someone can hit much better  still with a  crossbow .

I think I wrote this already on page 2 5 7 9 and  12 lol 

So why do you need the same amount of time  with Superior weapon.

The gun guys would like more time to you know . 

 

 

[wolc123]

37 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

What ever range you think someone good with a compound bow can hit with someone good with a crossbow can hit much farther if all things being =  and in fact with less skills someone can hit much better  still with a  crossbow .

I think I wrote this already on page 2 5 7 9 and  12 lol 

So why do you need the same amount of time  with Superior weapon.

The gun guys would like more time to you know . 

 

 

Allowing those "superior weapons" in from the start of archery season,  would make that season a more effective tool for the DEC, when it comes to controlling deer numbers.  You need only look at the Ohio harvest numbers, that someone posted a few pages back, to see proof of that.  Note how the archery totals equal or surpass the gun totals.   The crossbow plays a HUGE part in that.    Delaying the deployment of the crossbow until November, as has been the case for (4) years in NY,  just pisses away most of the advantage it could provide when it comes to controlling deer numbers. 

I hear repeated arguments of "just letting guns in from the start", but that would also piss away the advantage that having a "silent" season, followed by a "loud" one.   It takes deer some time to react to the pressure from the "silent killers".  You really only get one good day when the guns come in.  The one-two punch that archery (with crossbows allowed), followed by guns a month later, promises better results than one (loud) punch.   

To those who fear that the crossbow would collapse deer numbers, wiping them out like the bisons and carrier pigeons, I say, have no fear.  It is a simple matter of issuing less DMP permits, when and if the numbers need to be increased.   Look at the data from other states with full inclusion (most of which supposedly rank higher than NY in hunter satisfaction) to relieve your fears.   I don't believe that the sky fell in any one of them.   With a dwindling number of hunters, it makes sense to give those who remain a more efficient tool, and let them use it WHEN it could do the most good.         

p.s, You are doing a little better on your spelling now Storm, are you starting to proofread and use the edit feature as I suggested ? 

Edited April 14, 2018 by wolc123

[Hunter007]

2 hours ago, wolc123 said:

Allowing those "superior weapons" in from the start of archery season,  would make that season a more effective tool for the DEC, when it comes to controlling deer numbers.  You need only look at the Ohio harvest numbers, that someone posted a few pages back, to see proof of that.  Note how the archery totals equal or surpass the gun totals.   The crossbow plays a HUGE part in that.    Delaying the deployment of the crossbow until November, as has been the case for (4) years in NY,  just pisses away most of the advantage it could provide when it comes to controlling deer numbers. 

I hear repeated arguments of "just letting guns in from the start", but that would also piss away the advantage that having a "silent" season, followed by a "loud" one.   It takes deer some time to react to the pressure from the "silent killers".  You really only get one good day when the guns come in.  The one-two punch that archery (with crossbows allowed), followed by guns a month later, promises better results than one (loud) punch.   

To those who fear that the crossbow would collapse deer numbers, wiping them out like the bisons and carrier pigeons, I say, have no fear.  It is a simple matter of issuing less DMP permits, when and if the numbers need to be increased.   Look at the data from other states with full inclusion (most of which supposedly rank higher than NY in hunter satisfaction) to relieve your fears.   I don't believe that the sky fell in any one of them.   With a dwindling number of hunters, it makes sense to give those who remain a more efficient tool, and let them use it WHEN it could do the most good.         

p.s, You are doing a little better on your spelling now Storm, are you starting to proofread and use the edit feature as I suggested ? 

I thought gun season was for deer control .

Archery season was about archery from the start. 

 

[wolc123]

32 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

I thought gun season was for deer control .

Archery season was about archery from the start. 

 

Times have changed and deer have adapted.  Guns alone are no longer getting it done in many DMU's, including the one where I live.   If you do not live in a zone that is grossly overpopulated, then you may have no comprehension of this.  Climate change has also contributed to the overpopulation issue.  It has been more than (3) years, since we have had frost in the ground deeper than  2", and there has not been more than 2 weekends, the last three winters, for the snow to be deep enough for decent snowmobiling.   They are practically giving the used ones away around here now.     

Other states (such as Ohio), have accomplished better control of their deer herds, and a higher degree of hunter satisfaction, by allowing full-inclusion of the crossbow during archery season.  The guns alone have fell short in NY, primarily due to to their noise, and an opportunity for archery season to contribute has been squandered by keeping crossbows out.  A one-two punch of crossbows/compounds, then guns could likely get it done here just like it did in Ohio.  There is no evidence to prove that it could not, while there are many other states which have proved that it could.  Based on the increasing margin of support for full-inclusion that this poll is showing, it probably will not be too much longer before NY follows suit.  I will go out on a limb and predict that it will happen by October 1, 2019.  When do you think it will happen ?  All we have now, is a small group of "elitists" holding us back.   I don't see how they can hold on much longer, especially if we keep this poll right on top for all to see.  We have them on the ropes now and it is time to pummel them into submission.  We only need (4) more votes to get to 100.   

[fasteddie]

Wolc - In reference to your questions on page 18 - post #5 , The only compromise I would go along with is to give the 1st 2 weeks ( starting October 1st ) of Bow season to the Trad Bow Hunters . I am happy with the system as is but would go along with opening up for the Trad Guys . 

As for my posts , they are 98% as a MEMBER of the site . 

As to the 1st poll , it was 2 to 1 from what folks said . You should feel better now that is almost 3 to 1 .