posted
What is the PBS doing as an organization in the way of actively lobbying against / working with the state DNRs to shape plans, as it pertains to the inclusion of the crossbow in state archery seasons?
I'm an associate member and if my understanding of the PBS official position is accurate our dollars do (or should be) used to actively oppose such initiatives. Are they, and if they are, how can I get directly involved here in Indiana?
My home state of Indiana has passed a proposal, which is now open for public comment, that will allow crossbows to be used during archery season. Their public rationale is two-fold: 1. antlerless deer population management and 2. hunter recruitment.
Obviously there are alternative means by which the state can meet objective #1.
- lengthen the early archery season statewide by starting it Sept 15th (right now general season opens on Oct 1st statewide and Sept 15th in urban deer zones) - institute a doe before buck harvest rule statewide and promote in conjunction with the new rule the donation of the wild game meat to an org like Farmers and Hunters Feeding the Hungry - lengthen general firearms season
Point #2 (as it is fully articulated on the state's website) reads like it was written by the ATA or the NACF. Legalizing the crossbow for use in archery seasons will not increase the total number of hunters in any given state, it will simply bring more gun only hunters into archery seasons. It's a thinly veiled ploy to generate more license revenue and a complete roll over to the ATA and NACF lobbying in support of the crossbow at the state level.
Secondary questions related to the topic: have we gathered any finite data from states like OH that have had enough time in with a crossbow shared archery season to provide some hard data? Have we invested any dollars in this type of research in an effort to support our position with fact? Have we had any successes in opposing crossbow in archery season initiatives in any other states?
Just for the record, I hunt with both a compound and traditional tackle. I am not opposed to modern equipment and fiercely belief that unity among responsible, ethical, like-minded bowhunters is essential to our long-term success and defense of our sport. That said, I draw a hard-line at the crossbow in archery seasons, as it undermines everything that those that came before us stood for and envisioned when they fought so diligently for bow only seasons. The crossbow in our archery seasons is becoming an increasingly slippery slope and could in the very near future rob us of precious time afield and force upon us an association, by way of public digestion of manufacturer and ATA advertising, with crossbow users as "fellow bowhunters". They want the general public to perceive the crossbow as archery tackle and are having great success currently with their efforts. Pick up any hunting magazine or watch Versus for a few hours.
I have no problem with crossbows in the woods during firearm season, special weapons seasons or in the hands of a handicapped hunter but I do have an issue, given my desire to protect my ability to bowhunt long-term, with their inclusion in archery seasons.
Money makes the world go round and unfortunately right now we're on the short end of this one. We have nothing more to offer the state in the way of additional license revenues. Many of us are also shooting equipment made by manufacturers that also make and sell crossbows (and actively lobby individually and via the ATA for their inclusion in archery only seasons).
That said, if we can use fact to disprove the state's position that allowing the crossbow in archery seasons is BEST way to 1. better manage the antlerless deer population and 2. recruit NEW hunters, we might have a fighting chance. The states are also leaning on the position of wanting to increase the number of days afield for hunters. Any hunter wishing to can already increase their number of days afield, by learning a new skill - archery. It is not the states job to cater to the crossbow hunter by infringing on those of us that have been purchasing licenses and supporting the state wildlife budgets for years.
Also, something I think about increasingly, once the crossbow is in the archery season, what's to keep the ATA and NACF from lobbying the state to do away with traditional tackle, using "facts" to prove that it's relatively ineffective when compared to the modern equipment their constituency is peddling?
I apologize for the rambling. I’m very concerned and anxious to learn more about what we’re actively doing as an organization and how I can positively impact our efforts.
-------------------- Life is tough but it's tougher when you're stupid." - John Wayne
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin Posts: 364 | From: La Porte, IN | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Have you contacted PBS directly about this matter. There is a wealth of information out there. You may also want to cantact the NABC (North American Bowhunting Coalition) It is made up representatives from State bowhunting orgs as well as those Provinces in Canada. You are correct in your fears. And you are also correct on the money aspect, as well as the ATA involvement with crossbow usage. Crossbows do not recruit new hunters, merely firearms hunters who wish to hunt the archery season. Also, by allowing bowhunters to kill deer in urban areas, and assist in getting land access to bowhunters, State game agencies can and will see more deer dead. Contact your legislators and let them hear the facts. Set up a face to face meeting, write letters, visit their district offices, whatever you have to do in order to present your side. In this day and age, all people care about is money, and with budgets being tightened, they will stoop to no level to create a new license to increase revenue. The crossbow is not the second coming, I hate to rain on the pro-crossbow lobby's parade, but the truth is the truth. good luck with your fight.
-------------------- Vice President Life Member New York Bowhunters, Inc. All the best to you and yours >>>>------------------------> Posts: 1103 | From: New York | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Al, I have and it seems that the PBS has formed a coalition (North American Bowhunter Coalition), consisting of the PBS, P&Y, Comptons and numerous state orgs. They are meeting in April to discuss next steps. I'm in MN on business this week and may find time to stop by the P&Y hdqtrs to discuss with their point person.
-------------------- Life is tough but it's tougher when you're stupid." - John Wayne
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin Posts: 364 | From: La Porte, IN | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really don't think the PBS is very effective. It's pretty hard to ban a bow just because you don't personally like it.
Posts: 68 | From: Winnipeg Manitoba | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
a crossbow is a bow. It's a type of archery equipment.
btw..the US Government says its a bow-crossbows are taxed on the archery BOW category.
because it is archery equipment and indeed a type of bow-its very difficult if not impossible to present valid arguments against it.
I think the major point here is that archery and bowhunting are recreational activities. People participate in them for enjoyment. Some like to participate in the sport with stickbows-others with compounds-and others with crossbows.
And, some like to use all of them.
I personally do not care what people choose archery equipment wise in the field-as long as they abide by the game laws.
Posts: 68 | From: Winnipeg Manitoba | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry Cold Weather, the government says a lot of things we know aren't true. Anything with a shoulder stock and a fixed trigger is not a bow. And we aren't against people using them, just not in our hard earned archery seasons.
-------------------- PBS regular UBM life member Compton Posts: 1012 | From: Imperial, MO | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
CW, no just because "bow" is in the name does not make it archery equipment. It is by design, a gun that shoots little darts, takes minimal ability or practice to become proficient with and creates distinct advantages over archery equipment (trad or compound), by being able to be held in a cocked position and shot with a scope.
Our US gov't categorizes them the way that they do because of the lobbyist dollars the ATA and NACF spend cumulatively to create the "archery" association. The potential revenue pool to manufacture the crossgun would not be worth their time without that association. This has been a long range strategic objective of the ATA manufacturers - get em into the state archery seasons and then cash in at the registers. No one's gonna buy em if they can only use them during firearm or special weapons season.
-------------------- Life is tough but it's tougher when you're stupid." - John Wayne
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin Posts: 364 | From: La Porte, IN | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Steve, I posted the same topic on the PBS website and Tim Roberts (who Greg Darling had put me in touch with as the point person on the anti-crossbow activity) said the PBS is working with those organizations under the NABC umbrella. Perhaps "formed" was the wrong word choice but as I understand it the PBS's activity is being focused toward working through the coalition.
-------------------- Life is tough but it's tougher when you're stupid." - John Wayne
Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy. - Benjamin Franklin Posts: 364 | From: La Porte, IN | Registered: Jul 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JJB2: CW, no just because "bow" is in the name does not make it archery equipment. It is by design, a gun that shoots little darts, takes minimal ability or practice to become proficient with and creates distinct advantages over archery equipment (trad or compound), by being able to be held in a cocked position and shot with a scope.
Our US gov't categorizes them the way that they do because of the lobbyist dollars the ATA and NACF spend cumulatively to create the "archery" association. The potential revenue pool to manufacture the crossgun would not be worth their time without that association. This has been a long range strategic objective of the ATA manufacturers - get em into the state archery seasons and then cash in at the registers. No one's gonna buy em if they can only use them during firearm or special weapons season.
that's very interesting but really untrue. There is no such thing as a "crossgun"-the word does not exist in any dictionary.
the word "crossBOW" however does.
I was just reading Petersen's Bowhunting Magazine-and there was a crossbow article in there.
I was also just reading the latest issue of ARROWTRADE and there were articles on crossbows as well.
I recall reading a book called The Archer's Digest-and there was crossbow articles in there as well.
does it have advantages? all bows have advantages and disadvantages. Granted, it is easier for a first time person to learn to shoot-however all top scores are recorded with compound bows. It's disadvantages include it is more awkward to carry in the field and slower for a second shot.
one of the great advantages of a crossbow is it allows those of slight build who may be confined to use equipment of modest draw weight/performance (women, kids etc) to use equipment where there are no physical limitations. It's more humane in the field.
the crossbow dates much earlier than firearms-over 2000 years-so claiming it is a "gun" is impossible to support. Further to that, they are not regulated by the ATF.
Currently, crossbows are allowed in WY, OH, GA and others-in Canada ONT, BC, and QC and there are just no delerious effects to the archery seasons so claims by PBS etc just have no merit.
Really, the claims are much similar to when compound bows began to make inroads-claims they weren't bows-would destroy archery seasons-too easy-etc..
I really find it odd as an argument-the claim of no skill would be used. First of all-there is no demand of skill to get a bowhunting license. I used to work as an archery tech for a large outdoor store-saw people all the time who would come in-go bowhunting-who had zero skill.
I've seen traditional archers who bowhunt who frankly can't hit a bale of hay at 20 yards.
there are lots of "bowhunters" out there-both compound and stickbow who lack any dedication to shoot with any degree of consistant accuracy. If you doubt me-just go to your local archery shop that has lanes and watch people shoot.
quote:compete at many local and regional tournaments, an Indoor and Outdoor National Championships, the World Archery Festival in Las Vegas, the NFAA Indoor National Championships, the WAF Archery Classic, and the International Bowhunting Organization 3D World Championships for sport crossbows.
a crossbow isn't a bow-yet they are at the World Archery Festival-the NFAA championships-the IBO????? etc...?
I could go on-but rather than argue an crossbow isn't a bow-which is baseless-I think we should allow others-and give them the respect-to choose what they feel is best for them. They give you the respect for you to choose what is best for you.
Posts: 68 | From: Winnipeg Manitoba | Registered: Aug 2010
| IP: Logged |
posted
JJB2, Good luck with your mission, I watched it shoved down our throats here in Michigan.
I was goin to say more, but I guess that would be politics and tradgang frowns upon politics. And I don't mean choosing sides, I mean big money getting it's way, not the citizens vote.
Dan
-------------------- Compton member & Michigan Traditional Bowhunter member. Two Tracks & Vintage Bear Bows for me. Posts: 506 | From: Michigan's thumb | Registered: Oct 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just because it's called a crossBOW no more means it a bow than a seaHORSE is a horse or a groundHOG is a hog. It's just a name given to the weapon in history lore because as it was said, guns weren't invented. What else would they have called it in that time period? Had it been invented last week it might have been called a crossgun...but what's in a name anyway as the weapon is still the same weapon regardless of the name assigned to it.
The real issue with a crossbow isn't it's effect in and of itself. Rather, it's a symptom of a need by wildlife agencies to provide more choice to promote revenue, higher harvest, and participation. Unfortunately, it becomes the first step in a broadening arena of choice that not only includes crossbows; but also black powder rifles and firearms. "Choice" is not the sole domain argument of the crossbow advocacy and in that fact is where the devil lives. The crossbow may be argued NOT to have have caused the shortening of an archery season through it's harvest impact; however it cannot be said that crossbow legalization hasn't predated the abbreviation of archery only seasons by the 'choice' advocacy. There are cases where crossbow legalization was followed or legalized in conjunction with increased black powder dates in formerly archery only season structures. The same theme of "choice and participation" were used to include black powder weapons in formerly archery only seasons. Virginia and North Carolina come to mind as quick examples based on my understanding of the issue. The crossbow is just a first (but important) step in the blending and shortening of archery only formats...particularly true in areas of expanding herds and lower hunter numbers in general such as in the southeast. In as much it serves as a conditioning step for future change.
Ironically, the increased participation reasoning often used to promote the weapons legalization is not always true. The states of Georgia, Tennessee, and Alabama have less participation in archery seasons today than they did pre-crossbow legalization just a few years ago. In the case of Tennessee and Alabama both states archery particpation went down the very first year of crossbow legalation! The state of Georgia barely missed that ironic distinction as out of nearly 100,000 archers, crossbow legalization increased that states archery sales by 671 license...barely over 1/2 of 1% in the first year of crossbow legalization. Losses started occuring in the third year of legalization in Ga and at one point participation was down over 30% from it's pre-crossbow numbers!
As far as allowing youth and individuals of slighter build to participate in archery formats....all I can say is that my on son was only 9 when he killed his first deer with a 33 pound compound. This from a kid that was never big or strong enough to play any school athletics. I have a hard time buying into the disenfranchised argument from my own frame of reference.
As far a the degree of skill (or lack thereof if that's the case) required to shoot a crossbow, I will let that lay. However, I think any legimate archery weapon should at the very minimal require an archery skill set to shoot it. Is there any archery skills (either basic or advanced) required to shoot a crossbow? I'm not aware of any.
Posts: 110 | From: Union Ms | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"The states of Georgia, Tennessee, and Alabama have less participation in archery seasons today than they did pre-crossbow legalization just a few years ago. In the case of Tennessee and Alabama both states archery particpation went down the very first year of crossbow legalation! The state of Georgia barely missed that ironic distinction as out of nearly 100,000 archers, crossbow legalization increased that states archery sales by 671 license...barely over 1/2 of 1% in the first year of crossbow legalization. Losses started occuring in the third year of legalization in Ga and at one point participation was down over 30% from it's pre-crossbow numbers!"
Is there research that can draw a direct correlation between the inclusion of crossbows in the GA archery season and the trend of decreasing archery participation that you indicate? Without such research data how can you be sure crossbows were causative in this impact?
As far as TN is concerned, in 2005 the same year crossbows were included in their archery season they also had a 35% increase in archery license fees. Do you have research that directly links decreasing archery participation to crossbows in TN? How did you factor out the impact of the increased license fee that was put into effect the same year? Is it possible that the inclusion of crossbows might have actually minimized the overall impact of the license fee increase?
I have contacted Don McGowan of the GA DNR and Daryl Ratajczak of the TN DNR about the impacts of crossbows in their respective states and neither indicated the availability of scientific, sound, statistically significant research data that would allow me to answer my questions.
If you have such data, I would appreciate the source so I can contact them and investigate further.
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
