Trad Gang
Main Boards => PowWow => Topic started by: PASQUINELL on August 28, 2011, 11:47:00 AM
-
In my opinion Treed Partridges by Kiby Kohler was an article that says it all. Very well written. Agree or disagree I think most will enjoy!
-
Dick Robertson wrote a similar piece several years ago. Since that time, G. Fred and Don Thomas have also dealt with the topic. I concur with their perspectives. I don't think many do, though. At the least, these pieces get folks to think about the decisions they make.
-
You must be correct Orion. I thought for sure there would be more comments either for or against the article.
-
I met a gentleman at a 3D shoot years ago that gave me quite the unsolicited earful about my "shortcut" carbon arrows. He stated to me that he couldn't understand why someone would choose a traditional bow for the added challenge, yet use a "crutch" like carbon arrows. I asked him how he assumed to know why I shoot a recurve, as if his personal motivations were somehow universal. Ironically enough, we ended up discussing our favorite portable treestands, an invention that's arguably the biggest "shortcut" ever made for deer hunters. I guess we all have our "shortcuts" if you drill down deep enough.
Regarding the article in question, I found two points confusing. The first was the author's stance against the use of carbon arrows while rationalizing his own occasional use of them. The second was how using wood arrows put him in the company of Fred Bear, who shot aluminum and fiberglass arrows.
Aside from that, I think it's good to occasionally take stock of our individual hunting equipment and tactics and question our personal motivations for such things. A little introspection is a good thing. But I'd rather spend my time pulling my own dandelions than walking up and down the street criticizing my neighbors' lawns.
-
What Jason said :thumbsup: .
-
Very well said, Jason.
-
aw come on Jason. . . much more fun making comments of everybody else's lawn !
We ALL need to start thinking about what we do, and what it means to us. Not necessarily assigning "evil" and "bad" monikers, but just. . "Why am I here" kinda thoughts.
We are changing as a society. Quite rapidly lately. Part of that change involves technology, for better or for worse. Some of it we have to accept and use. . but I for one like to make some parts of my life a bit less stressed. Some things I can control. . this is one of them. Have fun your way.
ChuckC
-
Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
The second was how using wood arrows put him in the company of Fred Bear, who shot aluminum and fiberglass arrows.
Very well said.
And I firmly believe if Fred was still around...he would be shooting carbon himself! :archer2:
-
Jason couldn't agree moore.
-
I get the introspective part of these types of articals, but reject the idea that the steepest path is the only noble or correct way of arriving somewhere.
My elitism alarm started to blink as I read it.
I love traditional archery when its about having fun with simple archery gear. When it starts to become about being against something different, the fun starts draining.
Hunt and let hunt.
-
I must say in advance, i havent read the article as i dont get TBM (sadly, they dont accept paypal from overseas).
But when it comes to elitism and Fred Bear, this quote of Fred came to my mind. He said it to Mike Sarnitz (austria) after taking him on his first Bowhunt:
“When you get back home and you speak about bowhunting, never try to discriminate riflehunters but on the contrary be patient and let them be part of our beautiful hunting form. Let them hunt with both:bow and rifle”
-
I wonder how many beautiful old PortOrford cedars have been cut down to make arrows? Over the past 60 years I wonder how many of those arrows have been lost? I shoot carbons and like them, I'm a bit of a treehugger though and think that the old cedars shouln't be used to make "disposable" things like arrows.
-
-
An excellent article on Rose City Archery, in the April/May issue of Primitive Archer Mag states that "no wood is used that has not been dead at least 25 years." A bit of a revelation from one of the premier cedar shaft makers in the world.
Now I know that dead wood is an important part of the ecology of a forest, but it would seem that worrying about live trees being harvested for "only" arrows is not necessary.
To me your arrow choice is just that - your arrow choice.
-
Once again, I'm with Jason.
I haven't read the article in TBM, as I don't have a subscription to it. But, I usually do buy it when it reaches the newsstand. I like the magazine, but I don't always agree with everything in it.
Like I said, I haven't read the article but it sounds to me like it's just another nit-picky piece that just causes division among our ranks.
Too close to huntin' season for this.
-
Jason - not bad for a Chicago gapshooter! I couldn't agree more.
I had some of the same feelings yesterday reading the article. I suppose it is meant to be a bit of a shock deal, or maybe pot stirring. The thing some of these "philosophers" need to remember is that the more time you spend peeing on fence posts the more likely you'll get your own shoes wet. The REAL purpose of a philosopher is to get you to think....NOT to get you to think what THEY think. That's a tough edge to walk sometimes.
R
-
Jason
Extremely well said!
As long as it is legal, not interfering with others enjoyment of the sport and it adds to the ranks of hunters if they are happy I am happy!
FWIW to the OP I shoot carbon and have never shot wood so adult wood arrows may be completely different. I guess I am a lazy shortcutter to the author of the article. But if adult wood arrows are like my kids wood arrows call me lazy shortcutter, they require a lot of straightening versus shooting and break quite a bit while stumping. From a economical standpoint I choose carbon. I'll lose them before they break! And I never have had to straighten one.
-
Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
I met a gentleman at a 3D shoot years ago that gave me quite the unsolicited earful about my "shortcut" carbon arrows. He stated to me that he couldn't understand why someone would choose a traditional bow for the added challenge, yet use a "crutch" like carbon arrows. I asked him how he assumed to know why I shoot a recurve, as if his personal motivations were somehow universal. Ironically enough, we ended up discussing our favorite portable treestands, an invention that's arguably the biggest "shortcut" ever made for deer hunters. I guess we all have our "shortcuts" if you drill down deep enough.
Regarding the article in question, I found two points confusing. The first was the author's stance against the use of carbon arrows while rationalizing his own occasional use of them. The second was how using wood arrows put him in the company of Fred Bear, who shot aluminum and fiberglass arrows.
Aside from that, I think it's good to occasionally take stock of our individual hunting equipment and tactics and question our personal motivations for such things. A little introspection is a good thing. But I'd rather spend my time pulling my own dandelions than walking up and down the street criticizing my neighbors' lawns.
Very good post JRW. In my opinion, the largest threat to bowhunting, both modern and traditional, are attitudes like those of Mr Robertson, Mr. Thomas, and others. If the editorial content of TBM was more in line with your beliefs, many, including myself, would still be subscribers.
Originally posted by Hopewell Tom:
An excellent article on Rose City Archery, in the April/May issue of Primitive Archer Mag states that "no wood is used that has not been dead at least 25 years."
Same is true for carbon, only it's more like 2.5 billion years. ;)
-
We all walk our own path, the fact that we enjoy the same life sytle, doesn't mean or require that we wear the same shoes/boots as the other guy.
It is the journey, not the destination.
JRW, well written and I concur. Thank you.
-
I think those guys better learn how to make wood arrows then since my wood arrows shoot as good as my carbon. In fact would they say tapering wood arrows is a crutch too? To me nothing beats a good set of tapered matched cedar shafts. Unfortunately stump shooting with them doesn't work too well since they break so easily. Thats why i switched mostly to carbon, and the fact that it is great to practice before a hunt with a dull broadhead on then easily switch to razor sharp one and be ready to go in 5 seconds.
-
Originally posted by Glunt:
I get the introspective part of these types of articals, but reject the idea that the steepest path is the only noble or correct way of arriving somewhere.
My elitism alarm started to blink as I read it.
I love traditional archery when its about having fun with simple archery gear. When it starts to become about being against something different, the fun starts draining.
Hunt and let hunt.
:clapper:
I hunt with traditional equipment because it's simple and effective. Sure, the history is interesting and adds dimension. One thing that history shows cleary is that whatever technology makes the ol' stick and string more effective is what "traditional" archers of the times used!
-
Gap shooter from Chicago... :)
-
Very well said Ryan! It is an individual decision of equipment used.The road to becoming a human being is to not think too highly of yourself. I feel humility and respect of others run along side of each other. Traditional bowhunting offers much in the way of freedom,and the right to make our own choices! Don't worry be happy,after all Oct. is right around the corner. Gary. :thumbsup:
-
It's refreshing to read all the comments on this thread and the reason I come to TG everyday.
-
Most writers write based on their philosophy on the outdoors and how they interact with their surroundings while hunting. Writers in TBM, which of course includes Jason, provoke thought while expressing varied opinions on many subjects that are of interest to a readership that is unique. I welcome the thoughts and the reactions however I would hope the reactions would keep in mind that most writers are attempting to convey what they believe without necessarily trying to shove those thoughts down your throat. Cancelling a subscription is everyones right to express their distaste and I have done that in the past but the quality I see in TBM reflects much more that I believe than the contrary. By the way Jason I thought your article was wonderful and sure hit home for me.
-
I am with Jason!!!
-
I Have shot both..... I now shoot Carbons, Why ? Does it really matter ? The point is that we shoot, we hunt , we enjoy the outdoors. Some of us will never let a Carbon Arrow grace our shelves, others, can't understand why use Wood when Carbon is available. I believe that it does not matter why, or that I am more Traditional than the next guy. In the end, it does not matter if I am on the Primitive Side, or the slightly more Modern Side of the House. What Matters, is we are a Brotherhood. Tu Carnales, Sutty
-
Originally posted by smoke1953:
I welcome the thoughts and the reactions however I would hope the reactions would keep in mind that most writers are attempting to convey what they believe without necessarily trying to shove those thoughts down your throat.
I agree. Trying to convey a controversial message without sounding offensive can be a fine line. Someone mentioned Don Thomas earlier. To me, his writing walks that line better than most anyone else's. He has a knack for telling a hunting story in such a way as to include a message that's neither in the reader's face nor overtly judgmental. I wish more people with strong opinions and typewriters would follow his example. One can make a point without turning it into a spear.
-
I just read the article myself and I have a few words to say. I am finding I am reading more crap in these magazines than I can remember. This guy is a follower all he does is quote people he knows or reads about. I have a strong sense of who I am and I admire many people. But I chose my own path and make my own choices. If he does not like food plots then he should never hunt Illinois or Iowa because it is one giant food plot. He should never hunt a good funnel area for that would be to easy. What about hunting in remote areas where game sees very little human traffic is that like shooting a partridge?
He talks about tuning arrows and woods tune different and nobody really knows how to do it. It just shows this mans ignorance and lack of self try. There is no difference in tuning except there are more variables in each shaft. If carbons are cheating in his book he not only wears blinders he is blindfolded. There are many people who need to shoot carbons or aluminum's. Especially someone new to trad who does not need a variable such as wood arrows.
He talks about trail cams and how bad they are. They are a tool that people use who really enjoy wildlife. They do not mean instant success. You still have to put in the time you still have to deliver the arrow. People I know who use them probably have more dirt time than he will ever have.
According to him I think every one should go out cut down a tree. Then build there bow and arrows. Build your broad heads and string. Using no modern tools or materials. I do not know what he shoots for a bow but if it has any glass on it he is a hypocrite.
His philosophy is a joke. He is narrow minded and it shows his lack of intelligence. I think he should hunt the heavily hunted public land for that is the only true ethical way. That way the animal truly knows what is going on and they will not be taken by surprise which would be so unethical.
This is the type of person who will do more harm than good for our sport. He is the type of person who will help stop hunting bears over bait or put an end to chasing bears,cats and coons with dogs. He can not see the big picture and he has this grandeur that he himself is Aldo Leopold! He needs to stop day dreaming and come to grips with reality.
I love to hunt I use a recurve because I feel it is the best tool for me. I use what ever I feel fit. If I wanted a challenge I would shoot a compound! How is that for murdering partridge.
Scott Teaschner
P.S. I am not a teacher so there may be some bad grammar.
-
It's unfortunate that these discussions usually turn into shouting matches and personal attacks. The main idea in this article, and several that have come before, is that the hunter should give some thought to the technology/methods he/she chooses to use, because that technology/methods can change the nature of the hunt and the hunter. This piece might be more proscriptive than others, and one could argue unnecessarily so, but don't overlook the big picture. It's just to suggest that one do a little self evaluation and analysis now and again to establish and develop one's own personal ethics.
Things have changed a lot since I began bow hunting some 50 years ago. Back then, we didn't have tree stands, scent blocking clothing, ATVs, GPSs, trail cameras, instructional videos, or compound bows. Baiting/food plots were just about unheard of. The only camo available was WWII army surplus.
There's no doubt that these technologies have changed the way we hunt, tipping the scales in hunters' favor, as evidenced by the vastly higher success rate of today's hunters. Of course, that success rate is also influenced by the fact that there are more deer, more widely distributed in this country than there were 50 years ago.
Regardless, a little self-reflection and analysis about why we do what we do is a good thing. It's my hope that the article helps to stimulate that kind of self-awareness.
-
Quite frankly, I don't see either aluminum or carbon arrows as offering any real significant advantage over wood within the bowhunting/roving world. The arguement that they make bowhunting easier is a red herring to me.
HOWEVER, the arguement that carbon and aluminum are better because they don't kill trees sure got my attention! It's sort of a "paper or plastic" arguement I guess, but wood (in general with some exceptions like old growth) is a renewable resource; where both carbon and aluminum arrows consume much more in the way of non-renewable energy (primarily oil based) to produce. In my opionion at least, from an environmental standpoint, wood (from renewable or sustainable sources) is good; carbon and aluminum, less so.
-
I read the article and I definitely agree with Jason. I have nothing against examining the ethical implications of different methods of bow hunting but I firmly believe that different individuals can have different perspectives without anybody necessarily being right or wrong. I respect and admire both Dick Robertson and Don Thomas but that does not mean I have to believe all the exact same things they do. Although I am sure that what we would disagree on would be minor compared to the many important things we would agree on. I have to say that as usual Jason brings a common sense, down to earth approach to the issue at hand. BTW I use carbon exclusively because the arrows fly great, penetrate well and don't break or bend nearly as often as other materials. I like the simplicty of shooting a stickbow without sights and do not have to knap my own flint heads and chew sinew to consider myself an ethical hunter. I admire those who do knap their own heads and build their own selfbows but I do not think anyone who does something less is any less of an ethical hunter.
-
Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
Someone mentioned Don Thomas earlier. To me, his writing walks that line better than most anyone else's. He has a knack for telling a hunting story in such a way as to include a message that's neither in the reader's face nor overtly judgmental.
I would agree...when he sticks to the stories. When he saddles up on the high horse, that "line" gets left on his backtrail.
-
Well said Swamp Yankee,
-
I think all of us should occasionally examine what we do and how we do it. That includes bowhunting. Ethics and standards are rare in todays world.
My wife teaches high school. She can count on two hands the kids that she knows will tell the truth and won't cheat in school.
Which is why I constantly see four-wheelers in wilderness areas here in Montana where they are explicitly banned.
If an article makes somebody think a little bit about ethics, more power to the author. Even if they completely disagree. The world is way too full of Washington politicians as it is.
-
I know a gal who became a guy. I told the person "I am straight, but broad". Meaning it is not my thing, but if it does not affect or effect me, go on for it. Well said Jason and Ryan. Thanks
-
The story being discussed is neither nit picky, bad, or good. It just is. It is a reflection of what the author thinks, and feels, and believes. Those sorts of stories are typically written to tell the world what they think, and. . hopefully. . to hoodwink you into actually opening your mind. . assessing yourself and what you believe.
Let me tell you. . thinking about what we do, and why we do it, or why we feel the way we do is something we all need to do more often. Very often we will find out there is no basis at all for what we do. It is what we did, or family did, or locals have done for years, but never really thinking why.
I can immediately come up with some examples that have nothing to do with hunting or trad, but everything to do with getting along with other peoples.
This story we are getting a bit hot about may be a good example that fits our trad past time.
Change is not necessary. Heck, thinking isn't mandatory either, but it would sure open some eyes, and thinking is actualy healthy. . I think. We don't have to all wear the same colors, or shoot the same bows or arrows.
BTW. . I am gonna stand up for the TB magazine crew. . all of them, and especially Dr. Thomas. It is their magazine. They get to say what they want. You can buy it or not. I happen to love reading it, and, agreeing or disagreeing, I read it all, cover to cover. Then I wait for the next one.
I happen to think extremely highly of Don's writing and read all I can of it. I don't agree with all of it. Don't have to. That isn't one of the rules.
ChuckC
-
I agree with Chuck. I haven't read this article yet as I buy TBM on the newstand but Don Thomas is a skilled writer and one of my favorites. All this thinking and re-thinking what I am shooting and why makes my head hurt. I drank two beers tonight and shot three (carbon) arrows. One at thirty eight yards, one at twenty yards and one at 18 yards. All dead on! Why did I shoot carbon? Don't know. Why did I drink cheap beer? Don't know. But it is fun and I ain't apologizin' for that!
-
Orion & ChuckC,
Good thoughts.
-
I have to admit, I liked the article.
I find myself agreeing with Kirby Kohler,Don Thomas,David Petersen, and Dick Robertson more than dis agreeing.
I use wood arrows, don't own a trail cam, and prefer a one piece bow over any sort of ILF bow (those things are just plain ugly to me).
I guess I'm an elitist at heart. But that's the way I want to do it. You do it your way.
-
I shoot only stone arrows those wood ones are to easy to tune. Limestone for us cave men.
-
Don Thomas did not write the article. A man by the name of Kirby Kohler wrote the article. If it was Don who wrote the article it would be a lot better article. Every one is intitled to there own thoughts. But if you read his article he says carbons are cheating.Then he says but since Dave Patersen and Dr Ashby said you have to use them for elk well then its ok. But not for deer turkey, bear and so on. Then your sacrifice difficulty for ease. I say he is lazy if he is dead set on wood he sould use them. You can get a wood heavy enough. The guy says there are few that no how to tune and hunt with wooden shafts. Just because he doesnt does not mean no one else does. The guy lives in LaLa land he is teacher in enviromental stewardship and obviously does not get out much. For one I like to hunt and I hunt hard . Hunting is something that has been my life style from the time I was three or four years old. If some one is going to write an article like the one he did he better have some sound facts. Which he has none. It is not about reflecting at all. I never did care for a person who bends the rules just to justify thier believes. This guy is scary and he is the type who will help get rid of dogs for hunting bears cats birds what ever. If he does not agree with baiting bears he is the man to watch out for. That is unless Dave Patersen says its ok then its ok. When it comes to hunting I have my own thoughts and oppinions. But where do we draw the line. We have to stay together or we will lose more. I may not agree with the use of hounds but I wont attack it. Its been around a long time it is a tradition. But if you get a bunch of Kirbys together it may be gone in your state. If you can read that article and think it is just some guy reflecting then I must have read a different article. The guy writes rubish. He has no thoughts he just has others thoughts. He also has no experiance for if he did would not have wrote such a poor article.
-
Kirby Kohler is not even close to being a Dave Patersen, Don Thomas or Dick Robertson. To put him in that group would be an insult.
-
Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
[qb] One can make a point without turning it into a spear.
That is a great line JRW ..... I'm so gonna "borrow" it ..... :goldtooth:
-
You know Scott, I think you are taking the personal attacks too far.
Joshua
-
I agree jhg.
-
Yeah I was thinking after I wrote it I should have cooled down a little before I commented . Sorry for the the going off. I just think the guys way of thinking is bad for hunting in general. Every one has there way of thinking and how they like to spend their time in the woods. I just dont think the guys logic holds water. I have probably killed more game with woods than anything else I know how to build them from scratch. I currently shoot carbons. The way it reads in his article he knows very little about woods. So I think he owes it to the game to shoot carbons. I think ethicly it is the only choice for him. He has not done his home work and he tells us in print. When I read an article I think you should at least know what you are writeing about. I am sorry again for not stepping back and waiting a day to cool down.
Scott Teaschner
-
Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
The second was how using wood arrows put him in the company of Fred Bear, who shot aluminum and fiberglass arrows.
QUOTE]
I read it twice, and I must be blind, but where did he mention Fred Bear???
-
Well I'm sure one of Mr. Kohler's goals with this article, like any good article, was to spark some serious thought and introspection on the part of his audience, and he has apparently succeeded on that!
There have been a lot of thoughtful reponses on this thread [and a few that show no thought at all]. I liked the article myself, and think the point of taking stock in one's self, and in this case the way we pursue our bowhunting, from time to time is an important one.
Brad
-
Taking up traditional archery is a pretty good way for most of us to draw a little line in the sand and enjoy the contemplation of things from days gone by.
But I'd guess we all drive a car or truck every day; which reminds me of an exercise we did in an Environmental Economics class I took a few years ago. We calculated how many horses would be necessary to transport everyone to work in Manhattan, NY on a typical workday. Then we figured out how much horse manure all those animals would produce over the course of a day and divided it by the number of square feet on the island. The final answer was Manhattan would be covered by over 100’ (yes that’s FEET) of horse manure in one day.
The fact of the matter is, in many cases there simply is no going back.
As good at hunting as many of us think we are, given only our brains and a stick and string to survive, most of us would starve to death in a few weeks without many of the technological advances we depend on today. It’s nice to dream about a simpler way of life, and there are many lessons to be learned from those dreams, but there is no going back.
-
I have not read the article but will stand with anyone for their right to speak their opinion even if I disagree with it.
I kind of like being asked to take a different point of view into consideration as long as I'm not bashed for not going along with it as my personal choice.
I have the personal responsibility for my own ethics and integrity.
There are times I knowingly break the law like driving 65mph in a clearly posted 60mph speed zone. I am guilty and trying to do better. I won't allow myself to use the excuse "Everyone does it!".
I will however say that in some areas there isn't any true right or wrong, just opinion and yours is just as valid as any writers.
I am partial to what Davy Crockett had to say..“Be always sure you're right, then go ahead.”
God bless,Mudd
PS: I'm sorry if I rambled on too much.
-
To me, a trad bow has always been the easy, more effective hunting tool. Im almost embarrassed to recount all of my compound hunting days mishaps, missed deer a kicking distance, broken parts, loose parts and squeaky draws (not drawers) to name a few. To me the article was just one mans opinion and I certainly gained nothing from reading it but took no offense either. Like it has already been pointed out it aint the first and wont be the last of its kind. I just wish there were some way of knowing its gonna be that type of article so I can skip it before I start to read it.
-
I have pretty much stopped reading hunting mags of any sort. Life is much less confusing when I just do what makes me happy and let everyone else do the same for themselves within the law and common sense.
-
I have subscribed to TBM since it's beginning. Probably just me getting older but I find myself reading less of the content over the last few years if at all. I did read three and one half articles in this latest issue including the one by Kirby Kohler.
I'm not at all surprised by the article or that the editors would choose to print it. Their magazine and they make the choices as to what ends up in print. It is entirely up to us as the consumer whether we choose to support their decisions.
-
Originally posted by Swamp Yankee:
Taking up traditional archery is a pretty good way for most of us to draw a little line in the sand and enjoy the contemplation of things from days gone by.
I think this is where some of us get off the train. I'm not in any way saying you are wrong Swamp Yankee, to each his own, I just don't personally feel the need to draw any lines in any sand. Traditional archery is something that I do because I enjoy it. It's not a statement I'm trying to make. I'm not trying to reinact anything, or relive the good old days. I just enjoy it. It's like picking what foods I like to eat. If I want to eat a Big Mack and large fries and wash it down with a diet Coke, so be it. It doesn't need to make sense to anyone else but me. If my son wants to put catsup on a nice steak, who am I to tell him he's wrong? If my daughter likes to dip fries in her Frosty, what do I care? If I want to shoot carbon arrows out of selfbow, I sure as heck don't need anyone in a hunting magazine suggesting that it might not be the right thing to do or that it's not the way things were meant to be.
Unless it's governed by law, it really is only about me.
-
Well said Jeffrey! We need to stick together as one where much stronger that way.
-
I read the article and my fist thought was what Scott T was saying, he is just re wording stuff that we all have read in the past and took it as the gospil.
I have always have had a hard time understanding the thought process of I shoot a stick now every thing needs to be harder than needed.
When I'm Elk hunting and if I can take a trail that gets me to where I want in 1.5 hrs VS hiking straight up the back side in 3hrs just becuase it's the hard way, I'm taking the trail
-
I'm sorry Scott, and Jeffrey....but it is indeed about drawing a line in the sand.
Nobody with a "can't we all just get along" attitude ever won a debate or got a season granted or protected in a state Fish and Game meeting. Only those with agendas attend these things, and only those with agendas get politically involved. Give me one person with a good argument and he/she will be able to "whip the pants" of a hundred "can't we all just get along" folks. To say that if we just shut up and "take it" as it comes and everything will be alright is naive at best.
And it smacks of hypocracy to call names whenever someone who disagrees with your "get along" attitude speaks up. Should'nt you just "shut up" and take it....like you suggest they do?!!!
Intospection is necessary in our sport and has always been there.
Saxton Pope, and Art Young drew a line in the sand with their choices in modern bowhunting's infancy. The very existence of each and every state and national traditional organization is a "drawing" of lines. And....bow seasons, (like it or not) were formed by folks with specific gear who "drew lines" and fought hard to get them implemented. I guess they all were "elitists".
And hey...they did'nt have to deal with half the techno junk we have today and they were sick of it all, even back then!
You're right...there is a time and place for all to live....and bowhunters carved out their own "niche" and now, because of the "anything goes" crowd...we are faced with losing opportunity if we don't police ourselves and fight a bit amongst ourselves to keep what we have. Some of the names bandied about because of their opinions were among the few who stood strong when traditional bowhunting was at it's weakest. They saw what complacency has done to our sport and how out-of-control it has all become. Bowhunting never was supposed to be for everyone....only those who choose to accept the challenge were granted the increased opportunities. Can you say that modern bowhunters today are all about "accepting the challenges"??? No Way! They are all about doing whatever is legal and easiest.
Challenge remains the one thing about what we do that separates us from them...and make no mistake, what we do is very different from what they do. Challenge and accepting it is what defines us as traditional bowhunters, and we all have differing levels of that, and we recognize that our "satisfaction" is derived from our ability to overcome these. It is what keeps us doing this for a lifetime....neverending challenge. So what is wrong with a bit of "challenge" from time to time from those within our own ranks??? Nothing. It keeps us all healthy....wondering if we have "what it takes".
Personally, although I don't always agree with everything many of those type writers like to say, I love to hear their thoughts on the subject....and sometimes, sometimes, they get me thinking. And that's a good thing.
-
The thought provoking part doesn't give writers a free pass to make sweeping judgments and generalizations without getting some flak.
Carbons & pop-up blinds aren't ok choices? Thats plain silly thinkin' to me. Some folks wear the fact that they shoot "traditional" or hunt the "hard" way like a merit badge. Maybe its those folks that need to take a look in the mirror. Are they shooting a stick and POC arrows because they enjoy it or because of how others will perceive them? Do they really dislike camo, or do they just like to look the part in a plaid shirt kneeling introspectively over a whitetail buck? Do they put "hard hunted public land" in their successful elk tale to tell the story better or to grow their hat size?
Nothing wrong with being proud of taking on a challenge and imposing limitations on yourself. And, nothing wrong with dressing the part or choosing equipment that helps submerse one's self in a certain image that makes them happy. Start dictating choices and making assumptions about why others choose what they do, and expect some blowback.
I would prefer a day afield with a friend, his 1000 yard rifle, and his honest approach to hunting over a day with an elitist trad hunter with back quiver full of cane arrows thats out there to feed his image or ego.
I've built and shot arrows from wood, glass, aluminum and carbon. Heck, I even hunted one year (about 1986) with a Martin Cougar Magnum compound and cedar arrows when I was a broke kid. Whats in a guys quiver or what kind of weapon he slides out of the back seat has never been a good way to judge who he is.
-
I believe traditional archery is about using a recurve, longbow, or selfbow without sights to propel a feathered shaft. If one truly wishes to define traditional as only using wood arrows than maybe only selfbows, sinew strings, and stone points are truly traditional in this term.
-
Such articles serve a purpose in that they make us re-examine what we are doing and take stock. When I see an article such as this I generally read through it and think a bit. In this case, I didn't agree with most of what he had to say but no harm in that since I engage in this kind of introspection often already.
Even after such, I choose to use aluminums and trail cameras and pop-up blinds among other tactics and trends and ideas and what-not. My reasons may be different than yours. I use aluminums because I don't like the inconsistency of woods. I found an arrow that flies great out of my preferred bow and no longer have to "tinker" around with stuff (which I hate; others here love to tinker). I prefer to stick to this one size of aluminum so I know any arrows I make this year will be the same as those I made 10 years ago. Sometimes my quiver evolves into an ugly mess of leftover shafts from each batch, but they're all the same shaft, fletch configuration, weight. One could argue that such a strategy is fairer to the game animals we pursue. Or that by using aluminums (instead of wood), I save some time that can be better put to use by playing with my children or being a better dad or staying caught up on housework or my job or whatever.
When someone tells me that my choice of some type of equipment is not "traditional" enough, I sometimes wonder how much time that person has on their hands? (By the way, I do agree with Mark in that some lines need to be drawn--I hardly recognize the general "archery" equipment anymore). But bickering about what is traditional enough annoys me.
I've not found using trail cameras to help me kill big bucks (maybe I'm too stupid to use 'em right, but I've NEVER found NE whitetails to have such predictable trails/times). In fact, the same camera on the same scrape or trail has NEVER revealed to me a consistent pattern at all. Often it will show ONE photo of a desired buck in a month. Sheesh, some shortcut?
But they do allow me an additional window into the outdoor world that I love. They excite my children about looking through the SD cards. How is that bad? I actually endeavor/prefer to take a mature buck that I've already got a photo and shed antler from. One could argue that such an approach is an even greater challenge than simply hunting without either. Is that bad? If you don't like it, fine, but don't make assumptions about the cameras that aren't true.
I recently used a homemade fiberglass antelope decoy I copied off the Mel Dutton design 20 years ago or so. Does using that decoy mean I'm shortcutting...or does the fact that I made and painted it myself make it okay? Would it be more traditional if it was made of wood instead of fiberglass? Or should it be made of real fur like the Native Americans probably used?
I think sometimes we split too many hairs...and this article (rationalizing how it was okay for the author to shoot carbons in certain circumstances but not others) took that hair-splitting to another level.
And by the way, even out of a blind, no shot at a turkey is a slam dunk. At least not in my experience. :eek: My girls have been totally turned on by hunting and seeing turkeys up close in a blind; something not likely possible if I were not using one. Should I feel guilty for the use of the blind?
The assumptions many make of trail cameras--in my experience anyway--are not accurate. Just like the assumption the guy made of why and what Jason Wesbrock was shooting at the 3D event.
I don't know why I even feel the need to respond to this thread as I'm totally comfortable with the way I hunt but these are complicated subjects----or they can be very simple. And simply put: I shoot a longbow and have shot trad since 1988. That, to me, is the big choice. Whether I hunt from trees, blind, with wood or carbon, or using camo or plaid...relatively unimportant.
And even with that said, my primary hunting partner is a compound hunter with traditional values. She is trad-curious...and I suspect more compounders would be trad-curious if we didn't sometimes come across as stuffy hair-splitters.
My long-winded two cents. Sorry.
-
IT seems that huntin is a privelage, not a right. We are permitted by our nation to hunt recreationally. Not all people, in fact very few people have the privelages to hunt and fish as we do in our nation. Others are permitted to hunt with other equipment than I choose to use. Some of it makes little difference, others seem to be an unfair advantage to me. However, some one might think of my use of binoculars with my longbow as unfair use of optics. And maybe the next person might think that if I really was a hunter I would walk to the mountains instead of using my vehicle or Helicopeter.(I don't really have one). But some have used longbows and helicopters to get to the hunting location and thought themselves to be primative hunters.
So "the bus stops at a lot of different corners' and we all get on and off as we see fit. There can be slobs who shoot stone age bows and ethical hunters using more modern gear. There are ethical firearm hunters as well.
We have lots of technology available and we all use it it one form or another. I think there is plenty to do in keeping our own "porches swept."
-
TG is awesome in so many ways but I think that the diverse bunch of truly intelligent people that frequent this forum is TGs greatest asset. A lot of your responses are deep and I am glad to see how many people truly get it the way that I do if I am reading correctly. It seems that a common thread in these e responses is that Trad is about what makes us as individuals happy and lights our own individual fires. If finding this out this the authors intention Id say he hit a grand slam. And if it wasnt his intention I hope he will gain some insight from the responses here.
-
In response to Mark Baker and considering Pope and Young, they shot firearms into brush to drive game into shooting position. I don't particularly think I would care to do that for more reasons than because the game they were after were big cats. They followed lions in the "fliver" until they charged, which would be against game laws in many places in our country.
And they were chastized by firearm hunters for having a rifle to back them up when hunting lions. they hunted at night. So again, not all of our heros are heroes at everything.
I have convictions and I speak them.
This very forum is a great use of technology.
We can afford to hunt with bows and arrows for sport because we live in a WEALTHY technological nation. We each choose to step back in time as far as we see fit. Much of it depends on our past culture and environment.
It is kind like railing against logging as I sit in a wooden chair in a wood frame house. Sure their are abuses to use of any natural resource and abuses should be addressed, but logging provides us with homes, work places, furniture, etc.
Good hunting to you all.
-
I'm always impressed with the conversations here. This thread would have run off the road and into the weeds on page 1 elsewhere. Kudos to everyone here!
Now lets all go fling some arrows, by whatever means floats your boat.
-
A healthy dose of Socratic Dialectic is good now and then, for both TBM and our entire "2 sticks and a string" culture.
-
Originally posted by Mark Baker:
....but it is indeed about drawing a line in the sand.
I agree with Mark.
Compton's was established by drawing a line in the sand and has done great work in promoting traditional archery.
I bet not many on this form support crossbows in archery season. I don't. That's drawing a line in the sand.
Let's face it. It's human nature to use more advanced technology to make things easier. Some use carbon arrows because they can get them to shoot better than wood (i.e. it's easier to shoot well). Folks buy and use trail cams to aid in scouting (i.e. making it easier to find that big buck). If your reason for using a trail cam wasn't to help you scout before season, then why did you buy one? And don't say it's because you like to get pics of wildlife. If that's really the case, why did you set that trail cam up over a scrape and would you NOT hunt in an area where you got a pic of a Pope and Young buck?
Why won't we just admit we use technology because it makes things easier? Is it because if we admit we do something beacuse it makes things easier, it hurts our foolish pride a bit?
I use manufactured Magnus broadheads because it's easier than knapping stone points. I use pre-made wood shafts because it's easier than making my own. I use a glass laminated bow because they are easier to care for than a self bow and last longer. I use a treestand because it's easier to get into bow range of whitetails than being on the ground. I use cover sents and camoflage for the same reason. I'm comfortable saying I'm taking an easier route than those highly dedicated primitive guys who hunt with a selfbow carved out with only stone tools, knap their own heads, use cane shafts they harvested themselves, and hunt off the ground in plaid clothes. I'm not good enough yet to attempt such things - maybe someday if I'm not so lazy.
We should stop the "elitist" name calling because someone else drew their line in the sand a little farther back and voiced their opinions and reasons why.
-
First of one of my big things with this guy is if your going to write something you better know what your talking about. Drawing a line in the sand is fine but know what you are talking about. How can you talk about wood arrows being the only fair way to hunt. Then say ok maybe just for elk can you use a crbon. Then say you know I really dont know any thing about wood arrows no body really does and there is really no good info out there. What the guy is telling me is he wrote an article with no accuracy. If you dont know some thing how can you have an oppinion on it? How can I put any stock in any thing else he wrote. For all I know the guy has never even shot a deer. I am guessing he never even hunted turkeys out of a blind. But I bet if he came to Wyoming it would be all right to hunt out of a pop up blind for antelope. See when you draw the line it should be straight and and not curve all over the place as his does. Also if you want me to listen you better know what your talking about.
Scott Teaschner
-
Tradgang! What a great site and great bunch of Folks!!! :clapper:
-
"First they came for the communists (compound hunters),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist (compound hunter).
Then they came for the trade unionists (gun hunters),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist(gun hunter).
Then they came for the Jews (users of carbon arrows and tent blinds),
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew (user of carbon arrows and tent blinds).
Then they came for me (the guy with the line in the sand)
and there was no one left to speak out for me."
Martin Niemöller (1892-1984)
Hopefully he won't mind my edits.
-
Originally posted by jsweka:
Originally posted by Mark Baker:
....but it is indeed about drawing a line in the sand.
I agree with Mark.
Compton's was established by drawing a line in the sand and has done great work in promoting traditional archery.
[/b]
I've been a member of Comptons since shortly after they formed. One of the things that drew me to them, and keeps me renewing every year is how they promote traditional archery. They figured out how to advance what they like without insulting everything outside their circle. I can't remember ever once reading a compound-bashing piece in their magazine, and that says a lot.
Just because one draws a line in the sand does not mean they have to urinate across it.
-
Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:
.
Just because one draws a line in the sand does not mean they have to urinate across it.
Mate , you are on a roll ...... that is gold !
-
I agree...the urinating across the line quote of Jason's is classic.
I agreed with most of what jswelka posted except this:
If your reason for using a trail cam wasn't to help you scout before season, then why did you buy one? And don't say it's because you like to get pics of wildlife. If that's really the case, why did you set that trail cam up over a scrape and would you NOT hunt in an area where you got a pic of a Pope and Young buck?
Unfortunately, this statement assumes everyone's motive for a trail camera is one and only one thing, and if I said otherwise the accusation is that I'm lying. That's erroneous. Just as Kohler assumes a great deal about trail camera use that I find simply to be categorically untrue. Who says hunters are no longer putting in "dirt time" as he said? I sure am; if anything I'm putting in more.
Without turning this into a trail camera thread (only a small part of this puzzle), getting a quality photo of many bucks is what I like best. This allows me to leave the still camera in my pack and focus more on the actual hunting instead of trying to do both (ever since I started passing up bucks back in '84 I began using a camera in the field). I really DO love wildlife photos (and my in-field sketches), and I still do.
Does a trail cam help show what bucks are around? Sure. But I have seen three big bucks (through conventional scouting with binoculars) that I have NOT been able to get a single trail camera picture of all summer. Not as easy as people think.
Nor has a camera ever revealed some secret pattern to me. Ever. Not as simple as some think.
Why set it up over a scrape? Because I'm more interested in bucks than does.
Suggesting one should NOT hunt in any area that a camera revealed a P&Y buck(?) is similar to Kohler suggesting hunting on public ground was somehow more noble than private or something like that. Honestly, there is probably a 125"+ deer on most any decent-sized piece of good NE habitat that's not overhunted. In some parts of the best deer states like IA or IL, there is probably a 135-140" deer calling each decent piece of habitat their home.
By the way, trail cam pics given landowners have been greatly appreciated for many. And two years ago, when an absentee landowner suffered some theft, he called and asked if I'd bring my cameras out of the woods to the actual farmstead to try to help catch the scum.
-
The equipment doesn’t necessarily define the person but it does define the season.
When it come to seasons there needs to be a hard line drawn between bow season(primitive) and gun season (not so primitive).
Forty years ago this wasn’t a big deal because hunting wasn’t even thought of as a industry but if we fast forward 40+ years, now it’s a industry that makes a ton of money and that fuzzy line that was put in place several decades ago keeps getting pushed to the not so primitive side. So now the effectiveness and the learning curve of the weapon is encroaching (some wild life agencies are thinking it may have surpassed) it’s imaginary line.
-
Let's not forget that our bowhunting seasons had to be fought so hard for because many people believed at that time that the bow and arrow was not a viable hunting weapon. It wasn't looked at as a management tool at that time, as it's impact on total harvests was simply a "rounding error."
In this day and age, game departments are only concerned with taking ENOUGH deer each year and the seasons are set accordingly.
The popularity of modern archery equipment has taken bowhunting from a mere novelty to a bonifide management tool. In many states, bowhunters account for 1/4 to 1/3 of all the deer harvested. Those are real numbers. Because of this, ALL bowhunters have clout. ALL bowhunters have a voice. All bowhunters benefit.
Take away the "modern" segment of the bowhunting community, as some people seem to want to do, and we will be left with about a week long season, or worse yet, seasons shared with firearms.
Game departmens have a job to do, and that is to eliminate enough game to keep each species within what the environment can hold. In many areas, we STILL aren't getting that job done.
As passionate as we all are about traditional bowhunting, the facts are simple. Alone, we simply do not, nor will we ever have enough of an impact on game numbers to carry any real clout.
Draw all the lines in the sand that you want but be careful what you wish for, you just might get it...or lose it.
-
The author is all over the place with his thinking and trying to blend his mentors/hero's thoughts/writings with his own, which seem to vary.
"The point here is that traditional bowhunters need to remember to draw that line somewhere, committing to self-reflection and analysis, because we are part of something bigger than ourselves"
Most of us did that the day we chose to use a stickbow in lieu of wheelie bows or horizontal bolt launchers.
-
I am finally seeing some of the response that I was hopeing to see. That is you can have your own personal goals or standards. But that does not mean every thing else is wrong. People as they become more experianced may put more limitations on themselfs. Thats their choice. But when you start to narrow it down and start to get pushy its not right. We will loose privliages if we dont stand as one. That is a cold hard fact. I do not know how any one could read his article and not be just a little bit scared. Every thing I read said if had more power this is how it would be period. I like reading a story about some ones reflections. I saw no reflecting in his.
Scott Teaschner
-
I went through a period of time when I looked down on everyone who wasn't shooting something "Traditional"---at least as I defined it. It finally hit me that MY definition was not the only sensible one out there. I am embarrassed to remember some of the attitudes I adopted back then, and hope I can do better now.
I shoot glass backed recurves, aluminum arrows (because I still have oodles of them and don't want to spend more money on carbons) and I use a tree stand. Oh, and I usually wear some form of camo clothing. But I am a "traditionalist".
Lots of interesting ideas here and I have enjoyed this thread.
-
I just read "THE ARTICLE", and am really ambivolent towards it-nothing new here, it's been said many times before. I had a trail camera set up-in a refuge area we put off limits to hunting. I got photos of deer, turkey, fox, hawks, rabbits, raccoon, but only one of the bucks in a photo ended up in the bed of a truck. I simply enjoyed the photos.
Someone, and I can't recall who (Jose Ortega y Gasset???), said that we all go through phases as hunters. Phase 1 is going out, coming home empty handed and being frustrated. Phase 2 is killing something. Phase 3 is seeing how many kills you can make, not being selective at all. Phase 4 is becoming slective and only taking certain animals-all drakes, or bucks, or cockbirds. Phase 5 is selecting a more difficult method of hunting-going from a 12 guage to a 20 guage, going traditional, going primitive. The last phase is going out and choosing to observe more sand kill less. Each of us progresses through the various phases, some stopping in one phase, some in another, and some actually getting to the final phase. Does the phase you stop in make you a better, more ethical hunter than someone in a lower phase? Does being selctive with a method of hunting that makes me routinely successful make me inferior to the hunter who wants to make his hunt more difficult?
-
I finally got around to reading the article and feel its not as much your wrong and I am right but just to think about choices and author lists his. With that said I respectfully disagree on some items just like some of you would with my choices.
Carbon arrows (long run cheaper for me mentioned in my earlier post) and trail cams.
The one item on trailcams I see argued alot and I disagree with is the aspect of because I see a big buck at 1am in a photo I am going to be guaranteed to be grilling his back straps once the season opens. Unless I poach and shoot him at night with a spot light or until they create a robotrail cam that shoots a arrow or a .308 projectile that I operate from home through my kids Xbox (which I probably couldnt do anyhow!) and shoot him. So I disagree that getting deer photographed and getting em eaten is a huge gap in reality!
-
Now where getting to the core! Take Dick Robertson. He is a very talented man. He is a very acomplished hunter. I am sure he has his own oppions and strong. He has a lot of EXPERIANCE! He choses a more difficult aproach to challange himself. No I do not know the man personaly but I doubt he would make any such comments to put down other ethical means of harvesting game. If you go to his store in Lewiston MT you will see carbon arrows for sale. All I can say is use some common sense when it comes to these topics.
Scott Teaschner
-
It's unavoidable...technology has made possible a plethagy of choices in which to experiment with. I'd be willing to bet that if some keen inventor discovered that putting carbon in the limbs of bows back in Knottingham enhanced the performance...Robin Hood himself would've been first in line! To each their own! Just grab a stick and a "projectile" and go out and have fun! IMHO...I think people are way too obsessed with weights/gr., carbons, woodies, and all the other "specifics" of having that "perfect" arrow flight!
-
Originally posted by rholzie:
It's unavoidable...technology has made possible a plethagy of choices in which to experiment with.
What is a "plethagy?" Is that a new kind of carbon?
:biglaugh:
-
No, turkeys fear me, plethagy is what you catch if the thread goes over 6 pages!
-
OK Jeff, "plethagy" ok, let's see now...ummmmmmmm...mmmmm...mmmm...I got it...it means A LOT!...you know like "plethora", same thing! Hey I thought it was a word! I even used it in scrabble once! duh! I think it's time to go shoot a plethagy of arrows now! LOL :smileystooges:
-
I was going through all the posts from the start. One very intresting thing I noticed is Pasquinell who started the thread never once said any thing more than I thought it would raise more attention in the third post. He also started the same topic in Wisconsin Traditional Archers in the state trad. organ.. It seems to me he got what he wanted to stir the pot and sit back and watch. Why would someone start such a topic in two areas and never say one more word? Was he specificly looking for a reaction? If it was it looks like he got it. I just wonder why he never said another word? You would think if it was important enough for him to state his ground and start the topic he would at least participate!
Scott Teaschner
-
Wow Scott. . . do you agree with anybody here ?
Maybe he got embarrased by all the yelling and name calling and quietly bowed out.
Moderators ?
ChuckC
-
I never really seen any yelling going on ChuckC. But when some touches on some prety sensitive subjects I just wonder?
Scott Teaschner
-
I had a girlfriend like this once. You were in trouble if you said something...
And you were in trouble if you kept quiet.
She would conjure up all sorts of "reasons" why I was quiet and all of them were negative.
Its how she saw the world. And nothing was ever going to change that.
Joshua
-
At some point in every conversation it's just best to say nothing more.
-
The racing industry seperates its classes
Stock--Modified--Open. (the lower classes can run up but the upper class can't run down)
Why is it so bad that the Hunting Industry can't do the same and put some boundries on a weapon/s to be used in a specific season.
Bow(stock)--Shotgun/muzzle loader(modified)--Rifle/crossbow(open) the lower season can hunt the upper season but the upper can't hunt the lower. The lines between these season can not be the least bit fuzzy. Wanting to clean this fuzzy-ness up should not make one an Elitist.
If the hunters don't the manufacture are going to keep moving the line little by little.
-
Personally I feel the article was informative and opinionated! I will not knock a fellow because of his gear...it may be all he has or in his eyes its his perfect weapon. Will my leafy suit make me less of a trad hunter?or should I sale my 7mm rum and purchase a hawken riffle? To each his own...I've never had a trail camera but with the way I work I think one would help my sucess since I don't get to scout a lot. Between my long bow and recurve I've got less than 400.00 invested but I will be out there giving it my all come oct.1st!..oh yeah...woodsmans in the quiver hooked to carbon arrows,leafy suit..waterproof boots and all!
-
The man wrote a well written, thought provoking article, just what we expect to read in TBM. It obviously made people think AND stirred the pot. That is what Teachers, GOOD Teachers, do in class. They engage, inspire and encourage Socratic Dialectic conversation. Good Teachers throw out a question pertaining to a given topic, some observations and facts and then leave you to ponder; is the answer black and white, or IS there a shade of grey?
-
Hit-or-miss - this is the second time you've mentioned the Socratic method of debate. I agree with you...that's a great way to assess your belief system...you are just giving this article too much credit in that regard. The Socratic method is a debate method of asking and answering questions, of leading one to think, not dictating to one WHAT to think. It involves gentle coaxing, not bullying. The practitioner of the true Socratic method would rebel against the inconsistencies and hypocrisy that many in this thread mention.
Good teachers lead students to think, bad teachers dictate by rote and dogmatism.
I think we need to keep in mind too, that the author is relatively new to traditional bowhunting. From his statement he has been at it since 1998 - 12 seasons does NOT an expert make! Heck, with 26 seasons under my belt I get schooled by the deer constantly, my father has been chasing whitetails for nealy half a century and 18 month old does outsmart him all the time. Kirby will learn humility if he pays attention. Its all part of the growing/learning process. It also serves TBM's purpose to stir the pot. They are getting more exposure from this thread than several thousand dollar's worth of advertising would buy them.
Ryan
-
I have some assumptions about Kirby and his ilk. First, he is probably new to the sport or very young. He is enthusiastic about it. He has found, for the moment, what he considers to be the "right way" to do it. He troubles me, not because he thinks or does what he does...he reinvents history attributing to Fred Bear, and perhaps others, certain behaviors and attitudes that those of us who grew up with Fred Bear as he himself grew and evolved know for a fact weren't true. His fantasy trad bowhunter never existed in Fred Bear, Ben Pearson or any number of the early pioneers of our sport. Jason was spot on about the equipment Bear used and his ongoing attempts to improve and modernize the sport. In fact, Port Orford cedar was the not wood of choice for arrows for many years. If you want to be hard core then shoot birch. IMO, too many who were not there when Fred and Ben where making history and "gadgets" to make the sport more palatable to the non hunting public need to do more research and get their facts straight. I shoot what I shoot because I can shoot it more accurately than other things I can shoot. And it is durable and long lived. It has nothing to do with my sense of what a "fantasy traditional bowhunter" is. I want what works best for me in the real world and allows me to make quick, clean ethical kills. Hunting/killing wild game is not an experiment. Your shooting skills, hunting skills and equipment need to be the best you can obtain or achieve. Guys like Kolby, to me, are just making noise and are not living in the real world.
-
Originally posted by Ryan Rothhaar:
It also serves TBM's purpose to stir the pot. They are getting more exposure from this thread than several thousand dollar's worth of advertising would buy them.
Ryan
While I agree with your premise, unlike in the world of pop stars and reality TV, not all exposure is good exposure.
Whenever there is an article such as this discussed in the forums, more and more people respond by saying that this is the reason they no longer subscribe to TBM. There are very few "converts" from an articles like this. For those that agree, it's preaching to the choir. For those that disagree, it's just another point of division, or "line in the sand" as some have said.
-
Not long ago Fred Asbell wrote a similar article in TBM about "easy" mentioning trail cams, GPS's, cell phones, etc. I will rationalize the use of technologies that benefit me and refuse to use others, I think all of us will. At the end of the day, I only have to live with me!! I don't want to be held up as an example to others and I don't do things for the approval of others. If you are in traditional archery for the appoval of others or to be idolized, I think you have the wrong ideas. Archery is supposed to be fun. Traditional archery immerses you deeper into the concept of living archery with a hands on approach, making your own tackle, working to perfect your form and technique, slowing down and enjoying the dedication needed to achieve a goal through hard work and effort. I use the tackle I use for me, and me alone, for my own reasons. All I expect from anyone else is acceptance. My choices are just that-MY choices. You are welcome to yours.
-
Wanting to draw lines doesn't make you an elitist...wanting to draw lines for others does. That's the slippery slope.
-
The more lines we draw in the pie, the smaller each slice gets. There is only so much season to go around.
-
What is the problem with xbows, compounds, and trad equipment sharing a season? I can see differentiating between archery and gun but if it shoots an arrow with a string I really don't see what the big deal is. Xbows don't give any more advantage than compounds and I remember people fighting this same fight about compounds.
Another thing, I shoot what I shoot because I enjoy it and it makes me happy, I could care less what anyone else shoots. I really don't understand why some people are so interested in what everyone else shoots. It seems to me a lot of people are into trad archery for all the wrong reasons. Chris
-
A given method of hunting can be legal by a govenment regulation, but unethical for a particular bowhunter.
-
Originally posted by swamprooter:
I really don't understand why some people are so interested in what everyone else shoots.
In my opinion, it can usually be traced back to one's own insecurities, and need to justify their own decisions. Not always, but often.
-
Something was recently brought to my attention. I mentioned being confused by a comment regarding Fred Bear, and upon further review, that particular comment was not in Kirby's article, but another in the same issue. For incorrectly attributing it to Kirby, I sincerely apologize.
-
Originally posted by Turkeys Fear Me:
Originally posted by swamprooter:
I really don't understand why some people are so interested in what everyone else shoots.
In my opinion, it can usually be traced back to one's own insecurities, and need to justify their own decisions. Not always, but often. [/b]
Or it could just be because they are passionate enough about bowhunting to want to know the state of their avocation in a broader sense.
Reading through this thread, and the majority of opinions expressed here, got me thinking. I have only been bowhunting for about 15 years, but in that time it seems that the attitudes of "traditional" bowhunters have changed dramatically. When I first started it was all about the how... the method in which we pursued game. Though not the whole of it, equipment was a big part that how. A short 15 years later, after/during a huge resurgance in the popularity of "traditional" archery, it seems that the predominant view is, why should I care what anybody else is doing as long as it's legal...
I apologize, as I guess this was an observation of the reaction to the article more than the article itself. I just thought it interesting.
-
Originally posted by Brad @ Work:
When I first started it was all about the how... the method in which we pursued game. Though not the whole of it, equipment was a big part that how. A short 15 years later, after/during a huge resurgance in the popularity of "traditional" archery, it seems that the predominant view is, why should I care what anybody else is doing as long as it's legal...
I apologize, as I guess this was an observation of the reaction to the article more than the article itself. I just thought it interesting.
No need to apologize, conversations like this are good.
As to your statement, I don't think much has changed since you started, only the medium and the scope of how we discuss it has. Never before have we been able to have a "conversation" with fellow bowhunters from all over the globe. The internet has provided a forum where we can get immediate, and for the most part unedited opinions, in real time. In the past, when something was written in a magazine, the only opinions you heard were of course your own and those of a few friends that may have read it also. No longer is that the case. Editors and writers would share ideas and unless someone felt strongly enough about something to write a letter to the magazine, and the magazine felt confident enough to share it, nobody ever really knew how someone in a different state or country felt about it.
Good or bad, things are much more transparent now and what was previously just a monologue, has now become a dialogue. Editors and writers are having to justify and support their opinions like never before. Some of them are OK with that idea and some don't seem to like it.
Things like:
Do you really think that arrow shaft material REALLY changes what's in a hunter's heart? How about camo? Scent lock? A trail cam?
Does a brushed in tent blind as opposed to just a brush blind REALLY change how a person hunts?
Does hunting over a food source that was planted by a man and hunting over a food source that was placed by a man REALLY matter?
It used to be that they just wrote it and moved on. Now, they have to deal with the how's and why's.
Personally, I think that's a good thing. If it's a writers job to make us think, who's job is it to make writers think?
Our's of course.
-
Originally posted by Brad @ Work:
Originally posted by Turkeys Fear Me:
Originally posted by swamprooter:
I really don't understand why some people are so interested in what everyone else shoots.
In my opinion, it can usually be traced back to one's own insecurities, and need to justify their own decisions. Not always, but often. [/b]
Or it could just be because they are passionate enough about bowhunting to want to know the state of their avocation in a broader sense.
Reading through this thread, and the majority of opinions expressed here, got me thinking. I have only been bowhunting for about 15 years, but in that time it seems that the attitudes of "traditional" bowhunters have changed dramatically. When I first started it was all about the how... the method in which we pursued game. Though not the whole of it, equipment was a big part that how. A short 15 years later, after/during a huge resurgance in the popularity of "traditional" archery, it seems that the predominant view is, why should I care what anybody else is doing as long as it's legal...
I apologize, as I guess this was an observation of the reaction to the article more than the article itself. I just thought it interesting. [/b]
It's still about the how. THe thing is, if someone is forcing you to a given "how", then you haven't achieved anything. You haven't chosen a path, it's been chosen for you. Make your choices, choose to challenge yourself, then you've accomplished something.
IMHO, the only time we should be concerned about what choices others are making is when they threaten to deny us the choices we have made. That's not even close to the case when talking about traditional bowhunting. As long as a bow remains hand drawn and has one string on it, I guarantee you Joe Public doesn't give a flying flip what your arrows are made of.
We worry a lot about things like reduced seasons, but in my area I've had talks with deer biologist who have told me they don't care if bow season is all year long . Maybe things are different in other states, but the idea that we are losing opportunity, identity or "street cred" based on what kind of arrows we shoot is just ludicrous here.
I guess I can sum up my opinion by saying that when you draw a line, make darn sure you do it for a reason. Examine that reason and ask yourself if it's one your folks would be proud of. Be FOR something, not against everything else.
-
It's not really a case of "whatever's legal", it's just that there are so many options available now. Carbon arrows were a rarity 15 yars ago, aluminum was king. We now have carbon in bows, foam limbs, superior glues, several bow string materials, many takedown systems. Before about 1950, there was no fiberglass used in bows, they were all wood or backed with any of several materials. String materials have gone from flax/linen to dacron, to FF. A lot of primitive shoots have "no fiberglass, no aluminum, no plastic nocks, no synthetic strings"-is this where we need to go, limiting what's acceptable? What's allowed in competition is one thing, but for personal pleasure or hunting, who gets to decide what is and isn't acceptable as "traditional"-the wood bow shooters, the 50's/60's Bear shooters, the ILF folks, the 2 piece shooters, the 1 piece shooters? When we start declaring what is or isn't acceptable, doesn't it then become who's right and who's wrong?
-
Originally posted by swamprooter:
What is the problem with xbows, compounds, and trad equipment sharing a season? I can see differentiating between archery and gun but if it shoots an arrow with a string I really don't see what the big deal is. Xbows don't give any more advantage than compounds and I remember people fighting this same fight about compounds.
Another thing, I shoot what I shoot because I enjoy it and it makes me happy, I could care less what anyone else shoots. I really don't understand why some people are so interested in what everyone else shoots. It seems to me a lot of people are into trad archery for all the wrong reasons. Chris
Sorry swamprooter, I gotta disagree with you on this one. Xbows may not actually provide an advantage within a 20 yard range. An arrow through the lungs is a dead deer whether it came from a Xbow, compound, laminated bow, or self bow. But the big difference is in the ease at which the hunter became efficient enough to put that arrow through the lungs. My brother-in-law just baught a new fancy Xbow that shoots 410 fps with a mill dot scope. At thirty yards, me, my other brother-in-law, my nephew, and my sister-in-law all hit a snuff can size dot on our first shot with it. I have to admit, the thing is fun to shoot. However, soon Xbows will displace even compounds as the weapons of choice in archery seasons BECAUSE THEY ARE EASIER. Sorry, a crossbow with a scope is not a bow.
(The same brother-in-law also just baught a recurve, so I can't bash him too much.)
Archery and muzzleloader seasons were established for folks that wanted a greater challenge and a season in which they didn't have to compete with the rifle hunters for space in the woods. Why is it that we now want to take that increased challenge and use technology to make things easier. Xbows in archery season and in-line rifles in muzzleloader season. Let's face it we are a lazy society looking for the easy way to success.
-
Totally agree, except for the part where they (x-bows) don't provide an advantage within 20yds... the advantage is you don't have to draw the thing in the presence of the animal.
Brad
-
What a person chooses to hunt with and how they hunt, within the laws, is their choice...
I read the article and thought it OK but not enlightning for me. I appreciate the fervor and enthusiasm that converts to traditional archery bring to the table. But, the article did have a bit of a "lecture" tone to it...
-
Brad,
YOur right about the drawing, also the position from which you can shoot an Xbow. Compounds have a great advantage in that they can be held at full draw for long periods so they can be drawn and held while the animal moves to present a shot.
-
Be interesting to see how wood shaft sales go for the next few months with the TBM advertiers. Nice marketing artice, must be some excess inventory to move
-
John,
I can see your point and absolutely agree about x bows and inlines. However there seems to be enough deer to go around and I don't see how it effects me or my hunting with my recurve or my flintlock. There are lots of lazy people and I would rather have them effectively and humanely kill a deer with a x bow they didn't practice with as gutshoot one with a another type they didn't practice with. Chris
-
I enjoy reading such articles and threads. I like to see what other people think and why the use what they use. But I got to say that their choices in no way change anything I use or do hunting. I hunt for me because I enjoy it. I don`t knock others because they may not be as committed as I am to the hunt but maybe more so to the kill.Don`t matter any...do what makes you happy. As far as crossbows go...easy or not if my Son would hunt with me using one...I would buy him two.He is a sports fan and likes to Fish. But he will get one out of the woods for me with a smile.RC
-
Good point swamprooter. It is better that they use a xbow than to go out with a bow they didn't practice with.
It still bugs me that here in PA a lot of guys had no interest in archery season until xbows became legal. I have a good friend at work who falls into this category. Great guy, but never wanted to spend the time learning how to shoot any type of bow.
-
Ryan,
Let me clarify; As I stated, I think the aforementioned article was well written and thought provoking. However I didn't say that I agreed with everything he wrote, and I did notice a contradiction or two as others have previously pointed out. I thought the Author did a good job of stating his perspective and thoughts. Do I agree with him... no. To me, the topic is gray, not black and white. But I enjoyed reading his article and thoughts on the subject.
I love wood, but wood doesn't love me, as it always seems to seek out rocks and hard objects to splinter themselves on. Alumn. shafts are fickle as well, as they almost always bend on me, and I never get them as straight as they once were. For my money, I get the most durable use out of carbon. The 40 year old quiver on my 40+ year old Bear recurve carrys all 3 shafts, depending upon the season and game. And there is no doubt in my mind that if Fred Bear was still alive and able, he would be hunting with (and of course SELLING), CARBON arrows. So do I agree with Kirby's perspective 100%.... no. But I enjoy reading his thoughts and respect him as a writer and fellow bowhunter, despite how new his hunting boots may be. Although I never met the man, I know I would prefer to share a campfire with Kirby and debate the definition of "Traditional Bowhunting" with him, as oppossed to 99.9% of the chest thumping, ego driven, sponser owned bubba's I see on TV or in the "other" hook & bullet magazines.
Chris
-
I had the opportunity to read the Mr. Kohler's article and one thing struck me within the first few paragraphs. Something that in my opinion, taints the entire premise of the article.
Mr. Kohler refers to Aldo Leopold as a "traditional bowhunter," as though he was making some kind of statement by choosing a certain type of equipment. Aldo Leopold was not a "traditional bowhunter" as there were no "traditional bowhunters" in that day, they were just bowhunters who were using the most technologically advanced equipment of their time...just like now. It just so happens that the most advanced archery equipment they had was/is what we would consider "traditional".
-
"my father has been chasing whitetails for nealy half a century and 18 month old does outsmart him all the time"
Luv that statement...8^)
-
I read the article and saw nothing more than one mans opinions formed through time in the woods and changes in his own opinion. Ive come to a few of the same conclusions myself But i shoot carbon because I think there better. I have seen some bad things come from groups of people and trail cams (egos can really ruin a hunt). I feel bad for the guy right now, seams everytime a person steps out of the normal box they are open for a slam. Thats my opinion, this stuff isnt what i come to trad gang for.
-
Hows come traditional hunting "lease" hasn't been brought up yet...8^)
Sorry, couldn't resist...8^)
-
So... I'm just trying to shoot straight and kill an animal cleanly. Whatever it takes to get that done. Aluminum, carbon or wood is fine by me.
How many people shouldn't even take a bow without sights into the woods this fall because they are not proficient enough to do so? I think the focus should be on clean killing and shooting targets accurately.
I do get the philosopher thing and that is how I took the article. Also, as said in the article, heavy wood arrows do quiet a bow. I have been thinking hard about that.... There were some good points to the article.
-
Originally posted by pauljr:
I feel bad for the guy right now, seams everytime a person steps out of the normal box they are open for a slam. Thats my opinion, this stuff isnt what i come to trad gang for.
I don't see any slamming going on. I just see a campfire conversation. Some people agree with his premise and some people don't. Sounds like every campfire I've ever sat around.
The idea that a person, no matter who it is, should be able to lay out an opinion in an international publication and expect nobody to disagree...
It has been said numerous times that articles like this are designed make people think. Are we supposed to think but then keep our thoughts to ourselves?
-
I think it was a good article for the fact that it sparked this thread. Some of your responses have really made me think.
I know others have said it but these kind of threads would be very different anywhere else. Trad Gang is great!
Now I need to go mount some knapped heads on my carbons. :D Rob