IL proposal- Archery devices?

[bjansen]

This is a new bill introduced in IL  (HB0172), which would change the definition of a bow to allow for "archery devices" which pull 40# somewhere within a 28" draw.

   http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=0172&GAID=12&GA=98&DocTypeID=HB&LegID=69212&SessionID=85  

I personally do not think this will gain much ground, but wanted to highlight the item for others to be on the look out in your state, given at first glance it may not be apparant to a legislator it has any effect on the game law.  

The supposed intent of those pushing this legislation is to allow for sling-shot arrow shooting devices to be used in the deer archery season.  

Without even discussing the merits of such a tool for hunting, my stance is, archery season should be left solely for bows, and new weapons (whether that be sling-shots, atlatl, crossbows, or any other non-bow weapon) should have their own established season (if they are in fact so important to warrant use).

[LittleBen]

I'm on board with this too. I think archery is all about tradition, even if you;re using wheels. I'm ok with crossbows, rifles, guided missles, slingshots or whatever else but leave em for gun season.

I think archery season should be restricted to weapons which are either archery bows, or weapons which historically predate the use of the bow such as the thrown spear and Atlatl.

Lets consider the root of the word archery: ARCH, as in a bent stick forming an arch. Archer: one who bends the bow to an arc.

[Cold Weather]

a newer weapon is not a crossbow..

crossbows are certainly bows.

[ChuckC]

Sorry Cold, but I certainly disagree with that last statement.  They are crossbows, not bows.  Big difference.  Whether they are allowed or not is well above my power, but they are not bows.  

They were invented and developed because bows were to difficult for most because it actually takes an investment in time and effort to master a bow.   Anyboy can shoot a crossbow with minimal training.
ChuckC

[Cold Weather]

chuck

they certainly are bows.  a different type of a bow but a bow nonetheless

I really dont understand the argument regarding ease of use.

so what?

ever go to archery shoots?

lots of people shooting compound bows, and even stick bows without training.

[ChuckC]

Doug, I hear ya.  

I still don't agree about their being a bow, but that doesn't matter.  I count as only one voice.  

Some of us feel that you need to earn some things in this world, yeah , I know, that is not in keeping up with the rest of the world, but you can certainly see where that has gotten us lately.

Nobody wants to put in the time anymore. Nobody wants to earn the right to anything. Everybody wants to buy their way to immediate fame and glory.  Again, I count as one voice and I am getting old.  Good luck with the future.  It looks to be very, well... technical.

ChuckC

[Cold Weather]

Chuck

what I dont understand how you feel hunting with an xbow is "easy"

there is much more to bowhunting than just the shot.

the reasons I support xbows in archery season are:

they are bows

it keeps people in the game who if they used more conventional equipment would not

allows women to carry a bow that shoots with force-an xbow is not regulated by one's physical strength as a more conventional bow

archery seasons are recreational passtimes

now, as well, even those who say take up bowhuntin with an xbow-who is to say they can't be introduced to bowhunting with conventional equipment?

it is a way to grow archery.

any way, I think the die has been cast on this-every year it seems more an more states are allowing xbows in archery season.  and, that's gonna continue.

what I find interesting is the very same anti xbow arguments I heard before, as the compound was gaining popularity.  It was claimed as "not a bow" "easy" etc etc.

I own a xbow, and have 3 modern hi end compounds with release, sights, etc and a laser rangefinder.

what do you think I am going to be bowhunting with this upcoming season?  A Wallace Mentor recurve and a Fox High Sierra!

[ChuckC]

Doug.  whatever I believe in terms of it being a bow or not, once it is cocked, you aim it, typically with a scope, although I guess iron sights are possible, but who wants that ?. .  then you pull a trigger.  You don't have to have any skill, knowledge, prior experience, any amount of buy in. . nothing.  That isn't easy ?

  From all the literature I see nobody even holds the darned things up by themselves, tending to use a rest of some sort.

I am not familiar with Manitoba regulations, but in Wisconsin, the minimum bow weight is 30# for deer and no limit for most anything else.  I am gonna go out on a limb here and state that 95% or more of folks old enough to buy a hunting license can handle 30#.  If they can't handle that, how well can they handle slinging a crossbow around.

We already have laws in place here, and in all of the other states I have lived in, that allows elders (65+) and disabled folks to use one.

SCI printed an advertisement in a recent (April5 2013) magazine, Wisconsin Outdoor news, it is admittedly a propaganda piece and I have no idea whether any of it is true.  That said. .  they stated that in MI, our neighboring state, these things have been allowed for a number of years (since 2009).  

According to that, and I repeat. .  I have no idea if it is true. .  in 2009 they had 56,915 licensed (special stamp) crossbow hunters, in 2010 90,815 and in 2011 118,573.  

Per surveys they stated 75% were already bow hunters that switched over.  They also pointed to an increased success rate, exceeding not only that of "other bows" but also that of gun hunters.

This data, if reliable, tends to indicate a large increase in success rate over regular archery hunting.  The only change for most of them is the crossbow.  That doesn't make it sound like shooting a crossbow is more difficult, that's for sure.

We have a relatively long history of bow hunting here in this state.  Deer populations fluctuate with conditions.  They have been high, but with forests maturing and CWD, that is not likely a long term thing.  UP Michigan went thru a boom and bust with the maturing of their forests after massive logging efforts of yester year.

Bow hunting has historically been a numbers thing for the DNR,  high user hours, low impact to the deer.  I would really hate to have all that come crashing down when the herds are not as large as they are today and the "archery" success rate is artificially high due to inclusion of cross bows.

Say I am jealously guarding my life style and you would be very correct.
ChuckC

[Cold Weather]

Chuck

there is so much more to bowhunting than just the shot.

I can tell you I dont shoot the xbow any more accurate than my compounds.

towards WI-I have travelled your state many times.  I even took a tour of Mathews located in Sparta a number of years ago.

towards your doom and gloom about increased harvest compromising your existing archery season-show me one state or province where that has happened.

I think you will find that many choose to shoot the xbow AND also compounds and stickbows.

about handling 30lb draw weights-why should someone have to do that, when they can opt for an xbow with a power so much more than that?  what is fairer to the animal?

I havent kept up to date on all the states that have legalized xbows in archery seasons, but it seems to me-judging by increased media coverage in magazines-manufacturers introducing xbows-the increase and acceptance is more and more.

just like the acceptance of compounds, releases, carbon arrows, laser rangefinders, etc..

[ChuckC]

"about handling 30lb draw weights-why should someone have to do that, when they can opt for an xbow with a power so much more than that? what is fairer to the animal? "

My point in gold. . .  why should anyone have to do anything like. . practice, buy in. .  become proficient ?  Just buy the newest greatest and you are there.  

And what is "fair " to the animal.  I am attempting to kill it.  You can take that to the extreme and say using a .75 caliber rifle is much more fair than bows.  Lets not use bows and restrict all hunting to .75 calier rifles. . it is much more fair.

Doug,  I don't totally disagree with you and I don't think crossbows are inherently bad.  But I do have another point of view.  Next time I see you, I'll buy you a beer.  A campfire and some comfy seats would be good too.
Later
Chuck

[dnovo]

"it keeps people in the game who if they used more conventional equipment would not"

"about handling 30lb draw weights-why should someone have to do that, when they can opt for an xbow with a power so much more than that? "
what is fairer to the animal?

These 2 statements are a big reason why I oppose crossbows. I started shooting and hunting with a recurve before there were mechanical choices.
Bowhunting meant you had to want to do it and were willing to work at it. Why does everyone equate easy with better now? If you can't handle the equipment stay out of the game. I don't get to play a sport if I'm not good enough. They don't dumb it down for me if I'm not qualified. Bowhunting isn't for everyone and we don't have to include everyone.
"Fair to the animal?"  We are trying to kill it! It doesn't care a lick about fair. A wolf, coyote, bear, lion, etc doesn't worry if that deer suffers while it is being eaten
Dead is dead!

[Mitch H]

Been watching this one for a couple of days now.

Seems like everyone has valid points.

I agree that bow hunters should pay their dues, and practice diligently until they are absolutely confident that they can make a clean kill at their self imposed shot limit, whatever that limit is.

Unfortunately, a sizable percentage of licensed archers are ready, willing, and able to shoot and hope without much in the way of practice at all.

The statement directly above comes from many years of close observation being an archery only outfitter, and a president of a large archery club for nearly two decades. Through all of my personal observations I have never noticed any glaring difference in personal ethics and self control between traditional bow hunters, compound bow hunters, and now crossbow hunters.

Ethics do not follow the weapon, they reside within the person.

BTW, bow hunting is my life. It dwarfs everything else in my life except for God and my family. I do not know if I would continue to bow hunt if I could not longer adequately hunt with a vertical bow? I would likely go back to a compound if I had to in order to keep hunting, but I doubt that I would go to a crossbow.

That said, buying an archery hunting license does not require an ethics test, nor does it require a sworn statement of practice and proficiency.

In other words, a person can, and many do, simply obtain a bow of some sort, buy the required license/licenses, and go hunting…..without much practice at all. The majority of bow hunters do not live and breath this stuff like folks on Trad Gang do, or like folks on some compound bow sites do.

Being what it is, I would rather see a person who either cannot, or will not take the time to become proficient with a vertical bow, use a crossbow.    :eek:  

It is easy to prove that a crossbow is less accurate than a compound if both are being shot by a top shelf archer, but the crossbow does enjoy a much shorter learning curve to become, and remain marginally proficient.

In a perfect world, ALL bow hunters would practice diligently and limit their shots to their shooting, AND emotional ability……but that is not the way it is for many of us, and even the small percentage of us that do so still end up in less than perfect situations now and then.

[Stringwacker]

Personally, I have a real problem with an 'archery' weapon that requires no 'archery' skills to shoot it.

As far as all the positive attributes, it could be accomplished with pistols just as easily as crossbows. If your going to allow weaponry that isn't hand held, hand drawn or requires archery skills to shoot it...you might as well open it to others as well.

It seems to me the justification of sorts of the crossbow has always been built on it's similarities to a bow....while at the same time ignoring it's vast dissimilarities. It's the latter that blurs the lines and allows the arguments to be pushed forward to other weapon groups over time.

[Mitch H]

A crossbow still requires the exact same hunting skills as does the compound bow. It offers no further range than does a compound bow.

It is fired via a mechanical trigger mechanism, as is a compound bow.

It uses energy stored in bent limbs to propel an arrow via synthetic string, just like a compound bow.

It does NOT need to be hand drawn or held, unlike a compound bow. BTW, this is no monumental deal, as countless millions of us have overcome drawing in the presence game.

Comparing a crossbow to a pistol where hunting is concerned is inaccurate. One uses gunpowder, and has a greatly extended range if one chooses the correct caliber.

This argument is not different than when compounds became commonplace, and like it or not, we need those wheelbow folks because archery season is a management tool, period. Without sufficient harvest numbers archery seasons all across the country would be severely limited in order for firearm hunters to step in and meet harvest goals.

In almost every state that has given crossbows full inclusion there have been no negative impact on herds, or quality of hunt for vertical bow users.

Oh, a recurve, longbow, horsebow, compound bow, etc., takes absolutely zero archery skills to shoot either. Anybody can load an arrow and pluck the string.

[bjansen]

Cold Weather,

Regarding:

"a newer weapon is not a crossbow..crossbows are certainly bows"

Consider my word "newer" in the original post a synonym for "different".  My point is archery season should be left for bows and different or new weapons should not be continually thrown into a dedicated archery season.  Crossbows are not bows for many reasons but I would prefer not to argue about something so straight forward.  My thought is, that if these "different" weapons (without casting any positive or negative light on there individual merits) are so sought after for use in harvesting deer, a seperate, regulated season should be established for the weapon.  

Regardless of definition of a bow, or merits of the various weapons we can probably all agree that a slingshot, a crossbow and a tradiitonal bow all would have different impacts to game and harvest rates.  My point is: it would be prudent and best practice to manage those weapons seperately in an effort to best control game impacts as well as hunter recreation hours per resource.

   
Regarding:

"I havent kept up to date on all the states that have legalized xbows in archery seasons, but it seems to me-judging by increased media coverage in magazines-manufacturers introducing xbows-the increase and acceptance is more and more."

I agree, the acceptance is more and more.  It is truly amazing the influence that marketing and promotional dollars can have on people and  perceived acceptance.  I wish we had similar marketing budgets to pass different messages of what hunting and ethics are to the same public.

[Cold Weather]

I used to work as an archery tech for Cabelas.  I have now over 40 years experience in archery.

my first ever arrow btw was shot with an xbow.  remember it like it was yesterday.

towards people taking the time to learn to shoot-well I can tell you they dont.  if you doubt, just go to a range.

it what is more striking, is that there is now much information available on how to shoot compouds and stickbows.

anyway, anyone who thinks an xbow is "easy to shoot" really doesnt have the facts.  if it was, how come all the scores with xbows vs compounds show the lower for xbows?

after all, they perform like a firearm-right?

anyway, we are talking of a recreational pastime-archery, bowhunting.

someone wants to go bowhunting with an xbow for fun, relaxation, or recreation its really no concern of anyone else.

[Cold Weather]

Originally posted by bjansen:
Cold Weather,

Regarding:

"a newer weapon is not a crossbow..crossbows are certainly bows"

Consider my word "newer" in the original post a synonym for "different".  My point is archery season should be left for bows and different or new weapons should not be continually thrown into a dedicated archery season.  Crossbows are not bows for many reasons but I would prefer not to argue about something so straight forward.  My thought is, that if these "different" weapons (without casting any positive or negative light on there individual merits) are so sought after for use in harvesting deer, a seperate, regulated season should be established for the weapon.  

Regardless of definition of a bow, or merits of the various weapons we can probably all agree that a slingshot, a crossbow and a tradiitonal bow all would have different impacts to game and harvest rates.  My point is: it would be prudent and best practice to manage those weapons seperately in an effort to best control game impacts as well as hunter recreation hours per resource.

   
Regarding:

"I havent kept up to date on all the states that have legalized xbows in archery seasons, but it seems to me-judging by increased media coverage in magazines-manufacturers introducing xbows-the increase and acceptance is more and more."

I agree, the acceptance is more and more.  It is truly amazing the influence that marketing and promotional dollars can have on people and  perceived acceptance.  I wish we had similar marketing budgets to pass different messages of what hunting and ethics are to the same public.

I am sorry, but they definitely are bows.

even the very name of them-CROSSBOW-indicates its a type of bow.

I see now, more and more archery companies are introducing xbows.

most recently Mathews has one in their mission line.

there is certainly no reason to argue xbows are not bows-frankly I think its absurd to make such a claim.

because they are bows-and valid archery equipment, I see no reason that they belong anywhere else but an archery season.

what amazes me is some think they belong in firearm seasons-and they definitely are not firearms.

[ChuckC]

My thoughts are. . they are most definately NOT bows and I also think it is silly to think otherwise.

You see more and more companies introducing crossbows because they are the fastest growing (note. .  selling) component of hunting out there.  Nobody has them, market them and everybody wants them. That is called marketing.  Someone is getting rich off of this, that is why it is happening.  Heck, it is a wide open market, you don't even need to convince someone to upgrade cause the new model is 3 fps faster.

I never said they were more accurate than a compound with release and sights (although I hear tales of 1" groups at 100 yards bandied about), they sure are easier to use. .no doubt about that.
ChuckC

[Cold Weather]

Chuck

have you ever shot one?

ever carried one in the woods?

I find them more cumbersome than than conventional tackle.  They are slower for a second shot.

group size.  well my scope only goes to 50 yards, but I have shot groups offhand that one could put their hand around.

just was done at a mag stand.  picked up a copy of Bowhunt America.

hmmm xbows articles in there.  even a review on the Mathews xbow.

seen articles in Bow and Arrow, and Bowhunting World as well.

if everyone wants one then there certainly a demand.  Come to think of it, I have a good friend who is a dedicated longbow archer.  He has an xbow as well.

the views that you entertain are very similar to those when the compound was gaining popularity.

it was claimed ease of use, not a bow, etc..

I recall reading a book called the Archer's Digest-and this was when compounds werent that popular-there was an xbow article in it.

just was  on this site:

ibo.net

and they have an xbow division in there.

[Stringwacker]

I guess people can discuss this issue into eternity and I don't think people change their ideas very much. If you believe the crossbow requires archery skills to shoot, that string propelled is 'important' and hand held and held drawn is not...who is to say your wrong?

On the other hand if hand held, hand drawn is important, but the fact it shoots a bolt from string propulsion on a stock isn't...then who is to say that is also wrong?

Frankly, with all the respect I can convey, if one believes a crossbow is a bow I will respect the view point. If you think the crossbow is a sandwich; I'm good with that as well. Call it whatever you will.

My own opinion (opinion mind you) is that it's a hybrid that has some bow and gun attributes, neither defining what it really is. It's not called a Cross Bow, which in that case 'cross' would define what kind of bow, but rather a "crossbow" which is a noun that defines something totally different...much like the nouns 'seahorse' or 'groundhog'; neither representing an object as the name seems to imply.


My concerns with the crossbow is with the argument itself, based on it's 'just an incremental step' compared to compound which belittles history in that the compound was the great compromise of the sport of bowhunting. The compound allowed women, elderly, and children to participate in the sport and the advantage of the compound bow still promotes the same concepts as now is toted for the crossbow. I suppose the compound lost it's mojo.

Seems to me that an argument of 'inclusion' that actually *excludes* everyone except those who use 'strings' is a bit shallow and self serving. It's a wicked argument that has big shortcomings. Far better to say bow and arrow seasons are fair because they are open to everyone...only limited by the free will choice of individual participation.

In some ways I see the crossbow debate at least to some degree similar to an event in my home state. I can't help but remember how it was said that the newer, more reliable muzzleloaders equipped with scopes, shotgun primers, sabots, electronic ignition wasn't really a big deal...that the weapon still used black powder and the fuss made by 'purist' over the technology was a 'big to do over nothing.' Of course, those pundits were shocked when the state decided that those 'modern' muzzleloaders were so much like single shot centerfire rifles...that they were also legalized for those for special seasons! A few years later, people couldn't remember why we had the silly season the way it was set up and complained they were excluded with the auto rifles. This year primitive weapon (what a joke) season faded into the history books with the stroke of the Governors pen. "Poof'

You see, it's really not about how it's propelled or if it shoots an arrow. What it IS about is does the sport represent what is was intended to be; the reason that it was created as a separate season to begin with? When we blur the lines with weaponry that reminds people of firearms, it will not be long before the crossbow falls in to the same quicksand as the compound...that being it will just be the next spring board for another group whose definition of inclusion is different than our own based on the arguments of how this or that is similar. String and arrows don't mean squat. It don't mean anymore than 'black powder' did to primitive weapon season. Safety in numbers turned out to be a falsehood of propaganda.

States that have adopted crossbows such as Virginia and North Carolina have seen 'string' seasons already reduced in favor of black powder 'inclusion'. Like I said, 'inclusion' is a wicked argument because you don't get to stop it once it's set in motion to your own line in the sand; defined by an individual's definition of what is...and isn't.