when do you just say no?

[Brian Krebs]

I am ready to be corrected about the time line; but the Thompson brothers; confederate soldiers - started using bows way back after the civil war; and wrote about it.

 There was a lot of tournament archery going on; and it was not gender based- a lot of women shot bows and they shot at long distances.

 When Ishi turned himself in; the bows that Pope and Young used were not like what Ishi used. They used the bow of the day; which was a longbow.

 Long range shooting was common then; it was Ishi that was a hunter; and whose love of the woods: dragged Pope and Young into his world.

 But they did not hunt up close like Ishi did; and it wasn't until later that Fred Bear got tired of his longbow snagging branches and such - and was then involved in the birth of the 'bush bow' a shorter bow meant for hunting.

 Fred took long shots; and shots that worked perfectly well but would be frowned on now.
 But - he was a hunter; and that was the fascination about him.
I asked him what he wanted to be remembered for in the future; and I was really thinking something all earthy and traditional. He thought for several minutes and said for the words " pick a spot".
 That means a lot in bowhunting ! Not what I expected - but really important.

 Seeing him up close and personal with a brown bear-- really got peoples attention.

 The bows became shorter; and easier to use while hunting. Fred invented a bow quiver; making going under and through brush a little easier.
 His appeal though was his hunting; and his modest way of going about it.

  Hill on the other hand was a showman; and yes he hunted; but he was a different type of character.
  Nothing wrong with either.
I see the Wensels being more 'Bear' than 'Hill'; and Ron LaClair being more 'Hill' than 'Bear'

  Archery shooting fell out of favor - it was all the rave at one time; and although it never stopped; bowhunting became the more powerful of the two.

  If you ask yourself; 'how do you know what the right shot placement is- gotta figure some things were learned through experience.
  A lot of it you don't want to know about. But the result is that we now hunt more like Ishi than anyone else.
     Up close and careful.
  Animals to Ishi were living things to be respected for having a life and place on earth; and I think white people came into bowhunting- via the concept of shooting targets at different ranges; and then transferred their thinking to  the targets they hunted.
 It was Bear that steered us back 'on path' (in my opinion).

 There have been bowhunters for thousands of years; and 'we' are new to it really. Still finding our way.
 
 I watched a 'bowhunting show' tonight; where they sat around laughing hard at the blood pumping out of a huge hole in an whitetail- as it ran off ('its like shoving an axe through an animal !!)   - then laughing when the deer fell.

 Then the comment was made: ' the only thing that is better than shooting a big buck is watching it happen again and again- with your friends'.
 
  See we are still evolving; because I found what they said: to be very revolting.

[rickshot]

There have already been, and probably always will be, many good points made upon which to ponder.
 
Just to add a bit more to the assortment, and highlighted by mention of using a range finder, is that plugging organized shooting events into the equation, with familiar known distances, is an entirely different animal than being able to judge “long-distance” shots off the top of your head, in unfamiliar surrounds.

Personally, that is some of my favorite type shooting and I do it as often as I can, but I do not take such shots at game. The present atmosphere, non-hunting public aside, simply does not justify/arouse any need in me to make meat beyond more conservative distances…but I would be less than satisfied if did not know my limits, should some true need arise.

Were any of the older stories exaggerated or not?...kind of parallels even today’s level of competitiveness in many venues; it’s the credibility of witnesses that comes into play. Some probably should be given their due…but many we will never know for sure. Myths, legend, and folklore have their place…better they inspire, than spawn endless questionable debate.

What we have to draw from the past relies much on written accounts, almost always having promotional value of some sort. Influence of the “Two Season Hunter” campaign, gaining archery seasons, drawing from more immediate histories of the day, glorifying what was viewed to be accomplishments…the entire setting of which we speak, I’m sure, offered more tasty bones of contention than are likely to be available today. The positive is where we find it…as it was then.          

Wound rates are always speculative…even recent data I’ve seen is suspect…but it always has been more of an unspoken truth and less apt to be the highlight of any story. Respect/reverence for the game…well, if I thought more needed to be said then I would be speaking to the wrong people. What has greatly influenced me from younger days, sending arrows at small game, is a single purpose that has to be satisfied before choosing to loose the arrow, “End the chase.”    

Soon enough, we will be “the past”…and we, too, will be judged. Do the best you can with what you’ve got...give the future a break. Rick.

[Renaissance Man]

Shoot within your confident range, not based on what others do.It may be shorter than discussed or longer. Be comfortable with your equipment, know what you can do. Hunt small game a lot. Rove thru the woods with blunts or judos. Practice at longer distances makes you a better shot at all ranges.
Shoot at game only when you as a hunter are confident that you can make the shot. That is our responsibility.

[Brent Rudolph]

Well said.

[straitera]

A deer wounded at 40 yards is no less wounded at 10. Distance is not the issue. Total respect for the animal is. That means you'll secure the animal if hit. That reigns in a bunch of folks doesn't it myself included?

No worthy ethical hunter would ever carelessly lose an animal. Limiting distance shots should improve percentage; however, no less than woods skills, practice, equipment, & confidence, as well as tracking & recovery. Some hunters are better shots at 30 yards than others at 10. It is your responsibility as hunter what setup, skills, distance, & judgement will ethically allow.

[jhg]

Originally posted by straitera:
A deer wounded at 40 yards is no less wounded at 10. ...

I can't agree with  that because the percentage of wounding an animal at 40 yards is so much higher for reasons mentioned above. I do agree with the points regarding how important it is for recovery of a wounded animal. Whatever it takes.

I was face to face with this issue hunting elk this fall. A nice 6x6 broadside at 45 yards for 20 minutes. 20 minutes is a long  time to watch a nice bull and have to hold off.
Thing was, he knew I was there. I was caught out in the open. He had his eye on me the whole time. Not alarmed, but if I 'd flung an arrow I couldn't guarantee that he wouldn't have become so and jumped the string.
Every time I start to regret not shooting at that animal I go out and pace off 45 yrds and the regret goes away.

Joshua

[Renaissance Man]

Joshua, read my post above. You did what every hunter needs to do. Choose you actions based on the circumstances, your knowledge of the game, your limitations.
You did the ethical thing, we have all made these choices.

[Butch Speer]

I read The Witchery of Archery by Maurice Thompson. They regularly shot at flying birds. Sometimes at 100 yds or more. If they could see it, they shot at it. Shot deer at night then let the dog loose on it. Go to the swamps & take several dozen arrows for a month log hunt. They were also very happy if they hit there game. Much like we are today. Times were different. Were they right? They were for the times.

[killinstuff]

You all need to keep this in mind, all those stories were writen for entertainment value. A 50 yard shot sounded a lot better then a 25 yard shot in print. Yeah those guys told a lot of long shots but I bet they stretched the truth just a wee bit most of the time.

[Buckeye Trad Hunter]

Originally posted by killinstuff:
You all need to keep this in mind, all those stories were writen for entertainment value. A 50 yard shot sounded a lot better then a 25 yard shot in print. Yeah those guys told a lot of long shots but I bet they stretched the truth just a wee bit most of the time.

What?  You mean a hunter telling a Huntin' story, that never happens.     I agree that for print the stories probably were exaggerated.  Heck a lot of people stretch their stories just for their buddies.  

All that aside, if it doesn't feel right don't shoot, no matter how close or how far.  On the other hand if it feels right go for it. I like to keep it inside 20 yds. but I've taken game at ranges longer than that, but I follow my consience and shoot if it feels right.  I never know the distance until after I shoot.

I'm no expert by anymeans but those are my thoughts.

[xtrema312]

They were great shots, and not near as politically correct as we are. You can put an arrow on a dime at 100 yd. but you can't know what the animal will do while the arrow is on the way.  I do think many of them were top notch hunters, trackers, and woodsmen so they could handle a marginal hit and make it pay off.  I will give them a few more yards for that and their shooting skill.  Most unsuspecting game will not jump the string in a quiet bow much over 30 yd.  Sometimes a 30 yd. shoot is better than 20 if you can make the shot.  They were good and I would not think bad of them shooting 40-50 yd. on a calm animal feeding with a good shot angle, and plenty of time and space to follow it up.  Past that and I have to say it was not ethical.  

I have heard a lot about the out west hunting.  I don't know about that and I wonder if an elk jumps a string like a whitetail.  I don't think so, but I could be wrong.  I am a little surprised, pleasantly, that I don't read more about 30-40 yd. shots on TG on elk.  They seam like a big target for a proficient shot.  I am very impressed when all you guys shoot them at very close range along with all other out west game.  Looks like it can be done to me.  I guess we have some better hunter in the here and now maybe than the back then.

We are different hunters now and it is a good thing.  Back then I think there were a lot fewer bow hunter than now.  When I was a kid I knew a lot of people that shot bows, but few that really hunted much if at all.  If every bow hunter today shoot arrow at anything they could see, we would not have much to hunt.   Most compound shooter I know limit their shots to about 30-40 yd. max even if they have a lot longer target range accuracy.  

I think you can chalk it up to the mentality of the white man that hunted most things in this country to near extinction in a lot of areas.  They had no respect for animals at all for the most part.  It has taken may years to get past that thinking.  We don't want to go over board with that like the tree huggers, but I think we are in a better place than the early pioneers of modern bow hunting.  I think many of us today have more the mentality of the Indians.  We respect and value the animals much more as a whole.  

As for me, arrows are too hard to come by to shoot a few dozen of them off in the great beyond in hope of hitting something.  I lose just one arrow in a season and I am bummed out.  I lose an animal and I never forget it.

[Bill Carlsen]

Cj: Unless you were around during those days your points are mere conjecture. There were many films of the greats that showed them making those long shots and it was not always  "for entertainment value"....the pictures don't lie. Anyone remember Fred Bear shooting his tiger in India, for example, or Jim Dougherty's moose? How about Bill Shatner shooting a running grizzly on American Sportsman?....or the amazing running shots on some of the early Wensel videos?

Back when there was field archery tournaments every weekend judging distance sort of became second nature. Estimating distances out to 60 yards or so and being off by only a yard or two was not an uncommon skill...one that I have had and lost. Here in the northeast those long shots at game that were missed had more to do with the brush deflecting an arrow than lack of skill or game movement. Hunting field edges was also practiced more than it is now. It was also a pretty popular past time to shoot woodchucks in the summer. Taking and making shots in the 40-50 yard range was not all that uncommon.

Things have changed...better equipment, but.......!

[Jason R. Wesbrock]

One thing I've noticed after reading several hundred articles from that era is that there is a near total lack of tales regarding wounding and not recovering game. It seems they either killed or missed cleanly. Then again, today's outdoor writing is much the same way.

Does this mean folks didn't wound anything back then (or now, for that matter)? Of course not. If a guy wounds three deer at 60 yards and then kills one, guess which animal you'll read about after his typewriter goes silent.  

Call it a byproduct of promoting bowhunting as a humane pastime, or just chalk it up to human nature. Either way, I have a very difficult time believing those folks were that much better than good shooters today, especially since national championship results are still available via archive from that era.

As a group, bowhunters have learned a lot since then. And we should be thankful for those who paved the way for us. But one thing we can't do is judge yesterday's actions by today's ethical standards.

[Steve H.]

Rusty said "...we can barely hit the kill zones at 20 yds".

That works for me.  If I can keep doing just this amount I will pile up a huge amount of carcasses every year and keep my freezer full all the time!

[hayslope]

For the most part, animals are safe from me at those kinds of distances.  There are plenty of folks that are quite competent at those distances when shooting targets.  I'm not one of them (or at least not consistent enough to be one of them).

[30coupe]

I'm not a field archer. I'm a hunter. The area I hunt rarely offers a shot of over 25 yards...too much brush, limbs, etc. I don't practice beyond that distance very often unless I'm stump shooting. I can easily hit the kill zone at 20-25 yards because that is where most of my practice shots take place and most of my shots at game will be inside that distance. If the game I hunted and the area required it, I'd practice at longer ranges, and I'm confident I would be able to hit the kill zone at whatever range I needed to.

Fred Bear left Zwickeys and Razorheads stuck in trees all over the world. He thought nothing of practicing with broadheads because he had a pretty ready supply of them. I've seen film of him shooting at a big maple leaf stuck to a tree. Those arrows may still be there! Fred was a good hunter. He was a fair target archer, not great. I don't know that he was that much better hunter than we are now. He had a lot more opportunities than most of us could ever dream of. He also had some great guides along on many of his hunts. That would be pretty nice too...probably aided in the recovery part.

It's kind of funny that some people think it was fine for the hunters of the 50s and 60s took long shots at running game, yet have a fit when Tred Barta does it. Tred may not be the world's best archer, but he has shot ducks and geese on the fly with a longbow and has taken more big game with a longbow than most of us could ever imagine as well. His misses or miscues don't get cut, so he doesn't always look good, which is both his blessing and his curse.

To answer the original question, I'll probably stick with 25 yards or less at stationary or at most walking game.

[Brian Krebs]

I have noticed watching Tred Barta's shots ( where else can I see trad shooting) that he very often hits brush and misses.
 If you hunting in thick stuff; close up is in order; but out here where I hunt there is nothing over a deers ankle to worry about.
 Not that that I am excusing poor shots- its I have hunted in Michigan and Wisconsin with a bow; and I have hunted here in Idaho with a bow .. and to sit in a Michigan thicket; and make a judgment about shooting distances 'out west' - especially after hunting in one place over the other for decades is kind of prejudiced.

 When it comes to elk- my killing shots on elk have all been at the 20 yards or less range.
 Elk have bones that are thick and strong; and in my opinion the kill zone on an elk is only slightly bigger than on a whitetail. A shot that would kill a whitetail will often not kill an elk.

 I have seen in Michigan ( I think 'Michigan Bowhunters' organization) where members recorded where animals were hit; and how far they ran before expiring; and their is a correlation; in that the further the distance of the shot; the further the distance the animal runs.
 
 When you can see the animal you hit run 20 yards before it disappears into the brush- well its different than being able to see it run for a mile- literally.

 In a way we are like blind men describing     an elephant...