I'm disappointed

[Mudd]

I'd never read anything of Howard Hills before. I started "Hunting the Hard Way" a couple of days ago. I was thrilled at the end of chapter one and the telling of his off a pony buffalo hunt.
Then came the next couple of chapters and some of the shots he took.. well I'd be willing to bet I'd get flamed not only here but any other place I would dare post any attempts at like shots.

I thought that his "Hail Marys'" were just that.
Anyway I feel sad... kinda as if I've been sucker punched.

 I know that I have no one to really blame but myself for just accepting his image as portrayed by all the media.

 OK there is my gut reaction to the 1st 4 chapters of his book. I will finish it and hope things don't get worse for me. I'm ready to take my punishment for speaking my mind and gut feelings.

God bless,Mudd
PS Happy New Year!

[ChuckC]

Mudd    remember.  that was then and this is now.  We have evolved. ..  a lot.

Don't hold him to our standards, he was not alone in what he did back then.  Seeing and talking to old timers it can clearly be seen that this occurred a lot, probably more than it didn't.    back then.

Enjoy Howard and his exploits for what they are.  He was a great shot.  He was a role model in his own way and got a lot of folks interested in the lifestyle.

If you feel this strongly about the book,   DO NOT watch the movie Tembo. . . . (I think that was the right name)

ChuckC

[xtrema312]

Mudd,

I am with you.  I love what the early well know bow hunters did for getting the hunting side of the archery sport and seasons set-up, but I sure don't hunt like they did.  It was a different time and mentality.  From what I gather doing it the hard way for them was hunting like they had a gun only using a bow.  For me it is hunting like I have a bow.  The hard way is not hitting and killing something from far out, but getting very close so it is an easy shot.

[Bowmania]

I think you forget what "modern archery" was.  Back then you didn't think of a high % shot - 10 yds better than 20 yds.  Back than you took a shot if it was "clear" no matter what the distance.  In the 6o's we took 60 yard shots and longer.  Times and thinking change.  I never thought I'd ever get "good enough" to join Pope & Young, much less quit them in discust, pass on "P&Y" bucks, and think you had one of the most successful seasons ever while eating "tag soup".  I'll bet other archers that have been at it for 50 years took shots, that they'd never take now.

[TradBowyer]

better not watch any of the vintage Fred Bear clips either. They considered accurate bow range in the 50-60 yrd range and say so many times.

I have older archery material where they advocate ham (butt) shots. Different time, different era..can't judge past generations by our modern standards. Wonder how the next generation will judge us? Will my practices now be considered "unethical" because I hunt from a tree stand or shoot 25-30 yrds? Very well could be.

[lpcjon2]

Mudd,I have read all his stuff  and Do remember that he did win an astronomical amount of field competitions and I'm sure they were shooting at great distances. Who do you know that would shoot at running deer and be able to kill them.And he would shoot coins like its picking your nose.I believe he shot 80# plus on most of his bows, this is the way they did it.If you watch some of the shooting videos his ability to be accurate at small things and long distance was amazing.It's just like we can't believe the crazy things we did 20-30 yrs ago either,that may bring you some disappointment to.all in all he was the best IMHO

[James Wrenn]

As said above things were a little different than they are now.Read his chapter on making hunting arrows and you will see he was also a fan of arrows on the lighter side,no fan of heavy FOC and liked fast bows with good cast.:)Today when someone wants the same things many on this sight look down there nose at them.    Different times.  :D

[Dave McDaniel]

Yea, If you read Fred Bear's books he took many a long shot. He also missed alot. They are all excellent reads though. Different era different time.

[reddogge]

Hill was a man who could shoot an actor in the back or front hitting a small cork pad strapped to the actor.  Some of the shots were at actors on horseback.  The field round has target up to 80 yards so Hill was an unusually gifted archer with lots of experience.  Don't judge these old guys too harshly.

I read where Fred Bear arched an arrow over a rock and hit a sheep on purpose underdrawing the bow to get the proper trajectory like a howitzer.  Would you and I attempt that.  No way but he did.

[trapperDave]

different times. archery by todays standards was in its infancy and they were still learning what the true capabilities and liabilities of the equipment was.

[gsdmikko]

there was an story in TBM i think ( might have been somewhere else) about the first archery season somewhere and what the kill rate was and the shots they took..

[Mudd]

I didn't try to place any blame on Howard for what he did, I place the blame clearly upon myself. I have watched several of his movies including Tembo but for some reason nothing struck me like his telling of shooting a bear at some ridiculous yardage and hitting it in the paunch. I doubt we'd have been reading about it except when the bear ran trying to get away from whatever it was that hurt him, it ran toward Howard instead of another direction.
 I had a visceral reaction to what the bear might have been experiencing. I've had several punctures in my lifetime and even the smallest ones hurt like heck.

I'm sorry folks, I'm not going to be successful at explaining myself.

I do believe that Howard Hill did as much if not more for archery than any other living human being could. I just had an image of this Holier than me archer of him, I now know it ain't so, he just a heck of a lot better shot than I will ever be.
Please forgive my ramblings. I wasn't intending to besmirch Howards' good name nor will I ever.

 I was and still am a touched(in the head) ole man...lol

God bless,Mudd

[George D. Stout]

Folks, if you can't separate our present society from the 1940's and 50's, then don't bother reading any of the great hunting books from back then.

We can't apply todays logic or ethical parameters to what was done fifty or sixty years ago.  They didn't have the armchair experts, nor did they have a viable history of what works and what didn't....they really were pioneers in this sport.  It's a form of ethnocentricity to assume they should have acted, or behaved like we do now, based on some superiority of intellect or knowledge of present day archers/bowhunters.

Mudd....I would have thought that you would have read about Hill's exploits years ago; they are not much different from Fred Bear's, or Ben Pearson's, or Jack Howard's, or Jim Dougherty's, or Doug Kittredge's, or Walt Wilhelm's, or Roy Hoff's, or literally everyone back then who was learning the limitations, and the expectations of the sport of bowhunting.  Without them, we would have no bow seasons right now.  That is zero!

We have the luxury of knowing what works because those guys didn't and had to learn.  So to feel that "kick in the gut" is not realistic.  Of course that would not be condoned today, nor should it be; however, we are not pioneers, we have a rich history that was hard-earned by guys like Howard Hill, Ben Pearson, and many others who blazed the trails so we can hunt as we do.

Frankly, I understand what they did and will not turn my nose up in disgust.  Without them, I would probably be playing some stupid game like golf.

[joevan125]

I have read all of Fred and Howards books and loved every second of it. Like all have said different times and archery was just taking off.

I saw one of Howards film where he shot some sort of African cat and you could tell the cat was tied to something.

I still love both of these guys and really like to read there hunting stories.

[Gary Logsdon]

I can't add anything to what George just said, it was right on the money.  I taught in the public schools for 30 years and I must say that George would have received a "distinguished" mark for the proficiency of his writing:^)!

[joevan125]

George you posted while i was typing and i couldnt agree with you more.

Fred Bear is the only reason i picked up a stick bow earlier this year.

I remember when i was a kid seeing that picture of him with that elk laying on the side of a mountain, that image has stayed with me for 33yrs.

I cant explain why it took me so long to start doing this but im glad i did.

[bowhunterfrompast]

Mudd...Howard Hill would step out of his shop, every day, and shoot a few practice arrows at a target 100 yards away. Hell, you have guys  today, that make less than desireable shots on animals at close yardages. Is that more acceptable??

[Paul/KS]

Times change and standards change with the times Mudd...
Read some of the stuff in "The Witchery of Archery"... We have come a long way since then but it is still a part of the trail that we all travel as bow hunters.

Happy New Year...
Paul

[britts2]

As usual, George is right on the money. Couldn't have said it any better for those of us who lived and participated in archery during those times. thanks, George.

[Mudd]

I can certainly see your points. I still am not blaming Howard for what he did..it just took me by surprise that's all and I had a knee jerk reaction to it.
I'm not all that well read George. I'm just now getting around to Thoreau's "Walden" and most likely wouldn't be reading it if it hadn't been a gift from another trad-gang member.

I'm just another G.O.B. that does mean that sometimes much to my dismay I follow my ole  departed daddy's advice..like. "Boy, there ain't no point in being ignorant, iffen ya ain't gonna show it!"
God bless,Mudd

PS: I think that the fact that when I got up it was cold and very windy outside with the temps to be dropping all day long may have helped contribute to my insanity..lol