Norm Johnson's remarks on the future of bowhunting

[DesertDude]

There have been almost as many advancements to "Traditional" equipment as "Modern" equipment. The only Real BIG differance is that one bow has Let-Off. We (some of us) shoot carbon arrows, carbon/glass limbs, risers cut past center, modern string material, and some use metal risers. The only real differance is the let-off. Shoot what makes you happy, and treat others and the pray you hunt with respect.

Mark
Retired Navy and Father to a Marine

[John Nail]

My point-apparently poorly presented-was that we,all of us, are prone to the "easy way" instead of the hard way. Taking the road most traveled does little for the soul.

[doctorbrady]

John,
True enough.  I love traditional bowhunting because of the joy that it brings to me through the "struggle."  It demands a certain amount of my time and effort to remain a good traditional bowhunter.  It's just easy to pass off someone who doesn't seem to struggle or work as hard at it, but it's my joy from my effort I receive in the end.

Bill, you are absolutely right about Rick.  I have stood beside him when he made some amazing shots on critters.  This is not a short range sport for him.

[GEREP]

"My point-apparently poorly presented-was that we,all of us, are prone to the "easy way" instead of the hard way. Taking the road most traveled does little for the soul."

Good point...which I think leads us right back to what I stated before.  I guess it just all depends on when you choose to get off the technology train.

After all, bowhunting in it's earliest form was indeed the "easy way."  It was developed as an easier method than hunting with a spear, which of course was developed becuase it was easier than using a rock or club.  To many, using modern archery equipment IS the hard way.  It is harder than hunting with a gun.  Every one of us is on his or her own journey.  Who am I to tell the young man that picks up a compound because shooting deer at 200 yards with a rifle has lost it's lustre, that he is less a hunter than me.  To him, he IS taking the road less travelled.  Not any more or any less the the experienced hunter that decides to craft his own bow and arrows out of chunk of osage and some river cane because that happens to be where he is on his own personal journey.  

The vast majority of the people on this site have hunted with more modern equipment at some point in their lives...some still do.  I started with traditional gear because that's all there was.  I hunted with a compound for years and a number of years ago, I came back to where I get the most enjoyment.  I am no different today than I was when I shot a compound.  The idea that a recurve or longbow in someones hand somehow transforms them into a more spiritual, ethical, thoughtful bowhunter is offensive to me, and quite frankly detrimental to bowhunting as a whole. I just think we need to be very careful how we categorize people based on what they shoot and where they choose to get off the train.

Back to the original point of the thread, the idea that technology is going to be the ruin of bowhunting.  I just don't think that argument is supportable.  Game populations indicate otherwise.  Hunter numbers may very well become a problem  or availability of hunting land may become a problem but technology in and of itself is not the problem in my opinion.

       

KPC

[Bonebuster]

Indianabowman, I believe is correct. It is the public perception that will shorten, or end what we all love so much.

Honorable pursuit, the thrill of the chase, has been lost by too many hunters for the public not to notice. The kill has become too important. The more technology a hunter uses to achieve the kill,
the less honor the public sees in the whole affair.

I don`t believe it is technology in itself that is to blame. Just take a good look around. People are just different. Too many people want something for nothing. Hunter Joe wants to shoot a big buck to impress everyone. So he buys everything he can to make it easier, and quicker.
He is the same guy that gets mad if he has to wait for more than thirty seconds in the drive-thru to get his burger.

I`m worried about the things to come. Not just the future of hunting. I for one, am doing my best to show the honor, and truth about hunting, as I am sure you are all doing the same. And we don`t have to hunt with a recurve or longbow to do it.

[Nate Fikkert]

One thing to keep in mind is that alot of guys who don't think "the sky is falling" are from states with liberal tags, liberal seasons and shots in habitats that are usually limited by brush, trees, shot angles, etc.  

You can't compare loosing opportunity in Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania, to Utah, Nevada, or Arizona.  In the latter states residents quite often can't draw tags to hunt.  Tags are alloted based on success rates.  If a game department wants to harvest 20 elk, and the success rate is 50%, they give out 40 tags.  Now, in this typically open type terrain, with spot and stalk/ground hunting being the predominant method of hunting, the difference between 25% success rates and 50% success rates often is the difference in shooting 30 yards and shooting 60 yards.  The more people who take animals at 60 yards, the higher the success rates are, and the fewer tags are handed out, decreasing opportunity.  This is where technology decreases hunting opportunity.

I went to a 3-D shoot this past weekend.  There were 42 targets.  Maybe, and I mean maybe, 5 were in the 20 yard range.  A few more in the 30's, but the vast majority were 40, 50, 60, and up to 88 yards.  The youth stakes at the longer shots were in the 50's and 60's.  IS THIS WHAT WE ARE TEACHING THE NEXT GENERATION OF BOWHUNTERS???  Bowhunting is no longer about getting close and loving every minute of it.  It is about getting "close enough" and flinging an arrow.

Are bowhunters in the Mid-west/east going to loose hunting opportunity to technology?  Probably not.  Will bowhunters who live in the west and those who want to hunt in the west be affected by technology and subsequent higher success rates be affected by a loss of hunting opportunity?  I think it has already happened.

Nathan

[GEREP]

"One thing to keep in mind is that alot of guys who don't think "the sky is falling" are from states with liberal tags, liberal seasons and shots in habitats that are usually limited by brush, trees, shot angles, etc."

You bring up a very interesting point Nathan.  I live and do most of my hunting in Michigan and when I do go out of state, it is still on this side of the country or Eastern Canada.  I cannot comment on what it is like out west becuase I don't have any experience there.  I will have to take your word for it and I have no reason to doubt you.

What I do find interesting though is how regional differences can mold one's opinions on what is or is not "right" considering bowhunting methods.  For example, being from Michigan, I can't for the life of me understand why you would be so concerned about the things that you are concerned about.  On the other hand, I have been told in no uncertain terms by a couple of westerners that hunting bears over bait is simply unethical and should be banned.  In that wide open spot and stalk country of yours, I could see why one might think that.  You western folks are welcome to come to the upper peninsula of Michigan or Wisconsin or Northern Ontario and try that if you'd like...but I will give you one tip.  Leave your binocs and spotting scope at home, instead, bring a machete and a brush hog.     I have friends that actually use a string tracker when they bear hunt.  Not attached to their arrow or to find their bear mind you, but when they shoot a bear, they tie it to their tree so they can find their way back.        (no, im not kidding)

I guess this goes to show us all that there are no cookie cutter answers to all our "problems."

KPC

[Talondale]

Nate I find it interesting that within the same statement you accuse modern bowhunters of "getting "close enough" and flinging an arrow."  Yet you also complain that modern equipment has raised recovery success to 50%!  It sounds like they aren't just flinging it but actually hitting on target.  If modern equipment only increases the range they are able to wound an animal than the success rate wouldn't go up.  It means they are able to successfully harvest an animal with their equipment which is all we should ask of any hunter.  I think the limiting factor in your example is not the technology and the increased success rate but the carrying capacity of your terrain.  Perhaps rather than hampering the hunter or limiting the number of tags the focus should be on improving the habitat so that more opportunities can be enjoyed by everyone.  I'm sure that approach would have it's opponents but the harsh western terrain is a limiting factor and those who live there should recognize that fact and deal with it in whichever way they deem best.  It seems a false dichotomy to say it's either a bunch of hunters with little chance of success or a few hunters with a higher chance of success.

   

IS THIS WHAT WE ARE TEACHING THE NEXT GENERATION OF BOWHUNTERS??? Bowhunting is no longer about getting close and loving every minute of it.

As I remember it the early bowhunting white man was all about shooting game at 75 yards +.  Look at how Pope, Young, Hill, Bear, et al.  hunted.  Didn't the LDB take a caribou at over 100 yards?  Sounds like they were flinging them too.  At some point someone said to themselves: "I know I can kill them far out now let me see how close I can get."  Well now it's come full circle.  They are saying: "I know I can kill it close, let's see how far I can kill them."  To them the distance has now become the challenge, not the closeness.  Can they be proficient at a longer distance than most?  Same motivation - different outcome.


As far as the accusation that those who use modern "gadgets" are taking the easy way out.  I propose that maybe they are seeking the most proficient and ethical methods given the limitation of a bow.  Most guys I know who hunt compound want to be good at it and be able to shoot where they want and have confidence in their ability to kill the animal quickly and clean.  That is a goal to be applauded.  Their not using more primitive weapons often stem from their lack of confidence in their ability to effectively use that weapon.  This may be unfounded but it is the right decision to not use a weapon they don't feel confident with.

I also think it's a mistake to assume an universal reason for everyone using primitive weapons.  I, for one, don't use a bow because it's hard.  I use it because it's fun.  I like the romantic image of the bowyer, the thrill of up-close encounters, the fun of making my own equipment and accessories, the simplicity of pointing and shooting rather than using sights, the beauty of the early bow season.  If it was a constant struggle for me I'd probably not do it, but with a moderate level of effort on my part I can be proficient enough that I feel confident in going afield with my bow.  I feel no compulsion to put as many obstacles in the way of my success as possible.  I don't feel I have to make my own arrows and such in order to feel a sense of accomplishment.  I may make some of my own stuff but that's just because the project seems fun, not because it's hard.  

We're all wired differently and it's usually a mistake to paint with a broad brush.  I don't think technology is going to be the end of hunting, but public perception may be.  We need to make sure our image is clean and that our message gets in front of the public as much as PETA's/Disney/Greenpeace does.  We have to foster a positive public personna in the pop culture and in the classroom.  Think about how many kids wanted to learn to shoot a blackpowder and a bow from watching Davey Crockett and Daniel Boone.  Education and entertainment are the key to securing our hunting future.

[sidebuster]

I learned to make bows.  I am not a big bowyer just do it for fun and if I can sell one I'll do it.  On my business card my slogan says
"Get Close"  "Experience The Tradional Way"
In my opnion we hunt for the sport of it and not for the need of survival.  I feel we must respect the game and give the game every opportunity the ability to detects us.  If we hunt from far away and the animal cannot detect us then I am not equal with the game.  I try not to use any high tech items. like special scent inhibitors, camo clothing, carbon clothing etc that give me a greater edge than the game I am hunting.  I want my shot to be no greater than 15 yds.  I use the wind in lieu of scent destroyer and make sure I am clean of sweat.  When the animal is close I move very little or move very slowyly. I want the animal to know that something is not just right but I was able to outsmart him using the major senes , of sight, smell and hearing that I and the animal have.    I know that it is almost impossible to rid of all technology, especially on the glass bows and high end string material, high end arrows but you can try to lessen your high tech items.   My greatest hunting experience  was using a wood selfbow, common string and home made cedar arrow and harvesting a buck at 12 yds.   I enjoy the challenge but only with the least amount of technology and in trying to be as equal to the game as possible.

[Frank V]

Maybe Norm was referring to the success at any cost crowd???? Frank

[Nate Fikkert]

Hey all,

Just wanted to clarify a few of my points.  First, I can't prove this but I am pretty sure its true because of talk I hear, I believe wounding rates have increased with higher shot distances.  That is why I used the term "flinging".  Second, my use of 50% success rates was somewhat of a hypothetical.  Wyoming archery elk success hovers around 15%, I am not sure what Utahs is.  I imagine quite high in the Limited entry areas, and quite low in the general elk areas.

Talon, have you been out west?  Do you know the demands on the resources out here?  Range, timber, recreation, development, etc.  Summer and fall habitat is never the problem.  Big game animals in the west depend on winter range.  Problem is, most of the prime winter range is looked upon by people as prime real estate.  I am all for saving habitat, saving animals, and creating more opportunity.  My point is, that is not going to happen.  Hunting dollars, can't really compare to real estate, ski-resort, golf course dollars.  Overall what I am saying is most game and fish departments manage strictly on a numbers basis, and they don't care how they hit the numbers.  Unfortunately, they have more of a job of people management than game management.

I am not necessarily saying most guys use modern gadgets for the easy way out.  I know plenty of guys that shoot modern equipment, but they still have the "heart" of a bowhunter.  I have no problem with this, and these aren't the guys "flinging" arrows and wounding critters.  The issue I have is technology creating "instant" bowhunters.  This is where Talon's point of public perception is spot on.  These are the guys giving us a bad name, they have no respect for bowhunting.

I remember first reading "Trailing a Bear" and I couldn't believe the shots Fred Bear and his companions took at game.  They would definately be considered "unethical" by many today.  But they were trying to turn bowhunting into something.  Now we(some)are trying KEEP bowhunting something.  There is a big difference.

Anyway, good points everyone, I just wanted to bring the east/west perspective to light because there are some differences.

Nathan

[Nate Fikkert]

Oh yeah,

I grew up in Wisconsin and have spent the last 3 1/2 years living and hunting in Wyoming, and now Utah.  I feel I have a pretty good grasp of hunting on both sides of the Mississippi.

Nathan

[Jeff Strubberg]

I just don't agree.

In my home state bowhunting is such a non-issue that year-round seasons have been brought up several times.

If our success rate was 100%, the impact would still be negligible.  There simply aren't that many bowhunters.

[Plumbob]

I have enjoyed this thread, some great opinons. I would like to add that  in my small corner of the world the pressure to be sucessful is unreal. Speaking mostly of Elk, {and archers in general} there is some type of shame associated with not notching a tag. Last year alone the amount of bulls that were "stuck" and loss were shocking. {Amazing how it doesn't bother some people}

In my opinion poor shot selection and poor follow up are to blame most of the time. Once or twice a year I end up helping on a lost Elk to find that the person is not sure where the bull was, where they were, and so on.

Experience is hard to come by, yet everyone wants to be succesful now.

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Originally posted by snag:
Game management? Heck, in some states like Oregon they have made laws that have turned predators into their management tools...and if it keeps going this way the predators will replace us as the ONLY management tool...wolves are crossing over into Oregon now. Look what they have done in parts of Idaho.  This is just what the environ-tree hugging-tofu eating crowd want.  No hunters, just nature.

         

Tear em up Snag!!! I agree 100%   the environmentalists and animal activists that have slowly Califonicated Oregon, have got the poor game commission running in circles. We can't bait bears, or use hounds anymore...and now the dad burn things are moving into the city trashing out garbage cans! They did the same thing with cougars! The average sightings of cougar in Oregon has risen ten times in the last two years....I saw one myself in broad daylight right down in the camping area last fall....it's just a matter of time before we start loosing kids again.....you watch!  You guys back east with seven doe tags should come out west and fight the tree huggers for awhile....I'm hoping they open an either sex hunt on them myself....it's disgusting.....The advanced technology in compound bows isn't helping matters much out west either....the best we can hope for is "Traditional archery only Seasons" which is likely...it won't be long and the compounders are going to be dodging bullets and hunting with the rifle hunters out here....Kirk

[**DONOTDELETE**]

Originally posted by Plumbob:
I have enjoyed this thread, some great opinions. I would like to add that  in my small corner of the world the pressure to be successful is unreal. Speaking mostly of Elk, {and archers in general} there is some type of shame associated with not notching a tag. Last year alone the amount of bulls that were "stuck" and loss were shocking. {Amazing how it doesn't bother some people}

In my opinion poor shot selection and poor follow up are to blame most of the time. Once or twice a year I end up helping on a lost Elk to find that the person is not sure where the bull was, where they were, and so on.

Experience is hard to come by, yet everyone wants to be successful now.

I'm not far from you bro...and it's the same story on the Oregon coast.....the technology of the compound bow is giving the average archer the ability to shoot much further distances accurately.....well maybe the CAN shoot 6" groups at a target at 60 yards....most of em can't hit a pie plate at forty! But these guys are out there shooting up to 80 & 100 yards cross canyons!!!! I/ve seen these yahoos flock shooting at elk herds like this!!!!.....This is the main reason why i have chosen to go traditional. I was guilty myself....the last two elk i harvested were at 50 & 60 yards.....I'll bet i tracked a dozen other elk people shot at that distance that were never found...I shoot year round and could group arrows at 4" at 80 yards....Those animals don't stand still for the full second it takes the arrow takes to get there guys......I'm done with it myself....I'm going to take my elk with a long bow at 12 yards this year, or not take one at all.....

90 percent of the animals harvested,(Not just killed or wounded) are annually taken by 10 percent of the hunters....That is a fact!....I plan on staying in that 10 percent area myself......Kirk

[Nate Fikkert]

Thats kind of what I'm talking about Kirk.

Nathan

[GEREP]

Kirk:

"This is the main reason why i have chosen to go traditional. I was guilty myself....the last two elk i harvested were at 50 & 60 yards.....I'll bet i tracked a dozen other elk people shot at that distance that were never found...I shoot year round and could group arrows at 4" at 80 yards....Those animals don't stand still for the full second it takes the arrow takes to get there guys......I'm done with it myself....I'm going to take my elk with a long bow at 12 yards this year, or not take one at all....."

So let me make sure I have this right.  When it comes to your journey, you have decided that harvesting elk at 50 and 60 yards just wasn't satisfying anymore so you made the switch to traditional.  Now should we legislate that everyone else do the same?  I can assure you that the same slugs that would "flock shoot" elk across a canyon with a compound would do the same think with a recurve, longbow, or slingshot.  The equipment that you choose does not determine your ethics.

My mother used to say "honesty is like pregnancy...either you is or you ain't."  I suspect the same thing can be said about ethics.

It seems to me what this all boils down to is that we constantly hear about how we need to "pass it along."  We need to encourage more people to hunt, we need to protect our way of life. We just don't want them hunting the land WE hunt or "our" game.

Last but not least,and make no mistake about this.  The anti hunting crowd hates ALL hunting.  If you think for one second they like us more becuase we kill "nicer" or because we "do it the hard way," you are sadly mistaken.  Once they have taken out the "modern" crowd, they will come after us in a heartbeat.  They know what they are doing by taking a little bite here and a little bite there but the ultimate goal is to stop all hunting.  If we turn our backs on our modern counterparts, it will most surely come back to haunt us.  Sad to say, perception is reality.  When they do the "shocumentary" on bowhunting, do you want the video taken of the guys "driving tacks" at 50 yards with their compounds or do you want them taking the video at most of the trad shoots we all attend?  You know, the ones with those beautifully crested cedars sticking out of the neck, the legs and the hams of the foam deer,  all shot from 18 yards?

If we want bowhunting to last, we cannot let the romance of what we do cloud the reality of what we are up against.  Those that wish to take it away do not care one bit that we carved our own bow from an osage stave, or that we wear wool plaid and a Fedora.  In their minds, we are killing Boo Boo and Bambi.  The weapon is simply not relevant.

     

KPC

[IndianaBowman]

It's not about the anti hunters. It's about the non-hunting 80% that have no strong allegiance one way or another. If our public perception slips they will gain an opinion.

[GEREP]

Indianabowman:

"It's not about the anti hunters. It's about the non-hunting 80% that have no strong allegiance one way or another. If our public perception slips they will gain an opinion."

You are so right...but unfortunately that's not the whole story.  It IS the anti hunters that are setting the agenda and painting the picture for the 80%.  Unfortunatley, in our zeal to paint ourselves as the "good killers," and them (modern bowhunters) as the "bad killers," we are in effect doing their job for them.  Once we have been successful in achieving what we think we want, we will no longer have the numbers or the clout to effectively fight anything and hunting as we know it will be over.
   
KPC