TBM Article says it all

[dragonheart]

A given method of hunting can be legal by a govenment regulation, but unethical for a particular bowhunter.

[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.

[Jason R. Wesbrock]

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.

[Brad_Gentry]

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.

[Turkeys Fear Me]

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.

[Jeff Strubberg]

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.

[SELFBOW19953]

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?

[jsweka]

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.

[Brad_Gentry]

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

[Paul/KS]

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...

[kpete]

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.

[texbow2]

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

[swamprooter]

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

[RC]

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

[jsweka]

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.

[Hit-or-Miss]

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

[Turkeys Fear Me]

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".

[Zbone]

"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^)

[pauljr]

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.

[Zbone]

Hows come traditional hunting "lease" hasn't been brought up yet...8^)

Sorry, couldn't resist...8^)