TBM Article says it all

[Red4arm]

I shoot only stone arrows those wood ones are to easy to tune. Limestone for us cave men.

[Scott Teaschner]

Don Thomas did not write the article. A man by the name of Kirby Kohler wrote the article. If it was Don who wrote the article it would be a lot better article. Every one is intitled to there own thoughts. But if you read his article he says carbons are cheating.Then he says but since Dave Patersen and Dr Ashby said you have to use them for elk well then its ok. But not for deer turkey, bear and so on. Then your sacrifice difficulty for ease. I say he is lazy if he is dead set on wood he sould use them. You can get a wood heavy enough. The guy says there are few that no how to tune and hunt with wooden shafts. Just because he doesnt does not mean no one else does. The guy lives in LaLa land he is teacher in enviromental stewardship and obviously does not get out much. For one I like to hunt and I hunt hard . Hunting is something that has been my life style from the time I was three or four years old. If some one is going to write an article like the one he did he better have some sound facts. Which he has none. It is not about reflecting at all. I never did care for a person who bends the rules just to justify thier believes. This guy is scary and he is the type who will help get rid of dogs for hunting bears cats birds what ever. If he does not agree with baiting bears he is the man to watch out for. That is unless Dave Patersen says its ok then its ok. When it comes to hunting I have my own thoughts and oppinions. But where do we draw the line. We have to stay together or we will lose more. I may not agree with the use of hounds but I wont attack it. Its been around a long time it is a tradition. But if you get a bunch of Kirbys together it may be gone in your state. If you can read that article and think it is just some guy reflecting then I must have read a different article. The guy writes rubish. He has no thoughts he just has others thoughts. He also has no experiance for if he did would not have wrote such a poor article.

[Scott Teaschner]

Kirby Kohler is not even close to being a Dave Patersen, Don Thomas or Dick Robertson. To put him in that group would be an insult.

[Ben Maher]

Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:

[qb]   One can make a point without turning it into a spear.

That is a great line JRW ..... I'm so gonna "borrow" it .....  

[jhg]

You know Scott, I think you are taking the personal attacks too far.


Joshua

[jeff w]

I agree jhg.

[Scott Teaschner]

Yeah I was thinking after I wrote it I should have cooled down a little before I commented . Sorry for the the going off. I just think the guys way of thinking is bad for hunting in general. Every one has there way of thinking and how they like to spend their time in the woods. I just dont think the guys logic holds water. I have probably killed more game with woods than anything else I know how to build them from scratch. I currently shoot carbons. The way it reads in his article he knows very little about woods. So I think he owes it to the game to shoot carbons. I think ethicly it is the only choice for him. He has not done his home work and he tells us in print. When I read an article I think you should at least know what you are writeing about. I am sorry again for not stepping back and waiting a day to cool down.
Scott Teaschner

[German Dog]

Originally posted by Jason R. Wesbrock:

 The second was how using wood arrows put him in the company of Fred Bear, who shot aluminum and fiberglass arrows.

QUOTE]


I read it twice, and I must be blind, but where did he mention Fred Bear???

[Brad_Gentry]

Well I'm sure one of Mr. Kohler's goals with this article, like any good article, was to spark some serious thought and introspection on the part of his audience, and he has apparently succeeded on that!

There have been a lot of thoughtful reponses on this thread [and a few that show no thought at all]. I liked the article myself, and think the point of taking stock in one's self, and in this case the way we pursue our bowhunting, from time to time is an important one.

Brad

[Swamp Yankee]

Taking up traditional archery is a pretty good way for most of us to draw a little line in the sand and enjoy the contemplation of things from days gone by.
But I'd guess we all drive a car or truck every day; which reminds me of an exercise we did in an Environmental Economics class I took a few years ago.  We calculated how many horses would be necessary to transport everyone to work in Manhattan, NY on a typical workday.  Then we figured out how much horse manure all those animals would produce over the course of a day and divided it by the number of square feet on the island.  The final answer was Manhattan would be covered by over 100’ (yes that’s FEET) of horse manure in one day.
The fact of the matter is, in many cases there simply is no going back.
As good at hunting as many of us think we are, given only our brains and a stick and string to survive, most of us would starve to death in a few weeks without many of the technological advances we depend on today.  It’s nice to dream about a simpler way of life, and there are many lessons to be learned from those dreams, but there is no going back.

[Mudd]

I have not read the article but will stand with anyone for their right to speak their opinion even if I disagree with it.

I kind of like being asked to take a different point of view into consideration as long as I'm not bashed for not going along with it as my personal choice.

I have the personal responsibility for my own ethics and integrity.

There are times I knowingly break the law like driving 65mph in a clearly posted 60mph speed zone. I am guilty and trying to do better. I won't allow myself to use the excuse "Everyone does it!".

I will however say that in some areas there isn't any true right or wrong, just opinion and yours is just as valid as any writers.

I am partial to what Davy Crockett had to say..“Be always sure you're right, then go ahead.”

God bless,Mudd

PS: I'm sorry if I rambled on too much.

[Izzy]

To me, a trad bow has always been the easy, more effective hunting tool. Im almost embarrassed to recount all of my compound hunting days mishaps, missed deer a kicking distance, broken parts, loose parts and squeaky draws (not drawers) to name a few. To me the article was just one mans opinion and I certainly gained nothing from reading it but took no offense either.  Like it has already been pointed out it aint the first and wont be the last of its kind. I just wish there were some way of knowing its gonna be that type of article so I can skip it before I start to read it.

[vermonster13]

I have pretty much stopped reading hunting mags of any sort. Life is much less confusing when I just do what makes me happy and let everyone else do the same for themselves within the law and common sense.

[Jack Shanks]

I have subscribed to TBM since it's beginning. Probably just me getting older but I find myself reading less of the content over the last few years if at all. I did read three and one half articles in this latest issue including the one by Kirby Kohler.
 
 I'm not at all surprised by the article or that the editors would choose to print it. Their magazine and they make the choices as to what ends up in print. It is entirely up to us as the consumer whether we choose to support their decisions.

[Turkeys Fear Me]

Originally posted by Swamp Yankee:
Taking up traditional archery is a pretty good way for most of us to draw a little line in the sand and enjoy the contemplation of things from days gone by.

I think this is where some of us get off the train. I'm not in any way saying you are wrong Swamp Yankee, to each his own, I just don't personally feel the need to draw any lines in any sand.  Traditional archery is something that I do because I enjoy it.  It's not a statement I'm trying to make.  I'm not trying to reinact anything, or relive the good old days.  I just enjoy it.  It's like picking what foods I like to eat. If I want to eat a Big Mack and large fries and wash it down with a diet Coke, so be it.  It doesn't need to make sense to anyone else but me.  If my son wants to put catsup on a nice steak, who am I to tell him he's wrong?  If my daughter likes to dip fries in her Frosty, what do I care?  If I want to shoot carbon arrows out of selfbow, I sure as heck don't need anyone in a hunting magazine suggesting that it might not be the right thing to do or that it's not the way things were meant to be.  

Unless it's governed by law, it really is only about me.

[Scott Teaschner]

Well said Jeffrey! We need to stick together as one where much stronger that way.

[Rich in CO]

I read the article and my fist thought was what Scott T was saying, he is just re wording stuff that we all have read in the past and took it as the gospil.

 I have always have had a hard time understanding the thought process of I shoot a stick now every thing needs to be harder than needed.
 
When I'm Elk hunting and if I can take a trail that gets me to where I want in 1.5 hrs VS hiking straight up the back side in 3hrs just becuase it's the hard way, I'm taking the trail

[Mark Baker]

I'm sorry Scott, and Jeffrey....but it is indeed about drawing a line in the sand.  

Nobody with a "can't we all just get along" attitude ever won a debate or got a season granted or protected in a state Fish and Game meeting.   Only those with agendas attend these things, and only those with agendas get politically involved.   Give me one person with a good argument and he/she will be able to "whip the pants" of a hundred "can't we all just get along" folks.   To say that if we just shut up and "take it" as it comes and everything will be alright is naive at best.  

And it smacks of hypocracy to call names whenever someone who disagrees with your "get along" attitude speaks up.   Should'nt you just "shut up" and take it....like you suggest they do?!!!

Intospection is necessary in our sport and has always been there.  

Saxton Pope, and Art Young drew a line in the sand with their choices in modern bowhunting's infancy.   The very existence of each and every state and national traditional organization is a "drawing" of lines.   And....bow seasons, (like it or not) were formed by folks with specific gear who "drew lines" and fought hard to get them implemented.    I guess they all were "elitists".  

And hey...they did'nt have to deal with half the techno junk we have today and they were sick of it all, even back then!  

You're right...there is a time and place for all to live....and bowhunters carved out their own "niche" and now, because of the "anything goes" crowd...we are faced with losing opportunity if we don't police ourselves and fight a bit amongst ourselves to keep what we have.   Some of the names bandied about because of their opinions were among the few who stood strong when traditional bowhunting was at it's weakest.   They saw what complacency has done to our sport and how out-of-control it has all become.   Bowhunting never was supposed to be for everyone....only those who choose to accept the challenge were granted the increased opportunities.  Can you say that modern bowhunters today are all about "accepting the challenges"???   No Way!   They are all about doing whatever is legal and easiest.    

Challenge remains the one thing about what we do that separates us from them...and make no mistake, what we do is very different from what they do.  Challenge and accepting it is what defines us as traditional bowhunters, and we all have differing levels of that, and we recognize that our "satisfaction" is derived from our ability to overcome these.   It is what keeps us doing this for a lifetime....neverending challenge.    So what is wrong with a bit of "challenge" from time to time from those within our own ranks???   Nothing.   It keeps us all healthy....wondering if we have "what it takes".  

Personally, although I don't always agree with everything many of those type writers like to say, I love to hear their thoughts on the subject....and sometimes, sometimes, they get me thinking.   And that's a good thing.

[Glunt]

The thought provoking part doesn't give writers a free pass to make sweeping judgments and generalizations without  getting some flak.

Carbons & pop-up blinds aren't ok choices?  Thats plain silly thinkin' to me.  Some folks wear the fact that they shoot "traditional" or hunt the "hard" way like a merit badge.  Maybe its those folks that need to take a look in the mirror.  Are they shooting a stick and POC arrows because they enjoy it or because of how others will perceive them?  Do they really dislike camo, or do they just like to look the part in a plaid shirt kneeling introspectively over a whitetail buck?  Do they put "hard hunted public land" in their successful elk tale to tell the story better or to grow their hat size?

Nothing wrong with being proud of taking on a challenge and imposing limitations on yourself.  And, nothing wrong with dressing the part or choosing equipment that helps submerse one's self in a certain image that makes them happy.  Start dictating choices and making assumptions about why others choose what they do, and expect some blowback.

I would prefer a day afield with a friend, his 1000 yard rifle, and his honest approach to hunting over a day with an elitist trad hunter with back quiver full of cane arrows thats out there to feed his image or ego.

I've built and shot arrows from wood, glass, aluminum and carbon.  Heck, I even hunted one year (about 1986) with a  Martin Cougar Magnum compound and cedar arrows when I was a broke kid.  Whats in a guys quiver or what kind of weapon he slides out of the back seat has never been a good way to judge who he is.

[JamesKerr]

I believe traditional archery is about using a recurve, longbow, or selfbow without sights to propel a feathered shaft. If one truly wishes to define traditional as only using wood arrows than maybe only selfbows, sinew strings, and stone points are truly traditional in this term.