Right, and I'm not necessarily arguing about whether baiting or cameras should be legal and I'm certainly not trying to come off sounding like I'm better than anyone for the way I choose to hunt. All I'm saying is that when you take it to extremes, the argument that as long as it's legal hopefully falls apart. It should be more of an issue that we don't agree with what our lawmakers are considering to be legal.
Are we really hunting?
- Thread starter DonV
- Start date
that explains a lot. We love to split hairs on here. I care less about what others think.
Seems like your buddy took a little advantage of the situation by involving you - maybe he’s killing too much - whatever happened, he screwed up. That’s as good of a setup as it gets.
The xbow is more effective and will result in less lost deer. Making him switch to a bow may result in more lost wounded/dead deer.
Can you post up a couple pictures of some deer he’s killing and tell how many?
Everyone has diff circumstances and extremes.
I own 10 acres in an ag area. The deer come thru after dark and then back before light. Cars on the roads spook them. Everyone around there baits and hunts.
Id like to shoot a buck every year. It doesnt happen but my lil spin feeder and 2-3 acres of food plots keep some deer using the property. Every now and again a buck will show during legal hours, usually when im not there.
When folks start talking about how bad i am for using a feeder or cell cam it makes me chuckle. For every guy complaining there is one or two or three who use them. Usually comes down to horn envy or a lack of easy deer to kill.
The example mentioned where they shot a bunch of bucks off property but dont like neighbor using feed to draw deer. Its like they forget that we share deer w our neighbors and if you shoot em all, the neighbor doesnt get any. For all i know, im his neighbor. No wonder im not seeing many bucks.
rodney482
WKR
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2012
- Messages
- 4,162
first thing I would get rid of is youth season. followed by cell cams during season. Also zero drone use
People are conflating laws and regulations. If you dont understand the difference in this context you might consider reading up before you spout off. They are different, and for a reason. For all their warts, our regulations have been very successful at managing wildlife within the situation created by laws, development, etc. Neither one may match one persons desires…but ime very, very few of the people up in arms have a bigger picture view, and even fewer of them use anything more than emotion and lore to base their opinions on. if we’re talking about WT deer we’re literally infested with them across much of their range. Biologists are trying to find ways to take more of them at every turn, and the obstacle they are running into is people griping about crossbows and only shooting mature bucks, etc. Hunters keep griping about people not using science in setting regulation, and here people are arguing over bows vs crossbows. Science is agnostic about how they get shot. At some level skill and woodsmanship comes into it for public opinion—because we exist within a larger society that also has “ownership” over the wildlife—but from a biological perspective it doesnt make any difference whether a deer was killed with a stone point while wearing a loincloth, or a heat-seeking crossbow bolt with a thermal scope over bait. If thats what it takes to kill the right amount of deer, and provide the right amount of hunting opportunity, then who cares? If you think we arent killing the right amount of deer because we have the wrong population targets, then that has nothing to do with what implements are used.
New IL law helps farmers, landowners with nuisance deer control
A law taking effect Jan. 1 will give landowners and farmers more flexibility to hunt deer on their property.
Yes sway the 80% when possible
Good point. This morning I was thinking the younger generation todday using all this technology will be saying (in 40 years) that what the new younger generation has then will be to much but what they had was ok. I do agree with you that you have to draw the line and what is happening on my land is a little over that line.
As someone who lives and hunts in a baiting allowed state, it's just another way to do it.
I haven't shot a buck over bait in 4+ years. Have had more success and encounters not over bait, but there are properties I hunt that would be useless without bait.
Cell cams havent changed anything east of the mississippi, all they did was save gas money. Trail cams make people wait and hope for *insert named deer* to show up as they pass up younger deer.
Crossguns - that's where the line gets drawn. They have taken over most archery seasons and total harvest percentage in less than 10 years for a lot of places. Expanding ranges to 60-70-80 yards, might as well allow me to use a shotgun for archery season.
I haven't shot a buck over bait in 4+ years. Have had more success and encounters not over bait, but there are properties I hunt that would be useless without bait.
Cell cams havent changed anything east of the mississippi, all they did was save gas money. Trail cams make people wait and hope for *insert named deer* to show up as they pass up younger deer.
Crossguns - that's where the line gets drawn. They have taken over most archery seasons and total harvest percentage in less than 10 years for a lot of places. Expanding ranges to 60-70-80 yards, might as well allow me to use a shotgun for archery season.
Not to pick on you, just the most recent example of this sentiment is this thread. What is it about this that people dont like? The state has a harvest target and a population target. If they are remaining within those targets, why does it matter what implement people use? No one is saying YOU have to use a crossbow or a shotgun or whatever. I’m seriously wondering why this would bother anyone. If you think too many deer will be harvested, then the frustration would be far better directed to the population targets, not the implements used to achieve those targets.
If it's only all about harvest objectives why even divide the season?
Sent from my SM-S926U using Tapatalk
Interesting thread. Interesting to read that we all have different boundaries.
But don't kid yourselves for one second, those of you with high moral standards stating you are hunting them on their terms; no you're not. Heck, the clothes on your back is modern technology. Your boots, scent control, carbon arrow, your firearm. Unless you are running around barefoot, a loin cloth and a sharpened stick, you're using technology. Actually, a sharpened stick is technology.
I struggle with the technology thing, I admit it. But this is the way I look at it. If it doesn't impact others around you negatively, who cares? For example, you flying a drone over me is not cool, for any purpose. A gun and scope set up that is accurate to a 1,000 yards, fine. But here is where it starts to get a little gray for me. Using that gun at a reasonable distance makes total sense to me because it satisfies my own personal number one rule. Do whatever you can, reasonably to never injure an animal. Using it at a 1,000 yards, not so much. There is only one reason to shoot at that distance, the challenge of making the hit. That to me is unethical. But it's legal, so if that's what you want to do, and you can live with yourself when you shoot off a leg, go for it. It's my own personal rule and I have no right to impose it upon you. I bow hunt. I love to bow hunt. Bow hunting really goes against my own rule, so there's that. But personal rule number two, don't take a low risk, shot helps to mitigate it...... a little. See, like everyone else, I can justify my decision and actions all day long, Haha.
The backstop for all of this are the biologists and the quotas they set (as long as the legislature doesn't f it up). The limits they set kind of makes this discussion irrelevant. Funny thing is, I don't recall seeing harvest numbers sky rocketing anywhere I've ever hunted. I don't think crossbow have made any impact (btw how would it?) I don't think we are necessarily killing more. If anything, maybe we are just injuring more. Because I think the one thing that technology has done is afford the opportunity for a lot more people to get into the woods that have no idea what they are doing. The one thing technology has definitely ruined is mentorship. More importantly, the right kind of mentorship. Cam Hanes out there with you on your phone is not mentorship.
But don't kid yourselves for one second, those of you with high moral standards stating you are hunting them on their terms; no you're not. Heck, the clothes on your back is modern technology. Your boots, scent control, carbon arrow, your firearm. Unless you are running around barefoot, a loin cloth and a sharpened stick, you're using technology. Actually, a sharpened stick is technology.
I struggle with the technology thing, I admit it. But this is the way I look at it. If it doesn't impact others around you negatively, who cares? For example, you flying a drone over me is not cool, for any purpose. A gun and scope set up that is accurate to a 1,000 yards, fine. But here is where it starts to get a little gray for me. Using that gun at a reasonable distance makes total sense to me because it satisfies my own personal number one rule. Do whatever you can, reasonably to never injure an animal. Using it at a 1,000 yards, not so much. There is only one reason to shoot at that distance, the challenge of making the hit. That to me is unethical. But it's legal, so if that's what you want to do, and you can live with yourself when you shoot off a leg, go for it. It's my own personal rule and I have no right to impose it upon you. I bow hunt. I love to bow hunt. Bow hunting really goes against my own rule, so there's that. But personal rule number two, don't take a low risk, shot helps to mitigate it...... a little. See, like everyone else, I can justify my decision and actions all day long, Haha.
The backstop for all of this are the biologists and the quotas they set (as long as the legislature doesn't f it up). The limits they set kind of makes this discussion irrelevant. Funny thing is, I don't recall seeing harvest numbers sky rocketing anywhere I've ever hunted. I don't think crossbow have made any impact (btw how would it?) I don't think we are necessarily killing more. If anything, maybe we are just injuring more. Because I think the one thing that technology has done is afford the opportunity for a lot more people to get into the woods that have no idea what they are doing. The one thing technology has definitely ruined is mentorship. More importantly, the right kind of mentorship. Cam Hanes out there with you on your phone is not mentorship.
rookieforever33
WKR
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2024
- Messages
- 729
Every bow hunter I know that has switched to crossbow has not extended their range by more than a few yards. Wind and animal movement still apply. If a person thinks they can shoot animals at 80 yards with a crossbow, they probably would take that shot with a compound.
TSAMP
WKR
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2019
- Messages
- 2,017
What's the issue with youth seasons?
It's obviously hyperbole, noted by calling it a crossgun and not crossbow.
However, why do we turn a blind eye to something that is drastically different then it's predecessor? The overwhelming onset of crossbows should be worthy of investigation. 70% of the archery population rapidly changing should mean something... they aren't doing it for more of a challenge.
States differentiate muzzleloaders due to efficiency, scope vs open sights, 209 vs percussion, sabot vs full bore lead, pellets vs powder, closed vs open breech...
They observed that while both being 'muzzleloaders' there is a stark difference in ability.
Why isn't compound vs crossbow treated the same?
Arrow speed, draw vs precocked, telescopic sights, ability to use a tripod, only similarity is that it flings a stick with a pointy side on it.
But being where I am in NJ, we have 6 months of archery, unlimited does (most of the state) and 6 buck tags, they don't care about deer or population objective, each season is a new tag $$$. They could introduce a crossbow permit and make even more money. 6 buck tags is about $$$, not managing a population, otherwise they would reduce down to 1 buck tag to increase doe harvest for population management.
TLDR: What people dont like is pretending this is the same...
Hence, why fish and game reviews and adjusts seasons, and bag limits, and tags allocated.
But asking for them to differentiate archery vs crossbow is taboo?
KurtR
WKR
It makes kids soft and not appreciate tags. More or less grown men are jealous they dont get that tag.
rookieforever33
WKR
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2024
- Messages
- 729
Because anyone west of the Mississippi river thinks this is the only way crossbows are used, always over a corn pile. 
Its just as wrong as thinking every hunter west of the Mississippi river is taking 1000 yard shots, and only kill monster mulies and mega elk.
Its just as wrong as thinking every hunter west of the Mississippi river is taking 1000 yard shots, and only kill monster mulies and mega elk.
Similar threads
Featured Video
Latest Articles
- TT#64 Josh Boyd Elk Hunting Strategies for Every Season
- Aaron Davidson of Gunwerks
- TT#63 Dirk Durham’s Art of Elk Calling
- BIG Buck Stories with the Dirty Giants Podcast
- TT#62 Brian Barney Hunting Bulls without Calling
- Hoyt Alpha AX-2 SD Review
- Kuiu Kenai vs Outdoor Vitals Vario Hooded Jacket Review
- Hoyt RX-9 Ultra Review
- Hunting Vampire Bucks & Building an Optics Kit
- Darton Sequel ST2 35 Review