Ethical question - stickbow

[winter]

I've really been thinking a lot about being ethical with a stickbow.... it's my feeling that most "trad" shooters are pretty terrible shots and get lucky sometimes, but most have no business shooting past 8 yards. Maybe that ruffles some feathers but I'm serious.

I learned how to shoot a recurve when I was 13 months old - moved to compound around 8, competed at 16, made the US Collegiate archery team a few years back and have now progressed back to dabbling in the "trad" world. I've shot 2 deer with a recurve and a longbow and have made perfect shots on these whitetails from treestands at 10 and 17 yards respectively. I practice 3-4 times a week and feel like I have reaally really good form. I shoot a clicker and know the ins and outs of tuning. All that being said, I only can hit a softball at 20 yards about 80% of the time. I'm probably better than most I'd suspect, and I'm not at all happy with that accuracy. I took my trad bows whitetail hunting the first year with a 10 yard maximum and connected on a beautiful doe. Last year my limit was 20, and shot a really nice 8pt at 17 yards. At the time I was shooting really well, and could keep 95% of my arrows in a softball sized group at 20. But honestly, who can shoots softball sized groups every time from 20 yards?

A great friend of mine is the best shot I know with a recurve and even he botches shots at 20 and 15 yards - although rare, it still happens.

My reason for this rant is this: My favorite hunt is alpine mulies at 12,000ft. I do it every year and have shot two great bucks with my compound. I'm debating taking the stick, but am questioning the ethicalness. I know it can be done - South Cox seems to have great success at it. If you watch his video he also misses a lot of deer at close range and could have easily wounded them. I can guarantee if he'd be using a compound those deer would be dead and not potentially wounded.

Is it fair that we chose to handicap ourselves by shooting stickbows - or is it selfish of us? I can honestly shoot the same groups at 90 yards with my compound that most would be happy with at 20 with a recurve. Seems selfish that we would risk wounding something just because we want the thrill to harvest an animal with our stickbows. Even if we practice all summer - stump shoot around the mountains and feel good about things - theres still a much higher likely hood of wounding something. I watch the highly respected "trad" archers like Fred Eichler who when hunting the high places, they just want to "get an arrow into them". I'm torn when I hear things like that. Would I shoot a dall sheep in the butt just to slow him down so I can get closer and shoot him again while he's staring at me. I don't think I would. And I really respect these guys. Even Fred Bear was known to launch arrows at running game hoping to get lucky.

Some may argue that bowhunting is inherently risky business compared to a rifle, and if you're worried so much about wounding, that just shoot a gun and be done with it. I'm talking archery only....

Fella's, I'm torn. The two shots I had with my recurve/longbow were the most rewarding shots of my life. I watched both deer tip over. But is it worth the risk?

I just wanted to write down my thoughts and see what you guys think. I apologize for the rambling.

 

[dreamingbig]

I like your discipline but you are being too hard on yourself. Take the trad bow, limit yourself to your bounds and have fun! I watched my Dad hunt with trad for over 30 yards and while he did miss, 99% of the misses were complete whiffs. I don't think you will end up wounding tons of game. No more so than the average regardless of weapon choice.

 

[Jesse Minish]

Even the best shots with a compound will botch a shot heck even with a gun. Only you can determine what is an ethical choice for your own hunting equipment. I have 100% confidence in my trad equipment and have as much successes and a FAR less % of wounded or lost animals as my friends who use compounds.

 

[kad11]

I am drawn to the challenge of using a stickbow as well, but I am WAY more concerned about wounding an animal. I wounded and never recovered a small mule deer buck my first hunting season and there are still days (3 years later) where I think about that poor guy and wonder how much he suffered because of me. I am in no way a PETA hippy, but I can't help but feel bad. After that experience I want to do everything in my power to make sure it never happens again. I'm not saying it won't ever happen again, but I want to do everything I can to prevent it.

Why not challenge yourself by only taking shots at animals that are within stickbow range (15-20 yds) with your compound. By stalking in to that close range you have overcome one of the large hurdles of traditional hunting, but you can have the peace of mind that if a shot does present itself you should be able to cleanly kill the animal w/ your compound. I realize there are other challenges of using a stickbow (amount of time at full draw, etc.), but this might be a compromise that you could at least try.

 

[gobbler1662]

Okay maybe I am way out there but, As a trad archer long bow and recurve I shoot fairly high poundages. Most of my bows are at the 60 pound range. I shoot 30-50 arrows a day and shoot a trad league with 3D annimals once a week. I am good to great out to 30 yds and dam good to 40. Now I don't know if I'd shoot an elk at 40, but darn sure would at 30. Got a big 6x6 last year at 20. Again I shoot 10 grains per pound and I think the key is daily shooting, stump shooting at all distances and your confidence grows.Everyone has their comfort zone and that's fine but I think with today's high poundage and smokin fast recurves and longbows you can reach out there farther if you are comfortable.

 

[tater]

Unfortunately the "get one in 'em" mentality is not exclusive to certain trad hunters. I've seen plenty of it with rifleman and compounders. As far as comparing what Fred Bear and some of our other famous forbearers did, we as a trad community have hopefully learned limitations with humility and moved on.

Every hunter regardless of weapon should know his or her limitations. Just like not all rifle users should be shooting animals at 800 yards, not all archers (both trad and compound) have any business shooting past 15.

I chuckle about the "group" quest. I've never had more than one shot at an animal. I use blind bale work for form, and i practice one shot at a time with one arrow over multiple distances several times a week all year round. The concentration required for consistent "group work" with bare bow is incredibly rare, and to honest really boring for me. I would rather be able to place the first arow where i want it to go with the first shot consistently, than stack one on top of the other.

When i walk out of my door, and worry about my first arrow. That is the one that counts.

Your ethical concerns seem to be genuine, and i hope that you find some measure of peace with whatever you choose.

 

[winter]

Good thoughts here guys. Kad11, the idea of getting to stickbow range with modern equipment is a great idea. I think we always do our best to get as close as possible. Whitetails out of treestands are made for trad gear. This mule deer hunt is different. There's not much cover at 12,000.

Gobbler- do you shoot instinctive out to those yardages? That sounds impressive.

I was using the "group" as just a way to gauge ones accuracy. Would mean the same to me if you shot a target in the vitals the mass majority of the time, regardless if the arrows are in succession.

Good conversation.

here's another thought - I bet if you took all the bowhunters in the country and had them shoot at 15 yards, I bet more compound shooters hit the target by a HUGE margin. 15 yards is a distance I bet almost 100% of trad archers would take. So are those trad archers being selfish and unethical - I'm not sure. I think a lot of them just enjoy making their own back quivers and spending time in the woods. And I think that's great. I think most of you guys are the minority. We all live out west and are spending time reading the traditional section on Rokslide haha. You are more than likely pretty decent shots and good hunters. But 90% of the recurve/longbow guys that shoot at our local club here in Colorado shouldn't be allowed to shoot at live animals.

 

[Karlkortemeier]

Interesting thread. I started off my archery with trad gear then switched to a compound. I killed a lot of animals with my recurve. In fact, the deer in my avatar was shot with a bow by South Cox. I really enjoy my trad gear and still shoot it. At some point I will get the bug and hunt with it again. Compound or recurve I shoot my bow at a minimum of 5 days a week. I have never really understood the seperation between trad guys and compound shooters. At twenty yards I was happy with softball groups with my recurve, with the compound, golfball size groups. To me, both are a challenge, and a blast in their own way.

In the areas I hunt, you are lucky to get a 20 yard shot. Most of the deer and pigs I shoot are within 15 yards. I shot 4 whitetail this year and all were less than 10 yards. The reason I switched was a personal one. In that split second moment when I pulled back on an animal, all the training, practice, blind bailing, etc. went out the window with a recurve. I killed a lot of animals, but I was never 100% confident. With the compound, when I was exhausted, heart racing, I am always confident that my arrow is going to go were I want. For me the hunting is exactly the same. Its in that instant of shooting the animal that the difference comes out. And for me, the compound is what works.

That said, I am drawn to the simplicity, romance, and style of the trad bows. But as a tool to kill animals, again for me, the compound wins out. Like some other folks have said, I have gone to a number of trad shoots, and I was always surprised at how folks were shooting. We have a local 3d course that I get to once every couple of weeks. I can get kill shots 20 out of 20 with the compound. With the recurve, on my best days I was getting 18 or 19 kill shots. My average was probably more around 17 or so.

With trad gear I kept my shots under 20 yds. I prefer 15 or less. I stretched my yardage out to 30 with a compound.

Anyway, its all archery, and a blast. Shoot what you have 100% confidence in and practice a lot.

Great conversation.

 

[AndyB]

Stick within your 'effective range'..whether thats 50yds with a compound or 10 with your stickbow.
Your personal ethics will dictate whether you push those limits in the field.

I dont see a stickbow as a handicap, I accept that it will force me to improve my skills to get an animal within my effective range. It may limit my opportunities, but then so can a compound compared to a rifle.

 

[Kevin Dill]

I don't see the point in confusing ethics with accuracy. I have personally seen plenty of guys shoot a compound bow lights-out and then do a terrible job on animals in hunting situations. Conversely, I know plenty of people who can't consistently hit a white paper plate at 30 yards with a recurve, but they are money when it comes down to hunting and bringing home game. Accuracy on paper, in groups, measurable...has nothing to do with ethics. Skills and abilities (or lack of) do not make one ethical or not, but how one chooses to use these abilities certainly might figure into ethics. I know a number of guys who will steadfastly tell you it's an extremely poor ethical choice to take a 60 yard bow-shot at a mulie, no matter how accurate you are on paper. I personally keep my ethical judgments at home/to myself and avoid pronouncing others as ethical or not.

Keep in mind that ethics are always personal and always change. When did it become unacceptable to take a maybe-shot at a game animal? Why do we curse those who toss an arrow at a trotting deer at 30 yards but cheer the guy who wings a 60 yarder at a bouncing coyote? There was a time when any shot taken was that shooter's business and anyone who called them 'unethical' would have been pushed aside with a laugh. My point is that because one person or a group of people decides something is or isn't ethical doesn't make it universally so. Disagree? Read on...

If a compound guy can proclaim a longbow user who's accuracy doesn't measure up in their mind as being unethical or "has no business hunting big game", then why can't a rifle-man say the same about a compound bow user? Correct or not, there's a commonly held belief that bowhunters have it harder and end up wounding/losing more animals. Put a compound user and a rifle guy in front of a 125 yard target and see who has accuracy to spare. Not fair you say? I agree. Neither is the comparison between a longbow and a modern tech-evolved compound with trigger and all the goodies you can add to it. A good longbowman (or recurve user) will understand their effective range/accuracy and work within those self-imposed limits. For myself, the game isn't about the distances I can kill animals. It's all about how close I can get and completely defeat the animal's senses fair and square. That's what I call ethical hunting for myself, as opposed to seeing how far I can stretch my accuracy on animals which is to me very unethical. We are all individuals, and so are our ethics.

 

[Karlkortemeier]

I don't see the point in confusing ethics with accuracy. I have personally seen plenty of guys shoot a compound bow lights-out and then do a terrible job on animals in hunting situations. Conversely, I know plenty of people who can't consistently hit a white paper plate at 30 yards with a recurve, but they are money when it comes down to hunting and bringing home game. Accuracy on paper, in groups, measurable...has nothing to do with ethics. Skills and abilities (or lack of) do not make one ethical or not, but how one chooses to use these abilities certainly might figure into ethics. I know a number of guys who will steadfastly tell you it's an extremely poor ethical choice to take a 60 yard bow-shot at a mulie, no matter how accurate you are on paper. I personally keep my ethical judgments at home/to myself and avoid pronouncing others as ethical or not.

Keep in mind that ethics are always personal and always change. When did it become unacceptable to take a maybe-shot at a game animal? Why do we curse those who toss an arrow at a trotting deer at 30 yards but cheer the guy who wings a 60 yarder at a bouncing coyote? There was a time when any shot taken was that shooter's business and anyone who called them 'unethical' would have been pushed aside with a laugh. My point is that because one person or a group of people decides something is or isn't ethical doesn't make it universally so. Disagree? Read on...

If a compound guy can proclaim a longbow user who's accuracy doesn't measure up in their mind as being unethical or "has no business hunting big game", then why can't a rifle-man say the same about a compound bow user? Correct or not, there's a commonly held belief that bowhunters have it harder and end up wounding/losing more animals. Put a compound user and a rifle guy in front of a 125 yard target and see who has accuracy to spare. Not fair you say? I agree. Neither is the comparison between a longbow and a modern tech-evolved compound with trigger and all the goodies you can add to it. A good longbowman (or recurve user) will understand their effective range/accuracy and work within those self-imposed limits. For myself, the game isn't about the distances I can kill animals. It's all about how close I can get and completely defeat the animal's senses fair and square. That's what I call ethical hunting for myself, as opposed to seeing how far I can stretch my accuracy on animals which is to me very unethical. We are all individuals, and so are our ethics.

 

[JCT]

Kevin has pretty much said what I think.
Some time ago Missouri Universtity did a study of wounding rates on deer between traditional bows and compounds.
The wounds were much higher with compounds. They attributed that stat to the traditional hunters being more particular about shots
they chose to take. I have the article somewhere still and will dig it up before going into it further as to avoid mis-stating anything.
I will say this, I worked as a guide and wrangler in CO for 4 years. We had a husband/wife couple that shot for hoyt or some other
company and buddy they could flat out bust nocks at 60 yds in camp. My bossmans son guided them and they shot at 9 different bulls in 5 days
all under 30 yd and never cut a hair !
I shoot/ hunt with longbow and critters are dam sure dead if within 30 yds when I decide to shoot so I don't shoot past 25 or so to avoid as
much as possible any unwanted results.
I guided rifle hunters that couldn't hit a truck at 50 yds. I had a 13 yr old girl I guided that killed her elk at 475 yds steep down hill and dropped him
stone dead through the heart. My point is some people "got it" and some don't. Traditional bowhunting isn't for everybody and thats ok.

Regards
JT
JT

 

[JCT]

Kevin,
I have read and re-read your post in the past few minutes.
It is perfect and really says what I can never seam to put into words when having a conversation with someone
when out and about.
I think Im going to use it in the future. (with your blessing).
Well said,
Thank you
JT

 

[Kebler]

I have been thrus this debate of am I ethical enough with my longbow, am I pleasure seeking with the thrill and joy of the stick vs the animals wellness on a hunt.

i have made horrendous shots with a compund, rifle, shotgun and longbow. I have been on both sides spectrim with selfish greed a trophy animal escaped with little remorse for the animal to now complete remorse for the animal no matter what's is size.

bottom line all my bad shots were due not to lack of practice of preperation, but can be traced to the last 2 seconds where I did not take my time a focus on the shot and follow thru not because of the weapon.

 

[JCT]

Dam it, I had a post all written out, nice and respectfull then submit and find I'm not logged in!
Anyhow," learned to shoot recurve at 13 months" ? Typo? Has to be right?
Softballs 80% of the time @ 20 yds and "Im better than most", "great friend ,best shot I know botches shots at 20 yds and sometimes 15" ?
Winter, its apparent, to me anyhow, either you haven't spent much time around true dedicted trad bowhunters or your attempting to make a point
in a round about way. Sorry if Im getting this wrong but my BS alarm is quivering and ready to alert.
Regards
JT

 

[winter]

JCT,

I have a picture of myself in diapers with my dad shooting my little red Bear and cedar arrows. Parents have always told me I was 13 months old in that pic. I can only take their word for it. I have shot a bow for as long as I can honestly remember. Not what this was about.....I was just giving some background.

I have seen a lot of trad bowhunters shoot and very very few of them could honestly shoot a softball at 20 yards 8/10 shots (instinctively). I meant no disrespect to those who can, I was just using my life experiences as a gauge. I also said I "suspect" I was better than most.

You had me thinking that maybe I just haven't been around good trad archers. So I looked up some stuff. To get technical - the diameter of a softball is 3.5 inches. The bullseye on your standard NFAA 300 round is 3.2 inches. I just looked at the top 3 archers in the barebow class last year at indoor nationals. Their avg score for 2 days was a 289 out of 300. So they hit the "softball" 49 out of 60 shots. That's 82%. That is the barebow class where elevated rests are allowed along with clickers, and these are the "top 3" barebow shooters in the country. Also, I suspect most these guys are shooting arrows that put them 'point on' at 20 yrds, arguably much easier to be accurate than most instinctive hunting setups off the shelf.

That friend of mine shoots truly outstanding. He shoots instinctive and puts arrows in the kill at 40 yards consistently. That doesn't mean he's not immune to the occasional oops. That was the point.

The purpose of this discussion was to talk about how guys feel when they hit the woods with their stick bows knowing darn well they would be more proficient with a compound. Even the guys that are proficient with their stick bows more than likely would shoot better with a compound, but the thrill and simplicity drives them to carry the stick (like it does me). I didn't mean any more than that.

 

[JCT]

Winter,
I gotcha now. I disagree on some of your points, but, get the point your making now.
I would agree that a compound is most likely more accurate for most as a rifle would be also as Kevin stated
and the stats you give on the NFAA 300 are correct
but that's target archery with scoring. There is none of that in the woods or the backyards of the thousands of traditional hunters.
Nobody is in it for points. It's life and death.
All situations are different. When a bull comes in and the compound is drawn and held, then the bull hangs up with vitals behind a tree for
15 minutes the compound guy is quivering, straining and toast by the time the bull decides to take those needed steps, the guy with the longbow has
just sat relaxed and prepared physically and mentally for the shot in that time frame. A slight exageration possibly but only to make a point
and that is there are times when a trad bow shines.
I've seen multiple times on 3D courses where a guy draws and holds just to let down and say "whoo" wipe his brow and draw again and
bear down and shoot. Always kinda thought it was show boating, don't know, but always asked myself if that went on in the woods when hunting.
I personally feel very proficient with my longbow at my comfortable ranges and yes the thrill and simplicity is part of why I use it as you
say that drives you to carry it. I think if you separate the two and not compare them, as they are not the same, just as a rifle isn't the same
you may get what I'm saying. Compounds, muzzleloaders, rifles and trad bowhunters are all suseptable to the occasional oops.
Anyhow, nice civil discussion and my appologise for the BS alert comment earlier, missed the softball with that arrow! Ha!
Regards
JT
PS. For full disclosure I've bowhunted for close to 30 years and only attempted to hunt with a compound for one season.
Hated that thing but it was a long time ago.
Thanks

 

[Kevin Dill]

winter,

I believe your most recent post helps me understand your thoughts. It was likely not intentional, but you set a tripwire in your original post by bringing ethics into this discussion and tying them to accuracy. In reality this is mostly about accuracy (or lack of) and how it affects one's choice of weapon. I get that, and I've experienced it myself in the past. The inherent problem is that there is always some thing...weapon...device...item...tech...which will presumably make us more accurate. I've long seen guys use the ethical argument as a rationale to use every available piece of tech they can legally use. I think they believe in their argument, but I also think it is a flawed argument. Between a selfbow with reed arrows and a customized tack-driving centerfire...how many accuracy upgrades can we identify in there? How many can be justified by ethics? All of them? Sure...on a personal level, but that doesn't mean others agree or that we still won't shoot badly and wound an animal and be scorned by others for thinking we could employ endless accuracy advantages under the guise of ethics.

We users of conventional archery tackle have drawn a general line that we choose to hunt behind. We know we could do and use numerous things to make us more accurate. It's not all about accuracy though, and that's been proven a thousand times by excellent compound/crossbow/firearms users who blow an easy opportunity and send an animal off with a wound. It's a mental trap to start down the road of "I need this (thing) to be as accurate as I want to be". Doing so encourages greater reliance on tangibles and less development of our intangible hunting skills. It's those skills which make it possible for a guy to refuse a trigger, sight, let-off, laser, scope etc and go one-on-one up close and personal with a game animal. It's those same intangibles which allow us to turn down a 20 yard shot because we want that ten-yarder and we won't compromise our beliefs and our equipment just to make for an easier kill.

I have never bought into the argument of "I have to be (accurate, shoot what I shoot best, etc) or else I'm not an ethical hunter". I've heard it so many times that it's almost become a mantra for guys. If they really believed it, they would not impose any limits on their equipment and probably would not stop at any line in the sand. For some reason we've made it unacceptable to wound an animal. I intensely dislike wounding, but it is an undeniable part of trying to kill animals. I can live with that outcome as long as I gave a maximum effort. More interesting to me is that some people simply cannot tolerate the thought of a fabulous animal being less than 40 yards from them and they do not come away with a kill. I personally think this mentality is beneath 99.6% of decisions to use high-tech gear with better accuracy at medium-long ranges. I'd like to kill that animal too, but I will do it at ten yards or not at all. It will be me, my fairly simple bow, my muscle and my mind going against the animal's skills and abilities. I could have additional kills and more trophy pictures perhaps, but I'm not willing to cheat myself and take less from my hunting experiences. This is me...my mind...and I'm definitely not judging anyone else no matter how my words sound.

Fantastic discussion guys.

 

[PJG]

In my opinion this is a total BS thread. You state “the purpose of this discussion was to talk about how guys feel when they hit the woods with their stick bows knowing darn well they would be more proficient with a compound”. Please do not put words in the mouths of other people. I grew up shooting a compound, and have shot a recurve for the last 5 years; I am far more proficient with a recurve than I ever was with a compound. I am sick and tired of people using the lack of accuracy for an excuse when it comes to using trad equipment. Stating that a compound is more accurate than a trad bow is BS in my opinion. One example of this is low light shooting conditions, having to look for your pins thru a peep and actually see the animal in low light is extremely difficult with a compound; whereas, you do not have these variables when it comes to trad equipment.
If you are going to base your argument on paper scores, than you should even out the playing field. What I mean by this is you should look at the paper scores when shooting an oly type setup. Clicker, sight, long rod, v-bars etc… These are paper setups that should not be compared to a hunting setup. The same thing goes for the compound; a paper setup is far different than a hunting setup.
In my opinion the lack of accuracy in the trad circles comes more from their shooting style than it does from the equipment. I have yet to see a snap shooter be able to shoot accurately. However, on the flip side of the coin I have seen people that have been dedicated to learning an Olympic based shooting style become very proficient shots with a recurve. The truth of the matter is you cannot dictate the level of dedication that people are going to put into learning how to shoot trad equipment. Bottom line is maybe more trad shooters should seek out a shooting coach and actually learn to shoot. This is my opinion, which I am sure a lot of people will not agree with, but please don’t try to use trad equipment for an excuse to a poor shot.

 

[winter]

Well this discussion just took a turn for the worse...

Your point about shooting in low light is a valid one especially if ones peep is very small.

I would say you are the extreme minority if you honestly can shoot a recurve better than a compound. I'm not sure who would argue otherwise.

"Stating that a compound is more accurate than a trad bow is BS in my opinion." - uhhh....seriously? in 99.99% of shooters it is.

I'm really not sure what you are trying to say about the paper scores. Guys shooting bowhunter freestyle(normal compound hunting setups) are shooting scores that aren't even in the same zip code as the guys shooting barebow. And the guys shooting scopes and long stablizers are much better than the Olympic recurve shooters.... I'm not sure what your point is? When it comes down to it, the guys shooting recurve hunting setups are no where near the guys shooting bowhunter freestyle. There is no arguing that. Even the best barebow shooters aren't competing with the middle of the pack guys shooting compounds. Again, 289/300 is the avg for the top three barebow shooters. I shot my very first 300 round score when I was 15 with my hunting bow and shot a 286. Those barebow shooters are amazing and my young dumb self shooting 67 lbs for 60 arrows was only 3 pts behind with a compound! I'm not even sure why I'm rationalizing such an obvious point.

You then go on to say that trad shooter should get more coaching, and you have to be dedicated.... All very true and proving my point that it is much harder to become proficient with a recurve.

I'm not sure why I even responded to this.

This was a great thread that turned quickly. Thanks guys for all the great input. Moral of the story for me is this: pick a yardage as you maximum. Stick to that no matter what and have fun knowing you put in the time to do the best you could at that moment. Good luck next year whichever weapon you choose.