Idaho Lighted Nock and Expandable Broadheads.

[ODB]

That was always their response, worry of shortened seasons because a certain broadhead style was allowed. It ain't the arrow, it's the Indian. There will be no increase in harvest due to a broadhead being allowed and to think there will be is laughable.

You are right. Harvest won’t increase. Wounding will. More on elk than anything.

But I’m glad you are happy about the “old guard” sunsetting….


And for the record, I have never understood the habit of people, who stand on the shoulders of those who came before, to be so quick to take a piss on them.

 

[Nick Muche]

Not pissing on anyone. It’s silly to think either of the two things you mentioned would happen. But that’s ok, they’ll be legal soon I’m sure and nothing will change.

 

[Rob5589]

Going to be hard to measure an increase in wounding. Nobody will admit to it, especially when it was a poor shot or their set up was at fault.

 

[HuntHarder]

Bigger blood trails with expandables imo. I shot fixed blade for over 15 years. Love the penetration of fixed blades, but the blood trails are no where near what my expandables are. I think both have their place. In order to get fixed blade broadheads to fly like field points at long range, the bow has to be perfectly tuned and so does the shooter's form. To circumvent that, companies began making really small 1 1/16th" fixed blades and those were the rage. To each their own, but I will continue to shoot both fixed and expandables depending on which hunt I'm on.

 

[QuackAttack]

This is silly. There’s no logical reason to oppose lighted knocks or expanding broadheads.

The entire argument is silly in a world of Gucci Sitka gear, carbon fibre bows/arrows, and laser rangefinders.

There is nothing primitive about modern archery.

 

[Timberline001]

This is silly. There’s no logical reason to oppose lighted knocks or expanding broadheads.

The entire argument is silly in a world of Gucci Sitka gear, carbon fibre bows/arrows, and laser rangefinders.

There is nothing primitive about modern archery.

For sure. People can argue the lethality of expandables all they want but I’ll argue plenty of animals are wounded because people just screw on a fixed blade and go hunting without acknowledging the point of impact change or finicky flight of certain heads.

 

[Okhotnik]

This is silly. There’s no logical reason to oppose lighted knocks or expanding broadheads.

The entire argument is silly in a world of Gucci Sitka gear, carbon fibre bows/arrows, and laser rangefinders.

There is nothing primitive about modern archery.

Expandable broad heads work some of the time so let's embrace them as companies that manufacture spend a lot of Money on campaigns getting the useful idiots to approve them. The best thing for elk conservation is you tube videos of goobers taking 125 yard shots on elk with lighted expandable broad heads.

 

[Okhotnik]

Bigger blood trails with expandables imo. I shot fixed blade for over 15 years. Love the penetration of fixed blades, but the blood trails are no where near what my expandables are. I think both have their place. In order to get fixed blade broadheads to fly like field points at long range, the bow has to be perfectly tuned and so does the shooter's form. To circumvent that, companies began making really small 1 1/16th" fixed blades and those were the rage. To each their own, but I will continue to shoot both fixed and expandables depending on which hunt I'm on.

expandables work most of the time and wounded elk aren't a big deal. The wolves can eat them

 

[WeiserBucks]

I've never shot an elk with a bow, but I've shot a few deer with expandables and the results were amazing. I don't have the first hand experience to have a valid opinion regarding elk, but I'm 10000000% on board with expandables for deer.

 

[sneaky]

Fish and Game isn’t doing their job so state legislature has too. Just like what happened with the wolves. It sucks but if they won’t do their job and listen to he people someone has to. You’re kidding yourself if you think dealing with this is going to get in the states way. No reason to make such a big deal out of a small issue. We’ll get it passed and move on. Fish and game caught on when the state picked this up and is putting it into discussion now. So, just by putting it on the block the state as got fish and game off their butts.

Yeah, and the legislature pulling that bullshit started about half a dozen lawsuits regarding wolves and triggered a year long review from the dept of the interior on all of the expanded methods of take. Guess what? Harvest numbers are almost exactly what they were before.... guess the fish and game didn't have a clue on that either huh? We'll be lucky if we keep our wolf season after all the lawsuits and reviews run their course. The legislature brought that on us, not the commission.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[sneaky]

For sure. People can argue the lethality of expandables all they want but I’ll argue plenty of animals are wounded because people just screw on a fixed blade and go hunting without acknowledging the point of impact change or finicky flight of certain heads.

You mean like the ones who shoot expandables because "they fly just like field points so I don't have to tune for them? " crowd. I owned an archery shop for years... I've heard literally every lame excuse for bad shots on animals out there. I've also witnessed more failures from mechanicals than fixed heads. Seen some poor penetration from mechanicals on elk, and several snapped off right at the ferrule and shaft junction on solid bone hits. They're lethal on deer and bears, but for elk they're a roll of the dice. They're fine until they aren't.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[Timberline001]

When they legalize them they’ll be in my quiver for deer and bear just like they’re are in all of the out of state places I hunt. You can’t beat the blood trails a grim reaper leaves and they give a little more for error in shot execution compared to a fix. I’ll continue to shoot a fix blade for elk like I always do. Simply for me it comes down to freedom of choice. They are another lethal option and we should be allowed to make that decision ourselves.

 

[TheTone]

When they legalize them they’ll be in my quiver for deer and bear just like they’re are in all of the out of state places I hunt. You can’t beat the blood trails a grim reaper leaves and they give a little more for error in shot execution compared to a fix. I’ll continue to shoot a fix blade for elk like I always do. Simply for me it comes down to freedom of choice. They are another lethal option and we should be allowed to make that decision ourselves.

The grim reapers I’ve used for javelina were unbelievably disappointing. I think ever one I used needed follow up shots with fixed blades. I questioned everyone as to whether the blades fully deployed

 

[Timberline001]

The grim reapers I’ve used for javelina were unbelievably disappointing. I think ever one I used needed follow up shots with fixed blades. I questioned everyone as to whether the blades fully deployed

I use the 1 1/4 fatal steels.

 

[87TT]

You mean like the ones who shoot expandables because "they fly just like field points so I don't have to tune for them? " crowd. I owned an archery shop for years... I've heard literally every lame excuse for bad shots on animals out there. I've also witnessed more failures from mechanicals than fixed heads. Seen some poor penetration from mechanicals on elk, and several snapped off right at the ferrule and shaft junction on solid bone hits. They're lethal on deer and bears, but for elk they're a roll of the dice. They're fine until they aren't.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Yeah like maybe they should shoot the fixed blades a little before hunting?

 

[TheTone]

I use the 1 1/4 fatal steels.

That’s what I tried

 

[Timberline001]

That’s what I tried

I’ve shot lots of deer with them and 2 cow elk without any issues.

 

[sneaky]

Yeah like maybe they should shoot the fixed blades a little before hunting?

No way, they can't be bothered with that. They wanna buy something that flies just like field points out of the pack!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

 

[IdahoHntr]

Every time there has ever been any sort of public comment on expandables and lighted nocks, the majority of hunters have voted against it. People in Idaho have seen the technology slippery slope in other states and seen other states opportunities go down the toilet because of it. We’d not like to repeat that. Where IDFG has currently drawn the line is one of the easiest places to avoid further technology creep IMO.

Some butt hurt hunter who happens to have a legislators ear decided to circumvent the democratic process by creating a bill. Legislators know nothing about these issues and aren’t best equipped to make this decision. Stick to your lane.

If it’s all about freedom, are you comfortable with legislators making all the rules regarding hunting (and your life for that matter)? Even on topics they know nothing about and already has a public process that they would have to circumvent? Legislators voting on issues in the weeds that they are not equipped to speak intelligently about is the reason we have agencies like the fish and game in the first place. The legislature can’t possibly accurately understand all the intricacies of setting hunting seasons and rules and it is in fact the opposite of freedom having uninformed non-stakeholders vote on something that doesn’t effect them. It is idiocy to think that legislators setting hunting rules is democracy when they are circumventing a true democratic process.

Note: I oppose this on the grounds of keeping technology as limited in possible in hunting and the circumvention of the public process. I don’t necessarily have strong feelings about mechanical broadheads and lighted nocks. If technology stopped there I wouldn’t mind, but it has not stopped there anywhere else, so I don’t expect it to in Idaho.

 

[Timberline001]

No way, they can't be bothered with that. They wanna buy something that flies just like field points out of the pack!

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapat

Every time there has ever been any sort of public comment on expandables and lighted nocks, the majority of hunters have voted against it. People in Idaho have seen the technology slippery slope in other states and seen other states opportunities go down the toilet because of it. We’d not like to repeat that. Where IDFG has currently drawn the line is one of the easiest places to avoid further technology creep IMO.

Some butt hurt hunter who happens to have a legislators ear decided to circumvent the democratic process by creating a bill. Legislators know nothing about these issues and aren’t best equipped to make this decision. Stick to your lane.

If it’s all about freedom, are you comfortable with legislators making all the rules regarding hunting (and your life for that matter)? Even on topics they know nothing about and already has a public process that they would have to circumvent? Legislators voting on issues in the weeds that they are not equipped to speak intelligently about is the reason we have agencies like the fish and game in the first place. The legislature can’t possibly accurately understand all the intricacies of setting hunting seasons and rules and it is in fact the opposite of freedom having uninformed non-stakeholders vote on something that doesn’t effect them. It is idiocy to think that legislators setting hunting rules is democracy when they are circumventing a true democratic process.

Note: I oppose this on the grounds of keeping technology as limited in possible in hunting and the circumvention of the public process. I don’t necessarily have strong feelings about mechanical broadheads and lighted nocks. If technology stopped there I wouldn’t mind, but it has not stopped there anywhere else, so I don’t expect it to in