Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
There is a guy on HT that I can't remember who posted and talked about his hunts and using pods. It opened my eyes a little bit that maybe it isn't such a bad thing to allow them even though most states ban it.I had never heard of this before but it looks like it has been around the 60's and the Fred Bear was even a proponent of it...I'm stunned
Same here in NC.It’s in the KY hunting regs that you can’t use poisonous or chemically treated for hunting. Somebody must have been doing it.
Think about Fred bear era though, start of the compound bow with shots mostly under 30 yards. Idk what the lethality rate actually was but I'm guessing it wasn't exactly what it is today for shots at 30 or under. If you take that archery gear and add simply the modification of poison, wouldn't the lethality rates be greatly improved and more animals spared for the future without changing the lethality range a whole lot?Fred Bear's legacy of ethics and fair chase is in tatters. He deliberately shot a deer in the hindquarter w poison to see how long it would take to die. His reasoning was that responsible archers had no defense for the high wounding and low recovery statistics in archery hunting, and needed a cheater. Modern poachers take advantage of poison arrows.
I've heard the same things from rifle hunters blaming their scopes being out of true or the animal jumped at the last minute. When taking the life of an animal unless you are standing right next to it there are a hundred different reasons for a bad shot on both sides...not the least being lack of skill with said weapon.At least it would cut down or eliminate on all the “I hit him a little high or far back and he was fine the next day so I stuck another one 2 days later” stories I have to hear every year from bow hunters before I “cheat” with my rifle.
That's what I asked when the compound bow first came out. Seems like quite a few people are in favor of increasing success/effective range in a structurer designed to limit those in favor of opportunity.If it increases hunter success/effective range in a structure designed to limit those in favor of opportunity, why would anyone support it?
Except archery is wayyy higher. I’m not saying archery is bad, I’m just saying the number of archery elk hit and not killed or retrieved is substantially higher than with a rifle.I've heard the same things from rifle hunters blaming their scopes being out of true or the animal jumped at the last minute. When taking the life of an animal unless you are standing right next to it there are a hundred different reasons for a bad shot on both sides...not the least being lack of skill with said weapon.
Yep. I know they exist. I don't think they've genuinely considered the "why".That's what I asked when the compound bow first came out. Seems like quite a few people are in favor of increasing success/effective range in a structurer designed to limit those in favor of opportunity.
I don’t disagree with you on that point and I still say that the in my experience it’s lack of skillExcept archery is wayyy higher. I’m not saying archery is bad, I’m just saying the number of archery elk hit and not killed or retrieved is substantially higher than with a rifle.
Targets have been a round a long time. Practice that's what fits that mold. Of course no one wants to hear that because it's not am easy gimmick you can fork out a few bucks for.How many things about modern archery today fit that mold?