What's up with the lighted nock deal?

[BuzzH]

raodhunter, I'll remember that you said this:

Some people just don't accept change and prefer to do things the old way.

The changes already are coming. Many states are now "choose your weapon", many states are seeing shorter archery seasons, etc.

For archery hunters to live in a state of denial that their seasons arent going to be impacted from technology is really something.

Zach, I already stated that we're all going to have to eventually decide if high success rates and unlimited technology is something we're really ready to accept for less time in the field. Its happening all the time, more LQ areas, shorter seasons for all weapon types.

One big thing that you and others are missing though is that archery hunting was never supposed to be about making hunting easier, 100 yard shots, lighted pins, lighted knocks,etc.. Never. It was about a special/additional season, typically during deer/elk ruts, to allow those that wanted a more challenging hunt via a limit on weapons. The trade-off was supposed to be about low success, having to get closer, primitive weapons, etc. Rifle hunting was never about any of that.

While your harvest stats point out the number of elk harvested in CO, one thing to keep in mind. The stats point out that 4 out of every 5 elk killed in CO with archery gear are bulls. While rifle hunters harvest is over 50% antlerless elk.

Archery hunting is on flimsy grounds for any biological reason for a season at all...in particular for elk. It is nearly entirely a season based on hunter management and opportunity to hunt bull elk during the rut, exactly as it was presented from day one. It was sold as a primitive season, with single digit success, low hunter numbers, etc. Technology has turned that upside down, and greatly weakened the reasons why archery bull elk hunting in the rut is even allowed.

Much different now, and exactly why the dedicated archery hunters that have been bow hunting for a long, long time are having trouble defending long archery seasons, seasons during the rut, etc. as well as the advancement in technology that are going to threaten same.

Like I've already stated something is going to have to give...

If bowhunters want to continue down the path of allowing anything that will make it easier in exchange for short seasons...have at it. I'd rather not trade a week of season for a lumninoc. YMMV.

Its going to impact rifle hunters less as they are the main way that state game agencies manage surplus elk, pronghorn, and deer herds via antlerless harvest.

 

[roadhunter]

raodhunter, I'll remember that you said this:

Some people just don't accept change and prefer to do things the old way.

The changes already are coming. Many states are now "choose your weapon", many states are seeing shorter archery seasons, etc.

For archery hunters to live in a state of denial that their seasons arent going to be impacted from technology is really something.

.

You are welcome to remember that quote. It is definitely true about many people. Myself included.

What states have a shorter archery season because of legalizing lumiknocks?

What states have a shorter archery season because of crossbows being allowed?

I've lived and hunted in several states who allow modern technology and have not seen what you are describing.

 

[MKotur325]

Just my $.02, but in reflection back to what hunting was like, lets say 15years ago. This is based on my memory of what was common in Montana when I started hunting around that time.

15 years ago, IIRC Bows didn't (or didn't commonly) reach IBO's of 310fps. 40 yds was considered a long shot. 50yds was a stretch and beyond that was risky. Carbon arrows fairly new, mechanical broadheads were rare at best (and far less reliable), drop away rests were IIRC yet to be invented, sights were typically 3-5 pins and lots of people still shot with fingers or tabs.

Hunting handguns topped out with the .454 Casull and were few and quite far between (out west).

Muzzle loaders using 209 primers were almost unheard of. The Knight 85's were around, but IIRC they were about the only 209ML's avaliable.

Many popular rifle cartridges were still in development. Specifically the WSM, RUM, RSUM, RCM and their families. Rifle scopes were primarily 12x or less magnification (outside Varmint scopes). Range compensating reticules were Very uncommon, Shepard and Pride-Fowler were the only two that I remember. Exposed turrets and adjusting scopes in the field was uncommon at best. 400 yds was the generally accepted outer range for most rifles, and bullet technology wasn't even close. Bonded bullets were rare, The TBBC, Swift A-frame and Winchester Fail-Safe are the only three I'm aware were available. The only Monometal bullets were the original Barnes X. External ballistics was less understood, as was BC. The ability to accurately predict drop based on range was typically through DOPE, and from what I remember ballistic calculators in general were fairly rare.

What I'm getting at is this... Technology has advanced significantly with Every Major hunting weapon and optic just in the last 15years. Technological advances with these weapons have IMO increased success rates with All weapon systems for hunting. In many areas, populations are down, success %'s are up across the board. Yet we as hunters often get bothered when new technology isn't allowed for hunting. Something has to give.

The more we as hunters continue to allow more and more technology into the woods, the less resistance is shown to additional technology. Where do we draw the line? If we allow lighted knocks, how much of a stretch is it to allow lighted pins on a sight? If lighted pins are allowed for archery, how long will it be before rifle hunters start wanting to allow light enhancing optics (I.E. nightvision)? We have to look at what the priorities are and make a stand somewhere. Personally, I think with rifles we've already gone too far. I personally don't think that rangefinding scopes are ethical. Especially, the Burris Eliminator where the scope gives you a lighted point on the reticle based on programmed drop info and range. We as hunters MUST imho place our Ethical Standards above punching a tag. If we don't place value on maintaining our ethics that leads to more and more issues. Where would you draw this line? If we base our seasons on now outdated technology, when is it time to look at that? When we increase success rates and populations are decreasing, eventually Fish and Game has to do something. Are they going to limit tags? Shorten Seasons? Both? Quotas? Take away Antlerless tags? Something has to give.

Sorry for the long post, and thanks for reading. If I missed some facts about the last 15 years, let me know and I will correct it.

 

[BuzzH]

You are welcome to remember that quote. It is definitely true about many people. Myself included.

What states have a shorter archery season because of legalizing lumiknocks?

What states have a shorter archery season because of crossbows being allowed?

I've lived and hunted in several states who allow modern technology and have not seen what you are describing.

You arent paying attention.

How many CO hunters got to hunt bull elk with both a bow and a rifle last year?

I can only think of 2 states that now allow a hunter to hunt bull elk with both a rifle and bow with the same tag.

Didnt used to be that way...wonder why that is?

Keep in mind that most every state that has elk, probably have higher populations than ever, yet most states are choose your weapon.

I'm not tryng to argue or change your mind, I'm just telling that there is a reality and price to be paid for unfettered technology. I hear a lot of complaining about the advancements in archery technology at commission meetings, open house meetings, etc. all the time. Mostly from within the ranks of bowhunters and bowhunting organizations. They realize their sport is in jeopardy and their seasons either are, or are going to be, on the chopping block and the reason why is because of technology.

There it is...

 

[Zach]

So Archery hunters kill apprx 4500 bulls and rifle hunters kill apprx 17k bulls. Am I doing the math correctly?

Big game seasons are fairly new to me, especially archery. Is there a reference where I can read about archery seasons and their history? Honest question, I just want to read some history for comparison.

 

[BuzzH]

roadhunter, heres an example of shortened seasons and lost archery opportunity:

“The reason for this significant first-ever change is to allocate the harvest among deer hunters that is proportionate to the demand for that weapon choice. In some management units, the harvest proportion for certain weapon types exceeded the demand,” states Brian Wakeling, big game management supervisor for the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

http://www.azgfd.net/wildlife/hunti...-aware-of-new-permit-requirements/2008/05/22/

Another example...pay attention to the last sentence.

http://www.idahotraditionalbowhunters.com/new_page_5.htm

 

[MKotur325]

Roadhunter,

Another example of recent lost archery opportunity would be the Archery season changes in 2008 for Elk in Montana. Implemented in 2008 were new archery tags for 23 districts in Montana in Central and Eastern MT. All these areas are considered Trophy areas and have limited entry tags for Rifle hunting. Until 2008 you could hunt these areas with a bow on a general tag. Part of the justification for these changes was "Hunter Equity and Hunter Shifts" noting that in some of these districts there were more archery hunters than rifle hunters since rifle tags are restricted.

 

[Montanahunterjon]

Anybody who thinks hunting elk with a bow is easy is sadly mistaken. Lighted nocks would make no difference. It's still very difficult to get on elk and even if you can call them in its no gaurantee. You might get one or two encounters on public land, and if you get in range you have trees in the way. Most elk taken in archery season are taken by the same 10% of hunters who are hardcore and have skills and knowledge to get it done. They would all still hunt if they had to use a recurve I bet. I know I would. I hunt every year in the archery season and have yet to connect with a bow. I just think rifle hunters that think bow hunting is easy because of the technology and the rut don't really know the facts. Elk hunting success as a whole both rifle and archery success is only around 10 percent anyway. If your lucky enough to have the money to hunt ranches or own property then it's a different story, but In my opinion public land DIY is no easy task archery or rifle.

 

[Devil Diver Down]

Anybody who thinks hunting elk with a bow is easy is sadly mistaken. Lighted nocks would make no difference. It's still very difficult to get on elk and even if you can call them in its no gaurantee. You might get one or two encounters on public land, and if you get in range you have trees in the way. Most elk taken in archery season are taken by the same 10% of hunters who are hardcore and have skills and knowledge to get it done. They would all still hunt if they had to use a recurve I bet. I know I would. I hunt every year in the archery season and have yet to connect with a bow. I just think rifle hunters that think bow hunting is easy because of the technology and the rut don't really know the facts. Elk hunting success as a whole both rifle and archery success is only around 10 percent anyway. If your lucky enough to have the money to hunt ranches or own property then it's a different story, but In my opinion public land DIY is no easy task archery or rifle.

I don't think anyone arguing against further advanced technology in this thread is suggesting "hunting elk with a bow is easy." Rather - and you suggested as much in your own post - that the technological advancements have opened the willingness of people to hunt with a bow. In other words, the technology has increased the sheer numbers of hunters in the field, which has increased harvest numbers. If it was limited to just the 10% "hardcore with skills" - or even 50% - there would be fewer hunters in the field with bow in hand and fewer archery kills, tagged or not. Certainly the same could be said if archery hunting were dialed back to using recurves only. Without the bow advancements, I probably wouldn't hunt archery myself, as an example. I do not count myself among the "skilled" and my success rates reflect that. Not too sure whether I'd be considered hardcore.

Why are lumenocks appealing? For me, I want more information after my shot and I feel the lumenock would provide that - no inherent advantage given pre-shot. At least on the surface. In reality, the lumenock might offer a little bit more confidence on longer shots - after all, I get all the info I need from a shot on a bull inside 20 yards. I can follow that arrow flight easily. Not so at longer distances. Maybe then I shouldn't be taking a shot at a distance I cannot follow arrow flight. It is a slippery slope and as a bow hunter who originally considered using lumenocks - and maybe even discussed the same on here, using improved game recovery as a justification - I've decided against it despite it being perfectly legal in AZ.

As stated by others, advancements across the board (rifle/muzzleloader/archery) have changed the game considerably. Everyone has to make their own choices about where they will push the limit - legality and availability are just a piece of the puzzle.

 

[Straight Arrow]

For me, I want more information after my shot and I feel the lumenock would provide that

Therein lies the inherent problem. It is the "me, I, my, I", right now, today, this hunting season attitude that is, in my opinion, much too prevalent. Perhaps it takes becoming a grandparent and considering what hunting opportunities or, in contrast, limitations may be in place for the children of your grandchildren to force you to consider hunting outside your own wants, desires, and opportunities.

 

[Devil Diver Down]

Therein lies the inherent problem. It is the "me, I, my, I", right now, today, this hunting season attitude that is, in my opinion, much too prevalent. Perhaps it takes becoming a grandparent and considering what hunting opportunities or, in contrast, limitations may be in place for the children of your grandchildren to force you to consider hunting outside your own wants, desires, and opportunities.

I guess you missed the little nugget below before passing judgement.

I've decided against it despite it being perfectly legal in AZ.

As stated by others, advancements across the board (rifle/muzzleloader/archery) have changed the game considerably. Everyone has to make their own choices about where they will push the limit - legality and availability are just a piece of the puzzle.

Oh well.

 

[Straight Arrow]

Why are lumenocks appealing?

That was the question and the point is that the prevalent answer was reflected in your statement.

'Sorry if I offended you. I applaud your personal choice to abstain from pushing the technological envelope ... even though it does apparently appeal to you.

 

[roadhunter]

Roadhunter,

Another example of recent lost archery opportunity would be the Archery season changes in 2008 for Elk in Montana. Implemented in 2008 were new archery tags for 23 districts in Montana in Central and Eastern MT. All these areas are considered Trophy areas and have limited entry tags for Rifle hunting. Until 2008 you could hunt these areas with a bow on a general tag. Part of the justification for these changes was "Hunter Equity and Hunter Shifts" noting that in some of these districts there were more archery hunters than rifle hunters since rifle tags are restricted.

If Montana had allowed lighted knocks or crossbows before 2008 you might have a great point. Unfortunately those things are still illegal in Montana so I don't think they could possibly have anything to do with the seasons changing.

I believe what we are looking for are states who after allowing lighted knocks experienced a huge increase in harvest % to a point where the archery season had to be drastically changed. I have yet to see proof of this in any state.

 

[roadhunter]

You arent paying attention.

How many CO hunters got to hunt bull elk with both a bow and a rifle last year?

I can only think of 2 states that now allow a hunter to hunt bull elk with both a rifle and bow with the same tag.

Didnt used to be that way...wonder why that is?

Keep in mind that most every state that has elk, probably have higher populations than ever, yet most states are choose your weapon.

I'm not tryng to argue or change your mind, I'm just telling that there is a reality and price to be paid for unfettered technology. I hear a lot of complaining about the advancements in archery technology at commission meetings, open house meetings, etc. all the time. Mostly from within the ranks of bowhunters and bowhunting organizations. They realize their sport is in jeopardy and their seasons either are, or are going to be, on the chopping block and the reason why is because of technology.

There it is...

So you are saying that Colorado has had to drastically change it's archery season because allowing lighted knocks has increased harvest % so much?

Hard to blame technology in states like Colorado who don't allow lighted knocks, crossbows, or even scopes on crossbows.

What we are looking for is a state who after allowing lighted knocks has had to drastically change the archery season. Colorado does not allow lighted knocks so the example of their season dates clearly does not apply. If anything it shows that the seasons still change without the use of things like lighted knocks, crossbows, etc.

 

[roadhunter]

roadhunter, heres an example of shortened seasons and lost archery opportunity:

“The reason for this significant first-ever change is to allocate the harvest among deer hunters that is proportionate to the demand for that weapon choice. In some management units, the harvest proportion for certain weapon types exceeded the demand,” states Brian Wakeling, big game management supervisor for the Arizona Game and Fish Department.

http://www.azgfd.net/wildlife/hunti...-aware-of-new-permit-requirements/2008/05/22/

Another example...pay attention to the last sentence.

http://www.idahotraditionalbowhunters.com/new_page_5.htm

Buzz,

I read the article about Arizona. I could not find any mention of lighted knocks or other technology being the problem. It seemed more like many bow hunters were wanting to hunt some great units and they had to go limited entry because of the demand for the tag. Nowhere did it say that new technology such as lighted knocks were the problem. In fact I'm not even sure lighted knocks were legal before 2008(when the article was written) where they could have possibly had an effect in these seasons changing. Were lighted knocks even legal for Arizona in 2007?

The Idaho article also never mentions any direct problems from allowing lighted knocks. It seems more like an article about the good old days and how things have changed but again never shows any data to support blaming lighted knocks. In fact lighted knocks are not even legal in Idaho so clearly they are not to blame for the seasons changing.
https://fishandgame.idaho.gov/content/question/are-lighted-knocks-legal

So far you have not shown even 1 example of a state who allowed lighted knocks having to drastically change archery seasons. What you have shown in that states who dont' allow lighted knocks have had to change season dates but clearly it had nothing to do with lighted knocks as they are not even legal in these states.

There are plenty of examples of states who allow lighted knocks who have not made any drastic changes to archery seasons after allowing lighted knocks.

Can you provide even 1 state as an example?

 

[BuzzH]

Roadhunter,

You're right...advances in archery technology and making archery hunting easier has resulted in less archers taking to the field, more opportunities, longer seasons, decreased harvest statistics, and no changes to any regulations.

Even though I've provided you with blaring examples of seasons and archery hunters being impacted by technology, you can continue to believe what you want. Technology advancements are not limited to knocks, just in case you werent aware. Its a combination of technology...bow design, speed, arrows, broadheads, sights, releases, let-off, etc.etc etc. Lighted nocks are just the latest in the long list of items impacting archery seasons.

Let me guess, you probably call a decked out compound "2 sticks and a string"?

You've been lead to water...

 

[roadhunter]

Roadhunter,

You're right...advances in archery technology and making archery hunting easier has resulted in less archers taking to the field, more opportunities, longer seasons, decreased harvest statistics, and no changes to any regulations.

Even though I've provided you with blaring examples of seasons and archery hunters being impacted by technology, you can continue to believe what you want. Technology advancements are not limited to knocks, just in case you werent aware. Its a combination of technology...bow design, speed, arrows, broadheads, sights, releases, let-off, etc.etc etc. Lighted nocks are just the latest in the long list of items impacting archery seasons.

Let me guess, you probably call a decked out compound "2 sticks and a string"?

You've been lead to water...

Tags are harder to get than they used to be and it has nothing to do with lighted knocks. More likely it has to do with more people hunting due to a variety of reasons. More people hunting is a good thing, not a bad thing. Even if it does mean tags are harder to get.

Been led to water?

You have failed to provide even 1 example of a state who after allowing lighted knocks had to make drastic changes to archery seasons. In fact you provided examples of states who are making changes to archery seasons even though they dont' even allow lighted knocks. Nothing you provided showed lighted knocks having an effect on seasons, nothing.

Technology is changing everything, not just archery equipment. You could make the same argumenta bout rifle hunting being easier with better optics, drop compensating software/turrets, low BC bullets, super magnum/faster shooting rounds, electronic rangefinders, wind meters, etc. flintlocks vs inlines, longbows vs compounds.

You have failed to provide any examples of a state who after allowing lighted knocks had to make drastic changes to archery seasons, in fact the articles you linked never mentioned lighted knocks. Epic fail Buzz. Anyone who can read realizes it. '

Still waiting on 1 example of a state who after legalizing lighted knocks had to make drastic changes to archery seasons. If what you say is true you should be able to provide several examples, got even 1?

 

[BuzzH]

roadhunter,

Again...for the 10th time. Its a COMBINATION of technology (all those things that I listed that you continue to ignore) that has impacted archery hunting opportunities. Its there, black and white, crystal clear...AZ and ID are two examples. Any state that has choose your weapon seasons is another example.

I get it, you believe that archery technology has no impact on the resource, no impact in hunter numbers, has not impacted archery hunting opportunities in any way.

Reality says something different.

Continue to believe what you want.

 

[Topgun 30-06]

BuzzH---It would seem that the person you're trying to "splain" things to has a little bit of a reading comprehension problem!

 

[roadhunter]

roadhunter,

Again...for the 10th time. Its a COMBINATION of technology (all those things that I listed that you continue to ignore) that has impacted archery hunting opportunities. Its there, black and white, crystal clear...AZ and ID are two examples. Any state that has choose your weapon seasons is another example.

I get it, you believe that archery technology has no impact on the resource, no impact in hunter numbers, has not impacted archery hunting opportunities in any way.

Reality says something different.

Continue to believe what you want.

Buzz,

You listed states that don't allow technology such as lighted knocks. Do you not understand that examples of states who don't allow lighted knocks yet made changes to archery season do not prove your point. In fact they prove you wrong by showing that states who don't allow lighted knocks are making changes so clearly lighted knocks didn't cause the changes. I'm not sure why you can't seem to understand what is so obvious to the rest of us.

What you need to do is show a state where after allowing lighted knocks experiences a huge increase in harvest % and is forced to shorten the archery season. If you could do this you might have at least a leg to stand on with your argument. Without even 1 state as an example to back up your point you seem more like a guy wearing a tin foil hat blaming lighted knocks for changing archery seasons in several states where lighted knocks are not even legal in the first place. Makes no sense.