An interesting read for the anti's

[Buckeye Dan]

This information and data should help convince some of the folks against crossbows. It's probably already been posted but here it is just in case:
http://www.crossbow.com/uploads/CrossbowDyn41808-1226.pdf

I doubt any of them even bother to read it...

[Swamp Ghost]

Interesting indeed. LOL!

“By the 2001-02 season
crossbow hunter
number had increased
nearly 10-fold to an
estimated 106,000.

“Vertical bow numbers
had increased to 88,000
[from 82,000 in 1982].”

No explosion in crossbow use at all. :lol:

Nice job on the hunter retention VA!

Good job on recruiting crossbow users where it was allowed, pretty poor in overall recruitment.

Lots to work with here, thanks for the link.

[IceDaddy]

And that's why they are making them legal, instead of numbers constantly falling off, Michigan needs archery numbers to climb! Or eventually we could just have gun season from Oct 1st until Jan 1st.:lol:

[Swamp Ghost]

And that's why they are making them legal, instead of numbers constantly falling off, Michigan needs archery numbers to climb! Or eventually we could just have gun season from Oct 1st until Jan 1st.:lol:

You need gun hunter numbers to climb, we've lost 200,000 of them.

Or change buck regulations, which is coming, sooner than later.

[IceDaddy]

You need gun hunter numbers to climb, we've lost 200,000 of them.

Or change buck regulations, which is coming, sooner than later.

Maybe, just maybe, they are smarter than both you and I combined and thought, If we make the cross bow legal all season, hunter numbers for all seasons will start to climb and the state can get back to the task at hand and that is keeping the herd in check?

Other wise what other option is there, They keep making more and more doe season's which obviously "Still" is'nt working.:dizzy:

[Munsterlndr]

Or change buck regulations, which is coming, sooner than later.
Not if your buddies as MBH/MTB have anything to say about it! Why don't you tell us what your pals One-Eye and 2-Big have to say about OBR? :lol:

[Swamp Ghost]

Not if your buddies as MBH/MTB have anything to say about it! Why don't you tell us what your pals One-Eye and 2-Big have to say about OBR? :lol:

What they say about an OBR is somewhat true.

I put the health of the deer herd as a higher priority than recreational opportunity, but that's just me.

[Swamp Ghost]

Maybe, just maybe, they are smarter than both you and I combined and thought, If we make the cross bow legal all season, hunter numbers for all seasons will start to climb and the state can get back to the task at hand and that is keeping the herd in check?

Other wise what other option is there, They keep making more and more doe season's which obviously "Still" is'nt working.:dizzy:

Certainly not the case in every state where the crossbow is allowed.

Regulations manage the deer herd, not weapons.

[DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI]

And that's why they are making them legal, instead of numbers constantly falling off, Michigan needs archery numbers to climb! Or eventually we could just have gun season from Oct 1st until Jan 1st.:lol:

YAHTZEE

[BigBirdVA]

This came up on another MI forum. So for the few MI math deficient anti's I'll post some numbers to clear things up.

http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/022007/02152007/259896/index_html?page=1


Here's the numbers.
Resident archery licenses fell from 52,620 to 48,770, but resident crossbow licenses leaped from 14,475 to 20,081.Lost 4,000, gained 6,000. Net gain 2,000. Hope this helps those with defective calculators. :dizzy:



More from last years stats.
Archers, not including crossbow hunters, killed 17,335 deer. The bow kill was up 1% from the 17,160 deer taken by archers last year. The bow kill comprised 7% of the total deer kill.

Crossbows, which were legal for all deer hunters for the first time in fall 2005, resulted in a deer kill of 8,549 deer or <4% of the total deer kill. The crossbow kill was up 21% from the 7,069 reported last year.

White-tailed deer management in Virginia is based on the fact that herd density and health are best controlled by regulating antlerless deer kill levels and female deer kill numbers have been at record levels for the past five consecutive years. For 2007, the doe kill was up 12% from 2006 and is 21% greater than the average for the past 10 years. In fact, for 2007, the doe kill was greater than the antlered buck kill for the first time since the check station system was initiated in 1947.

Dang xbows !

[TOW]

BBVA,

Shoot me a PM with your email Addy in it and I'll share some more information with you. ;)

[Whit1]

Nice job on the hunter retention VA!



Page 28 gives a very graphic picture from Georgia concerning hunter retention.

[IceDaddy]

Certainly not the case in every state where the crossbow is allowed.

Regulations manage the deer herd, not weapons.


I fully agree with you, But when regulations are not even scratching the surface, then what? You must agree there is a over population problem of deer. what measures would you put forth? Many area's are way to populated with people to use gun's (hoffmaster state park, the islands at holland) The current archery means are not getting the job done? what do you suggest? At some point the dnr has to be grasping for straws, With todays compound bows the deer herd should have easily stayed in check, but guess what, the deer apparently breed like rabbits, or as I have stated before, we are worse hunters than our fathers.

[butter21]

I fully agree with you, But when regulations are not even scratching the surface, then what? You must agree there is a over population problem of deer. what measures would you put forth? Many area's are way to populated with people to use gun's (hoffmaster state park, the islands at holland) The current archery means are not getting the job done? what do you suggest? At some point the dnr has to be grasping for straws, With todays compound bows the deer herd should have easily stayed in check, but guess what, the deer apparently breed like rabbits, or as I have stated before, we are worse hunters than our fathers.
So if what you say is true, that crossbows and compound bows are the same thing then why would allowing crossbows keep the deer numbers in more in check?

[TOW]

What percent of the total kill in Michigan is taken by bowhunters?

[butter21]

What percent of the total kill in Michigan is taken by bowhunters?
26%

[November Sunrise]

What percent of the total kill in Michigan is taken by bowhunters?

26% statewide in '07, widely disparate by region.

In the southern lower pensinsula (SLP), 28% of the total harvest, and 34% of the antlered buck harvest was from archers. Compared to the harvest ratio of every state that I'm aware of, SLP archers shoot an incredibly high percentage of antlered bucks as a percentage of the total archery harvest mix - this is due to our combo tag structure which permits archers to first take a mulligan buck and then continue hunting during archery season and into firearm season for a 2nd buck. Over 95% of SLP hunting is on private land, and 60% of archers statewide hunt in the SLP.

On the other extreme, the upper peninsula (UP) has less than 10% of the states archers, and last season UP archers accounted for 18% of the total UP harvest. Public land in the UP is abundant and very lightly utilized during archery season.

Here's a link to the most recent harvest report:

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/dnr/3485_236922_7.pdf

[Swamp Ghost]

This came up on another MI forum. So for the few MI math deficient anti's I'll post some numbers to clear things up.

http://www.fredericksburg.com/News/FLS/2007/022007/02152007/259896/index_html?page=1


Here's the numbers.
Lost 4,000, gained 6,000. Net gain 2,000. Hope this helps those with defective calculators. :dizzy:



More from last years stats.




Dang xbows !

But you lost alot of deer hunters, and 10,000+ bowhunters (you know, the ones that dropped bows for crossbows) since 2005 (you know, the year before crossbows were legalized)

More bad news is that nearly 220,000 adults bought resident big game hunting licenses, a decrease of nearly 2,000 from 2005 to 2006 and nearly 15,000 from just two years ago

[Swamp Ghost]

Page 28 gives a very graphic picture from Georgia concerning hunter retention.

How many were retained? Apparently, not many:

Looking at general estimates of archery hunter numbers prior to the statutory change that included crossbows in Georgia’s archery season for deer (approx. 96,721) versus the change (97,392), only a minuscule increase in the number of archery hunters was seen.

[Swamp Ghost]

I fully agree with you, But when regulations are not even scratching the surface, then what? You must agree there is a over population problem of deer. what measures would you put forth? Many area's are way to populated with people to use gun's (hoffmaster state park, the islands at holland) The current archery means are not getting the job done? what do you suggest? At some point the dnr has to be grasping for straws, With todays compound bows the deer herd should have easily stayed in check, but guess what, the deer apparently breed like rabbits, or as I have stated before, we are worse hunters than our fathers.

You limit MI hunter's buck harvest, force them to kill antlerless deer.

We've lost 200,000 of MI's most efficient hunter, adding another less efficient weapon isn't the answer. Changing regulations is.

[Liv4Huntin']

Then, swamp, why do you not put as much time and energy into changing the regulations as you do fighting against crossbows?????? And if you say you are, what's being done???????
~ m ~

[IceDaddy]

There you go swamp, I would be willing to bet that the majority of adult male men ages 35 to 45 hunt with a bow and arrow for one reason, and one reason only and that is to kill bucks. They all use the age old if I want to kill
doe's i'll do it during gun season, but the reality of it, is after many kill there two impressive bucks they don't go into the woods much after that.

It appears with the xbow bill going to the senate, you are beating a dead horse. Maybe you should start lobbying for change to the regulations I would be willing to help by writing to congressmen or whoever.

What changes to the regulations would you make?

[DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI]

It appears with the xbow bill going to the senate, you are beating a dead horse. Maybe you should start lobbying for change to the regulations I would be willing to help by writing to congressmen or whoever.

What changes to the regulations would you make?

here's a NOVEL idea ! you have to shoot a doe first before you can shoot a BUCK.:evilsmile another words earn a buck. that would cure all the doe problems we have, but it sure as heck would piss off all those antler soup fellows:lol:

[Munsterlndr]

You limit MI hunter's buck harvest, force them to kill antlerless deer.


Why don't you suggest to your MBH buddies? Oh Wait, you did and it was met with deafening silence! So is MBH/MTB (gasp) wrong on that issue? :lol:

Crossbows are not the only answer to stemming the flow of hunters out of the sport but they can play a role, as has been evidenced in other states, where they have helped retain senior archers.

You present no feasible alternative to the continued loss of hunters that we face every year. There is actual data from other states that shows the impact of crossbow inclusion, show us the data from another state that shows how management changes have reversed a trend of falling hunter numbers and have increased the number of hunter, since you claim that to be the answer.

[Whit1]

Here's a question for those of you who are opposed to crossbow inclusion. Would you support such a regulation and an organization that also supported it IF said organization also worked with vigor toward changing deer hunting regulations that would offer a meaninful, effective, scientifically sound way to improve the buck age structure in the deer herd?

[Swamp Ghost]

Here's a question for those of you who are opposed to crossbow inclusion. Would you support such a regulation and an organization that also supported it IF said organization also worked with vigor toward changing deer hunting regulations that would offer a meaninful, effective, scientifically sound way to improve the buck age structure in the deer herd?

I would have a much more favorable opinion of crossbow inclusion.

If there was this much effort put into changing our herd management strategies we would be working toward a real impact on hunters numbers and retention.

Don't forget about balancing the herd as well.

I believe the MBH is wrong on several issues.

I'm sure some that agree with my deer management ideals think I'm wrong on the crossbow issue. I'm sure some that agree with my crossbow ideals think I'm wrong on deer management issues.

I place deer herd health and management as priority #1.

[Whit1]

I would have a much more favorable opinion of crossbow inclusion.

If there was this much effort put into changing our herd management strategies we would be working toward a real impact on hunters numbers and retention.

Don't forget about balancing the herd as well.

I believe the MBH is wrong on several issues.

I'm sure some that agree with my deer management ideals think I'm wrong on the crossbow issue. I'm sure some that agree with my crossbow ideals think I'm wrong on deer management issues.

I place deer herd health and management as priority #1.


Would you join such an organization and support crossbow inclusion, more effective scientifically based deer herdwildlife management that included buck to doe ratio improvement, age structure, particularly among bucks, improvement, keeping the deer herd in line with the available habitat/food sources (and this includes winter of course), as well as habitat improvement for whitetails as well as other species both game and nongame?

[Swamp Ghost]

Would you join such an organization and support crossbow inclusion, more effective scientifically based deer herdwildlife management that included buck to doe ratio improvement, age structure, particularly among bucks, improvement, keeping the deer herd in line with the available habitat/food sources (and this includes winter of course), as well as habitat improvement for whitetails as well as other species both game and nongame?

I'm already a member of the QDMA.

[Whit1]

I'm already a member of the QDMA.

Does QDMA support, with vigor, crossbow inclusion?

[TOW]

I'm already a member of the QDMA.

What does the QDMA say about an OBR?

[boehr]

Isn't the type of weapon allowed to be used part of the regulations??????

[Swamp Ghost]

Does QDMA support, with vigor, crossbow inclusion?

They are a deer management organization, I don't know why they would support weapon legislation or why they wouldn't.

Like the DNR they aren't concerned with what deer are killed with as long as that kill meets their goals or philosophy.

I'm certain the QDMA isn't concerned with or favors one deer management strategy over another. As long as the end result is meets their philosophy:

Quality Deer Management (QDM) is a management philosophy/practice that unites landowners, hunters, and managers in a common goal of producing biologically and socially balanced deer herds within existing environmental, social, and legal constraints. This approach typically involves the protection of young bucks (yearlings and some 2.5 year-olds) combined with an adequate harvest of female deer to maintain a healthy population in balance with existing habitat conditions

[Swamp Ghost]

If the crossbow advocates included some type of progressive deer management as part of the full-inclusion package or lobbied for management FIRST before working towards inclusion.. I would have an entirely different outlook on their motives for inclusion and possible impacts of inclusion.

The fact is they didn't.

Another weapon, same hunters, same regulations = same result, with an much increased possibility of negative impact on the 1.5 year old buck population.

[Riva]

If the crossbow advocates included some type of progressive deer management as part of the full-inclusion package or lobbied for management FIRST before working towards inclusion.. I would have an entirely different outlook on their motives for inclusion and possible impacts of inclusion.

The fact is they didn't.

Another weapon, same hunters, same regulations = same result, with an much increased possibility of negative impact on the 1.5 year old buck population.

You cannot assume that pro crossbow advocates do not share in your agenda surrounding progressive deer management. Some may, some may not. At my camp, we have been practicing QDM for years now, as do most of the neighbors in my section. I do not see that practice changing if/when crossbow full inclusion becomes fact, at least on my property.

If progressive deer management is indeed you primary focus, it's unfair to use crossbows as the whipping boy for why this agenda has failed to be embraced by Michigan's hunting community to more of a degree that it has. Indeed, crossbows could play some role in progressive deer management but, certainly not a large one.

[wildcoy73]

Swamp ghost:
I have a hard time believing that if we would of change the rules to OBO or EAB that you would of latter support the inclusion of the crossbow.
I believe we are doing the right thing by going for crossbows first, and getting the harvest data over the next three years and see if the harvest is changed any. Than and only than will all hunter be shown and than we can see about bag limit changes for the season. If it comes to massive changes on antlered deer than I will support it.
Will I like it? Not to sure yet I like the earn a buck system to a point, but would like to see it based off last years season. What that is:
The first year you get one buck tag and a doe tag( or more doe tags if needed in the area) You have a choice of what order you use your tag in. But to get a buck tag for the following season you will need to harvest a doe and have it checked in to be put in the computer system to allow you to harvest a buck the next year. Do not harvest a doe you will not be issue a buck tag.
I see this as both a positive for the hunter and for herd control. It is in your habd each season if you can hunt for the mighty buck the next year. And if the buck of a lifetime walks out opening day you will not have to pass on it for you still have to earn it that year.
This one buck will be per hunter and not weapon.

[Whit1]

Jamie,
I've laid out a scenario for you of a hypothetical situation that could arise. Join or not? A simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.

[Swamp Ghost]

I keep hearing the joyful bashing of the MBH's stance on the OBR by some crossbow advocates.

The MBH rejection of the OBR is primarily based on their belief that it will reduce recreational opportunity.

The crossbow advocates choice to pursue full inclusion is primarily based on their belief that it will increase recreational opportunity.

Both groups have shown that the health of the deer herd is not their top priority.

Like I said the deer herd and it's management is priority #1 with me.

[Swamp Ghost]

If progressive deer management is indeed you primary focus, it's unfair to use crossbows as the whipping boy for why this agenda has failed to be embraced by Michigan's hunting community to more of a degree that it has. Indeed, crossbows could play some role in progressive deer management but, certainly not a large one.

They will play no role, they do not influence management decisions.

[Swamp Ghost]

Swamp ghost:
I have a hard time believing that if we would of change the rules to OBO or EAB that you would of latter support the inclusion of the crossbow.
I believe we are doing the right thing by going for crossbows first, and getting the harvest data over the next three years and see if the harvest is changed any. Than and only than will all hunter be shown and than we can see about bag limit changes for the season. If it comes to massive changes on antlered deer than I will support it.
Will I like it? Not to sure yet I like the earn a buck system to a point, but would like to see it based off last years season. What that is:
The first year you get one buck tag and a doe tag( or more doe tags if needed in the area) You have a choice of what order you use your tag in. But to get a buck tag for the following season you will need to harvest a doe and have it checked in to be put in the computer system to allow you to harvest a buck the next year. Do not harvest a doe you will not be issue a buck tag.
I see this as both a positive for the hunter and for herd control. It is in your habd each season if you can hunt for the mighty buck the next year. And if the buck of a lifetime walks out opening day you will not have to pass on it for you still have to earn it that year.
This one buck will be per hunter and not weapon.

You would be sadly mistaken. If an OBR, AR, EAB or some other form of buck harvest restriction was in place it would be an entirely different ball game.

[Swamp Ghost]

Jamie,
I've laid out a scenario for you of a hypothetical situation that could arise. Join or not? A simple "Yes" or "No" will suffice.

If changing the way MI manages it's deer herd is their top priority, I would join.

[Buckeye Dan]

You limit MI hunter's buck harvest, force them to kill antlerless deer.

We've lost 200,000 of MI's most efficient hunter, adding another less efficient weapon isn't the answer. Changing regulations is.


In one argument you say that MI has lost 200,000 hunters. In another argument you claim all the gun hunters in MI will pick up a crossbow and archery hunt. If that argument is true you got your 200,000 hunters back. If they don't tag out in archery season then they can try again during gun season.
That alone should increase your tags sold to tags filled ratio to some extent thus making the extra hunters not necessary.
The difference is they now hunt the woods when you hunt the woods. And they will also hunt the woods when gun hunters hunt the woods. So the addition of a new challenging weapon to YOUR season is the true threat. When in fact the season is not YOURS it's OURS as in free for all archery hunters to use. You claim you need 200,000 hunters to replace your loss. But you choose not to gain any new hunter that wants to use a crossbow. A weapon that fires the same arrow and broad head YOU use. A weapon that has the same range limitations as YOUR weapon. A weapon that kills by hemorrhage like YOUR weapon. A weapon that will intrude into YOUR self proclaimed archery season. The data shows that the crossbow is exactly as efficient as a vertical bow. After 31 years of use here in OH the difference in efficiency is roughly 3-5 percent in favor of the crossbow. But we also have a slightly higher crossbow hunter to bow hunter ratio. I didn't bother complete the math but the ratio is almost identical at a glance. I expect if you nit pick down to the exact decimal then you will in fact find that the crossbow is virtually equal in efficiency or a few points more.

Furthermore I expect the vertical bow hunters recruit MORE crossbow hunters with influential propaganda that you and your like minded have been passing around this forum. It's your goal to GUILT anyone that even considers using a crossbow to not do so. Your like minded has been able to do this in all but 8 states and one Canadian province of Ontario. Yet the data for anything related to a crossbow being positive is ignored. And the misinformation and exaggerated myths are still influencing the masses. But we who are educated and becoming aware of the needs of our crossbow supporting brothers are waking up. 8 states down and 42 to go.

As for your regulations I don't have enough data to form a plan or opinion that would be of much use for MI. The only hunting I have done in MI is morel mushroom hunting. But I do drive your highways and walk in your forests so I am aware of what your herds look like. Judging from the road kill alone I know your deer are grossly over populated. Your buck to doe ratio is out of balance and your overall herd average age is too low. It does not matter what weapon a hunter chooses to use. If you can't convince your hunters to allow the largest portion of the animals to mature to the 3.5 to 6.5 age group and shoot young does then I guess you will have to pass laws and make regulations to force them to do so. But only if that is the COMMON goal of the greater number of hunters. The weapon the hunter uses has no impact on the outcome of this subject. This is an ethical and education issue and not a weapon issue as you have stated before.

[Swamp Ghost]

In one argument you say that MI has lost 200,000 hunters. In another argument you claim all the gun hunters in MI will pick up a crossbow and archery hunt.

Never made that claim.

If that argument is true you got your 200,000 hunters back.

It's not true, we don't know what's going to happen in MI. If MI is like other states we will keep losing hunters at the same rate, in spite of the crossbow.

If they don't tag out in archery season then they can try again during gun season.
That alone should increase your tags sold to tags filled ratio to some extent thus making the extra hunters not necessary.

We have a combo-tag system, it greatly influences MI hunters tendencies to shoot the first buck that comes along and continue to hunt for another "restricted" buck. It also increases the tendency not to kill antlerless deer in earlier seasons.

The difference is they now hunt the woods when you hunt the woods. And they will also hunt the woods when gun hunters hunt the woods. So the addition of a new challenging weapon to YOUR season is the true threat.

The difference is that hunters may be allowed to use a different weapon in a season that was set aside for bowhunters.

When in fact the season is not YOURS it's OURS as in free for all archery hunters to use.

The season isn't mine it's the license buyers. MI's bow season is open to anyone, all they currently have to do is pick up a bow. Which by most accounts in this forum is easy to master.

You claim you need 200,000 hunters to replace your loss. But you choose not to gain any new hunter that wants to use a crossbow.

In every state were the crossbow is allowed there is not one shred of evidence that the crossbow recruit new hunters. We may gain some "archers" but we will still lose far more deer hunters.

A weapon that fires the same arrow and broad head YOU use. A weapon that has the same range limitations as YOUR weapon. A weapon that kills by hemorrhage like YOUR weapon. A weapon that will intrude into YOUR self proclaimed archery season. The data shows that the crossbow is exactly as efficient as a vertical bow. After 31 years of use here in OH the difference in efficiency is roughly 3-5 percent in favor of the crossbow. But we also have a slightly higher crossbow hunter to bow hunter ratio. I didn't bother complete the math but the ratio is almost identical at a glance. I expect if you nit pick down to the exact decimal then you will in fact find that the crossbow is virtually equal in efficiency or a few points more.

That's all fine and good but even the ODNR defines the crossbow and the bow as different. Most pistols have the same effective range as a bow and muzzleloader success rates are lower than bowhunters success rates, what are we to make of that?

Furthermore I expect the vertical bow hunters recruit MORE crossbow hunters with influential propaganda that you and your like minded have been passing around this forum. It's your goal to GUILT anyone that even considers using a crossbow to not do so. Your like minded has been able to do this in all but 8 states and one Canadian province of Ontario. Yet the data for anything related to a crossbow being positive is ignored. And the misinformation and exaggerated myths are still influencing the masses. But we who are educated and becoming aware of the needs of our crossbow supporting brothers are waking up. 8 states down and 42 to go.

I fully expect more bowhunters than gunhunters will take up the crossbow. As evidenced by most of the data from other states. It won't be because of propaganda, it will happen because of the crossbows advantages, as evidenced by Ohio. I don't see this as answer to a net loss of total hunters, neither does 42 other states.

As for your regulations I don't have enough data to form a plan or opinion that would be of much use for MI. The only hunting I have done in MI is morel mushroom hunting. But I do drive your highways and walk in your forests so I am aware of what your herds look like. Judging from the road kill alone I know your deer are grossly over populated. Your buck to doe ratio is out of balance and your overall herd average age is too low. It does not matter what weapon a hunter chooses to use. If you can't convince your hunters to allow the largest portion of the animals to mature to the 3.5 to 6.5 age group and shoot young does then I guess you will have to pass laws and make regulations to force them to do so. But only if that is the COMMON goal of the greater number of hunters. The weapon the hunter uses has no impact on the outcome of this subject. This is an ethical and education issue and not a weapon issue as you have stated before.

Finally, something we agree on.

;)...

[TOW]

Where the rubber meets the road -

Basically all we will have is another choice on a deer hunting tool.

One that we can all have the opportunity to accept or reject.

No one will twist any arms and say that someone else HAS to hunt with a crossbow.

It will not matter one iota to us whether that deer hunter on the next forty is hunting with a compound, recurve or a crossbow. Thier CHOICE in an archery hunting tool will NOT impact us in any way. Our chocie will NOT impact them either.

In this case, choice is good...

[Swamp Ghost]

Where the rubber meets the road -

Basically all we will have is another choice on a deer hunting tool.

One that we can all have the opportunity to accept or reject.

No one will twist any arms and say that someone else HAS to hunt with a crossbow.

It will not matter one iota to us whether that deer hunter on the next forty is hunting with a compound, recurve or a crossbow. Thier CHOICE in an archery hunting tool will NOT impact us in any way. Our chocie will NOT impact them either.

In this case, choice is good...

If your a bowhunter the additional choice of a fundamentally different weapon is bad for you and bad for bowhunting. Just look at Ohio, explosive crossbow use and growth. Bows have been left behind. The crossbow will make an impact, one that changes the essence of bowseason forever.

It may or may not matter if a hunter is using shotgun loaded with buckshot or a 30-06 on the next 40, either. It appears some of us prefer to be oblivious and are of the opinion "What we don't know won't hurt us".

[TOW]

If your a bowhunter the additional choice of a fundamentally different weapon is bad for you and bad for bowhunting. Just look at Ohio, explosive crossbow use and growth. Bows have been left behind. The crossbow will make an impact, one that changes the essence of bowseason forever.

Where do you get that at?

Vertical bowhunters are setting records EVERY year in the number of deer killed. Look at some of those whoppers that are getting killed with vertical bows AND crossbows.

Joe Blow hunting with a crossbow doesn't take a thing away from John Smith hunting with a compound.

It may or may not matter if a hunter is using shotgun loaded with buckshot or a 30-06 on the next 40, either. It appears some of us prefer to be oblivious and are of the opinion "What we don't know won't hurt us".

Sure it will. They can reach out and touch them with the 30-06. We are trying to talk about like pieces of equipment here, not guns versus bows/crossbows.

[Swamp Ghost]

Where do you get that at?

The ODNR

Vertical bowhunters are setting records EVERY year in the number of deer killed. Look at some of those whoppers that are getting killed with vertical bows AND crossbows.

Crossbow harvest exceeds bow harvest according to the ODNR.

Joe Blow hunting with a crossbow doesn't take a thing away from John Smith hunting with a compound.

Says the crossbow user.

Sure it will. They can reach out and touch them with the 30-06. We are trying to talk about like pieces of equipment here, not guns versus bows/crossbows.

A 30-06 may reach out and touch them and crossbowhunters will be able to find a solid rest for their cocked and loaded advantaged crossbows on their back 40, while bowhunters perform fundamentally different actions with a lessor weapon to get equal results on their's ...

[swampbuck]

Another weapon, same hunters, same regulations = same result, with an much increased possibility of negative impact on the 1.5 year old buck population.


I think you may be wrong on that one also. As far as the NLP/UP and areas with few or no doe permits, firearm hunters in those areas who decide to use a crossbow would then have the option of taking a doe. An option that they rarely have in firearm season. Resulting in a positive(lower) impact on the buck harvest

[Whit1]

If changing the way MI manages it's deer herd is their top priority, I would join.

Even if that means supporting crossbow inclusion?

[TOW]

Originally Posted by TOW
Where do you get that at?

Swamp Ghost responded - The ODNR

Vertical bowhunters are setting records EVERY year in the number of deer killed. Look at some of those whoppers that are getting killed with vertical bows AND crossbows.

Crossbow harvest exceeds bow harvest according to the ODNR.

This is what I have from the ODNR...

2002/2003 season

Vertical - 20,552
Crossbow – 22,360

Total – 48,904


2003/2004 season

Vertical – 21,167
Crossbow – 29,397

Total – 50,564


2004/2005 season

Vertical – 24,897
Crossbow – 35,729

Total – 60,626


2005/2006 season

Vertical – 26,432
Crossbow – 33,658

Total – 60,090

Looks to me that BOTH vertical bowhunters and crossbowers are having banner years in Ohio. Vertical bowhunters are setting new records EVERY year for number of deer killed, aren’t they?

Sure, crossbowers are killing more deer, but there are more crossbowers to hunt those deer. Success percentages are almost equal. But, you know what? The number of crossbowers and their kill hasn’t impacted the vertical bowhunters a bit has it? They are setting new kill records EVERY YEAR.


Joe Blow hunting with a crossbow doesn't take a thing away from John Smith hunting with a compound.
Says the crossbow user.

Says anyone who stops and really thinks about it. See Ohio vertical kill record results above..

Sure it will. They can reach out and touch them with the 30-06. We are trying to talk about like pieces of equipment here, not guns versus bows/crossbows.

A 30-06 may reach out and touch them and crossbowhunters will be able to find a solid rest for their cocked and loaded advantaged crossbows on their back 40, while bowhunters perform fundamentally different actions with a lessor weapon to get equal results on their's.

LOL… Yeah that is why the success ratio is almost identical for vertical bows and crossbows. I’ve told you that I have hunted with a crossbow the last 7 seasons. I hunt exactly like I did with a vertical bow. Same set ups and most times even in the same trees as before. I also sit and stand a lot depending on how tired my legs or butt gets. If I am sitting down and I see a deer coming I slowly stand up. Deer do not always come out and stand exactly where we want them to do they? Why would anyone, vertical or crossbow, want to limit their ability to shift positions to get off a shot at the deer? If a deer is moving around the hunter, no matter what piece of archery gear he is using, had better have some mobility about him. Sitting down limits the direction that a bowhunter or crossbow hunter can swivel around to get off the shot.

There are some times that a crossbow hunter might be able to get off a seated and rested shots, but by far the stand up and shot is preferred – strictly because of mobility.

You see, you have never hunted wuth a crossbow and assign what you think, or someone has told you, about how we hunt.

[TOW]

BTW ...

Let's correct the record on the license sales in Virginia..

2005 (before crossbows)

Resident Vertical - 58,697
N.R. Vertical - 2,798

Total - 61,495

2006 (first year of crossbow)

Resident Vertical - 52,173
N.R. Vertical - 2,561
N. R. Crossbow - 628
Resident Crossbow- 15,039

Total - 70,401 (increase of 8,904 over 2005)

2007

Sportsman - 3,156
Resident Vertical - 48,346
N.R. Vertical - 2,611
N. R. Crossbow - 778
Resident Crossbow- 19,605

Total - 74,496

Net gain from 2005 is 13,001 licenses sold.

"Not recruiting hunters"???

[butter21]

During that time I was able to catch my breath and glance at my watch. It was almost 7 a.m., and there was now plenty of light but, unfortunately, nothing to shoot at. I was preternaturally calm as I scanned all sides of the thicket intently, but saw nothing and heard nothing. I knew he couldn't have been more than 25 yards from me.

After another 10-minute wait, a doe (possibly one of the previous does) walked up. It stood broadside in the shooting lane closest to where I believed the buck to be. My crossbow was already pointed in that direction, and I had used a rangefinder the day before to confirm that it was 18 yards away.

I looked through the scope and thought to myself: Oh, how I wish that buck was in the cross hairs! As if he'd read my mind, he quickly emerged and chased the doe through the shooting lane, quartering away. Without hesitation, I pulled the trigger.
http://www.ohiogameandfish.com/hunting/whitetail-deer-hunting/OH_0805_01/index.html

[DANIEL MARK ZAPOLSKI]

BTW ...

Let's correct the record on the license sales in Virginia..

2005 (before crossbows)

Resident Vertical - 58,697
N.R. Vertical - 2,798

Total - 61,495

2006 (first year of crossbow)

Resident Vertical - 52,173
N.R. Vertical - 2,561
N. R. Crossbow - 628
Resident Crossbow- 15,039

Total - 70,401 (increase of 8,904 over 2005)

2007

Sportsman - 3,156
Resident Vertical - 48,346
N.R. Vertical - 2,611
N. R. Crossbow - 778
Resident Crossbow- 19,605

Total - 74,496

Net gain from 2005 is 13,001 licenses sold.

"Not recruiting hunters"???


from the looks of those numbers it would be safe for one to assume not only recruiting but also retaining hunters 2 very important factors in the inclusion of crossbows:D

[butter21]

from the looks of those numbers it would be safe for one to assume not only recruiting but also retaining hunters 2 very important factors in the inclusion of crossbows:D

Yea but after the first year all it has done was take away from vertical bow hunters. So it really only recruited 1 year.

[TOW]

Yea but after the first year all it has done was take away from vertical bow hunters. So it really only recruited 1 year.

LMAO... yeah, sure... spin away...

13,001 new licenses sold in just two years..

Recruitment with a capitol R...

[butter21]

LMAO... yeah, sure... spin away...

13,001 new licenses sold in just two years..

Recruitment with a capitol R...

sorry i didnt use a capitol R when i said it recruited. Besides how many of those were already just gun hunters? Im willing to bet most of them were. So they it did do a good job in recruiting gun hunters.

[BigBirdVA]

sorry i didnt use a capitol R when i said it recruited. Besides how many of those were already just gun hunters? Im willing to bet most of them were. So they it did do a good job in recruiting gun hunters.WHO CARES?????????? They bought a different license. In VA. each weapon except gun requires the purchase of a different license. That's one for xbow, one for compound & traditional together, and muzzle loader is another license. Same number of deer tags as they come from the general gun license every deer hunter must buy. These fees go back to the sportsman in the form of lands, upkeep and studies to allow us to keep and pay our own way. Split hairs on who it was but there is no denying it generates funds in many, many positive ways for the sportsman of VA.

[butter21]

WHO CARES?????????? They bought a different license. In VA. each weapon except gun requires the purchase of a different license. That's one for xbow, one for compound & traditional together, and muzzle loader is another license. Same number of deer tags as they come from the general gun license every deer hunter must buy. These fees go back to the sportsman in the form of lands, upkeep and studies to allow us to keep and pay our own way. Split hairs on who it was but there is no denying it generates funds in many, many positive ways for the sportsman of VA.
It was originally brought up about crossbows recruiting more people to hunting. By the way we currently do it our tags, all you have to do is by a combo licenses. Then your good to go with any weapon any season. So unless it changes, which i don't see happening anytime soon, it wouldn't bring any more money either.

[BigBirdVA]

It was originally brought up about crossbows recruiting more people to hunting. By the way we currently do it our tags, all you have to do is by a combo licenses. Then your good to go with any weapon any season. So unless it changes, which i don't see happening anytime soon, it wouldn't bring any more money either.No it was originally brought up the xbow is the same weapon as a compound for deer hunting purposes. All the other was in counter to the additional issues the anti bunch tried to cloud it with. We thought xbows would be in with archery but they created another different license. Was a smart move in 2 ways. More funds and it allows the data to be kept separate on kills and hunter totals. The latter is important when proving anti's like you your thoughts are incorrect. Guess that make 3 good reasons. :lol::lol::lol:

[Swamp Ghost]

Let's be perfectly clear here, VA recruited crossbow users and still lost deer hunters. They lost 15,000 deer hunting license buyers from 2005-2007. VA recruited 13,000 from one segment hunters to another segment, these were not new hunters.

VA lost 15,000 deer hunters in spite of the crossbow.

[butter21]

from the looks of those numbers it would be safe for one to assume not only recruiting but also retaining hunters 2 very important factors in the inclusion of crossbows:D

Yea but after the first year all it has done was take away from vertical bow hunters. So it really only recruited 1 year.

LMAO... yeah, sure... spin away...

13,001 new licenses sold in just two years..

Recruitment with a capitol R...

sorry i didnt use a capitol R when i said it recruited. Besides how many of those were already just gun hunters? Im willing to bet most of them were. So they it did do a good job in recruiting gun hunters.

WHO CARES?????????? They bought a different license. In VA. each weapon except gun requires the purchase of a different license. That's one for xbow, one for compound & traditional together, and muzzle loader is another license. Same number of deer tags as they come from the general gun license every deer hunter must buy. These fees go back to the sportsman in the form of lands, upkeep and studies to allow us to keep and pay our own way. Split hairs on who it was but there is no denying it generates funds in many, many positive ways for the sportsman of VA.

It was originally brought up about crossbows recruiting more people to hunting. By the way we currently do it our tags, all you have to do is by a combo licenses. Then your good to go with any weapon any season. So unless it changes, which i don't see happening anytime soon, it wouldn't bring any more money either.

No it was originally brought up the xbow is the same weapon as a compound for deer hunting purposes. All the other was in counter to the additional issues the anti bunch tried to cloud it with. We thought xbows would be in with archery but they created another different license. Was a smart move in 2 ways. More funds and it allows the data to be kept separate on kills and hunter totals. The latter is important when proving anti's like you your thoughts are incorrect. Guess that make 3 good reasons. :lol::lol::lol:
Read all those now and i thing that is was brought up b/c of crossbows recruiting more hunters. Also never call me an anti again.

[TOW]

Let's be perfectly clear here, VA recruited crossbow users and still lost deer hunters. They lost 15,000 deer hunting license buyers from 2005-2007. VA recruited 13,000 from one segment hunters to another segment, these were not new hunters.

You have proof that it was only a transfer of one hunter group to another without any recruitment of new hunters at all?

I think BigBirdVA can give you an example of new recruitment with his daughters taking up hunting because of the crossbow. I'm quite sure it was not just his daughters that took it up in the entire state.

Crossbow brings in whole families because the kids and mom can go afield with an adequate deer killing tool when before they had to use a very marginable piece of archery equipment IF they could even pull one back at all.

VA lost 15,000 deer hunters in spite of the crossbow.

And how many has Michigan lost in the last 5 years?

Also the question is how many MORE hunters would VA have lost if it was not for crossbws?

Look at the states that just legaized where the older hunter can use a corssbow without going through a silly permit sysem. They have turned around the the loss of aging bowhunters..

[Swamp Ghost]

You have proof that it was only a transfer of one hunter group to another without any recruitment of new hunters at all?

The decline of every other deer license purchase and increase of crossbow license purchases. It's pretty cut and dry.

I think BigBirdVA can give you an example of new recruitment with his daughters taking up hunting because of the crossbow. I'm quite sure it was not just his daughters that took it up in the entire state.

I (and many other's) can give you examples of how taking my nephews and other youth small game hunting have hooked them for life.

Crossbow brings in whole families because the kids and mom can go afield with an adequate deer killing tool when before they had to use a very marginable piece of archery equipment IF they could even pull one back at all.

There are plenty of MI families that have no problem killing deer with a bow. We could "what if" any issue to death. To think any activity can be "all inclusive" is unrealistic.

And how many has Michigan lost in the last 5 years?

How many more hunters does MI have than VA? Would someone please tell me what the national average for hunter loss is? In a state that has consistently been a top 3 state in the nation as far as the number of deer hunters, wouldn't you expect that same state to be in the top 3 states when it come to hunter losses? Let's get real here.

Also the question is how many MORE hunters would VA have lost if it was not for crossbws?

I guess we'll never know for sure will we. The fact is VA is still losing deer hunters.

Look at the states that just legaized where the older hunter can use a corssbow without going through a silly permit sysem. They have turned around the the loss of aging bowhunters..

We've yet to get an actual number or even a percentage of this type of "retention"


...

[TOW]

Originally Posted by TOW

You have proof that it was only a transfer of one hunter group to another without any recruitment of new hunters at all?

The decline of every other deer license purchase and increase of crossbow license purchases. It's pretty cut and dry.

Not cut and dry at all. Since deer hunters in that state can buy more than one license it proves nothing in a transfer that all other types are down and archery/crossbow are up.



I think BigBirdVA can give you an example of new recruitment with his daughters taking up hunting because of the crossbow. I'm quite sure it was not just his daughters that took it up in the entire state.

I (and many other's) can give you examples of how taking my nephews and other youth small game hunting have hooked them for life.

That is great, but in a lot of instances (BigBirdVA’s example) the kids could not draw, much less master a hunting weight bow. I have seen numerous others posts on many different sites that their kids went hunting with them the first time because of the legalization of crossbows.

Just the fact that there is something new to hunt with will recruit hunters.



Crossbow brings in whole families because the kids and mom can go afield with an adequate deer killing tool when before they had to use a very marginable piece of archery equipment IF they could even pull one back at all.

There are plenty of MI families that have no problem killing deer with a bow. We could "what if" any issue to death. To think any activity can be "all inclusive" is unrealistic.

That may be true, but can you not give credit where credit is due? If crossbows only got one family into the woods and they hunted together would it not be a good thing?



And how many has Michigan lost in the last 5 years?

How many more hunters does MI have than VA? Would someone please tell me what the national average for hunter loss is? In a state that has consistently been a top 3 state in the nation as far as the number of deer hunters, wouldn't you expect that same state to be in the top 3 states when it come to hunter losses? Let's get real here.

Ah, but you are the one saying that VA lost hunters “ in spite of crossbows”. We are merely showing that losing hunters everywhere is a national trend. If crossbows recruit any at all that is a positive , right? .



Also the question is how many MORE hunters would VA have lost if it was not for crossbws?

I guess we'll never know for sure will we.The fact is VA is still losing deer hunters.

I don’t think anyone on the pro side said that crossbows is the answer to all our outdoor prayers and everyone in the state would pick up a crossbow and hunt. We have all said that crossbow is a PARTIAL answer to the declining numbers of hunters.



Look at the states that just legaized where the older hunter can use a corssbow without going through a silly permit sysem. They have turned around the the loss of aging bowhunters..

We've yet to get an actual number or even a percentage of this type of "retention"

Looks to me that Georgia says that crossbowers stick with it longer than bowhunters.

Pretty significant difference isn’t there?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Woowoo1/Winkies/Georgiacrossbowagegraphs.jpg

[butter21]

All that graph shows is the number that use crossbows versus compounds/recurve. It doesnt show that it keeps them in the sport longer, all those people could have very well used a compound the year before crossbows were legalized.

[TOW]

All that graph shows is the number that use crossbows versus compounds/recurve.

Surely you are not this dense and can not read a graph correctly?

No. it doesn't show that at all. This shows the age breakdown by PERCENT (Not numbers that use crossbows versus compounds/recurve) by the different pieces of archery equipment.

Anyone with a lick of sense can see that crossbows keep us old timers in the deer woods to a much greater age than compounds do.

It doesnt show that it keeps them in the sport longer, all those people could have very well used a compound the year before crossbows were legalized.

DUH... the graph is in percentage by types of archery equipment.

[butter21]

Surely you are not this dense and can not read a graph correctly?

No. it doesn't show that at all. This shows the age breakdown by PERCENT (Not numbers that use crossbows versus compounds/recurve) by the different pieces of archery equipment.

Anyone with a lick of sense can see that crossbows keep us old timers in the deer woods to a much greater age than compounds do.



DUH... the graph is in percentage by types of archery equipment.
Are u thick in the skull? All that graph shows is that older hunters use a crossbow more then a compound. That graph doesn't show that it retains older hunters in the woods longer. Where in the graph does it show that those hunters wouldn't be in the woods with a compound if there wasn't full inclusion of crossbows?

[BigBirdVA]

Being able to see and not wanting to see are two different things. :D

I see all my older hunting friends picking it up to keep hunting. One guy had surgery and used it and is trying to go back to a compound. It's a choice. Now if it was so darn advantageous why would he go back since it's legal and he has one?

[butter21]

Being able to see and not wanting to see are two different things. :D

I see all my older hunting friends picking it up to keep hunting. One guy had surgery and used it and is trying to go back to a compound. It's a choice. Now if it was so darn advantageous why would he go back since it's legal and he has one?

No I really want to see this one, I'm looking on that graph but ain't finding it. Care to point it out to me?

Perhaps your friend likes more of a challenge? I don't know I don't know your friend. :idea:

[TOW]

Are u thick in the skull? All that graph shows is that older hunters use a crossbow more then a compound.

Bingo!! Give the man a ceegggaaarrrrr..

Two different sets of hunters here....compound hunters and crossbow hunters.

You see the compound graph start to dip the older the compound hunters get?

Do you see the crossbow graph start to rise the older the crossbow hunters get? In fact the highest percentage of crossbow hunters by age group is the 55 to 59 group.

Ooopss!! The 55 to 59 age group of the compound hunters is half what the crossbowers are.

That graph doesn't show that it retains older hunters in the woods longer.

It's as plain as the nose on your face.

Where in the graph does it show that those hunters wouldn't be in the woods with a compound if there wasn't full inclusion of crossbows?

Figure 2 shows it very plainly. The compounders, who can still hunt with a compound if they choose to, are starting to quit at age 45 and it gets progressively worse as they age.

Deer hunters that use a crossbow keep right on hunting...that is called retention of hunters. Something that we need very desperately.

[Munsterlndr]

No I really want to see this one, I'm looking on that graph but ain't finding it. Care to point it out to me?

Perhaps your friend likes more of a challenge? I don't know I don't know your friend. :idea:

Since you seem to be graphically challenged, how about some numbers instead.

Crossbows were legalized for Seniors (over 65) in Wisconsin in 2002. 2001-2002 was the CWD scare and hunting license sales dropped across the board, so they are not good years for comparison. By the next year (2003) hunting license sales rebounded to just about the same level they had been prior to the CWD scare. That is except for the Senior archery license. Sales of that license not only matched sales from the pre-CWD, pre-crossbow years but they exceeded the 2000 license levels by 21%. The following year in 2004 they increased substantially again and were up over 48% over the pre-crossbow inclusion years. That 48% increase in the senior archery demographic can be solely attributed to the inclusion of crossbows for seniors. That my friend, is hunter retention!

In Maryland, the first year (2003) that crossbows were allowed for seniors, over-65 archery license sales increased by over 80% from the previous year when seniors were not allowed to use crossbows. The following year they increased to 290% above the last pre-crossbow year. The year after that the increase was up to 384% more senior bow hunters than before crossbow inclusion. Again this vast increase in the retention of the senior bow hunting demographic is solely the result of crossbow inclusion. You can try and spin those numbers any way you want but the facts are that as long as they were required to use vertical bows, fewer seniors decided to hunt during archery season.

[butter21]

Bingo!! Give the man a ceegggaaarrrrr..

Two different sets of hunters here....compound hunters and crossbow hunters.

You see the compound graph start to dip the older the compound hunters get?

Do you see the crossbow graph start to rise the older the crossbow hunters get? In fact the highest percentage of crossbow hunters by age group is the 55 to 59 group.

Ooopss!! The 55 to 59 age group of the compound hunters is half what the crossbowers are.



It's as plain as the nose on your face.



Figure 2 shows it very plainly. The compounders, who can still hunt with a compound if they choose to, are starting to quit at age 45 and it gets progressively worse as they age.

Deer hunters that use a crossbow keep right on hunting...that is called retention of hunters. Something that we need very desperately.
It shows that they use the crossbow more and more as they age. But it still doesn't show that if there wasn't full inclusion of crossbows that they would quit bowhunting.

[wildcoy73]

As we all know some will do the research and let the facts stand out, other will take those facts and never believe them.
Archers are so afraid of this mighty crossbow that common sense has ran out the door.
Give it a year or two and all of this will blow over, and even some of the most confused will see the end of hunting did not happen.

[TOW]

Since you seem to be graphically challenged...

"Graphically challenged"... I like that. :lol:

It shows that they use the crossbow more and more as they age. But it still doesn't show that if there wasn't full inclusion of crossbows that they would quit bowhunting.

Well, lets see when the Minnesota archery hunters stop their bowhunting.. WOW! That almost mirrors the Figure 2 of the Georgia graph doesn't it? Guess what? Minnesota does NOT have full inclusion of crossbows so those folks just flat out QUIT. Maybe if Minnesota had full inclusion of crossbows they would keep right on hunting with crossbows just like those old timers down in Georgia.

Which raises an important question - What about the old timers in Michigan? Do they deserve any less than the old timers in Georgia? Or should old Michiganders just hang up their bows like the old folks in Minnesota?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Woowoo1/Winkies/MNHunteragegraphs-1.jpg

[TOW]

Munsterlndr,

I think that you going to confuse him with facts when his mind is made up.

I mean if he cant look at a picture....er graph and tell..

[butter21]

Since you seem to be graphically challenged, how about some numbers instead.

Crossbows were legalized for Seniors (over 65) in Wisconsin in 2002. 2001-2002 was the CWD scare and hunting license sales dropped across the board, so they are not good years for comparison. By the next year (2003) hunting license sales rebounded to just about the same level they had been prior to the CWD scare. That is except for the Senior archery license. Sales of that license not only matched sales from the pre-CWD, pre-crossbow years but they exceeded the 2000 license levels by 21%. The following year in 2004 they increased substantially again and were up over 48% over the pre-crossbow inclusion years. That 48% increase in the senior archery demographic can be solely attributed to the inclusion of crossbows for seniors. That my friend, is hunter retention!

In Maryland, the first year (2003) that crossbows were allowed for seniors, over-65 archery license sales increased by over 80% from the previous year when seniors were not allowed to use crossbows. The following year they increased to 290% above the last pre-crossbow year. The year after that the increase was up to 384% more senior bow hunters than before crossbow inclusion. Again this vast increase in the retention of the senior bow hunting demographic is solely the result of crossbow inclusion. You can try and spin those numbers any way you want but the facts are that as long as they were required to use vertical bows, fewer seniors decided to hunt during archery season.

That would be what Swamp Buck was looking for. It shows that it does retain older hunters. The other graphs however did not. ;) This tells you the number of hunters pre-crossbow archery, and after crossbows were introduced. I can't believe you even think the graph did for Georgia. (but i know you wont admit that) ;)

[butter21]

"Graphically challenged"... I like that. :lol:



Well, lets see when the Minnesota archery hunters stop their bowhunting.. WOW! That almost mirrors the Figure 2 of the Georgia graph doesn't it? Guess what? Minnesota does NOT have full inclusion of crossbows so those folks just flat out QUIT. Maybe if Minnesota had full inclusion of crossbows they would keep right on hunting with crossbows just like those old timers down in Georgia.

Which raises an important question - What about the old timers in Michigan? Do they deserve any less than the old timers in Georgia? Or should old Michiganders just hang up their bows like the old folks in Minnesota?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v474/Woowoo1/Winkies/MNHunteragegraphs-1.jpg
Again this graph shows nothing, seeing as how they don't even have full inclusion. :lol: Keep trying bet you will find one eventually...then again maybe not.

[TOW]

Again this graph shows nothing, seeing as how they don't even have full inclusion. :lol: Keep trying bet you will find one eventually...then again maybe not.

Yes, munsterlndr was right....

Your stupid statements are digging you a big deep hole. When you find yourself at the bottom of a hole, quit digging.

[Swamp Ghost]

Since you seem to be graphically challenged, how about some numbers instead.

Crossbows were legalized for Seniors (over 65) in Wisconsin in 2002. 2001-2002 was the CWD scare and hunting license sales dropped across the board, so they are not good years for comparison. By the next year (2003) hunting license sales rebounded to just about the same level they had been prior to the CWD scare. That is except for the Senior archery license. Sales of that license not only matched sales from the pre-CWD, pre-crossbow years but they exceeded the 2000 license levels by 21%. The following year in 2004 they increased substantially again and were up over 48% over the pre-crossbow inclusion years. That 48% increase in the senior archery demographic can be solely attributed to the inclusion of crossbows for seniors. That my friend, is hunter retention!

In Maryland, the first year (2003) that crossbows were allowed for seniors, over-65 archery license sales increased by over 80% from the previous year when seniors were not allowed to use crossbows. The following year they increased to 290% above the last pre-crossbow year. The year after that the increase was up to 384% more senior bow hunters than before crossbow inclusion. Again this vast increase in the retention of the senior bow hunting demographic is solely the result of crossbow inclusion. You can try and spin those numbers any way you want but the facts are that as long as they were required to use vertical bows, fewer seniors decided to hunt during archery season.

Solely to the crossbow? Could it have anything to do with the overly cautious because of CWD waiting another year before they resumed hunting? Could it have anything to do with a large segment of hunter's entering that demographic at the same time?

384% WOW! 384% more than 10, 20, 100, 1000?

Small gains in one demographic or even in an entire segment while losing many more total deer hunter numbers isn't retention or recruitment, no matter how you want to spin it.

[Swamp Ghost]

These graphs are great if you are easily dazzled by power point BS, kinda like politicians.;)

[butter21]

That would be what Swamp Buck was looking for. It shows that it does retain older hunters. The other graphs however did not. ;) This tells you the number of hunters pre-crossbow archery, and after crossbows were introduced. I can't believe you even think the graph did for Georgia. (but i know you wont admit that) ;)
Side note Id be interested to see the increase of archery tags in all the age groups, after crossbows became legal in not just 65+. My guess is that it went up in ALL age groups in Georgia.

[BigBirdVA]

These graphs are great if you are easily dazzled by power point BS, kinda like politicians.;)You really don't have a clue do you? :confused:


To clarify the meaning it's not meant in an insulting way. Just you're not seeing it as some do. Back when I was on the anti wagon I didn't see it either so I fully understand where you're at in this.

[Swamp Ghost]

You really don't have a clue do you? :confused:


To clarify the meaning it's not meant in an insulting way. Just you're not seeing it as some do. Back when I was on the anti wagon I didn't see it either so I fully understand where you're at in this.

LOL! I am not anti-crossbow for the 1,000th time.

I see it exactly as they do. Some see a blip in one part of a graph and want to make all sorts of assumptions about it, but when you look at the whole graph or all the numbers it truly is "much ado about nothing".

[Munsterlndr]

Solely to the crossbow? Could it have anything to do with the overly cautious because of CWD waiting another year before they resumed hunting? Could it have anything to do with a large segment of hunter's entering that demographic at the same time?

384% WOW! 384% more than 10, 20, 100, 1000?

Small gains in one demographic or even in an entire segment while losing many more total deer hunter numbers isn't retention or recruitment, no matter how you want to spin it.

Swamp -

Your denial of fact has gotten to the point where it's pointless to even debate it with you. Rational people that look at these graphs and these numbers recognize the truth that they contain. You will continue to deny, reject and obfuscate any evidence that supports the inclusion of crossbows because it's all that you have. You've been unable to provide a shred of evidence to support any of your claims, so you resort to the tactics mentioned above. It really is immaterial whether you accept or reject any of this data. It's up to the other members of the forum who read the information and your responses to make up their own minds. Your inability to provide any factual data and to solely rely on rejecting any data that is placed in front of you exemplifies the meagerness of your argument. I'll leave others to judge the merits of both sides of this issue. Keep up the denials, they simply demonstrate the total inadequacy of the anti-crossbow position.

Plus it's a hoot to see you guys struggling! :lol:

[Swamp Ghost]

Swamp -

Your denial of fact has gotten to the point where it's pointless to even debate it with you. Rational people that look at these graphs and these numbers recognize the truth that they contain. You will continue to deny, reject and obfuscate any evidence that supports the inclusion of crossbows because it's all that you have. You've been unable to provide a shred of evidence to support any of your claims, so you resort to the tactics mentioned above. It really is immaterial whether you accept or reject any of this data. It's up to the other members of the forum who read the information and your responses to make up their own minds. Your inability to provide any factual data and to solely rely on rejecting any data that is placed in front of you exemplifies the meagerness of your argument. I'll leave others to judge the merits of both sides of this issue. Keep up the denials, they simply demonstrate the total inadequacy of the anti-crossbow position.

Plus it's a hoot to see you guys struggling! :lol:

It is up to other member's to make up there minds. You can make Hitler look like a good leader, if you leave out enough history.

I'm just glad you guys haven't come up with yet another problem that the crossbow will solve.

[BigBirdVA]

It is up to other member's to make up there minds. You can make Hitler look like a good leader, if you leave out enough history.

I'm just glad you guys haven't come up with yet another problem that the crossbow will solve.We're working on world hunger, the economy, and government reform - one state at a time! :evil: Almost forgot the biggest one thing - EDUCATION! You're getting smarter already.

[Swamp Ghost]

We're working on world hunger, the economy, and government reform - one state at a time! :evil: Almost forgot the biggest one thing - EDUCATION! You're getting smarter already.


LOL! I will admit I have been educated a great deal in what the crossbow can and can do and what the crossbow has and hasn't done.;)

[TOW]

These graphs are great if you are easily dazzled by power point BS, kinda like politicians.;)


Translation: "OUCH! Those graphs really do prove that bowhunters are dropping out at a certain age and that crossbows get them back in the game. That is real retention....Time for plan "B". I can't rebut the the numbers and percentages all I can do now is make fun of PowerPoint graphs."

I think we have a checkmate.....

[Swamp Ghost]

Translation: "OUCH! Those graphs really do prove that bowhunters are dropping out at a certain age and that crossbows get them back in the game. That is real retention....Time for plan "B". I can't rebut the the numbers and percentages all I can do now is make fun of PowerPoint graphs."

I think we have a checkmate.....

Supply complete data and we'll see the big picture. Oh! That's right, all the data and the big picture shows that overall hunter retention and recruitment is unaffected and declining.

[BigBirdVA]

Supply complete data and we'll see the big picture. Oh! That's right, all the data and the big picture shows that overall hunter retention and recruitment is unaffected and declining.So if overall participation is dropping why the big worry who's doing what with what? One day it could be reduced to one big season for all.

We have something like that here in a couple of eastern counties. Gun comes in first then bow. I did manage to take a deer on public land after 2 months of gun season being in with a bow. This WMA is gun by a draw for 2 months then they allow archery for another couple of months. These same eastern counties have bow during gun. You have to work for a shot really hard but it can be done. and you have to deal with the added bonus of deer hounds running around as well chasing deer. We have that method in VA. too. :confused:

[TOW]

Supply complete data and we'll see the big picture. Oh! That's right, all the data and the big picture shows that overall hunter retention and recruitment is unaffected and declining.

The graphs show very well that the numbers of hunters being retained by crossbows is significant. The crossbow is not the complete answer but it sure does help.

Just looking at the MN percentage drop of archey hunters after they hit 39 YEARS OF AGE and the graphs from Georgia that show crossbows do retaining older archery hunters should be a great clue that crossbows are doing their part.

If we are losing hunters in other disciplines of hunting that is another problem. But that total loss is lessened by the retention of archery hunters by using crossbows.

[butter21]

The graphs show very well that the numbers of hunters being retained by crossbows is significant. The crossbow is not the complete answer but it sure does help.

Just looking at the MN percentage drop of archey hunters after they hit 39 YEARS OF AGE and the graphs from Georgia that show crossbows do retaining older archery hunters should be a great clue that crossbows are doing their part.

If we are losing hunters in other disciplines of hunting that is another problem. But that total loss is lessened by the retention of archery hunters by using crossbows.
Again your graphs don't show anything....It only shows that as hunters get older that they prefer to use a crossbow.

[TOW]

Again your graphs don't show anything....It only shows that as hunters get older that they prefer to use a crossbow.

They do not show you anything as you are incapable of reading them.....

"Graphically Challenged..."

[butter21]

They do not show you anything as you are incapable of reading them.....

"Graphically Challenged..."
Keep telling yourself that those graphs show that crossbows retain hunters. ;)

[TOW]

Keep telling yourself that those graphs show that crossbows retain hunters. ;)


You're the only one here that doesn't see it. Now what does that tell us? :lol:

[butter21]

You're the only one here that doesn't see it. Now what does that tell us? :lol:
How are the graphs that you posted showing that it retains older hunters. They dont PERIOD. The only thing it shows is that hunters use crossbows more and more as they get older and older. In order to show that it retains hunters, you are going to have to find some type of pre crossbow graphs. That show the number of archery hunters pre crossbow inclusion. Those stats were posted by munster. As far as your MN graphs, well seeing as how MN doesn't even have crossbow inclusion, i dont see how you could even mistake those graphs with showing crossbows retain bow hunters.

[TOW]

How are the graphs that you posted showing that it retains older hunters. They dont PERIOD. The only thing it shows is that hunters use crossbows more and more as they get older and older. In order to show that it retains hunters, you are going to have to find some type of pre crossbow graphs. That show the number of archery hunters pre crossbow inclusion. Those stats were posted by munster. As far as your MN graphs, well seeing as how MN doesn't even have crossbow inclusion, i dont see how you could even mistake those graphs with showing crossbows retain bow hunters.

Keep digging...:lol:

[butter21]

Keep digging...:lol:
keep denying :o

[wildcoy73]

Two poster that can't read , one with no profile filled out and has just showed up with the crossbow debate, makes you wonder if in fact this is one in the same. Also notice that they word things the same for the most part. Wonder if the higher ups could get ip address and see if the same computer is in use for this.
Just So the mods all now if you pin my computer you will cath two user.
wildcoy73 is for myself and the only one I use
chrissy is for my wife and she is to use it.
Thanks to all that support the crossbow issue.

[butter21]

Two poster that can't read , one with no profile filled out and has just showed up with the crossbow debate, makes you wonder if in fact this is one in the same. Also notice that they word things the same for the most part. Wonder if the higher ups could get ip address and see if the same computer is in use for this.
Just So the mods all now if you pin my computer you will cath two user.
wildcoy73 is for myself and the only one I use
chrissy is for my wife and she is to use it.
Thanks to all that support the crossbow issue.
to funny :lol: Wonder if one was for me and the other for my wife as well?

[Joe Archer]

Here's a question for those of you who are opposed to crossbow inclusion. Would you support such a regulation and an organization that also supported it IF said organization also worked with vigor toward changing deer hunting regulations that would offer a meaninful, effective, scientifically sound way to improve the buck age structure in the deer herd?
Hells no! Buck age structure is way over rated. We need regulation to maintain deer numbers in some areas of Northern Michigan and drasticaly reduce numbers in Southern Michigan. Legislating hunters of large sections of private land in Michigan to control population numbers is not going to happen by limiting buck harvest. They have enough "family" licenses to take any buck they wish anyway.
<----<<<

[Joe Archer]

Swamp -

It really is immaterial whether you accept or reject any of this data. It's up to the other members of the forum who read the information and your responses to make up their own minds.... I'll leave others to judge the merits of both sides of this issue.
Well, in my totally unbiased review of the material in this thread I would conclude that Swamp Ghost is winning the debate.
Never give up.... never surrender!
<----<<<

[Swamp Ghost]

So if overall participation is dropping why the big worry who's doing what with what? One day it could be reduced to one big season for all.

We have something like that here in a couple of eastern counties. Gun comes in first then bow. I did manage to take a deer on public land after 2 months of gun season being in with a bow. This WMA is gun by a draw for 2 months then they allow archery for another couple of months. These same eastern counties have bow during gun. You have to work for a shot really hard but it can be done. and you have to deal with the added bonus of deer hounds running around as well chasing deer. We have that method in VA. too. :confused:

I don't worry about a whole lot of things. One thing I do worry about is the overblown "benefits" and "effects" used as the basis for crossbow inclusion.

If bowhunters shouldn't use tradition, emotion, feelings, and concerns to support their views about crossbow inclusion, I feel crossbow advocates shouldn't supply incomplete "data" based on opinion, "logical conclusions" and assumptions.

[Munsterlndr]

Well, in my totally unbiased review of the material in this thread I would conclude that Swamp Ghost is winning the debate.
Never give up.... never surrender!
<----<<<

Kind of funny that 94 out of 108 Representatives did not agree with you. :lol:

[Swamp Ghost]

Kind of funny that 94 out of 108 Representatives did not agree with you. :lol:

Maybe if I was there, they would have ;)

[Joe Archer]

Kind of funny that 94 out of 108 Representatives did not agree with you. :lol:
Not funny at all. If you look at bow hunters as a minority group and firearms hunters as the majority the end result should have been very predictable.
In a democracy, the majority opinion always will outweigh the minority when it comes to political support. In an election year "right" or "wrong" isn't really the issue.
<----<<<

[Whit1]

Not funny at all. If you look at bow hunters as a minority group and firearms hunters as the majority the end result should have been very predictable.

<----<<<


Joe, very few members of the House of Reps deer hunt with any weapon. The vast majority do not deer hunt.

[Joe Archer]

Joe, very few members of the House of Reps deer hunt with any weapon. The vast majority do not deer hunt.

Exactly! So who are they going to vote in favor of the minority opinion or desires of the majority?
<----<<<

[Munsterlndr]

Exactly! So who are they going to vote in favor of the minority opinion or desires of the majority?
<----<<<

Joe, I think your missing the point. Using your logic, the vast majority of voters are not hunters of any kind. If Legislators voted solely based on the feelings of the majority, they would not be voting in support of measures concerning hunting of any sort since only about 10% of their constituency hunts. Your also acting under the assumption that there are not any vertical bowhunters who support crossbow inclusion. That would be factually inaccurate as there are plenty of vertical bow users who are not opposed to the inclusion of crossbows in archery season.

[Swamp Ghost]

Joe, I think your missing the point. Using your logic, the vast majority of voters are not hunters of any kind. If Legislators voted solely based on the feelings of the majority, they would not be voting in support of measures concerning hunting of any sort since only about 10% of their constituency hunts. Your also acting under the assumption that there are not any vertical bowhunters who support crossbow inclusion. That would be factually inaccurate as there are plenty of vertical bow users who are not opposed to the inclusion of crossbows in archery season.

Plenty of bowhunters? It depends on what your criteria for "plenty" entails.

[10PtCrossbow]

Ghost,
You would have to do some form of a survey to get accurate numbers. We can also look at the current NJ survey to get a veiw of what their bowhunters thought:

SUPPORT FOR CROSSBOWS FOR DEER HUNTING
► Total support (strong support and moderate support) for the expansion of the use of crossbows for deer hunting was overwhelmingly in favor (73%) among all respondents.

► When broken down by user groups, total support was still in favor of crossbows: bow & gun hunters, 72%; gun-only hunters, 79%; bow-only hunters, 67%. The majority of non-deer hunters were also in favor of crossbows (56%).

Now I know, this is not NJ, but I was just trying to give you an example from a current survey. I personally would call 67% plenty.

[wildcoy73]

Joe with my talking to fellow bow hunters, I found thayt most of them also support the crossbow issue. So with that info I see no problem with the vote that has passed the house, and beleive it does represent the Michigan hunter.

[Munsterlndr]

Plenty of bowhunters? It depends on what your criteria for "plenty" entails.

Lots & Lots! :lol:

Take a look at the crossbow thread that was running over on Leatherwall, a notorious Trad bow only site where most look down on even compound users. There were 51 posts made in that thread many of them by trad bow uses who have no problem with the inclusion of crossbows. After some fast and furious moderating over there this morning all but 3 of those 51 posts were deleted! Good heavens, dissension in the Trad Bow ranks! When you take into account that MBH only represents under 1% of Michigan bow hunters I think it's a pretty fair assessment to say that there are Lots & Lots of vertical bow hunters that could care less about crossbows being included. ;)

[TOW]

Lots & Lots! :lol:

Take a look at the crossbow thread that was running over on Leatherwall, a notorious Trad bow only site where most look down on even compound users. There were 51 posts made in that thread many of them by trad bow uses who have no problem with the inclusion of crossbows. After some fast and furious moderating over there this morning all but 3 of those 51 posts were deleted! Good heavens, dissension in the Trad Bow ranks! When you take into account that MBH only represents under 1% of Michigan bow hunters I think it's a pretty fair assessment to say that there are Lots & Lots of vertical bow hunters that could care less about crossbows being included. ;)

Typical Bowsite administrative maneuvers...

Any dissension to their beliefs are quickly squelched..while the anti-crossbow diatribes stay up..

Been there, done that, have the T Shirt ;) ...

[Terry Williams]

Able-bodied Archers use BOWS

No true words have ever been spoken.

[Riva]

Able-bodied Archers use BOWS

No true words have ever been spoken.

These are the true words with regards to that subject: To quote:

"MBH supports the current standard for determining crossbow permit eligibility for physically challenged hunters. However we are opposed to lowering the level of permanent disability from 80% to 60%. Our Association acknowledges that the current evaluation process for crossbow permit applicants is expensive and frequently abused.
We therefore support removal of the physician from the evaluation process as a means of addressing both issues. Also, we would be very supportive of a more vigorous scrutiny of crossbow permit applications by the DNR Law division to further address the abuse issue. In addition, there are other issues with the crossbow permit system not mentioned in the proposal. We look forward to working with the NRC to resolve these concerns".

You know, I've been waiting a full two months now for the MBH to simply explain what they mean by "a more vigorous scrutiny of the crossbow permit applications by the DNR Law Division" without so much as a peep. Not a peep!

Perhaps, Terry, you'd like to take a swing at it because all the rest of the MBH has so far failed to own up to their own public position statement?:sad:

[awshucks]

Able-bodied Archers use BOWS

No true words have ever been spoken.

What about the 99% letoff compound you can draw and hang cocked and locked on your stand? Does that qualify?

[Terry Williams]

I think the language is fairly clear. It means that we (MBH) would like the law division to look at abuses of the system.

[Terry Williams]

What about the 99% letoff compound you can draw and hang cocked and locked on your stand? Does that qualify?

Now you know better than that:confused: If so why aren't you using one?

[awshucks]

Now you know better than that:confused: If so why aren't you using one?

After my shoulder surgery which I never recovered from enough to shoot a vert bow, I'm left w/ the xbow option. I couldn't draw it enough to practice to my standards. And yes I do know better. I've shot stick/recurve alot, and have taken 6 shots w/ a compound in my life, and I'm 61 yrs old. Lemme tell you about that. The first time was in 1989, a friend had an over-draw set up and I put 5 arrows into a coffee size cup group at 25 yds. Not dead center, but a group. The next shot was last March w/ the latest greatest set up a friend from Canada had brought w/ him. I did pull back the string a few inches sans arrow to check the "trigger" pull on his release, then proceeded to come w/ in 2" of the "X" at 30 yds. I shot these bows right handed, but I'm left handed, left eye dominant. All of which means little to you, your clubs agenda, or probably you personally, but the old adage "You can fool the fans, but not the players" comes to my mind.

Here's the post you obviously missed where the owner of Concept Archery demonstrated how to draw then hang the 99% letoff "bow"

Cocked, locked and ready to rock..

The Concept99 Compound Bow

http://www.conceptarchery.com/

The Concept 99 Compound has a let off of 99%. That means that a bowhunter pulling 60 pounds will have a holding weight of 6/10s of a pound.

Now here is the "Cocked, locked and ready to rock" part of the Concept 99.

I attended the ATA trade show in Indianapolis a few years back and visited the Concept 99 booth. The owner demonstrated the bow to my son and myself. Quite interesting.

My son shot the bow and said it was nothing like he had ever shot before. As a request he held it back for more than 3 minutes. He finally shot as his arm was getting tired holding up the 3 1/2 pound bow.

He then pulled it back and rested the bottom limb on his leg so that he did not have to hold the weight of the bow up. He could do that all day long. The bow is pulled back - "Cocked, locked and ready to rock".

The owner also demonstrated another way to be "Cocked, locked and ready to rock".

He pulled the bow back, aimed it at the floor and released the handle of the bow. The 3 1/2 pound bow handle kept the bow at full draw even though he was not holding the handle. Remeber all the bow is at is 6/10s of a pound holding so the 3 1/2 pound riser weight offsets that. He was still holding the string with the hande just dangling. However, he was told by his insurance carrier to not promote the bow that way.

What does that mean to a bowhunter using one of these bows?

Whenever he wanted to a bowhunter could -

1) Draw and put the bottom limb against their leg and wait as long as it took for the deer to get into range. "Cocked, locked and ready to rock".

2) Draw the bow, aim straight down, let go of the handle and hang the fully drawn bow on a bow hook. When a deer comes along, remove the fully drawn bow from the hook and shoot it. "Cocked, locked and ready to rock".

More technological advantages that a bowhunter can use....but shame on a crossbower that is "Cocked, locked and ready to rock".
http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2175120)

[Riva]

I think the language is fairly clear. It means that we (MBH) would like the law division to look at abuses of the system.

Please explain why MBH supports keeping the 80% permanent disability criteria knowing that there is 100% chance that somebody will not meet the criteria yet still be unable to pull or hold a bow? (take your time on this one).

Should somebody witha 79.5% permanent disability to "just keep the hell out!" (a simple "yes" or "no" is all that's required here)


Please define precisely how the law division will look at "abuses" of the system. C'mon..be brave. It's your words..back them up! I've scribed in the past my thoughts on the only logical way a law division can look at "abuses." Still, I'd love to hear your version. (no time limit on this answer--just some deep personal refelection)

Shall we expect an answer? :rolleyes:

[Munsterlndr]

The owner also demonstrated another way to be "Cocked, locked and ready to rock".

He pulled the bow back, aimed it at the floor and released the handle of the bow. The 3 1/2 pound bow handle kept the bow at full draw even though he was not holding the handle. Remeber all the bow is at is 6/10s of a pound holding so the 3 1/2 pound riser weight offsets that. He was still holding the string with the hande just dangling. http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/images/buttons/quote.gif (http://www.michigan-sportsman.com/forum/newreply.php?do=newreply&p=2175120)

You mean like this?

I went out to my shop and took this pic just a few minutes ago, just to satisfy any skeptics who might be out there. ;)

Geez Joe, where's the love? First you don't want me to use a crossbow and then you tell me you would have banned my compound, too? :lol:

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Munsterlndr/munstersconcept.jpg

[Terry Williams]

Well there you go that is certainly a solution for some.

[Terry Williams]

Please explain why MBH supports keeping the 80% permanent disability criteria knowing that there is 100% chance that somebody will not meet the criteria yet still be unable to pull or hold a bow? (take your time on this one).

Should somebody witha 79.5% permanent disability to "just keep the hell out!" (a simple "yes" or "no" is all that's required here)


Please define precisely how the law division will look at "abuses" of the system. C'mon..be brave. It's your words..back them up! I've scribed in the past my thoughts on the only logical way a law division can look at "abuses." Still, I'd love to hear your version. (no time limit on this answer--just some deep personal refelection)

Shall we expect an answer? :rolleyes:

Lets be honest this really isn't about the disabled hunter is it? Its always and will always be about full inclusion into the archery season. If MBH went to 50% your post would be saying "what about the poor old lady with 49.5%". So to answer your question no, until the law is changed.


The law division has stated that they know there are abuses out there, and we are simply saying do your job.

[awshucks]

" The law division has stated that they know there are abuses out there, and we are simply saying do your job. __________________"

Yeah, lets be "honest". This whole deal got started by your MBH stance of 80% disablity and the furthur scrutiny of the whole process. Imho, the powers that be have seen thru the thin veneer you guys tried to get away w/ and now it's biting you in the butt, as you "SEE" things. Had your group been more accomodating to the disabled, this may not have happened for several more years. But, it would have happened anyhow sooner or later. Fwiw, the same thing happened in La. The state tired of over 60, disabled permits, enforcement of same, and when the available data showed no difference to the resource, they came to the logical conclusion to just put it to rest for once and all. Voila, dejavu!

[Terry Williams]

You maybe right about our stance. But its not over yet

[treestand6]

Munsterlndr---Go to the Uncle Ted thread on this site and see how Whit-1 Deleted most of Autumn Archers post ---Then allowed the pro X-bow posters to post his deleted comments and rebut them.

I'm against X-bows in archery season for one reason----I like the quiet of the season (lac of hunters) Been that way for 72 yrs.

Only one dif in the x-bow and the compound---drawing at the time of the shot. I don't know how many deer that I have shot (55 yrs. ago I picked up my fiirst bow) but most times when the shot was blown it was while drawing the bow--Compound-Recurve-Long Bow-Selfbow...

X-bow

Scope

Thumb hole stock

fore arm

Trigger

Trigger guard

Safety

Barrel -(look at the horton adds)

Sounds like a gun to me!!!! LOL!!!!!

[Munsterlndr]

I'm against X-bows in archery season for one reason----I like the quiet of the season (lac of hunters) Been that way for 72 yrs.


Not sure why I even allow myself to be drawn into responding because it's clear that you have made up your mind and nothing I say will convince you otherwise. I kind of wonder why you guys don't just stay over on that "other" site, do you just come here to argue?

By your statement that you are opposed to crossbows because you like the lack of hunters in the woods leads me to believe that you must then happy about the fact that Michigan is losing 10,000 bow hunters every year. It means that much more room for you to have the woods all to yourself. Using that logic I suggest that you go back to bowsite and tell them to stop any recruiting efforts because it might result in more hunters in the woods. For the life of me, that is the only reasonable conclusion that I can come to after reading your statement. It seems illogical that you would welcome more vertical bow hunters into the woods but decry more crossbow hunters, when they both use a silent weapon. Unless the reason that you oppose crossbows really isn't about the lack of hunters.........

[Riva]

Lets be honest this really isn't about the disabled hunter is it? Its always and will always be about full inclusion into the archery season. If MBH went to 50% your post would be saying "what about the poor old lady with 49.5%". So to answer your question no, until the law is changed.


The law division has stated that they know there are abuses out there, and we are simply saying do your job.

I will give you the benefit of the doubt here, you being somewhat of a newbie here. There is not a person on this Internet forum who does not know what my position on this issue was/is surrounding the criteria for disabled persons rights. It has been my position since day #1. For the record, here it is:

Do away with ALL criteria with the exception that an person simply be required to obtain and produce a letter form their personal physician (not therapist) that states that in his/her professional opinion, the applicant has a either a temporary or medical condition to the degree of severity that render the person unable to pull or hold a bow".

Likewise Terry, this has not always been about full inclusion. You may not believe me but sometimes people are concered when disabled people are knowinging and willingly allowed to fall through the cracks. I'm not a saint by any means but I'm not evil. However: IMO, the MBH's effort to stunt crossbow expansion at the expense of discriminating against disabled persons is evil, was evil and will always be evil. I commented before that I thought that MBH posture in these matters was actually a clever political tactic, that is, if it were not so eggregiously immoral!!

So my questions still stand, Terry:

What do you say to the 79% permanently disabled person?

Please tell all of here just HOW the DNR law division will carry out your advocacy surrounding "vigorous scrutiny"?

Once again, please don't plead the 5th with your refusal to resond to these legitimate questions.:rolleyes:

[Terry Williams]

I answered that question the answer was NO. However I think you might see some things changing regarding that issue

[treestand6]

Munsterlndr

You should get your facts straight- I don't post at Bowsite and quit posting there about 2 yrs ago. Any other brite comments? No I was not barred from the site!

[Riva]

I answered that question the answer was NO. However I think you might see some things changing regarding that issue

So, just to confirm, your answer is "NO". If some person falls through the cracks, that just tuff crap? Is that correct?:sad:

And, if you are referring to the proposed changes relaxing the criteria coming out of the NRC, don't you guys even THINK about trying to take credit for them when the MBH kicked and screamed their disappoval of these changes throughtout the entire subcommitte process! I might have been born in the morning, but not THIS MORNING!:dizzy:

[Terry Williams]

The MBH should help those people to fing a way to get back in woods and start hunting.

We may become political too like Joel and flip flop.

[Riva]

[quote=Terry Williams;2177491]The MBH should help those people to fing a way to get back in woods and start hunting.

Well then, here's the answer:
Do away with ALL criteria with the exception that an person simply be required to obtain and produce a letter form their personal physician (not therapist) that states that in his/her professional opinion, the applicant has a either a temporary or medical condition to the degree of severity that render the person unable to pull or hold a bow

[Terry Williams]

I'll go along with that as long as we can also add a rider.....OBR.

[Terry Williams]

Also add to it an xbow license or deer checking so we can better monitor deer kills

[BigBirdVA]

http://i219.photobucket.com/albums/cc112/Munsterlndr/munstersconcept.jpgYou have to love that pic!!!!!!!! Yes compound guys you're so right it's just not fair not having to hold at full draw. The pic is added to my collection of crapola - a classic indeed. I also like how the anti guys just ignored it and moved onto something different. :yikes: So typical.

[Terry Williams]

I didn't ignore it, you ignored that I acknowleged it and said it would be a good alternative to the crossbow. Talk about typical

[Terry Williams]

I'll be back in a few, I'm baking the Bird a cake

[Terry Williams]

Also something for the little birds...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9KleCswrGk

[swampbuck]

I'll go along with that as long as we can also add a rider.....OBR.


what about this....

MBH Position Statement on One Buck Tag Proposal!
"The Michigan Bow Hunters Association and its membership support the current combination deer tag system and oppose the proposed bag limit of one antlered deer during the bow and arrow season and one antlered deer during the firearms seasons for the UP or the entire state.
The Michigan Bow Hunters Association believe that the present two-buck tag and combo license system provides for the greatest flexibility in the use of tags and maximum opportunity for time afield for all deer hunters with minimum impact on the deer resource. A regulation change to one buck per season would have a negative impact on all deer hunters by limiting time afield. We also feel that this proposal will have the most affect on recreational opportunity for those who hunt only with a bow or hunt only with a gun. In addition we are not aware of any biological reason for this change in deer hunting regulations."


AND CAN YOU GIVE SOME EXAMPLES FROM STATES THE ALLOW CROSSBOWS TO BACK UP THIS STATEMENT....

Michigan currently has more than 400,000 firearm deer hunters who have never taken up the challenge of bow hunting and who would flock to the bow season if they could shoot arrows with guns in October. The resulting social and biological impact will, in all probability, force the DNR to dramatically reduce the length of the archery deer season. The crossbow is not archery equipment, requires no archery skills and is much more user-friendly to firearm hunters than a conventional hand-held bow.

[Terry Williams]

MBH Position Statement on One Buck Tag Proposal!
"The Michigan Bow Hunters Association and its membership support the current combination deer tag system and oppose the proposed bag limit of one antlered deer during the bow and arrow season and one antlered deer during the firearms seasons for the UP or the entire state.
The Michigan Bow Hunters Association believe that the present two-buck tag and combo license system provides for the greatest flexibility in the use of tags and maximum opportunity for time afield for all deer hunters with minimum impact on the deer resource. A regulation change to one buck per season would have a negative impact on all deer hunters by limiting time afield. We also feel that this proposal will have the most affect on recreational opportunity for those who hunt only with a bow or hunt only with a gun. In addition we are not aware of any biological reason for this change in deer hunting regulations."


Thats our position, what isn't clear about it

Whats not accurate about the statement the 400,000 so make it 500,000

[Terry Williams]

I responded to one statement and in typical fashion you spin it inot another.

[swampbuck]

:banghead3

[Terry Williams]

:banghead3

So we agree on something

[November Sunrise]

Thou shalt not engage in an intellectual battle with an unarmed man.

[Terry Williams]

Were is that in the bible, you a mormon?

[swampbuck]

Terry w.

Do you honestly think people are going to but that bull#### you guys are preaching. Especially the legislature. I dont even think the regular anti guys on here will buy that stuff.

[Terry Williams]

We aren't preaching we've been about protecting bow hunting for over 60 years, what do you xbows bring to the table?

[Terry Williams]

Also you must be a QDMAer

[Michihunter]

Also you must be a QDMAerI sure hope for their sake you aren't on the recruitment committee for MBH:dizzy:

[CHASINEYES]

Also you must be a QDMAer

I dont think he is a QDMER. If he were, he might realize the benefits to his efforts would be greatly diminished. How many new comers or old timers are going to be selective when the moment(of what used to be truth) arrives? Do these guys think the deer recognize their property borders?:lol: Unless your tromping the s--- out of your land the deer think that fence( if one stands) is another branch to jump. Dont get the wrong idea, I,m not a QDM member I practice my own selective harvest. I pass on my share of the little guys,but when the end of season comes around and I have,nt connected with what I,m after,its grillin time one way or another.

Michigans bow season is what 45 days? Michigans gun 15 days? Muzzleloader now slp 15 days? I just wonder what 1 could do with statistics based on huntable days,# of deer left after archery for firearm/muzzle loader vs harvest#s. Deer activity after all the presure from small game-bow-water fowl-fall turkey hunting & rut winding down. You bring more hunters,and having more efficient weapons during that oct. 1 - nov 15th time frame and I think the QDM guys are asking for trouble. Just my opinion,but prob. more like a well educated guess. Maybe just good clean common sense? Is that even permissible with the read a book or dont understand BOYS.:16suspect

[Terry Williams]

Pathetic!

How many phone calls and pm's did you get from MBH members stating "Hey, cool it, dude" after that precious gem?:rolleyes:



Spin spin spin, it sounded like a bible verse and after searching I couldn't find it in mine, and I know the mormons use a different bible so I thought it might be in there.......

Zero calls in fact I recevied PM's stating they are against inclusion...

[Terry Williams]

I do think alot of QDMer want to see the xbow so it will drive Michigan to OBR.

[BigBirdVA]

Also something for the little birds...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9KleCswrGkThat's a pretty neat toy. I guess every MI kid will want one under the tree come xmas this year. Will make a good way to introduce them to xbows at a early age. The earlier they are shown xbows are archery the better. It keeps them from growing up biased, getting on-line later on in life and showing the world what an idiot they really are. :D

[wildcoy73]

As I did some reading from the sight, I seen that someone said the crossbow bill is mainly being pushed by the gun hunter. From a survey I have done on this I have found that to be wrong. The major support for this bill has came from bow hunter.
While talking to fellow sportsman on the street I have also that most gun hunters are unaware of this bill. That would be strange if the gun hunters are after the bow season.
I am an avid bow hunter, and started with my bow when I was 12. I have been pushing this issue with anyone that would listen to me for the last 5 years. The strangest part of all this, is I would give up my gun hunting before I would ever give up bow hunting. I love being in the woods during the archery season, and I see a great chance for others to enjoy and learn a new respect for the outdoors with the inclusion of crossbows. I believe that all the fear that some have will be proven wrong, and that hunting in Michigan will not change enough that we will notice it.
We as a sportsman need to embrace all forms of hunting. Archery season has enjoyed a long run of a season of its own, and the ability to share season. We get to hunt for three months. while for years the gun hunter was limited to just 14 days. But as a fellow archery hunter we have proven that the herd ment nothing to us and we went for the racks. So we have lost some of our alone time to gun hunter. Gun hunters have shown that they can and will take does, so they have been rewarded with more season to hunt. With current rules the 2 weeks they had is now 5 weeks long. What a reward for doing what need to be done.
So to all my fellow archery hunter. We may fight about this issue today, but what will we win in the long run by not allowing other to hunt with a crossbow?
My own answer is nothing good for us. With the changing weather, higher gas, and less jobs we will take less deer for less time afeild. This will result into the gun hunter being rewarded more time afeild. You think they will not take the chance to have more time in the field?
Is it really that bad to allow a few into the woods with us?

[Terry Williams]

Drink the kool-aid.

[Whit1]

Guys, we're doing more editing...with PMs of explanation being sent...........to members on BOTH sides of this issue. If you can't discuss this like gentlemen than stay out of this forum. The childish name calling, offensive language (even in disguise) and rudeness will end one way or another. If need be formal warnings will be given out and if further action is necessary strikes 1, 2, and 3 with progressively longer bannings will result.

Take heed guys and clean it up or the ax will fall on members who come into these threads with the sole purpose in mind to raise the roof. Again, I'm speaking to BOTH sides. You can disageree with each other without getting nasty.

[Riva]

Guys, we're doing more editing...with PMs of explanation being sent...........to members on BOTH sides of this issue. If you can't discuss this like gentlemen than stay out of this forum. The childish name calling, offensive language (even in disguise) and rudeness will end one way or another. If need be formal warnings will be given out and if further action is necessary strikes 1, 2, and 3 with progressively longer bannings will result.

Take heed guys and clean it up or the ax will fall on members who come into these threads with the sole purpose in mind to raise the roof. Again, I'm speaking to BOTH sides. You can disageree with each other without getting nasty.

Just look what happened at another Internet forum discussion that out of hand: (:lol::lol::lol:)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5xhcCOVpJY

[Michihunter]

Just look what happened at another Internet forum discussion that out of hand: (:lol::lol::lol:)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5xhcCOVpJYThat is HILARIOUS!!! Especially for those that knew TheSource!!:lol::lol::lol:

[butter21]

Just look what happened at another Internet forum discussion that out of hand: (:lol::lol::lol:)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5xhcCOVpJY

Wow this is a family site....:( Also he was my favorite member i actually agreed with 100% of what he ever said.

[Terry Williams]

So now we are Nazi's?

[Sib]

We aren't preaching we've been about protecting bow hunting for over 60 years, what do you xbows bring to the table?

I don't know Mr. Williams, after reading quite a few of your recent posts, I can't help and wonder if I/we hunters would have been better served by a different organization over that stretch of time. Because honestly, your ability to effectively get your point across and get the uncommitted to not only see, but embrace your position...seems to be woefully lacking.

And no, I'm not in the crossbow industry and I am even on record here as being against including crossbows in general archery.

[Terry Williams]

Sorry if I have disappointed you.

[NEMichsportsman]

I don't know Mr. Williams, after reading quite a few of your recent posts, I can't help and wonder if I/we hunters would have been better served by a different organization over that stretch of time. Because honestly, your ability to effectively get your point across and get the uncommitted to not only see, but embrace your position...seems to be woefully lacking.

And no, I'm not in the crossbow industry and I am even on record here as being against including crossbows in general archery.


Well spoken Sib!




So now we are Nazi's?

No.... but I would categorize you as a troll.

Pretty startling metamorphosis to go from an 8 year lurker to someone who has posted 60+ times in the last 24 hours!

99% of the posts sought to divide or criticize your fellow sportsmen. I would never consider returning to MBH if you are at the helm.

Nothing personal...

Good luck with whatever secret (or not so secret) agenda you are trying to advance.

[Terry Williams]

Troll???? Hardly

[butter21]

Well spoken Sib!






No.... but I would categorize you as a troll.

Pretty startling metamorphosis to go from an 8 year lurker to someone who has posted 60+ times in the last 24 hours!

99% of the posts sought to divide or criticize your fellow sportsmen. I would never consider returning to MBH if you are at the helm.

Nothing personal...

Good luck with whatever secret (or not so secret) agenda you are trying to advance.
Hes hardly a troll... He at least he lives in Michigan what about all the other crossbow advocates that dont live in Michigan? But yet they suddenly know all about Michigan hunting. :rolleyes:

[Michihunter]

Hes hardly a troll... He at least he lives in Michigan what about all the other crossbow advocates that dont live in Michigan? But yet they suddenly know all about Michigan hunting. :rolleyes:If he's Terry Williams from MBH he does NOT live in MI.;)

[Munsterlndr]

Hes hardly a troll... He at least he lives in Michigan what about all the other crossbow advocates that dont live in Michigan? But yet they suddenly know all about Michigan hunting. :rolleyes:

:lol::lol::lol: Um....Butter ol' buddy...... he's lives in Ohio. :yikes:

[Terry Williams]

They are correct I don't live in Michigan, however I hunt exclusively in Michigan and lived in Michigan for 10 years before moving to Ohio. I have been a Governor for almost 10 years. However I feel like I have a vested interest in what happends here

[Terry Williams]

Butter thank you though I appreciate your support and your point was well taken

[butter21]

:lol::lol::lol: Um....Butter ol' buddy...... he's lives in Ohio. :yikes:
I didn't know that, but I said that to make a point to all of the people that know nothing about Michigan yet they come on and support crossbows. I'll fix what I said, by saying at least he hunts in Michigan. ;) :o :D

[Terry Williams]

It is odd, but not so surprising that we have so many interlopers that are concerned about the Michigan season. I suspect many of their motives are financial. Some maybe truly enamered with the crossbow and I understand some of that. Some are just agitators.

[Michihunter]

It is odd, but not so surprising that we have so many interlopers that are concerned about the Michigan season. I suspect many of their motives are financial. Some maybe truly enamered with the crossbow and I understand some of that. Some are just agitators.
And some are reasonable bowhunters that understand that a crossbow is not the doom of the archery season or hunting. And instead welcome and hope to ease the way for their fellow hunters, regardless of weaponry, to enjoy the great hunting opportunities in this state. We are for MORE opportunities to hunt, not LESS.

[Terry Williams]

And some are reasonable bowhunters that understand that a crossbow is not the doom of the archery season or hunting. And instead welcome and hope to ease the way for their fellow hunters, regardless of weaponry, to enjoy the great hunting opportunities in this state. We are for MORE opportunities to hunt, not LESS.


I guess time will tell who is right and who is wrong....

[cadillacjethro]

I guess time will tell who is right and who is wrong....

I would hope if/when this passes, MBH would have a change of heart. Anything else would be a huge missed opportunity IMO.

[Terry Williams]

We have meetings in West Cadillac, I love it up there. I really can't speak for the membership and how they will direct us.

[Kelly Johnson]

Way, way way way way...too far off topic.

Subject closed.