|
Post by rbinar on Apr 3, 2009 3:18:51 GMT -5
8-)Recently I was contacted by a state legislator in a mid-western state. He was interested if I could make an argument for allowing the use of smokeless powder during deer season.
I am not political so the following should not be considered as to what I'd petition a government to do. It is my personal feelings and I repeat some of my written reply here:
Why Smokeless?
Many have asked why shoot smokeless powder? After all isn’t a muzzle loader supposed to be primitive? The reason many have gone this route can’t be known without knowing something about the political position many hunters find themselves in.
You know well that there is no RIFLE deer season in many states. If you don’t hunt DEER with a muzzle loader or shotgun you don’t hunt. It a sad state of affairs when the DNRs and Game Commissions in many states can declare hunters are too stupid to hunt with a rifle. However that is the way the states have helped in the biggest gun control effort in all of America.
With no chance to hunt with an efficient weapon does it not make sense that hunters would go down the only path available and try to make their primitive weapons less that way?
So to the few who complain that smokeless is “not traditional”, or “isn’t in the spirit of the sport” I ask. If your state took away all efficient rifles wouldn’t you want to at least have the right to have those left work as good as possible? Or are you like some who would assist in the biggest gun control scheme in history because you’re a traditionalist?
|
|
|
Post by kevin k on Apr 3, 2009 7:15:19 GMT -5
very well put thanks .kevin
|
|
|
Post by sw on Apr 3, 2009 7:20:40 GMT -5
:)Simple and to the point.
|
|
|
Post by paulslund on Apr 3, 2009 8:13:17 GMT -5
Ontario has an extra season for the muzzleloader in December (on top of the rifle deer seasons), which in most locations range from 1 to 2 weeks, depending on the area (with longer seasons in other areas).
I bought a smokeless powder Savage because I wanted the best performance to take advantage of the extra season (that and the whole cleaning thing with BP really turned me off).
One of the nice things about Ontario is that it isn't a "Black Powder" season, it's a muzzleloader season, which they define "a gun that is loaded through the muzzle" and makes no mention of type of powder.
Notwithstanding the increases in performance, a smokeless muzzleloader still has the same drawbacks that a flintlock does, in that it's a one shot deal, and it takes time to reload. If you miss, you're likely out of luck, unless you've got lots of practice reloading under pressure.
The same could be said about bows. Today's modern compound bows are light years ahead of yesterday's traditional and even recurve bows (actually, today's recurve bows are better than yesterday's recurve bows). I don't know the answer to this, but do those states that restrict smokeless powder muzzleloaders also restrict the use of compound bows during the bow season to basic long-bows and recurves? If not, then why discriminate on the smokeless powder front?
I don't own a traditional muzzleloader designed for black powder, but I did talk to someone at the range last fall who said he could put holes through a 2x4 at 100 yards with his black powder percussion cap rifle, using round balls to boot.
I guess the other question I would pose to those states that don't allow smokeless is do they allow modern inline BP? If so, then I think they are being hypocritical to discriminate against the smokeless powder option who's only advantages are simply extra range and accuracy (and hence an ethical kill) and cleaning advantages. A modern inline BP isn't really far behind a smokeless in terms of range and accuracy, IMO.
I think I'm starting to rant, here. Sorry. But that's how I see it.
Cheers, Paul.
|
|
|
Post by Buckrub on Apr 3, 2009 8:56:53 GMT -5
RB, this is my hot button.........wowzers.
First, I get a bit sick of those espousing "Primitive Weapon Season". Gag me with a fork!
I would ask them the same question I ask the Amish....... "Why did you decide to choose 1850 as your allowed technological time frame? Why not 1500? Why not 800 B.C.? Why do you get to define what is allowed and denied? How dead do you want a deer?"
I would also ask them, if they are so desirous of a "primitive weapon season" for ML's, then why do they allow compound bows or fiber optic sights? What hypocrites!
Here is what really, truly, seriously, ought to happen in every state. Anything less is pure politics:
Define a time period to allow deer to be hunted. South Carolina has August 15 till January 31 every year. Oklahoma has about 9 days total. Everyone else is in between somewhere. Doesn't seem to be any biological reason, nor any particular biological benefit of one over the other.......though every state will argue that their way is the best way. But what SHOULD be done is:
A) Define the season. Argue over the length if you will (I'd argue for a very long season), but set it somewhere.
B) Define the limits. If it's 3 Bucks of X size, and 4 Does, then fine. If it's 1 buck only, fine. Whatever is biologically sound, pick that. That's the limit for that area.
C) Let 'er rip, tater chip! Let anyone go hunt with any of the normal 3 allowed weapons, MG, ML, Archery. If ML's want to have some kind of 'feel good' season to call their own, let them congregate by choice on certain days and call that ML season for them. But the deer DO NOT CARE.
THE ONLY THING THAT MATTERS IN SETTING SEASONS, LIMITS, METHODS, RESTRICTIONS, GEAR, ETC, IS THE DEER POPULATION AND HOW HUNTING AFFECTS IT!!!! Make no mistake. When ML or Archery 'season' is set, and MG season is 'set', the total effect is what is being studied, the total impact on the deer population.....the rest is just political and social. The DNR's or Game and Fish Commissions should not be telling me which way to hunt and restrict that in any way. They should only tell me when, where, and how many.
But sadly that won't happen. Makes me mad.......but it won't. Traditions are hard to break.
SO..........
I suggest you tell him that 'dead is dead, and it's a whole lot better than wounded'.
That's the argument that won over Arkansas to allow scopes and inlines on ML's for us old fogeys that can't see. It's way more humane (I hate that word) or better for the DEER (the only thing I care about) to let me have a high chance of dispatching him than it is to restrict me to the point that I probably only wound him.
Heck fire, you might as well restrict cartridges to a maximum of 20g bullets, or 10g of powder, as to restrict ML's to only smokeless powder!
Sigh.
|
|
|
Post by boarhog on Apr 3, 2009 15:01:01 GMT -5
Buckrub! Amen and Hallelulia!! We here in Arkansas do have it better than most, but our Game and Fish division is still tuned in to the political winds, and is subject to being blown hither and yon if they get enough publicity about it. I personally harrassed Steve "Wildman" Wilson, along with anyone else I could snare, about the stupid Non-magnified scope rule.
I also consider the so called "Nature Centers" a massive waste of that 1/8 cent sales tax they pushed nthrough the legislature. Tax funds that could have been used to buy and improve land for wildlife.
I don't mean to do nothing but complain. At least they have the good sense to consider crossbows, compounds/recurves as equals for hunting, and us old guys can use magnifying scopes on our muskets. We just have to hope that some new, politically correct, ill advised, breeze doesn't blow our way! Boarhog
|
|
|
Post by bigmoose on Apr 3, 2009 16:02:58 GMT -5
Hunting is part of the American experence, in my library I have several volumes by Thomas Jefferson, America's Greatest Son, books about him, by him, and copies of his letters to John Adams and friends, I don't think, he would recognise or understand what has become of his dream. We now a nation of non-traditional, non- flag waving XXXXXX, I live in an area with 53 homes, My home is the only house that flies the flag
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 3, 2009 16:45:25 GMT -5
recently here in tn twra changed to allow crossbows during archery season and last year anything centerfire during gun season, all in an attempt to increase liscense revenue. twra is a self funded agency and you can tell it in every aspect of their legislation. we have very high costs for everything hunting & fishing related ( liscense/ permits etc) and they love to hand out citations ( not very user friendly) for anything possible, again to bring in revenue. we also have some of the worst deer management in the south ( IMHO).
in Ill where I hunt outfitters are scarfing up every morsel of ground they can get their hands on leaving little for the avg jo that enjoys hunting, where are we headed? its not hard to see, you got money - you hunt, you no got money - you stay home and watch the outdoor channel and dream about yesteryear....Bill
|
|
cgg
Spike
Posts: 48
|
Post by cgg on Apr 3, 2009 16:49:48 GMT -5
Shotgun only seasons are "the biggest gun control scheme in history?" I don't agree with that one. It does not bother me a bit that some states are "shotgun only." I think it saves a lot of deer and makes things a little more interesting. I had a 180-class drop tine broadside at 400 yds a couple years ago in Iowa. I could have shot him 5 times with my '06, but did not attempt it with a ML. So what? The buck won that round. I am glad Iowa does not allow rifles and I am glad they run gun season late, after the rut.
I hunt with inline ML's and have a Savage because they are more accurate, kick less and are less expensive to shoot than slug guns and their fancy $4 a shot sabotted slugs.
I enjoy PA's late flintlock only season too. It's one time of the year when there are not tons of people out. Regular rifle season is too crowded for me.
And I fail to see what this debate has to do with patriotism? I was born in the States, served four years enlisted in the Marines, vote and pay taxes; I'm as American as anyone on the planet.
|
|
|
Post by dougedwards on Apr 3, 2009 17:43:37 GMT -5
I live in eastern Virginia where primarily only shotguns are legally used during regular firearms season and now in most counties muzzleloaders are allowed during that season if the shooter is elevated at least 10 feet off the ground. I can tell you from much experience that shotguns are a very inefficient way to harvest whitetails. From my experience shotguns DO NOT SAVE ALOT OF DEER!. On the contrary they injure many deer that are never recovered. I call it "spray and pray" type of hunting as if we were shooting at dove. Of course I also live in a state that hunts deer with hounds so many deer are on the run when hunters shoot at them which may not be the case in other states. I have chosen to hunt on military and private property that doesn't allow hunting deer with dogs but that doesn't prevent the dogs from entering such property. Dogs don't read posted signs very well.
I love the purity of the sport of hunting also but I will use the best tool for the job at hand. I respect the purist point of view but don't respect their implication that those without their particular viewpoint are not lovers of the sport. I dont' condemn the shotgun hunters because they are doing what is legal. I sometimes will pull out my Model70 in 30-06 or my Rem700 in .243 to hunt deer where legal but most of the time I am hunting with my smokeless muzzleloader because it is very effective and it causes me to carefully take aim since I am probably only going to get one shot. My choice.
Patriotism? I don't think any of this is a matter of patriotism. But it is a matter of choice and it seems that our choices to live free of government intervention according to the rights granted to us by those who risked life and limb to secure that liberty are being impeded. I agree that the so called purist who points his finger at the hunter with a smokeless muzzleloader is aiding in the erosion of the right of all to bear arms. In my opinion it is nothing more than arrogance. My prayer is that we who value this traditional right to hunt will be united and of one accord so that we may possibly withstand this onslaught of those who wish to legally limit and abolish our right to bear arms. United we stand, divided we fall. For those who choose crossbows instead of the new high tech compound bows, just let them hunt. They are our brothers not our adversaries.
Doug
|
|
|
Post by rbinar on Apr 3, 2009 17:45:22 GMT -5
Shotgun only seasons are "the biggest gun control scheme in history?" I don't agree with that one. It does not bother me a bit that some states are "shotgun only." I think it saves a lot of deer and makes things a little more interesting. I had a 180-class drop tine broadside at 400 yds a couple years ago in Iowa. I could have shot him 5 times with my '06, but did not attempt it with a ML. So what? The buck won that round. I am glad Iowa does not allow rifles and I am glad they run gun season late, after the rut. Believe it or not I agree with you. At least I agree you may not be effected at all by the states regulations. You are not required to have interest in shooting at range and if so you may not need to be concerned. I also agree that your patriotism isn't my concern. I hope my time spent in the service was spent there to ensure you and I could show as much or as little patriotism as we like. Apathy is a right as much as owning a fire arm. Still something about your post bothers me a small amount. It seems that because the rules don't effect you, you might (might because I don't claim to know what you think) be hinting they should not effect any of us. Also it seems that you don't want to call a rule that prevents a weapon from being used for it's primary purpose (most rifles owned in America are deer rifles) gun control. As far as saving the deer herd. The blame things are so over populated now half the cars in rural areas have deer dents. The number of deer is rising at the same time the number of hunters in falling. It may in your mind only be semantics, but to a life long hunter that has a safe full of rifles that were made useless by the stroke of a pin it is a lot more than that. Would you ask that hunter to do nothing?
|
|
cgg
Spike
Posts: 48
|
Post by cgg on Apr 3, 2009 22:09:30 GMT -5
rbinar--I should have said shotgun-only seasons, run late, after the rut, save big deer. I think more big bucks grow to maturity that way. I am all for that.
And I am a lot of things, but I am not apathetic. And how do the rules not affect me? They affect me as much as anyone else. I just happen to agree with some rules you don't like. That does not mean I am apathetic or unaffected. And dougedwards, unfortunately the "spray and pray" deer wounding fiasco happens in rifle states too, not just the shotgun states. Plenty of PA folks are guilty of the Remington 760 "flock shoot." That kind of thing seems to happen everywhere.
I think modern rifled shotguns and fancy slugs are wickedly efficient deer killers actually, fully capable of 150 to 200 yard kills. I just don't like the price of the ammo.
And no, I do not think Iowa not allowing you to use a deer rifle "for its intended purpose" in regular gun season, is part of some sinister gun control scheme. BTW you can use that rifle for coyotes and for a late antlerless season.
I don't mind shotgun only seasons and support "traditional" BP seasons where they still exist--JMO
|
|
|
Post by rbinar on Apr 3, 2009 23:03:22 GMT -5
rbinar--I should have said shotgun-only seasons, run late, after the rut, save big deer. I think more big bucks grow to maturity that way. I am all for that. And I am a lot of things, but I am not apathetic. And how do the rules not affect me? They affect me as much as anyone else. I just happen to agree with some rules you don't like. That does not mean I am apathetic or unaffected. And dougedwards, unfortunately the "spray and pray" deer wounding fiasco happens in rifle states too, not just the shotgun states. Plenty of PA folks are guilty of the Remington 760 "flock shoot." That kind of thing seems to happen everywhere. I think modern rifled shotguns and fancy slugs are wickedly efficient deer killers actually, fully capable of 150 to 200 yard kills. I just don't like the price of the ammo. And no, I do not think Iowa not allowing you to use a deer rifle "for its intended purpose" in regular gun season, is part of some sinister gun control scheme. BTW you can use that rifle for coyotes and for a late antlerless season. I don't mind shotgun only seasons and support "traditional" BP seasons where they still exist--JMO I hope you don't think that I don't respect your opinion. I also hope you don't think my continued response is argumentative. I don't know about late shot gun seasons. I've never lived in a state that had such events and thus I'm in no position to tell you and people in your state what the best deer management system would be. If it is to build a better herd (either in size or quality) I support it. It may be you think that only guns meant for self defense qualify to be described as "controlled" when their use is banned. There is merit in that as it separates the constitutional debate from that we hunters have. However I think you have to admit rifles are a "traditional" method of deer hunting in every state. I wonder if you think that when rifles were banned in many states for deer hunting the reason was to better manage the deer herds? If your state and the hunters there want a "special" season(s) where there are limits be it bow season, muzzle loader only, traditional only, or shot gun only I'm in favor of it as well. However my comments have been concerning the "general" hunting seasons that have the fewest restrictions. I hate to say this but the primary reason for the elimination of "rifle" season in most states had nothing to do with deer management and everything to do with hunter management. Safety was used as a primary determination, but what that really meant was states were willing to accept political pressure that dictated hunters were stupid, and letting them have efficient weapons was dangerous. So in the states where rifles are banned for general deer season, dictating black power only rules seem to be another reason to say it's dangerous, so we can't let you stupid hunters have that. This is not a debate to remove traditional seasons, far from it. The idea is to stop the slide where soon we only be allowed to hunt if a state official is watching so we won't do anything dangerous. I'd personally like to see general hunting seasons opened to traditional rifles. Then muzzle loading season would be just that. That won't happen so at least we can let the state know there are enough restrictions in "general" hunting season already.
|
|
|
Post by dougedwards on Apr 4, 2009 8:26:08 GMT -5
I would like to add that the Virginia legislature makes it clear that the reason that centerfire rifles are not allowed during deer season in some counties is for safety reasons. In most of those counties slugged shotguns are also illegal to use for the same reason. However every year someone gets shot by buckshot never by a rifled bullet.
The odd thing about that idea of safety is that western Va has many thousands of acres of national forest in which all hunters are welcomed including out of state hunters once a fee is paid. Those hunters in the sometimes over crowded environment are allowed to use centerfires to hunt deer as long as they wear blaze orange. I hunt with much caution in those areas because you just don't know who is out there.
I tend to agree that traditionalist should have a short time of hunting to themselves. The problem that I have with it is defining "traditional". That was an interesting comment about the Amish choosing to live a certain primitive lifestyle. It is of course, their perogative but I also wonder what reasoning they used, if any, to accept some technological advances and refute others? I would have the same question for the "traditionalist".
Funny thing is that I had previously made some comments concerning the fact that I shoot a smokeless muzzleloader in a crossbow type of message board and got berated because of my choice of weapons. The comment was "it is not the weapon that I oppose, it is the powder that is used in it that I oppose". But years ago I made a comment here on this message board that I could understand giving the tradionalist a week or two to themselves early in the season and that was met with great resistance. I am feeling that even if we don't completely understand the reasons and motives of choices made by other hunters that we should remain somewhat respectful and open minded concerning their desires and avoid conflict if possible. Sometimes that is impossible I agree, but I am hoping not to give the anti-hunters a foothold of any kind.
Good posting made by all.
Doug
|
|
cgg
Spike
Posts: 48
|
Post by cgg on Apr 4, 2009 14:44:38 GMT -5
rbinar & dougedwards--We aren't that far apart really.
rinbar, you are right--I don't see "shotgun only" deer seasons as a 2nd Amendment issue. And you are correct again by pointing out that states with "shotgun only" seasons do that more to manage hunters than to manage deer. But I must admit that I don't take this to be as derogatory and insulting as you feel it is. I just think it is realistic--in some of the congested areas of the country I don't think it is feasible to allow centerfire rifles. A .30/06 bullet does fly further than a 12 ga. slug.
BUT, dougedwards is right too. Game commissions and state legislatures can regulate what weapons are legal for hunting, but unfortunately there are still hunting related accidents and the vast majority are close range affairs and very often are self inflicted. It does not matter what weapon some people have, they still do stupid, dangerous things. I don't know what the answer is, but I still feel the range limitations of slugs save some big deer from getting shot and that doesn't bother me.
I may be wrong about this, but I do not think so--there actually is not a rifle deer hunting tradition in every state unless you want to go back to the subsistence hunting or market hunting of the mid to late 19th century. In Iowa for the first half of the 20th century there was virtually no deer hunting at all--there were not any deer left. My friend's 75 year old father speaks of just a deer sighting in the 1930's being big local news. When deer hunting did begin in the 40's or 50's it was with shotguns because that's what folks had--they took the same 12 ga. out for deer that they used for ducks, fox & rabbits. And they ran the season late so farmers could participate after the crops were harvested. And yes, I suspect they did it for "safety" too, but remember, this was a new deer season and an expansion of opportunities for outdoorsman. This was not a further restriction on hunting. Other states have a similar history I think. When was the last time it was legal to hunt deer in places like Illinois, Indiana or New Jersey with a centerfire rifle?
And finally, dougedwards you're right. The problem with "traditional" muzzle loading seasons is the definition of "traditional." I enjoy PA's flintlock-only season and I hope they don't get rid of it, but I do not advocate going backwards and trying to get rid of inlines in other ML seasons anymore than I would advocate getting rid of compounds in archery seasons...
I was shooting my T/C Omega this morning and I cannot decide if I want to shoot my Savage ML, my .54 flintlock, or my .257 Roberts tomorrow. I enjoy them all and am glad I have the opportunity to do so.
|
|
|
Post by blackhawk7204 on Apr 5, 2009 7:48:27 GMT -5
Why is it legal for instance in Illinois to own and shoot any centerfire rifle you want, but you can't hunt deer with any centerfire rifle? I'm originally from there and everyone I know has some kind of centerfire rifle some even have the belted magnums but use them for groundhogs and coyotes but are not allowed to shoot deer with them.
If it's a saftey issue they would be banned altogether but they are perfectly legal to shoot varmints or targets with, why not deer?
|
|
|
Post by jims on Apr 5, 2009 8:15:14 GMT -5
Blackhawk: We have a similar law in Ohio. What I have been told is that groundhog hunters tend not to be congregated like deer hunters might be and hence it is safer. The groundhog shooter often has a high power scope and is a very accurate, deliberate shooter. They think the adrenalin rush of a big buck, drives and unfortunately some that spray and pray on shots makes the longer distance centerfires more dangerous in a relatively populated State.
|
|
|
Post by DBinNY on Apr 5, 2009 9:58:26 GMT -5
Why do we do it? It's fun, cheaper, cleaner (lot's cleaner), better performance is available for those who wish to pursue it, some of us do not have CF rifles as an option, it's way better than shotguns ..... why wouldn't we do it?
As for shotgun seasons being a form of gun control, I'm not buying that one. NY allows CF handguns during the shotgun season and the use of CF rifles is being expanded into the more sparsely populated counties of the southern tier that were formerly limited to shotguns. At one point handguns were limited to .38 caliber minimum but that has been relaxed and you can use a 7mm-08 or 30-06 if you want to.
As for who should have what seasons and what implements should be legal... In a nutshell, everybody has their own set of values and thoughts on this. Everybody is right, just ask them. What it boils down to is that we are talking about allocating a finite resource where demand often exceeds supply (i.e., not everybody is going to get a 10 pt buck). The bow-hunter who has put in considerable time and effort to become proficient with his bow and scouted to put himself into position for a close encounter isn't particularly thrilled with the idea of competing, at least not at the same time, with hordes of hunters toting guns capable of clipping deer off at 200 yards or more. This, of course, presents more of a problem where there are relatively more hunters.
I personally enjoy the diversity of opportunities available. I bow hunt and gun hunt and love them both. I don't want the seasons homogenized where everything is legal all the time. I think most serious bow hunters will agree with me. Of course people who have differing viewpoints are just as right in their minds. Argue this stuff till you are black and blue and I can assure you that you will never please everybody.
|
|
|
Post by Jon on Apr 5, 2009 11:05:53 GMT -5
RbinAr, I'm not able to hunt so I just shoot paper. My question is are they only going to allow black powder or are they going to allow subs. From what I read some of the new subs are closer to smokeless than they are to black powder, and some of your subs are technically a duplex. Where do the traditionalists draw the line? I realize I'm not a hunter but some of these new laws would affect me as much or more. Jon
|
|
|
Post by davewolf on Apr 5, 2009 12:25:42 GMT -5
Very interesting thread. Here in PA the 'vertical' bow hunters are up in arms because the Commission decided to allow cross-bows in archery season. They decided they wouldn't allow magnifying scopes--but might change their minds at their meeting in later this month. I'm amazed that vertical bow-hunter, claim that a cross-bow is not a bow. The archery season is the longest of all deer seasons and they have a special bear hunt just for bows. I shot my first buck last year with a cross-bow in a "special reg" area that has allowed them for years--as a test--more than anything. I wanted to see for myself how deadly they really were. Personally I see antler restrictions as the best tool to keep a viable deer herd. I see restrictions as a "social tool." But, I too hate to see hunters so divided. Of course safety is an issue--and I find time and again, that rifle hunters are the one's blamed, for some see it as an "easy" endeavor. I resent that rifle hunters get a black eye--which in turn gives all hunters a black-eye. Here we have an early ML season that allows a doe only--and a late flintlock season that allows a buck or a doe. During bow season either animal is legal, with the proper tags (antlerless tags.) Basically IMO we have so many laws on the book that a lot of folks have given-up hunting entirely. Too complex, they tell me. We are losing habitat through land development at an alarming rate and we are seeing an influx of 'no trespassing signs.' Our state game lands are over-crowded and it's tough to hunt anything there without a hunter behind every tree. Hunting is perceived as a dangerous sport, but if you look up accidents, it's far down the list. I know it's a pipe dream, but hunters need to stick together, respect one another--for I see the wolf at the door--the anti. Our forests are being used for timber resources, and I've heard the whitetail described as a varmint. Gas exploration is next and I have concerns about how much road-less land will now be filled with roads. I follow this issue almost weekly and the more I watch, listen and read--its the money trail that bothers me most. "Freedom of choice" is how one Commissioner put it--and the more I read and learn, the more I agree. Fortunately, I've been able to take whitetails with a recurve, a compound, a crossbow, a inline and a flintlock. All have their pluses. But one thing that stands out in my mind is that we need to 'be sure of our target' and take that deer quickly as possible. Seems to me the method that suits one best, should be the one they take their deer with and that laws should be simplified, along with seasons. I'm disappointed that some hunters feel their way is the only way. I don't mind the fact that semi-auto rifles are illegal here--but I am bothered that so many interests, logging, drilling, and anti's are so involved in the decision making process. Throw in the politicians and we have a real mess. Herd reduction has helped in some areas, but when someone has a deer camp in the 'big woods" and hunts hard and doesn't even see a tail does bother me. My grandson is on the cusp of giving it up, out of sheer boredom. If you're going to allow a bow or a firearm in any season, I want to be certain that it can get the job done. Good laws and bad laws and a lot of folks hoping our numbers continue to decline. Have a great day! Dave
|
|
|
Post by boarhog on Apr 7, 2009 23:46:27 GMT -5
Davewolf, very well said. I too have been lucky enough to tag Whitetails using a long list of methods. Olde English Longbow, re-curve, compound, crossbow, flintlock, cap-lock, in-line, center-fire pistol, and modern rifle. About the only weapon I have not yet used for deer is a shotgun. Nowadays though, I mostly stick with crossbow, in-line ML, and modern guns with scopes. These old shoulders won't allow me to draw a vertical bow without pain, and my eyes make it hard to see open sights well enough to hunt ethically.
I do it all simply because it is fun! I have built several of my own rifles, and 1 bow. The first was a TC Hawken kit. I also built a 257 Roberts by re barreling a 6.5 Jap action, and put it in a Fajen semi-inletted stock. I have been working on a Tennessee Mountain rifle for 2-3 years. I have a XX Premium Douglas, .45 cal barrel, a full length walnut stock, and hope to be able to make the Siler flintlock and cap-lock interchangeable locks work on it. I may not live long enough to finish the job. And now, I have the Savage to keep me in trouble with the "Bride".
I hope there is room for all disciplines in hunting. We must join forces to fight the "aginners", if we want our Great Grandchildren to have the outdoor opportunities we have available to us today. It is definitely becoming more expensive to hunt, especially duck and goose hunting. We have it great here compared to other states. I have relatives in Texas that pay $3500.00 per gun, per year, for a deer lease. That is $7000.00 per year if he wants to take his Son along!
Some of the dumbest and most ridiculous game laws/rules have come about in the name of safety. I include shotgun with buckshot only rules as exactly that. I am not allowed to use #2 shot in my 10Ga for turkey hunting because someone got shot, or they were afraid someone might get shot. Since our spring turkey season is limited to BEARDED turkey only, I can't imagine how a hunter could be mis-identified as a legal bird! Anyone that shoots another hunter because they "Thought he was a turkey or deer!", should be prosecuted for committing a crime. That is NOT an accident!
A while back, I read something about the reported hunting injuries and was surprised by the numbers. The top few were ATV spills, falls from tree stands, and knife slips while skinning deer. Gun accidents were less than1% of the total! I would not be surprised to find that a substantial number of those involved alcohol.
Anyway, I have rambled on about this, but I am in favor of most any type of hunting as long as it is based on what is best for the game, be it deer, bear, ducks, or name your poison. Intelligent management of resources is the only way our hunting heritage will survive.
|
|