# PA Spring Gobbler Hunters can Use Crossbows



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Wow, this is great news guys. PA is going to allow hunters to use a crossbow this year for turkey hunting..... THIS SPRING!

Release #51-06
April 26, 2006
For Information Contact:
Jerry Feaser
717-705-6541
[email protected]

*SPRING GOBBLER HUNTERS WILL BE PERMITTED TO USE CROSSBOWS*

HARRISBURG - With the scheduled printing of this Saturday's "PA Bulletin," Pennsylvania's official registry of statutory and regulatory changes, spring gobbler hunters can add crossbows to the list of legal sporting arms from which they may choose.

In January, the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners gave final approval to a regulatory change to permit the use of crossbows with bolts tipped with broadheads of cutting-edge design during any turkey season. Previously, only those disabled hunters with a permanent or temporary permit to use a crossbow instead of a bow had this option. However, the process that the Game Commission must follow requires that any regulatory change does not take effect until it is published in the PA Bulletin. 

Other legal sporting arms that spring gobbler hunters may choose to use are: shotguns plugged to three-shell capacity in the chamber and magazine combined; muzzleloading shotguns; and bows with arrows tipped with broadheads of cutting-edge design. Shot size can be no larger than No. 4 lead, bismuth-tin and tungsten-iron, or No. 2 steel. Rifle-shotgun combinations also may be used, but no single-projectile ammunition may be used or carried.

Carrying or using rifles, handguns, dogs, electronic callers, arrows or bolts tipped with field points, drives and live decoys is unlawful. The use of blinds is legal so long as it is an "artificial or manufactured turkey blind consisting of all manmade materials of sufficient density to block the detection of movement within the blind from an observer located outside the blind."

Hunters are required to wear a minimum of 100 square inches of fluorescent orange material on the head (a hat) when moving through the woods. The orange may be removed when a hunter reaches his or her calling destination. While not required by law, agency officials recommend that hunters wrap an orange alert band around a nearby tree when stationary, especially when calling and/or using decoys.

Successful hunters must properly tag harvested turkeys before moving them and report their harvests to the Game Commission within 10 days, using the postage-paid report card provided when they purchased their hunting license. Hunters are reminded that if they can't find one of the harvest report cards that came with their license, they can tear out and use the harvest report card found on page 33 of the Pennsylvania Digest of Hunting and Trapping Regulations.

Coyotes may be harvested by turkey hunters who have an unfilled turkey tag. Turkey hunters who have filled their spring gobbler tag or tags may not hunt coyotes or woodchucks (groundhogs) prior to noon Monday through Saturday during the spring gobbler season. 

For more information about the upcoming spring gobbler season, please see News Release #037-06 in the "Newsroom" of the Game Commission's homepage (www.pgc.state.pa.us).


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

:yawn:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

I think that's great news!:darkbeer: 

Crossbows should always be allowed when simpler and more range efficient choices are permitted (read that guns).

The controversy revolves around those seasons when more challenging and less efficient are required.....read that bowseason.

Most people agree that crossbows deserve time afield. WHEN is the question.


----------



## Pierre Tessier (Apr 18, 2006)

This issue is very hot in Quebec this year.The bowhunters are debating with the mnr(ministry of natural ressources).Here archery season has very little people and they think that by bringing in crossbow that it could attract more ppl to hunting.Im a bow hunter and i beleive that there should be at least 1 week of archery before combining archery/x-bow....hot topic ova here right now..Does ur state or province allow x-bows??


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> I think that's great news!:darkbeer:
> 
> Crossbows should always be allowed when simpler and *more range efficient choices *are permitted (read that guns).
> 
> ...


Glad to hear you say that! :darkbeer: 

Since it's a known fact there are several compounds more effecient and with more(longer)effective range, we should change it so they're not allowed either???? 

I will never understand the need for some to continue to attempt to DIVIDE archery hunters at a time when much UNITY is needed against the REAL enemies of archery hunting..... 

When and where exactly are "more challenging and less effecient weapons...."required"?? Exactly which states ONLY allow longbows(that fits your defenition of "more challenging and less efficient" modern compound bows do not ).....oh none, then IF 99% let-off compounds are allowed,with more speed and more effective range;there is simply no good reason for that attitude, which IMHO only causes division, among hunters....and serves no useful purpose whatever....

Fact is the crossbow, predates the recurve and compound bows by centuries, about as primitive as it gets except for longbows (which are the minority of bows used, because they are exactly what you seem to favor...more challenging and less efficient) ; which does more to harm the sport, trying to force other hunters to use what YOU decide for them, OR allowing hunters to choose their archery weapon of choice?

Archery hunter's numbers are in serious decline; we should be working together to change that, if it means working for crossbows, well, sharing the pie beats NOT having any pie to share......


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*"Wow, this is great news guys. PA is going to allow hunters to use a crossbow this year for turkey hunting..... THIS SPRING!"*

]I agree 100%! They'll need the extra hunters to perhaps avoid the fee increases that may well be coming soon!:cocktail:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> When and where exactly are "more challenging and less effecient weapons...."required"?? Exactly which states ONLY allow longbows(that fits your defenition of "more challenging and less efficient" modern compound bows do not )...........


Silly boy. You do not agree that bows are more challenging and less efficient than guns, and deserve their own season? 

By the way, it is quite arrogant for you to assume to tell me what my definition is.

Apparently the longbow is YOUR definition.



aceoky said:


> Fact is the crossbow, predates the recurve and compound bows by centuries, about as primitive as it gets except for longbows.


Primitive - What a joke. Get real.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

I didn't "assume" anything, I quoted you, and your definition...fwiw 

Here it is YOUR defintition *"The controversy revolves around those seasons when more challenging and less efficient are required.....read that bowseason"*(that WOULD include the crossbow as it IS less efficeint and more challenging than guns; as you "require")....


I simply don't agree that modern compound bows fit that criteria(niether do most hunters either btw)

You said *"Silly boy. You do not agree that bows are more challenging and less efficient than guns, and deserve their own season? "* (thanks for the boy comment, I don't hear that much at my age) :darkbeer: 

I do agree they(bows) are, and also KNOW that crossbows are also more challenging and less efficient than guns,(and *many* modern compound bows as well....) I see no reason to allow one, and not the other archery weapon during an open archery season...... I should know, I took both of my deer last season with a bow on the ground with one sight(not fiber optic either) But because I choose to use a bow, I see NO good reason for wanting to prevent another archery weapon during an open archery season, IF compounds are allowed, the crossbows should be as well, IF you're going to fight the inclusion of the crossbow expect to lose compounds as legal equiptment, the facts support they are so similar in harvest results as to be nearly identical.....


I can agree to disagree!:cocktail: .

You said *"Primitive - What a joke. Get real."*

History shows that back in *1575*, even Queen Elizabeth I killed six does with a crossbow. 

The earliest *written proof* of crossbows goes to the Chinese in the *fourth century BC*, and within a few hundred years they were appearing *regularly in documents *in the *Roman Empire*. The *Golden age of crossbows *was from around *1000-1500 AD. *

By the* fifteenth century*, crossbows were pretty much rendered obsolete as far as warfare goes by firearms, but they continued to be used in Europe as sporting weapons up till the 1800s. 

I'm "real", and have supporting facts; fwiw
IF YOU say that is not primitive, perhaps you can enlighten us all, and prove recurves and compounds existed then? Prior to them??? :wink: 

If anyone needs to "get real", it's those who are so uninformed they don't know the history of archery...IMHO


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> I didn't "assume" anything, I quoted you, and your definition...fwiw
> 
> Here it is YOUR defintition *"The controversy revolves around those seasons when more challenging and less efficient are required.....read that bowseason"*(that WOULD include the crossbow as it IS less efficeint and more challenging than guns; as you "require")....


Ah - there is your mistake. 

You believe I said that crossbows belong only in gun season - I didn't. I said they don't belong in bowseason. Do you understand the difference? Would it help clarify if I give you a hint ..... separate season?

Here is why your insistence on demonizing compounds as super high tech falls apart.
First you say:


aceoky said:


> I simply don't agree that modern compound bows fit that criteria(niether do most hunters either btw)


In the very next sentence you write:


aceoky said:


> I do agree they(bows) are, ......more challenging and less efficient than guns


So which side of your face should I believe? 



aceoky said:


> IF compounds are allowed, the crossbows should be as well, IF you're going to fight the inclusion of the crossbow expect to lose compounds as legal equiptment, the facts support they are so similar in harvest results as to be nearly identical.....


VA (the only state with actual crossbow kill AND crossbow hunter numbers) showed a 5% disparity in the first year, with rookie crossbow hunters. I don't consider that to be identical, or even nearly identical. We'll have to see what happens to the number as the crossbow hunters get more experienced with shorter range hunting.



aceoky said:


> I'm "real", and have supporting facts; fwiw
> IF YOU say that is not primitive, perhaps you can enlighten us all, and prove recurves and compounds existed then? Prior to them??? :wink:


I'll prove that your ridiculous spin is worthless.

Today's crossbow is NOTHING like the primitive crossbow you have described.

Synthetic stocks, composite limbs, fast flight strings, carbon bolts, optical scopes or electronic red dot sights. Most have cables and cams.

If you wish to consider this "primitive", you must accept that it is the modern evolution of a crossbow. At the same time, you must therefore acknowledge that the compound is a similarly evolution of the bow. I expect that we'll hear no more of your compound bashing foolishness now that I have explained the relationship of modern evolutions of primitive weapons.

Here's the rub....Back then, bows and crossbows were different. News flash - they still are.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

thesource said:


> VA (the only state with actual crossbow kill AND crossbow hunter numbers) showed a 5% disparity in the first year, with rookie crossbow hunters. I don't consider that to be identical, or even nearly identical. We'll have to see what happens to the number as the crossbow hunters get more experienced with shorter range hunting.


I gotta correct you on this one source. Tennessee also has real numbers on this as well, as they introduced the crossbow last year. When I get the article from the Federation Crossbow Committee Chairman later on this week or next week (as today is friday) you will see more truth to harvest figures and participation. The harvest was very small, yet participation was very high, mainly in women and older, former bowhunters returning to the sport. And let's not forget about Georgia, either...

The story is similar regardless where you look. The crossbow is actually proving in the field exactly what the pro-crossbow side has presented with facts for many years now. As more States adopt the crossbow, the faster many of these fears from the anti-crossbow side fade into the unfounded area.

Again, when I get this report emailed to me for the minutes from last night's meeting, I'll post it.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> Ah - there is your mistake.
> 
> You believe I said that crossbows belong only in gun season - I didn't. I said they don't belong in bowseason. Do you understand the difference? Would it help clarify if I give you a hint ..... separate season?(then let's separate the modern compound as well?? NO differnce really)
> 
> ...


So ? Longbows and recurves and compounds are all differnet, BUT allowed during the archery seaoson, again, your "points" don't make any logical sense, first you try to spin what I said into having "two sides" (which I've proven didn't occur), now you're saying the crossbow has evolved, been improved since then, so has EVERY other tool known to man........big deal!

I won't even bother to explain what is incorrect in your representation of the Virginia data, however, the fact is; even the longbow has been improved many times over, that won't "cut it" , most know improvements are a good thing, I seriously doubt you live in a cave, eat raw meat, don't drive a car, and I know you have "net access", change is a natural part of things, again, why spend time trying to divide, at the time when we need to unite more than ever???


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> I gotta correct you on this one source. Tennessee also has real numbers on this as well, as they introduced the crossbow last year. When I get the article from the Federation Crossbow Committee Chairman later on this week or next week (as today is friday) you will see more truth to harvest figures and participation. The harvest was very small, yet participation was very high, mainly in women and older, former bowhunters returning to the sport. And let's not forget about Georgia, either...
> .


You may be right about TN, as I was under the impression that they sold a separate crossbow license and should be able to ascertain a true harvest rate. If they can, they haven't shared that data yet. By all means, show it if you got it.

GA does not. They estimate the crossbow harvest and maybe even the number of crossbow hunters, I think. The last bit of "data" I saw was a memo from a GA biologist that clearly stated he was making a number of assumptions to estimate a crossbow harvest....including the assumption that the crossbow harvest rate was the same as the bow harvest rate. Kind of easy to get the answer you want when you assume it as a fact


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> You may be right about TN, as I was under the impression that they sold a separate crossbow license and should be able to ascertain a true harvest rate. If they can, they haven't shared that data yet. By all means, show it if you got it.
> 
> GA does not. They estimate the crossbow harvest and maybe even the number of crossbow hunters, I think. The last bit of "data" I saw was a memo from a GA biologist that clearly stated he was making a number of assumptions to estimate a crossbow harvest....including the assumption that the crossbow harvest rate was the same as the bow harvest rate. Kind of easy to get the answer you want when you assume it as a fact


The "assumptions" you mention on the GA data was compiled from survey information and includes check station data fwiw..... 

IN Most states, the compound and crossbow harvest rates are so close as to be the same for all intents and purposes, we ALL know archery is not the "killing machine", or the main form of population control, even if a state were to have a 300% increase, because of the crossbow, it wouldn't be enough to cause undo alarm,the gun kill in ONE day from most states would be much, much greater....

More opportunity means more hunters are expected, nothing "odd" there, and no reason for alarm, it's a win-win for the hunters and the game, the FACT that OHIO has just added 11 ARCHERY days and two GUN days for next season after 30 years of crossbows during the archery season is proof positive that it's postive!:darkbeer:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> first you try to spin what I said into having "two sides" (which I've proven didn't occur),


No, its right there for everyone to see. First you say "_I simply don't agree that modern compound bows fit that criteria"_ and then you say bows (and crossbows) do fit the criteria.

First NO, then YES. You obviously haven't proven anything except you can prevaricate with a straight face.




aceoky said:


> So ? Longbows and recurves and compounds are all differnet, BUT allowed during the archery seaoson, again, your "points" don't make any logical sense, first you try to spin what I said into having "two sides" (which I've proven didn't occur), now you're saying the crossbow has evolved, been improved since then, so has EVERY other tool known to man........big deal!


I'll slow down so you can understand this more clearly.

You cannot claim that longbows and compounds are different and suggest that modern crossbows are primitive. A compound is simply an evolved bow, just like your crossbow is an evolved crossbow. They are still as fundamentally different as they ever were, wether you compare a stickbow with a wood and iron crossbow or a bowtech to a 10pt.

Longbows, recurves, and compounds are all allowed into EVERY state's archery season because they are the same....they are all bows.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> The "assumptions" you mention on the GA data was compiled from survey information and includes check station data fwiw.....


No - he clearly stated they were ASSUMPTIONS. It doesn't change the fact that they cannot compile the real harvest rates like VA (and perhaps TN) since they do not understand how many hunters or how many deer.



aceoky said:


> IN Most states, the compound and crossbow harvest rates are so close as to be the same for all intents and purposes, we ALL know archery is not the "killing machine", or the main form of population control, even if a state were to have a 300% increase, because of the crossbow, it wouldn't be enough to cause undo alarm,the gun kill in ONE day from most states would be much, much greater....


Generally, it does not come down to the biological impact of the crossbow on the deer herd. It is simply a matter of whether or not an advantaged weapon such as the crossbow should be allowed into bowseason.

In my opinion, the answer is no.



aceoky said:


> More opportunity means more hunters are expected, nothing "odd" there, and no reason for alarm, it's a win-win for the hunters and the game, the FACT that OHIO has just added 11 ARCHERY days and two GUN days for next season after 30 years of crossbows during the archery season is proof positive that it's postive!:darkbeer:


Proof positive of what? OH has lost hunters at a faster rate than the national average, and they have had crossbows for 30 years! 

The fact that they are adding days is nice for OH residents, but its actually irrelevant in this discussion. It doesn't prove or disprove the question - do crossbows belong in bowseason?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Source, I can't help you with your reading comprehension, I *clearly stated* that IMHO neither fit your definition, and if one was allowed then they both should be.....IF one is not allowed then leave the other one out as well.....:darkbeer: 

YES the GA data came from exactly what I posted and it *states* that it did...again work on your comprehension...

The compound bow is the least traditional of all of them(including crossbows) is the newest on the market AND is the one most advanced(because it's the most popular, and the easiest of them to use.... so much for the challenge aspect and for "tradition"....

"Advantaged weapon"??? You have got to be joking! A compound with a 99% let off, fiber optic sights,- lighted sight pins, release aid,carbon arrows, special fletching , mechanical broadheads,etc.etc.etc. *exactly *what IS that?

It is an advantaged weapon, there are again MANY compounds that shoot faster, flatter and longer effectivly than ANY crossbow that is an indisputable fact....so IF they're allowed in the season there is NO reason for the crossbow to not be, regardless of you spin on the facts....

Ohio is losing hunting ground at a very fast rate to industry and housing, as *many other *states are, they are still growing in hunter numbers and still are harvesting record book bucks, even with all of that, they are still expanding the seasons and limits!! That does in fact prove your sides, opinions are not warrented and in fact are not based upon any facts at all, mere opinions and speculation fueled by emotions(of not wishing to share the woods with crossbow hunters during archery season)...

I've often heard (seen) you post ; about an exclusive season, without crossbows but you still haven't shown any reason why anyone deserves that, crossbows are just as much an archery weapon(if not more so) than the modern compound(which btw I use; just not with all the things now available, just as I ground hunt....because I *choose the challenge for myself.*...NOT for others......)

There is room for all hunters out there, and for ALL archery hunters during archery season....and more archery hunters because of the crossbow will only serve to be a positive factor in our fight against the REAL enemies of archey hunting, and regardless of your opinions, those are not crossbow hunters they ARE the anti hunting groups who's #1 goal is to END all bowhunting Nationwide!!


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*My Ga Proof.......*

GEORGIA CROSSBOW HUNTING STATISTICS

*Summary from Nick Nicholson/Georgia Senior Wildlife Biologist*

The following is *data* from the state of Georgia on the first two season where crossbows were legal. It appears from this *data* that the crossbow has made a positive impact on the number of hunters and the desired goal of reducing the deer herd population.



Deer Harvest *Summary* for 2002-2003

Archery Harvest (including crossbow)*

Thirty-five percent (35%) of deer hunters hunted with archery equipment. Twenty-four percent (24%) of these were successful in harvesting a deer. It took the average archery deer hunter about 30 days to harvest a deer and the average archery deer hunter spent 12 days hunting deer. Does made up 83% of the archery deer harvest. The table below provides additional information.

(Cut down to save space as this has been posted several places)






*Crossbow harvest - 4,429 (12% of archery harvest; 1% of total harvest)*

Almost thirty-seven percent (37%) of deer hunters hunted with archery equipment. Twenty-nine percent (29%) of these were successful in harvesting a deer. It took the average archery deer hunter about 24 days to harvest a deer and the average archery deer hunter spent 13 days hunting deer. Does made up about 74% of the archery deer harvest. The table below provides additional information. 


* Number of hunters using a crossbow - 22,136 (+4,814 from 2002-2003)

*Crossbow harvest - 10,313 (22% of archery harvest; 3% of total harvest)*
(+5,884 from 2002-2003)

*Summary* from Nick Nicholson/Georgia Senior Wildlife Biologist (Summary means just that btw)

It looks like Georgia has found a winner in crossbows...I received this information from the Senior Wildlife Biologist in Georgia *..."I have just completed looking at Georgia's 2003-2004 hunter survey results. *(now tell us it isn't so)"assumptions" made on survey results by a Senior Wildlife Biologist deserve respect from all hunters...)

Because of the interest in crossbow hunting, we decided to take a closer look at *crossbow harvest*. I have included *excerpts* from the *annual report *below.


The number of crossbow hunters and their harvest during 2003-2004 increased by 55.3% and 168.0% respectively over 2002-2003. To put these numbers more in perspective, crossbow hunters comprised 24.8% of archery hunters and 9.1% of all hunters for 2003-2004. Crossbow harvest comprised 21.8% of archery harvest but only 2.6% of the 2003-2004 total Georgia deer harvest.(*that comes from data btw)

Thirteen point five percent (13.5%) of crossbow hunters indicated they previously had used a crossbow under the handicap permit system. Thirty one point one percent (31.1%) of crossbow hunters (6,884) indicated they had not hunted with archery equipment prior to using a crossbow. 

To *estimate the real impact crossbow hunters have on total harvest *we must make several assumptions.
(based upon the data; not BLIND assumptions as you'd like us to believe; and again it's his job to evaluate the data, )

The first is that new crossbow hunters who already participated in archery hunting did not increase their harvest by changing from compound/recurve to crossbow. *The success rate for crossbows (.49 deer/hunter) is comparable to that of compound bows (.51 deer/hunter). (this mirrors most other states exactly btw)*

*Our survey indicates *that 78.5% of archers use compounds and it is less likely that a traditional archer would switch to a crossbow.

*There was a significant increase in the number of archery hunters for 2003-2004. The raw estimates give us about 9,300 additional archers. A large part of this increase can be attributed to the 31.1% of crossbow hunters (6,884) who indicated they were new to archery hunting.*(an increase in archery hunters is a "good thing" and badly needed!)



Additionally, age structure data indicates *an influx of older hunters into the crossbow hunter ranks.A portion of these individuals are likely retired archery hunters who were attracted back into archery hunting by the legalization of crossbows. * (anyone against this??)

*If* we assume all additional archers hunted with crossbows and the .49 deer per hunter harvest rate for crossbows is additive for both of these groups, then 4,557 additional deer would be attributed to additional archery (crossbow) hunters. The 95% confidence interval for total harvest is plus or minus 7,818 deer. 

These data and assumptions suggest that any additional harvest attributed to the legalization of crossbows is not significant at a statewide level.(just like ANY archery weapon)...

During 2002-2003 there was a small tendency for crossbow hunters to be older than the general hunter population. That trend continues for 2003-2004, particularly in age classes over fifty years old. Thirty four point six percent (34.6%) of the general hunter population is over 50 years old while forty three percent (43.0%) of crossbow hunters are over 50 years old. Older age groups show greater crossbow use for both seasons crossbows have been legal, however there also was an increase in crossbow selectivity this year by the 25-29 year age group. The average age for the general hunting population is 43.8 years. The average age for crossbow hunters is 45.3 years. 

*This is a summary of our results. A complete copy of the final report will be available soon*. Hope this helps. Let me know if you need any additional information." 

Nick Nicholson/Georgia Senior Wildlife Biologist

---------------------------------------------------------

So exactly as I said, they used *REAL DA*TA, to compile this *SUMMARY*....the "assumptions" were made based upon the facts and data, and were NOT blind assumptions.....

There is and would be NO need to disclose every single detail or aspect of the data , since they went to the trouble to present this SUMMARY....so the "average hunter" could easily understand it; that does NOT mean nor imply there was not more data available and analyzed......anyway you slice it, they do have the data(they said so several times, and admit this is ONLY a "summary" of it....

It seems to me at least your main point is he admits making assumptions based upon the data, though he states the results aren't "final".....but will be made available soon, and he IS in a posistion to have the DATA and the expetise to examine it and make assumptions based upon said data that he has.....

I think most of us can and will trust the GA Senior Wildlife Biologist's information......it's his state, he's educated in that field, thus he's qualified to make "assumptions" on some of it(much of it IS actual data they've compiled btw)...a few "assumptions" were admitted to being made, that does NOT mean every thing there is though assumptions....and what is, being based on solid data means a great deal.....IMHO


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Source, I can't help you with your reading comprehension, I *clearly stated* that IMHO neither fit your definition, and if one was allowed then they both should be.....IF one is not allowed then leave the other one out as well.....:darkbeer:


That means "You're right Source - you caught me talking out of both sides of my face!"



aceoky said:


> YES the GA data came from exactly what I posted and it *states* that it did...again work on your comprehension...


And THAT means "Right Again, Source!"



aceoky said:


> The compound bow is the least traditional of all of them(including crossbows
> is the newest on the market


*WRONG* That would be the compound crossbow - duh 



aceoky said:


> AND is the one most advanced(because it's the most popular, and the easiest of them to use.... so much for the challenge aspect and for "tradition"....


Take a poll on the bowhunting forum - let's see if you can get consensus that the compound is easier than a crossbow....What a friggin' joke. Your credibility is hanging by a thread ......



aceoky said:


> It is an advantaged weapon, there are again MANY compounds that shoot faster, flatter and longer effectivly than ANY crossbow that is an indisputable fact....so IF they're allowed in the season there is NO reason for the crossbow to not be, regardless of you spin on the facts.....


Put up or shutup. Please provide a list of the "MANY compounds that shoot faster, flatter and longer effectivly than ANY crossbow ", specifically the Excalibur Exomax.

We're waiting......



aceoky said:


> Ohio is losing hunting ground at a very fast rate to industry and housing, as *many other *states are, they are still growing in hunter numbers .....


*Wrong*



aceoky said:


> and still are harvesting record book bucks


*Irrelevant*



aceoky said:


> even with all of that, they are still expanding the seasons and limits!!


*Irrelevant*



aceoky said:


> That does in fact prove your sides, opinions are not warrented and in fact are not based upon any facts at all, mere opinions and speculation fueled by emotions(of not wishing to share the woods with crossbow hunters during archery season)...


It proves only that you are a charlatan, and not a very good one, spinnnig and spinning yet gaining NO believers. Your misinformation and half truth will not find root here, among bowhunters. We see you for what you are.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> So exactly as I said, they used *REAL DA*TA, to compile this *SUMMARY*....the "assumptions" were made based upon the facts and data, and were NOT blind assumptions.....
> 
> There is and would be NO need to disclose every single detail or aspect of the data , since they went to the trouble to present this SUMMARY....so the "average hunter" could easily understand it; that does NOT mean nor imply there was not more data available and analyzed......anyway you slice it, they do have the data(they said so several times, and admit this is ONLY a "summary" of it....
> 
> ...


Yuck.

The only thing worse than some biased biologist making assumptions about crossbow harvest is an even more biased crossbow partisan trying to validate it.

You are free to believe what you wish with regards to this information. It is clear to any logical and objective person that he his ESTIMATING based on ASSUMPTIONS. His assumptions lead to numbers, but they are not data. I have no idea what you do for a living, but it is clearly not science based or you would know when you should shut up.....this is one of those times.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Let's try to get back on topic here, gents. After all, the info pertains to PA and spring turkey hunting....


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

In January, the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners gave final approval to a regulatory change *to permit the use of crossbows with bolts tipped with broadheads of cutting-edge design during any turkey season.* Previously, only those disabled hunters with a permanent or temporary permit *to use a crossbow instead of a bow *had this option. 

As requested, back on topic, and I'll let those attempts to slander "slide"..........

This is very good news for all of us ! 

More archery hunters in a state where fee increases seem to be no option,perhaps this will end up curbing some of those???

I look forward to the Tennessee data as well!


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

aceoky said:


> In January, the Pennsylvania Board of Game Commissioners gave final approval to a regulatory change *to permit the use of crossbows with bolts tipped with broadheads of cutting-edge design during any turkey season.* Previously, only those disabled hunters with a permanent or temporary permit *to use a crossbow instead of a bow *had this option.
> 
> As requested, back on topic, and I'll let those attempts to slander "slide"..........
> 
> ...


Cool. Thanks.... I cannot wait to see the TN numbers in hard form, either. I have the upshot of the numbers from our Crossbow Committee chairman, but there's nothing like getting the actual report. This one is on him, and he ahs yet to send it to me. The puke! He better get it to me by Wed., because Thursday the minutes go out.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

I will be looking very much forward to them as well! 

And I honestly do hope this new reg helps with the impending fee/rate increases in Pa!:darkbeer:


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Ace get real for at least once, how many people hunt with a 99% let off bow? How many states even allow lighted sight pins? And just what the heck is “special” fletching? This just goes to show, you have to misrepresent bow hunting to it’s extreme to make x-bows fit in, where they don’t.



> It is an advantaged weapon, there are again MANY compounds that shoot faster, flatter and longer effectivly than ANY crossbow that is an indisputable fact....


Wrong again, I’m here to dispute it. Take the average “hunting set up bow” and the average hunting set up x-bow, and see which is faster, and flatter, and longer? You really need to do some more research on your chosen crusade.



> Ohio is losing hunting ground at a very fast rate to industry and housing, as many other states are, they are still growing in hunter numbers and still are harvesting record book bucks,


A lie, Ohio is losing hunter numbers, you need to look stuff up before you post.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

FreeRange you're "off topic" AFTER we were asked nicely to not "go there".....so in that "light", I'll simply state that I have no comment ....and leave it at that.....though, I don't appreciate it one bit being called a liar in a public forum.....not one bit fwiw...


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Then don’t quote misleading information, Hunter numbers are dropping in OHIO not hard to confirm


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

They're still killing many record book bucks in Ohio, not hard to confirm.....fwiw They also increased both the gun and archery seasons there!


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*Confirmed??????*



Free Range said:


> Then don’t quote misleading information, Hunter numbers are dropping in OHIO not hard to confirm



Really? Well then explain this(and yet no one disputed the claim either I read them all, and couldn't find anyone at all, so it seems easy to confirm my "Lie" as you put it as well???...hmm) Please also note which site this is cited from as well.... 

_______________________________________________

More deer in Ohio make it to the next year of life simply because they do not face the onslaught of Michigans 1 million hunters. Buck to doe ratio is better in Ohio.

* Hunter numbers growing in Ohio - *_more hunters looking for place to hunt so they want more state land. Hunter numbers declining in Michigan. _Unforutuanatly, it is more and more just us aging old farts all wanting something a little bit different out of our deer herd. 

From: HunterJoe........ ....... *Date: 16-Feb-05*

http://www.bowsite.org/bowsite/tf/regional/thread.cfm?threadid=106171&MESSAGES=67&state=MI

_________________________________________
So you see, it's not a lie, when one can back it up(and that IS only one case of doing so) that may not prove it to be a fact, but it does prove that I"m not the only one who is saying this, and apparently he lives in Ohio, guess you'd (in Colorado) know better than 

A resident deer hunter , 
it's "all over the net",

NOW I think that "Lie" was more than a bit "strong".......


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> I will start with trends in hunter and deer hunter numbers. As you can see from the figure below, both are declining, but the number of licensed hunters is dropping at a much sharper rate.
> 
> Quoted from Mike Tonkovich, Ph.D.
> ODNR


You need to be carefull from whom you get your, so called data. 

If your information is wrong it's wrong, I will conceed you MAY not have know you were giving out mis leading info, but like I said, the real info is not hard to find, even for someone from Colorado, that does know better.

I will be posting the whole response soon, but for now all you get is a glimpse


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> They're still killing many record book bucks in Ohio, not hard to confirm.....fwiw They also increased both the gun and archery seasons there!


 Your lost. There are record book bucks killed in just about every state every year. They increased the gun season to increase tag sales because were losing hunters badly. almost not worth our time messing with you.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Marvin said:


> Your lost. There are record book bucks killed in just about every state every year. They increased the gun season to increase tag sales because were losing hunters badly. almost not worth our time messing with you.


It might not be wise "to mess" with me on these figures because I can assure you that Ohio is not the only state that may be losing hunter numbers, and in fact will bet that I can PROVE many states are declining at a much faster rate than Ohio, AND they don't have the crossbow either!

THAT is the whole point folks! WE are losing the numbers battle! Period; pretending that we're not only serves the Anti Hunter's purpose! Not that hard to understand, and dividing fellow hunters because YOU don't agree with their choice of archery weapon doesn't help any of US!! 

Some of you contend that the rates in Ohio are dropping(some say they are , some don't agree, at this point who really knows??).....regardless of that fact; at the same time neglect to mention that MANY other states are declining even more rapidly in hunter numbers AND they don't include the crossbow, thus it can in NO way be blamed on the crossbow inclusion, though it's attempted anyway... 

There are MANY reasons why we're losing numbers division is among them, without a doubt, there was a time not so long ago, when we would support other hunters even when we didn't care about "gun hunting"(or whatever), NOW it seems too many ONLY care about supporting what they want, the rest can "do whatever", but they'll fight them from now on!......And that means hunters fighting other hunters over their own choice of archery weapons all too often! NO way of condoning that behavior, and no doubt it serves NO hunter's best interest, no matter what "spin" is placed on "rights of passage"etc. Fact is, we NEED more not fewer hunter numbers, "spin" or "propoganda" won't change that ......

I don't care what "Bob" or "Janie" or "Little Johny" choose to archery hunt with, their choice has "0" affect on me......and every honest hunter out there would have to admit the same; but yet some would rather risk it all than share!


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*Ponder this if you will...*

Something to "ponder" if you will......

"Bowhunters" are our own worst enemies IMHO, which I hate to admit being one.....yet it's true! NO other group of hunters continues to fight EVERY other group of hunters who only wish to do what they enjoy! Same as them, they just choose often to do it differently!

Take the ML season, always fought by whom? Crossbows same ole same, even compound bows were fought by which group? 

You guessed it, a few "bowhunters" who though they've never mostly at least personally done one thing to deserve it (myself included) get to enjoy the longest and often the very best hunting of anyone, yet a few of them are not content with that.......to some of them, "sharing" that bounty with fellow hunters is " a terrible thing" and often is referred to as "a cancer" on "our sport" (newsflash it's not ONLY your sport, "bowhunters" are in fact a minority of the hunting "clan", far outnumbered by both ML hunters and gun hunters, it's best to remember that fwiw)

These "few" "outspoken" individuals feel "entitled" to an "exclusive season", but never can explain why they *deserve* it! Sure some will try to say they "earned it" by " putting in extra time", but have NO compassion for anyone working two jobs, while raising a family who can't devote the time! That isn't "earning" anything except one's own respect anyway IMHO, and it certainly doesn't mean one deserves "special treatment or seasons" as a minority group(which I proudly belong to as well, I just don't feel "special" or "entitled" because I do, I feel I'm only a hunter ), who chooses to use a bow mainly , on the ground for MY OWN REASONS, but in no way wish to push that on others, that is an individual choice! Just as some choose a longbow or recurve for the challenge, that's great IF it's "for you", but it shouldn't be forced upon other hunters because YOU feel the challenge adds to the experience!

I firmly believe we must support each other AS HUNTERS, be united as hunters, that is what is most important that we are hunters and hunt, NOT the weapon of choiice or methods we choose to use! 

You can bet that our enemies see us all as hunters and seek to destroy what we have built and love to enjoy! Why and how can they be UNITED against us, and we can't be united to oppose that? 

They have no problem stating they intend to end all bowhunting nationwide, then ALL hunting!!! It is strange while their first focus is on bowhunting, some bowhunters wish and seem to seek division among their own kind? IF they cared about the sport half as much as they claim, they'd at the very least begin to see the "big picture", and learn to share and accept other's choices, which makes me question, which side are a few of these guys on?????

There is little doubt their ranting about "exclusive" and refusing to "share" with others causes us ALL great harm, now and into the future......WE must gain more numbers to survive and be able to defeat our known enemies! Division won't accomplish that, neither will being unwilling to share with other hunters, respecting other hunter's opinions and choices as well as their wishes will do that!!

I have yet to see one case of the crossbow being forced upon anyone ever! It's simply another choice! Use one IF you want, don't if you don't want to.....fair enough? Much more fair than the few trying to dictate to the rest?? OR we can simply take our chances with the Anti's and their Millions .......the choice is ours to make, we had better make it soon, I don't think the enemy is sitting aorund doing nothing!


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> It might not be wise "to mess" with me on these figures because I can assure you that Ohio is not the only state that may be losing hunter numbers, and in fact will bet that I can PROVE many states are declining at a much faster rate than Ohio, AND they don't have the crossbow either!
> 
> THAT is the whole point folks! WE are losing the numbers battle! Period; pretending that we're not only serves the Anti Hunter's purpose! Not that hard to understand, and dividing fellow hunters because YOU don't agree with their choice of archery weapon doesn't help any of US!!
> 
> ...



Yur chicken little prediction while amusing is not warranted. If a gun hunter is dumb enough to think that an attack on archery hunting does not effect him then we are doomed. Might as well play by the rules we want and get over it. I doubt you have no vested interest in seeing the crossbow allowed in bow season. It is sad you think we are that dumb.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> THAT is the whole point folks! WE are losing the numbers battle! Period; pretending that we're not only serves the Anti Hunter's purpose! Not that hard to understand, and dividing fellow hunters because YOU don't agree with their choice of archery weapon doesn't help any of US!!


Uhh, and who was it that said numbers are growing in Ohio? 



> regardless of that fact; at the same time neglect to mention that MANY other states are declining even more rapidly in hunter numbers AND they don't include the crossbow, thus it can in NO way be blamed on the crossbow inclusion, though it's attempted anyway...


I don’t recall who it was that said the numbers of hunters dropping was due to the inclusion of the x-bow, could you remind us, Ace. 
I do remember who it was that said the inclusion of the x-bow would increase hunter numbers, but so does everyone here so there is no need for me to remind them. 



> There are MANY reasons why we're losing numbers division is among them,


That’s an easy one, stop with the division, ACE, and this will all go away. Hunt with your x-bow during rifle season, as it has been in most states forever, or carve out your own season, on the front or back end of the hunting season, very simple. No division no argument, and then we can concentrate all our efforts on the “real enemy”. 

You see this is just one of the losses you fail to see, the loss of unification among hunters, every time some special interest group (see x-bow) tries to horn in on archery season, we lose, we lose strength, and we lose unification. And for you to hide behind the cloak of the big tent, to try to push your agenda is the most appalling thing possible. If you are as concerned as you say about unification then I would suggest you stop with the attacks on bow season.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Ponder this if you will.

I didn’t see where you gave credit to the person from whom this peace was written. I could be wrong, but this looks a lot like something posted by either DJH or bowriter, or maybe someone else I just don’t know for sure, but it does sound familiar.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Free Range said:


> Ponder this if you will.
> 
> I didn’t see where you gave credit to the person from whom this peace was written. I could be wrong, but this looks a lot like something posted by either DJH or bowriter, or maybe someone else I just don’t know for sure, but it does sound familiar.


I think this piece was written by Bill Hiltz, Sr.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

:cocktail: It is 100% my own, thus I had no need to "give credit" anywhere....

OH YEAH.....

*PA Spring Gobbler Hunters can Use Crossbows *

AND one more thing!

http://www.great-lakes.org/Wkly_news/11-07-05.html#Hunting_numbers_increased_in_2004_after_years_of_decline

Hunting numbers increased in 2004 after years of decline

*The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service *recently released the 2004 Hunting License Reports for hunting and fishing licenses sold, as well as the gross receipts related to the sale of those licenses, permits, assorted stamps and tags. 



Nationally, there were 28,499,206 fishing licenses sold with 38,421,267 total licenses tags and stamps, *grossing $540,933,776. *
(THAT'S WHERE NUMBERS COME INTO PLAY FOLKS) 

*Paid hunting license holders in America increased in 2004, putting the brakes on a downward drift that has had hunting enthusiasts concerned for a decade or more.

*

The National Shooting Sports Foundation closely monitors these numbers and noted that 2004 numbers "rose less than 1& (0.3 percent), from 14,740,188 to 14,779,071, but hunting advocates are hoping the up-tick indicates stabilization following a long downward trend."



The 2004 figures show gross cost paid by hunters for licenses, tags, permits and stamps--the primary funding source for wildlife conservation and management programs in America--*was $703,794,135.24. That's an increase of 3.5% over 2003.*(AGAIN the numbers matters as anyone can clearly see here)

---------------------------------------------------------------__________________________________________

So while it MAY be true some individual states ARE losing hunters(mostly to loss of land thorugh developement as I understand it) OVERALL, WE are making a comeback! THAT IS GOOD NEWS for all of us!

Is it enough? Possibly, not likely, though, we must continue to grow in numbers IF we're to survive, but we're not losing at a rapid rate lately, and IF we can continue to grow(wonder what may have caused growth??):darkbeer: 

I can think of one positive thing done to increase our numbers AND it appears to be working! Again GREAT NEWS for all hunters!

___________________________________________

Marvin I"m glad you find my "chicken prediciton" amusing!(and "little")

Keep right on fighting the MAJORITY of hunters AND when you need THEM , they just may decide to not care!



That is the risk you take, and it's your choice, just as Turkey Hunters in Pa will get to choose whether or not to use a crossbow this season! 

BTW, I couldn't care less what you believe,.....about me....

I'll say it again, I have never, ever shot a crossbow in my entire life, have never owned one or sold one, it's simple to me, there is NO good reason to exclude an archery weapon from archery season, no hidden "agenda" nothing more than what I keep saying, feel free to doubt and please try to prove otherwise(that should keep you busy and occupied for some time).....fair enough?

Did I mention:

*PA Spring Gobbler Hunters can Use Crossbows *


THAT is what this thread is about btw.....


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Nice job! Darned good article....

:yo:


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> :cocktail: It is 100% my own, thus I had no need to "give credit" anywhere....
> 
> OH YEAH.....
> 
> ...



Wow something somewhat usefull from Ace, But his number mearley indicate that we pretty much just paid more for tags with relatively stable ( I.E. unchanged) hunter numbers.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

It is down right hillarious how source discredits all of Ohio's crossbow numbers and positives as not being realavent in deiscussions about other states because Ohio is "different". But, will bring up Virginia numbers because he feels they support his point of view.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Is it true the the PA turkey season is open to bows, and guns, that there is no different archery season? 

Just wondering?


And what year was it that the non-res hunting license went through the roof for deer in states like Iowa, Ill, KS, and Elk tags in the western states??? Could this be the cause of all those extra funds??

Hunter numbers nationally increased by .3% (that’s less than 1%) but tag sales are up by 3.5%. Well I guess that’s good for those selling tags, but not so good for those getting hosed by the tag sellers. 

Hunter numbers up by any amount is good, and if this trend continues then that is indeed good news. If you look at any state the numbers from one year to the next will fluctuate considerably. Especially in states with late seasons, and the possibility of cold or harsh weather setting in during deer gun season. Missouri’s numbers can flux 20 to 50k from one year to the next due to weather. 38k new hunters nationally in 04 could be due to mild weather during rifle season, in just one state. I hope it’s the start of a new trend, and that numbers are rising, and for that matter it wouldn’t bother me one bit if, I SAID IF, it’s due to the x-bow. 

But it’s not, and there is no proof that it is, and further more to imply that it has been due to the x-bow is, well,,,, a fabrication. 

I do congratulate you on trying but you have come up short again.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Marvin said:


> Yur chicken little prediction while amusing is not warranted. If a gun hunter is dumb enough to think that an attack on archery hunting does not effect him then we are doomed. Might as well play by the rules we want and get over it. I doubt you have no vested interest in seeing the crossbow allowed in bow season. It is sad you think we are that dumb.


I agree with Marvin - the chicken little act is wearing thin.

You guys need to grow a set and quit shaking and quivering because the anti's threaten hunting. What's new? They have always opposed hunting .... Cowboy up, be a man, and quit kowtowing.

I, for one, will not put bowhunting on the sacrificial altar and allow its demise just to appease you "big tenters." Bowhunting is worth saving just as it is.

Allow its corruption and pollution by adding those who do not have bowhunting's interest at heart, and it may not be worth saving.

I'll fight now, rather than later, thank you.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> I have not,and will not,support any such season with my license dollars nor my participation. This means that I (for one of the few times in my adult life)did not bowhunt deer during "archery" season last year nor do I expect to while the current situation remains the same.
> 
> Posted on another site


How is this for a nevative, if one dropped out then there must be more. 
Ace I think you need to rethink your position, you are causing us to lose hunters.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

twogun said:


> It is down right hillarious how source discredits all of Ohio's crossbow numbers and positives as not being realavent in deiscussions about other states because Ohio is "different". But, will bring up Virginia numbers because he feels they support his point of view.


What is hilarious is that you spin and think folks will but it.

OH crossbow numbers are made up. OH estimates the number of people who use crossbows, and therefore fabricates any harvest numbers they report.

"Positives" is the spin that ALL crossbow advocates use to misrepresent their pilfering of OH bowseason from bowhunters. I have seen many, many OH bowhunters who do not feel that OH crossbows are positive at all.

I bring up VA numbers because it is the first TRUE data that has been reported on crossbow harvest rates. They count how many crossbow licenses they sell, they record how many crossbow kills they have had, they divide the real number of kills by the real number of hunters, and viola!!!! They calculate a true crossbow harvest rate that was higher in the first year of crossbow usage than the bowhunting harvest rate. Not "identical" as you, and others, like to say. It was HIGHER. Let's see what happens next year, when the crossbow rookies have a year of hunting under their belt.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

FR, as far as I know, ALL Turkey seasons, Spring and Fall, allow use of any implement you desire with the exception of single projectile firearms, such as rifles, pistols and black powder rifles. No separate bow for turkey then gun for turkey.

In NYS, you may use a recurve, long bow, compound bow, shotgun no smaller than 20 gauge and no bigger than 10 ga, I think, with shot no higher than #2 and no smaller than #8, as well as black powder shotguns using similar sized bird shot.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

It is 100% my own, thus I had no need to "give credit" anywhere....

Well since it’s yours then I know who I talking about. What I came to realize after pondering it was that it was written by someone that didn’t have bow hunting’s best interest at heart. Someone that would give up bowhunting on the slightest whim if he thought it would save his real hunting interest, it was written by someone that may bow hunt but makes me wonder what their motive for bow hunting really is. 

It makes me wonder what that person has done to create this great country we live in, it makes me wonder what they did to free the slaves, it makes me wonder what they did for women’s rights. I have come to realize after much pondering they did nothing for this country in those terms. It also makes me wonder what kind of asinine statement that is. Just because we were not there at it’s inception means we don’t have a say in archery season? What a foolish person to say something like that. We/I have been very active in getting more opportunities for bowhunters, such as more tags/limits, longer seasons. No matter what your naive thoughts are the game depts. do consider in put from the state bow hunting orgs, of course you found that out this year. So yes we do have a standing in this by our participation in the on going process. How much input has the x-bow guys had?? In most states it’s next to zero. 

And thanks doc, that could hardly be considered as x-bow gaining access to bow season. I have said all along there is nothing wrong with x-bows in gun season.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

thesource said:


> What is hilarious is that you spin and think folks will but it.
> 
> OH crossbow numbers are made up. OH estimates the number of people who use crossbows, and therefore fabricates any harvest numbers they report.
> 
> ...


Don't make me go back and prove you wrong again. I've had to do that on several occasions already. It's time consuming and tiring. In our discussion about KY you said that Ohio numbers didn't matter, not because they were inaccurate, but because Ohio is different from KY.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

> Source wrote:
> 
> The point I was making is that the states are quite different, and that it is quite a stretch to say that data from one would automatically be applicable to the other





> I wrote:
> 
> 
> the negetive things that people try to predict as a result of crossbow inclusion have not happened in Ohio; therefore, it is reasonable to assert that these negetive things won't happen in other places. By placing your numbers in context, it actually strengthens that point. If the crossbow hasn't harmed the herd, shortened the seasons, or flooded the woods in a state like Ohio, with more than double the potential hunter population and nearly 1/3 fewer deer, it's reasonable to conclude that it won't do those things in Kentucky either.





> Source wrote:
> 
> I don't know. But neither do you. And you certainly cannot tell from the OH numbers, because they are not, in truth, applicable after all.
> 
> You cannot take Ohio's success with crossbows and automatically translate it to all 50 states. *To ignore the state by state situational specifics is ignorant and myopic, and clearly motivated by a political agenda, not a biological one*.


So when you reference VA numbers and ignore state by state situational specifics to bolster you cause, you are being ignorant and myopic and are being motivated by a political agenda.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

> What I came to realize after pondering it was that it was written by someone that didn’t have bow hunting’s best interest at heart.


What exactly is "bowhunting's best interest", and how do crossbows threaten it?


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

What exactly is "bowhunting's best interest", and how do crossbows threaten it?

Well apparently you must be one of those I refer to if you don’t know. :wink:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

twogun said:


> So when you reference VA numbers and ignore state by state situational specifics to bolster you cause, you are being ignorant and myopic and are being motivated by a political agenda.



Am I extrapolating those numbers to ALL states? Am I suggesting that it is the same elsewhere as it is in VA? 

I am referring to the first real DATA that any of us have seen on this situation. Real numbers are SO much better than the make believe you and your compadres have been tossing around as gospel.


I am all about state by state situational specifics. I have stayed away from actively lobbying state governments and joining state associations that are not my own, saying all the while that the state's sportsmen should be allowed to determine their fate with regard to this (and other) matters.

YOU will not agree to that. YOU have to butt in where you do not belong, trying to interject YOUR will on those who do not need or request your intervention. Did you join UCBK? Many of your activist friends did, although they do not reside or even hunt in KY. Your ringleader, Willie, helped found the group. He is from IN. Most of the charter members are from Canada.

Don't EVER preach to me about political agenda, Twogun. You and your side are the paid professionals. Those of who dare oppose are just amateurs, fighting for a cause we believe in.......bowhunting.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

twogun said:


> What exactly is "bowhunting's best interest", and how do crossbows threaten it?


If you do not understand the things that are in bowhunting's best interest, you are not a bowhunter.

But, since you use a crossbow, that is redundant.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

What a huge total steaming hot mountain of bull crap!!!!!



> Am I extrapolating those numbers to ALL states? Am I suggesting that it is the same elsewhere as it is in VA?
> 
> I am referring to the first real DATA that any of us have seen on this situation. Real numbers are SO much better than the make believe you and your compadres have been tossing around as gospel.


This is a thread about crossbows in PA, and you reference success rates from VA. That is a total contradiction of your earlier stance. You change the rules as they suit you, typical anti-crossbow spin. You claimed Ohio numbers didn't apply to KY not because they aren't accurate but because of "situational differences". No way around it, you are contradicting yourself.




> I am all about state by state situational specifics. I have stayed away from actively lobbying state governments and joining state associations that are not my own, saying all the while that the state's sportsmen should be allowed to determine their fate with regard to this (and other) matters.


Nice try sister boy. You have yet to articulate anything that even resembles a detailed argument in your hundreds of posts on the subject that identifies situational specifics from one state to another. Kentucky did a survey that showed the people there were in favor of crossbows, and no where in that debate here did you ever say that the will of the KY sportsman should be carried out. You argued against crossbows in that state as hard as you do in all states. You are full of it.




> YOU will not agree to that. YOU have to butt in where you do not belong, trying to interject YOUR will on those who do not need or request your intervention. Did you join UCBK? Many of your activist friends did, although they do not reside or even hunt in KY. Your ringleader, Willie, helped found the group. He is from IN. Most of the charter members are from Canada.



You expect the UCBK to play by standards that you and yours do not follow. P&Y has members from all over the country, and they lobby against crossbows in all states. What's the name of the united group of bowhunting orgs that drafted that nice little letter opposing crossbows everywhere? (If you're a member of NYBI, then you're involved in other states business as I believe they were part of that big stand against crossbows.) Your side has organized opposition to crossbows from all over the country, and you're going to whimper around about crossbow proponents doing the same thing on a comparatively minute scale? More double standards and hypocrisy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



> Don't EVER preach to me about political agenda, Twogun. You and your side are the paid professionals. Those of who dare oppose are just amateurs, fighting for a cause we believe in.......bowhunting.


More typical anti-crossbow spin and dishonesty. You can't win the debate on merrit, so you try to demonize the opposition suggesting their motives are tainted by money. My motivation for participating in these debates is generated solely by people like you. I get paid by noone, and you have no reason to believe that I do. You have been shown to be dishonest in these discussions before, and this is just another example.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

thesource said:


> If you do not understand the things that are in bowhunting's best interest, you are not a bowhunter.
> 
> But, since you use a crossbow, that is redundant.


and




> FreeRange
> 
> What exactly is "bowhunting's best interest", and how do crossbows threaten it?
> 
> Well apparently you must be one of those I refer to if you don’t know.



    

Both big talkers dodge the same question in the same manner.

That deserves another round.

    

When you two "grow a set", maybe you can "step up" and defend your claims with some substance. Or maybe you could just respond with "If you don't know, I'm not tellin" again.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

twogun said:


> More typical anti-crossbow spin and dishonesty. You can't win the debate on merrit, so you try to demonize the opposition suggesting their motives are tainted by money. My motivation for participating in these debates is generated solely by people like you. I get paid by noone, and you have no reason to believe that I do. You have been shown to be dishonest in these discussions before, and this is just another example.


 lets analyze this statement with a relativbely simple breakdown of the facts.

1) DJH- benefits him financially to promote the crossbow. Has a magazine. Since your a teacher that means a paid poster with more sales meaning more money
2) Revival - selling his crossbow kill to who ever would buy it. Solicites crossbow manufactures and other hunting products manufactures. Finanacial benefit there again. paid poster. He does not even rep the bow manufacturer he shot the deer with. HHMMMMM....
3) Ace- the good old boy who has never even shot one but is hired to run a a crossbow website. It benefits him financially also along with a few other perks.
4) Doc - he writes procrossbow articles. It would also benefit him financially to see crossbow expansion so he can sell his articles. 

Need we go on?


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Twogun do you ever make a valid points, no. Source is making you look like a fool, everyone here knows exactly what he is saying and I suspect you do to, but just want to muddy the waters. 

The P&Y club??? Come on, that’s like accusing the NRA of butting in in all states but VA, or is their headquarters in MD, it’s right there on the line. 



> You can't win the debate on merrit,


Merrit??? Like having DJH and Bowriter pimp for the x-bow, both of whom make money off the sales of x-bows. And then there is JimC, who we haven’t heard from in awhile, as I understand it his wife runs a pro shop and they sell x-bows. And how about you twogun? What stake do you have? No one on this side has a stake in this in regards to money. And you talk about merit, the only merit you have is,,,,,well I haven’t found any yet.



> When you two "grow a set", maybe you can "step up" and defend your claims with some substance. Or maybe you could just respond with "If you don't know, I'm not tellin" again.


The way you defend yours??? No thank you, I’ll stick to real facts, you know the ones that are opposite of the kind of facts you and Ace try to use.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Free Range said:


> Twogun do you ever make a valid points, no. Source is making you look like a fool, everyone here knows exactly what he is saying and I suspect you do to, but just want to muddy the waters.
> 
> The P&Y club??? Come on, that’s like accusing the NRA of butting in in all states but VA, or is their headquarters in MD, it’s right there on the line.
> 
> ...



Ace musta bailed. Saw he was responding to this thread and them nothing shows. No stones i guess


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> Am I extrapolating those numbers to ALL states? Am I suggesting that it is the same elsewhere as it is in VA?
> 
> I am referring to the first real DATA that any of us have seen on this situation. Real numbers are SO much better than the make believe you and your compadres have been tossing around as gospel.
> 
> ...


THAT IS BS and a whole bunch of it! I happen to know the people who started the UCBK very well, Willie did a great deal, but KY members started it, he did his part in supporting it, AND well over 80% of the membership IS KY hunters! Now who's misrepresenting? 

NOT that it matters, we had people for NY, Colorado, (and I could go on and on) who had NO interest whatever in what we in Ky do, spreading their opinions to our Dept, and it's Commison, not to mention our Legislators.....so even if what you said were true(and it's not , far from it in fact) it wouldn't matter, it's the point that YOU seem to question everyone's credibility on each and every chance you can try to get, then come up with pure BS that there is NO way you can prove(since it's unfounded, and inaccurate at best).....


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Ace, here you go again, he said founding members, and we all know who they are, and where they came from. 

we had people for NY, Colorado, (and I could go on and on) who had NO interest whatever in what we in Ky do, spreading their opinions to our Dept, and it's Commison, not to mention our Legislators.....

Well, I can’t speak for others, but, I never spread my opinion to anyone in your Dept, or commission, or to your legislators, unless they get their information from these web sites. And as for having no interest whatever, another one of your fabrications, we all have interest in what happens in other states, it just so happens mine is not a monetary interest, is yours? 
How come there isn’t a list of the founding members on “your” web site?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*3) Ace- the good old boy who has never even shot one but is hired to run a a crossbow website. It benefits him financially also along with a few other perks.*

I would very much love for you to BACK THAT UP! I happen to KNOW that you can NOT do that though.....:darkbeer:

I can't and won't attempt to speak for the others you mentioned but you sir are 100% off base and full of bull, to state THAT as fact, where did you come up with that "information"?????

As is usual, you speak without any idea of any facts pertaining to what you post, nothing new, and frankly it's getting old, IF you're going to bring accusations or allegations perhaps you should KNOW of what you're speaking?? YOU are more wrong on that , and I won't bother to correct exactly how wrong you are, only you have NO idea of where you speak(which is normal for you it seems though you're certainly quick to question others aren't you) Yeah, I "bailed", NOT

I see nothing positve being served to continue to answer the same three people, which I have more than answered for many, many months on several forums, I never "got scared" at all during any of that, suddenly a couple of you guys think anyone would beleive, I suddenly have??  

There simply are not enough of you so strongly opposed to worry me, at all, the crossbow's legality is growing even as I type this, you and your few have lost! 

That is good news for us, good news for archery, and archery hunting, bad news for the Anti-hunters!!! And THAT is what IS important....spew forth all the misinformation you wish, it seems to me at least you're helping the "pro-side" of the crossbow issue, fine with me!


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> *3) Ace- the good old boy who has never even shot one but is hired to run a a crossbow website. It benefits him financially also along with a few other perks.*
> 
> I would very much love for you to BACK THAT UP! I happen to KNOW that you can NOT do that though.....:darkbeer: Lets see your reciept for your membership and donation amount:tongue:
> 
> ...


I love being called an anti hunter. pretty typical bunk from your side. And we cause division amoung hunter... right back at you then...xgun 

Its pretty funny to think that you recieve NOTHING for all that work. Really, were not that stupid, and for use to believe your truly out for sportsmans rights is down right hilarious. I enjoyed that very much. Are you really saying that people that don't hunt should have a say in what goes on in hunting season too?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Free Range said:


> How is this for a nevative, if one dropped out then there must be more.
> Ace I think you need to rethink your position, you are causing us to lose hunters.



ONE hunter from Tennessee, should I show you and the others how many NEW tags were sold due to the crossbow? :darkbeer: "must be more" REally? Why must there be more, how many "made fun" of him, who didn't agree, and didn't give it up????


SEE that is what is "killing" ALL of your opinions, once implemented, IT WORKS! 

AND NO.......I don't view that as a "negative", he made his *choice*! He had EVERY RIGHT to do so! I'm for more choice and opportunity, IF it means a few "hard heads" choose to leave for a year, I can live with that, since for the one(which we know of) MANY more were gained(thousands in fact)......thus as always with the crossbow HIS CHOICE *only* affected HIM.....

You can flatly refuse to share, as you've done, it won't matter because in the end you WILL share! All of this is a serious waste of time, for the simple reasons that though a FEW of you keep preaching "demise" "end" and "dillusion" but have NO facts to back it up, yet you guys preach, and mention me by name, all too often saying my data is not real! IF that's "growing a set" no thank you!

There is simply NO GOOD reason to exclude the crossbow, more and more people are realizing that, and season ARE changing a FEW don't like, it, oh well! Accept it, it's coming, and sooner than you'd like! :wink: 

Bottom line THE MAJORITY are getting what they want against a very loud , and vocal minority,(most bowhunters do NOT feel as these FEW post)...

More opportunity, another choice of an archery weapon during archery seasons, a "win-win" to MOST and MOST IS what matters!


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Ace, here you go again, he said founding members, and we all know who they are, and where they came from. 

Oh you do do you (know who they are and where they came from)??? Show me YOUR copy of the roster please!  

Now since obviously I DO KNOW, the facts of the matter, there was ONE founding member who started it all, AND HE IS A KY HUNTER.....

I was "there" from the beginning, and KNOW the details 100% so do not assume to correct ME on that........ever

IN fact we've proven the lies about our "huge Canadian membership", they made it up, and once the proof came out, it didn't hurt us, one bit, btw:darkbeer: 

YOU know abousoutly NOTHING about the UCBK, I notice however that doesn't stop you and a couple others from stating things as fact though...


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> ONE hunter from Tennessee, should I show you and the others how many NEW tags were sold due to the crossbow? :darkbeer: "must be more" REally? Why must there be more, how many "made fun" of him, who didn't agree, and didn't give it up????
> Yes please. not deer tags but hunting tags.....Hopw does it compare to teh national average. I one year average is hardly anything to hang your hat on. lets see the long run.
> 
> SEE that is what is "killing" ALL of your opinions, once implemented, IT WORKS! It is not working in ohio......
> ...



:cocktail:


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Marvin said:


> I love being called an anti hunter.( I NEVER called YOU anything, more hunters= bad news for the ANTIHUNTERS, as I've stated clearly several times)
> 
> pretty typical bunk from your side. And we cause division amoung hunter... right back at you then...xgun YES you do! Facts are still facts! You refuse to show us what you're losing and why another choice of archery weapon during an archery season is a "loss", say it over and over, but fail to prove any of it, that divides hunters.....period
> 
> Its pretty funny to think that you recieve NOTHING for all that work. Really, were not that stupid, and for use to believe your truly out for sportsmans rights is down right hilarious. I enjoyed that very much. Are you really saying that people that don't hunt should have a say in what goes on in hunting season too?


I don't care how "funny" you find it, you made the accusation without ANY knowlege of ANY of the facts.....that's "funny", 

I'm "out for sportsmans rights" (and women and youth for that matter) I don't franky care if you believe it or not, doesn't change anything one bit!

As for whether you're "that stupid" or not, I won't attempt to decide nor will I comment, perhaps, it's "wisdom" that casues you to make unfounded accusations , with NO proof, all the while challenging others on their opinions, facts and data???? It's not for me to care or to judge...


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> I don't care how "funny" you find it, you made the accusation without ANY knowlege of ANY of the facts.....that's "funny",
> 
> I'm "out for sportsmans rights" (and women and youth for that matter) I don't franky care if you believe it or not, doesn't change anything one bit!
> 
> As for whether you're "that stupid" or not, I won't attempt to decide nor will I comment, perhaps, it's "wisdom" that casues you to make unfounded accusations , with NO proof, all the while challenging others on their opinions, facts and data???? It's not for me to care or to judge...


 Run ace run.....its getting to hot for you here...run!! How many members does the UCBK have now? What your doing is called apathy Ace

Just keep having more to add.....How about proving me wrong ace? Hurry up and go forge a reciept and get this over with.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

You have yet to articulate anything that even resembles a detailed argument in your hundreds of posts on the subject that identifies situational specifics from one state to another. *Kentucky did a survey that showed the people there were in favor of crossbows, and no where in that debate here did you ever say that the will of the KY sportsman should be carried out. You argued against crossbows in that state as hard as you do in all states. You are full of it.*

As he also did in Tennessee AFTER they were in fact legal, which is easy enough to prove (though most of his posts have been removed as they also have been on the Ky forums, what does that tell you all??):cocktail: 

There are in fact three individuals who spend a great deal of time running from forum to forum, even where they're now legal, telling everyone(or trying to do so) what a mistake they are or will be making to include the crossbow! 

Rather than expound the virtues of "bowhunting" in archery forums, they instead spend their time in crossbow sections trying to force their collective opinions on those who mostly at the very least are not interested in them! But make no mistake, they make certain to always state they have "bowhunting's best interest at heart" , which must explain their posts on bowhunting in the archery sections! Not to mention all of their harvest photos which certainly must abound!

As is apparent even here, it is it seems more important to argue and cause divisions at every possible chance than to even attempt to post anything positive at all! We've all seen this firsthand, and should by that realize the truth......

Not that it is *anyone's* business, but I have in fact SPENT money, NOT recieved it for the UCBK! That I can easily prove, but do not intend to do so! 

To be accused of making money when I'm not for something I believe 100% in, and have donated MUCH time and even $$$ , should show everyone the truth, of what IS important to these few!

And they keep TRYING to make a point that I don't shoot one(before it was I must sell them btw)......NOW it's that I don't own one and have never shot one, so I must have some "secret agenda" or "making big $$" somehow, well, the fact is; I don't use one and never have, however, I see NO good reason for them to be excluded, therefore I intend to continue to work toward ending that exclusion in my own state!! I have as much say in Ky as most; perhaps more than many; those who haven't been following the Ky crossbow "mess" have NO idea, of what was attempted to be done, to EVERY hunter in Ky regardless of their stance on the crossbow! Some would have punished EVERY single hunter in Ky in order to "win" and "get their way", just to avoid sharing with other hunters!! That IS a fact!!

After the "back door dealings", etc. I am even more committed to making sure things are never done in such a manner ever again in our state, to the best of my abilities!! Bet on that!

Funny thing is, the crossbow issue has been around since 1997 or so, and for many of those years, I had no real opinion, that has changed, after much research, and honestly because of some's selfish intentions!

The majoirty of Ky hunters and landowners have said several times they support the inclusion of the crossbow into the regular archery season! Still that has not happened(yet, but it will)!!!!


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> You have yet to articulate anything that even resembles a detailed argument in your hundreds of posts on the subject that identifies situational specifics from one state to another. *Kentucky did a survey that showed the people there were in favor of crossbows, and no where in that debate here did you ever say that the will of the KY sportsman should be carried out. You argued against crossbows in that state as hard as you do in all states. You are full of it.*
> 
> As he also did in Tennessee AFTER they were in fact legal, which is easy enough to prove (though most of his posts have been removed as they also have been on the Ky forums, what does that tell you all??):cocktail:
> 
> ...



If thats true then you should have thousands of memeber....How many you got? Seems like a vocal minority to me if I have ever seen one. You sure do type alot for avoiding questions. Should we allow the non hunting public to have a say in the hunting regulations? Yes or no will do...if that too hard you can simply put a Y or an N


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Bottom line THE MAJORITY are getting what they want against a very loud , and vocal minority,(most bowhunters do NOT feel as these FEW post)...


Wrong (again).

The issue has been debated and polled repeatedly here at AT. 65-70% are always opposed to crossbows in archery season.

When asked if crossbows should even be considered as archery equipment, 2/3 said no.

You should not assume to speak for bowhunters..... you are obviously out of touch.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> Rather than expound the virtues of "bowhunting" in archery forums, they instead spend their time in crossbow sections trying to force their collective opinions on those who mostly at the very least are not interested in them! But make no mistake, they make certain to always state they have "bowhunting's best interest at heart" , which must explain their posts on bowhunting in the archery sections! Not to mention all of their harvest photos which certainly must abound!


First ace, you have no idea how often I post on other forums, second I don’t need to feed my ego by posting pics of my harvest, how about I post a pic of some big red tomatoes I harvested?



> As is apparent even here, it is it seems more important to argue and cause divisions at every possible chance than to even attempt to post anything positive at all! We've all seen this firsthand, and should by that realize the truth......


Just as you did on the SA thread, what a joke.



> I have as much say in Ky as most; perhaps more than many;


Uh like the say you had at the compromise meeting, oh yeah that’s right you weren’t there now were you? 



> punished EVERY single hunter in Ky in order to "win" and "get their way", just to avoid sharing with other hunters!! That IS a fact!!


Punished, Fact??? Ace you sure have a strange way of representing facts, the only ounshiment would have been to the game dept for falling prey to the x-bow lobby. 



> After the "back door dealings", etc. I am even more committed to making sure things are never done in such a manner ever again in our state, to the best of my abilities!! Bet on that!


What, are you going to stop the legislative process in your state, because you got your feelings hurt? It’s called politics, sometimes it stinks, sometimes it works, this time it worked, half way.



> The majoirty of Ky hunters and landowners have said several times they support the inclusion of the crossbow into the regular archery season! Still that has not happened(yet, but it will)!!!!


Hunters and land owners, decided what is best for bow season, kind of sounds like that back door dealing you were talking about. It’s bow season, and should be delt with by bow hunters, not land owners who by the way may or may not even hunt, and hunters that have no stake in bow hunting, that just want to take ADVANTAGE of our season, without having to use a bow. Nice!


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

The issue in this thread is PA and crossbows for turkeys. This is not the thread to bash eachother over crossbows and deer hunting. If you all cannot stay on topic, EOP actions will be initiated.

Thanks for your cooperation......


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Sorry, I guess I will have to go back and read the orig post. What was that again, oh yeah Turkeys in PA, with an x-bow during turkey season. Hey I'm all for x-bows in gun season, be it Turkeys, or deer.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Here, here.

Like I said in the #2 post, that is good news. Crossbows should always be allowed during a gun season.:thumbs_up


----------



## KOhunter (Mar 17, 2006)

*It's everywhere*

There is a push to recruit new hunters here in Oregon. In this months issue of Oregon Hunter, it goes into great detail of the decline of the amount of hunters in Oregon. Since 1980 the number of hunters in Oregon has declined by 50%. I could hardly believe that when I read it. With more and more restrictions being placed on hunters by the Oregon Dept. of Fish & Wildlife I can understand part of the decline. Oregon is only 1 of 4 states now that doesn't allow a xbow as a legal hunting weapon of any kind. When we talk about how easy it is for younger people to get involved in hunting, you would think they would be doing everything they could to encourage young people. One thing I've noticed most xbow hunters use varies weapons to take game, I would think many of these young people would evolve into vbow users, in fact I would hope they would. I encourage young people to try many forms of hunting and enjoy all of them. I would hate for somebody to miss out on any form of hunting. When folks go through hunters ed. they are exposed to all forms of weapons except xbow. I find it hard to believe that with some of the greatest hunting in the country there is such a decline here in Oregon. I think that says a lot about the influence of the anti hunters, and also how important it is for all of us hunters to stick together.

BTW...is the projectile propelled by an explosive powder or propelled by tension on a string...seems pretty cut and dried.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*SA and me....."in a nutshell"*




thesource said:


> I agree with Marvin - *the chicken little act is wearing thin.*(meant 100% for me)
> 
> You guys need to *grow a set *and quit shaking and quivering because the anti's threaten hunting.
> 
> ...


See there Doc, THAT is why my sarcasim in the S/A post!.

I'm a "chicken little" because I say the Anti hunters want AND are now working to destroy bowhunting! ( a FACT most of us KNOW anyway, but *I'm* a "chicken little" for expressing it often??????) 

I've ALWAYS said this is their goal, and even have predicted they'd start "smaller" than the entire US, but after all, what can I know as a "chicken little" 

I will be the bigger person and apologize as I admit it IS a serious matter, but after several months of statements like these, and some start to "show concern" while this post is still hot, makes me a bit "hot" myself!

Some will say that's there, not here, and they'd be correct, but when it's "here", and too late, what then??

I'd suggest you few "grow a set" and be willing to share, with the majority, while there is still something to share....


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

aceoky said:


> See there Doc, THAT is why my sarcasim in the S/A post!.
> 
> I'm a "chicken little" because I say the Anti hunters want AND are now working to destroy bowhunting! ( a FACT most of us KNOW anyway, but *I'm* a "chicken little" for expressing it often??????)
> 
> ...


Oh, I know. This is an agrument that continues to be based on personal opinion and fear. Stupid is as stupid does.

You know, SPring Gobbler hunting in PA with a crossbow is right on the money. It is a smart move that benefits all hunters, and I do not think anyone can argue against this extended opportunity for PA hunters and those hunting gobblers in PA this year. 

However, when it comes to deer hunting and archery seasons and crossbows, I have yet to see any solid facts from the Anti side to support any of the agruments they present. We went through this with the Louisiana debate, and the most common statement made when I demanded the debate be fact based only was that "no facts exist", which was about as bankrupt a statement as there is. Plenty of facts exist out there. But these facts do not support the claims those against crossbows put forth.

Again, I have yet to see any factual evidence that what the anti-crossbow crowd perports. Nothing, nada, zip, zero.

If you can back up the aggregious claims with facts, then we can have a debate. Otherwise, until that time comes, the anti-crossbow side is just engaged in bloviation.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> Oh, I know. This is an agrument that continues to be based on personal opinion and fear. Stupid is as stupid does.


Nice cheap shot, Mr. _moderator_.




doctariAFC said:


> Again, I have yet to see any factual evidence that what the anti-crossbow crowd perports. Nothing, nada, zip, zero.
> 
> If you can back up the aggregious claims with facts, then we can have a debate. Otherwise, until that time comes, the anti-crossbow side is just engaged in bloviation.


You run and hide from the issue. You change the subject to address things you call "facts" that are actually irrelevant to the discussion.

Most who are opposed to crossbows are opposed because they do not believe that crossbows are bows, and therefore do not belong in bow season.

You have a working definition of a bow that works for you - string propelled.

I have an entirely different definition - hand held and hand drawn.

It is a FACT that a stringgun operates entirely different than a bow, from how you hold it to sighting plane differences to how the projectile is released.

You don't care about those facts, but I do.

I am tired of you pretending like you are objective in this discussion only to stick it to those who think differently than you every chance you get.

Address the issue - do stringbows belong? - and quit trying to hide behind your imaginary facts, most of which are made up anyway.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> See there Doc, THAT is why my sarcasim in the S/A post!.
> 
> I'm a "chicken little" because I say the Anti hunters want AND are now working to destroy bowhunting! ( a FACT most of us KNOW anyway, but *I'm* a "chicken little" for expressing it often??????)
> 
> ...



Precious, when are you ever goign to back up your sharp little toungue? Do you really think that gun hunters are going to let bowhunter die out? I feel for your lack of respect towards other hunters and their ignorance. I feel they are smarter than that. Too bad you don't. Again I will ask do you feel we should allow the non hunting public to have a say in the rules and regs for hunting?


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

thesource said:


> Nice cheap shot, Mr. _moderator_.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why is it that when the words bring some facts are mentioned, this is the typical response.

Prove your position. I have yet to see anything resembling solid facts that make the anti-crossbow case. The Pope & Young Club position is only a fact in that it is their position. They need to bring some facts to legitimize their position, as well.

The day the compound bow was allowed, with all the gizmos and gadgets that have developed along with it, was the day the "hand drawn, hand held" definition ceased to be relevant. I do not consider a compound bow being held via a release to be hand held. Finger shoot? Ok, but not a release. NO way. Does this mean I am against using a release? Hell no. Makes for a more effective, more consistent shot and thereby a cleaner kill. Does a crossbow also afford a cleaner kill to a stick bow? Yes. 

So, methinks we should take the "logic" here and ban releases. After all, if you go by the definition that you put forth, release shooters do not fall into this category. They ain't using their hand to hold back the string. They're using a release, which does indeed give you a mechanical advantage in both the draw and the release.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

> lets analyze this statement with a relativbely simple breakdown of the facts.


A more accurate intro would have been something like:

"Let's analyze the select portion of this statement to which I can apply illogical thought processes while ignoring the parts that I can not address."




> 1) DJH- benefits him financially to promote the crossbow. Has a magazine. Since your a teacher that means a paid poster with more sales meaning more money


So? As I already said, you can't address the content of the argument so you attack motives. If DJH has made unreasonable claims or illogical arguments, it should not be difficult to show that. You can't.

If the fact that DJH could stand to gain financially from crossbow expansion should somehow discredit his point of view, then any magazine publisher who might stand to lose business by backing crossbows must also have their anti point of view discredited. 



> 2) Revival - selling his crossbow kill to who ever would buy it. Solicites crossbow manufactures and other hunting products manufactures. Finanacial benefit there again. paid poster. He does not even rep the bow manufacturer he shot the deer with. HHMMMMM....


Again, is there something Revival has posted that is not truthful? Do any of his arguments have logical flaws?



> 3) Ace- the good old boy who has never even shot one but is hired to run a a crossbow website. It benefits him financially also along with a few other perks.


Does this mean that the folks who run the NYBI web site have money as their motivating force in their opposition to crossbows? How bout all the other bowhunting organizations who oppose crossbows and have web sites?



> 4) Doc - he writes procrossbow articles. It would also benefit him financially to see crossbow expansion so he can sell his articles.


And yet again, is there something in these pro crossbow articles that is not truthful or logical? Can you attack the merrit of what he has to say? 

Does this mean that all the manufacturers, shop owners, and organizations who might stand to lose money as a result of crossbow expansion have no valid points to make? 

My original contention was:

"You (source) can't win the debate on merrit, so you try to demonize the opposition suggesting their motives are tainted by money."

You did a fine job providing a great example proving exactly that. Thank you.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

twogun said:


> A more accurate intro would have been something like:
> 
> "Let's analyze the select portion of this statement to which I can apply illogical thought processes while ignoring the parts that I can not address."
> 
> ...



Its Merit twogun...not merrit... 

Really whats your point twogun....you got pimp slapped and don't like it? They do not have bowhunting's best interest in mind just their own. We brought the money factor up cause you asked for it. Envious again? Yes they have posted untruthful material....So what if bowhunting organizations make money?....they use it to promote archery not their personal gains. Big difference but thanks for bringing it up... You can ask them all what they do with tehir money and they will tell you....How about your side?


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> If you can back up the aggregious claims with facts, then we can have a debate. Otherwise, until that time comes, the anti-crossbow side is just engaged in bloviation.


Doc, I don’t like to correct you for two reasons, one you are the mod here, and two normally you are on the mark with your statements. But this one is way off, there were no facts presented by your side either when you define facts as you have. There were no facts that proved hunter retention or recruitment. Yes there are isolated cases here and there, but not facts. The only fact we have for sure is the x-bow has not harmed the deer herd. And so what it hasn’t helped it either. 

This debate isn’t only about facts, and deer herds, if it were then we would have to all agree that bow hunting in any form is not justifiable, and pick up a gun and do our moral part to control the deer herd. 

Please don’t use your position to give more credit to one side over the other when none is warranted.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Free Range said:


> Doc, I don’t like to correct you for two reasons, one you are the mod here, and two normally you are on the mark with your statements. But this one is way off, there were no facts presented by your side either when you define facts as you have. There were no facts that proved hunter retention or recruitment. Yes there are isolated cases here and there, but not facts. The only fact we have for sure is the x-bow has not harmed the deer herd. And so what it hasn’t helped it either.
> 
> This debate isn’t only about facts, and deer herds, if it were then we would have to all agree that bow hunting in any form is not justifiable, and pick up a gun and do our moral part to control the deer herd.
> 
> Please don’t use your position to give more credit to one side over the other when none is warranted.


We went down this same road in the LA Crossbow debate. And we have returned to both sides bloviating their opinions. Let's stop the opion bloviations, unless we are (both sides) willing to show respect for eachother's opinions. Demand facts from both sides, and focus on the facts. Not statements of personal opinion. When someone presents numbers and surveys and the like, do not get personal with their support of the facts, rather, focus on the facts and ask some questions regarding the information presented. 

Opinions alone serve to divide. We have plenty of models to look at concerning the crossbow and its affects. The list of States adding crossbow as a choice to hunters is growing, and growing fast. And, without exceptions, those STates that permit crossbows have experienced NONE of the doom and gloom being mentioned by the anti-crossbow side. Just like when States allowed compound bows, none of the Doom and Gloom put forth by the anti-compound guys ever materialized. Just like when sabot slugs were permitted, or inline ML were intorduced, none of the doom and gloom came to be. 

History is repleat with these truths, Free Range. Goes back to day one with hunting seasons, and any change implemented thereafter.

I am truly interested in understanding if some of the anti-crossbow rhetoric has merit. I am still waiting to see some factual information that supports this. Personal feelings is not covered under proof or fact, as I am sure you will agree. Let's list the objections to corssbows in a bullet point list, and then let's but some back up under each bullet point to support each negative brought forth. I would charge the pro crossbow side to make their list of positives as well, bullet point. Under each bullet point, supportive facts to go along with it. Then let's compare apples to apples.

That is fair.

Now :focus:


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

> Its Merit twogun...not merrit...


I'm a horrible speller. That's no secret. But, I do have enough sense to not be a hypocrite about it. You, on the other hand, don't. You *******ize the English language on a regular basis and have absolutely no room to point out anyone's errors. Your above quote is proof enough.




> Really whats your point twogun....you got pimp slapped and don't like it?


I pointed out several inconsistencies in some of source's stances. He addressed none of them. Freerange commented that I was being made to look like a fool. You add that I've been pimp slapped. Yet, neither of you even attempt to back up your claims. You're like a couple cheerleaders on the sideline rooting for your team but offering nothing of substance.




> They do not have bowhunting's best interest in mind just their own.


The other two don't have the stones to explain this. How bout you? Or, do you just parrot this as some kind of sound bite rallying cry?




> We brought the money factor up cause you asked for it.


Review the thread. 



> Envious again?


 



> Yes they have posted untruthful material....


Prove it.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Bowhunting will be lost due to overcrowding and dilution. (Ohio more then 50% of hunters in bow season use a x-bow) 
 Allowing the x-bow in will lead to one season. (Ace said he was for it if the resource would allow) And which state is it that has this system now, WV, I think. 
 The rest have nothing to do with your type of facts, but are real just the same.

Ok now let’s hear the reasons I’m wrong, and let’s see all the facts as to why the x-bow is good for bow hunting. 

Should this go to a new thread?


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

> Bowhunting will be lost due to overcrowding and dilution. (Ohio more then 50% of hunters in bow season use a x-bow)



Please define "lost" and "dilution."




> [*]	Allowing the x-bow in will lead to one season. (Ace said he was for it if the resource would allow) And which state is it that has this system now, WV, I think.


This is purely speculative and can not be supported with any existing example. In fact, the states which have allowed crossbows for years establish examples that show the opposite.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Free Range said:


> Bowhunting will be lost due to overcrowding and dilution. (Ohio more then 50% of hunters in bow season use a x-bow)
> 
> *So what?
> 
> ...



Well, there you "have it".......you've shown IMHO only your opinions, and NO facts at all......nice try, but he asked for PROOF, and facts......not opinions..of what is a "bowhunter" and what isn't in YOUR opinion which is all that I see, and with 0 nadda, zilch , zip to back 'em up....


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Doc, please remind these two we want facts, fact over 50% in Ohio, fact Ace said he is for one season. 

Come on guys play by the rules


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

twogun said:


> Please define "lost" and "dilution."
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 sure I will 

Lost = twogun :tongue: 
Dilution = what your doing to bow season..

Muh spellin may not be great but al least I am smart enough NOT to be a teacher and a bad spell'r.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

Free Range said:


> Doc, please remind these two we want facts, fact over 50% in Ohio, fact Ace said he is for one season.
> 
> Come on guys play by the rules



I am playing by the rules. Asking you for clarification aids in a factual debate. The word, lost, could have several different meanings in your context. You need to elaborate.

And, my response that the states which provide examples do not support your speculation is fact.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

Marvin said:


> sure I will
> 
> Lost = twogun :tongue:
> Dilution = what your doing to bow season..
> ...



Now this is more like it. This type of comment suits you much better than trying to actually make meaningful comments.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Doc, please remind these two *we want facts,[/B fact over 50% in Ohio, fact 

That well may be a fact,(over 50%)... however you have in NO way proven it to be a negative, nor a "loss" or "dilution" THAT is the problem there YOU stated it, now back it up!.....facts remember??? (as you just said, which brings up the next point)..


Ace said he is for one season. 

Prove that as well, show us all where I EVER said such a thing, I'm for INCLUSION of the crossbow (an archery weapon) in archery season, THAT is hardly "for one season".....(which I am NOT for at all btw)
It's also what the majority of KY hunters AND landowners want, and support by a vast majority!! Thus, I have facts to support MY views, we're only asking you provide some yourself, as you stated "we want facts".....no more and no less.....

Archery really doesn't take all that many animals for the number of hunters, one can NOT say that for guns and ML (both of which I also use); it's absurd to "lump" them as the same, they're not and most can see beyond your "spin", wanting inclusion is NOT wanting "one season"..*


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> Ace said he is for one season.
> 
> Prove that as well, show us all where I EVER said such a thing,


Ace I keep a log of my discussions, well not all of them but a good deal of them, and I ran across this little bit from you, take notice of the highlighted sentence. What was that Source said,,,,well we don’t have to repeat it here. 




> aceoky
> 10-04-2005, 09:00 PM
> (1.)So you are for one season, bring whatever weapon you like? If not then, you sir, are being hypocritical, calling me selfish, then not wanting to share the woods with everyone.
> 
> ...


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Free Range said:


> Ace I keep a log of my discussions, well not all of them but a good deal of them, and I ran across this little bit from you, take notice of the highlighted sentence. What was that Source said,,,,well we don’t have to repeat it here.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

twogun said:


> Now this is more like it. This type of comment suits you much better than trying to actually make meaningful comments.


 Glad I can entertain. You asked and now you complain...geeesh whiner Those are straight form the dictionary.  Like you were going to give a meaningful response to anything ..


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

> aceoky
> 10-04-2005, 09:00 PM
> *(1.)So you are for one season, bring whatever weapon you like? If not then, you sir, are being hypocritical, calling me selfish, then not wanting to share the woods with everyone. *
> 
> ...


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> (even IF you "spin" that into something it wasn't and isn't, NOWHERE does THAT state "any season" at all! it says I'm all for it(after obvious editing no less.......I am quite certain I was speaking of the crossbow expansion, considering I went into GREAT detail that there was IN FACT a HUGE difference)...


Oh no you weren’t and there was no editing, you were saying you didn’t care if we went to one season, as long as the resource could handle it. Gee Ace I’ve been caught before not remembering what I posted, and didn’t try to squirm out of it like this.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Marvin said:


> Free Range said:
> 
> 
> > Ace I keep a log of my discussions, well not all of them but a good deal of them, and I ran across this little bit from you, take notice of the highlighted sentence. What was that Source said,,,,well we don’t have to repeat it here.
> ...


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Guys, please. Enough with the back and forths and personal attacks on the crossbows.

This thread is about TURKEY HUNTING IN PA. Oh, never mind


----------

