# KY Win Win??? on x-bows



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Looks like KY just reached a compromise, from what I’m reading the x-bow expansion was cut from full expansion to two weeks in Oct and another couple in Dec. I guess it wasn’t quite the slam dunk the pro guys thought.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Free Range said:


> Looks like KY just reached a compromise, from what I’m reading the x-bow expansion was cut from full expansion to two weeks in Oct and another couple in Dec. I guess it wasn’t quite the slam dunk the pro guys thought.



we will see-as more and more xbows are used in kentucky the full season will open up and along with it more facts that can prove that the anti xbow hysteria is just that


----------



## InKYfromSD (Feb 6, 2004)

I've bowhunted in Ky for a number of years now. Even with the Youth hunts, free weekends, and additional/extended muzzle loader seasons, I'm seeing more deer than ever. I've been asked to remove some from the neighborhood. I don't think crossbows are going to make much of a dent in the herd. I'm more worried about hitting one with a vehicle than I am of not seeing one in the woods. 

With the advent of TeleCheck we should have better access to the actual number of deer being harvested. Too bad it's not being used by everyone. Do you think any anti-xbow hunters are going to report they used an x-bow just to slew the numbers? I know two physically challenged hunters who use crossbows. Neither one gun hunts and if it weren't for the x-bow, they wouldn't be out at all.


----------



## tbailey (Feb 25, 2004)

InKYfromSD said:


> I know two physically challenged hunters who use crossbows. Neither one gun hunts and if it weren't for the x-bow, they wouldn't be out at all.


Physically challenged hunters have always been able to hunt with a crossbow during archery season they just have to get a statement from their doctor. The new rules do not affect them.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

tbailey said:


> Physically challenged hunters have always been able to hunt with a crossbow during archery season they just have to get a statement from their doctor. The new rules do not affect them.


****************************************** edited by marvin


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> more efforts by Marvin to cause trouble I see. I saw nothing in Brian's post that involved spinning facts. Must be tough to be so hateful marvin


removed - marvin- Off topic.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> more efforts by Marvin to cause trouble I see. I saw nothing in Brian's post that involved spinning facts. Must be tough to be so hateful marvin


I actually need to apologize, I read into it too much. He was justifying crossbows for the handicapped. No problem here. Sorry Jim I will edit my post


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Free Range said:


> Looks like KY just reached a compromise, from what I’m reading the x-bow expansion was cut from full expansion to two weeks in Oct and another couple in Dec. I guess it wasn’t quite the slam dunk the pro guys thought.


 looks like they rethought instead of a knee jerk reaction. looks like the KYDNR has their head on straight. Willie keeps commenting on "strong arm" tactics. anybody have a clue on what he is talking about? Maybe they checked the petition signatures?


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

deleted my comments Marvin since you apologized I do to


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> deleted my comments Marvin since you apologized I do to


I will delete my also Jim.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> deleted my comments Marvin since you apologized I do to


Jim, I know you don't care for me but i appreciate it.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Marvin said:


> Jim, I know you don't care for me but i appreciate it.


 I don't know you personally-I suspect we have more in common than in opposition


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> I don't know you personally-I suspect we have more in common than in opposition


I agree, i bet were probably more alike than we both want to admit. :zip:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Good call Free Range......win-win.

Crossbow hunters get an opportunity and bowhunters still have their own season. Seems fair.

Of course, I see the crossbow zealots are already complaining that they got some and not all.......


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Oh My God. Somebody pinch me....

Compromise is possible, and I applaud the sportsmen and women of Kentucky for having the willingness to set aside much of the in-fighting, and come to a reasonable solution that most can accept!

:yo:


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> Oh My God. Somebody pinch me....
> 
> Compromise is possible, and I applaud the sportsmen and women of Kentucky for having the willingness to set aside much of the in-fighting, and come to a reasonable solution that most can accept!
> 
> :yo:


are you talking about Ky or me and Jim?:tongue:


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Marvin said:


> are you talking about Ky or me and Jim?:tongue:


:chortle:

Both! HAHAHA.... Seriously, this compromise is really outstanding.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

We will see how outstanding it is next year. Hopefuly it will cool down for a few years anyway.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Free Range said:


> We will see how outstanding it is next year. Hopefuly it will cool down for a few years anyway.


Yes, I agree. Allow the compromise some time, say 3-5 years, and collect good, solid data and conduct a few sound hunter attitude surveys as well. If the compromise shows to warrant later an expansion, I think more would be receptive. If it doesn't, keep it as is and most everyone is still happy.

Win-Win for sure. Well done Free Range. Nice post. Thanks


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> Yes, I agree. Allow the compromise some time, say 3-5 years, and collect good, solid data


That seems reasonable.

If everyone were as open to this approach this issue would not be as devisive and hurtful as it is.

The separation between bowhunters and crossbowhunters in KY is a mile wide.....it will take some time to repair all that has been destroyed.

How much simpler would this have been if crossbows had lobbied for a different season from the beginning, instead of insisting they have access to all of bowseason?

Learn vicariously, people ..... learn.


----------



## Skeptic (Dec 11, 2005)

thesource said:


> That seems reasonable.
> 
> If everyone were as open to this approach this issue would not be as devisive and hurtful as it is.
> 
> ...


Often times to get anything in this country you have to ask for way more than you are actually wanting. Ask for the whole pie and be happy with a slice!


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

I don't see them happy they got "a slice." They are complaining they didn't get the whole thing and are vowing to continue the fight for expansion in KY.

The crossbow advocates are the group responsible for the bitter division in KY. They now have an early crossbow season that is the same length as the bowseason, and they are still crying about it.

More rational people see it as a reasonable and fair compromise.

Let me ask you all this:

Given the fact that crossbow hunters have been given an opportunity equal to that of the bow only season, and are still DEMANDING more, in fact all....why would the bowhunters in other states be willing to even consider dealilng on crossbows to begin with? Perhaps this is the basis of the NYB position - give 'em an inch and they will take a mile....never give 'em an inch.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> I don't see them happy they got "a slice." They are complaining they didn't get the whole thing and are vowing to continue the fight for expansion in KY.
> 
> The crossbow advocates are the group responsible for the bitter division in KY. They now have an early crossbow season that is the same length as the bowseason, and they are still crying about it.
> 
> ...


More crap -the division comes from selfish compound archers who think that their entry into the bowseason was fine but somehow crossbows should be treated differently than their mechanical archery equipment.

As I said, one day the question will be whether people like the source are able to hunt in archery season. SInce source always talks about letting the archery season hunters decide who is allowed in, one day its his confederates who will be the minority


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Jim C said:


> More crap -the division comes from selfish compound archers who think that their entry into the bowseason was fine but somehow crossbows should be treated differently than their mechanical archery equipment.


Wrong again, Jimbo. Since crossbows are in fact different than compounds, your arguement is silly....of course they should be treated differently.

The division continues in KY with crybaby xbowers complaining that their new crossbow season isn't good enough....they will keep up their bitter battle until they have it all. So much for the mantra that you are just seeking opportunity. 

Its obvious to everyone that crossbow advocates simply want an easier way to kill big bucks when they are most vulnerable - during the rut. Gun hunters want a chance at that bowhunter action without having to pay the dues of a bowhunter.

I think Kentucky got it right....



Jim C said:


> As I said, one day the question will be whether people like the source are able to hunt in archery season. SInce source always talks about letting the archery season hunters decide who is allowed in, one day its his confederates who will be the minority


Thanks, Jim, for articulating an excellent reason why crossbows should be opposed in their entirety.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> Wrong again, Jimbo. Since crossbows are in fact different than compounds, your arguement is silly....of course they should be treated differently.
> 
> The division continues in KY with crybaby xbowers complaining that their new crossbow season isn't good enough....they will keep up their bitter battle until they have it all. So much for the mantra that you are just seeking opportunity.
> 
> ...


same BS different day. What dues-this is the sort of psychotic nonsense that spews from the xbow haters-compounds elminated those dues which in the grand scheme of things matter not to game departments.

your sense of bowhunting as a religion or apprenticeship is silly, outdated and again your standards are not relevant to other taxpaying citizens

we understand your issues and reject them source


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Apparently it does matter to more than just me, or crossbows would not be so controversial. 

Back to topic.

Why should bowhunters in other states negotiate, deal, or placate the demands of crossbow advocates after withnessing all the whining crybabies that are complaining about a 3 week long early season and demanding more?


----------



## rocketshooter (Dec 26, 2005)

*Free Range............*

Just wondering where you got that info on xbows in KY? Their website still shows a FULL season for xbow hunters as well as all other archery. Just curious. Thanks!


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Rocketshooter, if you haven't found it yet this is where the info came from. I might have been a little off on the exact number of days, but this should clear it up. 


Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources League of Kentucky Sportsmen 
Joint News Release 
Season Dates Proposed for Kentucky’s 
2006-07 Fall Crossbow Deer and Turkey Season 
Immediate Release Contact: Norm Minch 
March 10, 2006 (800) 852-0942.434 
Frankfort, KY – Three key legislators, the League of Kentucky Sportsmen, bowhunters groups, and the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) have helped finalize proposed dates for the 2006-2007 crossbow hunting season for deer and wild turkey. 
KDFWR Commissioner Jon Gassett, Commerce Cabinet Secretary George Ward, Sen. Joey Pendleton, D-Hopkinsville, Sen. Gary Tapp, R-Shelbyville, Rep. Tommy Turner, R-Somerset, The League of Kentucky Sportsmen, representatives of the United Bowhunters of Kentucky and the Kentucky Bowhunters Association and Louisville outdoor radio show host, Jim Strader, met in Frankfort this week to solidify the proposed dates. 
“Crossbow season dates have been under debate for more than a year,” said Gassett, “but now we have come to an agreement that I believe will provide the additional crossbow hunting opportunity many sportsmen want, and likewise addresses concerns of some bowhunters about a fully expanded season.” 
“This is a great example of how the sportsmen can interact with the Department, the League and our elected and appointed representatives to make the outdoor experience better for all sportsmen of Kentucky,” said Ronnie Wells, President of the League of Kentucky Sportsmen. “I am most appreciative that the League of Kentucky Sportsmen was able to be at the center of the negotiations and play a part in achieving this just compromise. All the involved groups have pledged to work even more closely together on issues that may arise in the future. As a result the sportsmen and sportswomen of Kentucky are more united and stronger than ever.” 
The proposed opening of the crossbow season for deer is October 1. It will continue through the third full weekend in October (early muzzleloader season) and then re-open with modern gun season and continue through the end of December. 
Hunters would be allowed to use crossbows for wild turkey this fall during the same time frame, as well as during the October and December shotgun turkey seasons (as in past seasons). While the bag limit of four birds remains unchanged, a new restriction for 2006 fall turkey hunting limits the number of bearded birds hunters may take to no more than one with a beard length of three inches or longer regardless of whether a shotgun, bow or crossbow is used. Fall turkey hunters are limited to a total of four birds, two of which can only be taken during the fall shotgun season. 
All proposed hunting, fishing and boating regulations passed by the KDFWR Commission must gain approval from two legislative committees before becoming final. If the revised season dates and limit restriction passes legislative review, crossbow hunting for wild turkey and white-tailed deer this season would be open for approximately 30 more days each in Kentucky than in previous years. (These increases may be slightly longer or shorter, depending on calendar shifts year to year.) 
The legislative review process may take 60 to 90 days to complete. Hunters are urged to check with the KDFWR Information Center at 1-800-858-1549 in mid-June to learn these final season dates, or log onto the agency website at fw.ky.gov later this summer once season regulations are fully in place. 
-30- 
The Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources (KDFWR) manages, regulates, enforces and promotes responsible use of all fish and wildlife species, their habitats, public wildlife areas and waterways for the benefit of those resources and for public enjoyment. KDFWR, an agency of the Commerce Cabinet, has an economic impact to the state of $4.8 billion annually. For more information on KDFWR, visit our web site at fw.ky.gov.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Free Range said:


> Rocketshooter, if you haven't found it yet this is where the info came from. I might have been a little off on the exact number of days, but this should clear it up.
> 
> 
> Kentucky Department of Fish & Wildlife Resources League of Kentucky Sportsmen
> ...



anybody heard anything about how the UBK held the DNR hostage to get their way? all this "strong arm" talk but I have not heard of any kidnapping or abuse charges filed yet? This is serious. somebody could of gotten hurt at DNR. if you have any information please call the FBI.


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

I'm baaaaaaaaaaack. :wink:


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

PMantle said:


> I'm baaaaaaaaaaack. :wink:



cool


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

Jim C said:


> cool


They still won't let me even view the crossbow forum despite my peaceful nature there. Strange.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

PMantle said:


> They still won't let me even view the crossbow forum despite my peaceful nature there. Strange.



most of the posters wanted me to be the monitor when they asked for volunteers

stupid me-I didn't accept

I have no say over there on that


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

Jim C said:


> most of the posters wanted me to be the monitor when they asked for volunteers
> 
> stupid me-I didn't accept
> 
> I have no say over there on that


I really believe that would have been a bad idea, for you. To moderate properly..wait, nevermind. I can't go there.

Anyway, I have pm'd revival. Of course, I had to log out to even find him.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

PMantle said:


> I'm baaaaaaaaaaack. :wink:


Welcome back, PMantle  I can put in a word for ya on the crossbow side, if you would like....


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

doctariAFC said:


> Welcome back, PMantle  I can put in a word for ya on the crossbow side, if you would like....



It would be nice to at least be able to read it. I don't post there often, if at all. You never know, I might actually be able to help some folks over there.


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

PMantle said:


> It would be nice to at least be able to read it. I don't post there often, if at all. You never know, I might actually be able to help some folks over there.


Ok.... I'll pop a note over to Brad....


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

PMantle said:


> It would be nice to at least be able to read it. I don't post there often, if at all. You never know, I might actually be able to help some folks over there.


You can still view the threads if you log out.


----------



## BigBirdVA (Nov 5, 2002)

thesource said:


> Apparently it does matter to more than just me, or crossbows would not be so controversial.
> 
> Back to topic.
> 
> Why should bowhunters in other states negotiate, deal, or placate the demands of crossbow advocates after withnessing all the whining crybabies that are complaining about a 3 week long early season and demanding more?


Wonder how the tears would flow if compound hunters only got 3 weeks and stick bows got the rest? And what about the $$$ spent on the survey that some so conveniently forgot? I didn't see out of state responses on the survey. The correct question is why do people not follow their own survey results? Hmmmmm..... could it be the crying 2 time loosers who want to control something against the majority voice? :sad:


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

BigBirdVA said:


> Wonder how the tears would flow if compound hunters only got 3 weeks and stick bows got the rest? And what about the $$$ spent on the survey that some so conveniently forgot? I didn't see out of state responses on the survey. The correct question is why do people not follow their own survey results? Hmmmmm..... could it be the crying 2 time loosers who want to control something against the majority voice? :sad:


wow Ricks got a chip on his shoulder again... trying to fill doug's shoes or what?
If it truly was the majority we wouldn't be at this point would we.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Marvin said:


> wow Ricks got a chip on his shoulder again... trying to fill doug's shoes or what?
> If it truly was the majority we wouldn't be at this point would we.


NIce Penguin:cocktail:


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> NIce Penguin:cocktail:


 Man your just now picking up on that!?!?!  I like it too. Fits my AT personality wouldn't you say?  :evil:  you know whose avatar I am dissapointed in is Source. I expected more that just a silly plane. I was going to use this one!


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Marvin said:


> Man your just now picking up on that!?!?!  I like it too. Fits my AT personality wouldn't you say?  :evil:  you know whose avatar I am dissapointed in is Source. I expected more that just a silly plane



nah I am serious-nice bird.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> nah I am serious-nice bird.


 I added an avatar for source


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Marvin said:


> I added an avatar for source


You ought to have the two bows being burnt at the stake


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Jim C said:


> You ought to have the two bows being burnt at the stake


i'll see what i can do:wink:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Marvin said:


> you know whose avatar I am dissapointed in is Source. I expected more that just a silly plane.


Silly plane?!!!! 

Its an F-15 E Strike Eagle, and its one of the reasons we can have these silly differences of opinion without being thrown in jail!:wink: 

I'll have to see if I can find something more to the general public's liking, I guess.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

thesource said:


> Silly plane?!!!!
> 
> Its an F-15 E Strike Eagle, and its one of the reasons we can have these silly differences of opinion without being thrown in jail!:wink:
> 
> I'll have to see if I can find something more to the general public's liking, I guess.


 use the one I posted!! I will see if I can modify it to personalize it for you. The planes boring. Show us the bombs!! (the ones that attach to the plane )


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

*How about this one source?*

 :wink:


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

Marvin said:


> :wink:


Now that right there would be classic! :chortle:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Marvin said:


> The planes boring. Show us the bombs!! (the ones that attach to the plane )



Whooomp .... there it is!


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

Okay get serious ...heres your new one


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*As usual......*



Free Range said:


> Looks like KY just reached a compromise, from what I’m reading the x-bow expansion was cut from full expansion to two weeks in Oct and another couple in Dec. I guess it wasn’t quite the slam dunk the pro guys thought.



As usual, Tim, you're way "off base", on what actually occured...... 

It was indeed a "slam dunk", the Regs were filed, NO appeal was filed, thus the season(full expansion ) was a "slam dunK").....what did THEY do? 

They filed SB 211 which would have put a game season(Deer and Turkey) into a STATUTE(rather than a Reg as it's always been done), among other things, SB 211 when drafted did NOT include the disability permit prevision... (now if you were more familiar with Ky laws you'd understand why it never had a "real chance" to begin with) You can bet that tactic won't work next time!

THEY contend, that SB 211 would have easily passed, I happen to know otherwise.... :darkbeer: and in fact would never had made it, for numerous reasons, not the least of which the Ky Legislature did NOT want any part of any of that (changing from Regs to Statutes OR the setting of game laws in general for that matter).....

SO in a last ditch effort, and time running out, THEY contacted Dr. Gassett (who was under pressure from the Legislators to try to compromise for this season, and by using other pending bills that affect the KDFWR) ONE was reached......THAT is the strong arm tactics that are being complained about.......WE always for more than a year had offered a compromise, but the fact remains had one not been reached, FULL expansion would have been the result, which we could have done, but did not....... 

It's also very important to know, that a VOTE was taken on the LKS stance, and it was voted to fully support the survey's results(the independent survey conducted by Cornell U. which showed a vast majoirty FOR full expansion), so one has to wonder why the LKS "was central in the compromise position", when it's own members voted to support and push for whatever the outcome of the survey would be........?????????

So, source, "crybabies", is out of context many feel they were cheated, and by someone who was to support the survey's results, but instead went on HIS own, and helped work out this "compromise", instead of what the members voted for him to do.......

So, it's a "safe bet", that it's not "over", next season, will see what is "what".......bet on this, our being "sold out", won't soon be forgotten(and in fact many who were NOT for expansion are not happy with what the LKS did , against the majority vote fwiw)...

So to make it simple;

The full season expansion was done, and by the rules, a few, decided to try to set a "legal precident" with SB 211, which failed in a big way, though a compromise WAS reached, THAT could have been done over a year ago; why wasn't it????

Because THEY never intended to give the crossbow supporters ONE extra day........but they did, didn't they?? 

And, after what has occured on this, bet that won't be all that we end up with......and bet big!


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*Not hardly*



thesource said:


> I don't see them happy they got "a slice." They are complaining they didn't get the whole thing and are vowing to continue the fight for expansion in KY.
> 
> The crossbow advocates are the group responsible for the bitter division in KY. They now have an early crossbow season that is the same length as the bowseason, and they are still crying about it.
> 
> ...



Talk about 'off base"!

WHERE do you get the "compromise" is "equal to what other archers get now " ???

Archery season from Sept 3- Jan 15......did we get that?? No , thus it's NOT the same length is it???

*It was those against the expansion that caused ALL of the division, they went to the LRC and even for over a YEAR kept trying to involve politicians in OUR game laws*.......

THEY are the one's who caused 100% of the division, by failing to accept what the majority want, and they continued, in fightiing it even after TWO surveys proved what the majority wanted, and in fact, refused to allow ANY compromise for over a year, but when they had NO other choice, they then decided a little was better than letting us have it all(which would have been the result, had they still refused to compromise) .......

How many meetings of the Crossbow Advisory Panel, trying to reach a compromise had taken place???

Don't even act like the WHOLE pie was what we were after, WE tried very, very hard to compromise, it wasn't us who refused and got backed into a corner by our own actions......not at all.......

So yes, we got some of what we wanted, and yes, we'll get more........put your $$ on that, it's more than time for the vocal minority to stop trying to dictate to the majority, and soon that will be the case!


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Aceoky -

Interesting take on things.

For clarity's sake (read that complete and open honesty), please inform us how much of "Archery season from Sept 3- Jan 15" is exclusive for bowhunters?


Bowhunters are fighting against your cause because they do not believe that crossbows belong in bowseason - plain and simple.

You disagree - that;s fine, and its your right to do so. But acknowledge how devisive the crossbow lobby (that's you, by the way) has been fighting and argueing and demanding inclusion into the bowhunting season.

You are, of course, correct when saying that the fight would be non-exisient if bowhunters would roll over and accept crossbows.

Of course, I'm also correct when I say the fight would be over if crossbow hunters would back off and accept some other season.

Now that you have a season, and you still whine .....


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> Aceoky -
> 
> Interesting take on things.
> 
> ...


First, how did *I* become the "crossbow lobby"??? I have never even fired one in my entire life......ukey: 

I happen to believe, though, IF one is inclined for any reason to want to *use an archery weapon during archery seaosn,* that is not unreasonable....!!

Nor do I feel "special" or "entitled" because I don't use a crossbow, or bowhunt 100% from the ground.....unlike some who think they "deserve" something simply because they use a bow.....

As for any of "us" ......."fighting for inclusion", that is both false and misleading, our Dept(that's the KDFWR) decided based on over 5 years worth of study and data to expand crossbow use into archery season.........it was the "other guys", who decided to fight the majority and the KDFWR.......NOT US.......


THAT is in fact what caused the "division", a *few* very very vocal *minority* trying to dictate to the majoirty AND the KDFWR what would occur AND using any and every means possible to try to force their will upon everyone else......and it failed in a big way, and will continue to do so........bet on it 

Just as YOU expect us to "roll over", and be excluded from the pre-rut......not gonna last.....WE(read Ky hunters) spent over $70,000 for Cornell to do that survey, and WE expect the results to matter, and we think they do and will......

Again, WE tried for over a year to get a compromise to *avoid division*, THEY refused to budge , and only did when they had NO other choice.....at all......

And that is why things are as they are, and sad to say, will likely remain that way for a very long time, had they only seriously tried to work out a compromise everyone would be happy with a YEAR ago, we could have avoided 99% of all of this, they didn't and we are where we are.....


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

*NO SALE.*

You are a polished spinner, but a spinner nonetheless.

I notice that you failed to answer my question. I'll repeat it:

_For clarity's sake (read that complete and open honesty), please inform us how much of "Archery season from Sept 3- Jan 15" is exclusive for bowhunters?_


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*"Exclusive??" who's "whining now"??*



thesource said:


> *NO SALE.*
> 
> You are a polished spinner, but a spinner nonetheless.
> 
> ...


That should have been Jan 16 to be clear.......(last year's details btw) 

Modern Gun(depending on Zone, using the longest here)
Nov 12-27(shorter in Zones 3-4 fwiw) 

Youth only Oct 8-9

Muzzleloader Oct 15-16 and Dec. 10-18 

Free Junior Weekend Dec. 31-Jan 1

Crossbow Nov 28 - Dec 7

There you are, the REST of those many days ARE exclusive as of last year.........though 

A), I have no idea, what that has to do with anything
B). WHY do you feel *entitile*d to an exclusive season?? Is it because you've had one for so long? Things change,that's a fact of life......or do you feel "special"??

C.) Allowing another archery weapon during archery season, is NOT keeping it from being exclusive in ANY way, still only archery weapons would still be allowed, what part of that do you not understand? still close range, every single factor is in place, other than drawing, and raising a cocked but awkward crossbow more than makes up for that, then you have to factor in their weight..

D) NO one is "forced" to use a crossbow, if full expansion takes place.......ONLY the choice is offered, don't try to make it something that it isn't and never has been.

E) NO spin at all, simply what occured.......and the facts on the matter....as they were then, and are now......


But that's OK, I've been called much worse and likely will again, one thing though, I have learned in my years, the truth will always stand, and will do so on it's own merits.....


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> That should have been Jan 16 to be clear.......(last year's details btw)
> 
> Modern Gun(depending on Zone, using the longest here)
> Nov 12-27(shorter in Zones 3-4 fwiw)
> ...


Sure you do.

Your first post said:
_
"Archery season from Sept 3- Jan 15......did we get that?? No , thus it's NOT the same length is it???"_

It turns out the exclusive bowseason - bows only - would have been what? 16oct - 12nov. That's hardly the same as your insinuated Sept 3- Jan 15. We'll be polite and call it spinning .... but we all know what you are trying to pull. This is exactly why you crossbow guys can't be trusted.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Allowing another archery weapon during archery season, is NOT keeping it from being exclusive in ANY way, still only archery weapons would still be allowed, what part of that do you not understand?


I understand your point of view, so do not talk down to me.

I simply do not agree with it.

In my mind, there is a vast and fundamental difference in the way bows and crossbows operate, and I do not feel that they should be considered the same in any way. What part of THAT do you not understand?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> Sure you do.
> 
> Your first post said:
> _
> ...


I have NO desire to argue with you, you'll no doubt find some that will though.....

The KY hunting guide says "Archery Season" Sept3-Jan 15


*I* didn't say it or "spin it" fyi.......AND no, the rest of those days that do not allow other weapons.....(and there are plenty of them as well) who's "spinning" now??

ALL those "other days" after the "other seasons" (not to mention prior to them), and at NO time did I say "exclusive" you seem to be "stuck"on that idea....not me fwiw....

IF you're so inclined to add up ALL of the days that bows are allowed, and nothing else be my guest, fact is there are many........and there is no *good reason* to exclude crossbows from any of them.....


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> I understand your point of view, so do not talk down to me.
> 
> I simply do not agree with it.
> 
> In my mind, there is a vast and fundamental difference in the way bows and crossbows operate, and I do not feel that they should be considered the same in any way. What part of THAT do you not understand?


I understand plenty, including that your view is in Ky a minority view, that until recently was forced upon the rest of us, and that has changed, and will continue to do so....

The fact is; they're still short range archery weapons, and If one doesn't know how to do the things that make archery hunting what it IS, then it doesn't really matter......how they "operate", it simply boils down to a *few* who think they'e "special", and thus deserve or are and should be entitled to a "special season", have for a long time enjoyed that, but that is now in the past ......time to accept that .....it's not going to be the "end all" or anything else, it will be good for archery hunting, just as it has been in EVERY state that has expanded, which we need at a time when the Anti-Hunting groups are merging to END ALL BOWHUNTING as their #1 Goal.....MORE of us, means it's that much harder for them to succeed, that is the "big picture", whether one refuses to see it or not, doesn't change anything.....never has , never will.....

ONE more point; YES one CAN use a bow each and every single day from Sept 3- Jan 16.....so it is in fact Archery Season......as for "exclusive", sounds like you have a problem "sharing", well guess what, WE have to "share" (and always have in fact) with other archers, and gun hunters, as well, so did you have a point???? WE don't seem to have a problem with the sharing, wonder why some of you guys do?? 

WE learned as children, that to share was "a good thing", and we have retained that.......value.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> WE don't seem to have a problem with the sharing, wonder why some of you guys do??
> 
> WE learned as children, that to share was "a good thing", and we have retained that.......value.


Only a ***:nono:*** would believe that all of this opposition to crossbows is a result of bowhunter greed.....bowhunters encourage any and all to learn to shoot a bow and join us....that is sharing.

Obviously, its not the sharing part of the equation that is so controversial....its the crossbow part. Crossbows do not belong in bowseason - plain and simple.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> Only a brain dead idiot would believe that all of this opposition to crossbows is a result of bowhunter greed.....bowhunters encourage any and all to learn to shoot a bow and join us....that is sharing.
> 
> Obviously, its not the sharing part of the equation that is so controversial....its the crossbow part. Crossbows do not belong in bowseason - plain and simple.


Really??? I don't think so for a single minute, YOU after all were asking "how much is exclusive for bows".....which PROVES it's the sharing that IS the problem for you, plain and simple.....

Where crossbows do or do not belong is a simple opinion, no more or less....plain and simple, MORE see them belonging than do not, maybe some don't like that fact, that will not change it however...

BTW, it's archery season in KY, not "bowseason", and crossbows are indeed archery......plain and simple


You keep right on , pushing that idea, and that opinion, when the Antis manage to eradicate the archery seasons and bowhunting Nation-Wide, pat yourself on the back, for helping that to happen ukey:  

Many, many of us, realize to be able to fight them, we will need more archery hunters in the near future...plain and simple.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Really??? I don't think so for a single minute, YOU after all were asking "how much is exclusive for bows".....which PROVES it's the sharing that IS the problem for you, plain and simple......


LOL. It proves you have reading comprehension issues or are not the mind reader that you think you are.

Might it also "prove" that I am interested in knowing how long the bow only season is where the bowhunters need not suffer the indignancy of crossbows?

Like I said - if they want to hunt with a bow, I'll help 'em hang their treestand. Its not a sharing thing, but you do enjoy perpetuiating that myth. I wonder how making bowhunters look greedy or selfish helps bowhunting in your eyes? 




aceoky said:


> Where crossbows do or do not belong is a simple opinion, no more or less....plain and simple, MORE see them belonging than do not.


Certainly not nationwide, where FAR more states disallow xbows than allow them. 




aceoky said:


> You keep right on , pushing that idea, and that opinion, when the Antis manage to eradicate the archery seasons and bowhunting Nation-Wide, pat yourself on the back, for helping that to happen ukey:
> 
> Many, many of us, realize to be able to fight them, we will need more archery hunters in the near future...plain and simple.


Your big bad scare tactics won't work on me. If bowhunters knuckle under to crossbows, then MZ, then who knows what else ..... there won't be any bowhunting left to defend. 

Your procrossbow troops are doing a far better job trashing bowhunting and bowhunters than the antihunters ever could. Pat yourself on the back.

I far prefer a small army of dedicated soldiers that share a common interest to a large army that I cannot trust. Bowhunters will defend bowhunting. Crossbow hunters are not bowhunters, and they have already proven that they do not have bowhunting's best interests at heart.


----------



## willie (Jul 2, 2003)

................












............................


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

:moviecorn :moviecorn :darkbeer: :darkbeer:

:focus:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> :focus:



LOL - what's the matter, Doc? You don't like Willie's self-portrait? 

No one appreciates the fine art, these days.lol


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> LOL - what's the matter, Doc? You don't like Willie's self-portrait?
> 
> No one appreciates the fine art, these days.lol


You need help source-we tire of suffering the indignation of having your blather here. You sound like rich whites whining about black kids being in the neighborhood


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> I have NO desire to argue with you, you'll no doubt find some that will though.....


 this is my favorite line. Yet he persists.. Funny ain't in Jim:wink: 

who are "they" aceoky...the kdnr?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*"they"*

Well Marvin "they" can't be the "kdnr", since that doesn't exist......perhaps you brush up on things, then post about 'em????:wink: 

And btw, IF you think that is my "persisting", you've obviously not seen many of my posts elsewhere......but I digress........


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Well Marvin "they" can't be the "kdnr", since that doesn't exist......perhaps you brush up on things, then post about 'em????:wink:
> 
> And btw, IF you think that is my "persisting", you've obviously not seen many of my posts elsewhere......but I digress........


 awe shucks scooby..... you still can't or won't answer such a simple question. Who are "they" champ?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Marvin said:


> awe shucks scooby..... you still can't or won't answer such a simple question. Who are "they" champ?


IF you're meaning this( and you never said where your "they" came from, IF you want an answer it helps to let one know of what you mean) :wink: 

THEY refused to budge 

Then "they" would be a FEW members of the UBK, the KBA, Jim Strader and a very few very vocal anti-expansion people who refused to talk compromise for more than a year, inspite of our efforts to try to work one out...

IF anyone thinks, all of this division and the $70,000+ could not have been avoided then they are simply not paying attention to the facts ......

HAD this happened a year ago, it is very likely that we'd "let it go", it wasn't and we likely won't......we watched $70,000+ be spent to arrive at facts, and those facts say the majority are for FULL expansion........and that is what should occur.....the majority "rule" in this country, not the minority, who only got their way this time by using "dirty tricks/politics" and we won't soon forget that either....THAT is what has caused so much division, the minority, forcing their will on the rest of us, refusing to budge an inch, well, now we've worked too hard to "settle" for their "scraps".......their fault, not mine or ours.....

They're bragging about keeping us out of the pre-rut, yeah, that helps end divisions!  

IF anyone thinks that I"m going to express "gratitude" for something that could have and should have been done a year ago prior to all of the above, well they can live on that hope.....

And if anyone thinks that having an open/closed/open/closed seaons is "it" and it's "over" live on that dream as long as it last....

"They"(that would be the same "they" btw) think we'll take whatever they give us, after all their dirty tricks, and working our "tails off" for over a year begging for a compromise; but I'm betting as usual, that will "backfire" just as everything up to this point has done..

It is time for the very vocal minoirity to stop dictating to the majoirity in Ky!


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Gee Ace you ok there bro? And if you think you are fooling anybody with the, if they would have just compromised a year ago,,,well think again. 
Glad your back, I almost missed ya.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Whatever........


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

*"they" continued.....*

Here is some proof, AND what started all of this mess, and the divisions and cost us over $70,000.....

ShadowAceMarch 7th, 2005, 11:54 PM
When the commission put out the agenda for the meeting it only said that the crossbow survey would be discussed and no mention of a vote was announced. 

*United Bowhunters of KY is making a push against the decision in this regard. This could get even uglier than it already is.*--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Myk

When in *fact* the agenda did include "seasons discussion" right in it in plain vanilla English......

Just the facts.....(and it went downhill from there)


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Ace what the heck you talking about???
Someone or some group lobbied the game dept, to include the x-bow, period, there is no reason they would decide out of the blue to do this. So like we have said if it wasn’t for the pro x-bow push this never would have happened.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Free Range said:


> Ace what the heck you talking about???
> Someone or some group lobbied the game dept, to include the x-bow, period, there is no reason they would decide out of the blue to do this. So like we have said if it wasn’t for the pro x-bow push this never would have happened.



so what-how do you think compounds got into archery season
how do you think archery season got started in the first place?


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

You are correct Jim, I was referring to Ace’s claim that those opposed to the x-bow expansion is the cause of the rift, when in fact if they, you guys, had not started this push there would be no rift.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Free Range said:


> You are correct Jim, I was referring to Ace’s claim that those opposed to the x-bow expansion is the cause of the rift, when in fact if they, you guys, had not started this push there would be no rift.


blame is rather silly when applied to those who want to be treated the same as compound archers.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

If you want to be the same as a compound shooter, then pick up a compound, it's really not that hard to understand.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Free Range said:


> If you want to be the same as a compound shooter, then pick up a compound, it's really not that hard to understand.


30 years ago, you and your cult were telling them to pick up trad bows

the bottom line is you should hunt with what bow you want to use and stop worrying about and stop trying to limit the type of bow others want to use


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Free Range, once again you're so incorrect it's barely worth responding.......

But I will ;

It is our right as hunters to ask for something,(IF there hadn't been plenty of support for it, that would have been "that") .......

THAT didn't start any of this, as you can see, I have shown the proof of what started this; and btw, what gives YOU the right to demand that anyone who wants to participate in the archery season should HAVE to pick up a compound???

NOW understand this, we have done TWO surveys which both *prove* what the _majority of Ky hunters _want which IS a crossbow season that runs with archery season, that also is not so hard to understand.....

Had that occured a year ago as it should, we wouldn't have spent over $70,000 for the second survey which really only proved the first was accurate, and enough is enough!

Again WE didn't cause any of the division and were well within our rights to ask to be included in archery season with our archery weapons of choice....it was those who think they're so "special" they should have an "exclusive season" all for them when they've done nothing to earn it or to deserve it any more than we do....

Now I know that's nothing to you not living here, but for many of us, spending that much $ to get results then having them ignored IS a big deal, and one we have NO intention of forgetting.....had the survey's results went the "other way", you would have a point, they didn't and you don't....


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Free Range, once again you're so incorrect it's barely worth responding.......
> 
> But I will ;
> 
> ...



Don't forget landowners and fisherman ace. Wouldn't want them to be left out of bow season. They have a say too.  you keep saying "hunters fisherman and landowners" were surveyed but really have no proof the survery was not fixed. Why is that?


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> THAT didn't start any of this, as you can see, I have shown the proof of what started this; and btw, what gives YOU the right to demand that anyone who wants to participate in the archery season should HAVE to pick up a compound???


Ace you need something, not sure what it is that could help you but you are defiantly in need. 

Here maybe this will help, JIM SAID HE WANTED TO BE TREATED LIKE COMPOUND HUNTERS, I SAID THEN PICK UP A CPMPOUND. There was that slow enough for you. 
And while we’re at it, what gives you the right to demand people pick up a bow or x-bow to be able to hunt during bow season? What is that word,,,, yeah I remember hypocrisy. 



> Again WE didn't cause any of the division and were well within our rights to ask to be included in archery season with our archery weapons of choice


Again with the we stuff, I thought you didn’t use a x-bow, what’s up Ace you hiding a secret? 



> Now I know that's nothing to you not living here, but for many of us, spending that much $ to get results then having them ignored IS a big deal, and one we have NO intention of forgetting.....had the survey's results went the "other way", you would have a point, they didn't and you don't....


No survey would be needed if you didn’t push for inclusion in the first place. And you sound like someone else I heard about that lives by surveys,,, what was his name, Clinton? And what did Jim say about bad laws written everyday. Just because the majority wanted it, according to the wording of this survey, doesn’t mean there wasn’t still room for compromise. What was the %’s 65-35 for/against? Seams reasonable to me that they would increase the x-bow season by about that much. HMMM if I remember right I said something along those lines back when the survey came out. Also if I remember right I asked you if something like this happened would you be satisfied with it. In fact I asked several times and you refused to answer, saying it won’t happen. Well it happened and we know your answer, you want full expansion and nothing else will do. 



> Had that occured a year ago as it should, we wouldn't have spent over $70,000 for the second survey which really only proved the first was accurate, and enough is enough!


If it had occurred a year ago, you would have been asking for the whole thing this year, instead of next year.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Your last post doesn't make sense Free Range-no crossbow advocacy group is telling you and your ilk that they have to hunt with a compound, a crossbow or recurve. People should be able to hunt with any bow they choose in archery season unless you can prove that the bow itself (not the people who will use it or the numbers) is so different that the predicted harvest rate will change

You can't


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

Jim that is a good argument, but the flaw is now your using harvest rates to determine what should and should not be included in archery season. Now our old buddy Ace who only cares about giving people (not him you see) but giving other people more opportunity. He or his ilk, will come along and say, hey matchlocks, flint locks, percussion, and hand guns all have about the same harvest rates, WE SHOULD ALLOW THEM TOO ( And what do we say to them, “NO YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST LEARN HOW TO SHOOT A X-BOW” I say that’s exclusionary and we must allow them in too.

Then the other thing about rates, is this, the game dept’s will not care if the harvest remains 20% or whatever it happens to be. If you have 100,000 bow hunters now harvesting 20,000 deer. Then you have some 1,000,000 “bow” hunters harvesting 200,000 deer the rate stays the same, but now the game dept, has to say wait an minute we may need to look at this a little closer. Which could lead to restrictions on days afield or bag limits, or a restriction on tags sold.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Free Range said:


> Jim that is a good argument, but the flaw is now your using harvest rates to determine what should and should not be included in archery season. Now our old buddy Ace who only cares about giving people (not him you see) but giving other people more opportunity. He or his ilk, will come along and say, hey matchlocks, flint locks, percussion, and hand guns all have about the same harvest rates, WE SHOULD ALLOW THEM TOO ( And what do we say to them, “NO YOU HAVE TO AT LEAST LEARN HOW TO SHOOT A X-BOW” I say that’s exclusionary and we must allow them in too.
> 
> Then the other thing about rates, is this, the game dept’s will not care if the harvest remains 20% or whatever it happens to be. If you have 100,000 bow hunters now harvesting 20,000 deer. Then you have some 1,000,000 “bow” hunters harvesting 200,000 deer the rate stays the same, but now the game dept, has to say wait an minute we may need to look at this a little closer. Which could lead to restrictions on days afield or bag limits, or a restriction on tags sold.



a silly argument that has been destroyed many a time

I can prove that those weapons are 1) not archery 2) have characteristics of longer range, more knockdown power etc that give them a clear advantage over archery equipment

since you are not in anyway skilled or knowledgeable about crossbows and I am I can tell you crossbows have no such advantages over compounds

you want to increase time costs to keep people out-that is a lame argument that does not have any relevance to the issue-you could ask for laws mandating 40 hours of bowhunter education and that would be similar.

the fact is that you cling to some sweat equity argument that is stupid because right now there is no guarantee that compound archers actually practice


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Jim C said:


> a silly argument that has been destroyed many a time
> 
> I can prove that those weapons are 1) not archery 2) have characteristics of longer range, more knockdown power etc that give them a clear advantage over archery equipment



I agree that they are not archery. Of course, I don't think a crossbow is either, but that is beside the point.

A .357 has no more effective range than a crossbow, and maybe less. Since knockdown power has NOTHING to do with arrows, you are guilty of spinning another half truth.

I do not think a .357 is advantaged over a crossbow. If it is unscoped, it is probably at a significant disadvantage....its a heck of a lot harder to hit the bullseye at 35 yards with an opensighted revolver than it is with a scoped crossbow.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

I think Revival said something about a new crossbow scope with lines (crosshairs) out to 50 yards. (insert short range weapon snicker)


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Marvin said:


> Don't forget landowners and fisherman ace. Wouldn't want them to be left out of bow season. They have a say too.  you keep saying "hunters fisherman and landowners" were surveyed but really have no proof the survery was not fixed. Why is that?


I'm beginning to wonder if "your crowd"(or is it ilk) actually attends classes to be so inaccurate!

NO fishermen were surveyed, hunters and landowners were, since 90% of KY hunting takes place on private land, it only makes sense for them to survey some landowners......

As for the survey; the burden of proof is NOT on us, we stand behind Cornell's excellent reputation for doing accurate surveys, IF it's "fixed" prove it, or "drop it", if you can't.....

I've already proven all the "points" on the survey being "fixed"don't mean "squat" on a few forums,......and making unfounded allegations and accusations is not proof, get some proof if you can (you can't it's already been looked at by a team of lawyers dedicated to proving it , they couldn't btw).....

I will warn you though, it had best be "real proof", as Cornell won't likely stand by and let you slander their reputation, so easily.......

FreeRange, I honestly do not care that you don't want to believe that I don't and have not ever used a crossbow, grow up you're around my age.....for crying out loud!!

It's not the first time I've "went to bat" for others and likely won't be my last, and whether you believe it or not makes no changes in facts whatever.... 

WE(that would be KY hunters btw) got some expansion, deal with that; instead of what you've been doing in Tenn,. you're not going to change the facts, and frankly you look silly when you think you will....fwiw

FR; you're getting harder and harder to take seriously, so NO survey would have been needed had the oppositon let the majority of KY hunters wishes been granted after the first one IN 2002.....slow enough for YOU???

Again IF you insist on commenting on KY hunting in general (and me in particular) get your stories straight, think you can manage that???

And NO I wouldn't answer because I was well aware of the people who we were dealing with and their tactics thus far at the time, looks like I was correct in not answering as well....they did EVERYTHING in secret, in order to only give the least they could, NO it's not over by a long shot....

NOW I don't need your opinion on what I stated which was exactly what I MEANT........here it is one more time

Had this happened a year ago, it would have likely been over, it didn't and it isn't.......

YOU have no way of knowing whether I'm sincere in that or not, so please don't try to tell me or anyone what I would have done, I already have done so, and I can speak for myself, in case you haven't noticed.....

And NO I don't need anything, you on the other hand need serious professional help, it's not enough to jump on every crossbow forum in the country and try to force your opinon on others, (and in the crossbow section where most don't want it no less), but then you have to try to speak for people thousands of miles away whom you've never met and have no way of knowing anything about them, much less what they think or how honest the person may be..... 


YOU asked:

And while we’re at it, what gives you the right to demand people pick up a bow or x-bow to be able to hunt during bow season? What is that word,,,, yeah I remember hypocrisy. 

First WE didn't demand , we requested Then; TWO surveys were done,(again the first was in 2002, the impact on the resources were studied for three YEARS) it was found the MAJORITY OF KY hunters were in favor(by a large margin)........WE didn't try to FORCE anyone to change one single thing, only allow another archery weapon to be allowed during archery season, which is how A) archery season itself began here in Ky B) is our RIGHT as hunters to do.....

See? Once again, you have proven, what you don't know about all of this, and yet there is a "ton" more you do not know, or understand, and will not bother to try to find it out, but that won't stop you from posting about any of it......


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> I agree that they are not archery. Of course, I don't think a crossbow is either, but that is beside the point.
> 
> A .357 has no more effective range than a crossbow, and maybe less. Since knockdown power has NOTHING to do with arrows, you are guilty of spinning another half truth.
> 
> I do not think a .357 is advantaged over a crossbow. If it is unscoped, it is probably at a significant disadvantage....its a heck of a lot harder to hit the bullseye at 35 yards with an opensighted revolver than it is with a scoped crossbow.


gee that is among the stupidest things I have ever heard-I shot IHMSA with a 357 Dan wesson revolver many years ago. I could hit a ram target at 200 Yards (sometimes) with one. That was iron sights. You think you can hit anything at 200 yards with a bow-I know you can't.

I can shoot a 357 revolver accurately 6 times in less than 3 seconds-can't do that with a bow-I had a sub 4 second "pin table" with a 357 shooting the hottest loads around (200 grain bullets 1100 FPS) 6 inch SW 686 in 1985. That is five bowling pins all off the back of a 3 foot table in under 4 seconds. Now hitting a bowling pin squarely enough so that it clears the 3 foot table is about a 3" cirlce "kill zone" 

the trajectory of a 357 revolver is such that I don't worry about vines or branches a few feet above the target 

a deer shot through the heart or lungs with a modern 357 hunting round is far far less likely to run than one arrowed

You again prove you don't know anything about weapons or even hunting source


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

good for you.

I, on the other hand, have multiple small arms marksmanship ribbons from my time in the service, with both rifles and pistols.

I do not require your validation, and quite frankly could care less about your opinion.

I know what iron sighted revolvers are capable of, and I can balance that by knowing what typical 35 yd groups would look like. I'll stick by my claim. 

By the way. Only an ignorant slob would shoot .357 at a deer at distances greater than crossbow range....totally unethical.

You are quite simply, wrong again. If range is to be the determining factor of what weapons are allowed into bowseason, you need to consider revolvers.

If it isn't the determining factor, you should shut up about it and quit trying to divert the conversation.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> good for you.
> 
> I, on the other hand, have multiple small arms marksmanship ribbons from my time in the service, with both rifles and pistols.
> 
> ...


Poor source, Claiming someone who uses a long barrelled 357 to shoot a deer at 75 Yards is a slob

you proved how incredibly ignorant you are of hunting again.

You are the one who should shut up source because every time you start whining about experience compared to me you are going to come out looking bad

You already have been schooled on crossbows
now you have been schooled on pistols
Shall we turn to shotguns or perhaps slingshots?

tell me you can shoot a bow accurately 6 times in less than three seconds


do you actually hunt source? BTW why did your Ban last less than a week?


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

:focus:


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Jim C said:


> Poor source, Claiming someone who uses a long barrelled 357 to shoot a deer at 75 Yards is a slob
> 
> you proved how incredibly ignorant you are of hunting again.
> 
> ...



Yes, we know, Jim ..... the rest of us mere mortals bathed in ignorance when compared to brilliance of your skills and knowledge. 


Whatever.

Rifle experts agree that 1000 ft-lbs KE is a reasonable minimum for deer. The .357 RM is considered marginal at best for deer sized game at any distance, it certainly is considered far from ideal (read that unethical) at 75 yards. 

Since this is a bow forum, I digress and will cease my discussion of non-bow stuff. (including crossbows).


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

doctariAFC said:


> :focus:



Yes - sorry Doc. You posted as I was firing one off.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> Yes - sorry Doc. You posted as I was firing one off.



a blank:wink: 

What helps Kentuck deal with the unreasoned is the fact that the data from Ohio is rather applicable to its sister state


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Jim C said:


> a blank:wink:
> 
> What helps Kentuck deal with the unreasoned is the fact that the data from Ohio is rather applicable to its sister state


Shows how much you know.

OH has 250K "archers", KY has less than half that (100K).

OH "archers" killed 60,000 deer. KY archers killed 14,000. 

OH shotgun season was 7 days last year. KY rifle was over twice that. The KY MZ season is almost 3x as long.

Ohio's herd is dropping, by all accounts. KY is rising.




Yea, I can see how any OH data is applicable....NOT.


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> Shows how much you know.
> 
> OH has 250K "archers", KY has less than half that (100K).
> 
> ...


I don't pay much attention to a guy who thinks a 357 revolver is the same as a compound bow


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

LOL - what a joke! 

You must not pay attention, period. Please point out where I said a .357 is the same as a compound bow.

What you really meant to say was:

"Dang, you smoked me again, source!"


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

thesource said:


> LOL - what a joke!
> 
> You must not pay attention, period. Please point out where I said a .357 is the same as a compound bow.
> 
> ...


Source, there is a better chance that Vern Troyer will dunk on an NBA regulation rim than you smoking anyone

I note you used to whine about non NYS residents discussing the archaic and bigoted NYB and laws

I live next to kentucky
Family has property in Kentucky and on top of that
I am admitted in the Eastern District of Kentucky to appear in federal courts there
My father is Kentucky Colonel 

Now tell us your connection to KY (and by KY I mean the STATE)


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

SteveBlack said:


> I've done a fair bit of pistol shooting and have shot xbows as well as the other archery equipment. Never once did I think shooting a revolver was the same or even similar to the various bows.
> 
> Only someone totally ignorant with pistols and archery would confuse the two.
> 
> SteveBlack



Nor would anyone who has shot IHMSA ever believe that a big bore revolver has the same limited range as a compound bow or a remotely similar trajectory


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

SteveBlack said:


> Didn't TheSource say shooting a deer with a 357 at 75 yards was unethical and a slob?
> 
> http://www.chuckhawks.com/handgun_hunting.htm
> 
> ...



having owned a couple dozen crossbows and having shot 3D and target xbow for more than a few years I am not aware of a hunting crossbow-set up normally-that even allows a sight mark at 100 yards.


----------



## kybowhunter1963 (Jan 29, 2004)

If the crossbow expansion was meant to happen...both groups got the best "compromise" that could possibly happen. I am glad to see so many people outside of Kentucky concerned about what is happening in this state!

Hopefully this is a dead issue for many years to come.

It is only a very small group of people that go to just about every web site around and talk about this issue....most everyone is pleased that this arguing is over.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Jim C said:


> Source, there is a better chance that Vern Troyer will dunk on an NBA regulation rim than you smoking anyone
> 
> I note you used to whine about non NYS residents discussing the archaic and bigoted NYB and laws
> 
> ...



You FAILED to do what I asked and are trying to change the subject, so I will ask again.

Please point out where I said a .357 is the same as a compound bow.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

SteveBlack said:


> I've done a fair bit of pistol shooting and have shot xbows as well as the other archery equipment. Never once did I think shooting a revolver was the same or even similar to the various bows.
> 
> Only someone totally ignorant with pistols and archery would confuse the two.
> 
> SteveBlack


This is what happens when you come into the middle of a conversation, Steve.

I never said shooting a revolver is the same or even similar to shooting the various bows. You must be another one of these procrossbow spinners who specialize in halftruths and misrepresentations.

Our friend Jim, here, likes to say that crossbows belong in bowseason because they have limited range. I merely pointed out that some handguns have a limited effective range, too, that is not that different than a crossbow. Therefore, range alone is not a good determinant in defining what can go into a bow season.

Please try to understand the context of the conversation before jumping in with both feet - it makes you look silly.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

SteveBlack said:


> You stated using a 357 was unethical for deer hunting. Not true. You also stated something that is so absurd that it was easier to bag a deer at 35 yards with a crossbow than a 357. That is completely false as well. Clearly you have never shot, much less hunted with a revolver and a crossbow. You simply do not know what you talk about and it is so obvious. Why do you post on threads you have obviously no experience and knowledge of?
> 
> I tend to think you are on the wrong forum. There are forums which discuss daytime soap operas like The Young and the Restless or Days of Our LIves. I am sure you knowledge in those forums would be helpful.
> 
> SteveBlack



While I find your insults amusing, they are unsubstantiated.

I did* not *say a .357 is unethical for hunting, I said it is marginal at any range and insuficient (therefore unethical) at ranges longer than crossbow ranges. Kinda like a .243 is marginal on elk.....you getting the picture yet?

Disagree with me? OK - but realize that experts such as Petzal, Sundra, Carmichael and others have been saying this for years.

Now, as the moderator has suggested, we should get back to topic. Send me a PM if you would like to discuss your views of ethical handgun ranges.
I would be happy to give you my opinions.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

SteveBlack said:


> here is what you said
> 
> By the way. Only an ignorant slob would shoot .357 at a deer at distances greater than crossbow range....totally unethical
> 
> ...


I think you should either do a little more research on the lethality of .357 at 100 yards or be prepared to wound and lose a lot of deer (assuming you can hit them - which I highly doubt)

I have better things to do than argue with someone who is obviously uninformed and who misquotes, takes statements out of context, and does nothing but hurl insults.

Have a nice day.


----------



## CagomoC (Mar 25, 2006)

cool


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

thesource said:


> Shows how much you know.
> 
> OH has 250K "archers", KY has less than half that (100K).
> 
> ...


Also keep in mind:

KY population: 4+ million/ 39,732 square miles @102 ppl per sq. mile/ 900,000 deer

OH population: 11+ million/ 40,953 square miles @277 ppl. per sq. mile/ 650,000 deer


KY has more open space, more deer, bigger bag limits, and fewer hunters.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

twogun said:


> Also keep in mind:
> 
> KY population: 4+ million/ 39,732 square miles @102 ppl per sq. mile/ 900,000 deer
> 
> ...


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 (which is what Jim was inferring.)

How does your information change the point I was trying to make?

I think it strengthens it.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

SteveBlack said:


> I enjoy how theSource tries to be so informed and yet he is so uninformed. This guy or girl was on Hunting.net before we got rid of his or her's garbage.
> SteveBlack


Well, my, my .....

Looks like I've got myself my own little stalker, chasing me around from site to site! 

At least now everyone can plainly see what your agenda is.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

thesource said:


> 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 (which is what Jim was inferring.)
> 
> How does your information change the point I was trying to make?
> 
> I think it strengthens it.



The statistics that you provided needed to be put into context.. Some might view your numbers and assign some sort of causal relationship between crossbows and deer numbers.

I believe (and I could be wrong) that Jim's inference was that all 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.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

twogun said:


> The statistics that you provided needed to be put into context.. Some might view your numbers and assign some sort of causal relationship between crossbows and deer numbers.
> 
> I believe (and I could be wrong) that Jim's inference was that all 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.


Interesting train of thought. One could argue that crossbows have flooded the woods in OH, since they outnumber bowhunters 2:1. I know OH bowhunters feel that way.

But I understand your point.

Now understand mine. The fact that OH has a mere 7 day shotgun season has a HUGE bearing on the harvest results.

Not every state could (or would) tolerate almost a third of the harvest coming from "archery". KY, for example , has only 11% of the harvest from archery.....what will happen if that number becomes 30%? Would KY gun hunters stand idly by and allow their 3 week season to become a 1 week shotgun season after the OH model?

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.


----------



## twogun (Nov 25, 2003)

thesource said:


> > Interesting train of thought. One could argue that crossbows have flooded the woods in OH, since they outnumber bowhunters 2:1. I know OH bowhunters feel that way.
> 
> 
> Claiming that Ohio compound hunters feel crowded because of the crossbow is an unsupportable, unfounded generalization. I seriously doubt that you have discussed the issue with a fair representation of Ohio hunters to accurately make such a claim. I believe you call examples like this "spin".
> ...


----------



## Jim C (Oct 15, 2002)

Give it up source-you got schooled. When you hunt with a bow-any kind of bow a 35 yard shot requires you take into account branches or other obstructions above your arrow because of the flight path

you can't thread a shot through a 4" hole through brush 15 yards away 

its easy with a revolver.

You guess the deer is 30 yards and he is 40-you miss
with a 357 a kill shot at 30 yards kills him at 50


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

twogun said:


> Claiming that Ohio compound hunters feel crowded because of the crossbow is an unsupportable, unfounded generalization. I seriously doubt that you have discussed the issue with a fair representation of Ohio hunters to accurately make such a claim. I believe you call examples like this "spin".


Fair enough. Let's change the wording to read: "I know OH bowhunters that feel that way. "

How's that?




twogun said:


> I've always maintained that season/weapon decisions should be made on a state by state basis and should be guided by sound conservation principles.
> 
> 
> I'm, however, glad you admit that you, NYBI, P&Y, and many other organizations/groups all base your opposition on political rather than biological reasons.


I'll be the first to agree that NYB and P&Y are opposed to crossbows for political (and maybe social) reasons, and you have never heard me saying that crossbows will "decimate the herd." Actually, I've never heard anyone but pro-crossbows guys make that claim - more spin from your side.

I disagree, however, that season/weapon decisions should be made SOLELY from a biological viewpoint. Social and Political considerations MUST be considered as well. We would not even have a bow season if it were not for these considerations. There is certainly no way to protect a bowseason without these considerations.

Guns and tags will always do the heavy lifting of deer management. If you value bowhunting (and even crossbow hunting), be careful what you wish for. Clearly the most effective method of controlling a herd is with bullets and slugs, if that is ALL you care about.

Your focus on biology conviently ignores the bottom line question - do crossbows belong in bow season? Unfortuneately, that focus would also pave the way for MZ or any other weapon in bowseason, too.




twogun said:


> Please point to one "biological" concern in KY. You stated in an earlier post that the herd in KY is growing. Is that what the biologists in Ky want to happen? What are the goals of the deer management system in KY right now? What would the result be for the KY herd if somehow 120,000 crossbow hunters took to the woods killing an additional 25,000 deer during bow season?


One biological concern in KY with crossbows? That's easy - Turkeys.

I can't tell you what the impact of removing an additional 25000 deer from the KY herd would be. You cannot tell me either.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Jim C said:


> Give it up source-you got schooled. When you hunt with a bow-any kind of bow a 35 yard shot requires you take into account branches or other obstructions above your arrow because of the flight path
> 
> you can't thread a shot through a 4" hole through brush 15 yards away
> 
> ...


Duh. Since we are, presumably, bowhunters, let's assume we have taking the time to cut shooting lanes. Real bowhunters get their butts off the couch to prepare their stand sites well ahead of the season....or weren't you aware of that?

Let's also presume that when I said 35 yards, I meant 35 yards.

Not 30, not 40....not 37.5. If you have to delve that far into the details to try and derail my point, that should be a signal to you - your weak attempts to counter only strengthen my position.


----------



## oldbhtrnewequip (Dec 30, 2005)

thesource said:


> Interesting train of thought. One could argue that crossbows have flooded the woods in OH, since they outnumber bowhunters 2:1. I know OH bowhunters feel that way.
> .


One could argue they increased the overall number of bowhunters by >50%.
But then that would be me promoting another myth, and depending on your point of view, some might consider that a positive experience. Why is it a myth? Because the mythbusters choose to not call it a bow. They choose to call it a crossbow.

What you call it is all important because its the only way for those who are "bow" hunting to reserve access to resource in front of others. 

The negative view of that myth is the woods would be flooded by existing gunhunters and the existing "bow" hunters wouldn't have the solitude they are entitled to and so richly deserve.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

SteveBlack said:


> You're not a real bowhunter. You don't hunt at all. Everyone knows that from your posts.
> 
> Arrows shot from above impact higher so you have to make an allowance. A 357 would allow you to just hold point on. No allowance.
> 
> But you don't know that.


Sigh .... this basic, easy stuff that any bowhunter should know.

Arrows shot from above do not impact higher. If your's do, you are making one of two common mistakes. 

First, establish your yardage from the base of the tree, since gravity influences only the horizontal vector of an arrow.

Second, bend from the waist when you shoot down to maintain the relative position of your nocking point.

You sound eerily like a former poster at this site who got himself banned for posting nothing but personal attacks....you should be careful.


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

oldbhtrnewequip said:


> One could argue they increased the overall number of bowhunters by >50%.


Actually, that would be increasing the overall number by 200% (2:1 means 2 for every 1 which means 3, total). They have tripled the number of hunters in the woods. (Why does it appear all crossbow advocates are bad at math?)

Now, if they were new to hunting, that would be a good thing, as we would have more hunters. Yet the data doesn't support this, as OH loses hunters at a rate that is as fast (even faster) than the rest of the nation. If they are just transplanted gun or bow hunters, it matters not to hunting. 

Is it good for BOWhunting? I say no - not all of these crossbowers have bowhuntings best interests in mind. You have seen them repeatedly rail against Pope & Young, slander traditionalists, and bash bowhunters as greedy, selfish, and on and on. 

I have seen numerous crossbow advocates express their support for MZ in bowseason. I have seen some (albeit fewer) express support fo a one season, choose your weapon arrangement. I do not for the life of me see how any can construe these things as being in bowhunting's best interest.

I have also read that OH lags well behind the rest of the nation in recruiting new vertical bowhunters, and that would be due to the crossbow of course. Why work to be proficient with a bow when you can simply shoulder a crossbow? It will be interesting to see if that trend continues with the states that have legalized the crossbow more recently.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

kybowhunter1963 said:


> If the crossbow expansion was meant to happen...both groups got the best "compromise" that could possibly happen. I am glad to see so many people outside of Kentucky concerned about what is happening in this state!
> 
> *Hopefully this is a dead issue for many years to come.*
> 
> It is only a very small group of people that go to just about every web site around and talk about this issue....most everyone is pleased that this arguing is over.


Again, had it been done a year ago, likely that would have been the case it wasn't and it isn't, but I guess it is a nice dream, for those who refuse to share????

"Both Groups" were not even represented, does that really sound like a "fair" "compromise" to you or anyone? OR does it sound like a vocal few FORCED their will once again, on the majority? Rest assured, it won't be "many years to come" before we visit this again, AND in the proper manner, as it should have been done..

And how about the LKS president doing what he did AGAINST the vote and the Board Directive......yeah sounds "fair" so long as you didn't vote on that.....I suppose......many things were not done properly, much less in a "fair manner", for it to be "over", things have to be done in a "fair" manner.........THAT was the sole reason cited for the UBK and bunch to fight this whole thing.......guess it's fine though when it's them doing the "stuff"?????????????


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

source, I don't know where you're getting your "data" from but Ohio, has had an increase in verticle hunters as well as crossbow hunters for some time now, in fact MORE increase than other states.!!!!! That is a "myth" but not based on any solid data, and if you'll check, you'll know why........

The crossbow expansion in Ohio, has helped in two ways, more archery hunters using both weapons and an increase in verticle bow hunters too!!!


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

aceoky said:


> source, I don't know where you're getting your "data" from but Ohio, has had an increase in verticle hunters as well as crossbow hunters for some time now, in fact MORE increase than other states.!!!!! That is a "myth" but not based on any solid data, and if you'll check, you'll know why........
> 
> The crossbow expansion in Ohio, has helped in two ways, more archery hunters using both weapons and an increase in verticle bow hunters too!!!



I understand that the number of vertical bowhunters has grown in Ohio. My point is that they are growing at a slower rate in OH than elsewhere - because of crossbows, no doubt. Please slow down and read what I write. I believe I saw it in USFWS, but since they changed their website I can't find anything there anymore.

Maybe Doctari has a link for us - he is generally on top of these things.


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

thesource said:


> I understand that the number of vertical bowhunters has grown in Ohio. My point is that they are growing at a slower rate in OH than elsewhere - because of crossbows, no doubt. Please slow down and read what I write.


Not even close to accurate, and THAT is THE big problem

ALL the data is postive in EVERY state that has expanded! No negatives, not one anywhere, which is why so many are now expanding, decades worth of data is very hard to argue with "social and political" "reasons" notwithstanding.... 

AS I've said, there is NO good reason to oppose expansion...none, not one.....EVERY state that has expanded, has MORE hunters, more archery hunters, more new hunters......and more hunters = more P-R funds available for them....once expansion occurs, it's then our job to try to persuade them to put that "extra money" to work buying more public land......= win-win....


----------



## thesource (May 19, 2005)

Hi Doug.


----------



## 1wayin (Mar 26, 2006)

Ace, your the best I could follow you anywhere man. I am a big fan from another site keep em coming.At least you are from kentucky so you got some input for this.


----------



## oldbhtrnewequip (Dec 30, 2005)

thesource said:


> Your focus on biology conviently ignores the bottom line question - do crossbows belong in bow season? Unfortuneately, that focus would also pave the way for MZ or any other weapon in bowseason, too..


The bottom line answer is they do belong in bow season. States are deciding that, but they implement it by running concurrent seasons to overcome the social/political objections. You seem to have a problem with focus and getting to the meat of the problem but every now and again you do. Congratulations. There is nothing wrong with that focus, unless of course your objective is to defocus the issues in your process of protectionism.

Since you can hunt during MZ/firearms season with a bow in most states, the real issue, (let's focus), is how many days do you have in the woods in relative solitude. I base this on the repeated claims you make that there are those of us (please point me to them) who promote a unified bow season.
Please point out to me those bow or crossbow hunters who want Muzzle loaders into bow season. That is a serious safety concern, unless they are also promoting that everyone wear orange in a single season.

Quotes with url references will work.

thanks in advance.


----------



## oldbhtrnewequip (Dec 30, 2005)

We were talking about Ohio

I said 

"One could argue they increased the overall number of bowhunters by >50%." 

You said

"Actually, that would be increasing the overall number by 200% (2:1 means 2 for every 1 which means 3, total). They have tripled the number of hunters in the woods. (Why does it appear all crossbow advocates are bad at math?)"

First of all...what part of "greater than" don't you understand?

Secondly, I used your definition of 'bowhunter' so that you WOULD understand, since its not your choice to consider all bows in one category.

I said argue which implies its possible/probable that something is the case...and that was based on some presumptions:

1. that a number of vertical bowhunters (your definition) 
might have converted. 
(negative impact on bowhunting (your definition) population)
2. that new "crossbowhunters" (your definition) would enter 
crossbow hunting
a.) as either existing gun hunters 
or 
b.) those new to hunting period
and
c.) that some would convert to vertical bows.

You appear to presume that any/all new crossbow hunters will never convert to vertical bow. Do you?

You appear to presume that any 'bowhunters' (your definition) that have converted to become crossbowhunters, will forever stay crossbowhunters (your definition). Do you?

What percentage of those who have initially picked up crossbows have converted to vertical? 
What percentage of those who have initially picked up vertical bows have
covnerted to crossbows?

Go ahead...hazard a guess...or point me at stats if you have them...please


----------



## PMantle (Feb 15, 2004)

thesource said:


> Hi Doug.



I just noticed Doug was banned. What happened?


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> By Ace
> Again, had it been done a year ago, likely that would have been the case it wasn't and it isn't, but I guess it is a nice dream, for those who refuse to share????


What’s that saying, a skunk showing his stripes?


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Free Range said:


> What’s that saying, a skunk showing his stripes?


You seem to have a real problem in grasping facts and truth......

We played by the rules as set forth, we know what they did (those of us in Ky not Co. btw).....WE are well aware of what has been going on, what we got could have and should have been done a year ago, no good reason why it wasn't........NOW what we got first was not done in good faith, since both sides were NOT present, and we have an on/off/on/off season for the sole purpose of keeping crossbows out of the pre-rut......so much for "good faith", it wasn't enough for them to keep us out of Sept. and Jan. simply being selfish after all of this, you can call it what you wish, doesn't matter to me in the least, just bet on one thing.....this is not "it".......

Whether you like it or not, won't change it either, Co. must be a very boring state in which to live???? Being so concerned with what is going on in Ky. and Tenn. 

(and it seems you still don't grasp the fact that Tenn HAS expanded, yet you still insist on telling them why it's a "bad idea"??? They though don't think so, and why would they? Only 19% of their total archery harvest came from crossbows.....and yes they kept records)......

There are many things that have over the last year transpired here in Ky that should have ALL of us concerned, but you are not concerned with the facts of that, only your ability to "stir things" and things that have little(if any) affect on you at that.....

Suffice it to say WE know, and we don't plan on accepting things that way.....like it or not; as you said, there is room for compromise, so maybe we'll use your idea, we get 69% of the season(and we pick which parts).......

For the minoirty regarless of how vocal or what lengths they're willing to go to do so, to dictate and force the majority of Ky hunters is not acceptable, nor should it be....

That's all they've tried to do, it's not been working and it won't .......but we'll never know how it would have went ......

.......had they tried to work this out sooner with ALL parties present, but that is not our fault.......

They would have people believe this was "sudden", over a six year period is not sudden at all! So it took us six long years to get this "slice" they want everyone to believe was a "good faith compromise", yet their intent was to leave us out of the best hunting times.......so much for "good faith"....add to that the tactics used, and who was left out of the "deal", and anyone who is looking can see, there was no way to expect it to be "over"......by a long shot

For the record "WE" is those who support expansion, and the choice of an archery weapon during the archery season, there are many of "US" who don't use them and may never, we still support this and stand united with those who do......


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

PMantle said:


> I just noticed Doug was banned. What happened?


it had to do with some sheep, Big yellow boots and something about helping them across the fence.... Just kidding. He got too excited... but i see he is back.


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> NOW what we got first was not done in good faith, since both sides were NOT present,



What?? I thought you have been saying all along the game dept wanted this, without lobbing from the pro side? The game dept was there, so it seems both sides were represented, or do you mean you and the upstart KY x-bow organization? 




> for the sole purpose of keeping crossbows out of the pre-rut......so much for "good faith


So you admit the only reason for x-bow expansion is to allow those that don’t want to hunt with a bow the opportunity to hunt the rut.




> Whether you like it or not, won't change it either, Co. must be a very boring state in which to live???? Being so concerned with what is going on in Ky. and Tenn.


Not boring at all.



> (and it seems you still don't grasp the fact that Tenn HAS expanded, yet you still insist on telling them why it's a "bad idea"??? They though don't think so, and why would they? Only 19% of their total archery harvest came from crossbows.....and yes they kept records)......


I never told anybody that the x-bow in TN is a bad idea, although I do feel that way.




> they want everyone to believe was a "good faith compromise", yet their intent was to leave us out of the best hunting times.......


And you wanted everyone to believe you just wanted hunters to come together as one??? Now that there is funny.



> For the record "WE" is those who support expansion, and the choice of an archery weapon during the archery season, there are many of "US" who don't use them and may never, we still support this and stand united with those who do......


And there is only one that is the web master for the upstart KY x-bow org, makes a guy wonder???


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

KDFWR DID want this, but with several present saying only give THIS much, and pressure on other pending bills that isn't the way things are done in "good faith".....Even them wanting it, it was "fixed" so without a "pro voice" to insist on more , there was little to be done THEN.....

I didn't admit that or any other "silly claims" you've made , btw in KY we hunt the "rut" with high powered rifles or anything else (legal) we wish, once again , you astound me of your lack of knowledge about Ky and Tenn.

I could quote many times what you've posted in Tenn. and Ky , most of us know it, so I won't even bother.....


WHAT about "coming together as one", is a BS compromise which was an attempt to insult the majority??? You amaze me with your lack of understanding while continuing to post on things you don't have a "clue" about......

What organizations are you a member of Tim? Did you have a point? 

AGAIN, the majoirty of Ky hunters and landowners support FULL expansion, and that is exactly what they should get, fine if you don't like that, don't come out here and hunt, see yet again another "win-win" if you don't! :mg: 

More proof that all you intend to do is "stir things" out here as long as you're allowed to post, Tenn has full expansion, we have some expansion, but will have more.......get used to that....it's coming and nobody cares how you (or anyone else who's not hunting here or there) feel about that.......easy to understand.....(as you like to say)

Like I said, you have a serious problem with facts......nothing I can seem to do about that, but rest assured you're not changing any of them....


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> KDFWR DID want this, but with several present saying only give THIS much, and pressure on other pending bills that isn't the way things are done in "good faith".....Even them wanting it, it was "fixed" so without a "pro voice" to insist on more , there was little to be done THEN.....
> 
> I didn't admit that or any other "silly claims" you've made , btw in KY we hunt the "rut" with high powered rifles or anything else (legal) we wish, once again , you astound me of your lack of knowledge about Ky and Tenn.
> 
> ...



Ace , were still waiting on your "facts" You said you have posted them before but yet i can find NOTHING. any Hints? how about a link somewhere? surely a computer guru such as yourself could easily find it. KDFWR was for it? yet they did not give you full blown expansion....seems like BS. politicians listen to who ace? (insert voting public and anybody they took money from). So everybody wants FULL expansion except free range and the politicians? I think you over estimate your force by 10 fold...nah 20.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> "Both Groups" were not even represented, does that really sound like a "fair" "compromise" to you or anyone? OR does it sound like a vocal few FORCED their will once again, on the majority? Rest assured, it won't be "many years to come" before we visit this again, AND in the proper manner, as it should have been done..


 wow Ace...Looks like I have to bring up a few interesting points. You keep saying majority...but realizing that the study done by Cornell did not sample the majority of people. so the again leaves you on the outside looking in again. The same few VOCAL minority could have been polled to make up this survey. We will never know until they release the list.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> Not even close to accurate, and THAT is THE big problem
> 
> ALL the data is postive in EVERY state that has expanded! No negatives, not one anywhere, which is why so many are now expanding, decades worth of data is very hard to argue with "social and political" "reasons" notwithstanding....
> 
> AS I've said, there is NO good reason to oppose expansion...none, not one.....EVERY state that has expanded, has MORE hunters, more archery hunters, more new hunters......and more hunters = more P-R funds available for them....once expansion occurs, it's then our job to try to persuade them to put that "extra money" to work buying more public land......= win-win....


 Ohio lost 100,000 hunters over a ten year stretch and thats a positive? Your either a motivational speaker or lost


----------



## aceoky (Mar 17, 2006)

Marvin said:


> Ohio lost 100,000 hunters over a ten year stretch and thats a positive? Your either a motivational speaker or lost


I'm only lost in where "that information" came from.....Ohio did NOT lose any hunters in fact they're one of the few in this whole region who have gained hunters and archery hunters (both vertical and crossbows fwiw).....

I realize exactly what Cornell did, 

do they survey the majority of VOTERS in a Presidential Election? Why not??? Oh that's right there is NO need to do so with a random sample an age old fact many times proven......again, I'll stand behind Cornell's reputation, IF they're good enough for the U.S Census Bureau (among other things) then they're more than accurate enough for a crossbow expansion survey, and again no one has shown any proof of any wrongdoings....why??? 

I keep saying majority because that is exactly what it is/was and remains......why has no one any proof otherwise? Because the fact is, for every one against two are for expansion, three couldn't care less, expansion is NOT an issue for most Ky hunters, they are gun hunters and have no concerns for what an archery hunters uses....period!


And since when does the majority need to "bribe" politicians to get what they deserve? THEY went to them, not us, so who would you expect them to be listening to? You obviously have no clue of what you speak either.....

The KDFWR was and is for full expansion, without the pro side present, there is little that can be done (when you have the UBK, the KBA, and the LKS president saying take this ).....Rest assured it's a minor setback at best though, as for your proof, I've already told you, if you can't find it, not my problem, many have seen it , and know it's out there, I've typed it so much in over a year, I have no desire to do so again, nor do I intend on looking it up for you , you seem to think you have all the facts, and I can live with your having that beleif, if you can......

AS usual for the whole anti team never any good reason for opposing it, just try to attack those of us who do not oppose it, and it's only hurting you and helping us, why would I want to change any of that?  Beleive what you will, it will never change the facts....ever


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> I'm only lost in where "that information" came from.....Ohio did NOT lose any hunters in fact they're one of the few in this whole region who have gained hunters and archery hunters (both vertical and crossbows fwiw).....


Ohio Hunting Permit sales as of 1988 - 446,881
Ohio Hunting Permit sales as of 1997 - 347,974

Go to look it up for yourself. Its on Ohio's DNR website. 

PS Ace, we had the crossbow the whole time too. 

Long on typing, short on facts.....Nice Job Ace


----------



## Free Range (Apr 18, 2005)

> I keep saying majority because that is exactly what it is/was and remains......why has no one any proof otherwise? Because the fact is, for every one against two are for expansion, three couldn't care less, expansion is NOT an issue for most Ky hunters, they are gun hunters and have no concerns for what an archery hunters uses....period!


Nice when it benefits you it’s hunters, and then it’s bow hunters, when it’s good for you in that manner. This is about bow hunting and should have been bow hunters that were polled, as you like to say, those bow hunters that only hunt deer with bows, because as you have so eloquently put those are the only real bow hunters. ) 




> as for your proof, I've already told you, if you can't find it, not my problem, many have seen it , and know it's out there, I've typed it so much in over a year, I have no desire to do so again, nor do I intend on looking it up for you , you seem to think you have all the facts, and I can live with your having that beleif, if you can......



Same old story Ace, you have been using that line for almost a year now, with the same results, no proof, none found, none given, none existing.


----------



## Marvin (Feb 17, 2005)

aceoky said:


> I'm only lost in where "that information" came from.....Ohio did NOT lose any hunters in fact they're one of the few in this whole region who have gained hunters and archery hunters (both vertical and crossbows fwiw).....
> 
> I realize exactly what Cornell did,
> 
> ...


Enjoy Ace


----------



## doctariAFC (Aug 25, 2005)

And on that note, I think we will end this debate before we spiral even further down the dark side of the force.


----------

